List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

For polite and reasoned discussion of Star Wars and/or Star Trek.
User avatar
Trinoya
Security Officer
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Trinoya » Mon Oct 29, 2012 2:58 am

Well I just saw the most recent episode (tipping point). A delivery of rocket launchers basically turns the tide of war. While the episode may indicate higher hyperspace speeds no distance is known nor time passage.

What it does indicate is that apparently the Separatist forces couldn't spare one of those 200 gigaton turbolaser shots from a troop transport to wipe out the totality of their opposition. They basically constantly send in more and more reinforcements and then, only when they recognize they will need 'time' to defeat their enemy do they determine it isn't worth it and leave... without one city leveling shot in their wake...

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Mon Oct 29, 2012 1:09 pm

Lucas had made efforts to paint Grievous and Dooku as archetypical antagonists. The EU has added a layer of gratuitous massacres, notably with one by Tarkin.
I haven't watched that episode, so I don't know who led that particular campaign, but it's still possible that not all CIS leaders are cold hearted psychopaths.

User avatar
Trinoya
Security Officer
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Trinoya » Mon Oct 29, 2012 5:16 pm

Well in this case it is a droid who answered directly to Dooku and who had no qualms just executing the standing king of the people or flat out saying fear will keep everyone in line.

What is really bothersome is the rebels are basically underarmed militia in the mountains... A few kilotons would have neatly ended their cause... And the droid general states his intent to wipe them all out.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Mon Oct 29, 2012 5:45 pm

Trinoya wrote:Well in this case it is a droid who answered directly to Dooku and who had no qualms just executing the standing king of the people or flat out saying fear will keep everyone in line.

What is really bothersome is the rebels are basically underarmed militia in the mountains... A few kilotons would have neatly ended their cause... And the droid general states his intent to wipe them all out.
Like Talibans in Afghanistan?
Have the CIS forces attempted to root out the rebels by helping and building good relationships with the rest of the population? I guess not, based on what you typed about the king's demise.

Makes no sense. But it's a CIS droid after all.

User avatar
Trinoya
Security Officer
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Trinoya » Wed Oct 31, 2012 5:58 am

They had one camp that consisted of a hut, a tower, and a scaffold... They were using winged creatures for flight since they couldn't get space ships.

The Taliban is positively lightyears ahead of this force in terms of defensive capability. ^___^

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Lucky » Fri Nov 02, 2012 7:35 am

Mr. Oragahn wrote: But the book would have given an example of what they can do against some kind of ships.
To me thus far it seems like it said blasters can't do X as their category of weapon is not suited for blasting ships, and then expanded on some models of blasters which were built with more power, like going from a handgun to a shotgun.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that Heavy Blaster pistols have higher yields then the larger blaster rifles seemingly at the cost of accuracy and payload. The heavy blasters are the shotgun or the .50 cal BMG rifle. The next size up is the E-WEB type weapons that almost have to be mounted on vehicles. That would make talking about such an ability rather silly.

There is also that tiny blaster that destroyed an AAT in Episode one shot

Mr. Oragahn wrote: My point being that depending on the interpretation, there's not even a need to leave the door open for an "in theory" caveat of some kind.
I completely agree, you need more then a vague quote.

Mr. Oragahn wrote: Now that is very interesting. Simply joining the dots, we therefore have heavy blasters which are clearly capable of putting holes in the armoured hulls of small cargos. The MF, as per TESB, already was a tough ship.

The problem being that it doesn't say how heavy it is. The New Essential Guide To Weapons & Technology describes heavy blasters such as handguns.
We're a far cry from the bulky piece carried by stormtroopers. Not counting the equally huge power pack.
There are three classes of blaster pistol:
Sporting Blasters: Westar-34 Blaster Pistol
Heavy Blasters: DL-44 Heavy Blaster
Hold-Out Blaster: Q2 Hold-Out Blaster (Naboo Royal Pistol)

Blaster Rifles are given their own page.
The E-11 is the only example given

Finally you have the Repeating Blasters
The E-WEB is given as an example. It is classed in the article as an "Emplacement Weapon, Heavy Blaster".

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Lucky » Fri Nov 02, 2012 7:38 am

sonofccn wrote: I'm afraid I don't see your point. I have made no arguments regarding the mechanism by which blasters operate. I have suggested the possibility that a larger weapon could be more powerful, via more efficent/larger gas chambers/prismatic crystals etc, and that the desired effect, breaching hulls, may require something larger than a pistol.
You said something that sounded like you were theorizing that blasters that can't breach starship hulls might work differently then those that can.

The DL-44 is actually rather large by the standards of even blaster rifle once of remove the stock and barrel from the blaster rifles. The short barrel might be why its range is so limited.

The quotes provided already say heavy blaster pistols are more powerful then most blaster rifles. That would kind of put a kink in the theory that size matters to the degree required. You seemingly don't get a massive improvement in blaster performance until you get to things like E-WEB, but those have notably larger power sources, and requires external cooling systems.
sonofccn wrote: Except the word "worry" over implies what is really just a bit of fluff describing a weapon. At it core it states the weapon can do X but can't do Y. That's it. Anything else is an assumption, perhaps justified or perhaps not, which can and should be tested against the larger evidence.
There is no reason to design a weapon to not do something that no similar weapon can do. The quote is saying there are blasters pistols that can breach starship hulls, and there are blasters that can not breach stormtrooper armor.

sonofccn wrote: Its talking of personal shields and then just says armor. If it meant starship grade armor it would say so. It is an unreasonable assumption to assume its talking around or neglecting to mention starship breaching firepower in an piece focused on firepower.
The same page already established that less powerful blasters can defeat body armor. It would be redundant to state that a weapon 4 times as powerful can do the same.

sonofccn wrote: Even if a tank was better armored than merely a civilian "starship" you made claims regarding Star Destroyers which are warships and fairly powerful ones at that.
How thick is Star Destroyer armor? Republic Attack Cruiser armor looks to be only inches in some places, and the Invisible Hand had very easily broken windows shredded armor. This ignores the fact the Millennium Falcon is considered a Starship in Star Wars where many settings would call it something like a shuttle.

I need to remember that a humorous tone does not carry over well when you are communicating with written text. Who in their right mind would stick their hand outside a spaceship while in space?
sonofccn wrote: Which has no bearing on this hypothetical hull breaching blaster. Simply because a pistol is described as being unable to do Y doesn't mean there must be a pistol that can do Y.
There is no point in bringing up hull breaching as a possibility if it is not possible with a blaster pistol. If blaster pistols can not breach hulls then stating a specific model can't breach hulls as a safety feature. The Article is about X, and says something is possible then it is logical to think X can do what is describe rather then assume Y is what is needed when X is described as more powerful then most Y.

You seem to assume pistol equals less powerful for some reason in spite of being told otherwise. We are specifically told there are blaster pistols that sacrifice everything for yields that are higher then most larger weapons.

sonofccn wrote: I presume you mean fallacy. And no. It would be a fallacy if I argued merely because a weapon was bigger it must be more powerful however we must note we are dealing with two weapons in roughly the same tech base, which have equal reason to maximize firepower and thus damage potential, and the Tie laser cannon can be expected to deal with starship hulls, and pesky shields, far more often than a heavy blaster would. There is no reason for starfighter weaponry to be equal to a heavy blaster much less an E-11, which has demostrated no where near the power of Han's blaster for instance, and if the latter could damage the MF's hull the Ties should have went through it like a hot knife through butter.
Your first paragraph in the response I'm responding to looks like you are claiming bigger is better to me.

TIE blaster cannons often leave smaller craters then Han's gun, and the same can be said for snow speeders used by the Rebels. Much of that bulk is cooling systems, and things to increase range according to the SWTNEGW&T.

sonofccn
Starship Captain
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
Location: Sol system, Earth,USA

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by sonofccn » Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:12 pm

Lucky wrote:The DL-44 is actually rather large by the standards of even blaster rifle once of remove the stock and barrel from the blaster rifles. The short barrel might be why its range is so limited.
The quotes provided already say heavy blaster pistols are more powerful then most blaster rifles. That would kind of put a kink in the theory that size matters to the degree required.
You seemingly don't get a massive improvement in blaster performance until you get to things like E-WEB, but those have notably larger power sources, and requires external cooling systems.
So A) heavy blasters are big according to you but B) but put a kink in the idea size has a relation to firepower even through C) the most powerful infantry based blaster in common use is the mammoth E-WEB.

Simply put there is sufficent evidence to draw size is an issue in terms of firepower of blasters. Not the sole issue and ultimately there are tradeoffs for every action but it is there. Which brings us back to not knowing the size of a blaster needed to pierce a starship's hull other than a standard pistol won't suffice.
There is no reason to design a weapon to not do something that no similar weapon can do.
For the last time the quote doesn't say they specificly designed the gun to not do Y. They comment it can do X while not doing Y. Your making an assumption plain and simple.
The same page already established that less powerful blasters can defeat body armor. It would be redundant to state that a weapon 4 times as powerful can do the same.
Well for starters how about it establishes its range of penertration, that it can more easily pierce body armor than a blaster pistol because its powerful enough to shoot through personal shields? And even if it is redundant so what? That is what its says, the context is quite clearly on personal items not starships.
How thick is Star Destroyer armor?
Irrevelent. Said armor is designed to deal with capitol ship weapons which being bigger within same tech base and having absolutely every reason to maximize their ability to kill enemy warships should be as powerful if not more than a hand held weapon.
This ignores the fact the Millennium Falcon is considered a Starship in Star Wars where many settings would call it something like a shuttle.
You were the one who suggested an ISD was vunerable to a heavy blaster Lucky. The fact Starship is a loose term only adds to the ambigiousness of the quote and the dangers of making conclusions from it.
I need to remember that a humorous tone does not carry over well when you are communicating with written text.
Oh I think we all gathered you were attempting to make a joke. It was based upon an interpentation few if any would agree with however.
There is no point in bringing up hull breaching as a possibility if it is not possible with a blaster pistol.
Strictly speaking from the quote merely says it isn't possible. That the blaster can do X but can't do Y. We do not know what it will take to do Y.
The Article is about X, and says something is possible then it is logical to think X can do what is describe rather then assume Y is what is needed when X is described as more powerful then most Y.
The Article says X is possible, piercing stormtrooper armor, it doesn't say Y is possible, it only mentions Y in terms that it can't be done, and than moves on to talk about Z, more powerful handguns,. This would be like mentioning a handgun can pierce through a human target but can't say ten feet of reinforced concrete then talking about a .44 Magnum.
Your first paragraph in the response I'm responding to looks like you are claiming bigger is better to me.
Within the same tech base and similar imperative. Which my example would match.
TIE blaster cannons often leave smaller craters then Han's gun, and the same can be said for snow speeders used by the Rebels.
We don't really get much for Ties to shoot against that we can make comparisons to. We have the asteriods in TESB but we don't see Han shoot any so we don't know how well that would have fared. As to snow speeders they do not engage capitol ships to the best of my knowledge and therefore would not have the same imperative as a Tie fighter.
Much of that bulk is cooling systems, and things to increase range according to the SWTNEGW&T.
The size difference through makes such thought ludicrus. If Han's blaster, which can be fired repeatedly and not immolate him, can cut through ISD armor a Tie should not have any issues taking out the MF. As far accuracy considering the ranges Ties typically engage at that should not be a serious problem.

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Lucky » Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:31 am

sonofccn wrote: So A) heavy blasters are big according to you but B) but put a kink in the idea size has a relation to firepower even through C) the most powerful infantry based blaster in common use is the mammoth E-WEB.

Simply put there is sufficent evidence to draw size is an issue in terms of firepower of blasters. Not the sole issue and ultimately there are tradeoffs for every action but it is there. Which brings us back to not knowing the size of a blaster needed to pierce a starship's hull other than a standard pistol won't suffice.
An E-WEB is a very different animal then a blaster rifle of pistol. E-WEB is powered by a Class-4T3 power generator, but blaster rifles and pistols are powered by power packs. It would be rather pointless to lug around an E-WEB if it wasn't head and shoulders above blaster rifles. The Snowtrooper chose to take the time to set up the E-WEB rather then just use their blasters on the M.Falcon at Hoth remember.

The barrel of a blaster has little to nothing to do with its output per bolt. It seems that barrel length effects the safe rate of fire and range of the blaster. Cut off the stock and the barrel of a blaster rifle and you would seemingly have a heavy blaster pistol.

Those trade offs as I've been trying to explain are not firepower, but:
SWTNEGTW&T Page: 6 wrote: Blasters aren't without their drawbacks. They can be prone to overheating, especially when inadequately maintained or modified for full-automatic fire. An overheated blaster will lock up or, far worse, explode in the user's hand. On backwater worlds such as Tatooine, blasters are considered expensive weapons because they require a constant supply of power packs and blaster gas. Blasters have been tightly regulated under both the Empire and the New Republic. Many blaster pistols, including the DL-44, remain illegal on most New Republic worlds.
SWTNEGTW&T Page: 9 wrote: A typical blaster rifles factory enhancement is the ability to alternate among semiautomatic, fully automatic, and pulse-fire settings
This is why blaster rifles are used. They have higher rates of fire, and longer ranges then blaster pistols.

sonofccn wrote: For the last time the quote doesn't say they specificly designed the gun to not do Y. They comment it can do X while not doing Y. Your making an assumption plain and simple.
Then why are they saying blaster pistol can breach starship hulls? On top of that E-11 at full power seem to be able to possibly breach airlocks in episode 4, and Han thought he could blast his way through the sealed door to the trash compactor. Reall, it's hardly outlandish.

sonofccn wrote: Well for starters how about it establishes its range of penertration, that it can more easily pierce body armor than a blaster pistol because its powerful enough to shoot through personal shields? And even if it is redundant so what? That is what its says, the context is quite clearly on personal items not starships.
Then they would have had to phrase it differently.

Heavy Blaster Pistol > Most Blaster Rifles > Sporting and Hold-out Blaster Pistols

The lowly E-11 can seemingly breach walls in cellblocks, airlocks on ships, and random grates in cell blocks in the movies, and Han's blaster pistol seems relatively on par with the highest showing of the E-11.

sonofccn wrote: Irrevelent. Said armor is designed to deal with capitol ship weapons which being bigger within same tech base and having absolutely every reason to maximize their ability to kill enemy warships should be as powerful if not more than a hand held weapon.
It's rather relevant given what we see an E-11 do in Episode 4 and the fact Han expected to be able to blast his way out of the trash compactor. As odd as it might sound, a trash compactor needs to be rather sturdy.

sonofccn wrote: You were the one who suggested an ISD was vunerable to a heavy blaster Lucky. The fact Starship is a loose term only adds to the ambigiousness of the quote and the dangers of making conclusions from it.
It was a joke though fighters are a threat to Star Destroyers as is the Falcon

sonofccn wrote: Oh I think we all gathered you were attempting to make a joke. It was based upon an interpentation few if any would agree with however.
It's based on other people here apparently not having the same book handy, and forgetting what blasters did in Ep.4.

sonofccn wrote: Strictly speaking from the quote merely says it isn't possible. That the blaster can do X but can't do Y. We do not know what it will take to do Y.
sonofccn wrote: The Article says X is possible, piercing stormtrooper armor, it doesn't say Y is possible, it only mentions Y in terms that it can't be done, and than moves on to talk about Z, more powerful handguns,. This would be like mentioning a handgun can pierce through a human target but can't say ten feet of reinforced concrete then talking about a .44 Magnum.
Look at the quote again:
ISBN 978-0-345-44903-0 Page: 6 wrote: The DH-17 is meant for shipboard combat: its bolts are capable of penetrating stormtrooper armor, but can't breach the hull of a starship.
The DH-17 is specially designed for use on starships, but what is so special about being designed to be used on starships?

Being able to defeat stormtrooper armor would not make a blaster better suited for use on a starship.

Not being able to breach starship hulls would be a feature you would want on a blaster meant to be used on a starship, but it is only a design feature if there are blaster pistols that can breach starship hulls.

We see in the Episode 4 that E-11 can possibly breach hulls over Tattooien, when the stormtroopers break into the detention center on the deathstar, and again when Princess Leia blasts the grate.

Heavy blasters are stated to be more powerful then most blaster rifles.

Using something called logic we can conclude there are blaster pistols that can breach hulls. It is the only logical conclusion.
_____
I have no idea why you would compare a heavy blaster pistol to a real world pistol when they are clearly stated and shown in the movies to be similar in power to full on rifles, and blaster output has little to do with barrel length.
sonofccn wrote: Within the same tech base and similar imperative. Which my example would match.
Then you should have no problem believing a heavy blaster pistol can have a higher output then an E-11 which can seemingly blast through airlocks and cellblock walls.

A hull breach of any size is a major problem when in space.

sonofccn wrote: We don't really get much for Ties to shoot against that we can make comparisons to. We have the asteriods in TESB but we don't see Han shoot any so we don't know how well that would have fared. As to snow speeders they do not engage capitol ships to the best of my knowledge and therefore would not have the same imperative as a Tie fighter.
We see what T.I.E. weapons can do to R2-D2 don't we?

Don't we see Anikin shoot out a shield generator in ROTS with his fighter?


Don't we see an AAT fire at some N-1 and miss at the end of Ep.1?
sonofccn wrote: The size difference through makes such thought ludicrus. If Han's blaster, which can be fired repeatedly and not immolate him, can cut through ISD armor a Tie should not have any issues taking out the MF. As far accuracy considering the ranges Ties typically engage at that should not be a serious problem.
That is pretty much what the fluff says. Heavy Blaster pistols have higher yields per bolt then many Blaster Rifles, but have less range and lower rates of fire. The lower rates of fire has to do with the blaster pistol overheating.

Han's blaster seems larger to me then an E-11 if you cut off the barrel and stock of the E-11.

The fluff is vague as to what kind of starship it is talking about, but Star Wars vehicles seem to have odd design flaws. I highly doubt a heavy blaster pistol would have a hard time taking out a window on a ship.

sonofccn
Starship Captain
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
Location: Sol system, Earth,USA

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by sonofccn » Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:17 am

Lucky wrote:An E-WEB is a very different animal then a blaster rifle of pistol. E-WEB is powered by a Class-4T3 power generator, but blaster rifles and pistols are powered by power packs. It would be rather pointless to lug around an E-WEB if it wasn't head and shoulders above blaster rifles.
Okay. Now think. If firepower was not linked at all to size why would they bother lugging around something the fracking size of a E-web? Clearly firepower, be it in terms of a powerful enough generator or cooling system so it doesnt instantly explode in your face, is connected to size. You couldn't build a hand blaster with the same stopping power as the E-Web and in fact the E-Web is only blaster the Empire fields as an infantry weapon which could pose a threat to the MF. A hardly super large and imposing ship.

The Snowtrooper chose to take the time to set up the E-WEB rather then just use their blasters on the M.Falcon at Hoth remember.
I'm the one arguing size has a relation to firepower Lucky. You are arguing the inverse. I bloody well remember they needed the E-Web.
Those trade offs as I've been trying to explain are not firepower, but:
This is why blaster rifles are used. They have higher rates of fire, and longer ranges then blaster pistols.
Your quote doesn't say blaster rifle are used because of "higher rates of fire, and longer ranges then blaster pistols" it mentions blasters in general have a over heating issue. ROF is part of it but to claim that is the sole part and the only difference betweena blaster pistol and a blaster rifle is you once again stepping out on a ledge.
Then why are they saying blaster pistol can breach starship hulls?
It doesn't Lucky. It states a weapon can't breach a starship hull. What you are talking about is your inference of what the text means. An interpetation which doesn't hold even wthin the same book, would require outlandish assumptions like the writer is talking around firepower on the heavy blaster blub regarding firepower.
On top of that E-11 at full power seem to be able to possibly breach airlocks in episode 4, and Han thought he could blast his way through the sealed door to the trash compactor. Reall, it's hardly outlandish.
One unless E-11's have a blow torch feature it likely wasn't an E-11 which blew through the airlock door. Second neither a trash compactor nor an airlock door is a starship's hull.
Then they would have had to phrase it differently.
In your opinion. But my suggestion fits the text a lot better than your intepetation does.
Heavy Blaster Pistol > Most Blaster Rifles > Sporting and Hold-out Blaster Pistols
Well I'd state it: Heavy Blaster Pistol > Most Blaster Rifles > Blaster Pistols >Sporting and Hold-out Blaster Pistols. But generally speaking I'm not disputing this.
It's rather relevant given what we see an E-11 do in Episode 4 and the fact Han expected to be able to blast his way out of the trash compactor. As odd as it might sound, a trash compactor needs to be rather sturdy.
No its not. Nothing you cited has ever been fired upon by capitol ship weapons, none of it has ever been cited as to be on par with withstanding such. It has zero relation and nothing to do with our argument.
It was a joke though fighters are a threat to Star Destroyers as is the Falcon
A Tie figher doesn't have a heavy blaster. It has a laser cannon. And for the record the nearest the Falcon got to threatening a Star Destroyer was when it "rammed" one. Otherwise it typically runs away from them.
It's based on other people here apparently not having the same book handy, and forgetting what blasters did in Ep.4.
For the first part considering its based on a passage you cited I find that a weak excuse and as for the second blasters were not depicted as a threat to a starship's hull.
The DH-17 is specially designed for use on starships, but what is so special about being designed to be used on starships?
No. Its meant for shipboard combat. That's the niche market its made and sold for. It doesn't say it is specially designed to fill this niche, more so than any weapon, that would be an assumption on your part.
Being able to defeat stormtrooper armor would not make a blaster better suited for use on a starship.
Actually you are likely to combat Stormtroopers in shipboard combat, considering Imperial ships are crawling with the blokes, so I could see where such would come in handy. Speculation granted but based on evidence.
Not being able to breach starship hulls would be a feature you would want on a blaster meant to be used on a starship, but it is only a design feature if there are blaster pistols that can breach starship hulls.
But we have nothing that says it is a design feature. All we know is the gun is meant to be used on starships, can pierce stormtrooper armor but not a starship's hull. That's it. Everything else is speculation.
We see in the Episode 4 that E-11 can possibly breach hulls over Tattooien, when the stormtroopers break into the detention center on the deathstar, and again when Princess Leia blasts the grate.
Your confusing hulls with bulkheads? Because none of those examples breach the hull. The only thing close would be the airlock scene and that's parsing "Hull" unbelievably fine. So fine it would be far more informative to have actually stated it can't breach an airlock door.
Using something called logic we can conclude there are blaster pistols that can breach hulls. It is the only logical conclusion.
So walk me through this. Blaster pistols/blaste rifles have been shown shooting through things which are not a starship's hull. Heavy blasters are more powerful than most blaster rifles. Ergo blasters pistols can shoot through starship hulls?...you just made baby Spock cry! :)
have no idea why you would compare a heavy blaster pistol to a real world pistol
analogy
and blaster output has little to do with barrel length.
If you have a canon quote for this tidbit I would of course welcome it.
Then you should have no problem believing a heavy blaster pistol can have a higher output then an E-11 which can seemingly blast through airlocks and cellblock walls
I don't have a problem with a heavy blaster being more powerful than a E-11. Never have, never will. It is your assumption either of the above can shoot through a starship's hull which I took issue with.
We see what T.I.E. weapons can do to R2-D2 don't we?
Strictly speaking Han never shot R2-D2 that I recall. As well since R2-D2 was sitting inside/ontop of a presumbly shielded fighter that may have afflicted the results. So for absolute fairness we would need Han to shoot an astromech under identical conditions.
Don't we see Anikin shoot out a shield generator in ROTS with his fighter?
That wasn't a Tie fighter and we don't have any comparison to Han's blaster.
Don't we see an AAT fire at some N-1 and miss at the end of Ep.1?
If we were arguing which had more firepower an AAT or Han's blaster I could see where this might be useful but we are not.
That is pretty much what the fluff says. Heavy Blaster pistols have higher yields per bolt then many Blaster Rifles, but have less range and lower rates of fire.
Also less ammo. Only like 25 shots for a standard DL-44. But that is comparing this to something like this a weapon not massively larger than it. I'm talking about laser cannons mounted on a fracking Tie, weapons which if could pierce through a starship's hull would, which by virtue of not having to be man portable weapons have access to "better" equipment. Even if you want to argue its only cooling systems which are the inhibiting factor by being larger it can mount better cooling systems and generate a larger "pulse" without risk of blowing itself up.
The lower rates of fire has to do with the blaster pistol overheating.
For blasters that were modifed from semi-auto to full auto. It was an example of overheating not the sole cause. Nor was over heating presented as the sole issue with blasters.
I highly doubt a heavy blaster pistol would have a hard time taking out a window on a ship.
Perhaps but a window is hardly what one thinks of when you hear of the word "hull". Like I said before that is a very fine parsing of the word rendering it virtually without meaning.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Jun 15, 2013 11:24 pm

http://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/ ... t-10791774
Jared wrote:AND the Storm Troopers of Joker Squad sent down to check the remains of a Hutt compound on Napdu for survivors after it was bombed by a Pellaeon-class Star Destroyer. Despite the "overkill" of the bombardment, they were not walking around ground zero of anything resembling a gigaton explosion.
Any info on that?
Last edited by Mr. Oragahn on Mon Aug 19, 2013 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Mon Aug 19, 2013 2:50 pm

Evidence of hull-hugging shields in space found in the book THE ADVENTURES OF LANDO CALRISSIAN #2 : Lando Calrissian and the Flamewind of Oseon.

Rejects Saxton's notion that defense shields in space don't hugg hulls but instead obey some (odd) volumetric rule and fade over a distance.
And before someone objects, this is observed while the Falcon is stuck deep down a chiasm that protects her from particle winds. Not much of a dense planetary atmosphere to be found here, then.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Picard » Sat Sep 07, 2013 9:33 am

I'm not sure wether it has been pointed out, but Rise of the Dark Force by Zahn contradicts ICS-level firepower. There is Luke using lightsaber to cut through hull of (aging) heavy cruiser, ISD being destroyed because it got rammed by a 600-meter ship, AT-ATs very definetly don't have kiloton-level firepower and there may have been other examples as well (it's been years since I've read it).

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Sep 14, 2013 3:07 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:http://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/ ... t-10791774
Jared wrote:AND the Storm Troopers of Joker Squad sent down to check the remains of a Hutt compound on Napdu for survivors after it was bombed by a Pellaeon-class Star Destroyer. Despite the "overkill" of the bombardment, they were not walking around ground zero of anything resembling a gigaton explosion.
Any info on that?
Trying to find more info on that event, I looekd into wookieepedia's pages...

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Joker_Squad
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Destruction_of_Da_Soocha
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Napdu
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Vul_Isen
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Darth_Azard

It would seem the reference is hidden in either of those two books:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_War ... es,_Part_1
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_War ... es,_Part_2

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

Post by Lucky » Thu Jan 09, 2014 7:54 am

New year, and a new Star Wars book.
Publisher: Del Rey Series: Star Wars Title: STAR WARS THE NEW ESSENTIAL GUIDE TO VEHICLES & VESSELS ISBN: 0-345-44902-9 Page: 115 wrote: Republic Assult Ship
RHE Acclamator-Class Transgalactic Military Assault Ship


Once troops are released, the assault ship's mission profile changes to provide ground support. Scanning systems, including an extremely powerful radar array, gather data on enemy positions to assist in ground campaigns. The assault ship can also unleash a terrible orbital bombardment, launching high-yield proton torpedos at slow moving targets and opening fire with 12 turbolasers to destroy buildings and emplacements. During the Clone Wars, tracking devices in every clone trooper's helmet allowed controllers aboard the assault ship to monitor troop movements and coordinate attacks.
Strange use for 200 gigaton guns.
Publisher: Del Rey Series: Star Wars Title: STAR WARS THE NEW ESSENTIAL GUIDE TO VEHICLES & VESSELS ISBN: 0-345-44902-9 Pages: XII - XIII wrote:
Turbolaser

While starfighters tend to rely on standard laser cannons, capital ships, military installations, and space station can support the much larger and more destructive turbolaser. The energy blasts produced by a turbolasercan teat through armored starships and demolish entire fighter squadrons. A turbolaser's effective range is between double and triple that of laser cannon, and many capital ships carry turbolasers capable of targeting planetary structures.

This increased power comes at a significant cost, turbolasers recharge slowly and require dedicated turbines, multiple capacitor banks, and expensive and high-maintenanence independent cryogenic cooling systems. Trained crews must often be assigned to turbolasers to carefully monitor energy flows, in the hope of avoiding explosive power surges. Because of their low rate of fire and slow rotation speeds, turbolasers can be dodged by skilled pilots.

Turbolaser placement is extremely importent. When installed haphazardly, as is the case on the Trade Federation's battleships, turbolasers do not provide complete complete defensive coverage, and small starfighters can slip through the large openings between turbolaser emplacements in order to attack the capital ship. Aboard well-designed capital ships, including Imperial Star Destroyers, turbolasers are organized into banks. Computerized fire-control systems synchronize each bank, ensuring sustained barrages that are far more difficult to avoid. Turbolasers may also be controlled by trained live gunners located in protected stations.
It's rather funny how no turbolasers are depicted in the ICS.

Post Reply