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.