List of expanded universe sources incompatible with ICS

[User1601]

That's beacouse EU has nothing to do with canon - it's separate, non-canon universe, and as such does not have to be consistent with primary universe.

You perfectly know the EU itself tries its best to be consistent with the higher material, so from the EU's position it has to be.

BWAHAHAHHAAHAHHAHAA

[Admiral Breetai]

You perfectly know the EU itself tries its best to be consistent with the higher material, so from the EU's position it has to be.
Now, as I said, let's not derail this any further. If you want to continue this -although I wouldn't see any point to this considering the basic fact put forth- let's do so in another thread.

that's why you have massively inconsistent force powers Luke beating up elder gods and spamming a battle aura larger then the galaxy like some freaken jack kirby comic?

or the ICS? I mean some EU aspects are or try to be consistent but c'mon man

[User1601]

You perfectly know the EU itself tries its best to be consistent with the higher material, so from the EU's position it has to be.
Now, as I said, let's not derail this any further. If you want to continue this -although I wouldn't see any point to this considering the basic fact put forth- let's do so in another thread.

that's why you have massively inconsistent force powers Luke beating up elder gods and spamming a battle aura larger then the galaxy like some freaken jack kirby comic?

or the ICS? I mean some EU aspects are or try to be consistent but c'mon man

As I posted in another thread, Starlog Magazine's Official Star Wars Technical Journal of the Imperial Forces, Volume #2, was published by LFL in 1994; and it completely contradicts the ICS, which was published by the second-rate DK Publishing in 1998.

Therefore the ICS clearly DIDN'T try to be consistent, since they should have known about the official source published 4 years earlier!

The tech journal is definitely higher canon, since it's 1) the official source by LFL, while 2) it was written earlier.

The ICS, in contrast, is a wanked-up comic-book which DELIBERATELY fan-wanked the Tech Journal's figures.

[Picard]

You perfectly know the EU itself tries its best to be consistent with the higher material, so from the EU's position it has to be.

It tries and fails on so many points that it's just pathetic. EU is worse than Star Trek when it comes to consistency, and besides, it is only goodwill of authors to try and keep it consistent with canon.

BTW., if games count as part of EU, has anyone checked Star Wars: Empire at War? I played demo once, and there is whole lot of contradictions.

[User1601]

You perfectly know the EU itself tries its best to be consistent with the higher material, so from the EU's position it has to be.

It tries and fails on so many points that it's just pathetic. .

It does NOT try; in addition to deliberately ignoring the Tech Manual above, Darkstar details here how the firepower figures given in the Episode II ICS are nothing more than a circle-jerk between Curtis Saxton and his beatoff-buds at SDN to fantasize about defeating Star Trek because the live-action video doesn't do it for them.

[Picard]

Exactly my point.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

I don't see how any of these contradictions are crushing.

For example, how exactly is what appears to be a 1 kiloton weapon visible from space?

More on that, long range turbolasers are actually, believe it or not, implied (or more like deductible by the obvious carelessness of the authors) to be anti-starfighter weapons. Why? Because Han Solo was scared for a fighter squadron because they were up against a SSD with long range turbolasers, and heavy turbolasers are unsuitable for fighting starfighters. Therefore, long range turbolasers are:

a) long ranged because they're super accurate

or

b) long ranged because they're very powerful

If B was true, then why are they called long range turbolasers and not just "super heavy" turbolasers or something? Why are they so accurate?




The LOTF: Inferno example is just an outlier, like the numerous low end showings of Star Trek that I could bring up (a large chemical explosion being stronger than photon torpedos, said torpedos failing to shatter an asteroid barely larger than itself, the Enterprise's hull being penetrated by the kinetic energy similar to that of an AK-47 barrage, etc). The very same author contradicts himself again when he has the turbolasers of a star destroyer instantly vaporizing 10km by 10km orbital mirrors.

Troy Denning then contradicts himself more by having the former Chief of State's suicide bomb being small enough to hide on himself, yet powerful enough to be seen from orbit when it explodes, and for star destroyers to be able to blast ships into their elementary particles. So why are you guys only looking at his lower end firepower showings?




Any and all sub kiloton showings from Star Wars or Star Trek are laughably ridiculous by nature. The idea that any interstellar civilization would use sub kiloton weapons for combat when their engines would have to be many hundreds of times more powerful just to reach the nearest star is silly. And Star Trek has its fair share of sub kiloton showings.

[Mike DiCenso]

Not sure who and what you're responding to, so I'll refrain from going into detailed debunkings of your likely highly questionable claims about Trek and Wars tech. Suffice to say, this is a thread that lists sources incompatible with ICS to debunk the Warsie common claim that everything in the EU perfectly meshes with the ICS, thus no contradiction, and therefore it is valid. If you don't think that there is a source that is not being accurately reported, you need to provide proper quotes and page reference numbers. Preferably scan the pages in and post the images here as several people have done to show that Warsies lied about the original source material supporting high SW numbers when it didn't.
-Mike

[StarWarsStarTrek]

I doubt that many Warsies would claim that Star Wars canon is totally inconsistent, just like how the Star Trek canon is highly inconsistent. It's just that the upper end showings are more consistent with each other and rationizable, while the low end shOwings have the author contradicting said often times unrealistic showing the next book or within the same book.

[Picard]

Star Wars canon is highly consistent... not that it is hard, since it is made up from 6 movies, their novelizations and one TV series.

[User1356]

Star Wars canon is highly consistent... not that it is hard, since it is made up from 6 movies, their novelizations and one TV series.

Nope, the cartoon is highly inconsistent with the movies

[Lucky]

Star Wars canon is highly consistent... not that it is hard, since it is made up from 6 movies, their novelizations and one TV series.

Nope, the cartoon is highly inconsistent with the movies

I've heard this before, but no one ever backs it up. Why don't you start a tread that shows this?

[Admiral Breetai]

[Nope, the cartoon is highly inconsistent with the movies

I've heard this before, but no one ever backs it up. Why don't you start a tread that shows this?[/quote]

the Cartoon done by the guy who did Samurai Jack while arguably the single greatest piece of EU is massively inconsistent

if he means the CGI show..than aside from the really bad aim and near kiloton fire power...(which honestly isn't that staggeringly under par for wars) it's not that bad

[Praeothmin]

Star Wars canon is highly consistent... not that it is hard, since it is made up from 6 movies, their novelizations and one TV series.

Nope, the cartoon is highly inconsistent with the movies

You are correct, of course, the first Clone Wars animated series is not at all consistent with the movies, but TCW is, if you compare it to AotC and RotS... :)

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Star Wars canon is highly consistent... not that it is hard, since it is made up from 6 movies, their novelizations and one TV series.

Nope, the cartoon is highly inconsistent with the movies

I've heard this before, but no one ever backs it up. Why don't you start a tread that shows this?

TCW routinely shows combat ranges for space battles within a km, when Lando labeled a few dozen kilometers as "point blank range", and Ackbar, a legendary fleet admiral, thought it to be mad to close within such a range.

TCW isn't even internally consistent, with heavy artillery failing to penetrate the ground while shoulder mounted rocket launchers blow up mountain cliffs.