sonofccn wrote:
It makes plenty of sense. The whole context is of planet's defenses. And I have demostrated Modern in this sense can't mean average becaue worlds which would still be average don't have them.
Except that modern would refer to industrialized planets and major economic centers, which would happen to be
the most important planets. Would
all of my planets initially possess a planetary shield? No, but your statement that all of my industrial, economic, military and political centers being shielded is "useless" is hilariously off the mark.
And I'm saying if you want to go down that route the people on the rooftops are only seeing the light follow after the glow of the engines, it doesn't mean the turbolasers are aiming for them.
Oh my god...
And what advantages does your interpretation have over the far simpler solution of assuming that "tracking"
actually means that they are tracking? You yourself presented this quote as evidence; now, you are imposing an interpretation that exploits complex loopholes within the quote itself, yet does not explain the facts any better. What reason is there to believe that the turbolasers are not really tracking starfighters, but that the observers are just being tricked into thinking that they are, other than attempting to twist the quote to fit your own calculations (rather than melding your calculations to fit the facts, your twist the facts to fit your calculations. Brilliant!)
Besides, heavy turbolasers are not seen altering their trajectory or firing in any manner that would possibly be mistaking for tracking erratically moving starfighters at Endor. They are firing in straight lines to hit
other capital ships, something that requires no significant change in trajectory, and have absolutely no relation to the zigging and zagging starfighters.
I'd actually like to see the defination that says it must be deliberate.
freedictionary.com:
1. the act or process of following something or someone
1follow the course or trail of (someone or something), typically in order to find them or note their location at various points:
If you wish to say that the turbolasers were merely making the illusion of tracking the starfighters (even though heavy ones would have been firing at distant capital ships), you need to prove it.
I picture thinner more elongated things when I hear of hairlines thent he turbolasers depicted in the movie.
Which would be precisely the
opposite of the "light scatter" you are suggesting here, and would also fit closer with small, light turbolaser bolts than heavy or medium ones.
Well lets look at your theory. We only see one set of turbolasers, the ones "tracking" the fighters.
Of course. Heavy turbolasers have low rates of fire; out of the thousands of tiny streaks of light, the rooftop observers may see a few larger lines. Not enough to be referenced in a concise quote. You might as well ask why missiles aren't mentioned, or torpedos, or flak bursts...you get what I'm saying?
As the forward view from the cabin shows the Tradeship is still firing wildly at the yatch, which we can hear is still being hit, and its random chance the droids are being struck by skimming fire.
By random chance, they just happen to be consistently hitting tiny astromech droids, and nothing else?
As well if they are trying to stop the droids that means they are intent on capturing the ship, otherwise you'd just toast the ship and laugh at the droids, which destroys your argument they wouldn't be holding back against the ship.
I've already stated this.
As opposed to merely hitting harder? At the present rate your MTLs are fracking useless delivering a tiny fraction over a much longer time.
My point is that heavy turbolasers have a larger power output than smaller turbolasers, or else they would be useless. Therefore, their recharge rate will be lower by a lesser margin than their firepower will be higher.
Can you read? Can you look at a link? The Galaxy discharged torpedoes onto the target in a couple of seconds.
Sheesh. I posted an example of a Galaxy class firing torpedoes onto their target in a couple of seconds. It can drop down wind the ,generous, endurace of the Venator in about thirty seconds based on that. Eighteen salvos of four to be precise, should be 72 total torpedoes which the Galaxy class carries more than.
No. You found the
highest rate of fire demonstrated briefly in the entire video, and then presumed that the galaxy class will continue to keep this RoF up, completely ignoring the fact that it visibly
doesn't, and instead only fires in periodic bursts. 55 seconds, for example.
What is more, 300 megatons per second = 9 gigatons in thirty seconds. That is certainly enough to drop a galaxy class.
A ISD is stronger than a Venator but by how much is uncertain. Its rate of fire does not appear aprecitably increased nor has its accuracy.
In a rough guesstimate, an ISD has around a 60% larger surface area than the Venator, and its volume (related to reactor power) would be larger by an even greater margin. Even if we assume that the only difference between the two is size (yet the ISD renders the Venator obsolete), an ISD would output, by your lowball calculations, 480 megatons per second. Ergo, an ISD can drop a galaxy class.
The Tactical fighters? That appeared to be 1 out three shots, equalling the ISD, against a smaller target who was evading far more than the Tantive. An ISD would kill to have had that accuracy in that scenario.
Wait, you thought that the tactical fighters were evading
quickly? They were moving in predictable lines; and yes, they were smaller than the Tantive IV, but they were also almost literally within
spitting distance of the dominion fleet.
At best, the both series' accuracy is equally horrendous, due to intensive jamming technology. But this is ignoring, of course, the ion cannon in ESB.
I'm sorry I misread. I thought you said most are massively more powerful than an ISD. For that I apologize. Now I am going to ask where your getting a break down of the Imperial fleet to say that ISDs are most of it.
ISDs are not most of the imperial fleet. But they constitute the vast majority of the 25,000 star destroyers, given that they are the only ships present at Endor other than the Executor, that they happen to be the only star destroyers encountered in the OT, and that they were the main warships of the Empire at the time. Venators were already effectively phased out by the OT.
The hell? Yes I believe a Galaxy class owns an ISD. Yes I believe by even being in the same field of a Star Destroyer it makes local planetary defense ships virtually worthless. That has nothing to do who I think will win a total, convential war.
No. By your own calculations, an ISD beats the shit out of a galaxy class; the two are relatively equal in damage output, yet the former can tank relative SW firepower for a significantly larger period of time. In a straight up firefight, an ISD wins.
Then, there are
far more ISDs than there are galaxy classes, and there are
far more imperial ships than there are Federation ships. This does not work out well for the UFP.
If you gimp the Galaxy class and pretend the Venator can hit the broadside of a barn.
Exactly. Meaning that, even if an ISD is only the equal of a galaxy class, the counter-invasion your territories will face will be met with completely ineffectual resistance.
No. I said they outnumbered the Federation fleet, cut against most of those are system patrol ships useless in a fight, and had a larger industry because of it. I did not use the words enormous or ridiculous.
Which you just pulled out of your little pocket of convenient assumptions. Whenever is it stated that the 2400 combat starships per sector fleet (not including the 24 star destroyers, and
another 1600 "support" ships) are "patrol ships"? Where did you read or derive this? What's a combat starship but weaker than a star destroyer? Anything ranging from regular destroyers to frigates. And if an ISD and a galaxy were on par, then a frigate and, say, the Enterprise would have even shots against one another; and there are
millions of them.
I don't cling. I state. The DS1 defenses were a joke.
Too bad that we are talking about a completed DS2 here, which will have no critical weakness and no holes in its shields.
There is a remote possiblity undercut by the Empire never builidng them more than one at a time. And they still take years to build.
Which stems from your completely asinine claim that a project built away from one's industrial base is not a hindrance at all, and that a smaller Death Star would still take years to build at home.
This is despite the fact that torpedo spheres comparable in size to small Death Stars were already close to completion within months of the formation of the Empire (RotS). Why is this the case? Oh, right; because they were being built
in the Coruscant system, the economic center of the galaxy.
As I demostrated "modern" worlds as so defined are scarce, quite limited to only the most advanced and industrial worlds. Those still can be caught off guard and the rest I can render asunder quite effortlessly. The dying and the sick will clog what remains drawing everything into chaos. Your starfleets can either be used to try and stop this, spreading yourself thing across countless star systems, or try and pick your way through the Unkown Region into my home territory.
So basically, your plan will only work against planets that
aren't modern (read: backwards), and will do little to harm my actual industrial, military, economic and political centers.
It isn't a gameplay mechanic, its a piece of fluff building the world the players will inhabite. It isn't a mechanic like how powerful a blaster is.
No. I have demostrated that it exists that is all I have to do. And for the last time the hundred frigate thing was an exageration to make a point.
I'm saying far more mass goes into an ISD then for a Y-wing bomber. And I'm saying that per cubic volume the ISD is cheaper as it only costs a thousand times but is like a million times the volume. And this is empirically observed not some theroy of mine. And I am saying we see this same thing in the Death Star versus ISDs. Which is again observed.
Now if you contend with this, you may compare prices of other fighters and see if they fit better. Maybe I picked a bad example, the Y-wings were first OT fighter I could find a price for, but I have supplied evidence to support my contention.
Why isn't Subcommander Tyler speaking here?
