Discuss, mock, whine, and complain about your favorite and least favorite boards. Shameless plugging and recruiting for other boards goes here as well. (Translation: The affairs of other boards DO concern us.)
We know some Rebel ships escape the battle at Scarff. No reason per say Leia send message Rebel Base that they the Death star plans but, Milliennium Falcon likely bug. Give Han Sola have the ship carry money Han Sola and just go.Study details of Death star at Yavin IV.Were likely found less costly plan to destroy the Death star rather losing get number their best pilots. In practice the Death star had many weakness if battle Scarif questionable justified after all the thermal exhaust port was only one many weakness it biggest weakness factor depend X-9 heavy turbolaser battery and ship size Millennium Falcon fly right in. You could fit something like X-9 heavy Turblaser on ship even smaller Millennium Falcon with the Rebel able to make makeshift. Rebel Fleet attack in that way it like per say destroy this does even go into in theory commandos. This weakness Rebel found about relative early. This also beside point main question why did Millennium Falcon not drop Rebel on Rebel ship.
Here me out.
We only get to see MACO us scaner twice once rescue Hoshi Sato. Second investigating a pirating attack.
Know have see MACO place demolish charges in ENT: "The Shipment"
This hardly mean that MACO training could allow us the scaner effect need help make Xindi super weapon go boom. Archer need to us scaner before put charges in place.
Possible he try and fail to become tactic officer which train use scaner or tircord to put charge to right setting cause maximum damage. Starfleet might will said sorry we can make Caption but, you do have what take to tactic officer.
Talk about reason for him to anger with United Federation of planets.
So apparently a couple of new-canon books now claim the light ball turrets on AT-TE and AT-DP combat walkers are "heavy laser cannons". "Maad 21 heavy laser cannon" and "maad 38 heavy laser cannon" respectively. What were the writers thinking? This initially makes no sense though I come up with a possible solution later on below.
The cross-sections classification as anti-personnel cannons makes sense, as they're powerful enough to destroy heavy infantry like droidekas, produce blasts with limited casualty radii or to inundate light-armoured vehicles.
In the Rebels TV show, the AT-DP cannon requires multiple direct hits to overwhelm the armour of a fellow AT-DP. They can't penetrate the armour in "one-shot". The AT-DP cannon also couldn't penetrate the front armour of an RTT (Recon Troop Transport) even with multiple direct hits. This is despite what Piers Roddance claimed about "a single shot penetrating medium armour".
I have never seen the AT-TE light guns destroy a medium tank.
On a STAR WARS battlefield these are the 'light guns' so "maad heavy laser cannon" is misleading terminology, to say the least.
Even the sponson-guns on an AT-AT which dwarf these ball turrets are considered "medium" weight cannons.
Star Wars Rebels: The Visual Guide
Star Wars: Rogue One: AT-ACT Deluxe Book and 3D Wood Model
A semantical attempt to make sense of "maad heavy laser cannons"
"maad" = "Manned-Anti-Assembly-Defense" ?
Assembly in this sense refers to groups of enemy personnel & light-armoured vehicles. Anti-personnel weapons are often considered "defensive" systems on armoured vehicles, like point-defence.
A "heavy" anti-personnel laser cannon, as opposed to a "light" anti-personnel cannon, retains some effectiveness against light-armoured vehicles, can produce blasts with a casualty radius & can easily destroy the heaviest infantry including shielded droidekas with a single shot. Light-anti-personnel laser cannons might still produce limited casualty radius but are ineffective against light-armoured-vehicles, they are more akin to a personal infantry blaster set to full-power (like a light-repeater, and an example might be the concealable blaster on Poe Dameron's X-wing). But using the light vs heavy laser cannon terminology for anti-personnel cannons is extremely misleading when the term anti-personnel is omitted, as they are all "light guns" in contrast to true "medium" & "heavy" anti-tank guns or artillery.
Light-through to heavy anti-personnel laser cannons are equivalent to real-world ballistic autocannons as opposed to full-scale tank guns or artillery.