What about Prometheus-class starship vs a Star Destoryer.

[Questor 501]

Mith, you see what I've been going through? All I want is for him to use some logic and I'll leave him alone.

 

 

 

Jesus.

[enigma 521]

Mith, you see what I've been going through? All I want is for him to use some logic and I'll leave him alone.

 

 

 

Jesus.

 

 

 

Then again Mith believes in 1.5 MT turbolasers.

[Questor 501]

Then again Mith believes in 1.5 MT turbolasers.

 

 

 

And I can demonstrate 10 ton photon torpedoes and the fact that Voyager doesn't have enough acceleration to break out of a gravity well, I can also bring up the fact that TNG ships are massively slower than their TMP counterparts, and the fact that photons require more power to launch than a phaser. Its a bit of a Mexican standoff, or it would be if I were doing it for any reason other than mocking Jason.

 

 

 

Not that anything done in the debate in years (other than Ender's stuff on exploration speeds) is really backed up with quantitative evidence, and without that we can all keep cherry picking examples until the end of time.

[Tyralak 12,068]

I agree, Questor. Which is why the debate still exists. The canons themselves are so inconsistent in both universes, that you can pick proof scenes to support your point of view from anywhere. Or in Saxton's case, make shit up and declare it gospel.

[enigma 521]

I agree, Questor. Which is why the debate still exists. The canons themselves are so inconsistent in both universes, that you can pick proof scenes to support your point of view from anywhere. Or in Saxton's case, make shit up and declare it gospel.

 

 

 

Whatever numbers Saxton uses is deemed canon by LucasFilm. What we need is someone here that is a multi billionaire and by out the ST franchise and redo the canon\official policy. Then get some firm numbers.

[Mith 0]

And I can demonstrate 10 ton photon torpedoes and the fact that Voyager doesn't have enough acceleration to break out of a gravity well, I can also bring up the fact that TNG ships are massively slower than their TMP counterparts, and the fact that photons require more power to launch than a phaser. Its a bit of a Mexican standoff, or it would be if I were doing it for any reason other than mocking Jason.

 

 

 

Not that anything done in the debate in years (other than Ender's stuff on exploration speeds) is really backed up with quantitative evidence, and without that we can all keep cherry picking examples until the end of time.

 

 

 

*shrug*

 

 

 

It is possible for higher yields, but I was refering to thus far, the higher canon (for a Venator) is about a few kt at their lowest and 1.5 megatons at their higest. Is it possible to have more power? Certainly, but this must be proven. If you have larger yields (no, not Saxton), then please post them, I'd be happy to see them.

 

 

 

I've even recently been going over the NX and TOS stuff and I'm thinking about going back on the idea of the NX having 50 mt warheads, given what the evidence seems to suggest.

[Questor 501]

*shrug*

 

 

 

It is possible for higher yields, but I was refering to thus far, the higher canon (for a Venator) is about a few kt at their lowest and 1.5 megatons at their higest. Is it possible to have more power? Certainly, but this must be proven. If you have larger yields (no, not Saxton), then please post them, I'd be happy to see them.

 

 

 

I've even recently been going over the NX and TOS stuff and I'm thinking about going back on the idea of the NX having 50 mt warheads, given what the evidence seems to suggest.

 

 

 

Actually my entire point was about the cherry picking of examples. There are ways to generate a huge range of calculations. As I have said repeatedly, those were me going back into my own archives to find stuff I dismiss as absurd simply to screw with Jason.

 

 

 

Recently I haven't really gotten into the technical side of the debate. I'm much more at home in the space where Jason and I were during the Klingon Empire thread, examining societal, historical, and political implications. I think that that is far more reliable and more consistent than direct technological examination. Especially when statistical data is so hard to come by. Jason's inanity annoyed me to the point that I went after him on every level and layer. Even making absurd statements simply to see if he could construct a logical counter-argument. It took him quite a few posts to get to the point where he could prove that Federation medical technology was superior to Klingon. He didn't prove it, so much as I got bored.

 

 

 

I suspect you and I could have had a lot of fun arguing at each other 6-8 years ago, but now I just have a hard time finding the energy to care unless something really new is happening.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

I've even recently been going over the NX and TOS stuff and I'm thinking about going back on the idea of the NX having 50 mt warheads, given what the evidence seems to suggest.

Oragahn shot that full of holes 3km wide

[Tyralak 12,068]

Whatever numbers Saxton uses is deemed canon by LucasFilm. What we need is someone here that is a multi billionaire and by out the ST franchise and redo the canon\official policy. Then get some firm numbers.

 

 

 

*sigh* which has been largely retconned by higher canon.

[enigma 521]

what higher canon? TPM\AOTC\ROTS? Those came at the same time or after Saxton's numbers. I think. Besides they should not overrides calcs based on the original three movies.

[Tyralak 12,068]

TCW is higher than the ICS, and it's been overriding it consistently. The ICS also doesn't correspond with estimations from the movies. It really is out there by itself. Besides, as InvaderSkooj said, the good Warsie debaters make their arguments without relying on that particular piece of fanwank.

[Questor 501]

TCW is higher than the ICS, and it's been overriding it consistently. The ICS also doesn't correspond with estimations from the movies. It really is out there by itself. Besides, as InvaderSkooj said, the good Warsie debaters make their arguments without relying on that particular piece of fanwank.

 

 

 

Tyralak, I'll argue cannon on visuals in TCW and Comics. Given stylization issues, I would argue for Movie level cannon for dialog, but novel level cannon for visuals.

 

 

 

The artwork for TCW and many of the comics - Dark Empire in particular - are highly stylized, making attempts to rationalize visuals very difficult. Is it really that likely that every single Star Destroyer in the Empire is a separate class, or is it more likely that the artists fucked up?

 

 

 

I know this is a level of meta-analysis, but I really think it needs to take place now that we are trying to incorporate the stylized stuff into the upper levels of cannon. It would be very important in ST if the various ST comics were being introduced into cannon as well. Similar issues need to be brought in when trying to tie the OTL elements of Abramsverse into the original cannon, as the visual style of the films are very different, making direct comparisons difficult.

 

 

 

I'm not arguing in favor of the ICS here, although I do have a few rationalization theories that I am working on, but pointing out the difficulties in bringing in the animated material at the same level as the films.

[enigma 521]

TCW is higher than the ICS, and it's been overriding it consistently. The ICS also doesn't correspond with estimations from the movies. It really is out there by itself. Besides, as InvaderSkooj said, the good Warsie debaters make their arguments without relying on that particular piece of fanwank.

 

 

 

Did Saxton do the numbers for the Pre Original Trilogy movies and the TCW? As far as I know. he has only done it for the Original Trilogy and maybe later. His stuff still stands since it happens post clone war. 20 years or so does change things.

[Mith 0]

Did Saxton do the numbers for the Pre Original Trilogy movies and the TCW? As far as I know. he has only done it for the Original Trilogy and maybe later. His stuff still stands since it happens post clone war. 20 years or so does change things.

 

 

 

Saxton did it for the Clone Wars. The others were done by entirely different authors and in fact, make no mention of yields or anything for the original Star Wars. And there's probably a damn good reason as to why.

[Mith 0]

Tyralak, I'll argue cannon on visuals in TCW and Comics. Given stylization issues, I would argue for Movie level cannon for dialog, but novel level cannon for visuals.

 

 

 

The TCW is T Canon, not G canon.

 

 

 

The artwork for TCW and many of the comics - Dark Empire in particular - are highly stylized, making attempts to rationalize visuals very difficult. Is it really that likely that every single Star Destroyer in the Empire is a separate class, or is it more likely that the artists fucked up?

 

 

 

And while true, we should also note then, that it doesn't just come from visuals. We see that logically, they do not have the sort of firepower that Saxton claims. The most famous example is the asteroid field from Downfall of a Droid, where we see that Grievous and Anakin both consider it to be an obstacle. When in fact, if the shielding was so powerful--and if some say, powerful enought to ram through a Galaxy Class Starship without noticing, then we should have seen it here.

 

 

 

We didn't.

 

 

 

I k

now this is a level of meta-analysis, but I really think it needs to take place now that we are trying to incorporate the stylized stuff into the upper levels of cannon. It would be very important in ST if the various ST comics were being introduced into cannon as well. Similar issues need to be brought in when trying to tie the OTL elements of Abramsverse into the original cannon, as the visual style of the films are very different, making direct comparisons difficult.

 

 

 

I'm not arguing in favor of the ICS here, although I do have a few rationalization theories that I am working on, but pointing out the difficulties in bringing in the animated material at the same level as the films.

 

 

 

 

 

I have a problem period taking visuals over what the writers themselves wrote. It's really stupid that someone should consistantly write that a ship can move at 2/3rd the speed of light, but because visually that's not practically possible, then according to the classic debate methods, the writers are wrong.

 

 

 

It should be the other way around. We shouldn't assume that characters are pathelogical liars are retards. That doesn't mean visuals are useless, but they should be considered secondary to the plot.

 

 

 

Anyways, we seem to be derailing a number of threads because it seems there is some desire to quantify the ISD, so I will make a quantifaction thread in the SW only portion of the site.

[Questor 501]

The TCW is T Canon, not G canon.

 

 

 

I am not sure what the new cannon levels are. From the debates around here, I was under the impression that people were treating TCW as the equivalent of the old Movie-cannon. If its actually not, then this entire point is moot.

 

 

 

 

And while true, we should also note then, that it doesn't just come from visuals. We see that logically, they do not have the sort of firepower that Saxton claims. The most famous example is the asteroid field from Downfall of a Droid, where we see that Grievous and Anakin both consider it to be an obstacle. When in fact, if the shielding was so powerful--and if some say, powerful enought to ram through a Galaxy Class Starship without noticing, then we should have seen it here.

 

 

 

We didn't.

 

 

Haven't seen the episode, and probably wont. NJO and RotS pretty much killed any interest I had in Star Wars.

 

 

 

 

I have a problem period taking visuals over what the writers themselves wrote. It's really stupid that someone should consistantly write that a ship can move at 2/3rd the speed of light, but because visually that's not practically possible, then according to the classic debate methods, the writers are wrong.

 

 

 

Unfortunately, as I will demonstrate below, taking straight dialog has problems as well. As an aside to Tyralak:

 

 

 

How much of the old R&Rs are in force here? I think that it would be constructive for us to hammer out some guidelines of how to handle subjects that do come up. Just as before, I doubt anyone will adhere too closely, but defining the scope of the question seems like a good idea.

 

 

 

 

It should be the other way around. We shouldn't assume that characters are pathelogical liars are retards. That doesn't mean visuals are useless, but they should be considered secondary to the plot.

 

 

 

I don't assume they are retards, they demonstrate it on an almost episode-by-episode basis. Leaving aside the ridiculous statements made about biology and evolution, the characters commonly use nonsensical measurements that are out of context. While this happens in many sci-fi series, Star Trek is one of the worst about it simply because of its continual need to create technobabble filler that sounds authentic.

 

 

 

I encounter much the same problem any time I watch a crime procedural drama. Any time computer forensics or image enhancement come up, especially with regard to networking, I find myself yelling at the screen, "It doesn't work that way!" For those shows to accurately explain the damn near voodoo that can be performed by a good computer forensic tech, they would need to educate the viewer on everything from electromagnetism to packet routing. Since that is far beyond the scope of the show, they throw up a pretty graphic and make some "authentic sounding" technobabble explanation.

 

 

 

 

Anyways, we seem to be derailing a number of threads because it seems there is some desire to quantify the ISD, so I will make a quantifaction thread in the SW only portion of the site.

 

 

 

 

Please do, I doubt that I will participate in that, as it is outside my interest area, at least as long as there's nothing on the Jason level going on, but it should generate some interesting debate.

[enigma 521]

I am not sure what the new cannon levels are. From the debates around here, I was under the impression that people were treating TCW as the equivalent of the old Movie-cannon. If its actually not, then this entire point is moot.

 

 

 

<snip>

 

 

 

It is a step down from G-Canon and a step up from C-Canon

 

 

 

Canon Levels

 

 

 

But I wonder where the ICS and other similar material fall under? G or C?

[Praeothmin 532]

But I wonder where the ICS and other similar material fall under? G or C?

 

 

 

I thought all the books fell under C?

[enigma 521]

I thought all the books fell under C?

 

 

 

Elements originating with Lucas in the movie novelizations, reference books, and other sources are also G-canon, though anything created by the authors of those sources is C-canon.

 

 

 

So certain reference material tied directly to the movies is G Canon while the rest is C Canon?

[Questor 501]

So certain reference material tied directly to the movies is G Canon while the rest is C Canon?

 

 

 

So they made it as complicated as they possibly could. Fuck you Lucasarts.

[Jason 27]

May I remined you a star destoryer hard time hiting Han Solo ship.Prometheus-class starship devide it self up into three starships it not going to be that much bigger. We also see the Prometheus class starship us warp attacting. This being said it could most likley fly in and out of Star Destoryer fire range.

[Questor 501]

May I remined you a star destoryer hard time hiting Han Solo ship.Prometheus-class starship devide it self up into three starships it not going to be that much bigger. We also see the Prometheus class starship us warp attacting. This being said it could most likley fly in and out of Star Destoryer fire range.

 

 

 

Who are you trying to remind?

 

 

 

Do we have to go over the whole "quoting" thing again?

 

 

 

We've moved on from your pathetic scenario to a serious discussion of cannon, and the applicability of visuals and dialog to the debate. I believe ST characters being morons was also brought up. This has become a philosophical question of the framing of the entire debate.

 

 

 

BTW, you know how I've been spanking you every time you make a post? I'm doing that because you are unable to perform visual analysis and are forced to rely on the often contradictory dialog.

[Praeothmin 532]

Elements originating with Lucas in the movie novelizations, reference books, and other sources are also G-canon, though anything created by the authors of those sources is C-canon.

 

 

 

The way I read it, it says everything that comes directly from Lucas is G-Canon (names, places, stories, background), and anything that comes directly from the authors of other books is C-Canon (tech analysis, explanations on how the vessels work that weren't directly covered in the movies, etc...).

[InvaderSkooj 1]

May I remined you a star destoryer hard time hiting Han Solo ship.Prometheus-class starship devide it self up into three starships it not going to be that much bigger. We also see the Prometheus class starship us warp attacting. This being said it could most likley fly in and out of Star Destoryer fire range.

You fail..at math 3 parts of a 400+m ship are going to be much larger then a tiny maneuverable 35m long ship

[Mith 0]

I am not sure what the new cannon levels are. From the debates around here, I was under the impression that people were treating TCW as the equivalent of the old Movie-cannon. If its actually not, then this entire point is moot.

 

 

 

G: Movies and their novilizations, as well as the teleplays

 

T: The Clone Wars and the 2012 live action series

 

C: novels, sourcebooks, and the like.

 

 

 

 

 

Haven't seen the episode, and probably wont. NJO and RotS pretty much killed any interest I had in Star Wars.

 

 

 

The Clone Wars movie is pretty uninspiring, and as far as the Jedi are concerned, pretty much shows that they're selfish assholes who don't give a fuck about anyone but themselves...but it's still better than the rest of the prequels if simply because Anakin has been replaced by a younger and less wooden Chakotay.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, as I will demonstrate below, taking straight dialog has problems as well. As an aside to Tyralak:

 

 

 

How much of the old R&Rs are in force here? I think that it would be constructive for us to hammer out some guidelines of how to handle subjects that do come up. Just as before, I doubt anyone will adhere too closely, but defining the scope of the question seems like a good idea.

 

 

 

I might suggest very basic rules.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't assume they are retards, they demonstrate it on an almost episode-by-episode basis. Leaving aside the ridiculous statements made about biology and evolution, the characters commonly use nonsensical measurements that are out of context. While this happens in many sci-fi series, Star Trek is one of the worst about it simply because of its continual need to create technobabble filler that sounds authentic.

 

 

 

I encounter much the same problem any time I watch a crime procedural drama. Any time computer forensics or image enhancement come up, especially with regard to networking, I find myself yelling at the screen, "It doesn't work that way!" For those shows to accurately explain the damn near voodoo that can be performed by a good computer forensic tech, they would need to educate the viewer on everything from electromagnetism to packet routing. Since that is far beyond the scope of the show, they throw up a pretty graphic and make some "authentic sounding" technobabble explanation.

 

 

 

I don't mean to suggest that the characters should always be taken seriously; obviously Data's line about a fish being an amphibian is just God aweful--but there's a reason for that. It was during the writer's strike and in the episode that was the crack of all shit TNG episodes The Outrageous Okana.

 

 

 

On the other hand, the script is much closer to the intentions than a fucked up VFX and so it should be taken more seriously from a character who says that a 50 megaton bomb just went off rather than pick apart the VFX and say said character is basically a bat-shit moron because the cloud didn't last long enough; it's simply absurdities that people take too seriously. These aren't documentaries; they are TV shows. Let's treat them as such instead of holding them to a standard that will force 80% of all of it will fail to hold up to.

 

 

 

I suppose the underlying message is that people be reasonable, but I guess that's just a naive dream.

 

 

 

 

 

Please do, I doubt that I will participate in that, as it is outside my interest area, at least as long as there's nothing on the Jason level going on, but it should generate some interesting debate.

 

 

 

Still need to add much myself, just haven't had much time to focus on that sort of thing lately.