InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 13, 2010 What happens when you plug in 3.472e22J/sec into that?Which end? Front end drops it down couple OoM, Backend bumps it up about 5 or 6 Although by joules per second I presume you mean the backend Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted May 13, 2010 Which end? Front end drops it down couple OoM, Backend bumps it up about 7 or 8 That's my calculation for the amount of power available per mount... so back end. MUWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 13, 2010 That's my calculation for the amount of power available per mount... so back end. MUWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Yeah this is my I bent over backwards for low numbers but still try to accommodate as much canon as possible, not my boil the top 300m of the oceans to destroy the fisheries Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted May 13, 2010 Yeah this is my I bent over backwards for low numbers but still try to accommodate as much canon as possible, not my boil the top 300m of the oceans to destroy the fisheries Come on! 8.3 Teratons per mount, per second is fun! The fireball will last 1.6 hours and be 820km wide! EDIT: Create impulse shock directly to the mantle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 13, 2010 Come on! 8.3 Teratons per mount, per second is fun! The fireball will last 1.6 hours and be 820km wide! EDIT: Create impulse shock directly to the mantle. You forgot the ejecta being thrown into low orbit, to rain down somewhere else Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 13, 2010 The sad thing is my megatons per shot will still be too high for them, since it still implies the unholy "G" word Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted May 13, 2010 Since an ISD2 has a peak reactor output of 9.28e24w or 2.64 zettatons. How much of it can be directed towards the turbolasers? I mean even just half the output was put towards the turbolasers while blasting away at a planet (assuming the ISD2 can utilize all of it's turbolasers) in a period of 24 hours that is 114.048 zettatons. 342.144 zettatons if you use three ISD2s. How much damage can 342 zettatons do to an earth type planet? Yeah, the numbers are funky and not to be taken too seriously. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 13, 2010 Since an ISD2 has a peak reactor output of 9.28e24w or 2.64 zettatons. How much of it can be directed towards the turbolasers? I mean even just half the output was put towards the turbolasers while blasting away at a planet (assuming the ISD2 can utilize all of it's turbolasers) in a period of 24 hours that is 114.048 zettatons. 342.144 zettatons if you use three ISD2s. How much damage can 342 zettatons do to an earth type planet? Yeah, the numbers are funky and not to be taken too seriously. e24 is petatons, e30 is zettatons it would be zettawatts however Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted May 13, 2010 e24 is petatons, e30 is zettatons it would be zettawatts however I converted from watts to tons. e21 is zetta, and e24 is yotta. Check you SI knowledge. Non standard prefixes are e27 xenna and e30 weka. 9.28 yottawatts converts into 2.64 zettatons. Use a guesstimate of half that for the turbolasers (let's say they forgo the use of Ion cannons) and that is 1.32 zettatons. Then multiply that by 86400 seconds in a 24 hour period and that is 114,048 zettatons or 114.048 yottatons. Multiply that by 3 ISD2s and you get 342.144 yottatons or 1.2 wekawatts(? I know that prefix is non standard. It should be 1,200,000 yottawatts). I was off by a magnitude. lol! Funky math indeed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted May 13, 2010 This is my question to Mith regarding this debate: Are you a chick? Like a hot chick? Because Mith strikes me as being a chick's name. And of course the obligatory RayCav question........ Are you under 14 years old? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 13, 2010 I assume that you are willing to back that statement up with numbers, analysis and evidence, right? Because I did. Also, if you are going to cite Brian's site, be aware of what he actually calculated, and the many ways that his analysis was insanely conservative. The asteroid scenes in TESB have been discussed over and over, you really want me to cite the numbers again? In essence, the asteroid sizes ranged from 10 to 70 meters depending on whole MF's scaling you use. Some people said scaling the asteroids from the TL bolt's lengths was bad because of the perspective, so scaling them using the TL bolt's width was more accurate. Brian Young used a 20 meter average, for a vaporisation energy of 60Kton... So, using a 70 meter asteroid, with much greater volume, would yield about 448Ktons. Some shots did indeed come from the dorsal part of the ISD, so from HTLs. As most people agree, the TL bolt is akin to a shaped charge, so most of the energy would be absorbed by the asteroid. Brian forgot to remove the 200K the asteroids will already be at, when calculating the melting and Vaporization energies... As for the Pegasus incident, scaling goes from a 5km to a 10km asteroid using the middle trench (look here for scaling, use the search for "Pegasus" entries, be aware there are many). Using most meaning over 200 of the 250 Torpedoes on a GCS, the destruction of the asteroid to ensure no tech is available to the Romulans means leaving nothing more then small chunks of anything, but using only "fracturation" energy (as per the Asteroid destruction calculator) yields between 250Ktons to 950Ktons. Since Phasers are pretty much in the same ballpark figures as torpedoes (even using 50% of torpedo power), judging from DS9 battle scenes, then an ISD and a GCS pretty well balance out... You'll note that in a previous post, I said much the same thing. But I am not comparing their power directly, I am assuming 100% efficiency and using that to generate a minimum power reactor output. I then scaled the reactor output to an ISD and used that output to calculate the amount of power available to each weapons mount. This generates a minimum. Well, seeing as how they don't operate on the same principle, who says their outputs are scalable as you do? Also, while the reactors may be scalable, have you taken into account the fact that the DS fires 8 beams at once, with each conduit being of greater volume when compared to the DS's reactor then HTLs when compared to the reactor of the ISD? That both of these will need immense power just to move? They both have engines, and no mass lightening, so they would logically need most of their power just to move. The ISD doesn't have such huge rockets on its ass for nothing... So you can bring in badly written EU sources, but people who support Wars can't? How many times must I say it? Yes, you can, as long as higher canon isn't contradicted. No movie shows the firepower Warsies want SW ships to have. TCW doesn't show that either. The DS, in the EU or in the movies, are capable of destroying planets, the only difference is the amount of power needed to do it... Fine, we'll move from gravitational binding force calcs to velocity calcs, which EASILY survive your argument. You know that pops my numbers up about 7 orders of magnitude, right? Really? Because, you know, calculating the speed with shich the debris were moving towards the camera shows us velocities in excess of the escape velocity? Because we know for a fact this velocity was imparted by the DS, and not by the Hyperspace "shunting"? But even if it was the DS that imparted such velocities to the debris, since not all of the planet was in fact destroyed in "realspace", then you cannot calculate speeds for an entire planet's mass of debris... And we haven't even dealt with the planetary shield, So those numbers are minimums as well. Shields who's very existence are still in debate... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 13, 2010 Nope that was the Thrawn Trilogy, nice red herring by the way In what book is the Caamas destruction mentioned? I thought it was in the Thrawn trilogy? Still, it is in the EU, from the same author, in the same "timeline", that such a small force of ships are enough to tip the balance. So the example still stands... While that would cause widespread planetary scale damage, it still wouldn't cause the extinction of all life. For 3 star destroyers just to get to dino-killer level in 24hrs requires 385 megatons/ second Yeah, sure... The problem with your assessment? You seem to conveniently forget that such a planet as Caamas would have power generators, having planetary shields, cities using energy, lights, food processors and people needing heat. Now imagine a 1 Megaton strike hitting such a generator... Remember the small blast from the AT-AT hitting the power generator on hoth? Remember how it resulted in a bigger blast immediately after? Also, the strikes will go on for 24 hours, 1 Megaton at a time. The Dino-killer was one event, that hit in one location. Here, we're talking about many shots pretty evenly distributed over the entire world. Again, I didn't use the smaller guns, and adding to that the explosion of the generators, the buildings falling down on people and other smaller buildings, etc... Another excerp from the Wookiepedia article: After the Imperial bombardment, nearly all flora and fauna either disappeared or were mutated beyond recognition. Not all the flora was destroyed immediately by the bombardment... So the destruction, again, was far from complete... And nothing in the destruction specifies that the planet was lifeless immediately after the Bombardment. These effects were long-term effects, nothing instantaneous. Unlike your interpretation of the event... And given how they have trouble with very large rocks if they can do such a feat it wouldn't be through DET. And I wouldnt count on it, The Dominion had trouble doing that to Cardassia with hundreds or thousands of ships, and the breen attack on Earth was also unimpressive. ISDs also have tourbles with rocks, even low kinetic impactors hitting their towers... The Dominion had not deactivated Cardassian security systems, and were facing Cardassian forces who switched sides, in a conflict that lasted minutes, and yet was sufficient to kill 800 million Cardassians... Try again... The Breen attacked San francisco specifically, and they were all destroyed by Earth's security Forces/Systems/Ships... Again, no 24 hour bombardment, and the defense systems may have had shields... I do agree this is one weak showing, but you're still ignoring higher showings for ST (as you always do) while I don't ignore higher or lower showings for SW. I'm using TESB for a Firepower benshmark, while the equally valid (equally valid to the Caamas example) "Darksaber" has pathetic levels for SW, which I ignore... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted May 14, 2010 The asteroid scenes in TESB have been discussed over and over, you really want me to cite the numbers again? In essence, the asteroid sizes ranged from 10 to 70 meters depending on whole MF's scaling you use. Some people said scaling the asteroids from the TL bolt's lengths was bad because of the perspective, so scaling them using the TL bolt's width was more accurate. Brian Young used a 20 meter average, for a vaporisation energy of 60Kton... So, using a 70 meter asteroid, with much greater volume, would yield about 448Ktons. Some shots did indeed come from the dorsal part of the ISD, so from HTLs. As most people agree, the TL bolt is akin to a shaped charge, so most of the energy would be absorbed by the asteroid. Brian forgot to remove the 200K the asteroids will already be at, when calculating the melting and Vaporization energies... Brian also got the extreme low end. The amount of energy IN NO WAY would create the effects we see. You need a shitload more to do that. Do you understand the concept of a minimum? As for the Pegasus incident, scaling goes from a 5km to a 10km asteroid using the middle trench (look here for scaling, use the search for "Pegasus" entries, be aware there are many). Using most meaning over 200 of the 250 Torpedoes on a GCS, the destruction of the asteroid to ensure no tech is available to the Romulans means leaving nothing more then small chunks of anything, but using only "fracturation" energy (as per the Asteroid destruction calculator) yields between 250Ktons to 950Ktons. Since Phasers are pretty much in the same ballpark figures as torpedoes (even using 50% of torpedo power), judging from DS9 battle scenes, then an ISD and a GCS pretty well balance out... We're not talking about Pegasus. And also, do your own work. You, Tyralak, Paul, and Mith gave Enigma hell for linking to SDNet. Why do you get a pass on SFJ? Well, seeing as how they don't operate on the same principle, who says their outputs are scalable as you do? Also, while the reactors may be scalable, have you taken into account the fact that the DS fires 8 beams at once, with each conduit being of greater volume when compared to the DS's reactor then HTLs when compared to the reactor of the ISD? That both of these will need immense power just to move? They both have engines, and no mass lightening, so they would logically need most of their power just to move. The ISD doesn't have such huge rockets on its ass for nothing... How does 9 beams at once have anything to do with how much energy is required to generate said beams? Stated asumptions included that a similar portion of the power generation capacity was being used for other needs/ You really don't understand this calc at all, do you? How many times must I say it? Yes, you can, as long as higher canon isn't contradicted. No movie shows the firepower Warsies want SW ships to have. TCW doesn't show that either. The DS, in the EU or in the movies, are capable of destroying planets, the only difference is the amount of power needed to do it... :roll: Really? Because, you know, calculating the speed with shich the debris were moving towards the camera shows us velocities in excess of the escape velocity? Because we know for a fact this velocity was imparted by the DS, and not by the Hyperspace "shunting"? But even if it was the DS that imparted such velocities to the debris, since not all of the planet was in fact destroyed in "realspace", then you cannot calculate speeds for an entire planet's mass of debris... Unless you can A: Show how much energy "shunting" something into hyperspace takes B: Come up with supporting evidence C: Show me why you think that the hyperspace "shunt" consumed 99.9998% of the mass of the planet, when we can see quite a bit more debris than that. Shields who's very existence are still in debate... Alderaan's shields don't matter. The existence of planetary shields IS NOT in debate. The Death Star would have been designed to be able to overcome them. Otherwise it is useless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 14, 2010 . Some shots did indeed come from the dorsal part of the ISD, so from HTLs screencaps I gotta see this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted May 14, 2010 screencaps I gotta see this The ISD 2 has two octuple barbette turbolasers on the dorsal side of the command tower. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 14, 2010 In what book is the Caamas destruction mentioned? I thought it was in the Thrawn trilogy? Still, it is in the EU, from the same author, in the same "timeline", that such a small force of ships are enough to tip the balance. So the example still stands... Specter of the Past and Visions of the Future, and since we're talking firepower it's still a red herring Yeah, sure... The problem with your assessment? You seem to conveniently forget that such a planet as Caamas would have power generators, having planetary shields, disabled cities using energy, lights, food processors and people needing heat. as shown by modern life easily accomplished with a few gigawatts Now imagine a 1 Megaton strike hitting such a generator... Remember the small blast from the AT-AT hitting the power generator on hoth? Remember how it resulted in a bigger blast immediately after? Also, the strikes will go on for 24 hours, 1 Megaton at a time. The Dino-killer was one event, that hit in one location. Here, we're talking about many shots pretty evenly distributed over the entire world. Again, I didn't use the smaller guns, and adding to that the explosion of the generators, the buildings falling down on people and other smaller buildings, etc... This is where you'd provide evidence why this would make up a significant percentage of the energy required to kill every living thing on the planet. Occams razor frowns upon you Another excerp from the Wookiepedia article: Not all the flora was destroyed immediately by the bombardment... So the destruction, again, was far from complete... And nothing in the destruction specifies that the planet was lifeless immediately after the Bombardment. These effects were long-term effects, nothing instantaneous. Unlike your interpretation of the event... Now show me the quote from the book that says that, last I checked Wookiepedia wasn't canon. I took that into account 1 petaton probably isnt enough to kill everything in 1 day, just like the 100 teratons didn't kill the dinosaurs in one day. Usually I use 1e25J,and for all you know I put that into the wookiepedia article ISDs also have tourbles with rocks, even low kinetic impactors hitting their towers... And since they spent hours to days in the asteroid field depleting their shields this jives with my firepower calc. ISDs would only have high megatons to low gigatons for shields The Dominion had not deactivated Cardassian security systems, and were facing Cardassian forces who switched sides, in a conflict that lasted minutes, and yet was sufficient to kill 800 million Cardassians... Try again... Earlier they killed 2 million in seconds, they have hundreds to thousands of ships available they were supposed to have a fleet of 30,000 remember and going by the number of ships they had more than enough time and ships to TDiC the place The Breen attacked San francisco specifically, and they were all destroyed by Earth's security Forces/Systems/Ships... Again, no 24 hour bombardment, and the defense systems may have had shields... I do agree this is one weak showing, but you're still ignoring higher showings for ST (as you always do) while I don't ignore higher or lower showings for SW. I'm using TESB for a Firepower benshmark, while the equally valid (equally valid to the Caamas example) "Darksaber" has pathetic levels for SW, which I ignore... How am Ignoring the higher end, TDiC says Earth should be a lifeless planet with 30% of its crust gone. UFP still had no defense againt the breen energy dampening weapon at that point any defenses would have been trivially brushed aside. the Breen had jut gotten through wiping out a fleet remember. Dont ignore higher SW huh, was that a joke? Last I checked ICS was the devil round these parts Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 14, 2010 The ISD 2 has two octuple barbette turbolasers on the dorsal side of the command tower. I know. He says they were shooting the asteroids with them And its like 4 octuple batteries per side Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted May 14, 2010 I know. He says they were shooting the asteroids with them And its like 4 octuple batteries per side No just two. An octuple barbette per side. Two rows of four independently controlled (they can be fired independently and not just fired all at the same time) turbolasers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 14, 2010 No just two. An octuple barbette per side. Two rows of four independently controlled (they can be fired independently and not just fired all at the same time) turbolasers.I was refering to the individual batteries[8 barrels x 4 mounts] as barbettes apparently you were not. you meant 32 barrels per side right Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted May 14, 2010 No I meant 8 barrels per side. One barbette with two rows of four turbolasers. Total of 16 turbolasers altogether. One octuple turbolasers on a barbette mounting on each end of the dorsal side of the command tower for a grand total of two octuple barbette turbolasers. Clear as mud? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 14, 2010 No I meant 8 barrels per side. One barbette with two rows of four turbolasers. Total of 16 turbolasers altogether. One octuple turbolasers on a barbette mounting on each end of the dorsal side of the command tower for a grand total of two octuple barbette turbolasers. Clear as mud? Yeah I was referring to ISD mkII, are apparently refering to a mk I Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted May 14, 2010 I do not think that the MK 1s had dorsal weapons. Their weapons layout was different than the MK 2s. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 14, 2010 Brian also got the extreme low end. The amount of energy IN NO WAY would create the effects we see. You need a shitload more to do that. Where did he get the extreme low end? He averaged the asteroids at 20 meters, while some were smaller, and some were larger. I've given you the Vaporization energies, ranging from 60Ktons to 450Ktons. You say we'd need more, but how much more? Twice? Still ranging from 120Kton to 900Kton... How do you decide how much more power would be needed? According to what you want? Do you understand the concept of a minimum? I believe I do. Please, what have I missed then? We're not talking about Pegasus. And also, do your own work. You, Tyralak, Paul, and Mith gave Enigma hell for linking to SDNet. Why do you get a pass on SFJ? I brought Pegasus in because I wanted to show you comparable figures for HTLs and PTs. As far as I remember, I gave Enigma hell for going over the SDN and asking for arguments, not linking to calculations that had already been made. He also cited SDN a few times without ever linking to any threads. I linked the thread where I thought you would find the Pegasus calculations (size mostly). I do agree its long, and I re-made the Firepower calculations using fragmentation instead of melting (even though Riker wanted to preclude any technology from falling into Romulan hands), and using 225 Torpedoes for most. If the asteroid is 5km across: Volume : 65,450,000,000 or 6.5450e+10 m3 According to the Asteroid Calculator: Cratering = 590.4Mtons Vaporization = 935.7Gtons Fragmentation = 125Mtons Divided by 225 Torpedoes = 556Kton per torpedo If the asteroid is 10km across: Volume : 523,600,000,000 or 5.2360e+11 m3 Mass = 4,120,732,000,000,000 kg According to the Asteroid Calculator: Cratering = 4.7Gtons Vaporization = 7.490E+3Gtons Fragmentation = 1Gton Divided by 225 Torpedoes = 4.44Mtons per torpedo How does 9 beams at once have anything to do with how much energy is required to generate said beams? Phasers are scoffed at for not being DET, and yet you're going to tell me that 8 energy beams that convert together to create a bigger one don't require some magic Warsnobabble? The DS novel states that a Superlaser only 1/3rd of the original DS's power was cracking continents. So 1/3rd of 1E38 joules will only crack a continent? Stated asumptions included that a similar portion of the power generation capacity was being used for other needs/ Great, but we are still dealing with an unknown mechanism (DS Superlaser) that says nothing of it's true power ouput. And let's do an exercise in logic, shall we? Using the same analogy, if we use a power pack from a Heavy Blaster as a sphere of a 1cm diameter (conservative result, the pack will likely be a bit bigger). Volume = 0.00005236 m3 By the same token, we divide the volume of the ISD by the volume of the Blaster, using the same power density. Difference is 5.12e+12 times smaller for the Blaster power pack. Divide the total power output of the reactor by 5.12e+12, and we get 4.89e+15J for the Blaster. If we consider all the energy available for 1 shot ( like we do for the ship and the DS), we have 4.89e+15J per shot, or 1168.73804971 Ktons. Even if we use a 100 shots capacity for the Heavy Blaster, we still get 11.68 Ktons per shot... Do you still think scaling to obtain available energy to be acceptable? You really don't understand this calc at all, do you? I believe I undestand enough of the calc, while you seem to misunderstand (or conveniently ignore) the different premises for both "crafts", and the unbelievable results the calcs yield for hand weapons... :roll: Is that your reply? Unless you can A: Show how much energy "shunting" something into hyperspace takes B: Come up with supporting evidence C: Show me why you think that the hyperspace "shunt" consumed 99.9998% of the mass of the planet, when we can see quite a bit more debris than that. We know the DS doesn't use DET to destroy a planet, we know the Superlaser doesn't act anything at all like a Turbolaser, and I've shown you how scaling Reactors yields incredible energy levels for handhled weapons... I've shown you TESB's asteroid vaping as examples of ISD Firepower, you've yet to show me anything more powerful then that to support your scaling. So, unless you can A: show me examples of higher firepower equivalent in canon (EU is valid as far as examples go, but remember in the EU, InvaderSkooj's example can be explained using TESB yields, and Darksaber shows even weaker ones); B: come up with supporting evidence that scaling reactor volume is valid (that the power density will be the same, since we are talking about far less mass); C:Show me why you think that the DS novel, which nicely explains what we see in the Alderaan destruction (primary and secondary explosion, the second one shooting far more debris in space then the first one), isn't valid... See how that can be reversed so easily? Alderaan's shields don't matter. The existence of planetary shields IS NOT in debate. The Death Star would have been designed to be able to overcome them. Otherwise it is useless. Agreed, but since before the DS planetary shields were designed to repel ships with far more limited Firepower, the power to oversome them, specifically when we know that in SW, just as in ST, sufficient power applied to one point of a shield can effectively destroy or neutralize it at that point, then the DS's Superlaser is effectively a shield penetrator and doesn't need planet blowing power to pass through them... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 14, 2010 Specter of the Past and Visions of the Future, and since we're talking firepower it's still a red herring While I do agree it has nothing to do with the Firepower, I'm using them to show that the EU shoots holes in many accepted claims for SW, such as large forces, and also the accepted values on Firepower... disabled How, disabled as "cannot turn the shields on" or as "all power generators on the planet have been shut down"? Pretty important information... The generators were still there, even if they were not able to send their power to the shields. A car still has fuel even if the engine cannot use it because its engine has been sabotaged an cannot start... as shown by modern life easily accomplished with a few gigawatts Yes, because modern day Earth uses antigrav on buildings and vehicules, planetary shields for protection, Turbolaser and Ion canon emplacements... This is where you'd provide evidence why this would make up a significant percentage of the energy required to kill every living thing on the planet. Occams razor frowns upon you Actually, you first stated that the Caamas destruction was completed in 24 hours while the description gives no support to your assessment. So then, you first have to provide proof that what you say is true. The book only states that the Bombardment lasted for 24 hours. It did say that Caamas was destroyed and devoid of life immediately after the last shot was fired, which is what you argue for, so you need to provide proof of what you argue for. Since you haven't yet, and I've linked to an article describing the destruction in question, I've done far more then you did... Oh, and here's where modern scientists disagree with you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter#2007_study_on_global_nuclear_war A war using the total arsenal at our disposal would be catastrophic for the human race. And that arsenal is only 5000 Mtons, fas less then what those 3 ISDs would be raining down on Caamas... Again, since the description doesn't state, at all, that the destruction of all life on the planet is complete immediately after the bombardment, then Occam can sleep well tonight... Now show me the quote from the book that says that, last I checked Wookiepedia wasn't canon. I took that into account 1 petaton probably isnt enough to kill everything in 1 day, just like the 100 teratons didn't kill the dinosaurs in one day. I thought Wookiepedia took their information from the books. I will check the books, but don't expect the quotes to come quickly... Usually I use 1e25J,and for all you know I put that into the wookiepedia article Then you should have written "The Destruction was complete immediately after the bombardment", it would have helped your arguments... And the Caamas bombardment is still countered by the Darksaber one... And since they spent hours to days in the asteroid field depleting their shields this jives with my firepower calc. ISDs would only have high megatons to low gigatons for shields But it fits with the asteroid vaping calc... If they had such powerful weapons, that means they have very powerful shields, so the asteroids in TESB should not even have been a problem... The highest canon, the TESB movie, says they have weak weapons and shields... The TWC says they have weak weapons or shields... The EU (Caamas incident and Darksaber) says they have very strong weapons and shields, or weak weapons or shields, depending on which book you read... Higher canon has more weight... Earlier they killed 2 million in seconds, they have hundreds to thousands of ships available they were supposed to have a fleet of 30,000 remember and going by the number of ships they had more than enough time and ships to TDiC the place Still opposed by Cardassian an allied fleet, without the Cardassian fleet they had much less ships with them, and much more against them... Although I do agree this doesn't agree with Mton weapons, perhaps low Kton... How am Ignoring the higher end, TDiC says Earth should be a lifeless planet with 30% of its crust gone. UFP still had no defense againt the breen energy dampening weapon at that point any defenses would have been trivially brushed aside. the Breen had jut gotten through wiping out a fleet remember. You are ignoring "Rise", "Skin of Evil", "Pegasus", etc... Dont ignore higher SW huh, was that a joke? Last I checked ICS was the devil round these parts Not the Devil at all, just contradicted and superceded by higher canon like the movies and TCW "cartoon"... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 14, 2010 Enigma, on the ICS cutout I saw, the ISD had three 8-cannon emplacements per side on it's dorsal side (before the tower when looking at the ISD from the front), plus 1 8-cannon Ion cannon emplacement per side. I never saw a diagram of the ISD II. Where did you see it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
