Worst Lucas idea in the prequels? I vote Rule of Two

[Galvatron]

Good question. Size restrictions, maybe? Capital ships (even huge ones like the Executor) remain limited by what they can feasibly carry. Planets, on the other hand, can devote massive amounts of real estate to bigger guns and bigger generators. Could be that's why the Death Star was so damned big.

I'm sure someone around here could give you a more nuanced techie answer than I can.

[jollyreaper]

Size restrictions in Star Wars?

Objectively, what you say makes sense. You can put a bigger gun on a static mount than on a ground vehicle, bigger on a ground vehicle than a plane, larger on a ship than a ground vehicle, etc. last I saw with the tech guides, the equipment required for the ion cannon would fit in the hull of a typical SW cap ship.

The only way to reign in the ion cannon is saying it needs the full output of a major city's reactor complex for each shot. Sorry, no way to put that much hardware in a ship, couldn't possibly move. Except the fluff says star destroyers use more power in a hyperspace jump than some civilizations in their entire existence.

[CaptHawkeye]

Well, we run into the problem of Star Wars and scale. They didn't size the tech appropriately. It should take considerably less energy than the Death Star to break a Hoth shield. That's like saying you can't break through barricades in front of a house so drop an a-bomb.

No one is saying the Death Star must be used against a target like Hoth though, they could just land troops for that. I'm talking about important planets like Corellia which can just flip on their planetary shields and sit comfortably behind them. The DS was designed to bully the well defended core worlds into complete submission of the Empire.

One other thing is that the Death Star's beam is also adjustable in strength. At least DSII's was. Tarkin just cranked that shit up to 11 to make a point.

The basic idea of "we will end your planet" makes a lot of sense. That could be accomplished with a solar shade that puts the planet in total darkness. Megatech? Sure. Less complicated than a Death Star? Absolutely.

And less protected as well. Half of the Death Star was the superlaser, the other half was the planet sized battlestation bristling with guns and weapons making an assault a non-option. A naval raid using either starfighters or capital ships could quickly put the kibosh on a fragile space shade. Moreover, a space shade can't hold ships or starfighters while the Death Star can. The Death Star is both a superweapon and a base that can protect itself. Impractical but not completely without logic.

Also because of the high firepower nature of the superlaser, the defender is given very little time to consider any options other than the Empire's demands.

[jollyreaper]

I read a scifi story where the alien mega ship was a sun shade and battle station.

I know the torpedo spheres were supposed to be used for breaking planetary shields. Along that line, the Death Star would make sense if it was solely meant to reduce the shield. "We can take down your shield and obliterate cities. We can end your civilization. There, we just slagged your shield. Surrender? Why, yes, that sounds sensible."

The question I have is that taking down planetary shields seems like it would require less power. Like if we put blowing a planet to dust at 100, taking down a shield seems like it should be a 1. Wiping out the entire biosphere with a crust-slagging seems like a 2.

Frankly, the anti-capship abilities of the super laser I find more useful. It may have a long cycle time but no starship can resist -- it's one shot, one kill. No fleet could possibly face something like this in open battle. Forget scaling up to destroy planets, make it powerful enough to destroy 500km wide asteroids and it'll be good for capships. Strap on some big engines to the laser mechanism and strong secondary defenses against star fighters, deploy with ISD escorts, pwn the galaxy.

I know that there were supposed to be super super star destroyers using super lasers in the kja comics but I don't think they ever saw action in any of the rest of the EU.

[Galvatron]

Except the fluff says star destroyers use more power in a hyperspace jump than some civilizations in their entire existence.

Maybe that's also part of the problem. Ships have to allocate a significant amount of power to their hyperdrives. Planets don't.

[jollyreaper]

Then there's the question of how engineering in SW works. My car might be rated at x horsepower but that doesn't mean I can run an electric motor with that much power if I hook it to the electric system. The alternator only converts so much engine power to electricity, the rest mechanically drives the wheels. If my car was built like a diesel-electric train engine, then the full electrical power could go to the wheel motors or I could direct the power somewhere else.

So, are SW ships fairly electrical? You need a reactor to run life support, shields, lasers, etc. Do the engines generate surplus power or do they require power fed into them? How are hyperdrives powered?

My basic assumption is that hyperdrives are dead weight when in normal space and all reactor output can be redirected away from them to serve guns and shields. I don't know if this has been fleshed out anywhere.

I know in generic scifi you can rerout power from any system to any other system but that's because writers aren't engineers for the most part.

[Galvatron]

Objectively, what you say makes sense. You can put a bigger gun on a static mount than on a ground vehicle, bigger on a ground vehicle than a plane, larger on a ship than a ground vehicle, etc. last I saw with the tech guides, the equipment required for the ion cannon would fit in the hull of a typical SW cap ship.

IIRC, the power generator on Hoth was salvaged from an old Republic battlecruiser. Of course, that begs the question of how it could generate enough power to fend off a bombardment by a fleet of star destroyers and a dreadnought...

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/DSS-02_shield_generator

[Captain Seafort]

Of course, that begs the question of how it could generate enough power to fend off a bombardment by a fleet of star destroyers and a dreadnought...

Assuming that it could deflect literally any bombardment, rather than any bombardment light enough to disable it without slagging the entire base. It's possible that Death Squadron could have punched through, but would have flattened Echo Base (and Luke) in the process, which would rather have defeated the object of the exercise.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Of course, that begs the question of how it could generate enough power to fend off a bombardment by a fleet of star destroyers and a dreadnought...

Assuming that it could deflect literally any bombardment, rather than any bombardment light enough to disable it without slagging the entire base. It's possible that Death Squadron could have punched through, but would have flattened Echo Base (and Luke) in the process, which would rather have defeated the object of the exercise.

I tend to consider "deflect any bombardment" to mean "strong enough to deflect any bombardment we might make BEFORE that Ion Cannon disables all out ships and leaves us helpless."

[Galvatron]

I'm not saying you're wrong, but General Veers never said anything to indicate that they even KNEW about the ion cannon.

Com Scan has detected an energy field protecting an area of the sixth planet of the Hoth System. The field is strong enough to deflect any bombardment.

[Eternal_Freedom]

I'm not saying you're wrong, but General Veers never said anything to indicate that they even KNEW about the ion cannon.

Com Scan has detected an energy field protecting an area of the sixth planet of the Hoth System. The field is strong enough to deflect any bombardment.

Very true, although I would think that even if Death Squadron couldn't detect the Ion Cannon, it would be (I think) a reasonable assumption that if they have a theatre shield they will probably have some kind of ground-to-space weapon.

[Galvatron]

That kinda makes Captain "Our first catch of the day" Lennox look like a real idiot.

[Eternal_Freedom]

That kinda makes Captain "Our first catch of the day" Lennox look like a real idiot.

And the problem with that is....

[JME2]

[Darth Yan]

I wouldn't have minded an explanation on how force sensitives were detected without midichlorians. They couldn't just randomly ask everyone to submit to blood tests so there must have been another way to give a good preliminary idea.

[CaptHawkeye]

I think the blow of the midichlorian thing would have been softened if they were explained to be a symptom of force sensitivity, not a cause.

[Grumman]

I wouldn't have minded an explanation on how force sensitives were detected without midichlorians. They couldn't just randomly ask everyone to submit to blood tests so there must have been another way to give a good preliminary idea.

Darth Vader was able to not just recognise a force sensitive but which force sensitive just by being in the same hangar as him. ("I sense something... a presence I haven't felt since...") In the hands of a Jedi whose skill set was less focused on killing stuff, that could be enough.

[jollyreaper]

I'd be happy with making it not quite be like the Highlander immortal radar. A strong Jedi radiates and another strong Jedi can sense it. Masking the radiation when highly skilled is a difficult technique. Therefore a sith lord like Palpy being so powerful and seeming to lack Force powers is thus remarkable.

It could be a matter of pride and Jedi see being open as honorable. Though they are all supposed to work for the same order. It's not like samurai where they all subscribe to the same rules but serve different masters. I would actually prefer it to be less regimented, Jedi knights being more like the knights of chivalry. Christianity was their common religion, chivalry the common code, but knights could find themselves on opposing sides on the battlefield. With the sith not operating openly, why else would there be a need for dueling skills?

In this case, the Order sets standards and strives for peace and justice but Jedi who have taken the training could still have their own militant orders with cross purposes, just like the pope was nominally superior to the Templars and yet didn't trust them or feel he could control them.

The sith, though, would be the common enemy because two Jedi could debate the merits of one side versus the other in a war but would agree that the sith have no merit, they're evil. Good storytelling potential here. Two rival princes and their Jedi encounter signs of the sith and their Jedi tell them the war must be put on hold for a little while, something far more important needs dealt with.

As for finding novices, they would be difficult to detect with no force training and so scouting for talent is a specialized field. Many with talent might not be located. The signs would usually be exceptional prowess at physical activities, exceptional luck, superior intuition, etc. very difficult to determine whether it is natural or supernatural ability. Usually most obvious in times of danger when strong emotion can cause a talented individual to reach deeper than he ever has before.

This means that a Jedi could notice someone's talent in a time of danger or he might suspect and this construct a scenario in which the candidate feels real fear to see how he reacts.

[Grumman]

This means that a Jedi could notice someone's talent in a time of danger or he might suspect and this construct a scenario in which the candidate feels real fear to see how he reacts.

If they went with such an approach, I think it would be important to emphasise that the fear -> Force reaction is why they're training them and not just the identification method. Otherwise you're talking about deliberately putting children on the path to the Dark Side to find out if they're Force sensitive.

[jollyreaper]

Yes, I think that's a good point. Reacting with emotion is the easiest way to tap the Force. The Jedi approach is using it with calm and reason that can be drawn upon instantly in a centered fashion with a clear mind.

To my way of thinking, the dark side is quicker, easier, more seductive because emotions are easy. I don't think there's a good Force or evil Force, it's not like the dark side has evil radiation. The Force is the Force (of course, of course) and light and dark is simply how we access it. Calm and centered and zen is Jedi, with strong emotion is Sith. The Jedi believe all emotion is suspect and even using love to tap the Force will be self-deception and lead to corruption of intent. Luke demonstrates a third way, using emotion like the Sith but with zen control like the Jedi. The Jedi think attachment will be a weakness that will pull you to the dark side because of emotion. Luke shows attachment can be the only thing keeping you anchored and can pull you back.

My thinking is that Force techniques can come quick to adept students which is how Luke was able to go from novice to taking Vader in just a few years. The Jedi take so long to train compared to the Sith because they are focused on teaching control, not merely access to power. I think a lot of the Jedi lessons will involve facing the temptation of emotional response and resisting it. So for the first test of a potential student involving fear, that seems fitting.

Power magnifies personality flaws and the Force represents enormous personal power, not just in ass-kicking but mental manipulation. The potential for being a complete asshole is limitless. Given that so many Sith are fallen Jedi, it is understandable to wonder if they are more trouble than they're worth.

"You need us to protect you from people like us!"

"Did that sound as stupid to you saying it as it was for me hearing it?"

"Yes, I won't lie."

[Daefaron]

How is the rule of two such a terrible idea? I'll finishing reading pages 2 and 3 but so far I just don't see it.

The sith are inherently a back-stabbing group. Having a massive order just leads to chaos. Imagine a jedi order where instead of doing awesome to advanced, you just killed your biggest foes. You'd gut the order.

Instead, you have rule of two, a master and apprentice. They both know the apprentice is going to kill the master, then take his own to continue the legacy of the sith. The problem is Palpatine was obsessed with his own legacy instead of the sith's. That's why Dooku looked so shocked to be betrayed, He hadn't been taught as a sith.

And if you never understood this, the rule of two works because a simple reason. The Apprentice doesn't kill the master and claim the title until he can't learn anything more. It's how Bane and Zannah did it. Both know she'd kill him. He taught her everything she could, and she never struck until he couldn't possible teach her more. Then she took and apprentice.

And yeah, it's called the Sith stay in HIDING. I don't get your thoughts the two sith constantly engage the Jedi. There is a reason they were so surprised that a Sith had shown himself.

Midichlorians is the real big bad thing. Not rule of two.

[Metahive]

Why is the Rule of Two such a terrible idea? Because Bane left the one thing he supposedly objected to, the backstabbing, not only in but made it mandatory. Now imagine two ambitious Sith scoring a mutual kill during such an attempt, it means the order and whatever far reaching plans they had are finished for good (or at least until some stupid Jedi stumbles upon yet another Sith holocron lying around and goes power-mad).
As has also already been mentioned, since the backstabbing is mandatory and Sith-doctrine is all about personal gain, the logical conclusion for any Sith Master would be to never take any apprentices at all. That's the problem with a dogma that promotes absolute selfishness and Bane even exacerbated it.

And if you never understood this, the rule of two works because a simple reason. The Apprentice doesn't kill the master and claim the title until he can't learn anything more. It's how Bane and Zannah did it. Both know she'd kill him. He taught her everything she could, and she never struck until he couldn't possible teach her more. Then she took and apprentice.

Palpatine murdered Plagueous before he had learned everything he could learn and thus the knowledge of how to create life via the midichlorians was lost. Yeah, another problem with the Rule of Two, dealing with overly ambitious and impatient pupils adequately, especially when both ambition and impatience are practically Sith virtues.

[jollyreaper]

My very points, Metahive. I don't have a problem with backstabbing ruining the Evil Power Team-Up, it should be a bug, though, not a feature.

Also, it seems implausible that the entire Jedi Order (thousands? Tens of thousands?) are getting their asses kicked by two Sith. I don't care how hardcore these Sith may be, it makes the Jedi look weak. Plus there's nobody else with lightsabers for the Jedi to fight so why do they spend so much time learning saber fighting in the first place?

Now as far as palpy and his rise to power, I'm content with him being beyond what the Jedi were competent to deal with. The fallen Jedi would be their most difficult opponent. Wild talent would exist, people learning the Force on their own. Surely there's a black market in occult artifacts, Sith and other traditions. But these guys would be pikers. Palpy could be the only one who both got a holocron and also knew how to make use of it. Or maybe he joined a Sith cult of dabblers who kept under the radar, quietly enriching themselves but avoiding Jedi entanglements. And palpy was the one who realized that he could combine the Sith power with machine politics and take over the whole rotten republic.

In this case, palpy's grand design dwarfed anything the Jedi could conceive of. He's a throwback to the power and ambition of the old Sith masters.

[Ire]

Plus there's nobody else with lightsabers for the Jedi to fight so why do they spend so much time learning saber fighting in the first place?

I'm gonna say, tradition.

[Jim Raynor]

Is mandatory murder of the master even movie canon, or something made up by the EU and novelizations? I don't think that was ever stated in any movie. And while the handful of movie Sith expressed desires to usurp their masters, that by itself shouldn't be taken as evidence that all Sith do that. Can't most Sith masters simply die of old age or other causes, before the apprentice takes the mantle?

Also, it seems implausible that the entire Jedi Order (thousands? Tens of thousands?) are getting their asses kicked by two Sith. I don't care how hardcore these Sith may be, it makes the Jedi look weak.

The Sith didn't kick all their asses though. They stopped fighting directly and resorted to a conspiracy and let a war take out most of the Jedi.

Plus there's nobody else with lightsabers for the Jedi to fight so why do they spend so much time learning saber fighting in the first place?

There's no one for real martial artists and kendo practitioners to really fight any more, but those traditions remain alive despite their limited (at best) utility. The Jedi are also portrayed as a borderline religious order, who are caught up in their traditions and are overtaken by stagnation.

Also, the existence of battle droids with saber-proof fighting staffs suggests that there are other threats out there which may require swordsmanship.