Why would he do that when he can just co-opt decade-old TA wank and then call for help from pretentious posturing retards when literally nobody believes him? These are people who complaint about 'canon' and 'sources' and then say 'solar plant not solar' and 'wind farm not wind'. Gotta respect those sources! Some text written after the lead designer left says HUGEO NUMBORZ so clearly every single thing about the game is discarded... Except those parts we can wank out to huge numbers due to braindead maths and mass-energy equivalence.

Like I said before, if people want to talk about 'novel TA' with all this bullshit made up by marketers to please fat people, fine. Then they can have a discussion with no participants about something nobody cares about. Saying this stuff about TA the game is just laughable. It's even better when you think about games like Mass Effect where the cutscenes are explicitly 'wrong'.

I prefer to belive that people can learn, granted it could just be an old man's foolish hopes (ok maybe not that old I'm only 29, but still)

that said one must want to learn to be able to learn anything. But I'll leave for now, before I start to sound like wannabe self-help guru.

First off, people really need to read this and be clear:

There are NO TA novels. None, zip. It is hard to take critics seriously if they cannot inform themselves about the most basic bits such as the existence or non-existence of any novels (note: any, not a specific one). The Galactic War reports are direct Cavedog publications published online through their online Boneyards service. This is not a case of some company farming out novels to a third party publisher/writer, but the actual company releasing articles directly. It is equivalent to as if GW released fictional articles on its website (which it did do previously). The IP holder is the one that determines whether something is official or not. Not the original designer if they leave. The original designers for 40K have all left GW (yes, even Rick Priestley). Are we then to conclude therefore that nothing GW releases can ever be canon again just because the original designers have left? No, because GW still holds the IP rights, and legally they are the ones that get to release things using that franchise. An ex-designer would be sued if he tried to do so.

Second, trying to expand the conflict into space is not going to be productive because there isn't sufficient data with which to say anything, other than there is detail showing the existence of TA ships and the ability to destroy and/or capture ships in space:





There isn't much said at all about combat capabilities because the focus has been on the inability of support vessels and this Pioneer-class ship to escape. The key relevant parts however are in the above how it mentions Core forces focused on eliminating Arm support vessels "from space", and how fleeing civilians were captured despite trying to escape in an unmarked ship. The fact civilians were captured, rather than just simply blown up, shows the anti-space capabilities aren't just automated mines or some other automated kill everything defense. The "from space" phrase also rules out anything like a planet to space based weapon system.

However there are no details and there is no data with which to make any comparison, though 40K is also lacking in hard data regarding its ships and firepower yields. All that can really be said is that there is evidence of TA ships, and at least some of them are armed. Comparisons between the universes therefore would run into this obstacle of lack of data.

One thing however that needs to be noted, is that the cut scenes are not exactly the most accurate and be all and end all of canon, as there are certain dramatic liberties taken with the cut scenes that are not what is depicted in the actual game or background. The two key examples are the existence of only 1 barrel for the Flash tank (it has 2 guns, 1 on either side) and the Arm commander apparently starting construction of a heavy laser tower by itself (another construction unit would have had to start it, though the Commander could assist, but there is no evidence of such another construction unit in the cutscene).

Thus the constant claim of demanding a canon hierarchy runs into this issue as it is not a huge universe with a huge fanbase demanding clear-cut hierarchy. The manual and the cutscenes are extremely sparse in terms of background, and hence actually the bulk of things would lie in the Galactic War reports. However for the purposes of this discussion and at least my posts, here is the hierarchy being worked with:
1) Manual, cutscenes, and Galactic War reports of equal weight except where they directly conflict with game in which case game takes precedence (such as the 2 vs 1 barrel issue on the Flash tank, the firepower yields conflicting with lack of total destruction in game).
2) Actual in-game performance

Another such potential conflict between manual and game for example would be the so-called "Starburst missiles":


That description is completely at odds with how they function in game. In game, such missiles are too slow to do anything except hit stationary defenses so the claim they are "effective at destroying small fast units" is not supported at all, and the units with such weapons end up being more like siege units. When it is as dramatic a difference as being good at hitting fast units and being so slow that it can only work at firing at fixed defenses, the actual game performance should take precedence. This is not as nitpicky a thing as actual hitpoints or damage number but total role change.

In short, there is background evidence for some form of space based anti-spaceship weapon system, and there is evidence for use of spaceships in the TA universe. However that is all the data available. Hence any vs. discussion would have to confine itself to a planetary based scale because once you get into space, there is insufficient data with which to conclude anything other than "both sides can have spaceships with weapons".

I'm glad you have admitted your gasbagging about spaceships not in the scenario and making up capabilities never demonstrated was completely irrelevant. And sorry, fat people need to realise that almost nothing has a 'canon policy' and such is the exception rather than the rule, which is why you're even able to say 'throw out entire game except the bits I cherry-pick to give absurdly stupid numbers and instead use this other shit that's totally different'.

What's particularly sad is the realities of game development; all this garbage spewed out by people in different directions just showsthat heaps of ideas get made up and lost in production. I'm sure all these ideas were in their mind as they were worldbuilding. I bet the missile was originally fast, and they changed it and never bothered updating the worldbuilding fluff. Why would they? 1% of the players were ever going to care and the realities of design is that heaps of stuff would have been changed, just like in the creation of any work. That's why every TA thread ever boils down to 'ignore the game Total Annihilation, about which this thread is ostensibly about, and instead look at these pieces of terrible fiction wherein it is a competitive high-end scifi organisation'. Its exactly the same as people using worldbuilding or cut material or art proofs or crap the design staff complains about in any other medium to wank out their pet faction.

You need to practice simple skills like reading. I never claimed any specific abilities about TA spaceships. I only reported their existence and the existence of armed spaceships within the TA universe, which you kept trying to dismiss. 40K spaceships weren't in the scenario either, yet people keep trying to invoke their appearance. If people insist on trying to expand the conflict into space, a proper comparison would have to expand the assets of both sides.

What has been said however is that then both universes run into the problem of lack of hard data. There are no exact firepower yields for 40K ships and data on dimensions is rife with inconsistencies. TA's problem is simply there is little said other than there are spaceships.



Do you even read other people's posts? I explicitly addressed this issue in the canon hierarchy. Where there is direct conflict with actual in-game performance or role, the game takes precedence. Yes, your speculation about what happened with the Starburst missiles is a reflection of what happened in real life, and similarly with the 1 barrel Flash tank vs. the 2 barrel game model. That is why the actual final product of what happens in game takes precedence when in direct conflict with the manual or the cutscenes (as those were were finalized and produced before the game's final release).

This is no different from GW. It produces terrible fiction playing to fanboy superhuman fantasies of awesome marines killing hundreds or thousands of foes, whereas actually in game they would be hard pressed to kill a tenth of that. They are depicted in fiction as able to spit acid and digest metal but there are no in-game rules to allow for that. Yet people seem to have no issue or problem about discussing the novels as a part of the canon, albeit one that has examples of internal contradictions.

Your critique against the TA canon can be equally applied to many other science fiction universes. TA is no more unique in that respect than 40K.

That's why its called 'gasbagging', dude.

Its pretty terrifying when you say try to be a bigman smugbot and say LEARN TO READ NOOB when I just talked about how almost nothing has a canon hierarchy at all - certainly not TA - and thus talking about it is academic. There is no authority telling you what to accept and what not to accept. There is no 'real' TA, just a videogame everyone played and a puddle of horrible fiction a few fat people read. Comparing this to GW and their attitude towards their IP is, to be quite honest, fucking stupid. Videogame you complain has no novels and no rights holder who cares is JUST LIKE a setting with hundreds of novels written over decades with a rights holder that controls them. Right?





Its almost exactly like you snipped out the sentence so you could be a tryhard smugtard! ALL MOST!

Now fuckoff back to SB, there's a good boy.

It is far from academic when other posters have been calling over and over again for people to produce a TA canon hierarchy.

You and Lord Revan need to confer together to find out what you really want.

One is claiming a canon hierarchy needs to be produced to have meaningful discussion and to prove anything about TA. Another is claiming there is no need and there is no such thing as canon hierachy.

You can't have it both ways.

In the interests of satisfying those that are looking for more systematic reasoning on why certain background is being used or taken over others, I have provided the hierarchy that is being used in my posts on this thread.

Why is there a need for a canon hierarchy? 40K apparently has none and is doing fine.

---

I am the Purple Cube from beyond. Seek not to understand me for thau shalt fail.

Warning: I am an amateur writer/roleplayer and as such my posts are liable to contain text that would fit better into a work of literature than a conversation. Hence (unless I am in debate mode) be sure to read my posts with care and not take everything I say at face value. It might be (and at times is) full of stylistic exaggeration for the sake of explaining my point. Thank you.

NOTIFICATION: From this point on all my posts are censored by the thought police.

You sound like you need to chill and get off the TA hate, and where am I calling for help?

Again with the windmills, ignoring fluff and just going on visuals there is still no way a regular wind farm can do the stuff it does in game, a windmill can't even power simple things like unit production factories, metal extractors (windmills may have trouble powering something that can mine out enough metal to produce entire naval fleets, from 50km in the ground in minutes), or simple defense like giant laser and plasma guns let alone provide a more potent power source than anti-matter (it would take 325 square miles of windmills to equal 1 GW of power (I think 1 nuclear reactor produces about that much power) (remember only about 25% of the time windmills are functioning at their peak power). It's probably more logical to assume the windmills operate differently than the windmills we know today and considering their equivalent of infantry the peewee fires compressed laser light and has the ability to focus the explosion into a micrometre sized area and many of their basic units throw around anti-matter, the windmill is probably not the same as windmills that we know. Then again we have the Imperium whose lasguns are allegedly capable of blowing heads off but can be recharged by leaving the power pack in the sun for a little while or throwing it into a fire. With that in mind using the same logic I can say the Imperium truly does essentially equip its soldiers with flashlights, and using this I can figure out how tough all their other units are, hell IIRC the mighty land raider is described as only having the equivalent of 300mm of conventional steel armor (Forge World I believe) so we know most 40k tanks have far less armor than modern tanks.

Anyway if you want to ignore fluff, stop using the 40k fluff.

You will find many 40K people still use a hierarchy. The Codex for example is often taken to take precedence over a novel.

a canon hierarchy is a good thing when you want facts about a fictional verse since you tell easily what's "true" so to speak and what's not, it's not needed per se but it helps in threads like this.

few things have set canon hierarchy, only example I can remember from the top of my head is SW with various lvls of canon.

as for my asking for heirarchy if you look again, my exact words are "is there a set canon hierarchy or are you making as you go along". I have no problems with there not being no set heirarchy, sure it means there's more conflicts in the evidence but that's not my problem, if there's no set hierarchy we'll just have make one for the purposes of this debate but we must be honest about it.

I'm man thats cute. Let's equate some background scratchings that fly in the face of a dead game with no clear vision to an entire industry for a vibrant, living setting with a definite reality. Why? SB SAYS SO. :v.

All a 'heirarchy' would do is allow people to feel better about talking about a game while ignoring 99% of it and actually talking about something else. The only entertainment is in the excuses: oh, he explosions aren't big because the whole screen would be flashed out! Yes, that's why it plays like a regular RTS and not my megawank imagination.

Hey Revan, we 'need' to 'confer' and present a united front because .... I dunno? I just want to talk about this cool game and not ... Some barely related fiction in which wind farms are actually .... Something else.

That's my idea as well. It helps but it's not that necessary. We can just do what we always do and say that Gameplay < anything else and be done with it.

---

I am the Purple Cube from beyond. Seek not to understand me for thau shalt fail.

Warning: I am an amateur writer/roleplayer and as such my posts are liable to contain text that would fit better into a work of literature than a conversation. Hence (unless I am in debate mode) be sure to read my posts with care and not take everything I say at face value. It might be (and at times is) full of stylistic exaggeration for the sake of explaining my point. Thank you.

NOTIFICATION: From this point on all my posts are censored by the thought police.

So hen you end up talking about a game by ignoring it. Great idea! That is the preferred method when there are other media considered more important (like X-Wing vs actual Star Wars). When a game is the primary source and you end up saying 'everything here is actually wrong' you gotta ask what the point is.

War reports are unreliable dialog anyway. :v

it's kind of cute that they seem to think that there's only 2 viewpoints into this thing, reminds me of my neice, same childlike simplicity then again my niece isn't even 2 yet so that's to be expected.

well if he means actual gamemechanics (like hitpoints and such) then there's a point, however even that go only so far.

When the game is your primary source you must take them into account there's just no way of avoiding that even if it's just in-game cutscenes.

But nobody is talking about game numbers beyond things like comparing output from solar to commander - and those people have even speculated about why it might be the way it is.

All the EssBee crew has done is said 'here's some fluff that might imply its something else entirely'. Have any of them even talked about how a battle would be shaped? When fucking JSF is more constructive than you, you had to worry. They even flat out take the intro for its fast build speed and ignore the low firepower.

It's a shame all the TA wankers can't stop, because the idea of TA stuff hiding out on a 40k world and being a nearly uncleanable mess is really interesting and cool and thematic for both universes.

If you look at my earlier post I do define this hierarchy wherein the game is ranked lower unless there is explicit and direct contradiction in a major fashion such ad the aforementioned Starburst missile example.

The use of written background in relation to a game universe is nothing new especially 40K. A vast portion of the 40K background comes from sources not related to the main game of 40K. It is hypocritical for the rabid TA haters to criticize use of written background for TA as irrelevant to the game when the same situation holds for the relation of written 40K background to the actual tabletop game. The capabilities of Necron ships for example is not given in any concrete form that relates to actual 40K game effects.

Oh god, why does there even need to be a hierarchy in this case? It's one game and a few relatively minor bits of fiction, there is no need for a major overarching guiding principle to determine what overrides what. Just be sensible about it and don't be an asshole about it.

---

Commander of the MFS Darwinian Selection Method (sexual)

What kind of idiot thinks a debator can just define their own heirarchy and force others to use it anyway? Clearly the heirarchy of 'just what you see' is unacceptable to wankers, so why should anyone else accept 'wank out this vague worded bullshit from outside the game into megaton big berthas'?

But this guy is just doing EssBee standard 'talk in circles' crap, and continues to compare the 40k novels and universe outside tabletop to this TA stuff. Why? Cause he has literally nothing else to stand on. Yeah, official novels written by staff authors hired by the IP owner that have basically created most of the universe is just like a bunch of scribbles from a dead web service that totally distorts the world shown into the game into something irreconcilably different.

Yes they are equivalent because both are official releases by their respective IP holders.

You use a clear double standard in claiming that when a writer does so for 40K it is expanding and fleshing out the universe but the when a writer does so for another universe it suddenly does not count. Simply shouting out your personal dislike of one universe and insulting people that worked on it is not actual proof or a valid point. It would be easy to flip things around and claim 40K writers are producing unimaginative hacks and ripoffs of history and myths. Simply repeating a personal dislike like a broken record does not actually constitute proof of anything.

If the 40K universe as shown in written works off the tabletop is valid then so is the written work of any other universe it is being compared against whether it be Star Wars, Star Trek, or TA. It is ludicrous to claim one side has to restrict itself to your arbitrary boundaries while freeing the side you favor from any and all such restrictions. A debate cannot involve any side being able to arbitrarily apply rules selectively to themselves or the other side or shift goalposts. That you seem to think you are entitled to demand such double standards shows you are not trying to actually debate the actual material.

Also, for the record, gamer, I do not support a claim that TA wind generators are not wind turbines. They may achieve performance levels impossible today but that is similar to how 40K lasgun batteries are described as being able to recharge from lying in a campfire. Such a feat of battery charging enough to power a man killing laser is beyond what can be done today but that is not grounds to start claiming the battery packs are anything else.

Sorry, I don't dislike TA. I dislike TA wankers who want to take an RTS game about nano magic and make it into something totally different. I dislike people who see robots setting trees on fire and say 'obviously 9 megatons'. I dislike people who uselessly argue canon while not actually discussing any conflict that might occur, because they only signed up due to a thread on SB and need to drag out the same bullshit that's been going around for a decade.

Its a goddamn riot that you simultaneously say that wind turbines are real turbines, but somehow are magical and extract super levels of energy from air motion. Why? Because you're stupidly trying to reconcile it with some fluff garbage.

And sorry the jokes about 40k remain funny. 40k novels are crap, just like TA fanfic I mean galactic war reports posted on a dead service. I know you've just hijacked into canon debate because - like all TA wankers - you just can't handle losing.

Before you cry like a little girl, please note others have already offered the idea that the TA guys coudl well hide out and be an ongoing threat (ie, not lose). Turns out everyone can discuss TA except BUT WHAT ABOUT THE GIGATONS FROM THIS WAR REPORT idiots.

You know if we go with ta not using mass energy converters and gigaton lasers the windmills being windmills doesn't matter because the power levels are then perfectly reasonable.

If they had mass energy conversion... you'd think they'd use it as a power source. UH OH CANON PANIC!

No more garbage or ridiculous than 40K lasguns killing people while still being run off batteries that extract super levels of energy from a ordinary sized camp fire.

The only people going on about gigatons has ironically been you and gamer. Those same Galactic War reports you constantly disparage are also simultaneously some of the sources that argue against such yields. Internal contradiction yes but again 40K also has them within its own sources.

Also nobody except gamer has been claiming true energy to mass conversion. All metal makers have been described doing is using energy in a process that outputs the finished nanobots known as metal. As the TA manual stated and as quoted earlier, the term refers to strategic elements. Conversion of nonstrategic elements to strategic elements would be one explanation instead of just assuming creation of matter out of energy.

The best part about this particular example, right, is that its so overused. Its not like anyone doesn't know the answers; there are different lasguns, different energy storage systems, the energy doesn't have to come from the fire if the heat just catalyses a reaction, the weapon doesn't have to be on full power, the example could just be bullshit.

On the other hand you have wind actually producing more power than it carries. Because... oh right - the galactic war reports could just be bullshit.

Regarding 'metal' as a term in the game, does the manual say thats just what they call their nanobot goops? I'd imagined that's what would make sense, but I wasn't sure. Is the basic storage at the start supposed to be internal to the commander's backpack?