StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Yeah I missed 'em.

I honestly never saw the "whiney OT purist tripe" except on his forum after the fact.

(Unless of course his denigration of "I, Jedi" and WEG's stats are considered "whiney OT purist tripe" !)


I especially liked the Lightsabers page. Few sites had the depth of information and speculation. It was refreshing to see something observation based for that (much like Wong and Saxton's stuff with other aspects of Wars).

Darth Wong wrote: Only Bob himself could explain why, but I do know that corresponds to the time period when he seemed to go off the deep end.

I suspect it has something to do with various Kendo schools sending people to be extras in the film, and the director favouring the performers who favoured a "flashier", albeit technically inferior swordfighting style (ie- not Robert's style). This might have led to him feeling not just snubbed on a personal level, but also feeling that his entire sport (which is apparently a very big part of his life) was snubbed as well.

From what I got from the other posters there, it just seemed that Robert Brown got pissed off with the other "extras", who were typical fan wankers apparently.

I mean, i still don't know whether to cringe or laugh when that Jedi rested his lightsabre on his shoulder when he Force pushed C3PO.


And frankly, I still don't see him as a "purist OT wanker". He placed an extremely great premenium on the orginal OT, but he wasn't above including EU material in his anaylsis, even when it went against his personal feelings. And in this, he was way more professional than most of us here could ever hope to be.

So, he dennigrated the EU more than the rest of us here(while not hesitating to include materials for his anaylsis). And he hated Kevin J Anderson to the depth of his core, but if any of you dislike him because of that, I say you're crazy

Connor MacLeod wrote:

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Yeah, think of SW analysis in terms of a spectrum...

TheForce.net EU fanboys --- SD.net --- Mike and Saxton --- Bob Brown --- TheForce.net Purist Wankers

Thats a rather unfair generalization. I dont know if you spent any time there, but I have, and I found a number of people who were quite reasonable. The aforementioned and greatly esteemed (he in fact has had as much influence as Curtis, Wayne, Mike or Brian IMHO in SW analysis) Andrew Tse was a regular member, and he's not an "OT purist wanker" in the least. There was another person I remember going by the handle Saxman, and he always struck me as rather reasonable as well. And Painrack, who is present here, is not someone I would lump in with as a fanboy or "wanker." either.

However, there were others like Mister ORaghan and Frank Bitterhof (IIRC) rather odd. (ORaghan seems to have become worse since moving to SB.)

The board itself was, like ost sci fi boards, rather "cliquish" in its own way - a rather nice community for those inside it, but not realyl well received outside of it. Its not like say, SD.net, for example would not be viewed similarly by mainstream star wars fans (A bunch of people who analyze sci fi by acting as if it were real?)

Edit: Added Painracks name

Come to think of it, I still remember how I felt about IP when I came here. I initially thought he was Frank Bitterhoff, just one who had been consumed by the EU.

I mean, their mannerism are the same, the way they debate is the same, the way they brush off objections are the same, hell, just have Frank use more vulgar language and you get the twin opposite of IP.

I mean, look at this. Both IP and Frank argue for near-c, without the use of hyperdrives. The former just says its the use of the ion drives, while the other says its the use of sublight drives.

And frankly, I still don't see him as a "purist OT wanker". He placed an extremely great premenium on the orginal OT, but he wasn't above including EU material in his anaylsis, even when it went against his personal feelings. And in this, he was way more professional than most of us here could ever hope to be.

This is professional?

Below you will find an image from TESB, of the bounty-hunting droid IG-88. *WHY*? ... you may well ask ... everyone knows IG-88 was an assasin droid, one of five which escaped from a rouge experiment etc etc ... well, I'm going to tell you that I believe that NO IT WASNT SO ... I believe that IG-88 is typical of various forms of war-droids used in the pre-Imperium period. It was obviously a fully functional independant droid equipped for heavy combat. I believe that IG-88 is probably a 'destroyer-class' war droid who survived whatever wars it was built for, and over the years (without mind-wipes) developed a complex and cunning personality. the droid has since made its way working as a bounty hunter, a task requiring considerable intelligence.

The 'rougue assisain' story is pure apocryphal gibberish, it has NO BASIS in canon 'fact' - growing out of the relatively recent 'tales of the Bounty Hunters' anthology sponsored by KJA, it can be dismissed out of hand. Far more likely is that this droid, or indeed (if you feel attrracted to the 'multiple IG's theory) a GROUP of them, survived some war and went on to carve a career for themselves. After all, the official site write up on battle-droids makes it quite plain that the Neimoidians are not the only race to deploy military droids, ... indeed if the Droideka is the product of another planet, CollaIV. This then proves that military droid research was occuring in multiple parts of the galaxy at different times.

Come *on*. The funny thing is that Clone Wars *does* have droids that look like IG-88 engaged in battle (the silly speederbike lance episode), but that does not invalidate the EU nor did it even exist where he posted this no evidence, no reasoning, stupid rant.

What I particularly miss is not only the analysis of lightsabre fighting styles, but also his guide to designing fictional spaceships... though I can remember it roughly. (eg. the bit about devoting at least 33% of your ship's volume to propulsion)

I liked his site, particularly the stuff about light sabers and the comments about the fighting styles.

That last part I read he'd critiqued the styles shown in TPM.

Vympel wrote: This is professional?

Below you will find an image from TESB, of the bounty-hunting droid IG-88. *WHY*? ... you may well ask ... everyone knows IG-88 was an assasin droid, one of five which escaped from a rouge experiment etc etc ... well, I'm going to tell you that I believe that NO IT WASNT SO ... I believe that IG-88 is typical of various forms of war-droids used in the pre-Imperium period. It was obviously a fully functional independant droid equipped for heavy combat. I believe that IG-88 is probably a 'destroyer-class' war droid who survived whatever wars it was built for, and over the years (without mind-wipes) developed a complex and cunning personality. the droid has since made its way working as a bounty hunter, a task requiring considerable intelligence.

The 'rougue assisain' story is pure apocryphal gibberish, it has NO BASIS in canon 'fact' - growing out of the relatively recent 'tales of the Bounty Hunters' anthology sponsored by KJA, it can be dismissed out of hand. Far more likely is that this droid, or indeed (if you feel attrracted to the 'multiple IG's theory) a GROUP of them, survived some war and went on to carve a career for themselves. After all, the official site write up on battle-droids makes it quite plain that the Neimoidians are not the only race to deploy military droids, ... indeed if the Droideka is the product of another planet, CollaIV. This then proves that military droid research was occuring in multiple parts of the galaxy at different times.

Come *on*. The funny thing is that Clone Wars *does* have droids that look like IG-88 engaged in battle (the silly speederbike lance episode), but that does not invalidate the EU nor did it even exist where he posted this no evidence, no reasoning, stupid rant.

Really? Let me state this. How many trekkies do you know, who will willingly accept that a ISD single turbolaser outgun the entire Soverign ? He did the purist equivalent when he conceded that R2D2 had a propeller pack as opposed to no flying ability and redesigned his Artoo designs .

Why? Because canonical fact proved once and for all that Doug Chian TPM designs for R2D2 was true in AOTC. He has no qualms about riding bullshit over the various EU miminalist explainations, and does not bother to intergrete the EU story arcs into his anaylsis. Yet, he still willingly use ICS and other Eu diagrams of the MF to assist him in his deck design plans. Yet, he willingly use EU starships designs in the Correllian Starships page.

Painrack, you were never part of the private mailing list mentioned earlier, but I was. Trust me, Bob Brown's hatred of GL and the EU reached monumental proportions by the end, and was hardly "professional". His public face was not as unreasonable as his private one, but even his public articles contained more than enough vitriol for me.

We are talking about someone who questioned the legitimacy of events in TPM and AOTC because they contradicted his personal theories about the original trilogy. THAT is what people mean when they say that he was a rabid OT canon purist. That Frank Bitterhoff lunatic was even worse; he openly claimed that the prequel trilogy was not even canon. But Bob's approach to the prequel trilogy was only a shade more reasonable than Frank's.

Very interesting. So the private mailing list gives another nuance to the charge of "OT purist wanker" side of B. Brown.

My only experience was his site really, which I admit was a bit anal in places (the whole spelling of lightsaber thing for example) but enjoyable to read.

I consider myself a "geek" for this stuff, but not nearly the geek some people are. And I don't look down on them for being so, rather I'm glad somebody took the time to come up with this stuff so I don't have to.
; )

Kurgan wrote:My only experience was his site really, which I admit was a bit anal in places (the whole spelling of lightsaber thing for example) but enjoyable to read.

Man, was he anal about that. He evn went so far ast to have saber blocked as an obscene word in his forum! So if anyone wrote lightsaber, it came out light***** or something like that.

Galvatron wrote:Those deckplans can be found here.

I used them to construct my The Sims house

It's too bad he's out of the loop, but it would be interesting to see what he'd say when the SW OT DVD's come out (did B. reject the Special Editions?).

I'm betting 10 to 1 that the english subtitles/CC's on the DVD's will use the more common "saber" spelling. ; )

RogueIce wrote:Man, was he anal about that. He evn went so far ast to have saber blocked as an obscene word in his forum! So if anyone wrote lightsaber, it came out light***** or something like that.

Well, I understood that as more of a joke than him being an anal prick about it.

He did have evidence to back up his preference, of course: it was spelled "lightsabre" in the ANH novelisation, which was the first time it appeared in print.

PainRack wrote:I mean, look at this. Both IP and Frank argue for near-c, without the use of hyperdrives. The former just says its the use of the ion drives, while the other says its the use of sublight drives.

What purpose is there in dragging your stupid "sublight drives seperate from ion drives because I don't get parsimony" theory in and bringing up me?

Vympel directly cited just one example.

How about the AAT example? He assumes because they are low altitude in TPM that they absolutely CANNOT go higher, and that Chaing is an incompetant idiot for that assumption.

It is literally all over, and there are multiple examples where he basically questions the basic competence and character of PT stuff and compares it with the "good old days" of "Ralph McQuarrie and Joe Johnson."

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Well, I understood that as more of a joke than him being an anal prick about it.

Maybe, maybe not. I don't remember it that way. Alas, we don't have the board to go back and look.

Spanky the Dolphin wrote:He did have evidence to back up his preference, of course: it was spelled "lightsabre" in the ANH novelisation, which was the first time it appeared in print.

Big whoopdeedo. I didn't think it deserved a big huge colored box about it, like he had in his site. Since he took the time to make a big, noticable deal about it on his page, and then to declare "saber" an obscene word on his board, strikes me as him making a huge deal over something that really doesn't matter.

Illuminatus Primus wrote: What purpose is there in dragging your stupid "sublight drives seperate from ion drives because I don't get parsimony" theory in and bringing up me?

None whatsoever, just that both of you can be fanatics in public. I am not part of the private emails MW talks about and as such, I have not been exposed to the "OT purist wanker" you all talk about.

All I can say is, that in his public discourse on the forum, other than his massive disdain for EU writings, he was professional enough to incorporate evidence that ran contary to his previously expressed opinions.

Vympel directly cited just one example.

How about the AAT example? He assumes because they are low altitude in TPM that they absolutely CANNOT go higher, and that Chaing is an incompetant idiot for that assumption.

I think he called it a upper limit as expressed by canon. That's true.

It is literally all over, and there are multiple examples where he basically questions the basic competence and character of PT stuff and compares it with the "good old days" of "Ralph McQuarrie and Joe Johnson."

Right, tell me that the N-1 fighter, with its extended R2-D2 head is not idiotic. Yet, compared to other fanatics, he was willing to openly say that David Reynolds made the best possible compromise available. I mean, we only saw the fanatics at SB openly decry the ICS as uncanon and should be discarded and ass-pulled numbers, a warsie conspiracy etc etc etc.

He expressed his opinions, and in the end said that it was the only possible compromise for what we saw on canon.

He did go off the deep end by AOTC, and was an unreasonable SOB, but he was a dilligent anaylst and professional enough to had address the various problems raised in the canon. There are more than one canon purist in the world, and he's certainly not the worst of them.

Hell, at least he was willing to concede,(after an extremely heated debate) that Curtis Saxton work on the Ewok holocaust and the evidence of their extinction in the SW EU was "forced". The debate evolved into a topic from the EU illogical consitency towards Ewoks, and Andrew IIRC showed that while the explainations for the Ewoks continued existence in the EU despite the destruction of their habitat by Curtis is possible, it was certainly "bent" through a viewing lens so as to fit with logic.

Its better than the opposite spectrum on TFN, where they said that "magical items possessed by the Ewoks" meant Curtis Saxton anaylsis of the Ewok Holocaust was invalid.

PainRack wrote:I think he called it a upper limit as expressed by canon. That's true.

A lower limit. It can hover at least that high.

Why would you suggest it cannot go higher?

And I'm not talking about the N1 problem itself, but the fact that he totally blows the AAT's altitude out-of-proportion without any evidence to suggest it cannot in fact fly higher, and snidely says "well what do we expect from Chang..." which was entirely unnecessary and then brings up a totally irrelevent comparison to the OT.

What about the Falcon set which does not fit the exterior? I'd say that was a much larger and consistent OT fuck up...

PainRack wrote:He did go off the deep end by AOTC, and was an unreasonable SOB, but he was a dilligent anaylst and professional enough to had address the various problems raised in the canon. There are more than one canon purist in the world, and he's certainly not the worst of them.

Naturally, but I tend to think lowly of blowing extremely small problems out of proportion as a pretext to whine about falling standards and the "good old days" of the OT while they exhibited the Falcon screw-up, possibly the worst SoD problem in the history of the filmic canon.

Such as the IG-88 thing, despite the fact the cited text refers to Zuchess and Dengar as humans.

PainRack wrote:Its better than the opposite spectrum on TFN, where they said that "magical items possessed by the Ewoks" meant Curtis Saxton anaylsis of the Ewok Holocaust was invalid.

Perhaps you didn't see my scale, with the TFNers at opposite "moron" extremes of the spectrum?

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

PainRack wrote:I think he called it a upper limit as expressed by canon. That's true.

A lower limit. It can hover at least that high.

Why would you suggest it cannot go higher?

It would be a lower limit, if we know its easier to hover at higher altitudes than at lower altitudes.

Yes, he utterly discarded EU presumptions for that, but there is still nothing fundamentally bad about that because he openly stated that he "preferred" to compare canon sources over EU sources. He isn't Darkstar, who said that canon sources are the only valid sources as compared to the EU.

None of his gripes compare to the current Trekkie stand that the ICS is wrong, and all subsequent EU material about the Federation ships are wrong all just because the movie did not show the Core ships taking off at max speed and no destruction of Federation ships occured in space. Of course, many of them had the gall to suggest that the Republic did not destroy any Federation ships in space whatosever, just because the movie showed Count Dooku escaping in a peaceful manner. Contary to the canon novelisation of course.

What about the Falcon set which does not fit the exterior? I'd say that was a much larger and consistent OT fuck up...

Do you mean to imply that he did not complain about this?

Perhaps you didn't see my scale, with the TFNers at opposite "moron" extremes of the spectrum?

Just pointing out that there are worse. We do know that before AOTC, Rob Brown was a diligant SW analyst and he was one of the few who pioneered studying the SWU.... "cultural" aspect.

I'm not saying he's right. Connor IIRC himself once corrected him before on some aspects of the SWU. Its just that unlike what the term "OT purist wanker" suggest, he at least actively encourages debate and discussions, and is willing to look over the other side of the hill in public discourse.

I do not have access to what occured between MW and Rob Brown, other than the fact that he said that he and MW had a bitter discussion, and that it was a case of physics over screen analyst.

PainRack wrote:It would be a lower limit, if we know its easier to hover at higher altitudes than at lower altitudes.

I see that basic grade-school physics is beyond you.

If it can hover at X metres, then X metres is a lower limit for its hovering ability. It may be higher, but if it were lower, then it would not have been able to achieve that height.

Darth Wong wrote:

PainRack wrote:It would be a lower limit, if we know its easier to hover at higher altitudes than at lower altitudes.

I see that basic grade-school physics is beyond you.

If it can hover at X metres, then X metres is a lower limit for its hovering ability. It may be higher, but if it were lower, then it would not have been able to achieve that height.

Errr. I think something got mixed up here.

Let's run through the language. When I say it was an upper limit, I meant that as from canon, this was the maximum height that was reached by the hovertank.

Is this correct?

PainRack wrote:Let's run through the language. When I say it was an upper limit, I meant that as from canon, this was the maximum height that was reached by the hovertank.

Is this correct?

It is the maximum height reached by the hovertank in that scene. However, it is a lower limit for the hovertank's abilities.

PainRack wrote:It would be a lower limit, if we know its easier to hover at higher altitudes than at lower altitudes.

Alright. When we say the "lower limit" of a weapon system's yield, we mean that due to observation Y, we know it must at least be capable of reaching point X. Therefore the weapon yield is greater than or equal to X.

We know the repulsortank can reach height A. We know the repulsorlift's flight ceeling must be A or higher; therefore it is a lower limit on what it must be able to do. There's absolutely no reason to assume it cannot be indefinitely greater, but obviously it must at least be A because if it was lower, it wouldn't be able to reach the observed height.

Quite frankly, before you shoot off your mouth on how I'm a fanatic and my claims of Brown's dogmaticism and unfounded agenda are bullshit, learn some simple math. Its good for you.

PainRack wrote:Yes, he utterly discarded EU presumptions for that,

Really, what EU assumptions? There's no evidence behind my critique of Brown's idiotic remarks, simply logic.

There's no reason to assume the repulsortank cannot hover at greater altitudes, apart from the fact that Brown irrationally denied this possibility as a pretext for one of his self-endulgent little rants about the great fall of the PT and how competent McQuarrie was compared to the hack Chang or something..

PainRack wrote:but there is still nothing fundamentally bad about that because he openly stated that he "preferred" to compare canon sources over EU sources. He isn't Darkstar, who said that canon sources are the only valid sources as compared to the EU.

Strawman; I never brought up Darkstar, nor did I address the canon heirarchy at all in why he was off his hinges.

PainRack wrote:None of his gripes compare to the current Trekkie stand that the ICS is wrong, and all subsequent EU material about the Federation ships are wrong all just because the movie did not show the Core ships taking off at max speed and no destruction of Federation ships occured in space.

Strawman. What the fuck do Trekkies and their delusions have to do with this? Oh, that's right: jack and shit.

However, this is an example of the kind of blatantly illogical thinking Brown engaged in when it served one of his rants. The capability of the Core ships with regards to speed has lower limits placed on it by the speed it took off with in the atmosphere. However, the higher figures of AOTC ICS are still correct since they are above that. Naturally, of course, the AAT cannot go higher because it wasn't seen to in the movie. Exactly the same brand of thinking.

PainRack wrote:Of course, many of them had the gall to suggest that the Republic did not destroy any Federation ships in space whatosever, just because the movie showed Count Dooku escaping in a peaceful manner. Contary to the canon novelisation of course.

I'm really interested in what this AOTC stuff and Trekkie claims have to do with the things I said Brown did.

PainRack wrote:Do you mean to imply that he did not complain about this?

You don't get it: how can you rant at length on how wonderful and brilliant and professional the OTers were versus the hacks and incompetents of the PT when they made a fuck up like the Falcon? How can you say that McQuarrie and others "wouldn't have stood for those mistakes" with regards to the N1 and R2 when one of the major movie sets was entirely inconsistent with the ship itself?!

PainRack wrote:Just pointing out that there are worse. We do know that before AOTC, Rob Brown was a diligant SW analyst and he was one of the few who pioneered studying the SWU.... "cultural" aspect.

The fact that there are worse does not exempt Brown of criticism of his hard-line ideologies and biases which obviously infested more than one of his analyses. And quite frankly since he was studying more subjective things, he should've been more lenient before making proclamations on the competence of PT employees, particularly with such blatant double standards.

PainRack wrote:Its just that unlike what the term "OT purist wanker" suggest, he at least actively encourages debate and discussions, and is willing to look over the other side of the hill in public discourse.

Alright, if it isn't sugary enough for you, come up with a term which better fits what you think.

He's still irrational, and quite frankly I'm offended by some of the accusations levied at LFL employees and some brilliant artists and creators, particularly when he convienently overlooks some screw-ups he himself covers elsewhere to facilitate this ideology.

IP, in the case of the Falcon, it was designed to be the Blockade Runner. Lucas changed his mind at the last minute, and they came up with the current Falcon. They made do as best they could with the interiior ssets, instead of rebuilding them. Robert covered this on his website.

Lord Poe wrote:IP, in the case of the Falcon, it was designed to be the Blockade Runner. Lucas changed his mind at the last minute, and they came up with the current Falcon. They made do as best they could with the interiior ssets, instead of rebuilding them. Robert covered this on his website.

How is that an excuse? Its still a deep screw-up, and showed that GL didn't have some sort of magic absolute care back then either; nor was this really fixed or dealt with in TESB, was it?

GL didn't intercede on the N1 either. I don't see why the two events are not consistent to my point that its absurd to treat the OT as super-professional and sacrosant based on his claims.

Lord Poe wrote:IP, in the case of the Falcon, it was designed to be the Blockade Runner. Lucas changed his mind at the last minute, and they came up with the current Falcon. They made do as best they could with the interiior ssets, instead of rebuilding them. Robert covered this on his website.

To be fair (as I'm no fan of the prequels), didn't Lucas simply take a bite out of his hamburger and tell his guys that he wanted the Falcon to look like that?

Couldn't Johnston have designed the current Falcon to accommodate the established set?

A better question is that somehow they couldn't fix it for TESB?