EU's officiality

[Master of Ossus]

You act as if you think I was under the impression I could change your mind. The only minds I assume I might be able to reach are those which are active and open.

The most I expect out of you and the other warsies here is to make them realize that when they invoke EU data, they are not arguing using "the real story of Star Wars" (Cerasi), which is the canon.

We KNOW THAT ALREADY, DumbShit! We are using official material, which, when overriden by the canon material, becomes worthless.

BTW, that is NOT how you started this thread. You started this thread by stating that EU weapons were totally different than the weapons shown in the movies, and that therefore EU material was invalid on that "technical" area. I pointed out that parity of technology is the only explanation for such parity in design, and you (surprisingly) changed your argument to say that you are trying to make sure we know that there is a difference between official and canon. We already knew that. Your statements are incredibly stupid.

You also claimed that the ICS is not canon and cannot be used. The ICS is clearly canon, as it should be given more weight than the novelisations. The ICS only deals with material in the movies, and the novel both changes some scenes and dialogue slightly, AND it adds a considerable amount of information. ICS does not do this. ICS should be seen as a canon source, with at least as much authority as the novelisations, which are considered to be canon. You are clearly biased, and you imply that anyone who is not biased will come to your conclusions. This is not true. You claimed that the EU was inaccurate, and it refered to people with wholly different technology than the technology in the movies. That is OBVIOUSLY not the case. ANY non-biased observer would come to the conclusion that there is rough technological parity between the EU and the movies. You are sadly mistaken, here, yet again.

[Vympel]

*beating head against the wall*

Darkstar you're WRONG. A Base Delta Zero is ALWAYS **EXPLICITLY** stated if that is what they want done. It is a military code word- if it is not used- it is not a BDZ. Whatever else Daala ordered is IRRELEVANT. Not only that, they were clearly targeting structures- and I read the thread in spacebattles.com. It is clearly not a BDZ operation.

[DarkStar]

We are using official material, which, when overriden by the canon material, becomes worthless.

So long as you understand that it is only a choice on your part that gives it any worth at all, we're good. Others, of course, may choose differently.

BTW, that is NOT how you started this thread.

I didn't start this thread.

You started this thread by stating that EU weapons were totally different than the weapons shown in the movies, and that therefore EU material was invalid on that "technical" area.

My first post to the thread revolved around the canonicity of the EU, not ICS firepower figures versus canon firepower figures.

You are very good at revisionist history, but you need to learn that you can't revise history when the original facts are still available.

I pointed out that parity of technology is the only explanation for such parity in design, and you (surprisingly) changed your argument to say that you are trying to make sure we know that there is a difference between official and canon.

I've already responded to your point about parity... your effort to ignore that fact and claim an argument change on my part is very dishonest of you.

You also claimed that the ICS is not canon and cannot be used. The ICS is clearly canon, as it should be given more weight than the novelisations. The ICS only deals with material in the movies, and the novel both changes some scenes and dialogue slightly,

Sorry, dude, the ICS isn't canon, and never was. Only the films, scripts, novelisations, and radio plays are canon.

AND it adds a considerable amount of information. ICS does not do this.

Um, okay. I guess all those weapons firepower figures, background details, and cutaway drawings don't add anything to the canon film. Funny, I must not have seen the same movie as you, because I don't remember any of that.

ICS should be seen as a canon source, with at least as much authority as the novelisations, which are considered to be canon. You are clearly biased,

Oh, I'm biased for following canon policy and not arguing that the ICS should be canon, but you aren't? Wow.

You claimed that the EU was inaccurate, and it refered to people with wholly different technology than the technology in the movies. That is OBVIOUSLY not the case. ANY non-biased observer would come to the conclusion that there is rough technological parity between the EU and the movies. You are sadly mistaken, here, yet again.

Hand-grenade yield cannons versus 600 gigajoule cannons.
600 gigajoules = 143,403 kilograms of TNT
hand grenade = a rough maximum of 1 kilogram of TNT

This is similar to the 8 megaton weapons which did not do 8 megatons of damage to asteroids. Then, of course, you could point out the fact that the canon yield of several weapons described in the ICS is zero, since we never saw the damn things fire.

[DarkStar]

*beating head against the wall*

Darkstar you're WRONG. A Base Delta Zero is ALWAYS **EXPLICITLY** stated if that is what they want done. It is a military code word- if it is not used- it is not a BDZ. Whatever else Daala ordered is IRRELEVANT. Not only that, they were clearly targeting structures- and I read the thread in spacebattles.com. It is clearly not a BDZ operation.

What part of all turbolasers at full power do you not understand?

[Lord Poe]

Oops, I guess that wasn't your ass. I'll be back... gotta go hand Wayne his.

http://kier.3dfrontier.com/forums/showt ... post804306

http://kier.3dfrontier.com/forums/newre ... e2d&t=2243

[Lord Poe]

Oops, I guess that wasn't your ass. I'll be back... gotta go hand Wayne his.

And I've once again, proven you wrong. Which isn't all that difficult, as it turns out.

[LMSx]

Proof that Lucas referred to a parallel universe of the parameters you assume?

I'll address this below, having fully gone over your introductory post again.

What part of all turbolasers at full power do you not understand?

What part of all turbolasers at full power do you not understand?(z)

I guess that's how DarkStar's mind works. The man quoted said that BDZ was a specific operation and never had it's name changed.

Daala had been in the Maw for a long time, but having been advanced to the rank of Admiral, one would imagine that she learned the three letter designatin, if not at the academy then somewhere in the core.

She made no mention of a BDZ. Your theory assumes that she thinks all the officers on the ship are stupid, and in unspecific language tells the gunners to "turn the planet into a cinder".

There was ONE reason for being at Yavin. The Jedi Temple and the apprentices. Unlike a BDZ dictation, she did not annihilate the backside, then the front of the planet to kill the students, she had one goal in an isolated spot, and a BDZ would be far in excess overkill.

My first post to the thread revolved around the canonicity of the EU, not ICS firepower figures versus canon firepower figures.

Then I said that it would stand to reason that firepower, shielding, etc. would remain constant because no specific mention of difference had been made. YOU then said that was illogical. Refer to the Kennedy universe below.

With as many variables as an alternate universe presents, you can only extrapolate similarities as far as what is shown.

If you went to a parellel universe, and the description said that Kennedy had not been shot, according to your logic we should automatically assume that the atmosphere is 80 percent argon and dangerous to us, and thus come over in oxygen suits even although no mention has been made of a different type of atmosphere. My logic is saying everything up to Kennedy's attempted assasination should be considered parallel to ours, and the one event having been shifted was either that the gun misfired or the aim was off. Should the lack of his death result in humans breathing an atmosphere of 80 percent argon, the difference between the two planet's atmosphere would be so great that it would merit an addition to the description. No addition would be made, so it would be logical to assume that the atmosphere would not be dangerous. If we apply the same basic theory to the rest of the physical universe and no addition was made to the description, then we assume the only difference is that Kennedy was not shot.

Am I making sense at all? atmosphere = weapon yields, Kennedy = plot points, etc.


Here's your starting post:

The real story of Star Wars is the absolute Canon of the films (Cerasi, Sansweet). The remaining parts of Canon are the film scripts, film novelisations, and the 1981 radio plays (Insider #23), with a canonicity that drops off in degrees (Sansweet) based on how close they are to the movies in format and content (Cerasi).

ICS = very close to the movies in format and content. While the ICS probably wasn't published by the time of this quote, the ICS ends up with the canon definition. The main consistancy between all of them is that they are directly based off of the films, as is the ICS. One can indeed make the case that the ICS is a type of visual novelisation of the film. Here is the quote for the EU:

Lucas and LFL have allowed other writers to expand upon his films with original fiction novels(Dice's 1st Insider quote), games, and comic books (StarWars.com EU intro).....(continuity, LucasBooks)....This is known as the Expanded Universe, and authors who write for it must know not only the Canon, but also the EU Continuity.

The only connection that could possibly be streched is that the ICS is an "original fiction novel". However, the ICS is definitely not what could be considered a "original fiction novel". Curtis Saxton spent time at Skywalker Ranch and then formed the basis of the ICS around Lucas' vision, just like a film novelisation author, instead of the juicy (non-existant) plot details being formed in his head. If someone asked for a novel, and you gave them the ICS, would they consider it a novel in the same vein as DarkSaber and Heir to the Empire? No. DS and HttE are specifically the types of novels that the quoted source had in mind. So that fails two of the three criteria.

Now for the Lucas ideas:

Recently, Lucas cleared up the messy issue by explaining that the books, games, and comic books are part of a parallel universe

LucasBooks tries to use the events in the Canon universe in the parallel universe, but the fact that it is a parallel universe explains why Lucas isn't bound by it (as stated by Sansweet).

While you could make the attempt to consider the ICS a part of the parallel universe, it fits the definition of canon according to the previous quote and point. The ICS is DIRECTLY based off of AOTC. It isn't based off of Darksaber, it isn't based off of the X-Wing novels, it's directly based off of AOTC and what happened in AOTC shaped the final version of the ICS. Go back to the "absolute canon" qoute and see how the ICS faired.

If someone retold his tales, these events of another world might confuse Star Wars fans and violate the integrity of his work, and his vision for his universe. That is also why he works so closely with the authors who write the novelisations of his films

Being the huge buracracy that LucasFilms is, I doubt that Lucas personally oversees the novelisation, but rather a trusted aide or associate. (I.E "Lucas created the Star Wars story, but a friend helped him with some plot twists. Lucas still essentially created the Star Wars story.")

So, if Saxton went to Skywalker Ranch and worked with the Lucas team, it would stand to assume that Lucas considered the importance of the book enough so that it being written improperly would violate the integrity of his work and his vision of the universe. This snugs it in with the absolute canon quote and the Canon/Parallel boundry.

However, the real story of Lucas' Star Wars universe is the Canon, and that must be kept in mind by the fan or debater

Refer to all responses above.

Please note that even although you can find minor discrepencies between the ICS and final movie, you can also find minor discrepencies between the radio plays and the movie. Finding a discrepency does not remove it from canon status according to your document.

[Vympel]

Interesting. ICS vs canon you say? Well here's an interesting fact:

In the original 1998 Star Wars ICS- we see a cross-section of Slave I.

IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS THAT SEEN IN EPISODE 2, the movie. Down to the midship guns, the flip out warhead launchers etc. I.e: Lucas took the original ICS and gave Slave I everything it had in the book that was made 4 years before AOTC was released.

Most interesting.

And of course, the AOTC ICS has the same cross section, except from a different angle.

The only discrepancy between the OT ICS and AOTC ICS is that in the OT ICS the midship guns are called ion cannons, wheras in the AOTC one they are simply called midship weapons. Easily explained by a possible refit later on (considering decades have passed and ion cannons are a good idea for a bounty hunter ship)

[DarkStar]

She made no mention of a BDZ.

Irrelevant. She fired on the planet at full power with the full turbolaser complement of a Super Star Destroyer. There's not even evidence of one hit worth 200 gigatons, or even anywhere close to that.

This is a very simple concept here. She does not have to order a BDZ for this to be useful as a demonstration of what we could expect from a BDZ.

My first post to the thread revolved around the canonicity of the EU, not ICS firepower figures versus canon firepower figures.

Then I said that it would stand to reason that firepower, shielding, etc. would remain constant because no specific mention of difference had been made.

At which point I pointed out the fact that we cannot know what similarities exist in a parallel universe without specific knowledge.

"Hey, look, there's Luke! Okay, we mark his existence in both. Hey, look, he uses the Force! Mark that as similar, too. Hey, look, he's a good guy! Check. ..." And so on.

With as many variables as an alternate universe presents, you can only extrapolate similarities as far as what is shown.

If you went to a parellel universe, and the description said that Kennedy had not been shot, according to your logic we should automatically assume that the atmosphere is 80 percent argon and dangerous to us, and thus come over in oxygen suits even although no mention has been made of a different type of atmosphere.

Your mixing of genres (alternate history stories and sci-fi parallel universe possibilities) is silly.

If the description only says that Kennedy had not been shot, and not that the world was the same up to that point, then there is no reason to assume anything about the parallel universe, since in a realm of infinite possibilities, there could be many reasons he wasn't shot. Perhaps Oswald missed. Perhaps Kennedy didn't win the election. Perhaps Kennedy was never born. Perhaps the Americas were never conquered. Perhaps humanity never evolved. Perhaps life on Earth never developed at all. Perhaps the solar system never appeared. Perhaps the universe turned out differently.

My logic is saying everything up to Kennedy's attempted assasination should be considered parallel to ours, and the one event having been shifted was either that the gun misfired or the aim was off.

In an alternate history story, your presumptions would probably be valid. However, parallel universes by definition present infinite possibilities.

Here's your starting post:

This is funny... you argue ICS canonicity without reference to the canon policy statements directly, but by trying to find loopholes in what I wrote about the canon policy.

The real story of Star Wars is the absolute Canon of the films (Cerasi, Sansweet). The remaining parts of Canon are the film scripts, film novelisations, and the 1981 radio plays (Insider #23), with a canonicity that drops off in degrees (Sansweet) based on how close they are to the movies in format and content (Cerasi).

ICS = very close to the movies in format and content. While the ICS probably wasn't published by the time of this quote, the ICS ends up with the canon definition. The main consistancy between all of them is that they are directly based off of the films, as is the ICS. One can indeed make the case that the ICS is a type of visual novelisation of the film.

All the other ICSs are non-canon. Funny that this would be the one you guys try to slip into the canon... wonder why that would be?

Here is the quote for the EU:

Lucas and LFL have allowed other writers to expand upon his films with original fiction novels(Dice's 1st Insider quote), games, and comic books (StarWars.com EU intro).....(continuity, LucasBooks)....This is known as the Expanded Universe, and authors who write for it must know not only the Canon, but also the EU Continuity.

The only connection that could possibly be streched is that the ICS is an "original fiction novel".

It certainly satisfies the "original fiction" requirement.

Now for the Lucas ideas:

Recently, Lucas cleared up the messy issue by explaining that the books, games, and comic books are part of a parallel universe

LucasBooks tries to use the events in the Canon universe in the parallel universe, but the fact that it is a parallel universe explains why Lucas isn't bound by it (as stated by Sansweet).

While you could make the attempt to consider the ICS a part of the parallel universe, it fits the definition of canon according to the previous quote and point.

None of the Incredible Cross Section books are canon. They are all licensed materials, and are not specifically described as being canon. You may, based on the canon policy and the statements of Cerasi in particular, try to rate them as being somewhat less non-canon than other non-canon works, but that's as close as you're going to get to canon.

To argue otherwise is to try to use a warsie version of the trekkie argument of a canon Tech Manual.

If someone retold his tales, these events of another world might confuse Star Wars fans and violate the integrity of his work, and his vision for his universe. That is also why he works so closely with the authors who write the novelisations of his films

Being the huge buracracy that LucasFilms is, I doubt that Lucas personally oversees the novelisation, but rather a trusted aide or associate.

With the more recent novels, perhaps. However, the older novelisations were aided by Lucas directly.

So, if Saxton went to Skywalker Ranch and worked with the Lucas team, it would stand to assume that Lucas considered the importance of the book enough so that it being written improperly would violate the integrity of his work and his vision of the universe.

Um, no. The reason the ICS people go to the Skywalker Ranch is to peek at the concept art and any finished models, so the book can be published in a timely fashion. Much of the movie post-production was not completed by the time the deadline for the ICS arrived, leaving Saxton to guess.

However, the real story of Lucas' Star Wars universe is the Canon, and that must be kept in mind by the fan or debater

Refer to all responses above.

Please note that even although you can find minor discrepencies between the ICS and final movie, you can also find minor discrepencies between the radio plays and the movie. Finding a discrepency does not remove it from canon status according to your document.

It never gets a chance to be canon, according to my document, even with your attempted jumps through any loopholes I left. It has even less of a chance against the primary sources of the canon policy.

[Master of Ossus]

Damnit, DumbShit, why the hell did you ignore my arguments? Parity of design indicates a parity of technology. I cannot understand why you do not believe this. It seems not only perfectly clear, but also necessary. Without very advanced materials, it would be impossible to build certain structures. Without structural steel, it would be impossible to build many sky-scrapers. Without advanced ceramics, it would be impossible to build the space shuttle. Your "alternate universe" thing became crap the moment that you started posting that their technology levels were radically different.

I ALREADY KNOW OFFICIAL DOES NOT EQUAL CANON! I have stated that there is a difference. You have ignored canon policy regarding this matter. You are an idiot. ICS is certainly not original fiction. It works almost completely within the film.

Your hand grenade "example" (and I use that word sparingly) is crap. You fail to realize that in weapons firing energy in the form of joules, much of the energy will not be converted into Kinetic Energy. Rather, it will be converted into either photons (light) or heat energy. When the weapon fired on the asteroids in ESB, we clearly saw that the asteroid was vaporized. Not all of the energy was converted into KE. In fact, most of it was clearly converted into heat energy. I really don't understand what your example is attempting to illustrate, other than the fact that you do not see 8 megatons of damage in the film. That is because you are not thinking clearly. I have already attempted to explain this in the "Pure Star Wars" forum, here. When an energy weapon fires, all of its energy is not instantly put to moving things around. That is why the yields on the composite lasers carried by LAATs is reasonable, even though we did not see the equivalent of a gigaton explosion every time that it fired. Instead, most of that energy (almost all of it), was put to work in vaporizing a few cubic meters of rock--not to blowing things up and moving things around.

Incidentally, (and not really relevent, because your "example" did not appear to illustrate jack), a hand grenade does not explode with the equivalent of a kilogram of TNT. Most hand grenades today, used for military purposes, are called fragmentation grenades. When one of these detonates, it usually has no more than a hundred or so grams of explosive, and the majority of its damage is dealt through shrapnel that it creates. The other primarily military kind of grenade is called a concussion grenade, which seeks to deal damage through sheer force of explosion (shock waves, pressure, etc.). Such grenades were primarily used by the Germans in WWII, and WWI. These grenades need significantly larger charges, because they usually do not create nearly as much shrapnel upon detonation, but even these weapons usually carry only 300-400 grams of explosive, and sometimes not even that. I have not yet seen a hand grenade that carries a yield of about a kilogram of TNT.

Incidentally, you ignore the fact that BDZ shots and regular shots may attempt to operate on a target differently. We have seen, in the movies, both TL shots that appear to cause explosions, and TL shots that appear to cause melting of rock and other materials. That is canon, regardless of what STRANGE notions you have on canon. It is highly probable that explosive shots are used primarily for attacking starships, while melting shots are used for defense against asteroids and BDZs. You have refused to acknowledge this as a possibility. Also, the SSD in question did not bombard the planet for long enough even to circle the planet, much less BDZ the place.

Sorry, dude, the ICS isn't canon, and never was. Only the films, scripts, novelisations, and radio plays are canon.

You are right. Where does ICS fit in to either official or canon material (by definition)? It doesn't fit into either one. It is more accurate from what we can see on film, than even the novelisation, which adds a number of scenes and changes some others. ICS does add some information, but it never contradicts the film in any way--which BOTH the script and the novelisation do. It appears, in many ways, to be more accurate than either the film or the novelisation. That is why I do not think that the ICS belongs in the EU.

BTW, in ST:Nemesis, we never see the main weapon (PK weapon) of the Scimitar fire. I guess that means that it cannot. That is essentially what you are saying about the weapons we never see firing in ICS--that they have not been seen to fire, and therefore their yields should be rated at ZERO! I have no idea where you got this moronic notion. It clearly does not hold true. The Scimitar never fires its weapon, therefore its weapon cannot do any damage? That makes no sense. Sorry.

DumbShit, yet again, you have lost, but you continue to display the infamous "DarkStar Defense" of disregarding other posts and continuing to reiterate original points without changing them when new evidence becomes available. That is not a reasonable debating method. That is why you are a Village Idiot.

[Ender]

As I do not have the AOTC novel at hand, would someone be so kind to post the quote about the fight where it specifically says that the laser canons are almost totally drained. This would quite simply put an end to his point about AOTC and ICS contradicting itself on weapons power.

[SPOOFE]

What part of "all turbolaser batteries" and "full power" didn't you understand?

What part of the distinction between turbolaser batteries and heavy turbolaser batteries didn't you understand? Hint: One of the terms has the word "heavy" in it, and is different from the term that does not have the word "heavy" in it.

Funny, your average ISD has its HTLs mounted in multi-gun turrets.

So you admit that HTL's are not the same as "turbolaser batteries"?

Proof that an SSD does not?

Doesn't work that way. YOU made the assertion (that all weapons - as opposed to just the "turbolaser batteries" - were used in the attack), so YOU have to provide the proof.

No, you've been dishonest for posting bullshit.

Prove it. Cite a single of my claims that has been "bullshit".

[Master of Ossus]

Incidentally, DumbShit's argument is essentially irrelevent, anyway. Mike's site states that he uses official material, unless it is contradicted by canon, on the site. It also details how and why he made this decision. DumbShit's argument that, while using Mike's board, we should not be able to use official material without using canon material is bunk. If he wants to start a thread in which official material cannot be used, he can do that, and state that they are not using official material in the OP. His argument that ICS is not canon (and, essentially, that the ICS has little or no connection with the movies) is REALLY crappy--to the point of being unbelievable.

Further, I have no clue where he got the bizarre notion that none of us made any distinction between official and canon.

And can anyone tell me what his talk on hand grenades had to do with anything? I still can't figure that out. Some of his information is wrong, but I still can't figure out why he started rambling on that topic, seeing as how it seemed to start randomly and go nowhere. In fact, I'm not even sure he drew a conclusion!

[SPOOFE]

And can anyone tell me what his talk on hand grenades had to do with anything?

He's claiming that since the blasts delivered by Slave I in AOTC didn't release the supposed maximum power rating of 600 gigajoules, they are unable to.

Of course, small as his mind is, he forgets the time-honored mantra of "Variable yields".

[LMSx]

Um, no. The reason the ICS people go to the Skywalker Ranch is to peek at the concept art and any finished models, so the book can be published in a timely fashion. Much of the movie post-production was not completed by the time the deadline for the ICS arrived, leaving Saxton to guess.

0_0

Yes. That's what the ICS deals in: the concept art and finished models of the ships of AOTC. If it were merely EU, then no trip should have been necessary, since if the ICS had incorrect ship design Lucas and company would have been fine with that, since it's in a parallel universe.

They weren't happy with the idea of the definitive guide to AOTC ships being made without input from Lucas, so he went to SRanch to collaberate with them, to make sure that the models in the book didn't stray too far from the original vision. That's just what novelisation authors do, to prevent the definitive written version of the movies from straying too far from the original vision. Do you understand my position?

I would further like to note that I have never said anything about the other movies ICS canonocity.[/quote]

[DarkStar]

Damnit, DumbShit, why the hell did you ignore my arguments? Parity of design indicates a parity of technology.

And I quote:

"Funny, the concept of a flying wing bomber had already been realized in the 40s. Automobile design and theory hasn't changed dramatically since the late 40s.

The idea that the design similarities must mean technological parity is stupid anyway. How are you going to know the difference between a 1 ton weapon and a 1 megaton weapon between parallel universes?"

-Me

http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/vie ... c&start=45

I already told you I didn't ignore your argument. The first time you said it, it could have been a simple error... but by saying it again after I had already corrected you, you have proven yourself stupid, yet again.

Furthering the remarks above, I should point out that Ford could have constructed a vehicle looking externally identical in every detail to a modern vehicle back in 1910, with only one exception I can think of... earlier efforts at automobile glass were prone to more distortion, even though they usually weren't even curved. But, you wouldn't notice that in most circumstances.

Would the lights shine as brightly? No. Would the acceleration be as swift? No. Would what was under the hood even remotely resemble what we have today? Barely.

Or, take as an example the new Bug versus the old Bug. Parity of design? You betcha. Parity of tech? Ha! The same goes for all the retro cars, kit cars, et cetera.

Or, how about comparing OV-101... NASA's Enterprise... with the newer Endeavor.

The point I have made and which you have chosen to ignore is that parity of design does not necessarily indicate parity of technology.

I cannot understand why you do not believe this. It seems not only perfectly clear, but also necessary. Without very advanced materials, it would be impossible to build certain structures. Without structural steel, it would be impossible to build many sky-scrapers. Without advanced ceramics, it would be impossible to build the space shuttle. Your "alternate universe" thing became crap the moment that you started posting that their technology levels were radically different.

Tell me, then... what does a less advanced SW weapon look like?

The problem with your assertion is that you do not know. Even if I showed you a 500 gigaton weapon and a 1 megajoule weapon of an earlier era side-by-side, you wouldn't be able to tell which was which, even if we looked "under the hood".

I ALREADY KNOW OFFICIAL DOES NOT EQUAL CANON! I have stated that there is a difference. You have ignored canon policy regarding this matter. You are an idiot. ICS is certainly not original fiction. It works almost completely within the film.

No ICS is canon. Deal with it.

Your hand grenade "example" (and I use that word sparingly) is crap. You fail to realize that in weapons firing energy in the form of joules, much of the energy will not be converted into Kinetic Energy. Rather, it will be converted into either photons (light) or heat energy.

Assuming that by KE you mean blast, that's fine. But Obi-Wan was neither blinded nor singed by the tiny hand-grenade blast that each bolt produced, and I've made bigger fireballs with a gallon of gasoline.

That is why the yields on the composite lasers carried by LAATs is reasonable, even though we did not see the equivalent of a gigaton explosion every time that it fired. Instead, most of that energy (almost all of it), was put to work in vaporizing a few cubic meters of rock--not to blowing things up and moving things around.

You don't seem to realize that the vaporisation of rock is going to involve some significant blast effects.

Incidentally, (and not really relevent, because your "example" did not appear to illustrate jack), a hand grenade does not explode with the equivalent of a kilogram of TNT. Most hand grenades today, used for military purposes, are called fragmentation grenades. When one of these detonates, it usually has no more than a hundred or so grams of explosive, and the majority of its damage is dealt through shrapnel that it creates.

Quite true. That is why my comparison is based on concussion grenades.

The other primarily military kind of grenade is called a concussion grenade, which seeks to deal damage through sheer force of explosion (shock waves, pressure, etc.). Such grenades were primarily used by the Germans in WWII, and WWI. These grenades need significantly larger charges, because they usually do not create nearly as much shrapnel upon detonation, but even these weapons usually carry only 300-400 grams of explosive, and sometimes not even that. I have not yet seen a hand grenade that carries a yield of about a kilogram of TNT.

Neither have I. I was being generous to you by giving that as a rough maximum, since it puts it closer to the ridiculous 150,000 kg figure of yours.

Incidentally, you ignore the fact that BDZ shots and regular shots may attempt to operate on a target differently. We have seen, in the movies, both TL shots that appear to cause explosions, and TL shots that appear to cause melting of rock and other materials.

We've seen flak bursts. That's about as close to exploding turbolaser bolts as you can get.

That is canon, regardless of what STRANGE notions you have on canon. It is highly probable that explosive shots are used primarily for attacking starships, while melting shots are used for defense against asteroids and BDZs. You have refused to acknowledge this as a possibility.

That's because it is stupid. The difference between a directed energy weapon causing melting or explosions is going to be based on energy levels, and whether or not the target has something particularly combustible aboard.

Also, the SSD in question did not bombard the planet for long enough even to circle the planet, much less BDZ the place.

Funny, I thought you guys demanded that an hour is sufficient.

Sorry, dude, the ICS isn't canon, and never was. Only the films, scripts, novelisations, and radio plays are canon.

You are right. Where does ICS fit in to either official or canon material (by definition)? It doesn't fit into either one. It is more accurate from what we can see on film, than even the novelisation, which adds a number of scenes and changes some others. ICS does add some information, but it never contradicts the film in any way--which BOTH the script and the novelisation do.

Non-contradiction, even if that is true, is irrelevant. It is not canon.

It appears, in many ways, to be more accurate than either the film or the novelisation. That is why I do not think that the ICS belongs in the EU.

More accurate than the film???

BTW, in ST:Nemesis, we never see the main weapon (PK weapon) of the Scimitar fire. I guess that means that it cannot. That is essentially what you are saying about the weapons we never see firing in ICS--that they have not been seen to fire, and therefore their yields should be rated at ZERO! I have no idea where you got this moronic notion. It clearly does not hold true. The Scimitar never fires its weapon, therefore its weapon cannot do any damage? That makes no sense. Sorry.

Sarcasm is lost on you.

DumbShit, yet again, you have lost, but you continue to display the infamous "DarkStar Defense" of disregarding other posts and continuing to reiterate original points without changing them when new evidence becomes available. That is not a reasonable debating method. That is why you are a Village Idiot.

Yet again, you declare victory, apparently based on your posts demonstrating a higher idiocy-per-sentence level than mine, and continuing to falsely accuse me of various things.

You are a fool.

[DarkStar]

What part of "all turbolaser batteries" and "full power" didn't you understand?

What part of the distinction between turbolaser batteries and heavy turbolaser batteries didn't you understand? Hint: One of the terms has the word "heavy" in it, and is different from the term that does not have the word "heavy" in it.

"All" is not inclusive of "heavy"? Funny, I thought Ossus was the only one who doesn't speak English here.

Funny, your average ISD has its HTLs mounted in multi-gun turrets.

So you admit that HTL's are not the same as "turbolaser batteries"?

Never stated or implied.

Proof that an SSD does not?

Doesn't work that way. YOU made the assertion (that all weapons - as opposed to just the "turbolaser batteries" - were used in the attack), so YOU have to provide the proof.

Wrong again. The statement is that all turbolaser batteries were fired. You and Poe are the ones who brought up the notion that all batteries does not equal all weapons. This has been shown to be false... and yet you still bitch. In order to dismantle the fact that it has been shown false, you are the one who must provide proof.

No, you've been dishonest for posting bullshit.

Prove it. Cite a single of my claims that has been "bullshit".

With the possible exception of your neutronium arguments, everything I have seen out of you has been bullshit, or based on it.

[Doomriser]

Hey, dumbfuck, let's look at Daala's BDZ using official facts instead of your bullshit.

p258

(Daala to Pellaeon only): "You will take a fleet of Imperial Star Destroyers directly to begin the obliteration of the small jungle moon [Yavin 4]. And I will follow in the Night Hammer to ensure we maintain possesion of this worthless system"
p263

(Pellaeon to the assembled masses beofre launching the fleet): "a decisive attack on the new training facility where the rebels are attempting to create a commando force of their own jedi sorcerers. Our fleet will strike at the training centre and destroy it before the rebels even know we are on the march"

And what did Pellaeon do once he reached Yavin 4? Why, he deployed ground troops, didn't he?

Darksaber, (hardcover) pg. 276:

"Strike teams prepare, " he said. "We launch in five minutes. All Terrain Scout Transports and jungle assault vehicles will be the first wave. TIE fighters will provide air cover."

This is hardly a command one would employ if the surface of a world is to be completely destroyed. Obviously, Pellaeon knows exactly what result Daala wants, which is backed up by her musings about the event.

pg. 277:(hardcover)

Daala smiled, and her green eyes took on a faraway look as she imagined the unskilled wizards under attack by Pellaeon's hopelessly overwhelming forces; she then imagined the despair they would feel on seeing her enourmous ship arrive-like a second mortal blow.

p311:

(Daala to Pellaeon and Cronus only): "You will take a fleet of Imperial Star Destroyers to Yavin 4 and proceed with its complete destruction. I will follow in the Night Hammer with sufficient forces to occupy the rebel base permanently."

"Occupy the rebel base permanently." Hmm.....how does one occupy a base that is on a small jungle moon that she ordered "obliterated?" And how, ladies and gents, does one occupy a base that Pellaeon says they will destroy before the rebels know they are on the march? Curiouser and curiouser...... Sure doesn't sound like anything even remotely resembling a BDZ will be taking place there....

p323:

(Daala, thinking to herself as she borded the Night Hammer: After today, when Daala departed in triumph, the jungle moon Yavin 4 would be no more than a cinder. Every last jedi student had to be killed, their bodies strewn about the buring jungle as an unmistakable message to those who would still dare resist the empire.

Direct evidence of what Daala wants exactly. There can be no burning jungle if the crust is slagged. There can be no bodies left lying around in a non-existent jungle. Therefore, we once again know exactly what Daala ordered: the death of all Jedi students, the destruction of their training center, and a burning jungle. She ALSO wants to occupy said destroyed training center, so once AGAIN, we have evidence against anything resembling a BDZ, which, in the example of Caamas, leaves firestorms burning for years on the surface. That would be a tad difficult to garrison, wouldn't you say?

If Pellaeon was ordered to obliterate a moon, why the ground troops? Why is there not ONE LINE in Darksaber where Daala is SURPRISED that there are ground troops down on a moon that Trekkie cultists assume was to be BDZed?

Pellaeon was ordered to obliterate a moon, why the ground troops? Why is there not ONE LINE in Darksaber where Daala is SURPRISED that there are ground troops down on a moon that Trekkie cultists assume was to be BDZed?


Regarding Dayanko, oh yes, your argument is _so_ compelling.

"... to rendezvous at Dankayo and reduce the tiny base to molten slag.
Even before the last of its atmosphere drifted away, before the dense
clouds of atomized topsoil could begin to settle, Imperial transports
Elusive and Timely, as well as a complement of TIE fighters, moved in to
perform "mop-up" operations and a through search of Dankayo's now
evenly-cratered surface.
-- Scavenger Hunt, p.3 "

It is obvious that the entire planet was cratered you stupid fuck.

Oh, BTW:

"Transmitted from Dankayo to Alliance Com Buoy 965C shortly after the Imperial attack
Entry I
As instructed, I have remained behind until the last of our transports departed safely into hyperspace. Imperial Star Destroyers have so thoroughly blasted Dankayo that I fear for my safety, even in this deep-planet survival shelter."

Scavenger Hunt, p.20

Yeah, that's how far down you have to go to avoid a BDZ...

Let's take a look at BDZ statements:

Imperial Sourcebook, P82:

"Base Delta Zero;" the code for complete destruction of all "assets of production," including factories, arable land, mines, fisheries, and all sentient beings and droids.

Imperial Sourcebook, P61:

The Imperial Star Destroyer has enough firepower to reduce a civilized world to slag or take on a fleet of lesser vessels.
Page 71, The Essential Chronology

"Sir, what about bombardment? Is there a stage for that?"
"Blasting a planet from orbit is easy -- you don't need me to tell you how to do that. Limited orbital strikes would occur during the invasion stage. Just hope you are never given a Base Delta Zero order, lieutenant. Ah, yes, another question?"
"Sir, what's the Base Delta Zero order?"
"Base Delta Zero is the Imperial code order to destroy all population centres and resources, including industry, natural resources and cities. All other Imperial codes are subject to change, as you well know, but this code is always the same to prevent any confusion when the order is given. Base Delta Zero is rarely issued. ...."
A World to Conquor, Star Wars Adventure Journal #2, p.256

Leia on Imperial Retribution
http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/comics ... /54bdz.jpg

Following 3 months of exhausting fighting between AT-AT walkers and the New Republic Army, the defeated Imperials SLAGGED the planet's surface with a withering orbital bombardment, then fled..

Star Wars Technical Journal; under Star Destroyers

"These colossal, wedge-shaped behemoths, bristling with turboweapons and carrying entire TIE squadrons with them, each possess more firepower than the entire planetary forces of most worlds, and can reduce a planet surface to smoking debris in a matter of hours."

And in a galaxy of cities covering literal continents (please don't try and twist that one) the latter would be the equivalent of the former. BDZ is total and complete asset destruction, with the size and scope of development this means an entire world must be leveled. Next the term is slagged. Now lets do this:

Quote " slag an ENITRE WORLD"

From Webster's 4th Edition College Dictionary (1999)
slag: 1)the fused refuse or dross seperated from a metal in the process of smelting

2) lava resembling this

Do you get it yet, they have the quotable ability to turn entire worlds into molten lakes, a requisite for the term slag to be correct (perhaps you will chose to miss the whole lava or smelting parts that require temperatures in the thousands of degrees)

And now, a picture, since words are clearly far beyond you. Hope the implications of this don't sail above your head:
http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/cards/ ... ictory.jpg
A Victory-class star destroyer bombarding an unshielded planet's surface to slag in a Base Delta Zero operation. [STAR WARS Vehicles trading cards]
Yeah, that's right. Victory, a Star Destroyer class _inferior_ to an ISD.

[Doomriser]

As can be seen from my above post, Dorkstar, the official material is quite consistent in the magnitude of the BDZ definition [slag the entire planet, turn the surface into smoking debris, atomise the topsoil, blow off the atmosphere, kill all sentient life, destroy all population centres and _natural_ resources, and there is even visual evidence of what it looks like. The official material has presented the BDZ in a reasonably consistent manner while all you can do is try to twist a few examples. Too bad. All you can do is stretch semantics while the Wars side provides _explicit_ quotes and _explicit_ evidence of a BDZ. Can you do the opposite? No, you cannot.

[DarkStar]

You forgot the Sourcebook info:
http://www.trek-wars.info/debate/edam3.3.htm

As to the rest, I see the facts mixed with your assertions... but your assertions are not facts. The fact is that slagging the surface of a planet was never part of a BDZ operation until ICS, and ICS took the best-possible-spin of anything stated which could possibly refer to anything BDZ-like and treated it as gospel, much like Wong did and does.

[Ender]

You forgot the Sourcebook info:
http://www.trek-wars.info/debate/edam3.3.htm

As to the rest, I see the facts mixed with your assertions... but your assertions are not facts.

Neither are yours.

[Doomriser]

You forgot the Sourcebook info:
http://www.trek-wars.info/debate/edam3.3.htm

Uh...SD.net site isn't the only source of BDZ info. You know that, right?

"As to the rest, I see the facts mixed with your assertions... but your assertions are not facts. The fact is that slagging the surface of a planet was never part of a BDZ operation until ICS, and ICS took the best-possible-spin of anything stated which could possibly refer to anything BDZ-like and treated it as gospel, much like Wong did and does."

Where do you get that from, you braindead moron? You have failed to rebut a single one of my statements. Moreover, the slagging quotes are all from _before_ the ICS. In fact, I took the quotes from a page made in 2001, you moron! Your entire argument is completely invalidated.

And as for your ICS bitching, boo hoo fuckin' hoo you whiny bitch.

Bloody hell, you guys are idiots. I don't care if the preface to the ICS read:

"I AM MAKING TURBOLASERS 200 GIGATONS BECAUSE I HATE SPACEBATTLES.COM AND WORSHIP MIKE WONG! MUAHAHA! STAR TREK SUXORZ!"

As long as LucasFilm has it printed and published under their name, it's STILL OFFICIAL"
-WindupAtheist to SB.com

[Doomriser]

You forgot the Sourcebook info:
http://www.trek-wars.info/debate/edam3.3.htm

Hey, wow, thanks. That page you references contains yet _more_ pre-ICS 'slag' references. Do you even read what you are linking to?

[Master of Ossus]

No ICS is canon. Deal with it.

Fine. I agree.

[Ender]

Two points:

1) I really like how he diverted off the undefendable position of "EU is a parallel universe" to rehashed BDZ arguments. Splendid job with the red herring there.
2) All this is already packaged and dealt with in the Edam debate. He took the same position you are, and was beat down for it before ICS came out.