StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2017-10-26 02:35pm Every fandom, I've found, has its faction that worships at the (un)holy alter of Pragmatism, which they generally seem to mis-define as "The ends justify the means, and the more brutal and ruthless the means, the better." A festering combination of cynics, sociopaths, and internet tough guys trying to prove what HARD MEN they are.

So yeah, RogueIce, I am absolutely positive that a significant number of Star Wars fans would say that the Rebels should have used the Death Star if they acquired it, and not just on ships or military instillations, but on fucking Coruscant. And would look down on the Rebels as naïve goody-goodies for not doing so.

I imagine that there is significant overlap between these "fans" and the folks who vote in strong men in real life, because "We need a STRONG LEADER who will DO WHAT IS NECESSARY."

Now, certainly, there are times when it is justified to do horrible things to prevent even more horrible things. But the people who think this way don't seem, to me, to spend much time thinking about the "necessary" part of "necessary evil." They just use "necessity" as an excuse for doing the evil they want to do/see others do.

And on the other side we have people who would destroy a captured Death Star, despite its potential of more or less instantly winning the war (let's assume the alliance can keep it running), commiting a horrible crime against all the people suffering under the Imperial regime.

There was even an episode of Rebels about it! The one with a carrier over Ryloth.

If that stupid superweapon is against the rules of war in non-lethal mode, use the kill mode. Limit to military instalations, and starships. Mandos can live without their armour, only a small minority was unhappy under Bo's oh-so-beloved-sister Satine.

eMeM wrote: 2017-10-26 06:26pm

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2017-10-26 02:35pm Every fandom, I've found, has its faction that worships at the (un)holy alter of Pragmatism, which they generally seem to mis-define as "The ends justify the means, and the more brutal and ruthless the means, the better." A festering combination of cynics, sociopaths, and internet tough guys trying to prove what HARD MEN they are.

So yeah, RogueIce, I am absolutely positive that a significant number of Star Wars fans would say that the Rebels should have used the Death Star if they acquired it, and not just on ships or military instillations, but on fucking Coruscant. And would look down on the Rebels as naïve goody-goodies for not doing so.

I imagine that there is significant overlap between these "fans" and the folks who vote in strong men in real life, because "We need a STRONG LEADER who will DO WHAT IS NECESSARY."

Now, certainly, there are times when it is justified to do horrible things to prevent even more horrible things. But the people who think this way don't seem, to me, to spend much time thinking about the "necessary" part of "necessary evil." They just use "necessity" as an excuse for doing the evil they want to do/see others do.

And on the other side we have people who would destroy a captured Death Star, despite its potential of more or less instantly winning the war (let's assume the alliance can keep it running), commiting a horrible crime against all the people suffering under the Imperial regime.

Here's the thing:

If the Death Star is that powerful, then whoever is its current commander is basically the next Emperor, if he wants to be.

Who do you trust with that much power?

As to the Mando-killing weapon... I don't know. I tend to think a weapon which goes out of its way to cause more pain than needed, as seems to be the case here, should not be used whatever the advantages.

Did no one else notice that Saw threw away innocent lives, while Sabine and Ezra saved them, giving the Rebellion scientists and engineers who will probably be instrumental in helping them in the war effort?

Question, could any Rebel tech over the years be attributed to these scientists?

I wonder if the Rebellion will do missions to rescue their families, or if they will even have the means to do so.

TRR wrote:As to the Mando-killing weapon... I don't know. I tend to think a weapon which goes out of its way to cause more pain than needed, as seems to be the case here, should not be used whatever the advantages.

I'd have to rewatch the episodes to be certain but I didn't get the impression the weapon causing that much pain was a deliberate feature as opposed to being a side effect of the operational mechanism. Yes it still shouldn't be used because of that, but I don't think that was intentional. Sabine designed the damned thing. Even as an imperial cadet do you think she'd do something like that on purpose? Accept that the weapon does this, maybe. Deliberately build it in as an unnecessary feature?

FaxModem1 wrote: 2017-10-26 07:11pmQuestion, could any Rebel tech over the years be attributed to these scientists?

Given ho inbred the old EU was, I wouldn't put it past them at some point.

I wonder if the Rebellion will do missions to rescue their families, or if they will even have the means to do so.

It would be difficult, but possibly manageable. Especially if the Empire thinks they're dead, which they have no real reason to believe otherwise. That would give the Rebellion the advantage, as the Imperials wouldn't know the families "need" to be threatened due to the defections.

RogueIce wrote: 2017-10-26 12:58pm It's a goddamn terror weapon and you're saying the Rebel Alliance should use it! What in the actual fuck?

A 'terror weapon' that selectively kills enemy troops and leaves the populace/your own troops alone? Remember that's the position I'm arguing from. A sniper rifle can be a terror weapon used correctly (such as in DC). Against enemy soldiers though it's just a weapon.

Please, explain why a precision weapon used only to kill only enemy soldiers is a terror weapon?

No, the pain isn't a good feature, but shit, weapons hurt people. At least this one does it only for a second or two.

So if you were the Rebel commander at Echo base, and you had one of these, you wouldn't use it? You could avoid having to send troops out to die against the AT-ATs. You could prevent troopers storming your base and killing your people. But because it would kill all those guys you'd shoot anyway, you're gonna let your people die?

So, this week we learned that a U-wing can fuck up an Arquitens light cruiser on a scale not quite on par with the prototype B-wing. Why does the Empire keep using those damned things, again? Seems anything with more punch than an A-wing can casually swat one.

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2017-10-26 06:43pm

eMeM wrote: 2017-10-26 06:26pm

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2017-10-26 02:35pm Every fandom, I've found, has its faction that worships at the (un)holy alter of Pragmatism, which they generally seem to mis-define as "The ends justify the means, and the more brutal and ruthless the means, the better." A festering combination of cynics, sociopaths, and internet tough guys trying to prove what HARD MEN they are.

So yeah, RogueIce, I am absolutely positive that a significant number of Star Wars fans would say that the Rebels should have used the Death Star if they acquired it, and not just on ships or military instillations, but on fucking Coruscant. And would look down on the Rebels as naïve goody-goodies for not doing so.

I imagine that there is significant overlap between these "fans" and the folks who vote in strong men in real life, because "We need a STRONG LEADER who will DO WHAT IS NECESSARY."

Now, certainly, there are times when it is justified to do horrible things to prevent even more horrible things. But the people who think this way don't seem, to me, to spend much time thinking about the "necessary" part of "necessary evil." They just use "necessity" as an excuse for doing the evil they want to do/see others do.

And on the other side we have people who would destroy a captured Death Star, despite its potential of more or less instantly winning the war (let's assume the alliance can keep it running), commiting a horrible crime against all the people suffering under the Imperial regime.

Here's the thing:

If the Death Star is that powerful, then whoever is its current commander is basically the next Emperor, if he wants to be.

Who do you trust with that much power?

As to the Mando-killing weapon... I don't know. I tend to think a weapon which goes out of its way to cause more pain than needed, as seems to be the case here, should not be used whatever the advantages.

actually the real question here should be "what does the Death Star do better then the same amount of resources used on conventional equipment" and answer to that is "kill planets" for pretty much everything else a fleet of starships would be more useful.

Same with the "dutchess" the point I seem to have repeat is that the "dutchess" is tailor made to be used against the mandalorians and for the billionth time it targets the materials with the body armor used by your enemy not the troopers themselves making utterly trivial to counter if the armor doesn't have cultural signigance like beskar armor does for the mandos. Sure it might and I must repeat might be useful for a battle or 2 until the imperials adapt after that it's a burden to your logistical capasity and intel network. Hell even against the mandos the "dutchess" is of more symbolic then of practical use in "I can turn the very symbol of your defiance against you!" way.

There's a bloody good reason why Thrawn mocked these "silver bullet" as they're an easily countered single point of failure, just about the worst thing you can do from strategic or tactical point of view.

FaxModem1 wrote: 2017-10-26 07:11pm Did no one else notice that Saw threw away innocent lives, while Sabine and Ezra saved them, giving the Rebellion scientists and engineers who will probably be instrumental in helping them in the war effort?

Question, could any Rebel tech over the years be attributed to these scientists?

I wonder if the Rebellion will do missions to rescue their families, or if they will even have the means to do so.

They were all power engineers. Could figuring out the Death Star exhaust port be partially attributed to those engineers ?

bilateralrope wrote: 2017-10-27 01:43am

FaxModem1 wrote: 2017-10-26 07:11pm Did no one else notice that Saw threw away innocent lives, while Sabine and Ezra saved them, giving the Rebellion scientists and engineers who will probably be instrumental in helping them in the war effort?

Question, could any Rebel tech over the years be attributed to these scientists?

I wonder if the Rebellion will do missions to rescue their families, or if they will even have the means to do so.

They were all power engineers. Could figuring out the Death Star exhaust port be partially attributed to those engineers ?

possibly, it might because of them that rebels even looked for it (Galen Erso didn't mention the port to Jyn so that can't be why).

Rogue 9 wrote: 2017-10-26 10:56pm So, this week we learned that a U-wing can fuck up an Arquitens light cruiser on a scale not quite on par with the prototype B-wing. Why does the Empire keep using those damned things, again? Seems anything with more punch than an A-wing can casually swat one.

Rebels showed us a single TIE Advanced destroying a frigate, CR-90 (in anti-fighter configuration) getting wrecked by a TIE Interceptor, and an Immobilizer destroyed by blaster pistols... from the outside.

I know that this show is canon, but I hope it's not literally canon.

bilateralrope wrote: 2017-10-27 01:43am

FaxModem1 wrote: 2017-10-26 07:11pm Did no one else notice that Saw threw away innocent lives, while Sabine and Ezra saved them, giving the Rebellion scientists and engineers who will probably be instrumental in helping them in the war effort?

Question, could any Rebel tech over the years be attributed to these scientists?

I wonder if the Rebellion will do missions to rescue their families, or if they will even have the means to do so.

They were all power engineers. Could figuring out the Death Star exhaust port be partially attributed to those engineers ?

I wouldn't be surprised if they turn out to be involved somehow in the Rebellion gaining X-wings, which we know is going to happen this season.

Lord Revan wrote: 2017-10-24 10:39pm

Knife wrote: 2017-10-24 08:08pm

tezunegari wrote: 2017-10-23 05:10am
Haven't watched the episodes yet, but it might be that the weapon reacts to the Beskar in Mandalorian armor... and I believe Mandalorians are the only ones who use it. Imperial armor instead is made out of plastoid compound that might be used widely including civilian applications.

So it's either a very selective weapon against Mandalorians, or an indiscrimite weapon against anyone but Mandalorians.

And going by the trailer it seems the weapon is an Area-of-Effect weapon and cannot be targeted at a specific object.

They also go way out of their way to show, in dialouge, that Mando's wouldn't give up their special armor to avoid the weapon. Utter silliness.

Silliness yes but not implaucible silliness, it's also made clear that mandos see the armor as signifigant part of the mandalorian identity and culture and would see having to give up the armor as defeat. While silly it is somewhat understandble.

I guess but it's boarder line. X makes me special warrior. Y makes weapon to attack X. I can't give up X or I'm not a special warrior.

It's pretty close to being dumb.

Zixinus wrote: 2017-10-25 10:13am Oh, and to add to that: their armor is superior to the Empire's. That is a very big, collective advantage while the weapon would only be a selective one where it is employed and employed successfully. It also justifies their strong attachment to it. The risk of re-making the armor-fryer (for a lack of better name) weapon would risk losing that edge. Not only their armor but possibly their heavier equipment that might also be affected.

Yes, you could make countermeasures but you can counter countermeasures. You can capture engineers working with the armor-fryer and copy plans. You can fool self-destruct droids or disarm the explosive inside. It will prevent capture the first few times but not in the long-run.

If the armor-fryer is not developer, the Empire has to develop it from scratch (even if only temporarily). The fact that they couldn't and needed to interrogate Sabine shows that they have little idea how it works. If anything, there is a bit of a plot-hole about the engineers involved.

Not if special one off can take it out and the people inside it. Yes, they had a Mcguffin, now it's easy to kill. Sure, 10 seconds and cheaper, easier Storm Trooper armor is shit too. It makes all armor obsolete. Who can adapt better; Empire with large funds and needs to replace cheaper mass produced armor? Or Elitist culture who view it as sacrilege to change armor?

Lord Revan wrote: 2017-10-27 01:27am

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2017-10-26 06:43pm

eMeM wrote: 2017-10-26 06:26pm
And on the other side we have people who would destroy a captured Death Star, despite its potential of more or less instantly winning the war (let's assume the alliance can keep it running), commiting a horrible crime against all the people suffering under the Imperial regime.

Here's the thing:

If the Death Star is that powerful, then whoever is its current commander is basically the next Emperor, if he wants to be.

Who do you trust with that much power?

As to the Mando-killing weapon... I don't know. I tend to think a weapon which goes out of its way to cause more pain than needed, as seems to be the case here, should not be used whatever the advantages.

actually the real question here should be "what does the Death Star do better then the same amount of resources used on conventional equipment" and answer to that is "kill planets" for pretty much everything else a fleet of starships would be more useful.

I don't know, phallic compensation maybe?

Same with the "dutchess" the point I seem to have repeat is that the "dutchess" is tailor made to be used against the mandalorians and for the billionth time it targets the materials with the body armor used by your enemy not the troopers themselves making utterly trivial to counter if the armor doesn't have cultural signigance like beskar armor does for the mandos. Sure it might and I must repeat might be useful for a battle or 2 until the imperials adapt after that it's a burden to your logistical capasity and intel network. Hell even against the mandos the "dutchess" is of more symbolic then of practical use in "I can turn the very symbol of your defiance against you!" way.

There's a bloody good reason why Thrawn mocked these "silver bullet" as they're an easily countered single point of failure, just about the worst thing you can do from strategic or tactical point of view.

Yup.

Though its ironic given that Thrawn relied on some fairly gimmicky weapons in his original trilogy of books.

I don't know, phallic compensation maybe?

Still that's not a valid battlefield reason. The point I was trying to make was that the Death Star is a very different beast from the "Quasar Fire"-class carrier the rebels captured over Ryloth. Phoenix Home or Phoenix Nest as the carrier was called gave the rebels a mobile base to store/repair/refuel their fighters thus it was a major strategic asset.

The Death Star doesn't really give anyone strategic assets a similar sized (logistics wise) fleet wouldn't outside of being a tool of oppression, in fact due to being able to be at only one place at a time the Death Star is actually a detriment compared to similar sized fleet as a fleet can spread out if needed.

Yup.

Though its ironic given that Thrawn relied on some fairly gimmicky weapons in his original trilogy of books.

it is true, Thrawn relied on gimicks in the orginal Thrawn Trilogy but then that was the source his downfall as well.

It's completely irrelevant, as the "problem" was what to do with a captured Death Star, and the Death Star doesn't have a "transform into a million ISDs" button.

eMeM wrote: 2017-10-28 03:56am It's completely irrelevant, as the "problem" was what to do with a captured Death Star, and the Death Star doesn't have a "transform into a million ISDs" button.

the logistical burden of anything really doesn't stop at construction. Also you can, you know disassemble the Death Star and use it as raw material to build ships or other things. Using it as a warship means using it as big and expensive target that's really not worth it, best use of captured Death Star would be to disassamble one and use the materials for something more useful. It's not viable battlefield weapon and never was even meant to be one.

EDIT:In short the Death Star is the very defination of awesome but impractical as a battlefield weapon.

If u remove Planet-Destroyer SL, make a great if not interesting Battlestation, Repair Dock,and mobile base of operations facility

Yes, just because you have a superweapon that was used to commit war crimes doesn't mean that you have to commit war crimes if you use it.

Also, it doesn't mean that you have to use it as-is. You can modify it. You can re-purpouse it. You can take apart the superlaser and make smaller superlasers with it. You also don't have to keep it forever. You can dismantle it.

In terms of sheer resources, a captured Death Star is a gift from the gods in terms of military resources. Everything from raw resources to weapons, space, machines and who-knows-what that is inside.

But the problem is that war is about strategy, about figuring out the smartest way to win (get/do what you want) with what you have against what the enemy wants and has. A decentralized, resource-strapped rebellion relying on popular uprising and resentment against the Empire.

Let's supposed the Rebellion managed to capture the Death Star. This is a miracle an order of magnitude bigger than Luke blowing it up, especially because there is supposedly over a quarter of a million Imperial personal inside. But let's suppose they get a central control room, have all the codes to run it and are in complete control.

Will they manage to keep it? How will they control a quarter of a million people inside? Can they man all the defenses? How will they feed the giant reactor that powers it? Can they even man all the defenses is the Empire decides to mount an attack? Or even it to run it standby? How about all the other resources required?

And also think about how intelligence and security information get out of that system because it's supposed to be so large and "invertible"

Well, that last pair of episodes were all over the map in tone. The first got a little dark, although I like the "casual" outfits. The second was surprisingly much lighter, complete with a repeated stealing of a tie although the mysticism is stronger.

Also the atmosphere completely changed in the literal sense. They seemed to have forgotten that they'd just established that Lothal was totally fucked up and the atmosphere wrecked.

Well, there are two ways to read that:

Out-of-universe
1. The creators really underestimate just how fucked up a fire ,and atmosphere change, really is when you can literary see it from orbit.

In-universe example
2. Planets are big. The effects are somewhat localized. The capital was dark because it had polluting industry (and it was night). They were on the outskirts, far out in the sticks. For all we know, they could have been on almost another side of the planet where the pollution's effects are still light.

I wonder whether the pollution might be what is causing the wildlife to cozy up to Ezra. It might be the Force acting out to defend the life on the planet. It kind of feels that way.

Also, we finally see a glimpse at Kanan and Hera's relationship.

Rogue 9 wrote: 2017-10-31 08:14pm Also the atmosphere completely changed in the literal sense. They seemed to have forgotten that they'd just established that Lothal was totally fucked up and the atmosphere wrecked.

California is burning to ash right now, and some of the pictures from that look like what we saw as they landed on Lothal.

Things are fine in Indiana.

Planets are big man