Force Unleashed

For polite and reasoned discussion of Star Wars and/or Star Trek.
User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:45 pm

If anything, the Death Star novel makes it abundantly clear that the superlaser was totally out of the picture. It's also clear that this bit in the book has been precisely put into place to the close this topic once and for all.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5839
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Post by Mike DiCenso » Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:24 am

Well, that is interesting. I always thought that the ANH novelization was fairly clear on the emplacements having more firepower than half the starfleet, but this quote really does make it distinctly clear. Is there anything the superlaser section that indicates whether it uses direct energy transfer, or a form of chain-reaction?
-Mike

User avatar
l33telboi
Starship Captain
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:15 am
Location: Finland

Post by l33telboi » Sat Jan 03, 2009 7:05 am

Mike DiCenso wrote:Is there anything the superlaser section that indicates whether it uses direct energy transfer, or a form of chain-reaction?
Nothing on that, no.

User avatar
mojo
Starship Captain
Posts: 1159
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:47 am

Post by mojo » Tue Jan 06, 2009 9:16 am

Jedi Master Spock wrote:
ILikeDeathNote wrote:
Jedi Master Spock wrote: 81-tit
...not gonna go there....
Binary unit: Bit
Trinary unit: Tit
Quaternary unit: Quit

So as soon as we move to 0, 1, 2 and 3, everybody gets to go home! Ask Lucas to upgrade from trinary...
i demand that all computers be upgraded to trinary code so that all compgeek conversations become works of art in their hilarity

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5839
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Post by Mike DiCenso » Wed Jan 07, 2009 2:11 am

l33telboi wrote:
Mike DiCenso wrote:Is there anything the superlaser section that indicates whether it uses direct energy transfer, or a form of chain-reaction?
Nothing on that, no.
Ah, what a pity.
-Mike

Post Reply