Star Wars: Fighters vs Capital Ships revisited

[Gandalf]

*snip boring text*

Look do you have any proof that she knows what she's doing or not?

[Dragoon]

*snip boring text*

Look do you have any proof that she knows what she's doing or not?

Isn't the entire arguement about tactical ability a red herring?

We know that the fighters were supposed to draw fire away from the cruisers.

We know that they were worried about fighters heading towards the medical frigate.

There are repeated scenes of rebel fighters making strafing runs on star destroyers in the RoTJ battle and doing damage.

The tactical ability of people ie not in question. What is in question is the ability of fighters to do damage to cap ships. According to dialouge and to the fight scenes in both RoTJ and TPM they can. The Naboo fighters successfully blow off soome sort of reciever dish/ Was it unshielded?

Rebel fighters attack a star destroyer that has, apparently, not yet engaged the rebel cruisers and successfuly destroy one of the sensor domes (the scene with the black pilot's ship being blown apart).

Another scene (which I will post once I figure out how to get screen caps off of my TV) shows an X-Wing firing on and piercing the shields of a star destroyer.

That's what we've seen and heard. It's canon.

You are beginning with the assumption that the ICS is right and working from there. You should look at the movies and then see if the ICS actually fits or not.

[Kazeite]

Except I never said that. People on this board have a habit of misrepresenting others arguments.

You did said that Solo, Lando and Luke are amateurs. You did said that Lando is ignorant of the capabilities of his fighters. You did said that the DS2 was destroyed due to the pure simple luck. You did said that Lando doesn't behave like real military officer. You did said that Lando shows a poor grasp/ignorance of military tactics. You did said that Lando couldn't wrap his head around the numbers being thrown around, doesn't know that much about the capability of Alliance cruisers, and that he's not an expert on military hardware.

Which, I believe, can me summed as "dumb amateurs relying on pure luck."

The ICS figures have already been shown to correspond with the movies by Mike Wong and Brian Young.

Except that hey kinda haven't been shown to correspond with the movies. Sorry.

And who would that be?

That would be the author of the Jedi Consueling articles written for Star Wars RPG, but for you it should be more important that he presented his reasoning (regarding faulty assumptions of Dr. Saxton) to Leland Chee (I trust you know who it is) and Chee has approved his explanaton.

[Who is like God arbour]

*snip boring text*

Look do you have any proof that she knows what she's doing or not?

A prima facie evidence is sufficient, if not rebutted, to prove a particular proposition or fact.

Basically you have to assume, that someone knows what he or she does unless you can't prove the contrary.

You claim, that Amidala is incompetent and would not consult more experienced people.

Proof, that she doesn't know, what she is doing!

[Mr. Oragahn]

1. Mara Jade has her squadron aim somewhere close to the belly dome of an ISD if my memory serves me well. Is that supposed to be another glaring weak point? Seems like an ISD shield is only made of weak points.
2. Sensors being a weak point? Like those sensor globes, which happen to be on the bridge. You do realize that not only does this mean that once you've got the weak point pierced, you can cramp all that what have you in that zone to severaly damage a capital ship, but you also realize that some of these weak points are dramatically placed just above those command bridges which happen to make ships spin like a dancer during a funky ice parade when they're destroyed.
3. Right now, you're telling me that your wanked out ships have multiteraton level shields, not to say low digit petaton ones, and yet come with just so many holes that only a pack of megaton weapons can pierce them and blow them to hell.
That's just part of the finest nonsense I ever heard.

Ever heard of a back up bridge? The only reason why the Executor crashed into the Death Star was because the back up bridge couldn't take over in time.

Which kinda defeats the purpose of a backup bridge. If those automated systems and super computers can't even be efficient in case of an emergency, what's the point?
It only demonstrates a design flaw or a limit on how automatised systems can reroute tasks, if those systems are to boot, of course.

And we rarely see capital ships exchanging fire either. Count the number of scenes featuring plenty of rebel and imperial warships flying side by side and barely firing one single cannon.
It's not because we don't have an eye on every single damn TIE that it disputes Lando's point.

At least we see capital ships exchange fire several times, we never see a TIE fire on a ship once.

Doesn't change a thing. Even if the fighters were only relevant once shields were downed by enemy capital fire, we would still be left with a complete lack of TIE action against capital ships.
Just like we're left with a complete lack of action from the B-wings. Are we supposed to believe that they didn't do anything?
No, so this also applies to the TIEs. Which even have dialogue support regarding their actions.
Now, if you want to deny the dialogue, then so be it, but don't expect people to agree with your point.

Come on lets see your numbers then.

Most of the time, it's not even a question of numbers, but of the logic used first to know which equations to use then.
Why focus on the numbers when it's the reasoning behind them that is flawed? That's my point.

Sorry if you feel a bit lonely here, but I think there's still time for you to think a little bit more before posting this kind of stuff, and realize that your sanctified friends over SDN have gone too far in their quest of making Star Wars the *most powerful mainstream fictional universe*.

The people at SDN regularly admit that there are numerous sci-fi universes that can beat Star Wars. Doctor Who, The Culture and the Foundation to name three.

And secretly hope they could survive. Nevermind, I mentionned mainstream for a reason. Don't even pretend that Doctor Who is anything mainstream. It probably never made any noticeable intrusion beyond the old frontiers of the TV commonwealth.

You're showing a curious selective process here. You and your friends were very precious about remembering us how Chee's canon policy described in the Holocron was the way to go, as it made the EU canon yaddla yaddla.
Yet, you completely and conveniently forget that this same canon policy puts the ICS at the exact same level as the other EU novels, and even at the level of videogames.
So again, cherry picking.

No, as I have repeatadly pointed out to you when a piece of lower canon is backed up by higher canon IE: the ICS is backed up by the movies it trumps the rest of canon. The fact that you are unwilling to understand this is really not my problem.

Please define backed up. All I see is a book that uses stuff from the film and adds its own personnal little EU sauce. It's with that sauce that people have issues, not with the stuff that directly comes from the movies.
Again, in the end, what it adds to the elements it borrows from the film is still plain EU, at the same level of all the other sources I mentionned.

The context was different, and unless you want to admit that capital can't engage enemy ships safe at point blank range, then you should know that there's probably a reason to that, especially since they had already captured Palpatine, and yet remained in orbit of Coruscant just for the fun.

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about why the CIS fleet remained in orbit of Coruscant while their objective was apparently completed.
Of course, considering that the novel says absolutely nothing about planetary shields, the point is to know what the ships remained there, fighting at poitn blank range.
This was in relation to the previous point being that in both cases, there has been a reason why the ships engaged the enemy at such close distances.

Funnily, you're the one being pro-EU, yet you completely negate all those stories about the CIS fleet being stuck between shield layers and whatever else about hyperspace jumps being interdicted, which largely explains why Coruscant was another special case, with factors that have nothing to do with Endor.

There were no interdictors at Courascant, they hadn't been invented yet. I am fully aware of the fact that the ships trapped between shield layers. Yet the fact that they were at point blank rqange existed and Ackbar should have been aware of it, student of Imperial tactics that he was.

There was no point knowing that since the ships were forced to remain at point blank range. It had nothing to do with a given strategy.
As for the shields, it was just a way for me to be sure about your position.
The shield sandwich explanation holds no value, considering that the book never mentions this.

My position is none of your concern.

It is if you actually plan to debate honestly, and if you want me to understand your point of view.

That's where we start talking about faith. Your info is disguised as science, and sugar coated with science terms, but greatly disregards plenty of sources, from the films to a large scope of the EU.
You actually invent your own canon, which scores as a nice oriny in my book.
That's creationism, and it's damn hypocrite from the Wongies and Saxtonians to wrap themselves in a half assed white shroud of pseudo science to defend their wank.

So the work of an actual astrophysicist and mechanical engineer is pseudo science but your work (which you have yet to produce) is hard science. You sound like a creationist.

Yeah, denial of a secondary dealyed explosion that almost half the planet has been aware of since 79, creation of fake asteroids and denial of flak weaponry to promote the idea of megatons of firepower absorbed by small cargos.
And the list can continue.
Of course, you'll ask what I'm talking about. Most of the stuff I mentionned is already adressed on this forum, the rest, you can find it at Wong's Turbolaser pages.

ICS is not higher canon. What the ICS adds that is not directly coming from the film is just more EU at equal levels with novels, comic books, other guides and video games. You should know this fairly well.

I have explained this multiple times, that you refuse to except facts is not my problem.

You just have explained how your stance is wrong, without realizing it, with stories about back up being easily shot down by the most simple logic.
I just see that you have made up your own definition of canon, and it's funny that you are the people facing this accusation.

Solo and Lando share the same background, and Luke was the best pilot over there, and was NOT in command of the squadron attacking the first Death Star.

I never said he was. Don't misrepresent me.[/quote]

Your claim is that the Alliance promoted guys who had no reason to be put in place where they ended.
We all here had to demonstrate why those people actually deserved their position.

After that, I think he had plenty of time to catch up with the basics and show his superior skills in piloting. Plus it clearly boosted the rebels' moral, and that also matters a lot to have a leading figure that everybody appreciates and respects.
And then, when you realize that he's a Jedi, then you remember the good ol'times of Jedi leading armies against the enemy, and you believe that you have more than a combo. You have a savior.

I never said he didn't catch up. I said they had a history of using amateurs. Clearly he improved with time. Jebus do I have to explain everything to you.

You claimed Luke was granted a leading role while being an amateur. The slight problem is that by the time Luke was put in charge of several wingmen, he did prove his professionalism and skills.

Rather you defend your claim and show me how this makes him an amateur. The Alliance needed qualified people with enough charisma and cunning who could think out of the box.
Lando has desmontrated all of this, and has proved a damn fine sense of strategy.
Now, this point has been hammered by several people here, simply because your claim is just far fetched.

If you won't defend your claim, then I see no particular reason to defend mine.

Okay, this is getting stupid. You just prefer not to adress the point. Okay, this is noted.

And you have desmontrated this... when?

Plenty of times, your refusal to accept facts is not my problem.

Whatever. You have not proven that Lando "is ignorant of the capabilities of his fighters when compared to capital ships."

Oh no. I'm actually showing the double standard behind your claim. I'm actually pointing to a very respected EU war general, probably one of the best if you really want to have a handjob right now, and I have shown that most of his brillant moves were all tricks.
You know, things that defines people as amateurs, as per your definition.

You can take your handjob and shove it up your a$$. As for the rest of your argument, it doesn't even merit a response.

Cop out. Just because you're caught pants down. You claimed that Lando displaying tricks to win made him an amateur. I presented one of the EU's most respected tactical geniuses, whom most glorious attacks all relied on tricks. So I guess that by definition, this makes Thrawn an amateur.

Ah, I also forgot the use of moles to pierce the armor of the rebel ships stuck in the drydocks. Another trick you know.

At least at that point he might have had the benefit of some formal training rather than just tossing him into the fire with no experiance.

Geez. I'm talking about another of Thrawn's tactics.
Is that another main EU book you have not read, because it should have titled in your head the moment I talked about moles used to pierce armor of rebel ships stuck in drydocks.
Rha, well, anyway, that just served to demonstrate the wrongness of your trick=amateur reasoning.

I never claimed they were stuck in the palace for the entire year. I said they were there for part of the year. If you insist on misrepresenting my claims the least you could do is get them right.

Ok, I made a mistake here.

That does not undermine that if they wanted to give Solo a chance, that was the best thing to do. And that's what they did.

And if it hadn't worked?

Even Ackbar hoped it could work, otherwise, as the chief admiral, he could have easily ordered everybody to go back home.

On the contrary. But since I don't have the DVDs, that's why I pointed to two different scenes that would present a damn relevance to our whole discussion.

In other words you've got nothing.

I didn't claim I had anything to prove here. I merely asked people to look at two sequences to clarify a few things.

[Who is like God arbour]

*snip boring text*

Look do you have any proof that she knows what she's doing or not?

A prima facie evidence is sufficient, if not rebutted, to prove a particular proposition or fact.

Basically you have to assume, that someone knows what he or she does unless you can't prove the contrary.

You claim, that Amidala is incompetent and would not consult more experienced people.

Prove, that she doesn't know, what she is doing!

[Gandalf]

Isn't the entire arguement about tactical ability a red herring?

Not at all. If she doesn't know what she is talking about than she is sending the fighters to certain death.

We know that the fighters were supposed to draw fire away from the cruisers.

An attack which we never see.

We know that they were worried about fighters heading towards the medical frigate.

All Wedge says is that their heading for the frigate.

There are repeated scenes of rebel fighters making strafing runs on star destroyers in the RoTJ battle and doing damage.

Only when the shields are down.

The tactical ability of people ie not in question. What is in question is the ability of fighters to do damage to cap ships. According to dialouge and to the fight scenes in both RoTJ and TPM they can. The Naboo fighters successfully blow off soome sort of reciever dish/ Was it unshielded?

We see a fireball, for all we know it was just torpedo's impacting the shield. There is no proof that anything was destroyed.

Rebel fighters attack a star destroyer that has, apparently, not yet engaged the rebel cruisers and successfuly destroy one of the sensor domes (the scene with the black pilot's ship being blown apart).

I have already provided an explanation for that, I will not provide it again.

Another scene (which I will post once I figure out how to get screen caps off of my TV) shows an X-Wing firing on and piercing the shields of a star destroyer.

Lets see those screenshots, my recollection of the scene does not jive with what you are spewing.

That's what we've seen and heard. It's canon.

According to you.

You are beginning with the assumption that the ICS is right and working from there. You should look at the movies and then see if the ICS actually fits or not.

No I am saying that the ICS is vindicated by the movies and that is born out by the work done by both Wong and Brian Young. None of you have yet to provide any numbers that say anything to the contrary.

[Gandalf]

You did said that Solo, Lando and Luke are amateurs. You did said that Lando is ignorant of the capabilities of his fighters. You did said that the DS2 was destroyed due to the pure simple luck. You did said that Lando doesn't behave like real military officer. You did said that Lando shows a poor grasp/ignorance of military tactics. You did said that Lando couldn't wrap his head around the numbers being thrown around, doesn't know that much about the capability of Alliance cruisers, and that he's not an expert on military hardware.

Which, I believe, can me summed as "dumb amateurs relying on pure luck."

So? I don't see a coherent point in that mess.

Except that hey kinda haven't been shown to correspond with the movies. Sorry.

Lets see those numbers that prove otherwise.

And who would that be?

That would be the author of the Jedi Consueling articles written for Star Wars RPG, but for you it should be more important that he presented his reasoning (regarding faulty assumptions of Dr. Saxton) to Leland Chee (I trust you know who it is) and Chee has approved his explanaton.[/quote]

Except that the RPG figures are notoriously minimialistic. And George Lucas and LFL also approved the ICS.

[Gandalf]

Which kinda defeats the purpose of a backup bridge. If those automated systems and super computers can't even be efficient in case of an emergency, what's the point?
It only demonstrates a design flaw or a limit on how automatised systems can reroute tasks, if those systems are to boot, of course.

I never disputed that the backup bridge's inability to retake control of the ship presented a flaw.

Doesn't change a thing. Even if the fighters were only relevant once shields were downed by enemy capital fire, we would still be left with a complete lack of TIE action against capital ships.
Just like we're left with a complete lack of action from the B-wings. Are we supposed to believe that they didn't do anything?
No, so this also applies to the TIEs. Which even have dialogue support regarding their actions.
Now, if you want to deny the dialogue, then so be it, but don't expect people to agree with your point.

I don't expect alot of agreement on my points from any of you.

Most of the time, it's not even a question of numbers, but of the logic used first to know which equations to use then.
Why focus on the numbers when it's the reasoning behind them that is flawed? That's my point.

First you whine that the numbers are wrong then you claim that the logic is wrong. Make up your mind.

And secretly hope they could survive. Nevermind, I mentionned mainstream for a reason. Don't even pretend that Doctor Who is anything mainstream. It probably never made any noticeable intrusion beyond the old frontiers of the TV commonwealth.

Doctor Who is watched in both Canada, the US and the Commonwealth which extends to over 20 countries. Hardly a niche market. And the secret motivations of SDN are irrelevant. Frankly this boards obsession with SDN is creepy and disturbing.

Please define backed up. All I see is a book that uses stuff from the film and adds its own personnal little EU sauce. It's with that sauce that people have issues, not with the stuff that directly comes from the movies.
Again, in the end, what it adds to the elements it borrows from the film is still plain EU, at the same level of all the other sources I mentionned.

Dr. Saxton drew from material for AOTC not from the EU, someone posted the interview where he explains his methods. Go back and read it. He used pre-production reels, storyboards and concept art. He did not take from the EU. That is basing directly on the film. Your argument is baseless.

I'm talking about why the CIS fleet remained in orbit of Coruscant while their objective was apparently completed.
Of course, considering that the novel says absolutely nothing about planetary shields, the point is to know what the ships remained there, fighting at poitn blank range.
This was in relation to the previous point being that in both cases, there has been a reason why the ships engaged the enemy at such close distances.

The point is not in disagreement.

There was no point knowing that since the ships were forced to remain at point blank range. It had nothing to do with a given strategy.
As for the shields, it was just a way for me to be sure about your position.
The shield sandwich explanation holds no value, considering that the book never mentions this.

Tthe ships are described as being exhausted from hours of fighting

It is if you actually plan to debate honestly, and if you want me to understand your point of view.

Your understanding holds no interest for me.

Yeah, denial of a secondary dealyed explosion that almost half the planet has been aware of since 79, creation of fake asteroids and denial of flak weaponry to promote the idea of megatons of firepower absorbed by small cargos.
And the list can continue.
Of course, you'll ask what I'm talking about. Most of the stuff I mentionned is already adressed on this forum, the rest, you can find it at Wong's Turbolaser pages.

You still have yet to produce your own numbers or methods for review.

You just have explained how your stance is wrong, without realizing it, with stories about back up being easily shot down by the most simple logic.
I just see that you have made up your own definition of canon, and it's funny that you are the people facing this accusation.

It's interesting that "my version" is shared by the majority of SDN while you sit in your little fortress of solitude and pretend to be enlightened. If your so sure of your views on canon and SW then I suggest you go to SDN and SB and actually debate with those you snipe at from afar.

Your claim is that the Alliance promoted guys who had no reason to be put in place where they ended.
We all here had to demonstrate why those people actually deserved their position.

Clearly the Alliance is not short of qualified military officers. Generals Madine, Riekien and to and extent Admiral Ackbar but the fact that they have to resort to amateurs without bringing them upto speed speaks of their desperation.

You claimed Luke was granted a leading role while being an amateur. The slight problem is that by the time Luke was put in charge of several wingmen, he did prove his professionalism and skills.

No I claimed he was an amateur when he started out not by the time he got Rogue Squadron.

Okay, this is getting stupid. You just prefer not to adress the point. Okay, this is noted.

Very well.

Whatever. You have not proven that Lando "is ignorant of the capabilities of his fighters when compared to capital ships."

As I have previously stated your refusal to accept facts is not my problem. I do not feel the need to restate my position endlessly.

Cop out. Just because you're caught pants down. You claimed that Lando displaying tricks to win made him an amateur. I presented one of the EU's most respected tactical geniuses, whom most glorious attacks all relied on tricks. So I guess that by definition, this makes Thrawn an amateur.

I made no claims about Thrawn from any position.

Geez. I'm talking about another of Thrawn's tactics.
Is that another main EU book you have not read, because it should have titled in your head the moment I talked about moles used to pierce armor of rebel ships stuck in drydocks.
Rha, well, anyway, that just served to demonstrate the wrongness of your trick=amateur reasoning.

Perhaps I simply do not care for the state of the EU.

Even Ackbar hoped it could work, otherwise, as the chief admiral, he could have easily ordered everybody to go back home.

No if it hadn't worked they all would have been killed or at the very least the Alliance fleet would have been crippled.

I didn't claim I had anything to prove here. I merely asked people to look at two sequences to clarify a few things.

Very well.

[Dragoon]

An attack which we never see.

It's implied and one would assume that Lando can read a sensor board and tell where Imperial fighters are going to be attacking.

All Wedge says is that their heading for the frigate.

Which would, again, imply that they intend to attack.

Only when the shields are down.

Do you have proof that the shields were in fact down?

We see a fireball, for all we know it was just torpedo's impacting the shield. There is no proof that anything was destroyed.

The giant scorch mark on the surface wasn't evidence? And the droid fighter crashing into the superstructure somehow pierced the shields when lasers couldn't?

I have already provided an explanation for that, I will not provide it again.

Where, exactly? You could at least provide a link.

Lets see those screenshots, my recollection of the scene does not jive with what you are spewing.

I would ask you to not refer to myself as "spewing".

According to you.

According to the movies.

No I am saying that the ICS is vindicated by the movies and that is born out by the work done by both Wong and Brian Young. None of you have yet to provide any numbers that say anything to the contrary.

You don't need numbers if the entire premise of the arguement on which the numbers are based is logically flawed and not supported by visuals and dialouge.

[Kazeite]

So? I don't see a coherent point in that mess.

At least you admit that I captured the essence of your multiple statement :)

Anyway, the point is, I was merely amused by the fact that Wars side usually argues that SW characters are near-perfect and infallible... unless it's inconvienient, as you have so adequately shown :)

Lets see those numbers that prove otherwise.

The numbers and refutations are readily available at this very forum.

Except that the RPG figures are notoriously minimialistic.

Which is relevant... how? And the ICS figures are notoriously maximalistic, so? What's your point? It shouldn't concern us whether figures are minimalistic or maximalistic.

And George Lucas and LFL also approved the ICS.

And now it seems that they have realized it's incompatibile with the rest of the EU and the movies and are doing their best to make it fit with the rest of the EU, not vice-versa.

[Gandalf]

It's implied and one would assume that Lando can read a sensor board and tell where Imperial fighters are going to be attacking.

So sensors can tell when a fighter pilot is going to pull the trigger? And you have yet to prove that fighters can harm a capital ship.

Which would, again, imply that they intend to attack.

Which we never see.

Do you have proof that the shields were in fact down?

As a matter of fact the ICS says that fighters can't harm a capital ship.

The giant scorch mark on the surface wasn't evidence? And the droid fighter crashing into the superstructure somehow pierced the shields when lasers couldn't?

What scorch mark?

Where, exactly? You could at least provide a link.

Go back in the thread. I'm not doing your work for you.

I would ask you to not refer to myself as "spewing".

Noted.

According to the movies.

Which the ICS corresponds to you know..

You don't need numbers if the entire premise of the arguement on which the numbers are based is logically flawed and not supported by visuals and dialouge.

And none of you have shown that the ICS numbers are flawed or that the logical process that Dr Saxton used to arrive at the numbers was flawed. All we have is half-truths, baseless accusations, and appeals to the RPG.

[Mike DiCenso]

Here's the threads where SW and ST firepower are looked at on this forum:


www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=60

www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=144


The second provides a link to 2046's work on his ST-V-SW.Net site. The first one has an essay by your's truely dealing with the flaws in Brian Young's Turbolaser Commentaries, among other things.

But take a look there, and then we can go into the particulars of calculations.
-Mike

[Gandalf]

At least you admit that I captured the essence of your multiple statement :)

Anyway, the point is, I was merely amused by the fact that Wars side usually argues that SW characters are near-perfect and infallible... unless it's inconvienient, as you have so adequately shown :)

And I have not claimed excessive competance for any SW character.

The numbers and refutations are readily available at this very forum.

And as I have previously noted Kane Starkiller already refuted those. I see no purpose in going over that again.

Which is relevant... how? And the ICS figures are notoriously maximalistic, so? What's your point? It shouldn't concern us whether figures are minimalistic or maximalistic.

Yes it should. Whether the numbers fit into a galaxy wide civilisation is of paramount concern. See the Karen Traviss debacle.

And now it seems that they have realized it's incompatibile with the rest of the EU and the movies and are doing their best to make it fit with the rest of the EU, not vice-versa.

Well when they declare the ICS non-canon let me know.

[Gandalf]

Here's the threads where SW and ST firepower are looked at on this forum:


www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=60

Very well.

www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=144


The second provides a link to 2046's work on his ST-V-SW.Net site. The first one has an essay by your's truely dealing with the flaws in Brian Young's Turbolaser Commentaries, among other things.

But take a look there, and then we can go into the particulars of calculations.
-Mike

Darkstar? Give me a break, he's notoriously full of it.