I never disputed that the backup bridge's inability to retake control of the ship presented a flaw.
But your whole defense when I pointed out the vulnerability of the main bridge was to point to those backup bridges.
I simply reminded you how apparently those backups aren't quite reliable, and finally, this doesn't preclude the idea that brdiges are absurdly underprotected.
I see that since you had nothing to say besides evasive sentences, you painfully admit that a barrage of megatons of firepower on specific holes is still going to knock out shields.
And as I demonstrated, there are quite many of those weakspots, located at key points.
I don't expect alot of agreement on my points from any of you.
For obvious reasons, since we actually pay attention to dialogue and movie facts.
You have people in charge considering that fighters represent a danger to cruisers. You have fighters seen piercing shields with laser cannons. You have fighters noticed as heading towards capital ships.
All you bring in opposition to that is nothing safe your sacronumbers where kiloton level canon lasers would have no hope of ever defeating shields which supposedly have radiation rates of several teratons per second (like 143 TT/s for the Trade Federation core ships in ROTS or AOTC, can't remember).
The fact is you won't admit that thus far, you've provided little to no evidence, personnal reflexion, objective observation or basic logic. You're just defending yourself by appeals to authority and picking lines from the ICS, like if it was the book of Origin.
On this basis, you're not doing any better than all those believers Wong is pleased to mock.
First you whine that the numbers are wrong then you claim that the logic is wrong. Make up your mind.
It would actually help if you'd think about it.
The numbers, as figures, are wrong (though mathematically correct) since the logic behind them is originally wrong.
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.
Not even worth a blip on Europe's radar unless you really make efforts to find an obscure channel airing some unknown episodes late in the night.
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.
You're unfortunately not getting my point, and repeating the same stuff like a broken record.
I don't care where he took his info from.
Firstly because the so called backstage sources he used disagree a lot with what finally made onto the screen. Secondly, because what he invented as an author is nothing more than EU extra.
You know, all authors based their stories from the movies.
The movies are more canon than any backstage stuff used to create them.
By your flawed logic, they're even more canon than the ICS.
Tthe ships are described as being exhausted from hours of fighting
Probably because they were defending the Invisible Hand during the kidnapping.
It does not explain why they sat there for so long after Palpatine was captured.
Your understanding holds no interest for me.
A pity. Then why do you even bother coming here, if you're not expecting an exchange of ideas?
Are you just preaching your religious babble, only to come in a couple of days and see what we think about it? :)
You still have yet to produce your own numbers or methods for review.
You're hopeless. Did you even bother to look at the Turbolaser pages? It's been years since I've been pointing how they happily keep inventing so called asteroids while they're just TL explosions.
Why? Just to get more "evidence" of asteroid vaporization. Wong is not even ashamed of keeping this page up.
Actually, I'm glad he keeps it in place.
It just demonstrates the absurd frontiers they're reaching.
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.
Well, funny how SDN is often seen a secular fortress as well. They all share that form of canon? A pity, because it just means that none of them understands the basic meaning of Chee's words.
But considering how they're happy to declare bits of the EU non canon just because they don't like them, and invent rules to define what's more canon than the rest, then fine.
I guess that's just more delusion from their part.
They don't even fully realize that LFL are giving them polite up yours.
No I claimed he was an amateur when he started out not by the time he got Rogue Squadron.
And when he started, he was not in charge of anything. Make your mind.
Or better. Drop that stupid argument.
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.
You're actually expected to start your demonstration.
Or, eventually, if you think I am that mistaken, please point me to the post of yours. For enlightment.
I made no claims about Thrawn from any position.
It's funny how you don't understand the implication of your claims.
Fortunately, I'm convinced that the other members here have, for a majority, understood how you cornered yourself.
Perhaps I simply do not care for the state of the EU.
No comment.
No if it hadn't worked they all would have been killed or at the very least the Alliance fleet would have been crippled.
And as I said, Ackbar had the choice to order everyone to leave the combat zone, or to continue.
He chose to continue, and acknowledged Lando's advice to increase their chances of survival.
Now please make an effort, because this is not hard to understand at all.
Gandalf wrote:Dragoon wrote:
You still haven't addressed his arguement.
What's to address, the man has clearly lost his marbles. And it calls in to question the nature of his analysis.
That, my friend, is pathetic.
You're constantly resorting on appeals to ridicule, refusing to read one's observations because you've tagged him as a simpleton.
Actually, with such a logic, between him and you, guess who's the fool.
That said, if you're going to satisfy yourself with those fallacious stances, I can only advise you to enjoy your stay while you still can.
