^_^How to rationalize the ICS stats?^_^

[Lucky]

I've been thinking about this, and I realized that the Episode:II ICS does not specify if the 200 Gigaton per-shot for the quad turbolaser turrets, and 6 megatons per-shot for the laser canons are the weapons out put or the weapons in-put.

Is it possible that it takes 6 megatons to shoot kilo-joule bolts, and 200 gigaton to tera-joule bolts?

Then again there is a possibility that the ton does not translate to real world explosives.

Anyone have any better ideas?

^_^We must try to rationalize all the sources to fit after all.^_^

[Picard]

It might be in-universe gigaton of some crappy explosive, which is more than 20 000 times weaker than TNT (gigaton is actually TNT-equivalent; 1 gigaton nuke produces explosion equivalent to 1 000 000 000 tons of TNT). Or simply write off EII ICS alltogether - Saxton clearly meant 200 gigatons of TNT, and entire book is written in order to win ST-v-SW debate.

[Mike DiCenso]

There is no way to rationalize the AoTC and RoTS ICS numbers with anything in the rest of the Star Wars franchise. It belongs in it's own little world, not part of the world of George Lucas' vision of Star Wars, nor even with the Expanded Universe as it is so at odds with them. The numbers in them were the result of a twisted effort to inject the fanwank of a bunch of nerds who wanted to desperately settle a silly online debate once and for all by getting it codified in what they thought was canon.

As pointed out in other threads, there are no visible heavy or point defense turbolaser or laser gun batteries sticking up along the dorsal of the Acclamator, nor out of the trench sidewalls. So the Warsies don't even have that to fall as justification for the ICS' validity.

So I see no real way to do it. It's best to just excise it once and for all and be done with.
-Mike

[Mr. Oragahn]

No point. It claims things such as blast melting a 1000 km ice moon in one shot in the last ICS, and the AOTC:ICS is full of figures in e23~24 watts.
Don't bother.

[Mike DiCenso]

It should be noted that the ICS compliation, which includes ships and vehicles that did not make it into the previous ICS books, has no AoTC ICS style stats, and people like Pablo Hidalgo and Gary M. Sarli have taken active roles in retconning much of the Saxton-authored ICS material out of the EU. So it is clear that even among the EU authors and LFL in general, the AoTC and RoTS ICS is way too ridiculously out of line with everything else.
-Mike

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

It should be noted that the ICS compliation, which includes ships and vehicles that did not make it into the previous ICS books, has no AoTC ICS style stats, and people like Pablo Hidalgo and Gary M. Sarli have taken active roles in retconning much of the Saxton-authored ICS material out of the EU. So it is clear that even among the EU authors and LFL in general, the AoTC and RoTS ICS is way too ridiculously out of line with everything else.
-Mike

Do you have examples of where Pablo Hidalgo and Gary M. Sarli have done this or links to threads/posts that contain the material please mike?.

[Lucky]

You guys are taking this thread way to seriously. I put silly happy face in the title and everything.

No point. It claims things such as blast melting a 1000 km ice moon in one shot in the last ICS, and the AOTC:ICS is full of figures in e23~24 watts.
Don't bother.

How do we know they mean 1000KM in Imperial standard/real world KM? There is president for there being more then one meter in Star Wars after all.


Where are you getting the e23~24 watts quote from?

There is also the possible that while the ICS are what the ships could do they can't ever hope to for practical reasons like just not being able to carry that much fuel in at one time.^_^

[Mr. Oragahn]

You guys are taking this thread way to seriously. I put silly happy face in the title and everything.

My post was shorter than yours and still is.

[Mike DiCenso]

It should be noted that the ICS compliation, which includes ships and vehicles that did not make it into the previous ICS books, has no AoTC ICS style stats, and people like Pablo Hidalgo and Gary M. Sarli have taken active roles in retconning much of the Saxton-authored ICS material out of the EU. So it is clear that even among the EU authors and LFL in general, the AoTC and RoTS ICS is way too ridiculously out of line with everything else.
-Mike

Do you have examples of where Pablo Hidalgo and Gary M. Sarli have done this or links to threads/posts that contain the material please mike?.

Off the top of my head there is this description of Sarli's retconning going on here, and countering Saxton's Endor Holocaust scenario here. I'll see if I can locate the Wookiepedia fiasco argument mentioned in the article. RSA has the best archiving of those sources.
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

Where are you getting the e23~24 watts quote from?

That comes from the AoTC ICS itself from the stats for various starships' peak reactor power generation.
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

Here is a link to Sarli's battle with Rabid Warsies over the 40k tons of fuel per second issue, among other things.
-Mike

[Mr. Oragahn]

It should be noted that the ICS compliation, which includes ships and vehicles that did not make it into the previous ICS books, has no AoTC ICS style stats...

You're sure of that?

[Mike DiCenso]

Fairly sure as the last time I check through it, all the Saxton-written material was untouched, while the new material had little or nothing in the way of specific numbers, just generalities similar to those seen in the David Reynold West ANH and TPM ICS books.
-Mike

[Lucky]

Where are you getting the e23~24 watts quote from?

That comes from the AoTC ICS itself from the stats for various starships' peak reactor power generation.
-Mike

That is what I thought, but with all the numbers in the book I did not want to just assume.

Why does reactor output matter?

How long do you think they could run the reactor like that before it starts to melt?

[Mr. Oragahn]

Where are you getting the e23~24 watts quote from?

That comes from the AoTC ICS itself from the stats for various starships' peak reactor power generation.
-Mike

That is what I thought, but with all the numbers in the book I did not want to just assume.

Why does reactor output matter?

You think a ship that produces e24 W would only be able to fire like a millionth of its through its energy guns?
The ROTS:ICS makes it clear: the entire power production of a Venator's core can be channeled into the weapons.

How long do you think they could run the reactor like that before it starts to melt?

Easily an hour, if we go by the calcs supposedly supporting those figures.

@ Mike

The devil's in the details. Even if they removed the technical numbers, there's plenty of clues about the firepower "hidden" in the keys. You can see an example of that in the BDZ thread (description of fuel consumption, more or less direct quantifications of this or that type of gun, etc.). There's one that clearly talks about clone trooper rifles leaving 0.5 m wide craters in walls of some "crete" material, on the AOTC:ICS's page about the AT-TE.