I challenge darkstar to a debate

[General Donner]

I believe the molten slag stuff shouldn't be taken literally there. They went there to get information like the datacores, which means they wouldn't have gone for indiscriminate destruction, at least not on Saxtonian levels.

Destroying the rest of the planet fits the idea of reprisal and intimidation in the eyes of the more extreme Imperials. (Like Tarkin, Rule by Fear and all that.) So they could've done that just for its own sake, if they're sociopathic enough.

On another point, we know Dankayo was a planet, which puts a lower limit on its size, and probably an Earth-like one given that weak gravity wasn't mentioned in the story.

Drifting atmosphere is vague -- to me it does imply the planet's atmosphere was blown off, but then again (and as pointed out eleventy or so times) we don't see anything like the collateral damage we'd expect from this.

Maybe they used some obscure wavelength of beam that's extremely opaque to air and just heated the atmosphere without any serious surface impacts? But even then, the waste heat of the vaporising (plasmifying?) atmosphere should probably have done its fair deal of surface melting. So yeah, I'll have to agree that's some inconsistencies there.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Hey Donner, remember your speech about how stuff is subjective? Your interpretation of molten slag is that it's figurative (even though the same figurative phrase is conveniently used in the same context in several separate sources). You can't prove this without using circular reasoning; it's your gut feeling. But Saxton claims that it's literal, and his word got written down in canon. His interpretation is right because it's literally fact. Your response is to say that he "wrongly" interpreted other text because...because you don't like it.

[General Donner]

Hey Donner, remember your speech about how stuff is subjective? Your interpretation of molten slag is that it's figurative (even though the same figurative phrase is conveniently used in the same context in several separate sources). You can't prove this without using circular reasoning; it's your gut feeling. But Saxton claims that it's literal, and his word got written down in canon. His interpretation is right because it's literally fact. Your response is to say that he "wrongly" interpreted other text because...because you don't like it.

You might be misremembering. I specifically said that while morals are subjective, the laws of physics, aren't.

We know for a fact the base wasn't literally turned into molten slag, since there was recoverable equipment left there. A slagged datacore wouldn't really be much use for the Empire, I'd think ... if they could somehow identify its former substances.

The alternatives are either:

*The 3 ISDs had orders to literally slag the base, but they didn't. This implies they COULDN'T, though they tried.
*The ISDs didn't intend to literally slag the base, which was why they didn't.

As a moderate ex-Warsie, I picked the latter interpretation, because I feel it's more consistent with other EU stuff. (There are mentions of glassing of small cities and stuff in other books, and the famous quotes about slagging of surfaces from WEG, KJA etc.) But feel free to go with the former if you like. Can't see how it helps you, though.

[Praeothmin]

But Saxton claims that it's literal, and his word got written down in canon. His interpretation is right because it's literally fact.

Except it doesn't fit with the movies, or most of the rest of the EU in regards to the firepower, so no, his interpretation isn't right, except in his books, which are superceeded by the movies, which show nothing of the sort Saxton claims... :)

[Admiral Breetai]

But Saxton claims that it's literal, and his word got written down in canon. His interpretation is right because it's literally fact. Your response is to say that he "wrongly" interpreted other text because...because you don't like it.

your using the same logic you bash christian for using to defend star wars my god this is just sad and pathetic. Saxons words got written down in secondary canon that directly contradicts the films and that is absolutely true one need only watch the films to see this. his words are invalidated by the mere existence of space battles in the films

[StarWarsStarTrek]

You might be misremembering. I specifically said that while morals are subjective, the laws of physics, aren't.

But we're not talking about physics; we're talking about your interpretation of the text.

We know for a fact the base wasn't literally turned into molten slag, since there was recoverable equipment left there. A slagged datacore wouldn't really be much use for the Empire, I'd think ... if they could somehow identify its former substances.

The text stated that the 3 ISD's came there to turn the Rebel base into slag. That means that they had the firepower to do it, but obviously they didn't turn every last inch of it into literal slag.

The alternatives are either:

*The 3 ISDs had orders to literally slag the base, but they didn't. This implies they COULDN'T, though they tried.

Or it implies that they scanned the base after bombardment, found 99.999% slag, and decided to turn home.

*The ISDs didn't intend to literally slag the base, which was why they didn't.


As a moderate ex-Warsie, I picked the latter interpretation, because I feel it's more consistent with other EU stuff. (There are mentions of glassing of small cities and stuff in other books, and the famous quotes about slagging of surfaces from WEG, KJA etc.) But feel free to go with the former if you like. Can't see how it helps you, though.

"Other" EU stuff? Even if you prove that the slagging interpretation here isn't literal (hint: it can be literal slagging without literally turning every last inch and every last computer into slag), you cannot counter the ICS quote on Base Delta Zero, which is canon.

[Praeothmin]

Not that Bullshit again:

you cannot counter the ICS quote on Base Delta Zero, which is canon.

It is c-canon, which makes it just as canon as Darksaber, and the DS novel, and much, much lower canon than the movies, which disprove the BDZ Bullshit...

The text stated that the 3 ISD's came there to turn the Rebel base into slag. That means that they had the firepower to do it, but obviously they didn't turn every last inch of it into literal slag.

Ah, so now it's only the Rebel Base that got slagged, not Dankayo's surface...

[General Donner]

We know for a fact the base wasn't literally turned into molten slag, since there was recoverable equipment left there. A slagged datacore wouldn't really be much use for the Empire, I'd think ... if they could somehow identify its former substances.

The text stated that the 3 ISD's came there to turn the Rebel base into slag. That means that they had the firepower to do it, but obviously they didn't turn every last inch of it into literal slag.

And that was my entire point. I'm not going to argue there was no slagging at all, but obviously the whole base wasn't literally slagged.

"Other" EU stuff? Even if you prove that the slagging interpretation here isn't literal (hint: it can be literal slagging without literally turning every last inch and every last computer into slag), you cannot counter the ICS quote on Base Delta Zero, which is canon.

There were still ruins left on the surface. As in buildings that were totaled but still standing, at least partially. That translates, substantial parts of the base weren't actually slagged in any literal sense. It's not just the one computer that just happened to survive when everything else became an even sea of glass. Have you read the actual book? I have. I paid good money for it, along with a load of other RPG books back in the day.

Try "Jedi Knight." It does talk about cities being turned to glass:

Sunlight rippled across a sea of shimmering glass. Glass that had once been part of iridescent domes, towering minarets, soaring archways, vertical towers, and all the other structures that constitute a city. A city reduced to a sea of manmade lava, as Imperial laser cannon carved swathes of destruction through the once-beautiful metropolis. The resulting slag was thicker were buildings had been clustered and thinner out toward the suburbs, where the military base had been established.

The past could still be seen, on a hill where a nearly translucent temple glittered with emerald beauty, on a rise where a half-melted statue stretched a hand toward the heavens, and out on the silicone plain where isolated groups of dwellings remained untouched.

As for BDZ, I'd like that to be so. I really would -- even if not a Saxtonian BDZ, the old Technical Journal one was still very nice.

However, nowadays they've made that stupid cartoon instead and say it's higher canon, and those idiots in it couldn't destroy a single city with their weapons, much less a planetary surface.

[Mike DiCenso]

Have you read the actual book? I have. I paid good money for it, along with a load of other RPG books back in the day.

It's not as if SWST hasn't seen the quotes, nor the scanned in images provided here on SFJN in the "Base Delta Zero" thread by Mr. Oragahn and several others. You actually have to go out of your way to miss them.
-Mike

[Praeothmin]

As for BDZ, I'd like that to be so. I really would -- even if not a Saxtonian BDZ, the old Technical Journal one was still very nice.

However, nowadays they've made that stupid cartoon instead and say it's higher canon, and those idiots in it couldn't destroy a single city with their weapons, much less a planetary surface.

To be fair, even the movies excluded the Technical Journal BDZ before the TCW came out...
We saw no ICS level firepower in AtoC (KT weapons for fighters, MT to GT for SPhat-Ts)...
Even TESB clearly shows low KT firepower as a minimum, even by MTLs and HTLs, when they fire at self-exploding asteroids...

[General Donner]

To be fair, even the movies excluded the Technical Journal BDZ before the TCW came out...
We saw no ICS level firepower in AtoC (KT weapons for fighters, MT to GT for SPhat-Ts)...
Even TESB clearly shows low KT firepower as a minimum, even by MTLs and HTLs, when they fire at self-exploding asteroids...

The movies though, didn't exactly contradict high firepower figures for ISDs and up either, since we never really saw capships fire on max power at any identifiable target. Novelizations might (was ages since I read any), but not onscreen AFAIK. Though there were bits that implied against it, but nothing quite solid.

You could certainly rationalize Tech Journal firepower with the movies if you used only them. Especially if you kept to the OT. I'm not talking ICS firepower here, but somewhere around high megaton range. Kind of like Edam's (the old ASVS guy) idealized BDZ scenario described on Wong's site here.

[Mr. Oragahn]

ICS firepower was largely contradicted directly or indirectly for several types of weapons.
The turbolasers' yields weren't, but looking at the supposed thermal properties of materials, and what the Invisible Hand did during her reentry, was a good debunking of ICS yields for capital ships.

[General Donner]

Not necessarily, if shields, force fields and other "active" armor components do most of the damage reduction work. Those would be off aboard the ship if it wasn't able even to maintain orbit.

It implies it, but doesn't come right out and say it.

But like I said, I wasn't arguing for ICS yields. More like maybe Slave Ship yields -- capship weapons in the megatons/gigatons range. Not teratons and petatons.

[Mr. Oragahn]

The obvious problem with a strong deficit of defense in a translation from shield to armour would imply that ships would be immediately vaporized with a minute fraction of the energy needed to bring shields down.
This would hardly work, as it would imply that shields couldn't recharge or that a flank couldn't be left unprotected. It would also require that if ships were documented as surviving for certain period of time during a fierce battle, after having lost their shields, the enemy forces had dialed down their weapons to a yield that can't take down a capital ship in one shot or a salvo. It's quite problematic because the EU is literally full of examples of ships not going down after the loss of shields on a section.

Not to say that the ICS give multi-MT missiles to Slave-I, antimatter variant missiles to AT-TEs if needed, and indicates that a Venator's hull has barely been scraped by the explosion of a point-contact thermonuclear warhead.

[General Donner]

IIRC Saxton (and the Wongians) imagined some kind of thermally superconductive outer armor layer that'd hold up to megaton-level bursts even without the shields. Dunno whether that idea came first from the ICS, or the newsgroups/SDN.

That doesn't work so good with Ep3, obviously. But if you're dogged enough, I'm sure you can still get rationalizations together. Say, maybe the hull itself under those circumstances contains intrinsic forcefields that aren't connected to the shields, but still enhance durability and thermal conductivity? (Those "tensorial fields" Saxton mentions repeatedly in his ICS duology might fit the bill.) From Ep3:ICS, those were explicitly turned off when Invisible Hand crashed.

I'm not advocating that. I liked the ICS very much in my "Warsie wanker" phase and in a way I still do, but nowadays I'll fully acknowledge it's not really in tune with most of the other EU. But other people can and do invoke "active" armor systems to explain away discrepancies, and not just in SW. They're kind of like the variable yield claims for weapons that way -- you can magic away almost any contradiction by pointing to stuff like that.