- ROBERTO jh
- |
- Fabled Heroic Member
Posted by: Zero_Patience
Posted by: ROBERTO jh
Because tactically, the Star Wars universe sucks, and I can safely say that, no problem. Wars is all about epic battles with huge #s of ships and little strategic movements. Don't they literally call this "Empire syndrome" or something?
We must have been playing two separate games, because as I recall, the battles over High Charity, the Ark, Earth and limited skirmishes we witnessed in Reach weren't delegated by warships that danced like space ballerinas at high end C speeds; in fact it seemed strictly like WWII in space (as with most visual space operas).
Unless you can correct me, of course, and point to me these stunning examples of agile Covenant and UNSC warships?
-----So you must be unaware that the Halo games are extremely limited in their graphical abilities. They are rendered using the game's engine. Almost every single space battle we've ever seen in the Halo games have been rendered back drops, not a real-time battle.
The books would obviously be able to depict it more accurately.
They still fight like a water-based navy, where as Halo's ships are fast and nimble.
Just like in Halo 2, 3, Wars and Reach, right? Oh wait, no, they performed nothing like their novel counterparts in even the slightest.
-----see above
Also note that the Galactic Empire is composed of some -blam!- ship designs. Putting two obviously exposed shield generators
Actually they are sensor domes, the designer of the ISD and the SSD even refers to them as such. This quote comes from the professional report of Richard Edlund about ILM's work on Return of the Jedi, in the journal CINEFEX in 1983. This is a primary, contemporary source. There is no more authoritative source on ROTJ.
We're also still working on the sequence where Mad Max crashes his A-wing into Vader's ship and causes the star destroyer to lose control and crash into the Deathstar. The penetration shot with the mushroom-cloud explosion we've had for some time, and we've got the shot where the ship's been hit and is starting to heel over. A very large explosion is coming out of the bridge area and it's causing several others to go as well; and one of the big radar domes up on top has been blown away, and that's spewing flames. It's pretty spectacular. Between that sort of closeup of the bridge section and the long-shot of the surface, we need two more cuts of the ship continuing to heel over and dropping towards the Deathstar like an arrow. We've shot a number of elements on those - explosions and things that have to be projected onto the miniatures - and so they're pretty much ready to go. Don Dow will be shooting those tomorrow.
CINEFEX #13, p.55, 3 February 1983
---in ROTJ, we see one of those sensor domes explode and immediately after, the star destroyer loses its shielding. Everything I have ever seen after that, be it books, games or whatever, has stated hitting those two domes will knock out the shields. So now I'm suddenly expected to toss all of that out the window because of what one guy said?
If George Lucas said it, fine, THEN it would be G-Canon, but as it stands, G-canon indicates destroying those domes knock the shields out.
on your most obvious target that also happens to be your command bridge AND holds the reactor core is probably the worst design for a ship I've ever seen. Ever.
Do some research. The reactor of most Imperial vessels are found in the center mass of the vessel (I direct you to the following link), with auxiliary and secondary reactors stationed around the guns and the shield generators - purely for redundancy:
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/File:Reactors1.JPG
And IIRC, don't most UNSC vessels have exposed bridges? At least SW vessels are shielded, thus protecting the bridge towers, what's the UNSC's excuse for such a similar design flaw?
To see. I never stated the UNSC would be able to comfortably handle the Imperials; it'd take about 3 UNSC Destroyers to one Imperial-II Destroyer. I'm saying the Covenant, which have very much superior designs, would be able to comfortably handle them.
Besides, we're talking about the full universes of the two sides, not current incarnation (this is not Factpile).
Which I acknowledged in my first post. Read much? Again, with conventional - non-extinct - forces, it goes in the favor of the GE/Republic.
Is it too much to ask for people to read?
-----I read, I'm just making sure that is indeed what you're talking about, because if you recall you also did set up the scenario to be current incarnation (which even on Factpile I find to be a -blam!- rule) initially. Then you switched over, but I had two situations in one post. Just making sure.
And again, either way, the primary cannons of a Halo warship are at the very least the equal to a nuclear bomb, like a Covie plasma torp being calculated at several megatons and a Frigate MAC at something like 62 kilotons or whatever. Bring in the Forerunners and then...well, I need not say anything.
And vaporizing nickel-iron asteroids in Empire Strikes Back with just the light cannons alone is considered puny now? As I recall it would take nothing short of half a megaton to vaporize a ten meter wide iron asteroid in a fraction of a second with a beam weapon (since beam weapons ablate material on contact), and these are just the light cannons.
Canon figures ranges in the compendium of canon, with Star Destroyers tanking multi-megaton impacts to their shields (see: The story of Anakin skywalker), having "gigatonnage" heavy cannons (See: Bounty Hunters) or weapons that can vaporize small towns (ROTS novelization); whereas even the light cannons - from their depiction in the episode V - easily exceed the firepower of a UNSC MAC round.
And a Star Destroyer is covered from "head to toe" in these things.
-----Oh god it has begun......
Okay, let's try to keep this simple and civilized. Just here me out. watch this. Specifically when the Destroyer attacks the medical Frigate. You mean to tell me those little explosions were the size of a nuclear bomb?
Now again, this is why I -blam!- ing hate these Star Wars vs_____debates. They ALWAYS bring out these rediculous numbers that directly contradict the movies. Now about the Empire Strikes Back thing. Had the possibility that being a movie from the 80's with limited special effects ever come up?
Its one thing to show a Destroyer getting shattered on screen (which they do in RotJ). Its a larger object and is easier to capture in footage, but a pint sized roid that was in reality a potato would not shatter to well on screen. It'd look stupid as hell.
You also mean to tell me the space battles in Revenge were also using megaton nuclear explosions? The only one that I might accept was when the Venator "glassed" the CIS Frigate since it tore it in half, but those other lasers were NOT the equal to a nuclear bomb.
You can site these other sources all you want, but G-Canon overrides all other forms of canon. That is anything stated in the movies and how its depicted. Anything in the movies that contradict itself are overrided by the most recent incarnation of those movies. Anything in any other medium, like books, that contradict the movies are irrelevant.
I've never seen a Star Destroyer decimate another ship nuke-style in one shot in the movies before except for when a Venator effectively "glassed" a CIS Frigate in ep. 3. Wars ships are dangerous because of the shear number of guns on their hulls, not really their strength, which is probably better compared to a UNSC Archer missile.
LOL
Did you just - in all sincerity - compare the behavior of non-inert materials in a vacuum? Starships are not inert objects, and in space there is no air to resist the expansion of explosives, ergo comparing them is like comparing the Flying Spaghetti Monster to Jesus.
Neither of them exist, therefore neither of them can be quantified. Likewise saying that two explosions in space look similar therefore they behave similarly is horrendously ignorant.
In space explosions shouldn't even be physically possible. Nuclear bombs shouldn't even be possible. If we want to go by your realistic physics logic, then Star Wars loses because non of its weapons should be even possible. but these sure do look like atmospheric explosions to me
Those ships should not be in flames, pieces of metal should not be being blown out of ships like a missile impact and, according to you, these detonations are supposed to be the equal to a nuclear explosion. See why I can't stand the Star Wars EU?
Try this for example. You say that Wars ships are known for tanking massive megaton and even gigaton sized explosions, right? Then how the hell did a small little iron asteroid blow the bridge of a Star Destroyer clean off in Episode 5 in an accidental impact?
G-Canon says: they cannot take supermassive nuclear explosions.
And you say that vaporizing an asteroid about 10 meters in diameter would take about half a megaton? Okay, sure, youd be right.
Well in that case, a Covenant Assault Carrier vaporized a 3 kilometer in diameter asteroid in the book First Strike with a single malfunctioning plasma torpedo. It took a slight bit longer then the Destroyer's ten meter one, but it did it nontheless.
Just try to keep it civil people. Don't want this to turn to a fiasco.
Side question: how does it play out with the entire Halo universe at play?