Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Am I the only one tired of people saying ME or SW would destroy Halo?
  • Subject: Am I the only one tired of people saying ME or SW would destroy Halo?
Subject: Am I the only one tired of people saying ME or SW would destroy Halo?

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

You've inevitably just started another flame war. Anyway, no, I'm tired of people trying to pit Mass Effect against Halo since Halo would stomp them, but Star Wars is another matter.

  • 06.09.2011 7:14 PM PDT


Posted by: Devils Preists

Posted by: ROBERTO jh

Posted by: Devils Preists

Posted by: ROBERTO jh

Posted by: PLUT0NIUM 235
biggest problem for Universe comparison is lack of continuity, the way all of the said Universes seem to change whenever something else is required to assist the 'hero', the same thing happens with Star Wars and Star Trek debates, an example of universal messing, Star Wars Star Destroyers are said to be able to put out Gigaton levels of power with their Turbo-Lasers, a Star Destroyer itself has no issues taking countless hits from these weapons, yet in Episode V (I think) a Star Destroyer gets hit by an asteroid around 1/10 the volume of the bridge section, which cripples the Destroyer, the speed its moving and the size of it, the energy released by the impact would be several Kilotons at best. so right there is a classic example of 'science' in these universes changing to suit the needs of the stories.

same thing happens in Halo countless times, Magnetic Accelerator Cannons are powerful multi-Kiloton weapons, however a Spire in Reach gets destroyed by something less than even a Kiloton yield. Pillar of Autumn survives being hit by something like eight Plasma Torpedoes in the original cut-scene without catastrophic damage, these Plasma Torpedoes are said to 'melt ships...', again altering to suit the current situation.

Star Trek is also rather guilty of the same thing, Phase Cannons for example are said to put out 500 Gigajoules of energy, which is only around 180 tons of TNT, however in the first test of the Phase Cannon we see the weapon quite simply level a mountain on an asteroid, like the whole mountain and create a substantial crater! that is more like 500 Gigatons of TNT or an ungodly amount of Joules. Photon Torpedoes and Quantum Torpedoes change yield depending on the scene as well, they are significantly more powerful than Phase Cannons, yet said to put a 'kilometre crater in an asteroid...' something we witnessed the Phase Cannons doing, so like I said inconsistent as hell!

Stargate is plagued by these continuity conundrums as well, so all I am getting at is, its not possible to compare two different universes when individually they are in internal turmoil with dramatically altering weapon power, defence power and such. even 'Canon' sources are contradicted by other 'Canon' sources, which are contradicted by Game/Film footage, see Star Wars, Star Trek and Stargate and they appear left right and centre. so I personally recommend we cut it out with the comparison threads, unless you can find some 'rock solid' foundation for comparison, otherwise its going to, like always end up in a massive flaming war.


Which is why the logical approach SHOULD be (read: should ) to go with the highest canon source.

That'd be the Mass Effect Codex, the Star Wars movies, whatever 343i says for Halo, since in game depictions of technology is limited to whatever power the engine can depict, etc..

Though those above Halo inconsistancies are as follows: The MAC rounds in Reach are fired at low power to prevent collateral damage and the Covenant did not want to destroy the Pillar of Autumn, only disable it so as to question the crew. Again, they were firing on lower settings.

I don't delve deep enough into the Trek universe to understand their weapons though.

For example, people overestimate their universe's powers all the time. Krogan skin is not that tough, the Codex says they are killable with black powder weapons. None of Star Wars' weapons are close to being that powerful, the movies time and time again contradict this with literally every shot fired, and Elites' health cannot recharge in Halo.

Nothing that is in any of the Star Trek books is canon, only the movies and TV shows (people tend to use book quotes in arguments). Really Warhammer is the only consistently overpowered universe out there.


I'm sorry...but George lucas is the ultimate master of Canon for Sw and he says everything he authorizes to be made under the Starwars banner is Considered the highest form of Canon unless deemed otherwise. Which means all forms of Canon count as the highest.

Mass effect...blah.

Halo....Lacks anything actually powerful that isn't a god race or the ultimate I lose button.

Warhammer...yeah...it just wrecks everyone's front yard up.


Oh...You don't know of Star Wars' canon levels, do you?

In order from highest lowest

G-canon encompasses the movies (the ONE thing about Star Wars nobody knows about conveniantly in these debates)

T-canon encompasses all forms of television.

C-canon encompasses comics, videogames, books, etc.

I'll have to get back to you on what S-canon entails, I cant remember

and N-canon is all non-can material.

The higher up on this list you go, the stronger the canon.

A kiloton asteroid impact obliterated the bridge of a Star Destroyer in one of the movies (Empire Strikes back), while others caused some damage that had the Admiral of the fleet concerned on the Executor Super Star Destroyer, thusly flooring the power of their weapons and armor that Wars fans like to throw out.


Okay so does that mean we can only use the Hard canon for the Halo universe which means the games.

Plasma not melting faces, Marines taking down insane amount of Covenant warriors.

So you say 343i doesn't have it's levels of Canon? So if they don't does that mean 1337 is an actual Spartan?

Oh oh oh...what about Halo wars? The not so plot shielded forge beating the Arrogent Ripa?

Or are you saying bungie has no power and everything they've done is erased until 343i says otherwise and makes new content?

FYI. They needed to leave the Asteriod field because they needed to contact the Emperor. If you actually watched the movies closely. Derp.


Not to say Halo doesn't have its own canon levels

but you forgot the highest canon source: whatever 343i says on the subject, which includes necassary licensing regarding graphical limtations in games.

343's word>games>books>comics.

And I did listen to the movie, possibly a good 150 times.

Captain: "There's been no sightings of the Millenium Falcon, my lord, but considering the amount of damge we've sustained (referring to the Executor) they must've been destroyed."

Vader: "No Captain, they're alive; I want every ship available to sweep the asteroid field until they are found." (Captain walks off)

(Vader is approached by a COMS officer) "The Emperor wishes you make contact with him."

Vader: "Move the ship out of the asteroid field so we can get a clear transmission."

I never once said that they left the field to avoid more damage. I know why they left. I merely pointed out that the Captain of the supposed most powerful ship in the galaxy at that time was worried about asteroids. Besides, we quite clearly see an asteroid shatter the bridge of another Destroyer like it was glass. If their armor can tank gigatonnage blasts, why not kilotonnage asteroids?

If you had listened to the movie you'd know this. Derp.

  • 06.09.2011 7:16 PM PDT

Well the rules need to be the same for all correct?

So why is it 343i can say somethings canon yet contratradicts something else? According to Roberto they can.

Also TFoR and Halo Reach don't have any major issues as far as I can see it's simply the persons willingness to fix the issues themselves despite how small.

Though I agree that they should have been fixed prior to Halo Reach's release.

  • 06.09.2011 7:17 PM PDT

roberto, I link you here again.

http://stardestroyer.net/tlc/

All information gained from the movies, their novels, and screenplays.

Besides, you seem awfully biased against Star wars, pulling crap like "Because it's not shown to do that, it means it cannot!"

We can say the same using the 'hard canon' of Halo, the games. Cause we see plasma not melting a face, that means it cannot right?

  • 06.09.2011 7:18 PM PDT


Posted by: Devils Preists
Well the rules need to be the same for all correct?

So why is it 343i can say somethings canon yet contratradicts something else? According to Roberto they can.

Also TFoR and Halo Reach don't have any major issues as far as I can see it's simply the persons willingness to fix the issues themselves despite how small.

Though I agree that they should have been fixed prior to Halo Reach's release.


343 clarifies shady topics. For example, explaining why the MAC rounds fired in Reach were so weakly depicted. It was to avoid collateral damage, so they fired on low power. This was said on a Halo.xbox.com forum post, where someone asked this question.

Besides, they write the rules, no one else does. Sorry if Star Wars isn't as fantastically overpowered as you'd like to think, but I have yet to see ANY evidence suggesting their weapons are that powerful.

  • 06.09.2011 7:21 PM PDT



Posted by: Devils Preists

Posted by: ROBERTO jh

Posted by: PLUT0NIUM 235
biggest problem for Universe comparison is lack of continuity, the way all of the said Universes seem to change whenever something else is required to assist the 'hero', the same thing happens with Star Wars and Star Trek debates, an example of universal messing, Star Wars Star Destroyers are said to be able to put out Gigaton levels of power with their Turbo-Lasers, a Star Destroyer itself has no issues taking countless hits from these weapons, yet in Episode V (I think) a Star Destroyer gets hit by an asteroid around 1/10 the volume of the bridge section, which cripples the Destroyer, the speed its moving and the size of it, the energy released by the impact would be several Kilotons at best. so right there is a classic example of 'science' in these universes changing to suit the needs of the stories.

same thing happens in Halo countless times, Magnetic Accelerator Cannons are powerful multi-Kiloton weapons, however a Spire in Reach gets destroyed by something less than even a Kiloton yield. Pillar of Autumn survives being hit by something like eight Plasma Torpedoes in the original cut-scene without catastrophic damage, these Plasma Torpedoes are said to 'melt ships...', again altering to suit the current situation.

Star Trek is also rather guilty of the same thing, Phase Cannons for example are said to put out 500 Gigajoules of energy, which is only around 180 tons of TNT, however in the first test of the Phase Cannon we see the weapon quite simply level a mountain on an asteroid, like the whole mountain and create a substantial crater! that is more like 500 Gigatons of TNT or an ungodly amount of Joules. Photon Torpedoes and Quantum Torpedoes change yield depending on the scene as well, they are significantly more powerful than Phase Cannons, yet said to put a 'kilometre crater in an asteroid...' something we witnessed the Phase Cannons doing, so like I said inconsistent as hell!

Stargate is plagued by these continuity conundrums as well, so all I am getting at is, its not possible to compare two different universes when individually they are in internal turmoil with dramatically altering weapon power, defence power and such. even 'Canon' sources are contradicted by other 'Canon' sources, which are contradicted by Game/Film footage, see Star Wars, Star Trek and Stargate and they appear left right and centre. so I personally recommend we cut it out with the comparison threads, unless you can find some 'rock solid' foundation for comparison, otherwise its going to, like always end up in a massive flaming war.[/quote]

Which is why the logical approach SHOULD be (read: should ) to go with the highest canon source.

That'd be the Mass Effect Codex, the Star Wars movies, whatever 343i says for Halo, since in game depictions of technology is limited to whatever power the engine can depict, etc..

Though those above Halo inconsistancies are as follows: The MAC rounds in Reach are fired at low power to prevent collateral damage and the Covenant did not want to destroy the Pillar of Autumn, only disable it so as to question the crew. Again, they were firing on lower settings.

I don't delve deep enough into the Trek universe to understand their weapons though.

For example, people overestimate their universe's powers all the time. Krogan skin is not that tough, the Codex says they are killable with black powder weapons. None of Star Wars' weapons are close to being that powerful, the movies time and time again contradict this with literally every shot fired, and Elites' health cannot recharge in Halo.

Nothing that is in any of the Star Trek books is canon, only the movies and TV shows (people tend to use book quotes in arguments). Really Warhammer is the only consistently overpowered universe out there.[/quote]

I'm sorry...but George lucas is the ultimate master of Canon for Sw and he says everything he authorizes to be made under the Starwars banner is Considered the highest form of Canon unless deemed otherwise. Which means all forms of Canon count as the highest.

Mass effect...blah.

Halo....Lacks anything actually powerful that isn't a god race or the ultimate I lose button.

Warhammer...yeah...it just wrecks everyone's front yard up.[/quote]

Oh...You don't know of Star Wars' canon levels, do you?

In order from highest lowest

G-canon encompasses the movies (the ONE thing about Star Wars nobody knows about conveniantly in these debates)

T-canon encompasses all forms of television.

C-canon encompasses comics, videogames, books, etc.

I'll have to get back to you on what S-canon entails, I cant remember

and N-canon is all non-can material.

The higher up on this list you go, the stronger the canon.

A kiloton asteroid impact obliterated the bridge of a Star Destroyer in one of the movies (Empire Strikes back), while others caused some damage that had the Admiral of the fleet concerned on the Executor Super Star Destroyer, thusly flooring the power of their weapons and armor that Wars fans like to throw out.


Okay so does that mean we can only use the Hard canon for the Halo universe which means the games.

Plasma not melting faces, Marines taking down insane amount of Covenant warriors.

So you say 343i doesn't have it's levels of Canon? So if they don't does that mean 1337 is an actual Spartan?

Oh oh oh...what about Halo wars? The not so plot shielded forge beating the Arrogent Ripa?

Or are you saying bungie has no power and everything they've done is erased until 343i says otherwise and makes new content?

FYI. They needed to leave the Asteriod field because they needed to contact the Emperor. If you actually watched the movies closely. Derp.


Not to say Halo doesn't have its own canon levels

but you forgot the highest canon source: whatever 343i says on the subject, which includes necassary licensing regarding graphical limtations in games.

343's word>games>books>comics.

And I did listen to the movie, possibly a good 150 times.

Captain: "There's been no sightings of the Millenium Falcon, my lord, but considering the amount of damge we've sustained (referring to the Executor) they must've been destroyed."

Vader: "No Captain, they're alive; I want every ship available to sweep the asteroid field until they are found." (Captain walks off)

(Vader is approached by a COMS officer) "The Emperor wishes you make contact with him."

Vader: "Move the ship out of the asteroid field so we can get a clear transmission."

I never once said that they left the field to avoid more damage. I know why they left. I merely pointed out that the Captain of the supposed most powerful ship in the galaxy at that time was worried about asteroids. Besides, we quite clearly see an asteroid shatter the bridge of another Destroyer like it was glass. If their armor can tank gigatonnage blasts, why not kilotonnage asteroids?

If you had listened to the movie you'd know this. Derp.


No you also pointed out apparent fear which I did not see anywhere nor' took any note of.

I mean you do have to remember that Vader is rather intimidating as is the emperor.

Also if I do recall the asteriod hit the command center which would have destroyed the ship because the armor around the Command center is weaker generally and one would assume because the asteriods cause interference they would need additional power to go to the sensors. Also in other forms of canon which you disregaurd so Halo can win, The imperial Star Destroyer was the most flawed of all imperial warships which could have also played a factor, and not to mention that was the same fleet that would have been barraged by the Ion cannon moments before, ALso not to mention that Deflector shields can't take punishment from Mass Accelerator weaponary which one could argue asteroids may possess the same effect, but you wouldn't know that considering your extreame Bias towards Star Wars and your love of the movies in which the main characters are plot shielded like mad. Derp.

  • 06.09.2011 7:23 PM PDT

@Roberto.

Now that you've seen the pretty pictures, let's crunch some numbers. Let's suppose a 70 metre wide asteroid strikes a ship while moving at roughly 1 km/s (This is similar to the asteroid which hit an ISD bridge tower in TESB.). This is considered a benchmark for an ISD's resistance to physical impacts, albeit somewhat over-conservative. Remember that all the ships had already sustained damage beforehand (from prior asteroid impacts, and perhaps also from the Battle of Hoth and a near-collision with two other Star Destroyers), the shields may have been down to permit the holo-transmission, and neither the bridge tower or its shield generators would be as robust as the main hull and its defense systems. As a slightly off-topic exercise, ask yourself what this incident tells us about the structural strength of the bridge tower (hint: does the asteroid pulverize against the tower's surface, penetrate deeply inside, or fly right through and out the other side?)


In any case, given nickel-iron composition and roughly 7000 kg/m³ density, this asteroid would have roughly 1.25 million tons mass, therefore its momentum would be 1.25E12 kg·m/s and its kinetic energy would be 6.25E14 J (roughly 150 kilotons). We might leap to the conclusion that a Star Destroyer's shields must be limited to 150 kilotons for any weapon regardless of whether it possesses mass or not (assuming its bridge shields were, in fact, up at the time despite the holo-transmission which normally requires shields to be lowered), but this conclusion is oversimplistic and wrong. Knowing what we know about collision physics, we know that the shields must apply enough reaction force to reduce the asteroid's velocity to zero before impact. From another scene in ROTJ where a stricken fighter explodes against an ISD bridge tower's shields, they appear to be less than 10 metres away from the hull. This would give them less than 0.02 seconds to stop the asteroid, and the reaction force would be at least 6.25E13 N (note that we are ignoring the fact that no shield interaction was visible in the asteroid impact, so we are humouring the common Trekkie belief that the shields were up). This defines the physical stress applied to the shield generator's mounts, and stress causes structural failure.

Now, let us consider an equivalent turbolaser blast (again, speaking from a structural perspective). We know that turbolaser bolts do not arc measurably downward in gravity even over distances where it should be obvious (eg- the ground battle at Hoth, the space battles in low orbit over Endor and Tatooine), so they appear to be massless (and the SW2ICS provides official confirmation of this interpretation). Moreover, we know (from the TESB asteroid vapourization scene) that a long turbolaser bolt takes roughly 2 frames at 24 fps (0.08 seconds) to impart its energy to the target. Since the time duration is 0.08 seconds instead of 0.02 seconds, it needs 4 times as much momentum as the asteroid (ie- 5E12 kg·m/s) in order to subject the bridge tower to the same stresses. Therefore, since the momentum of a massless particle is U/c, this means that its energy yield would have to be 1.5E21 J, or 350 gigatons. In short, you would need to hit an already-damaged ISD's bridge tower with a 350 gigaton laser or turbolaser blast in order to cause the same physical impact damage we saw in TESB (assuming its shields are up, otherwise the sheer energy transfer would overwhelm the ship's armour regardless of the physical impact).

Here's some proof. (Quote from SW.Net.)

[Edited on 06.09.2011 7:30 PM PDT]

  • 06.09.2011 7:30 PM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: Lord Slade
What is there for a universe to "beat" another universe in? Threads like that are the equivalent of first graders saying "But my dad could beat up your dad!"

It's idiotic and childish.

  • 06.09.2011 7:30 PM PDT


Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: Lord Slade
What is there for a universe to "beat" another universe in? Threads like that are the equivalent of first graders saying "But my dad could beat up your dad!"

It's idiotic and childish.


It's a way to enjoy one's universe and tried to stack it up in a debate in which all enjoy until someone gets mad and pulls the I lose button?

  • 06.09.2011 7:31 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Do not waste your tears, I was not born to watch the world grow dim. Life is not measured in years, but by the deeds of men.

Posted by: goldhawk
We should know better, because we are better.


Posted by: Devils Preists

No you also pointed out apparent fear which I did not see anywhere nor' took any note of.

I mean you do have to remember that Vader is rather intimidating as is the emperor.

Also if I do recall the asteriod hit the command center which would have destroyed the ship because the armor around the Command center is weaker generally and one would assume because the asteriods cause interference they would need additional power to go to the sensors. Also in other forms of canon which you disregaurd so Halo can win, The imperial Star Destroyer was the most flawed of all imperial warships which could have also played a factor, and not to mention that was the same fleet that would have been barraged by the Ion cannon moments before, ALso not to mention that Deflector shields can't take punishment from Mass Accelerator weaponry which one could argue asteroids may possess the same effect, but you wouldn't know that considering your extreame Bias towards Star Wars and your love of the movies in which the main characters are plot shielded like mad. Derp.
The captain was clearly concerned about the asteroids as he warns Vader about them but is dismissed.

If the Command center is the weakest part of the ship why did the put it a dozen meters above the rest of the ship where everyone can see it? If the ship's weapons are as powerful as you say they are, then surely they can afford to redirect power from them to the shield? Those weapons must have a massive power strain on the reactor.

And why are the Star Destroyers weak against mass accelerator weapons? Space is full of debris and if a rock hit your ship while at high speeds it would have the same affect as a mass accelerator weapon. Are you telling me that the most common ship in the fleet is more vulnerable to rocks than super lasers?

Edit: Just read the paragraphs above. Interesting, but are you still saying that SD shields are weaker, to what is essentially one of the most common form of attack, then lasers?

[Edited on 06.09.2011 7:43 PM PDT]

  • 06.09.2011 7:36 PM PDT

Vengeance only leads to an ongoing cycle of hatred.

I really don't care when people say stuff like "this game is gunna destroy that game." I will just enjoy what I want to play.

  • 06.09.2011 7:38 PM PDT


Posted by: Xd00999

Posted by: Devils Preists

No you also pointed out apparent fear which I did not see anywhere nor' took any note of.

I mean you do have to remember that Vader is rather intimidating as is the emperor.

Also if I do recall the asteriod hit the command center which would have destroyed the ship because the armor around the Command center is weaker generally and one would assume because the asteriods cause interference they would need additional power to go to the sensors. Also in other forms of canon which you disregaurd so Halo can win, The imperial Star Destroyer was the most flawed of all imperial warships which could have also played a factor, and not to mention that was the same fleet that would have been barraged by the Ion cannon moments before, ALso not to mention that Deflector shields can't take punishment from Mass Accelerator weaponary which one could argue asteroids may possess the same effect, but you wouldn't know that considering your extreame Bias towards Star Wars and your love of the movies in which the main characters are plot shielded like mad. Derp.
The captain was clearly concerned about the asteroids as he warns Vader about them but is dismissed.

If the Command center is the weakest part of the ship why did the put it a dozen meters above the rest of the ship where everyone can see it? If the ship's weapons are as powerful as you say they are, then surely they can afford to redirect power from them to the shield? Those weapons must have a massive power strain on the reactor.

And why are the Star Destroyers weak against mass accelerator weapons? Space is full of debris and if a rock hit your ship while at high speeds it would have the same affect as a mass accelerator weapon. Are you telling me that the most common ship in the fleet is more vulnerable to rocks than super lasers?


Why put the bridge at the front of the ship with windows instead of armor?

Why place the warp nacelles in a spot easily removed from the ship?

Sci-fi is filled with things like that.

As for the final bit, this is why.

A: Rarely took larger ships through asteroid fields.
B: Next to nobody used mass driver weapons. Hell, slug-throwers were rare.

  • 06.09.2011 7:41 PM PDT


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
roberto, I link you here again.

http://stardestroyer.net/tlc/

All information gained from the movies, their novels, and screenplays.

Besides, you seem awfully biased against Star wars, pulling crap like "Because it's not shown to do that, it means it cannot!"

We can say the same using the 'hard canon' of Halo, the games. Cause we see plasma not melting a face, that means it cannot right?


No, I bloody love Star Wars. I've grown up with it all my life, read around 40 of the books, played all the games that came out in my life time starting with Jedi Knight II, watched each movie a good 200 times, and even write Wars fan fiction for myself in my spare time.

What I hate is the raging fanboys. I've even seen Star Wars fanboys flat out say to Harry Plinkett (the guy who critiqued the Prequels) on a Youtube comment that Star Wars is beyond something that normal humans such as Plinkett can comprehend, that it takes a higher level of intellectual understanding to comprehend something as grand as Star Wars.

THAT is the mental image of Star Wars fanboys I've grown up around and grown accustomed to seeing. So I' have never been able to take them seriously.

Anyway, I HAVE seen that page before, including some of the aspects that, even looking back at the movie frame by frame, doesn't seem to occur (at least in my copy of the movie. In my copy, the turbolaser bolt does not keep traveling forward after hitting the 'roid, it dissipates. It might be a difference between the 1997 remastered version--the one I have--and the original). Yet they conveniantly forget one very telling scene in Episode 6, where the Executor lands a direct hit on an X-Wing, a vehicle made of titanium.

The fighter is not vaporized, like how you would expect one of such weak armor to be when getting struck by a gigatonnage shot (note: Titanium has one of the lowest vaporization points in the periodic table of metals). How is it then, that every piece of this fighter is still intact--blown apart into tiny pieces, yes, but still intact--if it just got hit with such power? You mean to tell me their fighters are of comparable power now?

Or when the Death Star's turbolasers shoots down Rogue 6 in a New Hope? On such a powerful station, you'd expect them to be extraordinarily powerful in this case, yet he just burns to the ground.

Or pretty much every shot fired in the battle of Coruscant? Save the glassing beam on the Venator?

There are just far to many contradictions that outweigh the consistancies.

  • 06.09.2011 7:41 PM PDT

Really? Are we going to do this again? I thought we learned our lesson last time.

  • 06.09.2011 7:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Member of Bungie.net for nearly three years, still continuing!

Enjoy what you have and live on.

My gamertag is Elder Bias

All right, to help ROBERTO jh out.

Star Wars does not have gigaton or even teraton strength levels of firepower and nor have powerful armor to shrug off the gigaton-teraton levels of firepower. As stated in movies, a star destroyer gets crippled by a several-kiloton strength asteroid that is roughly 1/10th size/volume of entire star destroyer. Where you have been getting so-called gigaton or teraton levels of firepower? You forget about canon levels in star wars, as said by ROBERTO jh

Also, to clear this about halo's canon levels: It has different styles of canon stating. I hate to say this but I'll say this: Halo Bible (basically everything 343i says) > Game > Books > Marketing Material (such as comic, action figure, etc. In my opinion, it has been like this: Halo Bible > Books > Games > Marketing material.

And movies stated that to destroy a entire planet without death star which it would require over 2,000 Imperial Star Destroyers to completely annihilate a planet. That puts doubt on their gigaton-teraton levels of fire power...

Let me explain about this gigaton and teraton. Gigaton is more like super-nuclear firepower, I think. Teraton is more like extinction-class asteroid.

My educated guess that they can at least dish out multiple digits of kilotons to possibly single-digit gigaton levels of firepower.




[Edited on 06.09.2011 7:46 PM PDT]

  • 06.09.2011 7:44 PM PDT

AS I said if you read my post, the Star destroyer is the single most flawed ship in the Imperial navy Don't ask me why but the imperial engineers aren't too bright.

Deflector shields aren't designed to fight against Mass accelerator weapons as I found through som reaserch. Obviously my stance in this case is yes an Imperial star destroyer can be killed by a rock traveling at similar speeds as a MAC round. No they're more vulnerable to high speed rocks and again the super laser in question needs to be specified because as we've seen. A planet destroying laser is quite capable of destroying a ship with one shot. While regular turbo lasers aren't capable of said feat.

Again you can't describe the fear as depicted by the captain solely on the asteriods.

  • 06.09.2011 7:44 PM PDT

If I remember right, said x-wing was vaporized, the bulk which was directly hit. The outer parts feel apart.

As for the Plinkett dude... I don't see how anybody could take him seriously...

  • 06.09.2011 7:45 PM PDT

Oh the irony.

  • 06.09.2011 7:47 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Do not waste your tears, I was not born to watch the world grow dim. Life is not measured in years, but by the deeds of men.

Posted by: goldhawk
We should know better, because we are better.


Posted by: Omanisat
Really? Are we going to do this again? I thought we learned our lesson last time.
We never learn. We will still can't get everyone to believe that the legendary planet was not Reach or Onyx!

As for me, I will defend Halo until someone questions the schemes of Tzeentch.

  • 06.09.2011 7:53 PM PDT


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
If I remember right, said x-wing was vaporized, the bulk which was directly hit. The outer parts feel apart.

As for the Plinkett dude... I don't see how anybody could take him seriously...


Agreed..both statements.

  • 06.09.2011 7:56 PM PDT


Posted by: Devils Preists
AS I said if you read my post, the Star destroyer is the single most flawed ship in the Imperial navy Don't ask me why but the imperial engineers aren't too bright.

Deflector shields aren't designed to fight against Mass accelerator weapons as I found through som reaserch. Obviously my stance in this case is yes an Imperial star destroyer can be killed by a rock traveling at similar speeds as a MAC round. No they're more vulnerable to high speed rocks and again the super laser in question needs to be specified because as we've seen. A planet destroying laser is quite capable of destroying a ship with one shot. While regular turbo lasers aren't capable of said feat.

Again you can't describe the fear as depicted by the captain solely on the asteriods.


So it's a question of the kind of weapon used. THAT I can get behind a little better regarding armor and defenses.

So say, a MAC gun would chew through a Destroyer, while a plasma torpedo would take longer, right? What would a light weapon do? Be it a laser blast or a hard light beam?

@Why cant anyone take him seriously? Because he insulted Star Wars? If he has legitimate reasons for not liking the movies, is that suddenly a crime?

As I've said, I've seen each movie a good 200 times easily and you know what? He's right 95% of the time. The prequels are riddled with plot holes.

So tell me, whats so wrong with him?

  • 06.09.2011 7:57 PM PDT


Posted by: ROBERTO jh

Posted by: Devils Preists
AS I said if you read my post, the Star destroyer is the single most flawed ship in the Imperial navy Don't ask me why but the imperial engineers aren't too bright.

Deflector shields aren't designed to fight against Mass accelerator weapons as I found through som reaserch. Obviously my stance in this case is yes an Imperial star destroyer can be killed by a rock traveling at similar speeds as a MAC round. No they're more vulnerable to high speed rocks and again the super laser in question needs to be specified because as we've seen. A planet destroying laser is quite capable of destroying a ship with one shot. While regular turbo lasers aren't capable of said feat.

Again you can't describe the fear as depicted by the captain solely on the asteriods.


So it's a question of the kind of weapon used. THAT I can get behind a little better regarding armor and defenses.

So say, a MAC gun would chew through a Destroyer, while a plasma torpedo would take longer, right? What would a light weapon do? Be it a laser blast or a hard light beam?

@Why cant anyone take him seriously? Because he insulted Star Wars? If he has legitimate reasons for not liking the movies, is that suddenly a crime?

As I've said, I've seen each movie a good 200 times easily and you know what? He's right 95% of the time. The prequels are riddled with plot holes.

So tell me, whats so wrong with him?


1:I need to know a little bit about Light based weaponary so give me a moment to look them up. Perhaps if you give me the specs as to what you're trying to use maybe I'd get a better idea.

2: Because of my supposed fan boy diease...I won't even bother because you'd take it as bias and simply disregard it. But W/e.

  • 06.09.2011 8:10 PM PDT


Posted by: ROBERTO jh
@Why cant anyone take him seriously? Because he insulted Star Wars? If he has legitimate reasons for not liking the movies, is that suddenly a crime?

As I've said, I've seen each movie a good 200 times easily and you know what? He's right 95% of the time. The prequels are riddled with plot holes.

So tell me, whats so wrong with him?


Because his review has a -blam!-on of extra, unfunny crap thrown in which is completely unneeded? (Tied up, bloody woman in his basement begging to be let go while he yells "I'm doing a review! shut up -blam!-!")

Because he talks in a monotone and in circles?

Because he ignored a thing described in the VERY movie he was -blam!-ing about? (Aka, "Why are they going underwater! I thought they were going to the naboo." and ignoring that Jar Jar explained going underwater was quicker.)

Because in the review he states his dislike comes from the fact "The prequels are different, and I don't like things to be different!"

[Edited on 06.09.2011 8:19 PM PDT]

  • 06.09.2011 8:17 PM PDT


Posted by: raganok99
All right, to help ROBERTO jh out.

Star Wars does not have gigaton or even teraton strength levels of firepower and nor have powerful armor to shrug off the gigaton-teraton levels of firepower. As stated in movies, a star destroyer gets crippled by a several-kiloton strength asteroid that is roughly 1/10th size/volume of entire star destroyer. Where you have been getting so-called gigaton or teraton levels of firepower? You forget about canon levels in star wars, as said by ROBERTO jh

Also, to clear this about halo's canon levels: It has different styles of canon stating. I hate to say this but I'll say this: Halo Bible (basically everything 343i says) > Game > Books > Marketing Material (such as comic, action figure, etc. In my opinion, it has been like this: Halo Bible > Books > Games > Marketing material.

And movies stated that to destroy a entire planet without death star which it would require over 2,000 Imperial Star Destroyers to completely annihilate a planet. That puts doubt on their gigaton-teraton levels of fire power...

Let me explain about this gigaton and teraton. Gigaton is more like super-nuclear firepower, I think. Teraton is more like extinction-class asteroid.

My educated guess that they can at least dish out multiple digits of kilotons to possibly single-digit gigaton levels of firepower.




Where are you getting your opinions?

Well the ISD in question had A) been in the asteroid field for days, and B) the shields were likely still offline due to the Echo Base Ion Cannon.

While we never see the main guns of a ship fired at anything other than another ship in the films, and so there is no G-Canon level evidence for or against Gigaton or Teraton level figures, there is however plenty of C-Canon evidence, which can be summed up in 3 words.

Base Delta Zero.

3 Star Destroyers blew the atmosphere clear off the planet Dankayo and slagged the surface after less than an hour. Only reason it took 3 that long to do so was because each was performing double duty of bombardment and blockade, a single ISD could have done it but that would have left the other side of the planet free to evacuate while the side the ISD was pounding was atomized.

It takes the Covenant an entire fleet to glass a planet, a single star destroyer can achieve that in less time.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Must I give you statistics on weapons?

Turbolaser > MAC

An Imperial II Star Destroyer has 8 main octuple barreled guns, but it has 36 other turbolasers scattered across it's surface, and that doesn't include the 100+ point defense guns.

A Turbolaser is roughly 4 times stronger than a shipboard MAC(With the Old firepower figures) on the UNSC ship. Turbolasers fire one shot every second, add the other 43 Turbolasers, that is over 44 shot per second along with another wave a second later.

A Shipboard MAC is about 1.19 megatons of strength(remember, it used to be 1.17 teratons), so a Turbolaser is about 4.68 Teratons of strength. The MAC's were nerfed pretty hard since Reach's figures.

ISDII Per second Firepower is still 800 Teratons however, so even with the old figures Halo is no match for Star Wars, they are however, no longer beyond Stargate. Hell, aside from the SMACs they're not even Star Trek level anymore, maybe not even Battlestar Galactica.

Oh, and just a note, Turbolasers can track ships up to 180,000,000 km away (roughly 10 light minutes) so their range is an order of magnitude higher.

  • 06.09.2011 8:24 PM PDT