Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004





Foxfire_ posted:

If I were trying to justify a Star Destroyer's numbers into making sense, I'd go with that they are primarily troop transport with a splash of point defense lasers and fighters. Their main intended role would be to park over rebellious planets and be a base for occupation and anti-insurgency. Size and endurance would be so you could have a base that's less bombable by locals than a ground base.

We know Lucas wanted to base a lot of the space stuff off of wwII fighter dog fights. So ISDs being troop/fighter transports first, battle ships second, makes a lot of sense just from a meta knowledge design thing.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ghost Leviathan
Mar 2, 2017

Exploration is ill-advised




The treatment of Star Destroyers actually varies a bit across the franchise, in the first movie they seem more played up as major battleships and it's the Death Star itself that's among other things a massive base for starfighters.

Schadenboner
Aug 15, 2011

I MEAN, TURN OFF YOURE MONITOR, MIGTH EXPLAIN YOUR BAD POSTS, HOPE THIS HELPS?!



Trapick posted:

I haven't watched much, but I saw one where this girl got smallpox (from buried treasure or something), except it ended up not being smallpox, but anyway they had a big lockdown and the CDC was called in and poo poo, which makes sense, that's fine. But then House ends up in the room with the girl to do something and then he's like "oh no I've been exposed to smallpox" and is clearly upset/scared, but he's definitely of an age where he would have been vaccinated. So what the poo poo was up with that? Apparently even vaccination *after* exposure is really effective, so he could have just got a booster and almost certainly have been fine. So why was House so worried?

I legit wish I could get the smallpox vaccyboi.

Nebakenezzer
Sep 13, 2005

The Mote in God's Eye



Trapick posted:

I haven't watched much, but I saw one where this girl got smallpox (from buried treasure or something), except it ended up not being smallpox, but anyway they had a big lockdown and the CDC was called in and poo poo, which makes sense, that's fine. But then House ends up in the room with the girl to do something and then he's like "oh no I've been exposed to smallpox" and is clearly upset/scared, but he's definitely of an age where he would have been vaccinated. So what the poo poo was up with that? Apparently even vaccination *after* exposure is really effective, so he could have just got a booster and almost certainly have been fine. So why was House so worried?

Was it made before whenever the Bush II produced the new Smallpox vaccine?

Or possibly, it was TV

Vernii
Dec 7, 2006



Foxfire_ posted:

If I were trying to justify a Star Destroyer's numbers into making sense, I'd go with that they are primarily troop transport with a splash of point defense lasers and fighters. Their main intended role would be to park over rebellious planets and be a base for occupation and anti-insurgency. Size and endurance would be so you could have a base that's less bombable by locals than a ground base.

Agreed. The Empire had a near monopoly on capital ships and the Rebellion only had a few handfuls of proper warships, so most of their operational time can be expected to be spent showing the flag and reminding local system authorities who's in charge.

One of the legacy novels had a line about how the Empire built 25k of them. I have no idea how many systems the Empire controlled at its height in the EU but given how many stars are in a typical galaxy, it's possible that the ratio was dozens/hundreds (or more) systems per ISD, which makes sense in-character that they would be designed for long periods of self sufficiency for both supply and combat/peacekeeping.

Anonymous Zebra
Oct 21, 2005
Blending in like it ain't no thang

This whole discussion is reminding me of Farscape and the Peacekeepers Command Carriers. The Peacekeepers didn't even live on planets and their whole society lived on the carriers, which came equipped with not only battlements, but also giant parks and schools and poo poo. Also apparently they were like Homeworld mother ships since they could poo poo out actual battleships and stuff. Not that they needed them since apparently they were so gently caress-off tough that the only one in the whole show that's ever shown to be destroyed takes over an hour to blow up.

SlothfulCobra
Mar 27, 2011

STOP BEING EVIL.


It sort of makes sense to have one heavily armed mult-purpose carrier from the perspective of how the biggest threat to the Empire was surprise attacks on logistical centers, but then it does mean that most of your assets are too expensive to deploy in proportion to the problems that you need to respond to. Also might explain why Imperial command staff are always so pissed at their subordinates when they show up with the big guns. Having a Star Destroyer is proof that you're a big dog in the Empire, and all the smattering of other Imperial capital ships are weirdly shameful and pushed off to weird corners that nobody cares about.

It's a fun for writers or nerds to flesh out the niches of various ships or try dredging up obscure things out of the EU to fill a niche that they needed, but it's gotta be a bit soul-destroying to be a visual designer on one of these big projects and every time your job is mainly to replicate the same thing. Possibly because the company doesn't want to be obliged to give artists any extra credit or money and it's cheaper to pull up some old EU material.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004





SlothfulCobra posted:

It sort of makes sense to have one heavily armed mult-purpose carrier from the perspective of how the biggest threat to the Empire was surprise attacks on logistical centers, but then it does mean that most of your assets are too expensive to deploy in proportion to the problems that you need to respond to. Also might explain why Imperial command staff are always so pissed at their subordinates when they show up with the big guns. Having a Star Destroyer is proof that you're a big dog in the Empire, and all the smattering of other Imperial capital ships are weirdly shameful and pushed off to weird corners that nobody cares about.

It's a fun for writers or nerds to flesh out the niches of various ships or try dredging up obscure things out of the EU to fill a niche that they needed, but it's gotta be a bit soul-destroying to be a visual designer on one of these big projects and every time your job is mainly to replicate the same thing. Possibly because the company doesn't want to be obliged to give artists any extra credit or money and it's cheaper to pull up some old EU material.

There is value for an oppressive fascist regime for over responding to any and all threats. Also, we know they would take kids and train them, they could very well be trained aboard those ships and joined those divisions directly, like how a lot of old school mercenary companies used to pick up new meat as they went along.

Foxfire_
Nov 8, 2010



SlothfulCobra posted:

It's a fun for writers or nerds to flesh out the niches of various ships or try dredging up obscure things out of the EU to fill a niche that they needed, but it's gotta be a bit soul-destroying to be a visual designer on one of these big projects and every time your job is mainly to replicate the same thing. Possibly because the company doesn't want to be obliged to give artists any extra credit or money and it's cheaper to pull up some old EU material.

I'm honestly surprised at home samey everything was in the sequels, since more ship types = more toys to sell

Tulip
Jun 3, 2008

I have no country to fight for; my country is the earth; I am a citizen of the world.




SlothfulCobra posted:

It sort of makes sense to have one heavily armed mult-purpose carrier from the perspective of how the biggest threat to the Empire was surprise attacks on logistical centers, but then it does mean that most of your assets are too expensive to deploy in proportion to the problems that you need to respond to. Also might explain why Imperial command staff are always so pissed at their subordinates when they show up with the big guns. Having a Star Destroyer is proof that you're a big dog in the Empire, and all the smattering of other Imperial capital ships are weirdly shameful and pushed off to weird corners that nobody cares about.

It also adds an interesting layer of dysfunction to the Empire itself. The more independent your subordinates are, the less able you are to control them, basic identity property of management. When those subordinates are military this leads very rapidly to major structural dysfunction, see "the whole medieval period." The EU (which is of course our source for most of this stuff) had this come up - tons of Imperial commands operating like petty warlords. There's even a decent canon support for this: in Ep4 we see a veteran naval commander tell Vader to his face that he thinks Vader and the Emperor are full of poo poo.

Hell looking at the scene in question reveals some further cracks in the Empire:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_Z99MN9Qcs

(I'm copying quotes from https://8flix.com/assets/screenplays/s/tt0076759/Star-Wars-Episode-IV-A-New-Hope-1977-screenplay-by-George-Lucas.pdf because I don't wanna transcribe)

quote:

TAGGE

Until this battle station is fully operational we are vulnerable. The Rebel Alliance is too well equipped. They're more dangerous than you realize.

The bitter Admiral Motti twists nervously in his chair.

MOTTI

Dangerous to your starfleet, Commander, not to this battle station!

The "your" is doing a lot of work here - clearly Motti does not consider the Death Star and either the Navy in general or Tagge's specific fleet to share a common interest and safety!


quote:


[on hearing that the Senate was abolished]

TAGGE

That's impossible! How will the Emperor maintain control without the bureaucracy?

TARKIN

The regional governors now have direct control over territories.

This is how you get an An Lushan Rebellion! No wonder your whole government's got 4 years left from this point!

Mondian
Apr 24, 2007

Allow me to interject. I have been using electronic cigarettes for a few months now. You see, I am an Expert


Anonymous Zebra posted:

This whole discussion is reminding me of Farscape and the Peacekeepers Command Carriers. The Peacekeepers didn't even live on planets and their whole society lived on the carriers, which came equipped with not only battlements, but also giant parks and schools and poo poo. Also apparently they were like Homeworld mother ships since they could poo poo out actual battleships and stuff. Not that they needed them since apparently they were so gently caress-off tough that the only one in the whole show that's ever shown to be destroyed takes over an hour to blow up.

Actually they do encounter the wreck of a very famous command carrier in the uncharted territories. When they later encounter a Nebari they ask how many warships it took and he's just like "Huh? We don't have warships, it just took one of our standard starships"

Farmer Crack-Ass
Jan 2, 2001

~this is me posting irl~


I feel like commenting on an Impstar being "undergunned" is a bit odd in a setting where the weapons are at least partly energy based. Like, if you doubled the gun count, would the reactor even be able to support firing them all? Is it more effective to increase the number or size of your turbolasers?


wdarkk posted:

Star Destroyers explicitly replace the old Venator class, which carried about 420 (ha) starfighters on a smaller frame. I assume the tradeoff is in endurance: the Venator goes out, fights, comes back, but the Imperial-class spends a long time on station doing oppression.

EDIT: Legends section of wookiepedia (lol at this sourcing) says an Imperial II class can support its crew of 37,000 (!!!) and 9,700 troops for six years (!!!!) vs the Venator's 7,400 crew and 2,000 troops for two years.

Although why they need six years of supply on hand when the main base is only a couple days away at most is uh a mystery.

I think the big thing about Impstars is, as alluded to previously, that they're meant to enforce the Empire's will without having to worry about pesky things like "logistics". If you have to lay siege to a planet for months or years - if a small rebel base on an isolated planet can throw up a strong enough shield to deflect "any bombardment", imagine how hard it'd be to crack into the shields of a heavily industrialized planet - it'd be nice to not have to worry about your supply lines being severed by guerilla attacks, because you've brought all your supplies with you! Similarly, they can go on long patrols or garrison an unfriendly planet or do whatever indefinitely. Some smuggler hides out in an asteroid field? gently caress 'em, we can just park here until they starve to death!

frogge
Apr 7, 2006




I think imperial star destroyers function the same way the colonial marines big ship operates in the Aliens franchise- rapid response on a wide frontier where help might not come for months or years. Although the crews and fighting complements of both are hilariously different. ISD- 37K, USCM transport ship- 90 to 2,000.

Edit: I think in a way that's realistic for exerting power over a really wide area. The garbage tech is that like the killbots in Futurama you defeat them by sending wave after wave of men against them.

frogge fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Apr 8, 2021

SlothfulCobra
Mar 27, 2011

STOP BEING EVIL.


There's ways that Star Destroyers could be way worse.



I think that Earth might only have the one warship too that they keep having to repair. Although Futurama is littered with garbage technology in a garbage world. I think one of the worst is probably the transport tubes.

Farmer Crack-rear end posted:

I feel like commenting on an Impstar being "undergunned" is a bit odd in a setting where the weapons are at least partly energy based. Like, if you doubled the gun count, would the reactor even be able to support firing them all? Is it more effective to increase the number or size of your turbolasers?

Most lasers in Star Wars are some kind of packets of supercharged gas, however that works. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of diminishing returns from just increasing the size and output which is why they go for more units. The Death Star laser seems to be some kind of different thing.

frogge
Apr 7, 2006




Forget if it's been said already but that whole dealio with personal shields vs lasers in Dune being instant atomic explosions. Like hell no one wouldn't take advantage of that. It's in-universe consistent at least.

Lazy Fair
Sep 23, 2019


The movies go to great lengths to depict Star Destroyers as an overpowering force that crush anything they encounter in a fair fight. They're only taken down by the rebels being so darn plucky. The idea that they're "undergunned" is incompatible with the impression they're supposed to give in every on screen appearance.

We see them lose all the time because the writers need dangerous foes for the Rebels to overcome, but even though we frequently see them blown up the narrative is still telling us they're supposed to be overwhelmingly powerful.

Fantastic Foreskin
Jan 6, 2013

A golden helix streaked skyward from the Helvault. A thunderous explosion shattered the silver monolith and Avacyn emerged, free from her prison at last.



The only Star destroyer to go down in the entire trilogy is the super star destroyer that gets kamikazed. They never even try to attack them before that battle, they just run from them. Even then they don't expect to do anything to them, they're just trying to stop the death star from firing.

Fantastic Foreskin fucked around with this message at 13:58 on Apr 9, 2021

wdarkk
Oct 26, 2007

Friends: Protected
World: Saved
Crablettes: Eaten


Could have sworn I saw some ISDs exploding during Endor.

jeeves
May 27, 2001

Deranged Psychopathic
Butler Extraordinaire


Fantastic Foreskin posted:

The only Star destroyer to go down in the entire trilogy is the super star destroyer that gets kamikazed. They never even try to attack them before that battle, they just run from them. Even then they don't expect to do anything to them, they're just trying to stop the death star from firing.

Talk about lovely piece of garbage tech- that Super Star Destroyer had no backup controls so when the (stupidly exposed) bridge got blown up I guess the whole thing was stuck in 3rd gear and just plowed right into the nearest thing... while being completely full of a fireballs worth of gasoline apparently.

Fantastic Foreskin
Jan 6, 2013

A golden helix streaked skyward from the Helvault. A thunderous explosion shattered the silver monolith and Avacyn emerged, free from her prison at last.



wdarkk posted:

Could have sworn I saw some ISDs exploding during Endor.

I thought there were more too, but at least in the cut I found that keeps it just to the space battle, it's just the super.

fartknocker
Oct 28, 2012

Damn it, this always happens. I think I'm gonna score, and then I never score. It's not fair.




Wedge Regret

No, at least one regular ISD goes down in the background. You can see it at 6:26 in this video, just before the SSD gets hit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f38a6pYL_jE

Asterite34
May 19, 2009




jeeves posted:

Talk about lovely piece of garbage tech- that Super Star Destroyer had no backup controls so when the (stupidly exposed) bridge got blown up I guess the whole thing was stuck in 3rd gear and just plowed right into the nearest thing... while being completely full of a fireballs worth of gasoline apparently.

I mean, it IS a giant warship capable of casual FTL travel, I'd be shocked if it wasn't full of something dangerously energetic.

...speaking of, what the hell fuel does a Star Wars ship use? Antimatter or Hypermatter or whatever?

Barudak
May 7, 2007



It uses fuel that is limited enough to matter in The Last Jedi and Solo but not interesting enough to have any details

RBA Starblade
Apr 27, 2008

Going Home.



Games Idiot Court Jester


Whale oil

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004





Sorry, the RPG books have nothing

Tulip
Jun 3, 2008

I have no country to fight for; my country is the earth; I am a citizen of the world.




Fantastic Foreskin posted:

The only Star destroyer to go down in the entire trilogy is the super star destroyer that gets kamikazed. They never even try to attack them before that battle, they just run from them. Even then they don't expect to do anything to them, they're just trying to stop the death star from firing.

They get disabled by the ground batteries in Empire Strikes Back.

We do not see a lot of actual combat performance by them in OT. Endor is the only significant action we see them take part in and in that battle the Rebels take fewer capital ship casualties than the Empire (2:5).

Lazy Fair posted:

The movies go to great lengths to depict Star Destroyers as an overpowering force that crush anything they encounter in a fair fight. They're only taken down by the rebels being so darn plucky. The idea that they're "undergunned" is incompatible with the impression they're supposed to give in every on screen appearance.


Do they? Like I can't think of any fights that are suggested to be fair fights. In ANH they tractor beam in Leia's ship, in ESB they get disabled by ground batteries and otherwise float around menacingly, and in Endor the rebels win decisively despite being ambushed.

In any event the actual argument I have is that they are undergunned compared to their own volume. Nothing about how they might be armed relative to competitors, just relative to their visual profile. Purpose built warships are very visibly built around their weapon systems, whether that weapon system be a ramming prow, multiple decks of cannon, modern naval artillery, or a flight deck. Star Destroyers are built to look like triangles, which accomplishes several things for the films (notably the sick introductory shot to ANH), but is very funny if we try to stretch the implications past the cinematography.


And kind of a bigger question - do people think the Empire was really that competent? I've been around Star Wars nerds almost my entire life and I thought the consensus was that the Empire was pretty doomed. Frequent rebellions, delusional managers, infighting, low morale - not signs of a healthy political organization. If nothing else they got clobbered by Ewoks.

Asterite34 posted:

I mean, it IS a giant warship capable of casual FTL travel, I'd be shocked if it wasn't full of something dangerously energetic.

...speaking of, what the hell fuel does a Star Wars ship use? Antimatter or Hypermatter or whatever?

The EU explanation for Star Wars FTL was that the FTL system physically doesn't operate when you get too close to large gravity wells, which leads to the Empire making a specialized ship that creates big artificial gravity in order to prevent opposing forces from using FTL to escape. Which is fair enough because just chucking an empty X-wing at many times the speed of light into a planet would be an incredibly potent WMD and I can get why you wouldn't want to have the war system be "anybody who has can replace x-wings somewhat regularly effectively has the death star." So that's why at least the propulsion systems themselves aren't superweapons.

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Hypermatter/Legends is what Wookiepedia turns up for the fuel source used in SW and I gotta say, that's some crazy poo poo.

Fantastic Foreskin
Jan 6, 2013

A golden helix streaked skyward from the Helvault. A thunderous explosion shattered the silver monolith and Avacyn emerged, free from her prison at last.



fartknocker posted:

No, at least one regular ISD goes down in the background. You can see it at 6:26 in this video, just before the SSD gets hit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f38a6pYL_jE

I am bad at watching. Still, that's the only time in the entire trilogy anyone tries to fight them.

Nebakenezzer
Sep 13, 2005

The Mote in God's Eye



Tulip posted:

The EU explanation for Star Wars FTL was that the FTL system physically doesn't operate when you get too close to large gravity wells, which leads to the Empire making a specialized ship that creates big artificial gravity in order to prevent opposing forces from using FTL to escape. Which is fair enough because just chucking an empty X-wing at many times the speed of light into a planet would be an incredibly potent WMD and I can get why you wouldn't want to have the war system be "anybody who has can replace x-wings somewhat regularly effectively has the death star." So that's why at least the propulsion systems themselves aren't superweapons.

As a veteran of old Star Trek threads, I can tell you that FTL travel and normal space need to be exclusive. Past 80% the speed of light, the amount of energy needed to propel a given object faster climbs exponentially, so that at light speed, the amount of energy needed to drive any mass is infinite. (I think this is why only pure energy can move at the speed of light in normal space; no mass.) The even weirder implication of this is if the Sisko threw a baseball at light speed, the baseball would have infinite energy potential, and I'm not exactly sure what happened when a baseball hits an asteroid with infinite energy, but it is not good. So any FTL tech can't be used kinetically. The gravity restriction makes sense, then, because FTL is passing through low-mass objects and stopping well before high mass ones.

Tulip
Jun 3, 2008

I have no country to fight for; my country is the earth; I am a citizen of the world.




Nebakenezzer posted:

As a veteran of old Star Trek threads, I can tell you that FTL travel and normal space need to be exclusive. Past 80% the speed of light, the amount of energy needed to propel a given object faster climbs exponentially, so that at light speed, the amount of energy needed to drive any mass is infinite. (I think this is why only pure energy can move at the speed of light in normal space; no mass.) The even weirder implication of this is if the Sisko threw a baseball at light speed, the baseball would have infinite energy potential, and I'm not exactly sure what happened when a baseball hits an asteroid with infinite energy, but it is not good. So any FTL tech can't be used kinetically. The gravity restriction makes sense, then, because FTL is passing through low-mass objects and stopping well before high mass ones.

Yep! FTL is an extremely hosed concept and it's probably for the best to just keep it at an abstract narrative level 'this lets us change environments radically and quickly' use.

jeeves
May 27, 2001

Deranged Psychopathic
Butler Extraordinaire





Checks out

SlothfulCobra
Mar 27, 2011

STOP BEING EVIL.


Tulip posted:

And kind of a bigger question - do people think the Empire was really that competent? I've been around Star Wars nerds almost my entire life and I thought the consensus was that the Empire was pretty doomed. Frequent rebellions, delusional managers, infighting, low morale - not signs of a healthy political organization. If nothing else they got clobbered by Ewoks.

Eh, I've seen much less competent fascists out there. I'd like to think that keeping large masses suppressed is already a bit of a doomed enterprise to begin with, but the Empire managed to have a decent run at it. The Rebel Alliance's path to victory seems pretty harrowing what with having to stay on the move constantly, hide in obscure corners of the galaxy, and scrounging for supplies.

The old EU Empire was clogged thick with tales of incompetence and infighting, but I feel like a lot of the new Disney stuff is pretty shallow on that. Sometimes ends up a little heroes-on-both-sides-y, especially when paired with edgier rebels. And the sequels really diminish the accomplishment of conquering the galaxy.

Schadenboner
Aug 15, 2011

I MEAN, TURN OFF YOURE MONITOR, MIGTH EXPLAIN YOUR BAD POSTS, HOPE THIS HELPS?!




Txt me.

DrBouvenstein
Feb 28, 2007

I think I'm a doctor, but that doesn't make me a doctor. This fancy avatar does.


That's part of why I really like Babylon 5's interpretation of hyperspace.

It's a literal "other" area of space you travel in. You get to it via a jump gate or jump engine, but once you're in it, you travel via regular engines. Nothing in there can affect things in "normal" space and vice versa. They don't go full into a lot of details, cause that was never B5's thing, but you can communicate in/out of hyperspace, but that's about the limit. Any ship can go into/out of hyperspace with a jump gate, so even small fighters and transports can be IN hyperspace and not need to "dock" with a capitol ship to escape, though they can still get left behind if a ship closes the jump point early when escaping. You can also get lost in hyperspace and drift forever from the gravitation eddys if you lose you VERY important "find the jump gate beacon" thingy.

Most sensors don't travel between the barrier, so you can jump into an area you think is safe but WHOOPS, ambush and now you're dead.

Conversely, if you have a VERY good idea of where the enemy is, you can open a jump point in the middle of their fleet and gently caress them up, so being the faction that's planning the ambush can be very dangerous.

They also sometimes play around with fun things like,
"What if you open a jump point in an atmosphere?" or,
"What if you open a jump point with a jump engine inside an existing jump point made from a jump gate?"

Spoiler alert:
Pretty much always a "do never do", unless you're our protagonists, in which case your ship is awesome enough to do it and not blow up.

Farmer Crack-Ass
Jan 2, 2001

~this is me posting irl~


frogge posted:

Forget if it's been said already but that whole dealio with personal shields vs lasers in Dune being instant atomic explosions. Like hell no one wouldn't take advantage of that. It's in-universe consistent at least.

I think the issue there is that it breaks too many norms and is too big a gamble. Like at the time of the first book, inter-house warfare is already very narrowly proscribed so as to minimize civilian casualties; setting up a nuke-sized blast, even if it was technically a lasgun-Holtzmann effect, is going to kill a lot of bystanders. Also if a house uses atomics against people they'll have the entire Imperium coming down on them and annihilating them, so there's the possibility of the Landsraad just saying "yup, looks like atomics to us, gently caress 'em!"

I think Paul was willing to do it because, well, House Atreides was already pretty much wiped out, and plus he knows nobody's going to do a nuclear carpet bombing of Arrakis.


Fantastic Foreskin posted:

The only Star destroyer to go down in the entire trilogy is the super star destroyer that gets kamikazed. They never even try to attack them before that battle, they just run from them. Even then they don't expect to do anything to them, they're just trying to stop the death star from firing.

We see at least one Impstar exploding in the background in ROTJ:

Tulip
Jun 3, 2008

I have no country to fight for; my country is the earth; I am a citizen of the world.




SlothfulCobra posted:

Eh, I've seen much less competent fascists out there. I'd like to think that keeping large masses suppressed is already a bit of a doomed enterprise to begin with, but the Empire managed to have a decent run at it. The Rebel Alliance's path to victory seems pretty harrowing what with having to stay on the move constantly, hide in obscure corners of the galaxy, and scrounging for supplies.

The old EU Empire was clogged thick with tales of incompetence and infighting, but I feel like a lot of the new Disney stuff is pretty shallow on that. Sometimes ends up a little heroes-on-both-sides-y, especially when paired with edgier rebels. And the sequels really diminish the accomplishment of conquering the galaxy.

Oh yeah there's much dumber fascists, for sure. Lucas for his part was drawing a lot of inspiration from a couple of major sources - Westerns, WW2 films, and 30s pulp scifi being the obvious ones - and that WW2 influence comes through pretty clear with the Empire. They're supposed to look like and feel like Nazis, and Nazis were incompetent as hell. It's not at all a problem for the story if they're scary but beatable.

This is me being speculative and interpolating based on stuff outside the text, but Lucas I think wanted Star Wars to have an unambiguous, straightforward morality. There's Good Guys, and there's Bad Guys, and the Bad Guys can be scary but they can't actually win. And this is where Star Wars being mostly a drama between family members causes some stumbling for the larger morality of the work, because I don't suspect that Lucas was going to let the Death Star plan work, because I don't think he believes that fear and force is enough to sustain a whole government's legitimacy. The Empire's plan is that they'll just scrap the bureaucracy and republican norms and all the things that make the government work and just replace them with fear of overwhelming collective punishment. And that's dark side crap and the dark side is weaker than the light side, so even if the Alliance lost the Battle of Yavin or Endor the Empire would still have repeated constant rebellions (though the only way this really makes it on screen is that Leia doesn't crack, which is an individual character moment but given the other characters in the film seems to be a 'what any good person would do' - which is common enough that one of the big moments is Han, the scoundrel, coming back to risk his life). And I think this is part of why Endor plays out the way that it does: the most important part is that Anakin flips and embraces his son and throws off the Dark Side, but the rebels also win the ground and space battles happening at the same time. The bad guys can be scary for sure but they are destined to lose when good people stand up for what's right.

Farmer Crack-rear end posted:

I think the issue there is that it breaks too many norms and is too big a gamble. Like at the time of the first book, inter-house warfare is already very narrowly proscribed so as to minimize civilian casualties; setting up a nuke-sized blast, even if it was technically a lasgun-Holtzmann effect, is going to kill a lot of bystanders. Also if a house uses atomics against people they'll have the entire Imperium coming down on them and annihilating them, so there's the possibility of the Landsraad just saying "yup, looks like atomics to us, gently caress 'em!"

I think Paul was willing to do it because, well, House Atreides was already pretty much wiped out, and plus he knows nobody's going to do a nuclear carpet bombing of Arrakis.

Yeah the norms and house politicking are huge components of why characters do what they do in Dune. Paul's outside the rules in a lot of ways.

Tulip fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Apr 9, 2021

Anonymous Zebra
Oct 21, 2005
Blending in like it ain't no thang

Don't the Fremen gently caress with the Sardaukar early on using personal shields hidden in sand dunes? The Sardaukar had a habit of sweeping the sand with Lasguns since the Fremen could hide in the sands. So the Fremen starting leaving active shield devices buried and let the Sardaukar nuke themselves a few times so that they would stop doing that.

SlothfulCobra
Mar 27, 2011

STOP BEING EVIL.


I liked Star Control 2's take where hyperspace was all jumbled around compared to how things are arranged in truespace, which let them rearrange the galaxy however they liked and make the game reliant on a physical paper item back in the days of copy protection.

And then later on in the game you can get into Quasispace, another parallel dimension where there's a cluster of near-together portals that can shortcut across hyperspace.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004





Tulip posted:

They're supposed to look like and feel like Nazis, and Nazis were incompetent as hell.

Can you imagine if they built ISDs the way the nazis built panzers? loving hand crafted individual bits so parts are rarely interchangeable?

A fleet of 25,000 of those ships *WOULD* be the shittiest piece of garbage tech.

Fantastic Foreskin
Jan 6, 2013

A golden helix streaked skyward from the Helvault. A thunderous explosion shattered the silver monolith and Avacyn emerged, free from her prison at last.



Anonymous Zebra posted:

Don't the Fremen gently caress with the Sardaukar early on using personal shields hidden in sand dunes? The Sardaukar had a habit of sweeping the sand with Lasguns since the Fremen could hide in the sands. So the Fremen starting leaving active shield devices buried and let the Sardaukar nuke themselves a few times so that they would stop doing that.

They do a shield nuke at the end, but it's been so long I don't remember the specifics. A lot of things in dune are tradition, but using lasguns is dangerous altogether since if you hit a shield you didn't see you're liable to get caught in the blast.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Sir DonkeyPunch
Mar 23, 2007

I didn't hear no bell


Fantastic Foreskin posted:

They do a shield nuke at the end, but it's been so long I don't remember the specifics. A lot of things in dune are tradition, but using lasguns is dangerous altogether since if you hit a shield you didn't see you're liable to get caught in the blast.

The feedback makes the lasgun blow up too. You can use lasguns on a timer tho

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply