Endor battle?

NhikRath · Post by **NhikRath** » 2004-04-20 02:22am

"if I hear the hologram I want to hear how the Rebellion knows this said shield only protects the DS2 and not flash fry the genewrator from orbit"

I think what you mean by this is "How does the Rebellion know that the shield is only around the Death Star II? And if they did believe this, why didn't they perform an orbital bombardment?"

If so, I can answer your question simply: they didn't believe that. What they did believe was that the shield protected the Death Star II and a small portion of the Endor atmosphere around the generator, possibly stretching all the way down to the surface of the planet. The reason why they didn't perform orbital bombardment is simple: the shield was protecting that small portion of Endor's atmosphere around the shield generator.

If your question is "How did they know this?" then my answer is: that was part of the information their bothan spies informed them of.

I agree that the shield generator projected a shield that protected both the Death Star II and Endor. The extent and scale of the shield's protection of Endor was limited, as shown by the hologram diagram.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2004-04-20 02:34am

NhikRath wrote:
"if I hear the hologram I want to hear how the Rebellion knows this said shield only protects the DS2 and not flash fry the genewrator from orbit"
I think what you mean by this is "How does the Rebellion know that the shield is only around the Death Star II? And if they did believe this, why didn't they perform an orbital bombardment?"

If so, I can answer your question simply: they didn't believe that. What they did believe was that the shield protected the Death Star II and a small portion of the Endor atmosphere around the generator, possibly stretching all the way down to the surface of the planet. The reason why they didn't perform orbital bombardment is simple: the shield was protecting that small portion of Endor's atmosphere around the shield generator.

If your question is "How did they know this?" then my answer is: that was part of the information their bothan spies informed them of.

Proof...this is your ASSUMPTION unless you have direct quote that the Bothans provided them this.

I agree that the shield generator projected a shield that protected both the Death Star II and Endor. The extent and scale of the shield's protection of Endor was limited, as shown by the hologram diagram.

The novel disagrees with your assumption

I have shown you where I got my proof.

Show me yours because so far you are going off now with supposition.

The novel points that it not only showed where but that in the battle that they had a constant view of the grid when it was up and when it fell and that it covered both Endor and the Death Star.

So unless you can show a direct contradiciton we have two problems

Either the novel is utterly wrong and was full of it...and I would like to see the proof of this contradiction.

or that Endor was protected to which the novel supports this supposition.

vakundok · Post by **vakundok** » 2004-04-20 03:31am

And the hologram can be rationalised since they concentrated on the defense of the DS2.
Your version only contradicts the novelisation and creates unneseccary questions:
- Why the rebells did not bomb the area around the shield tube? If you want to suggest that the shield tube provided underground shielding, please provide evidence for that. (Preferably from the hologram itself, since you based your opinion on that the shield on the holo was all the shielding present.)
- If the shield tube (on the hologram) was the only protection for Endor, why they created a shield tube instead of a common bulb? Did they want to shield the shield energy between Endor and the DS2?

About the DS1 shield: It was said in the novelisation, that the imperials did not find a fighter a considerable threat otherwise they would have used a more tightly closing shield. This suggests that such shields are possible. (The energy consumption is an other question.)

atkindave · Post by **atkindave** » 2004-04-20 09:11am

Just to toss this in, speed was also an issue. Of course the rebellion wanted to destroy the DS2, but their real target was the Sith Lords, to crush the Empire. Otherwise they would just build another DS and another.

If the operation took too long and especially if it looked like it was going to go badly for the Empire, then the Sith would have attempted escape. This, like most of the aspects of the plan, was moot because the Emperer was dead and the Sith broken by the time the shield was down (IIRC).

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-04-20 09:42am

On Rebel squeamishness: is the argument here that the Rebels would allow the alliance to be destroyed, their cause lost, and the Empire to rule the galaxy forever because they're too soft to fire on Endor and knock out the shield generator from orbit, but they're perfectly fine with blowing up a 900 km metal object in low orbit? Endor is lost if the Rebels win no matter what; who cares if some of it gets blasted early?

Lord Pounder · Post by **Lord Pounder** » 2004-04-20 04:48pm

IIRC the Rebel Assault team (Han, Leia, Luke, etc) had to ask the Executor to arrange for the shield to be lowered to even land on Endor. This IMHO is further proof that all of Endor was shielded.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-04-20 05:50pm

atkindave wrote:Just to toss this in, speed was also an issue. Of course the rebellion wanted to destroy the DS2, but their real target was the Sith Lords, to crush the Empire. Otherwise they would just build another DS and another.

Lords? you mean Lord. Palpatine was the only sith lord at the time of the death star, and he was the one that ordered it. It's doubtful that the rebellion even knew he was a Sith.

If the operation took too long and especially if it looked like it was going to go badly for the Empire, then the Sith would have attempted escape. This, like most of the aspects of the plan, was moot because the Emperer was dead and the Sith broken by the time the shield was down (IIRC).

the only Sith that were in existence were Palpatine and Vader. with Palpatine literally being the one who made the big decisions of the empire. It seems more likely they'd want palpatine out of the way, without worrying about the Sith aspect. Unless you can show that they knew that palpatine was a Sith lord and were more concerned about the Sith than the Empire itself.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2004-04-20 07:57pm

Side item: If this shield is powerful enough to protect the second Death Star from any attack, why was not something like this already built into the death star. The generator, in scale compared to the Death Star, is pretty small. It would basically make the Death Star invulnerable.

The Prime Necromancer · Post by **The Prime Necromancer** » 2004-04-20 09:13pm

Erm, are we even certain that the Alliance knew the moon was inhabited? You'd think they might have brought it up in the briefing. "Watch out for fuzzy, short primatives."

Side item: If this shield is powerful enough to protect the second Death Star from any attack, why was not something like this already built into the death star. The generator, in scale compared to the Death Star, is pretty small. It would basically make the Death Star invulnerable.

The superlaser's power requirements *alone* are astronomical. Add in the requirements for life support, artificial gravity, sublight and hyperlight propulsion, tractor beams, weapons, better-than-capital grade shielding, and who knows what else, and you can see why they might not have the room for a planetary shield. Keep in mind also that that installation could be bigger than it looks.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2004-04-20 09:23pm

The Prime Necromancer wrote: The superlaser's power requirements *alone* are astronomical. Add in the requirements for life support, artificial gravity, sublight and hyperlight propulsion, tractor beams, weapons, better-than-capital grade shielding, and who knows what else, and you can see why they might not have the room for a planetary shield. Keep in mind also that that installation could be bigger than it looks.

It has always been a Maxim that you build any design to be able to take its own attack. The power generator has to be part of the ground installation. The whole instalation is small compared to the Death Star. It is obvious that they did not do it but it really does not make much sense.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2004-04-20 11:47pm

The shield was also mentioned in the ROTJ novelization during the Rebel Briefing at Endor (And for those who scream "they didnt show the shield so it doesn't count" Lets not point out they didnt show the troopers, the atmosphere of Endor, the Executor or other ships in orbit, or alot of OTHER details either.)

atkindave · Post by **atkindave** » 2004-04-21 12:46am

Darth_Zod wrote:
atkindave wrote:Just to toss this in, speed was also an issue. Of course the rebellion wanted to destroy the DS2, but their real target was the Sith Lords, to crush the Empire. Otherwise they would just build another DS and another.
Lords? you mean Lord. Palpatine was the only sith lord at the time of the death star, and he was the one that ordered it. It's doubtful that the rebellion even knew he was a Sith.

If the operation took too long and especially if it looked like it was going to go badly for the Empire, then the Sith would have attempted escape. This, like most of the aspects of the plan, was moot because the Emperer was dead and the Sith broken by the time the shield was down (IIRC).
the only Sith that were in existence were Palpatine and Vader. with Palpatine literally being the one who made the big decisions of the empire. It seems more likely they'd want palpatine out of the way, without worrying about the Sith aspect. Unless you can show that they knew that palpatine was a Sith lord and were more concerned about the Sith than the Empire itself.

I called them Sith because we know that they were Sith, not because the rebellion knew or didn't know. It's easier to type "Sith" than to type "The Emperor and Darth Vader" over and over again. Dillhole.

Yes, the rebellion was going after the Emperer Palpatine and Darth Vader as well as the Death Star. They may or may not have known whether Palpatine was a Sith. They probably knew that Vader was a Sith. (it's not like Vader hid this fact) If they knew enough of Sith lore they could probably deduct that Palpatine was a Sith: Vader answered directly to Palpatine, and Vader never aquired an apprentice.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-04-21 08:15am

Atkindave wrote:I called them Sith because we know that they were Sith, not because the rebellion knew or didn't know. It's easier to type "Sith" than to type "The Emperor and Darth Vader" over and over again. Dillhole.

i suggest getting your terminology straight then, twat. using bad terminology is confusing at best and causes misunderstandings. Saying that it's "easier" shouldn't come into a factor as this is a BBS, not a chat room. You also specifically referred to them as sith "lords" when there is clearly only one sith lord.

Yes, the rebellion was going after the Emperer Palpatine and Darth Vader as well as the Death Star. They may or may not have known whether Palpatine was a Sith. They probably knew that Vader was a Sith. (it's not like Vader hid this fact) If they knew enough of Sith lore they could probably deduct that Palpatine was a Sith: Vader answered directly to Palpatine, and Vader never aquired an apprentice.

the movies clearly stated they were after the empire, not necessarily the Sith controlling it. Simply get your terms and arguments straight when making them, it's not really a whole lot to ask for.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2004-04-21 10:59am

Deathstalker wrote:I thought they could get through the shield on the first DS because they knew where the shield's seams were. The only reason the DS2 had the planet generated shield was because it wasn't operational and still underconstruction.

IIRC the dialouge correctly, Red Leader said "Passing through the magnetic shielding, switch your deflectors to double front."

I'm guessig that the magnetic shielding is 'ray shielding'. Its possible that the Empire didn't have particle shielding on something so big, either for power economy or simple that you can't hurt something that big with out some major mass.

On the Deathstar II, we know through Akbars dialouge and the impact of a couple rebel ships, that it is protected by particle shielding. Perhaps this is why they needed a ground station. The power requirments for particle shielding should be more than ray shielding and they wanted all the power the had for construction and when the time came, death to the rebellion.

atkindave · Post by **atkindave** » 2004-04-21 12:26pm

Darth_Zod wrote:
Atkindave wrote:I called them Sith because we know that they were Sith, not because the rebellion knew or didn't know. It's easier to type "Sith" than to type "The Emperor and Darth Vader" over and over again. Dillhole.
i suggest getting your terminology straight then, twat. using bad terminology is confusing at best and causes misunderstandings. Saying that it's "easier" shouldn't come into a factor as this is a BBS, not a chat room. You also specifically referred to them as sith "lords" when there is clearly only one sith lord.

Yes, the rebellion was going after the Emperer Palpatine and Darth Vader as well as the Death Star. They may or may not have known whether Palpatine was a Sith. They probably knew that Vader was a Sith. (it's not like Vader hid this fact) If they knew enough of Sith lore they could probably deduct that Palpatine was a Sith: Vader answered directly to Palpatine, and Vader never aquired an apprentice.
the movies clearly stated they were after the empire, not necessarily the Sith controlling it. Simply get your terms and arguments straight when making them, it's not really a whole lot to ask for.

Sith is an accurate and concise term for reference to those two. It is not my problem that you thought I was changing context by referring to Sidious and Vader as Sith or the Sith.

There was only one Sith lord? Are you saying that Vader is not a Sith "lord?" Is this because of his position/rank of apprentice to Palpatine? You are implying honorific rules where there really is not enough information to do more than speculate. Sidious is referred to once in Episode 2 as a "Sith Lord" by Tyrannus/Duuku. In this case he was using it without name or rank honorific, perhaps to conceal Sidious' position as master. Qui-Gon Jinn also referred to Darth Maul as a Sith Lord once after being attacked. In this case it was also anonymous, and unknown whether Maul was the master or apprentice.
OTOH Darth Vader is constantly referred to as Lord Vader in episodes 4-6, even by Sidious in ROTJ when speaking to Luke. He is "My friend" when spoken to directly by Sidious.
Do you think that "lord" is the title exclusively of the Master side of the Sith pair? Do you think that it is a rank bestowed at a certain level of skill/power of the Force (or earned in some other way?) Why would you think either would apply to the Sith? There are only two. They can’t need any ranking system more complicated than master/apprentice. When dealing with others, you can bet that they would both prefer to be referred to as lord. And they are when they're in charge of the Empire.
There really is not enough information in the movies So did you get this from part of the EU somewhere that I should read?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-04-21 12:31pm

multiple EU sourcebooks clearly state that there is only one sith lord at any one time after Darth Bane sets forth his rules about the master/apprentice. The Jedi may have addressed maul as a sith lord, but they did not know for certain whether or not he actually was. After the battle they questioned whether or not they killed the Master or the Apprentice, which indicates the uncertainty as to Maul's position within the Sith.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-04-21 09:55pm

"Always two, there are. No more, no less."

Vader was a Dark Lord of the Sith. This doesn't refer to rank or whether he's the master or the apprentice; it merely denotes his mastery of the Dark Side, or something similar. He's constantly referred to as Lord Vader, and I think the radio dramatizations referred to him as Dark Lord of the Sith. The movies don't contradict them and they're higher canon than the EU. Pray tell, what says otherwise?

Okay, holding the Guide to the Star Wars Universe, third edition, which identifies Vader as a Dark Lord of the Sith.