The Size of the Droid Army "Retconned"

Fire Fly · Post by **Fire Fly** » 2006-07-02 08:13pm

Millions of factories? Assuming one droid is finished per every two seconds, as seen in AOTC, and assuming that each factory has four production lines, a million factories can produce....roughly 10^13 droids in a year. Yup, fights right in with the quadrillions of droids.

So, it seems that every source which did include hard/rough numbers all predated Traviss's work. Another fine example of shitty research by authors.

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2006-07-02 08:19pm

Even production well, well below what is seen in AOTC is more than enough to completely obliterate the Odds numbers. Those NEGTD numbers are pretty damning.

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-07-02 08:24pm

Dan Wallace is the man. Him, Abel Pena, and Jim Luceno should be the only folks writing 'non-fiction'-type material for Star Wars.

(Well, Curtis Saxton too, but he's not working for LFL anymore.)

The Original Nex · Post by **The Original Nex** » 2006-07-02 08:36pm

Here's to Dan Wallace *raises glass*

I would love for him and Pena to take over for ole' Pabawan. Perhaps some sort of coup?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2006-07-02 08:52pm

Dan Wallace is not an idiot. That's why I'm not entirely surprised that his writing would completely contradict KT's mewlings.

That being said, thank you, Mr. Wallace. You have once again restored my faith in the intelligence of the publishing community.

Post by **Vympel** » 2006-07-02 09:01pm

Cheers! Nice one.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2006-07-02 09:13pm

4 platoons of ARC troopers to take a single factory. A platoon is 32 men. That's 128 ARCs, of which 96 were killed. Yet there are the claims that there were only 100 ARCs. Funny that.

Don't get me wrong, there is some strange stuff in this book. But nothing as bad as the NEGVV. Plus I'm digging the obscure jokes and references - an homage to transformers, naming the Mustafar droid after a demon, and a couple of others. I'm miffed at some of the inclusion and exclusion choices, but what can you do.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2006-07-02 09:24pm

Wallace has his own attitude and approach to Star Wars than Curtis does. IIRC he already commented that he thought that Traviss' numbers were too low, but I also think that he felt Curtis' numbers were too high.

It doesn't really bother me though if he chooses to look at Star Wars differently than Curtis. I don't expect this to alter the beliefs of Traviss or her supporters, they'll either "rationalize" the factories as producing something else than battle droids, re-use the "misinformation" excuse invented in Odds, claim absurdly low droid production numbers, or something like that.

Besides, I thought Traviss already admitted she ignored what was mentioned in other SW sources and relies on her own "analysis". Why should she pay attention to anything Wallace writes?

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2006-07-02 10:39pm

She doesn't pay attention to any other information sources and then claims her writings are consistent with the other works?

The hell? Do we have a bong-smoking smiley?

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-07-02 10:46pm

She uses the Holocron, which is from my understanding an database of stripped-down raw facts for her writings. Think of it as a bare-bones Wookieepedia.

Incidentally, Dan Wallace posts over at TF.N with a fair amount of regularity-- at the moment he's entertaining questions and comments in the thread for this book.

I'd recommend against bringing up Traviss or the numbers or whatever, though, since it tends to make LFL folks uncomfortable when anything is implied about their feelings toward other authors-- remember the incident a few months ago involving Randy Stradley?

Fire Fly · Post by **Fire Fly** » 2006-07-02 10:53pm

000 wrote:She uses the Holocron, which is from my understanding an database of stripped-down raw facts for her writings. Think of it as a bare-bones Wookieepedia.

Incidentally, Dan Wallace posts over at TF.N with a fair amount of regularity-- at the moment he's entertaining questions and comments in the thread for this book.

I'd recommend against bringing up Traviss or the numbers or whatever, though, since it tends to make LFL folks uncomfortable when anything is implied about their feelings toward other authors-- remember the incident a few months ago involving Randy Stradley?

Could you enlighten please?

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-07-02 11:25pm

About what?

EDIT: Oh, the Stradley thing. Basically, Randy Stradley (Dark Horse's chief editor) said he didn't like Triple Zero.

Less than a day later he posted a lengthy apology to fans, Traviss, Lucasfilm, et. al.

Makes you go "hmm," eh?

This isn't the first time Stradley's made comments about other LFL contractees, only to retract or deny them later-- there are continuing rumors about bad blood between Dark Horse and Del Rey, mostly involving the NJO project.

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2006-07-02 11:34pm

000 wrote:About what?

I think he meant Randy Stradley?

I'm curious, what was the ruckus and what was he responsible for?

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2006-07-02 11:38pm

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
000 wrote:About what?
I think he meant Randy Stradley?

I'm curious, what was the ruckus and what was he responsible for?

The commando books came up at DHC. Randy posted a bit about how he disagreed with the depiction of the clones - he saw them as people who were lightly autestic, and basically meatdroids, and the comics were written as scuh. Nothing really critical, just talking creative differences. Next day he eats a ton of crow over it for no apparent reason, as what he said was not really critical IMO. So it looks like someone leaned on him behind the scenes.

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-07-02 11:53pm

Randy's comments:

Randy Stradley wrote:Sorry. I tried reading it, but couldn't get passed the opening. First, I couldn't for the life of me imagine a clone trooper keeping a journal -- let alone a novel-style journal like the one presented. To whom does he think he's writing? Who is his audience?

Second, the opening line, "You have to see the funny side of things in the army," seemed complete incongruous. See the funny side of things in the army as compared to what? As a clone trooper raised in a factory, what other experiences has he had besides being in the army?

Ms. Traviss might be a fine writer, but the opening sentences of Triple Zero booted me right out of the story, and my own "offended" sense of logic wouldn't let me continue.

Randy Stradley wrote:Clones falling in love?

Clones freakin' falling in freakin' love?!

[Randy looks around at the rapidly shrinking raft that was the Star Wars that he and Jeremy knew and loved. Kicks Jeremy off. "Sorry, pal. It looks like there's only room for one, now."]

His apology:

Randy Stradley wrote:In the less than twenty-four hours that have passed since I voiced my opinion about the opening paragraphs of Karen Traviss' novel Republic Commando: Triple Zero, at least three people (that I know of) have read additional, unintended meanings into my relatively brief post. You can read the post in question, here:

+http://www.darkhorse.com/boards/viewtop ... 7&start=15

There is also a follow-up post (maybe two) on the next page.

In another, unrelated thread, one poster even went so far as to decide from those few comments that I was at "war" with Del Rey (though I suspect he was grasping at anything he could throw at me because he was mad at me and he was otherwise out of ammunition). Before this goes any further, let me put my comments in context, and tell you the thoughts behind them.

First of all, as I made it clear in my post, I did not read the whole novel. I've heard it's a good read, and I will, in all likelihood, give it a complete read at some point in the near future.

Now, pay attention to this next part, because it's the crux of the matter: My gripes should in no way be perceived as directed at Ms. Traviss, Del Rey, or at any of the fine folks at Lucasfilm. My gripes are directed at the ether, at the zeitgeist, or at whatever undetectable community spirit moved everyone but myself (and possibly Jeremy Barlow, though I will not speak for him) to view the nature and aspect of the clones in the Clone Wars in a certain way -- a way different from how I viewed them.

See, I pictured the clones (based solely on what I saw in the films) as less-than fully developed humans. Possessing more of a sense of imagination (i.e., better problem solving skills) and more mission flexibility than any droid, but molded on a military framework that allowed concerns for little more than chain of command, mission parameters, and loyalty to the Republic and their fellow soldiers. In other words, I never envisioned them as being capable of possessing the hopes, dreams, desires (beyond the completion of their current mission) of a "normal" human. But I now see that I am in the extreme minority (lessee, there's me, and maybe Jeremy, and... well, me, for sure).

So, do I take the news like a man? Do I accept with calm reserve that the truth is other than what I imagined it to be? What -- have you not been paying attention?

Of course I don't accept it. I rail against it, kick its mighty stone foundation until my toes are bruised, shake my fist at its towering battlements, and make off-hand comments that can be misconstrued as criticsm of those lucky souls working within the same system as I, but who have not been afflicted the same way I have. Long story short, I act like a dumb-ass.

I apologize to any readers who mistakenly thought I was on a crusade against the status quo, or who somehow thought that I thought that I ever had a chance.

And, I apologize to the folks at Del Rey who may have taken offense at my comments. Even though we all work in the same arena, theirs is a different job than mine -- and one I would not presume to oversee.

To Ms. Traviss, my sincerest apologies for any perceived slight. Please know that my comments were in no way meant to be taken as an indictment of your skills or your work. As I stated above, my grief is all of my own making.

And, last but not least, I want to apologize to the people at Lucas Licensing, who I count as friends, with whom I work every day, and without whom everything Jeremy and I do would quickly go off the rails. No one should ever blame them for my occasional rants, and I'm truly sorry if they were caught in the fall-out from this one.

So, let that be a lesson to me to keep my big mouth shut. Especially when I know I have the weight of the entire Star Wars galaxy teetering above my head.

And the relevant thread:

+http://www.darkhorse.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=9021

Even more interestingly, a poster over at TFN brought up that Randy's apparently been wanting to do a story about Han and Bobby Fett teaming up for years. Guess what one of the main plot points in Bloodlines is going to involve?

Can't give any quotes for this one, unfortunately, since the relevant post over at TF.N was deleted.

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2006-07-02 11:58pm

Even more interestingly, a poster over at TFN brought up that Randy's apparently been wanting to do a story about Han and Bobby Fett teaming up for years.

I had that idea years ago too. The New Republic was going to actually hire Boba Fett to accompany Han on a mission to infiltrate and sabotage a new Death Star (based on the original design, sans weakness) that had been constructed in secret by the Corporate Sector Authority. Ostensibly, Fett was taking Han there to claim a bounty placed on his head years ago by the CSA (kinda like Leia getting Chewie into Jabba's palace disguised as a bounty hunter). And since Han had already blasted his way off of one Death Star, he reluctantly agreed that he was the best man for the job.

Yeah, it was a dumb idea.

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-07-03 12:06am

Since Bobby and Solo made up a long time ago, it's been a possible story for quite awhile. I'd much rather see Randy tackle it than Traviss-- or, better yet, Daniel Keys Moran.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2006-07-03 12:07am

Ahem...

+http://www.darkhorse.com/boards/viewtop ... 727#129727

Randy Stradley wrote:Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 5:31 am Post subject:

Wapoe, I watched your video and, per the "challenge" on your site, I judged for myself that the film is "revenge fantasy" and not satire. Satire would be poking fun of the cult of personality that is occurring around the Karen Traviss material (and the author herself). Inserting a version of yourself into the mix in order to show one-sided arguments against an effigy of the author and then killing her defenders makes it a revenge fantasy.

Which is not to say that Dark Moose and others are right. I hasten to point out that I have no firsthand knowledge of any of his statements or actions (nor do I really need to see/read them, as none of this has anything to do with events taking place on this site). But even if he has done and said everything you assert, it doesn't make your film satire.

Star Wars is a phenomonen like few others in fiction. It's well-loved and it's huge -- big enough that some fans are able to focus on tiny niches of the continuity, lay claim to them, and defend them voiciferously. Some authors will, as well (hey, just because someone can string words together or draw doesn't mean they aren't raging fans). But like any other shared continuity, and despite all best intentions, mistakes, contradictions, and even just plain bad ideas will creep in. We can shake our heads in dismay, but in the end all we can do is accept what has been done and hope that one day the bad stuff will be retconned into a more palatable form. Fantasizing about physical violence against authors or other fans is neither helpful, nor funny.

The guy gave it a fair shake, I'll say that for him, even if I do disagree with him.

EDIT: How soon do you think Dark Moosetard and KT Jelly will hoof it on over there after reading the above?

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2006-07-03 12:19am

Lord Poe wrote: EDIT: How soon do you think Dark Moosetard and KT Jelly will hoof it on over there after reading the above?

Depends on how many people have tomorow off. If its a 4 day weekend, I say DM tomorrow morning, KT Wednesday afternoon (she lives in the states now, right?). If not a holiday, or KT does not live in the states, then Dm tomorow morning, KT tuesday afternoon. DM early no matter what because he is a loser, KT later then him even if she notices first to try to appear more dignified then the lackey.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2006-07-03 12:28am

Ender wrote:Depends on how many people have tomorow off. If its a 4 day weekend, I say DM tomorrow morning, KT Wednesday afternoon (she lives in the states now, right?). If not a holiday, or KT does not live in the states, then Dm tomorow morning, KT tuesday afternoon. DM early no matter what because he is a loser, KT later then him even if she notices first to try to appear more dignified then the lackey.

Guess we'll see who is stalking whom, once again, eh? Especiall when the thread was effectively ended by Stradley himself.

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2006-07-03 03:25am

Ender wrote:A quick flip through has "millions" of factories, the Confederacy's army is made of "uncountable number" of droids, tens of thousands of one kind of droid guard a single factory, the size of the Confederate army was "unprecedented" and a couple of other bits.

Ender wrote:4 platoons of ARC troopers to take a single factory. A platoon is 32 men. That's 128 ARCs, of which 96 were killed. Yet there are the claims that there were only 100 ARCs. Funny that.

Would you be so kind as to post these quotes, with page numbers?

Also, The New Essential Guide to Droids just came out, right? One of the favorite arguments among the Fandawhorians at TFN is that since Odds came out after the ICS and other sources, it automatically retconned all of them away (which is ridiculous, even though Chee did say that newer sources usually take precedent, that rule is hardly set in stone, nor does it mean that the films can so easily be trumped by C-canon). Going by this logic, does this mean that the NEGTD has retconned away Odds?

Phil Skayhan · Post by **Phil Skayhan** » 2006-07-03 09:03am

Are we required to do a high school level paper on the subject of Talifan as satire where we go line by line and point out what its parallel in reality is?

Randy Stradley wrote:Posted: Sat Jun 17, 2006 5:31 am Post subject:
Wapoe, I watched your video and, per the "challenge" on your site, I judged for myself that the film is "revenge fantasy" and not satire. Satire would be poking fun of the cult of personality that is occurring around the Karen Traviss material (and the author herself). Inserting a version of yourself into the mix in order to show one-sided arguments against an effigy of the author and then killing her defenders makes it a revenge fantasy.

I guess we do...

Even if the term "revenge fantasy" were true, how does that remove Talifan from the satire genre? The cartoon version of Orwell's Animal Farm also has an end that could be called fantasy (at least at the time it was made) but that does not mean it is not a satire. Whether or not the concerened "Space Wars" fan is Wayne or the argument is "one sided" (duh, what is the point of satire?) is likewise irrelevant.

Which is not to say that Dark Moose and others are right. I hasten to point out that I have no firsthand knowledge of any of his statements or actions (nor do I really need to see/read them, as none of this has anything to do with events taking place on this site). But even if he has done and said everything you assert, it doesn't make your film satire.

So the actions of the moderators and "Fandalonians" on SW.com (and TF.net?) against detractors of Traviss and her works is in no way parodied in Talifan? Again, the point of satire is missed completely.

After her departure from the thread on TF.net, Traviss called foul (to put it mildly) and suddenly threads are locked and/or deleted, posters are banned and new and subjective standards of posting are introduced, and blogs are deleted. The one common thread to all of the above was criticism of the clone numbers and Traviss's harsh words against a segment of fandom. Strangely, blogs critical of that same segment were left untouched and even enjoyed "me-tooing" by some of the moderators. Dark Moose in particular pops up in these all the above instances more often than not.

So who and what do you think is parodied in Talifan when Crevice orders her minions to attack Concerned Fan? How is it irrelevant when it is one of the main points of the piece?

Star Wars is a phenomenon like few others in fiction. It's well-loved and it's huge -- big enough that some fans are able to focus on tiny niches of the continuity, lay claim to them, and defend them vociferously. Some authors will, as well (hey, just because someone can string words together or draw doesn't mean they aren't raging fans). But like any other shared continuity, and despite all best intentions, mistakes, contradictions, and even just plain bad ideas will creep in. We can shake our heads in dismay, but in the end all we can do is accept what has been done and hope that one day the bad stuff will be retconned into a more palatable form. Fantasizing about physical violence against authors or other fans is neither helpful, nor funny.

But how will LucasFilm know a bad idea has crept in if fans who raise the point are silenced or marginalized? And once again, the violence in Talifan merely symbolizes the arguments taking place on the internet. That Concerned Fan's (critic of Traviss) Kung Fu (arguments) is stronger than Crevis and Co.'s (you see where I'm going with this) is also merely the view of the author.

As to it being funny, to my mind neither is The Importance of Being Ernest by Oscar Wilde. The worst that could be said about Talifan is that it is not subtle. That is Wayne's style. If I had written it, it would have been done differently, but the points would have remained exactly the same.

Lord Poe wrote:The guy gave it a fair shake, I'll say that for him, even if I do disagree with him.

I don't really think so. But I do like the way his board is run more than SW.com or TF.net.

EDIT: I thought I'd add something you said to me three years ago when something I wrote was completely misunderstood.

Is sarcastic humor impossible to recognize unless it has "Monty Python" stamped on it?

Post by **Vympel** » 2006-07-03 09:19am

You know what's really hilarious? Even if we assume the nonsense in Odds is 100% accurate, i.e. that the average factory only produced 2730 droids per day (996,125 per year)- taking a bare minimum of 2,000,000 factories (millions of factories) works out to 5.5 billion droids of all types produced per day.

Goddamn that's funny. Three million clones. Yeah, sure.

Of course, we know Odds is utter garbage, so combined with the lower limit for millions of factories, it's extremely, extremely over-generous.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2006-07-03 10:07am

One of the favorite arguments among the Fandawhorians at TFN is that since Odds came out after the ICS and other sources, it automatically retconned all of them away

The rants of an anti-social clone does not in any way trump out-of-universe descriptions. This stance is inherently flawed.

As for "it came later so it's more correct" crowd, the OOU article in SWI#84 came out before SW:CL, so the later source would take precedence once again.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2006-07-03 01:12pm

Jim Raynor wrote: Also, The New Essential Guide to Droids just came out, right? One of the favorite arguments among the Fandawhorians at TFN is that since Odds came out after the ICS and other sources, it automatically retconned all of them away (which is ridiculous, even though Chee did say that newer sources usually take precedent, that rule is hardly set in stone, nor does it mean that the films can so easily be trumped by C-canon). Going by this logic, does this mean that the NEGTD has retconned away Odds?

Oh, but didn't you know? The NEGTD was "written before Odds".

That's the 'defense' against the NEGTD.