No, that would be DarkStar and his other personality, which oddly enough, is just as stupid as the other one.jegs2 wrote:[Hmm, so we have Trekkie Dee and Trekkie Dum, eh?
Concession accepted! (sorry, I just had to say it again. )
Moderator: Vympel
No, that would be DarkStar and his other personality, which oddly enough, is just as stupid as the other one.jegs2 wrote:[Hmm, so we have Trekkie Dee and Trekkie Dum, eh?
So, you are Darkstar with another name and avatar? Greetings.Vertigo1 wrote:No, that would be DarkStar and his other personality, which oddly enough, is just as stupid as the other one.jegs2 wrote:[Hmm, so we have Trekkie Dee and Trekkie Dum, eh?
Concession accepted! (sorry, I just had to say it again. )
gah, if you are going to insult, at least make it better than just plain lamejegs2 wrote:So, you are Darkstar with another name and avatar? Greetings.Vertigo1 wrote:No, that would be DarkStar and his other personality, which oddly enough, is just as stupid as the other one.jegs2 wrote:[Hmm, so we have Trekkie Dee and Trekkie Dum, eh?
Concession accepted! (sorry, I just had to say it again. )
His observations are interpretations. Not facts, though.jegs2 wrote:Your secret is one which you should take to heart, since the only "evidence" you've put forth that the domes are shield generators is "your observations" of a scene in a movie. That does not equate to fact by anyone's definition.Isil`Zha wrote:And that thread is not this thread... and I've got a secret for you... if you're argument lacks any evidence whatsoever, yours is the one that's hollow.jegs2 wrote: As appears in the ISD thread...
Nope. I'm using deductive logic from observed behavior. (or something like it, since I couldn't recognize deductive logic if it bit me ass)jegs2 wrote:Could you post a more obvious link to a diagram or supporting documentation?Slartibartfast wrote:Okay I posted my own observation there. To me it's the most obvious conclussion.
And the Acclamator would have to have the same type of shield emmitor because...?His Divine Shadow wrote:I believe they are sensors, thats just so obvoius, also did anyone note the lack of globes on the Acclamator huh?
Maybe cuz the Acclimator is shieldless?His Divine Shadow wrote:I believe they are sensors, thats just so obvoius, also did anyone note the lack of globes on the Acclamator huh?
Had to throw in that insult at the end there... which is slightly reminicent of a fault by association fallacy. I've never said that it was for the entire ships shields, but mearly for the bridge. And I never said that it could be destroyed before the shield was down.nightmare wrote:1) ONE of The Executor's globes was destroyed *after* it's shields was downed. It has many more than two.
2) An ISD is shown in ROTJ with bridge on fire, domes ok.
3) ISDs doesn't have as many globes as they do number of shields. (6?)
4) Other ships doesn't have such domes, but they do have shields.
5) Geoffry Mandels blueprint
6) STAR WARS Incredible Cross Sections tells they are targeting systems.
7) The MF clinging to the back of the tower to vanish proves they are some kind of sensors. Just look at the angle.
X-Wing The Bacta War
Anyone believing the globes are shield generators have the deductive abilities of a rock.
I'm confused. Are you still saying that they are shield generators? Or do you now agree that they are sensors?Isil`Zha wrote: Had to throw in that insult at the end there... which is slightly reminicent of a fault by association fallacy. I've never said that it was for the entire ships shields, but mearly for the bridge. And I never said that it could be destroyed before the shield was down.
And the ISD would have an inferior shield location why?Isil`Zha wrote:And the Acclamator would have to have the same type of shield emmitor because...?
irrelevant. When the globe was destroyed does not allow us to determine what the globe does.nightmare wrote: 1) ONE of The Executor's globes was destroyed *after* it's shields was downed. It has many more than two.
irrelevant. Shields can be dropped/drained and later re-established. You can remove the shields without destroying the shield equipment. This could be one of those examples.nightmare wrote: 2) An ISD is shown in ROTJ with bridge on fire, domes ok.
secondary shield emitters, or the globes are able to project multiple independent shields from the same locationnightmare wrote: 3) ISDs doesn't have as many globes as they do number of shields. (6?)
Irrelevant. Other ships don't use the exact same shield system.nightmare wrote: 4) Other ships doesn't have such domes, but they do have shields.
Geoff Mandel has stated his 1978 Imperator class blueprints were just something he did in his spare time. They were in no way sanctioned by Lucas(/film/books/arts).nightmare wrote: 5) Geoffry Mandels blueprint
Star Wars Incredbile Cross Sections does not label the domes at all. It labels the array between the domes.nightmare wrote: 6) STAR WARS Incredible Cross Sections tells they are targeting systems.
No, the Mf clinging to the back of the tower to vanish shows that wherever the sensors are they can't see the back of the tower. The only way to conclude from this the domes are sensors is if you start off assuming the domes are sensors.nightmare wrote: 7) The MF clinging to the back of the tower to vanish proves they are some kind of sensors. Just look at the angle.
X-wing Iron Fistnightmare wrote: X-Wing The Bacta War
Or are simply willing to accept the truth without resorting to fanart, sophistry and speculationnightmare wrote: Anyone believing the globes are shield generators have the deductive abilities of a rock.
So there are sensor domes, and there are shield domes. Your quote does not say which is where or where the attacking fighters were at the time of your quote.His Divine Shadow wrote:It's not just "fanart" there is also a quote from a novel I just found:
The Bacta War:
Pg. 321 : They flitted over the massive ship's surface, shooting concussion missiles at gunnery towers and sensor domes.
Actually if overall shields were reduced to 50%, and you destroyed one of two generators afterwards (regardless whether they are in the domes or not), the final shield figure would be something like 25%. (who's saying that they destroyed the one that was fully functional and the other one was completely drained already?)Lord Edam wrote:-Note that this SSD only lost one of its domes, the other was intact. The destruction of one dome only led to 50% shield degridation shipwide above the midline. However that does not realy conflict with ROTJ. Unlike the Executor which had been under heavy bombardment and quite possibly were under 50% already (hence the loss of the dome would lead to full shield loss), the Iron fist had not realy been under very heavy attack as yet.
An observation and a statement. It was not personally addressed nor intended so, and it may be considered only an insult if you a) feel that it addresses your personal opinion, and b) fell insulted by it.Isil`Zha wrote:Had to throw in that insult at the end there... which is slightly reminicent of a fault by association fallacy. I've never said that it was for the entire ships shields, but mearly for the bridge. And I never said that it could be destroyed before the shield was down.nightmare wrote:Anyone believing the globes are shield generators have the deductive abilities of a rock.
Neither is EU.Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Game mechanics are not canon.