Keeping an ISD from going into Hyperspace.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Old EU is overridden by new EU.

[Connor MacLeod]

Old EU is overridden by new EU.

And this was stated as policy where?

[Mr Bean]

And this was stated as policy where?

Standerd Cannocial Evidance Policy unless stated other-wise with EVERYTHING

The Newest Work Overides the Oldest, Or why do you think we don't Dis-regard Special Edition Changes?

[Connor MacLeod]

And this was stated as policy where?

Standerd Cannocial Evidance Policy unless stated other-wise with EVERYTHING

EU isn't canon, its official. And its never been stated anywhere. I'm asking for a proven STATEMENT of this, which NOONE seems ever able to provide.

The Newest Work Overides the Oldest, Or why do you think we don't Dis-regard Special Edition Changes?

Or it may be Lucas changing his mind, which he is entitled to do to ANY aspect of the universe. And as I recall, the "original edition" are still considered valid sources (Mike made this point specifically to Darkstar).

The *only* stated way one thing can override another is canon (or near-canon) overriding official, or canon overriding near-canon (the scripts, novelizations tied to the movies, and radio dramas tied to the movies.)

Basically, you seem to be inferring that because Lucas can change his mind or make changes to the universe he created, this means that ANY newer work can override an older one when they are in context. Yet this does not in any way mean that this ability extends to other sources, especially with this "newer overriding older" BS.

Unless you can actually STATE where this policy is derived from (IE a quote from a confirmed LFL source or employee) you cannot override older sources with newer sources if they conflict.

[Darth Yoshi]

Official means "canon unless contradicted by [science or] a higher source."

[Connor MacLeod]

Official means "canon unless contradicted by [science or] a higher source."

The only "higher" source than official is canon (meaning both primary and secondary canon.). This does not prove that some official sources rank higher than others. It amazes me that people continue to claim this, yet when I ask for proof, they all start clamming up and hope I go away.

[SPOOFE]

Well, there's always my old "List of things that the EU tells us about the Domes". To wit:

1. The domes are shield generators.
2. Shield generators protect themselves.
3. When a generator burns out, they are replaced to get shields back.

The second two (when you take the ROTJ evidence in conjunction with point #2) have quibbles with the first.

However, there is still the unreconcileable fact that, in numerous EU sources, the domes are identified as shield generators. My last proposal was that those were odd cases in which shield generation/projection equipment was also housed in the domes, along with the communications/scanning/whatever equipment mentioned in other EU sources. Furthermore, I like Connor's idea that any shield generation/projection equipment in the domes would be secondary in nature, designed to allow the ISD to communicate and scan without having to lower shields throughout the ship.

This way we have a reasonable interpretation of all the evidence without having to exclude any material (which I hate doing). I mean, really... those ARE big domes. They can easily house shield equipment, communications equipment, scanning equipment, and still have plenty of space left over for the captain's bordello and twinkie storage.

[SPOOFE]

Then again, there's something to be said for the whole "Newer evidence overrides old evidence," even if the newer evidence is a sloppy cover-up. But that would require that we accept that Greedo shot first... and I don't think ANYBODY wants that...

::shudder::

[Vympel]

Official means "canon unless contradicted by [science or] a higher source."

The only "higher" source than official is canon (meaning both primary and secondary canon.). This does not prove that some official sources rank higher than others. It amazes me that people continue to claim this, yet when I ask for proof, they all start clamming up and hope I go away.

I believe the SW Encylopedia said something like official material related only to the films (Incredible Cross Sections and Visual Dictionary) has higher status than other materials. This is perfectly logical.

I've never heard that newer overrides older though. I criticize official sources based on whether they contradict others.

Perfect example- the X-Wing games. So inaccurate that anyone who uses them as a source is off their nut.

[Connor MacLeod]

Official means "canon unless contradicted by [science or] a higher source."

The only "higher" source than official is canon (meaning both primary and secondary canon.). This does not prove that some official sources rank higher than others. It amazes me that people continue to claim this, yet when I ask for proof, they all start clamming up and hope I go away.

I believe the SW Encylopedia said something like official material related only to the films (Incredible Cross Sections and Visual Dictionary) has higher status than other materials. This is perfectly logical.

Nope. It says only the authorized adaptations of the film (novels, radio dramas and comics) are secondary canon. None of the ICS's fall into this category. They're merely official.

I've never heard that newer overrides older though. I criticize official sources based on whether they contradict others.

Perfect example- the X-Wing games. So inaccurate that anyone who uses them as a source is off their nut.

Thank you, you just insulted me. I suppose it would be my place to go tell you to fuck yourself, wouldnt it?

I've never had a problem incorporating the games on the same footing accorded to comics, novels etc. The fact that they cannot override one another (Being equal) solves that nicely. Therefore, there must be some explanation between official sources. (for ingame speeds for example, we know canonicaly and officially they can move faster - there is no way SW ships can be arbitrarily restricted by ingame speed values.)

If you get so threatened by a source that you need to arbitrarily dismiss it (you know, like how some trekkies deny the AOTC ICS?) rather than attempting a rationalization, you should give up.

[SPOOFE]

Perfect example- the X-Wing games. So inaccurate that anyone who uses them as a source is off their nut.

Why? Some aspects of the games - such as fighter speed, power, and range - are totally off the wall, and I believe those aspects of the games are, in fact, mentioned as being inaccurate in an article at SW.com (though I won't go look.... I have five IM windows and six different IE windows open for various debates right now. I'll see if I can find it later). However, if I'm recalling correctly, the same bit also mentions how some other aspects of the games - such as storylines - are just as official as everything else.

I mean, at the very least, we should treat the games -> novels progression pretty much the same as the novels -> movies progression... as long as there's no contradiction between other materials, the evidence stands.

[Vympel]

- The scaling is wrong
- The speeds are wrong
- The facts are wrong (in X-Wing Luke Skywalker doesn't blow up the Death Star for fuck's sake!)
- The weapons are wrong (according to TIE Fighter, an ISD has two heavy turbolasers, and according to X-Wing, it has none!)

Why should I accord them any status at all? In fact, I'd be interested to know where they are accorded official status- I thought they were apocrypha. But even if they are official; I think those are pretty compelling reasons to accord them no technical standing whatsoever.

SW.com uses the events of TIE Fighter as part of the 'history' of SW. That's as much as I'm willing to give them.

[Vympel]

"According to STAR WARS Encyclopedia, movie-based secondary sources are very close to canon status." from Star Wars Technical Commentaries.

Also, they look like they are official, but judging from the REAMS of technical errors, the games are only good as history, and even then that's case by case basis (i.e. we have to reject the last mission of X-Wing).

[DodoBrd16]

Something that is suspected to be 66.8 million metric tons and at 1,992.4 meters in length, parked smack dab in front of an ISD and staying in front of it....would keep it from going into HS right?

[Connor MacLeod]

- The scaling is wrong
- The speeds are wrong
- The facts are wrong (in X-Wing Luke Skywalker doesn't blow up the Death Star for fuck's sake!)
- The weapons are wrong (according to TIE Fighter, an ISD has two heavy turbolasers, and according to X-Wing, it has none!)

Why should I accord them any status at all? In fact, I'd be interested to know where they are accorded official status- I thought they were apocrypha. But even if they are official; I think those are pretty compelling reasons to accord them no technical standing whatsoever.

SW.com uses the events of TIE Fighter as part of the 'history' of SW. That's as much as I'm willing to give them.

So basically you have no proof, and its just your own irrational refusal to accept the possibility rather than any actual objective proof. Concession accepted.

[Connor MacLeod]

"According to STAR WARS Encyclopedia, movie-based secondary sources are very close to canon status." from Star Wars Technical Commentaries.

Also, they look like they are official, but judging from the REAMS of technical errors, the games are only good as history, and even then that's case by case basis (i.e. we have to reject the last mission of X-Wing).

Again, no proof, just your insistence that they MUST be dismissed. Concession accepted.

[Vympel]

- The scaling is wrong
- The speeds are wrong
- The facts are wrong (in X-Wing Luke Skywalker doesn't blow up the Death Star for fuck's sake!)
- The weapons are wrong (according to TIE Fighter, an ISD has two heavy turbolasers, and according to X-Wing, it has none!)

Why should I accord them any status at all? In fact, I'd be interested to know where they are accorded official status- I thought they were apocrypha. But even if they are official; I think those are pretty compelling reasons to accord them no technical standing whatsoever.

SW.com uses the events of TIE Fighter as part of the 'history' of SW. That's as much as I'm willing to give them.

Ok now you've pissed me off.

I've just shown the reams of contradictions that to any rational person would prohibit them being used as any sort of technical reference.

I have no proof? Are you fucking blind?!

So basically you have no proof, and its just your own irrational refusal to accept the possibility rather than any actual objective proof. Concession accepted.

[Vympel]

Ok now you've pissed me off.

I've just shown the reams of contradictions that to any rational person would prohibit them being used as any sort of technical reference on starwars spacecraft whatsoever.

Are you fucking blind?!

[Vympel]

"Again, no proof, just your insistence that they MUST be dismissed. Concession accepted"

*throws up hands*

You idiot! How the fuck else do you rationalize your character rather than LUKE FUCKING SKYWALKER blowing up the Death Star? Of course you reject something like that!!!!

[Vympel]

And additionally, I'd like to hear your brilliant opinion on what the games ARE good for, pray tell.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

How do you rationalise newer puplications that say:

The SSD is not 8 km.
DS1 is 160 km.

Among others?

[Vympel]

Directed at me or Connor?

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Connor.

I know you (like the rest of us) rationalise it as being a case of newer sources overriding older ones.

[Vympel]

Nothing gets me so angry as a 'concession accepted' where it is unjustified.

Just to put it in front of Connor's face AGAIN

- Weapons are wrong: none of the ships armaments remotely resemble those seen on the models in the film- including of course the ISD.
- Scaling is wrong: capital ships are tiny and if a Star Destroyer is really 1,600m long in X-Wing I'd like to know how long an X-Wing is in comparison by this ridiculous scaling.
- Speeds are wrong: well der.
- Facts are wrong: last mission of X-Wing has you doing what Luke Skywalker did.
- last mission of X-Wing Alliance has ridiculous historical revisionism where Lando on the Millenium Falcon orders the fighters (!) to concentrate fire on the Executor, and the Millenium Falcon destroys the Executor, only THEN going into the Death Star- where more bullshit revisionism takes place, with the Falcon taking a detour to deactivate the superlaser.

These contradictions are what I like to call evidece of the games low to non-existent standing as a technical reference, and their case by case standing as history (obviously, the events of the last mission of X-Wing and X-Wing Alliance did not happen, and as such, are thrown out).

[Hotfoot]

- Facts are wrong: last mission of X-Wing has you doing what Luke Skywalker did.

That was the last mission of one of the campaigns. There were at least three others, IIRC.

- last mission of X-Wing Alliance has ridiculous historical revisionism where Lando on the Millenium Falcon orders the fighters (!) to concentrate fire on the Executor, and the Millenium Falcon destroys the Executor, only THEN going into the Death Star- where more bullshit revisionism takes place, with the Falcon taking a detour to deactivate the superlaser.

Also, you (Ace Azzameen) are flying the Millenium Falcon, not Lando...but still Lando speaks? What trechary is this?

I would have rather had the Falcon tunnel run be a "bonus" mission and the "ending" have been a resolution of the Azzameen family plot, FFS.