Which side are you on?

Comosicus · Post by **Comosicus** » 2004-02-12 12:43pm

phongn wrote:
GySgt. Hartman wrote:
evilcat4000 wrote:The Rebel alliance fights for good while the Empire represents the dark side. So I choose the Rebels.
Nah, good and bad are soo relative; the empire represents order, while the rebels stand for chaos and destruction, they are not obeying the laws, they have pirates and smugglers in their ranks, they are responsible for countless atrocities, among them the death of millions of imperial and civilian personnel aboard two Imperial defensive platforms.
Yes, "defensive" platforms. propaganda++

At least there were less people than on Alderaan I think.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-02-12 12:45pm

Y-wings are a bit slower than B-wings, I'll note.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-02-12 12:46pm

"Defensive platforms"? That, I must say, is one of the more interesting names I've heard assigned to the Death Stars.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-02-12 12:47pm

Comosicus wrote:
phongn wrote:
GySgt. Hartman wrote: Nah, good and bad are soo relative; the empire represents order, while the rebels stand for chaos and destruction, they are not obeying the laws, they have pirates and smugglers in their ranks, they are responsible for countless atrocities, among them the death of millions of imperial and civilian personnel aboard two Imperial defensive platforms.
Yes, "defensive" platforms. propaganda++
At least there were less people than on Alderaan I think.

Less people on a developed planet than on two battlestations? Are you nuts?

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2004-02-12 12:53pm

What kind of nutjob thinks the Death Stars were "defensive" platforms?

Does he have a carrear as an Imperial propaganda agent?

"There are no superlasers, the superlasers are commiting suicide at the gates of the DS1"

nightmare · Post by **nightmare** » 2004-02-12 02:20pm

Empire. The ugliness that are Mon Cal cruisers coupled with whiny Luke and the pro-rebel litterature that invaribly makes me anti tops it off for me. In pure coolness factor, the Empire scores more points. Or as Vader would put it, "Do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side".

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-02-12 02:24pm

nightmare wrote:Empire. The ugliness that are Mon Cal cruisers coupled with whiny Luke and the pro-rebel litterature that invaribly makes me anti tops it off for me. In pure coolness factor, the Empire scores more points. Or as Vader would put it, "Do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side".

The Empire lost. Get over it.

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2004-02-12 02:26pm

Rogue 9 wrote:
nightmare wrote:Empire. The ugliness that are Mon Cal cruisers coupled with whiny Luke and the pro-rebel litterature that invaribly makes me anti tops it off for me. In pure coolness factor, the Empire scores more points. Or as Vader would put it, "Do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side".
The Empire lost. Get over it.

They only lost because of the unbelivable character shields.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-02-12 02:28pm

Tribun wrote:
Rogue 9 wrote:
nightmare wrote:Empire. The ugliness that are Mon Cal cruisers coupled with whiny Luke and the pro-rebel litterature that invaribly makes me anti tops it off for me. In pure coolness factor, the Empire scores more points. Or as Vader would put it, "Do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side".
The Empire lost. Get over it.
They only lost because of the unbelivable character shields.

Correction: Its ungodly high grossings shields, as established when Vader overcame Riker's character shield in some fanfic or something I read once. Said that Ungodly High Grossings Shields trump Main Character Shields.

GySgt. Hartman · Post by **GySgt. Hartman** » 2004-02-12 03:35pm

Darksider wrote:What kind of nutjob thinks the Death Stars were "defensive" platforms?

That'd be me.

Does he have a carrear as an Imperial propaganda agent?

We at the Imperial Ministry of Truth are commited to bringing you all the objective news to enable you as an Imperial citizen to make informed decisions to support Imperial efforts of crushing the terrorists that are currently trying to disrupt peace in the outlying parts of our galaxy. If you have any doubts about the veracity of our reports, please report to the nearest execution chamber.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-02-12 03:50pm

GySgt. Hartman wrote:
Darksider wrote:What kind of nutjob thinks the Death Stars were "defensive" platforms?
That'd be me.

Yes, and the B-29 is a "defensive" aircraft :p

consequences · Post by **consequences** » 2004-02-12 03:54pm

Joe wrote:
Comosicus wrote:
phongn wrote: Yes, "defensive" platforms. propaganda++
At least there were less people than on Alderaan I think.
Less people on a developed planet than on two battlestations? Are you nuts?

Look at Saxton's site, a crew of billions would not be out of line for something of the Death Star's volume. In fact, its a minimum requirement to explain the densities of crew encountered. Going by WEG and all of the supporting crap, you should only encounter a crew member every 100 klicks or so of corridor.

The Empire has serious problems. It needs some serious revamping. But so does your precious Rebel Alliance.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-02-12 03:59pm

consequences wrote:Look at Saxton's site, a crew of billions would not be out of line for something of the Death Star's volume. In fact, its a minimum requirement to explain the densities of crew encountered. Going by WEG and all of the supporting crap, you should only encounter a crew member every 100 klicks or so of corridor.

Well, it depends on what you want to do with the Death Star. I know about WEG's scaling errors (120 vs. 160 kilometres for the DS1) but does it actually need a crew of billions?

The Empire has serious problems. It needs some serious revamping. But so does your precious Rebel Alliance.

I don't think anyone here has argued otherwise.

Ronaldo · Post by **Ronaldo** » 2004-02-12 04:09pm

consequences wrote:
Joe wrote:
Comosicus wrote: At least there were less people than on Alderaan I think.
Less people on a developed planet than on two battlestations? Are you nuts?
Look at Saxton's site, a crew of billions would not be out of line for something of the Death Star's volume. In fact, its a minimum requirement to explain the densities of crew encountered. Going by WEG and all of the supporting crap, you should only encounter a crew member every 100 klicks or so of corridor.

The Empire has serious problems. It needs some serious revamping. But so does your precious Rebel Alliance.

The portions of the Death Star that we saw probably had a higher crew density than the rest of the Death Star. It seemed as if there was a lot of empty space (i.e. the giant hole in the DSI) that did not contain crew.

GySgt. Hartman · Post by **GySgt. Hartman** » 2004-02-12 04:19pm

How about quoting selectively?
Hitting "quote" and typing your reply beneath it tends to make posts ugly, like yours. And it's considered bad form, at least by me.

Hole? I didn't see a hole in the DS I.

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2004-02-12 04:29pm

Hole?
Look at this:

And by the way:
The Executor needed 250.000 Crew. Why the hell do you think then that a 160 km sphererical battlestation won't need a heck of crew?

Comosicus · Post by **Comosicus** » 2004-02-12 04:31pm

Joe wrote:
Comosicus wrote: At least there were less people than on Alderaan I think.
Less people on a developed planet than on two battlestations? Are you nuts?

I meant there were less people on the DS than on Alderaan. There's a big THAN not a THERE

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2004-02-12 04:38pm

[quote="GySgt. Hartman]
We at the Imperial Ministry of Truth are commited to bringing you all the objective news to enable you as an Imperial citizen to make informed decisions to support Imperial efforts of crushing the terrorists that are currently trying to disrupt peace in the outlying parts of our galaxy. If you have any doubts about the veracity of our reports, please report to the nearest execution chamber.[/quote]

Suck blaster Imperial scum!

::::Opens up with an E-11 on autofire, slaughtering dozens of stormtroopers and frying Hartman::::

Ronaldo · Post by **Ronaldo** » 2004-02-12 04:42pm

GySgt. Hartman wrote:How about quoting selectively?
Hitting "quote" and typing your reply beneath it tends to make posts ugly, like yours. And it's considered bad form, at least by me.

Hole? I didn't see a hole in the DS I.

I was referring to the large shaft that Luke and Princess Leia had to swing over. Obviously you wouldn't find a lot of crewmembers in places like that. I'm sorry if my post offended you. I would probably feel the same way if I saw your face. In the future I'll quote selectively.

As far as the crew of the DSI is concerned. It probably had a huge crew, but I'm pretty sure that Alderaan's population was higher than the crew of the Death Star.

GySgt. Hartman · Post by **GySgt. Hartman** » 2004-02-12 04:45pm

phongn wrote:I know about WEG's scaling errors (120 vs. 160 kilometres for the DS1) but does it actually need a crew of billions?

There would be billions of people in the station, but most of them would be "crew" only in the broadest definition of the word. The DS is dotted woth Gun turrets that need to be crewed, it will have a huge security detail, stormies, tech crew, hangar crew, medical staff, support. They need to cook for billions, wash their clothes, cut their hair, etc. - all the not-so-heroic stuff that isn't usually depicted, but needs to be there anyway. The DS I is a city that covers ~80.000 km^2.

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2004-02-12 04:47pm

GySgt. Hartman wrote:
phongn wrote:I know about WEG's scaling errors (120 vs. 160 kilometres for the DS1) but does it actually need a crew of billions?
There would be billions of people in the station, but most of them would be "crew" only in the broadest definition of the word. The DS is dotted woth Gun turrets that need to be crewed, it will have a huge security detail, stormies, tech crew, hangar crew, medical staff, support. They need to cook for billions, wash their clothes, cut their hair, etc. - all the not-so-heroic stuff that isn't usually depicted, but needs to be there anyway. The DS I is a city that covers ~80.000 km^2.

And that is only the surface!
My picture above clearly shows, that the interitor of the Death Star is similar to the inside of a starship. The number of crew members must be immense.

consequences · Post by **consequences** » 2004-02-12 04:49pm

The people who put out the 250000 crew for the Executor also think it was only 8 km long, and had no idea of how to do actual volume calculations as opposed to simple length. The Death Star certainly doesn't need billions of crew, but it seems to be Imperial policy to overman, and avoid relying on excessive droid usage wherever possible. You would certainly need billions of ground troops to effectively take an important planet you didn't want destryed, where populations could easily range into the tens and hundreds of trillions. If the DS had a crew of 100 billion, this would still be less than a sixtieth of a percent of the population of Coruscant alone. In fact, they could have spectacularly overcrewed it simply to have a place to put the ridiculous number of troops that the Empire could raise with any sort of half decent propaganda campaign.

nightmare · Post by **nightmare** » 2004-02-12 04:58pm

Rogue 9 wrote:The Empire lost. Get over it.

Yeah, and the rebels won glorious freedom for the galaxy to be annihilated by ugly alien invaders in an orgy of stupidity. Sure you want to call that better?

GySgt. Hartman · Post by **GySgt. Hartman** » 2004-02-12 05:07pm

According to the US Navy, a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier the length of ~330m needs a crew of 3,200, not including an air crew of 2,480. Just scaling that number up to a length of 17.6 km gives us a crew of ~169,000.
Scaling it up to the volume of an Executor would certainly give us a crew of a few million; that the actual number is a lot lower can be accounted to automatization and droids.

Scaling the crew up areawise from 13,594 m^2 to ~80,000 km^2 gives a crew number of ~19 billion for a death star. That shows that a few billions is not an overstatement. So, if you believe that "[t]he Death Star certainly doesn't need billions of crew", please show us why.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-02-12 06:17pm

GySgt. Hartman wrote:Scaling it up to the volume of an Executor would certainly give us a crew of a few million; that the actual number is a lot lower can be accounted to automatization and droids.

There is no particular reason why crew requirements must scale up in such a manner. Certainly, HIMS Executor will have a rather large crew, but does it need to be in the millions?

Should we assume that an ISD has a crew in the hundreds of thousands because the Dreadnought-class patrol cruiser has a crew of 16000? Certainly not, and there's no reason to believe that HIMS Executor must have millions of crew simply because an ISD has a crew of 32K or so.

Scaling the crew up areawise from 13,594 m^2 to ~80,000 km^2 gives a crew number of ~19 billion for a death star. That shows that a few billions is not an overstatement. So, if you believe that "[t]he Death Star certainly doesn't need billions of crew", please show us why.

Why don't you show us that the Death Star must need billions of crewers to operate? Why don't you show us that crew requirements scale up in such a manner as you postulate?