StarDestroyer.Net BBS

So, I'm watching some Star Wars and I was reading the opening crawl...
So as we all know and agree on, the movies trump everything else.
Based on that, what EU nonsense becomes invalidated if we take that line literally, as we should.

The first one that comes to mind is the whole "steal all the X-wings" story from some silly space fighter pew pew book I read way back when. IIRC they stole them from the Empire before they were delivered or some such. That would be a victory for sure, but as we know... that couldn't be possible.

Any others?

And yes, I hate the EU, especially the stuff set during and after the movies. Don't like it? Go start a "Validate the EU" thread.

About half of the X-wing PC game took place before ANH, so that's out, since the whole point of the game is X-wings blowing up TIE fighters.

Did the X-wing theft specifically come about as a result of a military victory? I thought it was just a case of the technicians ran off with the plans before the Empire could seize them, which is hardly what one normally calls a victory. Certainly not anything like what's implied by the owning crawl. Otherwise what, do we interpret that the rebels had a fleet without any non violent resistance what so ever before hand? Not even propaganda spray painted on the walls?

According to the EU, the theft of the X-Wing prototypes happened during the Battle of Fresia. Earlier than that was the First Battle of Kuat and after that the Battle of Turkana. All three are considered Alliance victories. So yeah, not quite in tune with the opening crawl.

Havok wrote:Sif we take that line literally

Which we shouldn't. What would constitute a "victory"? Would a bunch of Rebel guerillas ambushing and killing a dozen stormtroopers on a random moon count? Had the Alliance totally failed to ever win any victories against the "evil Galactic Empire" (a phrase that indicates subjectivity)?

Is a quarter of the entire EU, including KotOR and TOR, bunk because the sith have only existed "for a thousand years"? This isn't true, not only because Obi Wan contradicts the 1000 year old Jedi Order sentiment in ANH, but also because there are various rationalizations to this discrepency, such as the difference between the Bane line of Sith and the ancient Sith, and the Ruusan reformations.

And since the Galactic Empire is "evil", and must be taken literally, every single member of the Empire is an evil bastard. This means that all imperial apologists on this board (and there are plenty) are just so wrong because the opening Text in Space says so.

I'd imagine that "victory" here means "major victory".

That's missing the point of this thread. Hav is basically doing this to see how much he can throw out and get away with. So, if it comes down to it, then for the purposes of this thread, yes a quarter of the EU is bunk.

"When gone I am. The Last of the jedi you will be."

Bye-bye anything with jedi survivors in.

Okay, so how about going in a different tack: which victory from the EU would still be counted under this?

Presumably it would be the Death Star plans getting stolen, I guess. But which version of them getting stolen? IIRC at least two end up with them going to Princess Leia as per the movie, so you'd still have to choose something.

To be technically anal, the ANH opening crawl does not actually state that the Rebel Alliance itself scored its first victory. Rather, that a bunch of spaceships from a hidden fortress won their first victory. There is still room for other Rebels not based on Yavin IV to be out and about kicking Imperial ass...

Crazedwraith wrote:"When gone I am. The Last of the jedi you will be."

Bye-bye anything with jedi survivors in.

So Yoda was omniscient and knew about the precise locations of every possible surviving Jedi?

Crazedwraith wrote:"When gone I am. The Last of the jedi you will be."

Bye-bye anything with jedi survivors in.

Even I'm not this die hard... It's a BIIIIIG fucking galaxy. I'm OK with Jedi coming out of the woodwork after ROTJ, especially as they state in the movies that they alter the signal from the Jedi Temple to warn survivors to stay away well after Order 66, insinuating that even Yoda isn't sure if some Jedi survived.

My problem is with them being around any other time and being ACTIVE.

Luke Skywalker wrote:

Havok wrote:Sif we take that line literally

Which we shouldn't. What would constitute a "victory"? Would a bunch of Rebel guerillas ambushing and killing a dozen stormtroopers on a random moon count? Had the Alliance totally failed to ever win any victories against the "evil Galactic Empire" (a phrase that indicates subjectivity)?

A "victory" in this context would be for the Rebellion that can actually do harm to the Empire, which is the context the opening crawl and the movie, operates under.

Rebelling and winning are two different things. Your example of guerrillas would just be the course of Rebellion, but it is hardly a "victory" for the Rebel Alliance.

Is a quarter of the entire EU, including KotOR and TOR, bunk because the sith have only existed "for a thousand years"? This isn't true, not only because Obi Wan contradicts the 1000 year old Jedi Order sentiment in ANH, but also because there are various rationalizations to this discrepency, such as the difference between the Bane line of Sith and the ancient Sith, and the Ruusan reformations.

There is no movie information given to how long the Sith have existed. They say how long the have been thought to be extinct. Palpatine insinuates that they once "ruled the galaxy" and Mace states that the "oppression of the Sith" will never return.
That said I love when people justify EU crap with other EU crap.

And since the Galactic Empire is "evil", and must be taken literally, every single member of the Empire is an evil bastard. This means that all imperial apologists on this board (and there are plenty) are just so wrong because the opening Text in Space says so.

Yup. People held ALL Nazi's responsible for the crimes of the organization, even if they were all punished according to their own personal involvements or given passes based on what they could provide the victors of the war. They were all still considered guilty and evil despite that guilt and evil being ignored. However, the "People" on this board are wrong because they are fucking retards and need to have something explained to them that was literally spelled out for them and they still don't get it.

I'd imagine that "victory" here means "major victory".

Imagine away. I mean you can say some guy beating up a Stormtrooper trying to get away is a "victory" for the Rebel Alliance and that is fine, however it explicitly says "first victory" and it is clear that the crawl and movie is talking about the Rebel Alliance as a whole. Sorry.

Luke Skywalker wrote:

Havok wrote:Sif we take that line literally

Which we shouldn't. What would constitute a "victory"? Would a bunch of Rebel guerillas ambushing and killing a dozen stormtroopers on a random moon count? Had the Alliance totally failed to ever win any victories against the "evil Galactic Empire" (a phrase that indicates subjectivity)?

Did you watch the movie? Here's the money quote:

Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire.

This is the base that Tarkin and Vader are hell bent to find -so much so that they abduct a Senator, torture her and finally commit mass murder against her home planet to get her to talk. We see this base near the end of the movie. Remember what was at the hidden base? A bunch of long-range fighters and maybe some high-ranking Rebel officers. That's it! The big ace up the Rebellion's sleeve is a few dozen long-range fighters.

Even after the Death Star is blown to bits, the Empire is still trying to track down this base in The Empire Strikes Back. What do we see at the newly transplanted base? A bunch of long-range fighters. OK, there's a younger general, some speeders, some transports and some tauntauns -but the base is still a base for fighters.

So what can we deduce from this information? Well, apparently these long-range fighters are a real advantage for the Rebels. Why? Because they allow the Rebels to strike targets a long distance from where they are hidden. This ability must have been a major factor in whatever battle was won before the opening credits rolled, since the Empire seems more concerned with these fighters than any warships the Rebels might be using.

My guess is that the Rebels used their fighters the same way they did in ROTJ: They jumped with the larger craft and came out of hyperspace ready to fight. This would have been an advantage if, in the pre-crawl battle, the Empire didn't have their short-range fighters and interceptors ready to ambush them as they did at Endor. The fighters would then be able to carry out pinpoint attacks on larger enemy ships and screen TIE fighters and bombers from doing likewise.

I'd imagine that "victory" here means "major victory".

Or at least an important one or a noteworthy one. Size isn't necessarily an issue. Imagine a single ISD being defeated by a 'small band of Rebels".

The Rebellion in the EU came across the X-wing by the Rebellion smuggling out the senior design staff and the prototypes (the wiki says four, I've never heard of an exact number) and all the plans from under the Empire's nose. Basically Imperial Intel agencies suspected Incom's designers were disloyal and they fled before the Empire could take/execute them and/or the company could be Nationalized. This has been as far back as WEG goes. How this gets translated into 'steal all the X-wings' I have no fucking clue.

Now if you were going to complain about something, complain about the fact they apparently that all of the above happened precisely a year before yavin. I'm pretty sure the novels and radio drama have portrayed the fighters at Yavin as being far older than that.

Hell they look older then that, there pretty grubby.

Elfdart wrote: Did you watch the movie? Here's the money quote:

Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire.

This is the base that Tarkin and Vader are hell bent to find -so much so that they abduct a Senator, torture her and finally commit mass murder against her home planet to get her to talk.

Nitpick: Tarkin targeted Alderaan even after Leia (supposedly) revealed the location of the base because he was a self obsessed sociopath who wanted to "demonstrate" the Death Star's firepower. Threatening to fire on Alderaan was the pragmatic action, actually destroying it was just retardation.

We see this base near the end of the movie. Remember what was at the hidden base? A bunch of long-range fighters and maybe some high-ranking Rebel officers. That's it! The big ace up the Rebellion's sleeve is a few dozen long-range fighters.

Wait...we see a single pyramid shaped building with a bunch of fighters and personnel, and you presume that this is the entire garrison on the planet?

Even after the Death Star is blown to bits, the Empire is still trying to track down this base in The Empire Strikes Back. What do we see at the newly transplanted base? A bunch of long-range fighters. OK, there's a younger general, some speeders, some transports and some tauntauns -but the base is still a base for fighters.

So what can we deduce from this information? Well, apparently these long-range fighters are a real advantage for the Rebels. Why? Because they allow the Rebels to strike targets a long distance from where they are hidden. This ability must have been a major factor in whatever battle was won before the opening credits rolled, since the Empire seems more concerned with these fighters than any warships the Rebels might be using.

My guess is that the Rebels used their fighters the same way they did in ROTJ: They jumped with the larger craft and came out of hyperspace ready to fight. This would have been an advantage if, in the pre-crawl battle, the Empire didn't have their short-range fighters and interceptors ready to ambush them as they did at Endor. The fighters would then be able to carry out pinpoint attacks on larger enemy ships and screen TIE fighters and bombers from doing likewise.

Well, yeah. Is this relevant to the topic? If we're going on a tangent here, I'd question the necessity of using a planet as a staging ground for long range fighters, rather than, say, a spaceport. It would be more mobile, and far more difficult to track.

Or at least an important one or a noteworthy one. Size isn't necessarily an issue. Imagine a single ISD being defeated by a 'small band of Rebels".

Huh. Defeating a single destroying doesn't seem that important or noteworthy to me, albeit perhaps impressive. But stealing the plans to the Death Star; unlike successful guerrilla attacks, that would actually be relevant on a grand, strategic scheme.

[quote="Luke Skywalker"]Huh. Defeating a single destroying doesn't seem that important or noteworthy to me, albeit perhaps impressive. But stealing the plans to the Death Star; unlike successful guerrilla attacks, that would actually be relevant on a grand, strategic scheme.[/i]

In military terms it might not be significant to destroy an ISD. But it ma ypsychologically be far more effective. These ISD's are the ubiquitous symbol of the Empire that are capable of subduing whole worlds on their own. Now ify ou take that symbol and reveal to the whole galaxy that you can shatter it using a bunch of fighters, well, that Empire doesn't look so impossible to overthrow anymore.

Eternal_Freedom wrote:
In military terms it might not be significant to destroy an ISD. But it ma ypsychologically be far more effective. These ISD's are the ubiquitous symbol of the Empire that are capable of subduing whole worlds on their own. Now ify ou take that symbol and reveal to the whole galaxy that you can shatter it using a bunch of fighters, well, that Empire doesn't look so impossible to overthrow anymore.

Well then, you can assume that the "victory" that the Rebel Alliance scored for the first time in ANH, was a major victory from a strategic and military standpoint. It's certainly a better rationalization than throwing out many of the numerous novels and comics in between RotS and ANH.

...well, then again, I'd imagine that acquiring X wings would constitute as a major victory. So that wouldn't work.

Aaron MkII wrote:Hell they look older then that, there pretty grubby.

Funny enough it turns out it comes from 'Star Wars: Empire at War' - or at least thats the source cited for this kinda stuff.

So if you want to rant about something, blame about the video games. It's what gave us the canon contributions of 'The Force Unleashed' as well, after all.

On a slightly related note, I just noticed some contradictions in Yoda's teachings in ESB.

Yoda blames Anakin for never thinking about the present, and always being preoccupied with the future. Yet in the Prequels, it is heavily implied that Qui Gon was the "live for the present" preacher, while Yoda would always meditate on the future.

Also, Yoda tells Luke that he will only become a Jedi when he defeats Vader, but also says that, when he dies, the last of the Jedi, Luke will be. Luke is not a Jedi yet...

Was Yoda getting amnesia?

Luke Skywalker wrote:On a slightly related note, I just noticed some contradictions in Yoda's teachings in ESB.

Yoda blames Anakin for never thinking about the present, and always being preoccupied with the future. Yet in the Prequels, it is heavily implied that Qui Gon was the "live for the present" preacher, while Yoda would always meditate on the future.

Also, Yoda tells Luke that he will only become a Jedi when he defeats Vader, but also says that, when he dies, the last of the Jedi, Luke will be. Luke is not a Jedi yet...

Was Yoda getting amnesia?

As for the live for the present element, in ROTS Yoda realized that Qui-Gon was correct in many of his ideas about the proper path of the Jedi. After failing to defeat Palpatine, Yoda began learning new elements of the Force from Qui-Gon. Once this occurred, it would make sense that Yoda had learned some of those lessons better than he did before. Seeing the failing of your Order would lead most people to change their worldview slightly.

Regarding the last bit, I would think that Yoda was referring to his position as a full Jedi Knight more than as a Jedi in general.

As for invalidating the EU, I think that what is worse than the actual contradictions in terms of events is the thematic contradictions, those that attempt to change your perspective on the movies. One of the worst examples of this is the novel Death Star. In this story, the main gunner developed PTSD after firing the shot that destroyed Alderaan. As a result of this, he then hesitated when firing on Yavin, hoping that he wouldn't have to fire, which of course he didn't as Luke successfully blew up the Death Star. The problem with this concept is that it means that Luke was only successful because a random new character is somehow important. The additional problem with this is that it is lazy writing as well, the author wanted you to care about these characters so he put them in a position where they would influence major events.

Another example of this element is the entire concept of the New Jedi Order series. My problem with this series is that is causes the Rebels to largely have made things worse for the galaxy overall than if the Empire had stayed in power due to the fact that the Imperial military buildup would have led to defeating the Yuzhan Vong more easily. It seems that this has been retroactively given as Thrawn's motive as well. While there is nothing in the movies that directly contradicts these ideas, from a thematic perspective they are much more irritating than some of the more minor contradictions.

As for more direct contradictions, this entire current Clone Wars series is invalid due to the presence of Ashoka of Anakin's Padawan. In ROTS, Anakin was deeply upset about being put on the concil and not made a master but in this series he is made one by being given a Padawan. Also, the Jedi Concil didn't trust him at all, why would they suddenly give him a Padawan?

Adamskywalker007 wrote: As for the live for the present element, in ROTS Yoda realized that Qui-Gon was correct in many of his ideas about the proper path of the Jedi. After failing to defeat Palpatine, Yoda began learning new elements of the Force from Qui-Gon. Once this occurred, it would make sense that Yoda had learned some of those lessons better than he did before. Seeing the failing of your Order would lead most people to change their worldview slightly.

Ah, so Yoda realized his own mistake, and then turned around to drill Anakin for following his own [Yoda's] flawed teachings! Sly bastard.

Adamskywalker007 wrote:As for invalidating the EU, I think that what is worse than the actual contradictions in terms of events is the thematic contradictions, those that attempt to change your perspective on the movies.

Given that this is a board dedicated to analyze the combative implications of the number of pixels on a turbolaser, this is blasphemy!

One of the worst examples of this is the novel Death Star. In this story, the main gunner developed PTSD after firing the shot that destroyed Alderaan. As a result of this, he then hesitated when firing on Yavin, hoping that he wouldn't have to fire, which of course he didn't as Luke successfully blew up the Death Star. The problem with this concept is that it means that Luke was only successful because a random new character is somehow important. The additional problem with this is that it is lazy writing as well, the author wanted you to care about these characters so he put them in a position where they would influence major events.

I'm not so sure about this. What is wrong with having characters other than the protagonists actually matter?

Another example of this element is the entire concept of the New Jedi Order series. My problem with this series is that is causes the Rebels to largely have made things worse for the galaxy overall than if the Empire had stayed in power due to the fact that the Imperial military buildup would have led to defeating the Yuzhan Vong more easily. It seems that this has been retroactively given as Thrawn's motive as well. While there is nothing in the movies that directly contradicts these ideas, from a thematic perspective they are much more irritating than some of the more minor contradictions.

Actually, I would argue to the contrary. Yes, the Empire would have defeated the Vong invasion with ease (however, the Vong were aware of this; meaning that they may have waited for the Empire to grow weak), but then the galaxy would still be enslaved by a crazy old man. In the long run, the collapse of the Galactic Empire still benefited the galaxy in terms of net happiness and net suffering.

Oh...and without Luke and the Jedi, Abeloth would have easily conquered the galaxy. Just saying.

As for more direct contradictions, this entire current Clone Wars series is invalid due to the presence of Ashoka of Anakin's Padawan. In ROTS, Anakin was deeply upset about being put on the concil and not made a master but in this series he is made one by being given a Padawan. Also, the Jedi Concil didn't trust him at all, why would they suddenly give him a Padawan?

What? Since when does the act of having a padawan make you a master? Obi Wan was not a master in AotC.

Umm. Yes, he is.

first off this is the 'Invalidate some EU' thread, not 'invalidate some canon' thread.

Secondly if you're going to 'invalidate' anything, there's the issue that every single book in Star Wars has to involve some galaxy spanning threat or crisis that will topple, destroy, or otherwise plunge the galaxy or its government(s) into chaos cropping up every few months or few years. If there was one annoying thing about much of the EU from that period it was how each novel was some major catastrophe that had to be averted, which ends up making the New Republic look like it was run by the Three Stooges.