two years ago they were about 500 megatons, last I heard they were up to 200 gigatons,
it seems to fluctuate, anyone got concrete, or close to concrete, or just more than a pile of shit numbers that I can use ?

Moderator: Vympel
Slave-1's seismic charges are in the gigaton range (watch the AOTC asteroid sequence or read the SW2ICS), and Slave-1 would have no chance against an ISD. Do you seriously think that an ISD's weapons are less powerful than the ordnance of a one-man patrol ship?Omega-13 wrote:With all the new books out for starwars has anyone come up with figures yet for turbo lasers?
two years ago they were about 500 megatons, last I heard they were up to 200 gigatons,
it seems to fluctuate, anyone got concrete, or close to concrete, or just more than a pile of shit numbers that I can use ?
Didn't suggest that, just curious on numbers, now i have another question,Darth Wong wrote:Slave-1's seismic charges are in the gigaton range (watch the AOTC asteroid sequence or read the SW2ICS), and Slave-1 would have no chance against an ISD. Do you seriously think that an ISD's weapons are less powerful than the ordnance of a one-man patrol ship?Omega-13 wrote:With all the new books out for starwars has anyone come up with figures yet for turbo lasers?
two years ago they were about 500 megatons, last I heard they were up to 200 gigatons,
it seems to fluctuate, anyone got concrete, or close to concrete, or just more than a pile of shit numbers that I can use ?
They were either fired uppon by heavy anti starfighter lasers or Light Turbolasers which as I mentioned are likely in the low to high megaton range. Remember that the Tie Fighters never once threatened to bring down the shields of the Millenium Falcon but the Stardestroyer managed to completely drop their rear sheilds in a short amount of time. This clearly shows their is a marked difference in firepower between fighter weapons and the ones used on the Stardestroyer.Didn't suggest that, just curious on numbers, now i have another question,
was the MF hit by anti starfighter weapons when they were running from Hoth? or LTL's? or
its hard to tell
My books and scanner are in Chicago, I'm in Norfolk.McC wrote:Can you post that picture, Ender? I'm curious to see it.
Interestingly enough in "Survivors Quest" it was noted that Dreadnaughts have point defense guns (even anti-meteor laser cannons as well as ion cannons).Ender wrote:My books and scanner are in Chicago, I'm in Norfolk.McC wrote:Can you post that picture, Ender? I'm curious to see it.
Just go to Barne's and Noble and flip through it. It's a shot of the battle of Nar Shadda, and it shows that a single jagnormous turbolaser occupies a single blister, and that the blister covers are retractable as a result. It's a cool shot, explains how we don't see as many guns on the ISD as we should (they are covered by retractable openings), shows that the artist was going for the movie design ethos instead of RPG shit, and illustrates how Dreadnaughts could still be considered a threat in the time of Thrawn - concentration of guns that cover most angles with massive weapons. Gives it great punch.
Yep, and recent publications about ISDs list them as having 40 PD batteries (for a total of 200 point defense guns as Starships of the Galaxy said a battery is 5 guns). Apparently the ICS is having an impact on the very stuff it was correcting.Connor MacLeod wrote:Interestingly enough in "Survivors Quest" it was noted that Dreadnaughts have point defense guns (even anti-meteor laser cannons as well as ion cannons).Ender wrote:My books and scanner are in Chicago, I'm in Norfolk.McC wrote:Can you post that picture, Ender? I'm curious to see it.
Just go to Barne's and Noble and flip through it. It's a shot of the battle of Nar Shadda, and it shows that a single jagnormous turbolaser occupies a single blister, and that the blister covers are retractable as a result. It's a cool shot, explains how we don't see as many guns on the ISD as we should (they are covered by retractable openings), shows that the artist was going for the movie design ethos instead of RPG shit, and illustrates how Dreadnaughts could still be considered a threat in the time of Thrawn - concentration of guns that cover most angles with massive weapons. Gives it great punch.
The retractable bit is the rationalizatrion for that. We know out of universe they didn't put that many guns on it. We know in universe it has a huge number of guns. Rationalization I've seen tossed out is the possibility that they are retractable. That picture would support that idea.On the other hand, I'm not sure I recall ISD's having 'retractable turrets" and in some cases it would be hard to argue such. (for the most part they seem to be either internal or simply too small to see against the larger backdrop. In the "out of movie' context, they simply never put many actual guns ON the ship. Anyone who has seen the model can tell this.)
Actually, ISDs had poitn defense guns as of the second edition SWRPG (which came out when episode 2 did). As for the "5 gun battery" bit, I should point out that it was treating each separate gun as a battery (so it had 60 guns according to WOTC, linked into 12 5-gun batteries.) WEG treated them the opposite: 60 five-gun batteries composed of two dual turrets and one single. (same with ion cannons.)Ender wrote: Yep, and recent publications about ISDs list them as having 40 PD batteries (for a total of 200 point defense guns as Starships of the Galaxy said a battery is 5 guns). Apparently the ICS is having an impact on the very stuff it was correcting.
I dont quite see how its usually a problem, since we rarely see Star Destrroyers close up enough to notice any sort of apparent guns in the movie.The retractable bit is the rationalizatrion for that. We know out of universe they didn't put that many guns on it. We know in universe it has a huge number of guns. Rationalization I've seen tossed out is the possibility that they are retractable. That picture would support that idea.