Page 1 of 1
Saxton vs SW.com
Posted: 2006-01-16 05:16pm
by Lazarus
Concerning sizes, capabilities etc I tend to go with Curtis Saxton's ideas, his arguments are usually logically presented, and well backed up.
However, there is one figure which I am having trouble with on another forum. This is the 900km diameter width for the DS2, and the corresponding billions of crewmen figure. The quote which Saxton bases his case on states that the DS2 'will be more like 500 miles in diameter'. Saxton then logically assumes that this must correspond with an increase in crew, and I would agree.
However, my opponent claims that starwars.com still has the 160km figure, and a much smaller crew complement, which is clearly illogical. The problem is that he claims that sw.com overrides pretty much all else, including the cinefex quote, and as Saxton simply logically 'assumes' there is a crew increase, the most I seem to be able to propose is the 900km width figure, as Saxton states no evidence for a crew increase?
My question is that is there any evidence for the crew increase, and does sw.com in fact overrule everything ever except the great man himself? I have never liked sw.com and their rpg based ideas like super-class star destroyer etc, please someone prove this guy wrong!
Re: Saxton vs SW.com
Posted: 2006-01-16 05:23pm
by NecronLord
Lazarus wrote:does sw.com in fact overrule everything ever except the great man himself?
The 900Km, as I recall, is derived from scaling of the film. The only way Lucas could over-ride this would be to reissue the film (again) with a smaller Death Star in it, or claim it was a special effects mistake.
Re: Saxton vs SW.com
Posted: 2006-01-16 05:47pm
by Vympel
Lazarus wrote:
However, my opponent claims that starwars.com still has the 160km figure, and a much smaller crew complement, which is clearly illogical. The problem is that he claims that sw.com overrides pretty much all else, including the cinefex quote, and as Saxton simply logically 'assumes' there is a crew increase, the most I seem to be able to propose is the 900km width figure, as Saxton states no evidence for a crew increase?
My question is that is there any evidence for the crew increase, and does sw.com in fact overrule everything ever except the great man himself? I have never liked sw.com and their rpg based ideas like super-class star destroyer etc, please someone prove this guy wrong!
I notice in your post that you don't seem to be aware of the Inside the Worlds of the Original Trilogy book. Asides from observation from the film and the Cinefex quote, it is an official source which also says the DS is 900km. It is the same source that prompted the Executor-size change to the correct figure on the databank. The guy's a moron- to accept the size increase but assume the crew stays the same is moronic- not to mention that even assuming a 160km size, the crew number has always been ridiculously bare.
Posted: 2006-01-16 06:22pm
by Kurgan
So sw.com is canon unless contradicted elsewhere? Or is it little better than a moderated wikipedia in terms of reliability?
Posted: 2006-01-16 06:35pm
by Noble Ire
Kurgan wrote:So sw.com is canon unless contradicted elsewhere? Or is it little better than a moderated wikipedia in terms of reliability?
I don't recall any mention of the databank's canonicty, but since it is run by employees of the company, and not fans, I would suspect it has some status at least.
Posted: 2006-01-16 06:48pm
by Kurgan
Okay, 'cause on my forum I constantly run into this in any discussion, "the databank said it, I believe it, that settles it."
My main beef is that it's updated whenever they feel like it, yet sources are coming out all the time changing things or adding to them, and mistakes on it often take a long time to be corrected (if ever).
Also it has the style of leaving things incomplete to avoid "spoilers" of stories, and often in a silly fashion. For instance they forever tried to seperate Palpatine and Sideous (as did many other EU sources created from 1999 to right up to the release of ROTS).
Posted: 2006-01-16 06:55pm
by The Original Nex
The Databank falls into the same canon hierarchy as the rest of the Star Wars Continuity. The stuff under the "Films" tab is generally "Gospel Canon", and derived directly from the films and what is seen done in the films by this character/object. The "Expanded Universe" tab will have no more sway than the rest of EU, that is to say, it is canon unless contradicted by the "Gospel Canon." The "Stats" bar is generally EU derived, and therefore holds the same weight as other EU sources. The fact that it still claims the DSII to be 160km is simply a repeat of the WEG error, which has yet to be corrected.
Just because something is said in the Databank doesn't make Gospel.
Posted: 2006-01-16 07:56pm
by Darth Wong
DS1's diameter was officially corrected to 160km a long time ago, and DS2 is canonically much larger than DS1, so the DS2 160km diameter is obviously wrong.
EDIT: goddamned typodemons.
Posted: 2006-01-16 08:36pm
by Jim Raynor
Didn't Leland Chee say in the Holocron thread that the newest sources are generally more reliable, and that the Databank isn't always up to date?
Posted: 2006-01-16 09:53pm
by Kurgan
So the Databank IS part of the continuity.. okay, that much is clear from your reply.
But are you saying that the "films" section is G-Level canon, and the EU section and stats section are C-Level?
Or just [the whole thing is] generally C-Level, clarifying what's in the movies and EU, unless it contradicts a higher source (and the movies overrule any mistakes in it)? In other words, it's not at some special "second only to the films" tier of canon, where only stuff that's not up to date or typos are ignorable.
It's not exactly a primary source, it's a record of primary (g-level) and secondary sources (c-level), at least that was my impression, but I could be wrong. Some people view it essentially as equivalent to the Holocron, ie: Lucasfilm canon.
Posted: 2006-01-16 10:29pm
by Spanky The Dolphin
I think that's complicating a pretty easily understood issue.
Posted: 2006-01-17 08:01am
by Lazarus
Yeah I wasn't aware of the Inside the Worlds of the Original Trilogy book, thanks
What the guy is saying is:
Not just 'a' site. 'Thé' site. The only site. Anything that that site says is true untill they change it.
The site calls it a super star destroyer? Then it IS an super star destroyer, regardless of it's name.
I remember reading figures ranging from several hundreds of thousands up to a quarter of a million. So with both Death Star's casualties will be between one and two million. At most. And this is still highly exagerating.
But certainly not billions, at least, Alderaan would have had way more then both of the Death Star's combined.
Yah, that was Rogue exagerating. Even his quote said: "Each of these battle stations probably carried a few billion military personnel."
Note the use of probably. Means the author is speculating. Not solid proof. Duh because it's Lucas who came up with all of it.
He is saying that Lucas has the final word, and if he says that sw.com is approved, then sw.com is Lucas's word, and is the be all and end all.
Posted: 2006-01-17 08:05am
by Vympel
Lazarus wrote:
What the guy is saying is:
Is bullshit. Anything that site says is secondary to the movies, which are definitive Lucas' vision. The databank is just an official wikipedia, it's not always updated to be in line with the newest information and it's not always correct. The guy's a fuckwit, and you should tell him so. Any claim that the Death Star has but a few million personnel flies in the face of canon evidence and sheer common sense.
Posted: 2006-01-17 08:08am
by Ghost Rider
Lazarus wrote:Yeah I wasn't aware of the Inside the Worlds of the Original Trilogy book, thanks
What the guy is saying is:
Not just 'a' site. 'Thé' site. The only site. Anything that that site says is true untill they change it.
The site calls it a super star destroyer? Then it IS an super star destroyer, regardless of it's name.
I remember reading figures ranging from several hundreds of thousands up to a quarter of a million. So with both Death Star's casualties will be between one and two million. At most. And this is still highly exagerating.
But certainly not billions, at least, Alderaan would have had way more then both of the Death Star's combined.
Yah, that was Rogue exagerating. Even his quote said: "Each of these battle stations probably carried a few billion military personnel."
Note the use of probably. Means the author is speculating. Not solid proof. Duh because it's Lucas who came up with all of it.
He is saying that Lucas has the final word, and if he says that sw.com is approved, then sw.com is Lucas's word, and is the be all and end all.
It maybe from Lucas' words, but the movie is the end all be all, with novels still being higher then whatever interpretations the offical site can give.
He's mincing words and deliberating waffling on the issue that he cannot prove beyond an appeal to authority.
Posted: 2006-01-17 12:25pm
by Kurgan
Spanky The Dolphin wrote:I think that's complicating a pretty easily understood issue.
Just when you think you understand something, you hear a different reading.
If the Databank is equal in canon "authority" to any official SW guidebook (like the ICS, Inside the Worlds, Essential Guide, etc), then that's stating it plainly. Then you just have to know where the guidebooks stand.
Posted: 2006-01-17 02:35pm
by Ryushikaze
Unless the DS2 was mostly unstaffed, then by simple fact, it would have a larger crew complement than the DS1, just by simple necessity of defense and repair, not to mention the additional build crews who were, no doubt, camped out on the vessel itself by that point.
As for the 'Site is above all else', everyone else has mentioned that the movies hold that position, and from the movie, Scaling the DS2 against the 1G Sanctuary moon gives it a size far in excess of the minimalist 160KM measurement. If the site contradicts this, then it is blatantly in error.
But certainly not billions, at least, Alderaan would have had way more then both of the Death Star's combined.
Here's the trick, can he prove it? Meanwhile, while not exactly accurate, we do know that the near mile length Imperial vessels (Venator, ISD, etc) have skeleton crews numbering in the thousands, and full crews in the ten thousands. While it might fly over his head, you might want to demonstrate the size difference between the two, and then make a really simplified estimate of how many ISDs it would take to fill the DS2, than multilply the crew numbers by that amount. It's a faulty assumption (that crew complement raises perfectly linearly with size), but it's merely a step to get the point that the crew was utterly massive into his head.
Posted: 2006-01-17 04:40pm
by Lazarus
Thanks for pointing out that it is actually evidence directly from the movie that leads to the 500 mile figure, I hadn't made the connection that this therefore outranks sw.com.