Seismic Charges and Versus debates

[Stravo]

I honestly can't remember if the seismic charges as depicted in AOTC has ever been tackled by Trekkies in an attempt to dispute the massive firepower obviously inherent in those devices carried by a private patrol craft. They may bitch and moan about the AOTC ICS but how did they tackle the seismic charges which in my opinion is the most telling example of firepower that we've seen on screen?

No this is not intended to spark any kind of bashing I'm just curious as to how it was handled during the vs. debates that raged post AOTC.

[Darth Wong]

They usually pretend that they weren't that impressive, mostly by pretending that fragmenting multi-km asteroids is no big deal.

[Civil War Man]

I honestly can't remember if the seismic charges as depicted in AOTC has ever been tackled by Trekkies in an attempt to dispute the massive firepower obviously inherent in those devices carried by a private patrol craft. They may bitch and moan about the AOTC ICS but how did they tackle the seismic charges which in my opinion is the most telling example of firepower that we've seen on screen?

No this is not intended to spark any kind of bashing I'm just curious as to how it was handled during the vs. debates that raged post AOTC.

Those asteroids the seismic charges hit were obviously completely hollow and made of ice/basalt wood/styrofoam/goose down.[/trek wank]

[Lone_Prodigy]

In my experience, they claim that they were either piles of rubble loosely held together by gravity or already heavily pre-fractured. I simply show them a screen-shot of the obviously solid asteroid being shattered and demand a screenshot of these amazing fractures, and they usually shut up... only to repeat the same arguement a couple pages later.

[nesaminos]

I've seen trekkies pull out numbers for the fragmentation of one asteroid and claim it is an upper limit.

[dragon]

I also seen trekkies claim that since it was ashaped charge of some type it to hard to calculate the true power and so they ignore it. I don't see why it would be to hard to calculate.

[Alyeska]

When I first read stuff from the AOTC ICS I thought "How fucking pathetic". When I saw AOTC and watched that explossion I thought "This is SOOO fucking cool, oh, thats a LOT of firepower, oh well, Trek lost the debate for good".

[Vympel]

It is kind of hard to get the firepower down right, but it's obviously a lot of firepower for Slave I to be packing. I mean- the entire circumfrence of the "ring" is capable of shattering every asteroid it came into contact with, irrespective of size (watch for erroneous claims that the ring simply "cut" the asteroids, this is BS).

The most novel argument I've seen in that regard is to claim that Slave I's seismic charges are more powerful than say, the heavy turbolasers bigger than all of Slave I on an Imperator.

[Alyeska]

Potentialy Jango could have been packing a "strategic" level weapon. Though that pushes the envlope significantly.

[Darth Wong]

Potentialy Jango could have been packing a "strategic" level weapon. Though that pushes the envlope significantly.

The problem with arguing that Jango Fett carried more firepower than an Imperial ship of the line should be obvious from a logic standpoint.

[Alyeska]

Not necessarily. Compare a pirate today with a bolted on cruise missile launcher and a nuke warhead to a Ticonderoga class cruiser. Though a civilian getting strategic level weapons is where the example gets sticky. I'm not saying thats what happened, but thats about the most rational argument you can come up with for Jango having more firepower then a ship of the line.

[Darth Wong]

Not necessarily. Compare a pirate today with a bolted on cruise missile launcher and a nuke warhead to a Ticonderoga class cruiser. Though a civilian getting strategic level weapons is where the example gets sticky. I'm not saying thats what happened, but thats about the most rational argument you can come up with for Jango having more firepower then a ship of the line.

That still wouldn't work since you would have to explain why the Imperial warship doesn't simply use similar weapons. Not to mention the technological ability to generate that much energy from such a small self-contained device.

[Alyeska]

Actualy the rational is easy. Why would most ships pack strategic weapons? They are not strategic platforms, but ships of the line as you say.

[Darth Wong]

Actualy the rational is easy. Why would most ships pack strategic weapons? They are not strategic platforms, but ships of the line as you say.

The Empire does not make such distinctions. Every Imperial ship of the line is capable of mass-destruction attacks.

[Master of Ossus]

Actualy the rational is easy. Why would most ships pack strategic weapons? They are not strategic platforms, but ships of the line as you say.

Presumably, an ISD is a strategic platform, since that's what it's listed as in the EU consistently. Regardless, the point is moot since most vs. debates beyond the ship-to-ship level involve an all-out conflict, in which the Empire would presumably have access to its strategic weapons.

Plus, it begs the question of how and why a private bounty hunter would be willing to use strategic weapons willy-nilly when opposed by a single starfighter (albeit one piloted by a Jedi).

[Alyeska]

Think like someone who doesn't believe the Empire is capable of doing that with an ISD. Then you see where their logic comes about.

[Darth Wong]

Think like someone who doesn't believe the Empire is capable of doing that with an ISD. Then you see where their logic comes about.

But their logic implies that they would be capable of doing that if they just used seismic charges, which is the whole point. They just don't use any logic at all.

[Alyeska]

Actualy the rational is easy. Why would most ships pack strategic weapons? They are not strategic platforms, but ships of the line as you say.

Presumably, an ISD is a strategic platform, since that's what it's listed as in the EU consistently. Regardless, the point is moot since most vs. debates beyond the ship-to-ship level involve an all-out conflict, in which the Empire would presumably have access to its strategic weapons.

Plus, it begs the question of how and why a private bounty hunter would be willing to use strategic weapons willy-nilly when opposed by a single starfighter (albeit one piloted by a Jedi).

I never said this is my position. I said it was the most logical position someone could hope to take that would accept the Sesimic charge scene while ignoring everything else.

[Karza]

There's the "physics escape-clause" approach: "It's a planar blast and thus it's power can't be calculated".

How the appearance of the blast prevents anybody from calculating the energy necessary for fragmenting the said asteroids is anybody's guess. The answer is apparently so complex that only a rabid trekkie could understand it.

[Master of Ossus]

I never said this is my position. I said it was the most logical position someone could hope to take that would accept the Sesimic charge scene while ignoring everything else.

I know it's not your position, since you're actually an intelligent person and the argument is... well... far beneath you.

[SPOOFE]

I thought the typical Trekkie response to the seismic charges is to simply describe their behavior incredulously, and then leave the point hanging, eg: "Seismic chrges ar epathettic there just a glowwing ring not a real splosion itd would be a sphere, stupid Warsie!"

From this I conclude that Trekkies are just really high, and forget the latter half of their thought before they finish the former.

[Vympel]

I thought the typical Trekkie response to the seismic charges is to simply describe their behavior incredulously, and then leave the point hanging, eg: "Seismic chrges ar epathettic there just a glowwing ring not a real splosion itd would be a sphere, stupid Warsie!"

From this I conclude that Trekkies are just really high, and forget the latter half of their thought before they finish the former.

I think "vs-trekkie" applies more than "Trekkie" in this case, since I don't think there's a single prominent vs debater of actual repute who couldn't equally be described as fans of both- as for being high- can you seriously picture that? That's funny as hell

[Robert Walper]

Those asteroids the seismic charges hit were obviously completely hollow and made of ice/basalt wood/styrofoam/goose down.[/trek wank]

Actually, one could suggest at least some of the larger asteroids were in fact hollow. Jango Fett through one after all, and it was indeed mostly hollow.

[Ghost Rider]

Those asteroids the seismic charges hit were obviously completely hollow and made of ice/basalt wood/styrofoam/goose down.[/trek wank]

Actually, one could suggest at least some of the larger asteroids were in fact hollow. Jango Fett through one after all, and it was indeed mostly hollow.

Ummm...Walper that would mean ONE of them is hollow. Not some unless you have more PROOF unless you want to tack on the stupidity that because the Falcon flew into a large asteriod...must mean some(of some completely unknown and arbitrary quantity) the large one's in Hoth are also hollow.

[Lord of the Farce]

Actually, one could suggest at least some of the larger asteroids were in fact hollow. Jango Fett through one after all, and it was indeed mostly hollow.

Ummm...Walper that would mean ONE of them is hollow. Not some unless you have more PROOF unless you want to tack on the stupidity that because the Falcon flew into a large asteriod...must mean some(of some completely unknown and arbitrary quantity) the large one's in Hoth are also hollow.

Y'know, it just occured to me to consciously make the connection, but with the talk of hollow asteriod in AOTC and the reference to TESB, why couldn't the large hollow asteriod be a symptom of a family of giant space slugs... Or strip mining?