Powered Armor in Star Wars

[NecronLord]

Yeah that's what I figured the real reason was at the end of the day. Some sort of in-universe explanation would be nice, though maybe slightly strained.

I can't see how it can possibly be cheaper to replace a stormtrooper than a suit of powered armour (doesn't have to be anywhere near as mecha-like as a spacetrooper). The training alone takes years,

In some cases. It doesn't have to. Witness the flash-learning in the Thrawn trilogy, where it's just like installing software. This seems to be an unreliable technology, but it's there.

while surely the Empire could churn out even a suit of spacetrooper armour in a matter of hours, and for far less cost?

Stormtroopers are walking contradictions anyway, they're simultaneously highly trained soldiers AND they're disposable? If you want disposable troops, use droids, and you could get dozens, if not hundreds of droids for the price of one stormtrooper.

Agreed. But Palpatine stoked droid-predjucide by making the fiendish CIS with their fiendish 'droid general' brutalise the Republic. It wouldn't look that good to rely exclusively on them.

[Connor MacLeod]

I let this lag for awhile due to other discussions, but I intended to come back to it.

And why not? Since when does 'powered armour' have to mean some multi-ton warmachine like SM armour? The example I gave of Peter F Hamilton's work describes suits of similar size to stormtrooper armour, and of light weight (users can stand on heavy wooden plank flooring with no problem). Users are massively enhanced in every combat-relevant aspect, and all combat personnel use them.

And? Ground pressure and weight were only one problem I specified. In fact there were a good many specified over in the thread I mentioend (heat disposal, maintenance, etc.) All those magicwank "enhanced" features don't come without drawbacsk, you know. (more than just cost, anyhow.)

Moreover, I like how you assume it's neccearily REQUIERD for a given role.

I point again to Starship Troopers, which you claim is 'ludicrous' for equipping all troops with powered armour, despite the fact that this book created the very concept.

Uh, we they? As I recall MI were rather highly specialized troops, which was why they had those fancy jump packs and dropped from orbit in those drop pods. Hell, they even pointed out that they WEREN'T replacing alot of things (including tanks - which I also don't recall them using. I don't recall much of a combined arms doctrine mentioned period, in fact.) EVerything about them in the book screamed "specialization" - specialized troops for a specialized kind of war.

And apologies for misinterpreting your AT-PT point. Nevertheless, the case I'm making here is that SW tech should easily allow improvements in combat gear, and saying that these improvements are catered for by mechanised support misses the point. It's akin to saying that the US army didn't need to start wearing body armour, despite it being a practical reality. The technology is available, why is it not used?

Probably because, as NecronLord said droids are considered taboo. Much the same way that clones are, it would seem. Clones can, unlike droids, be "masked" in such a way that their presence is not known (why the stormies were both recruits and clones, apparently.)

Moreover, from a logisticial/industrial standpoint, droids are LUDICROUSLY more easily produced (asteroid field + automated construction = Army) - any one could field a massive army of them. That alone would be a good enough reason for Palpy to not want anyone to do so. Likewise, I doubt the Senate would want anyone else (including Palpy) doing it, and would come down hard on anyone trying to produce a droid army.

This is in much the same vein why Palpy went with the Death STar rather than just mass-producing a DS1's mass/volume in warships. Political/bureacratic shit would interfere or prevent it from getting done, or people would just unite against anyone who tried.

The best the Empire (or Palpy) can manage seems to be that droids are used in a strictly supporting role (IE the SD-series droids like we see in DE2, or the Darktroopers I suppose), in which case its obviously a matter of quality over quantity.

As I said above, there is no reason whatsoever to presume that 'powered armour' MUST be some sort of massive construction that can't walk on a second floor for fear of falling through.

I like how you assume "Power armour" must be capable of doing EVERYTHING and having every sort of wank feature possible, as if specialization is a bad thing, or that certain features might prove, for one reason or another, unneccessary. Or that power armour might have drawbacks regardless (which again, as I bloody pointed out, was covered in the aforementioned thread in OSF. If you need to, I'll bloody link you to it.)

Ok then, so it is necessary for an in-universe reason to deploy troops into situations where droids would be more effective, fair enough. Why, then, do these troops not have the benefit of combat gear that would improve their effectiveness as much as possible in the absence of droids? 'They don't need power armour, they have droids!' clearly falls on it's face. 'It's not practical' is also rubbish, there are dozens of improvements that could be made and used galaxy-wide for entirely justifiable expenditure.

Again, cost-effectiveness (where have they faced an enemy where such an upsurge in capability is neccessary? Do you think they can just make uber-wank armour out of the blue like this was some fucking Ringo novel?) Politics (you think the Senate is just gonna let Palpy or anyone else mass produce any sort of military force- you know, much the same reason why he needed a Death Star?) Or taboo (as Necronlord said, the Separatist Droid Armies fixed that.)

Frankly, the basic stormtrooper/clonetrooper armour sufficed most of their needs for what they've ever faced. They had considerable protection against ballistic and impact weaponry, they had energy-weapons rpotection enough against anything short of a full powered blaster bolt (and even then it enabled them to survive such a hit) The armour has communications, sensors/targeting assistance, life support and enviromental support, and carries a fuckload of supplise in a very compact form without a bulky backpack (food, water, etc.) Clonetrooper armour provides more protection, and then the Commando/ARC armour provides yet even MORE (and there are varying degrees of that.) Its durable, its low maintenance (the Visual Dictionaries say that stormtrooper armour can last for a LONG time without maintenancec or attendance, even if you buried it.)

I don't really see what the fuck else you could add to it. Enhancecd strength won't really carry any benefits (Their gear generally isn't that bulky to begin with.) Increases in a trooper's firepower does not neccesarily require great strength (the REbel troops were firing anti-armour weapons against the AT ATs in TESB. According to the RASB, the rifles could put fist-sized holes in AT-At armour, which suggests they carry considerable anti-vehicle firepower.)

Strength increases aren't neccesary for improved defense either. If they needed tougher, they could outfit stormies with Katarn armour or something comparable. Or stick them with personal forcefields. (They don't routinely use them because they are power intensive, which makes them very short-use devices in most cases. Not very good in an open battlefield.)

Enhanced strength for melee? Why? Vibroweapons seem to be just as effecitve (and can be made in various forms.) Disregarding something more exotic, that is. (Some sort of lightsaber like or forcefield assisted weapon, which IIRC also exist.)

Moreover, the shit to enhance strength will add to the power requirements of the armour, its complexity (which affects maintenance), and probably necceesitates additional waste heat disposal measures (which can create other sorts of problems.)

Speed enhancements? How do you propose that? That's about the only other advantage I can think of, and there are lots of other ways to handle that that wouldn't require some sortt of uber-wank power armour.

For example, Scenario 1: A stormtrooper sees a grenade hit the ground 2 metres away. He tries to take cover, but is too slow and is killed when it goes off.

And how powerful a grenade are we talking? According to the visual dictionaries (which state Stormie and clonie armour is "impervious" to explosions and shrapnel as well as projectile weapons), and calcable instances from the novels (such as Mike's calcs in the IXJAC Hate mail page) it would take quite a powerful grenade (or one flinging extremely sharp shrapnel) to have any chance of doing damage. Hell even ignoring that, we know Katarn armour is grenade proof at point blank range.

Scenario 2: A stormtrooper wearing an enhanced suit of armour sees a grenade hit the ground 2 metres away. Thanks to his speed and strength enhancing armour, he is able to cover 20 metres distance before the grenade goes off. He survives. He then takes a blaster bolt to the hip, but again survives thanks to his personal shield (deployed when entering a dangerous area).

Disregarding the question once more of "how powerful a grenade are you talking about" - I will note (again) that you can deploy personal shields on stormtrooper without wank armour. There are reasons stormies do not use them consistently. (The NEGW&T describes Imperial officers carrying the kind Katarn wore. THe clone Commandos had access to personal shielding of some kind too. A stormie officer is noted as having "Shielding" on his body armour in the ANH novel as well.

Hell, ,regular stormie armour seems to have some sort of "active" defensive measure, given it has heat sinks.

The second trooper is alive, the first is dead. Why? The second's equipment is easily and practically achievable by the SW galaxy, but WHY are these improvements not made?

I do get the feeling I'm just running into an out-of-universe inconsistency here though, so there may well be no real explanation...

Frankly, I question just how much information on SW you have acecss to to be making these judgements. Or maybe you just didn't think the matter through very hard. Or both.

Every single combat scenario. Enhanced armour improves the average stormtroopers survivability and lethality very considerably. Wearing full body armour encumbers Coalition troops in Iraq considerably, and they probably won't need it in most situations, but it is still worn.

"Enhanced armour?" is not the same thing as "power armour" - either you've decided to change tacks with what we're discussing or you're using a very loose definition of what "power" armour is supposed to be. In any way its bloody obvious that there are a goodly number of things you haven;'t considered or were even aware of.

Powered armour > non-powered armour. For that reason alone, it should be deployed in all situations where it is deemed necessary to wear armour at all.

so basically your contention is "Powered armour has a ton of advantages but no disadvatnages whatsoever?" Do you really believe you can get "something for nothing" in such a blatantly absurd manner? If not, what the fuck is power armour giving up for all these superhuman capabilities?

I see nothing that indicates military use of any form (rumoured use by 'Imperial agents' can mean anything), never mind the kind of widespread deployment that is necessary to take the disruptor as a standard example of Imperial military weaponry.

Did you even bother reading what Nightmare said, or what I posted with regards to disruptors? Here, since it escaped your notice:

click the link, now.

Note the longer barrel. Note the scope. Why the fuck do you put a scope on a weapon with only 20 meters range, pray tell?

Moreover, I think its rahter obvious you ignored the fact that a disruptor is packing the firepower to cremate a person into the size of a SMALL pistol. As I already said, this capabilitiy in such a small package entails some drawbacks (ammo use and fire rate and range.) In 40K terms this is more like an inferno pistol or a digital melta than a full sized melta gun or plasma weapon (which are also large, bulky weapons with drawbacks over other weapons.)

On top of that, I noted (and its on Mike's bloody site, which I also linked to) its an established fact that Disruptors are just obscenely overpowered blasters - moreso than heavy blaster pistols vs regular pistols. Making the weapon bigger than what a disruptor pistol is will overcome some of the drawbacks (like range and ammo capacity.) And, as Mike notes on his site, a Disruptor seems to be 20x more powerful than a blaster.

If you still need it spelled out - disruptors as shown in the images posted are VERY COMPACT, very specialized, ovepowered blaster weapons. A military man has no need to use something so bloody small (eve disruptor rifles are small compared to some the DLT-19/20 or the DC-15, for crying out loud.) Its bloody obvious troops aren't going to be using such specialized weapons. That doesn't bloody mean the weapon isn't used in some more practical form elsewhere (like those anti-vehicle weapons the Rebels used in TESB that I already mentioned.) - they're all still bloody blasters, after all.

[[R_H]]

Note the scope. Why the fuck do you put a scope on a weapon with only 20 meters range, pray tell?

Perhaps it's a reflex sight? It would be ridiculous if it was a scope, for the reasons you mentionned.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Note the scope. Why the fuck do you put a scope on a weapon with only 20 meters range, pray tell?

Perhaps it's a reflex sight? It would be ridiculous if it was a scope, for the reasons you mentionned.

Jedi Knight 1/2 has them as scopes. They seem to be compact sniping weapons.

[Beowulf]

Note the scope. Why the fuck do you put a scope on a weapon with only 20 meters range, pray tell?

Perhaps it's a reflex sight? It would be ridiculous if it was a scope, for the reasons you mentionned.

Jedi Knight 1/2 has them as scopes. They seem to be compact sniping weapons.

Which is ludicrous, because it's very difficult to stabilize a long arm that doesn't have a stock. Which is why pistols have shorter effective ranges than rifles. A pistol can normally shoot to about the same effective range as a rifle, but you can't shoot it that far because you'll miss. Certain types of slings help, but you can't beat a stock. It's why many SMGs have retractable stocks.

[Connor MacLeod]

We've seen blaster weapons firing without using the stock out to hundreds of meters range or more (AOTC), nevermind certain pistols without stocks (IE hthe DH-17 the Rebels used in ANH) have a ranges comparable to some SMGs as well.

That said, you're probably not going to be getting the multi-km ranges you get with other rifles regardless. Its alot larger than other disruptors, but it isn't nearly as big as a DC-15. Moreover, Disrutpors will still be trading range for power (roughly proportional, I'd say. A Tenloss disruptor pistol has a range around 10 meters vs a regular blaster pistolh aving up to 120 meter range, and a 5 shot capacity vs 100 shot. Heavy blasters vs blasters roughly corroborate this.) Given all that, I probably wouldn't expect that rifle to have much more than a few hundred meters.

I imagine that even at a few hundred meters, you would still need a scope.

[Beowulf]

Effective range changes when shooting at an area target as opposed to a point target. It's also larger when using volley fire as opposed to individual fire. A very large proportion of firing in AOTC was both.

It's quite possible to shoot a target that's a few hundred meters away without a scope. You might need a couple shots, and it might not hit something vital, but it's quite doable. I've done it (admittedly, it was a scaled target at 25 yards, not actually a 100 yd or further target, but that's due to firing range limitations).

Sniper weapons universally have a stock. You can't shoot accurately enough without one.

[Cykeisme]

Pure conjecture, but specialized precision weapons in SW may use some technological gadgetry like tiny built-in repulsors to stabilize a weapon by dampening unwanted movement.. essentially giving you the stability of a supported tripod, even when firing from a standing position.

We've heard of repulsors actually supporting the weight of heavy weapons like missile launchers, so it's possible (minimum scaling considerations aside) that there may be small units that may simply provide stability.


The Tenloss disruptor in the Jedi Knight games fired a tight and accurate beam that had a very long effective range (due in no small part to the powerful telescopic sight), but from the description ("ripping apart living tissue at the molecular level") it may have been very effective at tearing a living being apart from a hit on any unprotected flesh, but it doesn't sound like it would be effective if the shot were to hit an armor plate.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Okay, I tried this before, what exactly disqualifies Clonetrooper and Stormtrooper Armour from being power armour? I've yet to hear a decent explanation.

[NecronLord]

The Tenloss disruptor in the Jedi Knight games fired a tight and accurate beam that had a very long effective range (due in no small part to the powerful telescopic sight), but from the description ("ripping apart living tissue at the molecular level") it may have been very effective at tearing a living being apart from a hit on any unprotected flesh, but it doesn't sound like it would be effective if the shot were to hit an armor plate.

In game, at least, it does indeed seem like an NDF thing (and indeed, I wondered if Raven didn't recycle the vapourise script from their phasers on the same engine) and we certainly know that such sillyness exists in Star Wars technologies (here's looking at you, Galaxy Gun). I used to mind-trick and sneak up on the rodians and zap them in the back of the head with it from point blank.

[Ritterin Sophia]

In game, at least, it does indeed seem like an NDF thing (and indeed, I wondered if Raven didn't recycle the vapourise script from their phasers on the same engine) and we certainly know that such sillyness exists in Star Wars technologies (here's looking at you, Galaxy Gun). I used to mind-trick and sneak up on the rodians and zap them in the back of the head with it from point blank.

Thankfully, that's game mechanics and it contradicts a novel where Palpatine says that the Empire has never used a chain-reaction weapon.

[Darth Ruinus]

Thankfully, that's game mechanics and it contradicts a novel where Palpatine says that the Empire has never used a chain-reaction weapon.

Where does this happen?

[Ritterin Sophia]

Thankfully, that's game mechanics and it contradicts a novel where Palpatine says that the Empire has never used a chain-reaction weapon.

Where does this happen?

Trying to find it, I think it's in one of the Dark Empires where he says that before the Galaxy Gun they've never used them before.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The Galaxy Gun is exactly the wrong way to introduce a technology or weapon. Unlike the Death Star, which is remarkable only in the political will directed to scale up available technologies and optimize them for such a massive undertaking and role - the Galaxy is pure wank. It somehow pierces shields of any strength, someone annhiliates matter without energy input, it somehow has a galactic-range hyperdrive with transit time in a couple hours max, and it somehow has uber invulnerable shields. And do we see shield-penetrators coming into their own across the Empire's arsenal and revolutionizing warfare? Do we faster hyperdrives? Much stronger shields for smaller craft? Magic matter-annhiliation chain-reaction missiles on every scale?

Of course not. One-off wankfest, then press the reset button. Wouldn't want your McGuffin or handwaved plot gimmick to actually have consequences in the series, right?

[Sarevok]

Maybe ILM should make a Master of Orion style tech tree as a guide for writters coming up with new weapons. In big colorful letters with pictures suitable for children since some of the SW writers have shown inability to read any higher level textbooks.

[Connor MacLeod]

It somehow pierces shields of any strength,

It pierces planetary shields. I don't think that scales up automatically to "any strength". Torpedo spheres have "shield weakening" technologies that are similar, and we've seen other examples in smaller scales (from the personal field disruptors from the Tales of the mos eisly cantina stories to the shield piercing devices in AOTC and spinoff materials.) I don't see this as being "wank" as an extension of existing technologies (better shield peentration tech, that's all.)

Edit: checking Empire's end, it says that it penetrates "all known security shields" - that doesn't sound like it penetrates of "any strength" - just currently known kinds.

somene annhiliates matter without energy input, it

who says it has NO energy input? Its a chain reaction weapon, but being "Technobabble" doesn't mean its "Zero energy". Hyperdrives are technobabble, yet they do involve the consumption of energy.

somehow has a galactic-range hyperdrive with transit time in a couple hours max,

"hours-long" hyperdrive travel is odd? Anakin can do it rather easily, after all. I'd say its more remarkable for its precisio on a galactic scale than anything else.

edit: - the old EGW&T says the GG's hyperdrive could travel from the galactic core to the outermost systems in "a matter of hours". the NEGW&T says that the hyperdrive on the GG projectile rivals that of the Falcon. I guess this means that the GG's hyperdrive capabilities (at least in terms of speed) arenot meant to be distinctive anymore.

and it somehow has uber invulnerable shields.

As I recall it was resistant to fighter scale weapons and starship weapons (like ion cannons) of unknown grade. I don't see this as neccesarily being "uber invulnerable."

Edit: the old EGW&T says that its armour/shields "easily withstood" blasts from the most powerful "turbolaser and ion cannon". The NEGW&T merely says its shields and armour can 'defend against turbolasers and ion cannon"

On one hand that probably means a retcon of some kind. On the other its incredibly open ended. "turbolaserS" and "heavy turbolaserS" arguably arne't the same thing, nor are "turbolaser batteries." Planetary turbolasers were also a different class (and generally considered too short ranged to be effective beyond low orbit, and given slow ROF and tracking you wouldn't expect more than one shot anyhow.) WEG stats (at the time of the old EG) also flatly denied the existence of the canon "six HTL and two HIC" turrets on the ISD one, nevermind the ISD2, and the WEG armament was much smaller. And of course that doesn't neccecesarily mean a direct hit with heavier weapons in any case- some ofthsoe missiles weren't much larger than a fighter (going by DE, the projecitles could vary in size) so they probably weren't easy to target by the bigger guns in any case.

And do we see shield-penetrators coming into their own across the Empire's arsenal and revolutionizing warfare?

Considering they must be a well established tehcnology even back in the OR times, probably not. I figure its a kind of "measure/countermeasure/counter countermeasure" sort of thing.

Do we faster hyperdrives?

No, since we already know hyperdrive across large distancecs in hours already exists.

Much stronger shields for smaller craft?

Who says we haven't? Nevermind that how "extraordinary" these shields are depends on the examples of said "Strength" (and I don't recall anything extraordinary as it is.)

Magic matter-annhiliation chain-reaction missiles on every scale?

without knowing how the technobabble stuff occured how can we speak much to its ability to be mass produced, do we?

Of course not. One-off wankfest, then press the reset button. Wouldn't want your McGuffin or handwaved plot gimmick to actually have consequences in the series, right?

If we're going to complain about wank, I'd say the Eclipse superlasers and their magical "shield penetrating neutrino assisted beams" from the DESB are worse.

Edit: Oh yes, and the steam powered, space capable warships. Firing cannonballs. Those were SO MUCH more worse than the GAlaxy gun as far as DE2 was concerned. That and Boba fett's starship bouncing off of planetary shields without serious damage..

[Connor MacLeod]

Effective range changes when shooting at an area target as opposed to a point target. It's also larger when using volley fire as opposed to individual fire. A very large proportion of firing in AOTC was both.

Um, what? For one thing, volley fire would IIRC depend on the clones firing in disciplined, coordinated volleys. They weren't doing that that I remember.

For that matter the clones in AOTC were firing both "from the hip" and raised up to their shoulders both. Given that this is roughly at the same distance and with (roughly) the same ROF. That doesnt sound as if the "from the hip" gunners are using "area target" - there's no need to. And as I recall from the DK books dealing with AOTC, the guns targeting is linked to the helmets.

If you want to be perfectly pedantic about it, I know that in ROTS there are severla cases of clones engaging in long range firing without the use of stocks. (one is with the DC-15 carbines in the Jedi temple during Order-66, you see them firing from the higher levels down on the floor, which by my estimates ar easiyl close to or over a couple hundred meters, give or take a few tens of meters or so. The other is when the Clone "scouts" up high fire down on the approaching droids on Kashyyyk - if you look closely you'll see the stocks don't quite brace against their shoulders, ,at leat not for every shot.)

It's quite possible to shoot a target that's a few hundred meters away without a scope. You might need a couple shots, and it might not hit something vital, but it's quite doable. I've done it (admittedly, it was a scaled target at 25 yards, not actually a 100 yd or further target, but that's due to firing range limitations).

Yes, but that wouldn't be possible for a sniper, would it? I know some snipers (especialyl police/SWAT ones) are known to shoot at those close ranges, but as I recall they still use scopes. The other way would be more akin to using an assault rifle like na M-16 or something.

Sniper weapons universally have a stock. You can't shoot accurately enough without one.

Yes, I can understand that in most cases you would want one for stabilization purposes, especially with projectiles. However, not all blasters have recoil, but virtually all tend to be much longer ranged than their real-life analogues (save for special kinds like heavy blasters, which are baiscally engaging in tradeoffs of capability) And given other means of stabilization that they probably could use, that could ge worked around (gyrostabilization for example.) Againn, though, I'm not advocating these weapons being insanely long range even without the stock.

It also occurs tom e that it probably depends on who is using the weapon. The disruptors in the Jedi Academy games seem to be used by forcec users, which probably means they can compensate for the lack of stock in some way. Removing the stock would cut down on the length and aid carrying/concecalability.)

<<<>>>>

As an aside from the above...

Digging around the net, it looks like some disruptors do use stocks.

It also looks like, browsing around, others (in addtion to those shown above) used the disruptors. The Alliance did, the Mandolorians did, the wookiees did (and we apparently see them in rOTS- that was from the VD).

The Darth Bane novel apparently had sith army officers using a dsiruptor pistol that had 12 shots and an effective range of 20 meters, which was twicec as good as the Tenloss version.

I daresay they're alot more common than previously thought. Not really suprising considering that they're simply a variation on blasters.

In game, at least, it does indeed seem like an NDF thing (and indeed, I wondered if Raven didn't recycle the vapourise script from their phasers on the same engine) and we certainly know that such sillyness exists in Star Wars technologies (here's looking at you, Galaxy Gun). I used to mind-trick and sneak up on the rodians and zap them in the back of the head with it from point blank.

Even ignoring the "in-game" part, its possible some disrutpors are technobabble. However, most other sources tend to suggest the vat majority of disruptors are brute force weapons and simply a more extreme form of blaster. Despite propoganda from a certain fringe group, blasters are brute forcee weapons. Moreover, disruptors DO leave certain remains behind (even if its mostly vapour and ash), which NDFING the target wouldn't

[Lazarus]

At this point I think my argument's become a bit confused. I suppose it's not truly 'powered' armour I'm proposing, but 'better' armour (i.e including features I've seen elsewhere which improve on Stormtrooper armour), so I concede.

[Illuminatus Primus]

It somehow pierces shields of any strength,

It pierces planetary shields. I don't think that scales up automatically to "any strength". Torpedo spheres have "shield weakening" technologies that are similar, and we've seen other examples in smaller scales (from the personal field disruptors from the Tales of the mos eisly cantina stories to the shield piercing devices in AOTC and spinoff materials.) I don't see this as being "wank" as an extension of existing technologies (better shield peentration tech, that's all.)

Edit: checking Empire's end, it says that it penetrates "all known security shields" - that doesn't sound like it penetrates of "any strength" - just currently known kinds.

Since planetary shields comprehend all known examples of the toughest shields, I think that's what matters, don't you? Not to mention the context seems pretty clear for "all known security shields."

Its canon, that doesn't mean its quality. It still establishes a cheat that nullifies most of the most impenetrable of shields. The torpedo spheres and platforms were obviously at best an imperfect solution, as they had to analyze for peculiar shield weaknesses with complex sensors and computer analysis for quite some time and then pound them with massed ordinance and hope for a momentary breakthrough which would permit artillery to knock out the shield generator or projector equipment. That and partially-shield-disrupting torpedoes is hardly the same as a highly destabilizing weapon that can punch clean through "all known security shields" whole.

Its still a reset button; if they have the technology to defeat shields like that, why not anti-ship torpedoes that punch clean through shields? What about planetary assault missiles with penetrators that can knock out shields.

The Death Stars at least paid for their unique capabilities in cost and scale. There's nothing about them which means everything else in combat should be wildly different. The Galaxy Gun has all these magic contrivances to make it better than the Death Star but with none of the drawbacks and with none of those contrivances influencing tactics in general.

who says it has NO energy input? Its a chain reaction weapon, but being "Technobabble" doesn't mean its "Zero energy". Hyperdrives are technobabble, yet they do involve the consumption of energy.

Negligible energy input compared to damage inflicted; its a cheat and technobabble. And just because there is other handwavium and sillytech doesn't make the Galaxy Gun less stupid.

As I recall it was resistant to fighter scale weapons and starship weapons (like ion cannons) of unknown grade. I don't see this as neccesarily being "uber invulnerable."

Edit: the old EGW&T says that its armour/shields "easily withstood" blasts from the most powerful "turbolaser and ion cannon". The NEGW&T merely says its shields and armour can 'defend against turbolasers and ion cannon"

On one hand that probably means a retcon of some kind. On the other its incredibly open ended. "turbolaserS" and "heavy turbolaserS" arguably arne't the same thing, nor are "turbolaser batteries." Planetary turbolasers were also a different class (and generally considered too short ranged to be effective beyond low orbit, and given slow ROF and tracking you wouldn't expect more than one shot anyhow.) WEG stats (at the time of the old EG) also flatly denied the existence of the canon "six HTL and two HIC" turrets on the ISD one, nevermind the ISD2, and the WEG armament was much smaller. And of course that doesn't neccecesarily mean a direct hit with heavier weapons in any case- some ofthsoe missiles weren't much larger than a fighter (going by DE, the projecitles could vary in size) so they probably weren't easy to target by the bigger guns in any case.

Nespis was a world-scale construct, and its heavy guns had the same registry as the Hoth cannon. Still, the implication that they're essentially invulnerable is obvious. If they weren't an indefensible world cracker, who cares? Any planet with a decent shield, decent defense system, and some pulse mass mines should be able to hold them off by your conservative claim. Yet the NR GHQ didn't sport anything approaching this quality? Why would it be so destabilizing otherwise?

Considering they must be a well established tehcnology even back in the OR times, probably not. I figure its a kind of "measure/countermeasure/counter countermeasure" sort of thing.

And they those countermeasures just happen to be ineffective for the NR's troopships and GHQ? And major worlds defended by planetary shields? We're talking about capability; its obviously destabilizing/significant enough that those things didn't dampen its effect. And if its that effect, how come its unique to the GG? That's bad writing and contrivance. Reset button.

without knowing how the technobabble stuff occured how can we speak much to its ability to be mass produced, do we?

I'm not saying its CERTAIN in a discussion of absolute technical analysis. Of course we can make excuses. But we shouldn't have to if the writer did his job. Its a magic plot device sustained by contrivances which only pertain to it and are never seen again. That's reset button.

If we're going to complain about wank, I'd say the Eclipse superlasers and their magical "shield penetrating neutrino assisted beams" from the DESB are worse.

I never said that magical crap wasn't worse; it is. That was utter retardation. Thankfully it was limited to a sourcebook and a major EU epic plot line didn't hinge on its contrivances.

Edit: Oh yes, and the steam powered, space capable warships. Firing cannonballs. Those were SO MUCH more worse than the GAlaxy gun as far as DE2 was concerned. That and Boba fett's starship bouncing off of planetary shields without serious damage..

Sigh. Don't get me started on the Ganathans. I'm not so bothered by Boba Fett bouncing off a planetary shield; for all we know he took evasive action at the last minute, lowering his relative velocity enough for a painful crash, but not fatal. As opposed to the jammed ships in ROTJ, who would plunge right in unknowingly in an attack trajectory.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Perhaps, something I highlighted in the Fleet Junkie thread ages ago, that Dark Empire was ridden with plenty of problems. Let's start with the Falcon going into Hyperspace under Byss' shields. Now we all know about gravity well projectors, but if the shields can be avoided by jumping into hyperspace, the same probably could have held true for any attackers who could have done a microjump to avoid the shields. Now, what is the point of a shield if everyone could do just that?

[FTeik]

Aren't there shield-piercing torpedos in the BFC?

And is the speed of the missiles of the Galaxy-Gun that unlikely, if we consider the fact, that it hasn't to deal with inertial compensators and stasis-field-technology to keep the organic beings aboard a fighter or larger ship alive? Not to mention, that a missile would be used only once? Do we know the speed the hyperdrive-pods of probots have?

[Connor MacLeod]

I really gotta stop forgetting about things I start....

Since planetary shields comprehend all known examples of the toughest shields, I think that's what matters, don't you? Not to mention the context seems pretty clear for "all known security shields."

Yes, and so? I repeat, how does "all known security shields" translate into your original contention about piercing "Shields of any strength?" I'd say tjhere's a rather severe difference between the two.

Its canon, that doesn't mean its quality. It still establishes a cheat that nullifies most of the most impenetrable of shields. The torpedo spheres and platforms were obviously at best an imperfect solution, as they had to analyze for peculiar shield weaknesses with complex sensors and computer analysis for quite some time and then pound them with massed ordinance and hope for a momentary breakthrough which would permit artillery to knock out the shield generator or projector equipment. That and partially-shield-disrupting torpedoes is hardly the same as a highly destabilizing weapon that can punch clean through "all known security shields" whole.

Wait, how do you know enough about the penetration methods of the GG missile to make any sort of concrete conclusion about it? Last I checked, we don't know how it works. For all we know, its a refined version of what Torpedo spheres do.

Its still a reset button; if they have the technology to defeat shields like that, why not anti-ship torpedoes that punch clean through shields? What about planetary assault missiles with penetrators that can knock out shields.

Again, how do you know enough about the mechanisms of the GG to make any declarations about it, much less how "unbeatable" you apparently think it is?

Moreover, I reiterate that they've had "shield piercing" technology for a logn time now. hell, now that I think about it, the SW radio drama mentions the Rebel fighters equipped with countermeasures to help enetrate the DS's defenses.

The Death Stars at least paid for their unique capabilities in cost and scale. There's nothing about them which means everything else in combat should be wildly different. The Galaxy Gun has all these magic contrivances to make it better than the Death Star but with none of the drawbacks and with none of those contrivances influencing tactics in general.

Again, can you explain to me how you know enough about the Galaxy gun (such as its cost) to actually declare this? Is it actually stated anywhere, or is this merely what you think is the case?

Negligible energy input compared to damage inflicted; its a cheat and technobabble. And just because there is other handwavium and sillytech doesn't make the Galaxy Gun less stupid.

Just because its "technobabble" doesn't mean it involves "zero" energy. Even technobabble weapons have to obey physics in some respects (IE the 8472 beam still requires energy to come from somewhere to accelerate the mass of the planet beyond escape velocity. We just know the ships themselves aren't providing it.) And again, I ask how do you know the energy input is "negligible"? As far as I know we know nothing about how the tech works.

Nespis was a world-scale construct, and its heavy guns had the same registry as the Hoth cannon.

Based on what, a name? The size of those guns wasn't much more than a light TL or a poitn defense gun.

Still, the implication that they're essentially invulnerable is obvious. If they weren't an indefensible world cracker, who cares? Any planet with a decent shield, decent defense system, and some pulse mass mines should be able to hold them off by your conservative claim. Yet the NR GHQ didn't sport anything approaching this quality? Why would it be so destabilizing otherwise?

Er, could you be more specific?

1- which "conservaitve claim" of mine are you supposedly referring to?

2- I again have to ask you what sources you are drawing upon to reach your conclusions about the Galaxy Gun projectiles. Please do not restate it being "obvious."

And they those countermeasures just happen to be ineffective for the NR's troopships and GHQ? And major worlds defended by planetary shields?
We're talking about capability; its obviously destabilizing/significant enough that those things didn't dampen its effect.

Yes, and? Why is the Empire developing better "shield penetrators" such a wankish concept, per se? Bearing in mind we have no idea how the GG does it (unless you have specific evidence I lack, in which case I would love to see it.) Unless you're supposeldy thinking the "ability to penetrate shields" is somehow supposed to be permanant, in which case I have to ask how you reached this conclusion based solely on what we know.

And if its that effect, how come its unique to the GG? That's bad writing and contrivance. Reset button.

How is it "unique?" I've already referenced sources inidcating "Shield piercing" technology. If that is somehow "irrelevant" to the galaxy gun, I would like to see your proof.

I'm not saying its CERTAIN in a discussion of absolute technical analysis.

Um, so basically you're just stating your opinion of how you think it works?

Of course we can make excuses. But we shouldn't have to if the writer did his job. Its a magic plot device sustained by contrivances which only pertain to it and are never seen again. That's reset button.

That would be nice, yes, but unfortunately the reality is is that SW is full of stupid contrivancees and nonsense that must be rationalized. Like the Ewoks, or "subsonic glowing energy bolts that defy gravity", or any other various nonsense. How is rationalizing the Galaxy Gun any different, pray tell?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Yes, and so? I repeat, how does "all known security shields" translate into your original contention about piercing "Shields of any strength?" I'd say tjhere's a rather severe difference between the two.

Planetary shields, and large capital ship (NRS Pelagia) shields. It definitely is more effective at penetrating powerful shields than any other demonstrated countermeasures. Fine, the shields of any strength is conceded. Maybe there are some uber planetary shields it couldn't get through. But it gets through enough across the board to be destabilizing/tactically transformative just the same, yet the reset button gets hit because we don't want our McGuffin to actually effect SW, now do we.

Wait, how do you know enough about the penetration methods of the GG missile to make any sort of concrete conclusion about it? Last I checked, we don't know how it works. For all we know, its a refined version of what Torpedo spheres do.

It becomes impossible to critique the writing quality aspect of the tech appearing in a storyline unless I can deterministically describe the mechanism by which the sillytech operates?

How could it be a torpedo sphere thing? We KNOW that they defeat shields by analyzing them at length for brief fluctuations and bounding that point with immense quantities of basically conventional ordinance, followed by shooting the shield generator through any gap opened. You suggesting that off-panel, it hovered about its target and fired proton torpedo salvos at weak spots until it could shoot out a shield generator, then it dove into the target planet? If this isn't what you mean, you need to be less vague. What mechanism do you propose by which it is not destabilizing or tactically transformative?

Furthermore, the existence of stuff like torpedo spheres is exactly why I find this retarded. Why bother with all the trouble if you have penetration aids that let very large missiles fly through planetary and capital-scale shields.

Again, how do you know enough about the mechanisms of the GG to make any declarations about it, much less how "unbeatable" you apparently think it is?

As portrayed in the comics it IS destabilizing in the extreme, hence why it brings the NR to its knees. It portrays unusually adept shield penetration (as I describe below yet another example you offer is actually evidence of how unusually adept and capable the GG missile is, just like the TS example) that if applies to any other ships or missiles would totally revamp SW tactics.

Moreover, I reiterate that they've had "shield piercing" technology for a logn time now. hell, now that I think about it, the SW radio drama mentions the Rebel fighters equipped with countermeasures to help enetrate the DS's defenses.

The Death Star's defense was explicitly stated to be essentially porus against starfighter-scale threats, and Death Star - which I know you've read - describes its "rudimentary" shielding. How this is comparable to effortless penetration of planetary and security shielding which generally is impenetrable (DS2, Byss, etc.).

Again, can you explain to me how you know enough about the Galaxy gun (such as its cost) to actually declare this? Is it actually stated anywhere, or is this merely what you think is the case?

Its MUCH less massive than either Death Star, so it obviously incurs an extremely lower raw material cost. That industrial capability represents opportunity cost and definitely could not be equivalent between the two.

Just because its "technobabble" doesn't mean it involves "zero" energy. Even technobabble weapons have to obey physics in some respects (IE the 8472 beam still requires energy to come from somewhere to accelerate the mass of the planet beyond escape velocity. We just know the ships themselves aren't providing it.) And again, I ask how do you know the energy input is "negligible"? As far as I know we know nothing about how the tech works.

We know that the missile itself provides little of the energy; otherwise it would cause absurdly massive recoil in the Galaxy Gun. Adding some magic matter-to-energy chain reaction they just came up with begs the question of how come they can't just completely revamp their energy economy with such technology. Furthermore, why don't we see other warheads on this principle? How come fighter missiles don't employ this technology and become huge threats to large warships?

I know you CAN come up with excuses, but good writing precludes you from having to. The Death Star does not ask people to think up solutions for its contrivances.

Based on what, a name? The size of those guns wasn't much more than light TL or a poitn defense gun.

Conceded.

1- which "conservaitve claim" of mine are you supposedly referring to?

That the GG missiles capability is more limited, which therefore implies its action should be sensitive to countermeasures.

2- I again have to ask you what sources you are drawing upon to reach your conclusions about the Galaxy Gun projectiles. Please do not restate it being "obvious."

It neutralized a large capital ship and NR GHQ twice. Where do I expect to see better countermeasures and hardened defense then there? Why else would everyone capitulate to the Empire anyway.

Yes, and? Why is the Empire developing better "shield penetrators" such a wankish concept, per se? Bearing in mind we have no idea how the GG does it (unless you have specific evidence I lack, in which case I would love to see it.) Unless you're supposeldy thinking the "ability to penetrate shields" is somehow supposed to be permanant, in which case I have to ask how you reached this conclusion based solely on what we know.

I'm saying we never see these innovations make tactical transformation, even temporarily, outside the GG missiles themselves, which we should if the writing was good and these innovations were applied consistently. These capabilities just drop off the face of the saga.

How is it "unique?" I've already referenced sources inidcating "Shield piercing" technology. If that is somehow "irrelevant" to the galaxy gun, I would like to see your proof.

Because they LACK the same CAPABILITY? The GG is MUCH more capable and therefore less responsive to countermeasures that are effective against, say TS deployment.

That would be nice, yes, but unfortunately the reality is is that SW is full of stupid contrivancees and nonsense that must be rationalized. Like the Ewoks, or "subsonic glowing energy bolts that defy gravity", or any other various nonsense. How is rationalizing the Galaxy Gun any different, pray tell?

Its not. What's your point, that I'm not allowed to think its especially stupid? People criticize SW for hinging on something retarded in its plot movements such as your example of the Ewoks. I don't mind absurd blasters because they're portrayed and deployed consistently. But the GG and its innovations are not because the author wanted to give Palpy a magic sword to win back the galaxy in a few months, then kill it, give everything back to the good guys and brush off any consequences new technology to arbitrarily annhiliate matter and penetrate "all-known" security shields. I wouldn't care if it was stupid AND consistently incorporated into the series.

We're not even getting into the level fucking dumb in Jedi v. Sith with canonized wooden-battleships and worse. I realize that.

[JCady]

As you may have noticed, my point was that the UNSC are massively behind the empire in terms of technology, as are many other races which have mastered non-augmented powered armour (see above). If they can do it, the Empire logically can. That the UNSC version needs augmentation to use does not therefore mean that the Empire would run into the same problem despite their hugely more advanced civilization.

You're talking about completely unrelated fictional universes here; Halo has no bearing on Star Wars.

On top of that, none of the other universe examples you've given even do deploy power armour as widely as you claim they should -- Halo, 40K and Starship Troopers all make them limited issue equipment for elite special forces units only.

[MJ12 Commando]

Then try, say, Night's Dawn or the ISC Duology, where every soldier worth his or her salt has either power armor or so much augmentation they don't need it.

What we know the SW has:
1. High strength muscle systems, as evidenced by the B-1 battledroids and their stick-arms being at least capable of something resembling human strength and carrying their own weight. B-1s are mooks, so they probably aren't expensive.

2. Cheap and easy computer systems, as droids are fricking everywhere.

3. Stupidly high levels of power storage. Even going with a fairly low end and saying that a single blaster magazine for an E-11 has one megajoule of power in it, that's still enough to run a 10% efficient suit requiring peak human levels of power constantly (~1 kW) for 1 minute with a single E-11 magazine. Since I'm pretty sure that such a level of power is unnecessary for all but very brief periods of exertion (that's absolute peak exertion for very capable humans or thereabouts and I doubt you need that much to help carry 20-30 kg of stuff), an E-11 magazine has a lot more power than that available, and that an E-11 magazine, if it masses about as much as a modern magazine, is about .5 kg, it can't be hard to make lightweight batteries for your armor.

Assuming, say, a more reasonable 30% efficiency and a 10 megajoule magazine (probably still low on the magazine capacity), and an average requirement of about 500 watts in combat (this is enough to, not counting mechanical inefficiencies, hoist 50 kilograms of stuff upwards at 1 m/s continuously), .5 kilos of battery give your suit one and a half hours of combat endurance. 10 kilograms worth of battery (well within capacity) give your armor enough endurance that it'll last long enough.

The question here is how much would the enhancement systems necessary to lift all this extraneous battery and gear mass? Someone else will have to fill me in on a B-1 battledroid's mass and whatever strength level it had, but

So what's the purpose of all this added lifting capacity? I suppose the major one would be sticking another 15-20 kilos of armor onto it. Stormtrooper armor, if it wants someone to retain mobility and keep a reasonable level of endurance, is probably going to at most weigh as much as full plate (~20 kg), which doubles the armor protection.

The second one would be sticking more sensors, carrying more stuff, etc.

If stormtroopers are a reasonably elite force, powered armor makes a fair degree of sense for them. Training costs money. If Stormtroopers are generic grunts, it depends on what roles they're supposed to be taking.

I think, and you may or may not disagree since most of my EU knowledge is either secondhand or 4 years or so old, that the Galactic Empire may have overextended itself in terms of hiring soldiers, and ran out of money to equip them to their full potential. Cronyism and incompetence certainly didn't help things, and I suppose Palpatine's superweapon fetish didn't either.

I can imagine Palpatine striking off sensible, useful, but not terribly impressive-sounding initiatives, like, say, power armor off the budget to build more and more monuments to his insanity and megalomania like the Death Stars. :p