Regarding ion cannons...

[Srelex]

It seems to be general policy here and in scifi debating in general to assume that tech functions in differing universes as it does in it's home one. With that said, I was bored earlier and wondering about the effectiveness of SW ion cannons against other 'verse's shields--for example, would the big ion guns of the Malevolence from the Clone Wars series have the same effect on, say, an IoM battleship as they did against SW vessels as they did in the series? If this was connected to a fanfic, what sort of approach would be the best to take in regards to this?

[Simon_Jester]

If there's a huge difference between the modes of shields' operation, then it may affect their usefulness. 40k void shields have strange (possibly variable) modes of operation, and might be able to 'swallow' an ion bolt that would cause a lot of problems for a Star Wars ship. I don't know.

[Purple]

40K void shields like all 40K tech are described so differently in different places that my personal opinion is that they are not even the same thing but rather that the IOM has many different types of shields that all get grouped under the same name. I can't find you any quotes right now but the point is that they are different enough from SW ships that the ion canon might not work.

[Batman]

Given that Wars ion cannon have about as much basis in real world science as Trek phasers do the only answer I'd consider accurate if questioned 'what effects would they have on universe X's shields' would be 'I haven't the foggiest'.

[lordofchange13]

The 40k "Shields" shunt the energy/bullets/nukes to the Warp. so more then likly the anti-shield guns of SW would not have the same desired effect. But you could say sume bull about how the ions disrupt the "psyker field" of the warp powered shields. In your fanfic, it would probably be best just say the ion guns have minimal effect on the IOM ships.

[Darth Tedious]

Really, for the purpose of a fanfic, you have the advantage of writer's fiat. Out of the possible options (they have no effect, reduced effect, work as normal, work better than norma, works weirdly and has a completely different effect) you can apply the one which best serves the story.

[Purple]

One thing to remember thou is that IOM ships often have too many manual backups (read just manual labor) for things. Even if you decide that the Ion canons drop enemy shields the imperial captain will be stunned to find that the enemy guns are still firing, loaded diligently by the hands of galley slaves.

[khursed]

One thing to remember thou is that IOM ships often have too many manual backups (read just manual labor) for things. Even if you decide that the Ion canons drop enemy shields the imperial captain will be stunned to find that the enemy guns are still firing, loaded diligently by the hands of galley slaves.

Goes along what I'd think.

You could probably make a case for disrupting electronics and maybe some of their energy distribution grid, however a lot of the expected effects might be absent or simply different.

It's a clear case of whoever writes it, calls it.

[Stark]

'Absent or different'? Unless the level of autmation in IOM ships is around that of WWI (not impossible), they're still going to see the difference between director-laid gunfire and assisted ammunition handling and 'some idiot squinting' and 'some guys carrying shells'.

[someone_else]

Heh, it is unclear if the Ion cannon would work if shooting on an unshielded EMP-hardened modern vehicle (ion cannons are just an incarnation of the OMG THE ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE KILLS COMPUTERS hype, making stuff that doesn't give a fuck about EMP is doable, and most military stuff should be), so go figure.

Imperium stuff shows lots of techlevel variability due to logistic issues.

Rule of Cool applies.

[Whiskey144]

'Absent or different'? Unless the level of autmation in IOM ships is around that of WWI (not impossible), they're still going to see the difference between director-laid gunfire and assisted ammunition handling and 'some idiot squinting' and 'some guys carrying shells'.

I'll simply point out that the Nova Cannon used in Graham McNeill's Warriors of Ultramar novel did indeed use a "some idiot squinting" [through a telescope] system to aim it, and a "some guys carrying shells" method of loading*.

*Granted, the ratings didn't actually load it per se, but rather used an immense number of chains and pulleys to maneuver the nova cannon shell up from the magazine and into the barrel, before using similar mechanisms to shut the breech to ready the gun for firing.

[Batman]

Notice that Stark didn't say it can't be done, only that it'll be a hell of a lot less effective. As in the guy squinting through the telescope is going to be a lot less accurate (or at the very least a lot slower) than a targeting computer using sensors, and hand-loading a gun is going to be a lot slower (and less maintainable) than an automated loading mechanism. (Properly maintained, the loading mechanism will deliver the same performance every time. Humans-not so much).

[Connor MacLeod]

In 40K you can have steam power and cogwheels onboard the ship for no discernable reason. Or starship comms that work by hand crank (especially in a Ben Counter novel.) Crew complements for even cruiser scale vessels can run from mere "thousands" to "a hundred thousand" depending on your source and how Age of Sail you want to get.

As a rule, they do have a more centralized, computerized fire control (mainly with the human serfs loading the guns) but there are cases where "manual" targeting does happen. It may just be a backup, or it may just be a very low-tech run ship, or it may be a combination of both (yay grimdark?)

We know that 40K ships probably can be affected by ion cannon fire* becaue they have ammo that is meant to duplicate that sort of effect (disruption shells as of Battlefleet Koronus) - and taking those systems out WILL affect crew performance, because it forces you to some measure of human-scale response times, reactions, etc. (EG no near-c multi-light second broadsides or something like that, like I've seen some people claim as "common." even when it isn't.)

* Bearing in mind ion cannons are fairly magical devices themselves, and can be.. variable in interpretation, description, and effect. I wouldnt' assume ion cannons are neccesarily equivalent to EMP, because the evidence was never that clear cut - there are the DEMP guns for example, whicha re separate and distinct from ion cannons.

As far as OP goes, in my experience we take it on the concept of "unless we have some reason to believe it works, we assume it won't" - alot of this will hinge on similar events in other universes (EG charged particle or ion cannon like effects causing disruption or disabling effects, or knowledge of the mechanisms - like shielding - being involved.) The logic goes "assuming it works grants one side or the other an ability it might not normally or actually possess, so we assume it doesn't work until demonstrated otherwise."

For example, take transporters from Star Trek, and displacers from the Culture novels. We generally assume ST transporters don't work against shields because they exist in realspace as some tangible beam, and can be blocked by or interfered with in different ways by various phenomena. It is, as far as I am aware, the same as saying any beam weapon would be stopped by a shield because it gets in the way of it and the target. A Culture displacer IIRC is basically a wormhole device, meant to operate at (effectively) FTL speeds over tremendous distances. As far as we know, nothing about SW shields would allow them to block such a device, and assuming SW shields could block them would be granting SW a capability it might not normally have.

[someone_else]

I wouldnt' assume ion cannons are neccesarily equivalent to EMP, because the evidence was never that clear cut - there are the DEMP guns for example, whicha re separate and distinct from ion cannons.

Yeah, just wanted to say that the general effect takes clearly inspiration from an idealized image of real-world EMP.
They are clearly magical.

[Connor MacLeod]

I think they're meant to duplicate some of the ancillary effects of real life particle beams, but in typical fashion they never really thought it out. Same way lases and turbolasers were implied to be RL lasers or something.