Posted: 2005-05-20 01:29pm
At such short ranges, directed energy weapons would likely burn through deep into the hull before detonating anyway. So long as your shields held off any debris from the blast, you'd be fine.
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
After watching the movie a second time, and paying close attention to this scene, I saw that the clonetrooper caught the saber by the hilt. Unfortunately for him, it had already impaled him. So I think that this proves that sabers cannot get lodged into a person, or at the very least it makes it ambiguous.irishmick79 wrote:I would guess if Yoda threw the saber hard enough, the hilt would get lodged in somewhere, and prevent the blade from being able to move.
MrAnderson wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:
A nuclear weapon would be far more destructive than a bunch of buzzdroids no matter how industrious they are. Those things make the most sense if you assume they were designed for capturing enemy fighter pilots alive by disabling their ships.
Buzzdroids can be used at much closer ranges and in much tighter fights without worrying about collateral damage. If those two missles had been nukes then you would have wiped out lots of droid fighters and depending on how close they are a great deal of damage could have been done to the Invisible Hand or another cap ship.
Capships aren't supposed to fight at super-close ranges. That's highly abnormal and would only happen in exceptional circumstances. Besides, you could simply dial down the yield if you're worried about collateral damage; an explosive device is still going to do much more damage to the ship it hits than one which is a kilometre away.
But then Jedi are where their ability to disable and capture becomes important.kheegan wrote:Unless I read the ICS wrongly, the Jedi starfighters do not have shields, so the buzzdroids' ability to penetrate shields is a moot point.
The two MTL's may be mounted on the trench, but they're long enough that if the mounts can depress that far down, they'd be able to fire in that arc.The Original Nex wrote:Sorry if tis has been brought up already, but I noticed that in the space battle backdrop during the Dooku duel, we see a Venator high above a Munifiscent Frigate raining fire down on it. Now, IIRC the VenStar has no large batteries on the ventral surface (excepting the SPHA-T cannon which these bolts clearly weren't). The bolts certainly didn't look like small Point-Defence bolts either. So where was all this fire coming from?
Well, the ICS say's there are 52 PDG's and I count 18 on the side so 36 for both trenches. That leaves a couple for the dorsal and ventral sides.The Original Nex wrote:I'll have to look closer when I see it again, but it seemed like the bolts were coming from more than just two locations, and the angle seemed too steep for the trench MTLs.
it's probaly the WEG design instead of the ANH Design and as for hangar it seem to that it was for cargo unloading (by freighters or by loadlifters)Warspite wrote:What the fuck happened to the Tantive IV? It looked... weird.
I don't have a problem with the hangar, it could have had a refit between ROTS and ANH that eliminated the hangar, my problem is, no one on the art department went "What the hell is that?".Lord Revan wrote:it's probaly the WEG design instead of the ANH Design and as for hangar it seem to that it was for cargo unloading (by freighters or by loadlifters)
Commerce Guild Recusant-class support destroyer.YT300000 wrote:but what about the wierd spindly one,
Banking Clan Munificent-class frigate.or the ship with row upon row of windows?
Those are V-wing starfighters.Information about the pre-TIE seen at the end would also be greatly appreciated.
Two possibilitiesWarspite wrote:What the fuck happened to the Tantive IV? It looked... weird.
Oh, I think I could.Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Damn it, you couldn't be less vague, could you?
What? But there already IS a V-Wing, seen in Dark Empire and Rogue Squadron:Those are V-wing starfighters.Information about the pre-TIE seen at the end would also be greatly appreciated.
Does it say anywhere that its the Tantive IV? It could be an earlier number, using an earlier model.Macross wrote:Two possibilitiesWarspite wrote:What the fuck happened to the Tantive IV? It looked... weird.
1) It will undergo a major refit sometime in the next 20 years.
2) Bail Organa really likes the name Tantive IV and names all his ships that.
Virtually every source that mentions it says that it's the same ship seen in Episode IV.YT300000 wrote:Does it say anywhere that its the Tantive IV? It could be an earlier number, using an earlier model.Macross wrote:Two possibilitiesWarspite wrote:What the fuck happened to the Tantive IV? It looked... weird.
1) It will undergo a major refit sometime in the next 20 years.
2) Bail Organa really likes the name Tantive IV and names all his ships that.