StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Darth Hoth wrote:Except that is not how his "talent" is shown in the original trilogy. I did not read Outbound Flight, much like I have chosen to ignore most of what has come out of the EU since Bantam lost the license (I managed to slog through tNJO, and paid the price for that), so I cannot comment on that. In the trilogy, however, his abilities essentially amount to magical precognition and telempathy. Literally from the start to the end. In the very opening of Heir to the Empire he observes the formation of a fleet and immediately discerns (without any prior knowledge) that it is commanded by an Elomin, and then sets up a response with which that species is psychologically unable to cope. Then in The Last Command a major plot point is that he can second-guess the operational aims of the New Republic on the sole basis of knowing what pieces of art Ackbar and Bel Iblis favour (when the entire Imperial intelligence apparatus, with access to a galaxy's worth of the best analysts and computer assistance there is, fails spectacularly to do so, no less). His strategic/tactical "genius" is given no rational base - he simply "knows" things that no one else does (or, arguably, logically should, for that matter).

You apparently missed a lot of the pieces to the puzzle.

For example - there had been rumours of an Elomin elite unit active in the area. Thrawn would have known about this. Another example in the Heir to the empire - the Sluissi, where he combines his knowledge of Sluissi biology with the art. So in both cases, it is not the art alone. In Dark Force Rising, his greatest successes have had nothing to do with art. He did not have art telling him that the alliance had converted cruisers to carriers (remember the convoy attack), nor did he use art in getting the Katana fleet. He uses political intrigue. In the Last Command, his greatest success - the battle of Coruscant - has nothing to do with him and art, it is pure strategy. Same for his strike on Ukio. All the role art played in that battle was - hey, the Ukians do not deal well with surprises. Let's surprise them. As for Bilbringi - instinct. The Psych profile he had amassed on Ackbar and Bel Iblis is helpful, yes. But he still made a guess. Those apparently never happen, do they? Hey, when Antilles made the correct guess that Zsinji was going to hit Kuat, was he too being wanked out of proportion?

Art is just one of the many facets to Thrawn.

Thanas wrote:

Darth Hoth wrote:Except that is not how his "talent" is shown in the original trilogy. I did not read Outbound Flight, much like I have chosen to ignore most of what has come out of the EU since Bantam lost the license (I managed to slog through tNJO, and paid the price for that), so I cannot comment on that. In the trilogy, however, his abilities essentially amount to magical precognition and telempathy. Literally from the start to the end. In the very opening of Heir to the Empire he observes the formation of a fleet and immediately discerns (without any prior knowledge) that it is commanded by an Elomin, and then sets up a response with which that species is psychologically unable to cope. Then in The Last Command a major plot point is that he can second-guess the operational aims of the New Republic on the sole basis of knowing what pieces of art Ackbar and Bel Iblis favour (when the entire Imperial intelligence apparatus, with access to a galaxy's worth of the best analysts and computer assistance there is, fails spectacularly to do so, no less). His strategic/tactical "genius" is given no rational base - he simply "knows" things that no one else does (or, arguably, logically should, for that matter).

You apparently missed a lot of the pieces to the puzzle.

For example - there had been rumours of an Elomin elite unit active in the area. Thrawn would have known about this. Another example in the Heir to the empire - the Sluissi, where he combines his knowledge of Sluissi biology with the art. So in both cases, it is not the art alone. In Dark Force Rising, his greatest successes have had nothing to do with art. He did not have art telling him that the alliance had converted cruisers to carriers (remember the convoy attack), nor did he use art in getting the Katana fleet. He uses political intrigue. In the Last Command, his greatest success - the battle of Coruscant - has nothing to do with him and art, it is pure strategy. Same for his strike on Ukio. All the role art played in that battle was - hey, the Ukians do not deal well with surprises. Let's surprise them. As for Bilbringi - instinct. The Psych profile he had amassed on Ackbar and Bel Iblis is helpful, yes. But he still made a guess. Those apparently never happen, do they? Hey, when Antilles made the correct guess that Zsinji was going to hit Kuat, was he too being wanked out of proportion?

Art is just one of the many facets to Thrawn.

It is still strange that from racial characteristics he can distill such an accurate guess, I mean what can we derive about the likely strategic decisions of Gamelin or Guderian from the fact that both of them are human?

bz249 wrote:

Thanas wrote:

Darth Hoth wrote:Except that is not how his "talent" is shown in the original trilogy. I did not read Outbound Flight, much like I have chosen to ignore most of what has come out of the EU since Bantam lost the license (I managed to slog through tNJO, and paid the price for that), so I cannot comment on that. In the trilogy, however, his abilities essentially amount to magical precognition and telempathy. Literally from the start to the end. In the very opening of Heir to the Empire he observes the formation of a fleet and immediately discerns (without any prior knowledge) that it is commanded by an Elomin, and then sets up a response with which that species is psychologically unable to cope. Then in The Last Command a major plot point is that he can second-guess the operational aims of the New Republic on the sole basis of knowing what pieces of art Ackbar and Bel Iblis favour (when the entire Imperial intelligence apparatus, with access to a galaxy's worth of the best analysts and computer assistance there is, fails spectacularly to do so, no less). His strategic/tactical "genius" is given no rational base - he simply "knows" things that no one else does (or, arguably, logically should, for that matter).

You apparently missed a lot of the pieces to the puzzle.

For example - there had been rumours of an Elomin elite unit active in the area. Thrawn would have known about this. Another example in the Heir to the empire - the Sluissi, where he combines his knowledge of Sluissi biology with the art. So in both cases, it is not the art alone. In Dark Force Rising, his greatest successes have had nothing to do with art. He did not have art telling him that the alliance had converted cruisers to carriers (remember the convoy attack), nor did he use art in getting the Katana fleet. He uses political intrigue. In the Last Command, his greatest success - the battle of Coruscant - has nothing to do with him and art, it is pure strategy. Same for his strike on Ukio. All the role art played in that battle was - hey, the Ukians do not deal well with surprises. Let's surprise them. As for Bilbringi - instinct. The Psych profile he had amassed on Ackbar and Bel Iblis is helpful, yes. But he still made a guess. Those apparently never happen, do they? Hey, when Antilles made the correct guess that Zsinji was going to hit Kuat, was he too being wanked out of proportion?

Art is just one of the many facets to Thrawn.

It is still strange that from racial characteristics he can distill such an accurate guess, I mean what can we derive about the likely strategic decisions of Gamelin or Guderian from the fact that both of them are human?

Humans are tribal and respect force, and respond disproportionally to excessive force delivered at once as opposed to gradual force.
Aliens that can fly and are descended from hawk like predatory creatures would favour swooping sudden attacks.
Desert cultures might favour rapid raids.
Water dwellers would think in 3d well.
Blah blah.

Racial characteristics are a valid field of science when talking about genuine species . (as opposed to the pseudo science of subspecies/racism)

bz249 wrote:It is still strange that from racial characteristics he can distill such an accurate guess, I mean what can we derive about the likely strategic decisions of Gamelin or Guderian from the fact that both of them are human?

If that was the only information available, nothing.

That might change if we lived in a context with a thousand or more intelligent species; it's at least plausible that there are broad patterns that can be deduced from basic information about a species' environment and history, if you know what to look for. Since the only species we know is ourselves, we naturally don't know what we're looking for.

Characteristically 'human' traits would be precisely the ones we take for granted, and thus the ones we'd be least surprised to see in a commander of our own species. In fact, I'd expect that we would rationalize them as being eminently reasonable traits that any mind-in-the-abstract would use.

Simon_Jester wrote:That might change if we lived in a context with a thousand or more intelligent species; it's at least plausible that there are broad patterns that can be deduced from basic information about a species' environment and history, if you know what to look for. Since the only species we know is ourselves, we naturally don't know what we're looking for.

Characteristically 'human' traits would be precisely the ones we take for granted, and thus the ones we'd be least surprised to see in a commander of our own species. In fact, I'd expect that we would rationalize them as being eminently reasonable traits that any mind-in-the-abstract would use.

Of course such basic traits can be said, like: Human officers like to have three of four more or less independent subordinate commanders under them. Human units tend to prefer formations and are generally trained in small unit cooperation. Humans value direct confrontations and prefer to use shock and awe tactics. Human weapons radiate power, although they tend to be overcomplicated and overengineered. Deceptions is treated as a coward way to fight by humans.

But this is just general racial behaviour and individual commanders can clearly change the balance.

^Yes, but it does allow a commander like Thrawn to capitalize on that stuff. And some universal traits are true for such a large number of people/races/animals that the chances of someone falling out of order is pretty miniscule.

Thanas wrote:^Yes, but it does allow a commander like Thrawn to capitalize on that stuff. And some universal traits are true for such a large number of people/races/animals that the chances of someone falling out of order is pretty miniscule.

Yes but overplanning leads to epic fails. The Schlieffen plan had calculated what should the troops do in each minute and failed miserably, because the troops on the field can not follow the itinaire, thus deviations build up and from that point the plan was more hinderance than aid. A real genious never creates such a complicated chain, it is not fail safe.

bz249 wrote:

Thanas wrote:^Yes, but it does allow a commander like Thrawn to capitalize on that stuff. And some universal traits are true for such a large number of people/races/animals that the chances of someone falling out of order is pretty miniscule.

Yes but overplanning leads to epic fails. The Schlieffen plan had calculated what should the troops do in each minute and failed miserably, because the troops on the field can not follow the itinaire, thus deviations build up and from that point the plan was more hinderance than aid. A real genious never creates such a complicated chain, it is not fail safe.

Please do not use the Schlieffen plan unless you really know what you are talking about.

Thrawn also did not plan everything down to the last minute.
In any way, it is not like a simultaneous method existed for Thrawn to meticulously oversee every battle and give orders should something go contrary to plan....oh wait, it did.

Does Darth Bane qualify as a villain? Despite some of the ridiculousness about the Battle of Ruusan and the tactics used by the Brotherhood of Darkness, the character of Bane I think has turned out really well and I am really looking forward to the next Bane book in December.

Darth Fanboy wrote:Does Darth Bane qualify as a villain? Despite some of the ridiculousness about the Battle of Ruusan and the tactics used by the Brotherhood of Darkness, the character of Bane I think has turned out really well and I am really looking forward to the next Bane book in December.

I'm quite sure that he counts as a villain. A major Sith Lord and the founder of the Order of the Dark Lords of the Sith and someone who obviously had no qualms about killing people or using them without any consideration to any morality is a good sign that someone is a villain. Just because Bane clearly expected not to personally finish the work he started and that he showed self-discipline, restraint and intelligence does not disqualify him as a villain - it actually makes him more of a villain than a simple thug or a monster with no particular goal.

Add me down for GADM Thrawn.

I like Revan too, but the canon is he redeemed himself at the end of the first game's storyline. I sometimes wonder if maybe, given the tone of KotOR 2 TSL, perhaps Revan ought to have fell a second time.

Thanas wrote:For example - there had been rumours of an Elomin elite unit active in the area. Thrawn would have known about this.

Is that from some sourcebook? Because I cannot remember reading that in the novel.

Another example in the Heir to the empire - the Sluissi, where he combines his knowledge of Sluissi biology with the art. So in both cases, it is not the art alone.

That battle I do not remember any particular details from, so I cannot comment on that.

In Dark Force Rising, his greatest successes have had nothing to do with art. He did not have art telling him that the alliance had converted cruisers to carriers (remember the convoy attack), nor did he use art in getting the Katana fleet. He uses political intrigue.

Dark Force Rising did not have all that much on the military campaign, as I recall it; it was the middle story in the arc and focused mostly on building up the plot and the search for the Dark Force. The carrier conversion was supposedly a new discovery.

In the Last Command, his greatest success - the battle of Coruscant - has nothing to do with him and art, it is pure strategy.

Which, at that, only works because the New Republic are idiots who should not be entrusted with guarding a piggy bank. Somehow, in the middle of a war hanging in the balance, they forget to station forces to guard their capital from a surprise raid?

Same for his strike on Ukio. All the role art played in that battle was - hey, the Ukians do not deal well with surprises. Let's surprise them.

As for Bilbringi - instinct.

Translation: He just "knew" it.

The Psych profile he had amassed on Ackbar and Bel Iblis is helpful, yes. But he still made a guess. Those apparently never happen, do they? Hey, when Antilles made the correct guess that Zsinji was going to hit Kuat, was he too being wanked out of proportion?

You are comparing banthas and oswaft. Wedge reaches the conclusion that Zsinj is going to attack Kuat on the basis of analysing the forces defending the (classified) objective and comparing them to those guarding key planets while examining how a possible strike will fit into Zsinj's overall strategy. Allston shows how and why he reaches this conclusion, and before its confirmation it is treated as one of several possibilities. By contrast, Thrawn arbitrarily "knows" that everyone else in the Empire is wrong and he alone is right for no discernible reason.

Darth Hoth wrote:

Thanas wrote:For example - there had been rumours of an Elomin elite unit active in the area. Thrawn would have known about this.

Is that from some sourcebook? Because I cannot remember reading that in the novel.

Obroa - Skai was supposedly defended by them iirc. But I'll look for a direct cite when I get the books.

Another example in the Heir to the empire - the Sluissi, where he combines his knowledge of Sluissi biology with the art. So in both cases, it is not the art alone.

That battle I do not remember any particular details from, so I cannot comment on that.

In Dark Force Rising, his greatest successes have had nothing to do with art. He did not have art telling him that the alliance had converted cruisers to carriers (remember the convoy attack), nor did he use art in getting the Katana fleet. He uses political intrigue.

Dark Force Rising did not have all that much on the military campaign, as I recall it; it was the middle story in the arc and focused mostly on building up the plot and the search for the Dark Force. The carrier conversion was supposedly a new discovery.

In the Last Command, his greatest success - the battle of Coruscant - has nothing to do with him and art, it is pure strategy.

Which, at that, only works because the New Republic are idiots who should not be entrusted with guarding a piggy bank. Somehow, in the middle of a war hanging in the balance, they forget to station forces to guard their capital from a surprise raid?

Same for his strike on Ukio. All the role art played in that battle was - hey, the Ukians do not deal well with surprises. Let's surprise them.

As for Bilbringi - instinct.

Translation: He just "knew" it.

Which has got nothing to do that the overwhelming amount of victories Thrawn manages to do have nothing to do with art, they are just him being good at strategy. So far, you have only one real case here - and that is Bilbringi.

The Psych profile he had amassed on Ackbar and Bel Iblis is helpful, yes. But he still made a guess. Those apparently never happen, do they? Hey, when Antilles made the correct guess that Zsinji was going to hit Kuat, was he too being wanked out of proportion?

You are comparing banthas and oswaft. Wedge reaches the conclusion that Zsinj is going to attack Kuat on the basis of analysing the forces defending the (classified) objective and comparing them to those guarding key planets while examining how a possible strike will fit into Zsinj's overall strategy. Allston shows how and why he reaches this conclusion, and before its confirmation it is treated as one of several possibilities. By contrast, Thrawn arbitrarily "knows" that everyone else in the Empire is wrong and he alone is right for no discernible reason.

The difference here is in writing style. We are always privvy to Wedge's thoughts, we are never privvy to Thrawn's. Nevertheless, the circumstances are the same - everyone else did not get it, but the two characters did. That is not wanking, that is what makes great commanders exceptional. History is shock-full of those examples, made by less than brilliant commanders. Why is it wanking when a much more gifted commander has the same idea and luck?

Thanas wrote:Please do not use the Schlieffen plan unless you really know what you are talking about.

Would you care to elaborate on why you think the above interpretation of the von Schlieffen plan is incorrect?

Simon_Jester wrote:

Thanas wrote:Please do not use the Schlieffen plan unless you really know what you are talking about.

Would you care to elaborate on why you think the above interpretation of the von Schlieffen plan is incorrect?

I believe the problem was the plan was unworkable in the first place due to logistical problems and blaming its failure on friction is untrue.

Of course such basic traits can be said, like: Human officers like to have three of four more or less independent subordinate commanders under them. Human units tend to prefer formations and are generally trained in small unit cooperation. Humans value direct confrontations and prefer to use shock and awe tactics. Human weapons radiate power, although they tend to be overcomplicated and overengineered. Deceptions is treated as a coward way to fight by humans.

But this is just general racial behaviour and individual commanders can clearly change the balance.

That doesn't really fit- a good portion of human military history and commanders did not act that way. This fits the modern American military, but not much else.

the Concept of Thrawn was rather okay, even though its hard to grasp how he worked. Basically he's a guy really good at collecting and processing information into something that is workable. The whole bit about artwork was only a small part of it - he almost certainly studied and collected all sorts of information and then put that to use through observation. Having a good memory or access to a good database (which he probably does have onboard a star destroyer) no doubt would be an asset here. In a way I simply think of him as Sherlock Holmes combined a bit with Horatio Hornblower, although that's only a rough analogy at best.

That said, he did have some annoying traits (partiularily later on) the way in which Zahn wrote him (the stories of his first meetings with the Empire were particularily grating for me but the way he was a mastermind politician, warrior, logistician, etc.) and his "uber-wank" nature was saved only by the fact he wasn't supposed to be unique (one of twelve Grand Admirals).

As far as "best villian" - the question is too open ended. How do we define "best?" Havok mentions the EU Maul, which is a good choice - he's an evil Sith bastard and a ruthless murderer, but he also has a twisted sense of honor and morality that makes him likable (His handling of Pavan at the end of Shadow Hunter is always memorable for me). Prior ot Traviss, I would have thrown Boba Fett in there too (particularily the KW Jeter interpretation) - he was cold and amoral and a money grubbing bastard but he also had a sense of honor and morality about him.

Someone also mentioned Allston's Warlord Zsinj, who is perhaps the most likeable and well written Imperial character I have run across. He's intelligent and capable as a leader and strategist, he doesn't really HAVE a superweapon, but he's also got character without being one dimensional or overblown.

I always thought Isard had promise as a villain concept if Stackpole had handled it better and had the story been far less "Corran horn-centric". Some of the minimalism aside (IE Thyferra the sole source of Bacta), the idea of using biowarfare and a vital galactic resource to bankrupt/destroy the Republic is actually a rather clever idea IMHO. And the idea of portraying Imperial Intelligence as a major villain also had alot of merit, if they had handled it better (Again eliminating Kirtan Loor and the "Corrancentric" aspects of that might have helped.)

Cronal was memorable to me simpyl because of Stover. Stover's gotten to be a good writer and I enjoyed Shadows of Mindor even with the cameos.

I wouldn't include Nom Anor because he never really got developed in any significant way beyond being a self-centered and selfish bastard: he was a plot device and nothing more. Same with Onimi - he was a poorly developed and pathetic excuse as a villain.

Originally I was planning to do "most cruel and evil" star wars villian, but I wasn't sure that would fly. In that case Onimi would top the list, consiering the fact that he's the one who orchestrated the war, and who caused the death of trillions. Not to mention that he enjoyed it.

Darth Yan wrote:Originally I was planning to do "most cruel and evil" star wars villian, but I wasn't sure that would fly. In that case Onimi would top the list, consiering the fact that he's the one who orchestrated the war, and who caused the death of trillions. Not to mention that he enjoyed it.

Palpatine has that beat by several magnitudes.

Thanas wrote:

Darth Yan wrote:Originally I was planning to do "most cruel and evil" star wars villian, but I wasn't sure that would fly. In that case Onimi would top the list, consiering the fact that he's the one who orchestrated the war, and who caused the death of trillions. Not to mention that he enjoyed it.

Palpatine has that beat by several magnitudes.

Not magnitudes. The death and destruction caused by the Clone wars can't have been more than a magnitude from that of the Yuuzhan Vong turning a V shaped chunk of the galaxy into a charred wasteland overgrown by fungus and lacking in mechanical tools. He does get points for managing to reduce the overall standard of living (high taxes) for most of the galaxy for decades though, and purges (Jedi, protestors, beatniks, peaceniks, etc' )

ah, but I wasn't considering Movie villians. Plus, Palpatine tops it due to the fact that Onimi's batshit insane.

The Grim Squeaker wrote: Not magnitudes. The death and destruction caused by the Clone wars can't have been more than a magnitude from that of the Yuuzhan Vong turning a V shaped chunk of the galaxy into a charred wasteland overgrown by fungus and lacking in mechanical tools. He does get points for managing to reduce the overall standard of living (high taxes) for most of the galaxy for decades though, and purges (Jedi, protestors, beatniks, peaceniks, etc' )

He engineered the clone wars, which destroyed a lot of planets. He is also responsible for the Imperial civil war after his death, which utterly wrecked the empire. I really doubt the Vong managed to do the same. We are talking about galactic wars here, with the Vong never really managing to get the whole core worlds.

Thanas wrote:

The Grim Squeaker wrote: Not magnitudes. The death and destruction caused by the Clone wars can't have been more than a magnitude from that of the Yuuzhan Vong turning a V shaped chunk of the galaxy into a charred wasteland overgrown by fungus and lacking in mechanical tools. He does get points for managing to reduce the overall standard of living (high taxes) for most of the galaxy for decades though, and purges (Jedi, protestors, beatniks, peaceniks, etc' )

He engineered the clone wars, which destroyed a lot of planets.

Yes, they did, but there weren't that many cases of planets being totally destroyed, to the point of their needing to be rebuilt [Legacy]. Grevious was the exeption, and he burned a few dozen worlds at most as I recall.

He is also responsible for the Imperial civil war after his death, which utterly wrecked the empire.

Good point, I didn't think about that.

I really doubt the Vong managed to do the same. We are talking about galactic wars here, with the Vong never really managing to get the whole core worlds.

They got to Coruscant and wrecked the planet. That's hundreds of billions of deaths just there, ignoring other core worlds in the vicinity and their swathe of destruction.

Palpatine probably was responsible for more deaths than the Vong, but not for a hundred times more deaths (which is what even two orders of magnitude mean ). Are there any hard numbers on the deaths caused by the Vong or the Imperial civil war?

Palpatine wrecked coruscant as well.

Thanas wrote:Palpatine wrecked coruscant as well.

The city was damaged during the Battle of Coruscant, but you can't seriously be compared a few ships crashing into the city (with normal life resuming shortly) to the planet literally being rendered unfit for human life with most of the population entirely removed .