StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I'm not saying reject the games as history in their entirety, but that everything should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, and clearly the events of those missions in X-Wing and X-Wing Alliance did not happen. The others are allowed because there is no contradiction, similarly all of TIE Fighter is also allowed, because it doesn't contradict anything in the films.

As I recall, it was amusing that Lando was supposed to be flying the MF and Nien Numb was his copilot, but you turn and see ... Emkay. Right .....

Cussing and spitting does not help discussion.

Oh and how many miles is a Star Destroyer in length?

1.

And don't tell us what to do.

I dont seem to remember saying.... "You will NOT Cuss and spit at one another for it does not help discussion."

I was simply stating fact. Nothing more, nothing less.

And thank you for the Information on the Length Dolphin.

Vympel wrote:Ok now you've pissed me off.

I've just shown the reams of contradictions that to any rational person would prohibit them being used as any sort of technical reference on starwars spacecraft whatsoever.

No, you've shown a bunch of inconsistencies that have to be reconciled, and that you lack any sort of ability to perform rationalizations.

Are you fucking blind?!

No, you're just incapable of dealing with the source, so you have to pretend it doesnt exist.

Lets simplify this. We HAVE sources telling us how the EU is to be regarded. IT does not include making the kinds of distinctions you are trying to foist off because you lack the imagination to rationalize anything. I'm sorry you can't be bothered to make any attempt at continuity.

As I said before, concession accepted.

Oh for fuck's sake.

Go on. I'm waiting for your rationalizations.

Vympel wrote:"Again, no proof, just your insistence that they MUST be dismissed. Concession accepted"

*throws up hands*

You idiot! How the fuck else do you rationalize your character rather than LUKE FUCKING SKYWALKER blowing up the Death Star? Of course you reject something like that!!!!

Don't be dense. We already know canon overrides official, I don't believe I have to point out something so obvious to you (actually I lied, I do believe it.)

The whole Canon > Official aspect has no bearing on the fact you're attempting to foist off a completely arbitrary "caste system" on EU sources because you lack any ability at rationalization.

Vympel wrote:And additionally, I'd like to hear your brilliant opinion on what the games ARE good for, pray tell.

They're an EU source, like the novels, WEG games, and other sources.

But then again, I dont expect that fact to alter your judgement when you think something can be thrown out. Obviously I missed the party line where "Vympel's whiny tantrums about what he doesn't like in the EU override EU."

1: rationalize the gross misrepresentation of ship scaling
2: rationalize the complete error in detailing the armament of a Star Destroyer and other ships, which actually reached a peak in X-Wing Alliance where the destruction of non-canon structures on the surface of the Star Destroyer resulted in loss of weapons.
3: rationalize the factual errors in both X-Wing at the end of Campaign III and X-Wing Alliance in the Battle of Endor campaign.

You tell me I have no imagination? I tell you you're a nitpicker with nothing useful to contribute but telling everyone else they're wrong.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:How do you rationalise newer puplications that say:

The SSD is not 8 km.
DS1 is 160 km.

Among others?

We have an EU source indicating that the DS is 160 km. Either a misinformation effort by the Empire or invalid information by the Rebels.

We know the Executor is 17.6 km as per canon - both the 8 km and 12.8 km official scalings are wrong (ironically, try averaging 8 km and 17.6 km and see what you come up with.) The smaller ships must be vessels of similar shape and size that were mistaken by Rebels as being larger ships. (and of course, since we already know canon > official, whcih I have not argued against, we can ignore the 8 km scalings and rationalize them as mistakes.)

And in case you didn't notice, these are all contradictions with canon, dumbass.

No, you're just incapable of dealing with the source, so you have to pretend it doesnt exist

You fool. I'm saying that they are good as history where they don't contradict CANON.

I am saying that as a technical source, they are grossly in error on virtually every topic of importance, and are therefore, useless.

I would also add that for point 2, these sturctures can be destroyed with the shields up. More X-Wing idiocy.

Vympel wrote:Nothing gets me so angry as a 'concession accepted' where it is unjustified.

Just to put it in front of Connor's face AGAIN

- Weapons are wrong: none of the ships armaments remotely resemble those seen on the models in the film- including of course the ISD.

CAnon > official. THat has not been debated. If you bothered reading my posts rather than beating your head against the wall to get the mental gnomes working, you might have noticed I never disagreed on this point. I simply pointed out that EU sources have no such distinction among themselves.

Of course, we might also consider that there may be ISD subclasses that are armed differently, or that they may be in retractable turrets for some cases or some other similar rationalization, but that might make your head explode.

- Scaling is wrong: capital ships are tiny and if a Star Destroyer is really 1,600m long in X-Wing I'd like to know how long an X-Wing is in comparison by this ridiculous scaling.

Already dealt with this. But to reiterate for your simple mind, Canon > official has not been debated. But this has no bearing on official vs official. Yet another of your red herrings.

- Speeds are wrong: well der.

Say it with me class: "Canon > official". And for that matter, even if the speeds ARE arbitrarily set at lower velocity in this EU source and we didnt have canon acceleration figures to draw on, those speeds/accelerations cannot override higher examples, since EU sources are essentially equal.

Therefore any limitation on speed in the games must be for some other reasons than being absolute limits (the nature of the combat, for example. you think you'd accel at many thousands of gees if you fight at distances of a few km or less?) Again, if you bothered thinking things through you MIGHT realize this.

- Facts are wrong: last mission of X-Wing has you doing what Luke Skywalker did.

CAPTAIN DENSITY STRIKES AGAIN! Need I say it? Canon > official, and this has no bearing on EU in relation to itself.

- last mission of X-Wing Alliance has ridiculous historical revisionism where Lando on the Millenium Falcon orders the fighters (!) to concentrate fire on the Executor, and the Millenium Falcon destroys the Executor, only THEN going into the Death Star- where more bullshit revisionism takes place, with the Falcon taking a detour to deactivate the superlaser.

I can't believe you've made this many claims yet not grasped the simple flaw in your arguments - EVERY FUCKING EXAMPLE YOU STATE IS A CANON BASED EVENT. IF you bothered scrolling back you MIGHT notice my point was that some EU cannot be arbitriarly placed higher than others just because you feel its wrong somehow.

You have not only repeatedly failed to invalidate my argument, you have proven yourself to be incapable of actual debate. Are you positive you aren't just Darkstar masquerading under an assumed name?

These contradictions are what I like to call evidece of the games low to non-existent standing as a technical reference, and their case by case standing as history (obviously, the events of the last mission of X-Wing and X-Wing Alliance did not happen, and as such, are thrown out).

I repeat. You've proven that you're either too dumb to tell canon from official, or you're deliberately trying to mislead me. Let me repeat my point if it escaped your delusional mind at some point:


"The only "higher" source than official is canon (meaning both primary and secondary canon.). This does not prove that some official sources rank higher than others. It amazes me that people continue to claim this, yet when I ask for proof, they all start clamming up and hope I go away."

I stated this on the top of page three, and started on page 2. Note that at no time HAVE I denied that Canon overrides official, nor that secondary canon (the novels, scripts, radio dramas, etc. derived from the movies) override the EU. MY ENTIRE FUCKING POINT has been that you CANNOT make arbitrary distinctions AMONG EU SOURCES BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT HAD SUCH DISTINCTIONS MADE. You cannot rate the novels higher than WEG or the computer games. The best and ONLY way to deal with an inconsistency is to come up with a rationalization accepting BOTH EU sources equally.

Now go scamper off and bug someone else bucky. As I said before,
Concession Fucking Accepted. Just take your loss gracefully and move on.

Vympel wrote:And in case you didn't notice, these are all contradictions with canon, dumbass.

Wow, you actually CAN get facts past that ultra-dense skull of yours. Did you somehow miss it on page 3 when I mentioned that fact? ONLY CANON AND NEAR CANON OVERRIDES OFFICIAL. Official cannot override OFFICIAL.

I might also point out that I'm not the one who tried to prove that there "are" lower canon sources by using canon/official contradictions, so I wouldn't be so hasty about tossing the word "dumbass" in my direction before checking in the mirror.

Vympel wrote:

No, you're just incapable of dealing with the source, so you have to pretend it doesnt exist

You fool. I'm saying that they are good as history where they don't contradict CANON.

I repeat what I've been stating all along (as per page 3 of this thread)

"The only "higher" source than official is canon (meaning both primary and secondary canon.). This does not prove that some official sources rank higher than others. It amazes me that people continue to claim this, yet when I ask for proof, they all start clamming up and hope I go away."

Did this somehow escape your mind in that delusional ranting you started inflicting on me? I HAVE NEVER DENIED THAT CANON OVERRIDES OFFICIAL. My entire point has been regarding STRICTLY THE EU IN RELATION TO ITSELF. Obviously you did not bother reading my posts before assuming I was wrong, so you have been wasting my time by forcing me to explain this to you.

I am saying that as a technical source, they are grossly in error on virtually every topic of importance, and are therefore, useless.

And you're wrong. They Are EU, and are treated as such. And we know how the EU is treated (n regards to canon.) The simple fact that you dont think they should be usable is irrelevant. Barring canon contradiction, they are as usuable as the novels or other sources.

I would also add that for point 2, these sturctures can be destroyed with the shields up. More X-Wing idiocy.

And that was rationalized. Both Saxton and Ossus have mentioned how the X-wing series CD version mentioned this. I might point out there are a number of EU sources that indicate that shield weak points and GAPS can exist, and that since this does not happen in the EU (or canon) - there must be some reason why shields could be bypassed by the weapons - which was later countered by the Empire so we DON'T see this happening later on.

This whole thing has been YOUR fault, not mine.

Where in this thread did I say that there are castes of EU?

I speculated if X-Wing games were official, then in the next post, realized that they were, and then laid out why they shouldn't be used as a technical source, but were good as history except in individual missions where they contradict canon.

I also speculated that the ICS and VD had higher standing based on something Saxton said with reference to the SW: Encylcopedia; but I haven't got the Encylopedia, so I can't be sure.

I said the following things: in the following order:

"I criticize official sources based on whether they contradict others.

Perfect example- the X-Wing games. So inaccurate that anyone who uses them as a source is off their nut."

I then clarified:

"But even if they are official; I think those are pretty compelling reasons to accord them no technical standing whatsoever.

SW.com uses the events of TIE Fighter as part of the 'history' of SW. That's as much as I'm willing to give them"

I then said:

"Also, they look like they are official, but judging from the REAMS of technical errors, the games are only good as history, and even then that's case by case basis (i.e. we have to reject the last mission of X-Wing)."

So where am I introducing an EU caste system?!

And what the fuck is the exact problem of newer sources overriding older ones?

It makes perfect sense to most people, so why not to you?

Well just because its new does not mean that it is superior information.

It all really depends on how much research the writer did for the book. Thats all that should matter, not the age.

"Of course, we might also consider that there may be ISD subclasses that are armed differently, or that they may be in retractable turrets for some cases or some other similar rationalization, but that might make your head explode"

A very lame rationalization at that. I take it this subclass is so small that the pilot of an X-Wing, if standing, would be almost as tall as the command tower, and I guess these retractable turrets have displaced the obvious turrets seen on both the Devastator and Avenger models. Also, why would the Rebels call them 'Imperial' and 'Imperial II' class if that's not what they are?

And you're wrong. They Are EU, and are treated as such. And we know how the EU is treated (n regards to canon.) The simple fact that you dont think they should be usable is irrelevant. Barring canon contradiction, they are as usuable as the novels or other sources

So pray tell on what technical matters are the X-Wing games not contradicted? Considering that the very foundation of the games is horribly skewed in terms of weaponry, scale, etc?

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:And what the fuck is the exact problem of newer sources overriding older ones?

It makes perfect sense to most people, so why not to you?

Because there is no basis for it than an arbitrary assumption. THat alone is bad. Not that its even needed.

Explain.

Vympel wrote: A very lame rationalization at that. I take it this subclass is so small that the pilot of an X-Wing, if standing, would be almost as tall as the command tower, and I guess these retractable turrets have displaced the obvious turrets seen on both the Devastator and Avenger models. Also, why would the Rebels call them 'Imperial' and 'Imperial II' class if that's not what they are?

I'm sure you've scaled them, given your painstakingly detailed analytical methods.

besides which, you apparently have missed the point I have been making - EU cannot contradict itself.

So pray tell on what technical matters are the X-Wing games not contradicted? Considering that the very foundation of the games is horribly skewed in terms of weaponry, scale, etc?

Well lets see:

1.) Beam weapons

2.) Yields of the weapons (there are many kinds of warheads, duh)

3.) countermeasures.


You appear to not be able to get past this assumption of yours that somehow the games MUST be dismissed if any sort of consistency is to be maintained. Not only have you proven to be tremendously narrowminded, you apparently feel that being completely selective in how you handle sources is acceptable. Which probably shouldn't surprise me at all.

I've proven my poitn and countered each and every one of your arguments. The only thing you can do is continually whine "but they're NOT canon, they're NOT!" and plug your ears hoping I might go away. You have no proof, no argument, and no hope.

Concession accepted.

I'm still waiting for you to admit I wasn't arguing for an EU caste system, Connor, only commenting on X-Wing games as a soruce.

Well assume that you read a book two years ago and the writer spent time researching Star Wars and he put out a fine novel.

Now assume that just this week a book comes out for Star Wars written by a person who just pulled all the information out of his rear and he was wrong on every other page.


Now by assuming that New novels over ride old ones, it is being said that the new crap is better then the high quality older one. When in fact the older one is the more accurate one.