Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Nice link, though.

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

purplefood wrote:But aren't the varying depictions of these weapons' power different from author to author?
Same for the strength of their armour and shields?

It's called high and low end values. Generally you look at the factors between the high end, low end, and average examples and figure out a baseline. It's never going to be easy or precise, but you can do it.

Then how do you reconcile outright contradictory pieces of canon with one another? Like how apparently several million clones are holding off quintillions of droids.

Given that her number wasn't actually canon given the fact that officially the word from the owners of the Star Wars property is that a book can only be canon if it doesn't contradict a higher source. Thus, because of what we see in the movies and the fact that other sources mention thousands of ships, a number that wouldn't be needed for so few clones, it gets discounted. Also, her work has been discounted by several other sources within the company and the author has actually made threats against fans online and has been cited as actually aiming to troll the fanbase. We can only be glad she's working on Gears of War stuff now.

So the movies are a reliable basis for looking at standard range in SW naval engagements now? Cool.

But also by that standard, quintillions of droids can be easily discounted, since they couldn't even be transported by hundreds of thousands of ships.

The ranges we see in the movies are for a fight where the rebels closed in to limit the DSII's fire arcs. The other is under a planetary shield forcing them close.

Canadian 5th wrote:

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

purplefood wrote:But aren't the varying depictions of these weapons' power different from author to author?
Same for the strength of their armour and shields?

It's called high and low end values. Generally you look at the factors between the high end, low end, and average examples and figure out a baseline. It's never going to be easy or precise, but you can do it.

Then how do you reconcile outright contradictory pieces of canon with one another? Like how apparently several million clones are holding off quintillions of droids.

Given that her number wasn't actually canon given the fact that officially the word from the owners of the Star Wars property is that a book can only be canon if it doesn't contradict a higher source. Thus, because of what we see in the movies and the fact that other sources mention thousands of ships, a number that wouldn't be needed for so few clones, it gets discounted. Also, her work has been discounted by several other sources within the company and the author has actually made threats against fans online and has been cited as actually aiming to troll the fanbase. We can only be glad she's working on Gears of War stuff now.

So the movies are a reliable basis for looking at standard range in SW naval engagements now? Cool.

But also by that standard, quintillions of droids can be easily discounted, since they couldn't even be transported by hundreds of thousands of ships.

The ranges we see in the movies are for a fight where the rebels closed in to limit the DSII's fire arcs. The other is under a planetary shield forcing them close.

And the Clone Wars engagements?

BTW, completely ignoring other points in a person's argument is generally considered poor form.

Emperors Faithful wrote:And the Clone Wars engagements?

BTW, completely ignoring other points in a person's argument is generally considered poor form.

Completely ignored, how did I ignore anything you asked about the movies and I answered by pointing out that we see all of two major space battles in the movies. One at the start of Episode III under a shield which forces a close fight, and the other an ambush where they did something unusual by closing in to limit fire arcs.

As for the Cartoons, they aren't on the same level of canon as the movies and are actually even below the books. The events shown happened, but not always the exact same way.

How do you assign factual numbers and equations to things that don't actually exist and for technology that we have no way of truly understanding how any of it works let alone what it is all capable of

Commisar Wolfie wrote:How do you assign factual numbers and equations to things that don't actually exist and for technology that we have no way of truly understanding how any of it works let alone what it is all capable of

Easy, if to blows up a rock it blows up a rock. You can determine the energy input that feat takes by some basic math. If a large ball of ice melts, then you can do the same. You don't need to know how something works to know what it can do.

But how do you even know what it is actually capable of doing? Since half of the technology and items used in both "make-believe" worlds in now way exist in our world.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:But how do you even know what it is actually capable of doing? Since half of the technology and items used in both "make-believe" worlds in now way exist in our world.

A direct energy weapon like a turbolaser, or a big gun, or a lance battery, is pretty easy stuff. It's job is to send a destructive amount of energy into something. Thus when you see a flash of light blow up an asteroid, if you can figure out the size of the rock, you can get an idea of how much energy it would take to do that. For things like FTL travel, you can look at scenes from the books and movies. In the case of 40k it can be between arrive before you left, years late, and never come back. In Star Wars it's hours for fast ships in an emergency and a week for a slow bulk goods cargo ship. Shields can often be based on weapons strengths, if shields are lower powered than weapons combat will tend to be shorter or more brutal like in 40k or Trek, if they are more even you will tend to see longer battles with less damage and less ships lost.

ok still not really answering the question. Lets you wacth me break a rock with a sledge hammer. You have no way of knowing if i used minimal force to break it or if i used all my force to break it. All you know is I broke a rock with a sledge hammer. (I know it not a perfect example) So in this same vein how do you know what power level weapons are fireing at and if they are at maximum or minimal or somewhere in between and what said weapons are capable of.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:ok still not really answering the question. Lets you wacth me break a rock with a sledge hammer. You have no way of knowing if i used minimal force to break it or if i used all my force to break it. All you know is I broke a rock with a sledge hammer. (I know it not a perfect example) So in this same vein how do you know what power level weapons are fireing at and if they are at maximum or minimal or somewhere in between and what said weapons are capable of.

You don't know if any one example is the highest or the lowest. You need to look at more than one example to determine if that event was higher or lower than average in power. In the case of Star Wars the asteroid scene is average for lighter weapons on a large ship. We already knew that fighters had kiloton yield main weapons and mid megaton to low gigaton scale projectiles. Thus the scene fits with no added work.

Ok for that one scene what about others? What about 40K where things change depending on the edition and author? Plus very very very few motion picture examples like star wars. Which seems to be the only thing you know about and so in no way could you give any unbiased opinion.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:Ok for that one scene what about others? What about 40K where things change depending on the edition and author? Plus very very very few motion picture examples like star wars. Which seems to be the only thing you know about and so in no way could you give any unbiased opinion.

Sorry, I know Star Wars and many examples are brought back to the movies to see if they fit or not. In 40k you do the same thing and then work out if it was a different era that the ship is from, the condition of the ship/gun/tank, and then work from there. I even posted an entire page of threads on this subject for 40k.

Ok but in your opening post you were offering to run the numbers. But you just stated that your knowledge lies with SW and not in 40K. Infact you want somebody else to do all the number crunching for 40K. Very well I will do my "math" and you can do yours.
bolt pistol power = infinty
bolter power = inifinty
lascannon power = infinity

should I keep going?

Commisar Wolfie wrote:Ok but in your opening post you were offering to run the numbers. But you just stated that your knowledge lies with SW and not in 40K. Infact you want somebody else to do all the number crunching for 40K. Very well I will do my "math" and you can do yours.
bolt pistol power = infinty
bolter power = inifinty
lascannon power = infinity

should I keep going?

Actually I said I would do it if people asked. I also pointed them to works done by somebody else who's math is good and who is fairly impartial overall.

As for your numbers, what basis do you have? If a bolter was of infinite power then the recoild would be horrific and you wouldn't want to stand near it or it would light the atmosphere on fire. Also, given that bolters can't defeat all armor first try, does that mean armor is often infinite+ or even infinite++? Also, why would you need a lascannon if a bolter was already of infinite power.

See, your method has holes I can drive a truck through. Can you say that I'm wrong when I say that melting a 1,000km block of ice releases around 1.5x10^26 joules of energy?

All im saying is fake math is fake math regardless of how fancy you make it. and that is exactly what my basis was. Your makeing up numbers for things that do not exist except in the imagination of the creators and fans and so therefore can not be assigned any value in the real world because it is not real. So I used my imaginary numbers and imaginary facts to come up with my imiginary facts to dispute your imiginary numbers.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:All im saying is fake math is fake math regardless of how fancy you make it. and that is exactly what my basis was. Your makeing up numbers for things that do not exist except in the imagination of the creators and fans and so therefore can not be assigned any value in the real world because it is not real. So I used my imaginary numbers and imaginary facts to come up with my imiginary facts to dispute your imiginary numbers.

Except that your numbers have no basis in the fluff of the game world you're reading about. A bolter that can blow a regular person in half so long as that person isn't wearing armor isn't the next page going to blow up a tank through the frontal armor. If a gun makes a giant crater and kills tanks with single hits in one book, unless it has a good reason to do something else the author will tend to make a big gun blow up big holes in the next and other authors likely will as well. Lasguns are actually among the things with the most varied description, next are bolters, after that things tend to fall in line more.

Example, if an asteroid of say 25m diameter is blown up by an energy weapon, how much energy does that take?

Or, if I melt a 1m cube of ice how much energy do I need?

A bolter that can blow a regular person in half so long as that person isn't wearing armor isn't the next page going to blow up a tank through the frontal armor

This is 40k, it just *might* do that.

Also, all of 40k's visual media... as defined by video games and (a) movie... are decidedly "non-canon" in their depiction of units, fighting style, weapon power and so forth. Those make for interesting visual spectacle, but in no way, shape or form conform to anything printed regarding the actual game-mechanics or effects of weapons.

If you took DoW: Soulstorm as an example, you would believe that the IG fields lascannons with fully-automatic fire and a limitless ammunition supply, and that the IG would declare that the Space Marines and the Sisters of Battle were both groups of "extremists" that should be purged from their world.

Yeah... it doesn't work that way in 40K.

About the asteroid... what's it made out of? Porous rock? Calcite? Titanium? Admantium? Unobtanium?

We're still argueing who has the better make-believe world

Psienesis wrote:

A bolter that can blow a regular person in half so long as that person isn't wearing armor isn't the next page going to blow up a tank through the frontal armor

This is 40k, it just *might* do that.

Also, all of 40k's visual media... as defined by video games and (a) movie... are decidedly "non-canon" in their depiction of units, fighting style, weapon power and so forth. Those make for interesting visual spectacle, but in no way, shape or form conform to anything printed regarding the actual game-mechanics or effects of weapons.

If you took DoW: Soulstorm as an example, you would believe that the IG fields lascannons with fully-automatic fire and a limitless ammunition supply, and that the IG would declare that the Space Marines and the Sisters of Battle were both groups of "extremists" that should be purged from their world.

Yeah... it doesn't work that way in 40K.

About the asteroid... what's it made out of? Porous rock? Calcite? Titanium? Admantium? Unobtanium?

Show me an example of weapons power varying by that many orders of magnitude in 40k?

Who says the movie is non-canon? It was approved by GW and doesn't show anything that is inconsistent with the novels. You'll also notice that I said game cutscenes, the events of the games actual story are considered canon though. So all that dumb Blood Angels stuff really did happen.

Funny, I think it does. As does somebody who has run the numbers for years now for the 40k universe.

Generally based on appearance they are assumed to be nickel iron as that fits and is a common type. However you can run them as the lowest energy you can find that still fits, thus they couldn't be ice or rubble piles loosely bound by ice and gravity. They can be rocky asteroids, and the calculations have been done for granite, nickel iron, and silicone. Guess which takes more energy?

Canadian 5th wrote:

Emperors Faithful wrote:And the Clone Wars engagements?

BTW, completely ignoring other points in a person's argument is generally considered poor form.

Completely ignored, how did I ignore anything, you asked about the movies and I answered by pointing out that we see all of two major space battles in the movies.

You ignored this. And you also ignored my comment on the quintillions of droids.

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Emperors Faithful wrote:So hang on, purplefood is the one making an ass out of himself?

It's very difficult to get such measurements for 40k, becuase they don't really go into much detail. Nowhere does it state what sort of energy goes into upholding a gellar field, nor does it say what the energy output of their weapons are.

It can be tough, but isn't really that hard if you're willing to do a little work.

Enlighten me. Onus is on you here, after all.

Sure, you can make comparitive examples. For example, Star Wars shields aren't capable of blocking asteroids (or quickly weaken the shields until one gets through), as seen in ESB. On the other hand, BFG ships have shields that essentially brush aside asteroids (unless the asteroid is nearing the size of the ship itself) per the BFG rules, but the moment that they are without shields and they come into contact with an asteroid there is serious damage (capable of destroying outright smaller escort ships).

Ignore the fact that they were in that highly active field, for days at least,

So you can cite a source where it says that the asteroid field was unusually active, and that the ships had been out there for days. Becuase right now it looks like these excuses are your own personal speculations.

and that they likely had shields down for better long range communications and scanning.

They had shields down? Shields up affect communications and scanning? Oh right, this is more of that speculation that you seem to hate so much.

Not to mention that the ship survived the incident.

Yeah, as would most ships in the Imperial Navy with shields down (unless you rolled like an absolute champion on the Critical Damage table).

If an asteroid at that size and speed could really hurt them then they wouldn't need to arm transports with 200 Gigaton/second main guns.

And how does this measure up to Imperial Navy ship's shields just brushing aside asteroids?

Nor would we ships ships capable to melting 1,000km asteroids failing to kill ships in the same weight class.

"Now would we see ship capable..."?

I'm not saying an ISD couldn't go toe-to-toe with a Cobra Class Escort (in fact it would probably come off better as energy weapons have greater accuracy than ordnance). All I've done is show how you can compare the difference in shield strength.

The key to doing so in a relaxed and civil manner is, of course, to not be a dick about it if anyone so much as disagrees with you.

I'll cut you slack when you can cite sources and produce numbers.

Firstly, what more can I do? What I've told you is simply from the BFG rules for moving through Asteroid fields. If you don't believe me, GW still has the BFG rules sheet on it's website I think, and you can check for yourself.
Secondly, that dick thing I was talking about? You're still failing at it.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat480005a&categoryId=1100007§ion=&aId=4300022

One at the start of Episode III under a shield which forces a close fight, and the other an ambush where they did something unusual by closing in to limit fire arcs.

As for the Cartoons, they aren't on the same level of canon as the movies and are actually even below the books. The events shown happened, but not always the exact same way.

Okay, there's obviously some official high-end source that not only says that the Space Battles in the Clone Wars Cartoons and movies (I can't recall anywhere where it said that they were engaging underneath the planetary shields) are incorrect, but it replaces these incorrect sources with a definite example that SW naval engagements ussually occur hundreds thousands of kilometres apart. I'd still like to see it.

Whoever started talking about Star Wars is threadjacking and defying moderator action by resuming a locked discussion. This isn't the 40k vs Star Wars thread.

Emperors Faithful wrote:You ignored this. And you also ignored my comment on the quintillions of droids.

I was talking to like 3 people, I missed it.

Emperors Faithful wrote:Enlighten me. Onus is on you here, after all.

You can do some of your own work, it's not on me to do everything here.

So you can cite a source where it says that the asteroid field was unusually active, and that the ships had been out there for days. Becuase right now it looks like these excuses are your own personal speculations.

Most asteroid fields don't contain rocks bashing into each other nor with that level of density. From wikipedia on our own asteroid field:

The remaining bodies range down to the size of a dust particle. The asteroid material is so thinly distributed that multiple unmanned spacecraft have traversed it without incident. Nonetheless, collisions between large asteroids do occur, and these can form an asteroid family whose members have similar orbital characteristics and compositions.

The Hoth field was clearly dense enough that an unmanned probe that is unable to do much course correction would have been destroyed.

On the field's density and activity:

wookiepedia wrote:The Hoth asteroid field, also known as the Anoat Asteroid Belt, was an extensive, wildly erratic asteroid belt occupying the farthest orbit of the Hoth system in the Outer Rim Territories. Forged as the resulting effect of a collision between two rocky planets eons prior to the Galactic Civil War, the belt was a favored sanctuary for smugglers and pirates alike hoping to elude legal authority. The field was rich in untapped mineral resources such as metal ore, a magnet for mining prospectors hoping to make a fortune. The chaotic nature of the asteroid field sent a constant bombardment of meteorites to the surface of Hoth, the system's sixth planet.

On the time spent in the field:

wookiepedia wrote:The Millennium Falcon spent several days hiding within the massive asteroid while Solo and his passengers worked to repair the ship's faulty hyperdrive.[1] Solo cleverly shut down the ship's primary systems in order to avoid detection by the probing Imperial ships the group could hear overhead trying to chase them out. It was while cooped up within the close confines of the Millennium Falcon for several days that the longstanding romantic tensions between Solo and Organa first began to blossom. The princess finally warmed to Solo's roguish charms as they shared one of their first kisses within the deep innards of the asteroid.

However, it was not the might of the Imperial Navy that eventually flushed the Millennium Falcon out of its hiding place. The group soon discovered that mynocks living inside of the cavern had attached themselves to the ship's power cables, leeching the ship of its energy. While clearing the ship of the parasites, Solo and Chewbacca unwittingly discovered the true nature of their hiding spot. Stray blaster bolts fired into the walls of the cave had strangely caused the grotto to shake violently. It was not a simple cave that Solo had hidden his ship in, but the nesting area of a giant exogorth. Solo was able to pilot his ship out of the closing jaws of the massive space slug with only seconds to spare, but at the expense of knowing they would once again be engaged by the Imperial fleet.[2] The existence of an enormous space slug within the asteroid field had been written off as spacer legend until Solo's run-in with the creature. However, some continued to disbelieve the story, based on Solo's reputation for exaggeration.

[1] Galaxy Guide 3: The Empire Strikes Back, Second Edition
[2] Star Wars Episode V

They had shields down? Shields up affect communications and scanning? Oh right, this is more of that speculation that you seem to hate so much.

I can't find a source for that, so I may have misremembered.

Yeah, as would most ships in the Imperial Navy with shields down (unless you rolled like an absolute champion on the Critical Damage table).

So the IoM has lost ships to asteroid fields then.

Anyway, the Avenger, the ship struck, survived with 'damage' we don't hear how much damage.

wookiepedia wrote:The Avenger was the only ship attached to Death Squadron that managed to stay with the Falcon through the entirety of the asteroid field, earning the warship a reputation for persistence among the Imperial Navy. Needa had sent his Star Destroyer headfirst into the asteroids as Vader had commanded, sustaining substantial damage in the process. It was all his gunnery crews could do to try and keep up with the endless task of trying to shoot down the rocky debris in the Star Destroyer's path. So, when Solo suddenly and unexpectedly banked the Millennium Falcon on an attack course straight for the pursuing Avenger, Needa and his crew were ill-prepared and lost the Rebel ship for good.[1]

[1] Galaxy Guide 3: The Empire Strikes Back, Second Edition

And how does this measure up to Imperial Navy ship's shields just brushing aside asteroids?

Well, a 40 metre wide asteroid such as in the Hoth field striking with a relative speed of between 40m/s and 200m/s would impart an energy of between 0.05 kilotons and 1.2 kilotons. So they clearly weren't the primary threat to the ISD. However the lone ISD that is noted to be damaged was the same ship that was also hit by an ion cannon right before starting the chase. Thus it was likely that it was still recovering from battle damage and that Needa did the same thing as an 40k captain and pushed in with a ship that should have seen a repair dock.

A source for it having been disabled is here:

wookiepedia wrote:The Avenger was later reassigned to Death Squadron and served as the lead attack ship at Hoth. During the course of the battle, the Avenger was disabled. [3]

[3]A Guide to the Star Wars Universe, Third Edition

We know that damage from such weapons can be repaired, but we don't know to what extent they had time to fix things before taking multiple asteroid impacts. Also, being forced to fire her weapons for days on end to keep asteroids away would have placed a strain on the ships power systems, so that is another factor. A damaged ship was forced right into a hostile situation where it was fighting for days without proper repair and refit. Thus it's not really the best representation of how much punishment a ship can take.

"Now would we see ship capable..."?

I'm not saying an ISD couldn't go toe-to-toe with a Cobra Class Escort (in fact it would probably come off better as energy weapons have greater accuracy than ordnance). All I've done is show how you can compare the difference in shield strength.

You're going to need to show that bigger equals more powerful if you think the best an ISD can take is a Cobra.

Firstly, what more can I do? What I've told you is simply from the BFG rules for moving through Asteroid fields. If you don't believe me, GW still has the BFG rules sheet on it's website I think, and you can check for yourself.

Great, and in Star Wars games a lone fighter beats an ISD and Marines can be killed by a lone grot at least some of the time. Game mechanics aren't evidence for a debate or I could prove that any Star Wars fighter can bring down a ship many times larger than itself, that people in the Star Wars universe can heal by picking up health kits, and that no matter how many weapons you carry you never get encumbered. I could also show that lascannons have a range of under a hundred meters.

I bet you dislike your own rules now don't you?

Asking you to do your own work is being a dick?

Okay, there's obviously some official high-end source that not only says that the Space Battles in the Clone Wars Cartoons and movies (I can't recall anywhere where it said that they were engaging underneath the planetary shields) are incorrect, but it replaces these incorrect sources with a definite example that SW naval engagements ussually occur hundreds thousands of kilometres apart. I'd still like to see it.

Why would sources list effective range for a ship as being 10 light minutes if it was never used? I'll need to dosome poking to find exact examples for longer range engagements, but they certainly do exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Raxmei wrote:Whoever started talking about Star Wars is threadjacking and defying moderator action by resuming a locked discussion. This isn't the 40k vs Star Wars thread.

It's my thread, we can debate this if we like. If a mod has an issue with the topic, and not the way it was being talked about then they can deal with it. You're not a mod so stop pretending we need to care.

I can appreciate exactly how super serious this is, but let's not get too snarky here please people.

I wouldn't mind having some values to work with in the future, if you can work if out, by all means! You have my blessings on this. The Emperor protects.

If only your fellows were so polite.

I'll do what I can on that front when it isn't near 5am.

If people are to make any comparison you have to start with the assumption that basic rules of physics, chemistry and mathematics are the same in the SF universes to be examined and the modern day, except where needed to allow science fictiony things such as FTL travel.

Kilkrazy wrote:If people are to make any comparison you have to start with the assumption that basic rules of physics, chemistry and mathematics are the same in the SF universes to be examined and the modern day, except where needed to allow science fictiony things such as FTL travel.

Yup, you also need to treat what you see on screen or in text as a real account of what happened unless given reason to do otherwise.

Yes, and what happens if the description conflicts with reality.

For example, it takes a certain amount of energy for the human body to maintain itself, move around and do work. There is no way around this because the energy contained in molecules is a factor of chemical laws.

Therefore the idea of a food pill is nonsense. Even if you found a way to compress a day's rations into a pill-sized table, it would still weight the same as a day's rations.

Kilkrazy wrote:Yes, and what happens if the description conflicts with reality.

For example, it takes a certain amount of energy for the human body to maintain itself, move around and do work. There is no way around this because the energy contained in molecules is a factor of chemical laws.

Therefore the idea of a food pill is nonsense. Even if you found a way to compress a day's rations into a pill-sized table, it would still weight the same as a day's rations.

Not entirely true actually, we can, today, pack enough energy and vitamins into a pill and a shake to keep you alive and well. Not to mention that an MRE already gives you more vitamins and calories than a meal you would cook at home.

For other really out there stuff, like FTL travel, you just have to accept that it works as advertised and go from there. We don't need to understand exactly how a ship passes the speed of light, we just need to know how fast, for how long, and with what risks.

Canadian 5th wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:If people are to make any comparison you have to start with the assumption that basic rules of physics, chemistry and mathematics are the same in the SF universes to be examined and the modern day, except where needed to allow science fictiony things such as FTL travel.

Yup, you also need to treat what you see on screen or in text as a real account of what happened unless given reason to do otherwise.

This will be an interesting exercise! I think the calculations will be chiefly interesting from the perspective of showing how crazy the tech shown in 40k is.

However, I should warn you not to get too disappointed if someone refuses to agree with an assertion despite mathematical "proof." The problem is, many assumptions have to be made with regards to missing details, and even relying on "official" sources such as what appears in movies, etc isn't necessarily a sure-fire method thanks to the dramatic license that is often taken in such scenes. I think the issue is compounded in 40k, with its rule of cool and all.