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.

1 kiloton per shot, maximum.

In Star Wars, that means you've turned off your deflector shield and your thrusters and diverted all power to your weapon systems. Yeah, you'll hit hard... excepting anything big enough to need that kind of firepower is going to shrug off your blast with its deflector shields.

It's also only a single kiloton for what is, basically. a single shot (the coils will require a couple seconds to cycle up enough juice for another shot, and you're immobile and defenseless in space).

Kain wrote:Well, there's not many other forces you'd be able to deploy deep underwater. Certainly not the Guard unless there's some sharkmen abhuman regiment I've never heard about.

Now that you mention it ... there are supposedly catgirls in 40k now; I wouldn't be too surprised.

Although on a more serious note, if it weren't for the considerations I posted earlier, I'd probably rather go for something like the Navy Armsmen in Boarding Gear. You gotta admit, they look like right out of 20,000 leagues under the sea!

Psienesis wrote:1 kiloton per shot, maximum.
In Star Wars, that means you've turned off your deflector shield and your thrusters and diverted all power to your weapon systems. Yeah, you'll hit hard... excepting anything big enough to need that kind of firepower is going to shrug off your blast with its deflector shields.
It's also only a single kiloton for what is, basically. a single shot (the coils will require a couple seconds to cycle up enough juice for another shot, and you're immobile and defenseless in space).

It's still a ridiculously high amount of explosive yield, and one obviously not supported by the visuals of the movies. I'd expect capital ship cannons to have that much power per shot, but not starfighters...
Unfortunately, since the movies themselves do not discuss technical details in this depth, Lucasfilm's policy indeed renders the kiloton yield as canon, if only on the c-level. I maintain the author has no clue how much force that actually is.
I can only assume they just thought about the relationship between powerful deflector shields and futurespace sci-fi weapons, not thinking about what might happen when one of these shots actually hits something like a park or a farm.

Or what this would mean for hot pursuits through an urban landscape.

"Enemy shuttle shot down. Collateral damage: estimated half a million civilians, 400 billion credits in buildings and assorted vehicles."

Thanks for the scan, by the way. I wouldn't have believed it, had I not seen it with my own eyes.

In Black Tide by James swallow the Blood Angels deep strike an old Imperial Army submarine into a tyranid infested ocean. That’s the only direct reference to Naval equipment I've seen so far.

I imagine that, like most thing in the imperium, naval vessels are built by requirement, PDF's on aquatic or semi aquatic worlds (like, you know, ours) would operate navies, because the imperium doesn't have limitless resources to send battlefleets wherever they like and there would almost certainly be amphibious IG regiments, as unlike space craft the imperium does have almost limitless manpower and can afford to make task based IG regiments. (Otherwise every IG regiment would be a combined arms unit like a hunter cadre)

Well, if 95% of all planetary infrastructure you'd come across in the galaxy is land based and you have the ability to drop stuff down from space, why would you bother with things that float?

If you have the ability to fly, why swim?


So unless the target is actually in the oceans themselves, the Imperium/anybody else can simply bypass all that water and go straight to the land.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Well, if 95% of all planetary infrastructure you'd come across in the galaxy is land based and you have the ability to drop stuff down from space, why would you bother with things that float?

If you have the ability to fly, why swim?


So unless the target is actually in the oceans themselves, the Imperium/anybody else can simply bypass all that water and go straight to the land.

But they don't always have the ability to fly, most PDF's certainly don't have that many space capable craft, and I'd imagine that they use navies to good effect policing water lanes and such

PDF will have some surface ships to patrol sea lanes, but they aren't going to be majorly important in the event of an invasion. They'll just get shot down too easily and won't be able to contest a landing or anything.

 Lynata wrote:

Kain wrote:Well, there's not many other forces you'd be able to deploy deep underwater. Certainly not the Guard unless there's some sharkmen abhuman regiment I've never heard about.

Now that you mention it ... there are supposedly catgirls in 40k now; I wouldn't be too surprised.

Although on a more serious note, if it weren't for the considerations I posted earlier, I'd probably rather go for something like the Navy Armsmen in Boarding Gear. You gotta admit, they look like right out of 20,000 leagues under the sea!

Psienesis wrote:1 kiloton per shot, maximum.
In Star Wars, that means you've turned off your deflector shield and your thrusters and diverted all power to your weapon systems. Yeah, you'll hit hard... excepting anything big enough to need that kind of firepower is going to shrug off your blast with its deflector shields.
It's also only a single kiloton for what is, basically. a single shot (the coils will require a couple seconds to cycle up enough juice for another shot, and you're immobile and defenseless in space).

It's still a ridiculously high amount of explosive yield, and one obviously not supported by the visuals of the movies. I'd expect capital ship cannons to have that much power per shot, but not starfighters...
Unfortunately, since the movies themselves do not discuss technical details in this depth, Lucasfilm's policy indeed renders the kiloton yield as canon, if only on the c-level. I maintain the author has no clue how much force that actually is.
I can only assume they just thought about the relationship between powerful deflector shields and futurespace sci-fi weapons, not thinking about what might happen when one of these shots actually hits something like a park or a farm.

Or what this would mean for hot pursuits through an urban landscape.

Spoiler:

"Enemy shuttle shot down. Collateral damage: estimated half a million civilians, 400 billion credits in buildings and assorted vehicles."

Thanks for the scan, by the way. I wouldn't have believed it, had I not seen it with my own eyes.

Hah, kilotons, wait until you see mr.Saxton's estimations for the actual capital ships

http://cdn3.sportngin.com/attachments/photo/2377/5036/ep2-013.jpg

Look for the 200 gigatons on a small troop transport.

Actual star destroyers were given multiple teratons or something like that.

Oh and Grievous starship?

http://img.phombo.com/img1/photocombo/72/Ep3-009.jpg

If I remember right, a magnitude 10 earthquake involves several teratons of TNT equivalence in energy output (although only a small portion of that reaches the surface after being absorbed by so much rock)

 Psienesis wrote:
If the IG rolls up to a planet, aboard ships owned by the Imperial Navy, they don't need to worry about any terrestrial navy that the enemy owns, for the most part. Mainly because the Imperial Navy, having established space-superiority, can use orbital strikes to destroy those boats, their ports, and the manufacturing areas, rendering a terrestrial navy moot.

Some naval elements have appeared in various sources but, overall, an oceanic navy is outgunned and outclassed by a space navy.

Which they could do to any land based military features as well. So why the tanks?

Besides, your not going to use a Nova cannon to sink chaos cultist raiders and stuff who use swift boats and the like.

 djones520 wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
If the IG rolls up to a planet, aboard ships owned by the Imperial Navy, they don't need to worry about any terrestrial navy that the enemy owns, for the most part. Mainly because the Imperial Navy, having established space-superiority, can use orbital strikes to destroy those boats, their ports, and the manufacturing areas, rendering a terrestrial navy moot.

Some naval elements have appeared in various sources but, overall, an oceanic navy is outgunned and outclassed by a space navy.

Which they could do to any land based military features as well. So why the tanks?

Besides, your not going to use a Nova cannon to sink chaos cultist raiders and stuff who use swift boats and the like.

Tanks always have a place on the battlefield so long as they can tank small arms fire.

And you do need to frequently take land based objectives, and you can't always bombard them from orbit for the same reason why America doesn't drop nuclear weapons in Afghanistan and also concerns about destroying what you're fighting for in the first place.

There's very little worth fighting for in the sea when you can completely bypass it.