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.
Brennonjw wrote: Are you sure on the length and sizes? from what I've dug up, the Eclipse is one of the largest at just under 18 km, or am i missing something?
The Vengeance class and Executor class were both 19 km.
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia
asorel wrote: Size of SW ships in rough estimate KM, since we know these numbers for 40k, we can compare ship size, additionally, armament as well for the SW ships.
Ship size doesn't tell you very much. For example, a Culture warship is much smaller than a 40k battleship, but could destroy the entire combined fleets of 40k in less time than it took to write this sentence.
asorel wrote: With regards to armament, I think the best we can do is assume ships of equal size have about the same total armament, but not necessarily the same broadside weight etc.. The reason for this is that the "canonical" energy values are insanely high, even by 40k standards. The number of extra zeros at the end of those numbers means SW weapons would turn the entire "battlefield" incandescent from excess radiation alone.
Why should we assume that they are equal? The fact that Star Wars firepower numbers are insane even by 40k standards just means that Star Wars weapons outgun 40k weapons by a huge margin. You don't get to nerf one side just because they're too powerful to give you the outcome you want.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Why should we assume that they are equal? The fact that Star Wars firepower numbers are insane even by 40k standards just means that Star Wars weapons outgun 40k weapons by a huge margin. You don't get to nerf one side just because they're too powerful to give you the outcome you want.
It has nothing to do with the "outcome I want," I couldn't care less who wins this imaginary cross-franchise battle. I am merely pointing out that the weapon's stated energy output levels are ludicrous. In fact, one may create a canonical argument that those values may be disregarded using the Star Wars hierarchy of canon. The G-canon space battle scenes in the films clearly contradict the listed energy values in the C-canon blueprint book, by way of those scenes being something other than monotonic white light. As the G-canon overrides the C-canon, one may safely assume that these values are noncanonical.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/05 01:40:34
When the only tool you have is a Skyhammer, every army begins to resemble a nail.
asorel wrote: I am merely pointing out that the weapon's stated energy output levels are ludicrous.
So what? The fact that they're absurdly high doesn't mean that they aren't true. After all, Culture firepower numbers are even more obscenely high and yet there's no reasonable argument that they're "really" just 40k-level.
The G-canon space battle scenes in the films clearly contradict the listed energy values in the C-canon blueprint book, by way of those scenes being something other than monotonic white light.
On the other hand the example of a star destroyer's light point defense guns vaporizing asteroids with single shots pretty strongly suggests that the firepower numbers are accurate. The most reasonable way to resolve this is to assume that in those battle scenes the overwhelming flash is toned down by the camera so that the audience can see what is happening.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Well, C-canon is now L-Canon and therefore only useful when discussing the L-verse. Which only leaves us with G-canon telling us that a Star Destroyer's point defence gun can obliterate an asteroid a tenth the length of the whole ship with a single shot.
"That time I only loaded the cannon with powder. Next time, I will fill it with jewels and diamonds and they will cut you to shrebbons!" - Nogbad the Bad.
hold on. I was under the impression that an Impstar Deuce (the Imperial Star Destroyer Mark II) from Return of the Jedi ran about a kilometer in length, and the SSD (Super Star Destroyer) Executor was 10 kilometers long.
The planet destroying power of the Star Destroyer class of starships was sustained fire from their turbolaser batteries that would destroy the biospheres of the targeted planets, but it was never employed in the movies and is non-canon.
I am reminded of the initial space battles between the Tau Empire and the IoM. Small and maneuverable starships versus the Imperium's battlewagons. anyone else getting deja vu?
'No plan survives contact with the enemy. Who are we?'
'THE ENEMY!!!'
"Long ago in a galaxy far away" Star wars takes place in our past, so by they time they encounter each other the Star Wars Universe might have achieved singularity.
Although if there was some kind of time warp where they intersect, i just think dudes that are tougher than Captain America in Iron Man suits would have the edge.
carldooley wrote: hold on. I was under the impression that an Impstar Deuce (the Imperial Star Destroyer Mark II) from Return of the Jedi ran about a kilometer in length, and the SSD (Super Star Destroyer) Executor was 10 kilometers long.
1.6km for a star destroyer, ~18km for the Executor. There was an old ~10km number for the Executor, but it was invented in some random RPG supplement and directly contradicted on-screen evidence from the movies.
The planet destroying power of the Star Destroyer class of starships was sustained fire from their turbolaser batteries that would destroy the biospheres of the targeted planets, but it was never employed in the movies and is non-canon.
Even if you have a "movies only" position on canon similar firepower numbers are supported by the fact that a star destroyer's light point defense guns were seen vaporizing asteroids with single shots. When you do the math on how much energy would be required for that and scale it up proportionally based on the size of the main guns you get up in to the "destroy all life on a planet" range pretty easily.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Why should we assume that they are equal? The fact that Star Wars firepower numbers are insane even by 40k standards just means that Star Wars weapons outgun 40k weapons by a huge margin. You don't get to nerf one side just because they're too powerful to give you the outcome you want.
Instead of using stated firepower, because neither universe's writers know their head from their butts in terms of realistic damage outputs, we should use what has been demonstrated within the canon of each universe.
If the Star Wars firepower calculations are to be believed, the Imperial Fleet should have had no issues with the Rebel base's shield generator on Hoth. They could have just blown the planet itself to bits around the base and not bothered with ground troops. Who needs Death Stars when a couple Star Destroyers could do the same thing? Yet in contrast we constantly see 40k ships obliterating ground targets, and any ship that has Torpedo tubes can potentially be used to destroy a planet if you have the Life Eater Virus and/or some Clyclonic Torpedoes around.
Blasters should be disintegrating anybody who gets hit by them, or at least throwing them like ragdolls. Yet in the films and fiction we see them being demonstrably worse than even antiquated firearms. heck, even the in-universe black powder weapons actually outperform blasters in terms of damage, especially since it seems nobody makes body armor that can resist kinetic impact.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: If the Star Wars firepower calculations are to be believed, the Imperial Fleet should have had no issues with the Rebel base's shield generator on Hoth. They could have just blown the planet itself to bits around the base and not bothered with ground troops.
And killed Luke in the process. Remember how Vader's goal was to capture Luke, not simply kill all of the rebels?
Also, let's not forget that the same applies to 40k. If 40k firepower numbers are to be believed then why don't they use orbital bombardments to wipe out whole armies?
Who needs Death Stars when a couple Star Destroyers could do the same thing?
The death star can destroy a planet through planetary shielding that could hold off a star destroyer or two. And the death star turns a planet into a cloud of dust, it doesn't "merely" kill everything on the surface. That's an important difference for a terror weapon.
Blasters should be disintegrating anybody who gets hit by them, or at least throwing them like ragdolls.
They do throw their targets around pretty frequently, when they aren't hitting main characters. And, again, you can say the same about 40k weapons: if they're so much better than blasters then why does the canon (or at least the closest thing to canon in 40k) visual example of bolter combat look pretty much exactly like blaster combat but with some extra blood splatter effects?
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Always wondered what's up with these threads. 40k Fluff is all about mary sue one upmanship, it's the most extreme and over the top saturday morning cartoon out there. Isn't that why we like it? Also yes Imperium every instance.
Grey Templar wrote: If the Star Wars firepower calculations are to be believed, the Imperial Fleet should have had no issues with the Rebel base's shield generator on Hoth. They could have just blown the planet itself to bits around the base and not bothered with ground troops.
And killed Luke in the process. Remember how Vader's goal was to capture Luke, not simply kill all of the rebels?
True, but at the time that is Vader's personal goal. Not the goal of the fleet.
At the very least there would have been dialogue to the following effect when General Veers reported in to Vader,
"Comm Scan has detected an energy shield protecting an area of the 5th planet of the Hoth system, the field is strong enough to deflect any bombardment. The Fleet is preparing to maneuver to begin a perimeter bombardment to blast the plan..."
"NO! We will not bombard the planet. We must capture Skywalker alive! Prepare to land your forces beyond the energy shield and engage a surface attack."
que Admiral Hozzle getting chocked to death.
The death star can destroy a planet through planetary shielding that could hold off a star destroyer or two. And the death star turns a planet into a cloud of dust, it doesn't "merely" kill everything on the surface. That's an important difference for a terror weapon.
Cyclonic Torpedoes do basically the same thing. Not as fast to be sure, but if anything that is more effective as a terror weapon. And since just about every 40k ship has Torpedo tubes it could be done anywhere at any time. Not just one place in 1 ship which the Empire obviously spent way too much to build.
They do throw their targets around pretty frequently, when they aren't hitting main characters. And, again, you can say the same about 40k weapons: if they're so much better than blasters then why does the canon (or at least the closest thing to canon in 40k) visual example of bolter combat look pretty much exactly like blaster combat but with some extra blood splatter effects?
I don't mean push them back. I mean they should literally be evaporating in red mist or getting launched 30-40 meters into the air. Even if your body armor can withstand that your body is going to be pulped by the kinetic impact.
Leia should have been killed outright just from the shock of her entire arm disappearing.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2015/12/05 04:52:05
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: True, but at the time that is Vader's personal goal. Not the goal of the fleet.
But it's a pretty safe assumption that the rest of the fleet was told that they need to be taking prisoners. After all, it's not very helpful to have a stormtrooper shoot Luke because nobody mentioned that rebel officers are to be taken alive. The most likely explanation is that Vader made it clear that the rebels were to be taken alive whenever possible, but presented it as "we need survivors to interrogate to find the rest of the rebel bases" instead of "my son is there".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grey Templar wrote: Cyclonic Torpedoes do basically the same thing. Not as fast to be sure, but if anything that is more effective as a terror weapon. And since just about every 40k ship has Torpedo tubes it could be done anywhere at any time. Not just one place in 1 ship which the Empire obviously spent way too much to build.
But a cyclonic torpedo is a technobabble gimmick weapon that destroys a planet by space magic. The death star just shoots a really powerful gun at it and kills it by sheer firepower, just like a star destroyer obliterates all life on a planet with its normal guns.
I don't mean push them back. I mean they should literally be evaporating in red mist or getting launched 30-40 meters into the air. Even if your body armor can withstand that your body is going to be pulped by the kinetic impact.
Ok, let's assume this is true. If it is then all you've established is that Star Wars blasters are around bolter-level firepower, not vastly superior.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/05 04:52:33
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
I don't mean push them back. I mean they should literally be evaporating in red mist or getting launched 30-40 meters into the air. Even if your body armor can withstand that your body is going to be pulped by the kinetic impact.
A man-portable weapon that does this has a similar effect on the firer. Newtonian physics is not avoided by using lasers over solid projectiles.
Enough force forward to throw someone 30-40 meters generates enough force backwards to throw someone (in this case the poor bastard holding the weapon) 30-40 meters.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
Psienesis wrote: A man-portable weapon that does this has a similar effect on the firer. Newtonian physics is not avoided by using lasers over solid projectiles.
Enough force forward to throw someone 30-40 meters generates enough force backwards to throw someone (in this case the poor bastard holding the weapon) 30-40 meters.
I think you're misunderstanding here. A laser does not throw its target back because of physical momentum, it throws the target back because part of the target is vaporized and the explosion flings everything away. The laser itself, no matter how much energy it delivers, will never have any recoil for the shooter because the beam is not a physical object and has no momentum.
And bolters would have a similar effect since their primary damage is done by the shell exploding, not by the kinetic energy delivered by its impact with the target.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Bolters don't blow the target into smithereens, or even small pieces. They blow big chunks out of the target, yes, but not to the point of having only a pair of smoking boots left.
What bolters cause is massive tissue damage and wound-cratering. Get shot center-mass, and the exploding shell is likely to shred both lungs and the heart (and all intervening tissue) of a human target. It is not turning their entire upper body, head and arms into Ragu.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
Grey Templar wrote: Blasters should be disintegrating anybody who gets hit by them, or at least throwing them like ragdolls. Yet in the films and fiction we see them being demonstrably worse than even antiquated firearms. heck, even the in-universe black powder weapons actually outperform blasters in terms of damage, especially since it seems nobody makes body armor that can resist kinetic impact.
Depends on what a blaster "round" actually is. A bolter round is an AP rocket-boosted explosive round. A blaster "round" is an "energized particle", and it seems the damage is an effect of the little packet of energy hitting ceramic/plasteel/flesh/etc and making a mess of it. I doubt any kinetic energy; the film example of Han shooting Greedo, and Greedo just collapsing on the table, leaving "a mess". So, I don't think it's a coherent laser, but rather an energy bolt with would superheat a chunk of the target. So, a double-handful of Greedo's torso was just insta-cooked. I'd guess a shot into a smaller portion (such as a head) would be messy as there would be less surrounding mass to absorb the boiled-off liquid. Same with vehicle blaster rounds hitting vehicles; there is some "impact", but not much. Same with blaster shots hitting a wall and blowing out a chunk, leaving little burning bits. So by that measure, they are very effective. I would almost think of them as plasma pistols and plasma guns, without gets hot, rather than a lasgun.
So, IMO at the infantry level the Astartes/Empire mathhammer would be equivalent to 3 IG wearing carapace armor and armed with plasmaguns against each Astertes.
It then comes down to bolter ROF, power armor resilency and superhuman accuracy against weapons which will penetrate armor and kill the wearer.
Against IG, equal size forces I give it to the Empire (plasmaguns as wargear versus lasguns), with reinforcements eventually the Empire loses the battle of attrition.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/12/05 19:26:15
Grey Templar wrote: Blasters should be disintegrating anybody who gets hit by them, or at least throwing them like ragdolls. Yet in the films and fiction we see them being demonstrably worse than even antiquated firearms. heck, even the in-universe black powder weapons actually outperform blasters in terms of damage, especially since it seems nobody makes body armor that can resist kinetic impact.
Depends on what a blaster "round" actually is. A bolter round is an AP rocket-boosted explosive round. A blaster "round" is an "energized particle", and it seems the damage is an effect of the little packet of energy hitting ceramic/plasteel/flesh/etc and making a mess of it. I doubt any kinetic energy; the film example of Han shooting Greedo, and Greedo just collapsing on the table, leaving "a mess". So, I don't think it's a coherent laser, but rather an energy bolt with would superheat a chunk of the target. So, a double-handful of Greedo's torso was just insta-cooked. I'd guess a shot into a smaller portion (such as a head) would be messy as there would be less surrounding mass to absorb the boiled-off liquid. Same with vehicle blaster rounds hitting vehicles; there is some "impact", but not much. Same with blaster shots hitting a wall and blowing out a chunk, leaving little burning bits. So by that measure, they are very effective. I would almost think of them as plasma pistols and plasma guns, without gets hot, rather than a lasgun.
So, IMO at the infantry level the Astartes/Empire mathhammer would be equivalent to 3 IG wearing carapace armor and armed with plasmaguns against each Astertes.
It then comes down to bolter ROF, power armor resilency and superhuman accuracy against weapons which will penetrate armor and kill the wearer.
Against IG, equal size forces I give it to the Empire (plasmaguns as wargear versus lasguns), with reinforcements eventually the Empire loses the battle of attrition.
I believe he means that the energy should be vaporizing anything it hits if the "canonical" energy readings are to be believed.
When the only tool you have is a Skyhammer, every army begins to resemble a nail.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Exactly. We might not know the properties of fancy space armor, but we do know the properties of human flesh, rocks, and trees. Blaster round don't do all that much to those, not to where we can believe the canon power outputs.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Go watch saving Private Ryan. Then watch any Star Wars film. Then tell me who was better small arms: WWII armies or the stupid-ass SW fictional people. Then realize 2015 weapons are much more lethal than WWII weapons. Lucas is an idiot. And he was an idiot when we wrote Star Wars. He's a know-nothing that didn't understand how weapons really work.
Martel732 wrote: Go watch saving Private Ryan. Then watch any Star Wars film. Then tell me who was better small arms: WWII armies or the stupid-ass SW fictional people. Then realize 2015 weapons are much more lethal than WWII weapons. Lucas is an idiot. And he was an idiot when we wrote Star Wars. He's a know-nothing that didn't understand how weapons really work.
Which is a key factor in enjoying a fiction film isn't it.
tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam
Martel732 wrote: Go watch saving Private Ryan. Then watch any Star Wars film. Then tell me who was better small arms: WWII armies or the stupid-ass SW fictional people. Then realize 2015 weapons are much more lethal than WWII weapons. Lucas is an idiot. And he was an idiot when we wrote Star Wars. He's a know-nothing that didn't understand how weapons really work.
IOW, just like most of science fiction, 40k included.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Martel732 wrote: Go watch saving Private Ryan. Then watch any Star Wars film. Then tell me who was better small arms: WWII armies or the stupid-ass SW fictional people. Then realize 2015 weapons are much more lethal than WWII weapons. Lucas is an idiot. And he was an idiot when we wrote Star Wars. He's a know-nothing that didn't understand how weapons really work.
Which is a key factor in enjoying a fiction film isn't it.
Not for me. Fiction does not equal complete and utter nonsense. Which is what Lucas is asking me to swallow.
Martel732 wrote: Go watch saving Private Ryan. Then watch any Star Wars film. Then tell me who was better small arms: WWII armies or the stupid-ass SW fictional people. Then realize 2015 weapons are much more lethal than WWII weapons. Lucas is an idiot. And he was an idiot when we wrote Star Wars. He's a know-nothing that didn't understand how weapons really work.
IOW, just like most of science fiction, 40k included.
There is science fiction way more believable than Lucas or 40K. Trying to compare them is the intellectual equivalent of making pew-pew noise with toy soldiers. I'm wiling to buy fantastical technology as long as what transpires make sense. Nothing in SW or in 40K makes any sense at all.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/12/06 00:14:58
Grey Templar wrote: Exactly. We might not know the properties of fancy space armor, but we do know the properties of human flesh, rocks, and trees. Blaster round don't do all that much to those, not to where we can believe the canon power outputs.
You mean from the examples of movies? Blaster rounds do a lot when they aren't hitting characters. They blow trees apart, they blow chucks out of walls, they blow chunks out of droids, they blow open gun emplacements, they blow chunks out of vehicles or initiate catastrophic destruction. They only thing they don't blow chunks out of is people, in order to maintain a PG rating. A shot that blows a fist-size chunk out of a solid wall would certainly make a mess of a rebel trooper. A vehicle mounted blaster that can blow apart a gun turret or knock down a snowspeeder with one shot would almost certainly blow a person, ewok, etc apart, but that wouldn't be PG. The canon isn't limited to PG visual effects.
What would bolter rounds do in the 40K movie, video games, etc if they had to have a PG effect? A whole lot of "nothing". Whoever got shot would just fall down with a little black mark on their skin or armor, and we would all bitch about the effects not being "canon".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Go watch saving Private Ryan. Then watch any Star Wars film. Then tell me who was better small arms: WWII armies or the stupid-ass SW fictional people. Then realize 2015 weapons are much more lethal than WWII weapons. Lucas is an idiot. And he was an idiot when we wrote Star Wars. He's a know-nothing that didn't understand how weapons really work.
Star Wars movies are a children-acceptable PG. Saving Private Ryan wasn't.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/06 14:53:33
As badly scaled as 40k is, Star Wars is a franchise that is actually WAY worse.
Yep, and it's very inconsistent too. Part of the problem of having dozen of different writers working on the expanded universe.They can't even remember the correct size of certain ships.
Grey Templar wrote: Exactly. We might not know the properties of fancy space armor, but we do know the properties of human flesh, rocks, and trees. Blaster round don't do all that much to those, not to where we can believe the canon power outputs.
You mean from the examples of movies? Blaster rounds do a lot when they aren't hitting characters. They blow trees apart, they blow chucks out of walls, they blow chunks out of droids, they blow open gun emplacements, they blow chunks out of vehicles or initiate catastrophic destruction. They only thing they don't blow chunks out of is people, in order to maintain a PG rating. A shot that blows a fist-size chunk out of a solid wall would certainly make a mess of a rebel trooper. A vehicle mounted blaster that can blow apart a gun turret or knock down a snowspeeder with one shot would almost certainly blow a person, ewok, etc apart, but that wouldn't be PG. The canon isn't limited to PG visual effects.
What would bolter rounds do in the 40K movie, video games, etc if they had to have a PG effect? A whole lot of "nothing". Whoever got shot would just fall down with a little black mark on their skin or armor, and we would all bitch about the effects not being "canon".
Except those "chunks out of walls/trees/droids..." aren't all that impressive. And certainly not in line with what they should be doing if they had the canon levels of energy. With what we see them do to those inanimate objects is well below many modern day firearms, and definitely below what any 40k weapon does.
So our only conclusion is that Star Wars blasters are about on par with modern day firearms.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: Exactly. We might not know the properties of fancy space armor, but we do know the properties of human flesh, rocks, and trees. Blaster round don't do all that much to those, not to where we can believe the canon power outputs.
You mean from the examples of movies? Blaster rounds do a lot when they aren't hitting characters. They blow trees apart, they blow chucks out of walls, they blow chunks out of droids, they blow open gun emplacements, they blow chunks out of vehicles or initiate catastrophic destruction. They only thing they don't blow chunks out of is people, in order to maintain a PG rating. A shot that blows a fist-size chunk out of a solid wall would certainly make a mess of a rebel trooper. A vehicle mounted blaster that can blow apart a gun turret or knock down a snowspeeder with one shot would almost certainly blow a person, ewok, etc apart, but that wouldn't be PG. The canon isn't limited to PG visual effects.
What would bolter rounds do in the 40K movie, video games, etc if they had to have a PG effect? A whole lot of "nothing". Whoever got shot would just fall down with a little black mark on their skin or armor, and we would all bitch about the effects not being "canon".
Except those "chunks out of walls/trees/droids..." aren't all that impressive. And certainly not in line with what they should be doing if they had the canon levels of energy. With what we see them do to those inanimate objects is well below many modern day firearms, and definitely below what any 40k weapon does.
So our only conclusion is that Star Wars blasters are about on par with modern day firearms.
It's very impressive since a round from a modern 30 cal machinegun will only knock a divot the size of half a dollar out of a concrete floor.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
On a glancing blow. Blasters, due to being energy weapons, aren't going to deflect off of concrete. Their blast marks should be large enough to walk through.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
1850 
