On 1/12/2018 at 0:36 AM, Muelmuel said:

Hi, been lurking around in the forums

Just wanted to throw this out because felt its really weird.

Why does trajectory simulator come only in the Resistance Bomber? When they could not even launch their bombs into the target and had to slowly roll into danger and all die?

Sorry if I'm opening a can of worms.

(P.S. I believe the spoiler ban is lifted?)

Because it's a new card and Resistance Bombers (the title is a dead giveaway!) are the ship most suited to the upgrade in the wave.

Now, why don't X-Wings have barrel roll on their action bar?

39 minutes ago, Koing907 said:

Because it's a new card and Resistance Bombers (the title is a dead giveaway!) are the ship most suited to the upgrade in the wave.

Now, why don't X-Wings have barrel roll on their action bar?

...Because that is not a Barrel Roll. At all.

4 hours ago, Admiral Deathrain said:

It's called science fantasy for a reason.

That's no reason for not being logically consistent within the fictional setting.

If you establish A is A you can't then turn around and inform me it's D, because that breaks immersion and takes me out the movie.

On 1/12/2018 at 8:11 AM, BlodVargarna said:

ZOMFG! Bombs dropping in spaaaaaace!

ohhhhhhh aaahhhhhhhhhh This is so outrageous and dumb!!!

*Nerd Glasses*

An object in motion doesn't suddenly lose its momentum just because it hits vacuum. If an object is moving in a certain direction at the time it exits the artificial gravity of the vessel, (and even TIEs must have some sort of internal gravity and acceleration management, otherwise their pilots would be reduced to the consistency of toothpaste when maneuvering) it will continue its motion in that direction until it is directly acted upon by another force. Thus, if the bomb is dropped vertically from its carrier vessel, it will give the impression of the bomb "falling" even in space.

SCIENCE!

1 hour ago, Captain Lackwit said:

...Because that is not a Barrel Roll. At all.

A Barrel Roll is a type of roll in which the craft rolls along both its latitude and longitude, tracing the outline of a "barrel" as it moves forward.

In traditional aviation, a barrel roll differs from an aileron roll in that the former also includes elevator input.

So it still doesn't explain why only certain ships can barrel roll other than as an arbitrary mechanical restriction. FFG REALLY should have called it something else, because there should be nothing physically preventing ANY starfighter-scale craft (and for that matter, ANY SHIP AT ALL in vacuum) from executing one due to the lack of aerodynamics-related stress, or considerations of lift vs. drag vs. thrust.

Maybe they should have called it something like "Slip" instead, (an aerobatics maneuver in which the craft skids laterally against its flight path, essentially "flying sideways") which is mechanically MUCH closer to the results of the game's barrel roll. Then you can throw some Lore out there that the TIEs can do it because of their vectored thrust engines.

6 hours ago, jmswood said:

People are mad a big ship did a ton of damage in a suicide attack.

A single A-wing put down the Executor. Then the Executor evaporates without doing any significant damage to the Death Star.

The Devastator dropped out of Hyperspace and bug-splattered a GR-75 without taking damage. Yet moments before that, a hammerhead corvette destroyed 2 ISD’s and a shield gate by ramming at sublight speeds.

The Starkiller weapon was moving through Hyperspace, but everyone saw the beam move slowly accross the sky.

There are no rules; creative minds behind Star Wars obviously have no regard for science. Don’t canker yourself inserting real world physics into explanations of anything that happens in Star Wars.

Disney Star Wars movies are trash. Giving examples of plot holes in Disney movies doesn't make your case. (R1, Ep 7, Ep 8) As for the A-wing, the shields were down so its logical and reasonable that any starcraft could ram and do serious damage.

In the original trilogy, there ARE rules. All good movies have rules. The rules do not need to comply with real physics. However, if the movie starts breaking its own rules and starts doing things that do not make sense within the context of the movie, than that movie is bad.

Disney SW has zero regard to the pre-establiahed rules and the new rules in those movies. This is why the Disney movies are trash. You can reject it all you want with fanboy blinders, but there is a reason the Disney SW movies are rated poorly by users.

Hyperspace at this point should be weaponized. Of course everything before and after do not make sense. It breaks external and internal consistency.

1 hour ago, Rexler Brath said:

In the original trilogy, there ARE rules.

Disney SW has zero regard to the pre-establiahed rules and the new rules in those movies.

I’m not interested in an argument about the relative quality of the movies. “This bickering is pointless.”

There isn’t much to go on to establish rules from the OT. There is nothing in the OT to suggest ramming is impossible when jumping to hyperspace. We see in every Star Wars movie that ships rapidly accelerate before achieving hyperspace and rapidly decelerate when dropping out of hyperspace. Nothing in the OT says a collision can’t happen between two ships. We do know from Han’s lines in ANH that ships traveling through hyperspace can impact objects in normal space. There are no conversations between characters in the OT about the science of hyperspace.

Many of the in-universe rules fans cling to are based on assumptions, or story points from a defunct EU that was loaded with plenty of stupid ideas. So, which is it? Are you upset that Disney shattered your assumptions, or mad that Disney trashed a concept you were overly attached to from the EU?

3 hours ago, jmswood said:

I’m not interested in an argument about the relative quality of the movies. “This bickering is pointless.”

There isn’t much to go on to establish rules from the OT. There is nothing in the OT to suggest ramming is impossible when jumping to hyperspace. We see in every Star Wars movie that ships rapidly accelerate before achieving hyperspace and rapidly decelerate when dropping out of hyperspace. Nothing in the OT says a collision can’t happen between two ships. We do know from Han’s lines in ANH that ships traveling through hyperspace can impact objects in normal space. There are no conversations between characters in the OT about the science of hyperspace.

Many of the in-universe rules fans cling to are based on assumptions, or story points from a defunct EU that was loaded with plenty of stupid ideas. So, which is it? Are you upset that Disney shattered your assumptions, or mad that Disney trashed a concept you were overly attached to from the EU?

I assume that we don't see hyperspace ramming more often because:

a) most battles take place too close to gravity wells to allow for hyperspace jumps at all. Note that we see ships _leaving_ gravity wells when they want to retreat.

b) the timing window where a ship is both partly in and partly out of hyperspace while also aimed near a concentration of enemy ships would be prohibitively small for the few times that battles would be deep enough in space to allow for it. I mean. Imagine sacrificing an entire capship and only getting a few fighters in exchange.

Han Solo mentions the dangers of hyper speed in the first movie. The first movie!

I'm not sure how you're breaking the established rules of Star Wars by showing something that was mentioned in the first half of the original movie.

33 minutes ago, Shadow345 said:

Han Solo mentions the dangers of hyper speed in the first movie. The first movie!

I'm not sure how you're breaking the established rules of Star Wars by showing something that was mentioned in the first half of the original movie.

He mentions going too close to a star which would pull you out of hyperspace either inside said star of so close you could not escape.

Planets are the same you'd be pulled out either inside the world atomising you and causing massive damage to the world or you'd be pulled out above the world slam into it at lightspeed and do massive damage.

Then Tfa has him exit hyperspace inside the atmosphere of a planet breaking that rule.

That's the issue we have Disney movies to not respect the universe they are set in.

9 hours ago, Ambaryerno said:

A Barrel Roll is a type of roll in which the craft rolls along both its latitude and longitude, tracing the outline of a "barrel" as it moves forward.

In traditional aviation, a barrel roll differs from an aileron roll in that the former also includes elevator input.

So it still doesn't explain why only certain ships can barrel roll other than as an arbitrary mechanical restriction. FFG REALLY should have called it something else, because there should be nothing physically preventing ANY starfighter-scale craft (and for that matter, ANY SHIP AT ALL in vacuum) from executing one due to the lack of aerodynamics-related stress, or considerations of lift vs. drag vs. thrust.

Maybe they should have called it something like "Slip" instead, (an aerobatics maneuver in which the craft skids laterally against its flight path, essentially "flying sideways") which is mechanically MUCH closer to the results of the game's barrel roll. Then you can throw some Lore out there that the TIEs can do it because of their vectored thrust engines.

Ah geez another explanation of what a Barrel Roll is. You thought that I thought a barrel roll was just a spin didn't you?

20 minutes ago, Captain Lackwit said:

Ah geez another explanation of what a Barrel Roll is. You thought that I thought a barrel roll was just a spin didn't you?

I don't know what you THINK a barrel roll is, but your post made it seem you think that an X-wing should be incapable of performing one, which is highly illogical when one looks at what it IS.

FFG should have picked a different name for the action altogether.

2 hours ago, Ambaryerno said:

I don't know what you THINK a barrel roll is, but your post made it seem you think that an X-wing should be incapable of performing one, which is highly illogical when one looks at what it IS.

FFG should have picked a different name for the action altogether.

I'm not saying any one ship should be incapable. That's stupid to say. But that shot isn't exactly the best evidence either.

Regarding TLJ the biggest issue I have is the scene with the kamikaze attack, and all sound goes.

Star Wars is a space fantasy that has made a point to get exactly nothing about space correct, why start now????

The hyperspace attack is easily handwaved by most fleets being near enough a planet to shut down hyperdrives with mass fields (a'la interdickeries).

Don't care about Leia surviving vacuum, she was in the shield bubble, and I've ejected from an X-wing before... (and a TIE, and... just about everything). Just incase someone ******* about x-wing not being canon "PORKINS, EJECT" "I CAN HOLD IT...: Yeah, see that was in the first film too, in space, within explody proximity to a big *** battlestation.

Fine with a bomber literally dropping bombs, the above TIE Bomber did just that. Plus, star wars CLEARLY has artificial gravity fields. ****, look at Red 1 crashing because his engines dieded in the first film.

Fine With Vice Admiral Holdo not telling Poe the plan, he was demoted and most militaries don't just tell everyone the god damned plan.

Bottom line: Star was was never, not even for the barest second about realism in any way. It's about pew pew pew, fwoosh, buzzzzz. And historically the EU was always bending over backwards to keep it's... idiosyncrasies aligned. The EU Novels (and some games) filled in the plot holes, and fleshed out all the universe The new EU will likely do it again. It just needs a decade or two.

20 minutes ago, Captain Lackwit said:

I'm not saying any one ship should be incapable. That's stupid to say. But that shot isn't exactly the best evidence either.

Regardless, I'm sure we can agree that calling the action a "Barrel Roll" and then restricting it to certain ships is arbitrary and illogical (or at the very least demonstrates that whoever came up with the nomenclature had no clue themselves what a barrel roll actually was) and that it SHOULD have been given a different and more indicative name that better fits the mechanic altogether. I mean we've already got fictional names for the K-Turn, S-Loop, and T-Roll, no reason they couldn't have come up with something for this to set it apart from IRL maneuvers that it in no way resembles.

5 hours ago, Hobojebus said:

He mentions going too close to a star

true

5 hours ago, Hobojebus said:

which would pull you out of hyperspace either inside said star of so close you could not escape.

You added this part. Han said these hazards would, “...end your trip real quick.” He didn’t say how or why.

5 hours ago, Hobojebus said:

Planets are the same you'd be pulled out either inside the world atomising you and causing massive damage to the world or you'd be pulled out above the world slam into it at lightspeed and do massive damage.

You’re still putting words in Han’s mouth. It’s getting pretty full in there, maybe you should back off and let him breathe.

5 hours ago, Hobojebus said:

Then Tfa has him exit hyperspace inside the atmosphere of a planet breaking that rule.

That rule only exists in the imaginations of some outspoken fans. This rule you and others keep ranting about was never stated on screen in any Star Wars movie. Maybe it was in the EU, but that’s a different matter entirely.

5 hours ago, Hobojebus said:

That's the issue we have Disney movies to not respect the universe they are set in.

This opinion doesn’t bother me. I’m not disputing it. If the reason you hate Disney Wars is because you prefer the EU, then just say that.

I am disputing the validity of points you used to justify your specific position on hyperspace. Don’t sprout a malignant tumor of conjecture from a single benign line.

Interdictors are canon now. Mass/gravity causing hyperdrives to shut down would work. Unless the hyperdrive has been modified to have the safeties removed of course. OH look, see a way around it. Why not both indeed.

Regarding the old EU. There was a lot of great stuff in there, but there was a lot of ****. Indestructable stormtrooper armour, ridiculous planet killers, the vong... It needed to be restarted.

14 minutes ago, DariusAPB said:

Interdictors are canon now. Mass/gravity causing hyperdrives to shut down would work. Unless the hyperdrive has been modified to have the safeties removed of course. OH look, see a way around it. Why not both indeed.

Regarding the old EU. There was a lot of great stuff in there, but there was a lot of ****. Indestructable stormtrooper armour, ridiculous planet killers, the vong... It needed to be restarted.

They SHOULD have hired Zahn to act as the gatekeeper to coordinate everything (Actually, he should have written the Prequels, too). After the hard work he did in Hand of Thrawn to fix the screw-ups by the likes of Anderson, McIntyre, Kube-McDowell, and Anderson (yes, I know I said that twice. I DESPISE what Kevin J. Anderson did to Star Wars with the heat of a million suns) it pains me the royal cock-up Del Rey made of the EU from NJO forward (don't even get me started on their decision to kill off Mara and turn Jacen into a Sith Lord. As bad as the idea Luke would murder his own nephew in cold blood while blindly following a premonition from the Force ignores all of his past characterization, Jacen turning Dark Side may have been a thousand times more ridiculous).

"The Sun Crusher".

Going to bed. ..

1 hour ago, DariusAPB said:

Interdictors are canon now. Mass/gravity causing hyperdrives to shut down would work. Unless the hyperdrive has been modified to have the safeties removed of course. OH look, see a way around it. Why not both indeed.

If it worked like that, would make the whole season 3 ending of Rebels (which is also canon) pretty stupid. Thrawn brings Interdictors to blockade the Rebel base (pretty stupid if the rebels could just go safeties off and jump away) and the rebels go through a lot of stuff to destroy said Interdictors (again pretty stupid if they could have ignored them by modifying their hyperdrives)'

Same thing with the hyperspace ramming in TLJ: if it works like that, why didn't the rebels try it against the Death Star (either one) and how does that fit in with the ending scenes of Rogue One, when Vader's ISD jumps in straight in the path of rebels jumping out? (the maneuver would be quite suicidal).

There are several others things like these that Disney introduces, especially in Rebels (helicopter lightsaber, flying Inquisitors, Interceptors and Defenders pre-Yavin) which are then gone by the time the original trilogy takes place without any explanation (yet at least).

All of this stuff really stretches the believability of 'this is a single universe across all movies', for me at least, and I dislike that.

1 hour ago, DariusAPB said:

Fine With Vice Admiral Holdo not telling Poe the plan, he was demoted and most militaries don't just tell everyone the god damned plan.

That's not a 'plot hole' per se. A non-trivial part of the problems with the film aren't issues with "you're breaking the rules of the universe" so much as "every single commander in the setting appears to be ****** on a **** Dastardly & Muttley level".

That's....something I can accept, even if I don't like it.

• Hux: Dialogue that's escaped from an Adam Sandler sitcom and 'yo mama' jokes should not be part of a workable plan. However, Hux is an enormous cretin, so fair enough.
• Crimson Leader: Mutually supporting formations for bombers are 'a thing'. That's why there's a Crossfire Formation title. But when the formation is close enough that losing one bomber fratricides 75% of the squadron....maybe the formation was a touch too close. Especially since you only needed one bomber's payload to kill the target.
• Holdo: Thing is, demoted or not, Poe Dameron was the senior pilot in the resistance. More importantly, he's a decorated Resistance Spec Ops type, and as such is headstrong, cocky, and given to improvising and taking long shots. Holdo may not have known him personally, but that's basically the personality type of every effective Republic/Resistance/Rebel operative from Hera to most of Rogue Squadron, to Han, to Anakin Skywalker. You can't serve in that sort of organisation and not be used to that type of subordinate, and you should know that if you don't let him know that there isn't a better plan than 'we fly forwards until we run out of fuel and die' (which is what it looks like your doing) he'll come up with his own plan and execute it. Which might mess up your plan.

1 hour ago, jmswood said:

true

You added this part. Han said these hazards would, “...end your trip real quick.” He didn’t say how or why.

You’re still putting words in Han’s mouth. It’s getting pretty full in there, maybe you should back off and let him breathe.

That rule only exists in the imaginations of some outspoken fans. This rule you and others keep ranting about was never stated on screen in any Star Wars movie. Maybe it was in the EU, but that’s a different matter entirely.

This opinion doesn’t bother me. I’m not disputing it. If the reason you hate Disney Wars is because you prefer the EU, then just say that.

I am disputing the validity of points you used to justify your specific position on hyperspace. Don’t sprout a malignant tumor of conjecture from a single benign line.

You're pretty awesome for going through all this.

8 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

That's not a 'plot hole' per se. A non-trivial part of the problems with the film aren't issues with "you're breaking the rules of the universe" so much as "every single commander in the setting appears to be ****** on a **** Dastardly & Muttley level".

That's....something I can accept, even if I don't like it.

• Hux: Dialogue that's escaped from an Adam Sandler sitcom and 'yo mama' jokes should not be part of a workable plan. However, Hux is an enormous cretin, so fair enough.
• Crimson Leader: Mutually supporting formations for bombers are 'a thing'. That's why there's a Crossfire Formation title. But when the formation is close enough that losing one bomber fratricides 75% of the squadron....maybe the formation was a touch too close. Especially since you only needed one bomber's payload to kill the target.
• Holdo: Thing is, demoted or not, Poe Dameron was the senior pilot in the resistance. More importantly, he's a decorated Resistance Spec Ops type, and as such is headstrong, cocky, and given to improvising and taking long shots. Holdo may not have known him personally, but that's basically the personality type of every effective Republic/Resistance/Rebel operative from Hera to most of Rogue Squadron, to Han, to Anakin Skywalker. You can't serve in that sort of organisation and not be used to that type of subordinate, and you should know that if you don't let him know that there isn't a better plan than 'we fly forwards until we run out of fuel and die' (which is what it looks like your doing) he'll come up with his own plan and execute it. Which might mess up your plan.

But, you can. It had been a looooooong time since The Rebellion, and The New Republic functioned very differently.

But the resistance really didn't.

The New Republic functioned more on protocol. Poe broke protocol in “Before the Awakening” and almost singlehandedly started another galactic war.

The Resistance operated on the fringe and Leia recruited Poe because of the stunt that got him in trouble in the Republic. The Resistance needed him bad enough to weasel him out of consequences for insubordination as a New Republic officer. Vice Admiral Holda knew exactly the kind of loose cannon she was dealing with, and failed to point it in the right direction.

Speaking if which... Motion to name Crimson Leader "Caboose" or "Teamkilling fucktard". He earned it.