12-06-2005, 10:34 PM | #11 | |
Join Date: Oct 2005
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
Quote:
I'm reluctant to place total faith in "novel/RPG sourcebook/trivia junkie" when it conflicts with common sense, as they often have less than perfect accuracy even in regards to the movies (for example, a number of sources list Executor as 5 miles long, clearly in conflict with film comparisons to Imperial Star Destroyers). |
|
12-07-2005, 05:49 AM | #12 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Arizona
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
Quote:
So much for using conventional weaponry.
__________________
Two reasons for “evil” alignment, the idiotic notion that it somehow makes the PC “cool” or the doltish idea that it means that their character can do absolutely anything he or she wants. |
|
12-07-2005, 06:08 AM | #13 | |
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal, Canada.
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
Quote:
It's like digging a tunnel to Australia... This brought my previous point back: That level of power (and the defense to block it) is so ridiculously high that it fall in the realm of plot devices. |
|
12-07-2005, 06:18 AM | #14 | ||
Join Date: Oct 2005
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
Quote:
Quote:
While usually planet destroying superweapons are plot devices, they can be represented in GURPS quantitaively, if someone feels the need. Last edited by gjc8; 12-07-2005 at 01:47 PM. |
||
12-07-2005, 06:28 AM | #15 |
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal, Canada.
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
gjc8,
My numbers are based on the idea that the Earth is crushed by a Gigantic Space Monster(tm). The mechanics of the Death Star(tm) might work differently. Let's take as a theory that the Death Star(tm) Don't blew-up a planet but make it's center boils. That pressure would blew-up the planet and not the beam itself. Then, it would take less power to drill a hole to overheat the core than wasting the entire planet into pebbles. So your numbers might be right on the spot. |
12-07-2005, 08:13 AM | #16 | |
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Topeka, Kansas
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
Quote:
As for not placing faith in the novel/RPG/Trivia, up until very recently Lucas was very adamant about what went into books, including the RPG. It's only been since he did the new trilogy and contradicted what he previously told West End (and he now claims was never written down, but then how many of you have read the interviews West End did with Lucas for the Adventure Journals? 9 out of 10 people never heard of the interviews, he can plausibly claim they never happened) and other novels have been contradicted (and are therefore out of print because of that). Even KotOR 2 contradicts the Tales of the Jedi comics series, which at the time they were written, Lucas made sure everything was "canon" with him and didn't contradict... now, he doesn't care, as long as everyone watches his movies, he could care less what other people write in his universe. The new movies might have been novelizations by other than Lucas himself, but the original three movies, Lucas wrote the novels. As for the size of the Executor, are you seriously implying that as great as the original Star Wars movies are, do you really think that George Lucas did the math of a 5 mile ship scaled down to his models? you probably won't like it, cause it's not stated in the movies, but a Star Destroyer cannot land on a planet. It's too big. It's too heavy, if the re-entry heat didn't burn up half the atmosphere, it would crash and be a "planet buster". They are built in space because of their sheer size, if they were build on a planet with any gravity, they would never be able to get off the planet.
__________________
Cleopatra: Whenever she assigned me to the switch, was that Voice, or was Raina influencing her thinking? Because, I mean, if it was Raina, she got inside my head and decided that I would screw it up. |
|
12-07-2005, 08:42 AM | #17 | |
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal, Canada.
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
Quote:
Here's for your info: http://www.theforce.net/swtc/ssd5mile.html But even then, can a Star-Destroyer would be able to support his own weight in a 1G environment? I had always had the feeling that those ships had a tough external shell and no structure inside. Another point; what kind of fuel they are using? Maybe the worse damage a Star Destroyer can do to a planet is by a catastrophic fuel explosion. Let's keep in mind that Anti-Matter do 6D X 2.27 X 10^10 explosive damage by the pound. This let me say that planetfall is the least of their worries... |
|
12-07-2005, 08:44 AM | #18 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
Quote:
The earth has both HP and DR. The HP come from the total mass, which you can get from density and radius. But the DR appears to come from the crust, which is a fairly thin layer of rock. Once you get through that, you're dealing with fluid material most of the way down. I wouldn't consider the core as having DR; it's not shielding anything. Oh, I suppose you could say that the outer surface of the core has a DR, like any other chunk of solid iron, but compared to the damage that can shatter a planet, it's going to be pretty negligible. You might as well assume that the entire mass of the earth is one HP pool, and not try to do layered defenses. Now, a gas giant is not going to have any DR, if you look at it this way. Jupiter's surface is not rock. |
|
12-07-2005, 11:16 AM | #19 |
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal, Canada.
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
whswhs,
You got the main problem with my maths, we dont have the perfect 5 Tons, 1 Cubic Meter sample of "Earth" to get the equation right. There's also the case of how the physics of material composing the planet would react to a stress. As far as the Death Star(tm) is concerned, I will return to my theory about how the weapon work; the beam punch a hole throught the crust and bake the center of the planet. The core of the planet turn into plasma and, by expansion, blew the planet up. An egg in a microwave came into my mind. For all the "Shooting throught Yavin" debate goes, i have to said that it fails into the realm of the plot device. Let's just imagine that a beam able to make a planet blow-up got througth a gaz giant. Even if it lost 99% of it's power on it's way, the impact on the planet will be apocalyptic. I can imagine a hole in the planet's crust ten of kilometers across and vaporized ashes everywhere; a nuclear winter without atmosphere. In the original "Star-Wars"(tm), there's also another problem. The Imperials were slowly waiting that Yavin got ENTIERELY out of the way before shooting Yavin 4. Why? Let's take as an idea that the beam might deviate due to (Higher Yavin atmosphere, Yavin gravitic pull, weird shooting arc, your pick), What is the final result here? Do the planet will be in smaller pebbles if the beam hit at the middle instead of 2-3 thousands Km more to the left? It's all about the script, you know... |
12-07-2005, 12:31 PM | #20 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: Planet Destroyers
Probably because they didn't feel they needed to shoot through the planet or skim it's atmosphere. You're forgetting the sheer arrogance factor.
|
|
|