PDA

View Full Version : Original Death Star


Lieutenant_kettch
10-13-2004, 09:55 AM
It seems to me that the exhaust vent was a major oversight by palpatine... so were the lack of fighter defense etc.. could it be that palpatine meant for it to be destroyed?

dabe
10-13-2004, 11:39 AM
Possibly, as he could have made the plans for the next Death Star. So he delibrately made visible weaknesses so he could devise an even greater weapon, although it never worked out that way...

:deathstar

:deathii:

Or he never knew Obi-Wan was still alive (I believe he is the one wo says its a big space station, if I'm not mistaken, or Han :S). Therefore would never think anyone would realise as they weren't Jedi or had Jedi Powers of sense and sight.

Or he didn't realise how out of place it actually looked :eek:

Shok_Tinoktin
10-13-2004, 12:22 PM
i doubt Palpatine intended for it to be destroyed. There doesn't seem to be any motive. Also, it was hardly a "major oversight". There was a tiny exhaust port, hardly a crippling weakness.

Lieutenant_kettch
10-13-2004, 12:23 PM
hmm, it did end up crippling the death star, hehe

Jan Gaarni
10-14-2004, 03:09 PM
I doubt very much he wanted it destroyed.

Let's face it, why would he?

And I doubt very much he knew anything about something as trivial as an exhaust port.

The Empire was arrogant, just look at the many many large vessels emploid by the Empire. Most military officers wanted large ships, to great horror for the treasurers I might ad :p , while caring little for fighter pilots. Time and again, they refused to accept that they needed better fighters with more defensive capabilities, such as shields. The success of the TIE design though was to have it be as small as possible, therefor such energy sucking systems as a shield generator would increase it's size (as is evident in both the Avenger and Defender).

The TIE Advanced x1 do prove that they were looking into shielded, and hyperspace capabilities, but the side project that spawned out from that research was the TIE Interceptor. While it was equipped with angled solar/radiator wings to make the side profile smaller, and new ion engines, plus added firepower which suggest a better reactor but of the same size, it still lacked defensive systems such as shields. And hyperdrives.

TIE Interceptor really is just an improved TIE Fighter, with little "new" systems in it, just upgraded systems.
Cheap, easily maintainable fighters, and provides more funding for larger ships, such as the Lancer Frigate, which they could develop since they ended up producing TIE Interceptors instead of the more expensive TIE Advanced (later dubbed TIE Avenger). Of course, the Lancer Frigate was a flopp, and didn't really perform as well against fighters which is what it was made for in the first place. :p

Anyway, I'm rambling :p , like I said, the Empire is/was arrogant.

Lieutenant_kettch
10-14-2004, 03:12 PM
now, if they truly wanted to be a superpower, they should have had nothing but one SSD for a control base, and put all their other money into Interceptors

Shok_Tinoktin
10-14-2004, 03:25 PM
I think that aside from diverting funds to bigger ships, they wanted to focus on quantity rather than quality (ironically the opposite of what they do with capital ships, go figure), as is evidenced by the swarms of TIEs in the battle of Endor.

Lieutenant_kettch
10-14-2004, 03:26 PM
the TIES did well though, if only the fool palpatine hadn't released the shield info

El Sitherino
10-14-2004, 07:14 PM
"your over-confidence is your weakness..." - Luke Skywalker

coupes.
10-14-2004, 07:17 PM
Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch
the TIES did well though, if only the fool palpatine hadn't released the shield info
He didn't release the info abouth the first Death Star, he only did this with the second one because it was part of his plan. This way he could trick the Alliance into thinking the Death Star was vulnerable and get them into a trap.

Lynk Former
10-14-2004, 07:45 PM
But he didn't foresee the primitive Ewoks to be a threat and because of that the shields were taken down which led to the breakdown of his entire plan.

Again, his overconfidence is his weakness.

TK-8252
10-14-2004, 07:58 PM
The exhaust port wouldn't have been able to be penetrated without the Force aiding Luke's aim and timing. If it wasn't for the Force, the exhaust port would be impossible to hit - so it probably didn't make the designers consider it a weakness.

Still, Tarkin should have listened to Chief Bast and evacuated when he had the chance. But who knows... maybe it was for the better. One less arrogant officer in the fleet.

Lieutenant_kettch
10-15-2004, 08:09 AM
Tarkin was a good, loyal man, however, it wouldn't have been impossible to hit the vent without the force... just highly improbable, there is a distinct difference. Wedge or Baron Soontir Fel could have done it IMO

ET Warrior
10-15-2004, 08:12 AM
Wedge couldn't even make it all the way through the trench run, let alone hit the exhaust port :xp:


What I never really understood about their attack plan was the whole flying through the trench plan..

Why didn't they approach the exhaust port from a perpendicular angle and then had a straight shot into it? The Rebels are poor tacticians :D

Lieutenant_kettch
10-15-2004, 10:37 AM
Originally posted by .:CoupeS:.
He didn't release the info abouth the first Death Star, he only did this with the second one because it was part of his plan. This way he could trick the Alliance into thinking the Death Star was vulnerable and get them into a trap.

uhh, we were talking about endor...
and everyone says he didn't have the fighter support he needed at yavin...

BTW

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ET Warrior
Wedge couldn't even make it all the way through the trench run, let alone hit the exhaust port


What I never really understood about their attack plan was the whole flying through the trench plan..

Why didn't they approach the exhaust port from a perpendicular angle and then had a straight shot into it? The Rebels are poor tacticians

now, lets think about the problems with flying in perpendicular:

You would leave yourself very open to the surface guns, they would slaughter you, after you fired, you would have to pull out, and then reverse direction, so the would have had to pull out into the trench, even worse IMO...

Or they could pull out and get slaughtered by the surface guns again... sounds dumb

Shok_Tinoktin
10-15-2004, 10:40 AM
because if they had flown straight at it all the surface guns could have blown them out of the air with little or no difficulty. It seems that the computer had miscalculated, not that the pilots couldn't get the timing right (not to say they could without it), and it is possible that they do it without the force, but as RC said, very unlikely.

ET Warrior
10-15-2004, 11:18 AM
They had to come into the Death star at a perpendicular angle no matter how they did to get into the trench. It's a sphere.

Lieutenant_kettch
10-15-2004, 11:23 AM
ever hear of a tangent?, or , for that matter, any angle less than 90 degrees, take a ball, and hold a pen tip to it, you can change the angle of the pen and still keep the pen touching....

Shok_Tinoktin
10-15-2004, 11:31 AM
Yeah, but if a ball has a hole in it, then that hole is gonna be a lot bigger when viewed from the top then the side. It also has a little bit of a different effect when the ball is big enough to look like it is flat. And if you were trying to stick a pen through the hole, it would be a lot easier from above. I'm sticking with the turbolaser evasion theory.

Lieutenant_kettch
10-15-2004, 01:03 PM
i was just saying that there are other ways to approach a sphere then just perpendicular like ET warrior said. yes you would have the biggest target, but it would be stupid, you would be dead very very quickly, plus, the trench is so cool

ET Warrior
10-15-2004, 03:24 PM
You can come in tangent to a POINT on the sphere, but you're still going to be perpendicular to two other points on it, no matter your approach.

I'm not saying the trrench run shouldn't have happened because it was awesome, I'm just saying it would have been alot easier if the alliance would've straight shotted it in there.

They could've evaded the surface guns on the attack run in just as easily as they did when they were on approach to the deathstar, which you'll note netted them no casualties. It wasn't until they were flying parallel with the surface that they actually started dying from turbolaser fire.

Lieutenant_kettch
10-15-2004, 03:26 PM
because they were then close enough for accurate TL fire, and many crashed, however, coming in perpendicular, every TL on the hempisphere could kill them

Shok_Tinoktin
10-15-2004, 03:31 PM
there is a difference between the approach and actually taking a perpendicular shot. if they had tryed to hit it perpendicular, than they would have to line up the shot, so they would not be able to evade. that is why the turbolasers could not hit them, they do not turn fast enough. if the person is flying straight, you know exactly where they are gonna go, so you just wait for them to get in your crosshairs, then fire away. also, if the torpedo was fired above the surface, it could have been easily intercepted.

ET Warrior
10-15-2004, 03:34 PM
And yet they flew in very straight lines through the trench and were not hit.........

Shok_Tinoktin
10-15-2004, 03:49 PM
first off, the trench actually allowed for a lot more maneuvering than would be possible in setting up a 2 meter wide target. second, the pupose of the trench (for the Alliance) is that it is below all but the gun emplacements that are in the trench, so very few would be able to shoot at them. and finally, the guns stopped shooting because the TIEs might have been hit.

what I said about the lasers having better shots, also goes for the TIEs who did get a lot of kills in the trench, but would have it even easier if the fighters had come in perpendicular

ET Warrior
10-15-2004, 11:16 PM
I don't believe there's any way you could possibly convince me that it's easier to dodge while in a confined trench run, as opposed to having ALL OF SPACE to dodge in. They didn't have to come in DIRECTLY at the exhaust port, just at a reasonable enough angle so they could hit it from anywhere between 0 and 45 instead of the 90 that they utilized. They could've even done loops and flips, and had other fighters covering their backs to defend against TIE's.

The logistics just don't quite work out, their strategy was obviously planned by monkeys.

:D

Shok_Tinoktin
10-15-2004, 11:22 PM
I did not mean that the approach did not allow for maneuvering, I meant that you could not just pop of a shot as you are in the middle of a turn. the port is only 2 meters wide, so you would have to be pointed directly at it, so you would have to fly in a straight line. but regardeless, the proton torpedo could easily be shot at if it is not right next to the surface.

ET Warrior
10-15-2004, 11:33 PM
They had a hard enough time hitting X-wings, those torpedos are smaller AND faster, they'd only have to be lined up with the exhaust port for like, less than a second, and if they timed it right they could have three X-wings/Y-wings all line up and fire at the same time, increasing the odds of SOMEBODY making it :)

Lynk Former
10-16-2004, 12:14 AM
I'll settle this arguement once and for all...

It's a movie. A very entertaining movie. That is all.

:D

Shok_Tinoktin
10-16-2004, 12:22 AM
yes, but the difference between the fighters and the torpedos, is that the fighters are evading. Not only can torpedos not evade, but the fighters can not evade while they are lining up a shot that is that precise.

Lieutenant_kettch
10-16-2004, 01:10 PM
ET Warrior, i want you to try something, if you have a copy of XWA. Set up a large stationary Station(a GolanIII) would work nice), and pick out a turbolaser battery on it. You will have to turn your targeting computer off, and i want you to try coming in at different angles, try lining up a shot from straight above, and see how long you live. Then, imagine the experience being 10 times harder, and you will have an idea of what the fighters would have had to do against DS1

ET Warrior
10-16-2004, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by Lynk Former
I'll settle this arguement once and for all...

It's a movie. A very entertaining movie. That is all.

:D

Werd. :) though alas, I feel my argumentative nature cannot stop :xp:


i want you to try coming in at different angles, try lining up a shot from straight above, and see how long you live. Then, imagine the experience being 10 times harder, and you will have an idea of what the fighters would have had to do against DS1
Except in YOUR example you're flying at something that is shooting back, while the exhaust port was not a turbolaser.

And if they could shoot the torpedo so easily, why didn't they shoot luke's after he shot it?

Shok_Tinoktin
10-16-2004, 05:32 PM
Luke's torpedo was below the guns (except for those in the trench that had stopped b/c of the TIEs. Also, he could get closer b/c he only had to pull out a little to avoid crashing, whereas from above, he would have had to make a larger turn, that takes more distance. As far as the exhaust port not shooting back, every other turbolaser on the surface would be (and thats a lot more than there is on any station you can create in XWA. And I believe a turbolaser is much larger than 2 meters anyway, not to mention that it does not require a direct hit.

ET Warrior
10-16-2004, 06:19 PM
I think that the pullout necessary is actually the same, since there was a wall in the trench right after the exhaust port, and you could actually fire the torpedo from further out because your firing angle is much better.


Proof for the pullout
http://img96.exs.cx/img96/8619/Trench.jpg

Shok_Tinoktin
10-16-2004, 07:30 PM
You are overestimating the size of the wall, and the maneuverability of the fighters. A U-turn like that would take much more space, and pulling out of the trench would take less than a ninety degree turn. If you came in perpendicular, you would have to start the turn from much farther away.

http://www.geocities.com/jedi_duck_1138/Trench.GIF

Just look at Red Leader's attack run, it is far from a ninety degree pull out from the trench.

Jan Gaarni
10-17-2004, 01:20 AM
Lol, now we're starting to use illustrations too?!? :P :D

Lynk Former
10-17-2004, 01:59 AM
They're not happy until they figure out every atom within the Star Wars universe...

ET Warrior
10-17-2004, 08:43 AM
Originally posted by Lynk Former
They're not happy until they figure out every atom within the Star Wars universe...

Bah, atoms are too big, I must figure out every sub-atomic particle :)

You are overestimating the size of the wall, and the maneuverability of the fighters. A U-turn like that would take much more space, and pulling out of the trench would take less than a ninety degree turn.

But coming in from my direction means that a firing solution would be aquirable a LOT earlier, meaning that they wouldn't have to make so sharp a turn to pull out ;)

weiderudare
10-17-2004, 09:04 AM
Is it just me that thinks that they made it to have an awesome space battle?
I mean, just looking at the fact the DS was made to repel attacks by big ships seems kinda stupid, since the rebels didnt have that many oversized ships.

What was the trench even used for by the way?

Lieutenant_kettch
10-17-2004, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
Bah, atoms are too big, I must figure out every sub-atomic particle :)



But coming in from my direction means that a firing solution would be aquirable a LOT earlier, meaning that they wouldn't have to make so sharp a turn to pull out ;)
acquiring that firing solution earlier would allow the TLs to intercept the torp, and the massive u-turn would let many TLs to track and destroy the fighters

ET Warrior
10-17-2004, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch
acquiring that firing solution earlier would allow the TLs to intercept the torp, and the massive u-turn would let many TLs to track and destroy the fighters

Supposition and conjecture. No torpedo in the movies was EVER destroyed by turbolasers, so we can assume that they are just too hard to target ;)

Lieutenant_kettch
10-17-2004, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
Supposition and conjecture. No torpedo in the movies was EVER destroyed by turbolasers, so we can assume that they are just too hard to target ;)

no torpedo was ever launched above the surface in the movies,
so by your logic, it's obvious that the death star had a massize weapons jamming system

ET Warrior
10-17-2004, 04:44 PM
The rebels were still above the surface of the deathstar when they destroyed it...they certainly weren't flying INSIDE of it, just because it had a trench built into doesn't make the trench not the surface of the Deathstar ;)

Lieutenant_kettch
10-17-2004, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
The rebels were still above the surface of the deathstar when they destroyed it...they certainly weren't flying INSIDE of it, just because it had a trench built into doesn't make the trench not the surface of the Deathstar ;)

in every reference to the trench in all of star wars, the trench is NEVER above the surface, anything above the trench in considered above the surface.

TK-8252
10-17-2004, 05:22 PM
How would turbolasers be able to shoot down torpedoes? The turbolasers only took down one Rebel ship (Porkins), because the turbolasers are not meant for shooting small, fast-moving targets.

Lieutenant Tanbris
We count thirty Rebel ships Lord Vader, but they're so small they're evading out turbolasers.

If turbolasers could barely destroy X-Wings or Y-Wings, how could they destroy a torpedo?

Shok_Tinoktin
10-17-2004, 05:38 PM
Turbolasers did not take down Porkins. Starfighters can evade, but torpedos just fly in a straight line. That is why they are easier to intercept. Play X-Wing Alliance awhile and you will see what I mean. You can fly circles around capital ships and be fine, but you'll find that a lot of the time, your warheads will get shot down like nothing.

TK-8252
10-17-2004, 06:16 PM
Then what shot down Porkins? There were no Imperial fighters out yet.

Shok_Tinoktin
10-17-2004, 07:25 PM
There was a mechanical failure on Porkins' X-Wing, so nothing shot him down.

TK-8252
10-17-2004, 07:27 PM
Then why were they showing turbolasers blasting up, Biggs shouting "pull up," and then Porkins' ship blows up just like when a ship is shot down?

Shok_Tinoktin
10-17-2004, 07:42 PM
Porkins says "I have a problem here", then Biggs tells him to eject, but Porkins assumes the problem to be nothing to make the ship not flyable, so he continues to fly, but his ship blows up because of the mechanical failure, none of the turbolasers actually hit him. Either way though, it does not change the rest of the argument.

TK-8252
10-17-2004, 07:44 PM
No, Biggs says "pull up," not eject. And they showed the turbolasers firing for a reason. They wouldn't have if it was a mechanical failure.

Shok_Tinoktin
10-17-2004, 07:50 PM
He says pull up, then he says eject. I just watched it. They showed the turbolasers because it is part of the atmosphere, the turbolasers were firing the whole time.

TK-8252
10-17-2004, 07:57 PM
Yeah, he does say eject. I thought he was saying Jek, which is Porkins' first name.

Where'd you find out that it's a mechanical failure?

Shok_Tinoktin
10-17-2004, 08:41 PM
I think I have heard it in many places, so I will try to track down a few that I can rememeber.

http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/jekredsixporkins/index.html
I guess that means it is official.

http://decipher.com/starwars/cardlists/premiere/dark/large/ivegotaproblemhere.html
The only other source I can find.

TK-8252
10-17-2004, 08:42 PM
From the official site:

His fighter was hit by the Imperial weapons emplacement, bursting into fiery fragments, and killing Porkins immediately.

Not shot down by turbolasers eh?

Shok_Tinoktin
10-17-2004, 08:44 PM
Though his X-wing fighter was maneuverable enough to avoid the Death Star's sluggish turbolasers, a mechanical malfunction hampered his ability (stopped reading here) to dodge enemy fire.

TK-8252
10-17-2004, 08:45 PM
The mechanical failure disabled his manuverability, which allowed the turbolasers to shoot him down.

I see I have proved my point. :)

Shok_Tinoktin
10-17-2004, 08:48 PM
I feel it proves my point as well, it is the maneuverability that prevents them from being hit, the torpedos do not maneuver, so they are easier for the lasers to pick off then evading starfighters. Thanks for pressing the issue, I would not have found this compelling evidence!

coupes.
10-17-2004, 09:03 PM
===------(-
/||
=|||
|||||||======> vs. --
=|||
\||
===------(-

X-wing Torpedo


I wonder which is harder to hit.... :rolleyes:

*wonders*


edit: btw, if you scroll this page up and down really fast, you can get a seizure from looking at TK's sig :p

Shok_Tinoktin
10-17-2004, 09:15 PM
Lets see, something flying in a straight line at a constant speed, vs. something that is dodging, varying speed, completely unpredictable, and focused on not getting hit. Hmmm, I'll have to go with the torp on this one.

Lynk Former
10-17-2004, 09:38 PM
If you guys are gonna get technical and all why don't you first figure out how the hell an X-Wing could even exist since the way it travels in space is impossible in the first place :dozey:

Shok_Tinoktin
10-17-2004, 10:19 PM
Originally posted by Lynk Former
If you guys are gonna get technical and all why don't you first figure out how the hell an X-Wing could even exist since the way it travels in space is impossible in the first place :dozey:


I'm not so sure its known how an X-Wing travels in space. Please enlighten us.

RedHawke
10-17-2004, 11:11 PM
Originally posted by Shok_Tinoktin
I'm not so sure its known how an X-Wing travels in space. Please enlighten us.

Er'... watch the movies... all Star Wars (And the other popular Sci-Fi shows of the time like Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rodgers, etc.) fighters fly like they are in an atmosphere more than the way a spacecraft would handle.

The best representation, in my humble opinion, of space combat would have to be the series Babylon 5.

Lynk Former
10-17-2004, 11:34 PM
Originally posted by RedHawke
Er'... watch the movies... all Star Wars (And the other popular Sci-Fi shows of the time like Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rodgers, etc.) fighters fly like they are in an atmosphere more than the way a spacecraft would handle.

Exactly. There's no point argueing about such things when the whole basis of the arguement features machines that don't exist and that can't exist in their current form.

Lieutenant_kettch
10-18-2004, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by RedHawke
Er'... watch the movies... all Star Wars (And the other popular Sci-Fi shows of the time like Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rodgers, etc.) fighters fly like they are in an atmosphere more than the way a spacecraft would handle.

The best representation, in my humble opinion, of space combat would have to be the series Babylon 5.

they seem to maneuver like current aircraft in atmoshpere do because an aircraft maneuvers by redirecting air, which causes drag, and also changes lift, which allows aircraft to maneuver in it's dimensions. However, starfighters cannot maneuver via the redirectiong of air or by lift because they fly in vacuum. Thus, the designers created maneuvering thrusters(which are small thrusters that rotate the starfighters) and placed them on strategic places on the fighter to allow it maneuverability

TK-8252
10-18-2004, 01:18 PM
Originally posted by .:CoupeS:.
edit: btw, if you scroll this page up and down really fast, you can get a seizure from looking at TK's sig :p

Yeah, and you made the sig! :xp:

Kurgan
10-18-2004, 01:21 PM
We know that "manuvering" torpedoes exist in Star Wars (see Jango's "missile" that he fires at Obi-Wan's ship in AOTC). Even Luke's torpedoes fired into the exhaust port pull a sharp turn to go into the hole.

If the turbolasers can only hit one ship that's having mechanical difficulties and therefore flying in a straight line for too long, they're going to have a heck of a time hitting a tiny torpedo many times smaller.

The Death Star was built around a "large scale assault" involving capital ships ("they don't consider a small one-man fighter to be a threat, or they'd have better defenses"), it had great difficulty with one-man fighters, that was the whole point of the attack, and why Vader had to launch fighters to deal with them.

Shok_Tinoktin
10-18-2004, 01:29 PM
For that matter, why not just have an armada of Rebel ships firing swarms of dodging missiles from their maximum range, instead of coming within their turbolaser range?

weiderudare
10-18-2004, 01:49 PM
Cause the deathstar had BIG GUNS to kill BIG SHIPS
they wouldnt have been able to go into range before they were burned to ashes
and besides, i dont think they had any on Yavin 4

Shok_Tinoktin
10-18-2004, 04:00 PM
warheads have greater range than lasers, so they would not have to come within the range of their guns to fire warheads. also, an armada would not have to consist of capital ships, but could be swarms of starfighters (however, i intended it to mean everything they've got).


Whatever happened to the original topic?...

Well, this is more interesting anyway.

Kurgan
10-21-2004, 02:52 AM
There's also the theory that the Death Star had it's own invisible shield (not as powerful as the DeathStar 2's shield of course). Remember the "magnetic field" that the fighters had to slow down to pass through (they then "accelerate to attack speed" once inside)?

That might prevent missiles from being fired from long range to track into the hole. Also, there is mention of heavy jamming (more in the novel/screenplay but there's a few instances of pilots saying they "can't see" things). This jamming might make it difficult for missiles to track (hence why Luke had to fire his torps so close to the exhaust port, rather than a mile away or something).

Shok_Tinoktin
10-21-2004, 03:05 AM
that makes sense, and could explain why they couldn't come in perpendicular. the turning radius may have made it impossible to get close enough to take the shot. after all, Biggs says "at that speed, will we be able to pull out in time?" and that is just the little change in direction to clear the wall. imagine a full u-turn.

Lynk Former
10-21-2004, 03:10 AM
Originally posted by Shok_Tinoktin
that makes sense, and could explain why they couldn't come in perpendicular. the turning radius may have made it impossible to get close enough to take the shot. after all, Biggs says "at that speed, will we be able to pull out in time?" and that is just the little change in direction to clear the wall. imagine a full u-turn.

Because it's a movie.


Yeah yeah, I know that you guys like to discuss this sort of thing but my overwealming commonsense is making me say all of this. It can't be helped.

Shok_Tinoktin
10-21-2004, 03:14 AM
yeah, but my overwhelming nerdiness (if thats a word, and even if its not) makes me ignore it.