Sins Forums
They told me they fixed it!
I trusted them to fix it!
It's not my fault!
Ontop of being a kick-ass scout, I think the MF could also have the unique ability to make it past black holes while either taking reduced amounts of damage or none at all. After all, didn't it make the kessel run in under 12 parsecs.
Kessel run = full of black holes. The closer you go to them, the less distance you have to go to complete the run. The faster you go, the closer you can get! 
Yeah, and Han was absolutely insane (well, more absolutely insane than usual) to pull a stunt like that.
He's lucky he didn't find himself sucked into one of the black holes.
A few years back, Mars was at it's closest point to Earth for the next 5000 years.
Maybe Solo just waited for the right time to go.
No - the Maw doesn't orbit like that... It is literally as was stated above. The faster you can travel, the closer the event horizon is the the black whole (even horizon is the point where the black hole is sucking you in at the same rate you are pulling away - hence you are at a balance point and stuck). The MF was able to fly a shorter (and crazier) route then any other ship and therefore do it in less then 12 parsecs...
I love Star Wars, but come on... Even a sucker shouldn't fall for that.
Who's the more foolish - the fool, or the fool who follows him?
And it is in a books etc...
Sigh, I've always thought that Star Wars was cool because they lacked the BS non-science technobable that Star Trek falls for. Comon guys, let's just stick with Imperial conquest, cool weapons/ships and mass destruction, and leave the technobable for the Trekkies.
Hehe, I've always loved the Star Wars tech versus Star Trek tech discussions. People get so rabid about 'who is tougher'. The problem that the Trekkies forget is that their precious Star Fleet is a political quagmire. Star Trek protocols and politics leave the Federation pretty much incapable of doing anything on their own. Senetor Palpatine would literally OWN Starfleet within a couple of years through politics alone = never find out who was tougher because it wouldn't matter.
Yeah. He'd take the Prime Directive and shove it right up their ass.
Besides, Imperial ships have ONE purpose: Blow Shit Up.
Starfleet: Explore, seek out new life, and only have enough weapons to defend themselves, not wage any serious conquest.
The Eclipse would be like a Borg Cube: need 40 ships to bring down. And it would take all 40 with it, letting the Star Destroyers escorts raze Earth.
What is so technical about tribbles? 
It would take every ship to bring down one Star Destroyer and they still wouldn't tale it down.
The Science doensn't lie
In fact the Empire could just send another Death Star 1 and nothing would be able to stop it.
There is an interesting point a guy raised was that if there was a Star destroyer with the specs, of being able to go so far without refuelling, it was based upon the stated values in the star wars manual, the guy worked out that over half the ship would be used for just fuel storage.
His arguement went on to point out that from the stated sources, the federation has a more efficient power source, and that hyperdrive is actually slower than was suggested based upon evidence that the outer rim is not the edge of the galaxy but the edge of the Republic.
Practically the argument was tech wise the federation was more advanced but the Empire made up by being on a much bigger scale.
But it doesn't matter cause they are two entirely different sci-fi, you can't do straight comparisons as the values stated in the manuals doesn't stand up to the science we know. Basically I'm talking about power generation here. The power that they supposedly can get from so much material is not possible.
And if it was, it would mean an entire rewriting of physics.
Great Lord D
Lol yeah. No fighters to launch proton torps into the exhaust port.
Just photon torps bouncing off its shields.
Eh? What fuel was that? Also, wasn't the Federation supposed to be a quarter of the galaxy?
Yes, I know parsecs is a measurement of distance. This is precisely why I think that, should the Falcon be included, not only should it move like a fighter but any and all travel near a black hole should have reduced damage to the falcon (As in like, say, half of the damage it usually inflicts upon ships). As far as ace pilots go, if anything they could have a bonus to, perhaps, accuracy. However, I think it actually would be reasonable to have star destroyers commanded by hero's to, in fact, have better weaponry and armor than other SDs. After all, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that the best of the best in the imperial navy would get the best equipment? However, at the same time this would mean that the ships these 'heroes' have would have to be somewhat different in appearance when compared to the other, less important ships.
What can I say? I've always liked Thrawn since the Thrawn Trilogy. And I liked him even more when I read Outbound Flight.
People keep forgetting that Star Wars is science "fantasy" not science fiction. Think Tolkin in outer space, and you got Star Wars. Nobody knows what powers the empires monstrositys or where the "force" comes from. Nor do they care. They just know it exists. Think of chewbacca as a furry "Legolas" 
I just turn my brain off whenever I watch it. That way interstellar travel with manual weapons targetting doesn't completely fuck it up.
The summation of the who would win argument is in that too. Manual targetting.
/wrists
Please don't ever say that star wars has any fantasy in it... I hate fantasy. The force is the only mysterious part, and sadly that was explaned in EP1 (gheyness). And any ship or weapon does have science behind it in star wars, unless it's powered... by the force.
Hehe, best to turn off the brain and look at the pretty ships and explosions. Still, sometimes I like to look at what is possible versus probably impossible versus almost certainly impossible.
As for energy sources, we can (and do) presently use antimatter (take that Star Trek!)....it just is insanely expensive to make and contain. Maybe our new Super Collider will help advance our understanding (and control) of physics.
Who knows, maybe one day we'll be able to 'trick' our way past the speed of light barrier (think space folding or subspace). Barring that, we should still be able to 'evolve' our biology to the point that we can endure the massive centuries/millennia time frames it takes to travel between star systems at 80% light speed (using 'conventional' antimatter drives).
We should even be able to do limited amounts of planetary engineering/terraforming on planets that have Carbon Dioxide atmospheres like Earth/Mars/Venus (of course, Venus has way too much atmosphere and is too hot to bind up the carbon in its atmosphere = probably can't ever be terraformed). As for Mars, we can make robotic ships that attach to and guide comets into collisions with Mars = thicker atmosphere. We can do the same for asteroids (and Phobos and Deimos) in order to increase Mars gravity as well. Still, Mars has the problem of no magnetic shield.
Hehe, best to turn off the brain and look at the pretty ships and explosions. Still, sometimes I like to look at what is possible versus probably impossible versus almost certainly impossible.
As for energy sources, we can (and do) presently use antimatter (take that Star Trek!)....it just is insanely expensive to make and contain. Maybe our new Super Collider will help advance our understanding (and control) of physics.
Who knows, maybe one day we'll be able to 'trick' our way past the speed of light barrier (think space folding or subspace). Barring that, we should still be able to 'evolve' our biology to the point that we can endure the massive centuries/millennia time frames it takes to travel between star systems at 80% light speed (using 'conventional' antimatter drives).
We should even be able to do limited amounts of planetary engineering/terraforming on planets that have Carbon Dioxide atmospheres like Earth/Mars/Venus (of course, Venus has way too much atmosphere and is too hot to bind up the carbon in its atmosphere = probably can't ever be terraformed). As for Mars, we can make robotic ships that attach to and guide comets into collisions with Mars = thicker atmosphere. We can do the same for asteroids (and Phobos and Deimos) in order to increase Mars gravity as well. Still, Mars has the problem of no magnetic shield.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
