How in the actual fuck do they bypass Starkiller's shields with the Millenium Falcon?
Scene goes like this:
>It's nearly impossible to bypass the shield, we'll have to enter at light speed.
>5 seconds later
>We did it :)
No mention about it afterwards whatsoever.
Are we supposed to eat that shit up?
Meanwhile JJ and Disney execs are laughing all the way to the bank.
>how are we gonna get past the shields?
>they're designed to prevent anything moving slower than light speed from penetrating
>so we're going to enter at light speed?
>you got it
Pretty fucking simple
>Meanwhile JJ and Disney execs are laughing all the way to the bank.
Something you shouldn't be complaining about since you paid to see the movie.
I didn't though so I can say whatever I want.
Maybe next time you should download camrips like me.
Yeah, they describe it as being a fucking 1 in a million shot and they casually pull it off without much effort, the point is that artificial tension is created and released almost automatically, really cheap writing if you ask me.
Check out non newtonian fluids on youtube sometime. Pretty cool shit.
Doesn't have much to do with a force field not stopping a ship that's traveling at light speed, mind you, but cool anyway.
Why wouldn't Han give such trick to Lando and the Rebel fleet instead of planning all the sabotage of the shield generator at Endor?
How exactly the Falcon wouldn't survive a frontal impact of big sized asteroids in ESB but it can survive dozens of trees and a direct impact against snowy terrains?
How is Han skilled enough to exit hyperspace mere nanoseconds before impacting the planet?
"In fiction, a plot hole or plothole is a logical inconsistency within a story. Such inconsistencies include such things as illogical or impossible events, and statements or events that contradict earlier events in the storyline."
>illogical or impossible events
What is a plot hole anon, do tell me
Why is it illogical or impossible for the ship to warp through the gap in the shields?
They tell you the problem, then they tell you how they're going to solve the problem, and then they solve the problem.
Are you a bit of a silly-billy?
"Travelling through hyperspace isn't like dusting crops, kid. Without precise calculations, we would end in a sun or bounce too close to a supernova and that will the end of your journey, wouldn't it?
This in itself is just retarded. Does that mean every other force field in Star Wars can actually just be moved through without even entering light speed?
It's said as though it's some impenetrable new technology, but its just a force field with a relatively easily exploited flaw.
How come the rebels didn't just light-speed warp through the Death Star's shields? Or hell, go below light speed and do it if needing light speed is some new shield design,
I didn't realize that star wars had decided that warping actually meant going super fast and popping into another dimension. I assumed the writers of a sci fi would take into account the existence of warp drives in other media and not completely change the meaning of the word.
But hey, I guess it's no worse than pretending that a vampire is a glittery emo.
The point is that SW77 established hyperspsce can be really dangerous, and tricks like warping between a planetary shield and its surface, with only a few hundreds of kilometers of gap (at most) is one shot in a quadrillion.
In SW77 Han is warned by the Falcon's computers about their proximity to the Alderaan system by a long margin, and when they leave hyperspace they find out an artificial asteroid field, because it is assumed Alderaan has been destroyed for a few hours, giving time for its remains to float in different paths. Here, he just exists hyperspace at a random moment. The ship appears a few hundred meters before impacting the surface. Had he reacted mere nanoseconds later, they would have died.
Because it's dangerous. The Falcon crashed doing it. Han Solo is the type of cowboy who would do something that crazy. Why does everything need to be spelled out to you? It's a flick and this isn't even one of the most glaring plot conveniences.
>tricks like warping between a planetary shield and its surface, with only a few hundreds of kilometers of gap (at most) is one shot in a quadrillion.
ricks like warping between a planetary shield and its surface, with only a few hundreds of kilometers of gap (at most) is one shot in a quadrillion.
Never tell me the odds.
>Here, he just exists hyperspace at a random moment.
It wasn't random, he knew where the planet was and he exited after breaching the shields.
>Had he reacted mere nanoseconds later, they would have died.
Yes, I agree. You can have issues with that, by all means, but "plot hole" is not the correct term to use.
>The falcon crashed
It wasn't even damaged though, they just flew it back around ten minutes later.
>Han Solo is the type of cowboy who would do something that crazy.
Yeah, because guys like Wedge are just so cowardly, right?
Never mind, as i said, the rebels apparently wouldn't even have needed light speed.
>How come the rebels didn't just light-speed warp through the Death Star's shields?
>Does that mean every other force field in Star Wars can actually just be moved through without even entering light speed?
>one force-field has a weakness so they all do
Pretty sure if this is just how all force-fields work then he wouldn't have felt the need to specify that this one worked that way. Just look at it as an easily exploitable weakness similar to the first Death Star's exhaust port.
I ignore everything outside of the movies.
>It wasn't even damaged though
Yeah, it can handle interstellar space battles, but a car accident's going to take it out of commission.
>>tricks like warping between a planetary shield and its surface, with only a few hundreds of kilometers of gap (at most) is one shot in a quadrillion.
>ricks like warping between a planetary shield and its surface, with only a few hundreds of kilometers of gap (at most) is one shot in a quadrillion.
>Never tell me the odds.
Well, that was a failure.
What random science fiction technology does isn't important. But the fact that this is apparently the first time anyone has ever thought to use this glaring weakness is completely retarded.
Literally what possible reason did the First Order have for skimping on force field parts to the point where its sole use in blocking people from entry was compromised?
This is literally all I can think of, because it was just as retarded.
In the asteroid field chase scene, the asteroids are moving at sub-light speeds, like the Falcon. Han already knew it was very dangerous:
-"You don't need to do this to impress me"
-"It would be crazy to follow us, wouldn't be? [...] If you wanted me to fail, this is the time" (or something like that)
-"I take it back. You're gonna have all of us pulverized"
-"I can't argue with that. [...] We're gonna fly closer to that big one"
-"[...] Yeah, that would be a nice place"
-"I really hope you know what you're doing"
-"Yeah, me too"
And it was nowhere as dangerous as reckless as what he does in TFA.
Guys, I have no idea what the big fucking problem is. The shield scenario made perfect sense.
>The base needed shields to prevent enemy aircraft from entering
>But, it also needs to power its massive fucking laser to destroy planets
>Light and matter from the nearby sun are used as energy for this laser
>This material moves at lightspeed (yes, I know that something with mass cannot accelerate to lightspeed, but this is Star Wars and things can so fuck off)
>This allows the base to continuously charge its laser while preventing the vast majority of enemy aircraft from entering
>Unless you travel at LS, you aren't getting in
>Han is a skilled pilot and is one of the few people able to pull of this maneuver
No, other shields in Star Wars cannot be bypassed by simply walking through them. I'm not sure why you would think that.
For fuck sake, you don't like it when things are explained in Star Wars because you like mystery and aura surrounding things. But then when they are left with some mystery you complain that you don't understand it. What makes even less sense is that this fucking scene was 100% understandable and should not provide any further confusion.
>Why was there little damage to the MF?
It's a fucking spaceship that is know for being able to take hits. It takes blaster fire. Blaster fire is capable of destroying trees and debris. Therefore, it follow that if the MF is not heavily damaged by blaster fire, it wouldn't be heavily damaged by trees, either.
The Falcon is capable of taking direct blastes only when it has funtional deflector shields:
-"What's that flashing"
-"We'll losing a deflector shield, go back and strape to your seats, I'm gonna jump to hyperspace!"
-"Sir, we have lost the rear deflector shield. One more hit and we're done for"
-"Turn her around"
-"Turn her around, I'm gonna put all power on the front shield"
-"Sir, the chances of surviving an attack against an Imperial Star Destroyer..."
The Falcon could survive small particles like it did in Alderaan and the Hoth asteroid field. It couldn't survive a big meteoroid, let alone an asteroid. Yet it can impact against a snowy surface and hundreds of trees with no problem.
You pulled that shit about the matter from the sun being sucked at light speed out of your ass, besides that's not the reason for the shield's hole, it was outright described as an exploitable flaw in the movie.
Even still the main point of discussion isn't the flaw in itself, but the implausibility of the way it was exploited.
Maybe it's just some navigational trick he learned skin of the teeth like, like the 12 parsec run time.
The nav computers could plot the safe distances, with a little info on the planet, just need to figure out how to come out in the atmosphere. Or maybe a 2 stage jump, come in right outside the system so a more accurate shorter, more accurate jump could be calculated then do a microjump.
>Their shields have a fractional refresh rate. Keeps anything travelling slower than lightspeed from getting through
Its stated as though its some sort of new advanced technology, not as a retarded design flaw.
"Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star or bounce too close to a supernova, and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?"
"Admiral Ozzel came out of light-speed too close to the system"
The ship takes blaster shots from Storm Troopers all the time without its shields up -- that's more of what I was referring to, not Star Destroyer shots.
And, to a degree, I pulled it out of my ass, yes. But it completely follows from the information we are given.
If the shields of the planet prevented all matter from entering the planet at all speeds, then it could not charge the giant laser beam.
If, however, it allowed for matter traveling at LS to enter through the shields, then charging is permitted.
This works out based on what we know. Of course, this is just inference -- but it's rather sound reasoning.
It's also a rather safe risk since trying to bypass the shields while traveling at LS is extremely risky and will likely result in death. Han is an amazing and experienced pilot that has demonstrated his abilities over numerous films -- so his completion of this task should not be taken as deus ex.
The flaw in your argument is that they downright show you the sun's matter being sucked into the base, and it sure as hell didn't look to me like it was moving at light speed so it's probably another thing they overlooked.
Its the way its worded.
>You can't get in unless you walk through the door
>They didn't even lock the door, so we can just walk through.
Is the same as
>Their shields have a fractional refresh rate. Keeps anything travelling slower than lightspeed from getting through
>The shields have a new design flaw meaning we should be able to pass through them at lightspeed.
I'm not saying it's not fucking stupid all things considered, but in the Clone Wars cartoon Anakin warps his ship right up next to an enemy cruiser as a point of strategy.
So the lore was already broken.
If Anakin can do that then Han should be able to get in the space between a shield and a planet.
That reasoning would make sense, problem is that they sure as fuck didn't figure out any of these logistics, or else they'd at least try to show it to some capacity. I guess because they couldn't be bothered with those details they decide to nudge it to the side and never explain it, but holy fuck that whole base just sounds retarded once you really start thinking about it.
True, it did look like the matter was "flowing" rather than flying at LS. So I will give you that. However, my interpretation makes a lot of sense if that matter was moving at LS -- it allows for laser charging while maintaining non-permeability to the vast majority of objects.
Hopefully this is what they were going for.
It's not a design flaw. The risk of breach is extremely low because you need to travel at LS, enter through the shields, and slow down before you crash into the planet. Based on the speed of light this would give Han (or any pilot) a ridiculously minuscule amount of time to react and slow down and avoid collision.
But once again, Han is an experienced pilot.
It's advanced in its semi-permeability -- allowing for the charging of the station while reflecting nearly all objects.
The whole point of that is that the rebels are capable of detecting ships exiting hyperspace at a very close distance, thus giving them enough time to activate the energy shields. Had Ozzel existed further, they would have caught the Rebels before they could react. Although it doesn't explain why didn't the Rebels activate the energy shield once they started evacuation.
But thank you anon to discover another plothole in TFA. Why didn't the First Order detect the Falcon exiting hyperspace before Han was close enough for Ren to detect him through the Force? Why didn't Ren warn the Starkiller soldiers and officers about the Falcon crew anyway?
Blastes from blasters and bowcasters are supposed to be nowhere as powerful as blaster fired by the turrets of ships.
A blast from a ship like a Star Destroyer is bigger than a person, for starters. At the beginning of SW77 a blast impacts the Tantive IV, and said blast is as big as one of its engines. The Death Stars' blasts/lasers are also much bigger, to the point of being capable of one-shotting capital ships and entire planets. The basic logic is, the bigger the more powerful.
In the OT the Falcon is hit by debris in Alderaan and the asteroid field, it has a partial hit from one of the Death Star II's inner tubes so it only destroys its antennae. A frontal hit would have completely destroyed the Falcon, same as in the asteroid field where any reasonably sized meteoroid would have destroyed the ship. And even in ESB the Falcon never flies so close to a surface like Rey did in Jakku, there are at least several meters of distance to the surface in ESB.
I also believe we see normal Stormtroopers firing against Finn and Poe's TIE Fighter.
The Falcon would probably survive a few trees, but not dozens or hundrends, let alone making a frontal impact against a flat snowy surface. Otherwise, where's the danger in all of ESB's scenes?
My point with the second quote about Ozzel was that according to the OT the hyperspace tech is so imprecise and difficult to use that even trained imperial officers can make mistakes and overshoot. Guess all of that lore is out the window in JJ's star wars.
I have never understood thst scene like that. We see Ozzel already being naive and stupid before, we see Veers trying to defend Ozzel's actions later in the movie, but Vader had no time for useless officers so he killed him. Vader later kills Needa for even less reasons (losing the Falcon), whereas Ozzel would have allowed Vader to caugh Luke, the Falcon crew, the Princess and all the officials, soldiers and Rebel material and documentation at the Hoth base.
It isn't the hyperspace being so imprecise, is Ozzel being damn terrible at his job.
TIE Fighters are known for being weak but agile. Their strength is in the sheer number of them and the ability to mass produce them. The fact that a TIE was even able to take ST blaster fire and not explode lets us know that the MF will take quite more of a beating (especially considering we've seen it take ST blaster fire before).
Also, asteroids in space are far more massive and are moving at speeds far greater than a tree. This means they contain far more energy, and a crash with them would likely result in greater damage.
Trees are destroyed by regular ST blaster fire, and they have been in the star wars franchise. So if the MF can take on regular ST blaster fire, it can certainly survive many trees.
Also, the crash into the snow was not a frontal crash. Sure, they were moving forward, but they landed on their belly -- thus dispersing the force about the entirety of the broad underside.
Most of the asteroids in the asteroid field are moving at great speeds, but some others are stationary, at least relatively to the camera and the Falcon, and yet the Falcon avoids them. We also see than even small debris can we felt with great intensity, so an impact against dozens of trees would have probably made the crew land to the floor or otherwise being unable to operate the ship.
Also even with funtional deflector shields, a blast fired from a Star Destroyer can greatly alter the Falcon's path and position, we clearly see it in a shot of ESB after they have left the asteroid field.
In TFA's case, the Falcon has left hyperspace a few seconds before, so there's the chance its speed hasn't been fully slowed down, whereas in the asteroid field the ship's hyperdrive was damaged and the Falcon was moving at its usual speed. Also, the snow should have maximized the damage to the ship, and it should have landed in the upper part of the Falcon, or at least blocked part of the windows of the cockpit, and yet the Falcon didn't appear to suffer any damage.
>i know lets hyperspace into a planets atmosphere!
they would be a fucking meteor. bigger than the one that hit the earth when it wiped out the dinosaurs. there is no way the falcon could pull up after that. the kinetic energy would have them hit the planet with the force of a million nukes
Hyperspace in Star Wars is basically just wormholes. you're basically in another dimension of time-space until you come out. They generally follow pre-established "lanes," but with the right time, you can pull out of it anywhere.
It's not impossible. I used to pull out of FTL speed right in front of stars in my Type-7 back home.
Do they share the toilet in the Falcon with Chewie? Seems to me like he would clog it very often with shit and hair.
Does he get a lot of dingleberries?
Does he have separate quarters with a bidet and insinkerator just like the one on Kashyyk?
>I'm afraid, gentlemen, Starkiller isn't just Death Star. Its...XBOX HUEG DEATH STAR
>Han Solo: pfff, you just blow it up bro, no problem
>entire casts turns to the camera and winks
Jesus, is this how movies are going to be from now on?
wrong wrong wrong wrong
However, large objects in realspace cast "mass shadows" in hyperspace, so hyperspace jumps necessitated very precise calculations.
The lanes are places where there aren't any of those celestial bodies in the way, you can't just go through stars as if they weren't there
No, because if you travel fast enough, you don't trigger a collision detection. It's like in Sonic 2, you can fly through walls or the ground if you are Super Sonic since the game doesn't cap your speed like it does when you are regular Sonic
>How exactly the Falcon wouldn't survive a frontal impact of big sized asteroids in ESB but it can survive dozens of trees and a direct impact against snowy terrains?
Are you actually suggesting that sticks of wood and ice dust would do more damage than massive solid rock?
>Are we supposed to eat that shit up?
Did you honestly expect JJ Abrams and Disney to give a single fuck about the quality of the story?
The movie is simply a bunch of random scenes based wholly upon on marketing demographic data.
how did the first order manage to funnel the resources to make an even biggerer death star and somehow manage to keep its existence completely hidden
aren't they supposed to be like, the remnants of the empire? weaker than before and no longer the status quo?
I have already explained it, anon.
In SW77 the Falcon was hit by debris from the remains of Alderaan. It was very small debris,, but still capable of inflicting enough force to make the interiors of the cockpit move erratically. The Falcon is later hit with blasts from TIE Fighters, damaging the ship enough to cause an internal fire.
In ESB the Falcon is hit by debris from the asteroid field, and again, its cockpit moves like crazy, and Leis and C3PO has a hard time to not fall to the floor. It is also hit by a blast from a Star Destroyer, and we can clearly see it greatly affects the Falcon's trayectory, even if the Falcon recovers nearly instantly.
In RotJ the Falcon's antennae hits some tubes of the Death Star II. The impact is strong enough to detach the antennae.
In TFA, the Falcon hits dozens of trees mere seconds after leaving hyperspace. While the trees were stationary, there were so many of them they would have made some serious damage to the ship. Futhermore, the ship crashes against a snowy surface.
The Falcon should have been completely inoperative, if not destroyed. And even if it survives, the crew should have suffered huge wounds if not died due to the convulsions.
>how does the death planet move?
It doesn't move. Once it's drained the star completely it is useless. The star it was orbiting had enough fuel for two shots. That would destroy roughly 10 planets.
Understandably it feels like a "waste" to have the base be functionally useless after those two shots, but that's the nature of high grade military munitions. A tremendous investment is made for the benefit of an overwhelming and tactical show of force.
that seems like a massive waste of resources, especially since the first order isn't what it used to be
why didn't they just build a death star again and blow up multiple planets with it
>seems like a massive waste of resources
>why didn't they just build a death star again
Of a total of two Death Stars built in the Original trilogy, the Empire blew up exactly one planet.
Starkiller Base blew up five planets.
Seems like a superior return on investment to me.
>n RotJ the Falcon's antennae hits some tubes of the Death Star II. The impact is strong enough to detach the antennae.
Not just an antenna it was for the deflector shield generator.
nah starkiller moves. it makes it obvious in the new galaxy map. my problem is why cant they just suck up the sun of the worlds they want to destroy instead of shooting a fuckhuge laser at them?
I don't mind dumb science shit in Star Wars because it's fantasy, but jumping through the shield is inconsistent with Return of the Jedi and Death Star 2.
If you could just hyper little ships through shields there's no reason to infiltrate Endor in the first place. It's just dumb and glaringly contradictory of Jedi.
>Pedantically arguing over a series which justifies most things with an invisible magical power that can't be quantified, measured, or seen, is useless.
Almost as useless as pedantically criticizing and trying to stop people who argue pedantically for recreation.
What do shielding of space craft in any scifi setting do? Any laser blast violently rocks the ship and causes fires inside? |
In the last JJ star trek the ship had huge holes in it and they claimed the shields were at 6% still.
the whole movie is full of shit like this to eat up
>convenient weak spot meme reused twice to shorten and simplify something that should be more complicated
>convenient meme beam reused twice to cheapen and shorten experiences and real battle scenes
>invincible protag's that do no wrong
>shit enemies that have no weight behind their words or actions
>useless entire arcs in the story that serve no purpose other than to introduce old characters and add nothing
>nothing explained because Lost director who's writing style revolves around cheap inevitably empty promises
>makes it obvious in the new galaxy map
I don't know the map you're talking about.
>it was like 16 times the size
most of which was just the planet they built it into. Starkiller could conceivably be cheaper to build than a classic Death Star, being as the original Death Stars are a moon-sized chunk of metal and electronics, wheras Starkiller base is mostly comprised of the planet it is built into along with (doubtlessly considerable) metal and electronics for its Death Star capabilities.
>seems like a better long term investment
except those things have a track record of getting blown the fuck up. As I mentioned, the TWO Death stars from the Original Trilogy blew up a total of ONE planet.
The first order probably figured the heat would be on as soon as the weapon was used so they engineered one that would blow up multiple planets with the first shot.
In SW77 it does, the Falcon is hit by blasts, C3PO falls to the floor, a fire is started, R2 saves the day.
The movie does a poor job at suggesting any technological development at all.
The X-Wings are barely modified, Star Destroyers are like good old Star Destroyers, TIE Fighters seems a little better, but that's it.
What modifications could have been made to the Falcon to make it survive such a strong impact, or at least absorb it and mitigate it. At no point in the OT and in TFA it is suggested there's some type of shield protecting against physical impacts, they only have deflector shields and that's it.
Again, deflector shields only works with blasts. In ESB, the entire command bridge of a Star Destroyer suffers a direct impact of an asteroid, and is destroyed. Only Piett's death scene seems to suggest a relatuon between physical impacts and deflector shields, and yet it's quite possible the A-Wing could have destroyed the command bridge regardless of the state of deflector shields.
Are you retarded?
What happens to a car when you hit it at 200 mph? What would happen to a car if you hit it at 500 mph? What happens to ANYTHING hitting anything else at over 100,000 miles per second?
But so is calling them by their last name.
>i can't imagine something like that being cheap
Traditional Death Stars surely have some sort of fuel source as well. Im sure they aren't cheap as well.
But you're missing my point.
I said directly that while the Starkiller Base may feel like a "waste", that is the nature of largescale military munitions. They spend a shitload of money on something that will be used once. An atomic bomb is an enormous investment. That doesn't mean that militaries aren't willing to invest in them.
Even if Starkiller Base cost triple what a traditional Deathstar cost, its still statistically a superior investment to the Death Star, as those have a track record of destroying .5 planets per Death Star.
Different. Death stars move and have multiple uses. Their track record isn't by nature of their design. The planet had two uses and then that's it. I see what the other anon is saying.
Falcon crashing through a whole forest is dumb.
just like a lot of things in this movie are dumb. I say this even though i thought the movie was generally alright.
No need to justify The Falcon's mysterious invlunerability. Its dumb but its not your fault.
Starkiller base is an ice planet that can go close enough to a star to 'suck' it in for energy, yet not incinerate everything on the surface, or even melt the fucking snow. You can forget about stopping a spacecraft going at light speed within a couple hundred km.
>Death stars move and have multiple uses
So far they dont have multiple uses.
Wise military planning takes historical context into account. Surely the top brass of the First Order is aware that Death Stars don't have a good track record and have never been able to be used twice.
It is silly that you're arguing for the superior usefulness of the traditional Death Star when Starkiller destroyed five times as many planets as two Death Stars combined.
In Real Life, very small particles are still capable of dealing a lot of damage to space suits and ships, not because of their size but because of their relative fast speed.
A A-Wing crashing through the command bridge of the Executor is strong enough to make it lost control of its path and all towards the Death Star. It's stupid that the entire ship has such a single flaw point, but it still proves that, with enough speed, a ship wouldn't last.
The Falcon was also supposed to be junk. Very damn fast junk, but junk nevertheless.
>starkiller moves too
which is also dumb.
The writers knew the thing was gonna get blown the fuck up. Why not just write it as a stationary base that drains its' star and then is done?
>>Calling someone you just met purely by their last name is disrespectful, it implies an in-formalness you haven't yet earned
>But so is calling them by their last name.
Not really. The shield is probably not very far out from the surface. Trying to hit the sweetspot between surface and shield at FTL is probably really fucking hard.
Are you an autist?
The writers knew that the base was getting destroyed but the first order didn't, can't believe I'm explaining this shit.
Prior to that scene, they mention that the shield is phased in intervals, and it requires a lightspeed jump to cross in the intervals. Pay attention, nigger.
>Yes it does.
So any movie that's even remotely "made for kids" is automatically 10/10 and immune from criticism?
And stop with the bullshit that SW is made for kids. It's made for everyone. They fucking execute an entire village in the first 10 minutes of the movie. A soldier dies and leaves bloody fingers marks on his friend.
I hope you're trolling, because otherwise you're really fucking stupid.
I remember the map. I think it just showed Starkiller's location, don't recall any implication or outright statement of mobility.
I would say that it has to be immobile because it moving would be dumb as fuck... but this is Episode VII we're talking about here.
Anwyay, until they say it's moving to a new system in Episode IX (when we get Starkiller mark 2), I'm just going to assume it is immobile because nothing in Episode VII says otherwise.
I don't know, but that isn't a failing of the movie. The obstacle is that there's a phased shield, so you have to be traveling at lightspeed to bypass it. The end result is a cool, risky maneuver that thrills the audience.
>read the thread dumbass
the thread shows a marked difference of opinion on the question of whether it moves or not.
I certainly hope it wasn't intended to move, because that's dumb as fuck.
>How in the actual fuck do they bypass Starkiller's shields with the Millenium Falcon?
But I answered the question, anon.
I guess for bonus points, it's never mentioned again because pulling that move is rewarded by a cool landing on the enemy base. Does there need to be a lengthy disposition of the event afterwards?
but pablo hidalgo, author of the force awakens visual dictionary, confirms that it moves
I saw a link to a fucking wikipedia article. Frankly i didn't find it particularly convincing.
I saw a credible proof that it moves here
and I stated my opinion on that topic here
Now, please refrain from needless namecalling in the future. Or dont... this is the fucking internet afterall... you... ummm... u-useless... uhhh... Heeb.
the point is that they clearly establish that it's hard as fuck, literally travelling at light speed and stopping nanoseconds before crashing into the planet
when it actually happens they treat it like it was no biggie, Han literally says something along the lines of: "it has to be done now" and he casually pulls a lever or some shit.
The point is that it's some lazy writing, artificial tension is released almost instantly and with no consequences.
The first Death Star was capable of travelling across systems. The Starkiller is never seen capable of doing that.
The first Death Star doesn't need external power for its superlaser. The Starkiller needs an entire sun for recharging, thus it destroys an entire system before even firing its beam.
The second Death Star can use its laser against capital ships, thus allowing the Death Star to assist Imperial fleets. The Starkiller doesn't seem capable of that.
The only remote advantage the Starkiller could have is that 90% of its surface isn't covered by turbolasers like the Death Star, so it could probably have some docking bays or whatever. And even being covered by turbolasers and turrets would have allowed the Death Star to be used against entire Rebel fleets without problems, whereas Starkiller cannot be used for that purpose.
Other than that, it's such a waste of galactic resources for such an output, whereas the second Death Star, which would have been invulnerable, could destroy the same planets a Starkiller would do in one hit, albeit in a longer time.
It also doesn't matter the Starkiller could fire from anywhere, since the second Death Star would have been flawless, thus no rival faction would have been capable of avoiding complete, uther destruction.
There's no way you can say Starkiller is the superior design. It isn't.
so find one without any sizable planets.
the galaxy is fucking huge, there have gout to be more than 5000000+ lonely stars with nothing around them
and that is an extremely conservative estimate
I suppose you have a point. A lot of science fiction (not the good stuff like Heinlein and Clarke) is really fucking stupid when it comes to transportation.
I suppose there is just an emotional response that makes Starkiller moving seem less plausible than the Death Star, probably because the Death Star is a "constructed" object, whereas Starkiller is a planet.
Either way, they'd both have to travel through Hyperspace.
I don't even bother listing it as one of my objections to this new flick (because as mentioned most Sci-fi glazes over the difficulty of interstellar travel), but I find it kind of annoying how star drives in Abram's flicks are insta-travel miracle boxes... I mean... Rey and Chewy get the map to Luke and are there after a literal 30 second jump. The movie doesn't even try to imply a greater passage of time in transit, but represents itself as showing the entire jump.
This is a fairly minor quibble, but frankly I've always found that grappling with the immense distance and difficulty of interstellar travel creates the most interesting parts of good science fiction. Star Wars has always made space travel a little "too easy", but at least in Episode IV we got a long section of downtime onboard the Millennium Falcon en route to Alduran, which allowed us a period for character development...
okay... gripe over.
>"It is very much — and it's acknowledged as such in the movie — apparently another Death Star. But what it's capable of, how it works, and what the threat is, is far greater than what the Death Star could have done. Starkiller Base is another step forward, technologically speaking, in terms of power."
―J.J. Abrams, on the similarities and differences between the Death Stars and Starkiller Base
is he the biggest hack in history?
There's a shield on the planet to prevent unwanted landings, and there's a separate deflector shield on the thermal oscillator in place to prevent x-wings from hitting the weak spot.
If Starkiller uses the energy of a sun to recharge itself. How did the First Order managed to charge it up first for the first attack? Is Jakku actually Tatootine and they used the second sun? How the fuck do they recharge that shit when the weapon is stationary?
Star Wars ships have deflector and particle shields, shielding them from both energy and material attacks. Otherwise proton torpedoes and other physical attacks such as rockets would instantly kill any ship.
>Han is so badass he can pull shit like this
>shit that no other person can
>shit that has 2% chance of working
>he still gave up on looking for his son
>because it was TOO HAAARD!!!!
I know it's not the same, but fuck, it manages to make Han look like a cunt. The guy pulls the impossible before breakfast every day, but he just gives up? And it's not like he gave up 10 years after Kylo was gone, he went back to smuggling and not looking for him right away.
>The first Death Star was capable of travelling across systems. The Starkiller is never seen capable of doing that.
I was one of the guys arguing that Starkiller can't move because that would be ridiculous, but the thread has shown me to be incorrect in that assertion.
Starkiller moves just like the Death Star, so no advantage for the Death Star there
>The first Death Star doesn't need external power for its superlaser
There's just no way that is true.
We aren't told what the power source is for the Death Star, but it is obviously something. Obviously it doesn't eat stars like starkiller, but it clearly needs some source of fuel.
No Advantage for the Death Star there.
>being covered by turbolasers and turrets would have allowed the Death Star to be used against entire Rebel fleets without problems, whereas Starkiller cannot be used for that purpose.
Right... no way you could install all the turrets and missile bays you want onto Starkiller... afterall, you've only got a whole planet to work with.
No advantage for Death Star there.
>it's such a waste of galactic resources
We're talking about a weapon who's whole purpose is to destroy entire planets. Neither design is made by conservationists. Furthermore, in this context, destroying an extra system is conceivably an advantage, being that, as mentioned, the whole function of the weapon is to destroy star systems.
No advantage for Death Star there.
>the second Death Star, which would have been invulnerable
Neither Death Star was invulnerable.
No advantage for Death Star there.
>There's no way you can say Starkiller is the superior design. It isn't.
None of the design features you mentioned show a clear advantage for the Death Star. All of them are neutral at best. All we have to go on is the track record of the two designs, and as I mentioned several times earlier, Two Death Stars destroyed one planet. One Starkiller destroyed five planets.
Track record indicates that Starkiller is a superior design.
The movies never establish the concept of physical shields.
I'm sorry, but if you need to use EU material to explain what it happens in the movies, then it's the movie's fault.
NOTHING in the OT suggest the Falcon could survive its crash in Starkiller, and NOTHING in TFA suggest the Starkiller is mobile. I don't care about whatever guy tells in Twitter, and even if the battle station is mobile, it's still nowhere superior to the second Death Star as Jar Jar Abrams suggest for the reasons I said in >>64580889
> Death Star 1 was destroyed because of the 2 meter ventilation shaft
> Death Star 2 changed the 2 meter ventilation shaft for multiple, much smaller shafts
> Only got destroyed because it wasn´t finished and had a giant as fuck tunnel freely accessible
A third one would have worked fantastically.
Really would have liked a third Death Star more than that fucking planet.
I didn't read the article. I saw that a source outside the movie was required to clear up something the movie didn't make clear (something that's coming up more and more with this flick).
I saw the twitter post and acknowledged that the writers likely intended Starkiller to move, and I acknowledged that that's fucking dumb, but I got over it. Fuck, you want me to send somebody you've never heard of and don't care about to your house to explain that?
The only flaw found in the original Death Star was its thermal exhaust port. A sabotage mission would have probably been impossible given the bureoucracy and tons of garrisons in the battle station, and all available docking bays were in the equatorial latitude of the Death Star. We are also told the second Death Star didn't have the flaw the first one had, that's why destroying it before it was finished was so important, because the Rebels would never be capable of destroying it.
The second Death Star has an internal core which is destroyed by both Wedge and Lando, and that's how the Death Star generates its superlaser, whereas the Starkiller uses a beam, not a laser, and its beam is composed of energy from the local sun. Probably some fuel would be needed, but the Death Star must have some internal factories, otherwise if the station isn't self autonomous it would requires thousands of transport ships just for supplies for its workers. Every day.
Since the Starkiller itself only covers a small part of the planet, the Falcon could land in vast amounts of the planet's surface without problem, that would have been impossible with the Death Star because the entire artificial moon has covered with something.
Again, NOTHING in the movie suggest the Starkiller is a bigger thread. It's just bigger.
>A third one would have worked fantastically.
we both know that isn't true. This is Star Wars. Whatever the big bad evil guys built was going to be destroyed by the plucky heroes.
I imagine they would have destroyed it by infiltrating it like they did with the Starkiller base but planting bombs in the reactor or something so it really would be the empires incompetence to find intruders that is their downfall and not a problem with their superior tech.
I said physical shields, as in shields that protects against physical targets. The ships in the OT only has deflector shields, which could only protect against blasts, but it couldn't do shit against rocks and any other big stuff composed of matter.
They explain right before it happens exactly what they are doing and why it will work. I hated TFA and all the shitty writing, but that part was one of the few scenes done absolutely fine
I'm not going to fucking tell you how and why it worked, you should have been listening you ADHD retard
Ther retarded part about this scene is that he has to manually turn of the lightspeed travel, when he's past the shield but in front of the planet
While going at 300'000 km/h
By flicking a switch
The second Death Star would have destroyed those 5 systems in 5x the time, but without rendering 5 systems sunless, and without being unable to fire against rebel capital ships, and without being unable to attack entire rebel fleets just alone.
not really sure what you're trying to imply, but Starkiller is obviously a superior design. It destroys five planets in one shot. Also draining a star for a fuel source is likely a more efficient power supply than whatever powered the Death Stars.
(that is an assumption, but based on the fact that fusion power is the most efficient power source in real life or implied in the Star Wars universe)
The Star Destroyers in V are forced to blast every big asteroid they encounter. And even sometimes they can't avoid a direct impact. Do you remember that Star Destroyer whose entire command bridge was hit by an asteroid multiple times bigger than the Falcon? Also:
"Our ships have sighted the Millenium Falcon, my Lord. But, it has entered an asteroid field and we cannot risk..."
"Asteroids do not concern me, admiral. I want that ship, not excuses."
Why would Piett warn Vader against putting the entire fleet inside an asteroid field, if they could just power up their shields? They're clearly not invulnerable, no matter how much powerful the shields are, and we see them destroying each asteroid they find in their path.
>The second Death Star would have
You're arguing that a hypothetical Death Star would have been a superior design to the actual Starkiller.
The Death Star you're talking about blew up ZERO planets. How can you truly believe that it is a superior design?
I could play the same hypothetical game and say that Starkiller WOULD HAVE blown up 1000 planets, and drained the stars of 1000 more rebel friendly planets, but that would be a stupid thing to say because that's not what happened.
Death Stars get blown up by rebels. So do Starkillers. This is the nature of doomsday weapons.
The doomsday weapon that brings the most doomsday is the most successful.
Deathstar II planetary kill count - 0
Starkiller Base planetary kill count - 5
In Alderaan they only find the same type of debris they also find in Hoth. In Hoth, they also find asteroids much bigger than the Falcon itself.
Even the most powerful shield wouldn't protect the Falcon against such impact, which is why all the crashing in Starkiller Base is ridiculous.
because it lengthens the amount of time that they are inside the field searching for the falcon, thus increasing the strain on the shields leading to an eventual failure and putting the ships at risk. they shoot the asteroids to break them up into smaller pieces that don't hit the shields as hard
The more I think about it, the more the whole blowing up the death planet thing seemed ridiculously easy. here's a spaceship the size of a planet and you manage to blow it up in 2 minutes with one ground team and 15 fighter ships.
not to mention coincidentally finding the room where you can lower all the shields with a press of a button.
the complaints are more along the lines of >>64581396
everyone understands the hurr durr muh resetting force field
they act like it's all hard and shit and this impossible task is handled like it's a walk in the park to pull a lever in the exact nanosecond
The second Death Star was destroyed because its surface wasn't finished in time to prevent small one fighters to attack its core. Had the battle station being finished before the battle of Endor, it would have never been possible to destroy it. The Rebel generals tell this in their briefing, I am not making shit up.
Starkiller had vulnerable points in its surface. The finished second Death Star would have not. It's a superior design.
Also, why did the silver-armored Stormtrooper commander agree to lower the shields?
What is her incentive? If she doesn't lower the shields they'll kill her. If she does lower the shields then they'll probably kill her, and definitely try to blow up the base, killing her, her commanders, and all her men, not to mention crippling the cause she's fighting for.
What possible reason could she have for cooperating with them (other than moving the story along)?
This movie just gets dumber and dumber the closer you look.
At least Kylo Ren was scary as hell for the first half of the movie (until he runs up against Rey)
A single asteroid rendered an entire Star Destroyer completely useless. This happen in the same scene when this exchange from an Imperial officer to Vader happens: "[...] Considering the amount of damage we have sustained, they must have been destroyed"
Grand Moff Tarkin said the first Death Star was invulnerable too. That worked out great for him.
If they'd finished the second death star, some weakness would have been discovered and exploited. Or not.
Doesn't matter. Never happened.
Deathstar II - 0
Starkiller Base - 5
Exactly! Those pacing flaws really expose the lazy writing. There's no time to ponder on the consequences of any of their actions because they are being instantly dragged to the next set piece, and this breakneck blind pace dominates the whole movie.
some people do. I wont deny that genuine artistic expressions are getting pretty few and far between, but there are still people out there making movies for reasons other than money.
The Coen brothers spring to mind, but that's just my opinion.
Tarkin was warned by an Imperial officer than the Rebels could find a weakness. Which they did.
And he didn't say he didn't believe in the existence of such flaw. He was recommended by an officer to leave the station because they studied the Rebels' attack pattern and found a weakenss in the station, but Tarkin said the officers were "upper estimating their [Rebels] chances".
The Emperor sent the Death Star II plans to the Rebels, knowing they will find the station vulnerable up until it was completely finished. And indeed the Rebels found no flaws in the finished design of the station.
If the Death Star II didn't have the chance of destroying any further planets was because the Emperor made a terrible plan and the Rebels were finally capable of destroying the shield generator.
A finished Death Star II would have been impossible to destroy. The Starkiller had weak points which needed to have their own protections, whereas the second Death Star did not. You can argue the Starkiller needed internal sabotage before being rendered vulnerable, but the base also have thousands of kilometers for any sabotage team to land, whereas the Death Star did only have docking bays at its equatorial latitude, as the station was covered by turbolasers and turrets and was too small to maintain a breathable atmosphere.
No... No. That Can't be. That's impossible
you put a lot of effort into your arguments. I'll grant you that. But I think you place an inflated importance on the Rebel assessment of the second deathstar as "invulnerable". Surely you know that it was only described as such as a spur to increase the tension in the story.
You also repeatedly mention how impregnable the Death Star was as opposed to Starkiller base, citing the Death Star as having turrets and cannons everywhere and having considerably higher security. You talk about that as if Star Killer couldn't also be covered in turrets and personnel. Yes it is bigger, and it would require an enormous amount of equipment and manpower. That doesn't mean it is impossible.
We also saw that Starkiller's exploitable weakness was considerably less than the original Deathstar. The mechanism who's chain-reaction could cause a total destruction of the base was heavily armored and only exploitable after a sabotage effort. We've seen that sabotage is far from impossible onboard a Death Star, afterall, both Death Stars were infiltrated on foot.
I have already said half a dozen times that the only factor that really matters is the successful implementation of the Base's primary weapon. Death Stars have an atrocious track record on this front. Star Killer has a distinct advantage in that it destroys multiple systems before drawing the attention of the Resistance. The First Order knows that they may only be able to use the primary weapon once, so a primary weapon that destroys multiple systems at once has a considerable strategic advantage over a deathstar that has to move system to system and blast them one at a time.
It is clear to me why you think the Deathstar II is a superior design. It is clear that I think you're wrong. I don't think you're a bad person or autistic for thinking so. I just think you're wrong.
Have a good evening.
for the record, I'm the guy you've been debating with for the last half hour or so.
This is my response to your post
This is a random troll trying to get your goat
maybe try not to jump at every piece of bait.
Friendly reminder about picrelated moving Starkiller base from one location to another. Centerpoint station confirmed as Doomsday weapon of SW8.
Sorry for mistaking you or the troll.
It quite possible the Death Star could be sabotaged, like the Starkiller. It is possible the entire Starkiller planet could be turned into a metallical looking battle station.
Nothing like this is seen or suggested in the movies. Given all the information we have, it's clear the Starkiller is just a poorer design. The Death Star never had any single element at its surface that could create a chain reaction powerful enough to destroy the station. Its only surface weakness was just a mere passage for any proton torpedo to the station's internal core. That's why Death Star II's final design was invulnerable, only a sabotage could turn it down, and that would require a very careful plan with too many probabilities to fail. Even in TFA they required the assistance of a captain to bring down the shields (let's not think about how a mere captain could do that...).
It's possible the entire Imperial fleet, attacking at once could destroy the second Death Star. But that would have required weeks, if not months, of hundreds of Star Destroyers attacking the surface of the station. While at the same time the Death Star II had turbolasers, and cannons, and its superlaser to one-shot capital ships.
A similar attack towards Starkiller would have required a lot of time given the planet's much bigger size, but given the planet was mostly covered of its original terraforming material, it lacked the defenses the second Death Star II. Even if its internal material has been removed and replaced by artificial tunnels and factories, those would have been completely defenseless for the same reason a human heart is more vulnerable against external factors than our skin.
I simply don't see how Starkiller's design is better. Yes, he destroyed more planets than the second Death Star, but that's because of Sheev's lack of patience and his overconfidence rather than technical flaws.
>I simply don't see how Starkiller's design is better. Yes, he destroyed more planets than the second Death Star, but...
I've said repeatedly that the only factor that ultimately matters in my assessment is track record. The Second Death Star has the worst track record of all of them and Starkiller Base has the best track record, ergo I assess Starkiller base to be the most effective doomsday weapon yet seen in the series.
We're just repeating ourselves here, so I'm going to leave it alone and go to bed. As I said. I don't agree with your assessment but I see no need to make personal attacks because of that.
on the other hand, needless personal attacks are a hallmark of human interaction on the internet, and 4chan in particular, so I hope you won't misinterpret this as a lack of respect for your well-stated arguments...
You're a filthy heeb.
I'm going to bed.
the sad thing is that you're playing at being above Star Wars and seeing it for what it is or some shit, but in all actuality loved the movie and use this is a genuine defense for liking it irl