The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

D6 Stats for Fractalsponge Projects
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Ships, Vehicles, Equipment, and Tech -> D6 Stats for Fractalsponge Projects Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 10557
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

denderan marajain wrote:
What do you mean film evidence?

Google "Super Star Destroyer Length Controversy" and educate thyself, youngling.

Quote:
Quote:
Not when you consider the Empire's deemphasis on starfighters post-Clone Wars.


i have no idea what are you talking about? Which de-emphasis?

The Empire made a major shift in naval doctrine after the Clone Wars, away from massive starfighter groups and toward big gun capital ships. This is evidenced by comparing the Venator and Imperial-Class Star Destroyers; the Imperial is 33% longer, and much more massive, yet only carries 72 starfighters, whereas the Venator can carry over 400.


Quote:
i had the impression the Procursator ist more than a Victory but obviously i am wrong Smile

It's bigger (1200 meters vs. 900 meters) but bigger doesn't mean better. For one thing, as designed, it doesn't have a hangar bay, so it can't deploy fighters.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
dunderhead marajain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 207
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Google "Super Star Destroyer Length Controversy" and educate thyself, youngling.


what you call evidence i call opinion Smile

empirical evidence Looks different

Quote:
The Empire made a major shift in naval doctrine after the Clone Wars, away from massive starfighter groups and toward big gun capital ships. This is evidenced by comparing the Venator and Imperial-Class Star Destroyers; the Imperial is 33% longer, and much more massive, yet only carries 72 starfighters, whereas the Venator can carry over 400
.

i call it coincidence

i do not believe that there is a great plan behind this. i say no one from those responsible has put any thought about These changes. They just happend.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 10557
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

denderan marajain wrote:
what you call evidence i call opinion Smile

empirical evidence Looks different

...

Empirical evidence is what made people dispute the Executor’s length in the first place.

People like the crew at the Star Wars Technical Commentaries who made a detailed analysis of the physical evidence (detailed here), rather than just saying, “Well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.”

Quote:
i call it coincidence

i do not believe that there is a great plan behind this. i say no one from those responsible has put any thought about These changes. They just happend.

Well, you can apply that thought process to your own stat write-ups, then.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
dunderhead marajain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 207
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Empirical evidence is what made people dispute the Executor’s length in the first place.

No it is not

Quote:
People like the crew at the Star Wars Technical Commentaries who made a detailed analysis of the physical evidence (detailed here), rather than just saying, “Well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.”


Do you really know what empirical means?
Quote:

Well, you can apply that thought process to your own stat write-ups, then.


I hope you are Aware that i meant the offical guys from Lucasarts /Disney?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zarn
Captain
Captain


Joined: 17 Jun 2014
Posts: 591
Location: Norway

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm afraid I'm with CRMcNeill here, and that it seems that YOU are somewhat fuzzy on the idea of empirical evidence.

"Empirical" can have the definition, "based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic". So observing what you can glean from the movies IS actually physical evidence. The blueprints or whatever they planned as scaling doesn't matter. What matters, is how it was presented in the movie because this gives you all sorts of possibilities.

You don't need to refer to the "official guys" from Lucasarts. You refer to the movies, and occasionally you regret rediscovering the Holiday Special. From looking at and measuring frames from the movies, you can estimate bounds on all sorts of things. The speed of a blaster bolt in atmosphere as compared to the speed in space. The apparent size of the Death Star, or the Death Star II. And so on and so forth.

There's a shot of a Super Star Destroyer faceplanting into the Death Star II. This gives you all sorts of evidence for bounds on the size of the one relative to the other. That's all empirical evidence, in the sense that you can measure this on your TV or whatever, and as long as you don't have any weird stretching or distortion of the image, ANYONE can verify or disprove your measurements and methodology using the exact same source that you did. Try not to use a VHS pan-and-scan copy, though.

I have no idea what you think "empirical" means, not even from the meagre context you've given, but I can assure you that CRMcNeill used the term reasonably and similarly as to how I would use it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 10557
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

denderan marajain wrote:
Quote:
Empirical evidence is what made people dispute the Executor’s length in the first place.

No it is not

Quote:
People like the crew at the Star Wars Technical Commentaries who made a detailed analysis of the physical evidence (detailed here), rather than just saying, “Well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.”


Do you really know what empirical means?

I strongly suggest you avoid condescending to me.
    Empirical: (adjective) based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.
Observation would include WATCHING the actual films, then applying scientific processes to what is observed in them to generate hard numbers, or to take precise measurements of the physical models used and compare those measurements to other models. Both of these techniques were used by the SWTC crew to generate their ~17,600 meter length.
Quote:
Quote:

Well, you can apply that thought process to your own stat write-ups, then.


I hope you are Aware that i meant the offical guys from Lucasarts /Disney?
I don’t consider that a relevant factor when designing my stats.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
dunderhead marajain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 4232
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

denderan marajain wrote:
I hope you are Aware that i meant the offical guys from Lucasarts /Disney?

I think everyone agrees that Imperial star destroyers are 1.6km in length. You can tell with the naked eye that the Executor is longer than 5 Imps. Even on VHS.

In an official 1995 Lucasfilm publication which I own, the ILM special effects artists who actually created the effects shots of the Executor and the Imperial star destroyers explicitly stated that the Executor is eleven times the length of an Imperial star destroyer. 1.6 x 11 = 17.6km.

denderan marajain wrote:
CRMcNeill wrote:
Empirical evidence is what made people dispute the Executor’s length in the first place.

No it is not

Yes, it is.

CRMcNeill wrote:
denderan marajain wrote:
Do you really know what empirical means?

I strongly suggest you avoid condescending to me.

denderan, he does know what it means. His definition is a correct one. There is no reason to communicate with others in this way over anything, but it is doubly worse when you are so emphatically incorrect in your assertions. If you wish to continue any further in this conversation, I strongly suggest that you first read this handy dandy post I composed last year for your convenience:

HISTORY OF THE 5-MILE FALLACY +

It's loaded with citations of actual evidence. Thank you.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 207
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 1:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zarn wrote:



I have no idea what you think "empirical" means, not even from the meagre context you've given, but I can assure you that CRMcNeill used the term reasonably and similarly as to how I would use it.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_research

[/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 207
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Whill and CRMcNeill


i wrote a really long text but it
it was just too laborious to translate that from German into English.

in the end you do have a very strange view of what science is about


If correcting a statement seems condescending then I'm sorry

Maybe it's just because of my linguistic possibilities in written form

So I leave it at this point. It is just wasteful and brings nothing at the end


I hereby leave you your belief regarding scientific work and scientific knowledge


It's not meant to be mean
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 10557
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Where is your evidence, denderan? All I’ve read so far is opinion.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
dunderhead marajain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Site Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 4232
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

denderan marajain wrote:
@Whill and CRMcNeill


i wrote a really long text but it
it was just too laborious to translate that from German into English.

in the end you do have a very strange view of what science is about


If correcting a statement seems condescending then I'm sorry

Maybe it's just because of my linguistic possibilities in written form

So I leave it at this point. It is just wasteful and brings nothing at the end


I hereby leave you your belief regarding scientific work and scientific knowledge


It's not meant to be mean

This is unacceptable. English not being your primary language does not get you off the hook.

"That's not what empirical means. Empirical means..."
"Do you really know what empirical means?"

There is a difference between these two sentences. The second one is yours. That is not "correcting a statement". This isn't just a translation issue. You are talking down to people and telling them they are wrong without backing that up. You saying it's "not meant to be mean" doesn't excuse it.

Now the definitions of condescension, empirical, and science are very unfortunate tangents in this thread and it is beyond the scope of this website to explain these definitions in English, so let's just moved past that. denderan, if you wish to continue participating in this thread, please read the HISTORY OF THE 5-MILE FALLACY + post and discuss Star Wars. Thank you.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 10557
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2018 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Velox-Class Light (Scout) Cruiser

Images

The Velox-Class is the Imperial Navy's replacement for the aging Caravel-class. While the Caravel is essentially a modified Carrack-Class Light Cruiser, the Velox was designed from the outset as a dedicated reconnaissance ship. In fact, because of its size and relative fragility and light armament, there was some argument in the naval bureaucracy as to whether the ship should be classed as a light cruiser or a frigate. While the Velox lacks the Caravel's ability to absorb damage, it is also stealthier, with improved sensors. Although it retains the Caravel's minelaying and special operations support capability, the Caravel is still prefered for those missions due to the potential for coming under direct fire.

Craft: Kuat Drive Yards' Velox-Class
Type: Light (Scout) Cruiser
Scale: Frigate (+10D)
Length: 320 Meters
Skill: Capital Ship Piloting: Velox-Class
Crew: 982 (Skeleton: 180 @ +10) & 39 Gunners
Crew Skill:
Astrogation 5D
Gunnery 4D
Piloting 4D+1
Shields 4D
Sensors 5D
Passengers: 142 (Troops)
Small Craft Complement:
--4 Light Utility Craft
Cargo Capacity: 10,000 Tons (Normally Mines or Probes)
Consumables: 1 Year
Cost: Not available for sale
Hyperdrive Multiplier: X1
Hyperdrive Backup: X10
Nav Computer: Yes
Maneuverability: 2D+1
Space: 9
Atmosphere: 400; 1,150kph
Hull: 3D+2
Shields: 2D (Can operate in Stealth Mode, applying +2D Difficulty to opposed Sensor rolls, but cannot be used in both modes simultaneously)
Sensors:
Passive 80/1D
Scan 120/2D
Search 200/3D
Focus 10/4D
Weapons:
6 Dual Turbolaser Cannon
Fire Arc: 2 Front/Left/Right, 2 Front/Left/Rear, 2 Front/Right/Rear
Crew: 2
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Fire Control: 2D
Range:
--Space: 2-10/25/50
--Orbital: 4km-20km/50km/100km
--Atmosphere: 200m-1km/2.5km/5km
Rate of Fire: 1
Damage: 5D
2 Ion Cannon
Fire Arc: 1 Front/Left, 1 Front/Right
Crew: 2
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Fire Control: 3D
Range:
--Space: 1-7/17/35
--Orbital: 2km-14km/34km/70km
--Atmosphere: 100m-700m/1.7km/3.5km
Rate of Fire: 1
Damage: 4D (ionization)
12 Dual Laser Cannon (Fire Separately)
Fire Arc: 4 Front/Left, 4 Front/Right, 2 Rear/Left, 2 Rear/Right
Scale: Starship (+6D)
Crew: 1
Skill: Starship Gunnery
Fire Control: 2D
Range:
--Space: 1-3/12/25
--Orbital: 2km-6km/24km/50km
--Atmosphere: 100m-300m/1.2km/2.5km
Damage: 5D
2 Tractor Beam Projectors (Fire Separately)
Fire Arc: Front/Left/Right
Scale: Special*
Crew: 3
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Fire Control: 3D
Range:
--Space: 1-3/10/20
--Orbital: 2km-6km/20km/40km
--Atmosphere: 100m-300m/1km/2km
Rate of Fire: 1 (Full Round)
Damage: 4D
*May switch between Frigate (+10D) and Starship (+6D). Switch takes one round, during which the projector can not be used.
Note: I currently haven't worked out any rules for mine warfare, but here are some suggestions.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
dunderhead marajain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 207
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Mon Apr 30, 2018 1:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Where is your evidence, denderan? All I’ve read so far is opinion.



I just asked how you got that and I said that for me it's not empirical work.

I have never said that I have or will have to take any form of counter-proof.

It's okay if your SSD is 19,500 meters long. My world does not collapse. I like the work you do here. This disagreement does not change that



I also said that I would use the official statements as a basis and expand on them. Keyword Number of Starfighters on a Capital Ship or the tactics of the Imperial Navy.

If you made the decision for you, there was a turn in tactics from the Clone Wars to the Empire, that's fine, and in my view no problem. But it is ultimately an interpretation on your part. Is there an official statement that substantiates that? That was my question nothing else.



@Whill

Quote:
his is unacceptable. English not being your primary language does not get you off the hook.



I never said that I would like to get off the hook. I just made it clear that with my non-existent language skills I am unable to express myself as it should be.

You can accept this or not does not change the facts


But I can write you my well-founded answer in German and you are looking for someone who translates it to you if you should not speak German yourself.


"
Quote:
That's not what empirical means. Empirical means..."
"Do you really know what empirical means?"

There is a difference between these two sentences. The second one is yours.


i know that this is my sentence

Quote:

That is not "correcting a statement". This isn't just a translation issue. You are talking down to people and telling them they are wrong without backing that up. You saying it's "not meant to be mean" doesn't excuse it.


Do you see that's the problem in German that would have been understood completely differently than in English and because I lack the sense of language in English and I also do not know how it matters or what subtleties there are such misunderstandings.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Ships, Vehicles, Equipment, and Tech All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Page 6 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0