Spark of Rebellion

[Ser Yorick]

Also too Luke blew up the Death Star which makes him worse than Hitler because how many millions of non-superlaser operators were there there, huh? Wake up bantheople.

Episode VII will feature a member of the empire stumbling upon a proton torpedo and shitting his pants. "T-the weapon that killed my people!"

 

[BLADE]

Episode VII will feature a member of the empire stumbling upon a proton torpedo and shitting his pants. "T-the weapon that killed my people!"

Man can you imagine how terrifying it is to be a womp rat who runs into the grinning blond psychopath who now has superpowers and galactic carte blanche to do whatever he wants because he overthrew the only source of environmental regulation in the galaxy and who used to butcher your people for literal target practice?

 

[Brandon Rhea]

On a completely unrelated note, does it bug the shit out of anyone to see Star Destroyers in atmosphere?

Attack of the Clones showed similar stuff, bugged me then too.

Doesn't bother me.

 

[Blaxican]

Are you implying that I'm also a pedantic piece of shit?

 

[Cortan]

The disruptors didn't commit genocide. He shouldn't be pissed off at the guns. Whatever pain inflicted upon somebody by one of those rifles, Zeb has done worse. We've seen what they do, which is shoot an electrical current through whatever they're fired at. Zeb runs around stabbing people with a shock staff. A SHOCK staff. And it's implied he greatly enjoys killing. This was not the right character to try and sympathize with on account of loss of life.

Which gets into a debate on weapon vs person who wields it in the arms usage debate, which there's enough division over in real life and we don't need to clog the forum with it. As to the disruptors themselves, we've seen the effects on walkers and landscape, but not people. That puts it into a vague territory where the writers are trying to say its really bad, when the results could be mundane, as you've said. I still fall into going with what the writers are trying to sell, but I can still see why you'd come to the conclusion you have.

Now if only we'd discussed it in the thread for the episode itself.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Are you implying that I'm also a pedantic piece of shit?

No.

...

Yes.

 

[Ser Gregor]

On a completely unrelated note, does it bug the shit out of anyone to see Star Destroyers in atmosphere?

No, it doesn't. It is well-established in the old-EU (and obviously it has been carried over) that Star Destroyers can enter and operate within an atmosphere. The stat-block on the Star Wars wikia even lists it's top atmospheric speed...

 

[Brandon Rhea]

It's the same argument people made for the first JJ Trek, where people said that the Enterprise couldn't be built on the ground because it's a spaceship. Despite the fact that every real-world spaceship ever made has been built on Earth.

 

[Ser Gregor]

It's the same argument people made for the first JJ Trek, where people said that the Enterprise couldn't be built on the ground because it's a spaceship. Despite the fact that every real-world spaceship ever made has been built on Earth.

It would just have to be built much more resiliently. If you built it in space-dock you wouldn't have to worry about building under the stresses of gravity, but at the same time that undoubtedly means the ship is structurally more fragile. Not a good idea for a state-of-the-art deep-space exploration vessel.

 

[Johnnysaurus Rex]

 

[Blaxican]

No, it doesn't. It is well-established in the old-EU (and obviously it has been carried over) that Star Destroyers can enter and operate within an atmosphere. The stat-block on the Star Wars wikia even lists it's top atmospheric speed...

It's the same argument people made for the first JJ Trek, where people said that the Enterprise couldn't be built on the ground because it's a spaceship. Despite the fact that every real-world spaceship ever made has been built on Earth.

Never had a problem with the ships having the capability to operate in atmosphere. My problem is why they're bothering to do so in the first place. Sans an emergency, there are very few logical reasons for why Star Destroyer would willingly enter atmosphere. It's standard-fare for ships of SD size to disgorge entire planet-conquering fleets and armies complete with armor-assets, from space. Yet every now and again we're treated to scenes of the ships pretending to be giant boats and shit. It's done for artistic grandiosity, just like most things in Star Wars, and it's as silly as most things in Star Wars.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

It's also done in-universe to intimidate the hell out of a local population. Would you want to do something bad with a Star Destroyer hanging over your head?

 

[Cortan]

Yeah, its pretty much show of force stuff. Like how with real life militaries you'll see ships and aircraft sent just outside the borders of a place they don't like, just to say 'yeah we could totally shoot you if we wanted to'. And well, its little less effective if you can't see the ship with your naked eye, in the case of the local population.

 

[Blaxican]

It's definitely intimidating. A Star Destroyer hovering in orbit is also pants-shittingly intimidating, as are fleets of TIE's screaming over your building and legions of stormtroopers wandering through the streets busting your balls for selling fruit.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

It's basically the best visual way of saying "We are watching you and can kill you."

 

[Blaxican]

Yeah, I get you.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Trailer for the episode's re-airing, featuring Darth Vader:

[video=youtube;XlfYGiLydOs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlfYGiLydOs[/video]

 

[Kaeb]

The Darth Vader design looks terribad.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I'm surprised you don't like it. You've been super positive about everything else so far.

 

[Johnnysaurus Rex]

I'm surprised you don't like it. You've been super positive about everything else so far.