Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Hello its me again...and this time im not doing a useless thread this time its Valid...

Ok the Imperial Navy are suppost to be the Best of the Best in the Empire...Ok...So....WE DONT SEE IT...

It is stated SEVERAL times in the EU that IMPERIAL TIE PILOTS are THE best pilots in the galaxy...even tho they fly Unshielded Tie Fighters and Tie Interceptors the Tie Fighter has a Higher Manuvering Capability Correct....and it's Cannons shoot faster...


Now the Rebel Alliance's Ships are Shielded...thats about it...and it has more powerful weapons..


It would seem like the Imperial Tie Fighter Pilot would be able to Wipe Up with the Rebel Pilots other then the A-WINGS and we also see in the Star Wars Movies that the Shielding isent that much...since Tie Fighers with like 3 shots blew some rebel pilots into space dust...


So...Whats the deal?

dont capitalize every other word, it gets REALLY annoying. The TIEs were mass produced, so although the pilots are good, they fly crappy ships, if thats what you want to know. What exactly DO you want to know?

Well, no one ever said the rebels didn't get killed a lot. But you have enough pilots gaining experience through guerilla strikes, TIE pilot's defecting, plus some other various sources, and you'll have a decent Rebel Fighter Corp.

The TIE would destroy rebel fighters every time, assuming the rebels were dumb enough to engage the Empire in open conflict every time.

Oh what the hell...


a) Most of the Rebel pilots where trained by the Imperial Navy themselves, which - of course - means, that they would have received equal training to all those TIE-Fighter pilots, yet they have the better ships. So it's actually no great surprise that they get blown out of the sky in most occassions.

b) You answered the other part of the question yourself: The Rebel starfighters have shields. And more powerful weapons. So the chances are quite great that a Rebel fighter pilot will be able to take it up with an Imperial fighter pilot, even if the latter should have the greater piloting skills. In fact: The Rebel pilot just needs one single hit to destroy a TIE-Fighter. Which he might manage to do by luck.

That and the fact that in George Lucas' "black and white good guys are awesome bad guys are cannon fodder idiots" universe, the bad guy grunts are always inferior. Jedi and Clones > Droids. Rebellion > Imperials man-to-man.

Anyone care to explain how a farmboy, a princess, and two smuggelers managed to escape from an entire battle station's worth of the Imperial's finest foot soldiers, the 501st?

They let them go.

Afterwords with the TIE's, yeah. That doesn't explain how every time they engaged in a firefight with a squad of troopers the stormies got their asses kicked.

Weren't the Stormtroopers on the Death Star at the time the 501st's replacement, ala BF 2? If so, they were the fresh out of Boot.

Not sure. I don't think so though because I seem to remember the game remarking that shortly afterwards the DS was blown up and it took a chunk of the 501st with it.

But even then, a soldier fresh out ofd combat training should be able to handle a gun in a military scenario better than Luke, who's only experience is using probably a hunting rifle...

I only see it as remotely feasible that they go away as they did due to circumstance. They got the surprise on the docking bay soldiers and the ones in the detention center, they had "cover" in the narrow hallway and on the bridge. What really bugs me is that Luke somehow managed to stand in an open docking bay while a dozen stormtroopers fire at him, and not get hit.

Stormtroopers and TIEs are famously rubbish and that's just how it is.

In fact TIEs seemed roughly equivalent with X-Wings in ANH, with it being a Thunderbolts vs. Zero Fighters inpsired thing. but in ROTJ the TIEs are getting massacred in massive numbers.

It's a shame but it's the way it is.

Though they did let them go from the Death Star (and not just from the TIEs).

i want to recut all of the movies except get rid of things like 'clone armor thats made so that clones die in one hit'

I'm wounded! like hit, but non fataly!
I thought this armor was supposed to make sure you were dead... i mean, why else would we wear it?
Are you sure your not dead?
NO! i'm not dead!

LOL Wounded Storm Trooper Fan Vid...I WUVED ITZ...but still...yea I KNOW THEY ARE SUPPOST to die and everything...but i still think GL could have made them alot tougher...i mean really...how the hell does anyone miss a Man Standing out in the Open standing still....I can hit that while running...

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Stormtroopers and TIEs are famously rubbish and that's just how it is.


Doesn't role in the EU forum, Ushman.

There is no in-universe explanation for why the Imperial forces suck compared to the Rebels. Maybe it's because the Rebels are mostly American while the Imperials are British?

Pretty much. Since when have the British ever had naval experience?

Originally posted by Tangible God
Pretty much. Since when have the British ever had naval experience?

When they invaded the colonies...and then America later on.

and they had the huge Naval Battles with Spain they totally wiped out the Spanish Armada with a group of smaller and much fewer ships.

It was sarcasm, you asshats.

Normally I'd excuse them, seeing as how it's hard to convey it. But Jesus-tap dancing-Christ.

That was sarcasm?








Sarcasm is a form of Irony.

Sarcasm is facetiousness' little brother and irony's weaker second cousin.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
There is no in-universe explanation for why the Imperial forces suck compared to the Rebels. Maybe it's because the Rebels are mostly American while the Imperials are British?

There is an easy explanation for that: The Rebels have less troops and are idealists that actually care about their fighting force - the Empire doesn't do that, because it doesn't have to do it.

If you have 100 men for every opposing soldier, it simply doesn't matter if the enemy takes 10 of your men with him, because you have another 90 to defeat him after that.

.. which is why the "poorly trained" troopers still got their asses kicked by people who had no training, even though they had the numerical advantage?

Eventually the Imperials were outnumbered by the Republic once they became the remnant, yet they still suck. No... that doesn't make any sense.

PIS.

Though, for the record, the stormtroopers annihilated the Rebel soldiers when they captured Leia's corvette.

Originally posted by Gideon
PIS.



Exactly.

Though, even the sourcebooks and visual guides go into great detail about how vastly superior the Empire is.

Better training? Check. Better equipment? Check. Greater loyalty? Check. Greater numbers? CHECK. Greater support ships? Check.

It's ridiculous. On paper, the Rebellion -- seriously -- had no chance. None. Zilch. Zero.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Doesn't role in the EU forum, Ushman.

Yes it does. They are clearly seen on film as being rubbish; their fame as being rubbish is from the films.

That trumps everything in the EU, no question. So anything that says they are lethal elite troops is obviously wrong, in being so monumentally obviousaly contradicted on-screen.

At Endor, despite the presence of the TIE Fighters from the entire Imperial navy, they don't knock out a single Rebel capital ship save fpr the ones the Death Star shoots. But the Rebels manage to knock out Star Destroyers and even the imperial flagship, whilst massacring many times their numbers in TIEs.

You just cannot run away from this, ignore it, or say it doesn't 'role'.

The Imperials were crap. It's fact- get used to it.

PIS. PIS. PIS.

QED.

WTF, Ush.

It's Ush. He's always been this.

Guess C-3P0 and R2D2 can move faster than the speed of light since they evade shots from both Imperial and Rebel marksmen crossing a hall.

Christ, I've never seen this side of him.

Of course they can. R2-D2 > Storm Troopers. Farmboy no training Luke who's stabding still > Trained Stormtroopers.

Movie speekz troof. dur

i disagree with better equipment. X-Wings were clearly superior to tie-fighters... i don't know if that could even be debated. Mon-Cal cruisers never seemed to lost to a star destroyer once on-film. Heck, modified Light-freighters have a huge technological advantage on hoards of the emporours tie-fighters as well.... besides, didn't an entire regiment of the emporers best troops lose to ewoks? how the heck is that explained? AT-ST's and AT-AT's are shown to be tactical nightmares, lacking any kind of practicality,

As for the Ewoks, there's a reason why it's called PIS.

TIE's vs. X-WIng? The TIE Fighter is faster and arguably more maneuverable.

The standard Imperial-Class Star Destroyer has an acceleration of over 2300 G's, and has an armament of over 98 guns.

The MonCal Cruises are inferior.

AT-AT impractical? I guess that's why they beat the snot out of the Rebels on Hoth then, huh?

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown

TIE's vs. X-WIng? The TIE Fighter is faster and arguably more maneuverable.


actually... its faster.... this makes a difference in any dogfight we ever see it in... how? Its not as good as an X-Wing. Ask ANY pilot.


in terms of combat, not so, as the star destroyers are destroyed more easily than mon-cals.



The rebels on hoth took down a ridiculous number of AT-AT's in a fight in which they should have been wiped out without a fight.

And your comment about the Ewoks is relevant how? "best troops of the emporer" lost to Ewoks in a fight.... how can you even begin to defend that?

Originally posted by truejedi
actually... its faster.... this makes a difference in any dogfight we ever see it in... how? Its not as good as an X-Wing. Ask ANY pilot.

PIS.



PIS.



They were wiped out. The Imperials lost, what, two or three At-AT's?



You don't know what PIS is, do you? It's funny because you act like you do, but you probably don't.

... you're an idiot. Good bye.

I'm gonna flaunt my ignorance, and ask: what's PIS?

Plot Induced Stupidity. A comic book originated term for when something happens in a story just for the sake ofthe plot, I.E., if Luke had gotten shot and killed like he should have on the Death Star, the plot would have... ended.

PIS in a classic comic book example is Spiderman defeating Firelord, a guy who can move faster than light and has powers similar to Silver Surfer.

Another example is anytime a Sith acts arrogant and ends up losing because of it (Maul, Anakin).

So... Star Wars movies in their enitrety.

Basically, yeah. Indiana Jones, pretty much any time the bad guys have the upperhand but end up losing through circumstances that the good guys don't control...

See Star Wars: Clone Wars cartoon for emphasis.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
... you're an idiot. Good bye.
In other words.... "oh, he's right... it would screw star wars if every fight could be explained as PIS... (such as maul being arrogant, he's not arrogant, the script CALLED for his death...., as well as, he's not as good as Qui-gonn, because Qui-Gonn NEEDED to die so obi-wan could train anakin... where does the stupidity end?)

so what can i say? oh, there is nothing to say, so i'll just use a trick i've picked up from watching the presidential election, insult the other person, and hope no one notices...."




you are a fool.

Originally posted by Tangible God
PIS is nonetheless a great reason as to why the creators allowed it. Say, "it was in the movie, accept it" all you want, but the purpose of the EU is to extrapolate. The movie may depict the Ewoks winning in a certain manner, but if the EU can allow for a more realistic telling, then why not?

Not to mention, this is the freaking EU forum. If we brought all this up in the PT or OT Forums, Ush is right to b*tch all he wants, but not here.

but i repeat, where does it end? by introducing PIS as a valid argument in a fiction forum, you are leaving the door WIDE OPEN for that argument in ANY situation where a fan boy's favorite has lost. e.g. Anakin lost to Dooku badly in episode 2, so he never should have beaten him in episode 3, however, Dooku NEEDED to die as dictacted by the script, SO anakin went ahead and defeated him, though i could argue, that by PIS anakin is still not on the level of Dooku, its was simply a plot device, just as the argument was made that the ewoks couldn't defeat the Empirials, and the script simply gave it to them.
EVERY fight or confrontation that didn't go the way you would have liked in star wars is now open for debate ladies and gentlemen.

I am amazed how a single discussion ends up in personal affairs between our members, but now, going back to the purpose of this post....
How did the rebel pilots defeated the imperial pilots? there are many possible expanations, but based on my analysis these could be the more important: many of the rebels were in fact defected imperials (pilots and military leaders), so they know the tactics and weakness of TIEs and imperial forces, their ships were shielded and their guns were more powerful. While imperials have almost no info about the X-wings or other more advanced rebel ships. That's enough to knock down some TIEs for each downed X-Wing. But they were not invincible, not many rebel pilots survived the run against first Death Star.
Same applies to Mon-cal cruisers vs. imperial star destroyers. The imperial capacity and habit of concentrating fire power forced them to keep shields down to be ble to fight, they couldn't fire from behind a shield. mon-cals remained almost all time with shields up, open them for a short time and fire, and then raise up shields again.
How did the ewoks defeated the empire? because they were far more savage and feroicious than we do know. they may look like little furry balls, but they were a hunter culture, well integrated into their environment. Some tales like 'apocalypse endor' tried to show it.
Were storm troopers that elitesque? i'm not that sure...at the beginning they probably were, when clone troopers were still the main number of their ranks, but as conscripts started to join them, and numbers raised to keep police and political control of the entire galaxy, the training quality and moral began to decay. So by the time of ANH they were not as strong and elite forces as they were. They kept their fame from old times, and most of their success was probably based more on how much they were feared and their huge numbers, than their real fighting capacity as individuals.
How did a farmer boy and a smuggler defeated them anyway? you should remember that some civilians have far more motivation and skills than tarined military, otherwise the american militias wouldn't have the capacity to defeat the british read coats that were the most elite army of 18th century. Guerrilla tactics often used by the Alliance were efficient against the imperial mass moving army/navy, cause have more efficient supply lines, more flexibility, and often more skilled people.
How did Luke could knock down death star? caus ehe was been driven by the force, not the training or the ship capacity. That sense of the surroundings and opportunity gave him the chance to do such a proess.

This thread just got F'd in the A.

I think Episode VI is a shame...I felt alot better about the empire during Episodes IV and V o.o but Episode VI just...i wish George Lucas had thought about it...At least show some ties take down at least 1 Mon Cal Cruiser and a Blockade Runner.....and maby a few more X-WINGS and Y-WINGS o.o....No doubt the Rebels are meant to win...but common at least make it seem more REAL and not like a stroll in the park o.o....

Dude, even in the Expanded Universe, I cannot think of many instances where TIE Fighters don't suck unless it is down to individuals, such as Baron Soontir Fel or Biggs (when he was with the Empire). If someone could give me better examples I wouldn't mind hearing them. But I do agree with Ush, for the most part. The Imperials and the stormtroopers have their moments of success, but they really do act like line-up-and-knock-em-down targets for the heroes, as they are meant to for the sake of the story.

I mean, come on. Luke and Leia are standing absolutely still in the chasm scene, and yet the stormtroopers fail to hit either of them while losing a few of their own number. They are like the Nazis in an Indiana Jones film or the henchmen in a James Bond film.

Has no-one honestly never heard of Stormtrooper Syndrome/Stormtrooper Effect? The Principle of Evil Marksmanship?

And anyone who throws 'This is the EU forum at me' will have to argue that with George Lucas, who has stated before that the EU defers to the films. I believe it is a rule in this forum... and if it is not, it should be made one.

We had this discussion privately, REX. With all due respect with yourself and Ushgarak, you and he have both committed to making every event in the movies hyperliteral. Simply because the movies do not show it, it must not happen? We don't see Coruscant in the Original Trilogy -- is it gone? Imperial technology looks absolutely archaic compared to that of the prequel trilogy -- has technology, in that twenty year gap, downgraded? We only see Yavin, Tattooine, Endor, Hoth, Bespin, and Alderaan in the movies -- does the galaxy consist of less than a dozen planets? We only see a few dozen Star Destroyers in the movies -- is that the upper cap of the Empire's forces?

Not to mention the whole moral absolutism that you and he both play. The Empire is wholly evil. Well that contradicts the dangerously obvious theme as spoken by Obi-Wan that "only a Sith deals in absolutes!" Packing a lightsaber and cloak these days, REX?

The long and short of it is that while I respect you both as administrators, you're both deliberately ignoring context and -- in the case of the moral absolutism -- is contradicted by the movies themselves.

A losing argument. But I'll agree to disagree.

Gideon, then how about this? We consider every other character by their different versions. We have OT Luke, we have (ANH, ESB, ROTJ) we also have very many adaptations of luke AFTER those movies.
Instead of saying what happens onscreen couldn't possibly happen in individual fights (Dooku defeating Anakin, then losing to anakin) we use the different adaptations to show that ROTS Anakin is clearly superior to AOTC Anakin. It just makes sense, because HE PERFORMS differently in ROTS.

Now, the Empire, during most EU is indeed a very dangerous fighting unit. However, their OT versions seem to be lacking. Would it be stretching to say those versions of the Empire truly DO suck, but they had times in history when they were a superior fighting force?

(seriously though, i'm not sure of too many actual demonstrations of Empirical military competence, can you give me a few examples beyond the defeat of Hoth, and anything the 501st accomplished that proves their superiority? their numbers do not automatically give them an advantage, and MOST sources show them routinely getting their butts kicked, right up to the point of incompetence. Where are you getting your information that puts them at the absolute top of the food chain when it comes to fighting units?)

Yourself is a reflexive pronoun, and is not actually correct in this situation. Neither Rex nor Ush are performing an action on themselves, so the correct phrasing would be "With all due respect to you and Ushgarak..."

It is my experience that reflexive pronouns are misused primarily when the writer is trying too hard to sound formal, polite, or intelligent. The cure for all three situations: Take it easy, relax. You aren't writing a thesis!

This irked me. Thanks for your time.

my biggest pet peeve in grammar is the whole, "I'm going to bring it with me when i go," or variances. Its TAKE. I'm going to take it with me, and BRING it back. If you are taking something away from where you currently are, say take, if you are bringing something to where you currently are, say bring.

Originally posted by truejedi
Gideon, then how about this? We consider every other character by their different versions. We have OT Luke, we have (ANH, ESB, ROTJ) we also have very many adaptations of luke AFTER those movies.
Instead of saying what happens onscreen couldn't possibly happen in individual fights (Dooku defeating Anakin, then losing to anakin) we use the different adaptations to show that ROTS Anakin is clearly superior to AOTC Anakin. It just makes sense, because HE PERFORMS differently in ROTS.

This is a most ridiculous syllogism, born from desperation. I don't know if you're trying to cobble together a point because REX and Ush take it and you're trying to brown nose, but I honestly have no idea how any sane person could argue this case, hence why I am surprised that those two would even make an attempt to argue it.

An individual whose strength in the Force is bound to increase given experience and training is not comparable to the armed forces of a galactic regime.



Yes. Movies operate through certain rules: Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, and Han Solo aren't allowed to die for the purposes of the plot. Ergo, circumstances are drafted that whenever they are in danger, they walk out relatively unscathed. Due to the demands of the plot. Conditioned Rebel soldiers are annihilated by stormtroopers when Vader captures Leia in the first movie. Luke Skywalker defeats legions of them singlehandedly. Now, if Skywalker happened to be a pistol shot of great repute and training, this issue wouldn't be up for debate. But he's not. The only reason he survived is because he had to for the demands of the plot.



I see. And while Jedi Knights and Masters are annihilated by clonetroopers throughout Order 66, one turd fresh from the toilet murders about a dozen troopers when Bail Organa arrives at the Temple. I guess that padawan is greater than Ki Adi Mundi, Plo Koon, and every Jedi in the galaxy minus Yoda and Obi-Wan.

Plot induced stupidity. Jedi are supposed to be practically invulnerable, but for the purposes of RotS, they had to die, hence why they were annihilated by clonetroopers. PIS.



The Complete Visual Dictionary and the Ultimate Visual Guide.

then, outright rejecting the idea that they could possibly have been worse in the OT than they were at any other time, (which is really the easy out here gideon) You try to explain their ridiculous defeats as PIS. The problem with sticking PIS into ANY fiction argument, i've already listed above, you haven't tried to refute, because it really is true, if we accept PIS ONE TIME. even a SINGLE time, then the entire system of ranking charcters we have on KMC goes by the wayside. It screws the whole thing over, because anytime i or anyone dislikes the outcome of the fight, we can argue that it was PIS. (death of Darth Maul, defeat of Qui Gonn, Death of sidious by the hand of vader, Vader jumping over obi-wan. (i could argue, that he ISN'T actually emotionally affected by fighting Obi-wan as we always say, but that instead, it was just PIS, and Anakin is clearly going to defeat Obi-wan everytime.) Padme dying, Yoda running from sidious (since he clearly was living on dagaboh in ESB) (so i could argue by PIS, that Yoda is clearly > than sidious)

You starting to get it? PIS isn't valid when discussing fiction. And since fiction is pretty much the only thing with a plot anyway.... its really not valid, if we are going to discuss something like its real, like we do star wars on this forum.

And the crack about Ush and Rex? where did i ever give you the impression i cared what they think? when i formed an opinion that disagreed with your own?

oh, before i forget, i asked you for one example of competence besides hoth by the GE. You told me about the army of the republic killing jedi, and you talked about how the jedi shouldn't have died. If you notice, the death of all the jedi isn't PIS (as you call it) because later sources back up that a jedi didn't have to be all that outnumbered by clones to be outclassed (Evan Piell, counsel member, dying to five clones), 5 clones being the standard "hit squad" on jedi. If that was pretty much procedure, to send 5 clones, then Order 66 makes more sense than you gave it credit for, especially considering quite a number of Jedi DID get away from death-by-clone)
So again, where does the GE actually kick tail?
(without Thrawn, come to think of it, because any book he was in makes it obvious that HE and not his fighting force is the reason for his success)

Originally posted by Gideon
We had this discussion privately, REX. With all due respect with yourself and Ushgarak, you and he have both committed to making every event in the movies hyperliteral. Simply because the movies do not show it, it must not happen? We don't see Coruscant in the Original Trilogy -- is it gone? Imperial technology looks absolutely archaic compared to that of the prequel trilogy -- has technology, in that twenty year gap, downgraded? We only see Yavin, Tattooine, Endor, Hoth, Bespin, and Alderaan in the movies -- does the galaxy consist of less than a dozen planets? We only see a few dozen Star Destroyers in the movies -- is that the upper cap of the Empire's forces?

Not to mention the whole moral absolutism that you and he both play. The Empire is wholly evil. Well that contradicts the dangerously obvious theme as spoken by Obi-Wan that "only a Sith deals in absolutes!" Packing a lightsaber and cloak these days, REX?

The long and short of it is that while I respect you both as administrators, you're both deliberately ignoring context and -- in the case of the moral absolutism -- is contradicted by the movies themselves.

A losing argument. But I'll agree to disagree.

You are taking it to a ridiculous extreme and dipping into psychological analysis of babies. The baby does not see his mother, so she does not exist, so the baby cries. Not so, we know that those worlds exist regardless of whether or not they are shown on screen. We are, after all, adults.

Some of it is simply down to when the movies were made, as obviously technology has not downgraded (nor has it improved tremendously), but the only reason it would appear to have gotten worse is only because of how the movies were made. Those are different.

Battle droids fill in for the stormtroopers in the Prequel Trilogy. I am not saying that the stormtroopers never win, because they obviously do in the Battle of Hoth. I am just saying that the stormtroopers should not be thought of as the greatest soldiers ever, because they do lose and they do exhibit terrible marksmanship. There are things outside of the films that carry over the Principle of Evil Marksmanship with stormtroopers and various other bad guy thugs.

The 'moral absolutism' argument is not even relevant at the moment and I'm not sure why you're bringing it up other than to find fault with our views.

This is the bloody EU forum, why is it so important to have everything black and white? The whole point of the EU is to expand on issues. Instead of just "Empire is bad, stormtroopers suck," we can look at a broader picture, create things not seen in the movies.

Seriously, REX and Ush, you really need to lay off the EU, this is it's purpose.

Originally posted by Tangible God
This is the bloody EU forum

I just realized that the only times I ever come in here are to download comics and complain about everything else in the bloated expansion that is EU.

Ok, several points I want to make here, and these are factual pronouncements that are not up to debate or arguing.

1. The films are the primary source of canon and override anything in the EU.

2. 'PIS' is a feeble term used by people to try and escape storyline developments they do not like. You cannot use it to ignore canon. It will not be accepted as an excuse to do so in these forums. The way it is now being used to simply ignore absokutely anything at all that disagrees with some people's points of view is... shocking. So this is an outright ban on the use it in these forums.

3. If you disagree with the rules we have for EU and canon... well, sorry, but that's how it is and it is noit changing. If you want to post here, you do it by our rules.

I would remind you that evern the EU's own canon rules state the supremacy of the films.


Gideon, you are a logical man and I mena no offence but the aruments you have presented above really are very lacking indeed. Statements like:

"Guess C-3P0 and R2D2 can move faster than the speed of light since they evade shots from both Imperial and Rebel marksmen crossing a hall. "

...are the type I would expect from far less rational posters. They walked through a hallway where a battle was going on and didnn't get hit. That's all. Unlikely if you think Star Wars is some kind of girtty hardcore realisitc drama. Barely worth mentioning if you look at it as the light fantasy it is. Did you honestly think our psotion meant we thought we were claiming that C3-P0 moved at light speed? Even as a mockery by exaggeration that was... pretty feeble.

I am unsure why you thought the rest of what you said was some sort of sure-fire set of argument winners. OT technology looks rough and war-torn, sure. But not worse. PT technology is just shinier, as is relevant for the times. It is not shown that that Padawan was better than Mundi. It is just showed he killed a bunch of troopers. Now, you want to take that as proof that from my point of view I must think he is better. But the much more logical approach is that Mundi was surprised and betrayed, whereas that boy was none of those things and was in a much better position to fight. Besides which, it might just have been how it went. The best tennis player in the world does not always play at top form. Unfortunately, the Imperial's continued rubbishness means that argument cannot work with them. They on at Hoth, sure- because they were unbeatable, the Rebels were not equipped enoough to reasonably fight back. But when they COULD fight back at the other places... bye bye Imperial forces. Sorry... but you really have no case at all- none.


I am afraid the reason that Luke et al are so good is because they are heroes and therefore are automatcally brilliant. That's how it is in a setting like Star Wars. If you wanted a setting where the likes of stormtroopers truly are deadly elite soldiers... then you've come to the wrong place in Star Wars. As noted, the rubbishness of stormtroopers is legendary. Good Lord, they couldn't even beat the darn Ewoks...


As an additional, I will not stand for people mis-representing my position. Go and check the canon rules thread. People saying things like the attitude is "If it is not shown it doesn't exist" is a gross misrepresentation fo what is shown in there, and from this sort of false statement follows a mob-like mentality where people jump on a bandwagon spouting lies and unjustified attacks. I have seen otherwise intelligent posters make ridiculously stupid and untrue statements in these forums due to this issue, and it will not be tolerated. Read the thread about canon, and do not exaggerate or give way to hysteria.


TG, the purpose of the EU forum is to discuss the EU. It is NOT to try and re-make Star Wars in your own preferred image. It has its canon rules like everything else. If you truly think that the EU area here is for what you say, then again you were mistaken. The EU is full of contradicitions and errors. We must turn to the canon rules to sort out what is right from what is wrong, but once you start to do that the only logical approach is to apply the canon rules universally, not just when it suits. Now, if you want to make threads saying "Wouldn't it be better if...?" then fine. But you cannot change the canon facts about how things actually are.


Now. The topic of this thread as about the Imperial Navy being the best of the best, and how that doesn't seem to match up. The canon, film given answer is extremely simple- the supposition that the Imperial Navy is the best is not true. It is contradicted on screen. Any EU source arguing otherwise is incorrect. The Battle of Endor shows, conclusively, that the Imperial fleet was rather rubbish. Nothing can ever contradict that, and no desperate cries of 'PIS' can render it or its meaning untrue.

(And as a final statement on the moral absolutism thing- Geroge Lucas himself said that is how it was. So if you think the films are saying otherwise, it is your interpretation that is at fault. And if you seriously think that is what Obi-Wan meant... gah. And you accuse US of literalism?)

That's all there is to it.

If this thread tries to carry on as argument about EU vs films or an attack on our policy I will close.

And NonSensi-Klown- if you keep making posts like your "You're an idiot" one you will receive a warning. If you have nothing to add, then add nothing. Atacking the poster like that is spam and close to flaming and that is another thing I will not stand for.

I have a question. Do we know what storm trooper units were used in the OT. The 501st was at Hoth,were they on Endor? Was it around this time that humans started to become stormtroopers or were the newer breed of clones from a lesser host(then Jango Fett) started being used. That could explain help explain the difference from what we see in the EU and in the movies is the different "versions" of the storm troopers.

Oh and is there some piece of EU that goes into detail about the OT space battles. I'm really interested in reading more about the space battles beside what we see on screen.

GL's comments do indeed suggest that by the time of the OT the troopers were humans or from poorer quality models (seeing as the originals had aged out by then) but I do not know any info on specific units.

Originally posted by Tangible God
This is the bloody EU forum, why is it so important to have everything black and white? The whole point of the EU is to expand on issues. Instead of just "Empire is bad, stormtroopers suck," we can look at a broader picture, create things not seen in the movies.

Seriously, REX and Ush, you really need to lay off the EU, this is it's purpose.

TG, just because this is the EU doesn't make the movies non-canon. In fact, the ineptitude of the GE in combat during the OT is indeed canon, or rather, their inconsistency is canon, because, supposedly, they have shown remarkable military ability elsewhere (i'm still waiting on a single example of that though....)

EU INCLUDES the movies, and EXPANDS on them, but we all know, that when a movie contradicts another source, the movie gets final say. We have argued from that premise ever since the beginnning when the novels starting coming out all inconsistent.

For the record, no one said that the stormtroopers are the finest soldiers in SW lore. You have Echani, the Royal Guard, the Red Guard, Imperial Sovereign Protectors, the 501st Legion, Shadowtroopers, Shadow Guard, Purge Troopers, etc. But they were the mainstay of the most powerful military force in galactic history, REX. Common sense dictates that while they weren't the best seen, they were quite formidable indeed.

But, as I said, I'll agree to disagree with both you and Ush.

Agree to disagree all you like- they are clearly and canonically not very formiddable, save for their vast numbers.

Screw it. I said I'd drop it, so I will.

Most of the elite units- like the Red Guard- seem to be not-so-plentiful, even in the EU. But yes, they do show formidable capabilities. They will never be as lethal as our heroes (unless our heroes for the story are in the Red Guard, a la Kir Kanos, for example).

Originally posted by Captain REX
Most of the elite units- like the Red Guard- seem to be not-so-plentiful, even in the EU. But yes, they do show formidable capabilities. They will never be as lethal as our heroes (unless our heroes for the story are in the Red Guard, a la Kir Kanos, for example).

Kir Kanos is a protagonist. It'd be a stretch to refer to him as a 'hero', since he is a devout and staunch Palpatinist. Under Ush's perspective, that means he's a child rapist.

You guy should check out the fiction forum...

Originally posted by truejedi
TG, just because this is the EU doesn't make the movies non-canon. In fact, the ineptitude of the GE in combat during the OT is indeed canon, or rather, their inconsistency is canon, because, supposedly, they have shown remarkable military ability elsewhere (i'm still waiting on a single example of that though....)

EU INCLUDES the movies, and EXPANDS on them, but we all know, that when a movie contradicts another source, the movie gets final say. We have argued from that premise ever since the beginnning when the novels starting coming out all inconsistent. Ya... never said the movies were non-canon. My peeve here is certain people's viewpoint that just becuase what we see in the movies is poor performance of stormtroopers, amounts to a generalization of poor performance by ALL stormtroopers. My peeve is that certain people won't accept an alternative explanation to what's seen.

That does not mean a contradiction of the movies, but rather an extrapolation. E.g. (and simply for example) Anakin's fervent desire to be a Master in RotS. The movies would have us think he's a whiny little pinhead, but the novelization gives him a more legitimate reason. So why can it not be so with stormtroopers? Granted, the idea that mass-trained troops won't be the greatest is completely valid, but if an EU idea idea provides an alternative in certain situations, why is that so horrid? The movie's do not say the stromtroopers suck, we the viewers perceive it as so. (though I will gladly retract that if you can give me a link to GL saying it)

Such a black and white, "the movies imply so, now shut up" attitude behooves children and haters of expanded thinking. Again, as per the rules of these forums, I'd not argue if this were the OT forum, but as it is...

Originally posted by Gideon
Kir Kanos is a protagonist. It'd be a stretch to refer to him as a 'hero', since he is a devout and staunch Palpatinist. Under Ush's perspective, that means he's a child rapist.

I think you're being a bit harsh on Ush's opinion. It is highly possible for bad guys to be protagonists, Ush has told me this. I mean, look at Darth Vader. He is the antagonist to Luke and Leia, but in his own plot of obeying the Emperor and seeking his own path, he is the protagonist.

Protagonists do not necessarily need to be out-and-out good guys.

And I'm not saying they are morally gray...

Originally posted by Captain REX
I think you're being a bit harsh on Ush's opinion. It is highly possible for bad guys to be protagonists, Ush has told me this. I mean, look at Darth Vader. He is the antagonist to Luke and Leia, but in his own plot of obeying the Emperor and seeking his own path, he is the protagonist.

Protagonists do not necessarily need to be out-and-out good guys.

And I'm not saying they are morally gray...

REX, you referred to Kanos as a 'hero.' He's not. He's a protagonist; they're not the same thing. I was simply correcting you and poking fun at Ushgarak's stance on Star Wars morals.

Hero, protagonist, you get what I meant. No need to nitpick what word I used.

Originally posted by Tangible God
Ya... never said the movies were non-canon. My peeve here is certain people's viewpoint that just becuase what we see in the movies is poor performance of stormtroopers, amounts to a generalization of poor performance by ALL stormtroopers. My peeve is that certain people won't accept an alternative explanation to what's seen.

That does not mean a contradiction of the movies, but rather an extrapolation. E.g. (and simply for example) Anakin's fervent desire to be a Master in RotS. The movies would have us think he's a whiny little pinhead, but the novelization gives him a more legitimate reason. So why can it not be so with stormtroopers? Granted, the idea that mass-trained troops won't be the greatest is completely valid, but if an EU idea idea provides an alternative in certain situations, why is that so horrid? The movie's do not say the stromtroopers suck, we the viewers perceive it as so. (though I will gladly retract that if you can give me a link to GL saying it)

Such a black and white, "the movies imply so, now shut up" attitude behooves children and haters of expanded thinking. Again, as per the rules of these forums, I'd not argue if this were the OT forum, but as it is...

Basically, if you were 'never saying' the movies were non-canon, then the rest of your post is pretty much a waste of time. You're just not understanding how the canon works. You cannot try to worm out of it by saying something that boils down to "Oh, maybe it's just the crap ones that we see in the films." Aside from the Emperor thinking those on Bespin were his finest, that's just now how the concept works. The films establish the canoin concepts that stormtroopers are mass produced rubbish. And I am sorry, that's where it ends. Ok, if an EU novel wants to do a story about a single stormtrooper unit that IS good, then that's fine, but any attempt to make out that stormtroopers were generally elite troops... is in contradiction and that's that. And honestly, if after watching the factual performance of troopers on-screen you DON'T think they are rubbish then... you are taking a blind stance not worth arguing with. Sometimes, trying so hard to look for an alternative explanation is simple denial of the obvious truth right in front of you. But ok, here's the best evidence I can give you, taken from an issue of Insider:

-

"However, there is also an in-universe explanation, provided by none other than George Lucas himself. During the productions of Episode III, Lucas told crewmembers that the stormtroopers seen in Episode IV are made from multiple sources. That is, they're not all Jango clones. By that time in the saga, other clone hosts have been selected.

Lucas intimated that the selection proces has become more political than strategic in some cases - a highly placed officer's cousin might be selected over a more capable specimen, for example. The politicization results in less-than-ideal candidates, which could explain some of the embarrasing marksmanship witnessed in the original trilogy."

-

GL later intimated that the troopers were conscripts as well in some cases, but we cna clearly see that GL was happy with the idea of Clonetroopers being good, Stormtroopers not.

The thing with canon is that it is what it is, good or bad. You cannot pick and choose what you do and do not like. So if you don't like Anankin's fall in ROTS, thast's a reason to criticise ROTS, but it's still the canon fact of the matter. You can speculate- but not change- on what could have made it better.

All that has happened in this thread is a question asking why the Imperial Navy on-screen doesn;t seem to do as wlel as what the poster had understood the Navy to be like. The canon answer is and always will be that what he heard was wrong. Clearly the Imperial Navy wasn't that good, because we saw the Rebels so decisively kick the crap out of it. A fact nothing else can deny.

The Black and White atittude is the Star Wars attitude. If you wanted something more complex, you are again in the wrong franchise. I don't approve of you calling it childish. It is simply logical and in line with Star Wars' own canon rules.

That really is it. No more arguing on this. If you want to discuss it further, take it to PM.

Originally posted by Gideon
Kir Kanos is a protagonist. It'd be a stretch to refer to him as a 'hero', since he is a devout and staunch Palpatinist. Under Ush's perspective, that means he's a child rapist.

No, under my perspective I would say that the EU novels are written by people who don't bother to check the setting they are writing within, basically. Plenty of EU novels have been complete trash because of a lazy approach by authorship.

But it is very very important to note that you absolutely should not confuse a black and white morality setting with a setting where you cannot make characters interesting or give them complex motives. Frankly I always found an obsession with grey areas to be very adolescent anyway.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Basically, if you were 'never saying' the movies were non-canon, then the rest of your post is pretty much a waste of time. You're just not understanding how the canon works. You cannot try to worm out of it by saying something that boils down to "Oh, maybe it's just the crap ones that we see in the films." Aside from the Emperor thinking those on Bespin were his finest, that's just now how the concept works. The films establish the canoin concepts that stormtroopers are mass produced rubbish. And I am sorry, that's where it ends. Ok, if an EU novel wants to do a story about a single stormtrooper unit that IS good, then that's fine, but any attempt to make out that stormtroopers were generally elite troops... is in contradiction and that's that. And honestly, if after watching the factual performance of troopers on-screen you DON'T think they are rubbish then... you are taking a blind stance not worth arguing with. Sometimes, trying so hard to look for an alternative explanation is simple denial of the obvious truth right in front of you. But ok, here's the best evidence I can give you, taken from an issue of Insider:

-

"However, there is also an in-universe explanation, provided by none other than George Lucas himself. During the productions of Episode III, Lucas told crewmembers that the stormtroopers seen in Episode IV are made from multiple sources. That is, they're not all Jango clones. By that time in the saga, other clone hosts have been selected.

Lucas intimated that the selection proces has become more political than strategic in some cases - a highly placed officer's cousin might be selected over a more capable specimen, for example. The politicization results in less-than-ideal candidates, which could explain some of the embarrasing marksmanship witnessed in the original trilogy."

-

GL later intimated that the troopers were conscripts as well in some cases, but we cna clearly see that GL was happy with the idea of Clonetroopers being good, Stormtroopers not.

The thing with canon is that it is what it is, good or bad. You cannot pick and choose what you do and do not like. So if you don't like Anankin's fall in ROTS, thast's a reason to criticise ROTS, but it's still the canon fact of the matter. You can speculate- but not change- on what could have made it better.

All that has happened in this thread is a question asking why the Imperial Navy on-screen doesn;t seem to do as wlel as what the poster had understood the Navy to be like. The canon answer is and always will be that what he heard was wrong. Clearly the Imperial Navy wasn't that good, because we saw the Rebels so decisively kick the crap out of it. A fact nothing else can deny.

The Black and White atittude is the Star Wars attitude. If you wanted something more complex, you are again in the wrong franchise. I don't approve of you calling it childish. It is simply logical and in line with Star Wars' own canon rules.

That really is it. No more arguing on this. If you want to discuss it further, take it to PM. So, basically... when the EU offers an explanation, we should dismiss it? There can be absolutely no argument, no reason? There can be no external factors, no extenuating circumstances, no other reason other than "because the movie implied so." Helluva an EU forum, eh?

And they say only Sith deal in absolutes.

And here comes someone else bringing in a complete mis-use of that absolutes line...

When what is said in the EU blatnatly contradicts what is on-screen, then yes, we ignore it. The EU forum happens to run perfectly well like that, actually. It only disappoints those that wish to see Star Wars turned into something it is not- and it remains so, regardless of opinion.

So yes, contrary explanations are dismissed out of hand.

If you want to discuss the canon matter futher, as I say, take it to PM. Futher posting about it in here will be treated as spam.

That's not authoritarian at all. So let me get this straight: even if the movie does not actually give an explanation for something, it's implications are treated as canon?

Hmm... Well, there is the novel Allegiance, for example, which centers around imperial stormtroopers, precisely. In this novel, at least, stormtroopers actually demonstrate to be fairly capable at different combat situations.

Besides, I think that the fact that it has been stated stormtroopers are selected by more politically convenient means doesn't necessarily mean they have to be weak. That only tells us that more capable people are left behind, not that incapable people are chosen. Are some of them likely to be incapable? Yes, but not every single one of them.

I have the book, in case someone would like me to provide quotes.

Please...

... and thank you.

In allegiance, wasn't it the small group of stormtroopers that desert that actually showed that level of competence? the larger groups of stormtroopers were evaded quite easily for the rest of the book by those four (or was it five), and by mara. In fact, imperials especially came across looking like dolts, and not only dolts, but incompetent leaders (thus the reason the stormtroopers deserted in the first place) (i'm not arguing your point, just discussing it a bit, cause i haven't read that book in probably a year.

edit