To be fair, Kanan's light saber doesn't have a "purée" setting like the Inquisitor's.
Star Wars Rebels Season One (spoilers)
- Thread starter ALF
- Start date
To be fair, Kanan's light saber doesn't have a "purée" setting like the Inquisitor's.
^Swordsmanship isn't about how fancy your gadget is. If anything, it was quite hypocritical of the Inquisitor to claim superior fighting skill when he's so dependent on a gimmicky lightsaber. It doesn't take any skill to overpower an opponent when you're holding a propeller blade of lethal energy in front of you.
That was in the now decanonized EU, though. They might not take that approach going forward.
I think it's safe to say that most of that cost is in the hyperspace jumps. Punching through to and back from another dimension on a regular basis must take several orders of magnitude more energy than just defying about 1g of gravity for a few hours.
This. Flying between planets and achieving escape velocity costs fuel. Running the ships repulsorlifts probably just uses battery or generator power. Hell they put the things on crates. So they can require that much power.
Considering they have things that just hover normally, I doubt it is much of a drain on that universe's power cells.
As for decanonization of certain things, remember that they have kept the Clone Wars materials and seem to be investing a lot in the old West End Games based materials (the Inquisitor for example), so that concept of Force specialization may remain.
As for lightsaber skills, the Inquisitor names specific styles and it able to tell Kanan's teacher by his heavy use of Form III. Form III is considered to be a defensive style also used to deflect blaster bolts. This was Kenobi's style by the end of the Clone Wars, but Kenobi was the master of this style, able to use it for perfect defense until the opponent gave and openning, then just a quick slash or nick and the enemy is missing limbs.
The Inquisitor himself seems fairly skilled before he started turning on features to ensure superiority. They do call it a "cheat mode" lightsaber on the production side of things. He doesn't have all the skills, but seems to have at least some Force powers since he can force push, and I think deflect blaster bolts. He just has a cheat saber in case he runs into someone with really good skills. Plus he is probably lacking in other force skills since he's not a Jedi nor is he a Sith. He is likely one of those taken by the Jedi that failed to become a padawan and went on to some other Jedi department were they use some skills, but are not in any way going to become Jedi Knights.
Depa Billaba, in the old EU version, was one of the few Jedi that used Form VII (Windu's form). She was one of Windu's students but also went into a coma after falling to the dark side in a state of madness. But that was early in the war. I suppose she could have gotten better and to help her recover they gave her a padawan to keep her focused. They sort of did that with Anakin in the Clone Wars by giving him a padawan. Depa's place on the council was taken by Kenobi.
As for decanonization of certain things, remember that they have kept the Clone Wars materials and seem to be investing a lot in the old West End Games based materials (the Inquisitor for example), so that concept of Force specialization may remain.
As for lightsaber skills, the Inquisitor names specific styles and it able to tell Kanan's teacher by his heavy use of Form III. Form III is considered to be a defensive style also used to deflect blaster bolts. This was Kenobi's style by the end of the Clone Wars, but Kenobi was the master of this style, able to use it for perfect defense until the opponent gave and openning, then just a quick slash or nick and the enemy is missing limbs.
The Inquisitor himself seems fairly skilled before he started turning on features to ensure superiority. They do call it a "cheat mode" lightsaber on the production side of things. He doesn't have all the skills, but seems to have at least some Force powers since he can force push, and I think deflect blaster bolts. He just has a cheat saber in case he runs into someone with really good skills. Plus he is probably lacking in other force skills since he's not a Jedi nor is he a Sith. He is likely one of those taken by the Jedi that failed to become a padawan and went on to some other Jedi department were they use some skills, but are not in any way going to become Jedi Knights.
Depa Billaba, in the old EU version, was one of the few Jedi that used Form VII (Windu's form). She was one of Windu's students but also went into a coma after falling to the dark side in a state of madness. But that was early in the war. I suppose she could have gotten better and to help her recover they gave her a padawan to keep her focused. They sort of did that with Anakin in the Clone Wars by giving him a padawan. Depa's place on the council was taken by Kenobi.
I'm noticing another fundamental problem with this series. In both this episode and the pilot, the Ghost manages to escape an Imperial warship / fortress with no problem whatsoever. Why didn't the Inquisitor have his Star Destroyer in the neighborhood to prevent the Jedi's escape?
^Maybe they would've seen the Star Destroyer and known it was a trap?
(You know, it's just now occurred to me, after 37 years, that "Star Destroyer" is false advertising. I mean, the Death Star was supposed to be the ultimate weapon, more powerful than anything before it, and it was merely a planet destroyer. So it follows that Star Destroyers can't destroy stars. For that matter, even if you parse it as equivalent to "star ship," i.e. a destroyer that travels among the stars, that doesn't work either, because a destroyer is a relatively small class of ship -- in Wikipedia's words, "a fast and maneuverable warship of long-endurance intended to escort larger vessels in a fleet, convoy, or battle group and defend them against smaller, powerful, short-range attackers." But Star Destroyers are pretty much the biggest Imperial vessels -- except for Super Star Destroyers, which compounds the problem. And except for the Death Star, which I've just realized has its own nomenclatural problem, because it was called a space station, but it was capable of traveling under its own power, making it a ship rather than a station, because the defining characteristic of a station is that it is stationary, that it stays in one place -- well, one orbit, in the case of a space station. So that's no moon and it's not a space station either. It's a big round ship.)
(You know, it's just now occurred to me, after 37 years, that "Star Destroyer" is false advertising. I mean, the Death Star was supposed to be the ultimate weapon, more powerful than anything before it, and it was merely a planet destroyer. So it follows that Star Destroyers can't destroy stars. For that matter, even if you parse it as equivalent to "star ship," i.e. a destroyer that travels among the stars, that doesn't work either, because a destroyer is a relatively small class of ship -- in Wikipedia's words, "a fast and maneuverable warship of long-endurance intended to escort larger vessels in a fleet, convoy, or battle group and defend them against smaller, powerful, short-range attackers." But Star Destroyers are pretty much the biggest Imperial vessels -- except for Super Star Destroyers, which compounds the problem. And except for the Death Star, which I've just realized has its own nomenclatural problem, because it was called a space station, but it was capable of traveling under its own power, making it a ship rather than a station, because the defining characteristic of a station is that it is stationary, that it stays in one place -- well, one orbit, in the case of a space station. So that's no moon and it's not a space station either. It's a big round ship.)
Or it may not. Speculation isn't worth much.
At which point it becomes a wait and see question, rather that a "oh, they don't do that anymore" statement.
Yeah, the same thing could also apply to the name "Death Star" (although it could also look like a star raining down death and destruction from a distance possibly--at least until it becomes apparent it's no moon).I think the Empire just used the name Star Destroyer as a way to instill fear into their subjects.
And also because it just sounds really badass.
At first is was a Imperial cruiser. As some point later they started calling it a Star Destroyer.
I think it might be due to, at that time in the late 1970s, a cruiser and a destroyer were basically the same thing. The newest cruiser in the US Navy in 1980 was the Ticonderoga-class, which had been reclassified as a cruiser from its original destroyer classification due to a preceived "cruiser-gap" with the Soviets. All the other "cruisers" in the fleet after 1975 had been called frigates or "destroyer leaders" before the need to fill this gap with the Soviets. This was due to the decommissioning of the last of the World War II cruisers at around that same time. In 1977, the largest warships in the US Navy that were not aircraft carriers were a few nuclear powered cruisers of the California and Virginia classes (which were originally called frigates or "destroyer leaders" prior to 1975) and the new gas turbine powered Spruance-class destroyers that were very similar to what would become the Ticonderoga-class crusiers, since the Tico's were based on those destroyers.
Well those and USS Long Beach, which was basically the only real cruiser left at that point.
I think it might be due to, at that time in the late 1970s, a cruiser and a destroyer were basically the same thing. The newest cruiser in the US Navy in 1980 was the Ticonderoga-class, which had been reclassified as a cruiser from its original destroyer classification due to a preceived "cruiser-gap" with the Soviets. All the other "cruisers" in the fleet after 1975 had been called frigates or "destroyer leaders" before the need to fill this gap with the Soviets. This was due to the decommissioning of the last of the World War II cruisers at around that same time. In 1977, the largest warships in the US Navy that were not aircraft carriers were a few nuclear powered cruisers of the California and Virginia classes (which were originally called frigates or "destroyer leaders" prior to 1975) and the new gas turbine powered Spruance-class destroyers that were very similar to what would become the Ticonderoga-class crusiers, since the Tico's were based on those destroyers.
Well those and USS Long Beach, which was basically the only real cruiser left at that point.
Chewie's probably gonna get killed by a moon in Episode 7. I mean, it happened in the EU. I'm taking a wait-and-see approach.
Methinks you're being a tad too literal. "Star" is just short for starship. Just like "Star Freighter" or "Star Cruiser", it's a Destroyer class that's also a starship. Likewise "Super Star Destroyer" is just a *really* big Star Destroyer. Granted it's not a consistent naming scheme and yes, most SW ships appear to be starships, but it's just one of those terms that's part of SW's 'Flash Gordon' legacy.
On that note, what the heck is a battlestar supposed to be?
Sci-Fi "swag"?
(Honestly I'd never heard the term until the other day when my nephew wore a T-shirt proclaiming his to the Universe. Unfortunately I see it everywhere now <facepalm>. I wanted to smack him, but that's not legal.)
Similar threads
