Vondy Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? Stable -- or stagnant? Similar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clonus Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? Stable -- or stagnant? That's an interesting question. What does it say about a society when life goes on as it always did, unchangeable and unchanging, for hundreds or thousands of years? When you were what you were born into with no legitimate hope or means to improve your family's lot or even your own? From the intro cinematic to Old Republic, it certainly looks as if the only way to find any sort of personal freedom was to go into crime such as smuggling. It doesn't strike me that the worth of people was a particular virtue among the Jedi. Oh, come on. The intro cinematic to Old Republic doesn't include anything about how regular people live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSgt Baloo Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? I keep wanting to respond, but cannot think of a single thing to say that won't kill catgirls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? I don't think its necessary to take Kenobi literally. I think its sufficient to understand him as meaning the Jedi have been around "for a long darned time" and that means "since before the republic' date='" whose current incarnation - or whatever - is 1,000 years old.[/quote'] And Kenobi lies like the old man who is talking about the size of the fish he missed catching. So, you gott be careful with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? And I have a hard time imgaing the resources it requires to build one Stardestroyer, yet alone a moon sized space station. While it would answer the question about the apparent technological stagnation, I don't think it is likely that roles ins Star Wars where "fixed" as they were in China. Unless of course, the "localism" we identified above combined with the relative fixed definition who makes what (a Bank-Clan, the Trade Federation with a King) somehow played a mayor role... Death Star aside at least with Star Destroyers it might not be as much as all that. When you think on scale. It isnt resources from a country of even a single planet but possible galaxy wide (or reasonable swath of said galaxy). So, it might be similar to building a battle ship in USA (not that that is inexpensive of course, but it makes it a little less mind boggling) Now the Death Star?..........I got nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? According to wookiepedia, the Empire had around 25,000 Imperial class star Destroyers at its peak--before the Battle of Endor. Considering the Imperial class didn't even come into being until after Palpatine's takeover, that means the Empire was constructing at least 1000 Star Destroyers per year. You would definitely need a VERY large number of planets to support that kind of military infrastructure--that's untold billions of tons of materials and ludicrous quantities of credits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clonus Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? According to wookiepedia' date=' the Empire had around 25,000 Imperial class star Destroyers at its peak--before the Battle of Endor. [/quote'] Yeah but those estimates are based on assuming a large scale empire in the first place. Most importantly however, if the Galactic Empire are just posers rather than something that could justifiably claim galactic scale that changes the tone of Star Wars in a way I don't like. Galactic Empire is scary, even if there's a lot of places in the galaxy that remain uncontrolled. Poser Empire not so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? Yeah but those estimates are based on assuming a large scale empire in the first place. Most importantly however' date=' if the Galactic Empire are just posers rather than something that could justifiably claim galactic scale that changes the tone of Star Wars in a way I don't like. Galactic Empire is scary, even if there's a lot of places in the galaxy that remain uncontrolled. Poser Empire not so much.[/quote'] The novelization of Ep IV(which is canon) has Grand Moff Tarkin referring to the "million systems of the Empire". 25,000 Star Destroyers sounds fairly reasonable for a million-plus planet civilization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manic Typist Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? I find the amount of material not so much of a problem (my understanding is that there are lots of metals in asteroids, rogue planets, etc) so much as the manpower and logistics of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? I find the amount of material not so much of a problem (my understanding is that there are lots of metals in asteroids' date=' rogue planets, etc) so much as the manpower and logistics of it.[/quote'] Well, they have a lot of manpower, and a lot of sophisticated automation. They can also transport supplies in a matter of days or weeks, rather than months or years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? I find the amount of material not so much of a problem (my understanding is that there are lots of metals in asteroids' date=' rogue planets, etc) so much as the manpower and logistics of it.[/quote'] A friend of mine used to say: "It is not a feat that america got to the moon - hitting it with the technology they had back than, that was the real feat." So, maybe the Republic always had the resources and tech to build ISD's (or something similar), even back then. But they could not coordinate enough resources into one project to build and maintain any sufficciently large number to make a difference (it was like the SSD and the imperial fleet. It is awsome for it's time, but you can't field a lot of them). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? According to wookiepedia' date=' the Empire had around 25,000 Imperial class star Destroyers at its peak--before the Battle of Endor. Considering the Imperial class didn't even come into being until after Palpatine's takeover, that means the Empire was constructing at least 1000 Star Destroyers per year. You would definitely need a VERY large number of planets to support that kind of military infrastructure--that's untold billions of tons of materials and ludicrous quantities of credits.[/quote'] Hold on a sec. Is any of that G-Canon, or is it all EU references? Unlike Memory Alpha, which has a strict canon definition limiting entries to the television shows and movies, and then a separate Memory Beta site that includes other materials, Wookieepedia includes everything without distinction. I ask because the argument may not apply to the universe depicted in the films and television shows, which were notoriously spartan with specific references. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? A friend of mine used to say: "It is not a feat that america got to the moon - hitting it with the technology they had back than, that was the real feat." So, maybe the Republic always had the resources and tech to build ISD's (or something similar), even back then. But they could not coordinate enough resources into one project to build and maintain any sufficciently large number to make a difference (it was like the SSD and the imperial fleet. It is awsome for it's time, but you can't field a lot of them). The Republic wasn't on a permanent wartime footing until Palpatine acceded to power. So they weren't mobilized to maximize military spending and production and resource allocation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? The novelization of Ep IV(which is canon) has Grand Moff Tarkin referring to the "million systems of the Empire". 25' date='000 Star Destroyers sounds fairly reasonable for a million-plus planet civilization.[/quote'] A million inhabited systems? Or a million systems to exploit? But, either way, in terms of ludicrousness of scale, the novelization reference renders star wars a space satire rather than a space opera. Utterly ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? A million inhabited systems? Or a million systems to exploit? But' date=' either way, in terms of ludicrousness of scale, the novelization reference renders star wars a space satire rather than a space opera. Utterly ridiculous.[/quote'] But it IS "G-Canon". So, it's "official" by any standard you wish to use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted July 14, 2011 Report Share Posted July 14, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? But it IS "G-Canon". So' date=' it's "official" by any standard you wish to use.[/quote'] Sure... officially ridiculous. Look, I'll be frank. The only reason I like Star Wars is that I was 5 when I saw A New Hope in the theater and just turning 11 when I saw Return of the Jedi. At that age you can put up with this sort of insulting nonsense. The prequels had a certain amount of nostalgia value, but they also underscored just how juvenile and poorly conceived Star Wars really is. It has Jedi and Laser Swords and Han Solo and Slave Leia. Rule of cool. But taken as a whole, if you actually stop to think about it for a heartbeat or two, it becomes clear that canon has utterly ludicrous Death Star sized fridge logic holes in it. At that point, why take the Word of Mushroom Head seriously at all? No rational being in their right mind writing fanfic or running a game in it would throw those kinds of references out there if they were writing an even remotely serious story because they know how "see spot run" they sound. This canon demands heresy. Ooooh.... look at the big shiny numbers.... aaaaaah! Idiocy. Oh, and the best science fiction stories I've ever read didn't even have FTL travel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Mackinder Posted July 15, 2011 Report Share Posted July 15, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? Occurs to me that the Empire could have a lot in common with the militaries of ... certain regimes (past and present) here on Earth. "Sure, we are SO Big And Bad And Awesome, because our bookkeeping and our propaganda says so. But, erm, I cannot actually let anybody see our stuff..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted July 15, 2011 Report Share Posted July 15, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? It has Jedi and Laser Swords and Han Solo and Slave Leia. Rule of cool. But taken as a whole, if you actually stop to think about it for a heartbeat or two, it becomes clear that canon has utterly ludicrous Death Star sized fridge logic holes in it. At that point, why take the Word of Mushroom Head seriously at all? No rational being in their right mind writing fanfic or running a game in it would throw those kinds of references out there if they were writing an even remotely serious story because they know how "see spot run" they sound. This canon demands heresy. Ooooh.... look at the big shiny numbers.... aaaaaah! When the player ask questions that aren't covered by the canon, they don't want to play star wars. They want to play something else. The point of Star Wars, like any other fary tale, that it does not needs to make sense. It's just a universe where things tend to happen and things happen to work he way they should because the story needs it so. Ep4 needed a Moon Sized Space station. Plopp, the Empire had one. Ep5 needed people being able to breath without help on Hooth (no plantlife = no oxigen), so it happened so. Further it needed: a 13 Kilometer longs SSD, a Spacecity in a Gas Giant (how could Luke breath while hanging on the underside? Also, the wind would have been a dozen times to strong for him) Ep6 needed another, almost finished moonszied space station and some furballs kicking the the empires ass (with losses), so it happened. In each episode, when I think about the main plotline I could come up with a dozen inconsistencies/things that should not work. But I don't care, because I am wathcing Star Wars and I don't want to ponder reality in a modern fary tale. At least not any more than I wanted to ponder reality in Rapunzel or Snow White, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted July 15, 2011 Report Share Posted July 15, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? Well, Hoth could have plant life at the equator. But, then, Lucas liked planets with one enviroment (which would be another one of those physical unlikelihoods) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmjalund Posted July 15, 2011 Report Share Posted July 15, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? there could be plantlife that can live under snow. or the plantlife could be microscopic - and white. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Mackinder Posted July 15, 2011 Report Share Posted July 15, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? Ep5 needed people being able to breath without help on Hooth (no plantlife = no oxigen)' date=' so it happened so.[/quote'] Don't know for sure that Hoth totally lacks plantlife. Sure, didn't see any where the action took place (which was all in one very specific area of Hoth anyhow), but one also doesn't see a lot of plants in pics of Antarctica or the Sahara. For all we know, Hoth might have had a huge ocean full of plankton tucked away on the far side, or maybe the total (?) ice cover was a cyclic thing (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth ) - ie. the planet freezes over peridodically, but also has a warm season with plantlife. a Spacecity in a Gas Giant (how could Luke breath while hanging on the underside? Also' date=' the wind would have been a dozen times to strong for him)[/quote'] It is entirely likely (probes of Jupiter seem to confirm this) that a gas giant's atmosphere is multi-layered in composition, temperature AND wind speeds. So, possibly this particular GG had a atmospheric layer that was close to 'Class M'. A similar idea is used in the ultra-serious setting for the hard science / far future RPG 'Eclipse Phase', where part of Venus's upper atmopshere has been altered to the extent that it is breathable, and people live in various floating cities there.. In each episode' date=' when I think about the main plotline I could come up with a dozen inconsistencies/things that should not work. But I don't care, because I am wathcing Star Wars and I don't want to ponder reality in a modern fary tale. At least not any more than I wanted to ponder reality in Rapunzel or Snow White, Fair enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clonus Posted July 15, 2011 Report Share Posted July 15, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? A million inhabited systems? Or a million systems to exploit? But' date=' either way, in terms of ludicrousness of scale, the novelization reference renders star wars a space satire rather than a space opera. Utterly ridiculous.[/quote'] Someone has never read Lensman. Or the Foundation series for that matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clonus Posted July 15, 2011 Report Share Posted July 15, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? Don't know for sure that Hoth totally lacks plantlife. Sure' date=' didn't see any where the action took place (which was all in one very specific area of Hoth anyhow), but one also doesn't see a lot of plants in pics of Antarctica or the Sahara. For all we know, Hoth might have had a huge ocean full of plankton tucked away on the far side, or maybe the total (?) ice cover was a cyclic thing (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth ) - ie. the planet freezes over peridodically, but also has a warm season with plantlife.[/quote'] Uh-hunh. You can actually have a oxygen iceball just by assuming they're in the middle of an Oxygen Catastrophe It is entirely likely (probes of Jupiter seem to confirm this) that a gas giant's atmosphere is multi-layered in composition, temperature AND wind speeds. So, possibly this particular GG had a atmospheric layer that was close to 'Class M'. Personally I'd just go with an atmosphere retaining forcefield. A similar idea is used in the ultra-serious setting for the hard science / far future RPG 'Eclipse Phase', where part of Venus's upper atmopshere has been altered to the extent that it is breathable, and people live in various floating cities there.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 15, 2011 Report Share Posted July 15, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? Someone one has never read Lensman. Or the Foundation series for that matter. This. If it isn't Brobdignagian in scope, it might not be space opera. It is possible to introduce SO elements into hard sci-fi(the BSG reboot comes to mind), but it hardly seems sporting to knock SW for elements which are a common trope of its genre. Frankly, it could be a billion inhabited worlds and 25 million star destroyers, and it'd still be Star Wars, imo. Just the amount of materials involved in building the Death Star alone beggar the imagination. Think "1 million years of terrestrial steel production". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSgt Baloo Posted July 15, 2011 Report Share Posted July 15, 2011 Re: Star Wars: Technological Stagnation? Someone has never read Lensman. Or the Foundation series for that matter. This. If it isn't Brobdignagian in scope, it might not be space opera. It is possible to introduce SO elements into hard sci-fi(the BSG reboot comes to mind), but it hardly seems sporting to knock SW for elements which are a common trope of its genre. Frankly, it could be a billion inhabited worlds and 25 million star destroyers, and it'd still be Star Wars, imo. Just the amount of materials involved in building the Death Star alone beggar the imagination. Think "1 million years of terrestrial steel production". Exactly. Space Opera is to Science Fiction as WWE-style Wrestling is to Greco-Roman Wrestling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.