| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:24 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | Maybe the distinction is that, for a ship to travel from point a to point b in hyperspace, it needs to orient itself in the proper direction and achieve some sort of real-space velocity to jump. However, if a ship or object merely wishes to jump into hyperspace and remain stationary, all it has to do is jump to hyperspace. If it's just hovering at zero velocity, then it shouldn't need to plot a course to avoid space obstacles, because it isn't going anywhere, like how you don't need to worry about hitting a telephone pole when your car is parked and idling. |
An issue with this theory is that the galaxy is constantly in motion, planets orbit stars, moons orbit planets. If you're in hyperspace and remaining motionless then the galaxy is going to move in relation to you, potentially with disasterous resaults.
I've never been a fan of the ending of the Black Fleet Crisis books but then there was quite a lot of those books I didn't enjoy. A lot of the character reactions seemed not to gel with how I pictured the Star Wars characters so I tend not to include it in my mental version of cannon.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Esoomian wrote: | | An issue with this theory is that the galaxy is constantly in motion, planets orbit stars, moons orbit planets. If you're in hyperspace and remaining motionless then the galaxy is going to move in relation to you, potentially with disasterous resaults. |
That pre-supposes that motionlessness is absolute, not relative. If the ship in question is motionless relative to the star system it is in, then since gravity affects hyperspace as well as real space, the ship will be swept along by gravity just like everything else in the system. By motionless, I meant that the ship itself is exerting little or no self-propulsion in any form.
| Quote: | | I've never been a fan of the ending of the Black Fleet Crisis books but then there was quite a lot of those books I didn't enjoy. A lot of the character reactions seemed not to gel with how I pictured the Star Wars characters so I tend not to include it in my mental version of cannon. |
They could've been better done, but the same could be said of most of the EU novels. I grew up reading Tom Clancy novels, and I am a big fan of techno-thrillers and such. The Black Fleet Crisis trilogy is, at its core, an attempt to make a Star Wars techno-thriller, which makes it a combination of two genres that I very much enjoy. Some of the in-world tech and physics may clash with the rest of the EU, but such is life in the SWU.
_________________
"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.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | That pre-supposes that motionlessness is absolute, not relative. If the ship in question is motionless relative to the star system it is in, then since gravity affects hyperspace as well as real space, the ship will be swept along by gravity just like everything else in the system. By motionless, I meant that the ship itself is exerting little or no self-propulsion in any form. |
I've not found any evidence to suggest gravity can do anything other than pull a ship out of hyperspace so I don't see a ship being able to remain in orbit and remain in hyperspace.
| Quote: |
They could've been better done, but the same could be said of most of the EU novels. I grew up reading Tom Clancy novels, and I am a big fan of techno-thrillers and such. The Black Fleet Crisis trilogy is, at its core, an attempt to make a Star Wars techno-thriller, which makes it a combination of two genres that I very much enjoy. Some of the in-world tech and physics may clash with the rest of the EU, but such is life in the SWU. |
I'll admit there were some enjoyable aspects to the books, I quite enjoyed the overlapping shields providing an area of weakness but I found Luke's quest for his mother and Leia's decision not to use the Force in critical moments quite difficult to reconcile. If you enjoyed them then by all means factor them into your universe but I just couldn't make that leap.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I liked the BFC for some things it introduced (the white current, the ewings, the kwings.. ) but not for a lot of others (those probes that hover in hyperspace) since they flat out contradict everything else in EU and canon.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The white current  not one of my favorites...makes me wonder where I left my canoe.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gamer wrote: | Have you read the bit about the Hyperspace orbiting scanner in the ISB page 36?
This thing orbits a planet while in hyperspace. |
Just looked at it. It orbits the planet in hyperspace so that it can monitor information from target computers on the planet. It does that by "monitoring the hyperspace shadows left by streaking particles inside a computer."
That HOS, right? We don't use that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | That HOS, right? We don't use that. |
Of course you don't. That's Imperial Intelligence, not COMPNOR 
_________________
"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.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | I liked the BFC for some things it introduced (the white current, the ewings, the kwings.. ) but not for a lot of others (those probes that hover in hyperspace) since they flat out contradict everything else in EU and canon. |
Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of the White Current. The E-Wings were actually introduced in Dark Empire I.
I also liked the K-Wings, but I ended up really disappointed with their treatment in the EU. When I first read about them, they seemed like the SW equivalent of the A-6 Intruder, which was a truly excellent carrier-based bomber with long range and massive ordnance capacity. And then the disappointments started racking up:
1). It's a no-show in Cracken's Threat Dossier. Instead we get the Yevethan fighter, which was essentially wiped out at the Battle of N'zoth.
2). What? No hyperdrive? So this amazingly capable bomber can't make long range strikes and has to be delivered in-system by a NR capital ship? Sounds like a step backwards for starfighter development
3). Making the thing a straight-up bomb truck was a great homage to the A-6, which didn't come equipped with a cannon. But when the EG to Vehicles came out, the K-Wing was practically unrecognizable, with gun turrets sticking out all over the place. Plus, it was huge. How exactly is this ship supposed to fit onto the limited hangar deck space of a carrier ship?
For me, the EU treatment of the K-Wing has been one big bummer. Do-over, please.
_________________
"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.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | Bren wrote: | | That HOS, right? We don't use that. |
Of course you don't. That's Imperial Intelligence, not COMPNOR |
 Imperial Intelligence propaganda maybe. SW reality is something completely different. Were such a system possible than rather than many Bothans, we would have to say, "Many photons died to bring us this information."
Actually it should be obvious that the article on the HOS is merely a rather crude example of Imperial Intelligence's propaganda. Note that the head of the team responsible for the miraculouls HOS technology is Dr Lindu Sencker. At first glance an odd sounding name but a very simple analysis reveals it is an anagram of crud link sender a phrase indicating an unreliable source or a sender of links that are simply crud. While such a transparent disguise may fool the Rebel Scum, it cannot deceive the brilliant, but loyal supporters of the Emperors glorious New Order.
The trees that relayed coversations from all over Corsucant I can believe but reading the mass shadow of particles inside a computer from orbit while in hyperspace. Right... This reminds me of why when I first read the ISB years ago I quickly realized it was an assortment of ideas to pick and choose from. Not a well thought out, coherent, logical whole to implement in toto. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gamer
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 20 May 2010
Posts: 125
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bren make up your mind, do you prefer space opera or hard sci-fi.
You change directions more times than a women in a shoe store.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gamer wrote: | Bren make up your mind, do you prefer space opera or hard sci-fi.
You change directions more times than a women in a shoe store.
|
Depends on the game. Star Wars is space opera. Reading the hyperwave mass shadow of elementary particles inside a computer from orbit seems like a strange combination of NSA telecommunications eavesdropping combined with satellite surveillance translated into space. The absence of the need for characters doing dramatic things and the focus on computing technology as the be all, end all solution seems more like cyberpunk computer sorcery than space opera to me. But my dislike of a concept need not stop others from enjoying it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 am Post subject: Re: Hyperspace |
|
|
I agree that you can't be still in hyperspace (even relevant to the galaxy you are floating in). You can't even move slow. Things only being able to move fast in hyperspace would actually make the name "hyperspace" make the most sense.
The films show a big acceleration just before entering hyperspace and then a big deceleration when returning to realspace. My extrapolation from the films is that unlike real space that has a maximum speed of anything being the speed of light, hyperspace has a minimum speed of just under c. I view hyperspace travel as operating by the ship's hyperdrive motivator creating a portal into hyperspace ahead of the ship (but specifically for that ship and its vector) and hyperspace sort of "sucks" the ship into it and to velocities above the speed of light ("lightspeed"). But physical objects from real space moving through hyperspace is still an unnatural thing so the hyperdrive motivator has to maintain the path for the ship through hyperspace, and the mishap of just dropping out of hyperspace mid-journey is the motivator going offline (usually due to faulty astrogation).
Just my take.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:53 am Post subject: Re: Hyperspace |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | I agree that you can't be still in hyperspace (even relevant to the galaxy you are floating in). You can't even move slow. Things only being able to move fast in hyperspace would actually make the name "hyperspace" make the most sense.
The films show a big acceleration just before entering hyperspace and then a big deceleration when returning to realspace. My extrapolation from the films is that unlike real space that has a maximum speed of anything being the speed of light, hyperspace has a minimum speed of just under c. I view hyperspace travel as operating by the ship's hyperdrive motivator creating a portal into hyperspace ahead of the ship (but specifically for that ship and its vector) and hyperspace sort of "sucks" the ship into it and to velocities above the speed of light ("lightspeed"). But physical objects from real space moving through hyperspace is still an unnatural thing so the hyperdrive motivator has to maintain the path for the ship through hyperspace, and the mishap of just dropping out of hyperspace mid-journey is the motivator going offline (usually due to faulty astrogation).
Just my take. |
Hmmmm. Very interesting. I have heard a lot of interpretations of hyperspace, but this is the first time for this version. I like it, and it makes sense. Unfortunately, it certainly conflicts with hyperspace as presented in the Black Fleet Crisis, but conflicting sources in the SWU are certainly nothing new. Of course, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to say that the hyperdrive motivator could function the same way for an object holding a relative position as opposed to linear travel.
How would your concept work with hyperspace as presented in the Brian Daley novels, which are the only other source that I can think of that address the technical workings of hyperspace?
_________________
"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.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | This is far from being an isolated issue in the EU, where conflicting information sometimes seems the norm rather than the exception... Now, over ten years later, things have become much more complicated and cluttered. |
Exactly! I agree 100%. That's why I have hard time understanding how the EU can even be considered one single universe by anyone. There are definitely a lot of cool things in the EU, but as a whole the EU is one giant schizophrenic space-time anomaly. The directives for the EU's continuity are (1) it is not supposed to contradict the films, and (2) it is not supposed to contradict itself. I feel it has failed miserably on both accounts, even with the use of retcons.
| Quote: | | With so many conflicting stories, I enjoy utilizing a hierarchy so that I know what information is canon, and what is apocryphal. What can I say, I'm OCD like that. |
I understand. We can discuss what is and isn't "official" (EU) canon here, and we can also discuss our own personal individual canon. As long as everyone specifies which they are referring to, then I don't see any problems with both types of conversations. I hope that now you can respect that each of us have our own definitions of canon that comprise our own SW universes, just as I can respect the need for a hierarchy to know what is and isn't official canon, for the sake of discussing official canon.
| Quote: | When I refer to the hierarchy of canon that was accepted back on the old AOL list, this is an example of why I find it useful. Knowing what sources trumps what other sources allows one to make a decision as to which version is "more official". Although I don't recall the Essential Guides being mentioned in the old hierarchy (possibly because it existed before they did, but I don't remember exactly), the EU novel that is the primary source for the K-Wing would take primacy over a secondary source that chose to alter the information on the K-Wing for unknown reasons... in this case, incorrect information from a secondary source influenced stat writers to produce something divergent from what is actually seen in the official material...
Admittedly, the idea of a hierarchy of canon smacks of absurdity in such a fluid environment. In my defense, it was part and parcel of my introduction to the SW-RPG on line world. Discussions on all aspects of the rules and the interpretation of in-game scenarios were decided based on the source's position in the hierarchy of canon. |
I wasn't a part of the old AOL list, so I'll take your word on the canon hierarchy was commonly accepted among fans back then. But in what I am sure is much to your chagrin, it isn't set-up like that any more. It has evolved over the years (or perhaps devolved).
This canon hierarchy was publically officialized in 2000, and slightly augmented in 2008. The canon hierarchy of the modern EU has 5 levels. In order of precedence:
G-canon ("George Lucas") - The 6 live-action SW films, plus aspects of the films' other media adaptaions such as novelizations, radio dramas and comic books that do not contradict the films. Deleted scenes that do not contradict the films. Some statements made by GL about his films.
T-canon - ("Television") - The Clone Wars movie and current TV series, plus the future live action TV series only (Despite the word the "T" came from, no older television works are included here). This was the newest level added to give the producers of these shows more freedom in creating stories. They are free to contradict anything from C-canon below (and have), and thus only have to maintain continuity with G-canon above.
C-canon ("Continuity") - This is the vast majority of all published Star Wars continuity (aside from the above) since the formation of the EU in 1991, also including some previous works (such as The Han Solo Adventures and WEG 1E fluff), but not all older material.
S-canon ("Secondary") - This is the odd little "maybe" canon designation given to the pre-EU works that were deemed to not be C-canon in 1991, such collections of materials that were not that self-consistent, most notably the old Marvel comic series. The stories of these works are deemed to not be canon, but some elements of the stories may possibly later become canon (like Wroonians).
N-canon ("Non-") - What If? stories since 1991 intentionally created to not be a part of EU/C-canon, such as the Infinities comics, and any continuity that irreconcilably contradicts anything in any level above this one.
Rules for how it operates in use:
Some elements of continuity can move up in levels. Any EU author that uses a planet, character, creature, ship, etc. from a S-canon story elevates that item to C-canon. When Lucas used the capital planet name "Coruscant", Aayla Secura, swoop bikes and YT-2400's in the films, they rose from C-canon to G-canon.
Some more recent elements from the same level or above can bump things down to non-canon. As much as many fans in our generation were not pleased about it, G-canon from the newer versions of the classic fillms and the prequels rendered some previous G- and C-canon things to be non-canon. (IMO, there is a lot more older C-canon that should have been bumped down that wasn't. And there is newer C-canon that IMO continues to contradict G-canon everyday.) The Clone Wars TV show has contradicted several elements of C-canon, thus changing the previously-established EU.
The use of these retroactive continuity changes means that when in conflict, the newer supercedes the older. To tie this back into the AOL hierarchy, whether continuity source is a primary or secondary source (novel or informational sourcebook) doesn't matter so much anymore. In the specific example you referred to, the contradictions between the K-wing in the original novel and the Essential Guide were resolved by the Starships of the Galaxy, a secondary source as you use the term. Non-story resource books retcon previous stories all the time in SW, so as much as you like the resolution method provided by the hierarchy of old, the official resolution method is newer takes precedence over the older, regardless of whether the continuities (or discontinuities) in question came from a story or not.
Thats how it is supposed to work anyway. But then again there are zillions of discontinuities that remain unresolved so this could all be just a bunch of BS.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage
Last edited by Whill on Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 3:03 pm Post subject: Re: Hyperspace |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | Whill wrote: | I agree that you can't be still in hyperspace (even relevant to the galaxy you are floating in). You can't even move slow. Things only being able to move fast in hyperspace would actually make the name "hyperspace" make the most sense.
The films show a big acceleration just before entering hyperspace and then a big deceleration when returning to realspace. My extrapolation from the films is that unlike real space that has a maximum speed of anything being the speed of light, hyperspace has a minimum speed of just under c. I view hyperspace travel as operating by the ship's hyperdrive motivator creating a portal into hyperspace ahead of the ship (but specifically for that ship and its vector) and hyperspace sort of "sucks" the ship into it and to velocities above the speed of light ("lightspeed"). But physical objects from real space moving through hyperspace is still an unnatural thing so the hyperdrive motivator has to maintain the path for the ship through hyperspace, and the mishap of just dropping out of hyperspace mid-journey is the motivator going offline (usually due to faulty astrogation).
Just my take. |
Hmmmm. Very interesting. I have heard a lot of interpretations of hyperspace, but this is the first time for this version. I like it, and it makes sense. Unfortunately, it certainly conflicts with hyperspace as presented in the Black Fleet Crisis, but conflicting sources in the SWU are certainly nothing new. Of course, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to say that the hyperdrive motivator could function the same way for an object holding a relative position as opposed to linear travel.
How would your concept work with hyperspace as presented in the Brian Daley novels, which are the only other source that I can think of that address the technical workings of hyperspace? |
It's been almost 20 years since I read the Daley Solo books and I killed a lot of brain cells afterwards, so I do not posess instant recall on that topic. Do you mind refreshing my memory of how hyperspace described to work in those books? If so then I'll be happy to reply to your question with respect to the concept of hyperspace I presented in this thread. Thanks.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
