HOME | DD

Mikemicproductions In reply to TheMonkeysUnkle [2019-05-27 08:41:00 +0000 UTC]

the firepower on the eclipse though would easily destroy the supremacy. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TheMonkeysUnkle In reply to Mikemicproductions [2019-05-29 01:43:31 +0000 UTC]

No, please stop. I already gave my opinion and got insulted over it when the other person couldn't bring anything of value to the debate. I'm not continuing this.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Mikemicproductions In reply to TheMonkeysUnkle [2019-05-29 02:00:15 +0000 UTC]

thats ok

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

sasquatch668 In reply to TheMonkeysUnkle [2019-05-10 17:59:00 +0000 UTC]

No way possible. It took force storms to destroy eclipse 1 and a hyperspace collision to destroy the second. The armor is too strong to be destroyed by conventional means. Supremacy would not last 5 seconds.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TheMonkeysUnkle In reply to sasquatch668 [2019-05-10 19:24:28 +0000 UTC]

This is a logical fallacy. There's no actual evidence to say massed turbolaser fire would be ineffective, therefore we must conclude that the Eclipses were roughly on par with other ssd's when it came to shielding. Furthermore, the Eclipses had only a fraction of the number of weapons mounted on an Executor. Since there is no evidence to prove that the Eclipses' turbolasers and other weapons were more powerful individually than the Executor's, we must also conclude that the former had far less conventional firepower than the latter. When lacking evidence to the contrary, we have to assume parity between these sorts of things.

The first Eclipse was destroyed by force storms because that's what did the deed first. This provides no evidence whatsoever that the Eclipse was impervious to conventional weapons.

The second was destroyed in a collision with the Galaxy Gun because that was the most practical and expedient way of doing so. It resulted in the destruction of two Imperial superweapons without requiring the deaths of any more New Republic personnel. Again, this provides no evidence that turbolasers couldn't have done the job.

The defining factor of the Eclipses were their superlasers. There's nothing stating how durable they were in comparison to the Executors, so we would logically conclude some level of parity between the two, unless either Eclipse shows a feat that significantly overshadows the Executor being hit by three ISDs in hyperspace.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

sasquatch668 In reply to TheMonkeysUnkle [2019-05-11 00:45:16 +0000 UTC]

Its later been stated in legends. Both ships were fleet killers. You are crapping on the ships without knowledge of legends. The rebels had nothing to fight those ships that is exactly why they resorted to other methods. Also the eclipse boasted thousands of turbolasers. Its specs are even in the empire at war mods. All info was taken from legends. The supremacy couldn't even destroy a resistance mon cal cruiser at medium-long range. The eclipse would easily dispatch that ship with a single reactor shot. And the evidence you claimed doesn't exist is wrong. If you look at the specs of the ship you will notice the armor and shielding. Its armor is too thick to be damaged by conventional means. The only logical thing that could destroy it is another superlaser. Palpatine had it designed to be a near unstoppable ship. As stated before it took force storms to tear apart the first. Force storms are practically black holes. And a hyperspace collision speaks for itself in power. Also the eclipse had stronger shields than other SSDs. Considering there were a larger amount of SSDs they lacked the quality of the eclipse which took years to design and build to palpatines specs. You might want to brush up on Dark Empire material. The eclipse is my favorite ship so i know all of its specs and like all fans I know the ship was not a pushover.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TheMonkeysUnkle In reply to sasquatch668 [2019-05-11 02:46:34 +0000 UTC]

As I stated before, just because both ships were destroyed through unconventional means does NOT mean they could not be destroyed by massed firepower. This is a no-limits fallacy. The New Republic had an incredibly difficult time dealing with Executors, and when possible destroyed them through sabotage rather than open combat. That did not mean they were also impossible to beat in a straight fight, just impractically difficult.

The Executor was also a fleet killer, but logically a big enough fleet would be able to overwhelm it, same as the Eclipse. Saying that it's a fleet killer, so it can't be killed by any fleet no matter how large is also kind of like the no-limits fallacy. To my knowledge, no established durability feats of the Eclipse exceed the Executor's own, so you can't say with any certainty that it is vastly superior to the latter dreadnought.

Stats from fan made mods for games are even lower on the credibility ladder than wikis, and at least Wookiepedia provides (EU canon) sources for most of what it says. If you actually look it up, the Eclipse has exactly 1050 turbolasers and laser cannons and 75 ion cannons, a far cry from the Executor's over 5000 turbolaser batteries and ion cannons. If we wanted to highball the Executor, since batteries are usually referring to more than one emplacement, the Executor has even more firepower than it first appears.

One thing to note as well, the Executor was far more mobile, with a much higher acceleration rate, giving it a maneuverability advantage.

You've taken all that I've said to mean I actually think the Eclipse would reliably lose the Executor or, more to the point the Supremacy. I don't. The superlaser is a game-breaker. The instant it manages to score a hit, it's game over, but if something happened to put the superlaser out of commission, then yes, I do think it'd lose to the Executor, and the Supremacy if we assume EU parity with Disney canon.

Lastly, how about before getting snarky, telling others to brush up on facts, you do so yourself? You claim to know pretty much everything about the Eclipses, but you didn't even know something as basic as the approximate number of weapons systems on it. You also claim that knowledge of fan-made calculations that have no grounding in canon and are for balance purposes. Provide links that adequately support your claims, or I'll just take it as you pulling facts from nowhere because they're your favourite ships and you're just being an unreasonable fanboy.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

sasquatch668 In reply to TheMonkeysUnkle [2019-05-11 19:37:22 +0000 UTC]

The executor was not a fleet killer. It needed star destroyers to compliment it. Also I find your attitude rather hilarious as you try to call me out on facts which I have taken directly from The New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels as well as the Dark Empire trilogy. Ironically you are using Wookieepedia as your only source which Wikipedia can be edited by anyone as well as have information thst is not accurate. Also come up with better logic than callong people fanboys when you are one in some shape or form. So pot meet kettle. Also the executor had weaker shielding and lets not forget it was taken out by an A wing whilst being battered by the rebel fleet. And it possessedno firepower to annihilate a fleet by itself. The eclipse did due to its compliment of fighters. Also the amount of guns on the ship doesn't mean a damn thing. The axial superlaser could be fired many times over. And where did I say I didn't know the approximate number of weapons it had? Probably due to the fact it don't fuckin matter. It had a superlaser. Also you really must not be much of a star wars fan to know turbolasers batteries can be different sizes and boast different amounts of power. But the fact is you keep comparing apple's to oranges. Suggest you try buying the Dark empire trilogy and the essential guide I referenced before further debating.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0