Page 1 of 2
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:45 pm
by kham
HereA few new tidbits, at least have a reason why she got picked for this operation. A little more flash of Vader, but I get the sense he not doing much there but listening to more demagogues prattle on about their technological terrors....
At least looks like get some actual REAL battle stuff, and why the X-Wing still the baddest starfighter there is

Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 6:14 pm
by Mynock
There's one thing that drives me nuts here--we were discussing at work and somebody pointed it out........At the end of Episode III we see Death Star I well into construction, but it's just now being completed right before Episode IV.....18 years later? Wonder if that will get explained.
Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 6:43 pm
by Duncan Edwards
Mynock wrote:There's one thing that drives me nuts here--we were discussing at work and somebody pointed it out........At the end of Episode III we see Death Star I well into construction, but it's just now being completed right before Episode IV.....18 years later? Wonder if that will get explained.
It's a big ass Death Star. Some of the parts got lost in shipment from China.
Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:28 pm
by Mynock
Kind of hard to say. They don't really mention or show ship construction as canon. In some of the novels Star Destroyers come out of Kuat Drive Yards like Chevy's off an assembly line.
Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:30 pm
by kham
The story has been changed so many times, and with the lens flare douchebag film removing the EU to "Legends" that pretty much erases the board. One of the original explanations was that initial framework was easy, but the actual ENGINEERING involved in completing the Battle Station, and integrating the propulsion and reactor , were a little trickier. It is , after all a hyperspace-capable starship 120km in diameter. That delays and prototyping would be a hassle, would not surprise me. And just leaving at that, would be fine.
Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:38 pm
by Villein
Ben, you magnificent bastard, here's hoping you die a little better than "let off some steam, Bennett!"
This looks like what I sort of wanted The Force Awakens to be in style, so here's hoping they can postphone the end of the world at least until mid-to-late January.
And as for the Death Star's building?
Since when has a contractor or subcontractor bullshitted its client on completion dates?
Even in a fictional Flash Gordon universe with drag racing and space samurai I suspect it still takes place.
Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 10:31 pm
by H8ms2014
Mynock wrote:There's one thing that drives me nuts here--we were discussing at work and somebody pointed it out........At the end of Episode III we see Death Star I well into construction, but it's just now being completed right before Episode IV.....18 years later? Wonder if that will get explained.
DeathStar Mk1 may be the Imperial equivelent of and LCS?

Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 10:46 pm
by kham
No
The Death Star actually was a functioning weapons system
Having a weakness that could only be exploited by a Jedi , when there ARE no Jedi, was not something that could intelligently forseen. And even then, they only eluded destruction by about 3 seconds with the help of a guy who had to be talked into it
Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2016 12:37 am
by kham
Couple more shots
Re: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Trailer #2
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2016 5:29 pm
by Mynock
kham wrote:The story has been changed so many times, and with the lens flare douchebag film removing the EU to "Legends" that pretty much erases the board. One of the original explanations was that initial framework was easy, but the actual ENGINEERING involved in completing the Battle Station, and integrating the propulsion and reactor , were a little trickier. It is , after all a hyperspace-capable starship 120km in diameter. That delays and prototyping would be a hassle, would not surprise me. And just leaving at that, would be fine.
That is a good point, if the first one was a prototype and they were designing as they built it would take longer. Would also explain why the second one could be 3/4 done 4 years later (or maybe they started on Mk II while they were still building the first one).