Pitiful main weapon. (possible epilogue spoilers)

[Mister Oragahn]

With a model as complex as the Destiny you can’t just add another layer, you should know that since you have also done vis-FX.

Another layer of what? Cream? Fruits? Sauce?
You're talking nonsense, you know that?

If you don’t render it in frame you won’t get the shadow or glow against the ship and the weapon will look like it’s not from Destiny.

That's why people invented compositing and rendering effects if you're not fan of compositing. You can pretty have much any super glow wizzbang even after the lighting has been computed and you don't need any complex lighting. You have the equivalent of a neon that shines instead of a blob and the level of detail is not going to make a difference. Not to say that you don't need to cast light as if the beam was a neon, you can already settle on a distant omnidirectional light source of great magnitude and it will work wonders. Try it one day.

Taking away from that the ships in Star Trek are meant to be the protectors of the universe, same in star wars. These people are meant to look epic because it goes with the show, for Destiny with its limited power and life support systems failing isn’t just going to pull out some “big, honkin’ space gun.” It would go against the feel of the show

No. Just... no. That is such a silly argument.
That's a bad non sequitur you have here.
There's no reason why a rusty ship can't have nice weapons. It actually is meant to have some. They wouldn't put a big main gun that slowly and ominously comes down from its hidden slot if it weren't to show the audience that this big momma is serious business.
You know, even looking at a Bradley firing is far more impressive and pleasing, and yet it's a god damn tank from the last century.
Not to say that your logic completely fails to explain the whole rest of Stargate's ship weapon effects that suffer the same issues.

All right, now people should look at this SG:U
This battle makes your links look, well dated and weak. Also I think this music does make the weapons seem more powerful without adding any time to the production. Maybe a cheaper and better way to give people the kick they want without compromising the schedule of the show.

This space battle is exactly what I'm speaking of. It's just so flat, insipid, average. See 0:34, the guns look like crap : seriously, mere tubes and nothing else? No recoil, no details on it, and the firing and the projectiles look just as tepid. I even managed to pause when the second projectile is fired and it's the same uninspiring snort-coloured blur.
It's also the enemy ships having to come suicidally close to Destiny, making strafing runs 100 meters away from the hull, firing the same annoying pulses of energized-yawn. Seems firing off-axis, or using missiles or actually firing something like a beam that looks powerful, or a rain of projectiles that look nasty is a concept just too alien to these guys.
That's why it looks crap. Because it is. That's why every time TPTB were saying "and we're also doing a huge space battle" I knew there was nothing worth it that would put you at the edge of your seat. It's a joke how miserable space battles look.

let me show you some space battles
The Spacebattles.com Collection - Part 1

The Spacebattles.com Collection - Part 2

ok these are created by fans in the 90s on computers with 16 Video Ram ( i think ) , even my lappy is many times that now so the studios today can make much better , end of the story .

And now judging from the size of the blast in the door , it can't be stronger the 5-6 times the weapons of a deathglider

Bravo. You actually managed to post some space battles that are a million times worse than what Crias is basing his opinion on.
Unless you're trolling, I don't get what you're trying to show here with those low quality and badly scripted sequences. We're talking about a TV show level of production here, not something cobbled by a fan in his basement on an C64.

[webxro]

Bravo. You actually managed to post some space battles that are a million times worse than what Crias is basing his opinion on.
Unless you're trolling, I don't get what you're trying to show here with those low quality and badly scripted sequences. We're talking about a TV show level of production here, not something cobbled by a fan in his basement on an C64.

They are very worse , but that's the idea , they where made in the same time as the first stargate movie , computers have evolved many times since , the professional studios would be able to make things a billion times better

[Ouroboros]

This space battle is exactly what I'm speaking of. It's just so flat, insipid, average. See 0:34, the guns look like crap : seriously, mere tubes and nothing else? No recoil, no details on it, and the firing and the projectiles look just as tepid. I even managed to pause when the second projectile is fired and it's the same uninspiring snort-coloured blur.
It's also the enemy ships having to come suicidally close to Destiny, making strafing runs 100 meters away from the hull, firing the same annoying pulses of energized-yawn. Seems firing off-axis, or using missiles or actually firing something like a beam that looks powerful, or a rain of projectiles that look nasty is a concept just too alien to these guys.
That's why it looks crap. Because it is. That's why every time TPTB were saying "and we're also doing a huge space battle" I knew there was nothing worth it that would put you at the edge of your seat. It's a joke how miserable space battles look.

Here is something I find especially annoying. Annoying and curious and this battle shows it off perfectly with those guns you talked about.

Ok, the average American viewer has been watching action movies for years. The average person has probably seen dozens or hundreds of scenes in which someone was shot with a gun. I'd be willing to bet that even people who don't like action movies and go out of their way to avoid scenes of people getting shot are still conceptually familiar enough with the idea of a loud bang and flash followed by a bleeding hole appearing in the guy on the receiving end.

People are used to the notion that bullets travel so fast they're invisible.

As such you can create scenes where people shoot at each other with guns and NOT repeat NOT feel the need to add stupid little red streaks or whatever to tell the audience that the characters are in fact shooting at each other.

Ok so why can't that apply to space battles. Why not this one here. That thing on destiny LOOKs like a gun. If you show a picture of it to just about anyone and ask them what it looks like they're going to tell you "yeah that's a gun".

So if it looks like a gun, and audiences are used to how guns work thanks to seeing people get shot on TV for years, why can't it shoot like a gun? Why can't it produce a muzzle flash followed by an explosion on the enemy ship maybe a frame or two later? Why does it have to be a slow moving orange blob? Guns don't need slow moving orange blobs when they're shot at things by Scott and Greer, and since I can say with 100% confidence that anyone who sees that weapon will think of it as a gun, why can't it act like every other gun on the show?

I had this problem with Battlestar Galactica as well. It was like some deranged idiot started finger painting on the masterpiece that was that show's visual effects.

[Crias]

Well because that would make really boring tv. Just ships exploding would seem a little odd and all the advances we’ve made in animation (such as star wars) would be pointless. If we all know that there is no sound in space why would we put sounds on the guns? There are some things that we are allowed to take a little creative licence and add some Toronto magic to

[Mister Oragahn]

Well because that would make really boring tv.

No it wouldn't. This "boring TV" argument is so tiring and baseless. It's incredibly stupid, and completely misses the point that I'm providing facts and reasons as to what would make those battles more interesting and spectacular to watch.

The clips I provided of BSY would rather tell the contrary.
You could also watch the battles of BSG and see how they almost look like paintings.

It's very important for people reading this to understand that there's absolutely no substance to your claim.

I can claim that the lack of pink vampiric space elephants makes for boring TV. It's just as random and baseless as what you're claiming.

Just ships exploding would seem a little odd and all the advances we’ve made in animation (such as star wars) would be pointless.

Who talked of "ships just exploding" pray tell?
It's like you didn't even read any of the posts typed before you replied.

If we all know that there is no sound in space why would we put sounds on the guns? There are some things that we are allowed to take a little creative licence and add some Toronto magic to

Taking liberties has just nothing to do with the point, or at least not the way you present it. If anything, they don't take enough liberties (within acceptable margins) : they rather merely fall for the generic glowing plasma bolt and even them fail to be impressive.
They just look like silly stretched pixels on the screen.

Besides, having massive tubes of super energized particles or visible lasers is just as "unrealistic", unless you try to rationalize why the plasma is contained in a tube and why those lasers actually bleed off visible particles (all thanks to high tech). But it doesn't matter.

[Mister Oragahn]

I had this problem with Battlestar Galactica as well. It was like some deranged idiot started finger painting on the masterpiece that was that show's visual effects.

I think the battles of BSG are probably some of the most beautiful you can find in current SF. There's plenty of stuff flying, missiles, dumb projectiles and starfighters strafing massive warships.
The ships themselves, being akin to beached whales, exchanging salvos upon salvos of missiles and unguided explosive projectiles blowing up by the hundred against the adversary's hulls, all in some form of low tech setting. There's not much problem with their styles, since the spirit is to have something like huge drifting fortresses that can appear out of nowhere dish out anything they have against another drifting fortress. This style wouldn't fit all types of show, of course, but it works for BSG. For example, it would certainly not have its place in Star Trek. It would work better in Star Wars, if you remove all the advanced tech. But in BSG, everything from the Galactica's point defense gatlings to the turrets or Basestars' missile launches look nice, and the explosions and impacts are really made to look like something big is going on.
The final battle on the Cylon Colony was pure raw, with those turrets firing like crazy while railguns were making the old Battlestar jerk in her death throes. Finally, the nukes owned all this and it was time to pull the curtain.

Just an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_xFQ9ANVJ0

SGU's mid season space battles were just feeling so weak in comparison. It's really sad because the show made an effort to provide CGI enhanced sceneries, which is quite an obvious thing to do in a show called Stargate, and yet we had to wait that long to finally get there, and the ships themselves are truly beautiful. Seeing the Destiny and a seed ship fly side by side and race through stars was awesome. A pity they just can't sustain this level of awesomeness with proper action. Someone needs a McTiernan or Bruckheimer of space battles.

[garhkal]

The only issue i had with BSG, was if they were so strapped for ammo as they always seemed to be, why were those batteries firing so much??

[Mister Oragahn]

They needed ammo while on the run so they stopped at Anchorage, but after that the civilian fleet helped them get their bullets, missiles and shells. But it wasn't an easy thing. For instance, the point defense gatlings were rarely used at all. They favored the DCA curtains and tried to protect their birds as much as possible.
The turrets also were the only weapons Galactica had to fire shells at the Basestars.

[Ouroboros]

I think the battles of BSG are probably some of the most beautiful you can find in current SF.

Oh I agree, the space battles in BSG are the standard by which to measure all other TV space battles. My only issue with them (other than the ranges) is how they decided to make the primary weapon batteries of Battlestars shoot fireflies. You can see it in this video at :36 and especially with the Pegasus' forward batteries at 1:15.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVu0m...eature=related

It forces you to make up some bull**** about rocket assisted shells just to explain what you're seeing in what is otherwise a show that strives for a much higher standard of realism. Now granted it would be pretty awesome if the shells were in fact rocket assisted. I know that's what I'd do if I had access to Tyllium fuel. Rocket assisted huge bore shells packed full of the stuff = who needs railguns. I don't think anything in the show or misc tech manuals mentions that they are though, so we're just left with weird looking effects.

The smoke trails from the missiles or the smaller tracers from the point defense guns are fine and sensible though. That's a situation where tracers actually make sense. Well maybe not if you have computerized fire control like the Pegasus probably did, but even then it's not exactly bad as a "just in case" type backup when fighting enemies notorious for messing with computer systems.

[morrismike]

Here is something I find especially annoying. Annoying and curious and this battle shows it off perfectly with those guns you talked about.

Ok, the average American viewer has been watching action movies for years. The average person has probably seen dozens or hundreds of scenes in which someone was shot with a gun. I'd be willing to bet that even people who don't like action movies and go out of their way to avoid scenes of people getting shot are still conceptually familiar enough with the idea of a loud bang and flash followed by a bleeding hole appearing in the guy on the receiving end.

People are used to the notion that bullets travel so fast they're invisible.

As such you can create scenes where people shoot at each other with guns and NOT repeat NOT feel the need to add stupid little red streaks or whatever to tell the audience that the characters are in fact shooting at each other.

Ok so why can't that apply to space battles. Why not this one here. That thing on destiny LOOKs like a gun. If you show a picture of it to just about anyone and ask them what it looks like they're going to tell you "yeah that's a gun".

So if it looks like a gun, and audiences are used to how guns work thanks to seeing people get shot on TV for years, why can't it shoot like a gun? Why can't it produce a muzzle flash followed by an explosion on the enemy ship maybe a frame or two later? Why does it have to be a slow moving orange blob? Guns don't need slow moving orange blobs when they're shot at things by Scott and Greer, and since I can say with 100% confidence that anyone who sees that weapon will think of it as a gun, why can't it act like every other gun on the show?

I had this problem with Battlestar Galactica as well. It was like some deranged idiot started finger painting on the masterpiece that was that show's visual effects.

Most folks watching scifi aren't intelligent enough to realize you would see very little (and hear nothing) in a space battle. Of the intelligent ones, very few would realize that a plasma beam discharge would require converting a one ton slug of material into plasma. It's like they think that 10' diameter 10 second duration (and 5 mile long) beam only requires energy.

[RafK2]

Dramatic effect. Lets be honest here, a real space battle would be from Far beyond visual range (BVR), measured in the hundreds if not thousands or more miles. if they used lasers chances are they wouldnt be in the visible spectrum and effectively you would just see a hole appear in a ship that would spurt a bit of atmosphere and maybe if it hit the right type of object within explode... soundlesly. in other words....dull! far cooler for two ships to heave to next to each other and give each other a broadside.

[ggf31416]

That is what I call main weapons http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-48ewmvPE6c

[RafK2]

yeah baby

[cor]

Dramatic effect. Lets be honest here, a real space battle would be from Far beyond visual range (BVR), measured in the hundreds if not thousands or more miles. if they used lasers chances are they wouldnt be in the visible spectrum and effectively you would just see a hole appear in a ship that would spurt a bit of atmosphere and maybe if it hit the right type of object within explode... soundlesly. in other words....dull! far cooler for two ships to heave to next to each other and give each other a broadside.

Doesn't sound dull to me. in fact "for two ships to heave to next to each other and give each other a broadside" is rather dull to me, like watching a 17th century naval battle. now we know that there are plenty of shows that cater to you, but what about the people who want to watch something with the question 'what would it look like if this tech really existed?' .. there is really nothing out there being true to the science.

[Onealwasoverrated]

It is quite possible that daisy cutters or bunker busters wouldn't scratch the paint on the door.

I can buy that. The hole is relatively small from the 60% blast but if you want an effective ship to ship weapon going for a large surface area blast is not the way to do it. Large surface area would be great for destroying large urban areas and inflicting casualties but pretty terrible at ship to ship combat because they would lack penetration. A 60% blast from a small surface area high concentration weapon like a ship to ship cannon would probably look exactly like that blast hole or at least similar in size. A stronger blast would also likely yeild too much penetration and result in a possible collapse as it was written.

Ha'tak bombardments are not intended to inflict casualties, merely inflict fear and convince the population that the goa'uld are gods. They likely fire almost blanks at the planets surface to shake things up before they go down to claim their new subjects. As is stated early on most goa'uld weapons are ment to scare not to kill.

[RafK2]

Shock and awe baby shock and awe.

I think the producers of the show seem to be quite well researched but definetly give a leaning to dramatic effect. but certainly a race like the goa'uld, who lets face it seem to be somewhat unchallenged in there dominance of there section of the galaxy up to SG1 eras tactics seem to be more leaning towards shock and awe then genuine tactical or strategic advantage.

Any conflict you have would have a strategic objective eg what you want at the end of it and a tactical objective which is roughly speaking how you get to your strategic objective. The Goa'uld wouldn't really want to destroy the population of a planet just subdue it and spend a few generations exerting there dominance, therefore they would use some glorious pyrotechics but not really want to significantly depopulate it. thats why they seem to use relatively low level weaponry compared to what is available in the SG cannon

[Gormagon]

Ok. theKillman has some interesting theories that are almost perfect for explaining just about all the major SG technologies. Shields, Weapons, Naquadah, Trinium and more are all explained by it. The article is still under construction.

http://gwvf.wikia.com/wiki/Kiron_Theory

[morrismike]

Ok. theKillman has some interesting theories that are almost perfect for explaining just about all the major SG technologies. Shields, Weapons, Naquadah, Trinium and more are all explained by it. The article is still under construction.

http://gwvf.wikia.com/wiki/Kiron_Theory

another attempt to backfit bad writing on the part of TPTW?

[Gormagon]

Yeah, but it is a really good attempt. I just retcon'ed things.

[SGSargon]

Ok. theKillman has some interesting theories that are almost perfect for explaining just about all the major SG technologies. Shields, Weapons, Naquadah, Trinium and more are all explained by it. The article is still under construction.

http://gwvf.wikia.com/wiki/Kiron_Theory

Kirons were mentioned once in Small Victories and they were only related to Milky Way Replicator technology. How did it got from there to the main technologies in Stargate I can't understand.
Thor said

THOR
In simplest terms it is an energy particle.

The replicator blocks were said to contain 3 milion isolated kiron pathways. From what I know the only energy particle known, is the photon, and photons cannot form pathways or circuits. They're not stationary like matter. But Thor said in the simplest terms. So it's not an elementary particle, but something a bit more complex.
A quasiparticle. The most known quasiparticle is the phonon (with "n" not "t").
Definitions: A collective excitation in a periodic, elastic arrangement of atoms or molecules in condensed matter, such as solids and some liquids.
It represents an excited state in the quantum mechanical quantization of the modes of vibrations of elastic structures of interacting particles.
A phonon is a quantum mechanical description of a special type of vibrational motion, in which a lattice uniformly oscillates at the same frequency.........
.......Or in the simplest terms, an energy particle .
Quasiparticle physics is not as known as other domains, and since Carter is mostly active in astrophysics, she probably won't know more than minimum about it.
Replicator blocks are made of whatever metal the replicators come across, and since the phonons are nothing more that the collective quatizated mechanical vibrations in a solid cristalline structure, then it can be concluded that the kiron is nothing more than a phonon on steroids, a high energy mechanical vibration, and would also require a lot of energy, in order to exist, which would explain Replicator's affinity for energy, and why kinetic impacts kill them. And unlike photons, phonons interact with each other, and that's why the kiron pathways in the Replicator blocks are isolated.
As for the whole monopolar thing, Thor said:

THOR
Each individual building block is capable of exerting a reactive modulating monopolar energy field on other blocks allowing the replicators to assemble themselves into many forms

So the Replicator blocks are the one that are generating the monopolar energy field, not the kirons.
More on phonons.


As for why the main weapon did what it did to the bunker door, let's not forget that they only wanted to crack the door and not to blow up the city AND let's not forget that in Space when they started firing at the Nakai mothership, Eli said that they could risk blowing up the ship in they fired too much.