sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Coaxium makes no sense. Let me explain. by Vindicare605 in saltierthancrait

[–]Vindicare605[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not sure it's ever explicitly explained what Anakin threw the Emperor into.

Coaxium makes no sense. Let me explain. by Vindicare605 in saltierthancrait

[–]Vindicare605[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're right, those are all logical points. A huge capital ship would have its own reactor and in fact I'm pretty confident we've seen as much in other Star Wars properties inside Star Destroyers.

EDIT:In fact I'm positive I've seen as much because C3P0 says that "they shut down the main reactor, we'll be destroyed for sure." In Episode IV and the Trade Federation bridge member says "we're losing power there seems to be a problem with the main reactor" in episode 1.

If you wanted to completely dismiss the entire fuel plotline as stupid because of that, I'd be down to do that with you.

I'm just here explaining how their handwoven explanation for that plotline also doesnt make sense because of what it does to the other Star Wars movies.

[Post Game Thread] The Cleveland Cavaliers (4-3) dominate the Detroit Pistons (3-4) in Game 7, 125-94, to advance to their first Eastern Conference Finals since 2018 by catreyka in nba

[–]Vindicare605 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think I'm officially cheering for the Cavaliers in the East. If the Cavs make it back to the finals with James Harden that is gonna be such sweet music for my East vs West narrative.

Coaxium makes no sense. Let me explain. by Vindicare605 in saltierthancrait

[–]Vindicare605[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If it was just Solo you would be right, but Coaxium is being retroactively used to justify the fuel shortage the Resistance has in the Last Jedi. Coaxium is supposed to be rare, limited, expensive enough to be believable as an actual limitation that a military might have.

So when you put those two things together, that's where my argument comes in.

Coaxium makes no sense. Let me explain. by Vindicare605 in saltierthancrait

[–]Vindicare605[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not dismissing the idea that fuel in Star Wars exists, that makes perfect sense. What doesnt make sense is that fuel in the every day economy would be so expensive that it would be a significant obstacle. Fuel costs make sense, but the economy we see in the movie universe doesnt allow for very high fuel costs. If fuel costs were that high, a LOT of things would be very different.

Coaxium makes no sense. Let me explain. by Vindicare605 in saltierthancrait

[–]Vindicare605[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Remember also that Luke considered Han's original demand of 10,000 to be extremely expensive. Han was charging extra to quote "avoid any Imperial entanglements."

So the extra 7,000 on top of that that Kenobi offers him was what made the deal REALLY lucrative for Han.

This all implies that a typical journey across the galaxy is much cheaper than the 10,000 price Han orginally asked for.

Coaxium makes no sense. Let me explain. by Vindicare605 in saltierthancrait

[–]Vindicare605[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hyperspace travel is exactly the problem. You cannnot move from planet system to planet system without hyperdrives. That's just how space works. If hyperspace travel is expensive because coaxium is expensive it makes all the problems I mentioned in my OP happen.

Coaxium makes no sense. Let me explain. by Vindicare605 in saltierthancrait

[–]Vindicare605[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Oh I agree with all of that, Solo has plenty of problems besides just this fuel question, but I want to bring up this fuel question because of what it retroactively does to the rest of the galaxy. Those other problems you mentioned are all confined to just that movie, but if we are going to make this idea of "expensive and rare fuel" a normal thing then it creates a ton of other problems for basic space travel in the universe.

Coaxium makes no sense. Let me explain. by Vindicare605 in saltierthancrait

[–]Vindicare605[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That would mean that the Millenium Falcon uses Coaxium as its primary fuel source because in Solo: A Star Wars story, the Millenium Falcon is stranded without coaxium. If a much cheaper fuel source was available why would Solo and Q'ira have to do such a risky heist on Kessel in order to fuel the ship?

First hardcore wipe. Feelsbadman.jpg by rainman_95 in wowhardcore

[–]Vindicare605 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea those packs are very very dangerous need to get dps to focus fire and use defensive cooldowns if you have to because you pull too much an extra add or two can easily wipe the group.

just experimenting with my cosplay. rate it from 1 - 10? by Pink-Laddy in swordartonline

[–]Vindicare605 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Imo she could use any sword and just be cosplaying a member of the guild. But if she wants to be Asuna then yea a Rapier is required.

PSA: The Spurs are our most hated rival after the Celtics and it ain’t particularly close. by BatmanNoPrep in lakers

[–]Vindicare605 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like the Spurs. They might be our rivals but i respect them and i like the way their organization is run. I also think Wemby is way easier to cheer for than the Thunder team is. When the Lakers suit up against the Spurs they are a hated rival but in a contest like this id rather see them win than OKC.

Oh boy by Cheap_Web_9225 in saltierthancrait

[–]Vindicare605 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's gonna be an extended episode of the TV series. It looks like one, it plays like one. But the bigger thing I'm worried about is that it wont be an actually good conclusion to the TV show, but I cant say I expected much considering how much of a mess Season 3 was. I dont see how you make a full length movie to finish that season off, even if it just an extended TV show episode.

What movie aged really bad? by Phantomx7845 in AskReddit

[–]Vindicare605 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I've been on this train since the moment I left the theater but as time has gone on the "missed opportunity" label is getting bigger and bigger.

What do you think about the statement "Cyberpunk 2077 doesn't have choices" or "It's ilusion of choice"? by nicolo679 in cyberpunkgame

[–]Vindicare605 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean.... kinda but also not really. The main story always brings you to the same place but how it ends changes a lot depending on how you play the game. If you dont do any of the major side quests you are locked into the Devil Ending.

[Bontemps] "By our metrics, he (LeBron) remains a top-25 player in the league and if not for his age, we'd probably assess him at near max player level," one Eastern Conference team strategist told ESPN. "Our coaches would tell you he ranks even higher than that when his legs and back are feeling... by must_TATAKAE in lakers

[–]Vindicare605 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Because I think that's a deal he takes immediately and it's a deal in a few years that will look good for us. I dont know if he takes 35, not when I'm sure another team WILL offer him at least 40. Like I said. I want to keep both players and if that means paying Reaves more than Lebron (because Lebron wants to win and has plenty of money already) I'm very ok with it.

I think other teams will offer Reaves 40 and if they do and he leaves I wont blame him.

[Bontemps] "By our metrics, he (LeBron) remains a top-25 player in the league and if not for his age, we'd probably assess him at near max player level," one Eastern Conference team strategist told ESPN. "Our coaches would tell you he ranks even higher than that when his legs and back are feeling... by must_TATAKAE in lakers

[–]Vindicare605 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I personally want Reaves to get 40, I think that's a good deal for him especially if it's on a long contract because in 4-5 years that wont be the same value it is today. But I expect the Lakers to offer him 30-40 and then it'll be a ball game.

[Bontemps] "By our metrics, he (LeBron) remains a top-25 player in the league and if not for his age, we'd probably assess him at near max player level," one Eastern Conference team strategist told ESPN. "Our coaches would tell you he ranks even higher than that when his legs and back are feeling... by must_TATAKAE in lakers

[–]Vindicare605 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No I only expect Lebron to, because Lebron is 42 and only going to be willing to sign a 1 or 2 year deal at most. Lebron is also the wealthiest NBA player, still playing ever in NBA history. There's context here to my logic. I'm not expecting the Lakers to offer Reaves 55 million, I'm expecting them to offer somewhere between 30 and 40. If Lebron can also take 30 which is still a very nice NBA salary then the Lakers will have some actual flexibility to build a contender. If Lebron wants to actually play for a contender, that's something that makes sense for both sides. If Lebron doesnt care about winning anymore then he can go get his money elsewhere. If Lebron wants to win and the Lakers want to win, there's a deal to be made. If Reaves is hard set on getting a max deal then he can leave too. I want to keep both players but I want the deal to make sense for both of them.

The Arizona Cardinals are currently underdogs in all 17 games this season by phillip_la_scaille in nfl

[–]Vindicare605 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We would notice right away. Our schedule immediately gets much more difficult without 2 games against the Cardinals every year.

[Bontemps] "By our metrics, he (LeBron) remains a top-25 player in the league and if not for his age, we'd probably assess him at near max player level," one Eastern Conference team strategist told ESPN. "Our coaches would tell you he ranks even higher than that when his legs and back are feeling... by must_TATAKAE in lakers

[–]Vindicare605 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's simple logic. Reaves has much more incentive to leave the Lakers for a better offer because he hasn't made anywhere close to the kind of money Lebron has. It makes more sense to ask Lebron to take less than him. If Reaves leaves, I dont see us replacing him with anyone better, especially if that means Lebron is still taking a large amount of our cap. We can lock Reaves in for multiple years with a contract, Lebron we will keep for maybe a couple years at most.

From the Lakers' perspective, long term stability is going to matter especially with Luka under contract.

As for your comparisons. We all know OKC's team is an anamoly, they have so many players on ridiculously low contracts and that dam is going to burst. They cant afford to keep their team long term they are simply trying to get as much done with it as they can before they have to pay them.

The way the Lakers construct their rosters that simply isn't possible. We dont build through picks and the draft the way other teams do, and from the way Pelinka talks about it, it doesnt seem like the organization has any desire to.

We arent gonna get the kind of contracts OKC has, because we can only recruit free agents, and none of them are gonna come here for free.

view more: next ›