Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
It definitely needs shrinking or indeed removing entirely because it really it just feels more like dissing/complaining about Saxton. (Even on your revised version I'm not sure The Vs Debate needs mention? I'm not sure Saxton was even much of a participant though he does thank people that were)
There's certainly room to mention the controversy around ICS but I'm not sure it's even this trope.
All right, here's a second draft.
- The Incredible Cross-Sections reference books for the Star Wars prequel trilogy, written by physicist Dr. Curtis Saxton, became quite controversial for giving energy numbers that to some readers appeared to significantly inflated compared to the film special effects: for example, maximum yields of 200 gigatons on the turbolasers of Acclamator-class troop transports (Attack of the Clones) and 10 teratons for Venator-class star destroyers (Revenge of the Sith); the latter number is about 10% of the estimated yield of the Chicxulub meteorite impact. Saxton has shown where his calculations came from: primarily the Death Star's destruction of Alderaan, the concept of Base Delta Zero from West End Games' Imperial Sourcebook, and shots from The Empire Strikes Back of star destroyers blowing up asteroids said to be nickel-iron in Alan Dean Foster's novelization; however, other debaters such as Gary Sarli have questioned some of his underlying assumptions. The whole thing was ultimately rendered moot after Legends was decanonized, with the efficacy of Orbital Bombardment in particular dramatically scaled down in Disney canon reference books.
^Cool. I'll leave this up for a few hours before implementing to give other people time to contribute.
Trust me, I'm an engineer!I honestly do think the connection to the Trek vs Wars debates needs mention - from what I've read Saxton's involvement with it is very unclear in a way that's seriously poisoned the well surrounding his contributions to Star Wars (old) canon. I know this isn't an Overshadowed by Controversy example or anything, but I definitely think it's an aspect that people bring into his numbers.
Edited by nrjxll^I wouldn't go that far. Sci-Fi Writers Have No Sense of Scale is considered a trope and therefore can be Played With, and we do have the concept of Enforced Trope for situations where external factors led to the inclusion of a trope.
Third draft taking that into account:
- The Incredible Cross-Sections reference books for the Star Wars prequel trilogy, written by physicist Dr. Curtis Saxton, became quite controversial for giving energy numbers that to some readers appeared to significantly inflated compared to the film special effects: for example, maximum yields of 200 gigatons on the turbolasers of Acclamator-class troop transports (Attack of the Clones) and 10 teratons for Venator-class star destroyers (Revenge of the Sith); for reference, the latter number is about 10% of the estimated yield of the Chicxulub meteorite impact
. Saxton has shown where his calculations came from;note however, other debaters such as Gary Sarli have questioned some of his underlying assumptions (e.g. whether "Base Delta Zero" involves glassing an entire planet For the Evulz or just destroying mission-critical population centers). Due to his author's notes thanking various members of online "versus debating" communities, Saxton has also been accused of deliberately inflating his numbers to "win" arguments over whether Star Wars factions would beat Star Trek factions in a war.
- The Incredible Cross-Sections reference books for the Star Wars prequel trilogy, written by physicist Dr. Curtis Saxton, became quite controversial for giving energy numbers that to some readers appeared to significantly inflated compared to the film special effects: for example, maximum yields of 200 gigatons on the turbolasers of Acclamator-class troop transports (Attack of the Clones) and 10 teratons for Venator-class star destroyers (Revenge of the Sith); for reference, the latter number is about 10% of the estimated yield of the Chicxulub meteorite impact
Since it's been a couple days without further input, I've uploaded draft #3 to the page. Thanks, y'all.
Trust me, I'm an engineer!

Half the Literature folder on SciFiWritersHave.No Sense Of Energy is currently comprised of a nattery, Example Indentation-noncompliant Wall of Text about the Incredible Cross-Sections firepower numbers controversy in Star Wars Legends (which admittedly I contributed to over a decade ago when I was young and stupid).
Fixing it would be a major change that I think probably could use some extra sets of eyes, but couldn't find a good cleanup thread for this to go in, so I figured I'd come here.
Third draft:
- The Incredible Cross-Sections reference books for the Star Wars prequel trilogy, written by physicist Dr. Curtis Saxton, became quite controversial for giving energy numbers that to some readers appeared to significantly inflated compared to the film special effects: for example, maximum yields of 200 gigatons on the turbolasers of Acclamator-class troop transports (Attack of the Clones) and 10 teratons for Venator-class star destroyers (Revenge of the Sith); for reference, the latter number is about 10% of the estimated yield of the Chicxulub meteorite impact
. Saxton has shown where his calculations came from;note however, other debaters such as Gary Sarli have questioned some of his underlying assumptions.note Due to his author's notes thanking various members of online "versus debating" communities, Saxton has also been accused of deliberately inflating his numbers to "win" arguments over whether Star Wars factions would beat Star Trek factions in a war.
Edited by StarSword