Contents 1 Inaccurate 2 New Picture? 3 Overheating contradiction 4 Missing Information 5 Recoil?

InaccurateEdit

Isn't it interesting, that the E11, the standard weapon of stormtroopers, is inaccurate? Doesn't Obi-Wan say in AnH, that "only imperial stormtroopers are so precise"? Is Obi-Wan just an senile hermit, or did he just never play Dark Forces? Another quote from Obi-Wan is, that lightsabers are more precise than blasters. Maybe he totally mixed this up. He propably wanted to say: "Only Imperial Stormtroopers are so inaccurate." and "An elegant weapon, not as precise as a blaster."--TeakHoken84.173.16.160 22:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• An experienced Jedi Master mixing words? I don't think so. And game mechanics are something entirely separate. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 23:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • What source says they're inaccurate anyway? Compared to what? This isn't that easily refuted speculative stormtrooper effect explanation again, is it?Vymer 05:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, I think it is. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 11:18, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • In that case, I'll remove the "somewhat inaccurate" claim pending source verification, if any. The link to "stormtrooper effect" as well. Vymer 08:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Good idea. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 13:34, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Or this way. OK for me. But still why does Obi-Wan mean that blasters are not precise? Doesn't he remember himself shooting Grievous precisely into his vital organs?--TeakHoken84.173.66.9 01:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
        • This could very well come down to POV. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 19:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
  • It's all releative. They're "clumsy and random" by comparison to a lightsabre is what I take it to mean.Vymer 08:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, Obi-Wan was experienced with a lightsaber anyway. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 22:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

New Picture? Edit

The one from Dark Forces is kinda old and grainy... anyone have either JKJA or JO? There's a better picture of the E-11 there. Jorrel Fraajic 18:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

• The reason I think it's grainy is because there was originally a background. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 20:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I figured that was the reason, but since we have newer sources (JKJO or JA for example), I thought someone would be able to upload a new, better-looking picture. Jorrel Fraajic 03:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, providing we could get it from the user's point-of-view, I wouldn't mind. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 12:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Yes, that's what I meant. I'd do it, but I can't find my JK disk anywhere. Jorrel Fraajic 16:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
        • Hmm. I'm sure someone else has it. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 20:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Overheating contradictionEdit

Is it the E-11 or the E-11b that has overheating problems? This article says, "The E-11b was capable of higher rates of fire, but was prone to overheating". Yet the E-11b article says, "the Blastech E-11b's main changes were the addition of expensive cooling units, making these weapons less likely to overheat at higher fire rates, and allowing them to be made fully automatic". So which is it? -- Reignfire 02:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Missing InformationEdit

First of all, what happened to range information? I know it exists in the Essential Guides. Off the top of my head it's 100m optimal range with a 300m maximum range. Without range information on a weapon article when it's readily available, this article is totally incomplete. Secondly, what happened to mentioning such minutia as the E-11 having a 0.25 cm bore. Source support for that I'm not sure about but I remember it being in the article before, if anyone can check on that. —Unsigned comment by 24.158.232.19 (talk • contribs).

• My mistake, I just noticed the maximum range info in the sidebar there. —Unsigned comment by 24.158.232.19 (talk • contribs).

Recoil?Edit

I'm just wondering how it's possible for a blaster to recoil. I understand a slugthrower having recoil, but how can a blaster recoil if there is no projectile or propellant? Just wondering if anyone knows of a canonical explanation for this. Amaran Apprentice 17:12, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

As I see it, not having recoil's a violation of Newtonian Physics, assuming this even applies in the first place. Energy has to be imparted to the bolt in order to propel it at the target, and there must be an equal and opposite reaction to this action.--Raven's wing 22:21, February 25, 2011 (UTC)