Talk: Malevolence/Legends

Article milestones Date Process Result May 23, 2009 Good article nomination Failure July 30, 2009 Failed Good article nominee
Current status: Failed Good article nominee

Class

This there any indication as to the class this thing belongs to, if any? Unit 8311 19:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• No. Grand Moff Tranner ^(Comlink) 19:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • We should mention it is based on the "rotor ship" concept art (Art of ROTS)JustinGann 17:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Any illustrations available? :) VT-16 21:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Online Comic

"In the online comic, a schematic of the Malevolence is shown, despite the fact that the ship has not left any survivors for its raids up to that point." Where? Are you talking about the credit's page that always begins with a photo of the corresponding issue? --76.102.231.78 17:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Rising Malevolence

• Can we presume that it appears in the episode "Rising malevolence" --Jinzler 14:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Pinnance

--96.228.52.202 23:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC) Guys, I think we found our mystery ship in republic commando.

• Doesn't look like anything seen there. Even the thing at the end seems like a Recusant destroyer. VT-16 21:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

That Quote

8,12,17

Is that a deliberate in-joke? 81.140.74.41 13:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Very much so. One of the authors has been vocal about technical discussions for fictional universes, so this is a milder form of ridicule. But it's actually funny. VT-16 13:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I thought so too, to be honest :) 81.140.74.41 23:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

How big is this thing?Looks the size of a SSD. Sith-venator 10:40PM 10-10-08

• Shadow of Malevolence shows it saturating several ships with turbolaser fire, that Venator looks at least 1/5 its length. It's above 5km, at least. VT-16 09:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  • According to the Decoded episode Rising Malevolence, the ship is 'five times' larger than a 'Jedi cruiser' (I assume that means a Venator). A knight shall come 17:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Why Not Coruscant?

Why the hell didn't the CIS target Coruscant? It would have caused ultimate corruption in throughout the Republic, automatically winning the war, right?--Darth shohet 23:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe they didn't think of it. Maybe they did [think of it] and figured they would lose. Maybe it would be difficult to reach a target so deep in enemy territory. Maybe Dooku and Sidious didn't want them to and therefore made sure they didn't think of it.

The above maybes aside, these sort of discussions aren't supposed to be held on talk pages. -MPK 00:53, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Shields???

How the hell could a couple torps blow throw the ships hull all the way to the ion core. Shields would've taken pretty much the whole volley, not to mention the massive armor/hull would've prevented the weapons from disabling the cannons.

Lame how the Separatists have been thrown on the dirt in this new kid clone wars show, a few bombers couldn't possibly dream of hurting a standard capital ship, much less something that is more than twice the size of your standard cap ship. The CIS deserves some more respect than this if you ask me, the Republic didn't win every freakin battle, take a look at Duros, they leveled that whole planet.

• It doesn't go through the shields, the gun firing necessitates the shields going down around the gun. That's how they can hit it in the first place. VT-16 16:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm a bit amused by this statement: "a few bombers couldn't possibly dream of hurting a standard capital ship, much less something that is more than twice the size of your standard cap ship." I suppose a few bombers also couldn't possibly dream of hurting a moon-sized battle station... The whole point of bombers in space combat in Star Wars seems to be to perform precision strikes against vulnerable areas. We see this in pretty much all of the movies, it shouldn't be a surprise to see it here. Doluk^Talk 20:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Doluk, I'd like to say that your analogy, in which you compare a strike against a standard capital ship (something very general and common) with the attack against the Death Star (which is a very specific case because of the exhaust port) is flawed because of the fundamental differences in the two situations. Your conclusion, however, is sound; bombers are designed to attack capital ships, therefore there is no reason to be surprised when the damage a capital ship. -MPK 22:22, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
      • VT-16, Can you tell me where you found the statement, that the shields must be dropped for firing the malevolence's ion cannon? I didn't find this information anywhere.--91.97.131.145 17:36, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

While we don't know if the Malevolence did need to shut down its shields we do have cases like the one in season 2 episode 16 where to launch tracking missiles Trenches ship had to shut down its shields and couldn't raise them back up fast enough. When the Malevolence was being attacked it was charging up. This is not definitive but it is likely that it to had to shut down shields before firing 84.50.59.124 17:37, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

How Many Guns??

I did the endless minutes of counting and math to find out how many guns were on the Malevolence. This is what I have come up with. Bridge=32 Middle=98 Top=204 Front=177 Total=611 double barrel turbolasers or 1,222 single barrel turbolasers.

• Shadow of Malevolence decoded episode says "500 turbo laser cannons". A knight shall come 21:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Designer

According to the latest "decoded" episode of The Clone Wars (Rising Malevolence episode), the Malevolence was designed by Ruggle Schmong. I've found no other references to this individual, it's likely he was invented for this Decoded episode. I would make a stub page for him, but I'm not sure how to source these Decoded episodes as they don't have their own articles.  ?? A knight shall come 17:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Gun Battery image

On the Malevolence page there used to be an image of her gun batteries, it was taken down can someone post me the link to find it or can someone put it back on the web page?—Unsigned comment by 84.50.59.124 (talk • contribs)

Ion cannons

I feel like calling the primary armament "dual" ion cannons is a bit misleading. Perhaps, "interconnected" or something similar could be used. Most users would assume that two dual cannons means a total of four cannons, two on each side. Just like the Millenium Falcon's Quad laser cannons means a group of four barrels in a single mounting, rather than four seperate laser cannons such as on the X-wing. I get that they may be part of the same system, but because their fire arcs are opposed instead of identical, I feel like that should be cleared up, if need be "one dual ion cannon capable of firing to one side or the other," perhaps. Just trying to clarify it for more casual readers who haven't seen any episodes where it's clearly a single cannon shot to one side or the other, not a pair. --23.115.50.0 14:57, March 18, 2014 (UTC)