star wars - Why would a slug thrower be more effective against a lightsaber/Jedi than a blaster?

From this question about gunpowder in the Star Wars universe it is quoted that the shot from a slug thrower is not completely deflectable by a lightsaber. This seems to be listed as an advantage (over blasters) against lightsabers and Jedi.

For example, during the days of the Galactic Republic, mercenaries fearing an intervention by Jedi Knights used rapid-fire slugthrowers that were impossible to completely deflect, unlike blaster bolts.

This doesn't make much sense though. A slug, while maybe not as deflectable should be just as ineffective against a lightsaber as a blaster shot is, due to the nature of a lightsaber blade. That is, a blade made of plasma should simply vaporize the slug, should the slug manage to penetrate the containment field.

The weapon consisted of a blade of pure plasma emitted from the hilt and suspended in a force containment field. The field contained the immense heat of the plasma, protecting the wielder, and allowed the blade to keep its shape.

While a slug would seem to be more accurate than a blaster bolt (at least when used by a skilled marksman), I can't imagine that the slug would be faster than a bolt. Or if it is faster I wouldn't imagine it would be so fast that a Jedi would be unable to react with enough speed to block it, either with their saber or with the force. So what is the implied advantage of a slug thrower, versus a blaster, when used against a Jedi?

Answer

The real reason Slugs > Blasters against Jedi is really more straightforward than you'd think.

1. Blaster bolts can be reflected, slugs will be burned up by the blade. This removes a significant counterattack from the Jedi.


2. Slug-throwing weapons have a higher rate of fire. Jedi might seem impervious in the movies, but anyone can make a mistake. More projectiles = greater odds. Additionally, as others have pointed out, the higher rate of fire means more difficulty deflecting them.


3. Slugs probably travel much faster than blaster bolts. While there is some controversy about the exact speeds of blaster bolts, based on a visual summary of the films it is clear that they travel much slower than even the slowest bullets on earth do. Speed counts against Jedi.


4. Slugs are more difficult to see. While perhaps not always a total win against Jedi, less visibility is always an advantage.

Some additional notes. Why not always use slug weapons? Well, they have some drawbacks. For example, it is easier to shield against them. There exists various exotic metals in the SW universe like Durasteel. Durasteel is really only vulnerable to extremes of temperature like the blades of lightsabers and the bolts of blasters. The kinetic forces of slug weapons are simply not enough to do damage to it, even if the slugs are also made of Durasteel, they will simply bounce off. Slugs need to get very large before they can damage someone wearing Durasteel armor, and even then that damage would probably be concussive, not penetrative.

Jedi don't wear Durasteel, because it is heavy and would slow them down, and would offer little protection against their normal adversary, other lightsaber wielding foes.

Not only are they easy to shield against, they require non-compressible and heavy ammunition. Blasters work on energy and gas. In the SW universe both gas compression and energy storage are much more advanced than here on earth. This means that slug weapons are expensive to use on large scales, and require parts that need to be manufactured elsewhere rather than refilled on the planet they are being used on.

Consider the supply chain requirements for interplanetary war if you need to ship bullets between star systems? Forget about large shells.

Lastly, while less accurate, blasters also are easier to use and train in the use of. Slugthrowers are ballistic and therefore have drop-off at long ranges, are affected more by wind, and generally require more skill to use.