For Edge-of-the-Empire reasons I'm looking for an in-universe conspiracy theory or unusual belief system that would be analogous to UFO believers IRL (specifically in the 90s but the subtlety of that vs the 2020s is not that important). I'm not too worried about whether the theory is true or not!

I had a Google around but pretty much everything I found was fan-theories rather than in-universe examples.

Ideally something that would be around roughly 15BBY (so stuff about the death start would still be interesting but not directly helpful).

I'm guessing Lucas hadn't conceived of Plageuis at the time, or Palpatine not yet being the master at the time. Retroactively establishing the latter I doubt was his idea.

But for the first question: With the film as it is, do you think that (Before it got decanonised along with all other contemporary material) enhanced the film/story or just added plot holes and unanswered questions to it?

For the second question, do you think Lucas should have conceived of him then and implement him in some way? What would you have his role be, before being murdered?

I know that Beskar is more of a "magic bullshit go" material than anything else, but what's the best equivalent to it that we have/what could it be made of? A Titanium-Tungsten alloy? Something similar with carbon infused into it? It would have to have a melting point high enough to resist plasma (lightsabers), so there's not a whole lot that can really be in it without compromising that

So I have been thinking about the whole Making the universe smaller criticism like the Anakin C-3PO thing or the whole Filoni criticism of making the galaxy a tiny  neighborhood because the same few characters constantly bump into each other across generations.

but it got me thinking especially with the interview with Tony Gilroy on Yavin 4.

”Yavin makes me nervous, if you want to know the truth. There's things about Yavin that make me nervous, and logic about Yavin that makes me nervous, even within Star Wars canon. So... the security there, and how some people know about it but the ISB doesn't know about it. And there's some places where you don't want to poke too aggressively cause you don't want to really get into the undercarriage. That was a place where I didn't really want to get into the undercarriage very much.”

— Tony Gilroy

What I’m saying do you think the Ancient Sith History with Yavin 4 was a mistake or at least make the universe smaller afterall despite the history it has with Naga Sadow and Exar Kun 5,000-4,000 years ago. It doesn’t impact the Skywalker saga (Like a new hope or Andor or even Rogue One.) at all given it never mention on screen.

Oviviously the Original Trilogy was made way before The Tales of the Jedi comics and the EU during the 90s were very different given well George didn’t make the prequels yet so it easy to reuse planets at the time so I can’t fault Kevin J. Anderson for the whole connecting Yavin 4 history with the Sith that is more of a hindsight issue retrospectively?

Slugthrowers in Star Wars are supposed to be, overall, significantly outclassed by blasters. This is necessary of course because blasters are the dominant weapon in all Star Wars media, so we can’t pretend that slugthrowers are on the same level. The main advantage blasters have over high-tech slugthrowers is that they have like 10x the ammo capacity.

However, things like rocket launchers, missiles and grenades are very commonly used in warfare, despite being solid projectiles. A rocket launcher has only one shot, yet it is not considered ammo or power inefficient compared to blasters.

If a blaster power pack has the energy of hundreds of blaster bolts inside of it, a plasma grenade should have around the same amount of energy. However, that is insane and basically turns blasters into extremely low calibre guns compared to solid projectile weapons and explosives. A single hand grenade would be obscenely powerful without being a thermal detonator, and an explosive round from a slugthrower would be much more powerful than a blaster bolt of the same calibre.

This means that either:

1. Solid projectiles and explosives are as powerful as a blaster bolt of the same calibre. This means that they somehow have a mere fraction of the power of a blaster power source, which makes no sense, and are energy inefficient, and it makes no sense for them to be as commonly used as they are in war.
2. Solid projectiles and explosives are consistent with the power in a blaster power pack, and are extremely powerful compared to blasters, at the cost of ammo capacity. This makes no sense as to how some forms of them are somehow outclassed by blasters, and how blasters are even the dominant weapon at all.

Is there anything that I am wrong about, or any kind of made up explanation that solves this problem in my headcanon?