-
Dude, Mars13, it does nopt matter if you see it directly in the movies. Why? Becuase the EU is cannon for this type of discussion. EU cannon says that the light troop carrier can fire eight turbo lasers to achieve a destructive potetial damage of 200 gigatons and it can do it. Case closed. Discussion over. You're SOL.
BTW I do apologize for the 400 gw reference. It is two 400gw blasts that knock down shields and third that does real damage to the ship. Really injuring people.
As for your world devastating explosions? We have yet to see a single ST weapon do what the Death Star does.
-
[QUOTE=TW Scott]Dude, Mars13, it does nopt matter if you see it directly in the movies. Why? Becuase the EU is cannon for this type of discussion. EU cannon says that the light troop carrier can fire eight turbo lasers to achieve a destructive potetial damage of 200 gigatons and it can do it. Case closed. Discussion over. You're SOL.
BTW I do apologize for the 400 gw reference. It is two 400gw blasts that knock down shields and third that does real damage to the ship. Really injuring people.
As for your world devastating explosions? We have yet to see a single ST weapon do what the Death Star does.[/QUOTE]
except the 8472 bio ships,or the xindi super weapon,or the doomsday machine.
except those.
and yes,if you cant show where a TL does GT damage in combat,then they cant do GT damage in combat.i dont care what the manual says it should do,if doesnt do it in practice or against other SW ships then it cant do it vs ST ships.case closed.
200GTs is a shitload of power ,and to not have any examples ,considering the weapons are extremly common,then the tech manual is wrong and contridicted .belive it or not,incorrect information that not backed by any book,game or movie is NOT canon.if TLs were that much power they could have blown up alderran with a single SD in seconds,there was no need for a DS.thats a contridiction .this is why the tech manuals are glorified fanfic.
it should be no problem to come up with an example,you should be flaunting examples left and right if you have that much power used that often.1 shot should decimate entire continents of planets,they should be vaporizing asteroids thousands of kilometers across with ease.
show me where they have that much power used in combat.
-
[QUOTE=mars13]except the 8472 bio ships,or the xindi super weapon,or the doomsday machine.
except those.[/quote]
None of those is an ST weapon. The 8472 Bioships took ten ships to do something that mayhave been similiar, or simply blowing a borg weapons stockpile. We have no idea how often they can do that or even if it can be repeated. It may have been a one time deal. The xindi super weapon we never saw used, it was theorized it could take out a planet but didn't get the chance. The Doomsday Machine took hours to break up a planet, hardly worth comparing to the Death Star.
[QUOTE]and yes,if you cant show where a TL does GT damage in combat,then they cant do GT damage in combat.i dont care what the manual says it should do,if doesnt do it in practice or against other SW ships then it cant do it vs ST ships.case closed.
200GTs is a shitload of power ,and to not have any examples ,considering the weapons are extremly common,then the tech manual is wrong and contridicted .belive it or not,incorrect information that not backed by any book,game or movie is NOT canon.if TLs were that much power they could have blown up alderran with a single SD in seconds,there was no need for a DS.thats a contridiction .this is why the tech manuals are glorified fanfic.
it should be no problem to come up with an example,you should be flaunting examples left and right if you have that much power used that often.1 shot should decimate entire continents of planets,they should be vaporizing asteroids thousands of kilometers across with ease.
show me where they have that much power used in combat.[/QUOTE]
I do not have to. Do you not understand the rules or are you completely moronic? Star Wars canon means if it is in the licensed games, books, and novels and not DIRECTLY countered by the movies it is canon. The Technical manual say 200 gigatons for an eight gun volley from a troop transport, then that is what the weapon does since we see nothing that disproves that.
As for you mistaken believe that 200 gigatons is enough to vaporize continents, the yucatan pennisula meteor strik is thought to be 100 gigatons or more. It made an impressive crater, killed everything in a thousand miles and cuase nuclear winter, but hardly destroyed even a pennisula. As for the need for a Deathstar, SW planets have planetary defense shields. You could drop a moon on the field and it will just vaporize it. Even the Executor was not able to penetrate the shield used on Hoth and it carried 250 heavy turbolasers. That is why you need a Death Star.
Star Trek canon screwed itself over becuase we have to go strictly by the shows and movies. For 99.999999% we have to make extrapolations which in each case puts the Star Trek universe on the losing end. It is nothing against the show or the universe, it is just out classed. Now, next to Star Wars, Star Trek is the big honcho for starships. It falls dead last in ground combat but what do you expect from a peace loving society. BTW first is definately not Star Wars, Dune or even Starship troopers (book not movie). First place goes to a tie between Robotech, Gunadam, Transformers, and the Mechanoids.
-
[QUOTE=TW Scott]None of those is an ST weapon. The 8472 Bioships took ten ships to do something that mayhave been similiar, or simply blowing a borg weapons stockpile. We have no idea how often they can do that or even if it can be repeated. It may have been a one time deal. The xindi super weapon we never saw used, it was theorized it could take out a planet but didn't get the chance. The Doomsday Machine took hours to break up a planet, hardly worth comparing to the Death Star.
[/QUOTE]
wow,your just grasping now. your so full of shit you wont even acknowledge thing CLEARLY shown on screen destroying planets,deal with it .seen in trek,is a trek weapon,what the fuck is your deal?
and then you start babbling about gobots or something.
more planets are shown ON SCREEN destroyed in trek then SW.your the one lacking in planet destroying firepower.
half a blurb about SW firepower once with no correlitive material ANYWHERE is enough to convince you of something in SW,but things clearly seen on screen in trek are suspect?
lay of the :m:
-
[QUOTE=mars13]i dont care what the manual says it should do,[/quote]
That's 'cause you're a retard.
[quote]if doesnt do it in practice or against other SW ships then it cant do it vs ST ships.case closed.[/quote]
Oh, but it does. Watch the full-out battle above Endor. See those Mc80 cruisers getting smoked by ISDs? Yeah, not too many shoits to take out those klick-long ships. Those HTLs have to be pretty fuckin' powerful.
[quote]if TLs were that much power they could have blown up alderran with a single SD in seconds,there was no need for a DS.[/QUOTE]
Wrong, retard boy. For one, the majority of TLs don't fire 200gT bolts, those are just the HTL batteries, and only the largest of Imperial ships have those HTLs. Second, the boltsfrom an HTL broadside would possible smoke half the [I]surface[/I] of Alderaan, but not the whole of the planet itself. To do that took something much more powerful, i.e the Death Star.
And for the love of all that is good and bacony, learn to type correctly. Your posts look like a damn monkey typed them.
-
[QUOTE=Hapsburg]That's 'cause you're a retard.
And for the love of all that is good and bacony, learn to type correctly. Your posts look like a damn monkey typed them.[/QUOTE]
ah,insults and spelling errors,with NOTHING of substance.the last bastion of argument from someone with no case or supporting facts.
-
Dumbass, I just fucking told you and gave you evidence on the TL strength. It takes quite a shitload of power to known down a Mon Calamari cruiser, and the ISDs at Endor and throughout the games (TIE Fighter comes to mind) do that quite easily, indicating damn powerful weapons. Also consider that in Episode V they were vaporizing incoming asteroids, not just shooting them into smaller chunks.
-
[QUOTE=TW Scott]First place goes to a tie between Robotech, Gunadam, Transformers, and the Mechanoids.[/QUOTE]
All for Gundam.
-
[QUOTE=Hapsburg]Dumbass, I just fucking told you and gave you evidence on the TL strength. It takes quite a shitload of power to known down a Mon Calamari cruiser, and the ISDs at Endor and throughout the games (TIE Fighter comes to mind) do that quite easily, indicating damn powerful weapons. Also consider that in Episode V they were vaporizing incoming asteroids, not just shooting them into smaller chunks.[/QUOTE]
again,vaproizing SMALL[less then 10m] asteroids is not a show of power.the orginal Ent. can blow up asteroids roughly the size of our moon,but im sure blowing up tiny space rocks prove how powerful SW is to you some how, and blowing up MOONS proves st is weak somehow.blowing up a fucking MOON takes more power then a TINY chunk of rock.
and by the way ,usuing a shield strength based on weapons strength,to prove the weapons strength is a circular argument.
you may as well be arguing intelligent design.
-
Oh, good, now we're going to argue about evolution vs. intelligent design, too...you're a fucking genius, mars....
-
that was an example of a circular argument ,perhaps you need more evolution to understand that.
and on a side note,the moon sized asteroid wasnt destroyed.
-
Well Mars13 you are no better. You claim that Galaxy class shields must be better than 400gw (with a set of back ups) becuase the Photon Torpedoes are so powerful. You calim the torpedoes are so powerful so they can mess with shields.
Drop the HTL concern you are outgunned by the LTL alone.
-
[QUOTE=TW Scott]Well Mars13 you are no better. You claim that Galaxy class shields must be better than 400gw (with a set of back ups) becuase the Photon Torpedoes are so powerful. You calim the torpedoes are so powerful so they can mess with shields.
Drop the HTL concern you are outgunned by the LTL alone.[/QUOTE]
except ptorps have scientific basis for comparison,they contain a standard 1.5kilos of antimatter which gives us a reasonable yield estimation thats backed by on screen evidence of effects around and beyond the estimated yield,where as the TLs have NO visual confirmation of GT levels anywhere,only a refrence in a manual that isnt backed by any novel quotes,games,or movies .theres not even any evidence CLOSE to GT levels anywhere else BUT the tech manual.
thats the diffrence.
-
[QUOTE=mars13]except ptorps have scientific basis for comparison,they contain a standard 1.5kilos of antimatter which gives us a reasonable yield estimation thats backed by on screen evidence of effects around and beyond the estimated yield,[/QUOTE]
Show me where they ever say 1.5 kilograms in the show. Then show where if anywhere they do anything more than a 20 kiloton explosion. I want scripts here not transcripts.
Now get off the HTL, you are still insanely out gunned by a point defence weapon. Explain that.
-
[QUOTE=TW Scott]Show me where they ever say 1.5 kilograms in the show. Then show where if anywhere they do anything more than a 20 kiloton explosion. I want scripts here not transcripts.
Now get off the HTL, you are still insanely out gunned by a point defence weapon. Explain that.[/QUOTE]
i allready showed you,45 ptorps will level a planet,thats 11,333,333 square meters per torp,if 20KT would level that much land,japan would not exsist along with china and siberia.obviously,ptorps are MUCH higher yield then 20KTs.
-
[QUOTE=mars13]again,vaproizing SMALL[less then 10m] asteroids is not a show of power.[/QUOTE]
Actually, most of the those asteroids that they blasted were over 40 meters long. Some were even 100m long. Compare thier size to the ISD's size (length of 1600m). The energy necessitated to vaporize that size asteroid in a zero gee environment is equivalent to four atomic bombs. Those were the LTLs, too, not the main guns.
-
[QUOTE=mars13]i allready showed you,45 ptorps will level a planet,thats 11,333,333 square meters per torp,if 20KT would level that much land,japan would not exsist along with china and siberia.obviously,ptorps are MUCH higher yield then 20KTs.[/QUOTE]
No, you have proved nothing. You did not show how 45 torpedoes could elvel a planet becuase there is no way it takes that few to do it. Not when it takes five to destroy a unshielded, unmanned, and aging space craft. Or well over a hundred to blow apart a large sateroid.
Se why you keep losing Mars13, it is because we are not gullible enough to believe the things you make up. You were asked for simple proof that is easy to obtain. The reason you are asked is becuase the visuals and script DO NOT match what you say. Since NONE of the Star Trek books are canon you cannot fal back to them. It's a huge disadvantage I know, but you are the one supporting the losing side.
-
[QUOTE=Hapsburg]Actually, most of the those asteroids that they blasted were over 40 meters long. Some were even 100m long. Compare thier size to the ISD's size (length of 1600m). The energy necessitated to vaporize that size asteroid in a zero gee environment is equivalent to four atomic bombs. Those were the LTLs, too, not the main guns.[/QUOTE]
Actually vaporizing a 10 meter radius asteroid is the equivalent of 33 kilotons bare minimum. Factor in this is 1/8 the size of some of the ones in ESB and that shoots to 264 kilotons minimum. Factor in the rapidiness of the vaporization and in becomes anywhere from 2.64 megatons to 26.4 megatons with any believability. Personally I lean towards 4 megatons for a point defense weapon.
Now I have found som interesting information. Seems that Isoton may be a unit of measure meaning 1 million kgs or 1 kiloton. Seems ratianal when a scan of garbage scow says it is holding several million isotons.
-
[QUOTE=TW Scott]No, you have proved nothing. You did not show how 45 torpedoes could elvel a planet becuase there is no way it takes that few to do it. Not when it takes five to destroy a unshielded, unmanned, and aging space craft. Or well over a hundred to blow apart a large sateroid.
.[/QUOTE]
no they clearly state ON SCREEN,that the defiant alone could ''reduce the founders homeworld to a cinder''.thats cut and dry.no one questioned it,and no one had any doubts about its capabilities to do it.
45 ptorps plus phasers can destroy a planets surface,end of discusion.
and the fact that its been stated half a dozen times throu all the shows that a fed ship can destroy an entire planet confirms it.
face it,ptorps have a VERY HIGH yield,well beyond KTs.
-
Only you would take simple speech and mark it as fact...if one ptorp is enough to totally annihilate 11,333,333 km of land, then why were the borg so unstoppable? Why was anyone a challenge if the people with the ptorps could just instantly vaporize anything with one torp? That's the stupidest statistic I've ever seen, and that's saying something...
