View Poll Results: Which universe would win?

Voters
670. This poll is closed
  • Star Trek

    227 33.88%
  • Star Wars

    285 42.54%
  • Spaceballs

    51 7.61%
  • Farscape

    14 2.09%
  • Dune

    54 8.06%
  • Stargate

    39 5.82%

Thread: Star Wars vs Star Trek

  1. #3741
    [IMG] [/IMG]

    Kazon weapons have always been extremely weak against Voyager's shields. Infact this exactly as the first episode proceede. The Voyager took a beating but they were never in any danger from one carrier ship and a shielded raider.



    [IMG] [/IMG]

    In this clip Voyagers using three beams and the diverging two beams have created an explosion on the ship that nearly rivals the size of Voyager herself. To create an ignition flash point nearly 344 meters in diameter is working with incedible megaton fire power in the range of 5 to 10 megatons. And it's canon that those beams can be adjusted to the tactical officers wishes and frequently are altered.

    [IMG] [/IMG]

    This is the tird vessel...from the look of the detonation Voyager is targeting weapon enplacements.

  2. #3742
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
    No the Empire does not span the Entire Galaxy.
    Not the entire galaxy, no, but a very large fraction of it. Vastly more space than the Federation, in any case.

    The Federation has been described in First Contact as having thousands of star systems over thousands of lightyears.
    Thousands of systems is not the same as thousands of developed worlds.
    The first such strike would work but Star Fleet displays more tactical prowess than the Emprie ever had.
    No amount of "tactical prowess" will help you if your engines are so slow that the enemy can zip around in your space far faster than you can. If there are a lot of Federation ships guarding a planet, the Empire can simply take the fleet somewhere else. They can either concentrate the fleet in one place (in which case the empire can simply strike somewhere else) or they can spread their fleet thin, so that in each system a handful of federation ships faces the entire Imperial fleet.

    YOu haven't been here in a while but I have shown that the Galaxy class is sporting more than 6 times the fire power of a turbo laser by using nothing but canon examples.
    Could you point my to your posts with that analysis? This thread is so long that I don't really want to dig through it.

    The ability to destroy a star system seems to trump the ability to destroy a planet does it not.
    When has the Federation ever demonstrated an ability to destroy a star system?
    That's not a valid statement. Star Fleet has put the technology of the Genesis Device in a practicle purpose and it's been used before. Star Fleet doesn't uses superweapons and doomsday weapons to achieve victory. Your standards are different from the Federation..You're more like the US. Victory at all cost even at the cost of innocent lives. Star Fleet has never perscribed to the doomsday weapon.
    Starfleet didn't use the Genesis device on the Borg even when they had torn through most of starfleet like tissue paper. The Borg cube was sitting in orbit over Earth and was about to assimilate the entire planet...and still starfleet didn't use it. If you want to argue that they had it but simply weren't willing to use it under those circumstances, then it doesn't matter anyway, because apparently they'll never use it.

  3. #3743
    Quote Originally Posted by Nasor View Post
    Not the entire galaxy, no, but a very large fraction of it. Vastly more space than the Federation, in any case.
    ah...no according to the EU which is canon...or a type of canon for story line. The Emprie is an Remanent. Much less than a single Galactic Quadrant.

    Thousands of systems is not the same as thousands of developed worlds.
    Ah I see your point but this is a vague argument. I don't know the number of industrialized worlds and neither do you. This should not be a point of contention.

    No amount of "tactical prowess" will help you if your engines are so slow that the enemy can zip around in your space far faster than you can. If there are a lot of Federation ships guarding a planet, the Empire can simply take the fleet somewhere else.
    That is not tactics...that's evassiveness. Trek could do the same. Slip into warp where Star Wars ships can't track them.

    They can either concentrate the fleet in one place (in which case the empire can simply strike somewhere else) or they can spread their fleet thin, so that in each system a handful of federation ships faces the entire Imperial fleet.
    I'll hold on this.


    Could you point my to your posts with that analysis? This thread is so long that I don't really want to dig through it.
    I'll bring it up again...

    When has the Federation ever demonstrated an ability to destroy a star system?
    That was dicussion we've seen twice on this thread.
    Scorpian part two Seven and janeway argue the use of a 5,000,000 ISO TON warhead which Tuvoks points out would be enough to effect an entire star system. Janeway opposes this idea on the basis of endangering innocent worlds not to mention not enough time to create the necessary borg nanites.


    Starfleet didn't use the Genesis device on the Borg even when they had torn through most of starfleet like tissue paper
    .

    We don't know why...but that brings us to the second occasion. The material in the Genesis deviced called Proto matter was used with Trilithium resin as a bomb in Deep Space Nine. The cocktail would have been delievered to the Bajoran sun destroying the system.

    The changleing Docotor Bashir used a Federation shuttle craft to attempt this. While we don't know where he got the materials we do know that both are Federation in origin.

    The Borg cube was sitting in orbit over Earth and was about to assimilate the entire planet...and still starfleet didn't use it. If you want to argue that they had it but simply weren't willing to use it under those circumstances, then it doesn't matter anyway, because apparently they'll never use it.
    In proximity to the Earth...I doubt they would set off such a device near any habitable planet despite the threat. Protomatter is likely in research installation it's a matter of gathering those material and delievering the weapon...thus strategy...It would mean out fiting every ship with such a weapon...or manuvering a single warhead to a tactical point or bring that tactical point to you...but it's not removed from possibility.

  4. #3744
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
    To create an ignition flash point nearly 344 meters in diameter is working with incedible megaton fire power in the range of 5 to 10 megatons.
    Lol. Okay, please explain how you know that it would take 5-10 megatons to create a flash 344 meters in diameter? I would love to see the math on that.

  5. #3745
    [IMG] [/IMG]If the encounter with the Borg is Q Who was specificly about fire power then the Enterprise won that fight.

    Analysis of the Scene shows that Enterprise fire power was quite effective. But we must compare it to Star Wars. As a result we're looking for two unshielded object in each genre. Star Wars proponets chose the asteroid scene in Emprie Strike Back. Typically the scene without the Millenium Falcon and the Star Destroyer firing on floatin rocks in it's path. The size of this rock is unknown. Star Wars proponets typicaly regard this as a 40 meter wide asteroid. Never mind the validity of that statement. In this moment we're merely using it as a comparison.

    On the Trek Side, Enterprises first encounter with the Borg as an unshield (at that particular moment) object.

    The Star Destroyer fires once...the Enterprise fires three times.
    The Star Destroyer destoys the 40 meter wide asteroid in the range of a second. (It is unknown if the Star Destroyer was using it's fighter defense weaponry or it's main batteries which we might never see in use if this is not such an occasion) There is nothing left over.

    The Enterprise fires at the Edge of the Cube vaporising a section in second. It proceeds to fire twice more. From the dialog we find that the Enterprise has destroyed 20 % of the superstructure of a vessel 3040 meters long.

    The results are that the Enterprise vaporized alloyed metals (not armor) in less than a second which calucated from the percentages nears 246 meters of material from the borg ship...instantly...three times.

    That comes to the equilivence of equal to or greater than the mass of a miranda class starship in size and mass...instantly That figure is 6 times the amount of material destroyed by the Star Destroyer...more is you count that this was alloyed material designed to resist heat and not rock with nickel and iron ore. Counting for this alloy in a vague way the Eneterprise, Galaxy class vessel exceeds the displayed firepower by 7 maybe 8 times.

    These numbers are basic in every respect as we do not know the amount of material vaporized by percentage we don't know how much mass the Cub started off with. Basing these basic calucations from the Cubes length and there for Cubic volume. They are inherently inaccurate...but it does provide an idea of Greater or less than.

    Observing the after math...the holes in the Borg Cube are much greater in size than a Miranda class starship lending weight that the figures are perhaps much closer than I originaly suspected.

    But it does indeed tell us that the Enterprise is by canon greater than the turbolaser...

  6. #3746
    Quote Originally Posted by Nasor View Post
    Lol. Okay, please explain how you know that it would take 5-10 megatons to create a flash 344 meters in diameter? I would love to see the math on that.
    I couldn't do the math...at least without assitence in gathering the figures. Like with everything else in these genre's most figures won't match with real world comparison. My endeavor is to keep it comparitive. Comparitive facts are better as veriying information that doesn't exist for the sake of fiction is problematic.

    I've compared test images before...Flash points and expansion radi seperately...Voyager show a Large flash point in comparison to a high kiloton or low megaton war head.

  7. #3747
    And you must note that Phasers don't work on wattage or tonnage of detonation...the are nadion particles that break up matter. It's about equivilent effectiveness. Not fire power....

    Whether or not the Turbo laser delievers the same greater or less than the power of a phaser..is uknown...we do know through the comparison of destroyed material...the phaser ranks a as more or better.

  8. #3748
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Saquist View Post

    That comes to the equilivence of equal to or greater than the mass of a miranda class starship in size and mass...instantly
    Then how do you explain all the scenes in which unshielded ST ships take phaser hits and don't suffer much damage? If you analysis is correct, any unshielded ship should be immediately destroyed by a single phaser hit. They aren't. Therefore, you analysis is wrong.

  9. #3749
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
    I couldn't do the math...at least without assitence in gathering the figures.
    In other words "I made the numbers up because they sounded good."

  10. #3750
    Actually that's what Star Wars proppontes do...by giving estimate numbers instead of working in comparisons...

    By comparison Trek wins this hands down...The inescapable conclusion is that the area of 20% precent of the Cube was nowhere equal or less that the mass and density of a forty metter wide rock.

    So in other words Trek wins on the firepower. And it's made use of canon figures.

  11. #3751
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,223
    Give me a break. By your own admission, your analysis concluded that a single hit from a phaser should completely vaporize any unshielded, normal-sized ship. Since that's demonstratablye not the case, clearly your analysis was wrong.

  12. #3752
    And yet it still is more than the fire power of the ESB scene. Your own conclusions not withstanding it sound's like your really are in need of a break.

  13. #3753
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
    And yet it still is more than the fire power of the ESB scene. Your own conclusions not withstanding it sound's like your really are in need of a break.
    Ok, I'm gong to break this down as simply as I can for you, because you seem to be having some problems with basic logic.

    1. You tried to figure out how much firepower a phaser has by analyzing a scene from the show.

    2. Your analysis concluded that a phaser has enough power to vaporize a ship in one shot.

    3. Phasers can't vaporize a ship in one shot. Even you seem to agree with this.

    4. Since your analysis lead to a conclusion that is clearly false, your analysis must be flawed.

    Ok. So even though it's clear that your analysis is wrong, you are still trying to us it as evidence that phasers are more powerful than turbolasers.

    And yes, I do believe that several megatons (the energy levels obtained from the asteroid calculations) would be more than enough to destroy several hundred meters of a porus metal cube.

  14. #3754
    Quote Originally Posted by Nasor View Post
    Ok, I'm gong to break this down as simply as I can for you, because you seem to be having some problems with basic logic.
    OKAY Kewll.

    1. You tried to figure out how much firepower a phaser has by analyzing a scene from the show.
    No...I contradict this statement. I did not find out how much firepower a phaser has. That's why its called a comparison. There are no firepower figures here.

    2. Your analysis concluded that a phaser has enough power to vaporize a ship in one shot.
    False. my analysis concluded that a phaser can vaporize alloy metal in the range of volume 200to 246 meters (spherical)

    3. Phasers can't vaporize a ship in one shot. Even you seem to agree with this.
    I don't. I have made that conclusion one way or another.

    4. Since your analysis lead to a conclusion that is clearly false, your analysis must be flawed.
    Since you're wrong on the first three then your conclusion is in error. You made assuptions while I made a range of destruction...that is why...you failed.

    Feel free to try that logic again without the assumptions.

  15. #3755
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,223
    Ok, I want to be sure I understand you correctly. Are you saying that since the Enterprise was able to destroy 246 meters of the cube while the star destroyer was able to destroy a 40 meter asteroid, this means that the ST weapons are six times stronger than SW weapons?

  16. #3756
    Look at the range there between 6 and 8 times.
    we can quible on the actual size of the Cub but there is no denying ...the phaser destroyed more material than the turbo laser...SIGNIFICANTLY more material...

    Argue densities if you wish...those would be valied arguements.

    But if you argue that the Cube is porous then you might aswell jump into the same boat with TWSCOTT (Nutcase extrodinare) who thinks that 20 % structual damage means 80% of the 20% is damage to open space. WHICH is a mind boggling stupid statement.

    20% is twenty percent damage to the structure. Argue the density of the alloy metal in the outter hull...but this too would be dancing with the uncanon. We really don't know...

    It doens't mean the that the range is wrong. That's the prupose of giving a range....at this point anything stronger and and more dense that Iron Ore is obviously the victor....And alloy beats out Iron ore and Rock.

    Thus we've not establish a firepower...we've established greater and by an order of times through demonstration.

    If the density is regarded as wrong...then both the rock and the Borg must be thrown out and we go on just the amount of shear area and instant destruction...Either way here...the Phaser wins hands down...

    We'll say in my opinion...I don't mean to rub you the wrong way...but it seems very very obvious no matter which route you go...

    Another Star Wars fan knew what I was saying fairly well. He understood...but he just couldn't believe the Enterprise was sporting more firepower than the SD

    BUt note I never said that. I said turbolaser...not the whole ship...And like I said it's unclear if this was a main battery or a fighter defense turrent.

    For the prupose of my story I will keep with these finds understanding that a Sd has estimated six such Turbo batteries... I'll use RA
    s estimates for the fighter defense...

    At two barrels per turbo battery the Enterprise is stil in for a fight. I've put there fire powers closer together...

  17. #3757
    Purveyor of Truth and Fact Kittamaru's Avatar
    Posts
    7,817
    Quote Originally Posted by Nasor View Post
    5 megatons would be a very large nuclear weapon - about 380 times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Most of the explosions seen in the show look much smaller than that.

    Ah, right. Maybe they were able to cross the galaxy quickly because it was a very tiny galaxy. And even if they actually said that a SW ship could cross 50000 lightyears in a day, well, how do we know that light goes the same speed in SW? And how do we know that a day is the same length? Maybe in the SW universe, the word "day" means "50 years"

    Seriously, now. There is no reason to suspect that the SW galaxy is particularly small. It’s clear that SW ships can cross a galaxy in days, while ST ships would take decades. If you want to propose that the SW galaxy is a lot smaller than the ST galaxy, you need to provide some evidence to back that claim up. Note that “I want ST to win” does not constitute evidence.
    Not that "I Want SW To Win" Does not constitute evidence to the contrary

  18. #3758
    Purveyor of Truth and Fact Kittamaru's Avatar
    Posts
    7,817
    Quote Originally Posted by Nasor View Post
    Ok, I want to be sure I understand you correctly. Are you saying that since the Enterprise was able to destroy 246 meters of the cube while the star destroyer was able to destroy a 40 meter asteroid, this means that the ST weapons are six times stronger than SW weapons?
    Nasor, you want a reason? It's this:

    The borg work by ADAPTING... thus the weapon becomes 100% useless. There is no reason for "partial protection"

    Other races use Armor that spreads the impact across a larger area, not to mention structural integrity fields and that's without mentioning force fields and reinforced bulkheads and other such things that are designed to protect the people inside. Borg aren't too concerened about a few hundred thousand drones.

  19. #3759
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    51
    I give up with you people, if some one think star trek wins let them. Star trek wins end of disccusion. Simply becuase im sick of sheer stupidy on star wars side. No matter how perfect any race is, nothing ever goes exactly how you want it. Cannon Star trek lives, Star wars dies. The end. Now can we stop fighting over this?

  20. #3760
    Minister of Technology
    Posts
    4,149
    That was dicussion we've seen twice on this thread.
    Scorpian part two Seven and janeway argue the use of a 5,000,000 ISO TON warhead which Tuvoks points out would be enough to effect an entire star system. Janeway opposes this idea on the basis of endangering innocent worlds not to mention not enough time to create the necessary borg nanites.
    Okay, even if a five million Isoton bomb could destroy a start system (pretty big might) Why would the borg need the nanites and the bomb in combo? After all if it can destroy a whole system than it could easily take out the Bioships in that system.

    See where the logic falls down?

    Obviously they were not concerned about the bomb itself hurting anything but rather the large spread of nanites, which could just as easily kill just about any life form.

Similar Threads

  1. By Fettman in forum SciFi & Fantasy
    Last Post: 10-18-11, 02:02 PM
    Replies: 33
  2. By USS Athens in forum SciFi & Fantasy
    Last Post: 03-16-10, 04:47 PM
    Replies: 291
  3. By superstring01 in forum SciFi & Fantasy
    Last Post: 03-11-10, 01:57 PM
    Replies: 60
  4. By Orleander in forum SciFi & Fantasy
    Last Post: 07-11-09, 08:33 PM
    Replies: 27
  5. By Asguard in forum Computer Science & Culture
    Last Post: 09-13-08, 02:15 AM
    Replies: 0

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •