Star Wars vs Star Trek

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by FoolFromHell

If you dont make up crap like you do, Scott, ST wins. I would make up utter crap like you, but we want the truth, not the junk and other unmentionables you spout from your mouth.
By your "if it doesnt exist in the movies, it certainly does exist and wasnt used" logic, it certainly wasnt explained in the movie of shield harmonics, but it does exist in the SW universe but wasnt mentioned.
And, theres no evidence that SW ships can defend against phasers but there is evidence that ST ships can defend against lasers.

Shields and Weapons are defenitely inferior in SW.

**TW Scott** · 05-31-07, 08:03 PM

Originally Posted by USS Enterprise-B

Given this, should any ship from SW fire at a ST ship with its shields up, nothing would happen TW Scott. ARGUMENT OVER!!!!

Classic Trekkie hollow argument from the Outrageous Okona. The Enterprise was facing a small ship from a culture that had just attained warp recently. The lasers in question were gigawat lasers at best.

This argument has been used before, and dismissed by people afar more intelligent than you.

There is NO POSSIBLE way a ship that generates 1.2E19(1.2 x 10 ^19 or 12 billion gigawats) per second is going to stop a bolt is 7.8E20 (780 billion gigawats) for 1/15th second. The shields alone would need to be at least6,500% efficent higher if you wanted to power anything else.

Secondly we can see from cannon footage that the Bolts in question are not true lasers. First of all they travel slower than light, but no slower than Phasers. They are visible in space. They have a bit of a muzzle flash even in vacuum When they hit they cause blunt trauma as well as DET.

Obviously the statement you used is correct ST canon, but does not fit the weapon. In better terms it is like an M1A1 armor, it will protect in completely from a lot of crap, but Drop a tactical nuke on it and kiss it goodbye.

**TW Scott** · 05-31-07, 08:08 PM

Originally Posted by USS Enterprise-B

I don't see what you mean? What does this have to do with the argument?

Meanining if we translated this to nuatical terms Galaxy, Defiant and Sovereign would be the equivalent to lightly armed research vessels. Against a whaler or smuggler they do very well. But the ISD is like a Battleship. It doesn't need maneuverability as it has vastly superior firepower. They are made for heavy and prolonged combat.

**TW Scott** · 05-31-07, 08:14 PM

Originally Posted by USS Enterprise-B

That's debatable.

Leautenant: Sir we're detecting an Imperial class star destroyer on the planet's surface. It's shields and weapons are offline, it looks like they're awaiting to fight our marines on land.

Captain: Cancel the away team.

Captain: Mr. Anderson,

Captain: Fire.

The Fed ship bomboards the star destroyer with every weapon conceivable.

What makes you think the vessel would keeps it shiedls lowered when it detected your vessel 4 days out. Second you are assuming that 10 gigawats phasers and 25 tons torpedoes is going to do much damage to a nuetronium impregnated ship. Thirdly assume that they were jamming your scans so it appeared that they had their shields down, a common SW tactic. Fianlly you fail to realize that the ship would be sitting either in the middle or derectly beside the ship. Firing weapons into civillian populations centers is a no-no.

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:16 PM

Originally Posted by TW Scott

Secondly we can see from cannon footage that the Bolts in question are not true lasers. First of all they travel slower than light, but no slower than Phasers.

Remember again, pretty any measurment in power done by SW is considered non-canon. And why do they call them lasers if they're not really lasers. (And Phasers are faster than bolts)

**Mr.Spock** · 05-31-07, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by USS Enterprise-B

Who's side are you on?!?

im a sci fi fan first and foremost, the executor class rocks.

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by TW Scott

What makes you think the vessel would keeps it shiedls lowered when it detected your vessel 4 days out. Second you are assuming that 10 gigawats phasers and 25 tons torpedoes is going to do much damage to a nuetronium impregnated ship. Thirdly assume that they were jamming your scans so it appeared that they had their shields down, a common SW tactic. Fianlly you fail to realize that the ship would be sitting either in the middle or derectly beside the ship. Firing weapons into civillian populations centers is a no-no.

How 4 days out? Nuetronium is a ST object, used by the planet killer which was said to be made out of pure nuetronium.

**Oli** · 05-31-07, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by USS Enterprise-B

Remember again, pretty any measurment in power done by SW is considered non-canon. And why do they call them lasers if they're not really lasers. (And Phasers are faster than bolts)

Why does ST use the term ISOton when ISO isn't a prefix? Terminology means what the writers want it to mean.

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:25 PM

Once stated that only Quantum torpedos were not very effective against nuetronium, so screw that then let's use Photon torpedos. That thing isn't 100% nuetronium, if so how would the crew maintain it? And it's shields wouldn't be up while it was landed would have desasterous effects on the envirment.

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:27 PM

Originally Posted by TW Scott

Meanining if we translated this to nuatical terms Galaxy, Defiant and Sovereign would be the equivalent to lightly armed research vessels. Against a whaler or smuggler they do very well. But the ISD is like a Battleship. It doesn't need maneuverability as it has vastly superior firepower. They are made for heavy and prolonged combat.

Due to the poorly trained and highly undisciplined officers/gunners (aside from Vader's touch of death) they are pretty bad shots even without the rifle. ST ships would just drive them insane.

**TW Scott** · 05-31-07, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by USS Enterprise-B

That starship battle was pretty corny if you ask me. I like the Dominion war a lot better, ships move gracefully and aren't a lump on a rock like a ISD. Which reminds me, TW Scott, that opening battle over coruascant, notice the missile that hits the republic assault cruiser on the left. It literally puts a hole on it's hull! (You can see inside it) And look at the Invisible Hand's bridge layout (Greivous's ship) a captain's chair in the middle and surronded in a circlular (at least semi-circular) ring of stations. Gee, that sounds familiar.

Yeah that tiny whole in the side of the ship, actually cuased by a fragment of armor prpelled from the communications frigate being destroyed. Yeah I saw that, I also saw that the ASD was largely unaffected by the explosion.

As for the bridge lay out, of course it was familiar, doesn;t the Caption of any vessel stand or sit in the middle and give commands? Mush easier form the middle, you only have to be heard half the width of the room.

Also the battle of Corusacant had been going on for HOURS before we came into the movie.

And another thing, yes it very nice to slip around gracefully in battle, but the truth is that battleships and Dreadnoughts don't do that. The go in and pound the enemy flat. Since no Federation ship has shown any type of maneuverability better than a B-wing fighter. ST ships are much larger than SW fighters and if the ISD point defenses can hit them relaibly then a 200 yard+ plus frigat should be asy.

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by TW Scott

And another thing, yes it very nice to slip around gracefully in battle, but the truth is that battleships and Dreadnoughts don't do that. The go in and pound the enemy flat. Since no Federation ship has shown any type of maneuverability better than a B-wing fighter.

Haven't you seen the beginning of Star Trek first contact?!? Or that starship fight on Nemisis? Geeeez!

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:33 PM

I've said it once and I'll say it again, any estimate of power measurments is and should be considered NON-CANON!

**TW Scott** · 05-31-07, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by Oli

And lose approximately 1/3rd of their power per mile of sea level atmosphere traversed.

Your proof of this? Oh yeah that right, you have none and were completely bullshiting. Some simple extremely low power laser might display a phenomena that is a closer It is not the case with truly powerful beam weapon.

**Oli** · 05-31-07, 08:43 PM

Originally Posted by TW Scott

Your proof of this? Oh yeah that right, you have none and were completely bullshiting. Some simple extremely low power laser might display a phenomena that is a closer It is not the case with truly powerful beam weapon.

Really? Free electron lasers are the best in atmosphere and they lose approx 1/3 power per mile. I'll dig out the German research papers this weekend and scan them.
Bullshitting? Hardly dickhead - it's my business.
Initial power doesn't affect power loss...

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:44 PM

What is considered SW canon?

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:50 PM

Originally Posted by Oli

Really? Free electron lasers are the best in atmosphere and they lose approx 1/3 power per mile. I'll dig out the German research papers this weekend and scan them.
Bullshitting? Hardly dickhead - it's my business.
Initial power doesn't affect power loss...

And this is proof that Federation weaponary is more powerful than IMP weaponary. The Federation has been around for only 200 years and the Galactic Empire/Republic has been around for god knows when, and the Federation is this far in technology in this little time. Heck after seven centuries the Federation already know how to traverse time.

**Oli** · 05-31-07, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by USS Enterprise-B

And this is proof that Federation weaponary is more powerful than IMP weaponary. The Federation has been around for 200 years and the Galactic Empire/Republic has been around for god knows when, and the Federation is this far in technology in this little time. Heck after seven centuries the Federation already know how to traverse time.

No it's not "proof" read the reply earlier, post 4468. Turbolasers aren't lasers - the name sounds similar but they're NOT lasers.

**USS Athens** · 05-31-07, 08:56 PM

Still, then who named it?!?

**Oli** · 05-31-07, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by USS Enterprise-B

Still, then who named it?!?

Who named turbolasers as turbolasers? The scriptwriters, who probably know as much real science as any other script writer. They wanted a "cool" name and that's it.
"That which we call a rose..." etc.