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. #881
    give me liberty
    Posts
    1,085
    well since i have been educated on sw weapons,here is some info on st weapons.

    http://www.ravensoft.com/eliteforce/arsenal/

    http://www.answers.com/topic/weapons-of-star-trek

    http://www.zipfmage.net/weapsht.html

    http://www.freewebs.com/sanderwensin...echnologie.htm


    my favorite is their ballistic hand held TR-116. its a version of a regular bullet gun,but it uses tritanium bullets,propelled by some super powder ,and it can shoot threw walls because it has a tiny transporter and targeting system. it can shoot threw any solid object without shields.

    but,you know,star wars is pretty fucked when it comes to time travel,thats a HUGE disadvantage when it comes to winning a long drawn out galaxy vs galaxy,nothing to lose situation. more then one species will try and use time weapons to destroy sw. or even travel to the future and bring back super future tech,its happened before in voyager,so i dont see why it wouldnt happen again in this battle.

    also,st had a weapon that is described very similar to how a blaster works,the fussion missile is similar in operation as a blaster,but the blaster seems to be a focused beam where as the missle was an explosion, either way,they stopped using them because they are worthless against shields.

    also,trans warp ships should be able to intercept sw hyper drive ships before they reach thier targets, its the sensors on both sides that are at a disadvantage,but the borg ships should have trans warp sensors,but im not 100% on that,ill find out and post it.the sensors would have to detect a ship at hyper/trans warp and calculate their trajectory and probable target,then manuaver between the attacking ship BEFORE it can attack its target.both sides will have trouble with these types of attacks.allthough dimensional transporters could be used to beam over photon torpedoes throu sheilds as the ships approached each other,but i dont know the maximum distance of the dimensional transporter,but there is also a temporal transporter that might work even better. sw will have a hard time with these types of attacks because thistype of technology and attacks will be completly foriegn to them.

    sw will have its hands full,it wont be the cake walk sw fans suggest.
    Last edited by mars13; 10-20-05 at 12:52 AM.

  2. #882
    Strategic Operations
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by mars13
    well since i have been educated on sw weapons,here is some info on st weapons.

    http://www.ravensoft.com/eliteforce/arsenal/
    Basically non-canon.

    A mix of canon and non-canon. I recognize a bunch of stuff from the TM's, and they are not strictly canon.

    Stats non-canon.

    Stats non-canon.

    also,st had a weapon that is described very similar to how a blaster works,the fussion missile is similar in operation as a blaster,but the blaster seems to be a focused beam where as the missle was an explosion, either way,they stopped using them because they are worthless against shields.
    Good heavens. A fusion missile is nothing but a missile with a nuclear warhead (we have those today.) Why are you comparing a blaster to a nuke?

    As for 'stopped using them', you will note that the way energy is released from a nuke and a matter/antimatter warhead are basically the same. They're both explosives. The difference is that the latter has superior energy density to the former.

    In other words, if ST could make a conventional thermonuclear warhead comparable to a matter/antimatter one, they'd still be using nukes. (Actually, one suspects that there are those in ST who still do use conventional nukes.)

    also,trans warp ships should be able to intercept sw hyper drive ships...
    Transwarp uses a different 'layer' of space than realspace. Hyperspace is a different layer of space than realspace. But there is no reason to believe that they are the same, as you are unwisely assuming.

    This also calls into question if ST sensors would even be able to detect a ship moving through hyperspace. Again, something we have no reason to believe is possible. (On the other hand, we have no reason to believe that SW sensors are able to detect ships moving via transwarp.)

    And what you can't detect, you can't attack, no matter what fancy methods you have. Saying that, your entire argument falls apart.

  3. #883
    give me liberty
    Posts
    1,085
    how is any of that info not canon? offcial trek games dont count?

    and there is no reason to suggest that sw can detect st ships traveling in transwarp.

    but rikers enterprise COULD detect borg cubes before they arrived,so they might be able to scan for trans warp.also,trans and hyper drive seem to be about the same method of propulsion. they are very similar at least.

    saying that your argument falls apart as well.

  4. #884
    Hellenistic polytheist Hapsburg's Avatar
    Posts
    4,988
    No, trek games don't count. Game physics.
    And itt has been stated by survivng ST co-creators that the only official canon material for ST is only the shows and movies. Thats it.

  5. #885
    give me liberty
    Posts
    1,085
    well im not a co creater so i dont care about who considers what canon.the games are based of off the shows and movies so thats close enough for me.

    its universe vs universe,and the games on both sides are part of that universe.
    i consider anything labeled offcial ''star trek'' materials to be canon,i also recognize all things offcialy labeled ''star wars''as canon.

    fan fiction doesnt count thou,as it is not ''official'' material.

    besides gene roddenberry said only things he deemed start trek were to be considered start trek,but he is dead ,and most trek has been made after his death. so according to you we should only count the first two seasons of tng and the orginal,as well as a few cartoons.

    im not going to speculate on what gene would like and dislike,so all things trek are canon in my book. even thou i hate ds9 with a passion,i consider it canon as well.

    besides,your just mad that sw games suck balls.

  6. #886
    Hellenistic polytheist Hapsburg's Avatar
    Posts
    4,988
    Dude, the co-creators decide what is canon, not the viewer. It's a highly organized system.
    For trek, it's just the shows and the movies.
    For SW it goes:
    1. Movies.
    2. Books and Manuals.
    3. Comics.
    4. Games.

    Oh, and SW games sucks balls? Is that why Knights of the Old Republic and Knights of the Old Republic II both got game of the year for thier respective years?

  7. #887
    give me liberty
    Posts
    1,085
    because they paid advertisers to promote their games with awards so they sell more,the sims wins awards too,so its nothing to brag about.

    and any way,if Gene doesnt say its star trek,then its not star trek,no one else gets to decide whats what without him,but since he has been dead for years[and we will not speculate on what he would decide] and st was still being made there is alot of other things that are canon besides what some sw fan recognizes.anything licensensed by paramount as an offcial star trek product is canon.

    and like i said,if its ''offcial''then its canon,regardless of who says what. are the games licencesed by paramount? yes,then they count as canon.

    anything offcialy licensensed by paramount as ''star trek'' is canon.not co-creaters[whatever the fuck that means].

    your astounding hypocrisy when it comes to st is remarkable.sw games count in your eyes but st games dont[they both are licensensed by their owners]? thats just stupid.

    besides,all the information in all those links IS from the show, even the links from the games are still info taken from the show.
    and unless you find a way to resurect Gene then then this discussion is over.

    if its licensed by the owner of st then its canon,and since paramount owns st and allways has then anything they have deemed offcial counts.

  8. #888
    Master of Useless Information
    Posts
    306
    I actually have to agree that the game info should be canon as long as it is liscensed by the owners of Trek. However, whoever said fanfiction doesn't count is right as well...Moving along.
    Actually I wasn't done with SW weapons, not by a long shot, but I don't have much time, so this will be a short one.
    Anti-Vehicle Weapons
    Handheld Blaster Cannon_This is a vehicle/starfighter grade blaster cannon in infantry form. Around the equivalent of an energy bazooka.
    Handheld Ion Cannon_This is a handheld ion cannon used to damage vehicle electronics instead of disabling them. It has similar power to the above blaster cannon, but will not damage infrastucture or living beings.
    E-Web_The Empire's primary infantry heavy weapon, the E-Web is a tripod mounted heavy repeating blaster that can be carried into battle by two troopers-one for the blaster, one for the energy source. This has a very high rate of fire and range, which is why it is often used as an anti-starfighter weapon.

  9. #889
    Strategic Operations
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by mars13
    how is any of that info not canon? offcial trek games dont count?
    The ST canon is only the movies and the television shows (but not the Animated Series). No more, no less. Everything else can be ignored when it comes to the hardcore debates.

    and there is no reason to suggest that sw can detect st ships traveling in transwarp.
    I did point that out if you read my post in its entirety.

    but rikers enterprise COULD detect borg cubes before they arrived,so they might be able to scan for trans warp.
    If you are referring to "The Best of Both Worlds", the Cube was moving via conventional warp at the time, not transwarp.

    also,trans and hyper drive seem to be about the same method of propulsion. they are very similar at least.
    You have proof of this similarity? Because this would be like saying B5 hyperspace is 'similar' to SW hyperspace.
    Last edited by kv1at3485; 10-22-05 at 03:57 AM.

  10. #890
    Hellenistic polytheist Hapsburg's Avatar
    Posts
    4,988
    Yes, quite. Moving on:
    The SW universe has every single possible weapon type represented, as well as every single vehicle type represented. The main difference is: Warsverse used lasers instead of bullets for thier full-sized MGs.
    Now, trek might have thier phasers and etc, but they don't have proper antivehicle weapons, antiaircraft weaponry, automatic smallarms, or assault vehicles, artillery, and scout vehicles. Star Wars has all of these and more, and uses them with deadly effeciency and effectiveness.

  11. #891
    Maxwell's demon Kron's Avatar
    Posts
    339
    Can everyone just ignore Mars13? This is Star WArs versus Star Trek, not Everyone versus Mars. And Mars is winning because he has a kind of enforced ignorance that we call "Fanaticism".

    From now on why don't we all give PROOF of what we say. A lot of debaters are already doing that, but not everyone.

    Does anyone remember something called Dune? You know... that sandy place with big earthworms and all that? Anybody?....

  12. #892
    give me liberty
    Posts
    1,085
    trek doesnt need vehicles because they have transporters.but in nemisis they did have that super cool dune buggy thing with matching shuttle.and they never really show vehicles that much but they do have them. they have hover carts,all they would need to do is make one bigger ,add seats and phasers,and you got your self a nifty little hover mobile.im sure star fleet has built more then one ground vehicle.

    also,anything licensed by paramount is canon,regardless of how some sw fan feels.

    i have ''enforced ignorance''?would you care to back that up with PROOF?

  13. #893
    Hellenistic polytheist Hapsburg's Avatar
    Posts
    4,988
    1. Yes you do. How else would be able to get past a heavily shielde enemy base? SW often puts energy shields around thier bases. Transporters can't go through shields.

    2. Dude, everyone but you has acknowledged the fact that ONLY movies and shows are canon in ST. It has been stated by the creators, who own the ST franchise now. Thier word is law in Trek.

    3. Dude, you have been stating the same shit over and over and over again, despite the fact that we've proven you wrong. You fanatically and blindly stating bullshit, and not letting any reason into your posts.

  14. #894
    give me liberty
    Posts
    1,085
    you havent proven shit. you have CLAIMED that the only trek canon is preapproved by ''co-creaters'',and i say anything that is owned and licensed by paramount as ''star trek'' is canon,especialy for some stupid online debate,or are you chicken?

    how about you stop stalling and change the subject BACK to st vs sw ?

    you know i was watching ds9 the other day,and do you know what they had?

    SHRINKING TECH!! it was so stupid,but trek does have the ability to shrink ,they shrunk a ship and a small crew.they were about .5 cm tall,that kind of technology would be a bain to the empire,they would looking for a needle in haystack trying to find tiny spies on a n emperial ship, ther so huge it would be nearly impossible to find something that small.if they ever even noticed what was happening.

    also,the trek tr-116 should be able to shoot anyone on a planet that is not in a shield. it works just like a conventianal gun but it has a micro transporter/radar system on it to beem the bullet throu walls,or anything for that matter,to anywhere the transporter has range.
    this weapon would be devistating to ground troops,they could be shot in the face 500 miles away before they even had the feds on radar. also,i dont know about sw having shields on small vehicles,so it should go throu all those vehicles sw has.

    and i bet picard had jordi put shileds on that little dunebuggy thing after that first field test. small shuttles have shields so i know they can be put on small vehicles,and im sure there are tons of species in the trek galaxy with vehicles.


    so are you going to continue stalling or are you going to find a counter to these technologies?

  15. #895
    Strategic Operations
    Posts
    121
    To put an end to the "what is ST canon" tangent, this is straight from the Startrek.com...

    How do the Star Trek novels and comic books fit into the Star Trek universe? What is considered Star Trek "canon"?

    As a rule of thumb, the events that take place within the live action episodes and movies are canon, or official Star Trek facts. Story lines, characters, events, stardates, etc. that take place within the fictional novels, the Animated Adventures, and the various comic lines are not canon.

    There are only a couple of exceptions to this rule: the Jeri Taylor penned novels "Mosaic" and "Pathways." Many of the events in these two novels feature background details of the main Star Trek: Voyager characters. (Note: There are a few details from an episode of the Animated Adventures that have entered into the Star Trek canon. The episode "Yesteryear," written by D.C. Fontana, features some biographical background on Spock.)
    http://www.startrek.com/startrek/vie...s/faq/676.html

    As one can see, only the liveaction movies and series are canonical.

    An extended discussion on the subject maybe found here.

    ---

    SHRINKING TECH!! it was so stupid,but trek does have the ability to shrink ,they shrunk a ship and a small crew.they were about .5 cm tall,that kind of technology would be a bain to the empire,they would looking for a needle in haystack trying to find tiny spies on a n emperial ship, ther so huge it would be nearly impossible to find something that small.if they ever even noticed what was happening.
    Nope. In 'One Little Ship', the runabout was shrunk because of the subspace compression anomaly. It was not because of a technological process. Indeed, to reinflate the runabout, they had to put it back into the anomaly.

  16. #896
    give me liberty
    Posts
    1,085
    again,i dont care what some douche thinks about what is canon and what is not.
    all things trek are canon if they are licensed by paramount,plain and simple. regardless of what some faq board says.
    especialy for some online debate of st vs sw.

    and i missed the begining of that shrinking episode.

  17. #897
    Strategic Operations
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by mars13
    all things trek are canon if they are licensed by paramount,plain and simple.
    Paramount, the ones who actually decide what the ST canon is, would disagree with your inexpert opinion.

    As a side note, if you were familiar with the 'official' materials like the ST tech manuals, you would realize that it is to ST's advantage to ignore these sources since they frequently make ST weaker in these debates.

    Read through the TNG:TM sometime and you'll see what I'm talking about. I especially like the part where SW infantry weapons are almost as powerful (if not more so) than the Type X phaser...

    and i missed the begining of that shrinking episode.
    Do make an effort to do some research prior to posting. It would do wonders for your near-non-existant credibility.

  18. #898
    give me liberty
    Posts
    1,085

    and i missed the begining of that shrinking episode.



    Do make an effort to do some research prior to posting. It would do wonders for your near-non-existant credibility.



    fuck you my tivo was broke . how the fuck can rewind time ,asshole?i dont even like ds9,it was just on,and i watched the last half.

    also,yeah,your copy and pasting links somehow makes you more qualified for anything.

  19. #899
    Strategic Operations
    Posts
    121
    My point is that you know you missed a big chunk of the episode, and yet you still leapt headfirst to a conclusion with extremely incomplete information.

    Even then you may have salvaged the truth by embarking on a search on the intenet.

    It's one thing to come to an 'correct'/'incorrect' conclusion from interpreting relevant data.

    It's another thing to come to a conclusion with incomplete data.

    Which is where 'copy and pasting links' comes in.

  20. #900
    give me liberty
    Posts
    1,085
    im sorry you think i should never be wrong,im sorry im not completly infalliable.


    but still,how are you going to counter the p-116?

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
  •