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. #16501
    Registered Senior Member alpinedigital's Avatar
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by ProphetofWisdom View Post
    Will lets see...lose of 40 ships in THe Best of Both Worlds part II (correct me if wrong) was a heavy loss to the fleet, lose of 111 out 112 ships in DS9 was a heavy loss, then the loss of about 312 ships.
    I think its says somewhere on Memory Alpha that it would take time for starfleet to recover from the lost at Wolf 359 to the Borg.
    So you're still talking about the loss of ships? How fuckin dumb, fool. 'recovering' from a situation is not merely replacing or rebuilding ships. Sounds to me like you're just trying to dig for shit to provide us numbers so you can say some fuckin HALO shit can beat them. Go stick that shit in the Halo thread, cuzz it doesn't belong here!

    Quote Originally Posted by ProphetofWisdom View Post
    Now some more details on the Forerunner before any one says Trek can beat them.
    THIS IS NOT A THREAD OF EVERYTHING AGAINST STAR TREK, YOU STUPID FUCKING R-TARD!

    Sorry, did that sound mean? I apologize. I didn't mean to treat you with so much disrespect openly on a public forum, but I still think you're an R-tard.
    Now go back to Halo vs, R-tard.
    Last edited by alpinedigital; 09-07-09 at 08:06 AM.

  2. #16502
    So you're still talking about the loss of ships? How fuckin dumb, fool. 'recovering' from a situation is not merely replacing or rebuilding ships. Sounds to me like you're just trying to dig for shit to provide us numbers so you can say some fuckin HALO shit can beat them. Go stick that shit in the Halo thread, cuzz it doesn't belong here!
    Hey, I aksed for proof on the ship numbers for the Federation, not about where they get them etc. I want proof of anything beyond 30,000 ships for the Feds. And hey, I didn't start that really, I just said what the Forerunner could do and never mention it again until that idiot came along and tried to claim the Forerunner who look at anything below blowing up stars as "half-measures" could be beaten by even the 29th century Fed before the Forerunner wail on them and the Borg at the same time.

    THIS IS NOT A THREAD OF EVERYTHING AGAINST STAR TREK, YOU STUPID FUCKING R-TARD!

    Sorry, did that sound mean? I apologize. I didn't mean treat you wish so much disrespect openly on a public forum, but I still think you're an R-tard.
    Now go back to Halo vs, R-tard.
    Its ok, but I have to says this now to everyone: this is why you can't have a true debate with most Trekkies, you ask for the proof and they avoid it and insult you.
    I apologize also, but if your going to debate you don't go around insulting people over stupid things like this. Also if this is STvSW then why are there all those other options to chose from in the poll? From what I see it doesn't have to be pure STvSW.

    So now, either you or the person that claim 60,000+ ships cough up your sources now or shut and go along with a max of 30,000 ships in Starfleet.

  3. #16503
    That which cannot be known Kittamaru's Avatar
    Posts
    7,967
    Quote Originally Posted by ProphetofWisdom View Post
    Will lets see...lose of 40 ships in THe Best of Both Worlds part II (correct me if wrong) was a heavy loss to the fleet, lose of 111 out 112 ships in DS9 was a heavy loss, then the loss of about 312 ships.
    I think its says somewhere on Memory Alpha that it would take time for starfleet to recover from the lost at Wolf 359 to the Borg.
    Consider this:

    Starfleet has at LEAST 14 known, active fleets, and several smaller task forces, including two wings of JUST galaxy class starships (six ships per wing).

    Now, consider each smaller fleet has between 20 and 100 vessels, we can assume a loss of 40 ships is MAJOR to a fleet. Maybe not the StarFleet, but to, say, the Seventh fleet... yeah.

  4. #16504
    That which cannot be known Kittamaru's Avatar
    Posts
    7,967
    Quote Originally Posted by ProphetofWisdom View Post

    Now some more details on the Forerunner before any one says Trek can beat them.

    1. The 90,000-100,000 kilometer across megastructure known as "The Ark" was built in secret during the last few years of the Forerunner-Flood War and then transport with the sun built for it out to 260,000 light light years from the galactic core, beyond the range of the "Halo Effect" as the Forerunners called it.

    2. The Ark is not even the most impressive thing they seem to have built in secret during the end of the War when their industrial strength was a shadow of what it was at the start.
    They built high end 7 true Shield Worlds (high since this would go with 7 rings), each of them is built out of trillions of Onyx drones, thousands linked together can blast unshielded Covenant warships away with ease.
    At the center of these worlds are Slipspace rifts 2 meters across that house the Micro Dyson Sphere, which is 150,000 kilometers aross, or about 2 AU.

    3. Even during the end of the War 10,000 ships was still consider a 'surgical' strike. They also built fleets of thousands of standard non-Keyship Dreadnoughts with ease even when building their megastructures.

    Looking over all of this, it can be said that the Forerunner could easily over-run Trek high end and Wars high end without even breaking a sweat.
    And yet, if I'm not mistaken, these people are all DEAD... yeah, scary.

    And again, quality > Quantity my friend. And Trek has Quality all the way.

  5. #16505
    Quote Originally Posted by Kittamaru View Post
    Consider this:

    Starfleet has at LEAST 14 known, active fleets, and several smaller task forces, including two wings of JUST galaxy class starships (six ships per wing).

    Now, consider each smaller fleet has between 20 and 100 vessels, we can assume a loss of 40 ships is MAJOR to a fleet. Maybe not the StarFleet, but to, say, the Seventh fleet... yeah.
    Agreed. All I have asked for is proof of more then 30,000 ships, I mean that is a fair number of ships.
    The Kligons, RSE and Federation fleets combined I can see as being 90,000-100,000 strong but not more.
    I am also assuming that all 30,000 vessels are warships and only a small percentage, 2-4 percent might have been pulled out of storage since we know Starfleet keeps old ships in service for a long time.
    Depending on how long they keep old Starships in service the number of 23 century ships most likely ranges from 10,000 to 20,000 of the about 30,000 max of Starfleet.

  6. #16506
    Quote Originally Posted by Kittamaru View Post
    And yet, if I'm not mistaken, these people are all DEAD... yeah, scary.

    And again, quality > Quantity my friend. And Trek has Quality all the way.
    1. Yes, and if it is universe vs universe with nearly everything from all timelines vs nearly everything else that means the Forerunner come back with a bang.

    2. *sigh* THe Forerunner have been (as far as we know) dead for about the last 100,000 years and all of their megastructures and everything else(besides the Flood infected prototype shield world in HW) are in prefect shape, the same as the day they fired the Array.
    You see the Forerunner go for massive quality and quanity.

    Before going up against the Forerunner ask yourself this: "Can the Culture do it?"
    If the answer is yes just knock off a couple zeros and you should have the Forerunner version.

    Also note that the Covenant have had about mid-high end BDZ type weapons for ship to ship combat for thousands of years and a Forerunner Keyship with only a fraction of its full power and weapons systems online was able to swat entire fleets aside without breaking a sweat.

  7. #16507
    Registered Senior Member alpinedigital's Avatar
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by ProphetofWisdom View Post
    Hey, I aksed for proof on the ship numbers for the Federation, not about where they get them etc. I want proof of anything beyond 30,000 ships for the Feds. And hey, I didn't start that really, I just said what the Forerunner could do and never mention it again until that idiot came along and tried to claim the Forerunner who look at anything below blowing up stars as "half-measures" could be beaten by even the 29th century Fed before the Forerunner wail on them and the Borg at the same time.

    Its ok, but I have to says this now to everyone: this is why you can't have a true debate with most Trekkies, you ask for the proof and they avoid it and insult you.
    I apologize also, but if your going to debate you don't go around insulting people over stupid things like this. Also if this is STvSW then why are there all those other options to chose from in the poll? From what I see it doesn't have to be pure STvSW.

    So now, either you or the person that claim 60,000+ ships cough up your sources now or shut and go along with a max of 30,000 ships in Starfleet.
    No, stupid ass idiot, you're trying to argue these numbers so you can start a Forerunner debate. Why don't you cough up the proof that there is NOT that many, and then go post it on the HALO vs Star Trek thread where it belongs and shut the fuck up about it here.

    Also, its not the question of whether there is 30k or not that got you insulted, its your fuckin method of debating where it does not belong. That puts YOU outside the rules of debate because its off topic. Once you ask for proof for the purpose of debating SW vs ST, you wont have a problem.

    Now, since you're going to enter the poll as evidence that your argument doesnt have to be purely ST vs ST I'll submit MY observation that its also evidence of the ONLY things not purely SW vs ST, and I don't see HALO in that poll.

    Seriously, I didnt even have a problem with the 30K evidence until you mentioned Forerunner. Thats a very dickless thing to do when there's a forum thread started specifically for your comments. If you can't get enough attention there, maybe its because nobody cares about your stupid HALO crap.

  8. #16508
    Troper In Training
    Posts
    139
    I don't really care who beats who unless there is absolute proof of who could be a winner. But I'm going to restate alpinedigital's question as why is this being discussed on a STvsSW thread. Is the reason why we have 820+ pages because of off topic debates and repetitive claims?

  9. #16509
    No, stupid ass idiot, you're trying to argue these numbers so you can start a Forerunner debate. Why don't you cough up the proof that there is NOT that many, and then go post it on the HALO vs Star Trek thread where it belongs and shut the fuck up about it here.
    So know your trying to shift burden of proof? That is not how it works, I asked for what sources lead to the 60,000+ when at best I can see about half that.

    Also, its not the question of whether there is 30k or not that got you insulted, its your fuckin method of debating where it does not belong. That puts YOU outside the rules of debate because its off topic. Once you ask for proof for the purpose of debating SW vs ST, you wont have a problem.
    Hey! I brought up once, I would have dropped it later on if that idiot haden't brought it back up and the stupid chain reaction bit!

    Now, since you're going to enter the poll as evidence that your argument doesnt have to be purely ST vs ST I'll submit MY observation that its also evidence of the ONLY things not purely SW vs ST, and I don't see HALO in that poll.
    Fine, its not my fault that idiot decided to revive something I never planed to continue in this thread otherwise.

    Seriously, I didnt even have a problem with the 30K evidence until you mentioned Forerunner. Thats a very dickless thing to do when there's a forum thread started specifically for your comments. If you can't get enough attention there, maybe its because nobody cares about your stupid HALO crap.
    As I said he brought it back up, not my fault, I didn't expect an idiot like that to take it seriously since I meant it to be funny, you know fart at a star and boom? Might be able to put a dent in the shields of a garbage barg?
    Guess I sould have put a smile after those.
    God, it was that idiot who tried to say they were better, I just joked about it a bit until he brought up again.

    Also mistake I made before, I meant 24 century ships, not 23 century.

  10. #16510
    That which cannot be known Kittamaru's Avatar
    Posts
    7,967
    Yes, but add in the Future Federation ships (if you want to go all of timeline vs all of timeline) and now you have to deal with ships going back to before the Forerunner evolved from primal ooze and BDZ'ing their planet. *shrugs*

    That's the problem with not setting ANY boundaries...

  11. #16511
    That which cannot be known Kittamaru's Avatar
    Posts
    7,967
    Also, consider this:

    Look at Earth Spacedock... it's massive. Now, think of the Firepower they put on DS9

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qm4sqrLyMp4

    After a YEAR, they took a completely unarmed, unshielded, low-key station, and given it this kind of firepower... what do you think Earth Spacedock has on it? I mean, DS8 was cunt-punting Klingon ships, from Frigates all the way up to Battleships, like toys!

    This is what I was able to find on a standard Federation spacedock (like the one over earth) - not 100% sure how cannon it is, but about all I can really find seems to agree to this




    I give you Starbase 1, Earths Starbase - in detail:


    SPECS for Mk.I - Ournal I:
    Type: Starbase manufacturing and support facility
    Commissioned: 2274 - present
    Diameter: 3,810 m
    Height (main): 4,648 m
    Height (overall): 5,795 m
    Decks: 1,200
    Mass: 580,000,000 tons
    Crew: 15,000 Starfleet, 76,625 civilians and transients

    Armament:
    370 x Type XII phaser arrays, total output 2,240,000 TeraWatts
    80 type XIII Independant Twin Mount Phaser Cannons
    24 x Burst fire photon torpedo tubes. (upgraded to 50 after Breen attack) Total 12,000 photon torpedoes (now 40,000)
    20 Rapid Fire Quantum Torpedo Tubes (fit after Breen attack) Total 15,000 quantum torpedoes

    Defence Systems:
    High capacity shield system, capacity 75,600,000 TeraJoules
    Standard Duranium/Tritanium double hull.
    Low level Structural Integrity field

    Propulsion systems: 80 Maneuvering thrusters (If needed)
    Velocity: 10 meters a second
    Acceleration: Rest-Onset Critical Momentum: 15.8 sec

    Primary Computer System:
    Original Configeration: M-10 Duotronic IV Processor
    Current Configeration: M15A Bio-Neural Gelpack Isolinear II-A Processor

    Embarked Craft (Typical):
    285 Work Bee Class General Utility Craft
    100 Shuttlecraft (Various Classes)
    50 Danube-Class Runabouts

    Docking Facilities: Internal docking bay capable of holding up to thirty starships, depending on type
    Fifteen hangar bays capable of holding up to three hundred shuttlecraft shuttlecraft

    Diplomatic Capability: Three Grade 7 systems
    Refit Cycle Minor: 5 years Standard: 15 years Major: 30 years Expected Hull Life: 150 years

    AND

    Starbase 74


    SPECS for Mk.II - Ournal II:
    Type: Starbase manufacturing and support facility
    Commissioned: 2358 - Present Day
    Dimensions Diameter: 8,781 m Height (main): 10,712 m Height (overall): 13,360 m Decks: 2,400 Mass: 7,100,000,000 tons Crew: 85,000 Starfleet, typically 120 to 100,000 civilian

    Armament:
    2,000 x Type XII phaser arrays, total output 12,150,000 TeraWatts
    96 x Burst fire photon torpedo tubes. Total 50,000 photon torpedoes

    Defence Systems:
    High capacity shield system, total capacity 796,500,000 TeraJoules
    Standard Duranium/Tritanium double hull.
    Low level Structural Integrity field

    Docking Facilities Internal docking bay capable of holding up to two hundred starships, depending on type Two hundred hangar bays capable of holding up to three thousand shuttlecraft

    Diplomatic Capability: Five Grade 7 systems
    Refit Cycle Minor: 5 years Standard: 15 years Major: 45 years Expected Hull Life: 180 years
    Last edited by Kittamaru; 09-06-09 at 08:24 PM.

  12. #16512
    Quote Originally Posted by Kittamaru View Post
    Also, consider this:



    Look at Earth Spacedock... it's massive. Now, think of the Firepower they put on DS9

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qm4sqrLyMp4

    After a YEAR, they took a completely unarmed, unshielded, low-key station, and given it this kind of firepower... what do you think Earth Spacedock has on it? I mean, DS8 was cunt-punting Klingon ships, from Frigates all the way up to Battleships, like toys!

    This is what I was able to find on a standard Federation spacedock (like the one over earth) - not 100% sure how cannon it is, but about all I can really find seems to agree to this



    over 75 MILLION TJ! Holy shit!
    Everything but the shields are impressive. The only reason I say they are not impressive is because the Forerunner have the prefect FTL shield: Slipspace rifts 2 meters across in nomral space that house 2 AU across Dyson Spheres and star.
    Take all the most powerful starships from EVERY other sci-fi universe and have them shoot at it for a million years and they won't do any damage.
    For normal Sci-fi those are impressive shields.

    Now all this about the Forerunners as said is off topic so lets just save this for another thread.

  13. #16513
    Registered Senior Member alpinedigital's Avatar
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by ProphetofWisdom View Post
    Everything but the shields are impressive. The only reason I say they are not impressive is because the Forerunner have the prefect FTL shield: Slipspace rifts 2 meters across in nomral space that house 2 AU across Dyson Spheres and star.
    Take all the most powerful starships from EVERY other sci-fi universe and have them shoot at it for a million years and they won't do any damage.
    For normal Sci-fi those are impressive shields.

    Now all this about the Forerunners as said is off topic so lets just save this for another thread.
    Too late, moron! You want to have your final say and then leave. Im sure if somebody else counters, you'll be the idiot to continue.

    At least for those arguing for the side of Trek are in defense of Trek which IS part of the topic. Forerunner is not so that makes you the instigator, and the idiot.

    Quote Originally Posted by ProphetofWisdom View Post
    Hey! I brought up once, I would have dropped it later on if that idiot haden't brought it back up and the stupid chain reaction bit!

    Fine, its not my fault that idiot decided to revive something I never planed to continue in this thread otherwise.

    As I said he brought it back up, not my fault
    It IS your fault, because you instigated the entire mess. If you throw a match in a forest and the fire ends up engulfing the camp sites and blowing up campers and cars, is it their fault for parking there?

    dumbass.

  14. #16514
    Too late, moron! You want to have your final say and then leave. Im sure if somebody else counters, you'll be the idiot to continue.
    If anyone wants to continue this, them or me can just start a new thread or just use the PM system.

    At least for those arguing for the side of Trek are in defense of Trek which IS part of the topic. Forerunner is not so that makes you the instigator, and the idiot.
    HOW CAN ANYONE REALLY TAKE FART AT STARS AND THEY BLOW UP AS STARTING A NEW DEBATE? If I had wanted to start a new debate I would't have been throwing it out that way.
    I now I'm the inarigator, but anyone that takes the way I put that as a means to start a new debate is am idiot as I said before.

    It IS your fault, because you instigated the entire mess. If you throw a match in a forest and the fire ends up engulfing the camp sites and blowing up campers and cars, is it their fault for parking there?

    dumbass.
    I KNOW. If he taken the time to read it through on that bit and think about it, he would have seen it for the funny over-wank joke it was.

    Now, lets just drop this.

    As I have said before I agree with all the points brought up on firepower.

  15. #16515
    Registered Senior Member alpinedigital's Avatar
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by ProphetofWisdom View Post
    Now, lets just drop this.
    Are you still here??

    Damn, I can't believe we had a perfectly good topic about women going and now look. Just because somebody cant get it through their thick head about the meaning of 'loss' -we end up with stupid ongoing excuses.

    So back to the topic at hand, shall we??
    Star Wars vs Star Trek, but lets have some fun with it. Lets say with only the females!!

    No, actually, lets allow Star Wars to have any gender, any species, all their ships, and as much Force as they want. Just max out all their characters, and...

    oooh dang, a Voyager/Next Gen female tag team FTW!!

  16. #16516
    That which cannot be known Kittamaru's Avatar
    Posts
    7,967
    Quote Originally Posted by alpinedigital View Post
    Are you still here??

    Damn, I can't believe we had a perfectly good topic about women going and now look. Just because somebody cant get it through their thick head about the meaning of 'loss' -we end up with stupid ongoing excuses.

    So back to the topic at hand, shall we??
    Star Wars vs Star Trek, but lets have some fun with it. Lets say with only the females!!

    No, actually, lets allow Star Wars to have any gender, any species, all their ships, and as much Force as they want. Just max out all their characters, and...

    oooh dang, a Voyager/Next Gen female tag team FTW!!
    NO offense alpine... actually, yes, i do mean to offend...

    STFU! You're acting like a 10 year old brat who just had her favorite barbie doll taken away, resorting to name calling and vicious personal attacks... lay off the CRACK!

  17. #16517
    Quote Originally Posted by alpinedigital View Post
    Are you still here??

    Damn, I can't believe we had a perfectly good topic about women going and now look. Just because somebody cant get it through their thick head about the meaning of 'loss' -we end up with stupid ongoing excuses.

    So back to the topic at hand, shall we??
    Star Wars vs Star Trek, but lets have some fun with it. Lets say with only the females!!

    No, actually, lets allow Star Wars to have any gender, any species, all their ships, and as much Force as they want. Just max out all their characters, and...

    oooh dang, a Voyager/Next Gen female tag team FTW!!
    You do know I was say "lets drop this" as in drop it about the Forerunners, right? I really have to agree with Kittamaru here.

    Also, are AI's with holographic avatars allowed in this? If so, I'll get some pictures later.

  18. #16518
    Quote Originally Posted by Hellblade8 View Post
    And is loss within a black hole.

    Of course, the UFP can pretty much blow apart stars thanks to a certain scientist, and they can do it with their standard torpedo cases. No special ship required.
    Just wanted to clear this up: they don't need the Sun Crusher to use the torpedos, the torpedos are what do the work. The only thing really special about the SC is the ability to shurg off any amount of HTL shots and it even took a glancing blow from the SL on the prototype DS.

  19. #16519
    Quote Originally Posted by ProphetofWisdom View Post

    Also, are AI's with holographic avatars allowed in this? If so, I'll get some pictures later.
    Andromeda is a warships AI with holographic avatar and her droid avatar (Rommie)

  20. #16520
    Quote Originally Posted by Kittamaru View Post








    SPECS for Mk.I - Ournal I:
    Type: Starbase manufacturing and support facility
    Commissioned: 2274 - present
    Diameter: 3,810 m
    Height (main): 4,648 m
    Height (overall): 5,795 m
    Decks: 1,200
    Mass: 580,000,000 tons
    Crew: 15,000 Starfleet, 76,625 civilians and transients

    Armament:
    370 x Type XII phaser arrays, total output 2,240,000 TeraWatts
    80 type XIII Independant Twin Mount Phaser Cannons
    24 x Burst fire photon torpedo tubes. (upgraded to 50 after Breen attack) Total 12,000 photon torpedoes (now 40,000)
    20 Rapid Fire Quantum Torpedo Tubes (fit after Breen attack) Total 15,000 quantum torpedoes

    Defence Systems:
    High capacity shield system, capacity 75,600,000 TeraJoules
    Standard Duranium/Tritanium double hull.
    Low level Structural Integrity field

    Propulsion systems: 80 Maneuvering thrusters (If needed)
    Velocity: 10 meters a second
    Acceleration: Rest-Onset Critical Momentum: 15.8 sec

    Primary Computer System:
    Original Configeration: M-10 Duotronic IV Processor
    Current Configeration: M15A Bio-Neural Gelpack Isolinear II-A Processor

    Embarked Craft (Typical):
    285 Work Bee Class General Utility Craft
    100 Shuttlecraft (Various Classes)
    50 Danube-Class Runabouts

    Docking Facilities: Internal docking bay capable of holding up to thirty starships, depending on type
    Fifteen hangar bays capable of holding up to three hundred shuttlecraft shuttlecraft

    Diplomatic Capability: Three Grade 7 systems
    Refit Cycle Minor: 5 years Standard: 15 years Major: 30 years Expected Hull Life: 150 years
    damn pretty awesome stuff. just wondering Kitt have they a special method of storing Torps. I mean 50,000 to 55,000 coffin sized torps ??? Do they store them in full or do they just keep the payloads on stock and replicate the torps themself?? It would be logical as they have the technology to do so.

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
  •