Star Wars vs Star Trek

*chuckles* And the same tried, and decimated, rebuttals... complimented by an attempt at discrediting allusion... classic Scott, classic.

I'll take those posts apart piece by piece later tonight - sadly, I have to head into work early because my boss needs some extra hands for inventory.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I didn't want to have to this but, Q comes, kills everyone in the starwars universe. Game over. /end thread

LOL jk he probably just turns darth vaders armor pink and pees the death stars exhaust port or something lame like that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But the ejecta would directly reflect the power of the shot.
The droid tanks produced plums but 10 feet high and measurable small. That a terrestrial fire equivalent. So unless you're saying the Droid tanks are equivalent to current day tanks I'd suggest discontinuing to this reasoning.

Yes, EVERY WEAPON weapon in the New Trilogy and EU might have been dialed down.
1. The Republic artillery tanks.
2. The Republic transport missiles and laser turrets,
3. The So called Torpedo of the Naboo fighter,
4. the Tie Fighters in the asteroid field
5. The Star Destroyer's Turbo lasers taking out asteroids
6. The Base Delta Zero's in the entire Expanded Universe
7. The tie Fighters that struck Artoo directly in the dome
8. The droid tank missiles in TPM
9 The droid tank turret in TPM
10. And of course the storm troopers blaster was surely dialed as well of Leia simple had a blaster proof blouse right?

And every time they fired on just the right spot.

1. That's why Red Leader bit the dust
2. That's why Red 2 bit the dust
3. That's why Red 3 bit the dust.
4. That's why Porkins bit the dust.
5. That's why Gold leader bit the dust
6. That's why Red 8 bit the dust.
7. Thats why Hutch bit the dust
8. That's why Tiry bit the dust

Your explanations serve not as tangible possibilities but rather pedantic baseless babblings before a flock of inconsistency. "They're just dialed down." Its the most perpetuated excuse from the opposition. You have never once yielded to logic nor the evidence when your own conjecture is so effective a spackle for the holes in the the ICS presents.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

actually, considering his penchant for trouble making he'd get the war started then sit back with the rest of continium and watch like it was pro wrestling.

 

In other words you are gonna pull the same stunt as before, claim you have completely disproven something, yet never ever provide anythng even resembling proof.

 

Actually ejecta is not always a direct representation of the power level. In the case of a pure kinetic impact weapon, it's a good indicator as it takes a lot of power to create ejecta that way. In explosive weapons it not some much as a small amount of explosive in a loose surface create LOTS of ejecta. Fr energy weapons it's arguable as well. Phasers almost never create ejecta until you get to insane power levels. Sme could be said for lasers, x-lasers, grasers, ion cannons, and so on. These weapons attempt to burn their way through an object. They come into trouble against materials try to rapidly spread the incoming energy over a large area ie Storm Trooper armor, droid casing and so on. In these cases you see and explosive reaction.

1: Actiually as outside of the CLone Wars cartoon you never see them fired at anything less than a full starship....I think you are just reaching here.
2: The transports were obviously built with a combination of anitpersonell and anti vehicle weaponry. In the scenes i saw those weapons worked as needed.
3. The only scene where you could possibly thing the torpedo was weak was inside the Droid Control fighter. It was clear enough that the Two torpedoes were powerful enough to destroy and obviously heavily armroed and shielded reactor.
4. Every Asteroid we see hit by a TIE fighter is so massive that the comparitively small weapons wouldn't have done much. Also remember the canon composition of these Asteroids was the same materials used in Duraarmor.
5. We never see a Asteroid hit by a Turbolaser that wasn;t immediately vaporized. Considering some of said asteroids were ten times the Millenium Falcon in length and width, that is saying something.
6.As we have never seen the during of an Actual BDZ, and no Antilles did not order one, we have only completely lifeless and worthless planets with no signs of ever being anything useful to jufge by,
7. The blast that shot through a still operational shield and struck a droid that is designed to take hits from STarfighter level weaponry becuase of it's job function.
8. As they were fighting basically infantry and calvary would you load AP missiles or Fragmentation ones?
9. Easily could have been. After all at the shield there was a set slow rate of fire with heavy recoild from the barrel. Against the unshielded gungans high rate of fire and little recoil. Ask any Armor gunner if he'd love a main gun that could swith fire modes and damage levels to adapt to different targets and listen to what he says.
10. She was wearing standard issue camouflage cammon ablative BDU's. Blus she nailed with more a glancing hit, still where the wound was the shirt was charred and burnt.

Actually none of these guys went down to tank cannons. They were fired upon by starfightr and capital ship weapons. Thus this portion of your argument is completely stupid. It's like comparing victims of a precisely placed .22LR round and the victims of a well placed .600H&H Nitro
. Sure both are dead, but the the first guy was victim to a really lucky shot.

Well kinda hard to yield to something none of you have presented. And by the way, if it's logical that the Enterprise, a ship form a culture whose space travels has not even reached 500 years, can dial down a weapon, why can't the vessels of a culture who's been using much faster FTL for 25,000 years.

 

Of course not but it usually is.

No, Scott it's not arguable, it's conjecture

You're not presenting a reality here Scott. The Clones Wars are canon and their effects are canon as well. There is no stretching of of the facts.

They also worked considerably under the fire power dictated by ICS estimates.

Conjecture. The torpedoes produced an extremely limiting gasoline effect with nearly no concussive force and neither was the reactor of the appearance to be heavily armed it was in fact quite quite flimsy as it did not resist the weapons that tested it.

Facts and experiments have shown that the asteroids fired on were less than 4 meters wide...far from huge. The Wiki confirms the asteroids were nickel Iron.

No asteroids of that size were ever fired upon based purely on the facts.

Then the described BDZ's are the standard for BDZ

Yes it shot through without striking the shields according to the visual.
And yet Artoo can't repel blaster fire.

Regardless it still does not show full power in the range dictated and thus it's in the proper category.

But wasn't and with out supportive evidence of dial down it's conjecture to consider otherwise.

Actually she got a direct hit and she was bleeding.

ever claimed they did.

Only because you've made certain assumptions.

The weapons struck the ships and the shields did absolutely nothing. I'd say that it clearly points to the fact that Star Wars shields are wholely ineffective unless struct from the right angle.

Evidence? The evidence is aplenty and your conjecture is the only reply that you have thus I can't only describe you fallacy as an inherent fallacy but I don't require you to recognize that even though you went through quite a bit of trouble to counter that evidence so your denial is merely illusionary not absolute.

Conjecture...Scott. The ability is irrelevant with out proof that it happened. Your argument is circular. You assume the weapons were dialed down because you did not see the effect you think you should have seen. Your deduction is based on one premise discounting the possibility of a considerable range of proof...

This is akin to attributing chance to a series of unlikely events because one source says other wise. You believe the one source is right instead that the preponderance of evidence says that it is wrong.

 

@ Scott - no, my response was pretty much what Saquist already said... just not nearly as nice. How he still has the patience to show you any respect despite your apparently irredeemable and irreparable illogical mindset, not to mention your penchant for simply "getting out of dodge" when the proof becomes insurmountable...

I have no respect for people like you, Scott- I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt a couple times, but each time you tried to play the same tired games.

The proof is quite damning... the ICS is pretty well toast, as are these incredibly inflated numbers that Warsies keep spouting.

 

Heck the Wong numbers which were supposed to be based on canon is now it's been proven those numbers were inflated and completely fallacious. I don't use the word prove often but it's is extremely definitive that the asteroids were less than 4 meters wide.

 

Hello guys. I've been away because I installed Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit. had a bit installation issues after I, ehem, 'got' it lol
So how is everybody? Good I hope.

 

Eh, Saquist is just schooling TW Scotch as always... and George is making me question my faith in humanity (or at least humanities capacity for learning)

 

As usual the world goes to hell when we argue with Mr. Scott and the others who don't agree that Star Trek wins (no contest) lol I summon the nerd power that says you must agree with me. lol.

 

Love it both!

I have watched all its series. And I loved it very much. I just hope that there is another for both movies.

 

for those of you interested, i got REALLY bored of this thread. and this conflict. everyone, just get over it and admit you just defend your side ONLY because you like it more. dam, their both fiction, none of it is real, and really getting out of touch with the whole point of both franchises.
kit, FINE. i can GET OVER IT, and accept defeat, but ONLY because i don't want to bother with this shit anymore. OK? are you happy? sure you are, you'd been waiting for this for months. there you go, I AM DEFEATED.
my question now is if YOU would be able to accept reality and admit you just like trek and don't really care who wins. i don't. at all. i like both, but SW more.
i bet by freedom you won't.
and the other trekkie, just pass this stupid conflict. same goes for SW guys.
if any of you actually care about SW or ST, just get over it cuz its making both look stupid.
peace,and may the force be with you.:m:

 

but i still go with Wong's and Saxtons calculations, cuz they STILL are way smarter than any one here, and weather or not just fanboys, their numbers work. they DO have the upper word, but numbers mean nothing since all that dose matter is the message of SW, or ST if you like.
SW is considered many as THE epic of modern time. it takes mythology, religion, philosophy, history and tells them is a way they were never tell before.
ST is a hardcore scy-fy that, if you take away the ridiculous and moronic amount of technobabble, is a utopia future that is supposed to be scientifically, but dam fails. still, its settings that i mentioned above, mythology, philosophy, history, religion (actually it really fucking sucks at this), makes me like it. but, the main reason i don't like it that much is that its messing with science when its supposed to BE science. SW, even if it dose messes wit science, its main plot has nothing to do with science and respecting it would just compromise the story in most parts. but ST is supposed to FOLLOW it, right? so when the crew comes up with a ridiculous, inconsistent, pseudoscience that has really absolute no connection with what its supposed to be, then i ask you: why would i like it above SW? why would you? because this is the truth and nothing but the truth, so cope with it and answer.

 

You know the two are more evenly matched than most people want to admit for either side. It's not until Wong created the feral beast known as Warsie was sci fi turn up side down in these medieval like clashes of stupidity. I have a passing enjoyment for both (languishing over bad writing). If the fans weren't so pompous and obnoxious there might have been a cross over Movie....you know Lucas would do anything for more money but I think that's one war he'd like to avoid.

Nice system....
We're doing fine Apoc. I was permanently banished though. Ricery. Then he kept trying to come back under another user name. The guy wasn't the smartest pea in the pod. RIP

 

*chuckles* George, it has nothing to do with liking one side over the other - saquist and I are both fans of both Wars and Trek - thing is, Trek just has some advantages Wars cannot overcome, while Wars has numbers and construction capability that gives it an edge. It's a very evenly matched battle in the end... the deciding factor (IMHO) is the fact that the Federation has shown it's capability to sort of "sit up and take notice" and very quickly go from a peaceful state to a very heavy warlike state... I almost equate it to the US in WW2... staying out of it as long as possible, but once we were hit... well, get out of the way.

 

If the new Star Trek movie is canon, then Star Wars don't stand a chance, I bought it, it was AMAZING, the special effects.

 

Got anything to back that up, a proper report from a certified psychologist? For all we know Kittamaru is the smartest man on Earth, are you qualified to say otherwise?

Care to back that statement up?

I am properly certified a genius, but does that make my point more valid then the next person's just because I am a genius? Does that means "unless you can find another person smarter, I win!"?

 

Likewise - I have an IQ that, last tested, was over 140... not genius level but well, well above average. I've had an IQ over 130 since I was six... does that make more any more or less qualified to comment on what we see in a fictional universe?