Star Wars vs Star Trek

---Are you saying that the destruction of Alderaan is a technical specification?

What do you mean?

SCOTT

--Remeber the only reason why Geneisi failed was because of protomatter. It still made an incredible weapon...one I'm glad was never developed. Dr. Marcus touched on that.

Oh details!!! "The bureacratic mentality is the only constant in the universe"-McCoy. Trek had two. Star Wars had two...There both gone anyway so why don't you give a little...Each one had incredible potential...we'll never see either one ever again. Would you like to move on now?

--I wasn't being snotty...sorry.

I see so when something doesn't make sense our default is the charcter doesn't know what there talking about? Okay...that was real imaginative.

That's okay that response was very predictable. But I wasn't asking you anyway. That's why I didn't direct it at you.

And so heres the truth, as I see. Everything you say from this point out I'll just consider that "Wong" came up with it first. Since I've read just about everything on the Sci Fi debate I'll consider you his avatar.

AT least untill you have some more original thoughts or you become more open minded to be wrong everyonce and a while....

cannon
canon.....chose one Scott...I'm laughing at you...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It is a demonstration of ability from which one can draw conclusions. Destroying a planet like Alderaan would require around 10^32 joules minimum based on the gravitational binding energy of the planet.

I thought I was perfectly clear. If the Genesis Device was really the untimate weapon that you claim, they would have used it to destroy the Borgs cube that almost assimilated Earth. The fact that they didn't use the Genesis device against the Borg, even when the Borg cube had destroyed most of starfleet and was sitting in Earth orbit getting ready to turn everyone on Earth into a Borg drone, is proof that the Genesis Device isn't the great weapon that you believe it to be.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well I agree. We can conclude that it destroys the planet. But it's not a technical specification. It's a demonstration of ability. So I won't confirm any numbers you put up. It makes an assumption of the method creates it's beam and destroys the planet. There are many ways to do that I just can't give any validity to yours as the only method as Lucas film hasn't made a position on this subject.

As it stands for me. Star Wars has shown super destructive ability when creating moon size stations. That's the truth and that's what'll stick with.

I made that claim? Funny...I don't recall saying that. And I''m afraid I can't follow your destructive reasonings proportioned to the peaceful organization that the Federation is.

The proof that you claim isn't of anything remotely resembling a conclusion. You can only conclude the Federation did not pursue the technology....

Nor did the Galactic Alliance pursue the Death Star Project in light of the Yuuzahn Vong. You see reasonably you must draw the appropriate conclusions.

The Federation doesn't do doomsday weapons...never has.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Really? Do you have Amnesia?

 

Do like me. Ignore 1, 2, and 3.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Seriously though, we can't. It's one of those screwups only George will be able to resolve, and I doubt he even has any idea, or desire to do so.
Personally, there was no point whatsoever to have Amidala die in the third episode, especially right after she had given birth. The first trilogy was supposed to plug holes in the story, but it also created more. Like the one you brought up.

I see. Makes sense.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Thanks for the update.
So it's 2, 4, and 8 ofcourse.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You've accessed the correct information. You're just misinterpreting it. Your statement “joules are not measured in seconds, watts however are” is somewhat flawed. Joules are certainly capable of being measured in seconds, but as a stand alone measurement, joules do not incorporate a time component; they’re simply a measure of raw energy output over no defined period of time. Conversely, watts incorporate a very definite time component.

Consider the formula you’ve provided:

1 watt second = 1 joule

It actually supports my assertion after we calculate it:

1 watt second = 1 joule
1 watt second/second = 1 joule/second
1 watt = 1 joule per second

And, if we input some random numbers…

40 watts second = 40 joules
40 watts second/second = 40 joules/second
40 watts = 40 joules per second

Actually, in the Enterprise episode Fight or Flight, the newly installed phase cannon aboard the NX-01 Enterprise fires a 2 second burst. The energy output of the blast is 4 terajoules according to the bridge crew; therefore, we can calculate the wattage output by using the formula that you so graciously provided:

4 terawatts 2 seconds = 4 terajoules
4 terawatts 2 second/2 seconds = 4 terajoules/2 seconds
2 terawatts = 2 terajoules/1 second, or 2 terajoules per second

Unfortunately, Scott, for purposes of conducting a valid scientific experiment, there’s a rather large difference between heating a random object on the Earth’s surface and heating an asteroid in the vacuum of space.

A person can certainly heat a variety of objects at any time he desires. However, for purposes of this debate, science would likely ask the following question: Is it the right kind of “object?” And, is the object being heated under the correct conditions?

In this case, the answer is a resounding negative to both.

…as well as taking some liberties with the size and composition of various celestial bodies.

Actually, I never said anything of the sort. I never once stated that “the fireball is as big as the bright flash of light.” In fact, I never even mentioned a “bright flash of light.” Those were your words, not mine. I was referring to the visible fireball - not a mere flash of light - that erupted from the planet’s surface. Once again, I said visible fireball.

Speaking of “undereducated,” I would like to return to your earlier claim that my “math was way off.” Do you ever intend to support this claim mathematically?

I anxiously wait.

“Cherry picking” is a risk we take when we engage in these kinds of arguments. As both Saquist and I warned you, numerical values are nonexistent in Star Wars, and virtually arbitrary and often conflicting in Star Trek. Therefore, when collecting data for our positions, the best method is examining the stated effect of the weapon, rather than some random power reading. For example, good evidence might include Kirk’s statement that the Enterprise is capable of destroying an entire. We can also accrue good data by making comparisons between stated effects. For example, the Planet Killer’s antiproton beam had enough power to slice off planetary fragments with ease, yet the Enterprise’s shields withstood a number of direct hits from this weapon.

I didn’t ignore anything. I addressed these points quite thoroughly. Let’s recap.

1) We know that torpedoes can be set to variable yields.

2) Space is a vacuum; therefore, fireballs originating in space would look substantially different from fireballs erupting on a planet’s surface.

Really? Where is this fact in the movies…in the canon?

Your argument suffers one major fallacy, in my opinion.

Special effects can be wildly inconsistent within a series, as they were in Star Trek TOS. Of course, dialogue is subject to this same problem as early dialogue often contradicts later dialogue, especially in Star Trek; however, in my opinion, language is a far more reliable means of extracting the true abilities and implications of a fictitious technology. Special effects are limited by both technological and monetary constraints. Words are not. Through dialogue, an author can express his exact meaning without interference from a third party, which, in this case, is the special effects team.

My position never once considers the reality of these fictitious technological constructs—warp drives, hyperspace, transporter, etc. I’m only comparing the two primary mediums (dialogue and visuals) through which these technologies are presented to us. And I’ve concluded that the visual medium is subject to far more inconsistency than the dialogic medium. It’s just an opinion. There’s certainly no right or wrong answer here.

Incorrect. During the scene in question, a Cardassian commander gives the order to begin the attack and 8 ships (4 Cardassian and 4 Romulan) begin firing. After approximately 5 seconds, a Romulan Lieutenant states that the “first volley is complete” and that “30 percent of the planetary crust has been destroyed.” We should note that the first volley consisted of 8 ships and only 8 ships firing for a meager 5 seconds; therefore, we can reasonably assume that those 8 ships could’ve destroyed the entire planetary crust in less than 30 seconds.

If you don’t believe me, simply visit youtube.com and type in Battle of Omarion Nebula.

Although you can debate the merits of Kirk’s tactics, you cannot argue that the torpedo strike was clearly “gimped,” as you put it. It’s not even debatable. As you’ve already conceded, photon torpedoes move at .99c (or 99 percent the speed of light), and when any object of that size moving at such a high velocity impacts the surface of a world, the devastation would be measured in kilometers, not meters, even without an matter/antimatter warhead. Consider the kilometer-wide meteor crater in Arizona: It was created by an object the size of a train car falling at a velocity far slower than .99c. Kirk must have told Sulu to remove the warhead entirely and slow the torpedo down to a virtual crawl. It’s the only viable explanation.

Furthermore, the sheer velocity of a photon torpedo suggests that its blast yield is indeed measured in megatons. Why would any missile weapon incorporate a war head that is substantially lower than its inherent kinetic yield?

 

NASOR Really? Do you have Amnesia?


I must, I don't recall saying ultimate at all. You quoted me, yourself. Doomsday doesn't mean ultimate. Your putting words in my mouth. I don't appreciate you grandizing my statements...I can do that myself.

SAID BY HOTSPUR …as well as taking some liberties with the size and composition of various celestial bodies.

I CONCUR

Do like me. Ignore 1, 2, and 3. You're hillarious, I like your answer better than Scott's

I see. Makes sense.
Thanks for the update.
So it's 2, 4, and 8 ofcourse.

Yeah and eight because in odds they combine if aligned propperly into two poles total. I've been working on the three warp nacelles idea for a while...

Here what I've figured.

The only way 3 is possible is if the polar opposites were arrange toward the third nacelle or the third nacelle toward them. In other words it's ends would face one of the dual nacelles, the third nacelle bow toward the port and the end of the third nacelle toward the starboard nacelle.

It would end up looking like a large wing.

 

The reason the Alliance never used a Death STar is:

1. It takes time to make a Deathstar which they did not have.

2. It takes resources and manpower and political cohesion that they did not have.

3. Using the Deathstar on a planet (its primary target) would be the equivalent of taking a gigantic dump on your dinner plate (as all Vong occupied worlds were Alliance worlds).

4. There are more effective anti-ship weapons. Super Star Destroyers, for instance, are probably pound-for-pound better.

 

No, but one can calculate the Minimum required energy to effect the destruction of Alrderaan. It is described as earth like, so we have some good starting points.

He means to be a viable technology it has to be reproducable. If the Genesis devise was an ultimate weapons the Federation would have had no qualms about using it on the borg. Obviously either it wasn't that powerful or it was practically unique. From Wrath of Kahn we know it can't be the first.

David Marcus admitted he could not get it to work without Protomatter. In other words the device failed becuase of the very thing that made it work.

Here is the upshot, the Death Star can be rebuilt, and even worse weapons made, like the Galaxy gun, Suncrusher, World Devastator, as well as several Battle Moons and Torpedo Spheres. Now that it was invented anybody who can follow plans can easily build one. However as the Genesis device was never taken past the very flawed prototype and it's builder(and only person who really knew what it took to make it function) is dead there is never going to be another one.

The I apologize as well.

No, but it is a plausible and logical explanation. Plus for all we know Padme had a force spirit that hung around Leia. The point is that a character can be mistaken and still fit inot canon.

I am open minded to being wrong when there isn't a staggering amount of evidence to back me up.

BTW Wong did not get it first he discovered another engineer who had been studying the clips of the ESP asteroid scene and published the Turbolaser Commentaries web page, which Wong got persmission to repost as well.

As for my findings they are independant I calculated my own numbers bassed off more realistic compositions.

 

Actually take that your your local Physics or Chemistry teacher and see how fast you get laughed out of the building. Your having the same problem that many students have when they come to this.

Joules are not measured over periods of time. They are the total energy needed to perfom a set amount of work. 1 watt maintained for 1 second is 1 Joule. 1 watt for 2 seconds is 2 joules. I know this is difficult to understand, but I am sure you can do it.

True, the difference is that a object is vaporized at it's melting point, not the sea level boiling point. Melting point of an object never changes, boiling depends on the pressure around the object.

Okay heating from -200 celsius to melting in 1/40th of a second. Not hard.

Only to those who fell asleep in Physics class. Ask your professor how many Joules it would take to heat 1 gram of water in a vacuum from -200C to -199C. It should be 4.186 joules or 1 calorie

Taking liberty? Well yes I did make it a good deal smaller and a lower concentration of Iron, Tungsten, and Carbon than canon suggests.

I have that episode on tape, that isn't a fireball, that is a bright flash of light.

I pointed it out you had a erronious conclusion becuase of improper input.

First, our numbers are taken form direct observation. We saw the Death Star destroy a shielded planet. We saw Star Destroyer vaporize asteroids as big as 100 meter across with one shot. We see Deathstars and other Capatial Ships shrug off multiple direct hits with the same weapons that vaporize those 100m asteroids

Second. What is published in a SW Technical manual is Canon unless it directly conflicts with the movie

Third: We never saw a Federation ship destroy a world, not in the way a Death Star does. So this is hearsay. We didn't see the doomsday weapon devour chunks of planaet, again hearsay. For all we know to Kirk, destroying a planet might be just raising it to the ground and making it uninhabitable. The Doomsday weapon could have taken days to devour the planet. We have no evidnce except hearsay.

Which might, just might explain Wrath of Khan, but not Final Frontier or Undiscovered country.

Space is a vacuum and yes a fireball might be smaller, but the bright flash of light that would be blinding 1000 miles away would still be there.

The CEC YT-1300 is the ship the Millenium Falcon is based on is often used as a spice freighter. As for the stint as an Imperial officer Captain Solo joined the empire before he met Chewbacca. The mocve was to save his hide from CoreSec. Read some novels.

Yeah there is even Paramount says visuals first. So your opinion and quater will get you a Little Debbie snack.

Yes, unfortunately the view is ten and ten and not even a tenth of the surface seen is engulfed in weapons fire. This means Paramounts timeline and full history that states 30 and 30 makes more sense. And it fits the critiria in that it does not dispute what you see on film. After all who bombards a planet from just one side.

Photons move at .9875 light. However this is a top end no warp speed and the visual does not match. However you are correct in that a object coming in at that speed should have done much more damage after all the asteroid that hit the yucatan was not even doing .25c and there is no way Kirk could have lived through that. Perhaps the order had been to have the torpedo slwo to a stop at ground level then explode. Fits the vuisual of Photon strikes in Wrath of Kahan and Undiscovered Country.

Becuase you want the missle to get there fast and do wide damage not just punch a whole like a needle through the arm. If Photons just relied on speed they would make even worse weapons than they do now.

 

---The idea of calculating fiction only bring you ficticous calculations. THe only truth is that we don't know.

---Doesn't really matter

---I don't believe you're thinking this through. I would if I had an exact location for my target. Don't breed disbelief for no reason...have a reason.

So rather believe that there was an obviously neglected part of the story you believe the character had a memory about a dear loved one that was false?

This is why I have a bad feeling there will be no agreement with you.

I understand....You're right untill all the evidence says you're wrong? Well that means there no room for reason.

And yet your entire dilivery so far has been almost directly descended from Wong himself. I mean you think we're stupid for not believing your uncanon numbers, that apparently you must be right all the time. You've figured everything out...you've read all the books...your perspective is completely well rounded...

But it's already proven that you don't have a well rounded education about Star Wars or Star Trek. You didn't know intimate details of the Vong invasion because you didn't read all the books.

You didn't know how impulse drive works or Warp drive. And you didn't know Defiant's true top speed. You believed the DS9 tech manuel without researching the truth.

Afterward you scittered about with the wording of your post, adding "sustained" in what was sure to be you back door exit, bail out manuver for accepting (for perhaps the first time) That you were wrong.

I think your transgressions on the truth and cannon have only just begun.

 

If you don't want to judge the relative power of fictional weapons by examining their fictional effect, how would you judge it?

 

And as we noted: The movies are the highest canon. This includes visual effects.

We have a planet exploding from a single blast from a weapon that is capable of doing this routinely. We also have onscreen proof of large asteroid destruction by a Star Destroyer. All of these come with necessary power levels as determined by science.

 

If you don't want to judge the relative power of fictional weapons by examining their fictional effect, how would you judge it?

That's a good question. I've come to comparative method.
I really can't say that this method is right for everyone...okay?

I take the top canon ship of each series. The ship that destroys it's contemporaries the fastest.

This was difficult to find in Star Wars. Star Wars requires fighters to superscede the main weapons of a captial ships. Captial ship fighting apparently was not a common engagement untill the out break of the clone wars and they still used fighters in a heavy amount.

To be truthful...Aside from the Eclipse class star Destroyer...I couldn't find a captial ship (on screen) that preformed against it's contemporaries at a much higher level.

REturn of the Jedi required the Death Star a station to preform it's task. But the Reble ships inspite of being inferrior to the bristling Star Destroyers head to head still held there own with apparently little distress. (not including the Death Star)

However...Star Trek has several ships that have preformed exceptionally against it's own genere.

I find Defiant at number one. This ship has so far been unequalled in totall firepower brought to bear. It destroys attack ships in two seconds of sustained fire. It's taken on the Domminion Battle ship (lost), The REgents 4,000 meter long Neghvar (twice and won twice) It destroyed a Jem Hadar Warship in six seconds of sustained fire.

Prometheus would seem to be next in line. (but note that this is combined fire power of three ships) War Birds have a size comparable to the ISD.

Sovereign would seem to be next in line and last...dispatching a vessel several times the size of a star Destroyer (unshielded) in just four Quantum salvos.

Soveriegns fire power is due tot he Quantum torpedo...thus this would include any ship carrying those weapons( there does seem to be a difference between types of Quantum torps. Enteprise seems to carry a much larger yeild than most ships)

With Star Wars carrying ship borne missle nukes and fighter laser power that is sub kiloton (Note attack of the Clones) the Captail ships shields can't not be capable of advanced shield technology on Trek's level. Maybe they are equal...but I doubt it and they certainly aren't above Trek Shield technology. Fighters in star Wars simply aren't packing that much heat in their lasers. Maybe in the Proton Torpedos but not the Lasers.

Ship to Ship...Trek has an advantage of Shield and missle tech and manuverablity. Star Wars has more powerfull energy weapons...I don't think a Galaxy class could with stand more than a few minutes of sustained fire from an ISD's main batteries.

Defiant would appear to be an Ace in the hole and the Federation has allready begun to mass produce the vessel (although the new ones seem of lesser firepower).

Defiant seems to be capable of dispatchin up to three ISD's at a time...any more than that an the cross fire would become to thick. Defiant may take down one before it's destruction.

 

Saguist:

War Birds don't have a size comparable to an ISD. They are significantly smaller in volume.

Trek has better missiles...?

Torpedos fired from an X-Wing fighter, taking sustained fire from numerous turrets and nearly blown up by three Tie Fighters, raising down a trench about 40 metres wide, and without targetting reticles (but the help of the Force) is capable of firing down an exhaust shaft with an opening that is 2 metres wide, including navigating the twists and turns of said exhaust shaft, until it explodes in a hypermatter reactor at the centre of the battlestation (which is dozens of miles in).

A quantum torpedo fires straight against large and mostly stationary targets.

 

Translation: You have no real reason to throw out my calculations so you are playing the fiction card.

Sorry, bub, but that card does not get to be played in this convo. Suspension of disbelief means you cannot use such tactics.

Matters a great deal, in Doctor David Marcus used Proto-matter in a Federation funded experiment after the Federation outlawed the use of Proto-matter it must mean that he hid it's use. Which means no Genesis devices.

Okay so you do have not military sense. When bombarding a planet you want to make sure no survivors escape your grasp. Trying to do that form one side of the planet is impossible as we all know in Star Trek that magnetic poles can easily hide ships from even Federation sensors.

God, I did not know it was so easy to be so close minded. What I was saying is that Leia could have convinced herself that she remembered her mother. Also given the givens about the Force there are other explanations such as: Postcognition, Implanted Memory, Force Spirit, or Force Enhanced memory. I mean we are talking about a woman who even training in her minscule spare time was a powerful Jedi in her own right by the time the Vong came. Not as powerful as Luke, Kyp, Anakin Sole, or Mara, obviously but still more powerful than the average Knight of the day.

What? Becuase when I have all the evidence in the genres to back me up I must still be wrong? You must be one of the Jurors from the first Rodney King beating clase.

I'm not right all the time. I had assumed you would listen to facts and reason.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Listen I have read the books, I am a huge fan of Star Trek up until Enterprise, but as that show went completely against the history provided by the other four shows you can understand why.

I have read of the Vong invasion and unlike you I actually understood the concepts they had . As for my education on Star Wars and Star Trek, yes there are people who know more than me, but you are defiunately not one of them.

I know how Impulse and Warp drive works as Paramount and the show descrines it. I know the top speed of the Defiant is as I have stated becuase there have been several instances of the Defiant traveling warp 9.982 for short periods of time. And I have never read the DS9 Tech Manual. Paramount is very good at providing information if you make the proper requests.

Hmmm, so my use of actual Trek statistics has you pissy. That's fine, I explained sustainable as Paramount and Star Trek explains it. You don't want to be reasonable that is you perogative.

Please try to keep you petty opinions out of this. They and 25 cents will get you a fudge round.

 

On the matter of Leia:

Remembering one's mother vaguely, as a sort of feeling that one associates with one's mother, does not violate the canonical death of Amidala as a guffaw on the part of Lucas. Rather, it is meant to be taken that Leia feels she remembers how it was to have a mother, even if she probably does not legitimately remember anything.

 

Okay, so you’re saying ignore the statistics that are directly comparable and go based on your feeling? Oh lord, I was afraid you would come to this. There went any intelligent argument you could have had.

Hmm, so you ignore canon completely. Okay, easy to refute.

If you will notice Star Wars fighters do not work like conventional ones. They provide their carrier with an extra screen of offensive and defensive weaponry. They just aren't individually capable of taking on another colossal battleship. Sure a squadron of 72 Y-wings or 24 B-Wings could be a real threat to a ISD II, but you would lose most of your fighters doing it. Now throw in a Mon Cal MC 90 Star Cruiser with its screen of 144 fighters and suddenly you have a true threat. A Single ISD without it's escorts would be pulverized as it receives fire from the Capital ship and from the Fighters Proton Torpedoes. Now to counter this advantage the ISD would throw out its Fighter screen of Tie Fighters and the two corvettes it carries.

BTW Capital ship fighting was quite common before the clone wars. Provided of course that both sides had capital ships. Which in the case of the Naboo, they didn't and still don't.

Mon Cal ships are not inferior to Star Destroyers. If anything they are at a slight advantages one to one. A Mon Cal ship is extremely heavily shielded and even has backup shield generators and extremely heavy armor. Their firepower is lower, but not by much. However the truth is that the Alliance came to the battle with twice as many Mon Cal ships as the Empire brought Star Destroyers and still lost more than 50% of their ships in the cataclysmic battle.

I trust you will note that these are legendary and unique ships.

It has done this by being a Capital ship but by moving like a fighter. It's total firepower is no more impressive than an Ambassador class. It's shielding is nice but only on par with a Galaxy class as state by Canon and Paramount.

And those Warbirds were not the big ones. They were the smaller ones like the ones seen in Nemesis. Besides the Prometheus was firing on ships that had been fighting with several Federations ships for about a minute including at least one Defiant class.

Oh so you didn't notice all the other ships that had to help and the fact that Borg cube in question was nearly finished as it was and that Picard had inside info on a weak spot.

Again you are off, you saw only the four quantums used by the Sovereign and not the spreads of at least two other ships.

I am thinking attack of the clones and I seem to remember that the only fighter class missiles fired were from Jango Fett's Slave one and that was obviously a concussion missile and still in the megaton range at the very least. Let's not forget the seismic charge or the rapid fire light blaster cannons that were splintering asteroids with even grazing hits.

Now you are probably thinking that 'Yeah, but just one shot messed with Obi Wan's ship.' True, because Jedi Starfighters are not designed with ray shields. Even the ones Revenge of the Sith. They, like TIE fighters have no Ray Shielding, though they still have particle shielding.

Again you are cherry picking your data and then making stupid assertions based on it. You are basing lack of shielding tech for the big ships based on the little ones. Here is where that falls down.

In ROTS and ROJ we see multiple Capital Ships fighting each other. We know from the ESB asteroid destruction scene that a Turbolaser can inflict at least 4,257,992,530,563,190.00 joules in 1/15th of a second and fire one every second. We know that each ship can take several minutes of these blasts before their shield buckles and then take several minutes of fire before they are in danger. There fore their shielding must be powerful as well as their armor

A Galaxy class could not stand a one shot form one Light Turbo Laser Cannon. The only advantage Star Wars has is tactical speed. I'm sure one on one a Galaxy Class could take an A-Wing or up to even a half Dozen Tie fighter and still come out unscathed. However that is not going to happen against even the venerable Y-wing and Certainly not against X, B, or E wings. Forget trying to take the Millennium Falcon and the Tantive V would walk all over a Galaxy class.

The Defiant would unquestionable be the Federations most long lived Vessel. However that does not mean they would be effective. Three Defiant class ships would be like Three hyper fast X-wings but not as heavily shielded. The Captain of the ISD would be bemused that these 100-meter ships were spraying his ship with firepower easily rebuffed by his shields. After fifteen to twenty minutes he would probably figure out the attack patterns and have Tractor beams perfectly lined up. Once your caught in the beams you maneuverability is gone. Then comes the ion cannon blast and suddenly your shields are down, your structural integrity field is gone, the impulse engine is out, Life Support is out and oops the containment field is gone....BOOM!

 

Then there's Robert Anderson's method
Simply judging the superiority or advantage of tech. It avoids tedious and false stat making and sticks with the canon.

Advantage/Disadvantage
Shields: Wars: large planets/needs dual layer of two ypes.
Trek: small object coverage/ defeated by frequency specific

No clear advantage judge as equal according to ship size.

weapons

Beams: Wars: Few to noe
Trek: Large vareity of strenght and abiity

Projectiles: Wars: cucussion missles-proton torps-nukes/ no clear disadvantage

Trek: Missles-Torpedoes-Disrupters-phaser cannons (shielded weapons) / no clear disdvantage

Shielded weapons would be an unknown and a surprise: As well as the Phaser Cannon. This one goes to trek.
Federation tech has a clear variety and superiority in distructive ability

Superluminal: War's up to 10's of thousands of times faster than light/ No weapon use
Trek's: Much slower...7,000 x's c max/ no clear disadvantagge

Cloak: (Robert judges this one in favor of War's but I say Trek while he said Federation)

No ability to see outside the cloak for Wars
Trek: Romulan cloaking devices have only gotten better and with other features like phase cloak.

After one goes through this list, it becomes clear that the Star War galaxy has several advantages as well as trek...The battle between the two would be much closer than the Star War's fans would have us think. Infact it would be a far more intresting battle with different strategies to be employed by each.

What this avoids is grandizing and the manipulation of canon facts that is often done for Star Wars do to a lack of stats at all. It also avoids the over use of tech that Trek fans often ad to the mix and is more often apart of stratagy then regular tactics. All of these comparisons are true.

Just think if this list was carried forth of every comparable tech. It's the most fair to both worlds. It's canon in every way.

My way and Roberts way pretty much come out the same way more equal than superior on either side.

 

To TW SCOTT

You keep mentioning canon and sticking with it but that's exactly what you're not doing. We've never seen a X-wing or Tie figher or a Turbo laser go up against a Galaxy class starship. That's why I view your stats as uncanon.

I think you've found or fabricated enough evidence from cannon to justify the out come you wish to see. So okay...I've a different point of view.

If you take a challenge for me and the rest view the tread...Apply your reasoning to Trek solely. Watch a D7 be vaporized (TOS) in 3 seconds and the USS Lantree vaporized by a signle torpedo blast...

What are your calucations...based off on screen canon. What do your findings...your calculations show. And I want to see numbers. How much power does it take to vaporize these ships in the time alotted?

Frankly I don't think you're intrested in being fair...so you won't do it.