Star Trek vs Star Wars (multiple scenarios)

[billyboyjennings]

I would say the Federation advances FAR faster than the Republic/Empire in technology.

Time ships were being used by the Federation as early as the 26th century. Some of their vessels are also beyond transwarp by this point. They can fold space and are exploring other galaxies besides the Milky Way. - TNG: “A Matter of Time” / Ent: “Azati Prime”.

By the 29th century, they possess incredible technologies that allow them to monitor different timelines, alter the timelines with time ships and temporal transporters (capable of beaming an individual to virtually any point in space and time) and protect themselves from these changes with temporal sensors and shielding. Entire classes of time ships are being built. - VOY: “Future's End”, “Relativity”

By the 31st century, Federation technology has become so advanced that they’re able to create ships that are larger on the inside than on the outside. Think TARDIS. Time travel is so common that Federation teaches kids how to build devices that send messages through time in high school. Time wars are fought. - ENT: “Future Tense”, “Shockwave, Part II”

 

The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of erasing your enemies from history itself, which the Federation and many other Trek species are fully capable of doing at their height. The Galactic Republic has existed for tens of thousands of years and yet it never reached anywhere near the level of technology that the young Federation will achieve in only a mere 400 years after its creation.

[GarfieldJL]

I would say the Federation advances FAR faster than the Republic/Empire in technology.

Time ships were being used by the Federation as early as the 26th century. Some of their vessels are also beyond transwarp by this point. They can fold space and are exploring other galaxies besides the Milky Way. - TNG: “A Matter of Time” / Ent: “Azati Prime”.

By the 29th century, they possess incredible technologies that allow them to monitor different timelines, alter the timelines with time ships and temporal transporters (capable of beaming an individual to virtually any point in space and time) and protect themselves from these changes with temporal sensors and shielding. Entire classes of time ships are being built. - VOY: “Future's End”, “Relativity”

By the 31st century, Federation technology has become so advanced that they’re able to create ships that are larger on the inside than on the outside. Think TARDIS. Time travel is so common that Federation teaches kids how to build devices that send messages through time in high school. Time wars are fought. - ENT: “Future Tense”, “Shockwave, Part II”

 

The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of erasing your enemies from history itself, which the Federation and many other Trek species are fully capable of doing at their height. The Galactic Republic has existed for tens of thousands of years and yet it never reached anywhere near the level of technology that the young Federation will achieve in only a mere 400 years after its creation.

 

To add to that, the Federation knew how to do Time Travel back in ToS, but not with anywhere near the finese as time progressed.

[Astarica]

I noticed the Star Trek fans are arguing basically every plot device that's favorable to them even though literally Star Wars guy can counter any equivalent plot device that isn't from Q by "I sensed a disturbance in the Force". Heck, that probably even takes care of Q given Q can be manipulated, i.e. someone saw a vision of a Q and because Q can be manipulated/tricked/etc that'd take care of that. I mean seriously, time traveling? Time traveling only works in Star Trek universe because Q presumably knows the outcome of attempted time travel and only allows this to happen when the result wouldn't accidentally wipe out the galaxy/universe. If it's not supervised by Q you'd get something like The Entrophy Effect where some random time traveler accidentally caused the end of the universe while doing some totally random thing due to The Butterlfy Effect.

 

There was one episode where Picard decided to change his mind on a mistake he made as a youth with Q's help and found out in that alternate timeline he never became a captain, and if Picard never became a captain this probably leads to humanity getting wiped out by some other species at some future point. Now of course since Q is around Picard can say 'oops I take that back' but if you actually tried to use time traveling as a weapon all you'd do is destroy the universe because it's clearly outside of non Q beings to grasp what might happen.

 

I think most of you don't even get that it is common in fiction to claim some totally ridiculous stuff. If I claim to have a weapon that can penetrate any defense and you claim to have a shield that can defend against any weapon, and assuming there isn't a counterexample readily available, what happens when the unstoppable weapon fights the impenetrable shield? I guess the fanboy says 'my universe wins'. In reality no one can resolve a question like that and you'd just have to ignore it. Though so far as impossible to defeat plot devices go, Force visions are pretty hard to stop, because you can have a vision of a guy going back in past and then vision can tell you how to stop it. It doesn't matter if the guy doing the time traveling outtechs you because Force visions are pretty much never wrong.

 

And seriously people need to stop talking as if they know how the science in either universe can work. The only thing Star Wars and Star Trek has in common with science fiction is that both universe has science and both universe is fiction. There's really no logical basis on whether any amount of time could develoop technology into either universe so saying one universe can deploy the 'counter tech' to counter the other's universe 'tech' is stupid. Nobody really knows how energy weapon will interact with a magentic field and yeah people have theories about it but you'd have better luck having a theory on the Superstring Theory (which to this date has never been backed up by empirical evidence due to our inability to generate the energy needed to verify it) then how a weapon that we cannot build is supposed to interact against a shield we cannot build.

[Astarica]

Here's a random blurb on Transporters from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transporter_(Star_Trek)

 

Note this passage:

 

"When asked "How does the Heisenberg compensator work?" by Time magazine, Star Trek technical adviser Michael Okuda responded: "It works very well, thank you."[3]"

 

Star Trek also uses Inertial Dampners or whatever which wipes out the mass of an object. How does that work? It sort of just does. There's obviously nothing in science that'd tell us how to hide mass from itself, or how to get around the Heisenburg Uncertainty Principle. Of course Star Wars has the same kind of problem. Take the Death Star superlasers, given matter and energy is interchangeable, it is theorized that even if you've enough power output, when you focus the laser you'd create matter due to the energy level involved and the created mater would prevent your laser from getting focused correctly and thus the superlaser can never fire. But of course the superlaser sort of just works too, because it'd be pretty dumb to see it charge up and say "oops E=MC^2 got in the way, can't fire".

 

Because nothing in either universe is actually science you might as well replace the science terms with magic, and then you're basically arguing is mana or pixie dust the more potent form of magical energy. That said, because Star Wars have Force visions, they pretty much have an upper hand in terms of plot device because Force visions can see through other plot devices, including temporal/extra dimensional ones. To defeat a Force vision you need something equivalent of inevitability, namely a negative vision that cannot be avoided, but neither universe possess something like that to use.

Edited August 14, 2012 by Astarica

[GarfieldJL]

I noticed the Star Trek fans are arguing basically every plot device that's favorable to them even though literally Star Wars guy can counter any equivalent plot device that isn't from Q by "I sensed a disturbance in the Force". Heck, that probably even takes care of Q given Q can be manipulated, i.e. someone saw a vision of a Q and because Q can be manipulated/tricked/etc that'd take care of that. I mean seriously, time traveling? Time traveling only works in Star Trek universe because Q presumably knows the outcome of attempted time travel and only allows this to happen when the result wouldn't accidentally wipe out the galaxy/universe. If it's not supervised by Q you'd get something like The Entrophy Effect where some random time traveler accidentally caused the end of the universe while doing some totally random thing due to The Butterlfy Effect.

 

Other than claims that amount to the Millenium Falcon being able to fly through a star because it's hull is just like the sun crusher's, that blasters are god weapons, using faulty claims that the Hoth Asteroid field consisted of mostly iron asteroids (which if you knew anything about astronomy that is rather implausible) to claim Turbolasers are more powerful than they really are, and the claims they could find a planet from across a Galaxy that they have no navigational information to speak of... You guys don't even have a case.

 

1. Turbolasers are plasma weapons... Plasma Weapons are largely considered to be antique weapons in Star Trek.

 

2. Star Wars ships largely use fission and Fusion, while those are decent power sources you guys need to face the facts, Star Wars ships are completely outmatched. Matter/Antimatter Reactions make Fission and Fusion look like a complete and total joke.

 

When I commented about how proton torpedos are a joke compared to photon torpedos, I don't have to use anything from a Technical Manual to make that statement, it's basic real life physics. The amount of energy from a matter/antimatter reaction is quite literally E=mc^2, a photon torpedo is substancially larger than a proton torpedo. Mass for mass the photon torpedo has a larger explosive potential per kg than a proton torpedo, and it has more mass to top it off. Based on that information alone Star Trek has stronger weapons, end of discussion. If 48 proton torpedos can seriously drain the shields of a Star Destroyer, then imagine what 10 photon torpedos are capable of.

 

There was one episode where Picard decided to change his mind on a mistake he made as a youth with Q's help and found out in that alternate timeline he never became a captain, and if Picard never became a captain this probably leads to humanity getting wiped out by some other species at some future point. Now of course since Q is around Picard can say 'oops I take that back' but if you actually tried to use time traveling as a weapon all you'd do is destroy the universe because it's clearly outside of non Q beings to grasp what might happen.

 

See Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home sometime...

 

I think most of you don't even get that it is common in fiction to claim some totally ridiculous stuff. If I claim to have a weapon that can penetrate any defense and you claim to have a shield that can defend against any weapon, and assuming there isn't a counterexample readily available, what happens when the unstoppable weapon fights the impenetrable shield?

 

Problem with your statement is quite simple. Plasma weapons aren't exactly some new weapon in the Star Trek Universe, Turbolasers are plasma weapons and are therefore not some exotic weapon that Star Trek ships wouldn't have the information on how to minimize the effectiveness of said weapon...

 

Phasers are an entirely unknown quantity for the SW universe, as is antimatter let alone photon torpedos...

 

I guess the fanboy says 'my universe wins'. In reality no one can resolve a question like that and you'd just have to ignore it. Though so far as impossible to defeat plot devices go, Force visions are pretty hard to stop, because you can have a vision of a guy going back in past and then vision can tell you how to stop it. It doesn't matter if the guy doing the time traveling outtechs you because Force visions are pretty much never wrong.

 

Wrong, how about you read up about Zayne Carrick sometime, and those masters that butchered their own padawans...

 

And seriously people need to stop talking as if they know how the science in either universe can work. The only thing Star Wars and Star Trek has in common with science fiction is that both universe has science and both universe is fiction. There's really no logical basis on whether any amount of time could develoop technology into either universe so saying one universe can deploy the 'counter tech' to counter the other's universe 'tech' is stupid. Nobody really knows how energy weapon will interact with a magentic field and yeah people have theories about it but you'd have better luck having a theory on the Superstring Theory (which to this date has never been backed up by empirical evidence due to our inability to generate the energy needed to verify it) then how a weapon that we cannot build is supposed to interact against a shield we cannot build.

 

There is a reason why I looked for instances where ships from the two universes encountered a similar hazard, specifically close encounters with stars (you know the hot balls of gas up in space).

[ProfessorWalsh]

*snip*

 

You are trying to use a double standard and I will not allow it. You are wrong, and I don't care what you think you know.

 

Han's statement applies to a PLANET BEING COMPLETELY DESTROYED WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY SIGNIFICANT DEBRIS LEFT BEHIND. Also regardless his words are not canon no character's words are EVER canon. Canon has to come from a "seen and/or witnessed" source or an "out of universe" source. That is the rule and has ALWAYS been the rule.

 

Kind of like how you claim that the ASTEROIDS were what had the power to explode rather than the fact that the turbolaser shots were vaporizing them. Why? Because if they can vape asteroids it takes away your claims of Trek having better tech.

 

Of course.... It doesn't matter... If there is a Trek inconsistency then you let it slide, if it is a Wars inconsistency at all you declare it as gospel.

 

I'm done discussing this with you as it is pointless. You will always try to err on the side of Trek no matter what. Thus... I am ignoring you. This conversation is done. If you don't want to play fair then there is no point in discussing this with you.

 

If you do want to play fair:

 

THE STAR WARS TECHNICAL MANUAL NUMBERS ARE OFFICIAL CANON

 

You may not like it, but you don't have the right to argue from your platform. That is picking and choosing. If I can't pick and choose on Star Trek then you don't get to pick and choose on Star Wars.

 

How about the fact that Star Trek ships at normal sublight speeds routinely miss other CAPITAL SHIPS at close range? How about, again, the number of times we have seen things completely disable a Trek ship one week and the next week they can fly through a star?

 

You ignore all of those events.

 

The Star Wars technical manuals are canon. You may not like it, but you have to accept it if we are going to debate this at all.

 

So... Since you are so big into physics, here is my question...

 

If the USS NCC 1701-D were to be struck by an asteroid that has a radius of approximately 25 meters of solid mass, mostly iron, when the asteroid was moving at approximately 200 meters per second and the 1701-D were also moving at approximately 200 meters per second what would happen? How much damage do you reckon the Enterprise would suffer?

 

See... I know the answer for a Star Destroyer... But I'd like to hear what would happen to the Enterprise before I state that.

Edited August 14, 2012 by ProfessorWalsh

[GarfieldJL]

You are trying to use a double standard and I will not allow it. You are wrong, and I don't care what you think you know.

 

Stop Projecting....

 

Han's statement applies to a PLANET BEING COMPLETELY DESTROYED WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY SIGNIFICANT DEBRIS LEFT BEHIND.

 

That's not what Han said and your supposition is contradicted by X-Wing Book 4: Bacta War, and one of the Young Jedi Knight books, you know the one where Jacen and Jaina Solo fly to what is left of Alderann to try to get a piece of Alderann for their mother only to get ambushed by Boba Fett... If you'd like I can dig up the title of that book as well as the page numbers describing the remains of Alderann. I have both books on my bookshelf, though they are behind some other books...

 

Of course.... It doesn't matter... If there is a Trek inconsistency then you let it slide, if it is a Wars inconsistency at all you declare it as gospel.

 

When there is a Trek inconsistency, I go with my knowledge concerning Engineering and Physics, as well as what other episodes have said. Usually when there is a blooper, they don't have it happen over and over again.

 

I'm done discussing this with you as it is pointless. You will always try to err on the side of Trek no matter what. Thus... I am ignoring you. This conversation is done. If you don't want to play fair then there is no point in discussing this with you.

 

Stop playing the victim.

 

If you do want to play fair:

 

THE STAR WARS TECHNICAL MANUAL NUMBERS ARE OFFICIAL CANON

 

You may not like it, but you don't have the right to argue from your platform. That is picking and choosing. If I can't pick and choose on Star Trek then you don't get to pick and choose on Star Wars.

 

I don't think there is a Star Wars Technical manual, closest thing I've seen are things like the Guide to Vehicles and Vessels, Weapons and Technology, etc...

 

How about the fact that Star Trek ships at normal sublight speeds routinely miss other CAPITAL SHIPS at close range? How about, again, the number of times we have seen things completely disable a Trek ship one week and the next week they can fly through a star?

 

You have ships moving at speeds that are at speeds that have to be measured as like 20% the speed of light... Then there is the fact that Star Trek has plenty of ways to disrupt weapons locks, like the afore mentioned antimatter spread...

 

Then there is the fact that Star Trek has a lot of tactics to try to get around shields... Heck there were even a few episodes where they faked something getting past the shielding...

 

You ignore all of those events.

 

I don't recall Star Destroyers being all that maneuverable... When you have ships moving at speeds that are at least 20% the speed of light shooting at each other, the odds of missing each other goes up dramatically.

 

The Star Wars technical manuals are canon. You may not like it, but you have to accept it if we are going to debate this at all.

 

What technical manual.... Btw, from what I've read for instance a proton torpedo only has the range of 2 km... That seems to indicate that Star Wars ships may actually be substancially slower than Star Trek ships at sublight speeds.

Edited August 14, 2012 by GarfieldJL

[Aurbere]

I agree with Walsh on the SW technical manuals. If they are canon, then you must use them in a technological debate. You cannot just discount them because of what is shown on screen. I believe that movie novelizations and the like are at the same level of canon that the movies are. If that is true then you must take everything in the novelizations and the "tech manual" at face value. I don't know much about trek so I won't comment on anything like that.

[GarfieldJL]

I agree with Walsh on the SW technical manuals. If they are canon, then you must use them in a technological debate. You cannot just discount them because of what is shown on screen. I believe that movie novelizations and the like are at the same level of canon that the movies are. If that is true then you must take everything in the novelizations and the "tech manual" at face value. I don't know much about trek so I won't comment on anything like that.

 

Problem for Walsh is that I have some of those technical books...

 

Furthermore I have quite a few Star Wars Novels, including book 2 and 3 of the Thrawn Trilogy. I've read the essential guide to weapons and technology, and I even has some blueprints laying around.

 

The real problem Walsh is having is the fact he is debating someone with that actually has a scientific background along with some knowledge of engineering.

 

I know quite a bit about Star Wars as well as Star Trek, cause I'm a fan of both...

[ProfessorWalsh]

Problem with your statement is quite simple. Plasma weapons aren't exactly some new weapon in the Star Trek Universe, Turbolasers are plasma weapons and are therefore not some exotic weapon that Star Trek ships wouldn't have the information on how to minimize the effectiveness of said weapon...

 

You keep ignoring the fact that turbolasers aren't "just" plasma weapons, they are Tibana gas weapons.

 

Oh... Also... You are going to hate this by the way... Star Wars blasters do not use magnetic fields to keep the plasma bolt coherent.

 

They "align the plasma carrier waves more closely by utilizing galvan circuitry"

 

Oh and Star Wars does have disruptors capable of completely disintegrating a target.

 

Here are a few problems with the Star Trek supporters:

 

This is what happens when an attack hits a Star Trek ship and it does only "superficial" damage... Notice how the Enterprise is being slammed around? Great inertial dampeners there.

 

 

400 Gigawatts of Particle Energy is sufficient to completely disable a Galaxy Class Starship's shields.

 

Of course.... this happens when a tiny slow moving starship that is on a deflection course scraps a nacelle on the Enterprise D. Oh yeah, I can see that lasting long against a Star Wars ship... And being so tough... When we have seen Star Destroyers take hits from huge fast moving Asteroids. That was from what is the equivalent of swapping paint I should remind everyone.

 

Since you take the worst parts of Wars... Lets see what happens when we take the worst parts of Trek?

[GarfieldJL]

Of course.... this happens when a tiny slow moving starship that is on a deflection course scraps a nacelle on the Enterprise D. Oh yeah, I can see that lasting long against a Star Wars ship... And being so tough... When we have seen Star Destroyers take hits from huge fast moving Asteroids. That was from what is the equivalent of swapping paint I should remind everyone.

 

Since you take the worst parts of Wars... Lets see what happens when we take the worst parts of Trek?

 

Thank you for proving my point about either your ignorance or your dishonesty take your pick.

 

The Episode you are referring to is "Cause and Effect" which was in Season 5 of Star Trek the Next Generation. In that episode they are stuck in a temporal loop, where the ship loses nearly all power including shields and only had bare minimal structural integrity fields... The loop continues over and over until Data manages to break the loop.

 

You took something completely out of context either in ignorance or deliberately in an attempt to mislead people, and you just got caught at it.

Edited August 14, 2012 by GarfieldJL

[ProfessorWalsh]

Thank you for proving my point about either your ignorance or your dishonesty take your pick.

 

The Episode you are referring to is "Cause and Effect" which was in Season 5 of Star Trek the Next Generation. In that episode they are stuck in a temporal loop, where the ship loses nearly all power including shields and only had bare minimal structural integrity fields... The loop continues over and over until Data manages to break the loop.

 

You took something completely out of context either in ignorance or deliberately in an attempt to mislead people, and you just got caught at it.

 

No. Actually I didn't. See, that is the same thing you do trying to use Han's comments. You take it out of context and you take it as gospel and you shouldn't. Also, note... Shields in Star Trek don't work so well against physical impacts (they use particle shielding for that, which is separate) and this kind of thing happens all the time in the series.

 

This kind of thing constantly happens. They have their shields blown out, taken down, they have systems crash, shots to the ship that don't penetrate the shields cause panels on the bridge to explode into fatal shrapnel constantly.

 

Heck the Enterprise is an osha nightmare.

 

I am doing exactly what you are doing. I am taking worst case scenarios and using things out of context to make my argument. I already called you on doing it to Wars several times.

 

Editing to add:

 

Also transporters... Transporters are the most useless technology I have ever seen. If there is any electromagnetic interference these things become life threateningly dangerous to use. We have seen things like electrical storms stop them.

 

You have used a double standard this entire debate. You claim that you use your scientific knowledge but then you can't really do that because the tech on both properties are completely and totally inconsistent. Also I don't CARE if the structural integrity fields were down or not in the "paint scrape" scene.

 

My CAR has taken harder hits than that and it never exploded. What? Without the integrity fields Star Ships can't take even superficial damage and survive or something? We have a scene where a gigantic asteroid slams into a Star Destroyer's hull and the destroyer suffers absolutely no damage for cripes sake.

 

Edit again:

missing huge targets.

 

These are relatively slow moving ships against a stationary star base and the star base misses multiple times and the enemy isn't even evading. That is what I was pointing out... The tech in both of these things are so inconsistent it is comical and I actually do like both series.

 

But after seeing that I really don't think any capital ship in Star Trek could hit with any degree of accuracy something like a TIE fighter.

 

Of course we have also seen scenes where they can fire with pinpoint accuracy against tiny fast moving targets... Which is the problem with inconsistency again...

 

Later in the same video we see the Defiant, moving slowly compared to Star Wars fighters, dodging shots like a boss...

Edited August 14, 2012 by ProfessorWalsh

[GarfieldJL]

No. Actually I didn't. See, that is the same thing you do trying to use Han's comments. You take it out of context and you take it as gospel and you shouldn't. Also, note... Shields in Star Trek don't work so well against physical impacts (they use particle shielding for that, which is separate) and this kind of thing happens all the time in the series.

 

Have you read: Star Wars: X-Wing Book 4 "Bacta War," like I have? I'm guessing you haven't. Nor have you you read the Young Jedi Knight Series, I'm guessing. I'm using other Star Wars sources to back up my interpretation. You just gave a short youtube clip, where you didn't know the context.

 

This kind of thing constantly happens. They have their shields blown out, taken down, they have systems crash, shots to the ship that don't penetrate the shields cause panels on the bridge to explode into fatal shrapnel constantly.

 

Yeah well the Enterprise seems to attract trouble like a supermagnet...

 

Heck the Enterprise is an osha nightmare.

 

You did hear what happened when Microsoft tried to show the new Windows 8, I believe the computer underwent spontaneous combustion.

 

I am doing exactly what you are doing. I am taking worst case scenarios and using things out of context to make my argument. I already called you on doing it to Wars several times.

 

If Star Destroyers were really as powerful as you claim if Turbolasers were as powerful as you claimed, Palpatine would never have had the Death Star constructed, nor would he have had the Eclipse Class Star Destroyer constructed...

 

The difference between my examples and your examples, is that I can find other examples to back up my statements and show that it isn't a simple error.

 

The Eclipse Class Star Destroyer is in the Star Wars Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels, I can get the page number for it if you like and the copyright of the book since there are 2 editions to the book.

[ProfessorWalsh]

Have you read: Star Wars: X-Wing Book 4 "Bacta War," like I have? I'm guessing you haven't. Nor have you you read the Young Jedi Knight Series, I'm guessing. I'm using other Star Wars sources to back up my interpretation. You just gave a short youtube clip, where you didn't know the context.

 

I have read all 223 Star Wars novels and yes I am familiar with the Shards of Alderaan storyline you are referencing, which people found highly inconsistent because in other media they have said that there wasn't even an asteroid field remaining. It is one of the parts we have to shake our head about because Chee hasn't commented on. I, very likely, have read far more Star Wars than you.

 

Bacta War was odd, and has some issues with depictions, the whole X-Wing series did. I never claimed that Star Wars was very consistent nor would I ever.

 

According to all sources available, if we use the numbers that you say cannot be real, Star Trek cannot win. You instead say that those numbers aren't right because of logical plot holes in Star Wars.

 

Star Wars... A series which has always had logical plot holes... Where there are so many logical plot holes that people have nearly written books about them. You can't try to use logic with Star Wars because heck... If we do that... Sooooo much of Star Wars stops making any sense.

 

So no, your logic can't actually change canon...

 

Heck, are you familiar with a Base Delta Zero? The technique where the Empire renders a planet uninhabitable? There already was no need for a Death Star.

 

What about Galaxy Guns? Why did the Emperor need a Death Star when he had those?

 

What about Dark Saber? Though the thing blew up the proof of concept is that a Death Star superlaser can be constructed for a fraction of the cost and in a fraction of the time by just building it as a normal capital ship?

 

How about Hyperspace torpedoes? We know they have the technology after all and they are millions of times more powerful than anything else we have seen... So powerful the technology was banned.

 

Why did the Imperials in Empire Strikes back comment how the Falcon can't have a cloaking device because of its size but in the GAT trilogy we are told that nobody has the working technology for a cloaking device of any sort.

 

Why did nobody use droid armies after the clone wars when they are much cheaper... Heck... Why did Thrawn use clones if Stormtrooper clones are pretty much just as useful as droids...

 

Why did they use slaved ships for the Dark Force in GAT if they had, at the time they were constructed, the technology to man ships entirely by droids?

 

With Star Wars you have to kind of check logic at the door unless you want to go insane.

Edited August 14, 2012 by ProfessorWalsh

[GarfieldJL]

I have read all 223 Star Wars novels and yes I am familiar with the Shards of Alderaan storyline you are referencing, which people found highly inconsistent because in other media they have said that there wasn't even an asteroid field remaining. It is one of the parts we have to shake our head about because Chee hasn't commented on. I, very likely, have read far more Star Wars than you.

 

Bacta War was odd, and has some issues with depictions, the whole X-Wing series did. I never claimed that Star Wars was very consistent nor would I ever.

 

They never said there wasn't an Asteroid Field, only they came out of hyperspace into some kind of meteor shower... Considering the materials composing a planet like Alderaan, the X-Wing and Shards of Alderaan Storyline's description actually makes more sense than what you are stating. It is substancially more likely that there would have been large pieces of Alderaan still floating around. The superlaser hit a point on the planet it didn't envelop the entire planet...

Edited August 14, 2012 by GarfieldJL

[ProfessorWalsh]

They never said there wasn't an Asteroid Field, only they came out of hyperspace into some kind of meteor shower...

 

They didn't say it in the movie.

 

Actually Han said that there was nothing... He didn't note an asteroid field... In the comics they actually did say that there was "nothing remaining" then later there was the YJK novels which said there was something remaining, then in NJO Leia says that there was "nothing left" of Alderaan just "empty space" which would logically include an asteroid field if there was one there.

 

Also when the planet explodes we specifically see nothing left at all nothing even coming close to what we would see if the planet simply broke apart into an asteroid field.

[PaerisKiran]

They didn't say it in the movie.

 

Actually Han said that there was nothing... He didn't note an asteroid field... In the comics they actually did say that there was "nothing remaining" then later there was the YJK novels which said there was something remaining, then in NJO Leia says that there was "nothing left" of Alderaan just "empty space" which would logically include an asteroid field if there was one there.

 

Also when the planet explodes we specifically see nothing left at all nothing even coming close to what we would see if the planet simply broke apart into an asteroid field.

 

Yeah if something explodes you usualy see blast of light... and the remaining schorched debries usualy escapes attention. quite easily...especialy in dead of of space. If there was nothing left (akka planet was completly vaporized) there would be nothing hitting Falcon when it emerged from hyperspace.

 

I see rather large rocks (mostly from planetary crust) but given the scale and range using eyes alone it would be quite easy to miss even kilometer size rocks. (and glow of explosion and molten core most likely obscures a lot of them) (16-18 seconds of the video)

 

Plus I express firm belief that there will be more rocks when remants of molten core eventualy cool down. And mind this is only shot from one direction and we do not see other half of the planet.

 

So if you actualy do not SEE the rocks I suggest you search for apropriate medical help...

Edited August 14, 2012 by PaerisKiran

[ProfessorWalsh]

Yeah if something explodes you usualy see blast of light... and the remaining schorched debries usualy escapes attention. quite easily...especialy in dead of of space. If there was nothing left (akka planet was completly vaporized) there would be nothing hitting Falcon when it emerged from hyperspace.

 

I see rather large rocks (mostly from planetary crust) but given the scale and range using eyes alone it would be quite easy to miss even kilometer size rocks. (and glow of explosion and molten core most likely obscures a lot of them) (16-18 seconds of the video)

 

Plus I express firm belief that there will be more rocks when remants of molten core eventualy cool down. And mind this is only shot from one direction and we do not see other half of the planet.

 

So if you actualy do not SEE the rocks I suggest you search for apropriate medical help...

 

Uhm...

 

Paeris... I hate to tell you this... But the video you linked is a Star Wars fan edit. That isn't the explosion as shown in the movie. The explosion you showed was made by a Star Wars fan named Adywan and is not the official nor the canonical explosion.

[PaerisKiran]

Uhm...

 

Paeris... I hate to tell you this... But the video you linked is a Star Wars fan edit. That isn't the explosion as shown in the movie. The explosion you showed was made by a Star Wars fan named Adywan and is not the official nor the canonical explosion.

 

Utter original (one can see some debries and note that everyting that shines is by neccesity molten and radiating material)

I believe (despite the fan prank) this is lucas´s last version... still large amount of general debries is visible. (And lot of glowing rapidly cooling down matter which will turn into rather big rocks)

 

Does not matter which vid I watch... three is always some debries... combined with large amount of glowing pieces which, after they cool down will be just rocks.

 

Face it you can´t win this one. (and truth be told adwans edit produces less debries than Lucas´s last version...)

 

Alderaan was cracked up but definitely not disintegrated to dust.

[Nydus]

Also transporters... Transporters are the most useless technology I have ever seen. If there is any electromagnetic interference these things become life threateningly dangerous to use. We have seen things like electrical storms stop them.

 

WHAT?

 

That is pretty disingenuous man. I'm not sure if you are being facetious or not but I'd point out the following:

 

1. We've seen transporters used in large fleet engagements in the TNG era. If they were so easily disrupted they would not be a means to board Star Bases and Star Ships that are still functioning and in the fight. Even in the OS era we've seen transporters being used in times of duress (combat, interference).

 

2. There is an assumption that transporters have no combat capability themselves. What is to prevent a starship from beaming an entire ship's complement into the middle of an asteroid or 1" down so their feet are stuck in the floor? Transporter technology -- as with warp drive and phasers -- is closely guarded by the Federation for this reason.

 

But after seeing that I really don't think any capital ship in Star Trek could hit with any degree of accuracy something like a TIE fighter.

 

Of course we have also seen scenes where they can fire with pinpoint accuracy against tiny fast moving targets... Which is the problem with inconsistency again...

 

There is indeed a degree of inconsistency in the ST universe. We can't deny that (although I think the most egregious examples come post- TNG). I generally don't think your phaser fire is a good example though.

 

This is a matter of the ECM / ECCM suites on both star ships. When two star ships meet in combat, there is an intelligence battle going on between the computers of both ships; projecting false readings, conflicting warp trails, masking damage to vital systems, etc. on the one side, and trying to see through the false readings, conflicting warp trails, and masked damage being projected by the other ship.

 

In other words, phaser fire gets less accurate the more advanced a ship they are fighting. OS and TNG is fairly consistent here.

 

- Arcada

Edited August 14, 2012 by Nydus

[billyboyjennings]

My CAR has taken harder hits than that and it never exploded. What? Without the integrity fields Star Ships can't take even superficial damage and survive or something? We have a scene where a gigantic asteroid slams into a Star Destroyer's hull and the destroyer suffers absolutely no damage for cripes sake.

 

Hold on. When did this happen? I assume you're referring to this ESB asteroid scene where a Destroyer takes a direct hit to the command tower. The scene where the entire command tower is annihilated by the impact and the rest of the ship explodes moments later???

[Lorica]

I am a fan of both Star Wars and Star Trek as well. Both universes have huges holes and inconsistentcies to determine 100% who is better than who. It is well known that Gene Roddenberry and other Star Trek producers collaborated heavily with NASA and the scientific community regarding Star Trek while Star Wars was produced by Star Trek fans and not collaborated with the scientific community as much or if at all. Given that, technicalogically Star Trek is more realistically sound than Star Wars. However, there are always an exception to the facts and norm such as the use of ION drive on the Tie Fighters. ION drive was successfully implemented on a successful space program so ION drive is a fact.

 

Species Rules: No force-users, military power only. No calling out-of-faction help.

 

The Force is a huge plus for Star Wars and this weakens their position with the UFP (United Federation of Planets) and the Star Trek universe.

 

The Galactic Empire(RotJ, not post-RotJ) vs The Dominion (DS9)

 

Without the Force and potential troop sizes, the Galactic Empire is inferior to the Dominion. The Jem'Hadar only know war, they are drugged, their ships are for combat only (absolutely no luxuries), they are fanatical, they have weapons that can surpass star ship shields because they are on rotating frequencies, they can walk through shields, and they have nothing to lose which can not be said for the Sith.

 

Besides the force, it is proven in history many times over, it takes heart. quick adaptability, and numbers to win a war. Technology is only a plus. However, according to canon, there is no indication of Dominion numbers nor can I find any numbers of the Galactic Empire.

 

On the surface, the Dominion is superior but anything can happen.

 

The Undine(Species 8472 from Voyager) vs The Yuuzhan Vong.

 

Unless the Yuuzhan Vong adapt, the Undine would conquer. The Undine are highly adapatable to many environments, their space craft can easily slip between fluid space and normal space, they can use their bare claws to claw open the hull of a Star Ship like they did to Voyager, they have very virulent secretions, they can combine a cluster of bio ships to form a mother ship that can also destroy planets.

 

On the surface, the Undine are superior.

 

The Borg Collective vs the Galactic Alliance.

 

Without the force which may not be fully effective against the Borg (any energy attacks would probably be adapted to but throwing stuff would work, light sabers on a single frequency would become useless). Unless the Galactic Alliance can adapt to the Borg, the Galactic Alliance would be assimilated like many other civilizations. Without a "Skywalkerus" or 9 of 9, resistance will be futile.

 

Klingon Empire vs The Sith Empire(TOR) (Special Rule of no Force Users stretched to allow Average Sith Warriors, etc... no big boys).

 

Without the force, Klingons are stronger and larger than a Sith. Klingons would charge in with their bat'leths and cut down many sith and don't let the Klingons capture lightsaber or vibroblade tech. Light saber or vibroblade bat'leths sounds scary. In melee combat, that weapon is so much superior than a sword. After all. it was designed by a martial artist.

 

Again without the force and potential numbers, the Klingons are superior.

 

Now with the force and Star Trek shields down, most of the Star Trek universe would have a major issue.

Edited August 14, 2012 by Lorica

[liammozz]

over all it would be down to who controls space so star trek universe wins unfortunately

 

lol love that vid

 

 

(i know you said no specials but hes a legend Q would win everything)

[ProfessorWalsh]

Hold on. When did this happen? I assume you're referring to this ESB asteroid scene where a Destroyer takes a direct hit to the command tower. The scene where the entire command tower is annihilated by the impact and the rest of the ship explodes moments later???

 

Nope. Referring to a scene that happens later during the scene where the millennium falcon flees from the creature in the asteroid.

 

It is also described on page 127 of the novelization of the Empire Strikes Back.

 

As to that, you are comparing a slowed and deflected scrape vs a solid direct hit against the bridge itself (and the Star Destroyer you are referencing had already sustained heavy damage)... Weren't you the one who tried to call me out for trying to take things out of context?

[ProfessorWalsh]

WHAT?

 

That is pretty disingenuous man. I'm not sure if you are being facetious or not but I'd point out the following:

 

They couldn't use Transporters in TNG several times because of electrical storms on planets, once they couldn't use them because of solar flares, they can't use them through any shields, they can't use them to any place with a reactor breach, they can't use them through any electromagnetic interference. Basically they can't use them any time it would be inconvenient to the plot.

 

There is indeed a degree of inconsistency in the ST universe. We can't deny that (although I think the most egregious examples come post- TNG). I generally don't think your phaser fire is a good example though.

 

This is a matter of the ECM / ECCM suites on both star ships. When two star ships meet in combat, there is an intelligence battle going on between the computers of both ships; projecting false readings, conflicting warp trails, masking damage to vital systems, etc. on the one side, and trying to see through the false readings, conflicting warp trails, and masked damage being projected by the other ship.

 

In other words, phaser fire gets less accurate the more advanced a ship they are fighting. OS and TNG is fairly consistent here.

 

- Arcada

 

That doesn't work as an explanation. We are talking about shots from close range, things that MANUALLY could be aimed to hit. A targeting computer shouldn't have a problem hitting any target any person with a mouse and keyboard could bullseye with ease.