No Star Trek vs Star Wars threads?

[13_CBS]

I'm a little surprised by the fact that there are no ST vs SW debates here. Why is that? Has the fight been long over (stardestroyer.net seems to suggest that), or are people simply not interested?

[Emperor Tippy]

I'm a little surprised by the fact that there are no ST vs SW debates here. Why is that? Has the fight been long over (stardestroyer.net seems to suggest that), or are people simply not interested?

If you look at it objectively Star War's crushes Star Trek because of the vast difference in power scales.

Star War's wins in:
Strategic Speed
Communications
Weapons
Ground Forces
Shields
Super Weapons
Ruthlessness

We have had the debate before and it takes several pages and inevitable goes off topic.

[Skjaldbakka]

What is there to debate about? In terms of power level, Star Wars is the clear winner. With the exception of the Q continium and possibly the Borg, there really is nothing in the Star Trek Universe on the power scale of the Force, and the people that use it.

That will either answer the question or remedy it.

[Talkkno]

To avoid any further arguements, I recommend that you comb threw the "Is Star wars broken thread"

[FoE]

Ugh. Who wants to start that tired old debate? I think debating who kicks more ass — Star Wars or Star Trek — is basically the pinnacle of geekiness. Nobody's probably started it before now out of sheer embarrassment.

[Skjaldbakka]

I thought the old debate was about which is better, not about which would win in a fight. But really, that is a false dichotomy. Both are mostly good, and both have their fair share of bad stuff as well. Take Ep. 1 and half of the old Star Trek movies, for example.

[Green Bean]

Pfft. Star Wars versus Star Trek? It's been done to death. My friend, we are geeks, and that means we derive our cred from obscure sources; the odder, the better.

In fact, as debates on who could beat who multiply, we'll have to dig deeper and deeper, going for more and more obscure fandoms and universes, until everyone's so focused on the Carebears versus the cast of Abby McBeal that Star Wars and Star Trek become edgy and new again. And thus, the eternal cycle of geekdom is preserved. :smalltongue:

[averagejoe]

The real question is, which one wins physics?

Ah, who are we kidding? It's not so much a matter of winning as it is a matter of losing the least. :smallsigh:

[doliest]

I still don't where they get their win in a fight numbers, I think in terms of better, Enterprise & 1-3 killed the fun of argueing.

[Hawriel]

If you look at it objectively Star War's crushes Star Trek because of the vast difference in power scales.

Star War's wins in:
Strategic Speed
Communications
Weapons
Ground Forces
Shields
Super Weapons
Ruthlessness

We have had the debate before and it takes several pages and inevitable goes off topic.

big missunderstanding about star wars communications. Yes if your on coroscont you can talk to mon cal in real time. There are enough relay stations if any blow up. most places not in the core or along a majer trade lane can be cut off by taking out afew relay stations. In hyperspace you can not communicate at all. For a fleat exiting hyperspace is one of the most dangerios things to do.

Star Trek you can communicate normal in a worp bubble. This abbility for Star trek to communicate at faster than light speed is somthing that will tip the balance in their favor.

Star Wars does use better fleat tactics. Mixed forces of Carriers, Battleships, Cruisers, pickets, and varios fighters. SW also has an edge in ground combat. SW actualy has standing armies with planitary invasion being not just possible but acheaved multaple times.

Star trek fleats are make up of capital ships, some cruisers and distroyers. No carriers or fighters. No a runabout is not a fighter. The Defient is not a fighter. It is a war ship but its not a capital ship.

Weapons and shields are pritty much the same. They both have strenghs and weaknesses that balance out.

This is my tie braker. A SW ship gets hit not only can it shrug it off but will take alot of punding befir being sevearly damaged and destroyed. Friction and a really lucky shot not withstanding. A ST ship on the other hand well in every episode in wich there was a ship to ship battle the federation ships bridge half exploded on the first shot.

[ray53208]

lucas demolished his franchise. braga and berman destroyed trek. farscape and stargate, for all their good points arent serious contenders. at least not on the level trek and wars were.

they had a good run, but shows like firefly and the new bsg blow them out of an airlock.

[Nerd-o-rama]

We have had the debate before and it takes several pages and inevitable goes off topic.
How is this different from any other vs. thread?

[Neftren]

Lets compare: A Miranda Class Exploratory Vessel has an average crew of about 300 people. A Victory Class Star Destroyer has a crew of upwards of 1000. So a Miranda Class Vessel is large, and roomy, while a Star Destroyer is at least 10 times it's size. Now lets factor in weaponry.

Starfleet vessels usually travel alone, or in pairs. So, we have two Sovereign Class vessels, top of the line, versus a pair of Victory Class Star Destroyers, Who also generally travel in fleets of 2-4 with other possibly larger star destroyers. The two star destroyers unload on the two Starfleet vessels, with each turbolaser equivalent to several thermonuclear kiloton warheads. Each Heavy Turbolaser, well add another 4 or 5 times the number of warheads to the total energy overload. Now assuming we take Imperial Naval pinpoint gunning and apply it to the weak spots in shields. Poof, one star destroyer can take on at least 4 or 5 Sovereign class vessels without taking a sweat.

Even a squadron of X-Wings can take em out out. Star Wars is definitely for the win here.

[Executor]

Why no SW vs ST? Two reasons.

1. Star Wars is ridiculously overpowered in almost every single field

2. It's been done to death. So we've moved on to other things, like the Protoss vs almost anything.

[Winterwind]

The conclusions of previous threads can be summarised like this:
a) Star Wars weapons and shields are, apparently, much stronger than in pretty much any other universe, and so massively overpowered they could crack nigh any vessel with a single shot while taking incredible punishment.
b) Star Trek has one distinct advantage over other universes: Ships therein can fire while moving with FTL speeds.
c) These FTL speeds, however, are significantly smaller than in most other sci-fi universes, especially Star Wars, where ships move several thousand times faster than in Star Trek.
d) The conclusion of c) is that in such a fight, Star Wars could pick its targets and always strike where Starfleet currently is not (not that they would mind being fired upon very much due to a)), thus negating any advantage that Star Trek could have due to b).
e) This does not even begin to take into account that Star Wars has also more than a thousand times as many inhabited worlds as the Federation.

In other words, SW beats ST by sheer numbers in nigh every single field. That's hardly a contest, it's a slaughterhouse.

[factotum]

We had an absolutely massive discussion about this a few weeks ago, and, as is the nature of internet discussion, nobody could agree on anything. I'm personally in the "Star Wars would win" camp, but there are plenty who weren't...

[Logic]

I have to mention that the only reason that the ships of Star Wars can travel at such speeds is because of their computers and nav maps. They would be reduced to sublight anywhere else besides their own galaxy.

[Green Bean]

How is this different from any other vs. thread?

It has Wookies! :smallbiggrin:

[Deepblue706]

I enjoy Star Trek a great deal more than Star Wars, and it's primarily because of The Next Generation. Unlike Star Wars, Star Trek: TNG seemed to a bit more thought-focused, addressing morals, ethics and humanity. Star Wars has lasers, laser swords, and acrobatics - the last three movies were soley designed to appeal to children...well, actually, episode 3 seemed more geared towards brooding 15-year-olds.

While Star Trek is more than TNG (Actually, I find myself having a hard time enjoying any Star Trek show OTHER than TNG...), the entire Star Wars franchise seems to fail to provoke more thought than this one facet of Star Trek. Actually, I think all of the "Q" episodes alone beat Star Wars, in that department.

Also, Star Wars never had Patrick Stewart.

[Talkkno]

I enjoy Star Trek a great deal more than Star Wars, and it's primarily because of The Next Generation. Unlike Star Wars, Star Trek: TNG seemed to a bit more thought-focused, addressing morals, ethics and humanity. Star Wars has lasers, laser swords, and acrobatics - the last three movies were soley designed to appeal to children...well, actually, episode 3 seemed more geared towards brooding 15-year-olds.




Hey! I'm 15....and I like the prequals :P
Besides, if it was thought provoking, why hasn't been sucessfully exported overseas?

[Winterwind]

What do you mean? Star Trek is pretty popular here, I think there's always at least one series running daily, but usually several of them at once. And most people I know are rather familiar with the series or do even consider themselves Trekkies.

(I, personally, have a few major sources of discontent with Star Trek and with TNG more than any other - well, maybe except Voyager - including that "thought provoking part", but then, I also have problems with the Star Wars prequels, albeit of an entirely different kind)

[Talkkno]

What do you mean? Star Trek is pretty popular here, I think there's always at least one series running daily, but usually several of them at once. And most people I know are rather familiar with the series or do even consider themselves Trekkies.

*Looks at Hong Kong, China and Japan*

[Alex12]

The conclusions of previous threads can be summarised like this:
a) Star Wars weapons and shields are, apparently, much stronger than in pretty much any other universe, and so massively overpowered they could crack nigh any vessel with a single shot while taking incredible punishment.
Not really. 40k could match it, any random Schlockverse military group could at least match it, any random Culture ship could take out pretty much the entire Empire, the Xeelee would slaughter the GE utterly, Dahakverse could at least match them. That's just in firepower.
The Culture owns the GE in basically every military-related field (actually, basically every scientific field period) the Xeelee likewise, 40k is slower but has more ships, Dahakverse ships are huge (One of them was hiding as the Moon. for ~40000 years. Not in the moon. It was the moon.) and any single ship would destroy the Death Star with ease, though they're far slower. Schlockverse factions are superior in everything except numbers.

[Winterwind]

*Looks at Hong Kong, China and Japan*Ah, that kind of overseas. (Hey, I could get there going by land, if I wanted to!)

Okay, I don't know anything about the popularity of Star Trek in these regions.


Not really. 40k could match it, any random Schlockverse military group could at least match it, any random Culture ship could take out pretty much the entire Empire, the Xeelee would slaughter the GE utterly, Dahakverse could at least match them. That's just in firepower.
The Culture owns the GE in basically every military-related field (actually, basically every scientific field period) the Xeelee likewise, 40k is slower but has more ships, Dahakverse ships are huge (One of them was hiding as the Moon. for ~40000 years. Not in the moon. It was the moon.) and any single ship would destroy the Death Star with ease, though they're far slower. Schlockverse factions are superior in everything except numbers.Yes, I know, I participated in that large "Is Star Wars overpowered?" thread where we actively tried to find any universes which could beat Star Wars. We found quite a bit more of them, actually. I was just oversimplifying for the sake of this thread, because Star Trek most definitely was not on that list.

[Talkkno]

Ah, that kind of overseas. (Hey, I could get there going by land, if I wanted to!)

Okay, I don't know anything about the popularity of Star Trek in these regions.

Don't worry about it, suffice to say, the fact there isn't a Star Trek manga(IRRC), and they make manga pretty much about anything.(There's one about making interesting shapes out of bread and is pretty poupler )

[Deepblue706]

Hey! I'm 15....and I like the prequals :P
Besides, if it was thought provoking, why hasn't been sucessfully exported overseas?

Because people think it's boring. Laser swords aren't boring, laser swords are fun. Thus, Star Wars is popular. Its success has nothing to do with amazing plot, well-written dialogue, good script, or deep meaning. It's all the flashy lights, the costumes, the shapes and colors. That's what catches the eye. Philosophy doesn't catch the eye, it makes a lot of people fall asleep.

[Talkkno]

Because people think it's boring. Laser swords aren't boring, laser swords are fun. Thus, Star Wars is popular. Its success has nothing to do with amazing plot, well-written dialogue, good script, or deep meaning. It's all the flashy lights, the costumes, the shapes and colors. That's what catches the eye. Philosophy doesn't catch the eye, it makes a lot of people fall asleep.

But as Winterwind just pointed out, Star Trek is poupler, and that above statement seems to make a extremly blankent statement about people who live in the Far east...

[Alex12]

Ah, that kind of overseas. (Hey, I could get there going by land, if I wanted to!)

Okay, I don't know anything about the popularity of Star Trek in these regions.

Yes, I know, I participated in that large "Is Star Wars overpowered?" thread where we actively tried to find any universes which could beat Star Wars. We found quite a bit more of them, actually. I was just oversimplifying for the sake of this thread, because Star Trek most definitely was not on that list.

Was there one over here? I just belong to a forum that does things like that fairly regularly (it has a separate Vs Debates section, even)

[Talkkno]

Was there one over here? I just belong to a forum that does things like that fairly regularly (it has a separate Vs Debates section, even)

I'm betting spacebattles.com then. By the way, are you the one who posts the same vs that appear on this board on that board?

[Alex12]

I'm betting spacebattles.com then. By the way, are you the one who posts the same vs that appear on this board on that board?

Yes it's spacebattles, and my username there is exactly the same as on this one, though I haven't been here nearly as long as on SB. Which vs debates were you referring to?

[Talkkno]

Yes it's spacebattles, and my username there is exactly the same as on this one, though I haven't been here nearly as long as on SB. Which vs debates were you referring to?

Zerg vs Flood, Terrans vs Colinals of the top of my head, not accusing you or anything.

[Green Bean]

Was there one over here? I just belong to a forum that does things like that fairly regularly (it has a separate Vs Debates section, even)

Yep. You can find it here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52666)

Edit: Warning, old-ish thread. Look, but don't touch

[Alex12]

Zerg vs Flood, Terrans vs Colinals of the top of my head, not accusing you or anything.

nah, that's not me. The posters might not even be ripping from here, it's just that there's only so many different science fiction/fantasy universes that most people are going to be familiar with, and people will naturally want to see them fight more. Limited material=duplicated topics.

You a member of SB?

[Talkkno]

nah, that's not me. The posters might not even be ripping from here, it's just that there's only so many different science fiction/fantasy universes that most people are going to be familiar with, and people will naturally want to see them fight more. Limited material=duplicated topics.

You a member of SB?

Yup, the same screen as here.

[Eladrinstar]

I always think Star Wars is better.

I mean, I could never take Star Trek seriously. Star Wars I can't either. But the fact is, Star Wars doesn't want to be taken seriously. Trek does, and it utterly fails.

And anyone who thinks Star Trek is as popular as Star Wars needs a reality check.

[Winterwind]

Yep. You can find it here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52666)

Edit: Warning, old-ish thread. Look, but don't touchThere is also this thread here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58620), where foeofthelance and I reiterated that entire list, pretty much near the bottom of the first page. Oh, what the heck, I'll just repost it here:

Warhammer 40k (Similiar build, with more available firepower on a greater scale.
Asimov's Foundation Series (Overwhelming numbers)
Andromeda (Superior technology)
Human Imperium from Mutineer's Moon (Each ship was essentially a Death Star, and those were only the picket ships.)
Honorverse (Ships with near impentretable shields, coupled with far greater engagement ranges)
Replicators (No way to stop them, and they continously rebuild from a single survivng unit if necessary)
Anything with the title of 'Ancient' (Simply for normally being a 'Verses God powers, which really isn't fair, but we count it anyway to get back at the Jedi)
The Culture (vastly more overpowered in every regard)
Mantrid from LEXX (like Replicators, but on a cosmic scale (converted entire mass of a universe larger than ours into robotic drones within a few months))

foeofthelance takes the credits for the greater part of that list. I also think there may have been a few other universes which came up in the thread you linked; also, that thread makes the distinction between ground and space forces, with a few universes being able to defeat Star Wars on the ground, but not in space (StarCraft and BattleTech, for example).


EDIT: And, while I have mixed feelings about this, I mostly share Eladrinstar's opinion.

[factotum]

I have to mention that the only reason that the ships of Star Wars can travel at such speeds is because of their computers and nav maps. They would be reduced to sublight anywhere else besides their own galaxy.

I disagree. They might not be able to make the thousand-plus lightyear jumps they can in their own universe, but they could sure as heck make short jumps--say a light year or two--because you'd be able to SEE pretty much any obstacle at that sort of range. Furthermore, it would only take two starships positioned a reasonable distance apart to be able to determine the distance of all nearby stars via triangulation--you could map the entire galaxy very quickly indeed using such a method.

(Note I'm not making this triangulation thing up--one of the methods used for determining the distance of stars in our own galaxy is to take triangulation measurements from opposite sides of the Earth's orbit. That obviously takes six months to do because you have to wait for the Earth to move into position to take your readings, but if you have two starships positioned appropriately you can do it near instantaneously assuming you have FTL communication between the two vessels. Furthermore, you could use a much longer baseline (say, a light-year or more) to ensure greater accuracy in the readings).

[Logic]

Don't worry about it, suffice to say, the fact there isn't a Star Trek manga(IRRC), and they make manga pretty much about anything.(There's one about making interesting shapes out of bread and is pretty poupler )Don't be so sure. (http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-manga-Shinsei/dp/1598167448)

I disagree. They might not be able to make the thousand-plus lightyear jumps they can in their own universe, but they could sure as heck make short jumps--say a light year or two--because you'd be able to SEE pretty much any obstacle at that sort of range. Furthermore, it would only take two starships positioned a reasonable distance apart to be able to determine the distance of all nearby stars via triangulation--you could map the entire galaxy very quickly indeed using such a method.

(Note I'm not making this triangulation thing up--one of the methods used for determining the distance of stars in our own galaxy is to take triangulation measurements from opposite sides of the Earth's orbit. That obviously takes six months to do because you have to wait for the Earth to move into position to take your readings, but if you have two starships positioned appropriately you can do it near instantaneously assuming you have FTL communication between the two vessels. Furthermore, you could use a much longer baseline (say, a light-year or more) to ensure greater accuracy in the readings).
Han Solo, one of the gutsiest characters ever to grace the Star Wars Galaxy was unwilling to make a blind jump, even a short one to escape the Imperials. That implies that the technology is not precise enough without its navcomputer and maps.

Assuming otherwise, it would still take a great deal of time to map another galaxy, since the engines can't just jump as soon as they have completed one jump.

[Emperor Ing]

It seems painfully obvous to me. Star Wars capital ships are LITERALLY armed to the teeth with supposedly nuclear-class turbolasers.

But the lack of SW vs ST has a good reason. ST loses. game over. By the time the entire Federation fleet gets to coruscant, they'll be cranky old men (presuming that the crew are all human)

[Talkkno]

I disagree. They might not be able to make the thousand-plus lightyear jumps they can in their own universe, but they could sure as heck make short jumps--say a light year or two--because you'd be able to SEE pretty much any obstacle at that sort of range. Furthermore, it would only take two starships positioned a reasonable distance apart to be able to determine the distance of all nearby stars via triangulation--you could map the entire galaxy very quickly indeed using such a method.

(Note I'm not making this triangulation thing up--one of the methods used for determining the distance of stars in our own galaxy is to take triangulation measurements from opposite sides of the Earth's orbit. That obviously takes six months to do because you have to wait for the Earth to move into position to take your readings, but if you have two starships positioned appropriately you can do it near instantaneously assuming you have FTL communication between the two vessels. Furthermore, you could use a much longer baseline (say, a light-year or more) to ensure greater accuracy in the readings).
Well in Heir of the Empire Luke was willing to take his chances to make blind jump without navicompter or the Force, instead of getting capurted by the Empire

[sikyon]

Lets compare: A Miranda Class Exploratory Vessel has an average crew of about 300 people. A Victory Class Star Destroyer has a crew of upwards of 1000. So a Miranda Class Vessel is large, and roomy, while a Star Destroyer is at least 10 times it's size. Now lets factor in weaponry.

Starfleet vessels usually travel alone, or in pairs. So, we have two Sovereign Class vessels, top of the line, versus a pair of Victory Class Star Destroyers, Who also generally travel in fleets of 2-4 with other possibly larger star destroyers. The two star destroyers unload on the two Starfleet vessels, with each turbolaser equivalent to several thermonuclear kiloton warheads. Each Heavy Turbolaser, well add another 4 or 5 times the number of warheads to the total energy overload. Now assuming we take Imperial Naval pinpoint gunning and apply it to the weak spots in shields. Poof, one star destroyer can take on at least 4 or 5 Sovereign class vessels without taking a sweat.

Even a squadron of X-Wings can take em out out. Star Wars is definitely for the win here.

I need to point out some false conclusions here...

Imperial Naval pinpoint gunning? Hahahahahaha... you make me laugh.

Also, kiloton range nukes are nothing in comparison to 60+megaton photon torpedoes.

Finally, the idea that star wars has greater firepower comes from EU evidence, which I do not consider to be very reliable given the firewpower output shown in movies.

Anyhow, I don't want to start this here, because I do think SW has overwhelming numbers (though I feel that people give SW just abit too much credit).

Honestly, I couldn't get into the old Star Wars movies. They just seemed dull, and frakley poorly written to me. Lucas isn't a great writer by any stretch of imagination.

[Foeofthelance]

Also, kiloton range nukes are nothing in comparison to 60+megaton photon torpedoes.

Actually, from what the SW folks claim, the range is properly in the gigaton range for SW weapons. Apparently that's the low side for a troop transport at any rate. So yeah, ST gets reamed horribly. Then again, while ST tries to be serious and fails, mostly as a result of technobabble, we're comparing it to SW, which takes scientific sounding words and smacks them on ludicrously large numbers. This leads to such explanations as a small sun type power source making up the same power output as 300 million suns, or thereabouts, to power the Death Star. Both sides are silly in their own ways, so trying to figure out which is superior is difficult. ST is inherently weaker, but if SW ever rencountered the laws of physics as we know them it would most likely suffer a terminal failure of all systems.

Should both sides ever meet, I'm sure the universe would just reset itself to undue the headache such a meeting would cause, erasing George Lucas from the Time/Space continuum. Gene Rodenberry would be allowed to survive, but ST would never have gotten past Next Generations and a couple of movies, but we'd still have Andromeda.

[SITB]

There is also this thread here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58620), where foeofthelance and I reiterated that entire list, pretty much near the bottom of the first page. Oh, what the heck, I'll just repost it here:

Asimov's Foundation Series (Overwhelming numbers)


I would like to interject that The Foundation (pre-Gaia) would lose to the Star World 'verse, but it will all be rendered meaningless in a 500~1000 years time as The Empire/Republic would mysteriously fall leaving the way for the Foundation to begin anew.

And post Gaia would result in the quick assimilation of Star World 'verse into Gaia (Galaxy of Mules For the Win!).

[Winterwind]

I would like to interject that The Foundation (pre-Gaia) would lose to the Star World 'verse, but it will all be rendered meaningless in a 500~1000 years time as The Empire/Republic would mysteriously fall leaving the way for the Foundation to begin anew.

And post Gaia would result in the quick assimilation of Star World 'verse into Gaia (Galaxy of Mules For the Win!).I am not quite sure, but if memory serves this entry in the "What Beats Star Wars?"-list actually referred to the Empire before its fall. I might be mistaken though.

[factotum]

Han Solo, one of the gutsiest characters ever to grace the Star Wars Galaxy was unwilling to make a blind jump, even a short one to escape the Imperials. That implies that the technology is not precise enough without its navcomputer and maps.


Either that, or it implies that Han Solo wasn't as gutsy as his reputation suggested. The fact is, SW sensors have a multi-light-year span, just like Star Trek ones do, so it beggars belief that they couldn't see any potential obstacle to a hyperspace jump within that range and thus allow for "blind" jumps within at least that distance. As for not being able to jump again too soon, what does it matter? You're presumably using some sort of numerous, expendable smaller craft (e.g. probe droids) for this scouting mission, not Star Destroyers, so you could just leave the things where they are once they've done their job.

[Foeofthelance]

Either that, or it implies that Han Solo wasn't as gutsy as his reputation suggested. The fact is, SW sensors have a multi-light-year span, just like Star Trek ones do, so it beggars belief that they couldn't see any potential obstacle to a hyperspace jump within that range and thus allow for "blind" jumps within at least that distance. As for not being able to jump again too soon, what does it matter? You're presumably using some sort of numerous, expendable smaller craft (e.g. probe droids) for this scouting mission, not Star Destroyers, so you could just leave the things where they are once they've done their job

It could be that there would be almost no point to such a manouver. If you can do it so can they, and you still haven't managed to dodge. You'd need to jump outside their sensor range, so that they have no idea where you've gone.

[factotum]

It could be that there would be almost no point to such a manouver. If you can do it so can they, and you still haven't managed to dodge. You'd need to jump outside their sensor range, so that they have no idea where you've gone.

Struggling to see the relevance, considering I was discussing how Star Wars could map out the galaxy using short-range blind jumps...it has nothing to do with escaping an enemy attack.

[Logic]

The fact is, SW sensors have a multi-light-year span, just like Star Trek ones do, so it beggars belief that they couldn't see any potential obstacle to a hyperspace jump within that range and thus allow for "blind" jumps within at least that distance.Please cite some source, since this sounds like a fallacy to me. If a large Imperial Armada was able to hide on the other side of moon, then I doubt their sensors are powerful enough to detect ships out to a distance of several light years.

[Malic]

Star Trek wins but only becaus it has Omnipotent beings (Q that one thing on the destroyed planet that killed an entire race of Kobold like things)

[factotum]

Please cite some source, since this sounds like a fallacy to me. If a large Imperial Armada was able to hide on the other side of moon, then I doubt their sensors are powerful enough to detect ships out to a distance of several light years.

You mean, exactly the same way the Enterprise hid from the Reliant in Star Trek 2? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander...if you assume the Imperial sensors can't detect ships at any distance because they can't detect ships through the mass of a planet, then neither can Star Trek, by your own argument.

Anyway, if you want canon examples, look at Empire Strikes Back. When the Millennium Falcon sweeps past the Star Destroyer's bridge and then disappears from their sensors, the captain does NOT immediately assume it's gone into hyperspace, which would be the logical assumption if they had sensors incapable of detecting ships at any distance. His first puzzled exclamation is, "A ship that small can't have a cloaking device!"--in other words, he believes the only way the Falcon could POSSIBLY have evaded his sensors would be to use such a device.

We also know that Star Wars has faster-than-light communications (Death Star personnel are aware of the Millennium Falcon's escape from Mos Eisley pretty much as soon as the ship itself arrives in the Alderaan system), and it seems unlikely they'd have FTL communications without also having FTL sensor capability.

[Logic]

You mean, exactly the same way the Enterprise hid from the Reliant in Star Trek 2? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander...if you assume the Imperial sensors can't detect ships at any distance because they can't detect ships through the mass of a planet, then neither can Star Trek, by your own argument.

Anyway, if you want canon examples, look at Empire Strikes Back. When the Millennium Falcon sweeps past the Star Destroyer's bridge and then disappears from their sensors, the captain does NOT immediately assume it's gone into hyperspace, which would be the logical assumption if they had sensors incapable of detecting ships at any distance. His first puzzled exclamation is, "A ship that small can't have a cloaking device!"--in other words, he believes the only way the Falcon could POSSIBLY have evaded his sensors would be to use such a device.

We also know that Star Wars has faster-than-light communications (Death Star personnel are aware of the Millennium Falcon's escape from Mos Eisley pretty much as soon as the ship itself arrives in the Alderaan system), and it seems unlikely they'd have FTL communications without also having FTL sensor capability.Nebula consistantly mess with the sensors in Star Trek. It's their thing. In Star Trek, you cannot hide on the other side of a planet, but you can use the magnetic interference of a magnetic pole to hide.
My references are TNG Episode Descent, where the Enterprise is able to warp in on the other side of the planet to prevent detection, and it only provides them an obstacle for their enemies to go around.

And FTL communications in Star Wars are shoddy holograms. Little information can be sent over their channels, so it is possible that their long distance sensors have the same faults.

And the Imperial commander didn't assume the Falcon jumped because if it had hyperspace capability, it would have jumped already. And if I recall correctly, a hyperspace jump is easily detected, but the destination is not so easy to track.

On an unrelated topic, where did you get your phrase "sauce for the...?" It seems rather odd to me.

[Deepblue706]

But as Winterwind just pointed out, Star Trek is poupler, and that above statement seems to make a extremly blankent statement about people who live in the Far east...

It has nothing to do with any assumption that the people of the far east having less capacity for intellectual stimuli (I never stated anything so absurd) - it's the fact that it's not popular enough to be ported overseas, in the first place. There is a great disparity between those who enjoy explosions and those who enjoy watching others discuss the morals of using robots with AI to perform potentially dangerous tasks against their will. Guess which is more popular. Guess which is expected to have greater success outside of the home country.

Those expectations determine what is marketed, to what extent, and if it isn't sold well, it's because of that presentation. I never said people who didn't like Star Trek were dumb. Star Wars is dumb, but people like it because it appeals to their interests.

[LordVader]

Star Trek wins but only becaus it has Omnipotent beings (Q that one thing on the destroyed planet that killed an entire race of Kobold like things)

Yes, but Q has no reason to get involved and fight the Empire. They're bystanders.

[Talkkno]

Star Wars is dumb, but people like it because it appeals to their interests.

Which i can apply to Lord of the Rings as well, as with its with almost comically obvious stand-in for Satan, while Star Wars has a eastern religious mindset (the Force: an impersonal spiritual ether with an equal dark side and light side, much like the Yin/Yang balance of "Chi")

[Logic]

Yes, but Q has no reason to get involved and fight the Empire. They're bystanders.
I actually think Q would have just as much fun toying with some prissy Imperial Moff as he did toying with Jean Luc Picard. But fight anyone? Nah. Unless somehow the Empire tried to attack him, and even then, he would just have more fun toying with them some more.

[LordVader]

He'd have fun toying around, for sure. And I think that once they realized his power, they definitely wouldn't attack him.

[factotum]

Nebula consistantly mess with the sensors in Star Trek. It's their thing.

And FTL communications in Star Wars are shoddy holograms. Little information can be sent over their channels, so it is possible that their long distance sensors have the same faults.

And the Imperial commander didn't assume the Falcon jumped because if it had hyperspace capability, it would have jumped already. And if I recall correctly, a hyperspace jump is easily detected, but the destination is not so easy to track.

On an unrelated topic, where did you get your phrase "sauce for the...?" It seems rather odd to me.

The planet in Star Trek 2 isn't inside a nebula--they have to travel some distance to reach the Mutara Nebula, which is where their sensors really get stuffed up. The rest of your comment just seems to be proving my point--if planets are as much of a block for Star Trek sensors as they are to Imperial ones, how do you figure that Imperial sensors are worse?

Second point is an odd one, too. To transmit a full 3D signal, even in black and white, is going to require a lot more data than a simple 2D colour image will (and note all Star Trek communications appear to be via 2D colour screens). I don't consider that to be a proof that Imperial FTL communications are poor in any way, especially since the "poor quality" ones were transmitted while the ships in question were in a dense asteroid field--once the Executor left the field to take the Emperor's communication we got a huge, colour 3D image, which must have taken a heck of a lot of bandwidth.

The destination of a hyperspace jump is actually reasonably easy to work out because they always occur in straight lines--note that Darth Vader ordered the fleet to check every likely target along the Falcon's last known trajectory, which would have been pointless if the ship could manoeuvre in hyperspace. Also, if hyperspace jumps are so easy to detect, why did Admiral Piett say "If they went into hyperspace they could be on the other side of the galaxy by now"? He would already KNOW whether the ship had jumped or not!

Lastly, "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" is a proverb which originally meant that stuff a woman did that was regarded as misbehaving was just as much misbehaviour if a man did it (a gander being the male goose). I'm sure you could find a better description of it than that somewhere, though--it's a pretty common phrase.

[Eladrinstar]

There is a great disparity between those who enjoy explosions and those who enjoy watching others discuss the morals of using robots with AI to perform potentially dangerous tasks against their will.


Can't I enjoy both?

[factotum]

I agree there...I enjoy Star Wars, Star Trek (ignoring Voyager, as any right-thinking Trekker should :smallamused: ), Babylon 5, the new Battlestar Galactica...you get the idea.

[Logic]

Ok, I have to admit not having seen ST2 in some time, so I forgot that the ship was able to hide behind a planet.

You are also forgetting the poor qualty holgram of Vader to Veers in the AT-AT. On a clear day.

[Talkkno]

Ok, I have to admit not having seen ST2 in some time, so I forgot that the ship was able to hide behind a planet.

You are also forgetting the poor qualty holgram of Vader to Veers in the AT-AT. On a clear day.

Umm...I'm pretty sure the Rebels hand jammers consirding they fit jammers on everything, consiridng they managed to a get a threate sheild up. Heck, I'm pretty sure they made a jammer in a book somewhere of the equivlent of a power cell, comlink and some wires...

[Deepblue706]

Can't I enjoy both?

Sorry, that was to be interpretted as "There is a great disparity between the number of people who enjoy x as opposed to y." I was making a point that less people enjoy Star Trek because less people enjoy what I would see as "deeper". This has no relation to enjoying both.

Enjoying both is perfectly fine. Enjoy any over another is fine. But, I still feel that Star Wars is pretty darn silly. Doesn't keep me from occasionally watching any of the movies, though. And no, I don't hate people who prefer Star Wars, nor do I think them necessarily unintelligent. It's just, I've seen the light.

[factotum]

Ok, I have to admit not having seen ST2 in some time, so I forgot that the ship was able to hide behind a planet.

You are also forgetting the poor qualty holgram of Vader to Veers in the AT-AT. On a clear day.

On a clear day, while the AT-AT was presumably inside the Rebel's shield--remember that the only reason the AT-ATs were down there in the first place was because the Rebel shield could "deflect any bombardment", which implies it's pretty powerful. (Bit odd they wouldn't have taken the shield right down to ground level, like the theatre shields deployed by the Gungans in "The Phantom Menace", but I suppose the terrain may have made that impossible).

Frankly it's a bit of a pointless argument anyway, because there was absolutely no reason they had to use any sort of holograms for a simple transmission like that--a voice communication would have worked just as well. The fact they can afford to waste bandwidth on pretty pictures in such a situation is another pointer to them having a lot more available bandwidth than you're giving them credit for.

[thubby]

I've always seen them as just plane different.
if i want epic battles and magic powered turbo warriors separating man and limb. star wars.
if i want political intrigue and "mind over might", star trek.

[Logic]

On a clear day, while the AT-AT was presumably inside the Rebel's shield--remember that the only reason the AT-ATs were down there in the first place was because the Rebel shield could "deflect any bombardment", which implies it's pretty powerful. (Bit odd they wouldn't have taken the shield right down to ground level, like the theatre shields deployed by the Gungans in "The Phantom Menace", but I suppose the terrain may have made that impossible).

Frankly it's a bit of a pointless argument anyway, because there was absolutely no reason they had to use any sort of holograms for a simple transmission like that--a voice communication would have worked just as well. The fact they can afford to waste bandwidth on pretty pictures in such a situation is another pointer to them having a lot more available bandwidth than you're giving them credit for.Vader was supposedly in the AT-ST that found it's way to the rebel command center that day, so he was on the ground, and probably inside of the sheild as well, which theoretically could have made the signal better, since it would have been bouncing off of the inside of the sheild and the snow.

[Maroon]

Seeing as the Star Trek universe is apparently losing, what about Dan Simmons' Hyperion Cantos? I postulate a single archangel could decentralise the galactic empire in a week.

[factotum]

Vader was supposedly in the AT-ST that found it's way to the rebel command center that day, so he was on the ground, and probably inside of the sheild as well, which theoretically could have made the signal better, since it would have been bouncing off of the inside of the sheild and the snow.

So, where in the movie does it ever suggest that? For that matter, why would the Dark Lord of the Sith, Commander of the entire fleet, be wandering around in an AT-ST (which can be destroyed using a couple of chunks of WOOD!) while General Veers gets a nice command chair in an AT-AT?

[Talkkno]

So, where in the movie does it ever suggest that? For that matter, why would the Dark Lord of the Sith, Commander of the entire fleet, be wandering around in an AT-ST (which can be destroyed using a couple of chunks of WOOD!) while General Veers gets a nice command chair in an AT-AT?

Keep in mind, the AT-ST is supposed to be the equiviment of a jeep, hence its name "All terrian Scout something)

[Lord Iames Osari]

So, where in the movie does it ever suggest that? For that matter, why would the Dark Lord of the Sith, Commander of the entire fleet, be wandering around in an AT-ST (which can be destroyed using a couple of chunks of WOOD!) while General Veers gets a nice command chair in an AT-AT?


Ah, but there's no wood on Hoth, so Vader would have been perfectly safe.:smalltongue:

[factotum]

Keep in mind, the AT-ST is supposed to be the equiviment of a jeep, hence its name "All terrian Scout something)

Yeah, and I bet you wouldn't ever see a real-life commander of multiple armies and/or fleets wandering around in a jeep on the front lines either...especially not when there's no real benefit to him being there.

[LordVader]

On a clear day, while the AT-AT was presumably inside the Rebel's shield--remember that the only reason the AT-ATs were down there in the first place was because the Rebel shield could "deflect any bombardment", which implies it's pretty powerful. (Bit odd they wouldn't have taken the shield right down to ground level, like the theatre shields deployed by the Gungans in "The Phantom Menace", but I suppose the terrain may have made that impossible).

Frankly it's a bit of a pointless argument anyway, because there was absolutely no reason they had to use any sort of holograms for a simple transmission like that--a voice communication would have worked just as well. The fact they can afford to waste bandwidth on pretty pictures in such a situation is another pointer to them having a lot more available bandwidth than you're giving them credit for.

Also, a clear day on Hoth is still going to have a lot of snow particles flying about in the air. And the shield just adds even more interference.

[Logic]

Yeah, and I bet you wouldn't ever see a real-life commander of multiple armies and/or fleets wandering around in a jeep on the front lines either...especially not when there's no real benefit to him being there.Except that real commanders have been in Jeeps (or their equivalent) during real wars, at real battles (though I doubt they were going INTO the battle.)

I do concede that thus far, no information can back up my claim that Vader was in the AT-ST. My information came from the source which is not guaranteed to be canon. Blizzard Scout 1 (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Blizzard_Scout_1) where the information was printed, is only on the trading card.

This (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Blizzard_Force) implies that Vader approached the base the same way as the troops he led. Which, unless there were alot more AT-STs, proves my claims wrong.

[Rogue 7]

I thought Vader landed once Veers brought the shield down?

[electromagnetic]

On a clear day, while the AT-AT was presumably inside the Rebel's shield--remember that the only reason the AT-ATs were down there in the first place was because the Rebel shield could "deflect any bombardment", which implies it's pretty powerful. (Bit odd they wouldn't have taken the shield right down to ground level, like the theatre shields deployed by the Gungans in "The Phantom Menace", but I suppose the terrain may have made that impossible).

Frankly it's a bit of a pointless argument anyway, because there was absolutely no reason they had to use any sort of holograms for a simple transmission like that--a voice communication would have worked just as well. The fact they can afford to waste bandwidth on pretty pictures in such a situation is another pointer to them having a lot more available bandwidth than you're giving them credit for.

It depends. The Rebels aren't well equiped, they steal technology from the Empire and make some of their own. The shields appear to be home-made by the rebels as it takes time for the Empire to find them, if they were stolen technology you'd expect a "Hey that looks like a shield generator!" even from space. Also technology pre-empire was a lot more powerful than technology post-empire formation. Some of the books seem to suggest that resources in the empire are falling apart, it was like the Death Star was their last chance to get total control, the amount of energy and resources put into it was completely wasted.

Any military producing a super-weapon the size of a small moon is going to put a hell of a lot of resources into it, and to have it vapourised on day 2 of owning it is going to be a major waste of your resources. Most likely they lost territory to all the other side factions that they planned to get back with the death star, only to lose it for good.

Also look at the extended universe, it generally confirms that they've hit peak deuterium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil) and are going down in the world. The ships go from being designed commercially to designed for efficiency, they go from real armies to cloned ones (cheaper). Also the Gungan shields didn't even prevent against the Droid army moving through it, it appears that all shields prevent things moving into them over a certain velocity.

The principle why is probably similar to that of the personal shields in Stargate, what's the point of stopping something slow moving like air? It'd be a hell of a drain on power to have to push through the atmosphere, plus if you've got an army excessively exerting themselves inside it then it'd only be a matter of time before they all pass out and die from oxygen deprovation or CO2 poisoning.

There's lots of reasons why the shields wouldn't protect against an AT-AT walking through it, but not many reasons as to why it would. The things moved ass slow, so if people can pass through it without it being lowered (on a planet that's bombarded by meteorites, lowering the shield everytime you send out a patrol - it's only going to be so long till something goes splat) then an AT-AT could easily get in it as people were out running them.

However, the AT-AT's were firing long before they were said to go through the shield. From what I've read on blasters, they're a highly energized gas and respectively should have high particle velocities (triggering the shield) no matter how fast or slow the beam moves. Even if it moved at 1 mph, the energy in the blaster bolt should be stopped by a shield, just because it's pointless if it isn't.

[factotum]

The problem with all these arguments about the Empire's lack of resources is that they're ignoring extremely well-known and canonical facts--namely, that they built not one but TWO Death Stars, the second one being larger than the first and built in a much shorter timescale. The sheer amount of materials they had to be shipping in to the Endor system on a daily basis must have been incredible. Furthermore, the Expanded Universe is where you find ideas like building the Executor bankrupted the empire, despite the fact that ship is a tiny fraction of even a single Death Star, and despite Han's comment in Return of the Jedi that "there are lots of command ships"--e.g. lots of Executor class vessels, since he's talking about that ship when he says it.

The Death Stars were not built as weapons of war, anyway. They were weapons of terror, following the Tarkin doctrine of scaring any wavering systems into line. You could build thousands, possibly even millions, of standard Star Destroyers for the same material cost as a single Death Star, and those Star Destroyers would be a more flexible and more effective force in any war, since they can be in many places at once whereas a Death Star is limited to a single location.

Given those facts, I would have to say that the Empire was thriving and was nowhere near running out of resources...however, it was using its resources on the wrong things. Building bigger ships and stations simply allowed the more agile Rebel forces to slip through the cracks that much easier.

[electromagnetic]

The timescale between each movie is roughly a 10 year jump, which means it took the empire roughly 20 years to half-build the DS2 and get it to functioning. As it was over twice as big, then it's easy to assume that it would have taken roughly 20 years to build the first one. Although it may have taken longer as the DS2 is just a scaled up DS1.

Building one Executor could easily have bankrupted the empire as they'd have to build shipyards to make it, develop the technology for it, etc. etc. However once you've got the technology and the shipyards it would be cheap as anything to build more. It cost a fortune to develop the first nuclear bomb $23 billion by todays standards, and now a full nuclear ICBM with 8 nukes abord is worth only a few million. Once technology is developed it's instantly cheap and gets even cheaper the longer you have it.

The Empire couldn't avoid spending fortunes on the Death Star, granted they had majority control on the galaxy, but it still costs to build things. Even if they conscripted all the workers (doubtful) they'd still have to build resupply ships for the food and fuel and raw materials, etc. needed in building the DS. The second Death Star would likely have been cheaper to build than the first as it would be off the shelf technology with a few modifications.

Also a country can be bankrupt and still run, sorry to bring real world countries (not going political here but it's a good example of my point) the US currently has a debt of $10 trillion and a national budget of $2.5 trillion. It's way past the point of being bankrupt, but it's still operating fine. So long as you're capable of paying the interest on your debts then a country or the Empire would be capable of still operating bankrupt. It might take the empire a thousand years to get out of its debts from the Executor and the two failed Death Stars, but when you're an Empire not many people argue with you about interest rates on what you owe.

The question isn't whether or not the Empire is bankrupt, it's whether it's past the point of controlling it. Most western countries are in debt, but unlike the 3rd world countries they're all capable of paying their debts. So did the Empire turn itself into a 3rd world country or did it just have to raise taxes a bit? My bet is it just raised taxes, it's probably far from actually being bankrupt due to its position as an Empire, it probably just weakened itself needlessly.

[Dervag]

The principle why is probably similar to that of the personal shields in Stargate, what's the point of stopping something slow moving like air?Air molecules move at hundreds of meters per second, faster than arrows and as fast as pistol bullets.


The timescale between each movie is roughly a 10 year jump, which means it took the empire roughly 20 years to half-build the DS2 and get it to functioning. As it was over twice as big, then it's easy to assume that it would have taken roughly 20 years to build the first one. Although it may have taken longer as the DS2 is just a scaled up DS1.Are you sure the time scale is 10 years? I thought it was more like five.

Remember, Luke is in his late teens when A New Hope starts. Since he was born at about the same time the Empire was formed, the Death Star can't have been under construction for more than 20 years, and probably less.


Building one Executor could easily have bankrupted the empire as they'd have to build shipyards to make it, develop the technology for it, etc. etc. However once you've got the technology and the shipyards it would be cheap as anything to build more. It cost a fortune to develop the first nuclear bomb $23 billion by todays standards, and now a full nuclear ICBM with 8 nukes abord is worth only a few million. Once technology is developed it's instantly cheap and gets even cheaper the longer you have it.Yes, but the US goverment could still fund the Manhattan Project out of something like petty cash. It didn't come close to bankrupting the US at the time, and it wouldn't do so today.

No one weapons development project can consume so much of a civilization's resources as to bankrupt that civilization, because most of a civilization's resources are useless for the production of any given weapon. For instance, the Empire doubtless makes billions or trillions of tons of steel a year; how much of that steel would they need to develop a new TIE fighter? How many planets' worth of engineers and contractors would it take to build one super star destroyer; remember that they have hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of planets.


Even if they conscripted all the workers (doubtful) they'd still have to build resupply ships for the food and fuel and raw materials, etc. needed in building the DS. The second Death Star would likely have been cheaper to build than the first as it would be off the shelf technology with a few modifications.Unless I'm much mistaken, most of the technology that went into the Death Stars was the same kind of ship design technology that the Star Wars universe had been familiar with for millenia. The Death Star wasn't advanced; it was just really big. It was an engineering challenge to design, but not necessarily a scientific challenge to invent.


It's way past the point of being bankrupt, but it's still operating fine. So long as you're capable of paying the interest on your debts then a country or the Empire would be capable of still operating bankrupt.By definition, you can't be bankrupt as long as you're still making interest payments and paying all the bills on time.


The question isn't whether or not the Empire is bankrupt, it's whether it's past the point of controlling it. Most western countries are in debt, but unlike the 3rd world countries they're all capable of paying their debts. So did the Empire turn itself into a 3rd world country or did it just have to raise taxes a bit? My bet is it just raised taxes, it's probably far from actually being bankrupt due to its position as an Empire, it probably just weakened itself needlessly.I agree entirely.

[TheThan]

There is about two years between each of the original trilogy films. And about ten years between episode one and two, and three to five years between episodes two and three. And like 15-20 years (probably closer to 17-18 years) or so between episode three and four.


The deathstar was not an advanced piece of technology, the super laser in the death star was.

Aside from the rule by fear doctrine that the empire followed, the death star was a waste of resources and manpower. Lots of money went into developing the super laser and lots of money went into building the platform to mount it on. When you consider how easy they are to destroy, it’s like burning your money.


Eventually when a ship reaches a certain size the owners are going to hit diminishing returns. They’ll be putting more into the ship than what they’re getting out of it. In the starwars universe you hit it when you start building super star destroyers. The things may have the firepower to take on a fleet of smaller ships, but its not a fleet; it’s a single ship. Therefore a fleet can focus on it and destroy it. (Take the battle of Endor for example). Additionally a single ship can’t be in multiple places at once. Whereas a fleet can disperse and do just that. Not to mention that they could build dozens of smaller star destroyers and crew them with the same amount of money, time and manpower it takes to build and crew one of them.


There’s a reason why Thrawn (the single best commander in the star wars universe) didn’t try to build a super star destroyer or a super weapon like the death star. He simply didn’t need it to fight the new republic. He knew it was a waste of resources. Additionally he didn’t feel the need to build a massive ship in order to compensate for any shortcomings because he really didn’t have any. He really only made one mistake in the entire series, he underestimated Princess Leia.

[Dervag]

Additionally a single ship can’t be in multiple places at once. Whereas a fleet can disperse and do just that. Not to mention that they could build dozens of smaller star destroyers and crew them with the same amount of money, time and manpower it takes to build and crew one of them. Moreover, even a single squadron of star destroyers is sufficient to do a Base Delta Zero on a target planet and effectively lay waste to it, reducing its surface to a molten crater field

(there are several instances of this in the Star Wars continuity).

On the other hand, in the Honor Harrington universe even relatively small ships are quite capable of accelerating to large fractions of light speed and launching a salvo of missiles at a target planet which in turn reach speeds of 0.9c or higher. Thus, any Honorverse flotilla of substantial size (even a cruiser division much less massive than a squadron of star destroyers, which are roughly the size of a small Honorverse battleship or medium-sized dreadnought) can effectively pull off a 'Base Delta Zero'.

This Is Not Done in the setting, because the most powerful star nation in that setting has an actual constitutional amendment requiring it to go to war against any nation which makes use of massive indiscriminate bombardment of planetary targets, and it is several times the size of any other nation in the setting.