Star Wars RPG
Jana LaThea
-If the Force may not be used for attack, why add the control dice to a
lightsaber's damage?
-Did Luke kill Jabba's guards with the Force?
-When reflecting blaster bolts, isn't that using the Force for attack?
-What are the Emperor's Force skills???????????????????
-Who are the Sith?
-How difficult should it be to find a Master?
And I have a few answers:
-No one knows Jabba's species. He's probably a mutation...
-Yes, the Emperor's lightning bolts damaged Darth's circuits and thus his
breathing.
-One may not use the Force for attack(?), for instance using the Force to
pelt someone with stones, so using the Force to make a Lightsaber chase
someone is not allowed.
-Ent. will win a SD, Borg will win a DS, because SW is realistic (the films
at least) and ST is not.
Jeff Wright
Not sure about the force but Jabba is a hut it is a species. Emperor had
force skills somewhere around 13D adn had quit a few. Finding a master
after Vader killed them all would be tough
Peter Ferguson
> lightsaber's damage?
Who said the Force can't be used for attack... What if you're fighting Darth
Vader, you may need those control dice to do some extra damage to bring him
down. If you're fighting in defensive of yourself or others then you can
kill. "Self Defense"
>-Did Luke kill Jabba's guards with the Force?
I thought he just cut off their wind pipes making them go unconcious.
>-When reflecting blaster bolts, isn't that using the Force for attack?
Yes, but it's also using it for defense... Don't want to get hit by them, or
for the attacker to get better aim, turn his evil apon him.
>-What are the Emperor's Force skills???????????????????
A lot.. (actually I don't know)
>-Who are the Sith?
They were lords which used the Dark Side to gain control etc. Their teachings
are kinda opposite of the Jedi. I don't know too much on this subject. If you
believe anderson, then Exar Kun was the first Sith Lord, while Vader was the
last.
>-How difficult should it be to find a Master?
Very. Remember Vader and the Emporer wiped them all out. You may want to
allow players to find a weaker jedi, but one stronger then them. I usually
don't allow Jedi Masters because that means players will have to have their
character leave for awhile.
>And I have a few answers:
>-No one knows Jabba's species. He's probably a mutation...
He's a HUTT... Jabba the HUTT.. He speaks HUTTESE... He comes from the planet
Varl.
>-Yes, the Emperor's lightning bolts damaged Darth's circuits and thus his
> breathing.
As well they hit his heart. (says so in the book)
>-One may not use the Force for attack(?), for instance using the Force to
> pelt someone with stones, so using the Force to make a Lightsaber chase
> someone is not allowed.
I would say it is. First of all if you use the lightsabre to chase someone or
something away from a friend then it's ok. It's especially good if you just
scare that person or animal or thing. Second of all, even if that wasn't so.
Why would it NOT be allowed, everything is allowed in RPG's (or just about).
The jedi would just get a dark side point for doing an evil act. I ran a
marvel super heroes game where the players wanted to take drugs. They thought
that they'd tick me off by being silly. One of the characters got hooked :)
>-Ent. will win a SD, Borg will win a DS, because SW is realistic (the films
> at least) and ST is not.
Huh ? Enterprise will win a Stardestroyer ??? don't you mean beat ???
And if so... WHO F'IN CARES!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bart Barenbrug
>> -Ent. will win a SD, Borg will win a DS, because SW is realistic (the films
>> at least) and ST is not.
>>
>Emm - perhaps rather vice versa. In SW, sound transmits in a vacuum. This is
>impossible. And so on. I don't feel like going on forever, so I won't. And who
>cares which side will win, anyways? We're talking different worlds in here!
Not really: we're just talking about different times:
Star Wars takes place a long time ago in a galaxy far far away (but still in our
universe), so Star Wars presents us with a possible past, whereas Star Trek
presents us with a possible future...
So as always: these Star Wars vs. Star Trek discussions are pointless unless
controlled timetraveling is possible. So keep these discussions off this group!
(I know this will probably have no effect whatsoever, and this post could be
classified under a Star Wars vs. Star Trek thread, but I just wanted this off
my chest)
Bart
Taki Kogoma
<38lr4f$b...@wsooti09.win.tue.nl> in rec.arts.sf.starwars:
>Not really: we're just talking about different times:
>Star Wars takes place a long time ago in a galaxy far far away (but still in
>our universe), so Star Wars presents us with a possible past, whereas Star
>Trek presents us with a possible future...
Literalist.
There is a very simple way around this problem; all you have to assume
is that the Films are transcripts sent via spacial/temporal
disturbance from a distant galaxy several millenia in the future. ;-)
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk | "I'll get a life when someone
(Known to some as Taki Kogoma) | demonstrates that it would be
qu...@unm.edu | superior to what I have now."
Veteran of the '91 sf-lovers re-org. | -- Gym Quirk
Jens-Arthur Leirbakk
> I have a few questions concerning the SW RPG:
>
> -If the Force may not be used for attack, why add the control dice to a
> lightsaber's damage?
If you have to defend yourself, do it properly (and with lethal force...
literally.)
> -Did Luke kill Jabba's guards with the Force?
I think he knocked them unconscious.
> -When reflecting blaster bolts, isn't that using the Force for attack?
Obviously not. If you're REFLECTING them, then you're defending yourself from
them.
> -What are the Emperor's Force skills???????????????????
You don't want to know. If you still do, buy a sourcebook and find out.
> -Who are the Sith?
An ancient race of Dark Side adepts. Read Dark Lords of the Sith (Dark Horse
Comics) and find out.
> -How difficult should it be to find a Master?
Depends on which age you're playing in. After the New Order: Well-nigh
impossible. Before the fall of the Old Republic - not very difficult. They did
have academies then.
>
> And I have a few answers:
>
> -No one knows Jabba's species. He's probably a mutation...
Jabba is a Hutt. He speaks Huttese.
> -Yes, the Emperor's lightning bolts damaged Darth's circuits and thus his
> breathing.
Of course they did. But the impact on his living self must also have been rather
considerable.
> -One may not use the Force for attack(?), for instance using the Force to
> pelt someone with stones, so using the Force to make a Lightsaber chase
> someone is not allowed.
This is the Light Side philosophy. The Dark Side only cares about power.
> -Ent. will win a SD, Borg will win a DS, because SW is realistic (the films
> at least) and ST is not.
>
Emm - perhaps rather vice versa. In SW, sound transmits in a vacuum. This is
impossible. And so on. I don't feel like going on forever, so I won't. And who
cares which side will win, anyways? We're talking different worlds in here! If
there aren't enough room in your imagination to have both of them in there at the
same time, then do the Cobain thang. (Okay, that's rather nasty. But don't bother
the newsgroup with your insignificant posing and just as insignificant
arguments.)
>
--
| Jens-Arthur Leirbakk |
| E-mail: leir...@alkymi.unit.no |
| Recursion: If you got the point, stop, else see Recursion |
| Infinite Recursion: See Infinite Recursion |
Joel Inman
>
>In article <s9381694....@rkw-lan.cs.up.ac.za>,
s938...@rkw-lan.cs.up.ac.za (Jana LaThea) writes:
>> I have a few questions concerning the SW RPG:
>>
>> -If the Force may not be used for attack, why add the control dice to a
>> lightsaber's damage?
>
>If you have to defend yourself, do it properly (and with lethal force...
>literally.)
>
>> -Did Luke kill Jabba's guards with the Force?
>
>I think he knocked them unconscious.
speakers which simulate certain sounds for certain ships so that a pilot
can use almost all of his senses.
Francine M. Kent
>I have a few questions concerning the SW RPG:
>-No one knows Jabba's species. He's probably a mutation...
Excuse me? Jabba the HUTT. He is a HUTT. That is his species.
They are described as "an intelligent species from the planet Varl. A
Hutt has a huge, bulbous head, a wide, blubbery body, a tapering
muscular tail, and speaks Huttese. They ahve no legs but have short
swollen arms."
Hmmmmm, I think that that sounds like Jabba to me.
I would suggest getting "The Guide to the Star Wars Universe".
It explanes everything.
>-Ent. will win a SD, Borg will win a DS, because SW is realistic (the films
> at least) and ST is not.
I have to agree with you here!
Have a nice day :)
MTFBWY,A!!
-Fran
ps. sorry for the explosion, stress relief, ya know.
*******************************************************************
Francine Kent "Do, or do not, there is no try!"
Plymouth State College -Yoda, Empire Strikes Back
E-mail at: "The force is stong in my family."
f_k...@oz.plymouth.edu -Great great great grandfather Skywalker
*******************************************************************
Anthony W Becker
Trek) were to encounter a Star Destroyer (Star Wars) in battle, which
would be the victor? Ha
Beyond the fact that Star Wars and Star Trek are set in different
galaxies and times, which would make this encounter highly unlikely, this
is an interesting question. Comparing two ficticious elements in
different Å‚universesË› (ala Marvel vs DC) might be interesting.
Various methods have been suggested for determining the answer. An RPG
simulation of the battle, with corrected stats and what not, has been
suggested, but this would be difficult because the RPG stats differ
between games. Instead I will show that the answer is clear-cut if you
look at the problem carefully.
I think that the answer is clear, if one analyzes the data of both RPG
books (ignoring the numerical stats and looking at raw technology and
stats) that the Star Destroyer would emerge victorious in most instances.
There might be one or two out of a hundred battles in which the Enterprise
would get lucky or something, but these would be very isolated incidents.
Incidentally, all my information comes from either the source material
(film and video) and from books. (email me if you REALLY want a list.)
For the sake of convenience I have used a particular Star Destroyer, the
Avenger, under the command of Captain Needa, as a typical Imperial
officer. I have also assumed that the Enterprise in question (after all
there are 5...) is the Enterprise-D under the command of Captain Jean-Luc
Picard.
I base this assessment on these things:
A) Procedural advantage given to the Avenger by sheer virtue of
ideology. The Empire is not benevolent. Any conceivable meeting of the
two vessels in question would occur as part of a takeover attempt by the
Empire or as an accidental or exploratory voyage by the Enterprise
(through wormhole/time distortion/etc.) to the Star Wars galaxy,
throughout which the Empire is the ultimate authority (or thinks itself
so.)
Becuase of this, the Empire will be on the offensive first, while
the Federation ship will first attempt conciliatory gestures such as
negotiations or hailing or some such. It is quite likely that while
Picard was telling Worf to reopen the hailing channel, one of the
AvengerÄ…s 100 Heavy turbolasers would probably be slicing through the
EnterpriseÄ…s thin hull.
B) Shields: in this the advantage goes to the Enterprise. Because the
Star Wars universe does not have the same command over molecular matter
generation (direct energy-to-matter, like shields, conversion) their
shields are at best a deterrent, and not a physical barrier. The
AvengerÄ…s shields can dampen energy blows, but not completely. The
imperial fleet depends on thick hulls for protection, and Star Destroyers
hav e weak points - I would think these would be the main bridge windows
(as evidenced on the Super Star Destroyer Executor in Return of the Jedi,
which shares a similar main bridge construction) and the landing bay on
the underside.
Another problem with the Star DestroyerÄ…s shields is that they are
not redundant; that is to say, the coverage of the multiple sheild
generators does not overlap. If one of the shield generators goes out for
some reason, the area protected by that generator is left completely naked
to attack. The thick hull will still repel all but the strongest blows,
but a concentrated strike at a point with no shield protection would deal
the Avenger a serious blow.
C) Size and Maneuverability: The advantage of the Star DestroyerÄ…s
physical size, around 1.6 km versus around 600m or so for NCC-1701-D, is a
definite advantage for the Avenger. On the other hand this is almost
negated by the EnterpriseÄ…s comparative maneuverability (Star Destroyers
are lumbering giants, whereas a Galaxy-class starship is fairly nimble.)
D) Weapons: several factors must be taken into account for this field.
Quality and quantity of weapons are important, but must be weighed against
their ability to penetrate the opponentÄ…s shields and defenses.
A Star DestroyerÄ…s weapons complement consists of 50 Heavy
Turbolaser Batteries, which are big mama guns, 50 Heavy Turbolaser
Cannons, which are medium-mama guns, 20 Ion cannons, and 10 tractor beam
projectors. Once caught in the tractor, it is improbable that the
Enterprise could break free (if this option were to be employed.) This is
a high-quantity, high-quality weapons configuration. Ion cannons are
essentially disruptors, which wreak havoc with the shipÄ…s electrical
systems, which is bad because the Enterprise depends on its computers for
everything. Also this is a weapon the Federation does not use. I think
that 100 Heavy turbolasers, once powered up, would tear the hell out of
the EnterpriseÄ…s shields faster than they could be replenished by the
matter-generation method of Star Trek Universe shields.
All this is excepting, of course, the 6 wings of TIE fighters (TIEs
are well-armed and maneuverable, able to Å‚flit around,Ë› probably without
being hit by the slow targeting systems of the Enterprise) that a Star
Destroyer carries, the zero-g stormtroopers and assault shuttles, and the
sheer immorality of the Empire to use every means at its disposal to not
just win but utterly crush its enemies.
The Enterprise, by comparison, carries a phased-array (read
Å‚steerableË›) phaser bank that can fire from almost any angle, and around
150 or so photon torpedoes, I would guess. While these are formadable
weapons, I do not think they would meet the challenge of anything that
came out of Kuat Drive YardsÄ… orbital facility (KDY is the maker of the
Imperial-class Star Destroyer.)
Photon torpedoes could probably get through the AvengerÄ…s shields
and impact on the hull, but their destructive power is limited against
anything with such a thick skin. Against TIEs photorps would be useless,
unless they had been retrofitted with guidance systems (I am unsure
whether photorps are capable of course change midflight or not.)
Phasers, on the other hand, have better targeting systems but arenÄ…t
as powerful. At a guess I would say one phaser blast is equivalent to
maybe two turbolaser blasts. This is a powerful weapon, but it can only
fire a few shots at a time (and these must not be simultaneous.) This is
compared with one hundred weapons at half the power that can be fired
simultaneously from a Star Destroyer.
My opinion can be seen quite clearly. The Star Destroyer has
superior weapons and a superior hull. It would sustain superficial
damage, but in the time it would take to inflict meager pockmarks on a
Star Destroyer, the Enterprise would have a warp core breach or be
entirely vaporized, whichever came first.
Of course, there is the possibility that the higher level of
ingenuity that the EnterpriseÄ…s crew posesses could save them. Some
possible plans I can imagine are transporting an away team into the
Avenger and sabotoging it from inside, calling on a local Jedi for
assistance, firing into the Star DestroyerÄ…s engine exhaust port with a
photon torpedo or causing some kind of neat vibration effect with the main
navigational deflector to rattle the Avenger apart. Other than that, or
some other neat thing a scriptwriter comes up with, I can only say this:
The Federation Starship Enterprise better stay the hell out of the Star
Wars galaxy, because it doesnÄ…t stand a chance.
Anthony W. Becker
Northwestern University Class of 1998
28 October 1994
____________________________________________________________________
Anthony W. Becker | "It's better to burn out |
Northwestern University | than to fade away... There |
awb...@nwu.edu | can be only one!" |
_________________________________|_________________________________|
karl mamer
ss>I have a few questions concerning the SW RPG:
ss>-Did Luke kill Jabba's guards with the Force?
No one knows. He probably just incapacitated them if he was a good Jedi.
ss>-When reflecting blaster bolts, isn't that using the Force for attack?
It's an act of defense. If you try to deflect them into someone then that
would be attack.
ss>-What are the Emperor's Force skills???????????????????
Read the book, the Imperial Source book.
ss>-Who are the Sith?
No one knows. Apparently, Anderson wanted to do something with the Sith but
was told by Lucasfilm not to touch it.
ss>-How difficult should it be to find a Master?
Very hard.
ss>And I have a few answers:
ss>
ss>-No one knows Jabba's species. He's probably a mutation...
He's a Hutt.
~~~
* VbReader 2.22 #NR * One Scientologist, One bullet
Mark Browning
In a previous article, kam...@io.org (karl mamer) says:
> <** On 10-25-94, s938...@rkw-lan.cs.up.ac said to ALL: **>
>
>ss>I have a few questions concerning the SW RPG:
>
>ss>-Did Luke kill Jabba's guards with the Force?
>
>No one knows. He probably just incapacitated them if he was a good Jedi.
>
>ss>-When reflecting blaster bolts, isn't that using the Force for attack?
>
>It's an act of defense. If you try to deflect them into someone then that
>would be attack.
>
>ss>-What are the Emperor's Force skills???????????????????
>
>Read the book, the Imperial Source book.
>
>ss>-Who are the Sith?
>
>No one knows. Apparently, Anderson wanted to do something with the Sith but
>was told by Lucasfilm not to touch it.
>
> Well Anderson got his way, along with Verith<SP>, in the comic called
Dark Lords of the Sith, a 12 issue series(split in half)..
.
s
dda...@umuc.umd.edu
> Last night while watching TESB, my wife (to give fair credit) noticed
>something odd near the end. First, we see C 3PO standing on one leg,
>his right leg, with the other leg is his had. The right leg he is standing
>on is gold in color. At the end of the film, we see him from the back and
>his right leg, at least in back, is silver in color. What gives? Do i
>have a bad video copy or is this really the way it is and why would such a
>big mistake have been made?
>
> Just one other commn>
> Here's a much more interesting question. Why is it that Darth Vader can
>cut through anything with his lightsaber, including LUke's hand, but when
>Luke hit's Darth's arm in ESB, it seems like little more than a momentary
>pain enuses? Why does it take Luke so many tries to cut through Vader's
>suit in ROTJ? Doesn't make sense to me.
>
>Ken
>
>
>
Kenneth Litwak
something odd near the end. First, we see C 3PO standing on one leg,
his right leg, with the other leg is his had. The right leg he is standing
on is gold in color. At the end of the film, we see him from the back and
his right leg, at least in back, is silver in color. What gives? Do i
have a bad video copy or is this really the way it is and why would such a
big mistake have been made?
Just one other commnet. I am really sick and tired of wasting time
skipping past all these stupid x vs. y posts. SW exists in its own galaxy,
that is far far awat. It doesn't have Borgs or Aleins or any other fictional
contstuct from another fictional world or galaxy. We could invent dumb,
meaningless comparisons all day, like the Rancor vs. the Stay Puff
Marshmellow Man, but what's th4 point? It's not a meaningful discussion
of the SW universe. Could we stick to something at least logically
meaningful? It's hard enough to hold everything together that various
writers have created for SW, without trying to bring other fictional
elements in. It's like asking what would happen if Simba, as a cub, came
to the Death Star on Aladdin's flying carpet and confronted Darth Vader
with a lightsaber. First, I'd fire the scriptwriter. Second, I'd point out
that it's just not loigcal to put that sort of stuff together.
dda...@umuc.umd.edu
>
> Just one other commnet. I am really sick and tired of wasting time
>skipping past all these stupid x vs. y posts. SW exists in its own galaxy,
>that is far far awat. It doesn't have Borgs or Aleins or any other fictional
>contstuct from another fictional world or galaxy. We could invent dumb,
>meaningless comparisons all day, like the Rancor vs. the Stay Puff
>Marshmellow Man, but what's th4 point? It's not a meaningful discussion
>of the SW universe. Could we stick to something at least logically
>meaningful? It's hard enough to hold everything together that various
>writers have created for SW, without trying to bring other fictional
>elements in. It's like asking what would happen if Simba, as a cub, came
>to the Death Star on Aladdin's flying carpet and confronted Darth Vader
>with a lightsaber. First, I'd fire the scriptwriter. Second, I'd point out
>that it's just not loigcal to put that sort of stuff together.
>
> Here's a much more interesting question. Why is it that Darth Vader can
>cut through anything with his lightsaber, including LUke's hand, but when
>Luke hit's Darth's arm in ESB, it seems like little more than a momentary
>pain enuses? Why does it take Luke so many tries to cut through Vader's
>suit in ROTJ? Doesn't make sense to me.
>
>Ken
---Oops. Sorry about the previous post which was nothing more than an aborted
hack job of Ken's post. My fault! I goofed with the editor.---
Anyway, I have to disagree with Kevin's point about the "Vs." posts. Yes,
some of them are ridiculous and overdone, but some of them are pretty cool.
I, for one, enjoyed the Boba Fett vs. Aliens and BF vs. Predator posts that
some r.a.s.s.'ers and I took part in. Speculation is fun. Prediction is fun.
Poking fun is fun. Yes, it would be nice if people would stop tedious postings
and engage in a bit of self-censorship, since we (fortunately!!) have no
censorship on the net. But not everybody's going to do that. Also, while Ken
thinks his questions are valid and interesting, others may think they're trite,
meaningless, and worst of all, over-asked. Who's to judge?
Personally, I think Ken's 3PO and Vader questions are both good, and hopefully
they will fuel interesting discussion/debate. Still, I'd rather talk about
Boba fending off a facehugger some more!
- DFD
Kirby Koster
>They are described as "an intelligent species from the planet Varl. A
>Hutt has a huge, bulbous head, a wide, blubbery body, a tapering
>muscular tail, and speaks Huttese. They ahve no legs but have short
>swollen arms."
So does the guide give any indication of how a HUTT would move around or what
they're home planet is like? In ROTJ I thought that Jabba seemed like he
wasn't good for anything more than a doorstop and if all of his lakeys (Is
that a word?) were to quit doing everything for him he'd have been in really
bad shape. Seems like he would be most at home in a swampy sort of
amphibious environment instead of a desert planet .... hmmm.
Kirby
---
Kirby Koster (kko...@ub.d.umn.edu)
"That's no moon ... It's a space station!" -- Ben Kenobi
Thomas Bagwell
assumptions...namely the relative power of the weaponry. Going by
straight numbers, even if you're correct that a heavy turbolaser has
about half the power of a phaser shot, it doesn't take into account the
differing nature of the weaponry. A phaser is not a laser, and is
considered quite superior. The Federation hasn't used laser weaponry in
a century or more. The Enterprise phasers operate in the multi-megawatt
range. When faced by lasers of similar power, they considered the base
using them to be basically defenseless.
You also assume that fighters could be a threat, something I differ in
opinion on, as I consider their lasers far to weak to matter...even en
mass. This is based on the various attacks the shields have absorbed in
the series and movies.
I see little to justify your opinion of the SD's hull. It doesn't seem
particularly thick (judging from the number of windows and other
breaks). Granted we know nothing of its composition. Although the
Enterprise's hull is -probably- thinner, we do know it is made out of a
substance harder than anything conventionally available.
Re: size.... not nearly as important as power, speed, maneuverability.
Remember that the Enterprise is over a third as long as an SD (600+
meters vs. 1600+ meters.) So the difference isn't as much as some people
imply.
I think you underestimate the destructiveness of photon torpedoes vs. a
SD...especially in weaker areas such as the bridge. Remember these can
also be fired in large salvos, and this can be done in synch with
multiple phaser blasts from both the upper and lower phaser ring.
Finally, the Enterprise has an enormous advantage in that in can fire
these large salvos of photon torpedoes during warp-speed passes, during
which it effectively can't be touched. There's also the tactic of simply
staying behind the SD (where it seems to have a large blind spot when it
comes to weapon coverage) or underneath it (again, there seem to be far
fewer weapons on the bottom.)
If ion torpedoes are what their name signifies, anything ionized is
especially easy to deflect. Also, the SD couldn't lock a tractor onto
the Enterprise unless its shields were already down.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...A wild, weird clime |
That lieth, sublime, | Thomas N. Bagwell
Out of Space, | tbag...@netcom.com
Out of Time." |
--Edgar Allen Poe |
'Dreamland' | ____\|/_____________________\|/____
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN 'CHRIS' STROUT
> Last night while watching TESB, my wife (to give fair credit) noticed
>something odd near the end. First, we see C 3PO standing on one leg,
>his right leg, with the other leg is his had. The right leg he is standing
>on is gold in color. At the end of the film, we see him from the back and
>his right leg, at least in back, is silver in color. What gives? Do i
>have a bad video copy or is this really the way it is and why would such a
>big mistake have been made?
Related thing ... Suncoast Video is selling SW dolls (about 18" tall or so).
It's C3PO has one leg that's silver from the knee down. What gives?
Chris
NinjaBOB of the Fuuma Clan
Thomas Bagwell <tbag...@netcom.com> wrote:
>Very interesting, but you're still relying on unprovable
>assumptions...namely the relative power of the weaponry. Going by
>straight numbers, even if you're correct that a heavy turbolaser has
>about half the power of a phaser shot, it doesn't take into account the
>differing nature of the weaponry. A phaser is not a laser, and is
A phaser is not light based weaponry ok.
>considered quite superior. The Federation hasn't used laser weaponry in
>a century or more. The Enterprise phasers operate in the multi-megawatt
I haven't bothered to calculate the energy involved in disassociating a planet
but I bet it's on the order of 10^30 th J. If you assume that that the
blast took .01 seconds to work its magic then that comes to 10^32 Watts.
Which 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times more powerful than the best
ST weapon, 10 MJ. Now 690,625,000,000 Star Destroyers fit in our moon, so
that means your average star destroyers are 1.48 x 10^13 times more pwerful
than the best star trek weapon.
We finaly have a rough estimation of power. Granted I didn't compare volume
of DS dedicated to power production to volume of SD dedicated to power
production. I just said DS Volume = E's moon's volume....
>range. When faced by lasers of similar power, they considered the base
>using them to be basically defenseless.
>
>You also assume that fighters could be a threat, something I differ in
>opinion on, as I consider their lasers far to weak to matter...even en
Ships can fly through the Ent's shields, they've done it before and the tie's
will do it too. I know what I would aim for if I was flying in a TIE bobmer,
those big protruding nacells. We all know how vulnerable those are, don't we.
>mass. This is based on the various attacks the shields have absorbed in
>the series and movies.
But you neglect to mention, in the sieries ship fly THROUGH the shields.
>
>I see little to justify your opinion of the SD's hull. It doesn't seem
>particularly thick (judging from the number of windows and other
>breaks). Granted we know nothing of its composition. Although the
>Enterprise's hull is -probably- thinner, we do know it is made out of a
>substance harder than anything conventionally available.
>
>Re: size.... not nearly as important as power, speed, maneuverability.
>Remember that the Enterprise is over a third as long as an SD (600+
>meters vs. 1600+ meters.) So the difference isn't as much as some people
>imply.
>
>I think you underestimate the destructiveness of photon torpedoes vs. a
>SD...especially in weaker areas such as the bridge. Remember these can
>also be fired in large salvos, and this can be done in synch with
>multiple phaser blasts from both the upper and lower phaser ring.
>
See my note about how the smaller proton torpedos are more effective.
>Finally, the Enterprise has an enormous advantage in that in can fire
>these large salvos of photon torpedoes during warp-speed passes, during
The Ent. can't hit none warping targets from warp.
>which it effectively can't be touched. There's also the tactic of simply
>staying behind the SD (where it seems to have a large blind spot when it
Not large at all. In fact the blind spot disappeares fairly close to a SD.
>comes to weapon coverage) or underneath it (again, there seem to be far
>fewer weapons on the bottom.)
>
>If ion torpedoes are what their name signifies, anything ionized is
They are NOT ion torpedos.
>especially easy to deflect. Also, the SD couldn't lock a tractor onto
>the Enterprise unless its shields were already down.
This is UNKOWN. A SW tractor beam may or may not work on ST shields.
Thomas Bagwell
: >differing nature of the weaponry. A phaser is not a laser, and is
: A phaser is not light based weaponry ok.
Right. It's either not light-based like a laser, or that is merely one
component of the phaser beam. If it was purely light-based, it would be
called a laser.
: >considered quite superior. The Federation hasn't used laser weaponry in
: >a century or more. The Enterprise phasers operate in the multi-megawatt
: I haven't bothered to calculate the energy involved in disassociating a planet
: but I bet it's on the order of 10^30 th J. If you assume that that the
: blast took .01 seconds to work its magic then that comes to 10^32 Watts.
: Which 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times more powerful than the best
: ST weapon, 10 MJ. Now 690,625,000,000 Star Destroyers fit in our moon, so
: that means your average star destroyers are 1.48 x 10^13 times more pwerful
: than the best star trek weapon.
: We finaly have a rough estimation of power. Granted I didn't compare volume
: of DS dedicated to power production to volume of SD dedicated to power
: production. I just said DS Volume = E's moon's volume....
Ooookay.... I'm comparing the Enterprise's phasers to turbo-lasers, and you
feel it necessary to compare them to the DS's superlaser.
And what is this business of calculating the power of SD's by seeing how
many you can pack into the moon????!!?!?!??
Finally, why are you bringing moons into it at all? By "E's moon" do you
mean Earth's moon? If so, the Deathstar was nowhere near that size. As
I remember, it was around 100km or so in diameter...you build a base for it
in a lunar crater.
: Ships can fly through the Ent's shields, they've done it before and the tie's
: will do it too. I know what I would aim for if I was flying in a TIE bobmer,
: those big protruding nacells. We all know how vulnerable those are, don't we.
The only ship ever to fly through the Ent's shields did so when it was
not on alert status and the shields were at minimum levels. You can't do
it when the shields are on defensive status...otherwise they wouldn't have
had to drop them to get the shuttle back on-board in STV.
: But you neglect to mention, in the sieries ship fly THROUGH the shields.
Since I thought the circumstances were obvious, and they were only up
to the strength necessary to protect against ambient radiation.
: See my note about how the smaller proton torpedos are more effective.
And also how we never saw them used in combat, but only against a stationary
target? Again, we have nothing to base their effectiveness on. The only
explosion we see them cause was when they missed, and not only were the
ships able to fly directly through the explosion totally unharmed, but
the surface wasn't even marked by the explosion...much less damaged.
Doesn't seem very effective.
: The Ent. can't hit none warping targets from warp.
Who says? It would require a very odd explanation to explain why that
would be so. Certainly nothing has ever been said to indicate such. Warped
objects can obviously impact non-warped objects, which is why the ship has
navigational deflectors, why the Enterprise warping into the Borg cube was
being considered, why they go around stars and planets, etc. The above
claim smacks somewhat of desperation.
: >which it effectively can't be touched. There's also the tactic of simply
: >staying behind the SD (where it seems to have a large blind spot when it
: Not large at all. In fact the blind spot disappeares fairly close to a SD.
How?
: >comes to weapon coverage) or underneath it (again, there seem to be far
: >fewer weapons on the bottom.)
: >
: >If ion torpedoes are what their name signifies, anything ionized is
: They are NOT ion torpedos.
Hey, I was just responding to the previous post. Complain to them.
: >especially easy to deflect. Also, the SD couldn't lock a tractor onto
: >the Enterprise unless its shields were already down.
: This is UNKOWN. A SW tractor beam may or may not work on ST shields.
Of -course- it is unknown. ALL of this is -unknown-. That's why it's
called 'speculation'. Mine is based on the following... SW and ST
tractors seem to work similarly as far as we can observe. SW and ST
shields are obviously different, and ST shields seem to be much more
effective. ST shields are continuous and unbroken. SW shields seem to
be planes (other posters have explained that they don't even overlap on
SDs...I don't know myself), with the exception of the DS2, which required
a huge shield generator located off-site. ST tractors, (apparently
similar to SW tractors) cannot lock onto ST shields, and can't lock onto
the ship unless it can penetrate the shields. SW tractors can lock onto
SW ships, but their shields are different, and don't seem to be
continuous. Thus, there is ship available to be affected, instead of
being totally covered by shielding. Therefore, it's my -opinion- that SW
tractors couldn't lock onto ST ships.
George Washington
(STEVEN 'CHRIS' STROUT) wrote:
Hmmm.. might have been a replacement, necessitated by damage (Mebbe
salvaged from other unit ;-)
Chewie did put his head on backwards anyhow.. so ya never know.
just a thought
the dave man....
"These aren't the droids you're looking for..."
-Ben Kenobi
David Zeiger
: Who says? It would require a very odd explanation to explain why that
: would be so. Certainly nothing has ever been said to indicate such. Warped
: objects can obviously impact non-warped objects, which is why the ship has
: navigational deflectors, why the Enterprise warping into the Borg cube was
: being considered, why they go around stars and planets, etc. The above
: claim smacks somewhat of desperation.
If an object in warp can ram objects not in warp, and fire on them, etc,
it stands to reason that objects not in warp can detect objects in warp.
So, the SD would be able to see the Ent coming. Whether or not the info
would come in fast enough for the SD to do anything about it is
unknown, as I don't know the sensor range for a SD vs an object in warp.
: Of -course- it is unknown. ALL of this is -unknown-. That's why it's
: called 'speculation'. Mine is based on the following... SW and ST
: tractors seem to work similarly as far as we can observe. SW and ST
: shields are obviously different, and ST shields seem to be much more
: effective. ST shields are continuous and unbroken.
Unbroken? Hmmm, this may be something from the new series that I
didn't notice. I remember from TOS that the old Ent had a number
of different shields (1-8?). They overlaped, but if one went down,
there would be a gap. I've presumed that SW shields are similar in
function--the bridge deflector (for example) overlaps with, or at
least meets, another deflector. I apparantly missed the post claiming
that there were gaps, so I can't comment on that.
--
David Zeiger Outer Space our One Salvation
dze...@netcom.com May God help Us in Our Search
--Blue Oyster Cult
"Monsters"
Anthony Hahn u
before Han, Luke, Ben, the droids and Chewie's departure. Jabba was to
be a person and confront Han (in a nice way) but Lucas cut it out. For
the better, I think ...
Brian Hahn
Mark Browning
In a previous article, tbag...@netcom.com (Thomas Bagwell) says:
>NinjaBOB of the Fuuma Clan (guy...@u.washington.edu) wrote:
>: >Right. It's either not light-based like a laser, or that is merely one
>: >component of the phaser beam. If it was purely light-based, it would be
>: >called a laser.
>
>: With phaser the phased laser the resemblence is just too close to over look,
>: but it cannot be a laser. However, TURBO Laser must be a laser since the name
>: resembles laser. Once again I am astounded by your inconsistant and flawed
>: logic Thomas Bagwell.
>
>Once more you stoop to personal attacks...sigh. "Phaser" doesn't stand
>for 'phased laser' so far as I'm aware...in any case, judging by their
>other uses of the term 'phased' (phased cloak, phased weaponry, etc.) it
>would indeed imply a very different type of weaponry. 'Turbo' may refer
>to a new way of igniting a laser, but the fact remains that it's still
>called a laser.
>
>: Since you missed this sentence the first time through I thought I'd underline
>: it for you.
>
>Sorry, but I'm still missing whatever point you're trying to make.
>
>: No, I used the power of the superlaser to derive a rough approximation of
>: the power of star destroyer weaponry in the ST universe.
>: Because we can assume that it takes the same amount of energy to disapate an
>: Earth sized world in both universes, we have a basis of comparison.
>
>So, what you're saying is that the superlaser is just a really big
>turbolaser?
>
>
>: Right, I said on a per unit of volume basis a SD can generate as much power as
>: a death star. Which means 700 billion star destroyers could indeed do what
>: the death star does, and makes Han's quote about how the entire empierial
>: fleet could never dream of blowing Alderan of the star charts ring a little
>: truer.
>
>Actually, I think he said,"It would take the entire Imperial fleet and more
>firepower than..."
>
>: Oh, I see you caught me little error, tee hee. I was REALLY REALLY hoping
>: you would point this out. By making the moon radius large I increased the
>: volume of the moon and skewed the data, in favor of you Tom.
>: If the volume of the DS is smaller then fewer Star destroyers fit in it,
>: which gives the SD's a bigger "share" of power. What you SHOULD have argued,
>: Tom, is "Your Death Star is too *small* it was the size of Yavin, do your
>: calculations again with jupiter's radius."
>: This would make a SD about as powerfull as the enterprize.
>
>Ah, you were trying to be clever. True, if I thought as you seem to,
>that I had to 'win' the debate at all costs, then perhaps I should have done
>as you recommended above. However, I'm willing to take your arguments as
>you choose to make them. The fallacy is assuming equivalent firepower per
>unit volume. After all, the Defiant is far smaller than the Enterprise, but
>has much more firepower. The Deathstar was built primarily as a platform
>for the superlaser.
>
>: >The only ship ever to fly through the Ent's shields did so when it was
>: >not on alert status and the shields were at minimum levels. You can't do
>: >it when the shields are on defensive status...otherwise they wouldn't have
>: >had to drop them to get the shuttle back on-board in STV.
>
>: I tend to think that they just we kind of stuck for a plot at the time, but hey
>: it's cannon so ship can pass through shields which means as the shields loose
>: energy tie fighter will fly in and boom, one less enterprise again.
>
>The shields weren't on defensive status when the shuttle passed through
>it. If the shields were that close to going down (and assuming the
>fighter could survive passage through shields charged with so much
>energy that they -are- going down) then the fact that a few fighters might
>be able to get through is irrelevant...the Enterprise is on the verge of
>losing anyway.
>
>: Let's talk about how compleatly uneffective photon torpedos are for a moment.
>: In the lameness that is ST: Undiscoverd Country Kirk orders a Photon torpedo
>: express deliverd to his location so he could kill god. Well he gets it and
>: not only does it take quite a while for it to arrive considering the speed the
>: torpedos are supposed to travel but the explosion is tiny, maybe 20m diameter.
>: Not only that but the near by James Tea Kirk is UNSCATHED no radiation burns
>: nothing. ST weaponry isn't just weaker than SW weaponry it's weaker than
>: conventional weaponry as well.
>
>Ignoring whatever effect the entity being fired at might have had on the
>blast from the torpedo (I'm sure it tried to contain the blast), photon
>torpedoes can be configured for any power desired. Knowing they were
>firing that near the landing party, obviously they would have used as
>low power a torp as they could. They also had a cliff between them and
>the explosion.
>
>: >Who says? It would require a very odd explanation to explain why that
>: >would be so. Certainly nothing has ever been said to indicate such.
>
>: I talked to a trek fanatic I know and he said that warped objects pass through
>: normal objects, this being true ST ships can fight each other in warp or in a
>: normal reference frame, but you can't cross reference frames with the weapons.
>: Not to mention that SD can't hit a warping E, the shots will pass through the
>: E just as the E's shots would pass through the SD.
>
>Show me a canon source and I'll believe it. Nothing of the sort has ever
>even been implied in the series, movies, or tech manual. If it were so,
>then Riker's order to go to warp and ram the Borg ship would have made
>no sense.
>
>: Not to mention but in the "Picard Manuver" you come out of warp to hit the
>: other ship. You don't just fire on the fly, why is that? Does the Picard
>: Manuver suck? It can't cause Picard is bald.
>
>Fed ships have no advantage in staying at warp, as they can track and fire
>at vessels in warp whether they are or not. The best tactic is to damage
>the opposing ship and then follow up when weaknesses develop. In fighting
>with both ships in warp, or just one, you end up with high speed passes
>that require time to pass between engagements. It just isn't tactically
>valid. The best approach is to face each other in normal space and fight it
>out until one loses and/or runs. The Picard Maneuver is a use of warp speed
>in normal space...so you still have a normal space battle, but with a trick
>thrown in.
>
>In Star Wars, they show no ability to detect ships approaching in hyperspace
>(the SD captain implied the only way to track the MF was by it's entry vector
>into hyperspace), and even if they could, it probably wouldn't work on a
>warped vessel as the technology is radically different. Thus the Enterprise
>gains a large advantage in undetectable ftl 'strafes' where nothing is
>detected until the photons impact.
>
>: No, my statement smacked of logic, a sound totally unfamiliar to you to be
>: sure.
>
>It's certainly unfamiliar the way you try to use it...
>
>: I could acctuall determin this mathhmatically, but at the moment I'm
>doing : newsgroups and a lab so I will draw a picture.
>: _____[]
>: ____ ---- |\
>: ---- ___ Victory| > <== No fire zone
>: ~~~~ -| |---_____|/
>
>: So how did you like the picture?
>
>Fine, I guess...it's exactly how I pictured it except that the 'no fire zone'
>would more closely resemble a cylinder than a shallow cone. That cone might
>represent where absolutely no weapons can reach, but only a few peripheral
>weapons can fire back at all leaving a cylinder with minimal fire coverage.
>
>: >Of -course- it is unknown. ALL of this is -unknown-. That's why it's
>: >called 'speculation'. Mine is based on the following... SW and ST
>: >tractors seem to work similarly as far as we can observe. SW and ST
>: >shields are obviously different, and ST shields seem to be much more
>: >effective. ST shields are continuous and unbroken. SW shields seem to
>: >be planes (other posters have explained that they don't even overlap on
>: >SDs...I don't know myself), with the exception of the DS2, which required
>: >a huge shield generator located off-site. ST tractors, (apparently
>: >similar to SW tractors) cannot lock onto ST shields, and can't lock onto
>: >the ship unless it can penetrate the shields. SW tractors can lock onto
>: >SW ships, but their shields are different, and don't seem to be
>: >continuous. Thus, there is ship available to be affected, instead of
>: >being totally covered by shielding. Therefore, it's my -opinion- that SW
>: >tractors couldn't lock onto ST ships.
>: >
>: Ok, I buy that.
>
>Whoa....whiplash:)
>
>
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"...A wild, weird clime |
> That lieth, sublime, | Thomas N. Bagwell
> Out of Space, | tbag...@netcom.com
> Out of Time." |
> --Edgar Allen Poe |
> 'Dreamland' | ____\|/_____________________\|/____
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Acually in ROTJ, they plainly showed a screen that detected the Rebel
Fleet approaching Endor, in Hyperspace.. (Don't say they didn't I saw
it.), as to Disruptor weapons, read the Han Solo adventures.. Mark
NinjaBOB of the Fuuma Clan
>: >differing nature of the weaponry. A phaser is not a laser, and is
>
>: A phaser is not light based weaponry ok.
>
>Right. It's either not light-based like a laser, or that is merely one
>component of the phaser beam. If it was purely light-based, it would be
>called a laser.
With phaser the phased laser the resemblence is just too close to over look,
but it cannot be a laser. However, TURBO Laser must be a laser since the name
resembles laser. Once again I am astounded by your inconsistant and flawed
logic Thomas Bagwell.
>
>: >considered quite superior. The Federation hasn't used laser weaponry in
>: >a century or more. The Enterprise phasers operate in the multi-megawatt
>
>: I haven't bothered to calculate the energy involved in disassociating a planet
>: but I bet it's on the order of 10^30 th J. If you assume that that the
>: blast took .01 seconds to work its magic then that comes to 10^32 Watts.
>: Which 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times more powerful than the best
>: ST weapon, 10 MJ. Now 690,625,000,000 Star Destroyers fit in our moon, so
>: that means your average star destroyers are 1.48 x 10^13 times more pwerful
>: than the best star trek weapon.
>: We finaly have a rough estimation of power. Granted I didn't compare volume
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>: of DS dedicated to power production to volume of SD dedicated to power
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>: production. I just said DS Volume = E's moon's volume....
^^^^^^^^^^
Since you missed this sentence the first time through I thought I'd underline
it for you.
>
>Ooookay.... I'm comparing the Enterprise's phasers to turbo-lasers, and you
>feel it necessary to compare them to the DS's superlaser.
No, I used the power of the superlaser to derive a rough approximation of
the power of star destroyer weaponry in the ST universe.
Because we can assume that it takes the same amount of energy to disapate an
Earth sized world in both universes, we have a basis of comparison.
>And what is this business of calculating the power of SD's by seeing how
>many you can pack into the moon????!!?!?!??
Right, I said on a per unit of volume basis a SD can generate as much power as
a death star. Which means 700 billion star destroyers could indeed do what
the death star does, and makes Han's quote about how the entire empierial
fleet could never dream of blowing Alderan of the star charts ring a little
truer.
>Finally, why are you bringing moons into it at all? By "E's moon" do you
>mean Earth's moon? If so, the Deathstar was nowhere near that size. As
Oh, I see you caught me little error, tee hee. I was REALLY REALLY hoping
you would point this out. By making the moon radius large I increased the
volume of the moon and skewed the data, in favor of you Tom.
If the volume of the DS is smaller then fewer Star destroyers fit in it,
which gives the SD's a bigger "share" of power. What you SHOULD have argued,
Tom, is "Your Death Star is too *small* it was the size of Yavin, do your
calculations again with jupiter's radius."
This would make a SD about as powerfull as the enterprize.
>I remember, it was around 100km or so in diameter...you build a base for it
>in a lunar crater.
>
>: Ships can fly through the Ent's shields, they've done it before and the tie's
>: will do it too. I know what I would aim for if I was flying in a TIE bobmer,
>: those big protruding nacells. We all know how vulnerable those are, don't we.
>
>The only ship ever to fly through the Ent's shields did so when it was
>not on alert status and the shields were at minimum levels. You can't do
>it when the shields are on defensive status...otherwise they wouldn't have
>had to drop them to get the shuttle back on-board in STV.
I tend to think that they just we kind of stuck for a plot at the time, but hey
it's cannon so ship can pass through shields which means as the shields loose
energy tie fighter will fly in and boom, one less enterprise again.
>
>: But you neglect to mention, in the sieries ship fly THROUGH the shields.
>
>Since I thought the circumstances were obvious, and they were only up
>to the strength necessary to protect against ambient radiation.
>
>: See my note about how the smaller proton torpedos are more effective.
>
>And also how we never saw them used in combat, but only against a stationary
>target? Again, we have nothing to base their effectiveness on. The only
>explosion we see them cause was when they missed, and not only were the
>ships able to fly directly through the explosion totally unharmed, but
>the surface wasn't even marked by the explosion...much less damaged.
>Doesn't seem very effective.
Let's talk about how compleatly uneffective photon torpedos are for a moment.
In the lameness that is ST: Undiscoverd Country Kirk orders a Photon torpedo
express deliverd to his location so he could kill god. Well he gets it and
not only does it take quite a while for it to arrive considering the speed the
torpedos are supposed to travel but the explosion is tiny, maybe 20m diameter.
Not only that but the near by James Tea Kirk is UNSCATHED no radiation burns
nothing. ST weaponry isn't just weaker than SW weaponry it's weaker than
conventional weaponry as well.
>
>: The Ent. can't hit none warping targets from warp.
>
>Who says? It would require a very odd explanation to explain why that
>would be so. Certainly nothing has ever been said to indicate such. Warped
I talked to a trek fanatic I know and he said that warped objects pass through
normal objects, this being true ST ships can fight each other in warp or in a
normal reference frame, but you can't cross reference frames with the weapons.
Not to mention that SD can't hit a warping E, the shots will pass through the
E just as the E's shots would pass through the SD.
Not to mention but in the "Picard Manuver" you come out of warp to hit the
other ship. You don't just fire on the fly, why is that? Does the Picard
Manuver suck? It can't cause Picard is bald.
>objects can obviously impact non-warped objects, which is why the ship has
>navigational deflectors, why the Enterprise warping into the Borg cube was
>being considered, why they go around stars and planets, etc. The above
>claim smacks somewhat of desperation.
>
No, my statement smacked of logic, a sound totally unfamiliar to you to be
sure.
>: >which it effectively can't be touched. There's also the tactic of simply
>: >staying behind the SD (where it seems to have a large blind spot when it
>
>: Not large at all. In fact the blind spot disappeares fairly close to a SD.
>
>How?
>
I could acctuall determin this mathhmatically, but at the moment I'm doing
newsgroups and a lab so I will draw a picture.
_____[]
____ ---- |\
---- ___ Victory| > <== No fire zone
~~~~ -| |---_____|/
So how did you like the picture?
>: >comes to weapon coverage) or underneath it (again, there seem to be far
>: >fewer weapons on the bottom.)
>: >
>: >If ion torpedoes are what their name signifies, anything ionized is
>
>: They are NOT ion torpedos.
>
>Hey, I was just responding to the previous post. Complain to them.
>
>: >especially easy to deflect. Also, the SD couldn't lock a tractor onto
>: >the Enterprise unless its shields were already down.
>
>: This is UNKOWN. A SW tractor beam may or may not work on ST shields.
>
>Of -course- it is unknown. ALL of this is -unknown-. That's why it's
>called 'speculation'. Mine is based on the following... SW and ST
>tractors seem to work similarly as far as we can observe. SW and ST
>shields are obviously different, and ST shields seem to be much more
>effective. ST shields are continuous and unbroken. SW shields seem to
>be planes (other posters have explained that they don't even overlap on
>SDs...I don't know myself), with the exception of the DS2, which required
>a huge shield generator located off-site. ST tractors, (apparently
>similar to SW tractors) cannot lock onto ST shields, and can't lock onto
>the ship unless it can penetrate the shields. SW tractors can lock onto
>SW ships, but their shields are different, and don't seem to be
>continuous. Thus, there is ship available to be affected, instead of
>being totally covered by shielding. Therefore, it's my -opinion- that SW
>tractors couldn't lock onto ST ships.
>
Ok, I buy that.
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"...A wild, weird clime |
> That lieth, sublime, | Thomas N. Bagwell
> Out of Space, | tbag...@netcom.com
> Out of Time." |
> --Edgar Allen Poe |
> 'Dreamland' | ____\|/_____________________\|/____
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
-NinjaBOB of the "short sig" Clan
Christopher Ruzsicska
: >elements in. It's like asking what would happen if Simba, as a cub, came
: >to the Death Star on Aladdin's flying carpet and confronted Darth Vader
: >with a lightsaber. First, I'd fire the scriptwriter. Second, I'd point out
: >that it's just not loigcal to put that sort of stuff together.
You made me laugh.....I think it's a great idea...... :)
: Anyway, I have to disagree with Kevin's point about the "Vs." posts. Yes,
: some of them are ridiculous and overdone, but some of them are pretty cool.
: - DFD
I agree with both of you. (How's that for what seems like a contradiction) :)
Anyway, to the point.
I think some of the comparisons (forgive the spelling but I'm in the middle
of exams, it's 1:30 am and I should be programming *SIGH*), ......
As I was saying, I think some are good, the serious ones, however, a certain
idiot (I won't mention R5D4, or whatever it was) was making a heap of
posting where the titles were something like "Dumbo vs. SSD" and the only body
to the message was something like "This would be interesting".
I think they are a complete and utter waste of time.....
But anyway, the programming beckons ..........
Have a good one.
Chris.
Thomas Bagwell
: >component of the phaser beam. If it was purely light-based, it would be
: >called a laser.
: With phaser the phased laser the resemblence is just too close to over look,
: but it cannot be a laser. However, TURBO Laser must be a laser since the name
: resembles laser. Once again I am astounded by your inconsistant and flawed
: logic Thomas Bagwell.
Once more you stoop to personal attacks...sigh. "Phaser" doesn't stand
for 'phased laser' so far as I'm aware...in any case, judging by their
other uses of the term 'phased' (phased cloak, phased weaponry, etc.) it
would indeed imply a very different type of weaponry. 'Turbo' may refer
to a new way of igniting a laser, but the fact remains that it's still
called a laser.
: Since you missed this sentence the first time through I thought I'd underline
: it for you.
Sorry, but I'm still missing whatever point you're trying to make.
: No, I used the power of the superlaser to derive a rough approximation of
: the power of star destroyer weaponry in the ST universe.
: Because we can assume that it takes the same amount of energy to disapate an
: Earth sized world in both universes, we have a basis of comparison.
So, what you're saying is that the superlaser is just a really big
turbolaser?
: Right, I said on a per unit of volume basis a SD can generate as much power as
: a death star. Which means 700 billion star destroyers could indeed do what
: the death star does, and makes Han's quote about how the entire empierial
: fleet could never dream of blowing Alderan of the star charts ring a little
: truer.
Actually, I think he said,"It would take the entire Imperial fleet and more
firepower than..."
: Oh, I see you caught me little error, tee hee. I was REALLY REALLY hoping
: you would point this out. By making the moon radius large I increased the
: volume of the moon and skewed the data, in favor of you Tom.
: If the volume of the DS is smaller then fewer Star destroyers fit in it,
: which gives the SD's a bigger "share" of power. What you SHOULD have argued,
: Tom, is "Your Death Star is too *small* it was the size of Yavin, do your
: calculations again with jupiter's radius."
: This would make a SD about as powerfull as the enterprize.
Ah, you were trying to be clever. True, if I thought as you seem to,
that I had to 'win' the debate at all costs, then perhaps I should have done
as you recommended above. However, I'm willing to take your arguments as
you choose to make them. The fallacy is assuming equivalent firepower per
unit volume. After all, the Defiant is far smaller than the Enterprise, but
has much more firepower. The Deathstar was built primarily as a platform
for the superlaser.
: >The only ship ever to fly through the Ent's shields did so when it was
: >not on alert status and the shields were at minimum levels. You can't do
: >it when the shields are on defensive status...otherwise they wouldn't have
: >had to drop them to get the shuttle back on-board in STV.
: I tend to think that they just we kind of stuck for a plot at the time, but hey
: it's cannon so ship can pass through shields which means as the shields loose
: energy tie fighter will fly in and boom, one less enterprise again.
The shields weren't on defensive status when the shuttle passed through
it. If the shields were that close to going down (and assuming the
fighter could survive passage through shields charged with so much
energy that they -are- going down) then the fact that a few fighters might
be able to get through is irrelevant...the Enterprise is on the verge of
losing anyway.
: Let's talk about how compleatly uneffective photon torpedos are for a moment.
: In the lameness that is ST: Undiscoverd Country Kirk orders a Photon torpedo
: express deliverd to his location so he could kill god. Well he gets it and
: not only does it take quite a while for it to arrive considering the speed the
: torpedos are supposed to travel but the explosion is tiny, maybe 20m diameter.
: Not only that but the near by James Tea Kirk is UNSCATHED no radiation burns
: nothing. ST weaponry isn't just weaker than SW weaponry it's weaker than
: conventional weaponry as well.
Ignoring whatever effect the entity being fired at might have had on the
blast from the torpedo (I'm sure it tried to contain the blast), photon
torpedoes can be configured for any power desired. Knowing they were
firing that near the landing party, obviously they would have used as
low power a torp as they could. They also had a cliff between them and
the explosion.
: >Who says? It would require a very odd explanation to explain why that
: >would be so. Certainly nothing has ever been said to indicate such.
: I talked to a trek fanatic I know and he said that warped objects pass through
: normal objects, this being true ST ships can fight each other in warp or in a
: normal reference frame, but you can't cross reference frames with the weapons.
: Not to mention that SD can't hit a warping E, the shots will pass through the
: E just as the E's shots would pass through the SD.
Show me a canon source and I'll believe it. Nothing of the sort has ever
even been implied in the series, movies, or tech manual. If it were so,
then Riker's order to go to warp and ram the Borg ship would have made
no sense.
: Not to mention but in the "Picard Manuver" you come out of warp to hit the
: other ship. You don't just fire on the fly, why is that? Does the Picard
: Manuver suck? It can't cause Picard is bald.
Fed ships have no advantage in staying at warp, as they can track and fire
at vessels in warp whether they are or not. The best tactic is to damage
the opposing ship and then follow up when weaknesses develop. In fighting
with both ships in warp, or just one, you end up with high speed passes
that require time to pass between engagements. It just isn't tactically
valid. The best approach is to face each other in normal space and fight it
out until one loses and/or runs. The Picard Maneuver is a use of warp speed
in normal space...so you still have a normal space battle, but with a trick
thrown in.
In Star Wars, they show no ability to detect ships approaching in hyperspace
(the SD captain implied the only way to track the MF was by it's entry vector
into hyperspace), and even if they could, it probably wouldn't work on a
warped vessel as the technology is radically different. Thus the Enterprise
gains a large advantage in undetectable ftl 'strafes' where nothing is
detected until the photons impact.
: No, my statement smacked of logic, a sound totally unfamiliar to you to be
: sure.
It's certainly unfamiliar the way you try to use it...
: I could acctuall determin this mathhmatically, but at the moment I'm
doing : newsgroups and a lab so I will draw a picture.
: _____[]
: ____ ---- |\
: ---- ___ Victory| > <== No fire zone
: ~~~~ -| |---_____|/
: So how did you like the picture?
Fine, I guess...it's exactly how I pictured it except that the 'no fire zone'
would more closely resemble a cylinder than a shallow cone. That cone might
represent where absolutely no weapons can reach, but only a few peripheral
weapons can fire back at all leaving a cylinder with minimal fire coverage.
: >Of -course- it is unknown. ALL of this is -unknown-. That's why it's
: >called 'speculation'. Mine is based on the following... SW and ST
: >tractors seem to work similarly as far as we can observe. SW and ST
: >shields are obviously different, and ST shields seem to be much more
: >effective. ST shields are continuous and unbroken. SW shields seem to
: >be planes (other posters have explained that they don't even overlap on
: >SDs...I don't know myself), with the exception of the DS2, which required
: >a huge shield generator located off-site. ST tractors, (apparently
: >similar to SW tractors) cannot lock onto ST shields, and can't lock onto
: >the ship unless it can penetrate the shields. SW tractors can lock onto
: >SW ships, but their shields are different, and don't seem to be
: >continuous. Thus, there is ship available to be affected, instead of
: >being totally covered by shielding. Therefore, it's my -opinion- that SW
: >tractors couldn't lock onto ST ships.
: >
: Ok, I buy that.
Whoa....whiplash:)
David Zeiger
: David Zeiger (dze...@netcom.com) wrote:
: : If an object in warp can ram objects not in warp, and fire on them, etc,
: : it stands to reason that objects not in warp can detect objects in warp.
: : So, the SD would be able to see the Ent coming. Whether or not the info
: : would come in fast enough for the SD to do anything about it is
: : unknown, as I don't know the sensor range for a SD vs an object in warp.
: The Enterprise has subspace sensors which propagates information ftl.
: Normal sensors might be able to detect a warped vessel, but the information,
: travelling at lightspeed, would arrive after the ship did. So, sure the
: SD might be able to detect a warped ship, but it would do so after it had
: already passed.
Mabye. Mabye not. Warp drive warps space around the drive (thus the
name). Presumably, that warping is going to have repurcussions
a long way beyond the ship--miniscule bending, probably lasting
for light years away before the bending becomes small enough to
get lost in all the noise. Detect the bending, and you detect the
ship--a *long* time before it comes into range.
John Hagerman
> I am really sick and tired of wasting time skipping past all these
> stupid x vs. y posts.
That's what kill files are for. Learn 'em and love 'em. If your news
reader doesn't support them, get one that does. You'll actually enjoy
reading this group again...
~ John
Thomas Bagwell
: If an object in warp can ram objects not in warp, and fire on them, etc,
: it stands to reason that objects not in warp can detect objects in warp.
: So, the SD would be able to see the Ent coming. Whether or not the info
: would come in fast enough for the SD to do anything about it is
: unknown, as I don't know the sensor range for a SD vs an object in warp.
The Enterprise has subspace sensors which propagates information ftl.
Normal sensors might be able to detect a warped vessel, but the information,
travelling at lightspeed, would arrive after the ship did. So, sure the
SD might be able to detect a warped ship, but it would do so after it had
already passed.
: Unbroken? Hmmm, this may be something from the new series that I
: didn't notice. I remember from TOS that the old Ent had a number
: of different shields (1-8?). They overlaped, but if one went down,
: there would be a gap. I've presumed that SW shields are similar in
: function--the bridge deflector (for example) overlaps with, or at
: least meets, another deflector. I apparantly missed the post claiming
: that there were gaps, so I can't comment on that.
They didn't overlap, they were just different areas of the unbroken
shield. The new Enterprise is the same way, but when it is struck it is
obviously an unbroken spheroid. Different areas of the sphere are
generated by different generators. Yes, if one of the areas goes down a
gap is left. The SW post I was referring to claimed that the SW shields
mainly covered vital areas and were not continuous. Might have been Mark
Brown, but I'm not sure. I've seen similar information before, though.
Thomas Bagwell
Acually in ROTJ, they plainly showed a screen that detected the Rebel
Fleet approaching Endor, in Hyperspace.. (Don't say they didn't I saw
it.), as to Disruptor weapons, read the Han Solo adventures.. Mark
Did they? Okay. Evidently the Rebel Fleet didn't have the reverse
capability. In any case, the Enterprise travels in subspace and not
hyperspace. I didn't realize the Han Solo adventures were canon... if
we can bring in novels and novelizations, then the Enterprise carries
planet-busters capable of wasting a planet as thoroughly as the DS.
RENSHAW
: >
: >
: | Darth Vader was wearing that black suit of armor. And presumably most
: | of his limbs are mechanical prosthetic replacements, which would be
: | much harder to cut through than Luke's puny wrist.
: | HeWhoHasNoName
David Zeiger
: I'm not saying that it's impossible...just that the topic is venturing
: further into the area of pure speculation not supported by anything
: concrete in either series.
Agreed. I'm just assuming that is space is bent in one area, the
rest of the universe has to compensate :-). I presume the dialogue
in the SD would be something like "I'm getting a strange sensor reading,
sir." "Well, what is it?" "I don't know sir, I've never seen anything
like it!" WHAM!
If the SD lives long enough, they'll figure it out. But living long enough
depends on the relative power of weapons/shields.
Thomas Bagwell
: Mabye. Mabye not. Warp drive warps space around the drive (thus the
: name). Presumably, that warping is going to have repurcussions
: a long way beyond the ship--miniscule bending, probably lasting
: for light years away before the bending becomes small enough to
: get lost in all the noise. Detect the bending, and you detect the
: ship--a *long* time before it comes into range.
Well, to paraphrase...Maybe. Maybe not. I'm aware of no indications
that the warping extends far beyond the ship. Most diagrams seem to
indicate that it's very localized. Even if this bending were to exist,
we have no evidence that Imperial technology could detect it...after all,
the Empire uses hyperspace, not subspace or warped space.
I'm not saying that it's impossible...just that the topic is venturing
further into the area of pure speculation not supported by anything
concrete in either series.
Gilberto Charriez
speculated a marriage between Rush Limbaugh and the obese woman from the
Snapples' commercials. After showing side-by-side photos of Rush and the
Snapples lady the next scene showed their offspring...Jabba the Hutt!
By the way, my ex-girlfriend's mother had a severe weight problem. So my
ex got a Jabba the Hutt postcard and put it on the door of the
refrigerator and told her that she had to stop eating or she would look
like Jabba.
The poor woman lost 30lbs. in two months.
--
END OF LINE
Francine M. Kent
> Just one other commnet. I am really sick and tired of wasting time
>skipping past all these stupid x vs. y posts. SW exists in its own galaxy,
>that is far far awat. It doesn't have Borgs or Aleins or any other fictional
>contstuct from another fictional world or galaxy. We could invent dumb,
>meaningless comparisons all day, like the Rancor vs. the Stay Puff
>Marshmellow Man, but what's th4 point? It's not a meaningful discussion
>of the SW universe. Could we stick to something at least logically
>meaningful? It's hard enough to hold everything together that various
>writers have created for SW, without trying to bring other fictional
>elements in. It's like asking what would happen if Simba, as a cub, came
>to the Death Star on Aladdin's flying carpet and confronted Darth Vader
>with a lightsaber. First, I'd fire the scriptwriter. Second, I'd point out
>that it's just not loigcal to put that sort of stuff together.
I have to agree with you totally!!!
I like the point of Simba and the carpet, you intergrated my favorite
movies....
Thank you for posting that, they are my feelings also!
>
> Here's a much more interesting question. Why is it that Darth Vader can
>cut through anything with his lightsaber, including LUke's hand, but when
>Luke hit's Darth's arm in ESB, it seems like little more than a momentary
>pain enuses? Why does it take Luke so many tries to cut through Vader's
>suit in ROTJ? Doesn't make sense to me.
Ya know... I never thought of that.
Now that I do... It makes no sence at all either....hmmmm
Oh well.
MTFBWY,A!
-Fran
*******************************************************************
Francine Kent "The force is strong in my family"
Plymouth State College --=> My great great great
f_k...@oz.plymouth.edu grandfather Skywalker
Too much Star Wars is just barely enough!
*******************************************************************
Keith A. Schneider
>: > Last night while watching TESB, my wife (to give fair credit) noticed
>: >something odd near the end. First, we see C 3PO standing on one leg,
>: >his right leg, with the other leg is his had. The right leg he is standing
>: >on is gold in color. At the end of the film, we see him from the back and
>: >his right leg, at least in back, is silver in color. What gives? Do i
>: >have a bad video copy or is this really the way it is and why would such a
>: >big mistake have been made?
One of C-3PO's shins is silver throughout all three movies.
>: > Here's a much more interesting question. Why is it that Darth Vader can
>: >cut through anything with his lightsaber, including LUke's hand, but when
>: >Luke hit's Darth's arm in ESB, it seems like little more than a momentary
>: >pain enuses? Why does it take Luke so many tries to cut through Vader's
>: >suit in ROTJ? Doesn't make sense to me.
>: | Darth Vader was wearing that black suit of armor. And presumably most
>: | of his limbs are mechanical prosthetic replacements, which would be
>: | much harder to cut through than Luke's puny wrist.
The lightsaber can cut through most thigns pretty easily, it seems.
The hacking occuring in Jedi is Luke's lightsaber smashing against
Vader's (he's still holding on to it while on the ground). After a few
hard smashes, Luke cuts off Vader's hand.
keith
Anthony W Becker
post with such unsupportable crap. If we can't discuss this with some
kind of decorum, let's not discuss it at all. Of course the Star
Destroyer is going to win... this is rec.arts.sf.STARWARS!
____________________________________________________________________
Anthony W. Becker | "It's better to burn out |
Northwestern University | than to fade away... There |
awb...@nwu.edu | can be only one!" |
_________________________________|_________________________________|
Todd Bangerter
: >elements in. It's like asking what would happen if Simba, as a cub, came
: >to the Death Star on Aladdin's flying carpet and confronted Darth Vader
: >with a lightsaber. First, I'd fire the scriptwriter. Second, I'd point out
: >that it's just not loigcal to put that sort of stuff together.
But what happens when the Energizer Bunny confronts Darth Vader on Cloud
City? (Anyone else think that commercial is absolutely hilarious?)
William A. Zuidema
Path: bigboote.WPI.EDU!transfer.stratus.com!news.bu.edu!olivea!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!eo263
From: eo...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Browning)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.starwars
Date: 3 Nov 1994 11:45:00 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Lines: 181
References: <s9381694....@rkw-lan.cs.up.ac.za> <tbagwellC...@netcom.com> <396qbm$a...@nntp1.u.washington.edu> <tbagwellC...@netcom.com> <398mm2$e...@nntp1.u.washington.edu> <tbagwellC...@netcom.com>
Reply-To: eo...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Browning)
NNTP-Posting-Host: eeyore.ins.cwru.edu
First... You ALL owe me Chocolate Chip Cookies for this one...
1.> Phaser stands for <Ph>oton <A>mplification by <S>timulation of
<E>mitted <R>adiation.
2.> In S.W., They can trace ships by use of probes before major
hyperspace points. The Techs usually neglect such minor things,
and say things like "Sensors picking up ships in Hyperspace",
when they should say "Probes at Jump point #... show ships on the
Way", or, even if they can be detected through H-Space, the sensor
array could be powerful enough to pick up anomalies in the area, that
any ships would set off it's sensors. take these thing into account,
and you could trace a ship from beginning to end, if it used normal
Jump routes... Much more to this, but I want To hit Everything with
much less space...
3.> Shields work by sending energy away from the ship in many different
directions, thus dissipating it. Since the Tractors use Energy to
pull things, and shields do what they do, the energy from the Tractors
is thus dissipated. Note: Energy is also in reference to an object's
Kinetic Energy, and its atoms' energy. It would dissipate
Photon torpedoes for breakfast using this principal... If it had
enough energy to do this infinately...
4.> As for the "phased" keywords... Techs once again just take a good
Phrase and "Phase actuate" the hell out of it.. Note: Techs means
Technical operators... Not Tekkies...
5.> The Star destroyer really only has one weakness: The Deflector
Generators. The lasers can completely cover the whole aspect of the
ship, and so, The Engineers Didn't take into account such a trivial
thing as this weakness. If you find this hard to believe, how else
can you account for the Exhaust Port on the Death Star?
6.> In conclusion, you guys REALLY should shorten your Posts.. If you want
Lengthy Discussions, Go through Personal E-Mail, And Save the rest of
us from the Ever-Deadly doldrums of such posts.
Thanks, And Remember the Cookies...
Will
Pilot, Jedi Master, Holocron Programmer
dlc...@indyvax.iupui.edu
> In article <tbagwellC...@netcom.com>,
> Thomas Bagwell <tbag...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>NinjaBOB of the Fuuma Clan (guy...@u.washington.edu) wrote:
>>: >differing nature of the weaponry. A phaser is not a laser, and is
>>
>>: A phaser is not light based weaponry ok.
>>
>>Right. It's either not light-based like a laser, or that is merely one
>>component of the phaser beam. If it was purely light-based, it would be
>>called a laser.
>
> With phaser the phased laser the resemblence is just too close to over look,
> but it cannot be a laser. However, TURBO Laser must be a laser since the name
> resembles laser. Once again I am astounded by your inconsistant and flawed
> logic Thomas Bagwell.
A Phaser is not a phased laser. It stands for PHASed Energy Rectification. A
laser is in no way invovled. It is almost pure energy of a different type
altogether.
>>
>>: >considered quite superior. The Federation hasn't used laser weaponry in
>>: >a century or more. The Enterprise phasers operate in the multi-megawatt
>>
>>: I haven't bothered to calculate the energy involved in disassociating a planet
>>: but I bet it's on the order of 10^30 th J. If you assume that that the
>>: blast took .01 seconds to work its magic then that comes to 10^32 Watts.
>>: Which 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times more powerful than the best
>>: ST weapon, 10 MJ. Now 690,625,000,000 Star Destroyers fit in our moon, so
>>: that means your average star destroyers are 1.48 x 10^13 times more pwerful
>>: than the best star trek weapon.
>
>>: We finaly have a rough estimation of power. Granted I didn't compare volume
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>: of DS dedicated to power production to volume of SD dedicated to power
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>: production. I just said DS Volume = E's moon's volume....
> ^^^^^^^^^^
> Since you missed this sentence the first time through I thought I'd underline
> it for you.
>>
>>Ooookay.... I'm comparing the Enterprise's phasers to turbo-lasers, and you
>>feel it necessary to compare them to the DS's superlaser.
>
> No, I used the power of the superlaser to derive a rough approximation of
> the power of star destroyer weaponry in the ST universe.
> Because we can assume that it takes the same amount of energy to disapate an
> Earth sized world in both universes, we have a basis of comparison.
The DS laser did not dissipate the planets it destroyed. The actual energy
that desroyed the planet was a chain reaction from within. Note: DS fires
laser which focuses on Alderaan for a few seconds, then BOOM! An explosion
internal to the planet. If is had been the DS laser which destroyed the
planet, it merely would have vaporized as the laser reached it. "But it also
blew up ships" you may argue. Considering the minimal shielding of ships
within the SW continuity, that effect is nothing that couldn't be reached using
a well, aimed phaser within the ST continuity.
>
>
> Right, I said on a per unit of volume basis a SD can generate as much power as
> a death star. Which means 700 billion star destroyers could indeed do what
> the death star does, and makes Han's quote about how the entire empierial
> fleet could never dream of blowing Alderan of the star charts ring a little
> truer.
>
>>Finally, why are you bringing moons into it at all? By "E's moon" do you
>>mean Earth's moon? If so, the Deathstar was nowhere near that size. As
>
> Oh, I see you caught me little error, tee hee. I was REALLY REALLY hoping
> you would point this out. By making the moon radius large I increased the
> volume of the moon and skewed the data, in favor of you Tom.
> If the volume of the DS is smaller then fewer Star destroyers fit in it,
> which gives the SD's a bigger "share" of power. What you SHOULD have argued,
> Tom, is "Your Death Star is too *small* it was the size of Yavin, do your
> calculations again with jupiter's radius."
> This would make a SD about as powerfull as the enterprize.
>
>>I remember, it was around 100km or so in diameter...you build a base for it
>>in a lunar crater.
>>
>>: Ships can fly through the Ent's shields, they've done it before and the tie's
>>: will do it too. I know what I would aim for if I was flying in a TIE bobmer,
>>: those big protruding nacells. We all know how vulnerable those are, don't we.
>>
>>The only ship ever to fly through the Ent's shields did so when it was
>>not on alert status and the shields were at minimum levels. You can't do
>>it when the shields are on defensive status...otherwise they wouldn't have
>>had to drop them to get the shuttle back on-board in STV.
Actually, the only reason that any ship was able to come throught the shields
was because they ALLOWED them to.
>
> I tend to think that they just we kind of stuck for a plot at the time, but hey
> it's cannon so ship can pass through shields which means as the shields loose
> energy tie fighter will fly in and boom, one less enterprise again.
>
>>
>>: But you neglect to mention, in the sieries ship fly THROUGH the shields.
>>
>>Since I thought the circumstances were obvious, and they were only up
>>to the strength necessary to protect against ambient radiation.
>>
>>: See my note about how the smaller proton torpedos are more effective.
>>
>>And also how we never saw them used in combat, but only against a stationary
>>target? Again, we have nothing to base their effectiveness on. The only
>>explosion we see them cause was when they missed, and not only were the
>>ships able to fly directly through the explosion totally unharmed, but
>>the surface wasn't even marked by the explosion...much less damaged.
>>Doesn't seem very effective.
>
> Let's talk about how compleatly uneffective photon torpedos are for a moment.
> In the lameness that is ST: Undiscoverd Country Kirk orders a Photon torpedo
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you're going to quote from a movie, at least pick the right one. That was
in ST V: The Final Frontier, the one that even Gene Roddenberry himself
considered apocryphal. Everyone thought is was doo doo and not even most ST
fans consider it true Canon.
> express deliverd to his location so he could kill god. Well he gets it and
> not only does it take quite a while for it to arrive considering the speed the
> torpedos are supposed to travel but the explosion is tiny, maybe 20m diameter.
> Not only that but the near by James Tea Kirk is UNSCATHED no radiation burns
> nothing. ST weaponry isn't just weaker than SW weaponry it's weaker than
> conventional weaponry as well.
The payloads of photon torpedoes can also be altered. They can fire torps as
weak as that one as well as ones powerful enough to decimate a city.
>
>>: The Ent. can't hit none warping targets from warp.
>>
>>Who says? It would require a very odd explanation to explain why that
>>would be so. Certainly nothing has ever been said to indicate such. Warped
>
> I talked to a trek fanatic I know and he said that warped objects pass through
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Really, ask him what his basis is for this. Whatever is is, it's not correct.
Why do you think that they have to calculate their trajectory so carefully?
If a warped ship hits a planet for some reason, it still goes BOOM.
David Zeiger
: A Phaser is not a phased laser. It stands for PHASed Energy Rectification. A
: laser is in no way invovled. It is almost pure energy of a different type
: altogether.
Well, I was going to bow out of this arguement once and for all, but this
was just too choice to overlook. Let's break down the name "phased
energy rectification." "Phased" obviously suggests that the output
is all in phase. "Energy" implies that the weapon output is in "pure"
energy--photons. (there is no "pure energy of a different type
altogether"). The fact that the phaser obviously operates
in the visual spectrum means that the energy being talked about is light.
"Rectification" is a null word added to make it a viable acronym. All
it means is that the energy has to be "rectified" to make it all in
phase.
So, what you come out with is light that is in phase--a phased laser.
(BTW, Tom, I guess you were right--I *was* referring to ST when I used
the term "techno-babble." This is a perfect example of it)
Thomas Bagwell
: Well, I was going to bow out of this arguement once and for all, but this
: was just too choice to overlook. Let's break down the name "phased
: energy rectification." "Phased" obviously suggests that the output
: is all in phase. "Energy" implies that the weapon output is in "pure"
: energy--photons. (there is no "pure energy of a different type
: altogether"). The fact that the phaser obviously operates
: in the visual spectrum means that the energy being talked about is light.
: "Rectification" is a null word added to make it a viable acronym. All
: it means is that the energy has to be "rectified" to make it all in
: phase.
: So, what you come out with is light that is in phase--a phased laser.
You're making unsubstantiated assumptions. You're assuming the energy
referred to is composed of photons. There have been many references in
ST to many different types of energy, including exotic ("technobabble")
types of energy. You also assume a simplistic definition of 'phased'.
Remember the various non-standard ("technobabble") uses of the term,
including phased cloaking devices and other instances implying its use
with subspace technology (also 'phased' creatures that are not quite
in our universe, but just out of phase with it.)
Also, 'phased laser' is redundant. A laser is phased by definition.
If your interpretation were correct, it would simply be a laser, and they
wouldn't distinguish between the two.
: (BTW, Tom, I guess you were right--I *was* referring to ST when I used
: the term "techno-babble." This is a perfect example of it)
I've never had a problem with 'technobabble'. It's integral to much of
science fiction. Whenever you're postulating devices or abilities that
don't yet exist, you must make up terminology to describe it. Witness
NinjaBOB's discourse on shield technology and manufacturing in Star Wars.
Star Trek uses tb, Star Wars uses tb, Babylon 5 uses tb, Forbidden
Planet, 2001, etc. etc. etc. all use technobabble.
In this particular discussion, it safely removes 'phasers' from the realm
of anything we currently understand by inventing a name for a weapon that
uses principles we don't yet understand.
JEREMY DAVID BALSLEY
People, Photon Torps have been used to RELIGHT STARS and BLOW UP STARS! You
are talking about an ANTIMATTER WARHEAD HERE! You can stuff .001g (or less)
of antimatter, or > 1kg of antimatter. As far as I know, as long as you have
enough antimatter for the Warp Sustainer that powers it, StarShips can fire
ANYTHING they want in a Photon. They once used a modified Photon Torpedo to
transport Warf's "girlfriend" to Enterprise once! Photons are both weaker
and stronger than both you are saying...read this as they are very virsitile.
dlc...@indyvax.iupui.edu
Do you mean that just because we are on SW "turf" the SD is automatically going
to win? God I hope not. If so, most of history is in error. Because we went
over to Europe and eventually Germany, by your logic, the Germans certainly
should have won WWII. Oh, ST and SW are both fiction you say. I agree, which
is why the Enterprise would win. They're the GOOD GUYS. And just like in all
fiction, the good guys always win. Either way, your argument for the SD has no
base. Now if someone can give me some numbers or equations of power and energy
dispersal rates and stuff like that, then we have a basis for discussion.
Otherwise, it is down to pure speculation and strategy.
David Zeiger
: You're making unsubstantiated assumptions. You're assuming the energy
: referred to is composed of photons. There have been many references in
: ST to many different types of energy, including exotic ("technobabble")
: types of energy. You also assume a simplistic definition of 'phased'.
: Remember the various non-standard ("technobabble") uses of the term,
: including phased cloaking devices and other instances implying its use
: with subspace technology (also 'phased' creatures that are not quite
: in our universe, but just out of phase with it.)
Thank you, Tom. You've made my point for me. If "phase" and "energy"
mean something different in the ST universe than they do now (where
they are well-defined), by what right do you assume that "laser"
in "turbolaser" means the same thing in the SW universe that it does
here? (where it is well-defined).
: Also, 'phased laser' is redundant. A laser is phased by definition.
: If your interpretation were correct, it would simply be a laser, and they
: wouldn't distinguish between the two.
Could be a bunch of lasers all in phase.
Dennis Smith
David Zeiger
: 1.> Phaser stands for <Ph>oton <A>mplification by <S>timulation of
: <E>mitted <R>adiation.
Well, that's definately a laser (photons in visual spectrum == light)
: 6.> In conclusion, you guys REALLY should shorten your Posts.. If you want
: Lengthy Discussions, Go through Personal E-Mail, And Save the rest of
: us from the Ever-Deadly doldrums of such posts.
Well, you would have gotten a cookie if not for this crack--you included
the entire, multi-page quoted article, including headers, then ask *us*
to cut down on the size of our posts?
(not to mention the 2 pages of blank lines that followed your sig...)
Thomas Bagwell
quoting any of it, and I'm certainly not going to edit through the whole
thing just to include you comments at the end...so I'll respond to what I
remember.
The definition you gave for 'phaser' is identical to the definition for
'laser' except you substituded 'photon' for 'light'. No, that is not
what 'phaser' means.
Were you talking about how SW shields function? It certainly isn't how
ST shields function.
Tracking something in hyperspace doesn't mean you can necessarily track
something in subspace.
Thomas Bagwell
: Thank you, Tom. You've made my point for me. If "phase" and "energy"
: mean something different in the ST universe than they do now (where
: they are well-defined), by what right do you assume that "laser"
: in "turbolaser" means the same thing in the SW universe that it does
: here? (where it is well-defined).
'Phase' and 'energy' are fairly broad terms with a number of different
meanings and applications today, especially as we're talking about the
broader definition of energy (not simply E=mc^2), but energy in the
sense of radiation of different types. Then include into these already
broad definitions a fictional technology that includes subspace, warp,
and transporter sciences to broaden them and they could indeed mean just
about anything.
'LASER' is a specific acronym referring to more specific terminologies,
although they may be a little more leeway in the use of 'radiation'...
it's still more specific.
: : Also, 'phased laser' is redundant. A laser is phased by definition.
: : If your interpretation were correct, it would simply be a laser, and they
: : wouldn't distinguish between the two.
: Could be a bunch of lasers all in phase.
Just makes a bigger laser.
David Zeiger
: 'Phase' and 'energy' are fairly broad terms with a number of different
: meanings and applications today, especially as we're talking about the
: broader definition of energy (not simply E=mc^2), but energy in the
: sense of radiation of different types.
All of the different types of 'energy' you describe break down into the
same thing.
: 'LASER' is a specific acronym referring to more specific terminologies,
: although they may be a little more leeway in the use of 'radiation'...
: it's still more specific.
'LASER' is a specific acronym. 'Laser' is not an acronem at all--it
is a word. BTW, nice try on the 'radiation' bit--if it can mean
10 billion things when refering to 'energy' it can mean the same 10
billion things here as well...
dlc...@indyvax.iupui.edu
Ahhh, I see. Light is the only type of energy in existence. No? You say
there are OTHER types of energy? Kinetic, potential, radiation, light, heat,
chemical... shall I go on? There are probably other types of energy that we
haven't even discovered yet. Your leap of "logic" is of the same type of
"logic" that would lead a person to believe that if an object in question is a
tapered cone for the most part, orange, eaten by rabbits, and has green stalks
at the end of it is called a vegetable then it must be BROCCOLI.
Perhaps you took your lessons in logic from Sir Bedivere in Monty Python and
the Holy Grail.
We burn witches
We burn wood
Wood floats
Witches float
Therefore Witches are made of wood.
Ducks also float
Therefore, if a person weighs the same as a duck, they are a witch.
-Grand Admiral Thrawn-
Mark Browning
In a previous article, han...@wam.umd.edu (john william mills) says:
>dlc...@indyvax.iupui.edu wrote:
>Um, how about the fact that the Enterprise isn't designed to target/defend
>against fighters......they would be the first breach.
>After the shields were down, the SD would pummel the 1701no suffix,a, b, c
>OR d because they fire blasts which are tightly packed energy, like a
>TORPEDO.
>It wouldn't be an easy or an instant win, it would in fact be a
>spectacular battle, but the TIE fighters would be the key to surgical
>hits to knock out the shields and engines and power, leaving the E a
>sitting duck.
>But it all cahnges if Kirk is at the helm....the Enterprise would
>probably limp away. Picard? They're toast.
>
>Picard: "Mr. Worf, hail the big nasty ship that's pounding the crap out
>of us. Maybe we can talk."
>
>Data: "Everybody but you, me and Spot(Data's cat, for you who don't know)
>are dead, Captain."
>
>Picard: "Maybe we can resurrect them in enough time to ..."
>
>Cut to shot of Enterprise exploding.:)
>
>REMEMBER THAT IT'S ALL IN FUN!
>John
>
>
All anyone need do is find a way to knock down the ships shields, then
the thing is vulnerable to a simple laser cutting beam, Ala Borg..
Mark
john william mills
Um, how about the fact that the Enterprise isn't designed to target/defend
- Zorro -
No. It mearly fits into a sub catagory. However, this not the point.
NO other energy travels at the speed of light. Name 1 thing that can deliver
energy at the speed of light?
You can do it and you never will beable to.
>there are OTHER types of energy? Kinetic, potential, radiation, light, heat,
Try this.
Kinetic Poential
light rock teatering on a cliff
heat a battery
radiation a nuclear bomb
an anvil just before it hits the matter
coyote
>chemical... shall I go on? There are probably other types of energy that we
No, you've demonstraited your ignorance quite well.
There surely are other means of producing energy that we have not yet
discovered, but if it travels at the speed of light then it is light.
>haven't even discovered yet. Your leap of "logic" is of the same type of
>"logic" that would lead a person to believe that if an object in question is a
Your attempt at logic, or is it humor (like Batman the TV series (tm)), leads
a person to believe that if an object in question is car-like in apperance
and function, but it has lost a hub cap, then it must be something other than a
car.
>tapered cone for the most part, orange, eaten by rabbits, and has green stalks
>at the end of it is called a vegetable then it must be BROCCOLI.
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Perhaps you took your lessons in logic from Sir Bedivere in Monty Python and
>the Holy Grail.
>We burn witches ====================================================
>We burn wood | Am I from aol and mearly faking a edu extension?|
>Wood floats | You Make The Call |
>Witches float ====================================================
>Therefore Witches are made of wood.
>Ducks also float
>Therefore, if a person weighs the same as a duck, they are a witch.
> -Grand Admiral Thrawn-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Your sig is ready sir.
| /~~
[|B{>+-N
| \__
-zorro-
Lee Conner
: No, you've demonstraited your ignorance quite well.
: There surely are other means of producing energy that we have not yet
: discovered, but if it travels at the speed of light then it is light.
Ahem... Zorro, correct if I'm wrong, but this is science _fiction_ is it
not? If the writer wants to create another form of energy, explained or
not, he just does it. Also, by "light" I assume you are referring to the
_entire_ EM spectrum and not just visible light. We must also be ignoring
the theoretical existance of "sub-space" energies such as tachyons. You
really need to lighten up kiddo.
Lee Conner
- Zorro -
You are a imbicil. Do your self a favor and learn to read.
Light = electro-magnetic radiation there is nothing to assume.
There are no other forms of energy only potential and kinetic, everything
falls in these two catagories.
You and your sub-human brain are ignoring the fact the tachyons are theoretical
PARTICLES that start out with a C+ velocity. Just because they are a featured
particle of the week on Star Drek, doesn't mean that they are concotion of
Rodenberry's sad attempt to make his own live action batman tv series.
at least batman is funny
Would it fucking kill you to pick up a book lee?
jeez
Lee Conner
: Light = electro-magnetic radiation there is nothing to assume.
: There are no other forms of energy only potential and kinetic, everything
: falls in these two catagories.
: You and your sub-human brain are ignoring the fact the tachyons are theoretical
: PARTICLES that start out with a C+ velocity. Just because they are a featured
: particle of the week on Star Drek, doesn't mean that they are concotion of
: Rodenberry's sad attempt to make his own live action batman tv series.
: at least batman is funny
: Would it fucking kill you to pick up a book lee?
: jeez
Once again, you really need to lighten up and leave the thinking to the
adults.
Okay, I'll pick up a book and read...
Webster's New World Dictionary Second College Edition :
Light : 1) a. the form of electromagnetic radiation that acts upon the retina
of the eye, optic nerve, etc. making sight possible: this energy is transmitted
at a velocity of about 186,000 miles per second. b) a form of radiant energy
similiar to this, but not acting on the normal retina, as ultraviolet and
infrared radiation.
Once again, this deals with physics (one of my degrees). Physics have very
little to do with science fiction other than lay a theoretical background
for the literature (another one of my degrees).
Once you mature enough to post like an adult, rather than like a child that
had too much sugar for breakfast, I will be willing to engage you in a
rational discussion. Until then...
Lee Conner
light :
AlphaBeta1
Well, I'll get into the fray. In a battle between Star Wars and Star Trek
I think it would be a draw. Star Trek has by far more advanced
technology, but Star Wars has, by far, more equipment to throw at them.
Unless you have a Star Trek turnout like that at Wolf 359. Then the
forces of Star Wars would have about as much time to pray to their
individual deity and watch their life flash before their eyes.
Lee Conner
: "With over 25,000 of these ships at his disposal, it is no wonder that Emperor
: Palpatine could instill fear into the hearts of the galaxy's citizens." That's
: 25000 Star Destroyers, alone. With their other ships, that would bring the fleet
: total to well over one million. What does the Federation have? A few hundred
: ships at most, I would say.
That would be a good point Keith, but there is another angle to consider this
data... As someone else pointed out, the Empire controls the entire galaxy.
I make a rash assumption that the galaxy does not follow the Emperor out of
love, but fear. Fear based on those 25,000 SD's being scattered across the
galaxy. Making the assumption that the SD's are policing the galaxy, they
need to be somewhat evenly distributed. This _really_ waters down the number
of available SD's to engage in combat. However, since the Federation is not
based on extortion and putting down rebellion, there should be a few more
ships available in the event of a hostile take over. Also, the Federation
needs fewer "police" ships since they only need to patrol the borders and
not the entire volume of their respective space.
Lee Conner
Keith Ferguson
>Well, I'll get into the fray. In a battle between Star Wars and Star Trek
>I think it would be a draw. Star Trek has by far more advanced
>technology, but Star Wars has, by far, more equipment to throw at them.
>Unless you have a Star Trek turnout like that at Wolf 359. Then the
>forces of Star Wars would have about as much time to pray to their
>individual deity and watch their life flash before their eyes.
Once again, I say this whole thing is ridiculous, but like a passerby
fascinated by a car wreck, I am fascinated. Star Trek has more advanced
technology? How so? The only thing that may be more advanced is
transporters. Humans have been in space for thousands of years in the Star
Wars universe, only a few hundred years in the Trek universe. As for the
turnout at Wolf 359, that is insignifcant compared to the Empire's numbers.
I quote the Star Wars roleplaying manual, refering to Imperial Star Destroyers,
"With over 25,000 of these ships at his disposal, it is no wonder that Emperor
Palpatine could instill fear into the hearts of the galaxy's citizens." That's
25000 Star Destroyers, alone. With their other ships, that would bring the fleet
total to well over one million. What does the Federation have? A few hundred
ships at most, I would say.
Keith Ferguson
- Zorro -
AlphaBeta1 <alpha...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <CzMwy...@melpar.esys.com>, lbc@h4snap (Lee Conner) writes:
>
>Well, I'll get into the fray. In a battle between Star Wars and Star Trek
>I think it would be a draw. Star Trek has by far more advanced
>technology, but Star Wars has, by far, more equipment to throw at them.
Hahahaha. Man did you even see star wars? Nope, probably not. In Star Wars
ships travel and 3*10^6 C in star drek they travel at 1/1000 of that. In SW
90% of the galaxy has been explored and 1 force rules the galaxy. The
Empire can build ships that can destroy planets in a microsecond. In SW
everyone and there brother has a platoon of sentiant robots. In ST they
control a tiny quarter of the galaxy, and this is by treaty not by force.
They haven't even finished exploring there quadrant yet and they can't even
annilate an entire planet. They did manage to make one sentient robot in ST
and only recently did he acuire emotion.
Let's talk about weapons.
In ST by the time the shields are down 30% the warp drives are offf line and
consoles on the bridge are exploding, you'd think they'd use surge protectors.
In ST they want to talk when someone starts kicking their ass. Not to mention
the 6 or 7 times a totally tecnologicaly inferior race finds a new partical of
the week which completely pentraits the ST shields and incapacitates te
capatain. Not to mention the 10000 times they were trapped in the holodeck.
Stormtroopers may be pretty pathetic but they have never be trapped by TV's.
AlphaBeta1
Zorro -) writes:
Look at the stats:
Weapons:
Star Wars: Lasers, torps and concussion missiles
Star Trek: Phasers and anti-matter torps
Shields:
Star Wars: Effected by an ionic stream of charged particles
Star Trek: Absolutely uneffected by laser fire. In VERY large
quantinties it might have a slight effect.
Ships:
25,000 Star Destroyers
Klingons, Federation, and Romulans oh my!
I don't remember ever seeing a Star Trek ship at 30% shields and be almost
totally ineffcient. The klingons destroyed a planet before and the new
TriLithum technology found on the movie Generations. How about destroying
a solar system. If you don't remember, In the Timothy Zahn trilogy, the
Katana fleet went crazy because the cyborgs went crazy with their
emotions. Not to mention that Star Wars would have to deal with the Borg.
Even though they aren't part of the Federation like the Romulans, do you
honestly think they would stand back and watch?
Information obtained from:
Star Trek Technical Manuel
Star Trek Encyclopedia
The Star Wars Universe
Numerouse Star Trek episodes and movies
and Star Wars movies
- Zorro -
AlphaBeta1 <alpha...@aol.com> wrote:
Your are as lame as your logon name *YAWN*
yet I still see fit to once again refute your idiotic tripe.
>In article <3b02ef$2...@nntp1.u.washington.edu>, guy...@u.washington.edu (-
>Zorro -) writes:
>
>Look at the stats:
>
>Weapons:
>
>Star Wars: Lasers, torps and concussion missiles
>Star Trek: Phasers and anti-matter torps
You have no point here. A good point would be "In Star Wars we see the Empire
blast a planet in to volvo sized chunks, yet a demonstation of this sort of
power is completly lacking in Star Trek."
BTW your information is inaccurate.
>
>Shields:
>Star Wars: Effected by an ionic stream of charged particles
>Star Trek: Absolutely uneffected by laser fire. In VERY large
>quantinties it might have a slight effect.
Am I to take it that light and charged particles cannont effect the enterprize?
You have just eliminated all forms of weaponry except neutrons and projectiles.
Once again you have forgotten to think before you write, please stop.
I would like to point out that we can make lasers that are more intese than the
sun at the surface. Do you propose that the enterprize can fly through a
medium sized yellow star?
>Ships:
>25,000 Star Destroyers
>Klingons, Federation, and Romulans oh my!
>
But the Empire is strong and the ST, ahem, races, are all weak. They pathetic
whining weenies, much like trekkies.
>I don't remember ever seeing a Star Trek ship at 30% shields and be almost
>totally ineffcient. The klingons destroyed a planet before and the new
Well then you don't watch the show much do you?
I'll give you two examples, cause I'm so nice.
Star Trek Movie VI
The E has 3 holes from torpedos in it before the shields give out.
Last episode of the next generation, where B. Crushers ship is being
asailed by evil klingons. The warp drive does offline at 30% and the
warp core is going to explode by 9%.
>TriLithum technology found on the movie Generations. How about destroying
>a solar system. If you don't remember, In the Timothy Zahn trilogy, the
>Katana fleet went crazy because the cyborgs went crazy with their
>emotions. Not to mention that Star Wars would have to deal with the Borg.
> Even though they aren't part of the Federation like the Romulans, do you
>honestly think they would stand back and watch?
>
Zahn is a loser who should learn how to write science fiction, I hear classes
are taught.
The Borg wouldn't sit back and watch, they would come forward and die by the
millions.
Just thought you'd like to know that the Romulans aren't part of the
federation.
>Information obtained from:
>Star Trek Technical Manuel
>Star Trek Encyclopedia
>The Star Wars Universe
>Numerouse Star Trek episodes and movies
>and Star Wars movies
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is highly susspect. It is more probable that your freinds saw the Star
Wars saga and related the short version to you. With ST you probably slept
throught all the movies and tv eps, but I can hardly blame you.
Belrose The Blue
>Look at the stats:
>Weapons:
>Star Wars: Lasers, torps and concussion missiles
>Star Trek: Phasers and anti-matter torps
Ok, anti-matter torps are just concussion missiles. Just because they are not
identified in SW like they are in ST, it doesn't mean that the torpedoes in SW
are powered by TNT.
SW has blasters (not lasers), turbo-lasers (don't know what they are), ion
cannons (presumably beams of highly charged particles; they disrupt shields
and all ships electronics), a death star planetary trasher (no idea what kind
of weapon, but damn good range), and light sabers (again, nor real idea of
what they are, but extremely effective!)
SW has Phasers (both hand and ship). Nobody seems to know exactly what they
are, but apparently they are not lasers.
I don't see any conclusive evidence hear that indicates ST has superior
weapons. They just put a power rating beside them.
>Shields:
>Star Wars: Effected by an ionic stream of charged particles
>Star Trek: Absolutely uneffected by laser fire. In VERY large
>quantinties it might have a slight effect.
How many times does the Enterprise either lose its shields, or have to drop
them when flying through a highly charged nebula? Seems to me that it is
effected by them.
You claim that ST ships are completely unaffected by lasers (except perhaps
ultra powerful ones). It may be that phasers are more difficult
technologically speaking. Once races develop the phaser technology, they drop
their old laser technology. Consequently, any races that still use pure laser
technology are far inferior technologically speaking. Perhaps that is why the
Feds do not worry about ships that fire at them with pure laser weapons.
Of course, as I have stated before, I am not at all convinced that the SW
weapons are pure lasers. They certainly don't behave like a laser any more
than ST phasers do. In fact, they act remarkably similar. Still, even if
they are laser thechnology, it is TURBO-laser technology (whatever that
means). Perhaps they never developed phaser technology because turbo-laser
technology was so effective. It certainly doesn't take many turbo-laser
blasts to trash a big ship like a SD. They obviously carry a HUGE punch.
>Ships:
>25,000 Star Destroyers
>Klingons, Federation, and Romulans oh my!
It would certainly make things interesting. Especially if you add the borg
and the rebels.
>I don't remember ever seeing a Star Trek ship at 30% shields and be almost
>totally ineffcient. The klingons destroyed a planet before and the new
>TriLithum technology found on the movie Generations. How about destroying
>a solar system. If you don't remember, In the Timothy Zahn trilogy, the
>Katana fleet went crazy because the cyborgs went crazy with their
>emotions. Not to mention that Star Wars would have to deal with the Borg.
> Even though they aren't part of the Federation like the Romulans, do you
>honestly think they would stand back and watch?
Not to mention the Genesis device. These could all make the entire situation
interesting. So would a Death Star moving towards Earth occompanied by
a fleet of SD and SSD similar to the one in ROTJ. Haven't seen Generations
yet, so can't comment on that.
The borg would be a factor. However, there is no way you can convince me that
they will take sides. They will, however, be a factor. However, the Emperor
will have absolutely no concerns about trying to exploit the Borg by 'leading
any stray borg ships into Federation space. The Feds may have more trouble
with the morality of such a thing (probably not Star Fleet, but just
individual Captains...)
Of course, all I have said leads to no conclusion as to which is better.
Robert Edward Powers
: As
: turnout at Wolf 359, that is insignifcant compared to the Empire's numbers.
: I quote the Star Wars roleplaying manual, refering to Imperial Star Destroyers,
: "With over 25,000 of these ships at his disposal, it is no wonder that Emperor
: Palpatine could instill fear into the hearts of the galaxy's citizens." That's
: 25000 Star Destroyers, alone. With their other ships, that would bring the fleet
: total to well over one million.
: Keith Ferguson
25,000?!?! Twenty-five THOUSAND ships that are each a mile
long?!? That's a buttload of ships, a buttload and a half
actually. I find that figure... questionable. There couldn't have been
more than 50 or so SDs at Endor... and you'd think they'd bring in at
least a big chunk of the fleet for the final obliteration of the
Alliance. 250, maybe, perhaps even 2500 -- but 25,000 just doesn't seem
realistic, sourcebook or no. --
------------------------- /./.|I am the Dread Pirate Roberts, and there
Robert Powers |will be NO SURVIVORS!! All your worst
repo...@artsci.wustl.edu \__ |nightmares are about to come true!...
-------------------------------|The Dread Pirate Roberts is here for
If there's nothing wrong with |your SOOOUUUUUUUULLLL!!!!! --- Fezzik
me, then there must be something|-----------------------------------
wrong with the universe. |This is madness. We'll be destroyed
--- Beverly Crusher |for sure. --- C3PO
Belrose The Blue
>Keith Ferguson (kfer...@vt.edu) wrote:
>: I quote the Star Wars roleplaying manual, refering to Imperial Star
>Destroyers,
>: "With over 25,000 of these ships at his disposal, it is no wonder that Emperor
>: Palpatine could instill fear into the hearts of the galaxy's citizens."
(snip)
> 25,000?!?! Twenty-five THOUSAND ships that are each a mile
>long?!? That's a buttload of ships, a buttload and a half
>actually. I find that figure... questionable. There couldn't have been
>more than 50 or so SDs at Endor... and you'd think they'd bring in at
>least a big chunk of the fleet for the final obliteration of the
>Alliance. 250, maybe, perhaps even 2500 -- but 25,000 just doesn't seem
>realistic, sourcebook or no. --
Hey, the galaxy is a big place. If the Empire maintains 100,000 planets
(which is probably not that unreasonable, but I do not have any figures), then
that is only 1 SD for every 4 planets. Spread a bit thin isn't it? Any if
you consider that there are millions of star systems in the galaxy, each
capable of hiding a rebel outpost/rendezvous point, you begin to realise that
25,000 SDs don't go very far. Besides, the amount of minerals that go into
building a single DS could very well be used to construct hundreds, perhaps
thousands of SDs.
AlphaBeta1
Zorro -) writes:
Please shut up. Your points are stupid and irrelavant. Like i said
Trilithum in a star can cause the solar system to go bye-bye. Borg die?
Please. The shields of Starfleet have greatly improved over 100 years
since the Enterprise-A. Like, about 4 different shields. And yes, the
Enterprise meta phasic shields can with stand a star. Remember the
episode about the runaway Borgs? Oh, yea, of course not, too many big
words for you to understand. The Enterprise shields work on an energy
matrix so heat has nothing to do with their shields. Positive and
negative particles? Remember elementry chemistry or did you fail it?
Please go play with your toys and leave the Internet to the adults.
AlphaBeta1
writes:
Finally, someone that thinks! Ok, Turbo-blasters are your basic laser
system with a rapid recooling device so they can fire twice as fast.
Phasers are highly charged particles (unknown about the matrix which makes
a hellva difference, but i think it is a matter-anitmatter phaser).
Concussion missile are not the same as photon torps because a photon torp
has two compartments, one for matter and one for antimatter. the two
compartments are then intergrated when the torp has reached the target.
The emperor couldn't take over the borg because they are cyborgs and are
run by computers. No life. Ok, about the Nebula. Do you know how many
Ionic particles that is? It would be like 1000000 ion blasting the ship
at once. A SW fighter would be totally incapacitated. I totally agree
about your no conclusion. Like i said in my first letter, it think it
would be a draw because you have SW's many ships and ST superior
technology.
AlphaBeta1
Mark Browning
Their puny shields didn't help them against a SINGLE bird of prey..
What makes you think they can withstand an Imperial Naval assault?
Mark
AlphaBeta1
(Mark Browning) writes:
A SINGLE bird of prey? You must be talking about Generations. The only
reason that bird of prey beat the hell out of the Enterprise was because
they found out the the frequency of the Enterprise's shields. They work
with energy and not heat so if you find the right frequency, oh boy. But
under normal circumstances a Klingon bird of prey, even the C class, is
definitely not a match for a Galaxy class ship.
Mark Browning
In a previous article, alpha...@aol.com (AlphaBeta1) says:
Never heard of a C class, but Well 3 Birds of Prey in Yesterday's
Enterprise also wiped it out, and any type of anomely can also cause
trouble to the thing.. Face it the Galaxy-Class is a design failure..
Mark
dlc...@indyvax.iupui.edu
Nope, Troi would feel the pure evil oozing out of the SD from lightyears away.
She'd come up to the bridge, stagger most likely under the barrage of negative
emotions and tell them of the SD's intentions. They wouldn't try to talk while
the SD was trying to pound them. Actually, Data would most likely find the SD
within the Entertainment database along with whatever specs are available and
find a weakness. The fighters wouldn't be a large threat. After a spectacular
battle, the Enterprise would stand victorious. (If it weren't already crashed
on Veridia 3 right now.) Oh well, there's always the Enterprise-E to look
forward to. Or how about if a SD showed up in the ST mirror universe against
the evil Enterprise. Now, there would be a fight!
-Grand Admiral Thrawn-
David Zeiger
: Nope, Troi would feel the pure evil oozing out of the SD from lightyears away.
: She'd come up to the bridge, stagger most likely under the barrage of negative
: emotions and tell them of the SD's intentions.
Nope. The "pure evil" oozing out of a SD is as fictional as "pure evil"
oozing out of an old Soviet tank batallion. Unless the SD happens to
have Vader, Tarkin, or a few other select people, the only thing that
would be detected by Troi would be a sense of duty, a desire for order,
probably some ambition, and *possibly* a tinge of ruthlessness.
Mark Browning
Nice of you to bring up the entertainment database, which means that I
can say that Trek will NEVER take place anyways, so the Empire would
find nice little Earth like it is right NOW.. Earth against the Empire,
I can picture them blowing up Paramount studios.. In fact I even wrote
a story about this, where the Empire was able to cross time and in fact
cross dimensions.. Right to Earth.. Mark
Belrose The Blue
>Finally, someone that thinks! Ok, Turbo-blasters are your basic laser
>system with a rapid recooling device so they can fire twice as fast.
Possibly. Any references to support this? I don't have any references to
support anything I said, it was purely speculation. The biggest problem I
have with comparing the two is the lack of any pseudo-scientific babble and
'energy ratings' describing Star Wars equipment.
>Phasers are highly charged particles (unknown about the matrix which makes
>a hellva difference, but i think it is a matter-anitmatter phaser).
I am not certain I can agree with this. They are constantly using the hand
phasers in exactly the same manner as lasers (cutting through walls, etc.). A
matter-antimatter mix will creat an explosion. How could the stun setting
on phasers knock people out if it were a matter-intimatter mix? That seems to
require more of an ionic field to disrupt the brains synapsis (sp?). When the
phasers are set to kill, it simply makes them vanish or disintigrate. I have
no idea how that would work. Seems more of a transporter function, but
without any attempt to reintegrate the individual. Again this is most
decidedly not a matter-antimatter reaction. Of course I am talking about hand
phasers, not the ships main phasers. Still, why would they use the same term
for two completely different pieces of technology?
>Concussion missile are not the same as photon torps because a photon torp
>has two compartments, one for matter and one for antimatter. the two
>compartments are then intergrated when the torp has reached the target.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Luke blow up the DS in ANH with a photon
torpedo? It's been awhile since I saw the movie, so I could be mistaken.
>The emperor couldn't take over the borg because they are cyborgs and are
>run by computers. No life.
This I have to strongly disagree with. The borg were all alive. They are
cyborgs, part machine and part living organism. In addition, their minds all
form the 'borg collective'; a larger consciousness, but with a loss of 'self'.
What this would mean when compared to the force, I have no idea. It is
possible that the emperor would easily be able control the minds of individual
borgs. The force has influence over weak minds. I could certainly argue that
borgs are weak minded INDIVIDUALS. However, the borg also have the
collective, and it may well be that this would make a huge disturbance in
the force, and render any mental manipulations the emperor did a waste of
effort (think of trying to dig a small hole in the surface of the ocean).
> Ok, about the Nebula. Do you know how many
>Ionic particles that is? It would be like 1000000 ion blasting the ship
>at once. A SW fighter would be totally incapacitated.
Or a single blast from an ion cannon. Remember in TESB, when they were
leaving Hoth. A single shot (ok, maybe a couple of hits) completely disrupted
the electronics of the SD. Since we have seen that ionic particles can
disrupt the Enterprise shields, then I postulate that the rebels ionic cannon
could do the same to the Enterprise. However, I don't know if a SD normally
comes equiped with them or not. Seems to be me they could be refitted with
them.
And yes, a SW fighter would be disrupted by them as well. Fortunately for
the fighters, it would not be necessary to create a large field to do this.
> I totally agree
>about your no conclusion. Like i said in my first letter, it think it
>would be a draw because you have SW's many ships and ST superior
>technology.
I guess this is were I really differ in opinion with a lot of people. Most
trekkies tend to assume that ST technology is superior. The only reasons I
can see for this is that they are constantly trying to push the techno-babble
at the audience, in an attempt at realism, and they use computers for
everthing. In SW, they don't use computers for anything (although droids are
everywhere), and they don't even attempt to explain any technology. Why is
that? Well, why don't contemporary stories explain why we wear clothes, or
describe the physics of why a club hits harder than a fist? Because they are
such an ingrained part of society that people just don't talk about it. That
doesn't mean that they are inferior technology. It does mean that they are
tried and true.
Percy Cuscaden
> Intergalactic battle between the Empire and the Federation. While
> it is refreshing to see people such as yourself engaged in such
> energetic arguments over the technical aspects of this conflict,
> I feel that you have forgotten one very important factor. THE FORCE
> , now let's face it the FORCE would be that, which would ensure the
> the Empire's Victory. No, doubt you will regail me with stories of
> the equal power found similarly in the Federation's citizens, but
> it is my belief that the FORCE would spell the end of the Federation.
> Thankyou, Percy.
Mark Browning
Well someone just mentioned that Federation ships can't take ionic
disturbances, so Ion Cannons could take care of that.. But the Force,
well yes, but Trek fans come back with Q.. Even though I have never seen
him around when they are in real trouble... In a ground battle The
Empire wins hands down(as long as theres no Ewoks around)... Mark
dyodyo@ 'SC
> >Please go play with your toys and leave the Internet to the adults.
> >
> Their puny shields didn't help them against a SINGLE bird of prey..
> What makes you think they can withstand an Imperial Naval assault?
Like the man said lasers are worhtless against Federation ships, they
wouldn't even have to raise shields. The Nav shields would handle the
fire. It is like being naked in a lite drizzle, do the drops of water
penetrate your skin, no of course not.
--
SSSSSS CCCCCC GO TROJANS !!!!!!!!!!!!!
SSS CCC
SSSSSS CCC " A LIFE LIVED IN FEAR IS A LIFE HALF-LIVED "
SSS CCC
SSSSSS CCCCCC dyodyo@'SC
dyodyo@ 'SC
> >has two compartments, one for matter and one for antimatter. the two
> >compartments are then intergrated when the torp has reached the target.
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Luke blow up the DS in ANH with a photon
>torpedo? It's been awhile since I saw the movie, so I could be mistaken.
Luke used a proton torpedo, not photon.
Gregory S Neuman
Now end this discussion.
----
neu...@mail.auburn.edu
Greg Neuman
AlphaBeta1
(Mark Browning) writes:
You know, there really is not point on discussing this topic further. No
one side could win over the other because for every action there is an
equal and opposite reaction. Q vs. Force, Sd vs. Galaxy class starship,
SSD vs. Dreadnought, Stormtroopers vs. Starfleet marines, Blasters vs
Phasers, etc. etc. The technology is totally different and way the
universe works. BTW, who said the Enterprise can't destroy fighters? ST
has fighters but found them inefficent and just use them around Earth.
This posting area should be shut down. No one can argue one why or the
other and be right for the reason i just stated.
JEREMY DAVID BALSLEY
----------------======You Said=====-------------------------------------------
Their puny shields didn't help them against a SINGLE bird of prey..
What makes you think they can withstand an Imperial Naval assault?
WARNING! Spoilers to the Star Trek: Generations movie follows! If you don't
want the movie spoiled for you, DON'T read!!!
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!!
Ok, you asked for it...
First, as for the single K'Vort class ship managing to get thruough the Big
E's shields, if you know the Shield Modulation Frequency, shields are
no problem. The only way the Klingon Scum found out was by using Geordi's
VISOR to read the panel.
As for the Imperial Navy, Who knows...I have given up on dealing with the
nonsense on this newsgroup...no one here is rational.
*****************************************************************************
* Jeremy David Balsley * Clans Suck, LAMs Rule *
* cs12...@bit.csc.lsu.edu * To boldly go where no oen has gone before*
* jba...@tiger.lsu.edu * These opinions expressed here are mean- *
* * ingless...they came from me! *
*****************************************************************************
Jason C Fleshman
Star Trek.. by Belrose The Bl...@gov.nb.
> >has two compartments, one for matter and one for antimatter. the two
> >compartments are then intergrated when the torp has reached the target.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Luke blow up the DS in ANH with a photon
> torpedo? It's been awhile since I saw the movie, so I could be mistaken.
No, but it's kinda close. In ANH, Luke uses a proton torpedo. Since SW
doesn't explain its technology -- see below -- I assume it's a bundle of
protons.
> In SW, they don't use computers for anything (although droids are
>everywhere), and they don't even attempt to explain any technology. Why is
>that?
SW doesn't depend on its technology as much as ST does. If you were to
take away the space travel and the droids, you could rework the scripts
a little bit and still have SW. If you took away the "treknology" it
would be difficult (if not impossible) to have ST. Imagine where Picard
& Co. would be if they couldn't "beam down" to every Planet O' Death
that the Enterprise went into orbit around. Oh, wait a sec...you
wouldn't have the Enterprise, either...See what I mean?
Which is better? Well, I like both of them myself. I'll be seeing Star
Trek: Generations soon and if they make a new Star Wars movie like has
been rumored, I'll probably go see it, too. They both have their
advantages and disadvantages and really can't be compared (unless of
course you want to annoy half the newsgroup :-) )
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Fleshman jf...@andrew.cmu.edu
Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA
"No, I'm NOT a !@#$%^& Steelers fan!!!"
Kyp Duron
> leaving Hoth. A single shot (ok, maybe a couple of hits) completely disrupte
> disrupt the Enterprise shields, then I postulate that the rebels ionic cannon
> could do the same to the Enterprise. However, I don't know if a SD normally
> comes equiped with them or not. Seems to be me they could be refitted with
> them.
An Imperial Class Star Destroyer (as seen in ESB) has 60 Ion Cannons .
Source: The Star Wars Sourcebook
Revised and Edited for Second Edition
by West End Games
This is considered canon.
-- Talon
Heinrich Goetz
: Luke used a proton torpedo, not photon.
Rrrright, it was a proton torpedo. And if the Star Wars Sourcebook (the old
edition) is right, a proton torpedo is quite close to a nuclear missile. So
it works with nuclear FISSION, which is quite different from the matter/anti.
matter principle used in Star Trek. I'd say Photon Torpedoes are a good deal
more powerful than Proton Torpedoes, but they are also considerably BIGGER.
Remember, a starfighter (like an X-Wing) can at least carry two torps, where-
as one photorp is almost as large as a coffin. While the Enterprise (D-Class)
carries 100 photorps in two launchers, a SD can easily carry a mere thousand
protorps, let alone the number of launchers one could apply to its surface.
I'm not really interested in participating in stupid "SW is better than ST is
better than SW"-discussions, but I see considerable fun in discussing the
techs of both universes. E-mail me if you like to.
GH Inc.
Matt Terl
So much for this discussion, Federation has been wiped out by a smuggler
with a heart of gold.
Belrose The Blue
Hmmm, if they have 60 on a SD, and a couple of hits are all that is required
to disrupt a SD, then I suspect they are overequiped. Probably the ground
based rebel Ion cannon is more powerful than the 60 that are built on the SD.
jyu
> Their puny shields didn't help them against a SINGLE bird of prey..
> What makes you think they can withstand an Imperial Naval assault?
What makes you think a Imperial Naval Assault can take a Bird of Prey.
Scott Bitsy Sherris
: >An Imperial Class Star Destroyer (as seen in ESB) has 60 Ion Cannons .
: >Source: The Star Wars Sourcebook
: > Revised and Edited for Second Edition
: > by West End Games
: >This is considered canon.
: Hmmm, if they have 60 on a SD, and a couple of hits are all that is required
: to disrupt a SD, then I suspect they are overequiped. Probably the ground
: based rebel Ion cannon is more powerful than the 60 that are built on the SD.
The ground ion cannon was huge! It also had a lot more power to draw
from, being on a planet and not on a Starship.
--
Scott David Sherris | AKA Bitsy, Spot, Hotwire
Georgia Institute of Technology | Atlanta, GA, U.S.A.
FDC Vice President of Imagineering | FDC Star Tours Pilot Max
gt5...@prism.gatech.edu | "Making me watch Star Trek is Hazing!"
SC64...@ysub.ysu.edu
Mark Howard
Can't we stop this DROS!
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Mark EMail ma...@darklord.demon.co.uk |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Belrose The Blue
>Belrose The Blue (bo...@gov.nb.ca) wrote:
>: >An Imperial Class Star Destroyer (as seen in ESB) has 60 Ion Cannons .
>: >Source: The Star Wars Sourcebook
>: > Revised and Edited for Second Edition
>: > by West End Games
>: >This is considered canon.
>: Hmmm, if they have 60 on a SD, and a couple of hits are all that is required
>: to disrupt a SD, then I suspect they are overequiped. Probably the ground
>: based rebel Ion cannon is more powerful than the 60 that are built on the SD.
>The ground ion cannon was huge! It also had a lot more power to draw
>from, being on a planet and not on a Starship.
I agree with you that the ground rebels ground ion cannon was huge. But, why
does it have more power to draw from the ground than on the SD? The SD is
over 1 km long. God knows what its total mass is. Surely they can put a
power plant of the necessary size on a SD. Not enough for 60 such cannons,
but perhaps 1 massive cannon.
Justin Poe
>From: alpha...@aol.com (AlphaBeta1)
>Subject: Re: Star Wars vs. Star Trek (Not again!) (was: re: Star Wars RP
>Date: 26 Nov 1994 01:00:13 -0500
>In article <bobd.33....@gov.nb.ca>, bo...@gov.nb.ca (Belrose The Blue)
>writes:
>Good point
What point? Why don't you include the previous post for practical
purposes? There's over 250 posts here a day, I'm not going to go back and
read every one to find the "good point". Thank you.
* . .
* .
/ \ * "Obi-Wan once thought as you do,
| ( ) | you don't know the power of the
. \ / * darkside!"
. -Darth Vader
* * .
.
Lee Conner
: In article <3b6itd$h...@newsbf01.news.aol.com> alpha...@aol.com (AlphaBeta1) writes:
: >In article <bobd.33....@gov.nb.ca>, bo...@gov.nb.ca (Belrose The Blue)
: >writes:
: >Good point
: What point? Why don't you include the previous post for practical
: purposes? There's over 250 posts here a day, I'm not going to go back and
: read every one to find the "good point". Thank you.
One of the major problems of AOL is that their "newsreader" only automatically
prints the by-line. The user is required to copy and paste the text they are
referring to on their own and then tag it with ">"'s. There is an courtesy
guideline folder in the internet section that describes this procedure.
However, it is my experience that most AOL users will skip this folder and
go straight to posting. This is one of the bad side effects of AOL, no one
really wants to pay $3.50 an hour to learn good manners. A good thing about
AOL is that they retain articles longer, so if you miss something you can
dig through their "reader" and perhaps find it. Back to the bickering at
hand...
Lee Conner
dlc...@indyvax.iupui.edu
Nope. Either way, it wouldn't work.
If the SW people were to show up in the ST universe, any force use would be
negated. Why? Because the Force does not exist within the ST universe. The
ST universe was vreated by Gene Roddenberry and he did not include the Force.
George Lucas's universe does include the Force. Now, if some Federation ships
showed up in the SW universe, it would also not make much of a difference.
They would undoubtably meet up with the New Republic and get their help. Also,
some Federation people would most likely be discovered to have Force potential.
Now that they are in a universe that has the Force, they could be trained by
Luke to use it. The sides would be even. Either way, the Force is not a
deciding factor.
dlc...@indyvax.iupui.edu
If if the feelings are of duty or order, the intent to destroy would still be
very strong once they made contact.
dlc...@indyvax.iupui.edu
You also seem to forget that Star Wars NEVER happened, so, your point is
pointless.
Belrose The Blue
>Nope. Either way, it wouldn't work.
>If the SW people were to show up in the ST universe, any force use would be
>negated. Why? Because the Force does not exist within the ST universe. The
>ST universe was vreated by Gene Roddenberry and he did not include the Force.
You mean to tell me that just because we haven't seen something in Star Trek
so far, it CANNOT exist in that universe? So is it impossible to have trees,
that grow a fruit shaped like a heart, and have pink flowers on them?
Pierre Newberry
: >: based rebel Ion cannon is more powerful than the 60 that are built on the SD.
: >The ground ion cannon was huge! It also had a lot more power to draw
: >from, being on a planet and not on a Starship.
: does it have more power to draw from the ground than on the SD? The SD is
: over 1 km long. God knows what its total mass is. Surely they can put a
: power plant of the necessary size on a SD. Not enough for 60 such cannons,
: but perhaps 1 massive cannon.
...the power is distributed to the 60 cannons and various other ship
functions like navigation. 60 cannons allow attacking multiple targets at
many angles. A cannon getting hit still leaves the other 59 to do the job.