Making fun of Star Wars

[Anonymous]

posted on February 21st, 2009, 5:05 am

Last edited by Anonymous on February 21st, 2009, 5:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

aww man. and we were having such fun. party pooper 

but more to the point, what does it disprove?
It's kinda saying the same thing I said about Dadonna. 

besides if u show me that link, Ill show u this
Star Wars vs Star Trek Essays: Star Wars vs Star Trek in Five Minutes

or this if u have the patience
Star Wars vs Star Trek Technology: The Death Star

or this
The Ultimate Star Wars Vs. Star Trek Database

But dont worry, I'm not resting my case.... cos im enjoying this.. 
and if we get tired of this thread, we can start beatles vs rolling stones next.... 

[Rhaz]

posted on February 21st, 2009, 6:36 am

Last edited by Rhaz on February 21st, 2009, 8:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Okay. So let's discuss that one point. The Rebel starfleet at that time consisted of exactly what? No Mon Calamari cruisers (yet)...so Bulk Cruisers (maybe) a few Nebulon B's (maybe) and some transports? Joke fleet imo. So they're obviously referring to the imperial fleet because if the rebels HAD that many capital ships they would have used them.

And I refuse to use any biased material IE...Stardestroyer.net lol. And even your last source is super biased =/.

posted on February 21st, 2009, 11:22 am

Star wars will kick ass of any star trek tech anytime anywere. Olso comparing them is not an option. First of all star wars is suppose to take action 10k years into the future at least. Star wars is a fantasy universe with knights and special powers and warrior princesses and stuff like that. You have the light side and the dark side wich you find in other fantasy universes like lotr. Star Trek on the other side is more of a tom clancy story - it's something that could happen in the next 100 years. It's based on realism ( in a way cause you don't yet have this kind of technologies or knowlege ), and techs that could be discovered rather soon. Now for the sake of this post let's compare some facts:

Star Wars turbo lasers - nothing in star trek can match to pure power of this devastating weapons - remember that a large turbolaser platform was enough to destroy most non-battleship type ships. The turbo laser weapon on the republic artillery had so much fire power that took out a banking clan starship with one shot. And it wasn't a special weapon. Compare the massive planetary assault mechs ( AT-AT AT-TE AT-PT or Turbo-Tank ) with the nothingness in star trek. A photon torpedo was strong but compare that to the powerfull proton torpedos, seismic charges or the nuke grenades in star wars. It's almost as comparing a cigare heat with a napalm launcher heat.
  Another thing that SW is superior to ST is aliens. In star wars you see al kind of shapes and sizes. In star trek all you see is humanoid ones. The only non humanoid aliens in star trek were the spece enteties. The rest nothing else then masked humans. Klingons lookt like armored homo-erectus, romulans lookt like elfs, kardasians lookt like a porn star with silicons in the neck muscles and all other species were humans with a new head bone structure or a couple of antenas on their head, and from time to time a new skin color. I really doubt all the aliens would look exactly like a human in looks.
  But all in all i don't think it's a good comparison. It's like comparing LotR with a Tom Clancy book. At least this is how i see it.

posted on February 21st, 2009, 11:59 am

and if we get tired of this thread, we can start beatles vs rolling stones next.... 

beatles!!! 

posted on February 21st, 2009, 2:08 pm

Didn't expect this to grow so fast. In the Star Trek technology time frame lasers are already obsolete technology.
Even the NX class Enterprise was already armed with phasers.

SW wouldn't stand a chance. But aside from the everlasting discussion which is better SW or ST adding vessels from SW, Babylon 5 or Battlestar Galactica would be interesting.

For those who wish to continue the discussion RS >> Beatles and for the SW vs ST:

posted on February 21st, 2009, 2:33 pm

I'd say the beatles on the andromeda ascendant could beat the rolling stones on a star destroyer.
However, the rolling stones on an ori cruiser would be superior to the beatles on the droid control ship.

And more importantly: could gandalf the white beat a star destroyer, if he had the beatles with him?
Gandalf uses laser-like beams and is known to posses shield technology...

And who would win, the borg or the ancient non-canon sith empire?

[Dr. Lazarus]

posted on February 21st, 2009, 2:34 pm

Last edited by Dr. Lazarus on February 21st, 2009, 2:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

And a race could last for 10,000 years and only advance linearly or stagnate in terms of technology. Both in real life and in Star Trek, human technology accelerates, due to the fact that we constantly seek to improve everything even when it's not necessary. This is the basis behind humans being behind the Vulcans in Enterprise but vastly ahead in TNG.

This is why Q wanted Riker, so that they could acheive the human capacity for self improvement. Other races in Star Trek in fact did get their technology over thousands of years just like Star Wars. Often they got it through conquest (e.g. Klingons) or linear, boring advancement (the Cardassians were warp capable in the 1920's, so obviously their rate of advancement is inferior to humanity). The vulcans were warp capable several thousand years ago. Their focus on religion and logic makes for a linear or stagnant rate of advancement, although nonetheless impressive considering the timescale.

I guess my point is that accelerating advancement can give you massive returns in only a short time, with most of the growth in the final moments. Most futurists are very excited about the 21st century because we will acheive much of fictional 24th century tech quite soon, albeit if you ignore some of the more bizarre techs such as warp drive (although it's wise not to write anything off, as naysayers often discover). So I don't quite get the argument that Star Wars is 'way in the future'. Time is only a factor if you make good use of it, and humans in Star Trek and the real world make very good use of it.

posted on February 21st, 2009, 3:39 pm

It´s quite hard to compare two things that have totally different sources and ideas about them.

But i would vote for star trek tech all the time for a simple reason, they can adapt to most situations while star wars tech can´t.

For example, a starfleet vessel could recalibrate their shields to match the energy signature of those funny laser cannons and wouldn´t get any damage at all, while star wars ships couldn´t do something like that.

And by the way, the Borg against the Deathstar ?! All the Borg need to do is beam a few drones over and they have a new ship 

posted on February 21st, 2009, 4:08 pm

And last time I checked, star wars isn't in the future, or our future at least..."Along time ago...."

posted on February 21st, 2009, 4:58 pm

Star Wars turbo lasers - nothing in star trek can match to pure power of this devastating weapons - remember that a large turbolaser platform was enough to destroy most non-battleship type ships. The turbo laser weapon on the republic artillery had so much fire power that took out a banking clan starship with one shot.

Nothing besides some shuttle phaser cannons.  :D

Of course SW weapons are powerful - compared to the weak ships in SW.

But answer me one question. If they are really that powerful, how is it possible, that small fighters are a threat? Fighters, who will be completly destroyed by a mere thermonuclear weapon and who need several laser hits, before being destroyed.  The only logical thing is, that the laser are considerable weaker than the Proton torpedos. We have seen Capital ships exchanging heavy turbolaser fire for quite some time the movies, and it is also the way battles are described in the novels. So, turbolaser cannot be that powerful, because if they would, ships would not last that long in battle. The average Turbolaser will deal arround the same amount of damage as a Proton Torpedo would.

So congratulations on your ohh so powerful weapon - it needs at least 6 direct hits to destroy a puny runabout. (If the crew aboard is stupid enough to get hit, thats it.  :lol:

They are still useful for planetary bombardement. The power of a thermonuclear explosion is nothing to take easy on an unshielded planet. So above does not oppose the "'Star Destroyer can wreak havoc to a planet surface thing, which is often stated in SW circles."

Compare the massive planetary assault mechs ( AT-AT AT-TE AT-PT or Turbo-Tank ) with the nothingness in star trek. A photon torpedo was strong but compare that to the powerfull proton torpedos, seismic charges or the nuke grenades in star wars. It's almost as comparing a cigare heat with a napalm launcher heat.

I agree, we have never seen any ground combat vehicle in Trek. However, that does not mean, that any of those vehicles is a danger to the Federation worlds.

1. The weapons are to weak to destroy even a shuttle, while the phasers of a shuttle would easily rip through their armor.
2. Even if no shuttle is available, a simpel transporter could do lethal damage to any imperial walker. (Beaming away of vital components for example. Or beam the crew in to the brig.  :innocent: Or use the klingon solution and beam some ultritium aboard..... Bye Bye imperial dreams of conquering the planet.

Let us now assume a very bad case, where nothing like that is available. Using Phasers to destroy an AT AT may take some time = Considerable Federation losses, as normal uniforms dont offer protection against even weak blaster or laser shots. Yet, it is surely doable. An AT-ST would be an even easier prey.

(I however personaly think, that the Feds would just hide behind their strong shielding, watching in amusement as they effortlesly keep the Imperials at bay. )  :D

And you are right with your comparsion, it is just the other way arround.   A Photon is far more powerfull than those mere thermonuclear weapons described as Proton Torpedos in Star Wars.

[Dominus_Noctis]

posted on February 21st, 2009, 5:51 pm

Last edited by Dominus_Noctis on February 21st, 2009, 6:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

And.... you fail.
"According to the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual, 25 isotons is the maximum theoretical yield of a matter-antimatter reaction in photon torpedoes and that quantum torpedoes have a yield of 50+ isotons. (pg. 85)

These figures are not compatible with on-screen statements.
As with most other units of measure used in Star Trek: Voyager, isotons came to be used with unrealistic magnitudes such as four trillion isotons for the large Malon export vessel. As with most other measures used in Star Trek there are no direct conversions to real world measures given.

In Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual a figure of 1,5kg of antimatter is given as the maximum warhead material of a photon torpedo. (pg. 129) Using standard physics calculations a direct 1:1 explosion would equal to about 64 megatons. Warhead materials are however premixed to achieves the level of destructive force of an antimatter pod rupture containing 100 cubic meters of antideuterium. (pg. 69) Antimatter is stored as liquid or slush on starships. (pg. 68) Density of mere liquid antideuterium is around 160 kg per cubic meter. According to this comparison the high annihilation rate energy release would be comparable to about 690 gigatons. Furthermore it is not clear if the 1,5 kg should be compared to the 200 isoton figure given on-screen, or the 25 isoton figure given in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual. " -Alpha

In Star Wars, there is no onscreen confirmation... so goodluck comparing the two.

posted on February 21st, 2009, 6:33 pm

2. Even if no shuttle is available, a simpel transporter could do lethal damage to any imperial walker. (Beaming away of vital components for example. Or beam the crew in to the brig.  :innocent: Or use the klingon solution and beam some ultritium aboard..... Bye Bye imperial dreams of conquering the planet.

Or go with the fun solution and beam a few Klingons/Borg into the cockpit.

posted on February 21st, 2009, 6:41 pm

>:( Is no one listening to me?!!!! I already said that!

posted on February 22nd, 2009, 12:15 am

Keep calm megaman, it´s just too funny to say it only once 

posted on February 22nd, 2009, 1:39 am

Good point. But, the fun solution would to be to beam mirrors in front of the lasers.  After all, LASER stands for Light Amplfication by Stimulated Emmision of Radiation. Basic toying with light makes mirrors the best shield against them.  Watch them blow themselves up...