Star Wars vs. Star Trek, and so on.

posted on August 18th, 2009, 12:44 am

Hey, I was wondering what you people thought about this age old probably never going to be answerable question. I personally believe that Star Trek would have a defiant technology bonus, but of course Star Trek doesn't have any Jedi...anyway, I stand neutral because I love both series, but what do you people think. There is one place that has a bunch of tech info. Shield dissipation strength weapons output, all of that business. Go to this link, Star Wars vs Star Trek: I Want YOU for the Galactic Empire! and see his discussion, as well as this guy's initial thoughts. I find that while he seems smart, the section of his brain where he thinks of both technical and strategical possibilities seems to be made out of lead. However, I believe Star Trek would win. (I will explain more details in my later posts based on you answers) What do you believe?

[Tyler]

posted on August 18th, 2009, 1:15 am

Last edited by Tyler on August 18th, 2009, 1:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

Go to this link, Star Wars vs Star Trek: I Want YOU for the Galactic Empire!

Extreme bias and minimal actual evidence. Try this one, it actually uses evidence: Star Trek vs Star Wars.

Trek has Borg, Technology and intellect advantage, Star Wars has number advantage. Even the Force has it's limits and is nothing to a Q (and I actually can see the Sith trying to mess with the Q...)

On another note, I smell a flame war if this thread caches on...

posted on August 18th, 2009, 2:01 am

They are two completely different universes with two entirely different laws of physics. Neither could win because if either side tried to even enter into the others' universe the laws of physics upon which each sides ships had been created and species evolved would cause obscene consequences. Either that, or due to a terrible miscalculation of scale, the entire battle fleet of both sides was accidentally swallowed by a small dog.

posted on August 18th, 2009, 2:18 am

Well, lets just say they both met in a neutral place, some where off in the middle of nowhere. Now, there are no "God" like beings one either side, just a huge fleet for both ends, including super weapons. Now, I would say that despite the manuals saying that Star Wars would have enormously greater firepower, the Trek ships would just simply maneuver out of the way, since I noticed that Trek ships are defiantly more maneuverable. Then, using the extremely common various blind spots on the enemy vessels would just stay in those zones and so tremendous damage to important things like bridges and engine blocks. Meanwhile the Borg would just assimilate anything, and the Cardassians would use a Dreadnought missile to vaporize any Death Stars.At the same time, the Feds or whoever could just destroy vessels like Super Star Destroyers by transporting high explosives into the reactor or scrambling the molecules into gas or something. The Treks would win like shooting a bug with a phaser on setting 20 1/2 End of story.

posted on August 18th, 2009, 2:24 am

I'm actually surprised by how ridiculously inaccurate that site is... and keep in mind I'm talking just from a physics perspective--not from a show vs. perspective.

posted on August 18th, 2009, 2:26 am

Which Site? The Star Destroyer one, ST Vs SW one or both?

posted on August 18th, 2009, 2:28 am

I'm actually surprised by how ridiculously inaccurate that site is... and keep in mind I'm talking just from a physics perspective--not from a show vs. perspective.

Phew. Someone else shares my perspective. (You should check out his library, it is a serious pile of nonsense) My brother said I was overreacting, and my friends didn't really care. Yeah, he is jut plain weird.

posted on August 18th, 2009, 2:29 am

Which Site? The Star Destroyer one, ST Vs SW one or both?

The Star Destroyer one.

posted on August 18th, 2009, 2:30 am

The Star Destroyer one

Hehe, indeed Fralo... I mean the energy amounts are just... messed up

Most of it just seems to be neither here nor there--just sort of him making up numbers on the spot...

posted on August 18th, 2009, 2:35 am

Hehe, indeed Fralo... I mean the energy amounts are just... messed up

Most of it just seems to be neither here nor there--just sort of him making up numbers on the spot...

If I remember correctly, a good amount (at least some) of the figures come from someone who admitted he got stats from the comics instead of SW canon.

posted on August 18th, 2009, 2:44 am

If the sw ships not necessarily have stronger weapons, the bigger ships at least have more of them... too bad they probably won't be balanced out and put into flops, lol...

posted on August 18th, 2009, 3:41 am

1. Star Wars takes place in another galaxy. hence the in a galaxy far far away.
2. they are in different universes so they are really not comparable.
that would also explain the differences. There really is no reason the discuss which is better because it is a matter of opinion. But don't let this stop you. Continue on with the debate while i watch and eat popcorn and play Fleetops 

posted on August 18th, 2009, 4:17 am

Off topic note: this deserves to be in the general star trek section...

posted on August 18th, 2009, 3:16 pm

Yeah. I find that those Star Wars numbers are way too high. If they were any real accurate the Star Trek numbers would be about the same. Besides, he doesn't put any possible scenarios into his thoughts. He was talking about the Borg-Species 8472 war. Voyager develops the nanotorpedo. Voyager fires several into bio-ships and kills them. After 17 or so were destroyed they retreat and leave Voyager and non-fluidic space behind. He said that that was stupid because they could have destroyed Voyager. I beg to differ. If you are invincible, and suddenly an opponent has a weapon that can kill you in an exotic and extremely painful violent fashion, I would be freaked out and retreat. Because Species 8472 is so telepathic, I bet that they could hear screams of pain and help when the ships were destroyed. Realizing also that 7of9 could just send the Borg the plans (Which I bet she did) the war was just lost. I would have retreated, it makes a lot of sense. 

[Tyler]

posted on August 18th, 2009, 3:20 pm

Last edited by Tyler on August 18th, 2009, 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Plus the 'Warp is inferior to Hyperdrive' angle is the only decisive factor in every battle 'example', even though it isn't actually known for certain which really is faster. That's as conflicted and impossible to determine as Trek Vs Wars.

The 'Star Destroyer' site is quite amusing, really. I like reading it.