being advanced dosnt mean anything the empire has more star destroyers then the population of the federation!!
actually technology does matter. in empire strikes back when the falcon dissapears the ship captain goes "no ship that small has a cloacking device!!"
whereas in star trek they cloak tiny mines as early as the 22nd century. so the entire imperial starfleet would be taken out by self replicating mines.
we have fought for too long you and i
let us become one with the force
live long and prosper
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you agreeing with me that the Venator-class has double the straightline acceleration of the Galaxy-class?
Right, and every space battle we've seen in SW has been an average naval engagement. Besides, the maximum effective range of the Venator's long range gunnery doesn't mean that all naval engagements have to, or would, happen at such range.
Just means that a Venator can send turbolaser bolts to meet a target at 180 million kilometers away. And it's not like we don't have evidence for extensive EWAR capability and usage in SW- oh wait, we do!
For one, I doubt that Industrial Light&Magic did the effects for Star Trek. For another, did it ever occur to you that we don't have giant nuclear blasts whenever a turbolaser blast strikes a SW ship because, oh:
1) There are shields2) Turbolasers are energy weapons, not explosives
Incidentally, this is an example of the fallacy "all weapons are the same, all targets are the same". Further, we can't use something like a ship to compare weapons damage; a ship has all sorts of things that can blow up, and it's composition isn't (easily) discernible.
Or it could be that ST sensors are designed for a different purpose? Just because Trek would know that Data is aboard a shuttle doesn't mean that Wars automatically must be able to tell if there are droids in an escape pod, or else be inferior technologically.
I've never claimed such a thing. But the idea behind that comment, that the purported superior advancement of the Federation would matter in a conflict when compared to the numbers the Empire could bring to bear and the sheer industrial might the Empire has, is actually pretty accurate.
If the Feds did have better gear on a ship-for-ship basis, then the situation is somewhat like WWII; the Germans could build better tanks, but the US could build more. It might take five or ten Shermans to equal a Tiger or King Tiger, but the US can build twenty-five Shermans to every Tiger or King Tiger.
And you completely ignore the fact that said mines would be unable to so much as damage any Imperial warships. Consider the fact this: the replicating mines are reputed to contain a photon torpedo warhead. 1.5kg AM+1.5kg Matter. ~64 megatons.
And you think this would take out a ship which can withstand multiple, repeated, teraton-range strikes? Wow.
Uh huh. No thanks; I like being myself and I think Vulcans are pretty lame.
you wanna join our Old Republic Guild. you would fit right in.
website: http://starfleetdental.org/forums/
guild hq: http://www.swtor.com/guilds/39764/starfleet-dental
Sure--I'll let you have that. Not as a fan but as a student of history, there is an advantage that Starfleet has. It's the ability to maneuver at warp and to move to and from warp quickly that gives them a real tactical advantage.
"Microwarp" maneuvers that were tough to pull off in the original Star Trek become quite common as the series progresses and that will give the Federation a real capability that isn't easily matched or countered by the Empire.
Your Venator juggernaut can sprint like a drag racer but it turns like one too. We also already know that Imperial light defenses on their big ships are challenged by small, fast moving targets and that they have trouble avoiding one another maneuvering in close and crowded combat.
Ships like the Defiant and Delta Flyer--even Borg small craft, gunships and armed shuttlecraft--would be a real challenge for the Imperials to to target. Their ability to warp in and out quickly as well as tightly maneuver would make them like a swarm of hornets--which also would make them serve as excellent skirmishers while the larger federation ships warped in and out at range launching heavier weapons and then quickly withdrawing.
The Empire would have no training or experience against such tactics and it would not be easy to adapt their large fleet strategies where "ships of the line" duke it out to targeting skirmishers with significant firepower and the capability to appear in and leave space within seconds.
Throw in cloaks, antimatter mines dropped in front of charging Imperial fleets and I'm betting on the Federation--which will also capitalize on its transporter technologies to beam aboard holed Imperial capitals--perhaps even capturing them. Certainly the Federation would force fleets to guard their bases. A warpinjg Federation fleet could quickly destroy outposts and forward supply centers.
The Imperial fleet would die from a thousand cuts...the Spanish Armada all over again.
Ever hear of Mosby's Raiders?
No thanks. Not really a big SW gamer.
No, I haven't heard of Mosby's Raiders. The problem is that you're assuming that the Federation can create ordnance that has any chance of harming Imperial warships, or that the Empire would conveniently concentrate themselves where the Feds would be able to engage them in a fleet battle.
It's far more likely that the Empire would concentrate in force where Starfleet presence is low or nonexistent. It's also far more likely that Starfleet will be highly distributed; strikes on outlying, relatively unimportant colonies would either force Starfleet to disperse, attempting to protect everything, or cluster around the most strategically important sites and risk the enormous political fallout that will entail.
I doubt the Federation will hold together all that well if they defend only the most vital of colonies and all of their main assets, as the rest of the astrographic polity will likely secede in order to avoid being a target for Imperial retribution. After all, why should they be a part of the Federation, that's under attack, when they're just a backwater that Starfleet doesn't care about?
The biggest, erroneous assumption you make is that the Federation can rapidly marshal together enough ships and firepower to bring together a situation akin to the Spanish Armada dying from a thousand cuts. The disparity in firepower is just too great. You also ignore the fact that Imperial anti-fighter defenses aren't truly challenged by fightercraft, because said craft are no threat to the Imperial capital ships anyways. Further, you ignore the fact that significant EWAR is conducted during Imperial engagements, and we haven't seen a whole lot that suggests that ST powers ever use anything even resembling EWAR capabilities.
There's also the slight fact that most fighters are capable of outrunning capital ships in straightline acceleration. Case in point- the Eta-2 Actis interceptors, used by Anakin and Obi-Wan in the opening scene of EP3, can do a hefty 5200 G's of acceleration. It's also known that they are very maneuverable. The tradeoff is that the Eta-2 is an unshielded fighter, but that's not the point; it's agile, it's very fast, but the only real reason it can avoid anti-fighter fire is because of the fact that Anakin and Obi-Wan are Jedi, and have precognitive combat skills. Even then, a Vulture droid was still able to get a pair of Buzz Droid missiles to hit Obi-Wan's fighter.
You're also ignoring the fact that there is canon evidence that a Star Destroyer, such as the Imperial-class, can actually shoot down fighter-sized proton torpedoes. Keep in mind that said fighter-sized proton torps are a quite a bit smaller and more agile than photorps; a 72,000g turn into the DS1's thermal vent; said vent is a 2-meter diameter hole, and two proton torpedoes handily fit through it.
Spill what? My drink? No thanks.
I'd thought it'd be obvious. Say what you're holding your tongue about man!
Meesa not holding mysah tongue.
Due to the vast technological disparity between the Empire and the Federation, in my opinion, the Federation's only hope for survival is to ally with the Alliance and the New Republic, depending on when the crossover occurs. Otherwise, the Federation will probably crumble in such a dire scenario like the New Republic did during the Yuuzhan Vong War. The tremendous differences in weapons yield between Wars and Trek tech just aren't meant to coexist.
ILM did the visual effects for some of the Star Trek films, going all the way back to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, along with some work on TNG. This is why First Contact has a YT-1300 light freighter from the Special Editions, i.e. the Millennium Falcon, as an easter egg in the Battle of Sector 001.
It's just a whole lot of frustration to see the same arguments going back and forth. I don't know how you do it. I'd be beyond irritated at having to repeat the same argument over, and over. It's an exercise in futility, Nobody will be convinced their "own" sci-fi show could be beat. Both shows are full of so many contradictions that almost all arguments can be beaten down over some obscure contradiction from some obscure episode. Just one example being the effects of lasers on Federation shields. In one TNG episode it's remarked that the Enterprise D can't go into combat against them because their shields aren't designed to defend against them, and then in another episode they do in fact go into combat and the laser based weapons have zero effect. While, (IMO) the Empire most certainly would defeat the Federation easily just based on basic ideas of the Empire having a several thousand year advantage, and (for the most part) evidence that shows a much larger scale to their weapons systems. However, someone is always going to argue it, based on the inherent flaws in the script writing that shows contradictions like the one above, or some random crappy design flaw ala-the Death Star.
*disclaimer* I enjoy both shows so I'm definitely not a "fan boy" of either.
WRT ILM, I did not know that! That's funny that ST:FC has a YT-1300 easter egg.
Protip: remove other people's quotes from a post your quoting. Makes it much neater.
WRT the arguments and stuff, I can do it because I, in some ways, live&breath the debate. I am a member, and regularly read, a board that was founded to refute the most ridiculous of Trekkie fanboy claims during the heyday of the debate.
However, I'll note that the laser effects on Fed shields can be easily explained. In the case of "lasers won't even penetrate our navigational deflector!", then Riker (the speaker in this case), was most likely referring to "lasers [of that yield] won't even penetrate our navigational deflector!". While in the other case you mention, it could be a special type of laser (such as a xraser or graser, firing x-ray and gamma-ray beams, respectively), or it could be lasers of a particularly potent yield.
Though what is actually stupid is Trekkies who claim that Turbolaser=Laser. Just because laser is in "turbolaser". It's like calling an artillery piece or a tank main gun a "cannon", and then saying that it fires grapeshot; we do it because that's a term that's become general usage for large-caliber gunnery weapons, rather than the original short-ranged broadside and field artillery guns that were used in the Civil War era and prior.
Funny thing about DS1's design flaw- it was actually a valid method of solving the thermal issue of the platform; it just happened to be a design choice that was very exploitable by a at-this-point-in-SW-time very rare group of individuals. Though you're correct in that there are people who argue based on obscure or overly stretched interpretations of dialogue or the script. In fact, there's one who comes to mind: Robert Scott Anderson.
The guy's a textbook case of fanboy turned up to OVER 9000 (had to put that for laughs, though it's ironically quite accurate). He's a hardcore TREK=GOD person, who has actually built up his own interpretation of SW and ST canon, and has argued about ST and SW canon with the people who actually decide what is/is not ST/SW canon! I'm not kidding, either. If you want to know more, check out this link.
I only know about the ILM work on Star Trek, because I took the time to look it up on Wikipedia. I know about the First Contact easter egg because of Memory Alpha. I haven't seen the Battle of Sector 001 in so long that I haven't seen the YT-1300 easter egg for my self.
Then came the spies...
I recognize two of them. And Picard simply could not pass as an Imperial officer, because he lacks the moral ambiguity that many of said officers are marked by. If he's ordered to do a BDZ of a civilized world, he's going to say "no", and then his cover's blown.
Quite frankly, only the good Doctor poses any threat to the Empire, and hey, it's because he's a bloody Time Lord.
It's Commander Sheridan from Babylon 5, Colonel O'Neil from Stargate SG-1 and Picard and the Doctor you know.
Of course the Doctor is the engineer of their plan and your Empire is doooomed.
The problem is that the Doctor is the only one who could have any ability to pass as an Imperial officer. The other three all have this thing called "morals", which are usually lacking to some degree or another in an actual Imperial officer.
And I've already conceded that the Doctor could take down the Empire. He's a bloody Time Lord, after all.
Victory is miiine! Yes...it is miiiine.
...of course.
Not really. You see, I fully understand that the Time Lords could whip the Empire. There was never any debate or doubt WRT that.
OTOH, I fully understand that no Trek power, even if the entire Trek galaxy allied together, could stand up to the Empire.
Wait till I bring in Neo and Carrie Fisher...muwahahahah!
wrong again idiot. if the empire can't defeat catapults and gliders built by idiots, its not gonna be able to defeat a dog with a horn on it.
Tremble before Ewok might!
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
