Originally posted by Robtard
Why should I get banned? I've told him I've stopped in this thread, yet he continues to troll me with the same failed arguments. All very odd, when there's other posters in here he can continue regurgiate his failed points to.BTW, he's sent 9 PM in about 16 minutes.
This one really touched me:
A member is not allowed to post PMs because they are private. Tell him to stop PMing then report him.
Originally posted by The Nuul
A member is not allowed to post PMs because they are private.
Members aren't supposed to troll either, yet the guy's obsessed with it.
He sent me 11 PMs, basically just rehashing what we've already debated in here, all the while calling me "stupid", "immoral" "piece of shit" and a "troll", when I've said I'm done debating this with him.
Originally posted by -Pr-
transport pads? photon grenades? phaser rifles that can cause massive tectonic displacement? houdini mines? assimilation by the borg?and that's just off the top of my head.
Except that none of these would affect an AT-AT.
Hypothetical land battle:
20 AT-ATs, 3000 GASF troopers and 300 artillery batteries vs 10,000 Federation troopers with that fancy tech that you mentioned.
Star Wars would win easily. Star Wars would have a large range advantage, with their AT-ATs (range: over 17 miles) and artillery, which Star Trek lacks. Star Trek's unarmored troopers would get pwned before they even get close.
Originally posted by The Nuul
Report him.
It does nothing and seeing his truer colors come out in PM while he throws a tantrum does have it's LoL-factor.
In regards to his claim, I said this, after about his 4th spam PM to me, of him basically just reposting what he'd posted on this board and 3-4 other times via PM:
"I'm actually less inclined in believing you're just a troll pretending to be foolish Star Wars fanboy and more inclined in believing you're either Autistic or possibly have some mild-level of retardation, similar to Forrest Gump. Though he was portrayed as being far more reasonable to logic." -Robtard
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Except that none of these would affect an AT-AT.Hypothetical land battle:
20 AT-ATs, 3000 GASF troopers and 300 artillery batteries vs 10,000 Federation troopers with that fancy tech that you mentioned.
Star Wars would win easily. Star Wars would have a large range advantage, with their AT-ATs (range: over 17 miles) and artillery, which Star Trek lacks. Star Trek's unarmored troopers would get pwned before they even get close.
why wouldn't they affect an at-at?
so it's fact now, even though you don't even consider what half of that tech would do to the empire's supposedly wonderful armies.
star trek armies are well trained, so you were wrong before. they have personal shields, which makes armour look like shit. some have cloaking devices, which stormtroopers won't see through, and with their enhanced weaponry, they can route any number of troopers you can come up with.
they'll just save the "fancy" tech for the walkers.
Originally posted by -Pr-
why wouldn't they affect an at-at?so it's fact now, even though you don't even consider what half of that tech would do to the empire's supposedly wonderful armies.
star trek armies are well trained, so you were wrong before. they have personal shields, which makes armour look like shit. some have cloaking devices, which stormtroopers won't see through, and with their enhanced weaponry, they can route any number of troopers you can come up with.
they'll just save the "fancy" tech for the walkers.
Except that you're ignoring the range difference. AT-AT could destroy the troopers before they get to use any of their fancy tech. LAAT gunships have weapons that are more powerful than weapons on the Enterprise D.
BTW, let me guess; most of this fancy tech that you talk about is from the novels, right? Star Wars novels are considered to be canon, yet official Star TREK sources say that Star TREK novels are not canon.
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Except that you're ignoring the range difference. AT-AT could destroy the troopers before they get to use any of their fancy tech. LAAT gunships have weapons that are more powerful than weapons on the Enterprise D.BTW, let me guess; most of this fancy tech that you talk about is from the novels, right? Star Wars novels are considered to be canon, yet official Star TREK sources say that Star TREK novels are not canon.
why do you assume that star wars has such better range? star trek has transporters.
gunship weapons are NOT more powerful. i really don't know where you're getting this. Galaxy class weaponry can cause massive tectonic destabilisation with one shot. Gunships can't do that.
and no, i'm talking about most of it being from the shows.
btw, star wars novels aren't explicitly canon either.
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Yet correct, unless if you have some valid proof that ships with 15 billion gigawatt reactor cores can stand up to ships with 200 trillion gigawatt reactor cores.
where did you get those numbers, btw?
Originally posted by -Pr-
why do you assume that star wars has such better range? star trek has transporters.
Yet said transporters have limited range, are prone to malfunction, can transport a limited amount of people, can be disrupted and wouldn't do Star Trek that much good against the superior ground forces of Star Wars.
While the Star Trek forces are trying to use their transporters, Star Wars AT-ATs blast them to bits.
gunship weapons are NOT more powerful. i really don't know where you're getting this. Galaxy class weaponry can cause massive tectonic destabilisation with one shot. Gunships can't do that.
I was talking about an LAAT vs the Enterprise. The former actually has more powerful weapons.
and no, i'm talking about most of it being from the shows.
"most"
where did you get those numbers, btw?
200 trillion gigawatts - canon Star Wars source
15 billion gigawatts - Star Trek episode
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Yet said transporters have limited range, are prone to malfunction, can transport a limited amount of people, can be disrupted and wouldn't do Star Trek that much good against the superior ground forces of Star Wars.While the Star Trek forces are trying to use their transporters, Star Wars AT-ATs blast them to bits.
they can transport anywhere on the planet, so no, not limited.
they aren't prone to malfunction. transporting is actually one of the safest ways to travel in the star trek universe.
they have industrial transporters that can transport more than a few people.
how is star wars going to disrupt them? by using star trek tech?
I was talking about an LAAT vs the Enterprise. The former actually has more powerful weapons.
not based on showings it doesn't.
"most"
yes, as in the majority of.
tell me, why did you handicap star trek by taking away their atmospheric vehicles?
200 trillion gigawatts - canon Star Wars source
15 billion gigawatts - Star Trek episode
which ones?
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Yet said transporters have limited range, are prone to malfunction, can transport a limited amount of people, can be disrupted and wouldn't do Star Trek that much good against the superior ground forces of Star Wars.
I'm sorry, but where did you get the idea that transporters are prone to malfunction? Barring the horrible Enterprise series (which was supposed to be the first ever launch of and indtroduction of many of Trek basic tech) transporters work just fine.
Originally posted by -Pr-
gunship weapons are NOT more powerful. i really don't know where you're getting this. Galaxy class weaponry can cause massive tectonic destabilisation with one shot. Gunships can't do that.
Another example of the power differences, in the original series of Star Trek. But it deals with a space-weapon dubbed "the plant killer", which is able to destroy planets, just like the Deathstar.
A Constitution Class star-ship from THAT era is able to take one of its hits and survive, though with heavy damage.
Originally posted by Robtard
Another example of the power differences, in the original series of Star Trek, forget the episode name. But it deals with a space-weapon dubbed "the plant killer", which is able to destroy planets, just like the Deathstar.A Constitution Class star-ship from THAT era is able to take one of its hits and survive, though with heavy damage.
aye. star trek ships can take an insane amount of damage. plus, their shields can hold off a whole lot.
-remembers the asteroid field from ESB-
Originally posted by -Pr-
aye. star trek ships can take an insane amount of damage. plus, their shields can hold off a whole lot.-remembers the asteroid field from ESB-
Episode: The Doomsday Machine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Doomsday_Machine
So in short, Kirk's Enterprise could likely survive a hit from the Deathstar, though with heavy damage.