Whose tech is superior ?

Originally posted by The Ellimist
OK, but that doesn't really refute my argument. The disparity in FTL speeds makes it impossible for the Alpha Quadrant powers to effectively fight back against, say, the Galactic Empire, when the imperial starfleet can strike anywhere in the Milky Way at will and the Federation and co. have to spread their fleet across all their territory because they can't hope to mobilize them quickly enough to defend nearby systems or really do anything.

But that's just the first "level" of argument - you can ignore that, and still conclude a Star Wars stomp.

Level 1: they're too fast, they just blitz ST territories and bomb them.
Level 2: they're too big, the Empire alone controls enough industry to build a Death Star in a few years - that second Death Star outmasses the entire Federation starfleet by like nine orders of magnitude.
Level 3: they have superweapons, they can just genocide the entire Milky Way, while ST superweapons are a) too slow, b) have to genocide a much larger civilization and c) largely won't even penetrate planetary shields.
Level 4: calculations from a variety of events suggest that Star Wars's firepower and shielding abilities are literally [b]millions of times superior pound for pound.
Bonus level: Force users, particularly ones in Legends, could infiltrate and disassemble the Federation without much difficulty.

Star Wars wins. Unless if you bring the Q and such beings into play, they're just orders of magnitude beyond the Alpha Quadrant in terms of their military ability. [/B]

Level 1: well you're welcome to prove this come time.

Level 2: for the purposes of this debate that isn't the nature of this or our future battlezone. We can only use what we see with our own eyes or what is referenced within a reasonable manner. So you can't argue they create multiple Death Stars just as I can't argue they mass produce dreadnaught class weapons. What we see or hear about is what we get. Two Death Stars that's it.

You won't be just facing the Federation there or here. Food for thought.

Level 3: a). Perhaps but we will find out later. I am more than confident. B.) Or just take out your two super weapons. C). Based on what resistance feats ?

Level 4: I tend to avoid need calculations that can't be proven when they don't adhere to common sense or the manner in which they are portrayed.

Nah. Trek's sophistication, tech superiority, and progression are what makes them superior here. Wars has quite the military force but they progress for shit and are light years behind Trek in a lot of areas. We have to leave detain characters out of Trek to even make this a contest. Our debate of NuTrek vs. Ot should be entertaining.

Originally posted by Nai
And they transport them where exactly? Into outer space? 🙄
I accept your concession. Beaming is not an option. Thanks for agreeing with me.

Which, given the difference of firepower between SW and ST is probably going to take any amount of time between days and years...

As far as the thread goes, we were talking about technology and who is more advanced. And in that regard: Starkiller Base could have moved to the star about to go supernova far faster than Spock's ship and have drained it completely, before the supernova even happened. Again: Star Wars > Star Trek.

Don't see what is there to patch up, aside from the argumentative Titanic you happened to construct out of words, just to drive it straight into the iceberg of your lacking brains, dimwit.

As far as this thread goes, we were arguing technology. As far as that goes, you have failed to explain how the Star Trek side would even be capable of delivering Red Matter to any SW ship / base, since they would need years to get anywhere in the Galaxy, when the SW side travels through the Galaxy within hours.

Star Wars Blasters aren't lasers. They fire charged up plasma bolts that explode when making contact with the target. Thus, the Borg would need to adapt to explosions. 👆

Since they will never get their hands on either, since they are snails in space compared to Star Wars ships and still can't get through Star Wars shielding, assimilation is another non-issue, next to beaming. 👆

It's still useless, if you want to discuss Star Wars vs Star Trek. So?

They do adapt to enemy weapons, not "assimilate", Quanchimon. Furthermore is this not an issue of "potency" of those weapons, but the mere fact, that they aren't phasers, but plasma weapons. And the latter were explicitly considered to combat Borg, because they couldn't adapt to them (ST:TNG episode "The Best of Both Worlds" for reference). Thus "adaption" is also ruled out
3:00
Luke fires on the Death Stars surface, with large parts of it getting vaporized by that shots, with the last explosion leaving a

"This is about EAR (WAR)! Trek has holodecks!" I wonder if you are even trying to make sense at this point. 🙄

"Easily"? Right. They focused their fire on that

Since transportation doesn't work against Star Wars, all of this is pretty much a non-issue now. Thanks for trying...

So you believe transporting them near the planet on an asteroid isn't possible to stage an attack or near their fleet ? Oh quit being ridiculous. We see Khan transport to Kronos before his jump ship can be taken out. We see Trek can arm torpedoes to go off in seconds of their intended target. We also see Trek can transport key or significant Trek people in lieu of a Wars attack out of harms way. Kirk and Sulu are transported mid free fall. Your mind seems so limited.

Except you haven't supported the difference in power in any way, shape, or form. Hell, if we just compare the firepower between Khan's handheld weaponry to the firepower the Stormtroopers or the rebels use then the overwhelming advantage is in Trek's favor. Khan downs Klingon patrol ships or leaves armored Klingons in stumps. We see random Star Wars blasters unable to critically or even superficially damage the MF and that's 30 years into the future from the OT. That's called an example to back my claim.

Both had ways to deal with the stars. Yes, The starkiller base could have drained the star before it went super nova but the starkiller base didn't drain a super nova. Spock's timing is another matter altogether. He did erase the super nova not in time just as the starkiller base failed to launch a second offensive due to being destroyed before a second attack could be employed. Ridiculous. Trek already proved this black hole can decimate a planet or take out a super nova which is another matter altogether than a sun. Are you suggesting the super nova couldn't harm the starkiller base if it came into direct contact with it ?

You still believe the notion of your theory when it hasn't been proven. It's baseless claims reinforced by insults. If you can't back it then it's baseless my arrogant friend. Fitting since Star Wars characters have a history of falling after demonstrating arrogance.

Transportation. They can transport the red matter all over to Trek fleets, planets, etc.

Oh here we go with the over exaggerations. Bias is a very ugly thing. They don't explode when hitting the target. Do I need to post videos of this not occurring or people just outright surviving them as in Vader or Luke. The Borg adapt to the frequencies of the attack. i have numerous examples of characters hit without exploding to targets who cannot adapt to the frequencies of the attack as well. That's called backing a claim whereas you just keep throwing the shit at a wall and hoping it sticks.

So you're saying in this space battle they never even get close to a battle is beyond ridiculous. In combat Star Wars ships can't fight at light speed and don't show anything close to that then once again it's another biased and baseless claim. The imperial ships were unable to decimate the MF without Han piloting or able to access the hyper drive until he fixed it. That's just one ship they were unable to bring in or destroy in time, that's called refuting your silly claim with a fact.

You haven't proven they can't make it through their shielding either. In the Star Wars films it doesn't appear that difficult at all. Portrayals clearly matter not your overexaggerated and baseless claims.

So the Borg using time travel is useless now ? Did you even see the film ? Your notions of Wars not engaging Trek fleets and weapons is hilarious but failing to address time travel to severely neuter Wars is kind of ironic. Unlike you I do want them to engage and fully believe they would. You are just trying and desperately I might add that Wars these overwhelming advantages that Trek can't seem to overcome. It's laughable.

My iPad autocorrected the word so relax. Adapt. Films only. Their weapons don't consist of the exact same properties also. If you believe they are exactly the same feel free to do so with the films only. You can't reference any episodes of either series. Do not be a hypocrite and please back your claims.

Luke takes out very small parts of it doing no significant damage. So ? The federation ships would do more damage if they attacked at that proximity and have damaged a considerable size of other ships with shielding on. If Han Solo is aboard the starkiller and uses explosives which he has that doesn't mean the weapons went through the shielding as well. The same logic applies to Luke attacking at close proximity.

I already said that was an upgrade. The same logic doesn't apply across the board. Their mega weapon 30 years later was upgraded but the standard firepower the Stormtroopers did not. The same fighter ships 30 or so years later didn't significantly improve either unlike Federation ships. Hell, we see in the span of a few years that the Federation severely upgraded a ship for combat purposes. 3 times the speed and twice the size as well as being able to be manned by one individual if need be.

What relevance does c3po have here in a battle between the two ? Is this the comedic part of your post ? Do you want to compare capabilities of Data to c3po ? Ok anakin did so at age ten what did he do later in life in way of progression that made c3po look like this accomplishment was silly in direct comparison. Your debating consists of over exaggerating anything from the Star Wars universe. The holodecks are far more amazing in terms of practicality and function than a goofy and slow moving c3po.

Ridiculous logic. Basically without proof once again that Wars is the pinnacle so progression will be much more difficult is silly. Can anyone there transport light years away ? Nah. Are their ships dramatically improved decades later ? Nah. It's like comparing the weaponry used from WW1 to WW2. In Star Wars things don't get that much different save the really big super weapons. Laser swords and blasters stay the same pretty much three decades later. Progression isn't something that moves at a snails pace in reality or the trek universe just the Star Wars one.

No the resistance doesn't. They were outmatched in power, numbers, and mega weapons to the point of pitiful. The empire crumbled due to poor tactical decisions and sheer arrogance. Empire had far more ships, resources, etc. but were overcome due to the vulnerable position the emperor put them in. Period. Go fetch the crayons and color since you ignore the reality of their grim situation.

Trek doesn't need years to make a weapon capable of super nova destroying power. They use something very small not something very big in order to do so which is also more practical. But go ahead and continue to brag about the resources and time needed to build something as big as Wars did.

So now Trek can't take out the deflector shields ? Based on ? This was something easily accomplished in the film. And we see thousands of kamikaze pilots from the new trailer alone. Luck and mere chance aren't required for Trek like it was in Wars for the heroes to overcome.

Another baseless claim.

Originally posted by Nai
Yeah. I have. Where is the point?

Problems: Star Trek can't get Red Matter anywhere close to the Death Star and if it could, it stands to reason that the Death Star, being thousands or millions times faster than the Enterprise, would escape the black hole anyway.

He evades ships that are made for large scale warfare against ships on their size or planets. Gosh. Much more: Ships that were not even trying to destroy the Millenium Falcon in the first place. So what he did was, pretty much, avoiding tractor beams. And big laugh at the "easily malfunction": there was a part damaged during the attack on the Rebel base on Hoth, which is why Han can't get to hyperspace. It didn't just stop working, as you want to make it look.

Does any of that matter for the topic of this thread? I don't think so. Moving on.

Those are still laughable, even compared to the Empire alone, which still - let me point this fact out again for you - controls the entirety of the Star Wars Galaxy. And Trek doesn't have superweapons. They have some technologies that could potentially be used as such, one time, against a single planet (Genesis device) or somewhere in space (Red Matter), with the issue still being, that none of that would ever get near Star Wars ships / space stations.

What I have "proven" with this clip is, that Star Treks real "combat speed" isn't "lightspeed" but looks even slowers than the usual Star Wars combat speed. There goes your argument. And I'm very sorry: You can't post a clip where an Imperial ship fails to destroy the Millenium Falcon since, spoiler alert for people who know jack shit about Star Wars, not a single imperial ship did ever try to destroy the Falcon.

Oh. Quanchilogic at work.
A single X-Wing took down the Death Star. The Death Star > Thousands of Borg Cubes. Therefore Luke Skywalker in his X-Wing > entire Borg collective. I'm not ignoring any combat ship, Quanchimon. It's a fact that they never engage targets on "lightspeed" when there isn't a pursuit going on. Totally irrelevant for this track.

What do you want to transport near Starkiller base. You are, essentially, suggesting, that they could just transwarp beam red matter to any location in space. Which is utter nonsense, since they wanted to get it to a certain location in space as fast as possible and did sent Spock with his ship, instead of just beaming it there. So either is their beaming technology (fully developed by Scott in Spock's original timeline) limited, or it is not possible to deploy the red matter in that fashion. There goes your argument.

Tears from laughing perhabs, given that none of that works, as demonstrated above.

I don't need to act as if they can't monitor stuff lightyears away because they can't even monitor what is minutes of travel time ahead of them in the first Star Trek movie. They fly right into a freaking trap, when Vulcan is just 16 lightyears way from Earth. That's the extend of their monitoring abilities. Just for the record: The Millenium Falcon, operating at speed Star Trek has to offer in terms of energy use. And it's also far superior

You're a moron who doesn't have an argument and tries to missdirect opposition in order to continue the debate. This is over for lack of opposition. As I said: You're just cheap entertainment.

What on earth are you talking about ? What black hole was escaped when it was used directly on it ? The Death Star won't be near the red matter it will be detonated on it. The enterprise didn't have red matter detonated on it. You really think your dishonest debating tactics are going to cut it here. Really ?

Han wasn't even piloting as he was fixing the ship. That's the point and for all the imperial badassery not being able to bring in ones ship despite being overwhelmed is quite frankly laughable. They were firing shots at the MF as well. Did you even watch the film ? Yes, the shitty Star Wars ships can malfunction while being attacked thus preventing their hyperdrive from working. I agree.

It shows the general stupidity and conformist mentality that permeates the Star Wars universe.

So despite multiple rebels ships and instances of rebels getting near their ships and planets somehow the universe with transporting capabilities just never manages to even see any of this. They are either picking their asses in apparent dim witted glee while these light speed attacks take place and take them out before they can even pass gas in defiance. Oh please. So now you are trying wordplay where as if it takes away from the relevance of their technologies. Red matter can be used. Super weapon. It's been used and portrayed as such. Genesis as well.

3times warp do,bar speed is far faster than any tie or rebel fighter seen in a dogfight in a Star Wars film. Your cherry picking fails. We see unlike the Death Star which can't handle pinpointing smaller ships do defend itself unlike the Borg cube is another testament to its failures. We see them attacking the MF. It was hit by blasts. News flash.

A single ship did so but multiple ships were needed to provide the opening. Do not ignore the context just to make another shitty point. When do they ever attack in light speed ? Answer they don't.

They could transport the red matter to different Star Trek ships, silly goose. I am not saying they simply lob it into space hoping it finds the target I am saying they give it to Trek ships with pilots seeking certain targets.

Why doesn't a black hole take out the starkiller base ? You haven't refuted the validity of the tactic and idiotically laughing to yourself isn't s rebuttal either.

That's just the first film. You act as if their technology doesn't improve. For ****s sake we have Trek hundreds of years into the future and you want to base everything off the first film. Pisspoor.

It can absorb the power of a star not a super nova. It fires multi planet killing shots which is nice but it doesn't have anything greater to its resume. Red matter does as well as its smaller and easier to use or employ. Starkiller isn't something they can ship up easily when things go boom boom.

Why can't they detonate the red matter on anything ? We see the black hole come into effect. So now you're saying it won't work because you say so. I repeat anything it's been detonated on has either been destroyed or transported back in time thus rendering the target out of sight out of mind in that particular time period.

Irony. You're that arrogant fanboy who thinks everything from his preferred universe is more powerful and will try whatever far reaching and crazy explanation to support his insane proclamations.

I do not expect another response from Nai. He always tucks tail and runs after his exaggerations are exposed.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Level 1: well you're welcome to prove this come time.

Yeah, your denial of the FTL speed differential is one of your more bizarre stances.

Level 2: for the purposes of this debate that isn't the nature of this or our future battlezone. We can only use what we see with our own eyes or what is referenced within a reasonable manner. So you can't argue they create multiple Death Stars just as I can't argue they mass produce dreadnaught class weapons. What we see or hear about is what we get. Two Death Stars that's it.

What are you reading? I never said that they would mass produce Death Stars - I was using the construction of the Death Stars as indicators of their industrial capacity, which lie far, far beyond anything the Federation has ever done.

You won't be just facing the Federation there or here. Food for thought.

It doesn't matter. The difference in size is multiple orders of magnitude - the Klingons, Romulans, Borg and Dominion together are nothing compared to the Galactic Empire.

Level 3: B.) Or just take out your two super weapons.

How?

C). Based on what resistance feats ?

Based on Alderaan's planetary shield deflecting the 10^38 joule superlaser for a fraction of a second. 👆

Level 4: I tend to avoid need calculations that can't be proven when they don't adhere to common sense or the manner in which they are portrayed.

To be a little rude, nobody cares about what your personal canon is, and nobody is going to accept gut feeling responses like "common sense" as rebuttals. And just stating that the calculations "can't be proven" is just begging the question - the calculations unto themselves contain evidence and arguments, and, newsflash: you need to explain how said evidence and arguments are actually wrong rather than just declaring that they aren't proof because you say-so.

Take, for example, the fact that Rogue Squadron was able to circumnavigate the gas giant Yavin in the course of like, what, 3 minutes? - to reach the Death Star. You can calculate how much energy that would take based on reasonable estimates of the mass of an X-wing, and then recognize that if the power source can be diverted to shooting ion gas out of a thruster, they can also be used to launch proton torpedos or power turbolasers (otherwise, the predominant weaponry would just be dumb projectiles powered by the same sources).

Or, take the asteroid vaporization scenes in ESB and calculate how much energy it would've taken for the turbolasers - which in many cases were the extremely small ones you can barely see - to do such a thing.

Nah. Trek's sophistication,

Which supersedes performance now?

tech superiority,

Based on your gut feeling, maybe. Based on the numbers? Nah.

and progression are what makes them superior here. Wars has quite the military force but they progress for shit and are light years behind Trek in a lot of areas. We have to leave detain characters out of Trek to even make this a contest. Our debate of NuTrek vs. Ot should be entertaining.

Tech progression is a separate question from present technological edge.

Impulse is easily as fast as Wars sublight, if not faster.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Yeah, your denial of the FTL speed differential is one of your more bizarre stances.

What are you reading? I never said that they would mass produce Death Stars - I was using the construction of the Death Stars as indicators of their industrial capacity, which lie far, far beyond anything the Federation has ever done.

It doesn't matter. The difference in size is multiple orders of magnitude - the Klingons, Romulans, Borg and Dominion together are nothing compared to the Galactic Empire.

How?

Based on Alderaan's planetary shield deflecting the 10^38 joule superlaser for a fraction of a second. 👆

To be a little rude, nobody cares about what your personal canon is, and nobody is going to accept gut feeling responses like "common sense" as rebuttals. And just stating that the calculations "can't be proven" is just begging the question - the calculations unto themselves contain evidence and arguments, and, newsflash: you need to explain how said evidence and arguments are actually wrong rather than just declaring that they aren't proof because you say-so.

Take, for example, the fact that Rogue Squadron was able to circumnavigate the gas giant Yavin in the course of like, what, 3 minutes? - to reach the Death Star. You can calculate how much energy that would take based on reasonable estimates of the mass of an X-wing, and then recognize that if the power source can be diverted to shooting ion gas out of a thruster, they can also be used to launch proton torpedos or power turbolasers (otherwise, the predominant weaponry would just be dumb projectiles powered by the same sources).

Or, take the asteroid vaporization scenes in ESB and calculate how much energy it would've taken for the turbolasers - which in many cases were the extremely small ones you can barely see - to do such a thing.

Which supersedes performance now?

Based on your gut feeling, maybe. Based on the numbers? Nah.

Tech progression is a separate question from present technological edge.

It took years and why would trek need such a gigantic weapon when they have super powered weapons which don't take years and manpower to construct.

Based off what we see are they magnitudes bigger ? What in the films shows this enormous force that can't be conquered by the Trek films. The films portray an inept imperial fleet incapable of decimating a much weaker and less powerful rebel force that don't have any mega weapons such as what Trek possesses as well as the ability to adapt and assimilate.

Black holes.

When is this number stated in the film ? Do you feel the planetary shielding can resist black holes ?

The nerd numbers don't match up with what we see on screen. The portrayal doesn't sync up. Let me explain. Take for instance Link from the video game Twilight Princess. He has strength feats in the game but is portrayed as struggling with stopping. Nerd calculations determined Link lifting the gigantic rock people known as the gorons as multi ton strength. That does not match up his portrayal in the game and the gear he clearly needs to achieve said feats. The same can be said for Star Wars. Their blasters are pathetic especially if we look at clips of them failing to tear into fleshy bodies despite multiple close range shots hitting their targets. Someone will just focus on certain explosion blaster feats from mainly the new hope and overexaggerate the power of the blasts despite them failing to tear apart fleshy bodies. It's fiction. It doesn't have to add up or be consistent because it isn't real. People trying to make sense of it sometimes is an exercise in futility.

To me this is nerd math and guesstimating which isn't factual. It's usually used to overexaggerate the characters just like with Link and ignore the guy struggling against weaker characters or really struggling to stop a goat. Yet the fans will instead claim he can lift fifty tons based off nerd guesstimating and will ignore the portrayal of Link throughout the game.

We don't know the weight of the asteroids but it's just basically nerd guesstimation. Plus it has no shielding like the Star Trek ships. I am not saying it doesn't pack a whallop I am saying that just because it vaporizes an asteroid doesn't mean it will vaporize a Trek ship.

Based off portrayal. Portrayals matter just like feats do. In the Star Trek film we see the Narada is portrayed as capable of downing Star Trek fleets unlike the Executor or Star Wars destroyers. They don't wade through the opposition or have the portrayals to back the exaggerations IMO. In these kinds of debates common sense needs to be applied.

Time travel, transporting, artificial black holes, etc.

Well one universe is static and one is more dynamic so that universe has the advantage due to its progression and adaptability.

A storytelling fictional feat doesn't override how they are consistently portrayed meaning just because Superman bench presses a planet for five days doesn't mean jack shit when he goes up against a peer without a similar feat. We can determine based off power scaling that his opponent doesn't need that feat to be his equal or superior depending on how they each square up against one another.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I have never denied their fast travel time I have denied tn conclusion this somehow makes this a Star Wars stomp. I mean we have the entire first order struggle with just one droid yet the stance is the empire is this well oiled machine systemically decimating Trek before they can mount a counter offensive.

It took years and why would trek need such a gigantic weapon when they have super powered weapons which don't take years and manpower to construct.

Based off what we see are they magnitudes bigger ? What in the films shows this enormous force that can't be conquered by the Trek films. The films portray an inept imperial fleet incapable of decimating a much weaker and less powerful rebel force that don't have any mega weapons such as what Trek possesses as well as the ability to adapt and assimilate.

Black holes.

When is this number stated in the film ? Do you feel the planetary shielding can resist black holes ?

The nerd numbers don't match up with what we see on screen. The portrayal doesn't sync up. Let me explain. Take for instance Link from the video game Twilight Princess. He has strength feats in the game but is portrayed as struggling with stopping. Nerd calculations determined Link lifting the gigantic rock people known as the gorons as multi ton strength. That does not match up his portrayal in the game and the gear he clearly needs to achieve said feats. The same can be said for Star Wars. Their blasters are pathetic especially if we look at clips of them failing to tear into fleshy bodies despite multiple close range shots hitting their targets. Someone will just focus on certain explosion blaster feats from mainly the new hope and overexaggerate the power of the blasts despite them failing to tear apart fleshy bodies. It's fiction. It doesn't have to add up or be consistent because it isn't real. People trying to make sense of it sometimes is an exercise in futility.

To me this is nerd math and guesstimating which isn't factual. It's usually used to overexaggerate the characters just like with Link and ignore the guy struggling against weaker characters or really struggling to stop a goat. Yet the fans will instead claim he can lift fifty tons based off nerd guesstimating and will ignore the portrayal of Link throughout the game.

We don't know the weight of the asteroids but it's just basically nerd guesstimation. Plus it has no shielding like the Star Trek ships. I am not saying it doesn't pack a whallop I am saying that just because it vaporizes an asteroid doesn't mean it will vaporize a Trek ship.

Based off portrayal. Portrayals matter just like feats do. In the Star Trek film we see the Narada is portrayed as capable of downing Star Trek fleets unlike the Executor or Star Wars destroyers. They don't wade through the opposition or have the portrayals to back the exaggerations IMO. In these kinds of debates common sense needs to be applied.

Time travel, transporting, artificial black holes, etc.

Well one universe is static and one is more dynamic so that universe has the advantage due to its progression and adaptability.

Calling things "nerd math" and the like is kind of funny when you're arguing how one fictional universe can beat another fictional universe. Most people outside of Science Fiction fandoms would call this entire exercise "Nerd fights." just saying.

Originally posted by Chosen_Sith
Calling things "nerd math" and the like is kind of funny when you're arguing how one fictional universe can beat another fictional universe. Most people outside of Science Fiction fandoms would call this entire exercise "Nerd fights." just saying.

star trek sucks ass

I love you Bart.

sometimes being coherent is a mad quality 🙂

Originally posted by JKBart
star trek sucks ass

Originally posted by Ziggystardust
I love you Bart.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Iyo but what does that have to do with this topic ? Objectivity, friend.

The relevance to the topic is pretty obvious tbh 🙂

Originally posted by JKBart
The relevance to the topic is pretty obvious tbh 🙂

Quit hiding, Nai.

Originally posted by JKBart
star trek sucks ass

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
👆