The Starship Vs. thread!
- Thread starter WarsTrek1993
- Start date
It depends on how you define "stagnant." It would probably be fair to say that, yes, there seem to be very few major advances in specific technologies in the SW universe over a relatively short period of time. But the same argument could be made for Trek as well, since technology like phasers and warp drive seems a bit more advanced in TNG but is still essentially the same principles that existed in TOS. If there's a piece of particularly advanced technology, it's usually associated with a specific faction (Borg or Dominion for example).
So, going from that, I wouldn't categorize SW tech as stagnant in that sense. They just haven't really created something that's sufficiently ground-shaking for plot purposes yet that merits technological evolution.
According to my Warsie sister, the correct way to end this discussion is: "Commence primary ignition." Any questions?
Depends on which Enterprise. Is it the TOS/TMP-continuity Enterprise or the TNG-continuity Enterprise-D/E ?
That site's argument is based on the destruction of a ~40m iron composition asteroid by a single turbolaser bolt. The TOS E withstood a diminished Romulan plasma weapon which at optimum range "pulverized" a 3,200m iron composition asteroid in "Balance of Terror". That's about 512,000x the power compared to a 40m asteroid.
By the time of "The Deadly Years" they were able to withstand 3 plasma weapon hits (visually confirmed) and 12 hits from a mix of klingon looking torpedoes and offscreen hits that could be of the plasma variety. (TOS original FX)
They even dropped a large enough Antimatter charge to destroy a 10,000 mile space amoeba. That's larger than the planet Earth (even if it was made out of space jello
)TOS-continuity also sported different types of FTL systems, including Warp, Hyperdrive (but probably not the same as SW), Ion drive, and some unknowns like the First Federation ship. Their "actual" speeds at warp between systems could get up to 700,000c. If you count TFF's Enterprise's 1 day jaunt to the center of the galaxy, we're already well into the millions of c.
But, if we were to look at TNG-continuity, then I'd give it the Imperials. TNG's fastest actual speed for sustained warp is about 900c. Voyager's newer engines push it up to between 1,000c and 20,000c (short dash). There doesn't appear to be any variety (accept maybe a light sail from DS9) of FTL systems that are in "official use" of Starfleet. Shields and weapons seem to be weaker than TOS as well. The only time we see anything approaching TOS-level of destruction is "The Die Is Cast"'s fleet bombardment of a planet and that's from DS9 which tended to ignore some of TNG's rule.
The one common thing that all sides appear to be vulnerable to are ion weapons/storms. TOS and Voyager had strong ion storms that could disrupt the ship. TESB showed powerful enough ion blasts can disable Star Destroyers.
As to the Death Star, just sucker it to a star system and then blow up the star with a few specialized photon torpedoes
But at the end of the day, I agree that it depends on the writer of the story on who wins or loses.
Depends on which Enterprise. Is it the TOS/TMP-continuity Enterprise or the TNG-continuity Enterprise-D/E ?
Well the OP started this out with the 1701-E so I was sticking to TNG values.
True. But there are a few caveats. First, the Romulan plasma weapon pulverized the two mile asteroid, the Imperial turbolaser vaporized the smaller asteroid. And that was using one it's smaller guns. The really big turbolasers which flank the superstructure were never seen firing and we can assume they are as much proportionally heavier hitting as they are bigger physically. And I would stress the point you mentioned about how it diminished over range. The Enterprise outran it for a good period before being overtaken and survived only because of the weapon's limited range. Also, the website I referenced figured out the power requirements needed to melt the entire surface of an Earth-sized planet to a depth of one meter, a feat Star Destroyers are allegedly capable of. On the other hand, the TOS E has been boasted of as having similar ability (though I always assumed this meant a Connie could handily wipe out every major city and industry and render it essentially destroyed, or causing enough damage to create unrecoverable ecological collapse, not literally slagging the whole globe, like an ISD is supposed to be able to do.)
By the time of "The Deadly Years" they were able to withstand 3 plasma weapon hits (visually confirmed) and 12 hits from a mix of klingon looking torpedoes and offscreen hits that could be of the plasma variety. (TOS original FX)
They even dropped a large enough Antimatter charge to destroy a 10,000 mile space amoeba. That's larger than the planet Earth (even if it was made out of space jello
Let's not forget the Nomad blast: equivalent to ninety of Enterprise's photon torpedoes. (Moments after his own shield absorbs the 90x photorp power Kirk is flabbergasted that anything could possibly survive such a powerful blast when Nomad shrugs off the one photorp he sent it's way.
)This is why I kind of like TOS better. There was just more creative stuff. It seemed like big universe where stuff actually happens. The later shows everything just seems more and more mediocre. Also this why I like TFF so much; it reminds me of the feel of TOS more than any of the other movies. [sacrilege!]Even more than TMP![/sacrilege!]
You seem to be seeing my point clearly.
The one common thing that all sides appear to be vulnerable to are ion weapons/storms. TOS and Voyager had strong ion storms that could disrupt the ship. TESB showed powerful enough ion blasts can disable Star Destroyers.
As to the Death Star, just sucker it to a star system and then blow up the star with a few specialized photon torpedoes
Why go to the trouble? I understand there a small thermal exhaust port just below the main port... But watch out, I hear it's only two meters wide and it's ray-shielded!
But at the end of the day, I agree that it depends on the writer of the story on who wins or loses.
Exactly.
--Alex
^ I think we're in agreement for the most part. I believe "vaporize" is never used in dialogue in SW but is used as a description by that site for what was shown in TESB. In any case, I made the connection between "pulverize" and "vaporize" since they are both listed as synonyms (according to Merriam Webster) for each other. So to me I see the firepower comparison to be the same
edit: With the Nomad blast, I think it makes sense in context to the series. In S1, the ship could barely take a weakened Romulan plasma weapon hit. By S2, only 4 episodes after "The Changeling", she's able to take more than 3 direct hits from the same weapon. That would point to a massive shield upgrade on Starfleet's part in response to the new Romulan weapon. I think the shield upgrade probably outpaced the torpedoes of the Enterprise, leaving her photon torpedo power in the dust to only catch up at a later time, perhaps in the movies. That would also explain the apparent Klingon reluctance to go one on one with the Enterprise without first sabotaging the ship or evening the odds in their favor.
One thing that bugs me about SW is the big space battle over Endor in ROTJ. The big ships aren't firing anywhere near the number of weapons that I'd expect to see based on their paper stats. If we analyzed that battle, it would appear that the Star Destroyers were largely ineffective against the smaller Rebel fleet in a standup fight, even losing a Star Destroyer to Rebel fire.
edit: With the Nomad blast, I think it makes sense in context to the series. In S1, the ship could barely take a weakened Romulan plasma weapon hit. By S2, only 4 episodes after "The Changeling", she's able to take more than 3 direct hits from the same weapon. That would point to a massive shield upgrade on Starfleet's part in response to the new Romulan weapon. I think the shield upgrade probably outpaced the torpedoes of the Enterprise, leaving her photon torpedo power in the dust to only catch up at a later time, perhaps in the movies. That would also explain the apparent Klingon reluctance to go one on one with the Enterprise without first sabotaging the ship or evening the odds in their favor.
One thing that bugs me about SW is the big space battle over Endor in ROTJ. The big ships aren't firing anywhere near the number of weapons that I'd expect to see based on their paper stats. If we analyzed that battle, it would appear that the Star Destroyers were largely ineffective against the smaller Rebel fleet in a standup fight, even losing a Star Destroyer to Rebel fire.
Last edited:
Vader gives a Southside of Chicago (not pretty if you have seen or been involved in one) style asswhuppin to Picard on any ship
Kirk beats Vader every time
Kirk beats Vader every time
Countered immediately with "target their primary weapon and fire main phasers."According to my Warsie sister, the correct way to end this discussion is: "Commence primary ignition." Any questions?
Countered immediately with "target their primary weapon and fire main phasers."According to my Warsie sister, the correct way to end this discussion is: "Commence primary ignition." Any questions?
Oh and, Trek capital ships are pactically in constant motion during battles, not to mention capable of behaving like jet fighters due to lowering their mass via subspace fields while at impulse.
The DS would simply have an very difficult time firing at any one of them like they did with big and mostly stationary rebel ships.
Same goes for star destroyers.
They can't maneuver as fast as Federation ships... though we don't know their maximum sublight speeds.
Plus, if the Feds keep pounding them with phasers from 300 000 km distance while making circles around them along with torpedoes... the Empire will have a pretty rough time scoring any hits whatsoever (though we don't know the maximum effective range of turbo lasers).
Hitting a rock with a feather at 300,000 KM distance is still hitting a rock with a feather.
YMMV.
YMMV.
Star Wars ships only use laser power.
Assuming Star Wars's turbolasers are exactly the same as the lasers mounted on the shitbox excuses for starships in The Outrageous Okona.
I'll entertain this. So, the Enterprise's navigation shields defend against any laser? How about a laser with twice the power pumped into at as the average phaser blast? Ten times? A hundred?
How much scaling does it take, Admiral?!?
The point being, that it's a bit silly to say "the Federation is immune to all lasers", especially since the Borg weapon in Q Who was a laser. Ergo, a laser of sufficient power will hurt the Enterprise.
I'll entertain this. So, the Enterprise's navigation shields defend against any laser? How about a laser with twice the power pumped into at as the average phaser blast? Ten times? A hundred?
How much scaling does it take, Admiral?!?
The point being, that it's a bit silly to say "the Federation is immune to all lasers", especially since the Borg weapon in Q Who was a laser. Ergo, a laser of sufficient power will hurt the Enterprise.
This is something I've noticed about these debates when they come around. For Star Trek, canon is only live action professional productions. Not cartoons, novels, comic books, tech manuals, etc..
For Star Wars it's basically everything goes.
Which one standard do you which to go by? Does eveything go in terms of "the expanded universe" of Star Trek? Or do you wish to confine yourself solely to the information in the dozen hours of live action Star Wars?
Because if you open this up to all the stuff in the Star Trek FASA universe,
quite frankly Albertese, you don't have a prayer.
Wrong. The Borg first used a beam (not a laser) to disable the Enterprise's shields, once they were down, the Borg did use a laser to cut into a small ara of the Enterprise's hull. The Borg made no attempt to fire a laser at the Enterprise prior to the shields dropping.
You know, just because they're both referred to as "lasers." And you seem to be assuming that the ship's weapons in "The Outrageous Okona" are not significantly more powerful than the best turbo-laser in the Imperial fleet.
Except Imperial SSD's hulls are not made of rock, they're made of materials design to protect against other ships armed with lasers.
In Return of the Jedi, a small A-wing fighter rammed into the bridge of a SD, resulting in much damage. The SD was engaged in combat, and had been for several minutes, it is reasonable to assume that whatever passes for shields/deflectors in the Star Wars universe were in place. A fighter simply flew through them and (literally) into the bridge.
Photon torpedoes could do the same.
In Return of the Jedi, a small A-wing fighter rammed into the bridge of a SD, resulting in much damage. The SD was engaged in combat, and had been for several minutes, it is reasonable to assume that whatever passes for shields/deflectors in the Star Wars universe were in place. A fighter simply flew through them and (literally) into the bridge.
Photon torpedoes could do the same.
IIRC, the bridge shields of the Super Star Destroyer was blown up by several fighters moments earlier. Afterwards, an A-Wing was hit and flew out of control into the unprotected bridge structure.
So, you could destroy the shield generator for the bridge (the spheres on top of the bridge structure) and then target the bridge.
Also, IIRC, in TESB, a Star Destroyer was hit by a largish (60-80m?) asteroid at a relatively low speed and that took out the ship as well.
Phasers (which have vaporizing/phase properties) have a maximum effective range of 300 000 km.
So by that premise alone, the maxed out power output of the beam would be the same within that range... beyond that, it drops exponentially.
Also, in Q Who, Worf distinctively said the following:
'A type of laser beam is slicing into the saucer section'.
He said... 'a type of laser beam' which means he couldn't really identify it, and the closest analogy for him was a laser... and this happened after the shields failed.
Plus that was the Borg cutting beam.
Such beams might have certain properties that make it look to Federation sensors as 'a type of laser beam' but it may be anything but.
That was the first encounter ever that the Federation had with the Borg.
Subsequent encounters yielded much accurate descriptions of the technology they used after proper analysis was conducted.
Granted, we don't know what happens if you pump extraordinary amounts of power into lasers and what kind of effects they would have on Federation shields, BUT, the Borg can obviously become immune to various weapons after adaptation and it would appear that no amount of power you push into it will make a difference.
Same can be said for Federation shields. If they are immune to lasers, then no amount of power pumped into lasers might make a difference.
Obviously this goes against the premise that there have to be certain limits to how much power something could absorb without any damage... but as evident from various encounters with alien species in Trek, adjusting shields to specific frequency can do 0 damage to the shields or make them seem as if they are non-existent.
In case of 0 damage, I would surmise that there's a cancelling effect on a subspace basis which is exploited since much of the technology in Trek is subspace based.
They simply channel the energy into subspace or just turn it into something usable that was designed to accept huge amounts of power.
^ On the other hand, the Borg possess superior power generation capabilities compared to the Federation. A single cube might appear immune to the most powerful energy weapon that can be pumped out by a single Federation starship but with enough combined firepower from new and upgraded ships as seen in "First Contact" you can bring one down.
The E-D's navigational shields and combat shields are probably very efficient in blocking lasers but at some point a powerful enough laser will overwhelm the shield and power generation capabilities of the ship. Then again, SW's weapons don't behave like lasers and are called "turbolasers" so it might be more than a laser in the same way there are "plasma phasers", "compression phasers", and "phased polaron" weapons.
The E-D's navigational shields and combat shields are probably very efficient in blocking lasers but at some point a powerful enough laser will overwhelm the shield and power generation capabilities of the ship. Then again, SW's weapons don't behave like lasers and are called "turbolasers" so it might be more than a laser in the same way there are "plasma phasers", "compression phasers", and "phased polaron" weapons.
I have a couple of scenarios for this thread in mind, not Federation vs. Empire though. How do you think a Vorlon Dreadnought, not the big, ungainly Planet Killer, but the big squid-like battlecruiser, fair against an Emperial Stardestroyer? The FTL systems of both ships share similar properties; ie. opens a hole to another dimension. The offensive systems are quite different, the SD has a multitude of offensive weapons, the Vorlon dreadnought has its main cannon that appears to function as a very powerful cutting beam and defensively, the SD has it's shields and the Vorlon ship has an adaptive, organic hull that becomes resistant to a particular weapon type after just one hit. Manueverability in normal space seems quite different though, the Stardestroyers don't seem to be all that nimble, but, judging from the pilot movie when B5 gets blown off it's axis, the Vorlon Dreadnought manuevers much like a Federation starship; ie. spun on its verticle axis and manuevered away very easily. Hope this scenario isn't considered off topic as the title of the thread indicates any ship vs. ship scenario.
Similar threads
