Star Trek vs. Star Wars

The place where serious discussions can take place.

Moderators: MrVulcan, thunderchero

User avatar
znite94
Cadet 2nd Year
Cadet 2nd Year
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:00 am
Location: Somewhere this side of the Delta Quadrant!

Star Trek vs. Star Wars

Post by znite94 » Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:33 pm

Ok, so this one might have been done before, but hey, It's my first time to do this one:

In a battle between the Federation and the Empire, would the Federation be more powerful, would the Empire be more powerful, or would it come down to the minds in command and the tactics they choose.

Personally, I'd love to see that battle go down. I think it really would come down to the minds in command and the tactics the chose. Both sides have their advantage over the other. Some examples:

The Federations cloak is better. (Yes, I know the Federation isn't allowed to develop cloaking technology, but they did, and it kicked the Romulan cloak's butt)
The Federation ships are more manuverable than the Imperial starcruisers.
On the other hand, Heavy Turbo lazers seem to be more powerful.
The Empire has hyperdrive that, while it is more difficult to navigate in hyperspace, they could bring reinforcments faster: case and point, it was going to take Voyager 70-80 years to travel across the galaxy at maximum warp, whereas for a starcruiser to travel across the galaxy it is a matter of weeks.

So, that's where I start it, anyone else have an opinion?
In a Galaxy where disorder reigns, there is the USS BLAZER

User avatar
rodglas
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 2:00 am
Location: Hamilton, ON Canada (NORPAC)
Contact:

Post by rodglas » Fri Jul 21, 2006 7:29 pm

Realisticly if this battle could happen the Empire would utterly destroy the Federation. Sheilds and weapons on Imperial ships are far far superior, and the Empire has tens of thousands of warships.

Also the Empire has the resourses of over a million worlds to draw from. The Federation has only 150ish member worlds and a fleet of maybe a few thousand ships.

This would really be a no contest kind of situation, SW military tech is just too powerful.

User avatar
znite94
Cadet 2nd Year
Cadet 2nd Year
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:00 am
Location: Somewhere this side of the Delta Quadrant!

Post by znite94 » Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:37 pm

You did bring up a couple of things I didn't think of. I'd have to say your right there.
In a Galaxy where disorder reigns, there is the USS BLAZER

Twitch
Commander
Commander
Posts: 1321
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:00 am
Location: L.A. CA USA

Post by Twitch » Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:21 pm

I'd agree. The Empire all the way. 8O
The Borg will rock your world!

User avatar
Thrawn
Cadet 1st Year
Cadet 1st Year
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 2:00 am

Post by Thrawn » Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:32 am

If a certain blue skinned admiral is in command of Imperial Forces, the Empire could win with a single Star Destroyer.

User avatar
hawke
Cadet 1st Year
Cadet 1st Year
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:00 am

Post by hawke » Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:15 pm

I dont see how people can compare star wars with star trek tech. From what I have seen from both series, the physics just dont match :/. The technologies are just so different, theres not much that can be compared to each other. SW's sheilding has never been subject to ST fire, vise versa. Whos to say SW's sheilds would even protect against ST high energy transporters/tractor beams or phasers for that matter, they would never have even designed those shields for them. Its my opinion that its just a big unknown who would come out with the advantage, but based on resources alone SW would win no matter who had the advantage.

User avatar
Thrawn
Cadet 1st Year
Cadet 1st Year
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 2:00 am

Post by Thrawn » Sat Jul 29, 2006 12:38 pm

There have been no known weaknesses in SW shielding to a certain type of weapon. Even if phasers did even more damage than normal to SW shields, the SW shields are still orders of magnitude above the best shields in ST.

User avatar
intermech
Cadet 1st Year
Cadet 1st Year
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:00 am
Location: New Orleans, LA
Contact:

Post by intermech » Wed Aug 09, 2006 3:01 pm

I love this debate! I don't side with either side, however, I would like to point out that SW and ST have very different fleet tactics. Starwars is much more like the sea battles in the WWII Pacific with carriers protected by battleships and fighter aircraft to get in close. The ships are huge and lumbering but appropriately armored and defended. In Star Trek, you have a much more Greco-Roman style type battles, vessel manuevering is key, ships ram each other, you have boarding parties, and fleets tend to form formations to enhance the safety-numbers tactics.

Weapons cannot be compared, they are all made up, for the sake of argument I would assume equal total armaments for each fleet. However, each side spreads and groups these armaments differently. Star Wars tends to have more specialty ships . . . Medical Frigate, Bombers, fighters, ships individually designed to support a single weapon or fighting style. Starfleet ships are for the most part capable of multiple tasks. Science, cargo transfer, defense, diplomatice.

Also, as fun as it is to imagine, Starfleet really does not use fighter craft heavily. This is likely because computers control most gunnary and can easily track and lock on to multiple targets. In Star Wars, I get the impression that gun turrets are mostly manual.

They should make a movie like that, Star Wars vs. Star Trek. Everyone would hate it, but everyone would go see it anyway.

User avatar
Thrawn
Cadet 1st Year
Cadet 1st Year
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 2:00 am

Post by Thrawn » Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:28 pm

A medium Turbolaser on an Acclamator TRANSPORT is rated at 200 GT's This is more than enough to destroy even a starbase in one shot. A ship such as a Star Destroyer would plow through Federation ships like so many gnats.

User avatar
imagin
Cadet 4th Year
Cadet 4th Year
Posts: 151
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:00 am

Post by imagin » Fri Sep 15, 2006 2:24 pm

Star wars would totaly win for two reasons.

1. Star wars weapons, shealds, and hyperdrives are far superior.

2. Star wars has the bigger budget, and the force.

P.S. You guys are putting up a great argument. I have seen some realy idiotic arguments from some harcore trekkies, and its refreshing to see people with common sense.

User avatar
SherlockHolmes
Cadet 2nd Year
Cadet 2nd Year
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 2:00 am
Location: Earth

Post by SherlockHolmes » Tue Sep 19, 2006 9:34 pm

Starfleet has superior weaponry.

I have yet to see a blaster VAPORIZE a person.

Star Destroyers would not plow into starfleet. THEY ARE TOO SLOW.

and The millneum falcan is the fastast ship around. only goes .5 beyond light speed? That means it goes 1 and 1/2 times the speed of light. Warp 2 on the warp scale is 10 times the speed of light.

The reason the ships seem so much faster is because the producers of star wars dont know jack about Galactic distances. Heck, Han Solo thought a Parsec was a unit of time. It is in fact, a unit of distance (Approxomatly 3.26 lightyears).

I will agree the Empire would win because of the vast resources they have. However, I strongly disagree when people think that Star Wars Technology is superior. Not that anyone has bothered to explain how the SW tech works in detail that people have in star trek.

I still think the Galactic Empire is no match for the borg

User avatar
rodglas
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 2:00 am
Location: Hamilton, ON Canada (NORPAC)
Contact:

Post by rodglas » Tue Sep 19, 2006 10:17 pm

For someone who calls himself Sherlock Holmes you lack one important quality, the ability to reason based on evidence.
Starfleet has superior weaponry.

I have yet to see a blaster VAPORIZE a person.
Proving nothing, different weapons do different things. A blaster kills you just as dead as a phaser. Vapourization is not inheirently superior nor is it therefore beyond Star Wars ability.
Star Destroyers would not plow into starfleet. THEY ARE TOO SLOW.
Compared to what? An Imperial Star Destroyer is a mile long, compared to the Enterprise E which is less then 800 meters. Not to mention shear volume. A speed boat may look like its going faster then an Ocean liner, but over distance the Liner is moving much faster.
and The millneum falcan is the fastast ship around. only goes .5 beyond light speed? That means it goes 1 and 1/2 times the speed of light. Warp 2 on the warp scale is 10 times the speed of light.
Stupid trekkie fanboy BS. Tattoonie to Alderaan in a matter of hours at most in ANH. Tattoonie( on the fringe of the galaxy) to Coruscant (in the core of the galaxy) in maybe a day in TPM. Distances of thousands-- even tens of thousands of light years in travelled all at 1.5 times light speed.

Or is it more likely .5 past light speed refered to something else?
The reason the ships seem so much faster is because the producers of star wars dont know jack about Galactic distances. Heck, Han Solo thought a Parsec was a unit of time. It is in fact, a unit of distance (Approxomatly 3.26 lightyears).
Maybe if you knew that Kessel was star system full of Black holes and rememebered that gravity casts a shadow in hyperspace, you understand that most ships would take a wider track on the Kessel run to avoid the mass shadow, but a sufficently fast ship, like the Falcon can get closer and skirt the gravity wells, traveling closer traveling a shorter distance (in parsecs no less) then more legitimate and sane ship captains.
I strongly disagree when people think that Star Wars Technology is superior. Not that anyone has bothered to explain how the SW tech works in detail that people have in star trek.
Psudeoscience explainations of fanciful tech are of little value in any disscustion. If we are going to debate this at all we need to evaluate real evidence going to real physics and understand real implications for that same fanciful tech.

None of you arguments are even remotely new, and not one of them actually holds water in a detailed reviewing of the evidence (ie actually watching both with an open mind, not fanboy lust).

Rod.

MajorPayne
Past Administrator
Past Administrator
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 2:00 am

Post by MajorPayne » Wed Sep 20, 2006 2:37 am

Right then. I'm going to be a party pooper big time here.

I'll leave this open on two conditions:

1) I, as no time, want to see any arguements concening which is better. Any flaming of ANY sort will be dealt with harshly and swiftly to all parties concerned, and,

2) I don't want to see people stating statistical equations, that "such and such" weapon is rated in "such and such" power, or strength.

I personally, hate this kind of thread because of the amount of times it has gotten out of hands, and if anyone wants to act like a purist, then do so some place else as I've little time for it.

Now to the point in question. To me neither will win, neither will loose. Why?? Well, your talking two seperate science fiction series, which are set in two completely different time periods. As it stands, and speaking realistically, Trek has always made a great series with the films being somewhat less so, whereas Wars has always made the big screen entertainment far better (it remains to be seen how this new wars series will hold up).

User avatar
cecilzero1
Past Administrator
Past Administrator
Posts: 2226
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 2:00 am
Location: from the Dark Side of the moon
Contact:

Post by cecilzero1 » Wed Sep 20, 2006 10:20 am

not this topic agian!!!!!!! this has been a debate even before Star trek gaming has come out

oh lets not do any name calling huh? ill just delete ur post if u like to namecall someone
Image

User avatar
SherlockHolmes
Cadet 2nd Year
Cadet 2nd Year
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 2:00 am
Location: Earth

Post by SherlockHolmes » Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:46 pm

I did not expecte to be flamed. But I stand by my opinion. I picked Sherlock Holmes as a user name because I am a fan of Sherlock Holmes. I do not claim to be as smart as Sherlock Holmes.

Back on topic, the Millinuem Falcan in "Empire strikes back" proved that the Star Destroyers have poor Manueverability. When I said they were slow, I meant that they had poor Manueverability. And yes I am aware my spelling is bad.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests