Replacing the AotC vs Nemesis thread lost when the board was reset.
I like both... but Star Wars is better. Any Star Wars movie (except maybe PM) is better than any Star Trek movie... the Trek movies are fine movies, but just don't compare to the greatness of the Star Wars series...
Oh, and if Star Wars ships fought Star Trek ones the Star Wars ones would win easy...
The better Star Trek movies were far better than the last two SW movies. And Wrath of Khan is better than any of them period.
And Star Wars ships are either very tiny and lack shielding, or very large and have glaring weak points. Enterprise-E could take out any ship in the Star Wars universe.
Ah this debate... It's always hilarious to hear them debate who has the better technology. To be honest, not that I'm a fan of Trek or anything, but they do seem to outclass the SW universe in pretty much every technical field. Of course, as far as warriors, I do believe the Jedi could easy take on any Klingon, well, except maybe that one Klingon my trekkie friend goes on about that supposedly forged one of those weird Klingon blade weapon thingies by dipping his very hair into some volcano. But, he's a hero unit from some long agon era of might and magic, so he doesn't count, or does he?
Anyway, back when "The Force" was magic, I do believe a Jedi could actually destroy a Q, beings so intuned with the laws of physics they could easily control them, but would be damaged by something that actually breaks the laws of physics, magic, but now that ol' George is giving a scientific explanation of the force, and slowly removing it's magical nature, I think they could be snapped out of existance like any other non-magical being.
Oh well, in the end, Samus could take 'em all on. The Fett family greatest bounty hunter? Pah, they both died pathetic anti-climactic deaths, using such inferior weapons as a "laser gun" and a true flamethrower, and a jet pack. Samus however has space jumping, a plasma based "flamethrower", armor that can easily stand a blow by the strongest beam or material based weapons, a cool energy arm cannon, and a morphing ball. All created with technology so advanced that it looks magical even to the era she's from. Of course, like the Xel'Naga, the poor Chozo ended up being destroyed for all their advancements, by one of their very creations ("wisely" made by them to counter the Metroid world's version of the Zerg before it could gain too much genetic advancements, like genetically cloning and improoving upon the ultimate warrior).
Well, there are several reasons that Star Wars ships would win.
First, speed. Star Wars hyperdrive gets you across the galaxy in a matter of days. In Star Trek (not counting Borg Transwarp) it takes decades... just a slight advantage for SW, I'd say. :)
As for the ships themselves, yes, Star Trek's ships do seem tougher to kill... but there are far less of them. And they aren't used to really dealing with masses of fighters like Star Wars ships have as their main fighting force... while a bunch of TIEs would die fast, it'd take a while to kill them with just the several phasers Star Trek ships seem to have on them... and by then they'd do a lot of damage.
What I don't know is how the damage lasers/phasers do would be compared. And as for the range of the guns, I don't know ranges in Star Trek and in Star Wars I only know the ones in the sim games (TIE Fighter, X-Wing Alliance, etc).. which probably aren't 100% accurate. In those games anyway, turbolasers can shoot 2.5-3km while being able to aim. Fighters have to go to 2km. Missiles can be shot from farther, though. Anyway, ST might be able to shoot farther more accurately, and phaser cannons on the ships are definitely stronger than any laser or turbolaser... but ST capitol ships have dozens of laser batteries, somewhat making up for that.
Of course it is kind of strange to compare things that were never made to be comparable... and the fact that SW space combat is based on WWII fleet and navy airforce battles while Star Trek is soley giant-ship combat doesn't make it any easier. They are each made with very different opponents and universes (like how SW ranges might be shorter but there all ranges are short so it doesnt matter).
We don't know how big the galaxy far far away is, it could be rather small for all we know
I think the borg could take any Super Class Star Destroyer
SSDs are incredibly big ships. Sure, they are beatable (the New Republic killed a couple of them, and the Vong mostly killed one), but they are huge and incredibly strong... 12.8km long. Thats huge. Hundreds of fighters, turbolasers, ion cannons... they are extremely powerful. The crew compliment is HUGE, too.
http://www.starwars.com/databank/starshi...r/bts.html (with info and length, along with list of how many laser batteries it had-- hundreds-- on the EU page. Note - size isn't definite, as this theforce.net article shows.
http://www.theforce.net/swtc/ssd.html#ratio ).
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/schema..._ships.htm -- borg ship lengths (site also has other Trek ship specs). 3km long. Less crew than a SSD also (I think I heard 250,000 as the crew of a SSD).
A Borg Cube? Big... but not as long as a SSD. They are taller, though, but honestly I think the SSD would win. More crew, more weapons, and that massive fighter screen should keep the cube occupied long enough to kill it.
Oh, and saying 'maybe the star wars universe is smaller' is just bizarre. It isn't. The Star Wars ships just go a lot faster.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/index.html - interesting site with st-sw comparisons. On the SW side, but thats ok. :)
edit 2: OK. I just don't get how someone could say that ST would win. Lets look at size first. A Imperial Star Destroyer is 1 mile (1600km) long. A SSD is 12,800 km long (official site) or 18km long (Theforce.net estimates based on movie model size). Calimari Cruisers? The big ones are about as big as a ISD. Fighters of course are small, and minor capitol ships are in between.
Weapons? Lasers (also in more powerful Turbolaser battery arrangement in cap ships), Concussion Missiles, Proton Torpedoes, and Ion Cannons (disable machinery). Cap ships have dozens of each... SSD's have hundreds of lasers and ion cannons and over a hundred missile batteries. The range is a weakness, maybe -- only 3-4km (maybe 5 with missiles). I think Trek ships can shoot farth... but usually don't, so range isn't that important either. No, SW just has a huge, huge advantage. There is no possible way the Trek universe could win.
Does Trek have any advantages? Well, yes. One: Transporters. They don't exist in Star Wars... so that'd be a big advantage. That is, once they knock down the shields on a SW ship so they can tranport over... and even then the power advantage SW has probably would win them the day. No Trek ship group could come close to beating a SW one...
I like both Star Trek and Star Wars for different reasons, but I definitely like SW a lot more than ST.
I saw a thread in another forum that pretty decisively proved that Star Trek's ships were far superior to those of Star Wars, but damn me, I can't find it anymore.
Then again, when I made this thread, it was espousing the superiority of Star Trek Nemesis over Attack of the Clones :D
I liked Nemesis a lot, but definitely not as much as any SW movie. But hey, everyone's entitled to their own opinion. Even if they're wrong. Like Weltall. :D
j/k 'ole buddy.
Hey we have some truly nerdy dudes here.
You're posting at a Nintendo message board, bubba. That officially makes you a nerd.
I hardly know anything about Star Wars or Star Trek, but I had a couple friends who were absolutely obsessed with both. One knew just about everything possible about Star Trek especially, and he once told me the Enterprise was the size of Arizona. Now, I thought that was pretty darn large, but even if it's a ton smaller than that, it's still much larger than 12 km.
No, you dont know much about Star Trek. None of the Enterprises (all the way up to the E) are any longer than 700m... that's about 1/20th of the length of a SSD... a little more, if you take the 18km number instead of the 12.8km one.
Just go to one of the sites I linked (the Star Trek Ships one). Its got all the numbers for Trek ships.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/schema...ships1.htm
Federation ship types list, A-K. Note the Galaxy-class (TNG's Ent-D) is 642 meters... the Ent-E is 682 meters, and its the longest ship we know of in the fleet. Trek just isn't designed to be able to cope with the capabilities of the Star Wars universe.
Oh, and I don't see how Nemesis could possibly be better than AotC in pretty much any way... its a good movie, but nowhere NEAR as good as AotC...
And any thread that 'proves' Trek is better is either resorting to relying from help from some godlike race ("Q would intervene") or is using some... creative... numbers.
Quote:Originally posted by A Black Falcon
No, you dont know much about Star Trek. None of the Enterprises (all the way up to the E) are any longer than 700m... that's about 1/20th of the length of a SSD... a little more, if you take the 18km number instead of the 12.8km one.
Just go to one of the sites I linked (the Star Trek Ships one). Its got all the numbers for Trek ships.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/schema...ships1.htm
Federation ship types list, A-K. Note the Galaxy-class (TNG's Ent-D) is 642 meters... the Ent-E is 682 meters, and its the longest ship we know of in the fleet. Trek just isn't designed to be able to cope with the capabilities of the Star Wars universe.
Oh, and I don't see how Nemesis could possibly be better than AotC in pretty much any way... its a good movie, but nowhere NEAR as good as AotC...
And any thread that 'proves' Trek is better is either resorting to relying from help from some godlike race ("Q would intervene") or is using some... creative... numbers.
Not really. One of the arguments I remember best is the Borg assimilating a Jedi and adopting all of a Jedi's powers and skills (as that would happen.) Just one instance of that, and you could say bye bye to the Star Wars universe, as you'd have literally trillions of Borg with Jedi powers after awhile. And using one of Trek's godlike beings is only fair, since the Star Wars universe has Jedis that have all sorts of magical powers.
Man, OB1 is a human irony detector. Do this one next!
Quote:j/k 'ole buddy.
J/k? wtf is that? Type out some full words there, champ.
But the Q have stated over and over that what they do isn't magic at all :D.
Anyway, assimilating a Jedi would indeed suck wouldn't it? Of course, they would suddenly find they could only do the dark side's abilities, for even with scientific assimilation, they can't overcome the limits of the good/evil thing.
Quote:Originally posted by Dark Jaguar
But the Q have stated over and over that what they do isn't magic at all :D.
Anyway, assimilating a Jedi would indeed suck wouldn't it? Of course, they would suddenly find they could only do the dark side's abilities, for even with scientific assimilation, they can't overcome the limits of the good/evil thing.
But what limitations would they have? Borg drones are already mindless. They would simply do whatever the Queen orders, and she definitely has a mean streak to her. Then again, if you theorize that every Jedi has the capacity for good or evil, it's possible the Borg could, free from conscience as they are, exploit both ends.
Well, since the Queen is evil, and she's the center of the Borg collective mind, then the entire borg collective is then also evil, wouldn't you say?
Quote:Originally posted by LukeIsTerrified
Man, OB1 is a human irony detector. Do this one next!
J/k? wtf is that? Type out some full words there, champ.
I am very well of the fact that I am also a nerd for being here. I was just pointing out the fact that you are also a nerd for being here.
And when someone posts as often as I do they're allowed to use "j/k" and "imo"
thank you very much.
I am just playing with you, OB1, my e-pal. We are all friends here. Except lazyfatbum, because he is one screwed-up dude.
So, Star Wars. I haven't read this thread because there was a lot of talk about Borgs and Enterprises and other things that I don't know too much about -- but I do know that Attack of the Clones was painful to watch. What was the deal with Natalie Portman falling for this totally unlikable guy who is also quite clearly a wacko, on the verge of becoming Darth Vader? Were there some Jedi mind tricks going on there? Am I alone on this one?
I agree. What is with the girls who fall for the jerks anyway? The only thing I can figure is that somehow the girl must think something totally stupid like "the only reason they SEEM like a jerk is because they are angry about something they see that I don't". Nope, they are just jerks. That's right, Darth Vader is the result of teen angst gone unchecked.
AotC was a very, very good movie! I really liked it... not as much as RotJ, but more than PM or ANH and about as much as ESB.
(thus: RotJ > ESB | AotC > ANH > PM)
Q? I doubt Q would invervene... he hasn't done anything any other time humanity was in trouble and the problem wasn't caused by a Q... not really...
Borg-Jedi? Interesting idea... but of course all Borg wouldn't be Jedis anytime fast. Being a Jedi isn't something you can just do... you need the midichlorions-- its genetic... so only borg children of infested Jedis would be Borg Jedis as well. Not a whole lot of them for some time... and thats assuming Borgs have children like normal races... (or make them)
Oh, and being here makes you a nerd? So?
You know, I hate that they made it a genetic thing. At first, Jedis were something you could choose to do. It was one of the few super heros that were the result of diligent training. Now though, it's like any other American super hero. Sure, they train, but what about me? Well, I'm not an alien, I didn't win the lottery, no reason for me to actually work to get my goals, I just need random luck, blah blah blah...
Quote:Originally posted by A Black Falcon
AotC was a very, very good movie! I really liked it... not as much as RotJ, but more than PM or ANH and about as much as ESB.
(thus: RotJ > ESB | AotC > ANH > PM)
Q? I doubt Q would invervene... he hasn't done anything any other time humanity was in trouble and the problem wasn't caused by a Q... not really...
Borg-Jedi? Interesting idea... but of course all Borg wouldn't be Jedis anytime fast. Being a Jedi isn't something you can just do... you need the midichlorions-- its genetic... so only borg children of infested Jedis would be Borg Jedis as well. Not a whole lot of them for some time... and thats assuming Borgs have children like normal races... (or make them)
Oh, and being here makes you a nerd? So?
The Borg would take the midichlorians, replicate them ad infinitum, and infuse each and every member of the race with them. And, the Borg actually grow children, they don't make them... the conventional way.
Yeah, I thought the Borg made (or grew) children in those growth chamber things.
Inject people with Midichlorions to make them Jedis? Intresting idea, but I have no idea if it would work.
I dont think it was ever true that anyone could be a Jedi... it was always a special thing... but before PM, they'd never explained why a few people had Jedi powers and most of the rest didn't. IMO, it was a good explanation.
Put the Klingons in the mix and the Star Wars universe is truely screwed.
They take infants from assimilated races and put them in maturity chambers, where they are assimilated as they rapidly grow. A lightsawber would be ineffective, its an energy weapon and the borg's personal shields would adapt after one use.
Star Wars Sucks (Science fantasy)
Star Trek Rules (Science fiction) :shake:
Fiction, fantasy, aren't those words pretty much similar? Magic is after a totally fictional science. You also can't tell me Q is based on scientific precepts.
In any case, light sabers may be energy, but they are especially strong energy weapons. They might be able to modify the phase varience or whatever word they use for that, but that would only neutralize the same amount of power that it's switched to, the rest of the sword's energy could still penetrate. That's the problem I had with those phazers. They should have increased their power level, thus even with the shields modified, it wouldn't be enough to totally block the blast. They'd have to find a way to increase their shield's power.
Oh well, light sabers aren't totally unblockable. They have a tough time with those really solid doors on whatever space station that was, and I know they couldn't cut through the material the Master Sword is made of.
Science fiction is a little more down to earth than scence fantasy. Sure it contains stuff that hasn't came to be, but it has more realism. Believe it or not, teleportation has worked, mind you it was a single atom, but it's still teleportation. alot of the technology on star trek can actually be acomplished nowadays.
like phasers, we all know the US has laser weapons, they just don't use them.
When was the last time you saw a jedi holding a lightsaber playing mindtricks on someone?
Science fiction is fantasy. Or have you ever heard of faster-than-light travel? So Star Wars goes farther... so? That doesn't make it any less interesting... and Star Trek has some pretty significant fantasy stuff in it... supernatural beings, deity-type beings (Q), a planet that makes you live forever... need I go on?
Oh, and Borg shields wouldn't be able to stop lightsabers! Almost nothing is impervious to them... and those little personal shields wouldn't work. Against blasters, sure... but lightsabers? They are very, very strong...
Star Trek is pure science fiction, while Star Wars is fantasy with samurai influences that appears to be science fiction.
In Episode 4 they go into Hyperdrive they say they are going to light speed.
Warp 1 is 1000 times the speed of light
Well, here's something totally anal to think about.
Some say that the constant of the speed of light is actually slowing down, bit by bit, over long periods of time. In other words, the laws of physics themselves are breaking apart bit by bit.
Now then, we all know that Star Wars is "a long time ago", but we have no idea how long ago. What if it was so very very long ago that the constant of the speed of light actually WOULD be enough for inter-planetary travel? With that in mind, travelling at the speed of light would be like Star Trek's warp speed, or something like that.
Okay, with that suggestion, which by the way I don't actually believe, I just want to hear your opinions on it, I shall step out.
BTW, light speed capable ships have been around in the SW galaxy approximately 25,000 years before Episode IV.
That's one of my few problems with the fantasy genre-- it almost always involves a world/universe where technology hasn't changed in some ridiculously long period of time.
Yeah well... they fought a lot.
If anything, fighting should INCREASE the speed of technological development. After all, most of the greatest technical developments in this world can be attributed to war. One can't do a study on the history of science without also studying the history of conflict, for the two are intertwined, and other deep philosophical tripe. From spears to the internet, it all had a battle tactic in mind when it was made.
However, why on Earth should it be forced to be realistic? It is a work of fiction, so one shouldn't nit pick about certain aspects not seeming all that real. Sheesh, for the matter of realism, no one named Obi Wan ever actually existed, so why doesn't anyone complain about the fact that those characters don't actually exist in the real world?
Oh well, at least this isn't the debate over sci fi weapons in FPS games. Those people who complain about the guns not being real, saying that was one of their favorite parts of Golden Eye or whatever, SERIOUSLY frighten me.
Whats wrong with wanting realism?
Also, yes, war does definitely increase technology... sometimes it took/takes a lot longer, but war definitely is a catylyst for science... war science, but science.
Its just funny to think of these worlds that are in the standard fantasy realm: Perpetual Middle-to-Late-Middle-Ages-with-magic. Thousands and thousands of years, in many cases, stuck in some timewarp... :) Usually the "explanation" is some lame thing like godes that froze technological progress (D&D has something like that... the gods slowed tech progress and made the races all hate eachother...). It usually doesn't make a whole lot of sense...
Star Wars does the same thing, but in a futuristic world. I mean, 25,000 years of VERY slowly evolving tech? Umm....
However, it does have tech progression... my only question is, as they flesh in the past of Star Wars (with stuff like Knights of the Old Republic) how do they explain that the ships then (which don't seem thousands of years behind the modern-era star wars ones) don't progress at that rate? Of course they can't because if they do the whole history doesn't work, but still its strange. Oh well... 'suspension of disbelief' is called for in these situations, I guess.
Well in the FPS thing, the people who want all the guns to be totally real frighten me because, well, why on EARTH would they be so persistant that they are using weapons one can get in the real world too? It's very unsettling...
The thing is, even if it's war based at first, it always ends up progressing to real world usage. I mean, the internet was designed for a war purpose, but it ended up being twisted into a common day utility. It's the same with most great inventions we use in our everyday lives. We have mankind's hatred to each other to thank for modern convenience.
If I may offer my own theory on technology:
Technological growth is best kindled under certain circumstances: Take the 20th century, for instance. In the last 100 years, there have been more advances in technology than perhaps in all of human history. Before 1900, humans used trains, for a short time, but horses were also heavily relied upon for transportation, as they had been for almost all of human history. In less than a hundred years, we went from using trains and horses, all the way up to traveling to the freaking moon, or flying across the entire world in a matter of hours. We went countless millenia without these abilities, their advent was sudden. They ended up happening because conditions in the 20th century were right for it. Scientific discovery was openly encouraged, whereas before the 20th century it was looked upon with distrust and scorn.
Long periods of technological stagnation are pretty possible, even for thousands of years. Certainly advancement in the field requires a certain level of political stability. I don't know the Star Wars universe outside of the movies, but perhaps that could explain things.
Yes, it is true that long periods of very slowly changing technology are possible... for most of human history there has been very little change, with a few major ones along the way -- agriculture, stone/iron/steel weapons, horses, saddles, etc. that completely changed the world. In between those changes were usually very slight... so sure its possible.
However... in the modern world, technology is changing faster than ever before. It is almost certainly true that in the past 150 years technology has improved more than ever in history, and WAY faster, I'd have to say. Past 100 years? Maybe, but by 1900 industrialization was well on its way... if you go to 1850, it had just started... trains were here, but really industrialization had only barely begun.
Anyway, in Star Wars tech is clearly stagnant. Look at Star Wars, then the Sith Era shown in Knights of the Old Republic (the PC/X-Box game). There aren't that many differences... which doesn't really make sense given how in the Star Wars books weapon tech definitely improves. I guess there is one possible explanation -- that it had been peaceful for so incredibly long that military tech improvement stopped long ago when wars stopped being fought... it is true that war greatly increases science and technological development and Star Wars hadn't had a war in the galaxy for over a thousand years or more until the Clone Wars. So that's part of it... but still it doesn't fully explain it. You've just got to believe, without any real explanation, that it was static... same as almost every fantasy book I've read with thousands of years of barely changing, stuck-in-the-middle-ages-(with magic)- history. Oh well... its just a little annoying I guess. I wish they'd explain why in more fantasy stories... some do, but most don't seem to.
Anyways... Star Wars totally pwns Star Trek.
Yeah, Star Wars is definitely the best.
Or would be, if most of the characters weren't bland, one-dimensional cardboard cutouts.
Oh yee of little understanding.
It's my understanding of character development, coupled with my expectations, that provides for my opinion.
Star Wars characters are simple. You know who's good and who's bad in like three seconds.
That's the case with most fables/fantasy tales.
It starts with 'A long time ago in a place far, far away' for a reason, Weltall... think about it, what kinds of stories start with that line? :)