K`tinga class battlecruiser vs Corellian Corvette

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2002-11-01 10:55pm

Just a thought, having no specs to rely on, I thought I would ask joo guys. What do you think? They`re two of my all-time favorite ships in sci-fi.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-02 12:08am

This is Stardestroyer.net

You can safely assume that a modified Light Stock Freighter armed with purely point-defense antifighter weaponry is more than sufficient to destroy, in honourable combat, no more than 50% of the Klingon Navy, circa whatever timeperiod you choose to name.

For more amusing discussions, you can question the impact of a single X-Wing fighter on a massed Federation Squadron, such as present against the Borg at Wolf 359.

Im betting on the X Wing, in these enviorns.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2002-11-02 12:20am

Oh, I expect that kind of crap, of course. If anyone has real calcs from somewhere, I`d like to see that, too.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-02 12:32am

It all depends on what inital assumptions and whose calculations you want to belive.

ditl.org, and misseur Okona, would have you belive that the aformentioned K'Tinga is capable of killing not only the entire Imperial Navy present at the Battle of Endor, but might well put forward the supposition that due to the fact that 'Navigational Sheilds deflect Laser Weaponry', said K'Tinga is likely able to withstand the firepower output of a Deathstar Superlaser.

I take some exception to this position.

Sanity is oftimes absent from either extreme in such arguements.

For my own part, I take Misseur Wong, and Stardestroyer.net, as the Pro-Wars, but well reasoned and sane arguement.

By Mr. Wongs calculations, the Klingon Capital Vessel dies horribly at the hands of the Transport.

For Pro-Trek, but again well thought out arguement, i might reccomend
http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWhi.html.

By his calculations, said K'Tinga is capable of slaying the Transport without even really trying, and might give a Star Destroyer a decent fight.

In my not so humble opinion, both sides are usually guilty of picking only the 'best' examples or datasets for their own 'side', and then countering the other sides arguements with the weakest datasets and examples aviliable to them.

Since im more prone to being a WarGamer than a professional arguer of esoterica, I make whatever assumptions are necessary for a good game. In General, I like my Star Destroyers big, slow, and relatively powerfully armed (relative to their mass), with some notation that these are also carriers and assault transports, and thus likely less powerful in terms of direct firepower than a similar mass ship, purely dedicated to the heavy-anti-ship role, and built on a simliar Technology Base.

Typhonis 1 · Post by **Typhonis 1** » 2002-11-02 12:33am

the medium turbolasers on a20 yr old trasnsport are rated at 200 gigatons.A carrack is armed simuarly I believe so it too could carry those nasty weapons.Now then a Klingon Cruisers shields can only take 5 to 10 photon torpedo hits before collapsing .now givewn a torp has 1.5 kg of Am that means they hit with about 64 MT worth of force.....the Klingon ship is dead as soon as it gets in range

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-02 12:34am

Thank you, Typhonis, for proving my point so elegantly.

Post by **Vympel** » 2002-11-02 12:57am

Marcus wrote:Thank you, Typhonis, for proving my point so elegantly.

The size of the main guns on a Corellian Corvette (on the dorsal and ventral sides) are similar to the size of the quad TLs on the Acclamator. Gigaton level firepower is perfectly reasonable. Post your own calcs.

In my not so humble opinion, both sides are usually guilty of picking only the 'best' examples or datasets for their own 'side', and then countering the other sides arguements with the weakest datasets and examples aviliable to them.

Assertion without evidence.

By his calculations, said K'Tinga is capable of slaying the Transport without even really trying, and might give a Star Destroyer a decent fight

Calculations which have no basis in reality, having referenced Darkstar's page you are most obviously a noob. Darkstar is hated by both the SW and ST side- he never concedes a point, twists evidence to suit his position, and ignores all rebuttals. He is an uber-troll.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-02 01:12am

Actually, though I am most certainly new to these enviorns, I found his choice of assumptions and methodology not at all different from Misseur Wongs.

As for the overall approach and validity of calculations... barring alot more looking, and thinking, im not prepared to say. Misseur Wong, et. al. have put alot of work and thought into their numbers, and ive certainly not done the work to countermand them.

One thing I do find interesting is the overall baseline attitude of the board towards all things ST. Noone finds it necessary to debate the ability of the Galactic Empire to fight off the aggressive attentions of, say, the Culture. (I recall reading a thread that amounts to 'well duh'). Skylark, no problem, yup, that ship bigger and meaner. The Warhammer 40K Imperium of Man got a quite, reasonable discussion, with points and counterpoints raised and discussed.

Has the past experience of the typical Star Wars fan, in such discussions, with the typical Star Trek fan been so bad as that? My interest in Trek fairly well begins and ends at SFB, and ill admit the attentions of the 'The Federation ALWAYS wins' crowd grows quite annoying in the context of Star Fleet Battles, which is a wargame first and a platform for Gene Roddenburys vision of the future not at all.

I just find the gut-reflex vitriol somewhat... id say amusing, but yould take it the wrong way. You get my point.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-11-02 01:19am

One shot for a turbolaser or one minute or less worth fire from the laser cannosn and the K'Tinga is dead.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2002-11-02 01:36am

Marcus wrote:For Pro-Trek, but again well thought out arguement, i might reccomend
http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWhi.html.

Since when does the phrase "well thought out" apply to Darkstar?

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-02 01:40am

You must also grant my 'Sanity is often absent from the extremes' point.

Misseur Darkstar (I was quite unaware he went by that name on this board, thank you for pointing it out) habitually puts out some rather extreme numbers for trek, and has some sillyness of his own that I wont go into here.

That said, until I find a better-reasoned 'Pro-Trek' site, it will have to do. Perhaps someone could point me in such directions?

Moonshadow · Post by **Moonshadow** » 2002-11-02 01:43am

Star Fleet Battles eh? i haven't played it myself but since i'm a model builder. i do collect the little Ships. Do you prefer the Plastic or the Pewter ships?

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-02 01:47am

Lead. (is my age showing?)

Seriously, though... ~sighs~ for display, Pewter. For day-in, day out use, Plastic. Lighter, MUCH more survivable. Drop a pewter mini off a table, its haul out the superglue. The plastic mini bounces.

SFB, Full Thrust. Dirtside. Some 40K, but the Marketing Department of the Microsoft of Wargaming eventually sent me into the hills. Some Battletech, Waaaayyy back in the day. (Now there was a 'reality' that wasnt often visited by reality). Some of the old FASA Starship Combat Game... which always kinda struck me as SFB lite...

Moonshadow · Post by **Moonshadow** » 2002-11-02 02:06am

i find that paint looks better on the Pewter ships but runs real bad. On Plastic the paint doesn't run as bad but the color ends up looking duller. As far as the durability, i see your point but plastic ships don't survive moving too well. When i moved to GA, my Ptolmey class tug was smashed and would up as a kitbash. My Dreadnaught took damage but was fixable. I recently ordered a Plastic Federation Fleet box and wound up with a Glow in the dark Dreadnaught

while the others were the usual off-white. I kept the new Dreadnaught the way it was and put the old one on display with the rest of the new fleet. I also have a Pewter Klingon Fleet box and pewter Romulan Sparrowhawk, Firehawk, Seahawk and Skyhawk.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-02 02:08am

yes. The inflexiblity of paint I also find costs me, when the plastic models beneath them BEND.

Glow in the Dark Federation Dreadnought... Hmm... Reactor Casulty?

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-02 02:10am

And I must admit, I loathe the look of most of ADBs models. Im considering trying to convert some of the Taldren-designed Starfleet Command vessels into 3D models... serious work, but might be worthwhile...

Moonshadow · Post by **Moonshadow** » 2002-11-02 02:20am

well i like the Romulan "Hawk" series of ships because i've seen another Romulan Fleet Box that had basically different sized RBoPs for the different ships. While i like the RBoP, i like to see some variety in designs.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2002-11-02 04:52pm

Hold just a second, guys. You`re saying that SFB miniatures are still available, and in a CHOICE of materials?!?

HOLY TOOKAH!! Where? How much?

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-02 10:42pm

Well, I dont know if they do ordering off their main site.. but for my own part, id give www.starfleetgames.com a look-see.

ADB is alive, well, and kicking after an extended leave-of-absence.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-11-02 11:12pm

Marcus wrote:
For Pro-Trek, but again well thought out arguement, i might reccomend
http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWhi.html.

You called Dark Star's arguments "well thought out." Prepare to die.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-11-02 11:13pm

Marcus wrote:This is Stardestroyer.net

You can safely assume that a modified Light Stock Freighter armed with purely point-defense antifighter weaponry is more than sufficient to destroy, in honourable combat, no more than 50% of the Klingon Navy, circa whatever timeperiod you choose to name.

For more amusing discussions, you can question the impact of a single X-Wing fighter on a massed Federation Squadron, such as present against the Borg at Wolf 359.

Im betting on the X Wing, in these enviorns.

Hahaha

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2002-11-03 12:01am

Ah yes, the assumption that the middle of the road must be correct. Gotta love it.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-03 12:54am

Its probably safe to state that I can find at least SOME evidence and inital datapoints for EITHER universe to prove whatever I bloody-well please. Like alot of debate, ultimately the point seems to be to define what evidence is admissable, and what preponderance is necessary.

Lets face it guys, Star Trek has never suffered from the 'Consistency' bugaboo, and StarWars, though better, is hardly perfect.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2002-11-03 12:56am

Marcus wrote:Its probably safe to state that I can find at least SOME evidence and inital datapoints for EITHER universe to prove whatever I bloody-well please.

I challenge you to find evidence that Star Trek can destroy an entire planet Death Star-style through sheer direct energy transfer.

Like alot of debate, ultimately the point seems to be to define what evidence is admissable, and what preponderance is necessary.

Naturally.

Lets face it guys, Star Trek has never suffered from the 'Consistency' bugaboo, and StarWars, though better, is hardly perfect.

Canon SW is quite consistent. The EU is a bit less so.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 2002-11-03 01:09am

Okay, ill admit ive not read the entirity of the EU (or, for that matter, seen every episode of ST, other than ST:TOS... this reveals my ST leanings, I suppose.. ~G~)

Planetbusting-Right out for Federation Ships. Never seen anything on that scale.

Species 8472 APPARENTLY does it (I dont watch much Voyager).

Various Space Monsters of TOS do it.

The infamous super-duper antimatter of the TOS Obsession Episode would allow you to bust a planet with enough of it (and it shouldnt take all that much!) (PS... Mr Guardian, whatever-his-name-is-here... im curious about his K-T event values, there MUCH smaller than mine. Neither a criticism or a support, just a question...)

However, none of the above is direct evidence from something seen on-screen.

(Side note... we might get better debates from limiting everyting to whats seen on-screen, and extrapolative from whats seen and done on-screen. Or we might get a harder-to-codify mess. Unsure. The only thing sillier than our collective passtime here, and we must admit playing my imaginary universe can beat up your imaginary universe is a fairly silly passtime by normal standards.... is having the vicotry of one side or another based on the typical SF authors inability to understand very large numbers, or for that matter count beyond fingers and toes)

Ill grant that, taken just for whats on-screen, SW is ALOT more consistent. One writer with a single unified vision will tend to have that effect.

Side note... did anyone ever quantify exactly HOW much energy it takes to, by main energy transfer, break a planet into itty-bitty peices? Does the fact that much of a typical class-M planet is liquid help? (it would seem too, but the realm of high-energy physics is just plain wierd, alot of times)