Star Trek Weapons Scientists vs.Star Wars Weapons Scientists

[Stark]

It could be argued that ignoring holodeck technology, there was essentially no development in ST until the very end of Voyager. They got faster, more powerful (although hey, anyone want to PROVE the new phasers are better and by how much? ) and thats it. Truely *new* technologies were either ignored (like all the tech of the week) or never worked properly. Ships are still driven by warp, armed with phasers and torpedoes and protected by shields - wow, look how far we've come!

Bio neural gel packs = teh suxor.

[Ra]

B1ot3ch!
Phaser technology hasn't improved at all, it's gotten worse. SF made the change from "bank" to "strip", and I don't know of any advantage an array has over a bank. As for personal weapons, they abandoned pistol phasers for the fucking "banana" phasers. On top of that, the things were bigger, and hard to aim. They only introduced a real rifle (albeit one that's bulkier than a modern M-16 and has a flashlight to give away one's position) after the Borg and Dominion showed up.
What's worse, photorps haven't improved in nearly a century. The photorps used since STII are still in service in STG. The quantum torpedo is just a prettier color.
Improvement my ass.
- Ra

[Castor Troy]

I'm not disagreeing with you or anything, but what about developement in term of robotics? Data as an example.

[Spacebeard]

Bio neural gel packs = teh suxor.

"Get that cheese to sickbay!"

But yeah, you have a point. For all the evidence that the Star Wars universe is in a state of technological stasis, there's also evidence that the Star Trek universe is scientifically stagnant. Enterprise especially made this obvious: there's no major technology in TOS, TNG, DS9, or VOY that hasn't been seen on Enterprise. It gives us the impression that Star Trek humans haven't really developed any technology on their own beyond the warp drive; everything else is ripped off of the Vulcans or Klingons or some random forehead aliens.

The quantum torpedo is just a prettier color.

And twice the yield, no?

Phaser technology hasn't improved at all, it's gotten worse. SF made the change from "bank" to "strip", and I don't know of any advantage an array has over a bank.

Again, greater firepower. A phaser array is many phaser banks operating in parallel.

We do see a steady improvement in firepower, just like we see steady small increases in warp speed, but the base technology remains mostly the same. Any qualitatively different weapons we see, such as the Breen magic energy sink, seem to be based on cheap technobabble tricks which are quickly invalidated by other cheap technobabble tricks. This seems to be where much of Star Trek's weapon development efforts are focused: an arms race between weapons optimized to penetrate specific designs of shields versus shields optimized to nullify specific weapons.

[Spacebeard]

I'm not disagreeing with you or anything, but what about developement in term of robotics? Data as an example.

There were androids in TOS that seemed just as capable as Data. See "What Are Little Girls Made Of?", or "I, Mudd".

[Castor Troy]

There were androids in TOS that seemed just as capable as Data. See "What Are Little Girls Made Of?", or "I, Mudd".

Ah, then I stand corrected.

[Ra]

Again, greater firepower. A phaser array is many phaser banks operating in parallel.

We do see a steady improvement in firepower, just like we see steady small increases in warp speed, but the base technology remains mostly the same. Any qualitatively different weapons we see, such as the Breen magic energy sink, seem to be based on cheap technobabble tricks which are quickly invalidated by other cheap technobabble tricks. This seems to be where much of Star Trek's weapon development efforts are focused: an arms race between weapons optimized to penetrate specific designs of shields versus shields optimized to nullify specific weapons.

I was referring as much to personal weapons as I was shipboard weapons. I see your point about strip phasers and their improved firepower. Conceded. But what of the personal phasers? I can't see any improvement in their firepower, just the ability to widebeam. And that depletes the power cells rapidly, IIRC.
- Ra

[Spacebeard]

I was referring as much to personal weapons as I was shipboard weapons. I see your point about strip phasers and their improved firepower. Conceded. But what of the personal phasers? I can't see any improvement in their firepower, just the ability to widebeam. And that depletes the power cells rapidly, IIRC.
- Ra

Someone in another thread said that the wide beam setting existed in TOS. He was a troll that got banned, though, so I don't know if he can be trusted on that.

I don't see any improvement in firepower either, for the personal weapons. The main site says that only apparent improvements are that the power cells are far less volatile and dangerous while providing the same power.

[Lord Revan]

Yeah tech development in ST

Photon torps: basic princeble unchanged for 200 years
Phasers: unchanged for 100 years (though there has been proto-phasers for 200 years)
Warp Drive:basic princeble unchanged for 300 years
Impulse Drive:basic Princeble unchanged for at least 200 years
Transporters:basic princeble unchanged for 200 years

[Batman]

I don't see any improvement in firepower either, for the personal weapons. The main site says that only apparent improvements are that the power cells are far less volatile and dangerous while providing the same power.

Well, in all fairness being sidearms they don't need more firepower.
A modern pistol is no more powerful that one 100 years ago, and modern military rifles actually are less.
Making a weapon more powerful just because is stupid.

[Lancer]

I'm not disagreeing with you or anything, but what about developement in term of robotics? Data as an example.

There were androids in TOS that seemed just as capable as Data. See "What Are Little Girls Made Of?", or "I, Mudd".

Designed by an alien race, and Data, unlike the TOS androids, can resist being crashed by humans acting illogical.

[Spacebeard]

I'm not disagreeing with you or anything, but what about developement in term of robotics? Data as an example.

There were androids in TOS that seemed just as capable as Data. See "What Are Little Girls Made Of?", or "I, Mudd".

Designed by an alien race, and Data, unlike the TOS androids, can resist being crashed by humans acting illogical.

True. But Starfleet has never been able to reproduce Data, so for all intents and purposes he might as well have been designed by aliens too. As for the logic bugs, I don't remember that happening in "What Are Little Girls Made Of?", only in "I, Mudd", but I could be mistaken about that.

[Lancer]

There were androids in TOS that seemed just as capable as Data. See "What Are Little Girls Made Of?", or "I, Mudd".

Designed by an alien race, and Data, unlike the TOS androids, can resist being crashed by humans acting illogical.

True. But Starfleet has never been able to reproduce Data, so for all intents and purposes he might as well have been designed by aliens too. As for the logic bugs, I don't remember that happening in "What Are Little Girls Made Of?", only in "I, Mudd", but I could be mistaken about that.

Data was built with the established techbase of the Federation. The androids in "I, Mudd" and "What Are Little Girls Made Of" aren't.

Otherwise, I could take an ISD from Star Wars, fly it into Federation space, and argue that it's indicative of the Federation's capabilities.

[SirNitram]

Arguing Data as a good point for Federation advancement is akin to arguing Quantum Crystalline Armour is a good point for Imperial advancement(As it is not lost tech, having been reproduced twice since the Suncrusher incidents, and Data's never been properly reproduced). However, I think most will agree this isn't a good path for the main discussion.

[Spacebeard]

Data was built with the established techbase of the Federation. The androids in "I, Mudd" and "What Are Little Girls Made Of" aren't.

Otherwise, I could take an ISD from Star Wars, fly it into Federation space, and argue that it's indicative of the Federation's capabilities.

This thread is about Star Trek scientists, not their technology base (and not specifically Federation scientists, either). It doesn't speak well of these scientists that they cannot reproduce Data.

[Castor Troy]

This thread is about Star Trek scientists, not their technology base (and not specifically Federation scientists, either). It doesn't speak well of these scientists that they cannot reproduce Data.

True, but technological developement and rate does reflect on the scientists in terms of performance, among other things.

[Stark]

The quantum torpedo is just a prettier color.

And twice the yield, no?

This is an example of the compressed summation of ST tech advancement arguments. How do we know the yield? Whoops, we FUCKING DON'T. We don't know proper numbers for ANYTHING. It just looks different. AI, robots, guns, jack.

I know Spacebeard isn't one of these people, its just an example, please don't take it personally.

[Spacebeard]

The quantum torpedo is just a prettier color.

And twice the yield, no?

This is an example of the compressed summation of ST tech advancement arguments. How do we know the yield? Whoops, we FUCKING DON'T. We don't know proper numbers for ANYTHING. It just looks different. AI, robots, guns, jack.

I know Spacebeard isn't one of these people, its just an example, please don't take it personally.

Yeah, I got that statement about quantum torpedoes from the main site, which in turn got it from the DS9 TM. I don't think the show gives us anything conclusive to either confirm that or contradict it; no numbers, like you said.

The problem as I see it is that the capabilities of Treknology vary wildly from episode to episode according to writer fiat. One week they can supposedly melt a planet's crust, the next week they're helpless against an asteroid. And when we do get numbers from dialogue or from reference books, they're total bullshit, often not even in real units ("isotons").

[Stark]

Poor main site... we need to generate a staff for an update. The ST:TM stuff is, in particular, quite misleading.

[Coalition]

You'd have the Lensmen on crack. Triplanetary and First Lensman especially portray the cliche of "think it up one day, build it the next, arm the fleet with it on the third day."

You forgot:

And on the fourth day, they think up the countermeasure to make it useless.

[Lancer]

You'd have the Lensmen on crack. Triplanetary and First Lensman especially portray the cliche of "think it up one day, build it the next, arm the fleet with it on the third day."

You forgot:

And on the fourth day, they think up the countermeasure to make it useless.

err, no. More like "on the hour after the third day, they think up the countermeasures to make it useless."

[Darth Fanboy]

SF Weapons Scientist:

"We've just devised a new crossmodulation node for the phaser barrel which allows for rapid adjustments to the phaser's frequency."

SW Weapons Scientist:

"I call it, the Death Star....."

[Castor Troy]

Well, here's my look at the different weapons designing "philosophies".

The Empire likes to improve their technology, and basically make their weapons more powerful. Superweapons equates to "the bigger, the better" and basically a huge industrial infrastructure to back it up.

The Federation, on the other hand, likes to find more "scientific" ways to design new weapons, and can also be considered adaptable.

Anyways, that's just my take, but please, correct me if I'm wrong.

[SirNitram]

Well, here's my look at the different weapons designing "philosophies".

The Empire likes to improve their technology, and basically make their weapons more powerful. Superweapons equates to "the bigger, the better" and basically a huge industrial infrastructure to back it up.

The Federation, on the other hand, likes to find more "scientific" ways to design new weapons, and can also be considered adaptable.

Anyways, that's just my take, but please, correct me if I'm wrong.

What's scientific about 'We've found this completely new idea... Whoops, it completely fails to work. Eh-heh. More funding please?', precisely, that is not scientific about 'By using known physics and engineering principles, we've miniaturized this hyperdrive to a size suitable for usage on the TIE fighter', exactly?

[Castor Troy]

What's scientific about 'We've found this completely new idea... Whoops, it completely fails to work. Eh-heh. More funding please?', precisely, that is not scientific about 'By using known physics and engineering principles, we've miniaturized this hyperdrive to a size suitable for usage on the TIE fighter', exactly?

What I meant was that the Federation would like to research new technologies. Again, this is just a generalization I'm making, and I didn't say it was any better than the Star Wars method.

But yeah, it was poorly thought on my part.

Nevermind it, then.