The crucial error on which this site seems to be based...

[Triforcer]

The ranks of the resurgent Empire continue to swell. What say you, citizen? Are you ready to join the Empire? Are you ready to fight for the glory of Coruscant? If you are, then join now. Fight for your people. Fight for your Emperor!

Decades after the disastrous Battle of Endor, our saviour finally arose from the ashes of the Empire. He bore the noble bloodline of Vader and the dark power of the Sith. It was under his leadership that the Empire was reborn. It is under his leadership that we shall accomplish the unprecedented: the conquest of a new galaxy. A galaxy bereft of strong leadership. The galaxy of Star Trek!

Young cadet, it is time for you to prove your mettle. It is time for you to bring civilization to the uncivilized, backward savages who live in this "Federation". Let the slaughter begin!

Okay, from this quote we gather the main thrust of the site: the NEW EMPIRE discovers the Federation and our galaxy and wants to conquer it. All of the documents written from the Imperial point of view (intelligence assessments, industrial comparisons, etc.) back up this point, if him having it on the front page of his site wasn't enough.

Next point, words in caps are my own emphasis...

Give us Fifty Thousand Years
I wish I had a dollar for every time I've heard this argument:

"The Empire may be more powerful than the Federation, but they've been exploring space for tens of thousands of years. The Federation has only been exploring for a few hundred years, so it's not a fair fight. Give the Federation tens of thousands of years, and then we'll talk."
This argument basically claims that because the Empire has numerous built-in advantages over the Federation, it's not a fair fight. But this is a pretty strange definition of "fair fight." If we decide that a fight is only fair when the two contestants are evenly matched, then all fair fights will end in a draw. Does this make sense? I don't know about everyone else, but my definition of a fair fight is one in which the two contestants have to play by the same rules. The two contestants don't have to be evenly matched. If Lennox Lewis fights Pee Wee Herman, I consider it a fair fight as long as both fighters wear the same gloves and obey the same rules. It would be an incredible mismatch, but it would still be a fair fight.
Our Trekkie friend is trying to take a fair fight and turn it into an unfair fight. Instead of taking the Empire and the Federation and simply pitting them against one another AS THEY ARE, he wants to give the Federation tens of thousands of years to prepare. This is ridiculous. If I asked whether the 21st century American armed forces could crush Julius Caesar's Roman army, would you answer that the Americans have an unfair advantage? If you do, you would be evading the question. Of course they have an advantage; that's why they would win!

I know next to nothing about physics and science, but I do know something about logic and consistency. In refuting the 50,000 years argument, this site makes the correct point that you can't automatically make them equal out of some mystical vague sense of fairness. The second quote also makes the point that you must pit the Empire against the Federation, AS THEY ARE.

This also seems reasonable, until you remember that the entire premise of a reborn Empire (with the tacit assumption that it holds all the resources and capabilities of the old Empire) is something that whoever made this site pulled directly from his ass. At the most lattermost stage chronologically of the SW universe that we know of, the Empire exists as the Imperial Remnant. It held (in Pellaeon's own words in one of the Thrawn EU books) a thousand star systems where it once held a million. Under 200 Star Destroyers where it once held 25,000. Severely limited industrial capabilities. And remember, this was at the time of the Thrawn books. Subsequent EU events and the Vong incursion (even given the Remnant's attempt at isolationism in that conflict) can reasonably be inferred to have whittled down those numbers even more. NOWHERE is there a mention of a reborn Empire that holds everything the Old Empire held.

In summary, this entire site compares Star Trek at its latest point chronologically (with all its up to date technology) with a magic fairyland reborn Empire that exists nowhere else but this site. After setting the stage this way, it is then arrogantly proclaimed that you cannot advance ST technology 50,000 years, because the two must be pitted against each other "as they are".

This is no different than if I started a site called www.starshipenterprise.net, and then on the front page revealed that Riker regained the powers of the Q and decided to rule the galaxy through replicating Lore trillions of time to act as his enforcer thugs. I then pit Riker against the Imperial Remnant and declare VICTORY!!1!

You simply can't have it both ways. You need to exercise one of a few options:
1. Actually pit the Federation as it is now against the "Empire" (the Remnant) as it is now, and redo all your calculations from that standpoint. Could the current Remnant beat the Federation?

2. Let Trekkies design their own ludicrous, totally unsupported alternate history of ST in some sort of vein like my starshipenterprise.net idea so that they are on even standing with your magical fairyland.

3. Just admit that you are comparing "The old Empire at its known height" to "the Federation at its known height" and lose all the reborn Empire BS on this site.

If you won't do any of these things, you have to admit that the 50,000 year argument is valid. If you can make up false crap about what the Empire currently is, they can make up false crap about where the Federation would be in 50k too.

Nothing I've said makes your actual math or scientific analyses less valid, but it is totally illogical to compare the current ST universe to your madeup SW universe that totally contradicts you. Either admit that you are not pitting ST v. SW "as they are", or change the site to Federation v. Remnant. Otherwise, you just look stupid.

[Lord Sauron-Tyranus-Vader]

The ranks of the resurgent Empire continue to swell. What say you, citizen? Are you ready to join the Empire? Are you ready to fight for the glory of Coruscant? If you are, then join now. Fight for your people. Fight for your Emperor!

Decades after the disastrous Battle of Endor, our saviour finally arose from the ashes of the Empire. He bore the noble bloodline of Vader and the dark power of the Sith. It was under his leadership that the Empire was reborn. It is under his leadership that we shall accomplish the unprecedented: the conquest of a new galaxy. A galaxy bereft of strong leadership. The galaxy of Star Trek!

Young cadet, it is time for you to prove your mettle. It is time for you to bring civilization to the uncivilized, backward savages who live in this "Federation". Let the slaughter begin!

Okay, from this quote we gather the main thrust of the site: the NEW EMPIRE discovers the Federation and our galaxy and wants to conquer it. All of the documents written from the Imperial point of view (intelligence assessments, industrial comparisons, etc.) back up this point, if him having it on the front page of his site wasn't enough.

Next point, words in caps are my own emphasis...

Give us Fifty Thousand Years
I wish I had a dollar for every time I've heard this argument:

"The Empire may be more powerful than the Federation, but they've been exploring space for tens of thousands of years. The Federation has only been exploring for a few hundred years, so it's not a fair fight. Give the Federation tens of thousands of years, and then we'll talk."
This argument basically claims that because the Empire has numerous built-in advantages over the Federation, it's not a fair fight. But this is a pretty strange definition of "fair fight." If we decide that a fight is only fair when the two contestants are evenly matched, then all fair fights will end in a draw. Does this make sense? I don't know about everyone else, but my definition of a fair fight is one in which the two contestants have to play by the same rules. The two contestants don't have to be evenly matched. If Lennox Lewis fights Pee Wee Herman, I consider it a fair fight as long as both fighters wear the same gloves and obey the same rules. It would be an incredible mismatch, but it would still be a fair fight.
Our Trekkie friend is trying to take a fair fight and turn it into an unfair fight. Instead of taking the Empire and the Federation and simply pitting them against one another AS THEY ARE, he wants to give the Federation tens of thousands of years to prepare. This is ridiculous. If I asked whether the 21st century American armed forces could crush Julius Caesar's Roman army, would you answer that the Americans have an unfair advantage? If you do, you would be evading the question. Of course they have an advantage; that's why they would win!

I know next to nothing about physics and science, but I do know something about logic and consistency. In refuting the 50,000 years argument, this site makes the correct point that you can't automatically make them equal out of some mystical vague sense of fairness. The second quote also makes the point that you must pit the Empire against the Federation, AS THEY ARE.

This also seems reasonable, until you remember that the entire premise of a reborn Empire (with the tacit assumption that it holds all the resources and capabilities of the old Empire) is something that whoever made this site pulled directly from his ass. At the most lattermost stage chronologically of the SW universe that we know of, the Empire exists as the Imperial Remnant. It held (in Pellaeon's own words in one of the Thrawn EU books) a thousand star systems where it once held a million. Under 200 Star Destroyers where it once held 25,000. Severely limited industrial capabilities. And remember, this was at the time of the Thrawn books. Subsequent EU events and the Vong incursion (even given the Remnant's attempt at isolationism in that conflict) can reasonably be inferred to have whittled down those numbers even more. NOWHERE is there a mention of a reborn Empire that holds everything the Old Empire held.

In summary, this entire site compares Star Trek at its latest point chronologically (with all its up to date technology) with a magic fairyland reborn Empire that exists nowhere else but this site. After setting the stage this way, it is then arrogantly proclaimed that you cannot advance ST technology 50,000 years, because the two must be pitted against each other "as they are".

This is no different than if I started a site called www.starshipenterprise.net, and then on the front page revealed that Riker regained the powers of the Q and decided to rule the galaxy through replicating Lore trillions of time to act as his enforcer thugs. I then pit Riker against the Imperial Remnant and declare VICTORY!!1!

You simply can't have it both ways. You need to exercise one of a few options:
1. Actually pit the Federation as it is now against the "Empire" (the Remnant) as it is now, and redo all your calculations from that standpoint. Could the current Remnant beat the Federation?

2. Let Trekkies design their own ludicrous, totally unsupported alternate history of ST in some sort of vein like my starshipenterprise.net idea so that they are on even standing with your magical fairyland.

3. Just admit that you are comparing "The old Empire at its known height" to "the Federation at its known height" and lose all the reborn Empire BS on this site.

If you won't do any of these things, you have to admit that the 50,000 year argument is valid. If you can make up false crap about what the Empire currently is, they can make up false crap about where the Federation would be in 50k too.

Nothing I've said makes your actual math or scientific analyses less valid, but it is totally illogical to compare the current ST universe to your madeup SW universe that totally contradicts you. Either admit that you are not pitting ST v. SW "as they are", or change the site to Federation v. Remnant. Otherwise, you just look stupid.

Gotta admit, he has a good point..
BTW, welcome to SD.net
Please enjoy your stay and Merry Chirtsmas.
Have a great day.

[Ghost Rider]

Even then...let's take yours and not Wong's own little fanfic(as he made up that and yet all his calculations are of the time in which the Empire was at their height in RoTJ)

Okay the Imperial renemant has maybe 100 ISDs, 1 SSD and about handful of star systems.

1 ISD could destroy let's say around 1000 Galaxy class starships(don't take my word...look at the site itself it's all there for anyone to look for it)

so the Federation would have to muster appoximately 100,000 Galaxy classes to stop the Empire at it's lowest ebb.

Yeah this makes your first post oh so pre-evident that we have been led astray.

[Ghost Rider]

And you do notice also both of you that NONE of the debates have ever used Wong's own Star Wars universe...so stop sticking your heads in the ground and look at these things...jeebus.

[Darth Wong]

This also seems reasonable, until you remember that the entire premise of a reborn Empire (with the tacit assumption that it holds all the resources and capabilities of the old Empire) is something that whoever made this site pulled directly from his ass.

Wow, you figured that out all by yourself? What a genius you must be. Nobody but you noticed that the Empire fell in ROTJ. Everybody give the man a big round of applause for his sparkling intellect!

At the most lattermost stage chronologically of the SW universe that we know of, the Empire exists as the Imperial Remnant. It held (in Pellaeon's own words in one of the Thrawn EU books) a thousand star systems where it once held a million.

What difference does it make? One Star Destroyer could defeat the entire Federation.

In summary, this entire site compares Star Trek at its latest point chronologically (with all its up to date technology) with a magic fairyland reborn Empire that exists nowhere else but this site.

Would you prefer a divergent timeline where the Empire wins the Battle of Endor? You need some kind of excuse to have the Empire and Feds meet; what's your plan?

After setting the stage this way, it is then arrogantly proclaimed that you cannot advance ST technology 50,000 years, because the two must be pitted against each other "as they are".

Technologically speaking, yes. Since the Feds get to eliminate all of their political troubles and enemies while the Imps don't, this seems reasonable.

This is no different than if I started a site called www.starshipenterprise.net, and then on the front page revealed that Riker regained the powers of the Q and decided to rule the galaxy through replicating Lore trillions of time to act as his enforcer thugs. I then pit Riker against the Imperial Remnant and declare VICTORY!!1!

And (here's the important part) given that particular scenario, you would probably be correct. So what's the problem?

1. Actually pit the Federation as it is now against the "Empire" (the Remnant) as it is now, and redo all your calculations from that standpoint. Could the current Remnant beat the Federation?

None of the calculations are affected. The size of the Empire is icing on the cake.

2. Let Trekkies design their own ludicrous, totally unsupported alternate history of ST in some sort of vein like my starshipenterprise.net idea so that they are on even standing with your magical fairyland.

Don't be an asshole. You're nitpicking.

3. Just admit that you are comparing "The old Empire at its known height" to "the Federation at its known height" and lose all the reborn Empire BS on this site.

Which would have exactly the same outcome as this scenario, since it would merely be another way of reaching the same destination.

If you won't do any of these things, you have to admit that the 50,000 year argument is valid.

Leap in logic. That argument is designed to allow latitude to invent new technologies out of thin air and alter the evidence to suit one's wishes: unacceptable in any debate over any subject.

If you can make up false crap about what the Empire currently is, they can make up false crap about where the Federation would be in 50k too.

None of the Empire's current status exceeds that of the Empire at its known height in the movies. Stop bullshitting.

Nothing I've said makes your actual math or scientific analyses less valid, but it is totally illogical to compare the current ST universe to your madeup SW universe that totally contradicts you. Either admit that you are not pitting ST v. SW "as they are", or change the site to Federation v. Remnant. Otherwise, you just look stupid.

Speak for yourself. Your desperate attempt to nitpick a "crucial error" doesn't change a damned thing; it only makes you look like a dishonest nitpicker.

[Lord Sauron-Tyranus-Vader]

Sorry Triforcer, you got slammed. Good luck.
BTW, nice rebuke Darth Wong.
I admire your logic.

[Triforcer]

Even then...let's take yours and not Wong's own little fanfic(as he made up that and yet all his calculations are of the time in which the Empire was at their height in RoTJ)

Okay the Imperial renemant has maybe 100 ISDs, 1 SSD and about handful of star systems.

1 ISD could destroy let's say around 1000 Galaxy class starships(don't take my word...look at the site itself it's all there for anyone to look for it)

so the Federation would have to muster appoximately 100,000 Galaxy classes to stop the Empire at it's lowest ebb.

Yeah this makes your first post oh so pre-evident that we have been led astray.

I'm not saying that the Federation could beat the Remnant. Remember this site's own words (loosely paraphrased) "if something is 50% more powerful, then the difference is too close to call. But if it is hundreds or thousands of time more powerful, we can make determinations". If the Federation is up against the Remnant (a few hundred systems versus a thousand, 100 ISDs versus the Fed fleet) then I believe the debate gets much more interesting. And remember, part of the reason the Federation (in this guys fanfic briefing) concluded they would be attacked is the aggressive nature of the reborn Empire. Hasn't the EU shown us Pellaeon isn't some slathering carnivore warmonger? Would the Remnant, currently dealing with the Vong and struggling to keep the few aliens it has left from seceding, start the war?

[Ghost Rider]

I'm not saying that the Federation could beat the Remnant. Remember this site's own words (loosely paraphrased) "if something is 50% more powerful, then the difference is too close to call. But if it is hundreds or thousands of time more powerful, we can make determinations". If the Federation is up against the Remnant (a few hundred systems versus a thousand, 100 ISDs versus the Fed fleet) then I believe the debate gets much more interesting.

And?

The Renemant is hundreds of times more powerful, and the only thing so far would make it anymore intersting is that one lone ISD helmed by R2.

Besides you deviating onto this point has still yet to bring up anything that Wong in his post didn't already prove otherwise.[/b]

[Triforcer]

Wow, you figured that out all by yourself? What a genius you must be. Nobody but you noticed that the Empire fell in ROTJ. Everybody give the man a big round of applause for his sparkling intellect!

I did notice. I read the EU after that and it kept reminding me. Apparently, in your fantasyland, you didn't notice.

What difference does it make? One Star Destroyer could defeat the entire Federation.

Did you miss the part where I said I know nothing about science or physics? I'll take your word for this. THAT WASN'T THE POINT.

Would you prefer a divergent timeline where the Empire wins the Battle of Endor? You need some kind of excuse to have the Empire and Feds meet; what's your plan?

No, the timeline I prefer is the one that actually happens in the books, unlike you. The Remnant can find a wormhole in their territory just like the Empire could've.

After setting the stage this way, it is then arrogantly proclaimed that you cannot advance ST technology 50,000 years, because the two must be pitted against each other "as they are".

Technologically speaking, yes. Since the Feds get to eliminate all of their political troubles and enemies while the Imps don't, this seems reasonable.

What the hell are you talking about? If you agree that they must be pitted against each other "technologically speaking" in the present, then you must redo your calculations from the Remnant perspective.

This is no different than if I started a site called www.starshipenterprise.net, and then on the front page revealed that Riker regained the powers of the Q and decided to rule the galaxy through replicating Lore trillions of time to act as his enforcer thugs. I then pit Riker against the Imperial Remnant and declare VICTORY!!1!

And (here's the important part) given that particular scenario, you would probably be correct. So what's the problem?

The point being that neither me nor you would be being realistic or have any grounding in the actual continuity for either universe. That would make us, accordingly, dumbasses.

1. Actually pit the Federation as it is now against the "Empire" (the Remnant) as it is now, and redo all your calculations from that standpoint. Could the current Remnant beat the Federation?

None of the calculations are affected. The size of the Empire is icing on the cake.

Yeah, going down a thousand times in size has never affected the industrial capabilities of any civilization. I repeat, you may be and are probably still RIGHT in that last conclusion. But that doesn't mean you don't look like a dumbass for setting up the current illogical comparison. Tell me mister Science, when scientists out in the real world accidently get what most colleagues think is the correct conclusion from a lucky faulty experiment is that good enough for the community?

3. Just admit that you are comparing "The old Empire at its known height" to "the Federation at its known height" and lose all the reborn Empire BS on this site.

Which would have exactly the same outcome as this scenario, since it would merely be another way of reaching the same destination.

You still don't get it, do you? I am not debating whether the Remnant or the Empire could beat the Federation. I am saying you are setting up a blatantly false comparison between your imagination and ST canon. You can't say that you are comparing them "as they are", and still have your reborn Empire BS. Pick one or the other.

Leap in logic. That argument is designed to allow latitude to invent new technologies out of thin air and alter the evidence to suit one's wishes: unacceptable in any debate over any subject.

Then redesign your site. You are altering the evidence of what actually happened post-Endor (the Remnant) to suit YOUR wishes: a reborn Empire. Pot, meet kettle.

Speak for yourself. Your desperate attempt to nitpick a "crucial error" doesn't change a damned thing; it only makes you look like a dishonest nitpicker.

Its nitpicking to point out the fact you are pitting continuity ST against your made up reborn Empire? I don't know or care if the Remnant could still easily beat the Federation. The point is that is the valid comparison, and saying "Well it would still be the same outcome so I don't have to change any of my glaring consistency related errors" is simply not good enough. You keep stating that the Remnant could beat the Feds, well PROVE IT.

[Ghost Rider]

He does...many times over.

1 ISD could crush about 1000 Galaxy class starships.


1

Imperial

Class

Star

Destroyer

Mark

II



The Remnant has more than 1 of these...and they have a SSD.

And based on the calcs(so what if you don't know Physics...they literally spell it all out for you), the Remnant wins.

Just because you are harping on one point makes no difference in the end other than you are another nit-picking troll who wants attention.

[Lord Sauron-Tyranus-Vader]

He does...many times over.

1 ISD could crush about 1000 Galaxy class starships.


1

Imperial

Class

Star

Destroyer

Mark

II



The Remnant has more than 1 of these...and they have a SSD.

And based on the calcs(so what if you don't know Physics...they literally spell it all out for you), the Remnant wins.

Just because you are harping on one point makes no difference in the end other than you are another nit-picking troll who wants attention.

Oh come on, lets go easy on the Feddies.
One TIE Defender.
The feds are still hopelessly outmached.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Do more than just "Me too" posts or shut up, Twelve-Year-Old Moron.

[DocHorror]

I see your point Triforcer.

But this site is only meant to be a bit of fun...

Wongs Empire is mearly a plot device to keep the Empire from the SW films at its current size. Instead of using the Empire Remnant...

You could argue that it may have been better to choose a time period during the movies...

But then you have too much overlap and people can start creating stupid 'Rebellion joins the federation' senarios...

Just think of it as the same old Empire, just without that loon Palpatine & his fucking Scoooby Doo method of taking over the galaxy

[Slartibartfast]

Speak for yourself. Your desperate attempt to nitpick a "crucial error" doesn't change a damned thing; it only makes you look like a dishonest nitpicker.

Its nitpicking to point out the fact you are pitting continuity ST against your made up reborn Empire? I don't know or care if the Remnant could still easily beat the Federation. The point is that is the valid comparison, and saying "Well it would still be the same outcome so I don't have to change any of my glaring consistency related errors" is simply not good enough. You keep stating that the Remnant could beat the Feds, well PROVE IT.

Yes it's definitely nitpicking. Wong's "reborn Empire" is for all practical purposes identical to the canonical Empire right before the Battle of Endor made everything a mess. He isn't making up stuff, he simply is copy/pasting the Empire that we know. It's another way of saying "a not horribly crippled Empire", which is more than fair in a versus debate.

Your horrid nitpicking is along the lines of "you can't compare Star Wars versus Star Trek the Original Series because that's what happened before! You must compare it to Voyager or Nemesis because it's just as Trek is now!"

Here's a hint: neither Star Trek or Star Wars take place "now". Star Trek is a fictional universe which takes place centuries from now. Star Wars has a timeline totally unrelated to ours. Which point of each timeline you choose for debate is irrelevant.

No versus arguments are derived from any "fairy tale magic made up universe" - the description in StarDestroyer.net is only flavor for Mike's fan fiction, and you fail to see that. It has nothing to do with actual debates. If according to you he can't make up any events which don't change at all any capabilities or power figures, no fan-fiction could be even written. Guess what genius: fan-fiction are made-up stories, it doesn't matter that they're made-up as long as they're self-consistent.

[Darth Wong]

Triforcer, your entire argument is based on the notion that it's somehow unfair of me to base my website upon a "future Empire" scenario. You tried to equate it to some fantasy-land scenario where you get to make up evidence out of thin air.

However, to show that this argument is true, you would first have to find a "SW vs ST" argument on my site which does one of the following:

A) invents evidence out of thin air
B) relies upon this particular scenario and could not be applied to some point in the movies or post-ROTJ era.

You have not done this. You have not even tried to do this. Instead, you merely attack the site on the assumption that the validity of its arguments is based on the accuracy of the scenario on the front page, which is just a front for my fan fiction! Are you really this fucking stupid? Take my Death Star pages for example; how are they based upon the "future Empire" front-page intro? Take my turbolaser firepower calcs; how are they based upon the "future Empire" front-page intro? Take my essays on Trek engineering. How are they based on the "future Empire" front-page intro? You are looking for excuses to cast doubt on the validity of the entire site by nitpicking the setup for my fanfic.

[Slartibartfast]

...You keep stating that the Remnant could beat the Feds, well PROVE IT.

Prove it? PROVE IT? Use the fucking BBS search function you lazy retarded whiner!

[Lord Sauron-Tyranus-Vader]

...You keep stating that the Remnant could beat the Feds, well PROVE IT.

Prove it? PROVE IT? Use the fucking BBS search function you lazy retarded whiner!

Only dumbasses do not see that the Remnant wil own the Feddies wimpy asses. You seem to be one of them.

[Typhonis 1]

Lets see a Star destroyer has 60 heavy turbolaser mounts each heavy turbolaser at minimum is a 200 gigaton weapon shield strength is at minimum 30 teratons the best the Federation has is maybe MAYBE 500 megaton energy shielding nuff said

[Mr Bean]

Lets see a Star destroyer has 60 heavy turbolaser mounts each heavy turbolaser at minimum is a 200 gigaton weapon shield strength is at minimum 30 teratons the best the Federation has is maybe MAYBE 500 megaton energy shielding nuff said

You keep forgeting Typ, Heavy Turbolasers are of UNKNOW strength, However Medium TL on a 20 YEAR OLD TRANSPORT are clocked in at 200 Gigatons

[Knife]

Activated Sarcasm* Well lets see, 1+1=2. Ok, I am not a math wizz but I will take your word for it, that one and one combined will equal two. But I do not agree with your use of the symbol +, as it is a symbol it really means nothing. If you really wanted to depict the problem correctly, you would spell out the word "add" instead of using symbology that could or could not mean anything.Deactivate Sarcasm



Please, Mr. Wongs site and his reborn Empire, serve as an editorial device he uses as a bases for his analytical disscussion of the SW universe and how it would fair against the ST universe. One tends to have a pretense to start such research, much like you found his site as a pretense to start an argument over it.

Weather or not a Reborn Empire or an Imperial Remmenant goes up against the Federation, the science and the mathmatics of the two civilizations will still be the same. A 200GT turbolasere is still 200GT's weather it is mounted on an Remmenant stardestroyer or a Reborn Imperial stardestroyer.

Your argument is fluff, and no substance. Your want to argue the pretext in which Mr. Wong used to start his comparison of the two cultures and military, and have no interest to argue the comparison itself.

[Lord Sauron-Tyranus-Vader]

Activated Sarcasm* Well lets see, 1+1=2. Ok, I am not a math wizz but I will take your word for it, that one and one combined will equal two. But I do not agree with your use of the symbol +, as it is a symbol it really means nothing. If you really wanted to depict the problem correctly, you would spell out the word "add" instead of using symbology that could or could not mean anything.Deactivate Sarcasm



Please, Mr. Wongs site and his reborn Empire, serve as an editorial device he uses as a bases for his analytical disscussion of the SW universe and how it would fair against the ST universe. One tends to have a pretense to start such research, much like you found his site as a pretense to start an argument over it.

Weather or not a Reborn Empire or an Imperial Remmenant goes up against the Federation, the science and the mathmatics of the two civilizations will still be the same. A 200GT turbolasere is still 200GT's weather it is mounted on an Remmenant stardestroyer or a Reborn Imperial stardestroyer.

Your argument is fluff, and no substance. Your want to argue the pretext in which Mr. Wong used to start his comparison of the two cultures and military, and have no interest to argue the comparison itself.

Yes, Triforcer, it serve as an background to the site, not to the debates. Hell, make the Empire a conglermation of 10 planets and give em 1 ISD and 6 frigates, and they will still win.

[Lord Sauron-Tyranus-Vader]

Lets see a Star destroyer has 60 heavy turbolaser mounts each heavy turbolaser at minimum is a 200 gigaton weapon shield strength is at minimum 30 teratons the best the Federation has is maybe MAYBE 500 megaton energy shielding nuff said

You keep forgeting Typ, Heavy Turbolasers are of UNKNOW strength, However Medium TL on a 20 YEAR OLD TRANSPORT are clocked in at 200 Gigatons

I always smile when I read that.

[Triforcer]

Triforcer, your entire argument is based on the notion that it's somehow unfair of me to base my website upon a "future Empire" scenario. You tried to equate it to some fantasy-land scenario where you get to make up evidence out of thin air.

However, to show that this argument is true, you would first have to find a "SW vs ST" argument on my site which does one of the following:

A) invents evidence out of thin air
B) relies upon this particular scenario and could not be applied to some point in the movies or post-ROTJ era.

You have not done this. You have not even tried to do this. Instead, you merely attack the site on the assumption that the validity of its arguments is based on the accuracy of the scenario on the front page, which is just a front for my fan fiction! Are you really this fucking stupid? Take my Death Star pages for example; how are they based upon the "future Empire" front-page intro? Take my turbolaser firepower calcs; how are they based upon the "future Empire" front-page intro? Take my essays on Trek engineering. How are they based on the "future Empire" front-page intro? You are looking for excuses to cast doubt on the validity of the entire site by nitpicking the setup for my fanfic.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but here goes: I agree that the Empire at its height could own the Federation. But chronologically, from what we know about the "current" eras of both universes, you are cross-timing. You are comparing the "current" Federation with the "past" Empire of the SW galaxy. If you just want to say "I am comparing them when they are both at their height", then say it and I won't have any problems.

But if you don't take this tack, then your "Give us 50,000 Years!" rebuttal is SIMPLY NOT VALID. That entire argument is based on the premise that we are comparing ST and SW from their CURRENT technology levels. I agree that we should do this, and you are NOT doing this. You are comparing the Federation to a reborn Empire, not the war-torn, Vong besieged, Pellaeon-led Remnant which you truly should be doing if you were comparing them AS THEY ARE, as you claim you are doing.

If you are comparing the current Fed to a pre-ROTJ Empire, say that SOMEWHERE on this site. Say that your intel reports and industrial assessments that come from your reborn Empire perspective should have a magic psychic logical leap performed on them to be about Palpatine's Empire. I wouldn't use your fan fiction to counter your arguments if YOU didn't use it IN your arguments.

But if you do those things, you cannot criticize Trekkies for bouncing around to the time of the T'kon Empire or 50,000 years in the future to find the tech level to fight you. When you bounce around in time to find your optimum position, why can't they?

[Triforcer]

Please, Mr. Wongs site and his reborn Empire, serve as an editorial device he uses as a bases for his analytical disscussion of the SW universe and how it would fair against the ST universe. One tends to have a pretense to start such research, much like you found his site as a pretense to start an argument over it.

Weather or not a Reborn Empire or an Imperial Remmenant goes up against the Federation, the science and the mathmatics of the two civilizations will still be the same. A 200GT turbolasere is still 200GT's weather it is mounted on an Remmenant stardestroyer or a Reborn Imperial stardestroyer.

Your argument is fluff, and no substance. Your want to argue the pretext in which Mr. Wong used to start his comparison of the two cultures and military, and have no interest to argue the comparison itself.

Fluff? Mr. Wong wouldn't answer this, so perhaps you would have. Please tell me how your totally unsupported argument that the Remnant would easily beat the Federation is at all supportable.

1. Pellaeon has shown his willingness to make peace with the Republic. He is not a warmonger, so the premise that he would even attack at all is suspect.

2. Lets go with a conservative estimate and say that the Remnant still has 150 Star Destroyers. How make can they spare when they are in a fight trying to stave off EXTINCTION at the hands of the Vong? How much resources would Pellaeon spare on attacking a galaxy of largely unknowns while gravitic anomalies are squeezing Munnilinnst or Bastion in half?

3. The Empire is one one-thousandth the size it was. Anyone who thinks, just in general, that it would be just as easy for the Remnant to conquer the Feds (and allies) as the Empire is smoking crack, plain and simple.

Basically I've heard two arguments today...

1. The Remnant would conquer the Feds just as easily as the Empire, even in the middle of their own fight for their lives! I don't have to prove this because if someone determines the right answer to a math problem is 1, and I take 5-3 and get 1, then the process really doesn't matter!

2. You are attacking my fan fiction! That has no bearing on my arguments, even when I argue that the Feds and the Empire should be compared AS THEY ARE!!

Neither is overly convincing.

[Ghost Rider]

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but here goes: I agree that the Empire at its height could own the Federation. But chronologically, from what we know about the "current" eras of both universes, you are cross-timing. You are comparing the "current" Federation with the "past" Empire of the SW galaxy. If you just want to say "I am comparing them when they are both at their height", then say it and I won't have any problems.

Did you even see the arguments of that the Federation at the Height of their military build up but no casualties...I guess fucking not

But if you don't take this tack, then your "Give us 50,000 Years!" rebuttal is SIMPLY NOT VALID. That entire argument is based on the premise that we are comparing ST and SW from their CURRENT technology levels. I agree that we should do this, and you are NOT doing this. You are comparing the Federation to a reborn Empire, not the war-torn, Vong besieged, Pellaeon-led Remnant which you truly should be doing if you were comparing them AS THEY ARE, as you claim you are doing.

And would it matter dumb shit given a 20 year old goddamn transport could destroy the finest warship on the Federation side with one shot from it's medium turbolaser?

If you are comparing the current Fed to a pre-ROTJ Empire, say that SOMEWHERE on this site. Say that your intel reports and industrial assessments that come from your reborn Empire perspective should have a magic psychic logical leap performed on them to be about Palpatine's Empire. I wouldn't use your fan fiction to counter your arguments if YOU didn't use it IN your arguments.

He does dumbshit...read more.

But if you do those things, you cannot criticize Trekkies for bouncing around to the time of the T'kon Empire or 50,000 years in the future to find the tech level to fight you. When you bounce around in time to find your optimum position, why can't they?

Then let's use a Empire 2 billion years in the future where they make the Culture look like pussies with BB-guns...but then we would have calcs to back up either side now would we dumbass?