Star Trek VS Star Wars

swoganrich · Post by **swoganrich** » 2006-07-19 06:45pm

Ok. I'm a trekker, all the way. The Star Trek's technology vs Star War's technology is an ongoing argument on the Trek boards as well.

The Death Star, while clumsy and cannot aim their main weapon at the Enterprise, IS constructed to fend off an Enterprise level attact. (Re: A Brave New Hope). They could throw many squadrens of TIE fighters at the Enterprise and overwhelm her in sheer numbers.

Fleet to Fleet... It would be one heck of a fight. I think we should commission ILM to put it together.

Beyond that, both franchises are great in their own light barring all the technology inconsistancies in both.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-07-19 06:48pm

The only way it becomes a fight is the Imperials all go out for Pizza and hookers and the ships sit there for 2 weeks.

Other then that it becomes a boring and banal affair of "Fire at that one with only 30% to the turbolasers, maybe we it won't explode..."

"Guess not."

Other then that I recommend reading the board before others come here.

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2006-07-19 06:49pm

At least people are posting in the SWvST forum again.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-07-19 06:49pm

Wow. First post and you're already trolling. Or abysmally stupid. Or both.
You are aware that this has been done to death countless times on this here board alone and that Trek doesn't stand within hailing distance of a chance, right?
In excess of 100,000:1 firepower/resilience advantage for the Empire. Case closed.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-07-19 06:50pm

Run, don't walk, run over to the Announcment thread and read it. Wouldn't hurt to take a look at the main site either. Then if you do have an interesting thread in mind, please take a moment to compose it. Wouldn't hurt to have a question or atleast something to discuss in it though.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-07-19 06:51pm

Darth Garden Gnome wrote:At least people are posting in the SWvST forum again.

Pfft, I'd rather it stay dead then have people beating on the dead horse thinking they are winning bonus points

.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-07-19 06:53pm

The horse isn't just dead, it's no longer there. Even the bones have decomposed by now.
At best this guy is good for a few laughs.

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2006-07-19 06:57pm

Ghost Rider wrote:Pfft, I'd rather it stay dead then have people beating on the dead horse thinking they are winning bonus points .

Yeah, that was actually in response to the OP. There seems to have been a rash of newbie one-shot threads lately dealing with issues that were resolved 5 years ago.

Pax Britannia · Post by **Pax Britannia** » 2006-07-19 07:11pm

Not everyone discovered this site five years ago or has the patience to read through old threads. Give them a break.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-07-19 07:12pm

Pax Britannia wrote:Not everyone discovered this site five years ago or has the patience to read through old threads. Give them a break.

They can have the deceny of reading the SITE attached to the board.

And DGG is not talking old threads, he's talking about something far older which predates this site, which utterly destroyed the debate. This site was more the clean up of the last idiot batch. So learn history before spewing random accusations.

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2006-07-19 07:13pm

Pax Britannia wrote:Not everyone discovered this site five years ago or has the patience to read through old threads. Give them a break.

THEN PERHAPS THEY SHOULD READ THE SITE ATTACHED TO THE GODDAMN BOARD

Pax Britannia · Post by **Pax Britannia** » 2006-07-19 07:15pm

I'm just saying that if this discussion is as defunct and tiresome as you all claim then why is there any point for this section of the forum at all?

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-07-19 07:17pm

He probably doesn't have the patience to do so. And why should he? It's not like he's required to do so. Oh wait.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2006-07-19 07:17pm

Pax Britannia wrote:Not everyone discovered this site five years ago or has the patience to read through old threads. Give them a break.

This isn't a matter of reading old threads from years ago. It is a matter of someone not reading the announcements and someone not really knowing what he/she is talking about.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2006-07-19 07:19pm

Pax Britannia wrote:I'm just saying that if this discussion is as defunct and tiresome as you all claim then why is there any point for this section of the forum at all?

Because this is where it all started, and there are still plenty of SW vs ST topics. But trying to rekindle a done-to-death argument with conjectural BS won't be put up with much if at all.

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2006-07-19 07:20pm

Pax Britannia wrote:I'm just saying that if this discussion is as defunct and tiresome as you all claim then why is there any point for this section of the forum at all?

That was very clearly not what you were saying.

It's left open because A.) there's the chance that something new or interesting is introduced (it does happen every so often) and B.) Because it's kind of a big part of SDN history to just board up and throw away.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-07-19 07:21pm

Pax Britannia wrote:I'm just saying that if this discussion is as defunct and tiresome as you all claim then why is there any point for this section of the forum at all?

Let's see, the debunking of morons like swoganrich, tradition, the fact that technology is not the only aspect that can be debated, inertia, the fact that while the overall debate is done there may still be limited scenarios that are fun to debate, and that's just off the top of my head.

OmegaGuy · Post by **OmegaGuy** » 2006-07-19 08:13pm

swoganrich wrote:Ok. I'm a trekker, all the way. The Star Trek's technology vs Star War's technology is an ongoing argument on the Trek boards as well.

While it's true that Star Trek does have some technology that Star Wars does not, overall the advantage goes to Star Wars.

The Death Star, while clumsy and cannot aim their main weapon at the Enterprise

Because it wasn't designed to. It was designed to destroy planets. The second Death Star, however, would probably be able to target the Enterprise.

, IS constructed to fend off an Enterprise level attact. (Re: A Brave New Hope).

It's "A New Hope". No 'brave' anywhere in there.

And it was designed to fend off a lot more than that.

They could throw many squadrens of TIE fighters at the Enterprise and overwhelm her in sheer numbers.

Or just blow it away with turbolasers, which wouldn't unnecessarily put fighters at risk.

Fleet to Fleet... It would be one heck of a fight. I think we should commission ILM to put it together.

If you consider what Indiana Jones did to sword - wielding assassin guy 'one heck of a fight'.

Beyond that, both franchises are great in their own light barring all the technology inconsistancies in both.

The point is who would win, and Star Wars just has masssive advantages in pretty much every area of military importance.

LeftWingExtremist · Post by **LeftWingExtremist** » 2006-07-20 05:42am

look its not hard just look at bit bit and it will all explain it in a few minutes (hence the name).

General Deathdealer · Post by **General Deathdealer** » 2006-07-20 06:48am

Pax Britannia wrote:Not everyone discovered this site five years ago or has the patience to read through old threads. Give them a break.

There is no reason to give him a break. If he would have read rule 10 of the official board policies, he would know the risks of starting a new thread that might have been discussed before, and then discussed again, and again, and again...... If you are going to post, you need to have a thick skin. You get flamed, then you move on.

(Here is rule 10:
If you intend to start a debate, search the forum and the associated websites first, to see if your arguments have been raised before. If you are too lazy to search the forum and the associated websites before launching what you no doubt believe to be an innovative and original argument, then do not complain if you are flamed to a crisp.)

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2006-07-20 01:12pm

swoganrich wrote:Fleet to Fleet... It would be one heck of a fight. I think we should commission ILM to put it together.

Hi, and welcome to Stardestroyer.net. Please take a moment to review what it says just beneath the STARDESTROYER.NET banner on the upper-left of the website (especially the last five words). I might recommend that you visit the Spacebattles forum, but these days the folks there seem to be less friendly to the uninformed than they once were, though they're still a bit less brutal than here.

Again, welcome!

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2006-07-20 01:26pm

swoganrich wrote:The Death Star, while clumsy and cannot aim their main weapon at the Enterprise, IS constructed to fend off an Enterprise level attact. (Re: A Brave New Hope). They could throw many squadrens of TIE fighters at the Enterprise and overwhelm her in sheer numbers.

What is it with trekkies that they all seem to forget about the massive numbers of surface TL turrets on the DS?

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2006-07-20 02:18pm

Darth Servo wrote:What is it with trekkies that they all seem to forget about the massive numbers of surface TL turrets on the DS?

Why should they bring up the turbolasers that the Enterprise could shrug off with their navigational thingie? Besides, if the TLs can't hit an x-wing, then why would they hit the much larger Enterprise?

swoganrich · Post by **swoganrich** » 2006-07-21 08:30am

jegs 2 - thanks for the welcome. Wow! Batman. I sincerely apologise. Didn't mean to ruffle your cape.

In reality....Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar (et al...) have a serious weakness that is exploited constantly and NONE can withstand....

The film editor's floor.

And, between the three of these franchises, more Star Trek film has hit the floor than either of the other two combined.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-07-21 09:34am

swoganrich wrote:jegs 2 - thanks for the welcome. Wow! Batman. I sincerely apologise. Didn't mean to ruffle your cape.

In reality....Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar (et al...) have a serious weakness that is exploited constantly and NONE can withstand....

The film editor's floor.

And, between the three of these franchises, more Star Trek film has hit the floor than either of the other two combined.

Yes, and?

I will say this honestly. Starting out like this is painting a target on your head and going "Ping me!"

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Star Trek VS Star Wars

Star Trek VS Star Wars

Re: Star Trek VS Star Wars

Re: Star Trek VS Star Wars

Re: Star Trek VS Star Wars

Re: Star Trek VS Star Wars