Today's Trekkie Idiot

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-01-11 06:11pm

Today's Trekkie Idiot is a guy who says his name is David Cutter:

Darth Wong wrote:
David Cutter wrote:Name: David
E-Mail: Daye49@Hotmail.com
Comments: U say star wars weapons arn't limited to 2-3 klimoter ranges. i agree they're not limted t0 2-3 Klicks they're limited to 1 and a bit.
How odd, then, that AT-AT walkers could target a Rebel shield generator from 17 km away in TESB.
David Cutter wrote:A 1 klimoter range limit on laser cannons is descriped in Star Wars X-Wing: Rogue Squadron ans as u have not contradiction betweent this stamement and the films your agument is baseless.
Must be easy to win arguments when you presuppose your opponent's answer. What do you when your opponent mentions something which obviously never occurred to you?

Next message/reply:

Darth Wong wrote:
David Cutter wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Must be easy to win arguments when you presuppose your opponent's answer. What do you when your opponent mentions something which obviously never occurred to you?
i admit iam wrong? what do u do?
I try to prevent such an occurrence by doing my research BEFORE presuming to critique someone.

And the third message/reply:

Darth Wong wrote:
David Cutter wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: I try to prevent such an occurrence by doing my research BEFORE presuming to critique someone.
On furthur reflection it does occur to me that there is a difference between the laser cannons u put in a fighter craft and ones u put on a tank. I see your piont as to AT-Ats but as fightercraft are concerned my piont still stands.
No, it doesn't. Effective range limitations in fighter craft are generally caused by the difficulty of actually hitting another fighter. This doesn't mean they couldn't hit a relatively huge vessel like a capship at far greater ranges. Since they were hitting enemy armour with HAND WEAPONS on Geonosis and Hoth are multi-kilometre ranges, your moronic argument is that a typical SW assault rifle has many times longer range than a fighter weapon.

Quick! Call MENSA and tell them there's a new member waiting to join!

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-01-11 06:29pm

Jesus he is stupid. The very passage that says the Lasers are centered at 1 klick for dogfighting also says they were set for 20 at Yavin, and the fact that they converge at that point does not mean that they stop there.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-11 06:35pm

That was painful to read...

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-01-11 06:39pm

I should add that unless there is more to this then posted, it seems he is a warsie idiot like Wes Hutchings instead of a trekkie idiot.

Sr.mal · Post by **Sr.mal** » 2003-01-11 06:56pm

There should be a liscence requirement for internet use. It's requirements should be: basic typing skills, spelling skills, and grammar.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-01-11 07:28pm

I see no one caught the fact that he used a Game as higher evidence over the movies. Not exactly the work of an experienced debater here.

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2003-01-11 07:32pm

Starnge, where's Huntsman to come and defend this idiot asshole from being flamed?

As for the game, did he mean for N64 RS? I thought he meant the book.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-01-11 07:51pm

This one would not even challenge our newest memebers

Heck I think I can find a brain-dead hillbilly or two who could take this fellow on in a debate and win

God Emperor · Post by **God Emperor** » 2003-01-11 07:51pm

I believe it was the book.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-01-11 07:51pm

God Emperor wrote:I believe it was the book.

The book never said that AT-ATs were that short of range.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-01-11 07:59pm

Alyeska wrote:
God Emperor wrote:I believe it was the book.
The book never said that AT-ATs were that short of range.

No but it said Xwing lasers were set to converge at one klick. That's whgat he was talking about.

Anarchist Bunny · Post by **Anarchist Bunny** » 2003-01-11 08:12pm

I read that book(few ones of the X-Wing series I have), it was also, I believe, asked why such a close range.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2003-01-11 08:20pm

Converge distance eh? That's not max range. That's the distance they think they'll be fighting at.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-01-11 08:31pm

Nice MENSA comment, Mike. I particularly like his ludicrous idea that because starfighter weapons are designed to converge on a target about a kilometer away (for hitting other starfighters while they're maneuvering) that must also be the maximum possible range.

Vertigo1 · Post by **Vertigo1** » 2003-01-11 09:18pm

Sr.mal wrote:There should be a liscence requirement for internet use. It's requirements should be: basic typing skills, spelling skills, and grammar.

That would ban nearly the entire AOL population.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-01-11 09:41pm

Own his ass back to first grade, Mike. That way he might pick up some grammar and punctuation.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2003-01-11 11:01pm

Gee, he was a moron. You brang up the AT-AT at Hoth, and he goes on to say that those were "different" than the ones on an X-Wing. Rabid Trekkies these days will do anything to defend their feeble points.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-01-11 11:10pm

In all fairness, the AT-AT weapons do appear to be different than those on snubfighters.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-01-11 11:12pm

Alyeska wrote:I see no one caught the fact that he used a Game as higher evidence over the movies. Not exactly the work of an experienced debater here.

Saw that, I did.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-01-12 12:10am

Just a suggestion Mike. I suspect that not ALL of your idiot e-mail "fans" post things solely on the vs debates. If you ever get an idiot who only posts pure trek or pure wars arguments, might want to move them into the Pure forums.

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2003-01-12 12:50am

Hey, Wong, take Wicked Pilot's advice a while earlier and leave this POS for all of us to flame. That way you'll save time in your so-busy life!

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2003-01-12 02:58am

Hey just a slightly relevent question. I know Z-95's have their lasers hardwired into set zero ranges, so the lasers converge at a preset difference. But can more advanced fighters like the X-Wing dynamicly alter their laser zero point? So that the lasers adjust their beam convergence point bassed on a target lock?

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-01-12 03:35am

Chris O'Farrell wrote:Hey just a slightly relevent question. I know Z-95's have their lasers hardwired into set zero ranges, so the lasers converge at a preset difference. But can more advanced fighters like the X-Wing dynamicly alter their laser zero point? So that the lasers adjust their beam convergence point bassed on a target lock?

That sounds like the feature added in the XW:A game....

As for the above it was one of the Rouge Squadron novels he was quoting not any of the games (though the books do try to integrate the game mechanics in a logical way with the rest of the SW universe).

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-12 03:45am

Dr Saxton shows that TIE Fighters are able to fire their weapons 'off axis'- in addition, in ROTJ the blasts fired by the X-Wing and Y-Wing from the cockpit POV look off-centre *shrug*

Sothis · Post by **Sothis** » 2003-01-12 07:29am

He seems to struggle with the word 'you'.