Hyperdrive

Butterbean569 · Post by **Butterbean569** » 2003-01-24 03:31pm

I'm sure that this has been discussed on the forums (and I have read it on Mike's site) but I thought it would be worthwhile to bring up again.

Why is this debate of Star Wars vs. Star Trek continuing? With such a large advantage in speed (hyperspace vs. warp? lmao) there is no chance that trek would last for WEEKS...maybe not even DAYS. Send 1 ISD to every "large" planet (meaning planet with a somewhat respectable industrial output and at least a few billion occupants) and perform a BDZ on it. Within hours, the major planets of the entire galaxy are gone. Even if the entire fleet of ISD's was destroyed after completing it's mission, it would only take a few years for the Empire to replace them...while the ST galaxy would replace its most valuable plane....err...wait there's no replacing planets.

This might be a somewhat weird example, but when it comes down to it the speed advantage of SW would destroy ST. All of these other arguements are just extra icing on the cake....even if a TL was only a few megatons one ISD could lay waste to a world in hours.

Any trek supporters that want to cite the ".5 past lightspeed" quote from Han to "prove" that SW ships are slow...well...you'll just show your own stupidity. I'm already dealing with a bunch of people that are trying to use that quote on the Star Wars Galaxies forum...

What do you guys think? Is it just me, or does this speed advantage basically end the debate?

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2003-01-24 03:35pm

The only ones who continue to debate that the Feds could beat the Empire believe Hyperdrive is slow or can't see the horribly large stragetic advantage it gives the Empire.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-24 03:36pm

Speed and industry.

And not much really in the way of arguing aside from some random troll...

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-01-24 03:45pm

Well for starters if your going to claim Star Trek vs Star Wars, you have to look even broader then just Hyperdrive and Industrial. We already know who wins in the ST vs SW debates, Q does. However when it comes to Federation vs Empire debates, thats a little different. Most Trekkies, even the ones who think a GCS is a match for an ISD, agree that the Empire has FTL, Industrial, and fleet strength advantages. That is without question, for the most part. What we debate then is different aspects. We try smaller strategic debates, debates on ground forces, debates on tactical engagements, hypothetical situations, etc... Hell, there is still "new" evidence found from time to time that changes the debates somewhat. There is still plenty of fun value in continuing the debates.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-01-24 04:11pm

I also think they're a useful teaching tool. Rationalizing them from a scientific mindset and approach (the way we do it, the way Curtis Saxton does it) forces you to learn quite a few scientific and technical principles along the way. I've gotten quite a bit of feedback on my site E-mail talking about how my stuff made them go crack open their mouldy old physics textbooks.

That's where I think sci-fi has potential teaching applications: not in terms of directly teaching concepts (the notion that people learn science from/i] Trek is just frightening), but as object lessons: opportunities to try applying a principle in a manner which is more interesting than your typical high school textbook "a point mass is moving in X+ direction at ..." examples.

EDIT: I've actually been toying with the idea of revamping my site to emphasize the places where real scientific principles can be applied.

Nova Andromeda · Post by **Nova Andromeda** » 2003-01-24 05:34pm

--"EDIT: I've actually been toying with the idea of revamping my site to emphasize the places where real scientific principles can be applied."
-What would really be nice is showing definitively that science and logic apply to morality as well as technology. Yes, I know you believe morality can't ultimately be objectively based (or I have failed to show that it can be), however, an analysis of a group of interacting entities with random goals would be objective and answer the question. "Good" would the the maximization of overall attained goals and bad would be anything "less."

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-01-24 06:31pm

Darth Wong wrote:I also think they're a useful teaching tool. Rationalizing them from a scientific mindset and approach (the way we do it, the way Curtis Saxton does it) forces you to learn quite a few scientific and technical principles along the way. I've gotten quite a bit of feedback on my site E-mail talking about how my stuff made them go crack open their mouldy old physics textbooks.

That's where I think sci-fi has potential teaching applications: not in terms of directly teaching concepts (the notion that people learn science from/i] Trek is just frightening), but as object lessons: opportunities to try applying a principle in a manner which is more interesting than your typical high school textbook "a point mass is moving in X+ direction at ..." examples.

Yes, that's great. I've learned a lot about science, mathematics, physics, and chemistry just from debating. They've also been a great way to apply knowledge of what I already knew, and what I already understood in an applicable manner.

Admiral_K · Post by **Admiral_K** » 2003-01-24 10:51pm

Let me be the first to say Fuck Q.

ali-sama · Post by **ali-sama** » 2003-01-24 11:44pm

Admiral_K wrote:Let me be the first to say Fuck Q.

and fuck reality. lol. you cant; have them out of it if you dsicuss st vs sw as a whoel universe. their part of it. nto only them btu al the other super pwoers tha tcna cream the federation.

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-25 01:22am

ali-sama wrote:
Admiral_K wrote:Let me be the first to say Fuck Q.
and fuck reality. lol. you cant; have them out of it if you dsicuss st vs sw as a whoel universe. their part of it. nto only them btu al the other super pwoers tha tcna cream the federation.

Fuck you n00b. And stop typing like a retard with frostbitten fingers and 50% packet loss from your brain to your hands. The Q never interferes in conflicts like this, and he'd just most likely be amused by the whole event.

ali-sama · Post by **ali-sama** » 2003-01-25 04:16am

Fuck you n00b.

i am sorry I only fuck pussy that is female.

And stop typing like a retard with frostbitten fingers and 50% packet loss from your brain to your hands. The Q never interferes in conflicts like this, and he'd just most likely be amused by the whole event.

star trek vs star wars involves both universes. it does not matter if they do join in conflicts or not. it;s the universe of str trek vs the universe of star wars. then Q wins. if it;s the federation vs the empir eor another speicific empire then there is a debate. you can't fight creatures who can redfine reality at a whhim.

consequences · Post by **consequences** » 2003-01-25 04:25am

Actually, you can fight creatures like that, the trick is to take them out before they can form that whim. And not to stop just because you've splutted their torso.

ali-sama · Post by **ali-sama** » 2003-01-25 04:31am

consequences wrote:Actually, you can fight creatures like that, the trick is to take them out before they can form that whim. And not to stop just because you've splutted their torso.

only if you can find them.

EmperorMing · Post by **EmperorMing** » 2003-01-25 05:51am

ali-sama wrote:
consequences wrote:Actually, you can fight creatures like that, the trick is to take them out before they can form that whim. And not to stop just because you've splutted their torso.
only if you can find them.

Q would not be an issue. Period. Almost everything else is fair game.

ali-sama · Post by **ali-sama** » 2003-01-25 06:28am

EmperorMing wrote:
ali-sama wrote:
consequences wrote:Actually, you can fight creatures like that, the trick is to take them out before they can form that whim. And not to stop just because you've splutted their torso.
only if you can find them.
Q would not be an issue. Period. Almost everything else is fair game.

if you dictate we remove Q then I say we remove all the empires superweapons.

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2003-01-25 07:29am

EmperorMing wrote:
ali-sama wrote:
consequences wrote:Actually, you can fight creatures like that, the trick is to take them out before they can form that whim. And not to stop just because you've splutted their torso.
only if you can find them.
Q would not be an issue. Period. Almost everything else is fair game.

Hardly. By DEFINITION Star Trek vs Star wars who will win equates to everything in Trek vs everything in Wars. The Q by DEFINITION are on the side of Star Trek and win the engagement in as long as it takes for them to snap their fingers. Granted their involvement makes the whole debate no fun. However it does not matter what you think of them getting involved or not. In a question like ST vs SW they are COMPELLED to fight just as much as if you have a thread like GCS vs ISD. Its hardly likely they are insantly going to start shooting at each other but for the purposes of a Vs debate, they do.

Now that being said, its a pointless debate. So we move to exclude and narrow the focus like to 'UFP vs Galactic Empire' (gee THAT was never one sided either but hey). Or GCS vs ISD or whatever.

Prior to ICS when I thought there was a reletive degree of tactical equivilance (give or take), I debated the tactical aspects and such mostly. While hte FTL and industrial capacity meant that in the long run the Empire would win, it was interesting to discuss more limited possibilites with smaller forces, different objectives and such.

These days by the calcs I use, it would take oh...around six hundred Akiras firing from each tube 3 torpedoes of a half a gigaton nominal yeild and impacting at the same time on one shield arc of an ISD to take its shields down...well its just a little one sided.

Which is why I genearly stay out of the ST - SW debates and keep in either pure Trek or Pure wars.

Lord Pounder · Post by **Lord Pounder** » 2003-01-25 12:20pm

The Q are hardly an issue, Out of the hundreds of Q only 4 of them ever appear in the series and they was a pure joke. Horny Q, Bitch Q, Kid Q and Suicide Q.

The fact of the matter is every time Q interfered with Jean-Luc he got a roasting over by the Contiunium. HE WASN'T SUPOSED TO FUCK ARROUND WITH PPL in the world. They even made him human for a time as punishment for doing it. So in the event of the factions of Star Trek going at it against the EMpire do you really think they are gonna haul ass to help the feddies? I think not.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-01-25 12:23pm

Darth Pounder wrote:The Q are hardly an issue, Out of the hundreds of Q only 4 of them ever appear in the series and they was a pure joke. Horny Q, Bitch Q, Kid Q and Suicide Q.

The fact of the matter is every time Q interfered with Jean-Luc he got a roasting over by the Contiunium. HE WASN'T SUPOSED TO FUCK ARROUND WITH PPL in the world. They even made him human for a time as punishment for doing it. So in the event of the factions of Star Trek going at it against the EMpire do you really think they are gonna haul ass to help the feddies? I think not.

Except the way a ST vs SW debate works is that both sides unit against the other. You really think the Rebellion would normally side with the Empire? Same thing when it comes to the Q.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-25 12:40pm

ali-sama wrote: if you dictate we remove Q then I say we remove all the empires superweapons.

Pointless statement...literally most don't use the Eu stuff.

As to the whole Q point...if the debate is a pure ST vs SW, then yes Q is a general factor given he is a creation for ST, thus in consideration of not two galaxies et al going against each other but in essence two franchises yes, Q would be ST corner.

But since no one is going to debate really one isde has godlike being other does not, that's why ST vs SW is considered to be Empire vs AQ/UFP/etc...because those things we can quantify and put something towards.

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2003-01-25 02:25pm

ali-sama wrote:
EmperorMing wrote:
ali-sama wrote: only if you can find them.
Q would not be an issue. Period. Almost everything else is fair game.
if you dictate we remove Q then I say we remove all the empires superweapons.

first of all even without any superweapons the empire could effortlessly beat the entire ST galaxy into oblivion (except for Q but i'l get into that later) so even if you remove the superweapons the empire still wins due to massive advantages in weapon firepower and industrial capacity
second Q would not interfere almost every time Q ever appeared he was trying to screw around with humanity and he always got bitched at by the continum for it the only time he ever offered to help anybody was when he wanted to :: shudders:: score with janeway (is there an emoticon for physically ill?) he wouldn't interfere in the conflict

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2003-01-25 10:00pm

Except the way a ST vs SW debate works is that both sides unit against the other.

Really?

Then how come we often get newcomers to the debates who mention something like "While the Empire is distracted by the Federation, the Rebels destroy the Empire"?

It's been stated, numerous times on the show, that Q is not allowed to interfere in human business. Getting stomped by the Empire is "human business".

To be honest, I think most Warsies want to keep Q out because, once omnipotents are involved, we start dredging up crap like that idiotic extra-universal alien from The Crystal Star, and NOBODY wants that...

Besides, the mentioning of Q really just goes to show how much more honest the Warsies are... ANY Warsie worth his salt would immediately say, "Yup, Q beats the Empire." Beyond that, look how long it took the Trekkies to start to come around in the Empire vs. Federation argument... hmm...

ali-sama · Post by **ali-sama** » 2003-01-25 10:26pm

SPOOFE wrote:
Except the way a ST vs SW debate works is that both sides unit against the other.
Really?

Then how come we often get newcomers to the debates who mention something like "While the Empire is distracted by the Federation, the Rebels destroy the Empire"?

It's been stated, numerous times on the show, that Q is not allowed to interfere in human business. Getting stomped by the Empire is "human business".

To be honest, I think most Warsies want to keep Q out because, once omnipotents are involved, we start dredging up crap like that idiotic extra-universal alien from The Crystal Star, and NOBODY wants that...

Besides, the mentioning of Q really just goes to show how much more honest the Warsies are... ANY Warsie worth his salt would immediately say, "Yup, Q beats the Empire." Beyond that, look how long it took the Trekkies to start to come around in the Empire vs. Federation argument... hmm...

i never said "q beats the empire" is aid q beats starwars...... that is honest. also there are peoepl as pwoerfull as the q who are nto Q. it;s a star trek vs star wars. nto a star treek vs the empire....

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-26 01:08am

You do understands SPOOFE's reason though?

Basically at that point we start trying to find godlike after godlike and it becomes a Lucfier vs Living Tribunal thread...where neither side wins because they are winking each other out of existence.

As I said we take Q out because honestly if this was truly between franchises...all we would have is crappy EU aliens vs Q and literally there would be nothing but purely subjective debate which is absolutely pointless.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-01-26 01:17am

Alyeska wrote:Except the way a ST vs SW debate works is that both sides [unite] against the other. You really think the Rebellion would normally side with the Empire? Same thing when it comes to the Q.

Please introduce me to the Trekkie debater who allows a SW debater to assume that the Rebellion, Empire, and every other entity in SW lore will harmoniously "unite against" Star Trek, irrespective of their existing conflicts, feuds, personalities, and ideologies. I would like to meet this person, as I haven't encountered anyone like him before.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2003-01-26 01:22am

i never said "q beats the empire" is aid q beats starwars

And who are you?

Oh, that's right... NOT the person I was talking to.

By the way... I'd like to introduce you to the "Shift" key. Learn it, love it, live it.

that is honest.

Thanks for repeating what I said. Any other comments? Would you like to point out that the grass is green, or that the sky is blue?

also there are peoepl as pwoerfull as the q who are nto Q. it;s a star trek vs star wars. nto a star treek vs the empire....

"Star Trek vs. Star Wars" typically means "the most well-known aspects of Star Trek vs. the most well-known aspects of Star Wars". This is a term designed as shorthand for the benefit of the layperson who isn't nearly as fond of vs. debates as some other people may be. If I were to debate Chris O'Farrell, for example, I would be quite clear on what I want to debate.