Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

SWvST: the subject of the main site.

Moderator: Vympel

Post Reply
SeaTrooper
Youngling
Posts: 126
Joined: 2010-08-31 03:04am
Location: Darwin, Oz

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by SeaTrooper »

bz249 wrote:
SeaTrooper wrote:
What would be a reasonable stuff with the shield is to use a trigger signal type thing which temporaly make the shield to nil, but keeps it at full power otherwise. This is possible with simple electronics, however whether it is possible with high power shield generators and weapons is still a question (at least to me). The fact that pulsed phasers of the Defiant were an achievement indicates that producing such with phasers might be a little bit more difficult than doing the same stuff with lasers (where femtosecond long pulses repeated with MHz frequency is commercially available).
The common argument there is that each species already knows the freq of their own beam weaponry, and can thus set their shields 180deg in order to pass through them. This would, of course, require those beams to be restricted to as narrow a freq-spectrum and wave-form as possible, otherwise you'll have side-lobe and damage your own shields. However, if everyone is using ultra-focused and super-coherant beam weapons, then enemy shields that are NOT modulated 180deg out from it shouldn't be allowing all that leakage through.

Which is where we come to a basic explaination of frequency. Put simply, and as it refers to ST, frequency is the number of oscillations per second, which may or may not be the rate it flashs on/off. Assuming it is (and I've no reason not to) then the endless repetitions of 'frequency' in ST may refer to their shields going up-down-up some millions or billions of times per second. In that case, then we DO have some opportunity for a beam to leak some chunks of each blast through those oscillating shields; hence they take damage well before the shields completely fail.

Whew... hope that's clear enough. :D This point has beenn argued before, so I hope anyone with a better appreciation will step in if my description is inadequate.
"Know Enough To Be Afraid" - Transylvania Polygnostic

The Royal Navy has not survived for so long by setting an example for others,
but by making an example of those others...
User avatar
Serafina
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5246
Joined: 2009-01-07 05:37pm
Location: Germany

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Serafina »

Read the quote Serafina posted again:

BEVERLY: They must have found a way to adapt. Milan's work in radiation sensitivity suggests it's possible. Perhaps with extensive virotherapy ... Until they found the answer, their mortality rate must have been staggering.

It did have an awful negative effect. IIRC that's the reason they sent Data down there to begin with - human members of the crew would have been killed by it.

Of course, these people did manage to adapt to it somehow, but no negative effect whatsoever simply isn't true.
Yes, the radiation was initially deadly (tough we don't know over what time period). But human beings could still adapt to it - that still puts a limit on it.
Actually, you don't know that. The fictional element could have been super-uranium that did fission and the hydrogen was used for a secondary explosion (like a hydrogen bomb contained by magic) or whatever. Maybe the hydrogen was just part of a trigger for the other element's reaction.
So, what about the Briar-patch from Insurrection then?
Those gases were clearly just that - gas. No super-technobabblium, no antimatter - just gas.
Nobody actually knows.
In other words, you are handwaving it away because you don't like it.

Chemical explosions occasionally rivaling ST-weapons makes perfect sense if you accept KT-firepower for them. If you take the briar patch as an example, the fact that the gas was more powerful can simply because it bypassed the shields, thus striking the hull directly. We have other instances that show us that ST-starships can be destroyed by KT-level firepower without their shields - Jem'Hadar ramming attacks and photon torpedoes.
Low KT-level firepower is reasonable if we assume that that gas was both very dense and volatile - and we can already conclude the density from it's effect on the ships inside it (very low impulse speed etc.).
On the other hand, if you assume MT or even GT-level firepower, that whole scene just doesn't make sense. You can't get such a big explosion with the amount of gas we saw.
SoS:NBA GALE Force
"Destiny and fate are for those too weak to forge their own futures. Where we are 'supposed' to be is irrelevent." - Sir Nitram
"The world owes you nothing but painful lessons" - CaptainChewbacca
"The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of a mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." - Wilhelm Stekel
"In 1969 it was easier to send a man to the Moon than to have the public accept a homosexual" - Broomstick

Divine Administration - of Gods and Bureaucracy (Worm/Exalted)
Picard
BANNED
Posts: 168
Joined: 2010-07-01 05:26am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Picard »

ultradense hulls
Don't make me laugh.
If that would be the case, they would still get slaughtered by numbers, speed, an actual ground army instead of a few guys in pijamas with rockheaters and some superweapons here and there.
Ah, yes, except that even if SW ships can match ST firepower, ST ships totally stomp SW when it comes to issue of range.

As evidenced by you saying so. Unless you are talking ship phasers, in which case you are probably correct.
...and as evidenced by my blog and several ST episodes.
Again, no evidence (excuse me, no actual evidence, as in actually happening in the TV series or the movies as opposed to the fevered imaginations of you or Dorkstar),
I already gave evidence - Voyager, "Rise"; TNG, "Skin of Evil", few other episodes.

Because-you say so.
And beacouse-we-see-lot-of-things-protected-by-forcefields.
No. Supposed. Because we don't see firepower like that. Maybe you do. In that case, I suggest taking off your 'magnify Trek firepower by orders of magnitude just because' glasses.
Yeah, right. And you think that Saxton is right? I just analyzed actual episodes, and if you don't like that...
Err-no. Wars-200GT MTL on a Clone Wars era troop transport. TT and up firepower for real warships. The EU doesn't go away just because you want it to. But again, if you want to go back to downscaling from the Death Star 1, I'm game
Riight. You want to tel me tha unarmed troop transport is equipped with guns 100 000 times stronger than main guns of ISD as seen in G canon? Wanker.
As evidenced by nothing whatsoever. Show me the calculations.
I used Wong's calculator. And actual episode.
As evidenced by nothing whatsoever. General Order 24 might have been a bluff to begin with and requires nothing beyond KT level firepower even if it is the real thing.
Except that GO24 was not bluff and is canon, unlike BDZ.
User avatar
Serafina
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5246
Joined: 2009-01-07 05:37pm
Location: Germany

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Serafina »

Just more bog-standard Trektard stupidity. Move along, nothing special to see here.
ultradense hulls
Don't make me laugh.
Sorry, moron, it's right there in the canon? You don't like it? Well, that's just bad luck for you.
Ah, yes, except that even if SW ships can match ST firepower, ST ships totally stomp SW when it comes to issue of range.
As per you saying so. Yet we know that they have far greater engagement ranges than ST right from G-canon, and range is not going to be of much use when you are outnumbered 100:1. Because, you know, battles are not fought about empty regions of space.
Again - if you had a working brainstem, you would know why ST would get slaughtered: The empire can concentrate all it's troops on single attacks, because their FTL-speed is orders of magnitudes faster. If they want to, they can just jump to a planet with a thousand ships, drop out of hyperspace in orbit and just BDZ the damn thing. ST on the other hand is so slow that they will need decades or even centuries to reach any imperial planet.
...and as evidenced by my blog and several ST episodes.
Except that your blog is bullcrap, full of lies and false assumptions.
And beacouse-we-see-lot-of-things-protected-by-forcefields.
Yet we never see forcefields around doors. And besides, weren't you saying that phasers are super-powerful against forcefields? They wouldn't do much good then, eh?
Yeah, right. And you think that Saxton is right? I just analyzed actual episodes, and if you don't like that...
Saxon is so right that he got published in an official, canon SW-publication. That doesn't really hold up against a crappy blog full of errors everyone with internet access can spot.
Riight. You want to tel me tha unarmed troop transport is equipped with guns 100 000 times stronger than main guns of ISD as seen in G canon? Wanker.
Who the fuck said that an Acclamator is unarmed? Oh, right, just you :roll:
Except that GO24 was not bluff and is canon, unlike BDZ.
Except that we SEE BDZs happening. We never see GO24 being carried out.


So, as i said - nothing special. Picard claims that his blog is the end-all of ST/SW-calculations, which can even overrule canon - despite the blatant errors/lies in it. He then outright lies about canon (SW-hulls, armament of the Acclamator) and demonstrates blatant ignorance about basic strategy.
SoS:NBA GALE Force
"Destiny and fate are for those too weak to forge their own futures. Where we are 'supposed' to be is irrelevent." - Sir Nitram
"The world owes you nothing but painful lessons" - CaptainChewbacca
"The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of a mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." - Wilhelm Stekel
"In 1969 it was easier to send a man to the Moon than to have the public accept a homosexual" - Broomstick

Divine Administration - of Gods and Bureaucracy (Worm/Exalted)
Picard
BANNED
Posts: 168
Joined: 2010-07-01 05:26am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Picard »

Sorry, moron, it's right there in the canon? You don't like it? Well, that's just bad luck for you.
Your dismissal of everything you don't like (including fact that G canon overrides any and all EU wank) does not mean it's not true.
Yet we know that they have far greater engagement ranges than ST right from G-canon
5 000 kilometers is now more than 225 000 kilometers? How so?
Except that your blog is bullcrap, full of lies and false assumptions.
Riiight. Can you show some of these?
Saxon is so right that he got published in an official, canon SW-publication. That doesn't really hold up against a crappy blog full of errors everyone with internet access can spot.
Official =/= canon. And I bet Lucas never saw Saxton's work, let alone acknowledged it as canon.
Who the fuck said that an Acclamator is unarmed? Oh, right, just you
Plus any and every single scene from movies where Acclamators appear.
Except that we SEE BDZs happening. We never see GO24 being carried out.
Yes, we see sub-kiloton to kiloton range shots being fired by ISD on... wait. We do have indirect evidence ...and estimation derived from it.
Heavy turbolasers as based on BDZ are 24 megatons to 1.4 gigatons
Picard
BANNED
Posts: 168
Joined: 2010-07-01 05:26am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Picard »


Your dismissal of everything you don't like (including fact that G canon overrides any and all EU wank) does not mean it's not true.
About examples... scene when asteroid promptly obliterated ISD's bridge.
User avatar
Serafina
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5246
Joined: 2009-01-07 05:37pm
Location: Germany

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Serafina »

Your dismissal of everything you don't like (including fact that G canon overrides any and all EU wank) does not mean it's not true.
So tell me then, retard: Where in G-canon does it say that SW-ships do not have very dense hulls?
5 000 kilometers is now more than 225 000 kilometers? How so?
Except that both of these numbers are essentially made up on your blog. Sorry, you loose.
Riiight. Can you show some of these?
I already did, shithead. You are assuming that the Enterprise destroys the whole asteroid in the episode "masks", even tough we only see them destroy a thin layer of it, their weapons are offline afterwards and there is another agency which has both cause and ability to do so. Everyone who watched that episode (or even read about it's plot) would know that they did NOT blow up the whole asteroid. Either way, it's false, but because it's so obvious it's very likely that it is a deliberate lie.
Official =/= canon. And I bet Lucas never saw Saxton's work, let alone acknowledged it as canon.
Wrong, fool. If it's official, it IS SW-Canon.
Plus any and every single scene from movies where Acclamators appear.
Evidence, shithead. Oh, you think because we don't see any big heavy turbolaser turrets, that says that they don't have medium turbolasers, which are typically mounted in the trench?
Yes, we see sub-kiloton to kiloton range shots being fired by ISD on... wait. We do have indirect evidence ...and estimation derived from it.
Liar. We see what they can do to a world with a BDZ. That's direct evidence.
Besides, if you want to throw out "estimations derived from it", you have to throw out your whole blog as well. Not that that is a bad idea.
About examples... scene when asteroid promptly obliterated ISD's bridge.
So you appeal to a hit on the least armored part of the ship in order to conclude that the ships armor is weak? Which wasn't even "obliterated", because we saw that the Captain was alive AFTER the impact? And have you actually calculated the impact energy of that asteroid, or taken conservation of momentum into account?
SoS:NBA GALE Force
"Destiny and fate are for those too weak to forge their own futures. Where we are 'supposed' to be is irrelevent." - Sir Nitram
"The world owes you nothing but painful lessons" - CaptainChewbacca
"The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of a mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." - Wilhelm Stekel
"In 1969 it was easier to send a man to the Moon than to have the public accept a homosexual" - Broomstick

Divine Administration - of Gods and Bureaucracy (Worm/Exalted)
Picard
BANNED
Posts: 168
Joined: 2010-07-01 05:26am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Picard »

Evidence, shithead. Oh, you think because we don't see any big heavy turbolaser turrets, that says that they don't have medium turbolasers, which are typically mounted in the trench?
Beacouse we don't see them either. To remind you, we have few nice shots of acclamators head-on, and guess what? No goddamn guns.

https://ryan.delariviere.net/photo/d/28 ... ft_off.jpg
Except that both of these numbers are essentially made up on your blog. Sorry, you loose.
Except that both of these numbers are taken from canon. Sorry, I win.
I already did, shithead. You are assuming that the Enterprise destroys the whole asteroid in the episode "masks", even tough we only see them destroy a thin layer of it, their weapons are offline afterwards and there is another agency which has both cause and ability to do so. Everyone who watched that episode (or even read about it's plot) would know that they did NOT blow up the whole asteroid. Either way, it's false, but because it's so obvious it's very likely that it is a deliberate lie.
And if you actually bothered to read my blog, and not just skim through it, you would notice that I dropped that estimation.
Wrong, fool. If it's official, it IS SW-Canon.
Even when contradicted by higher canon? Fool?
Liar. We see what they can do to a world with a BDZ. That's direct evidence.
Besides, if you want to throw out "estimations derived from it", you have to throw out your whole blog as well. Not that that is a bad idea.
Ah, yes, "putting patches of forest on fire". Impressive indeed. And my blog is based on canon, unlike Saxton's ICS wank.
So you appeal to a hit on the least armored part of the ship in order to conclude that the ships armor is weak? Which wasn't even "obliterated", because we saw that the Captain was alive AFTER the impact? And have you actually calculated the impact energy of that asteroid, or taken conservation of momentum into account?
Entire bridge was destroyed from "neck" up. Ship itself was destroyed later, either due to chain reaction or additional collisions - and as for captain, he might or might not have been on bridge. And he disappeared shortly afterwards.
This, of course, is what seals the trek vs wars debate, regardless of everything else. Throw in the industrial lopsidedness too just for good measure.
True. We do have some extremely high Trek speeds observed, but these run contrary to remainder of canon.

EDIT: Graham Kennedy took (made up) "warp highways" as explanation for these inconsistencies, which fits well with what we see in canon.
User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 10402
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: CIC, Battlestar Temeraire

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Eternal_Freedom »

Oh wow I didn't think this guy was still here.

Serafina is right, if we don't allow derivations fro indirect evidence, his blog goes "bye bye"
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.
User avatar
Darth Yan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 2008-12-29 02:09pm
Location: California

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Darth Yan »

actually picard, we don't see all of the ship's trench, meaning that it is possible for their to be guns. or the guns are really small. and a bdz isn't burned patches. It's melting the entire surface right down to the deepest parts of the crust. and your calcs are not canon because they are faulty and make mistiakes. Saxton is canon. Deal with it child. and no the bridge wasn't obliterated.
User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 10402
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: CIC, Battlestar Temeraire

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Eternal_Freedom »

The typical SDN smackdown. Nicely done
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.
User avatar
Darth Yan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 2008-12-29 02:09pm
Location: California

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Darth Yan »

Really?

And his "it't canon" just struck a nerve. someone had to beat him down.
User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 10402
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: CIC, Battlestar Temeraire

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Eternal_Freedom »

Really. It was short, brutal in the right places, and contains details on the flaws of his argument, in a few lines.
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.
User avatar
Serafina
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5246
Joined: 2009-01-07 05:37pm
Location: Germany

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Serafina »

See here at aprox. 5.00 for the scene where the asteroid hits the ISDs bridge. We see that the captain is still there after the impact, and from the scene where we see him he recoils and points at something before vanishing.
Even if we suppose that the bridge was completely destroyed, look at the size and speed of that asteroid. Consider that it is most likely solid nickel-iron like the rest of these asteroids and then try to calculate it's kinetic energy and momentum. And then tell me whether you think the bridge was weak because it could not survive such an impact, or not.

Regarding hull strength: assuming that the neutron pellets are added without contributing to the hulls strength is just laughable. They are most likely (since it would be the sensible thing to do) used as part of an alloy, so even small amounts could do a lot.
Furthermore, that's hardly the only evidence we have for very strong hulls - the fact that they can build SSDs and Death Stars without using structural integrity fields tells us that their materials have to be very strong, else those structures would collapse - and we know that even SSDs can land and launch from a planet, and that they need no active systems in order to stay intact in it's gravity field (the Lusankya stayed on Coruscant for a long time and later launched from it).
SoS:NBA GALE Force
"Destiny and fate are for those too weak to forge their own futures. Where we are 'supposed' to be is irrelevent." - Sir Nitram
"The world owes you nothing but painful lessons" - CaptainChewbacca
"The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of a mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." - Wilhelm Stekel
"In 1969 it was easier to send a man to the Moon than to have the public accept a homosexual" - Broomstick

Divine Administration - of Gods and Bureaucracy (Worm/Exalted)
User avatar
Kythnos
Youngling
Posts: 143
Joined: 2008-12-05 10:19pm

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Kythnos »

Picard wrote:
Ah, yes, except that even if SW ships can match ST firepower, ST ships totally stomp SW when it comes to issue of range.
Yet we know that they have far greater engagement ranges than ST right from G-canon
5 000 kilometers is now more than 225 000 kilometers? How so?
So where do you get the max range for Star Wars weapons? (if the number is not made up)
the DBY-827 could hit a target vessel at a range of 10 light minutes.
Unless 111,600,000 miles < 225,000 kilometers
Because that is a from CANNON quote, and unless you can show me proof that it is over written by a higher cannon it stands.
There's a great difference between potential and developed power. The one is clearly visible and can be awe-inspiring. The other may take a demigod to recognize.
User avatar
Batman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 16389
Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
Location: Seriously thinking about moving to Marvel because so much of the DCEU stinks

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Batman »

And it's overridden while we're at it but thank you very very very much, Adam.
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
User avatar
Serafina
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5246
Joined: 2009-01-07 05:37pm
Location: Germany

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Serafina »

Regarding "General Order 24":
How about "The Neutral Zone", where they are surprised by the destruction of a couple of outposts and think that whoever did this was more powerful than them:
PICARD: Do you think we attacked your outposts?

TEBOK: Once we realized the level of destruction, we knew it could not have been you.

PICARD: I would like to offer a proposal.

THEI: An alliance? Between the Romulans and the Federation?

PICARD: Nothing so grandiose -- just this. Cooperation... whoever or whatever did this is more powerful than either of us.

THEI: Agreed.
They clearly state that whoever destroyed those outposts was "more powerful than either of us" - which means that neither of them could have done that. But if they can destroy whole civilizations, why would the destruction of a small outpost be impossible to them?
Why do we never see massive orbital bombardments? For example, look at the end of the Cardassian War - why did the Dominion only manage to destroy a single city, instead of the whole planets surface? They had no reason to hold back, did they? Why did they have to send ground troops, rather than just doing it from orbit?
Why are orbital bombardment never a concern when fighting against the Dominion, or against any other enemies? If a single ship was capable of wiping everyone off the face of a planet within a few hours, that should be a major concern - yet it never is.

Given that GO24 is only mentioned twice in TOS and never actually carried out, we can't conclude much from it.
The Die is Cast is inconclusive for similar reasons, and any firepower estimates from it are highly incompatible with other observed instances of firepower.
SoS:NBA GALE Force
"Destiny and fate are for those too weak to forge their own futures. Where we are 'supposed' to be is irrelevent." - Sir Nitram
"The world owes you nothing but painful lessons" - CaptainChewbacca
"The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of a mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." - Wilhelm Stekel
"In 1969 it was easier to send a man to the Moon than to have the public accept a homosexual" - Broomstick

Divine Administration - of Gods and Bureaucracy (Worm/Exalted)
User avatar
Stofsk
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12925
Joined: 2003-11-10 12:36am

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Stofsk »

Serafina wrote:Regarding "General Order 24":
How about "The Neutral Zone", where they are surprised by the destruction of a couple of outposts and think that whoever did this was more powerful than them:
Nowhere in that quote did I read anything regarding the level of destruction those outposts suffered, and it proves nothing at all except that the level of destruction exceeds both their capabilities as well as the Federation's. Considering the Borg were responsible, it turns out Tebok's and Picard's suppositions were well-founded.

It certainly doesn't disprove the destructive capabilities the Federation (or the Romulans, or any other power) can bring to the table.
They clearly state that whoever destroyed those outposts was "more powerful than either of us" - which means that neither of them could have done that. But if they can destroy whole civilizations, why would the destruction of a small outpost be impossible to them?
You're being disingenuous. They were talking about the manner in which those outposts were destroyed. They weren't simply destroyed via conventional means, they were ripped out of the ground consistent with what the Borg did in system J-25 in 'QWho'.
Why do we never see massive orbital bombardments?
But we do. TDiC is one, which only lasts a few seconds before the fleet gets attacked by the Jem'Hadar. But only one example is needed to demonstrate that orbital bombardments can and do occur.

As I said before, the false sensor readings can apply to the report that '30% of the planet's surface was destroyed'. But that doesn't diminish their entire plan to destroy the crust in an hour's worth of bombardment. As I said, it's wrong to conclude they can do a third of the job in 1/60th the time they were expecting, but that doesn't mean you can conclude they are unable to accomplish the task they went to a lot of effort to do! The entire premise of the episode revolves around making a surprise attack on the Dominion's homeworld using massive orbital bombardment.
For example, look at the end of the Cardassian War - why did the Dominion only manage to destroy a single city, instead of the whole planets surface?
Lol - the Dominion punish Cardassia by killing 800 million people in a short span of time. What, did they do that hand-to-hand or something? The first city was a demonstration to the Cardassians to fall in line. When they heard that the Cardassian fleet had turned on them, the Founder ordered the planet to be exterminated. We even see a long camera shot of the devastation of Cardassia.

Unless you're seriously arguing they used nothing but hand weapons, which would be hilarious considering the kind of complaints relating to Trek hand weaponry being always weak. :lol:
Why are orbital bombardment never a concern when fighting against the Dominion, or against any other enemies?
Ah but it is. An Admiral raises concerns with Sisko's plan to retake DS9 by pointing out that drawing away fleet elements would leave Earth and other core systems vulnerable to attack. Incidentally the Breen do attack Earth but were driven off by a defending fleet.
If a single ship was capable of wiping everyone off the face of a planet within a few hours, that should be a major concern - yet it never is.
You're wrong. A single Klingon Vor'cha attack cruiser completely destroyed the biosphere of an M-class world in a brief span of time in 'The Chase'. This wasn't through firepower as such, but likely some kind of weapon that was deployed using a plasma chain reaction that wiped out all life. However, that's not the point - the point is even a single ship poses a threat.

Enterprise threatens to bombard a planet in 'A Taste of Armageddon' but we've already cited that example. In 'Where No Man Has Gone Before' Kirk orders his CMO Dr Piper to beam up to the ship with orders that if he doesn't return in 12 hours that the entire surface of Delta Vega be subjected to neutron radiation bombardment. In 'Broken Link' Garak tries to commandeer the Defiant's weapons in order to make a suicidal attack on the Founder's homeworld, citing the Defiant carries enough firepower to turn it into a smoking cinder. Naturally the writers didn't feel like quantifying Garak's poetic description of planetcide, however the point is that one ship can easily do tremendous damage to a planet in a short span of time. And though I'm loathe to cite it, the entire premise of the movie 'Nemesis' revolved around Shinzon aiming his one ship with its superdeathray at Earth.
Given that GO24 is only mentioned twice in TOS and never actually carried out, we can't conclude much from it.
Lol - you quoted out of context 'The Neutral Zone' which doesn't even prove anything, but when Scotty goes 'All cities and installations on Eminiar 7 have been located, identified, and fed into our fire control system. In 1 hour and 45 minutes, the entire inhabited surface of your planet will be destroyed.' you go we can't conclude anything from it? It's as clear as fucking crystal what their capabilities are. Oh, and here's a quote from 'The Neutral Zone' you neglected to include:
PICARD
Captain's log, supplemental. We
have arrived at the edge of the
Neutral Zone. We will now have
an opportunity to learn firsthand
what happened to our distant
outposts.

42 INT. MAIN BRIDGE

Data is at Science One.

DATA
There is nothing left of Outpost
Delta Zero-Five.

GEORDI
It must have been one hell of an
explosion.

DATA
Sensors indicate no evidence of
a conventional attack.

He turns to face Picard.

DATA
(continuing)
There is nothing left.

PICARD
Can you determine what happened?

OFF Picard's REACTION.

WORF
The outpost was not just
destroyed, it is as though some
great force just scooped it
off the face of the planet.

STAR TREK: "... Neutral... " - REV. 3/21/88 - ACT FOUR 44.

42 CONTINUED:

They continue scanning.

PICARD
Could it have been a natural
phenomenon?

DATA
Insufficient information.
They already knew it's not a conventional attack. The manner is atypical, so atypical that Picard even asks if it conforms with some sort of natural phenomenon.
The Die is Cast is inconclusive for similar reasons, and any firepower estimates from it are highly incompatible with other observed instances of firepower.
So I guess you're going to say Colonel Lovok was talking shit to Garak when he tells him (and us, the audience) that their entire plan was to destroy the crust in one hour and the mantle in five?

Have you even watched any of these shows or episodes you presume to quote from? Every point you make is so demonstrably wrong that I find it unfathomable unless you actually have never seen any of it.
Image
User avatar
Serafina
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5246
Joined: 2009-01-07 05:37pm
Location: Germany

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Serafina »

I listed 9 episodes where orbital bombardment was a threat just two pages ago in this thread, in response to Serafina! viewtopic.php?p=3417116#p3417116

The Warsie wall of ignorance is astounding.

Here we go again, with some details this time, to benefit those of us who haven't actually seen the show:
Except that the details you are now giving show that it's all about shooting something from orbit - NOT about massive orbital bombardment, which i was referring to (something that wipes out population centers and the like).
Only the first two of your examples actually refer to MOB, and they are only threats and never seen carried out.
"A Piece of the Action" only hits a single house block - not even remotely comparable to MOB.
"Balance of Terror" - it depends on how large these outposts are. If they are comparable to those we see, we are talking about a small city - not planet-wide destruction.
"Skin of Evil" - single-target bombardment. KT-firepower is not inconsistent with being visible from orbit.
"The Survivors" HOW massive? I didn't find any decent screenshots, and the Memory Alpha summary seems inconclusive. But apparently, the ship that did that was much stronger than the Enterprise, so it's not that useful for determining Federation capabilities in the first place.
"Time's Arrow" That episode involves a lot of time-technobabble, and i do not see how we can conclude anything about MOB about it.
"Unification" Wrong - it could as well be that Vulcan is an (nearly) unarmed planet with lot's of centralized infrastructure. In fact, that would make conquest MORE effective, since it would be hard to remove these ground-troops from that infrastructure - you would need to assault them, since you can't bombard it from orbit because you don't want to destroy it. Compare that to a ship which might be destroyed in ship-to-ship combat, my explanation fits the definition of "Conquest" much better.
"Gambit" - which is, again, only a single complex - NOT MOB.

This isn't an exhaustive list - it's just the ones that come to mind.
And as i said, none of them involve anything even remotely comparable to a Base Delta Zero or similar forms of massive orbital bombardment. We do not even see single large cities being destroyed by orbital bombardment.

And then we can go into DS9. The Die is Cast is certainly massive bombardment. "In the Pale Moonlight" describes Betazed as being invaded and conquered in a matter of hours (with one of the tie in novels describing most the damage done by orbital bombardment, according to the Star Trek wiki). That episode with Eddington vs Sisko, "For the Cause" IIRC, had Sisko depopulating planets from orbit with magic.
Tdic is very muddy due to the plot of that episode and the strange visual effects. It's also the ONLY instance where we see anything comparable to MOB, and it's inconsistent with a lot of other instances.
Conquering a planet of pacifists is not hard, it's likely that this was similar to the planet conquest of Vulcan (see above). Also, precision strikes are more useful for conquest than MOB, so you don't need to infer the later anyway.

The overwhelming power of starships is also a well established background fact in the universe. Starships control worlds and keep the peace consistently. How would that be so if they couldn't threaten them?
As i said twice now, that doesn't require MOB. It just requires the ability to hit certain strategic points - such as a centralized power grid. Or to damage population centers, which is enough of a threat to rule trough fear. It doesn't require the ability to destroy all life on a planet within a short timeframe.


There we go - a lengthy strawman by yourself (tough it may have been a genuine misunderstanding). I never said that Trek has no orbital bombardment as in "they can hit stuff from orbit". I DID say that they do not have orbital bombardment as in "devastate the surface of a planet, destroy most life or annihilate civilisations". The former is observed regulary, the latter is only observed in one contradictory instance and is otherwise utterly absent from Trek, even tough that capability should have a large influence on warfare.
SoS:NBA GALE Force
"Destiny and fate are for those too weak to forge their own futures. Where we are 'supposed' to be is irrelevent." - Sir Nitram
"The world owes you nothing but painful lessons" - CaptainChewbacca
"The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of a mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." - Wilhelm Stekel
"In 1969 it was easier to send a man to the Moon than to have the public accept a homosexual" - Broomstick

Divine Administration - of Gods and Bureaucracy (Worm/Exalted)
Picard
BANNED
Posts: 168
Joined: 2010-07-01 05:26am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Picard »

Saxton is canon. Deal with it child. and no the bridge wasn't obliterated.
Saxton is not canon and yes bridge was obliterated. Watch movie, if you did not.
Even then, only direct quotes from it is canon.
And even then, only quotes which do not contradict higher canon.
We see that the captain is still there after the impact, and from the scene where we see him he recoils and points at something before vanishing.
You have any proof he was on bridge?
And then tell me whether you think the bridge was weak because it could not survive such an impact, or not.
No, I only think that "neutronium hull" theory/fallacy is just laughable.
So where do you get the max range for Star Wars weapons?
Hoth ion canon fired at ISD from 10 to 13 000 kilometers. Ship to ship range will be lower - plus, speed of TL bolt limits engagement range, and then we have ranges of ISD's vs MF. And if you want me to really take "direct quote" from canon - in ROTJ we know that Rebel cruiser "Freedom" "furiously fought in long range battle" (translation from Croatian). In movie, that "long-range batle" is 200 kilometers at most, probably gross overestimation.
They clearly state that whoever destroyed those outposts was "more powerful than either of us" - which means that neither of them could have done that. But if they can destroy whole civilizations, why would the destruction of a small outpost be impossible to them?
Maybe outposts were shielded? You know, outpost does not need lot of things starships need, which means more energy to weapons and shields.
Why did they have to send ground troops, rather than just doing it from orbit?
Maybe beacouse fleet was waiting for Federation forces? And would you bomb your own troops? Also, cardassia Prime might or might not have planetary shield.
Why are orbital bombardment never a concern when fighting against the Dominion, or against any other enemies? If a single ship was capable of wiping everyone off the face of a planet within a few hours, that should be a major concern - yet it never is.
Maybe beacouse of planetary shields? Beacouse we DO know from canon that single BoP can wipe out life on planet without any problem, to point no DNA is recoverable (althought that was chain reaction but it is irrelevant in this case - ordinary planetary bombardment probably would not destroy DNA, especially given size and relative power of said ship). Also, main problem with Cardassian "bioweapon delivery system" was not that it can transport microbes without needing delivery capsule, but rather that it can do it without targeted planet realizing what was happening (this example is from TNG episode "Chain of Command"). Answer: planetary shields. Plus, we have direct evidence from TOS.
User avatar
Serafina
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5246
Joined: 2009-01-07 05:37pm
Location: Germany

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Serafina »

Saxton is not canon and yes bridge was obliterated. Watch movie, if you did not.
*Sigh* When will Trektards get this? The ICS II is C-canon, and so are the calculations published within. ONLY if you can show that G- or T-canon actually overrules it, then it is overwritten - but not actually removed from canon.
You have tried, you have failed - utterly.
Furthermore, the fate of the bridge is not clear, since it's obscured by the explosion.
You have any proof he was on bridge?
Gee, where is the captain of a ship likely to be?
But if he was NOT on the bridge, then why did he vanish? After all, we saw that the rest of the Star Destroyer was unharmed. (there is a simple answer to this, let's see if you can find it).
No, I only think that "neutronium hull" theory/fallacy is just laughable.
Calculations, moron. Have you calculated the kinetic energy and momentum of that impact?
By the way, high density does NOT necessarily translate into high material strength. Go back to high school chemistry. And we DO have a canon source that they use neutronium in their hulls. It's therefore neither a theory nor a fallacy (it's funny that you treat the two interchangable) - it's a fact. You can argue about the implications of that fact, of course - but further evidence still disagrees with you.

As expected, you ignore the part where i challenge you to do these calculations. Most likely because your tortured subconscious knows that those calculations won't agree with you.
Hoth ion canon fired at ISD from 10 to 13 000 kilometers. Ship to ship range will be lower - plus, speed of TL bolt limits engagement range, and then we have ranges of ISD's vs MF. And if you want me to really take "direct quote" from canon - in ROTJ we know that Rebel cruiser "Freedom" "furiously fought in long range battle" (translation from Croatian). In movie, that "long-range batle" is 200 kilometers at most, probably gross overestimation.
So, if you are standing in front of me (2 meters away) and i shoot you with a rifle, what we conclude about the range of the rifle from that?
Go read up on lower limits, idiot.
Maybe outposts were shielded? You know, outpost does not need lot of things starships need, which means more energy to weapons and shields.
Or maybe less power generation equipment. Which makes sense, given that such equipment requires maintenance, fuel and money.
Maybe beacouse fleet was waiting for Federation forces? And would you bomb your own troops? Also, cardassia Prime might or might not have planetary shield.
Planetary shields we never saw. Nice one, retard. Even if they had them, how about this: disable them, beam your troops away, obliterate the planet with the whole fleet which is in orbit anyway?
SoS:NBA GALE Force
"Destiny and fate are for those too weak to forge their own futures. Where we are 'supposed' to be is irrelevent." - Sir Nitram
"The world owes you nothing but painful lessons" - CaptainChewbacca
"The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of a mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." - Wilhelm Stekel
"In 1969 it was easier to send a man to the Moon than to have the public accept a homosexual" - Broomstick

Divine Administration - of Gods and Bureaucracy (Worm/Exalted)
Junghalli
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5001
Joined: 2004-12-21 10:06pm
Location: Berkeley, California (USA)

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Junghalli »

Serafina wrote:Regarding "General Order 24":
How about "The Neutral Zone", where they are surprised by the destruction of a couple of outposts and think that whoever did this was more powerful than them:
Are these outposts quantified at all? I watched that episode and I don't remember it. They could have been shielded, or buried under kilometers of rock.

At any rate it's fairly obvious from that bit of script Stofsk posted that the noteworthy thing was that they were scooped clean off the planet, not that somebody blew them up, but Stofsk already covered that.
Picard
BANNED
Posts: 168
Joined: 2010-07-01 05:26am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Picard »

Planetary shields we never saw.
But we do hear about them, and many things in Star Trek can be explained only by planetary shields.
Even if they had them, how about this: disable them, beam your troops away, obliterate the planet with the whole fleet which is in orbit anyway?
Alliance fleet was on way. If Cardassia had shield, how long it would take for Dominion fleet to breach it?
So, if you are standing in front of me (2 meters away) and i shoot you with a rifle, what we conclude about the range of the rifle from that?
Go read up on lower limits, idiot.
...long range battle... ...lower limits... Am I only one here who sees discrepancy?
As expected, you ignore the part where i challenge you to do these calculations. Most likely because your tortured subconscious knows that those calculations won't agree with you.
You want result? ISD's tower was totally obliterated by terajoule-range impact.
You have tried, you have failed - utterly.
Only in your warped mind. You don't change your ideas about SW firepower according to facts, you warp facts to fit ICS.
Furthermore, the fate of the bridge is not clear, since it's obscured by the explosion.
Obscured?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_10H8_Gaw0N0/T ... e+copy.gif

Riight.
Picard
BANNED
Posts: 168
Joined: 2010-07-01 05:26am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Picard »

Go read up on lower limits, idiot.
And what about 200 km "long-range battle"? That is lower limit too?
User avatar
Batman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 16389
Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
Location: Seriously thinking about moving to Marvel because so much of the DCEU stinks

Re: Yuuzhun Vong vs. Star Trek

Post by Batman »

Picard wrote:
Planetary shields we never saw.
But we do hear about them,
You no doubt have the quote handy.
and many things in Star Trek can be explained only by planetary shields.
I'm waiting with bated breath.
So, if you are standing in front of me (2 meters away) and i shoot you with a rifle, what we conclude about the range of the rifle from that?
Go read up on lower limits, idiot.
...long range battle... ...lower limits... Am I only one here who sees discrepancy?
Yes?
As expected, you ignore the part where i challenge you to do these calculations. Most likely because your tortured subconscious knows that those calculations won't agree with you.
You want result? ISD's tower was totally obliterated by terajoule-range impact.
As evidenced by nothing whatsoever, as usual for you.
You have tried, you have failed - utterly.
Only in your warped mind. You don't change your ideas about SW firepower according to facts, you warp facts to fit ICS.
Bwa. Bwaha. Bwahahah. There's somebody warping facts here but it sure as hell isn't Serafina.
Furthermore, the fate of the bridge is not clear, since it's obscured by the explosion.
I finally get it. You like torpedoing your own point. You do know that picture completely fails to show a bridge-less Star Destroyer, right?
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
Post Reply