General Empire vs Borg musings

[Shroom Man 777]

Then again R2 is like a special forces droid with more collective hero-ing experience than almost everyone in all the Star Wars movies...

[Q99]

Then again R2 is like a special forces droid with more collective hero-ing experience than almost everyone in all the Star Wars movies...

True, but he's not unique in his capabilities by any means, Chopper can also hack quite well. IG-88.

And the Borg'll certainly assimilate people with rank cylinders and the contained codes. Hm, the Rebels have likely captured a lot of those, hence R2's access (/making up headcanon on the spot).

I don't think it's indicate who if anyone started it. The DS crew didn't seem to have much awareness of where they were otherwise they'd have flood the area with storm troopers and so on. Probably the compactor goes on a time or when it reaches a certain mass.

I'm going to simply assume they did on the basis on them not doing anything being even worse a sign of their ability.

[Shroom Man 777]

Then again R2 is like a special forces droid with more collective hero-ing experience than almost everyone in all the Star Wars movies...

True, but he's not unique in his capabilities by any means, Chopper can also hack quite well. IG-88.

You picked up other badasses though. That's like saying "shooting down billions of TIEs isn't that unique of Luke, look at Hera, Wedge and Han..."

And the Borg'll certainly assimilate people with rank cylinders and the contained codes. Hm, the Rebels have likely captured a lot of those, hence R2's access (/making up headcanon on the spot).

IDK maybe the Borg might have to make up a pot-shaped borgified astromech and have it put on the moves on Chopper...

Imagine going all Sausage Party and have a Borg code cylinder try to romance an Imperial code cylinder.

When it comes to trying to decode encryption, the Borg do beat SW in terms of sexiness.

That is my general Empire vs Borg musing.

[Q99]

You picked up other badasses though. That's like saying "shooting down billions of TIEs isn't that unique of Luke, look at Hera, Wedge and Han..."

True. Still, there's the code cylinder thing, we saw that get used in Rebels.

IDK maybe the Borg might have to make up a pot-shaped borgified astromech and have it put on the moves on Chopper...

Imagine going all Sausage Party and have a Borg code cylinder try to romance an Imperial code cylinder.

When it comes to trying to decode encryption, the Borg do beat SW in terms of sexiness.

That is my general Empire vs Borg musing.

Heh

[Shroom Man 777]

You picked up other badasses though. That's like saying "shooting down billions of TIEs isn't that unique of Luke, look at Hera, Wedge and Han..."

True. Still, there's the code cylinder thing, we saw that get used in Rebels.

That's if they get the hands on the code cylinder and use it without the Imperials knowing that the code cylinder was stolen.

Sure the Imperials are incompetent a lot of times, but Kallus still had to pickpocket the cylinders and it hinged on the original owner and everyone else not knowing what's happening and assuming that the officer and the cylinders were uncompromised with everything being normal. That would not be the case if an officer mysteriously went MIA, the rest of the base would probably lock out said codes.

[Lord Insanity]

It doesn't speak much to the competence of the DS computer security that R2 can just go in and do things like shut down compactors and open doors and find prisoners and so on.

Real trash compactors have emergency stop and door releases. That would be a safety feature not a security flaw. If anything the detention level trash compactor not having an emergency door release on the inside is proof of high security. (The Empire would rather risk the lives of maintenance personnel than risk a prisoner escape.) Also, before they went down the garbage chute C-3PO flat out says; "All further information on your level is restricted."

[Q99]

That's if they get the hands on the code cylinder and use it without the Imperials knowing that the code cylinder was stolen.

Sure the Imperials are incompetent a lot of times, but Kallus still had to pickpocket the cylinders and it hinged on the original owner and everyone else not knowing what's happening and assuming that the officer and the cylinders were uncompromised with everything being normal. That would not be the case if an officer mysteriously went MIA, the rest of the base would probably lock out said codes.

They're going to try and prioritize snagging those with regularity and they can be pretty sneaky (especially if they set up a transporter for use inside the DS- Remember the Picard grab! Just beam next to your target, grab, and beam out), and more than likely they're going to use the code's short-term access to input stuff and put in more to gain deeper, long-term access. Sure, people will be reported going missing, but get someone as they go off-shift and you have, what, 12-16 hours before they're expected to report again? They're more likely to be shutting down codes when they notice massive sudden dataflow as the Borg do

Eventual goal is total control of the computer system or, failing that, make the Empire shut off computers in large areas making, in turn, attempts to displace them far harder.

[Shroom Man 777]

It doesn't speak much to the competence of the DS computer security that R2 can just go in and do things like shut down compactors and open doors and find prisoners and so on.

Real trash compactors have emergency stop and door releases. That would be a safety feature not a security flaw. If anything the detention level trash compactor not having an emergency door release on the inside is proof of high security. (The Empire would rather risk the lives of maintenance personnel than risk a prisoner escape.) Also, before they went down the garbage chute C-3PO flat out says; "All further information on your level is restricted."

Maybe there WAS an emergency stop and door release inside the compactor but either it was concealed under the water and detritus (like, the emergency stop and door release could've been on the "ground" level of the compactor but Han and Luke and Leia and Chewie are like fifteen feet above that because of the layers of crap).

Or the dianoga was sentient and sabotaged the safeties because if it can't eat its prey, it can let the compactor... pre-chew the prey instead! A trick that Bor Gullet taught other anti-Imperial molluscs that frequently snack on Imperials(' bodies and/or brains or both!).

Gasp. For all we know, the dianoga WAS Bor Gullet! Infiltrating the Death Star and trying to eat what he thinks are stormtroopers... to AVENGE SAW GERRERA! Hey, we don't see Bor Gullet's entire body so for all we know, he does have pop-able eyeballs!

[DarthPooky]

Huh? I mean, those aren't bad showings, but I'm not sure why you think it's much more than what a phaser's done. They've taken down stone columns with explosive force, cut open vaults and doors, made people's torsos explode (remember 'Conspiracy'? Not actually too impressive but fun), and, in one case, a single shot from a type 2 phaser destroys an aquaduct.

Most of those were NDF as for the stone column I thought I herd a theory were the NDF effect would travel through the cracks in the stone and that caused the explosion

Now the aqueduct is interesting however it was not destroyed. The NDF effect traveled up it so again its not conventional fire power through DET but NDF witch is what makes Phasers far less effective against Borg drone shields. Again I'm not saying that Phasers don't do any DET but its less than Blasters.

[Q99]

Most of those were NDF as for the stone column I thought I herd a theory were the NDF effect would travel through the cracks in the stone and that caused the explosion

Now the aqueduct is interesting however it was not destroyed. The NDF effect traveled up it so again its not conventional fire power through DET but NDF witch is what makes Phasers far less effective against Borg drone shields. Again I'm not saying that Phasers don't do any DET but its less than Blasters.

NDF refers mostly to the disintegration effect (e.g. nuclear disruption force), which neither the aquaduct nor the stone columns showed in any significant amount. If you heard a theory about how it's 'NDF effect traveling through cracks and...', then that's a fan theory that I don't think has any onscreen evidence of or what the tech manual says, for that matter. Many of the phaser's settings are listed as heat-based, and that's in line with the observations. We also have examples of them melting ore, or even 10 meters of ice.

Oh, hey, I just pulled out my tech manual and found somethingfascinating- It actually says how much of the effects are caused by NDF and how much by 'SEM' (Simple ElectroMagnetic effects), with many of the lesser levels having 'negligible' NDF. The first 'vaporize a human' level? 3:1 ratio. Meaning when someone's being vaporized, the electromatic effects are accounting for 1/4th of that... also you're assuming that NDF doesn't have a significant energy component, which sounds... doubtful and a major leap.

So, no, blasters haven't shown to have greater DET, talking simply explodey-type effects and energy transfer phasers compete just fine, before getting into, well, NDF does involve energy. Especially not standard sidearm blasters, which tended to be on the lower end of the shown feats.

[NecronLord]

Why is this a discussion?

I invite anyone who thinks that phasers' DET output is harmless to have 1.05 megajoules applied to their chest in the form of heat.

The dustbuster type Starfleet rifle is 1.05 megajoules/shot, this is stated on screen in TNG. Enterprise has single-figure MJ phase pistols (the TNG weapon being less powerful isn't unrealistic, WWI rifles had far more power per shot than modern ones) and by First Contact and Nemesis the federation's rifles are tactically equivalent to Star Wars guns (Rapid fire pulse weapons) except possibly in range, with the additional options that NDF gives on top of that.

As least if we allow the AotC ICS large clone battle rifles have an 8 Mj/shot maximum.

We see in Enterprise that the borg shields can eventually repel 10 Mj/shot guns (souped up phase pistols) and that means that basically yes, borg will deflect SW smallarms, perhaps after a short delay.

But there are so many other weapons available, plus concentration of fire, which no one from starfleet ever tries on the borg.

[Q99]

Quite. About the only complaints I hear on hand phasers are Rate of Fire and ergonomics of the grips.

The compactness of energy storage of hand weapons in both universes is very impressive.

[DarthPooky]

NDF refers mostly to the disintegration effect (e.g. nuclear disruption force), which neither the aquaduct nor the stone columns showed in any significant amount. If you heard a theory about how it's 'NDF effect traveling through cracks and...', then that's a fan theory that I don't think has any onscreen evidence of or what the tech manual says, for that matter. Many of the phaser's settings are listed as heat-based, and that's in line with the observations. We also have examples of them melting ore, or even 10 meters of ice.

This is what I was thinking of from the main site.

Rock shattering. We've seen phasers shatter rock quite easily in some episodes, easily blasting boulders free which may be as large as several tons. On the other hand, we've also seen phasers strike the ground in combat situations (eg. "Rocks and Shoals") without damaging the ground noticeably at all. This is extremely confusing, especially since phasers tend to produce a disintegration chain reaction or a localized heating effect in other situations. Why then, do they sometimes blast large, intact, unheated chunks out of rock walls? One possible explanation might be that natural rocks are not chemically or microstructurally homogeneous, so the phaser chain reaction may "shoot through" the rock along natural pre-existing grain boundaries, hence the shattering effect.

Oh, hey, I just pulled out my tech manual and found somethingfascinating- It actually says how much of the effects are caused by NDF and how much by 'SEM' (Simple ElectroMagnetic effects), with many of the lesser levels having 'negligible' NDF. The first 'vaporize a human' level? 3:1 ratio. Meaning when someone's being vaporized, the electromatic effects are accounting for 1/4th of that... also you're assuming that NDF doesn't have a significant energy component, which sounds... doubtful and a major leap.

I will remind you that the Technical Manual isn't canon and its description of what Phaser settings doesn't match up to what we see on screen.

But there are so many other weapons available, plus concentration of fire, which no one from starfleet ever tries on the borg.

That relates to a question I asked earlier how many shots would it take for a star wars blaster to down a drones shield.

I will also bring up the infamous taking cover behind packing crates and no you cant say there on lower settings since if they have the ability to penetrate the crates wile your people are getting shot at then they would use it. Also I thought most people hear consider Phasers to be material dependent or is that just when NDF applies.

[Batman]

Why the hell would anything OTHER than NDF be material dependent? The results are likely to be, but whatever DET component phasers have will affect all materials equally (and as NecronLord said, 1.05MJ is nothing to sneeze at).

[Q99]

And, like, phasers get used against shields all the time. If there's something that indicates phasers are proportionally better against material objects than shields, I can't say I'm familiar with it.

I will remind you that the Technical Manual isn't canon and its description of what Phaser settings doesn't match up to what we see on screen.

NDF is a Technical Manual term to begin with. We use it when talking about the glowy-disintegrate-y visual effect, but if you're arguing that phasers are weaker because of it, well, you're in TM territory yourself.

And the Technical Manual doesn't line up perfectly, but it does hit most of the similar beats ('cause the TM people were trying to describe the onscreen stuff). With the note we've never seen the highest phaser level in the TM on screen... but we do have multiple characters verbally refer to higher levels of destruction than we see them do, for that matter. So, there's a lot of overlap.

[Captain Seafort]

With the note we've never seen the highest phaser level in the TM on screen... but we do have multiple characters verbally refer to higher levels of destruction than we see them do, for that matter. So, there's a lot of overlap.

Yes we have. Riker may have talked about setting 16 flattening half a building, but Worf demonstrated what that setting could do in Chain of Command, and it was far less impressive.

[Q99]

Yes we have. Riker may have talked about setting 16 flattening half a building, but Worf demonstrated what that setting could do in Chain of Command, and it was far less impressive.

True, but that's not even the biggest on-screen phaser feat, so it doesn't exactly scan with being at the top, unless that was some very very tough rock.

[BabelHuber]

Why is this a discussion?

I invite anyone who thinks that phasers' DET output is harmless to have 1.05 megajoules applied to their chest in the form of heat.

The problem is that phasers show a variety of effects which are hard to explain:

They are terrible effecive against rocks, but on the other hand we see people use packing crates as cover against phasers in TNG and DS9

On maximal setting, humans hit by a phaser simply dissapear:

They aren't vaporized, otherwise we'd see vapour

The effect is the same for any human being, big or small. We never see a big creature only partly dissapearing (with some limb or so remaining), or a small person dissapearing with some excess energy (damaging the surroundings).

Also, some objects cannot be destroyed or even damaged by phasers at all, like the door on Cardassia Prime in DS9 "What You Leave Behind".

Hence phasers don't work by simply releasing energy at the target. As explanation, the NDF-theory was created.

See this old thread: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=54580

[Q99]

They are terrible effecive against rocks, but on the other hand we see people use packing crates as cover against phasers in TNG and DS9

Think about this, on a ship you'd be loathed to use settings that can potentially punch holes in walls, and the crates are ones used to transport fragile and very dangerous stuff at times in a somewhat high-danger environment like a ship. So they're probably made of similar alloys as the decks and all. I'm sure they can be dealt with by cranking up the power, but it'd hardly be preferred.

Heck, a lot of the time they're using lesser-kill settings that burn and wound rather than disintegrate.

Also, some objects cannot be destroyed or even damaged by phasers at all, like the door on Cardassia Prime in DS9 "What You Leave Behind".

A neutronium door. I wouldn't expect anything in the MJ range to scratch something like that. On the ship scale, we saw *no* ship weapons work on Trek neutronium of sufficient thickness (stuff the Planet Killer was made of).

Hence phasers don't work by simply releasing energy at the target. As explanation, the NDF-theory was created.

The point is more, the presence of exotic effects don't make it *not* pack megajoules of energy. It just means it has some funky effects and can punch above it's weight class in oddly specific ways (megajoule aren't going to vaporize, disintegrate, whatever a whole person).

Note they can additionally be used to simply apply lots of heat. Superheating rocks is done several times, making explosions is a thing, melting a material or cutting it rather than disintegrating it is also a thing.

[BabelHuber]

Think about this, on a ship you'd be loathed to use settings that can potentially punch holes in walls, and the crates are ones used to transport fragile and very dangerous stuff at times in a somewhat high-danger environment like a ship. So they're probably made of similar alloys as the decks and all. I'm sure they can be dealt with by cranking up the power, but it'd hardly be preferred.

Heck, a lot of the time they're using lesser-kill settings that burn and wound rather than disintegrate.

Sorry, but this does not make sens at all. I give you a real-life example:

When I was young, I had to join the German army (Bundeswehr) for 12 months after school. This was mandatory.

Back then in 1992/1993, we had the G3 rifle and the MG3 machine gun. Both used the same ammunition with caliber 7.62mm.

This had 2 advantages: It simplified logistics (only one type of ammunition for both weapons) and the G3 had lots of power - you hardly will find a tree big enough to hide behind, usually the G3 could shoot right through it.

But nevertheless the NATO moved to rifles with a smaller caliber of only 5.56mm, so nowadays the Bundeswehr uses rifles like the G36.

While it has less power (the enemy can take cover behind a big tree), it has 30 rounds of ammunition per magazine instead of the 20 the G3 had. Each soldier has a standard equipment of 5 magazines, so this gives you 150 rounds of ammunition instead of 100.

The reason for this change was that usually, 150 "weaker" rounds are "better" than 100 "stronger" rounds.

But this doesn't mean that a soldier cannot be confronted with a situation where using 7.62mm would be an advantage - when the enemy takes cover behind something a G3 could penetrate, but a G36 cannot.

Now let's assume the NATO would be able to equip its soldiers with a rifle with both characteristics: You would have a G3-mode and a G36-mode, so a soldier could choose between 20 high-power shots or 30 low-power shots.

Wouldn't that be great? Wouldn't that be a no-brainer if it would be technically feasible and cost-effective?

The same goes for a phaser: If the Federation could create a phaser which can or cannot penetrate a packing crate depending on its setting, the Federation would be utterly stupid not to provide such phasers.
Of course the soldiers onboard starships would have to receive a training on when to use which setting, but the benefits surely would outweight the downside.

So the mere fact that the Federation doesn't have phasers with such a feature can only mean two things:

- The Federation is utterly stupid
- The Federation is unable to field such a weapon.

I think option 2 is much more probable.

So I argue that most probably this is a technical restriction - phasers can't be used against materials with a high desity like a lot of metals, but is is effective against low-density materials like rocks.

As a side effect, Federation soldiers equipped with phasers most probably would have troubles fighting against WW1-tanks, but I digress.

A neutronium door. I wouldn't expect anything in the MJ range to scratch something like that. On the ship scale, we saw *no* ship weapons work on Trek neutronium of sufficient thickness (stuff the Planet Killer was made of).

This is just another example of phasers being not effective. The best one is still the packing crate, because it requires less energy than a "neutronium door" (whatever this may be).

The point is more, the presence of exotic effects don't make it *not* pack megajoules of energy. It just means it has some funky effects and can punch above it's weight class in oddly specific ways (megajoule aren't going to vaporize, disintegrate, whatever a whole person).

Note they can additionally be used to simply apply lots of heat. Superheating rocks is done several times, making explosions is a thing, melting a material or cutting it rather than disintegrating it is also a thing.

This is utter bullshit: We see phasers making huge amounts of rocks dissapear, which in real-life needs much more energy than punching a hole in a packing crate.

The fact that a phaser can do the former but not the latter is proof that phasers don't work by releasing energy at a target - it has to work on a different mechanism

Also note that we see no proof that the packing crate was heated at all (it didn't turn red when hit - the phaser simply doesn't seem to do any damage at all)

The best explanation I know for this behaviour is the NDF-theory - your theory simply doesn't fit to what we see on screen.

[Q99]

The same goes for a phaser: If the Federation could create a phaser which can or cannot penetrate a packing crate depending on its setting, the Federation would be utterly stupid not to provide such phasers.
Of course the soldiers onboard starships would have to receive a training on when to use which setting, but the benefits surely would outweight the downside.

Hm... I don't think you quite get what I'm saying. I'm saying it's a tactical/safety call to keep the settings at that level. I'm not saying the phasers cannot be set higher, I'm saying it is a decision to have them set there on default for aforementioned reasons.

I mean, we see them cut through ship wall material on occasion, ship doors, bank vaults, etc..

We know full well they work on dense material because we have seen them work on dense material, if you're arguing they can't, that's a non-starter.

Also another consideration is high level is going to drain power cells very fast. It does seem to be much more a tool-setting rather than a combat-setting in practice.

This is utter bullshit: We see phasers making huge amounts of rocks dissapear, which in real-life needs much more energy than punching a hole in a packing crate.

The fact that a phaser can do the former but not the latter is proof that phasers don't work by releasing energy at a target - it has to work on a different mechanism

Ooor that the phaser has multiple settings. Like, every time they do the rock thing they always adjust the settings. The packing crates, flipside, are done on a ship, often in cargo bays with doors that open to space. I.e. places you do not want high penetration beams going around.

We see and are told of them adjusting the settings before doing the rock thing. We also see them work on dense material, again, usually after messing with the settings. We see the blasts that get stopped by the crates also hit people- they aren't even on disintegration, generally speaking, so they are not the same blasts that are used to disintegrate large quantities of rock.

You're trying to speculate reasons why the difference in performance but this is not a mystery that needs speculating, we know with 100% certainty that it is the same weapons fired at different setting and not simply different materials having different effects of that magnitude. Especially as we do see them work against dense materials.


Hm... I'd also note that most types of rock are not known for their lack of density. Quite the opposite, those boxes when moving generally look less massive and thus less dense than rocks to begin with. Maybe 'energy resistant alloys' would be a better term than density?

[BabelHuber]

Sorry, but you don't get the point:

You can come up with lame excuses all day long, but in real life you disable your target through a cover if you can. If you don't, you can't.

It's as simple as that.

Also, I don't remember an instance where a federation officer orders to use the phasers on low settings, since higher settings could damage the ship/ space station. Characters simply take cover behind packing crates like it's the smart thing to do. They would behave differently if they knew the adversary can shoot them through the cover.

And finally you haven't addressed the main point:

If a phaser delivers energy to its target, why isn't the target affected? When a phaser hits a packing crate or a wall of the Enterprise, simply nothing happens at all. No heating, no smoke, no noise, no movement of the packing crate whatsoever. In most cases, ther isn't even a scorch on the wall.

Compare this with real-life hits which don't penetrate: A WW2 tiger tank which is hit by Shermans always has scars, it's not that the Sherman's grenades don't do anything at all. They impact and they damage the armor even if they don't penetrate - like Han Solo's blaster.

Phasers? Not so! Hence the NDF theory.

BTW: Have you even read the old thread I linked to?

[Batman]

Sorry, but you don't get the point:
You can come up with lame excuses all day long, but in real life you disable your target through a cover if you can. If you don't, you can't.
It's as simple as that.

Hogwash. By that reasoning, NATO should've KEPT the 7.62 battle rifles as they're much better at punching through cover (and I think you seriously overestimate the penetrative capabilities of that round).

Also, I don't remember an instance where a federation officer orders to use the phasers on low settings, since higher settings could damage the ship/ space station. Characters simply take cover behind packing crates like it's the smart thing to do. They would behave differently if they knew the adversary can shoot them through the cover.

No, they'd behave differently if they could reasonably expect their adversaries would shoot through their cover. Given their wonky nature it's entirely possible that phasers can't shoot through the crate like projectile weapons can, they have to NDF it away in its entirety, eating up a prohibitive portion of the weapon's charge.

And finally you haven't addressed the main point:
If a phaser delivers energy to its target, why isn't the target affected?

It is. We see scorch marks on PJs, we see phasers used to heat rocks, we see targets made to disappear, we see phasers used to cut ship walls...

When a phaser hits a packing crate or a wall of the Enterprise, simply nothing happens at all. No heating, no smoke, no noise, no movement of the packing crate whatsoever. In most cases, there isn't even a scorch on the wall.

Standard infantry fight setting phasers don't leave marks on shipbuilding materials. 9mm Para rounds don't leave marks on battleship armour either. It doesn't mean they DON'T deliver energy, just not enough to leave a mark. Since we already KNOW phasers don't incapacitate/kill by brute force that doesn't really come as a surprise.

Compare this with real-life hits which don't penetrate: A WW2 tiger tank which is hit by Shermans always has scars, it's not that the Sherman's grenades don't do anything at all. They impact and they damage the armor even if they don't penetrate - like Han Solo's blaster.
Phasers? Not so! Hence the NDF theory.

Bzzt. Wrong. Phasers routinely do (see above). It's entirely possible for the target material to be (or at least appear) completely unaffected if the amount of energy delivered is low enough. Again, as phasers dont kill by brute force I'm perfectly willing to accept a standard kill setting shot will leave no visible mark on a packing crate. Doesn't mean they deliver ZERO energy.

[Q99]

Sorry, but you don't get the point:

You can come up with lame excuses all day long, but in real life you disable your target through a cover if you can. If you don't, you can't.

It's as simple as that.

Simply being dismissive and insulting towards an argument isn't a good argument. I get your argument, it's just that your argument doesn't counter the reality of shown feats.

"In real life if you see a weapon do something in one circumstance, it can do it in others. It's as simple as that."

Rocks are, in fact, dense material.


Also, as Batman says:

No, they'd behave differently if they could reasonably expect their adversaries would shoot through their cover. Given their wonky nature it's entirely possible that phasers can't shoot through the crate like projectile weapons can, they have to NDF it away in its entirety, eating up a prohibitive portion of the weapon's charge.

Phasers at high do not penetrate, they remove. Doing so on a starship has obvious hazards as well, but spending a second or two to remove cover is, while something that logically would be an option, a lot different than simply penetrating it.

No-one is arguing that phasers can shoot through cover.

Also, I don't remember an instance where a federation officer orders to use the phasers on low settings, since higher settings could damage the ship/ space station

You got that backwards (and skimmed my argument a bit, I see, because I did mention how it worked).

It's not that they specifically lower it when in ships. It's that the normal, what-you-have-your-sidearm-set-on level is at stun or normal kill, not high power disintegration.

They don't need to turn the power down- rather, we see them turn the power up when they specifically want to phaser away a large dense mass of rock or similar. That's not speculation, that's on-screen shown. The big feats come after hitting some buttons on the phaser.

If a phaser delivers energy to its target, why isn't the target affected? When a phaser hits a packing crate or a wall of the Enterprise, simply nothing happens at all. No heating, no smoke, no noise, no movement of the packing crate whatsoever. In most cases, ther isn't even a scorch on the wall.

What makes you think there's no heating? Heat doesn't automatically make scorch marks or melt stuff (also I can recall seeing a fair number of sparks and such, but whatever). If I press a heating element at three thousand degrees up against a metal with a melting point above that, then remove the heating element, the material I'm touching it to will be hot but will visually be unaffected. And if I press the same heating element to a person, the effects will be more pronounced.

The normal setting used in combat doesn't cause all that much damage to a person, so it's not a surprise it's not going to do that much damage to material. It doesn't disintegrate rock walls unless it's turned up.

Another thing to consider is, we're saying 'packing crates,' but we don't really have much data on precisely what they're made of, and these are not UPS boxes- they're used to transport both dangerous and fragile material on occasion. So, them having a degree of resistance to weapons fire is not odd.

And at the end of the day, we see Phasers on higher levels do more damage in a variety of situations, and we have not seem someone crank up the juice to try full power on the crates.

It doesn't matter how many reasons one can come up with why you think they shouldn't based on tactics or so on, these are a large number of shown feats that indicate phasers can and do cause significant destruction to dense objects, either through disintegrating them away, or in other circumstances through causing significant heat/explosive damage (ala the pillars shot down in TOS, or Picard welding the door shut in Nemesis).

BTW: Have you even read the old thread I linked to?

Yes, but I will note "Read this multi-page thread" rather than being able to provide succinct arguments yourself or even pointing to specific sections which you think proves your argument is not great debating, especially as it meanders over different points and is not directly addressing this argument.

Suffice to say, I don't think it materially supports your conclusion. No-one is saying phasers don't have NDF effects, at least on many settings, merely that they (1) also have other effects, (2) do involve significant amounts of energy transfer regardless. Wong's primary point in it is some materials are seen to be highly phaser resistant, which is certainly accurate, but also certainly in line with my arguments.

[NecronLord]

Why is this a discussion?

I invite anyone who thinks that phasers' DET output is harmless to have 1.05 megajoules applied to their chest in the form of heat.

The problem is that phasers show a variety of effects which are hard to explain:

They are terrible effecive against rocks, but on the other hand we see people use packing crates as cover against phasers in TNG and DS9

On maximal setting, humans hit by a phaser simply dissapear:

They aren't vaporized, otherwise we'd see vapour

The effect is the same for any human being, big or small. We never see a big creature only partly dissapearing (with some limb or so remaining), or a small person dissapearing with some excess energy (damaging the surroundings).

Also, some objects cannot be destroyed or even damaged by phasers at all, like the door on Cardassia Prime in DS9 "What You Leave Behind".

Hence phasers don't work by simply releasing energy at the target. As explanation, the NDF-theory was created.

See this old thread: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=54580

And finally you haven't addressed the main point:

If a phaser delivers energy to its target, why isn't the target affected? When a phaser hits a packing crate or a wall of the Enterprise, simply nothing happens at all. No heating, no smoke, no noise, no movement of the packing crate whatsoever. In most cases, ther isn't even a scorch on the wall.

Babel, I get the feeling you've read the main site without being aware that the quantity of canon Star Wars has increased massively since Mike wrote it.

At the basest level, you have quoted something that seems to be an attempt to refute the idea that the phaser itself can produce thermal effects.

WORF: Commander. Here's another one. This was done by a phaser on a setting of six or seven.

This is an example of someone killed on a setting between the usual kill and the vapourise setting. That looks an awful lot like a megajoule-type thermal effect (comparable to say, third degree burns from oil; also a several megajoule-level burn, though over a longer time)

Even stun settings do impart thermal energy, as shown in the burns on Burke and Samno in Star Trek VI after they are murdered with point-blank stun shots.