Taking up the ST/SW issue with a philosophical approach

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2003-04-30 05:37pm

Hi everyone.

I’m a long time on again off again lurker here, and I’ve read most of Wong’s material and a lot of his detractors, as well as participated in ST/SW discussions online and in the real world.

And there’s something about it all that bothers me.

It seems to me that most ST/SW debates occupy too much of a vacuum. Watching videos and trying to calculate turbo laser and phaser output is all well and good, but I feel that it ignores the different spirits of the Star Trek and Star Wars universes, and especially the philosophical differences between the GE and the UFP (which is what I’ll focus on since it’s the classic scenario).

A lot of it can be boiled down to the good guy / bad guy effect, but I want to look at a few specific issues.

First of all, ground forces. Star Wars people often insist that the GE is better than the UPF because of its massive ground forces. And then Trek people idiotically try to argue that three redshirts with phasers could take on an Imperial legion. But neither side pays attention to the fact that these redshirts really aren’t a ground force. The UFP just doesn’t have any ground forces at all. This is because the UFP is supposed to be a friendly and defensive alliance, and they’ve chosen to put their trust in Starfleet and fight their battles in space. The GE, on the other hand, expands and conquers, so it needs to have powerful and brutally effective ground forces, since just as in the real world air power can only kill things: you need ground forces to gain political control. The point? Yes, GE ground forces > UFP ground forces, but who cares? That doesn’t tell us anything about the technological capabilities of the GE in relation to the UFP, because only one side has even tried (seriously).

Likewise with planet killing. There’s no question that the DS Superlaser and Base Delta Zero scenarios have no parallels in UFP tactics, but that’s because the UFP has never tried to do that to a planet and never would (unless I’m forgetting an episode that is highly contradictory to everything that the UFP stands for). Even in an all out war between the GE and the UFP, UFP’s goal would only be to defend it’s own space. I suspect that if they wanted to do so, UFP could develop a technology that would destroy worlds quickly and easily, and if not then some silly script writer would technobabble in a few singularities and temporal shifts and make it happen that way. And it would be cannon if it showed up on screen. But in whining about canon and technobabble I digress. The point is that it doesn’t matter if the UFP could or could not destroy a world, because they wouldn’t.

…at least if they were still keeping with the Star Trek that Gene Roddenberry came up with. This brings me nicely to my next issue, or bone to pick if you will, which is the genesis of the GE and the UFP in their creator’s minds. (This is highly based on my interpretations – I have no interviews or such handy.) It seems to me that the GE was cooked up to be an ultimate symbol of evil. Placing it long ago and far, far away makes it something that hopefully no crazy person will go and try to emulate in the real world. Furthermore the technology of the GE is meant to have been honed by long years of brutal war. That’s why it looks sort of crude on screen – it was slapped together to be efficient at war making alone. And it certainly is. Suppose that Star Trek people are right, and turbo lasers are really weak and have tiny ranges. Guess what? It doesn’t matter, because an ISD has tons of them and it looks scary as shit! In fact, it could be argued that it would make sense for the GE to design low yield weapons and put lots of them on each ship – the purpose of the ships is to safeguard the GE against small threats that lack the facilities to build many really serious capital ships (the only ones they do fight, Calamari Cruisers, seem to rely on fighters) and to launch TIE fighters and ground invasion forces. Furthermore, this explains having things like the DS -> it fills a gap in the ISD’s mission, as well as being scary as anything. I realize that here I’m ignoring the BDZ scenario, but my point is that if we try to psychologize the GE it’s more interesting than if we just try to calculate the destructive power of its toys.

The UFP on the other hand (which if you haven’t noticed I’m a little more educated about) was envisioned as a future for our real world. Nuclear war – FTL travel – alien encounters – and boom! Mankind realizes that war is bad and money is evil, and they build a nice utopia and set out to explore and be happy. I would argue that the UFP represents the utopian ideal, and as such focuses on utopian ideas like love and harmony, and the positive aspects of humans and of individuals (which I’ll come to next). As such, UFP ships are meant to carry out scientific experiments, look pretty so other races aren’t scared, etc, and have the prime directive and so on. Since they aren’t intended to kill and only kill as efficiently as possible, its silly to compare them to something that is.

Now let’s look at the individual factor. Here’s another major area where the good guy / bad guy divide comes into play between the GE and the UFP, and it’s fairly important. GE officers are essentially mindless goons that do as they’re told, follow procedures, and do the sorts of things that their training and responsibility for an ISD force them to. The on screen effect? The human factor is irrelevant. Vader routinely kills officers that fail in their missions, because any other officer would do just as well. This is in keeping with the bad guy image of the GE.

In the UFP’s Starfleet, on the other hand, individuals make all the difference. Take the battle at the beginning of ST: First Contact. When the Enterprise shows up, the fleet has been shooting willy-nilly and getting it’s butt kicked. Picard shows up and orders everyone to fire on one part of the Borg cube. The dialogue implies that this is a weakness that Picard knows about from his assimilation, but I would contend that it’s common sense. Hmm…big ship, maybe vital systems are in the CENTER and the way to get there is by shooting the same place?! Genius! Or not. The obvious conclusion is that except for Picard, no Starfleet officer has a brain in his or her head. (My first reaction is to argue that all of their good officers are probably off on missions like Picard’s and not rotting around Earth in case someone happens to attack out of nowhere, but that would be a digression.) In fact, what’s going on here is the elevation of Picard as the good guy, as the *hero*: the one who comes in to save the day, and his being smarter than everyone else is a plot device to make us like him. The GE doesn’t have any heroes, so there’s no need to make any of their officers less than any of the others.

Let’s look at the potential importance of individuals in the context of my favorite debate, the GCS Enterprise bumps into an Imperator ISD for no reason in the middle of nowhere. The ISD follows standard procedures and starts shooting, since that’s what ISD’s do.

If I were commanding the Enterprise, knowing what I know about the GE’s agenda and tactics, I’d execute the Picard maneuver to close before long-range fire or TIE’s could harass me and attack the weak area of the ISD’s bridge. I have no doubt that I would destroy the ISD with minimal damage to the Enterprise, and thus fulfill every Federation cultist’s wildest fantasies. But let’s gain some perspective.

If Picard were commanding the Enterprise, he’d try to negotiate, possibly figure out what was going on quickly since he always seems to be at the center of conflicts and he is the good guy and the hero, then slog his way through all of the ISD’s fire and attack it, hitting the bridge (or any weak point) if this week’s script writer had bothered to have a tactical scan done and decided it would be effective, but no doubt getting the Enterprise beat up enough for Geordi to have to roll under the blast door in Engineering, and then maybe the Enterprise would win and maybe the ISD would.

If any schmuck were commanding the Enterprise (or if Picard was having a bad day), he would be unwilling to return fire without knowing everything he could about the ISD. Therefore when the engagement started he would fall back to run a threat assessment, and the TIE’s would come after him. He’d probably shoot a few, or a few dozen, and without bothering to get into the TIE power arguments, I’ll suggest that the Enterprise might be destroyed without ever even engaging the ISD itself.

So what am I saying here? Obviously I didn’t type all of this just to tell you that figuring out terajoules of pretty lights per meter or whatever has no value, because then I’d just be telling all of you that you’re wasting your time and you should go home and never come back here. That would be no fun at all.

I guess that what I’m asking is that we should be aware that both Star Trek and Star Wars are more than just conjectural figures. Making statistical comparisons is fun, but I sort of feel that it rips the soul out of the material that I assume we’re all here because we love.

So why don’t we change it up? Why don’t we have scenarios that take into account human actors and real Star Wars and Star Trek tactics, or a scenario pitting the UFP against the New Republic, so they’re both “good guys?”

I realize that this makes it harder to be objective and thus “prove” that your side is right or wrong, but I think it would be loads more fun.

I realize this has been pretty long, so thanks for reading it,
Worlds Spanner

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2003-04-30 05:56pm

Worlds Spanner wrote:It seems to me that most ST/SW debates occupy too much of a vacuum. Watching videos and trying to calculate turbo laser and phaser output is all well and good, but I feel that it ignores the different spirits of the Star Trek and Star Wars universes, and especially the philosophical differences between the GE and the UFP (which is what I’ll focus on since it’s the classic scenario).

That's great and all, but that is not how you objectively view either sides military forces. "Spirit" is irrelevent. Numbers are how you deabte. Deal.

A lot of it can be boiled down to the good guy / bad guy effect, but I want to look at a few specific issues.

Bullshit. Good guy/ Bad guy effect is retarded. Saying the godo guy will always win is sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling, "lalalalalalala! I can't here you! UFP wins 'cause they're good you silly Warsies, case closed!" Don't go down that road.

Whether or not the UFP has a ground force, it is in dire need of one. Witness "The Siege of AR-###, where the UFP thought they could take a planet with a group of, what, a couple dozen redshirts armed with phasers?

There's some garbage about "heros" here that I don't care to reply to....

If I were commanding the Enterprise, knowing what I know about the GE’s agenda and tactics, I’d execute the Picard maneuver to close before long-range fire or TIE’s could harass me and attack the weak area of the ISD’s bridge. I have no doubt that I would destroy the ISD with minimal damage to the Enterprise, and thus fulfill every Federation cultist’s wildest fantasies.But let’s gain some perspective.

Emphasis mine. I don't know if you're beign sarcastic, but if not, your staement is BS. A UFP vessel could never hope to scratch the shields on an ISD's bridge. A single TL would vaporize the Enterpirse.

If Picard were commanding the Enterprise, he’d try to negotiate, possibly figure out what was going on quickly since he always seems to be at the center of conflicts and he is the good guy and the hero, then slog his way through all of the ISD’s fire and attack it, hitting the bridge (or any weak point) if this week’s script writer had bothered to have a tactical scan done and decided it would be effective, but no doubt getting the Enterprise beat up enough for Geordi to have to roll under the blast door in Engineering, and then maybe the Enterprise would win and maybe the ISD would.

Hitting the bridge means NOTHING if it has its shields up, you know. No UFP vessel could damage it. Furthermore, the Enterprise could not "Slog [its] way through all the ISD's fire and attack it," a single (inevitable) hit would destroy the Enterprise.

I guess that what I’m asking is that we should be aware that both Star Trek and Star Wars are more than just conjectural figures. Making statistical comparisons is fun, but I sort of feel that it rips the soul out of the material that I assume we’re all here because we love.

Too bad. That is what the website, and subsequently this part of the forum is for. From the main site:

"What is the Federation's capacity to wage war comparitive to [the Empire's]?"

So why don’t we change it up? Why don’t we have scenarios that take into account human actors and real Star Wars and Star Trek tactics, or a scenario pitting the UFP against the New Republic, so they’re both “good guys?”

Human actors and tactics are irrelevent in an SWvsST debate. The ship is what counts in these scenarios, and as such the Empire will always be victorious. The NR would wipe out the Feds just as fast if they engaged in a war.

I realize that this makes it harder to be objective and thus “prove” that your side is right or wrong, but I think it would be loads more fun.

It wouldn't be objective at all (Picard wins because he's more heroic than an ISD Captain

). And speak for yourself, I think it would easily be much less enjoyable.

I realize this has been pretty long, so thanks for reading it,

Haven't said anything I haven't already heard.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-04-30 06:02pm

You've focused waaaay too much on the thought that disregarding power...it's heart and soul that win the day.

In heroic fiction yes...in firepower does no such thing.

Post by **AdmiralKanos** » 2003-04-30 06:22pm

This person is basically arguing that if somebody wanted to write Star Trek more like Star Wars, then Star Trek would be able to take on Star Wars.

All I can say is "wow, what a shocking development"

The POINT here is that Star Trek is NOT written like Star Wars; it is a different series with much weaker ships, and that's simply the way it works. The Federation does NOT have enormous firepower, so they must make do with tricks. The Federation does NOT have galaxy-spanning propulsion systems, so they must make do with limited territory. The Federation does NOT have enormous military forces, so they must make do with coalition-building.

All of this is part and parcel of Trek; he is basically saying that if he could just rewrite Trek and change the whole setup, he could make it stronger. Well, duh ...

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-04-30 06:37pm

Lets see....this seems to be....
Lets pretend that firepower means nothing....now lets pretend that being cool is what matters....since I am cool....I could have all the firepower I could ever need to do whatever cool things I want to do.....

Privately owned vessels in star wars (belonging to individuals and not companies...) have performance in excess of Star Trek style military flag ships.....so.....I'm once again toying with the idea of a roleplay character of mine from the Star Wars Combine against all the military powers of the ST universe.....with just his personal belongings.....

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2003-04-30 08:00pm

Keevan_Colton wrote:I'm once again toying with the idea of a roleplay character of mine from the Star Wars Combine against all the military powers of the ST universe.....with just his personal belongings.....

Do it.

Ignoring all of the sarcasm in the above replies and not bothering to reply to quotes much since I find quoted quoted quotes nearly unreadable (sadly these appear a lot in point by point arguments, but there's no helping that), I'll try to reiterate the helpful intentions of my post.

Likewise I'm ignoring responses to any of my technical arguments or illustrations, since my comments are poorly researched and mere examples - the power of ISD shielding is irrelevant to my point.

I am not arguing that anyone should abandon their statistics. As stated, that would be a silly thing for me to say. Nor do I contend that a meaningful conversation could go on if "heroes always win" or "if Starfleet tried they could kick the Empire's ass" arguments were used.

All I'm saying is that I think the ST/SW debate could change and gain meaning if people let it be a little subjective.

Obviously there are limits of reason that have to be self imposed, which some might find it impossible to do, but I think that the thinking majority could discern and ignore those. It sort of does anyway.

Finally, do you think it's an accident that I'm pointing out issues that would help the UFP on the premier pro-GE message board? If anyone can be trusted to use these ideas but not abuse them, it's you guys.

And I still want to see a UFP/New Republic scenario.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-04-30 08:03pm

Worlds Spanner wrote:And I still want to see a UFP/New Republic scenario.

They die. Pathetically.

Post by **Dalton** » 2003-04-30 08:15pm

I've read and noted your requests for more subjectivity. This is the wrong forum for that. I direct you to the fanfic forum, which might find your ideas more appealing.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2003-04-30 08:19pm

This is a military war! We don't give a damn about story, characters or anything! We're taking two powers and pitting them against each other.

And concidering a 20 year old transport can't take out 56 Federation ships every time it fires its weapons, it's a rather 1 sided battle.

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2003-04-30 08:41pm

Dalton wrote:I've read and noted your requests for more subjectivity. This is the wrong forum for that. I direct you to the fanfic forum, which might find your ideas more appealing.

Noted with thanks.

I had thought that threads like this one indicated that this board was open to scenarios with real forces on either side as opposed to figures.

If this message board exists only for mathematical comparisons, I will take this idea elsewhere with apologies for wasting your time.

Post by **AdmiralKanos** » 2003-04-30 08:42pm

Worlds Spanner wrote:
Dalton wrote:I've read and noted your requests for more subjectivity. This is the wrong forum for that. I direct you to the fanfic forum, which might find your ideas more appealing.
Noted with thanks.

I had thought that threads like this one indicated that this board was open to scenarios with real forces on either side as opposed to figures.

If this message board exists only for mathematical comparisons, I will take this idea elsewhere with apologies for wasting your time.

Mathematical comparisons are objective, and therefore more "real" than subjective comparisons. Your definition of "real" is clearly erroneous.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2003-04-30 08:54pm

When a fucking 20 year old TRANSPORT can wipe out FIFTY-SIX Fed ships, you can be lazy and use math figures.

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2003-04-30 09:09pm

Grand Admiral Thrawn, thanks for clearing that one up unasked! I was confused when you said "can't" the first time.

Mathematical comparisons are objective, and therefore more "real" than subjective comparisons. Your definition of "real" is clearly erroneous.

Excellent! Bringing a little philosophy into a thread that I for some reason included the word philosophy in!

Figures are indeed more "real" in a tangible sense (although one wonders at their use when both ST folks and SW folks are forced to place huge margins of error in their guesstimations), but my point is that they don't reflect a "real situation."

Moreover, I would point out that in issues like "How many Feds can Jedi X take on?" one does account for that persons motivations and habits. How is it that Jedis are people with the power to be actors in a scenario and starship captains (on either side) are not?

Running the numbers only works if all vessals on both sides are operated by computers of identicle capabilties.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-04-30 09:15pm

Side A has 100,000 ships armed with TT(Teraton level) weaponry, armor with PT(Petaton level) armor.

Side B has 10,000 ships armed with MT(Megaton) level weaponry, armor with MT(Megaton level) armor.

Side A are nothing more then witless morons who only know to do one thing...pressing the firing switch.

Side B is the greatest coalition of minds every to be known.

So who the fuck do you think wins?

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-04-30 09:18pm

Worlds Spanner wrote: Moreover, I would point out that in issues like "How many Feds can Jedi X take on?" one does account for that persons motivations and habits. How is it that Jedis are people with the power to be actors in a scenario and starship captains (on either side) are not?

Running the numbers only works if all vessals on both sides are operated by computers of identicle capabilties.

The thing is....the Jedi is a person....his strengths are based on "who" and "what" he is....meanwhile....a captain is limited by the capabilities of the vessel they command....much as a jedi is limited by what his body can do....though in the latter case....personal experience/motivations/habbits play a tangible roll....in the case of a ship....well....
Put the best general in command of medieval infantry and set them against a squadron of apaches under the command of a tactical dunce......what do you think happens?

RTN · Post by **RTN** » 2003-04-30 09:24pm

I'm not sure if I'll take the time to read the opening post are not. But it is true, the purposes of both pieces of science-fiction are different. Starwars has, for the most part, been designed to fullfill the role of entertainment and awe. Something, I think, it has done quite nicely. (because it kicks ass

)

Star Trek was created by Roddenberry (spelling?) to present a vision of a possible future and to publically discuss controversial topics. It is a sci-fi universe, and therefore, the general population does not care what philosophical and controversial subjects are presented -- because it is NOT real. However -- here me on this --, the fact that average people do not take the show seriously is what allows Star Trek to succeed in its intended philosphical endeavors. It is true, a great deal of people do not like Star Trek. But it is also true that a greater amount of people have seen Star Trek. When watching an episode with a real life controversial subject, they are not offended because it isn't real to them -- but it doesn't matter if it's not real. The idea, from multiple perspectives, without political obligations and real-life "strings attatched"has already been presented. TOS came at a time when the United States was in a cold war; a great many people didn't believe humanity could survive without living through a nuclear holocaust. So an image of a future, when humanity had overcome a great deal of its internal striffe was energizing to see, as it represented hope that humanity will overcome [even if it wasn't as governmentally realistic].

Technologically speaking they are different as well. Star Trek, though it has a great deal more technobabble, uses actual scientific ideas. Star Wars doesn't need to, it's there to put the audience in awe.

What I wrote above are the reasons why the technology and governments are different. To me, science-fiction is not a fantasy, but a possible future and should be repesected as such.

That is my small opinion, amongst many thoughts of others. In terms of this website, however, it is clealy about... battle

RTN · Post by **RTN** » 2003-04-30 09:28pm

EDIT:
"here me on this" = "hear me on this"
"philosphical endeavors" = "philosophical endeavors"

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2003-04-30 09:29pm

Ghost Rider wrote:Side A has 100,000 ships armed with TT(Teraton level) weaponry, armor with PT(Petaton level) armor.

Side B has 10,000 ships armed with MT(Megaton) level weaponry, armor with MT(Megaton level) armor.

Side A are nothing more then witless morons who only know to do one thing...pressing the firing switch.

Side B is the greatest coalition of minds every to be known.

So who the fuck do you think wins?

*Shrug* Side A has greater firepower somewhere in the what? 100,000,000 factors of 10 range? (I don't know the prefix peta-).

I'd say that side A wins, but here's where some fun can be had.

Run the scenario such that EVERY single good idea, loophole, or bit of tactical genius EVER seen in Trek (we can drop the side A / side B cloak) is employed (within reason - none of the "Enterprise is invincible!" crap please). How many of the 100,000 can the 10,000 take? 100? 1,000? 20,000 maybe, if they reached levels of genius no one has ever imagined?

Play! Have fun! I can't imagine that it's fun to just post "burnt toast" again and again.

If it is, well, good for you, and again maybe I just don't belong here.

Peace.

Thirdfain · Post by **Thirdfain** » 2003-04-30 09:36pm

Technologically speaking they are different as well. Star Trek, though it has a great deal more technobabble, uses actual scientific ideas. Star Wars doesn't need to, it's there to put the audience in awe.

Star Trek doesn't use actual scientific ideas. Star Trek uses FANCY SCIENTIFIC-SOUNDING words, in an attempt to make the show appear more cerebral. Star Wars dispenses with such tomfoolery and shamelessly admits that it is a fun space opera. In terms of technology, Star Trek is conceited- Star Wars is not.

Play! Have fun! I can't imagine that it's fun to just post "burnt toast" again and again.

If it is, well, good for you, and again maybe I just don't belong here.

Peace.

Star Trek vs. Star Wars debates are not what this site is all about. You've lurked for a while, you've seen the OT, SLAM, Gaming, OSF boards- that's where the action is at. ST vs. SW? It's a side show, these days. The proof has been presented. Everyone knows that in terms of might, the Empire wins every time.

So, erm, Play! Have fun!

Don't come to the SW vs. ST section of this board, cuz it is no longer the center of playing and having fun!

RTN · Post by **RTN** » 2003-04-30 09:41pm

Thirdfain wrote: Star Trek doesn't use actual scientific ideas. Star Trek uses FANCY SCIENTIFIC-SOUNDING words, in an attempt to make the show appear more cerebral. Star Wars dispenses with such tomfoolery and shamelessly admits that it is a fun space opera. In terms of technology, Star Trek is conceited- Star Wars is not.

I disagree. As an aerospace engineering major, the terminology makes sense for the most part and is not the technobabble that everyone whines about. Really, I could care less about how plausible the technologies are. I'm just tired of people claiming bullshit because they can't see it happening.

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2003-04-30 09:42pm

Star Trek vs. Star Wars debates are not what this site is all about. You've lurked for a while, you've seen the OT, SLAM, Gaming, OSF boards- that's where the action is at. ST vs. SW? It's a side show, these days. The proof has been presented. Everyone knows that in terms of might, the Empire wins every time.

So, erm, Play! Have fun!

Don't come to the SW vs. ST section of this board, cuz it is no longer the center of playing and having fun!

Fair enough.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-04-30 09:45pm

RTN wrote:
Thirdfain wrote: Star Trek doesn't use actual scientific ideas. Star Trek uses FANCY SCIENTIFIC-SOUNDING words, in an attempt to make the show appear more cerebral. Star Wars dispenses with such tomfoolery and shamelessly admits that it is a fun space opera. In terms of technology, Star Trek is conceited- Star Wars is not.
I disagree. As an aerospace engineering major, the terminology makes sense for the most part and is not the technobabble that everyone whines about. Really, I could care less about how plausible the technologies are. I'm just tired of people claiming bullshit because they can't see it happening.

Excuse me but I must cry bullshit....if it's violating all the known laws of physics and pissing all over them, then....how exactly is it more scientific?
They use scientific sounding words.....in totally bullshit ways......so dont claim its using "actual scientific ideas".

Thirdfain · Post by **Thirdfain** » 2003-04-30 09:45pm

I disagree. As an aerospace engineering major, the terminology makes sense for the most part and is not the technobabble that everyone whines about. Really, I could care less about how plausible the technologies are. I'm just tired of people claiming bullshit because they can't see it happening.

As a high school student who's only just about to begin a college career, I have pretty llimited knowledge- but I can see that they tack on random "scientific" words. Photon torpedoes? Quantum Torpedoes? Plasma Conduits? The list goes on. Nonsensical collections of scientific terminology, thrown together in a haphazard manner.

RTN · Post by **RTN** » 2003-04-30 09:49pm

Thirdfain wrote:
I disagree. As an aerospace engineering major, the terminology makes sense for the most part and is not the technobabble that everyone whines about. Really, I could care less about how plausible the technologies are. I'm just tired of people claiming bullshit because they can't see it happening.
As a high school student who's only just about to begin a college career, I have pretty llimited knowledge- but I can see that they tack on random "scientific" words. Photon torpedoes? Quantum Torpedoes? Plasma Conduits? The list goes on. Nonsensical collections of scientific terminology, thrown together in a haphazard manner.

Photon Torpedoes... yeah, that's pretty retarded.

Quantum Torpedoes... that depends on how they claim to work and which theories you personally support. I personally write my own, so do what you want with that statement.

Plasma Conduit... what the hell is difficult about having a pipe with an ionzied gas in it??

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2003-04-30 09:51pm

Actually, I give them a *little* credit with the power generation. A plasma conduit is obviously a conduit or pipe that plasma travels through, and the M/AMR makes some sense.

Why doesn't make any sense at all is the entire dilitium crystal thing (which is kind of important) and the whole subspace bubble thing, which is the output.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Taking up the ST/SW issue with a philosophical approach

Taking up the ST/SW issue with a philosophical approach

Re: Taking up the ST/SW issue with a philosophical approach