Star Trek vs Star Wars : If games were canon

[seanrobertson]

But in fairness to Malak's ships, these guns had a VERY high rate of fire, probably close to 100 shots/sec.,

By that, I mean all guns firing at once. Each cannon probably put out around 2 shots/sec. or so.

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

*still has no idea what you are talking about*

So it's a cheat huh?

Yes, in Galactic Battlegrounds with the expansion. It's a cheat, but it shows how big the Death Star really is. Just scale from their, and SW is incredibly powerful.

Oh, and since ST games are of equal level of canon, I say that BC is the most accurate.

Do you mean BC with or without the USS Salem Canon Pack and the P81 ships with Elminster Upgrades?

[YT300000]

Do you mean BC with or without the USS Salem Canon Pack and the P81 ships with Elminster Upgrades?

Unmodded, no patches, no upgrades, nothing.

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

Do you mean BC with or without the USS Salem Canon Pack and the P81 ships with Elminster Upgrades?

Unmodded, no patches, no upgrades, nothing.

In that case, the GCS loses, what, 7 phaser arrays from what we saw on the show?

[Johonebesus]

With SFC2 I do not believe the Federation could loose. Their largest battleships can shatter a planet while combat at less then 10,000km is considered CLOSE range.
...

IIRC the planet shatters into several large pieces that blow away from eachother at speeds faster then the ships can move in game.

Are you talking about SFC2 or 3? I've never managed to blow up a planet in EaW or OP. You can basically BDZ them, take out all systems and reduce the resistance to 2 and bring the "hull integrity" to almost 0, but after that nothing happens. Unmodded, it would take forever and a day just to destroy an asteroid, even with a BB.

The Organians are in SFC2. They have seemingly limitless capabilities (I am NOT proposing the no limits fallacy) and can prevent war between the Klingons and Federation through total annihilation of their ships at will. Their demonstrated power idicates they are capable of far more then they have shown. In SFC2 they were right pissed at the Galaxy for being at war so they introduced another race to destroy them all out of pure spite.

The Organians did not bring in the ISC out of spite, they did it to unite the Alpha quadrant in preparation for a greater threat. In the last mission, the allies create a machine to capture the Organians but they surrender just before some new ships appear and take Organia. This shows that that the Organians are not invincible. They could be defeated by standard Trek technology, and they evidently were sent packing by whoever showed up at the end (maybe the Andromedans? maybe that was going to be the story for the third game before they lost their TOS/TMP license).

[Johonebesus]

I just remembered that I did once blow up a planet when I loaded a ship up with TRB's. I thought it was just a bug, since I never managed it with ph4's and drones and other heavy weapons. But then the TRB is a cheat.

[Connor MacLeod]

Jedi STarfighter allows Jedi to use Force lightning against fighters and I think capital ships

[Connor MacLeod]

And in the Galactic Battlegrounds expansion, Jedi can regenerate.

[Connor MacLeod]

lets not forget that ni the Star Wars flight sim games for computer you can damage/destroy capital ships with lasers and torpedoes far more easily - which gives them multi GT/TT firepower.

[HappyTarget]

That or KT/MT shielding. Not to mention visual combat ranges only.

[Connor MacLeod]

That or KT/MT shielding. Not to mention visual combat ranges only.

Actually the AOTC ICS is still canon. And visual targeting only because its purely manual targeting (You never get a targeting computer in the games like in the movies, which demonstrated a possible range of nearly a thousand km)

[HappyTarget]

Actually the AOTC ICS is still canon. And visual targeting only because its purely manual targeting (You never get a targeting computer in the games like in the movies, which demonstrated a possible range of nearly a thousand km)

If AOTC ICS is still cannon then doesn't that mean that fighter weapons stay the same as well? Wouldn't it apply evenly to both fighter based weapons systems and capital ship defences?

[HappyTarget]

The targeting computer (in the X-wings and other Rebel craft) also seems good only for picking off a fixed target as it is NEVER ONCE used against anything else except for the DS I exhaust shaft. I can see it useful against orbital weapons platforms and surgical orbital bombardment, but not against a maneuvering ship

Vader's targeting computer only worked in visual range, very CLOSE visual range, so IMHO it doesn't count much either. (shrug)

[RogueIce]

The targeting computer (in the X-wings and other Rebel craft) also seems good only for picking off a fixed target as it is NEVER ONCE used against anything else except for the DS I exhaust shaft. I can see it useful against orbital weapons platforms and surgical orbital bombardment, but not against a maneuvering ship

If you're talking about X-wing...it's been forever since I played the Death Star Trench Run, but you can get a targeting computer like thing in the other missions by pressing the I key. It's basically like they ones we say in Vader's craft...lots of lines in a cone, which gives you a view of where the enemy is in relation to your nose.

At any rate, the CMDs get much better in XvT and XWA, letting you target specific ship's components (as well as different sections of hull on larger targets).

And in XWA, a sufficently skilled ship (Vet or better IIRC) can shoot down missles quite well at a decent range.

[Connor MacLeod]

If AOTC ICS is still cannon then doesn't that mean that fighter weapons stay the same as well? Wouldn't it apply evenly to both fighter based weapons systems and capital ship defences?

Yes, and capital ships retain their high shield and weapons outputs.

In the games, fighters can be outfitted with different weapons systems. A fighter is much more eaisly than a capital ship can refit its own. We can more easily rationalize high end numbers with low end numbers with fighters than we can with capital ships. Try thinking these things through, will you?

[Connor MacLeod]

The targeting computer (in the X-wings and other Rebel craft) also seems good only for picking off a fixed target as it is NEVER ONCE used against anything else except for the DS I exhaust shaft. I can see it useful against orbital weapons platforms and surgical orbital bombardment, but not against a maneuvering ship

Wrong. They used targeting computers in ANH against fighters as well (in fact, the novelization indicates they are at least PARTIALLY computerized/automated, and capital ship batteries are canonically "computerized"/computer assisted.) On top of that we know fixed weapons can have off-axis firing capability (both for Rebel and Imperial fighters.) which means that as long as they can track it within the arc, they can probably in fact hit it. The fact we've "never seen it used" does not dismiss the possibility at all if the possibility exists reasonably.

[quoted]
Vader's targeting computer only worked in visual range, very CLOSE visual range, so IMHO it doesn't count much either. (shrug)[/quote]

Yes, lets just ignore the little fact about all the heavy jamming and EW mentioned in the movies and novels and s uch, shall we? You seem to have this love with selectively "picking and choosing" your evidence in debates.

[Lord Pounder]

If Games become cannon you can build a Star Destroyer in about 15 minutes. Source Homeworld New Rebellion Mod or Star Wars Invasion.

[YT300000]

If you get really big ships, (like the ESD custom .opt) then the battle always starts inside of them, cause they're really, really big. (XWA)

[HappyTarget]

Yes, lets just ignore the little fact about all the heavy jamming and EW mentioned in the movies and novels and s uch, shall we? You seem to have this love with selectively "picking and choosing" your evidence in debates

Who said I was ignoring it? The fact remains that in an EW heavy combat environment (most Wars battles are this, although not to the insane extents of ANH Battle of Yavin.), the targeting computer is still visual range only. How it might function WITHOUT EW is an unknown quantity and pure guesswork as such a battle has never been seen.

On top of that we know fixed weapons can have off-axis firing capability (both for Rebel and Imperial fighters.) which means that as long as they can track it within the arc, they can probably in fact hit it. The fact we've "never seen it used" does not dismiss the possibility at all if the possibility exists reasonably.

Gotta remember that quote for some of the more obscure/seldom used uber Trek tech then. (most of it just faded away afterall, not totally destroyed beyond the realm of rebuilding)

Judgeing from the games, this option of off axis tracking is rarely used with the near TL level upgraded fighter blasters. If it was used in one of the Xwing or Tie games, I'm willing to accept that, but in all the games I've played, you couldn't autotrack your lasers (even though you could in canon.) (shrug)

If Games become cannon you can build a Star Destroyer in about 15 minutes. Source Homeworld New Rebellion Mod or Star Wars Invasion.

Mods don't count IIRC. Only core/unmodded games.

[Isolder74]

in Rebellion if you have enough shipyards you can build a Star Destroyer in one "day"

[Alyeska]

Will you people grow a fucking brain already. Cheats and mods DO NOT COUNT.

[YT300000]

Will you people grow a fucking brain already. Cheats and mods DO NOT COUNT.

Well, you sometimes start inside an SSD, so that still counts.

[RogueIce]

Will you people grow a fucking brain already. Cheats and mods DO NOT COUNT.

Well, you sometimes start inside an SSD, so that still counts.

In the regular, un-modded XWA?

[Connor MacLeod]

Who said I was ignoring it? The fact remains that in an EW heavy combat environment (most Wars battles are this, although not to the insane extents of ANH Battle of Yavin.), the targeting computer is still visual range only. How it might function WITHOUT EW is an unknown quantity and pure guesswork as such a battle has never been seen.

How so? Without EW fouling it up, it works pretty much as intended. Unless the target has some sort of sensor-stealth or magic immunity to detection, or it isn't emitting, sensors should work fine (ignoring other factors such as target nature, detection range, sensor type, etc.)

The targeting computer was short ranged because they needed to BE that close to burn through the jamming. The targeting computers were so fouled up by DS jamming that they could only be effective at close range (same with the torpedo drop, even though they could technically "Acquire" the target from much farther away.)

Gotta remember that quote for some of the more obscure/seldom used uber Trek tech then.

You ignored the whole "reasonable possibility existing" bit. We see guns firing off axis. We have sources for computer-assisted (or in some cases) fully automated targeting. We can point to battle droids as further examples (including droid starfighters), we can draw on the EU for additional examples supporting the use of targeting computers. "lost tech" in trek does not fall under that guideline.

(most of it just faded away afterall, not totally destroyed beyond the realm of rebuilding)

Uh huh.

Judgeing from the games, this option of off axis tracking is rarely used with the near TL level upgraded fighter blasters. If it was used in one of the Xwing or Tie games, I'm willing to accept that, but in all the games I've played, you couldn't autotrack your lasers (even though you could in canon.) (shrug)

What part of "the games use different targeting methods than in canon" did you miss? The manual/visual targeting we see in the games has no relevanec whatsoever to targeting in the movies or other sources. Trying to manually target your fighter in addition to manually adjusting the guns firing axis would be incredibly difficult.

[JodoForce]

You guys need to decide whether to:

1. discard all other sources for canon except games
2. take the 'best' of all sources
3. take the 'worst' of all sources

Or hold separate discussions for each scenario. Otherwise there will just be endless bickering and contradictions.