24th century firepower based on TDiC

[enigma 521]

Tell me you're kidding. You didn't really pull out that old neutronium hull falsehood did you? Why don't we go back to the old "Turbolasers are useless against Trek ships because lasers can't penetrate navigational deflectors" argument? On the off chance you aren't pulling my chain and are actually being serious, RSA swatted this one down in less than a page. Nuetronium Hull Falsehood

 

 

 

Not going to argue because you are not making any sense whatsoever. As for the laser quote, that was against an opponent that had weak lasers. Besides let's say someone attacked you with a feather. You'd laugh and say that feathers can't hurt you. Now again what if that same guy had a bag with 100lbs of feathers and hit you with it. Are you still immune to feathers? Scale up the lasers to turbolasers and tell me again that they'd never pass through the navigational deflectors.

 

 

 

I'll respond more about it later

 

 

 

 

 

 

You keep saying this, but "rippling clouds" is not what we see. Clouds don't come UP from the planet, and we don't see clouds to begin with. What we see appears to be the surface itself being liquefied and rippling. Look closely at the colors.

 

 

 

If there was no clouds then it is even worse. A small part of the planet being pounded and the end result was the same! No change! If I was to destroy\liquify\burn\etc.. one third of anything you would see actual damage not tilling the soil! My god the Romulans and the Cardassians have just helped the Founders with their farming by tilling the soil with beam weaponry and torpedoes! Geez, what happened to the old fashion way of using a horse?

 

 

 

 

Nobody said anything about destroying a planet. A Warbird isn't a Death Star. We're talking about destroying the crust. And as I mentioned before, we don't really know what "destroyed" means in this case. It could be any range of things.

 

 

 

True but that also doesn't help your case if you cannot agree on the term "destroy". Did they destroy the landscape but other than that the planet remained unscathed?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Once again, it depends on what exactly you mean by BDZ. You really need to define your source for BDZ and exactly what it constitutes. Mind you, without resorting to the ICS, which really has been retconned out of relevancy. *sigh* must I quote Scooter again? BDZ

 

 

 

I'm not going to argue over Scooter as better debaters than I have crushed him like a bug.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And got creamed by one with it's shields up. Oh, and a Clone Wars era ship burned up on re-entry.

 

 

 

 

For the first part, they were going full speed after the MF and the ship that got hit only lost partial functionality yet was not destroyed. The others were unscathed. Gee 100% survival rate with 33% of sustaining damage. While the E-D wouldn't even risk a shuttle. Yea, good rebuttal.

 

 

 

You'll have to clarify the CW part.

[Tyralak 12,068]

Not going to argue because you are not making any sense whatsoever. As for the laser quote, that was against an opponent that had weak lasers. Besides let's say someone attacked you with a feather. You'd laugh and say that feathers can't hurt you. Now again what if that same guy had a bag with 100lbs of feathers and hit you with it. Are you still immune to feathers? Scale up the lasers to turbolasers and tell me again that they'd never pass through the navigational deflectors.

 

 

 

You missed my point completely. I'm not defending the laser/navigational deflector idea. It's a ridiculous argument. THAT was my point. It's just as ridiculous as the neutronium hull business. The link I gave thoroughly rebukes the argument. As far as the rest of your post goes, I will get to it tonight. I have to go to work.

[Praeothmin 532]

Phasers are useless against neutronium yet turbolasers can destroy it.

 

 

 

Sorry, Phasers are useless against a "Pure Neutronium" hull, not the SW hull plating alloy that buckles upon impact with an A-Wing (the ship went through more then just the windows, it took out the surrounding structures too), an asteroid (unless you are going to say the asteroid was made of neutronium too ), and a crash landing.

 

There's also the fact that any real "neutronium" would be so dense as to crush anyone walking too close to it, such as crewmembers, droids, even shuttles...

 

Sorry, but it just doesn't cut it...

 

 

 

I'll let Tyralak discuss the TiDC events with you, I haven't seen it in while and don't have the time to do any kind of research at the moment.

 

 

 

I'd question the captain's competence if he didn't flinch at the results and asked some questions as to why a third of Moscow was reduced to ruins within ten seconds when he was told that it would take an hour to completely destroy the city. I'd certainly would question my men as to why I was falsely told that it would take an hour when at most it would have taken a total of half a minute.

 

 

 

Ah, but see, you would not question the fact that your officer told you you could destroy Moscow if it was true.

 

Sure, it was weird that they didn't question why it was that fast, but the fact they did not question the estimated capabilities of their weapons shows that these "power prejections" are not out of the realm of possibilty for ST weapons...

 

 

 

I have no doubt that they could *damage* a planet, we are doing the same right now to Earth! But outright destroy a planet will take a whole lot more ships than one or twenty.

 

 

 

See, I'd like to argue and say I disagree, but even to me, it always seemed a bit much, and since, as I mentioned earlier, I don't have the time to do any research, I'll leave the finer points specific to TiDC to you and Tyralak...

 

 

 

Until it is outright disproven then BDZ will reduce a planet's crust into lava up to a depth of somewhere between half a mile to a mile.

 

 

 

According to who?

 

What were the sources that specified that a BDZ involved this?

 

According to the WookiePedia, this is what a BDZ means:

 

Base Delta Zero was the naval code used by the Sith Empire, Galactic Republic, Galactic Empire, and Confederacy of Independent Systems to order the complete surface destruction of a planetary target, eliminating all life, industry, and natural resources

 

 

 

This statement leaves the door wide open to a multitude of possible interpretations, and closely resembles Starfleet's "General Order 24", which was known to be doable by a lone starship.

 

The molten crust statement, as I recall, came from an extreme interpretation, unsupported by anything seen in the movies, or even in the Clone Wars series...

 

 

 

In Pegasus, it was mentioned that it would have taken all of E-D's torpedoes to destroy the asteroid and escape. If the Fed's firepower is of so powerful then one or two torps would only have been needed not over 200. Jango Fett had an easy time destroying asteroids with his seismic charges. As for overall sturdiness, easy to compare as E-D couldn't maneuver through a stationary asteroid field yet ISDs were able to go through a violent asteroid field.

 

 

 

And this asteroid also had an intense magnetic field, which asteroids shouldn't have, so it wasn't your run of the mill asteroid.

 

Also, in Voyager, 1 single torpedo is sufficient to completely destroy a 50-100 meters asteroid (which should have been vaporized if it had been a "normal" one).

 

You see, over the hundreds and hundreds of hours of ST, we have many examples at both ends of the spectrum, while all the live action SW and animated series show us a good, base average.

 

 

 

Jango's mine was obviously a special type of weapon (some could say subspace weapon) since its most destructive effect was 2 dimentional...

 

And hed didn't destroy as much as sawed and asteroid in half... not the same...

 

 

 

As for sturdiness, the external shell of the E-D survived, intact, the semi-controlled re-entry that the Invisible hand couldn't.

 

The difference is that, while the bridge of the Invisible hand seemed to have good shock absorbers, the E-D's didn't... Guess which bridge I'd rather be on...

 

 

 

Sorry but ST's firepower is sorely lacking compared to SW.

 

 

 

 

Still unproven...

 

 

 

I'm not going to argue over Scooter as better debaters than I have crushed him like a bug.

 

 

 

Actually, even though I don't agree with all his conclusions, I don't agree with your assessment either.

 

Debaters that say their better then him think they have crushed him...

 

But, when you take the time to analyse many of these debates, you realize many of these so called "better debaters" declared victory while they hadn't even answered all his questions or disproven all his points...

 

Not the same thing...

 

 

 

 

 

For the first part, they were going full speed after the MF and the ship that got hit only lost partial functionality yet was not destroyed. The others were unscathed. Gee 100% survival rate with 33% of sustaining damage. While the E-D wouldn't even risk a shuttle.

 

 

 

Full speed which for ISDs is turtle speed, which means low kinetic impacts...

 

Also, all of the ships were damaged at least in part, because one Captain assumed the Falcon destroyed based on the amount of damage the ISDs had sustained themselves...

 

And we have no indication that the ISD that lost its bridge tower only lost partial functionality, since we see nothing of them afterwards.

 

For all we know, they could have exploded ofscreen later, or they may have needed to be towed out, we simply don't know...

 

 

 

See, in this entire SW versus ST debate, the problem comes from debaters entering the fray with preconceived notions from both sides, and with no intention of letting anything change their points of view...

 

This is problematic when most of the debate revolves around unknowns, and when a lot of things must be assumed by one side or the other...

 

Interesting, nonetheless...

[InvaderSkooj 1]

Are you quite certain this is the argument you want to push? I'll give you some time to reconsider before I reply.

The lack of anything clearly being ejected into space, and recognizable fireballs of sufficient duration clearly precludes any of the weapons operating through any DET method. At best they are operating under treknobabble of the highest order

[StarDestroyerAvenger 2,147,483,647]

Ok, let me make it official. All of you who think that any significant planetary damage is occuring at all are now officially goddamn morons. We've been through what three pages of this fucking bullshit now? If you can't get it through your fucking thick skulls then there is no fucking hope for you now or ever. Concession accepted.

 

 

 

For those of you who actually have used logic and math to prove your points, move along now and quit wasting your time on these fucktards.

[Praeothmin 532]

Concerning the planetary damage, when you look at the screencaps of the episode, there does seem to be some bright, fiery damage and the shockwaves do seem to continue after the ships stop firing.

 

What could cause this?

 

See here:

 

http://ds9.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/3x21/dieiscast_433.jpg

 

(remember Trekcore doesn't allow hotlinking, so copy and paste the link on your browsers)

 

 

 

Concession accepted.

 

 

 

Yes, we conceed you are an imbecile with no arguments of your own, and nothing constructive to say...

[Tyralak 12,068]

This is the problem I have with the Warsie opposition to this. They are so desperate to explain away what is right in front of their faces, that they are willing to ignore the preponderance of surrounding evidence in favor of picking apart TV budget special effects. Saying that because the few seconds we see of the orbital bombardment doesn't look exactly like what they think it should, that the rest of the supporting evidence should be discarded. Along with discarding context, and common sense. THAT is truly delusional. They might have a point if the context didn't support it and there was no other indication from previous episodes that it was possible. But we have evidence as far back as TOS. The best example I could come up with is someone videotaping a person being attacked by the neighbor's Pit Bull. The neighbor admits this is his Pit Bull. The person being attacked says it was a Pit Bull. The videotape shows a Pit Bull, but you go and examine his bite marks and say. "No. That can't possibly be a Pit Bull that attacked you. The bite mark looks wrong." That's insanity roughly on the same level.

[Praeothmin 532]

Well, Tyralak, it's been proven that in SW, the Pitbull exerts a force of 200 Gigatons of pressure per square inch with its jaw.

 

I know, I know, you'll ask me why then did it not tear the leg off of the Battle Droid it attacked.

 

Well, that's clearly because the Battle Droid has Neutronium plating in its leg...

[Tyralak 12,068]

Well, Tyralak, it's been proven that in SW, the Pitbull exerts a force of 200 Gigatons of pressure per square inch with its jaw.

 

I know, I know, you'll ask me why then did it not tear the leg off of the Battle Droid it attacked.

 

Well, that's clearly because the Battle Droid has Neutronium plating in its leg...

 

 

 

I KNEW there was something fishy about that Battle Droid!

[classichummus 0]

Hey, want to know something SUPER COOL?

 

 

 

NEUTRONIUM DOES NOT EXIST!!! I WIN! YOU LOSE!

 

END OF FUCKING STORY!

 

 

 

Want to have some fun? If you think it exists, find it on the Periodic Table of Elements:

 

 

 

http://www.bpc.edu/mathscience/chemistry/images/periodic_table_of_elements.jpg

 

 

 

[Grandtheftcow 0]

If I cross my eyes and step back three paces I can see it.

 

 

 

Isn't neutronium one of those silly EU inventions anyway? It can't be anything special if it gets fucked up by a slow moving asteroid, as we've seen in TESB.

[Praeothmin 532]

If I cross my eyes and step back three paces I can see it.

 

 

 

Isn't neutronium one of those silly EU inventions anyway? It can't be anything special if it gets fucked up by a slow moving asteroid, as we've seen in TESB.

 

 

 

Oh, but I'm sure the guys at SDN will say different, and they'll find some contrived, bent-over backwards way of explaining it...

[Grandtheftcow 0]

Oh, but I'm sure the guys at SDN will say different, and they'll find some contrived, bent-over backwards way of explaining it...

 

Rusty bolts were the culprit! That's why the bridge separated so cleanly from the hall.

 

 

 

I remember some holdouts over that issue years back, but I think most of them do accept that the bridge was raped by an asteroid now.

[Tyralak 12,068]

Rusty bolts were the culprit! That's why the bridge separated so cleanly from the hall.

 

 

 

I remember some holdouts over that issue years back, but I think most of them do accept that the bridge was raped by an asteroid now.

 

 

 

Plus, how long do you think an ISD will last with that kind of damage, even if it WAS just the bridge?

[enigma 521]

Plus, how long do you think an ISD will last with that kind of damage, even if it WAS just the bridge?

 

 

 

Since it didn't go kablooie I kinda guess that the ship survived. True, that ISD would be laid up in a shipyard berth for a while but it would survive. But you guys forget that the other two ISDs managed to survive the asteroid field trouble free. BUT on the other hand, no Trek ship has been shown to pass the same type of asteroid field and the only time a ship (E-D) encountered an asteroid field (stationary asteroid field) they refused to enter and wouldn't even risk a shuttle! But my bad, Star Wars sucks right?

[Praeothmin 532]

Since it didn't go kablooie I kinda guess that the ship survived. True, that ISD would be laid up in a shipyard berth for a while but it would survive. But you guys forget that the other two ISDs managed to survive the asteroid field trouble free. BUT on the other hand, no Trek ship has been shown to pass the same type of asteroid field and the only time a ship (E-D) encountered an asteroid field (stationary asteroid field) they refused to enter and wouldn't even risk a shuttle! But my bad, Star Wars sucks right?

 

 

 

Did you see anyone here say SW sucked?

 

I sure didn't, and I also happen to love SW.

 

I have all the movies and series, and have some of the better novels.

 

The setting is very entertaining and interesting, just like ST...

 

 

 

What we are saying though, is that SW should be analyzed using the same parameters and criticism as ST is, and that people should not accept all SW wank and then over analyze ST, or vice-versa...

 

 

 

Oh, and by the way, the NX-01 navigated through asteroids just fine in the second season episode "Singularity".

 

The unpolarized hull survived an encounter with a 15-20 meter wide piece of planetary rubble (what seemed like solid rock) just fine...

[enigma 521]

I haven't seen much of ENT so I apologize there.

[Praeothmin 532]

I haven't seen much of ENT so I apologize there.

 

 

 

That's okay, there are so many ST series, not many people can say they saw them all...

 

 

 

Going back to Enterprise, in the second season episode "Judgement", the NX-01 goes (again) at high speeds (higher then an ISD's, I mean) in a planetary ring filled with big sized asteroids (they hide behind 1 close to 500-600 meters) without any apparent fear for their safety.

 

The Klingon BoP firing at them hits an asteroid that came up behind the NX-01, and quite literally shattered up half of it in tiny chunks (most were small enough to be hard to see after the explosion).

 

Now, given that the NX-01 is roughly 200 meters long, and about 60-80 meters wide, the asteroid was about 40 meters in size.

 

Note that the NX-01 endured at least half a dozen of those shots without any visible damage, and minimal sparks inside...

 

Nowhere near kiloton yields, but for Enterprise's time, not too bad...

[enigma 521]

Yes but think. ENT and TOS are like the early explorers\ cowboy types where they set their own rules (so to speak). By TNG and onward, they've become overly cautious and rather talk their opponents to death.

[Praeothmin 532]

Yes but think. ENT and TOS are like the early explorers\ cowboy types where they set their own rules (so to speak). By TNG and onward, they've become overly cautious and rather talk their opponents to death.

 

 

 

While I agree with this assessment ( ), it doesn't mean that there were no advances in firepower.

 

In fact, it was clearly established in Enterprise that a Kirk-Era ship is more then a match for any Archer-Era ship, even against multiple opponents...

[enigma 521]

While I agree with this assessment ( ), it doesn't mean that there were no advances in firepower.

 

In fact, it was clearly established in Enterprise that a Kirk-Era ship is more then a match for any Archer-Era ship, even against multiple opponents...

 

 

 

True but phasers and torpedoes (except quantum) haven't changed much since TOS to TNG as per Laforge's comment to Scotty in "Relics".

[InvaderSkooj 1]

True but phasers and torpedoes (except quantum) haven't changed much since TOS to TNG as per Laforge's comment to Scotty in "Relics".

Shhh youre not supposed to mention that part

[Praeothmin 532]

True but phasers and torpedoes (except quantum) haven't changed much since TOS to TNG as per Laforge's comment to Scotty in "Relics".

 

 

 

 

 

Hhhmm, let me see:

 

So you're saying that we have to believe that, since Phasers and Torpedoes haven't changed much in the way they act between Kirk's era and Picard's era, that means that their power levels cannot have changed?

 

 

 

Ok, so then, I guess even though a .357 magnum still works the same way as a colt peacemaker (single loader, powder-propelled projectile), that they have the same power right?

 

 

 

 

 

Shhh youre not supposed to mention that part

 

 

 

He can mention it as long as he wants, it doesn't change the fact that their power capabilities can, and did, change even if the principle is the same...

[enigma 521]

Come on now. This time visuals trump dialogue? Make up your mind.

[Praeothmin 532]

Come on now. This time visuals trump dialogue? Make up your mind.

 

 

 

I think you've got me confused with someone else...

 

I've never said either "Visuals trump dialogue" or "Dialogue trumps Visuals", I've always been in-between.

 

Like you, I think that TiDC doesn't seem to convey the extraordinary effects I would expect to see from the attack, but I also cannot simply dismiss 20 ship Captains not batting an eyelash when someone proposed their ships do something which they should know is impossible or not...

 

 

 

In this case, what did Geordi say exactly?

 

If it's simply "You know, Phasers and Torpedoes haven't changed much in the last years", that statement is so vague that you need to find other clues to interpret, whether it is other dialogue, or Visual clues...

 

In this case, a lot of Visual clues point to them being more powerful, even if they do seem to work with the same basic mechanisms...