Styroks 0 Posted August 13, 2009 Yes! It's a battle between the two classic mooks. On the one side we have the fearsome stormtrooper who probably couldn’t hit water even if he fell from a boat, and in the other corner we have the fearless redshirt, doomed to die a most gruesome and pointless death. They clash in a battle of epic proportions! P.S. The redshirt is actually a TNG era goldshirt. But I like saying redshirt. So I said redshirt instead of goldshirt. Even though I meant goldshirt. Now go forth and debate! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Airlocke 12,014 Posted August 13, 2009 Well the purpose of the Redshirt/Goldshirt is death. At the very least, Storm Troopers have the advantage in reputation(in-universe) as scary and imposing killing machines. While we don't really get tot see any competent showings on-screen, we are forced to assume that there are some off-screen. Going from this, I would give it to the Storm Trooper. If we were judging by who had a weapons advatage, well, the phaser kicks the E-11's ass. I still give it to the stormie, however. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Styroks 0 Posted August 14, 2009 <p class='citation'>Quote</p><div class="blockquote"><div class='quote'>Well the purpose of the Redshirt/Goldshirt is death. At the very least, Storm Troopers have the advantage in reputation(in-universe) as scary and imposing killing machines. While we don't really get tot see any competent showings on-screen, we are forced to assume that there are some off-screen. Going from this, I would give it to the Storm Trooper. If we were judging by who had a weapons advatage, well, the phaser kicks the E-11's ass. I still give it to the stormie, however.</div></div> Bah! Redshirts only die when a character with a name is nearby, all in an effort to increase suspense. There are no named characters here, so no pointless death by random plot event. Besides, if we we're to play the out-of-universe game the redshirt wins by default because he's the good guy, and the good guys always win! Apart from that, I'd say they're pretty equal, all in all. The redshirt has the better weapon, but that hardly matters considering both weapons are good enough to do the one-hit-one-kill thing. The stormie has armor, but again, what's the point when we're talking one-hit-one-kill weapons? Grenades and fragmentation are problematic? Weeell… maybe, if we assume the stormie carries a 'nade on him. The redshirt is likely to carry a tricorder though, which would be a lot of help considering it'd allow him to track the stormie from afar. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Elagabalus 0 Posted August 17, 2009 Who says the Redshirts are the good guys? The Federation and Starfleet are fascist, arrogant organisations, dominated by thoughts of manifest destiny. I certainly view them as the villains in most of Trek. Romulans... now there's a noble raison d'etre. Anyway, Redshirts are pussies; Stormtroopers uber alles. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted August 17, 2009 I'm a big fan of Romulans, myself. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted August 19, 2009 <p class='citation'>Quote</p><div class="blockquote"><div class='quote'>Well the purpose of the Redshirt/Goldshirt is death. At the very least, Storm Troopers have the advantage in reputation(in-universe) as scary and imposing killing machines. While we don't really get tot see any competent showings on-screen, we are forced to assume that there are some off-screen.</div></div> No, the purpose of the Redshirt/Goldshirt is security, which, against unamed characters that are not the "monster/alien of the week", do pretty well (DS9's protection vs Klingons, security personnel in Nemesis, etc)... While the Stormtrooper's reputation is more along the line of loyal servants of the Empire who are willing to do anything ordered. But scary? I think not... They can't aim, can't fight, and don't have better strategies then the Redshirts/Goldshirts who are only supposed to be the equivalent of MPs. And we are not forced to assume any competent showings offscreen... If anything, since we see Stormtroopers are so incompetent, we should be forced to assume anybody that cannot fight them is even more incompetent... I give it to the Redshirts/Goldshirts, because at least they duck and take cover in a fight... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Airlocke 12,014 Posted August 19, 2009 <p class='citation'>Quote</p><div class="blockquote"><div class='quote'><p class='citation'>Quote</p><div class="blockquote"><div class='quote'>Well the purpose of the Redshirt/Goldshirt is death. At the very least, Storm Troopers have the advantage in reputation(in-universe) as scary and imposing killing machines. While we don't really get tot see any competent showings on-screen, we are forced to assume that there are some off-screen.</div></div> No, the purpose of the Redshirt/Goldshirt is security, which, against unamed characters that are not the "monster/alien of the week", do pretty well (DS9's protection vs Klingons, security personnel in Nemesis, etc)... While the Stormtrooper's reputation is more along the line of loyal servants of the Empire who are willing to do anything ordered. But scary? I think not... They can't aim, can't fight, and don't have better strategies then the Redshirts/Goldshirts who are only supposed to be the equivalent of MPs. And we are not forced to assume any competent showings offscreen... If anything, since we see Stormtroopers are so incompetent, we should be forced to assume anybody that cannot fight them is even more incompetent... I give it to the Redshirts/Goldshirts, because at least they duck and take cover in a fight...</div></div> Yes, yes we are forced to assume competent showings off-screen. It's all in the dialogue. One scene that stands out in my memory, is the scene where Obi-wan and Luke find the dead Jawas and their wrecked sand-crawler. "No, the blaster points are too precise for Sand People... Only Imperial Storm Troopers are so precise." Or something very similar to that. They easily took out the Tantive IV troops in ANH, and were shown to dominate the relatively hapless Rebels all throughout ESB. Then, you know, there is that kind of cheap excuse that Han, and Luke and the others were purposely allowed to escape from the Death Star. They are feared throughout the Empire, and, In-universe, have a very good reputation. Now, plot requires them to have very poor aim when the named characters are involved, as it does in every movie of the fantasy genre, but off-screen, they are anything but incompetent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted August 20, 2009 <p class='citation'>Quote</p><div class="blockquote"><div class='quote'>Yes, yes we are forced to assume competent showings off-screen. It's all in the dialogue. One scene that stands out in my memory, is the scene where Obi-wan and Luke find the dead Jawas and their wrecked sand-crawler. "No, the blaster points are too precise for Sand People... Only Imperial Storm Troopers are so precise." Or something very similar to that. They easily took out the Tantive IV troops in ANH, and were shown to dominate the relatively hapless Rebels all throughout ESB. Then, you know, there is that kind of cheap excuse that Han, and Luke and the others were purposely allowed to escape from the Death Star. They are feared throughout the Empire, and, In-universe, have a very good reputation. Now, plot requires them to have very poor aim when the named characters are involved, as it does in every movie of the fantasy genre, but off-screen, they are anything but incompetent.</div></div> This is a good point. I have no doubt that they have good aim in general. What would it say about the competency of a military if their soldiers couldn't shoot straight? We can't be expected to believe they could dominate a galaxy based solely on space superiority. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted September 2, 2009 Yes, yes we are forced to assume competent showings off-screen. It's all in the dialogue. Then, by the same token, we are forced to assume that the Federation Redshirts are also competent, because they represent Starfleet's security forces, so then we also have to assume that they wouldn't be there if they were incompetent. So, assuming both sides can aim, and use their equipment well, Starfleet forces have tricorders, more powerful weapons that can fire in widebeam mode, and actually duck in a firefight. I still give it to the "Redshirts"... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jason 27 Posted September 13, 2009 I give to the Redshirt/Goldshirt any day. I however give more goldshirts the red shirts. Even if the stromtroopers can aim straight. It fact that Stromtroopers do to many suicide chargers to have any chance of winning a real battle. Federation red shirts / Gold shirt ensigns on the other known when to take cover. I never saw a stromtrooper duck. I have many times seen redshirt ensign and a goldshirt ensign duck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grandtheftcow 0 Posted September 24, 2009 I envision a never-ending battle of near misses and smokey special effects. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NX-01 519 Posted September 25, 2009 I envision a never-ending battle of near misses and smokey special effects. LOL! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted September 25, 2009 I envision a never-ending battle of near misses and smokey special effects. Why do you think Starfleet invented the "Wide-Beam" setting on their weapons? When your security officers can't hit the proverbial elephant in a six feet wide corridor, invent a weapon that covers 6 feet of width... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paul 11,988 Posted September 25, 2009 Why do you think Starfleet invented the "Wide-Beam" setting on their weapons? When your security officers can't hit the proverbial elephant in a six feet wide corridor, invent a weapon that covers 6 feet of width... See I've never understood why they never used that on a normal basis anyways. Like for example on the siege of AR-558, set the phaser rifles to wide beam setting and fire. Even if its just stun you can then walk up and bitchslap them afterwards Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grandtheftcow 0 Posted September 25, 2009 See I've never understood why they never used that on a normal basis anyways. Like for example on the siege of AR-558, set the phaser rifles to wide beam setting and fire. Even if its just stun you can then walk up and bitchslap them afterwards I'm tempted to dismiss it as simply another one note weapon we'll never see in use again. The problem with that though is it's a standard phaser from the late TNG era. I don't recall the lead-up to the scene off hand, but is it possible Tuvok had time to modify the phaser so he could take out the bridge crew quickly and easily with a wide beam? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted September 25, 2009 We've actually seen widebeam settings used in TOS, TNG and DS9 as well, so it's not like it's a special setting or anything... They should have used it more often, but I guess it was just a question of power consumption and diminished range... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grandtheftcow 0 Posted September 26, 2009 We've actually seen widebeam settings used in TOS, TNG and DS9 as well, so it's not like it's a special setting or anything... They should have used it more often, but I guess it was just a question of power consumption and diminished range... Can you provide other examples of a widebeam setting being used? I only remember the one instance in Voyager. Edit: After thinking about it. During drills against a possible changeling intruder the crew had used the larger phaser rifles set to a widebeam in order to force the changelings out of their form. I'd still be interested in other examples though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted September 28, 2009 Can you provide other examples of a widebeam setting being used? I only remember the one instance in Voyager. Edit: After thinking about it. During drills against a possible changeling intruder the crew had used the larger phaser rifles set to a widebeam in order to force the changelings out of their form. I'd still be interested in other examples though. In TOS, I believe it was Sulu who fired multiple "smaller" beams, that acted a bit like a "widebeam" setting in later Trek. In "A Piece of the Action", the ship Phasers are used in Widebeam "stun" setting to incapacitate opposing forces in a street... In TNG, although I don't think it's ever been seen, Riker once threatened to use it on building once I believe (when he was in a "mental institution")... In DS9, that was the example I was thinking of, when they were being drilled on Changeling infiltrations... And in Voyager, Tuvok used it to incapacitate the whole bridge crew on stun. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StarDestroyerAvenger 2,147,483,647 Posted October 5, 2009 Oh you've got to be fucking kidding me. This is all the proof I need that this website is a fucking joke. If I started a thread like this on SDN I would be banned and rightfully so. I could go over how Stormtrooper blasters can fucking gouge out a fucking wall or how Stormtroopers have, contrary to "popular" opinion, have excellent marksmanship, with CANON PROOF, but the fact that people are seriously asking this question just shows me that we just have a bunch of fucking newbs here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StarDestroyerAvenger 2,147,483,647 Posted October 5, 2009 In TOS, I believe it was Sulu who fired multiple "smaller" beams, that acted a bit like a "widebeam" setting in later Trek. ...and the episode was? In "A Piece of the Action", the ship Phasers are used in Widebeam "stun" setting to incapacitate opposing forces in a street... That was a fucking STARSHIP. We're comparing INFANTRY WEAPONS here. If phasers are as powerful as people claim to be, why did Kirk and Spock spend most of the episode brandishing Tommy Guns (you know, a REAL weapon?) In TNG, although I don't think it's ever been seen, Riker once threatened to use it on building once I believe (when he was in a "mental institution")... Oh fuck you. I am so sick and tired of this bullshit being trotted around. I don't need to explain why a dream sequence shouldn't count. In DS9, that was the example I was thinking of, when they were being drilled on Changeling infiltrations... There were a NUMBER of episodes, including "Way of the Warrior" where they were using NARROW BEAM PHASERS to out Odo on a training exercise. Obviously wide beam setting can't do the trick. And in Voyager, Tuvok used it to incapacitate the whole bridge crew on stun. ONE example. And the crew was possessed. We've seen episodes where crew was incapacitated when possessed with some really low settings (TNG "Power Play") so obviously it was more about convincing the alien to leave the body than actually rendering the target unconscious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Elagabalus 0 Posted October 5, 2009 There were a NUMBER of episodes, including "Way of the Warrior" where they were using NARROW BEAM PHASERS to out Odo on a training exercise. Obviously wide beam setting can't do the trick. Homefront. Starfleet security personnel test the efficacy of wide beam phasers to reveal Changelings. It happened, clearly and on screen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StarDestroyerAvenger 2,147,483,647 Posted October 5, 2009 LOL either way forcing a changeling to revert back to his natural state and scaring aliens out of bodies (LOL sounds like some sort of crappy exorcism THE POWER OF CHRIST COMPELS YOU!) doesn't really qualify as a combat example. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Elagabalus 0 Posted October 5, 2009 LOL either way forcing a changeling to revert back to his natural state and scaring aliens out of bodies (LOL sounds like some sort of crappy exorcism THE POWER OF CHRIST COMPELS YOU!) doesn't really qualify as a combat example. Are you kidding? If it's possible to phase on a wide beam, it logically follows that with a greater power setting, a wide beam could be used in combat. Try to base your arguments on facts and not rhetoric. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StarDestroyerAvenger 2,147,483,647 Posted October 5, 2009 Are you kidding? If it's possible to phase on a wide beam, it logically follows that with a greater power setting, a wide beam could be used in combat. Try to base your arguments on facts and not rhetoric. You ever stop to think that maybe all that extra power is being used to put that beam on a wide dispersal pattern in the first place? Of course not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Airlocke 12,014 Posted October 5, 2009 Are you kidding? If it's possible to phase on a wide beam, it logically follows that with a greater power setting, a wide beam could be used in combat. Try to base your arguments on facts and not rhetoric. I would like to point out that rhetoric, as originally defined by Aristotle, is a way to find the truth in a given situation. The word doesn't really fit here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
