Author Topic: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four  (Read 12122 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stormkeeper

  • Interviewer Extraordinaire
  • 211
  • Boomz!
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
Its difficult to compare universes, because what seems imba in one universe is normal in the other.
Ancient-Shivan War|Interview Board

Member of the Scooby Doo Fanclub. And we're not talking a cartoon dog here people!!

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
But Inferno is FS canon?
Sorry, for the following comment, but who the **** said that?

[edit]
Just to say, whenever people start disputes over FS canon (ie. TVWP is "semi-canon"), I tend to get rather pissed off.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2008, 09:01:04 am by Snail »

 

Offline Spicious

  • Master Chief John-158
  • 210
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
I think it was you (among others):
Skip the Lucifer, go straight to Gargant please.

 
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
Three star destroyers crashing into the executor does not produce said "Teratons" of energy...even if they were moving at relativistic speeds (well, maybe if they all smacked at a single point...very very tiny). A teraton is ****ing retardedly huge amount.

I recall saying that if a planet was bombarded with teraton-level weapons...uhh...funny things would happed because the atmosphere would do something funny.

Try doing some research.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/releng.html

A 6 - km long asteroid travelling at only 17 km/second hit the earth with a force of 100 teratons 65 million years ago.

3 1.6 - km long hunks of much denser material travelling thousands of times as fast would do much more.

Not to mention a single ISD can canonically melt the surface of a planet, destroy all natural resources and render it so uninhabitable for life that it would be easier to terraform a new one in 1 hour.

Not to mention it's specifically stated that an Acclamator class transport carrier has shields that can dissipate 16 teratons of energy per second, and an Executor Dreadnaught >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an Acclamator

Sig censored by people with no sense of humor

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
I think it was you (among others):
Skip the Lucifer, go straight to Gargant please.
That was a joke, not an actual suggestion, and if you misunderstood it, I'll tell you now: I do not think Inferno is canon in any way shape or form.

 

Offline Retsof

  • 210
  • Sanity is over-rated.
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
I'm wondering if he knew that hyperspace dosent work in a nebula.  In "The Dark Nest 1: The Joiner King"  The Falcon made an uncalculated jump and ended up running into a nebula.  After the expected dramatics they got shut down, but if they hadn't they would have been destroyed by the process of hittting dust particles at superluminal speeds.
:::PROUD VASUDAN RIGHTS SUPPORTER:::

"Get off my forum" -General Battuta
I can't help but hear a shotgun cocking with this.

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
Does hitting dust particles at superluminal speeds create tetratons of energy? (well, superluminal IS fast, so it might)

But seriously, shields dissipating tetratons of energy per second = complete bull

 
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
Right, because the Millenium Falcon, a modified civilian freighter, is going to have shields as powerful as a warship  :doubt:

The figures are canon, stop whining
Sig censored by people with no sense of humor

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
The figures are canon, stop whining
Just because these numbers-that-Lucas-and/or-random-authors-pulled-out-of-their-asses are "canon" doesn't make them any less subject to ridicule.  And said numbers generally don't mesh at all with what we see on-screen during the films.  The asteroid field scene during ESB is used as a classic example; if those Star Destroyers are wary about colliding with several-meter-long asteroids, their shield/hull strength has to be many orders of magnitude off their "canon" listings.  That's the thing that always cracks me up about those Trek-vs-Wars arguments that the idiots on such sites as StarDestroyer.net brew up; they wind up being boiled down to, "Hahaha our numbers are bigger than yours kthxbai." Just because some hack licensed writer throws down a few facts doesn't mean that they're "true."

(As a side note, the other thing that cracks me up about the Trek/Wars arguments is that no one ever takes into account the fact that Trek ships are capable of fighting at superluminal speeds, and they usually engage from a range somewhere in the tens of thousands of kilometers.  A Star Destroyer wouldn't even be able to see what was hitting it.)

 

Offline Spicious

  • Master Chief John-158
  • 210
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
(As a side note, the other thing that cracks me up about the Trek/Wars arguments is that no one ever takes into account the fact that Trek ships are capable of fighting at superluminal speeds, and they usually engage from a range somewhere in the tens of thousands of kilometers.  A Star Destroyer wouldn't even be able to see what was hitting it.)
When did that ever happen?
How would they hit anything? Their weapons clearly travel at somewhere around the speed of sound in atmosphere.

If you choose to disregard canon numbers because you don't like them, why bother with canon at all? You'll just chuck out anything you don't like.

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
It happened in...almost every episode involving two ships fighting each other.  One ship goes to warp (i.e., above the speed of light), another gives chase while shooting at it.  In fact, I can think of at least several instances when one ship managed to knock another one out of warp by damaging its engines enough.  And considering how nervous Worf's voice was when the distance between two attacking ships had decreased to a few thousand kilometers, one can assume that that's considered close-range combat.  It's certainly a few orders of magnitude further apart than Mon-Cal cruiser vs. Star Destroyer.

And regarding the numbers, what I'm arguing is that these "canon" digits plopped down in some ship guide or side-novel somewhere are flat-out wrong when compared to what we actually saw happen in the original trilogy.  (You can take or leave the new films as you please.)  I'll almost buy the "over 9000 gigaultramegajoules" figure for the Death Star's superlaser, since we actually see it disrupt a planet beyond gravitational reattraction.  (But then again, given the mind-bending energies involved in such a feat, one doubts that even a reactor as massive as the Death Star's could charge enough capacitors to provide enough power for it, no matter what it burns.)  But most of the other numbers I've seen touted about smack of some giddy author somewhere thinking, "Hmm...what's an asininely big value to make these things seem uber-impressive?"  We've seen what a Star Destroyer's turbolasers do against another ships shields/hull (not much, individually)...and yet we're supposed to believe it's capable of glassing an entire planet's surface?  Please.  And considering that a single low-mass fightercraft, moving at a relatively  slow speed, managed to slice neatly into a supposedly incredibly-armored ship's bridge, I fail to see how those values hold up either.  Hell, the only reason you need such ridiculously-supercharged shields/hulls in the first place is because of the aforementioned ridiculous weapon values.

In the end, all those numbers come down to a bunch of fanboys (and yes, I'm counting published authors in that category too) trying to play physics with a largely fantasy-based universe that was never intended to be scientifically consistent in the first place.  I'm not limiting that just to Star Wars, either; it seems to be a common ailment among sci-fi fans of all creeds, and it's the one thing that irritates me more than any other about that particular fandom.

...I apologize for this off-topic diatribe. :p

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
If you choose to disregard canon numbers because you don't like them, why bother with canon at all? You'll just chuck out anything you don't like.
Star Wars is a cluster****: That's what I do.

 

Offline Spicious

  • Master Chief John-158
  • 210
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
It happened in...almost every episode involving two ships fighting each other.  One ship goes to warp (i.e., above the speed of light), another gives chase while shooting at it.  In fact, I can think of at least several instances when one ship managed to knock another one out of warp by damaging its engines enough.  And considering how nervous Worf's voice was when the distance between two attacking ships had decreased to a few thousand kilometers, one can assume that that's considered close-range combat.  It's certainly a few orders of magnitude further apart than Mon-Cal cruiser vs. Star Destroyer.
I like how you state that as fact and expect everyone to believe you.
And which Mon-Cal vs. star destroyer battle are you comparing to? The one where they specifically engage at point blank range?

 
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
They weren't worried about the asteroids at all, in fact the novelization describes multi-megaton impacts hitting them for days on end. Only one Star Destroyer was damaged in the asteroid field, and that's because its shields were down for a holonet conference and it was already damaged from the ion cannon at Hoth.

Furthermore, Star Trek battles almost always occur at only a few ship-lengths away with slow maneuvering. Star Wars ships can hit enemies from light-seconds away in some circumstances. Warp Strafing is a Trekkie fanfiction invention that has never been seen in canon.

If you want to talk about what we see onscreen, look at the asteroid scene in episode II when Slave 1 (a modified civilian patrol ship) demonstrates easily gigaton - level firepower.
Sig censored by people with no sense of humor

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
Realistically, when you see an asteroid you shouldn't see another reasonably sized asteroid for a long way.

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
I like how you state that as fact and expect everyone to believe you.
And which Mon-Cal vs. star destroyer battle are you comparing to? The one where they specifically engage at point blank range?
I'm sorry that I can't give you specific episode names and time stamps, since I have no at-hand access to Trek material (nor would I remember specific episodic instances even if I did), but having seen more Trek than is probably healthy for me, all I can say is that I've seen ships at warp fight each other on numerous occasions across two or three different series.  I don't proclaim to be a Trek expert by any stretch of the imagination, so I'd hope there's someone much better informed than I to clarify things.  And the engagements I was talking about were during the Battle of Endor, since that's the only time in the films I can think of where we see those two sorts of ships engage.  If you want a different example, the Star Destroyer at the beginning of ANH was right on the tail of the Tantive IV while trying to capture it, and if you're expanding this to the prequels, the two destroyers at the beginning of ROTS were broadsiding from point-blank range as well.  Like I said, I don't have any specific evidence to back things up on the Trek side of things, but I've always been under the impression that even at impulse speed, Trek ships seemed to have an extraordinarily fast closing speed, on the order of  thousands of kilometers a second, and that combat from those ranges was not uncommon.

Quote from: DarthWang
They weren't worried about the asteroids at all, in fact the novelization describes multi-megaton impacts hitting them for days on end. Only one Star Destroyer was damaged in the asteroid field, and that's because its shields were down for a holonet conference and it was already damaged from the ion cannon at Hoth.
I've already said that I'm considering neither the novelization nor the figures that it contains, since it's really so much fluff in the end.  If you want to get down to brass tacks, the asteroids we saw in ESB were rather dinky as a whole (unless you count that space worm hangout), and they didn't seem to be moving at much of a relative speed to the Star Destroyers at all.  Hardly "multi-megaton" material, considering how big and how fast a meteorite has to be to cause that level of impact on our own planet.

Quote
Furthermore, Star Trek battles almost always occur at only a few ship-lengths away with slow maneuvering. Star Wars ships can hit enemies from light-seconds away in some circumstances. Warp Strafing is a Trekkie fanfiction invention that has never been seen in canon.
Without concrete evidence, I can't do anything more than claim that you're way off-base here from my own viewing experience, so I'm not going to attempt to do so.  What I do know is that I don't ever recall seeing Trek ships engage at only a "few ship-lengths," nor did I ever see Wars ships engage at "light-second" range (again, the Death Star might be an exception, but it's kind of a gamebreaker by its very nature anyway).  The term "warp strafing" came up in some random argument I found via a Google search, but I can't confirm or deny the episodes it referenced; what I do know is that combat between two ships both at a similar warp speed seems to be fairly common.

Quote
If you want to talk about what we see onscreen, look at the asteroid scene in episode II when Slave 1 (a modified civilian patrol ship) demonstrates easily gigaton - level firepower.
It also demonstrated the most scientifically-inaccurate weaponry I've ever seen in sci-fi.  "Hey, let's kill things in space...with sound!  Brilliant!" :p

Okay, look...this whole argument got started around a one-off comment I included in my first post in here that wasn't even the main point of what I was trying to say.  I will freely admit that I'm not capable of giving this argument any informed justice, since I simply don't have references at hand to pull up and use as examples.  (Now, if someone wants to permanently loan me a thousand bucks' worth of DVD sets, that can change...) I don't want to waste anyone's time pulling a he-said-she-said style of discussion, since the topic's deserving of something far better-informed than that.  And besides all of that...I really, really loathe space-battle-style arguments, and the last thing I ever wanted was to become embroiled in one. :p I'm going to do everyone a favor and pull out of this, with the hope that someone who actually does know what they're talking about can continue it somewhere/when else.

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
Universe-vs-universe debates are pointless, just leave it up to ShivanEmperor to get the judgment right.

 
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
If you're going to simply ignore canon and not give sources for your claims, there's no point in debating this.

Back to the point, crossover fics usually have to have one or both sides altered in power to be more balanced anyway. Even Mike Wong did that in a fic he wrote.
Sig censored by people with no sense of humor

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
Back to the point, crossover fics usually have to have one or both sides altered in power to be more balanced anyway. Even Mike Wong did that in a fic he wrote.
Obviously, since otherwise there's no way to get them to work without messing up everything.

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Freespace V.S. Star Wars Part Four
If you're going to simply ignore canon and not give sources for your claims, there's no point in debating this.
...thank you for summarizing what I just said.  I can never seem to remember what I've just typed. :p