Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid people
* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 
Want to support this site? Click

Quote of the Week: "History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives." - Abba Eban, Israeli statesman (1915-2002)


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 472 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-26 02:23am
Offline
Sith Apprentice
User avatar

Joined: 2002-08-01 05:03pm
Posts: 14053
I'll also note that they don't have to rely on a single kill mechanism to destroy the world. They might be using several kinds (one brute force, one designed specifically to attack the matter of the planet, one designed to attack subsurface installations, radiation weapons, etc.) to ensure maximum devastation. Hell if there WERe brute force attacks, they might not come until later (or vice versa.)



Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-26 02:45am
Offline
Sith Apprentice
User avatar

Joined: 2002-08-01 05:03pm
Posts: 14053
Oh yeah a third thing occured to me as far as detonations go. The nuclear weapons calculator on the site assumes a nuclear (fission or fusion) detonation. Whilst it may have some applicability to other forms of attack I might still take it with a grain of salt, because other reactions will generate different byproducts, and they may interact with the atmosphere differently. For exampel the antiproton one Mike mentioned for photon torpedoes had most of it as charged pions and gamma rays. The latter I know are very penetrative in the atmosphere (moreso than the soft x-rays that make up some 80% of a nuclear detonation IIRC). And the pions are noted to decay rapidly after travelling short distances. I don't know how penetrative they are in an atmosphere (depends on charge and mass, I think) but that could skew things a bit too.

The Key point I think is that noone (at least noone I'm arguing with) is arguing for the really high yields where the things I mentioned stop mattering or other effects (like ejecta, large scale atmospheric firestorms, etc) start becoming noticable if not significant. There's more wiggle room at lower yields to explain certain absences (especially if it isnt atmospheric detonations, like I suggested.)



Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-26 04:40am
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2010-09-02 09:08am
Posts: 2393
Location: Little Korea in Big Germany
Huh? Between my last reply and Norade's next post Lord Helmet's reply seems to have gone missing. It's also not in HoS, so where did it go?



People at birth are naturally good. Their natures are similar, but their habits make them different from each other.
-Sanzi Jing (Three Character Classic)

Saddam’s crime was so bad we literally spent decades looking for our dropped monocles before we could harumph up the gumption to address it
-User Indigo Jump on Pharyngula

O God, please don't let me die today, tomorrow would be so much better!
-Traditional Spathi morning prayer

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-26 07:45am
Offline
Transphobic Ignoramus

Joined: 2011-04-21 07:44am
Posts: 57
Norade wrote:

This thread here dealt with at least the episode 'Inheritance' and the supposed drilling there. Serafina ripped it to shreds.


I find it interesting that you define "ripped to shreds" as ignoring direct canon material regarding the depth by nitpicking a few inconsequential details who's issues could easily have been dealt with with standard trek tech they use pretty much every day. But then Serafina seems pretty high on the rabid warsie scale especially after reading his comments trying to justify exploding and burning asteroids in deep space (by using a laboratory experiment with pure oxygen ect) then claiming that rust on the roids would create the same environment... :roll: :lol:

Quote:
We never see Phasers or Disruptors do anything like that ever again so calling bullshit is easy.


You mean never apart from masks,

Quote:
Nobody has yet rebutted the claim that you couldn't see a nuke through clouds yet.


Because it is not worth addressing pal, you are the one cherry picking certain aspects of the effects (duration of fireball in this case) and ignoring others aspects while at the same time acting like we should treat them like nukes for your cherry picked effect when nothing about them is consistent with a nuke. There is also the fact that you seem to insist that we accept they must have been surface or air-bursts when they were more likely (given the reports from the Romulan on the warbird) underground detonations.

Simply put you are living in your own little delusion.


Quote:
What is expected and what happened seem to line up like a square peg in a round hole most of the time.

We see shit go wrong all the time in ways that could be modeled. So don't tell me they model everything.


Because you say so?.

We are supposed to see shit happen as that is what the focus is upon, given the time frame in a normal episode of hours to a few days and the the time from the start of ENT: Broken bow to VOY: Endgame it is fair to say a considerable amount of mundane crap went on.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-26 05:10pm
Offline
Transphobic Ignoramus

Joined: 2011-04-21 07:44am
Posts: 57
Destructionator XIII wrote:
Another hand phaser vs wall of stone: "Rapture" DS9, Sisko uses a wide beam do disappear < 10 m^3 by eyeball in under five seconds.


In masks they disintegrated the large comet surrounding that database structure and i think they mentioned the phasers were actually set low so they did not destroy the structure itself.


Some one has tried to calc the size but i have no idea how accurate they are:

Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-26 05:27pm
Offline
Transphobic Ignoramus

Joined: 2011-04-21 07:44am
Posts: 57
Oh and here is the episode in question and the phasers were set to 10% of maximum with a wide dispersal and set to cut off when the core was reached according to the comment at 8:30.


Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-26 11:42pm
Offline
Padawan Learner
User avatar

Joined: 2008-10-18 08:37am
Posts: 353
Location: HIMS Korthox III, Assertor Class Star Dreadnought
Seriously? going after that masks thing again? wow, don't we have like cliff notes or a database somewhere that has all these old hat claims debunked in one convenient package?

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 02:18am
Offline
Transphobic Ignoramus

Joined: 2011-04-21 07:44am
Posts: 57
Azron_Stoma wrote:
Seriously? going after that masks thing again? wow, don't we have like cliff notes or a database somewhere that has all these old hat claims debunked in one convenient package?


After seeing what "debunking" entails on here i would not bother if i were you as the there are already enough inaccuracies and flawed material on the main pages.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 02:31am
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2005-09-23 11:33pm
Posts: 2424
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Destructionator XIII wrote:
Norade wrote:
This thread here dealt with at least the episode 'Inheritance' and the supposed drilling there. Serafina ripped it to shreds.


That's not saying they didn't drill. That was about the rate that they drilled it.

In Legacy, Geordi lists how deep they got in real time. I don't have that episode, so I'm depending on my script and my flawless photographic memory from watching the episode many years ago, the latter being perfect so I cannot possibly be wrong.

The speed there was ~100 m/s making a tunnel that they could beam through. Who knows what percentage of capability this represents.

If we take the simplifying assumption of 1m x 1m we get a rate of disappearance of ~100 m^3/s.


Serafina was talking against a guy claiming many cubic kilometers with shakier evidence. I'd have to watch the episode in question again to see for myself.


Naturally, this is well below what it'd take to fuck up a planet quickly.


So you're unwilling to do your own research and didn't even read the entire thread I linked to. Fuck off and come back when you have the evidence and not a script and some memories.



School requires more work than I remember it taking...

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 08:19am
Offline
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: 2011-01-16 09:48pm
Posts: 1070
Destructionator XIII wrote:
BTW: appealing to this site's authority should warrant an instant demerit. Anyone who thinks threads here are sources of good information is an idiot.
Appeals to authority of any kind are bad.
However, there has been a lot of stuff being brought up lately that has already been debated (whether it was disproven or not) long ago. Given that site policy requires people to present their own arguments and not appeal to authority, there is little left to debate on such points. It's impossible to present your own argument when you are merely +1ing an argument from a thread 8 or 9 years ago. Even if it was a valid, salient point, it's already been done. The Darkstar page on the Rise asteroid is a classic example. It has been torn to pieces multiple times over the years. I think this is why many ST vs SW questions simply get referred to the search function.



"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 10:46am
Offline
Transphobic Ignoramus

Joined: 2011-04-21 07:44am
Posts: 57
Darth Tedious wrote:
Destructionator XIII wrote:
BTW: appealing to this site's authority should warrant an instant demerit. Anyone who thinks threads here are sources of good information is an idiot.
Appeals to authority of any kind are bad.
However, there has been a lot of stuff being brought up lately that has already been debated (whether it was disproven or not) long ago. Given that site policy requires people to present their own arguments and not appeal to authority, there is little left to debate on such points. It's impossible to present your own argument when you are merely +1ing an argument from a thread 8 or 9 years ago. Even if it was a valid, salient point, it's already been done. The Darkstar page on the Rise asteroid is a classic example. It has been torn to pieces multiple times over the years. I think this is why many ST vs SW questions simply get referred to the search function.


I think what you illustrate above is where a lot of forums on both sides of the fence including this one fall down, rather than allowing potential newbies to bump heads in these threads and enjoy the arguments afresh older members tend to charge in and with a one line comment that says it has been done and almost always includes a insult that ends the enjoyment of the discussion for others.

I wonder if these are the sort that took delight and a false sense of importance and power telling small children the truth about Santa when they were younger.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 03:34pm
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2005-09-23 11:33pm
Posts: 2424
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Lord Helmet wrote:
Darth Tedious wrote:
Destructionator XIII wrote:
BTW: appealing to this site's authority should warrant an instant demerit. Anyone who thinks threads here are sources of good information is an idiot.
Appeals to authority of any kind are bad.
However, there has been a lot of stuff being brought up lately that has already been debated (whether it was disproven or not) long ago. Given that site policy requires people to present their own arguments and not appeal to authority, there is little left to debate on such points. It's impossible to present your own argument when you are merely +1ing an argument from a thread 8 or 9 years ago. Even if it was a valid, salient point, it's already been done. The Darkstar page on the Rise asteroid is a classic example. It has been torn to pieces multiple times over the years. I think this is why many ST vs SW questions simply get referred to the search function.


I think what you illustrate above is where a lot of forums on both sides of the fence including this one fall down, rather than allowing potential newbies to bump heads in these threads and enjoy the arguments afresh older members tend to charge in and with a one line comment that says it has been done and almost always includes a insult that ends the enjoyment of the discussion for others.

I wonder if these are the sort that took delight and a false sense of importance and power telling small children the truth about Santa when they were younger.


Image
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid people.

Oh, and spoiling the sex talk is much better than killing Santa.

Destructionator XIII wrote:
I kinda think of referring to the search and huge ass long threads is a kind of filibustering, and arguably, thread necromancy.

Actually, let's briefly discuss thread necromancy. We all know PR11: "Let Dead Threads Lie. Do not post in old, inactive threads (eg- no activity for more than a month). If you want to resurrect an old subject, it is preferable to make a new thread with a URL reference to the old one."[/qoute]

I asked you to read, not post moron, thus no necromancy. You asked for evidence and where something had been debunked, I showed you the way.

Quote:
1) It makes out-of-date stuff appear new; the causal reader might miss the date on the earlier posts, assuming they are fresh since it's at the top of the list. This is bad because it leads to confusion. The new thread suggestion avoids that confusion.


Nice strawman moron, nobody asked anybody to post in that thread and if somebody's too stupid to read dates then we mock them. See motto above.

Quote:
2) Since it's old, the context is out of people's minds; without drawing attention to the date, the posts might not make any sense. A separate link draws attention to the fact that it's not necessarily current.


The thread I link contains all the context it needs, again, nice strawman.

Quote:
3) It's likely long... meaning people will have to read through a huge pile of out of date crap to be caught up. I don't know if Mike had this in mind when he wrote the rule, but long threads have a higher barrier to entry than new ones, like Lord Helmet said. By requiring someone to read an old thread as entry into the new thread, isn't that reviving the old thread in all but name? (Reviving the old discussion is a different story though, since that has a low barrier to entry. You can always summarize the old discussion in the new thread.)


You asked for proof, I don't have to break it all down for you if I don't want to.

Quote:
A new thread linking to an old has that stuff available, but it isn't required to be read; the context important to the new thread should be in the new thread. This is suggested in the context of news threads in PR15: "Reference News Sources. If you create a thread about a news article, always provide a link or a text reference to the source. Also, provide enough text excerpts from the source to permit meaningful discussion even if readers don't visit the URL."

I think that same idea makes sense with any link. I'm always annoyed with youtubes becuase I generally won't watch videos. They are long, very distracting from my other life activities, hard to scan, and don't work in my (normal) browser anyway. If someone says "here's what happened and why it's relevant to this discussion", good, then they just provide the source so the rest of us have the option of checking their interpretation.

It ought not to be required though - part of making your argument is actually discussing your sources! Demanding someone else read through a long, rambling, irrelevant diatribe before we can continue is pretty much the definition of filibustering, which isn't a very polite tactic, at least.


I provided the link to my source, I don't give a shit if helmet reads it or not when you haven't.

Oh, so your browser sucks and you're still lazy. A youtube video is just as valid as a text breakdown of the contents of said video. If you can't be assed to watch then get out of the debate. You don't get to ignore evidence that you don't like.

Oh, so you're just being lazy again. You always like to make the don't have time for this claim when you're losing.



School requires more work than I remember it taking...

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 04:06pm
Offline
Transphobic Ignoramus

Joined: 2011-04-21 07:44am
Posts: 57
Norade wrote:

Image
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid people.


The thing that a lot of us find amusing is this part "and mockery of stupid people" although you it seems along with most of the people on here seem to miss its true implication and application, not smart enough maybe ? :D.


Quote:
I provided the link to my source, I don't give a shit if helmet reads it or not when you haven't.


When did the ravings of the boards more rabid members become a proper source?, oops sorry i forgot where i was for a second as the board is founded on such.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 04:46pm
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2005-09-23 11:33pm
Posts: 2424
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Quote:
When did the ravings of the boards more rabid members become a proper source?, oops sorry i forgot where i was for a second as the board is founded on such.


If you think it's bunk then challenge her to a debate on it.



School requires more work than I remember it taking...

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 05:08pm
Offline
Emperor's Hand
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
Posts: 13456
Location: Looking for another drawer
But that would require him to show she was actually wrong. Blithely disregarding it and hoping nobody notices (not that I see why he'd think that would fly here, mind you) is so much easier.

As for the newbies not being allowed to rehash arguments that have been dead for over a decade, why should we? And yes, I'm including myself in this because let's face it, Trek vs Wars was dead before this forum was created. There's nothing in the Board Rules that says we're guaranteed the right to rehash topics that were solved for keeps 10 years ago (leave alone on this forum).
And while there's threads that get locked down due to 'been there, done that', there's plenty of others that aren't (like this one).



'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kids with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 05:11pm
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2005-09-23 11:33pm
Posts: 2424
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Given the level of proof he's managed thus far I doubt he'd last long anyway. Even DXIII is reaching straws at this stage.



School requires more work than I remember it taking...

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 11:06pm
Offline
Sith Apprentice
User avatar

Joined: 2002-08-01 05:03pm
Posts: 14053
It puzzles me how I can seemingly have a normal discussion with most of the people in this thread (although I still have no fucking clue what issue Mercenario had with me) yet everyone else seems to be at each other's throats. Particularily since the main issues I was discussing noone seems to have a problem with.

I feel like the only truly neutral party involved in the Battle of Waterloo or something.



Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-27 11:52pm
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2005-09-23 11:33pm
Posts: 2424
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Destructionator XIII wrote:
In "Legacy", the phasers drilled through about a mile of rock. Do you dispute this fact?

Geordi called out the numbers for the last part in real time, according to the script. Do you dispute this fact?

My flawless photographic memory and stunning intuition tell me that the numbers in the script were probably read about once every second or two; a typical Trek countdown. Do you dispute this recollection?

Mathematically, distance divided by time equals speed. Do you dispute this fact?

Therefore, we have an approximate drilling speed they did in this situation. Do you dispute this logic?


Are you going to show me the actual episode or not?



Quote:
Quote:
The thread I link contains all the context it needs, again, nice strawman.


<snip>


The thread also contains more information than an episode of Trek, and I doubt it takes more than a half hour to read for an average person.



School requires more work than I remember it taking...

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-28 12:15am
Offline
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: 2011-01-16 09:48pm
Posts: 1070
Connor MacLeod wrote:
It puzzles me how I can seemingly have a normal discussion with most of the people in this thread (although I still have no fucking clue what issue Mercenario had with me) yet everyone else seems to be at each other's throats. Particularily since the main issues I was discussing noone seems to have a problem with.

I feel like the only truly neutral party involved in the Battle of Waterloo or something.

It may be because you are tending to provide very level analysis of the facts (or really, fiction) at hand. I would guess that Merc had a problem with you for that reason, it got in the way of his more bizarre claims...

Batman wrote:
As for the newbies not being allowed to rehash arguments that have been dead for over a decade, why should we?
As someone who is relatively new here, I completely agree.
You wouldn't go to SLAM and debate whether the Earth or the sun are the center of the Solar system, because it's been done. The answer is known, and theories to the contrary have been torn to shreds before.
There are enough new debates to be had without retracing old ground...

Destructionator XIII wrote:
Another fun fact there: apparently beaming through more than 400m of hard rock isn't recommended.
A very fun fact, it gives us a guideline limit for transporter ability through (presumably) non-exotic minerals.



"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-28 12:44am
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2005-09-23 11:33pm
Posts: 2424
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Destructionator XIII wrote:
Wow. You expect me to read through 200 posts of irrelevant shit, but you can't be bothered to actually look up an episode. Actually, it proves what I said in the last post!

But, I am a generous god.


GEORDI (O.S.)
(continuing)
And that's about two kilometers
of solid granite above them.

47 RESUME

RIKER
So much for the transporter.

GEORDI
Not necessarily. We could use
the ship's phasers to cut a shaft
through the bedrock to this
storage tunnel here.

47A INSERT SCHEMATIC MAP (OPTICAL)

Geordi's hand indicates a line starting from just
outside the surface settlement and heading straight
down through the ground to a chamber near the one he
previously indicated.

GEORDI (O.S.)
With a clear path through the
rock, we'd be able to transport
down to the tunnel. That would
put us close enough to get to the
crewmen.

Geordi's finger traces out the steps on the map.

47B RESUME

GEORDI
(continuing)
It would take me a few hours to
adjust the phasers for drilling.


[...]


58 INT. BRIDGE

Picard is watching the planet on the viewscreen.
Geordi is at his station, leaned over his instruments.

PICARD
Status, Mister La Forge.

GEORDI
Phasers in alignment and ready
to fire.

PICARD
How far must we penetrate to
safely allow transporter function?

GEORDI
One point six kilometers.

A beat.

PICARD
Fire phasers.

STAR TREK: "Legacy" - REV. 9/5/90 - ACT FOUR 45.

58 CONTINUED:

GEORDI
Aye, Sir.

Geordi touches the panel.

59
thru OMITTED
60

61 EXT. SPACE - THE ENTERPRISE (OPTICAL)

The phasers fire in a single beam down towards the
planet.

62 EXT. TURKANA FOUR COLONY (OPTICAL)

Same MATTE SHOT as previously, with a phaser beam
continuously striking perpendicular to the ground just
outside the city proper.

63 INT. BRIDGE

Picard watching Geordi as Geordi watches his
instruments.

GEORDI
One point three kilometers. One
point four. One point five. One
point six.
(to Picard)
Deep enough for transport, Sir.

PICARD
Cease fire.

PICARD
(to com)
Picard to O'Brien, Energize.




Another fun fact there: apparently beaming through more than 400m of hard rock isn't recommended.


The script is not the episode in question and seeing as there are often changes between script and screen that simply won't do.



School requires more work than I remember it taking...

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-28 01:01am
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2005-09-23 11:33pm
Posts: 2424
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
So you don't accept ICS numbers because while they fit with other derived numbers I didn't come up with them personally?



School requires more work than I remember it taking...

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-28 01:04am
Offline
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: 2011-01-16 09:48pm
Posts: 1070
I find I must agree with you there about geocentrism vs. heliocentrism. The analogy I used was probably not the best one for the point I was trying to make. I quite love some of the detail put into the old geocentric models. Getting the calcs just right for the retrograde motions must have been a bitch!
And I see your point in general.

Norade wrote:
So you don't accept ICS numbers because while they fit with other derived numbers I didn't come up with them personally?
No, he's saying it would be more fun (especially for you) if you were to do the calcs yourself.



"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-28 01:09am
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2005-09-23 11:33pm
Posts: 2424
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Except that I don't care to do calculations for something that has already been done. Hell, even when I do the numbers DXIII makes up some bullshit and tries to pass it off as being a great theory even though it has holes you can drive a truck through. So instead he gets this, show a single weapon, deployable against starships, and in common federarion use that can hit with anywhere near 200GT per shot. Then go find one that puts out even more because that's far less than an ISD can dish.



School requires more work than I remember it taking...

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-28 01:12am
Offline
Emperor's Hand
User avatar

Joined: 2003-11-10 01:36am
Posts: 12924
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Norade wrote:
The script is not the episode in question and seeing as there are often changes between script and screen that simply won't do.

Are you claiming the televised episode differs from the script in some way? Are you going to attempt to prove that?



Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Why do people assume that the Empire has better tech? PostPosted: 2011-06-28 01:20am
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2005-09-23 11:33pm
Posts: 2424
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Stofsk wrote:
Norade wrote:
The script is not the episode in question and seeing as there are often changes between script and screen that simply won't do.

Are you claiming the televised episode differs from the script in some way? Are you going to attempt to prove that?


I'm saying that I have no way of knowing if it does or not without him posting a link to the episode. I don't really care for Trek and thus don't have episodes laying around at home.

Destructionator XIII wrote:
Darth Tedious wrote:
The analogy I used was probably not the best one for the point I was trying to make.

Yea, though even with old stuff that holds no interest to you, you can always just not click the thread; there's no benefit to jump in there and flame folks for doing what they want to do.

It's just I think you're missing out on opportunities if you do that. I often enjoy some good hard sci fi talk. For a while, I was like "zomfg we've done this all before!!!11! space fighters r teh st00pid n00b stfu!!11!11!one!"

But, now, I've actually come around to a different perspective, in part because little new ideas in "old" discussions kept popping up, and they eventually combined into a compelling alternate view.

The only trick now is to not get too dug in with the alternate view and start hating the old stand-by!


Space fighters generally do make little sense and the old ideas are talked about because they make sense. Not out of some desire to stifle discussion.



School requires more work than I remember it taking...

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 472 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group