More Trektardism

[Darth Servo]

Never mind. The thread just got locked by the forum mods.

Next time, just post this and remind everyone that Jay insists that is a hit, over and over again.

Too bad you can only post links rather than actual pictures over there.

[TC Pilot]

He actually immediately started a new thread, so if you'd like, you can do it yourself and get an early start.

[Darth Servo]

He actually immediately started a new thread, so if you'd like, you can do it yourself and get an early start.

That lying jackass really isn't worth my time.

[PayBack]

(43GT or thereabouts) I'm not entirely sure how that makes any difference whatsoever in the vs debate. Even assuming that Cardassian warhead was NOT an omnidirectional explosive it's roughly the equivalent of 1/5th of a single Acclamator's MTL discharge.

Is that correct? I thought a 4 MTL Acclamator battery was 200 GT, making a single MTL 50 GT. IIRC this 200 GT MTL has become a bit of a brain bug as it applies to a battery, not a single MTL.

[Darth Ruinus]

Is that correct? I thought a 4 MTL Acclamator battery was 200 GT, making a single MTL 50 GT. IIRC this 200 GT MTL has become a bit of a brain bug as it applies to a battery, not a single MTL.

Heavy guns: 2.4 million megatons (200 gigatons per shot from each turret, 12 turrets)

Its quite clear that each shot is 200 gigatons. Not that all the turrets combined equal 200 gigatons.

[PayBack]

Each Turret, not each gun. An Acclamator has 12 QUAD MTL turrets.

[PayBack]

Crap, no edit. I'm not trying to semantic whore here. It's just it sounds to me each Turret produces 200 GT per shot, not each gun.

[Darth Ruinus]

Each Turret, not each gun.

It's just it sounds to me each Turret produces 200 GT per shot, not each gun.

Yeah, each shot is worth 200 GTs, whats to be confused about? Is there a difference between turrets and guns, something I missed?

[PayBack]

Well a turret holds 4 guns so yes there is a difference. 4 MTLs per turret, 200 GT per turret, thus 50 GT per MTL?

[Darth Ruinus]

Well a turret holds 4 guns so yes there is a difference. 4 MTLs per turret, 200 GT per turret, thus 50 GT per MTL?

I still dont get the confusion. Everytime it shoots, a 200 GT shot comes out. I mean, how do you get the statment "200 gigatons per shot" and turn it into 50 GTs per gun?

[PayBack]

Because it's per shot from a turret, not per shot from an MTL. I take that as meaning when all 4 MTLs on the turret fire, the result equals 200 GT.
If you think it's each MTL with a resulting firepower of 800GT possible (200 GT x 4) from a turret, then you have interpreted it differently to me.

"200 gigatons per shot from each turret" I didn't think that meant each gun on each turret.

[Darth Ruinus]

Because it's per shot from a turret, not per shot from an MTL. I take that as meaning when all 4 MTLs on the turret fire, the result equals 200 GT.

Ok, this is where I get confused. What medium TLs? A quad TL turret has 4 barrels. 200 GTs per shot from each turret means that the other turrets could be firing and each of them would still give 200 GT shots.

If you think it's each MTL with a resulting firepower of 800GT possible (200 GT x 4) from a turret, then you have interpreted it differently to me.

Well yeah, if all the barrels can fire at one time, but as far as I know, they cant. It just means that if each quad TL turret fires at the same time, then all of them combined would be 2400 gigatons.

"200 gigatons per shot from each turret" I didn't think that meant each gun on each turret.

I think it does, since quad TLs of or the smaller variants cant fire all of their barrels at the same time can they?

[Batman]

I was talking per turret not per barrel, my apologies if that wasn't clear. I've been using the conservative approach to Accie MTL firepower because let's face it, a factor of four reduction in Acclamator firepower won't do beans about what would happen if Trek were to face Wars.

[PayBack]

Well yeah, if all the barrels can fire at one time, but as far as I know, they cant.
I think it does, since quad TLs of or the smaller variants cant fire all of their barrels at the same time can they?

Why not? I don't recall seeing anything to suggest a turret can't fire all it's guns at once.

I was talking per turret not per barrel, my apologies if that wasn't clear. I've been using the conservative approach to Accie MTL firepower because let's face it, a factor of four reduction in Acclamator firepower won't do beans about what would happen if Trek were to face Wars.

Don't worry it's pretty much been expressed like that many times, and I meant to start a thread about it as many people are saying an MTL is 200 GT.
However, no you're right, it wouldn't make one iota of difference vs a trek ship, but I bet it wouldn't stop them pointlessly using that small discrepancy to cloud an argument.

[Darth Ruinus]

Why not? I don't recall seeing anything to suggest a turret can't fire all it's guns at once.

True, but, isnt the purpose of multibarreled weapons to fire faster than single barrled ones?

However, no you're right, it wouldn't make one iota of difference vs a trek ship, but I bet it wouldn't stop them pointlessly using that small discrepancy to cloud an argument.

True, though sometimes it doesnt even go that far. Sometimes they say the ICS is fanwank.

[PayBack]

Why not? I don't recall seeing anything to suggest a turret can't fire all it's guns at once.

True, but, isnt the purpose of multibarreled weapons to fire faster than single barrled ones?

Isn't it because 4 barrels can have greater firepower than 1? Reasons for not just having one barrel 4x as large are heat dissipation and targeting speed.

[Batman]

Why not? I don't recall seeing anything to suggest a turret can't fire all it's guns at once.

True, but, isnt the purpose of multibarreled weapons to fire faster than single barrled ones?

[/quote]
The phrase 'It's not quite that simple' comes to mind

Sometimes they say the ICS is fanwank.

Regardless of the fact that downscaling from the Alderaan incident gets you firepower way in excess of the ICS figures, the ICS figures ARE official
And yeah. WE are the ones using fanwank.

[Swindle1984]

Four barrels can either fire simultaneously for a single massive strike, or fire in sequence to allow sustained fire while each barrel gets to cool down between shots.

We saw the twin heavy turbolaser turrets on the Death Star firing both barrels simultaneously, so they obviously can fire every barrel on a turret simultaneously if they want to. The mode of fire depends on what they want, maximum firepower per shot or sustained fire.

[Darth Wong]

Why not? I don't recall seeing anything to suggest a turret can't fire all it's guns at once.

True, but, isnt the purpose of multibarreled weapons to fire faster than single barrled ones?

Right, so barrel #1 could fire, followed by barrel #2 30 seconds later, followed by barrel #3 30 seconds later, followed by barrel #4 30 seconds later. That would be 4 shots in two minutes, whereas a single-barrel turret with a two minute cycle time would fire once in two minutes.

[Darth Wong]

We saw the twin heavy turbolaser turrets on the Death Star firing both barrels simultaneously, so they obviously can fire every barrel on a turret simultaneously if they want to. The mode of fire depends on what they want, maximum firepower per shot or sustained fire.

You're assuming that these turrets are identical in terms of firepower, cooling systems and other cycle time limitations, etc. For all you know, if you fired more than one barrel on an ISD's heavy turret simultaneously, you'd wreck the turret.

[PayBack]

For all you know, if you fired more than one barrel on an ISD's heavy turret simultaneously, you'd wreck the turret.

Though at the moment AFAIK there's no evidence either way? (I've read the main site but it was a while ago).

Also I believe the turrets are designed to withstand GTs of recoil. If TLs are primarily energy weapons, doesn't that imply they can all fire at once to come even close to that level of recoil?
Admittedly I'm biased as I prefer the idea of full broadsides.

[PayBack]

Of course I could counter my own argument with this...

"Anything less, and a single shot fired in battle would rip a destroyer or battle cruiser in two, a victim of its own lethal strength.

[Ryushikaze]

And now people are arguing in another thread that the Federation or the Krenim could curbstomp the Daleks or the Timelords.

Words are not enough.

Look here

[Aratech]

And now people are arguing in another thread that the Federation or the Krenim could curbstomp the Daleks or the Timelords.

Words are not enough.

Look here

Aye, I've seen that bit before. Despite what SFJ nutjobs would have people think, the war is over before it begins. Quite literally, considering how advanced Dalek timetravel is.

In the words of the immortal Dalek Sek, a war between the Dalek Empire and the UFP can be summed up as follows:

This is not war, this is pest control!

[EnterpriseSovereign]

And now people are arguing in another thread that the Federation or the Krenim could curbstomp the Daleks or the Timelords.

Words are not enough.

Look here

Aye, I've seen that bit before. Despite what SFJ nutjobs would have people think, the war is over before it begins. Quite literally, considering how advanced Dalek timetravel is.

In the words of the immortal Dalek Sek, a war between the Dalek Empire and the UFP can be summed up as follows:

This is not war, this is pest control!

"You are superior in only one respect"

"what is that?"

"you are better at dying!"

Latest rant from Jay, now he thinks the Delta Flyer wasn't a shuttle
Link

The stupidity keeps on coming