Target practice (2008-07-22)

[Batman]

That seems to be about the gist of it, yes.

[Darth Servo]

I got the exact same response Batman did. Here was my response (warning, its big) to first reply he sent me, for the record:

We can have fun laughing at each other. I thought most of what was on the site was silly fanboy stuff.

Yet you're the one who can only hurl names and say "can't hear you!!! nya-nya-nya"

Really, the vast majority of your "arguments" were shot down years ago and are already on Mike's hatemail page.

If your mind is closed, and you just call a counter argument hatemail, it say's more about you then the sender.

Thank you for proving you just ignore anything you can't deal with and launch more personal insults.

I see you are utterly clueless about the energy difference between glassing a planet and making it blow up like a bomb. You are similarly ignorant of this thing in SW called "planetary shields" that can stymie bombardment from a few ISDs but not from the Death Star.

Glassing a planet would be just has effective as a terror tactic.

No, its not. A glassed planet is still there. A planet blasted into an asteroid is not.

By any measure the DS was a waste of resources.

Because you say so...

It seems the Emperor wanted control, and so a small number of powerful units are easier to control.

Pure speculation. Try stating some actual facts for a change.

In ANH Tarken talked about "Fear keeping the local systems in line. Fear of this Station."

Which proves nothing about it being a waste of resources.

Han Solo told us the whole Imperial Fleet couldn't destroy a planet, a 1,000 ships. Then his thought was cut off.

Which proves we do NOT know the entire statement, or the entire thought, making it utterly worthless.

From that you can draw 2 things. First the empire has fewer then 1,000 ships. Second that no one had ever blown up a planet before.

Its always amazes me how trektards like you insist on taking a heat-of-the moment statement like that and trying divine actual fleet numbers from it. Han is a smuggler, not an expert on Imperial numbers or capabilities.

In that very same scene, Han said that small moon was too big to be a space station. But guess what? Is WAS a space station. Han was WRONG.

The mere existence of the Death Star is proof that the Empire has far more than 1000 ships. The DS has the volume of MILLIONS of ISDs

It would have been much better to build 100 ISDs and patrol more of the Empire.

100 IDSs is a drop in the bucket of an Empire spanning a million planetary systems.

As for planetary shields, SW fans came up with them based on a few fames in the Alderan destruction seen, a crescent of light from the point were the beam hits. In the remastered digital version, the crescent effect is gone. Did the shield disappear? No, it was never there.

Now you're just lying. The crescent is MORE visible in the DVD release than in the theatrical SE release.



The shield in ROTJ encompassed the entire planet as well, as clearly stated in the novelization.

ROTJ novelization p.71

At the center of the briefing room was a large, circular light-table, projected above which a holographic image of the unfinished Imperial Death Star hovered beside the Moon of Endor, whose scintillating protective deflector shield encompassed them both.

We're told Coruscant's planetary shield had to be deactivated by spies in order for Palpatine to have been kidnapped just before ROTS and the shield is mentioned again in the SW novel Shadows of the Empire.

We saw [fighters] take out shield generators

There is no primary evidence that those domes are shield generators and the secondary literature is contradictory on the matter. Some sources say "shield generators" other (including the guy who designed the Executor model and did FX work for ROTJ) say sensor equipment.

The novelization points out that the Cap ships needed to take down the shields FIRST.

Source: ROTJ novelization p.148

"Forward ships have made contact with the Imperial fleet, sir."

"Concentrate your fire on their power generators. If we can knock out their shields, our fighters might stand a chance against them".

We heard Admiral Ackbar order the rebel fleet to concentrate fire on the Executor in the film and we saw a Rebel Frigate shooting the thing.

and then cut up the surface. One takes out the bridge by crashing into it, after going out of control.

Once again, you're clearly lying. All we saw was an A-wing crash through the bridge WINDOW.

The SSD then goes out of control and crashed into the DS.

In other words, you admit that you were completely wrong about fighters taking out Cap ships, since the DS is hardly a fighter.

If small fighter were useless no one would use them. May be you think they only have them to take out DSs.

I see your reading comprehension is so low that you don't know the difference "useless without cap ship support" (my actual argument) and "totally useless" (your strawman distortion).

The point your missing is that turbo lasers on big and smaller capital ships put out about the same fire power.

I'd LOVE to see your evidence for this baseless claim, especially since we saw many different sizes of guns on various SW ships. They range from the tiny ones taking aim at R2 & 3PO's escape pod



to the enormous monstrosities flanking the ISD's dorsal superstructure.

to take out a capital ship they have to score hundreds of hits.

Which would be proof of pretty damn strong shields that can withstand long bombardments, unlike Trek shields that go down after a few shots.

We have never seen big ships fire can opener guns,

Yes, we have, and I gave you an example of one in my previous email. The Mon-Cal obliterating an ISD in ROTJ. We also see a similar blast in ROTS. We see the Death Star blow two Mon Cal cruisers to bits in a single shot in ROTJ.

That is a powerful single blast that does heavy damage to another ship, or even pierce the hull. Unlike the big lasers in Babylon 5, and the phasers in ST which are can openers.

Which you assume to be due to powerful weapons rather than weak shields and hull.

Very funny. Pegasus was the phase cloaked ship that got stuck in an asteroid? In that episode the Enterprise didn't want to fire in side the asteroid for fear it would collapse around them.

My, my, what selective memory you have. You really should review the episode in question before spouting off your mouth. You'll look a lot less foolish.

BEFORE they went in the asteroid, Riker suggests destroying the asteroid to prevent the Pegasus from falling into the hands of the Romulans.

RIKER: I recommend we destroy the asteroid. It would take almost all our photon torpedoes, but it would preclude any possibility of the Pegasus falling into Romulan hands.

In the TOS "Paradise Syndrome the Enterprise tries to split an asteroid half the size of the moon in half. Given they are firing phasers into a deep rift, they were trying to cut though about 1,000 miles of rock, nickel, and Iron. Do you think an X-Wing can do that? Granted they failed, because their engines were already overloaded, but they thought they had a fair chance to do it.

I could go blue in the face listing instances where Trek characters thought something and were proven completely wrong.

Wayne's infallible Mr. Spock page

Concerning the asteroid's size,



That doesn't look half the size of the moon to me.

Oh, and you're lying about their objective. They were trying to DIVERT the asteroid, not blow it in half.

SPOCK: Far enough away, the angle necessary to divert it enough to avoid destruction is minute, but as the asteroid approaches this planet, the angle becomes so great that even the power of a starship

The E-Refit had 50% more phaser power, the D and E seem to have twice that.

Twice that based on what?

If you think an X-Wing could do that your just delusional.

Too bad we have DIRECT OBSERVATION of Slave-1 doing precisely that while all you have is failure on the part of the Federation.

You do realize Newton's laws still hold sway? They don't have to burn engines to keep moving.

They DO need to burn engines to MANEUVER, which is what your point was about, not moving in a straight line which is next to impossible to determine in space on a flat screen.

They show no indication they can race up to a planet, or other target,

I guess you'll just ignore the Imperials orbiting Endor in seconds, the Endor moon enlarging rapidly as the Rebel fleet leaves hyperspace, etc.

unlike SDs they can maneuver.

<Yawn>

Movie clip of Mon Cal turning to avoid the DS 2 shield.

We have seen SDs with planets behind them, and we don't see the relative position change.

When did we see an event where this would be required?

Once again, orbiting Endor in SECONDS. From a dead stop on the far side.

That indicates their speed is not high enough to see a change with in a few moments.

non-sequitor.

They may be 10 times faster then the shuttle, but not much more. May be a few hundred KPS.

Pure speculation without a single calculation to back it up.

ST ships have been shown to move and maneuver at more the half light speed.

No, they have not. The only confirmed 0.5C incident I remember was The Motion Picture, where the Enterprise most certainly was NOT maneuvering.

SWs fighters may not be that fast.

Right, they can only orbit Yavin in a few moments to get to the Death Star. No X-wing pilot ever needs a stretch break in those cramped little cockpits of theirs, yet they travel from one planet to another regularly.

If Yavin is about Jupiter's size they only need to be moving 10 times or less the Shuttle's speed.

Given how ENORMOUS the Death Star is, that requires enormous amounts of thrust.

They never said it was NUCLEAR fusion.

That's the only kind there is.

No, it isn't. Fusion only means "joining". Melting is often called fusion. Matter-antimatter reactions could be described as fusion. Fusion ONLY means two things are being combined.

Matter fusion or what ever your calling it was dreamed up by a fan, and accepted by fanboys,

And PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL LITERATURE, making it far more authoritative than your personal interpretation of a vague quote.

And once again, its called "HYPERMATTER"

because they couldn't accept the limits of fusion drive.

Another trektard who thinks he can read minds.

They have to ignore the obvious to make it sound more advanced.

The only one ignoring things is you. SW reactors are said to be able to run off heavy metals. Nuclear fusion in heavy metals is a net energy LOSS reaction.

We know what fusion is.

And we know it is utterly inadequate to generate the energy needed for the feats observed in SW (blowing up a planet at significant fraction of the speed of light, fighter-sized craft lifting off from planets at least twice on a single fuel tank (Hoth and Degobath, etc)

Wrong again, ST ships are much faster.

Prove it.

More overwhelmingly they can attack ships in normal space, at warp speed.

Wrong. Every TNG era warp combat seen involves one ship at warp chasing another ship at warp. The velocity relative to each other was near zero (Nemesis)

Don't even try to reference Elaan of Troyius. Sulu called out the distances that clearly indicated SUB-light relative speed.

SULU: Aye, sir. One hundred thousand kilometres. Ninety. Eighty.

A ship traveling even at Warp one would cover 20,000 km in less than a second.

The TNG era writers apparently figured out that the whole idea of warp strafing is utterly retarded and clearly dropped it. We NEVER saw DS9 attacked in this manner.

At relative velocities exceeding c, the sublight target would be in firing range for a few nanoseconds.

SWs would have no defense, they wouldn't even see the attack coming.

They have shields. They can scan planets outside a solar system (Vader's squadron scanned the rebel's shield while still outside the Hoth solar system and the Rebel base picked them up as well). That requires having long range FTL sensors.

Wrong again, they do use main power in normal space. Your thinking main power is only used for warp drive.

You have not proved that assertion wrong. You have not proved they power their impulse drives with the warp core.

I guess you don't know much about designing real ships?

I obviously know more than you do, since Federation ships are WORSE in this regard than SW ships are yet you use it as a point for Trek superiority.

Every thing is a design compromise. A ship that is 1/3 warship, 1/3 carrier, and 1/3 attack transport, is not as good at any of it's jobs as a purpose built ship.

And SW DOES have such ships. The ISD has a relatively small fighter complement. Its the Venator class (seen in ROTS) that is the dedicated carrier and the Acclamator class (AOTC) that is the dedicated troop transport. They also have the Frigates and Corvettes seen in the films.

Compare this to the Federation who can't make up their mind if the Enterprise-D is a warship, a courier, a diplomatic vessel, a science and exploration ship, a freighter or a luxury cruise ship.

However Crew size on a SD is in the thousands, and they all need space, food, life support, water, and a whole range of services. crews 10-20 bigger means a lot of resources, and more mass to the ship, then just huge crew quarters.

Why don't you try calculation HOW MUCH bigger instead of making these vague unqualified statements.

And you completely ignored the DOLPHIN TANKS, never mind all the other wastes of space on Federation ships like Holodecks.

Not sure what you mean? are they lasers? They say they are, but some time they seem more like particle streams. Could be just the way the effects look. I think they call them torpedoes because of the naval reference. Since your so in the know what do you think they are?

I have no clue what SW weapons are but they are clearly NOT real life lasers. If two real laser beams cross, they do NOT interact, much less combine into a larger beam the way the DS superlaser or the LAAT gunships in AOTC do.

Its just a name. It means little if anything as you admit with regard to torpedoes. You can't have it both ways.

Wow, you have no idea what the corona of a star is like. An energy blast is a focused effect on a small area, for a short period of time. Being close to a star is being hit with massive heat, and radiation over the whole surface of your ship, and or shields, every instant your there. It's like shooting you with a water pistol of boiling water, or dropping you into a pool of water at 180F for 5min. The first will burn you, the second will kill you.

Once again, I clearly know far more than you. The corona is very hot but its ALSO very diffuse. You would get far MORE energy input into your body from a laser than you would from a room full of corona density gas. The point remains EM radiation (the stuff both of both lasers and solar radiation) is clearly a threat to Federation ships, contrary to your earlier claim. EM radiation completely blinded Voyager's sensors.

The only thing that matters is the total amount of energy transfered to the target. In fact, focusing makes it WORSE (as any kid who has ever fried ants with a magnifying glass knows).

They make things disappear into thin air. No shock wave is EVER observed from the magic phaser disappearing act.

You are funny. I'm talking about on the atomic level, you don't see that with the naked eye.

So you have absolutely zero evidence of this claimed shock wave. Concession accepted.

Bullcrap. They repeatedly talk about close proximity torpedo explosions being a threat to the firing ship (TNG Q-who, VOY The Swarm)

We have clearly seen them used for point strikes. ST III, V, and in most combats in TNG on.

I'm amazed you actually referenced The Final Frontier, given a rock the size of a photon torp dropped from orbit would have done more destruction than the torp did.

A max yield blast would cover a whole ship. We have rarely seen them do that.

So rare that you don't even mention a single instance.

We know a PT has more penetrating power then a Nuke,

We do? How?

When they do the blast is huge, covering most of a Borg Cube, and being a danger to near by ships.

They NEVER covered most of a Borg ship with a torp explosion.



Not even future Janeway's technobabble torps from Endgame.



Neither of those cover "most" of the cube. Maybe 1/4 at most.

And what does ANY of this have to do with your claim of torps being able to be focused explosions in a single direction?

Voyager used 2 Tricolbalt warheads that almost enveloped the Caretakers Array, destroying it in seconds.

You're lying again. The primary explosion was minimal. The array was destroyed from secondary explosions inside the structure itself.

Chuck's review of Caretaker part 2

The Array was about 10 miles across. A dozen such weapons would destroy the DS.

Thanks for proving your utter lack of math ability. Volume is based on the CUBE of one dimension. Even if the Caretaker array was a 10 mile wide sphere (its not) thats a volume of about 525 cubic miles. A 100 mile wide Death Star has a volume of about 525 THOUSAND cubic miles. Thats a bit more than a dozen times the size.

You don't have to destroy the whole mass of the station. You use 2 to take out the planet killer weapon, then take out a chunk 10 miles deep, then fire the others down the hole, one at a time. 6 of them could blow though 60 miles too the core, then boom.

This entire line of reasoning is just too stupid for words. The Death Star has SHIELDS. The Caretaker array clearly does not since people could transport freely in and out of it.

Its utterly mindboggling that you can even begin to equate the thin spindly structure of the caretaker array with the solid armor of the Death Star.

The only Proton Torpedo explosion seen in ANH was Red Leader's impacting next to the exhaust port. Explain to me why we should assume the warhead had armed itself at that point when it was dozens of miles from its intended target--the Death Star reactor.

Because it blow up. Nuff said.

No, its NOT Nuff said. You don't see what actually blows up. You have no idea if thats the warhead or the fuel cooking off.

Childish.A light Saber is device, a transporter, or replacator is not just a device. They represent a technology that would revolutionize the whole culture. It's like going from a steam engine, to a nuclear reactor, and saying it's just a another way to generate heat.

Irrelevant hair splitting that has nothing to do with your original point. Nothing more than a distraction technique.

Oh, and if SW doesn't have transporters, how did Qui-gon Jinn get Anakin's blood sample from Mos Espa back to Amidala's ship in TPM?

You are a athlete. What a leap.

Are you suggesting the blood sample did NOT get back to Amidala's ship? How then did Obi-wan do the Midichlorian count?

You guys missed the whole point. Not only did it make a planet, did you forget the star it made? There was no star there before, just gas.

Wrong again.



The Regula planetoid clearly has a day side and a night side. Therefore there clearly is a star near by.

By the way, creating a star is ALSO a net NEGATIVE energy event.

If you think building the DS was a greater technical feat, it shows your just fixated on destruction.

No, it shows I know how to calculate required energy while you do not.

Changing the nature of matter on that scale is a feat magnitudes above scaling up a laser.

There is far MORE to building a Death Star than just "scaling up a laser"

Mike's size matters essay.

Creating lifeforms by design, and a whole ecosystem for them is staggering. The level of complexity is off the chart. Your guys are being obtuse, in other words block heads not to understand what would be involved in such a feat, and what it would mean.

Are you a creationist? Otherwise, there is nothing spectacular about the genesis device. It didn't do ANYTHING that couldn't occur naturally. It just seemed to speed up the process.

100 SD would be just as easy to hide as the 30 that were there.

How do you know? Also, diverting many more ships would ALSO be more noticeable as more ship would be missing from their standard patrol duties, etc.

No one in SWs has long range sensors, that can look into other systems.

Proof?

To find them you have to be on top of them.

Proof?

Your creating a theory to fit your conclusion that the Empire could have had many more ships, but chose not to bring them.

No, YOU are making up criticisms out of thin air with no supporting evidence what-so-ever.

The trap was not very effective. First off the Rebel ships could have just jumped away, after the first ship was taken out, by the DS.

No, thats what the Imperial fleet was there for. To prevent anyone from escaping.

Second the fleet was inadequate for the job. even with the DS in support the fleet was beaten in a stand up fight.

The fleet broke up with the loss of both the Death Star and the command ship, the certain death of the Emperor, Vader and fleet commanders aboard those two ships. It was loss of morale that finished them, not the Rebels. The literature even speaks of the Emperor using the Force to help bolster his ranks, the loss of which certainly contributed to the ensuing chaos.

I stand by my conclusion the Emperor was a poor strategist.

Even though you have zero supporting evidence. The only oversights with the plan was not expecting Vader to turn against him and not expecting the surprise attack of the Ewoks.

The parts were made by replicators.

Prove it.

Wrong. In SW they repeatedly talk about crossing the entire galaxy in short order. Han had claimed he'd done it personally and Imperial officers in in TESB stated that the Falcon could have done it by the time Vader had choked Captain Needa.

Again silly. Every word or causal reference can't be taken as a hard fact.

Yet thats precisely what YOU do when discussing Han's single heat of the moment comment about 1000 ships couldn't destroy Alderaan.

Mine comes from MULTIPLE sources. AOTC explicitly states that every star in their galaxy has been charted which is more than we can say for Trek.

The empire does not cover a large Galaxy like the Milky Way. The Empire has tens of thousands of systems.

No, the Empire has a MILLION systems (ANH novelization p.116 "This station is the final link in the new-forged Imperial chain which will bind the million systems of the Galactic Empire together once and for all.") and the SW galaxy is actually LARGER than the Milky Way. 120,000 LY across.

The whole galaxy would have hundreds of billions of systems.

You're confusing total star systems with star systems with inhabitable planets in them.

The events of ROTS, took about 9 months.

Based on...??? Your idiot assumption that Padme was knocked up right at the beginning of the film?

That indicates a lot of time spent moving around the galaxy.

No, it doesn't. You ASSUME all dead time is spent traveling instead of planning attacks, etc. Much of said traveling occurs in one-man craft. It is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to travel for months in such a vehicle.

In ST V the Enterprise A reached the center of the galaxy in a few days. Was it really the center of the galaxy?

No, it was not. The REAL center of the galaxy is massive black holes, not inhabitable planets.

I'm very capable of telling the difference. My point went over your head. The times and speeds are abstract, and very hard to judge.

No, MY point went over your head. They give clear numbers for their distances and time frame. Thats not abstract at all and there are obvious reasons for the discrepancy you gave.

So those Peregrine fighters I saw in DS9 were a figment of my imagination, right? Those Scorpion ships in Nemesis were a hallucination. Then again, Nemesis was so bad, its not inconceivable it induced temporary insanity.

The fighters in ST are bigger then SW.

The Peregrines, yes. The Scorpions, no.

I see you ignored my points about shields vs lasers. I guess you had no answer to that on the "Hate Mail list".

I didn't ignore it. I pointed out that SW weapons are NOT REAL LIFE LASERS, therefore your entire point is irrelevant.

Thanks for the laughs. I hope this gives you a few. Your probably some nice young guys. Your just caught up in rampant fanboyism.

I'm 35 with a college degree in biology and just about to complete a masters in Finance.

Next reply in a bit...

[Darth Onasi]

We're told Coruscant's planetary shield had to be deactivated by spies in order for Palpatine to have been kidnapped just before ROTS and the shield is mentioned again in the SW novel Shadows of the Empire.

Moreover the RotS ICS clearly states on the page 14 Invisible Hand insert that the Seperatist fleet is trapped and forced into combat by the Loyalist fleet below Coruscant's defensive shield (presumably having been re-activated a little after Palpatine's abduction).

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

The Alderaan .gif might not actually get through to him. I've had people argue, even examining a frame-by-frame, that it makes perfect sense for the beam to suddenly stop and spend as much time making the clouds green as it does to turn the planet into a rapidly-dispersing cloud. Thus, there is no need to assume there's a shield blocking the beam.

[Darth Servo]

The Alderaan .gif might not actually get through to him. I've had people argue, even examining a frame-by-frame, that it makes perfect sense for the beam to suddenly stop and spend as much time making the clouds green as it does to turn the planet into a rapidly-dispersing cloud. Thus, there is no need to assume there's a shield blocking the beam.

And thats when you know you're dealing with a complete retard who will make up anything.

[PeZook]

Again with the "High numbers = impossible!!!"

Sixty years ago, delivering 20 000 TNT tonnes worth of explosive devastation over a city required hundreds of heavy bombers.

Now, you can do a couple hundred times more with one bomber.

What's so hard to understand? SW has huge advantages in power generation over ST, they can build huge-ass ships that dwarf anything ST has to offer, they can cross the galaxy in hours or days. They're superior. The tech may be ridiculously overpowered, but it's right there.

[atg]

Not so fast buddy, i bet he'll make at least one "Trek makes better Androids because they look more human"

Guri.
Game. Set. Match.

[Dooey Jo]

And when Han Solo said the Death Star was too big to be a space station and not a moon, he's also absolutely right. The Death Star is in fact a moon and the Empire can make any moon spit out planet destroying death rays!

And so can we!

[Revy]

So basically his argument now boils down to - "Yeah, so I admit Superman could beat James Bond, but it's a stupidly unbalanced match! Superman is ridiculously overpowered for such a fight! So yeah, he'd win, but you're a moron for saying so!"

That's kind of ... you know ... the point? Of course Wars is hugely overpowered next to Trek. That's why they'd win so easily. That is, in fact, what everyone's been trying to tell these people from day one.

And I would hardly describe Trek tech as 'realistic'. Wars tech might be overpowered, but it's just a sci-fi space based extension of todays tech (space based carriers, fighters and warships, holonet a galactic based internet, more advanced robotics etc.). Trek tech on the other hand God help him if he starts on that 'Trek inspired loads of modern day inventions' stuff.

[Darth Onasi]

It's always the same, they start the vs. debate against Wars then cry foul when it finally dawns on them how outclassed Trek is.
And all because... what? They don't like Wars? I don't like the Culture, but I'm not going to waste my time arguing that the Empire has a chance in Hades of even bothering it.
But then I don't base my psyche entirely around my favourite sci-fi universe reigning supreme, like some of these people do.

[Ted C]

We're told Coruscant's planetary shield had to be deactivated by spies in order for Palpatine to have been kidnapped just before ROTS and the shield is mentioned again in the SW novel Shadows of the Empire.

Moreover the RotS ICS clearly states on the page 14 Invisible Hand insert that the Seperatist fleet is trapped and forced into combat by the Loyalist fleet below Coruscant's defensive shield (presumably having been re-activated a little after Palpatine's abduction).

That actually makes a bit of sense. Grievous couldn't jump to hyperspace with his "prisoner" because he couldn't get OUT through the shield, which had been put back up to prevent his escape.

I'd been wondering about that, but I never read the novelization or ICS.

[Ender]

We also see the shield flare in the movie. As Anakin and Obi-wan dive through it they accelerate, and we see blue flashes. The look is consistent with TL shots hitting shields, and is what one would expect from the exhaust stream from the drive hitting the shields.

[Darth Servo]

This was my reply to the rant Batman posted earlier:

Concession accepted. However, you continue to mutilate the English language.

1) Saying "SW would defeat Trek in war" is NOT the same as "taking it seriously". I fully realize SW tech is unrealistic. I also say that the same can be said for Trek. Faster-than-light travel is a scientific impossibility yet it is one of the most fundamental technologies in Trek (and sci-fi in general). We are NOT saying SW is more realistic than Trek. Its Trektards like you who go around saying Trek is more realistic than others. They are BOTH fantasy.

Yes, hypermatter is made up. Just like all the stable trans-uranic elements mentioned throughout Trek. Trek makes up new materials practically every other episode. The TERM "anti-matter" is from real life science but Trek has gone and given it totally absurd properties like sealing "temporal" fissures in space-time and being used as a medical treatment.

2) Allies: the Federation has repeatedly pushed potential allies away with mindless obedience to the Prime Directive.

3) We did NOT say the Emperor dying was the SOLE cause of the defeat at Endor. We said it was a CONTRIBUTING FACTOR. Learn the difference.

And moron Bob replies:

Concession accepted. However, you continue to mutilate the English language.

1) Saying "SW would defeat Trek in war" is NOT the same as "taking it seriously". I fully realize SW tech is unrealistic. I also say that the same can be said for Trek. Faster-than-light travel is a scientific impossibility yet it is one of the most fundamental technologies in Trek (and sci-fi in general). We are NOT saying SW is more realistic than Trek.

Its Trektards like you who go around saying Trek is more realistic than others. They are BOTH fantasy.

No that's not the point I was making. I was talking about the site and you guys talking about "Calculations", as if the conclusions are mathematical facts. You can make calculations based on what a matter/antimatter or a fusion reactor might put out, based on what we know, or think we know. When you start with some thing like Hypermatter there is no starting point to extrapolate from. When you use terms like "Trektards" you sound like an asshole. It just reinforces the impression the site is an illogical rant.

Yes, hypermatter is made up. Just like all the stable trans-uranic elements mentioned throughout Trek. Trek makes up new materials practically every other episode. The TERM "anti-matter" is from real life science but Trek has gone and given it totally absurd properties like sealing "temporal" fissures in space-time and being used as a medical treatment.

Stable trans-uranic elements may or may not exist. We keep finding them in the real world. May be Kryptonite exists some were. ST is a sci/fi show. Temporal rifts, worm holes, and so on belong to theoretical physics, so they pop up in ST. If they exist, trying to effect them is a logical plot development. The fact they have been shown working with such forces adds to the Feds reputation for tech prowess. It's one of the reasons I give ST an edge in science. SW is about an epic heroic legend. The tech is part of the back ground. The hugh weapons, and ships are props. The heroes deal with the overwhelming threat by acts of heroism. If the DS attacked a Federation world the heroes would stop the threat by figuring out a technological solution administered in a dramatic way. Trek plots often revolve around a group of characters working together to over come some thing more powerful then them, by analyzing how it works. The Dooms Day Machine, The God Apollo, Vol, Dominion poloron beams, the Breem energy dampening weapon, and on, and on.

2) Allies: the Federation has repeatedly pushed potential allies away with mindless obedience to the Prime Directive.

The Prime Directive applies to pre space travel cultures. Most of them wouldn't make effective allies. The Feds have made alliances with the Klingons, Romulans, and others for at least a limited time. It's hard to maintain alliances with morally repulsive regimes with out a compelling threat being around. America could ally with the USSR in WWII, but then the Cold War was all but inevitable. The Federation it's self was formed in a series of alliances, and is an on going alliance.

3) We did NOT say the Emperor dying was the SOLE cause of the defeat at Endor. We said it was a CONTRIBUTING FACTOR. Learn the difference.

I didn't say it was. I said it was used as a plot device retroactively to explain why the battle ended right then. When I saw the movie I thought any Imperials left retreated, because they thought the battle was going against them, and wanted to regroup. We never really saw them jump away. I only know what I read in the Thain books.

Yep, the guy thinks the DS2 reactor shows plasma in its explosion, that stable trans-uranic elements might actually exist. The guy doesn't even try to be self-consistent.

[Darth Onasi]

No that's not the point I was making. I was talking about the site and you guys talking about "Calculations", as if the conclusions are mathematical facts. You can make calculations based on what a matter/antimatter or a fusion reactor might put out, based on what we know, or think we know. When you start with some thing like Hypermatter there is no starting point to extrapolate from. When you use terms like "Trektards" you sound like an asshole. It just reinforces the impression the site is an illogical rant.

Yes, because we know of the real-world potential of a matter/anti-matter reactor where the annihilation is regulated by dilithium crysta... oh wait, no we don't.
And apparently the genius here doesn't get that you can observe and work out power-output without knowing how the power source works.

Stable trans-uranic elements may or may not exist. We keep finding them in the real world. May be Kryptonite exists some were. ST is a sci/fi show. Temporal rifts, worm holes, and so on belong to theoretical physics, so they pop up in ST. If they exist, trying to effect them is a logical plot development. The fact they have been shown working with such forces adds to the Feds reputation for tech prowess.

Wait.. what? Star Wars is silly fantasy because Hypermatter doesn't exist, but when Trek works with elements that don't exist, they "may" exist somewhere and Trek is just that much more science-y for having it?

It's one of the reasons I give ST an edge in science. SW is about an epic heroic legend. The tech is part of the back ground. The hugh weapons, and ships are props. The heroes deal with the overwhelming threat by acts of heroism. If the DS attacked a Federation world the heroes would stop the threat by figuring out a technological solution administered in a dramatic way. Trek plots often revolve around a group of characters working together to over come some thing more powerful then them, by analyzing how it works. The Dooms Day Machine, The God Apollo, Vol, Dominion poloron beams, the Breem energy dampening weapon, and on, and on.

Oh sweet heavenly cosmonaut Jesus. I was wrong; he went right past superior morality and went head on into juvenile "The Federation are the good guys and the good guys always win against evil." territory.

The Prime Directive applies to pre space travel cultures. Most of them wouldn't make effective allies. The Feds have made alliances with the Klingons, Romulans, and others for at least a limited time. It's hard to maintain alliances with morally repulsive regimes with out a compelling threat being around. America could ally with the USSR in WWII, but then the Cold War was all but inevitable. The Federation it's self was formed in a series of alliances, and is an on going alliance.

Funny how it *had* an alliance with the Klingons and then refused to help the legitimate Klingon government during an uprising in TNG "Redemption", citing the almighty Prime Directive.

[Darth Wong]

It's always the same, they start the vs. debate against Wars then cry foul when it finally dawns on them how outclassed Trek is.

They start with the conclusion and then work back to the method and facts. It's actually a very common approach; all creationists do this too.

And all because... what? They don't like Wars? I don't like the Culture, but I'm not going to waste my time arguing that the Empire has a chance in Hades of even bothering it.
But then I don't base my psyche entirely around my favourite sci-fi universe reigning supreme, like some of these people do.

It's a bit more complicated than that. They base their judgment on a subjective perception of how "advanced" everything seems to be from its verbal descriptions and user interfaces (notice how the guy started his initial E-mail with the subject line: "tech levels") rather than an engineer's perspective of saying "Let's try to measure the horsepower on this thing".

Once they run head-first into the other approach and realize on some level that it's clearly a more logical way to do things, they try to save face by turning it into a personality debate.

[Darth Servo]

I loved how he included Kryptonite in his list of things that might actually exist.

[Peptuck]

I loved how he included Kryptonite in his list of things that might actually exist.

So, kryptonite might exist but hypermatter is bullshit?

[Darth Wong]

I loved how he included Kryptonite in his list of things that might actually exist.

So, kryptonite might exist but hypermatter is bullshit?

And this is from a Trekkie who has no problem with "warp plasma" that you pump through copper pipes, or "plasma coolant" which is a heavier-than-air smoky gas, or "dilithium" which is used to hold antimatter, or antimatter which can be "deactivated", or particles that make you travel through time, or radiation which passes effortlessly through shields and hull plating and bulkheads but which interacts violently with the human body, or "energy dampening fields" which render weapons completely useless but have no effect on the human body's energy-driven processes, etc.

[Darth Servo]

And this is from a Trekkie who has no problem with "warp plasma" that you pump through copper pipes, or "plasma coolant" which is a heavier-than-air smoky gas, or "dilithium" which is used to hold antimatter, or antimatter which can be "deactivated", or particles that make you travel through time, or radiation which passes effortlessly through shields and hull plating and bulkheads but which interacts violently with the human body, or "energy dampening fields" which render weapons completely useless but have no effect on the human body's energy-driven processes, etc.

He probably doesn't even begin realize why those are serious problems. After all, this is a moron who used the DS2 reactor explosion as "proof" that it utilizes nuclear fusion.

[skies]

And this is from a Trekkie who has no problem with "warp plasma" that you pump through copper pipes, or "plasma coolant" which is a heavier-than-air smoky gas, or "dilithium" which is used to hold antimatter, or antimatter which can be "deactivated", or particles that make you travel through time, or radiation which passes effortlessly through shields and hull plating and bulkheads but which interacts violently with the human body, or "energy dampening fields" which render weapons completely useless but have no effect on the human body's energy-driven processes, etc.

He probably doesn't even begin realize why those are serious problems. After all, this is a moron who used the DS2 reactor explosion as "proof" that it utilizes nuclear fusion.

Why bother? He's just a typical Trekkie who is dazzled by technobabble, thinking it makes Trek scientific, not realizing that hard Sci-fi is realistic because it conforms to and explores the ramifications of real scientific laws and principles. Star trek never did that, even from the start. To be fair, Star wars isn't hard Sci-fi either, but it still shows a quantifiable advantage that's orders of magnitude above Trek tech. Trying to shift the debate to which is more scientific is useless.

[Revy]

The fact is, who is more advanced doesn't ultimately matter. As has been pointed out, a phaser is more advanced than a machine gun, but which one is deadlier? And which one is more combat effective? I remember a Stargate episode when a group of rebel Jaffa are sneering at being given boxes of 'primitive' human weapons. Jack, thouroughly pissed off with their snobby superior attitude, decides to show them how wrong they are by demonstrating the effectiveness of a P90 in relation to a Staff weapon.

"This [holding staff weapon] is a weapon of terror; it is designed to intimidate your enemy. This [holding P90] is a weapon of war; it is designed to kill your enemy."

So even if Trek tech was more advanced or sophisticated (and it isn't) it wouldnt matter, because the whole point of SW vs ST is about who would beat who in a fight. That is all. So we look at combat effectiveness - NOT who has the flashiest, most high-tech gadgets or equipment.

But of course this has already been said, and ignored by Trekkies, because they know full well that if they dealt with the issue head on they'd either have to admit the truth or (more likely) have a massive dellusion attack wherebye they blow Trek combat prowess totally out of preportion (you know the type, saying a Starfleet shuttle can survive against the DS head on).

I guess it's the same with every damn '? vs ?' debate. Every side will have it's share of annoying fanboys that will never admit to their favourite side as pottentially losing, no matter what evidence or argument is presented.

[Wyrm]

Alert: Long winded rebuttal initiated.

No that's not the point I was making. I was talking about the site and you guys talking about "Calculations", as if the conclusions are mathematical facts.

If you accept the assumptions and rationales behind the calculations, and the calculations verified as correct, then the results of those calculations are mathematical facts. Want to dispute them? Attack the calculations and show them to be incorrectly calculated, or attack the underlying assumptions and show them to be inapplicable. THAT'S the way to do things, bucko.

You can make calculations based on what a matter/antimatter or a fusion reactor might put out, based on what we know, or think we know.

Yep, and what we do know about such devices means that none of them can possibly power the DS or ISDs. The performance we see from these spacecraft is far too high; too much fuel would be required from each of them.

When you start with some thing like Hypermatter there is no starting point to extrapolate from.

We do not know the mechanism of operation of a hypermatter reactor. We do know that it has a fuel energy density beyond that of nuclear fusion or anitmatter reactors. Otherwise, their fuel tanks would be larger than the ships. QED.

When you use terms like "Trektards" you sound like an asshole. It just reinforces the impression the site is an illogical rant.

Logic depends on sound reasoning, not a clean mouth. A potty mouth can demonstrate impeccible logic: "Socrates is a fuckin' man, bitch. All men are mortal. You're a goddamn moron not to understand that Socrates is mortal!" A polite mouth can be illogical to the point of nonsense: "Nothing is better than Heaven. A ham sandwich is better than nothing. Therefore, my hair is green."

Stable trans-uranic elements may or may not exist. We keep finding them in the real world.

Flat out lie. All elements heavier than lead are radioactive, which is the very definition of "not stable."

ST is a sci/fi show. Temporal rifts, worm holes, and so on belong to theoretical physics, so they pop up in ST. If they exist, trying to effect them is a logical plot development. The fact they have been shown working with such forces adds to the Feds reputation for tech prowess. It's one of the reasons I give ST an edge in science.

The "science" is made up out of whole cloth and doesn't resemble anything in the real world. Even the process doesn't resemble anything scientists do in reality. Remember the magic meeting room in Paralax? Like, GAWD!!

SW is about an epic heroic legend. The tech is part of the back ground. The hugh weapons, and ships are props. The heroes deal with the overwhelming threat by acts of heroism.

Which is why they are more accurate not only with currently known science, but also real life. Who the hell talks about diffusion rates of heated water over coffee grounds and thermally-induced seepage in their Mister Coffee percolator, unless they're engineers designing the damn thing? In ST, they explain how the tech works ad nauseum (and more often than not, gets it completely wrong). In SW, the tech just works, just like in real life.

If the DS attacked a Federation world the heroes would stop the threat by figuring out a technological solution administered in a dramatic way. Trek plots often revolve around a group of characters working together to over come some thing more powerful then them, by analyzing how it works. The Dooms Day Machine, The God Apollo, Vol, Dominion poloron beams, the Breem energy dampening weapon, and on, and on.

The science is so wrong that the only way they can actually "figure out" anything is that writer's fiat says that the nonsense they spout works. Same story with the tactics, strategy and logistics. In a neutral setting where the science, tactics, strategy, ect. actually has to match reality, the Federation would be doomed by their own incompetence, let alone the firepower of Imperial ships.

(Sorry 'bout that...)

[Batman]

And moron boy replied to me, too.

Hi Fanboys. Thanks for your well thought out reply. This is such fun. Unlike you kids I will not use the F word, or call you guy liars, or morons. You not morons your just deluded.

I've been out there saving the galaxy when your grandfather was in diapers.
Actually that may be a lie since I don't know when DC got me involved with the universe-threatening event-of-the-season but I HAVE been out there fighting crime when your grandfather was in diapers.

The reason I was laughing at Hypermatter is it's BS. It's not based on any real world theory.

Unlike, say, Warp drive or phasers? Or deflector shields?

After reading about it I understand why you kept talking about "Negative Energy Events". A nuke explosion releases energy at about 3% matter to energy. Fusion would be better. Matter/Antimatter could in theory be 100%. Some energy would most likely be lost, but it's much more efferent then most other concepts.

There's no such word as 'efferent' (at least that I know of). I assume you meant 'efficient'.

Hypermatter is taking more then 100%.

Because-you say so. Why don't you show me some supporting quotes.

Once you say you can get more energy then E=MC2 says then your past all rational calculations.

As Wars never does that this is relevant why?

Is the ratio 2/1?, 10/1?, 100/1? When you say "You have done the math" what math are you talking about?

The one Mike and people like him did and you didn't. Show me the part of the DS1 destroying Alderaan that requires violating e=mc^2, asshat.

It just nonsense, your just pulling numbers out of the air.

Actually that's what you Trektards are doing. The WARS numbers are perfectly in line with what the movies and the official literature show.

The guy who came up with the stats comparing SW to ST, just took some stated or inferred Trek numbers, and multiplied by 100.

As evidenced by-you saying so. When the numbers yiu get from downscaling from the DS1 are way in EXCESS of the official numbers the other sources provide.

The reason most people think SW ships have normal fusion power is that all the on screen evidence supports it.

Blatant lie.

The engine exhausts expel plasma.

Becauase-you say so. We can tell they GLOW and that's it.

In ROTJ when we saw the DSs reactor core, we saw a mass of plasma held in a magnetic field.

No we didn't. We saw a roughly spherical thingy that apparently didn't take well to being shot at.

That's what you would expect it to look like.

The phrase 'You're a lying little fuck' comes to mind. WHATEVER the nature of the DS reactor, it's IMPOSSIBLE to tell just from the view we got of it in Episode VI.

The logical reason the DS is so big is it needed massive reactors to power it's main weapon. What other reason could there be?

Vee, what possible reason could there be to make a TERROR weapon big and menacing?
But even if it WAS, so Valendamned what? This proves it was fusion-powered how exactly?

I know you will use the pedantic reply, "In your opinion". What's your opinion?

My opinion is you have yet to show ANY evidence for Wars technology to be powered by nuclear fusion to begin with, no have you shown any evidence for TREK technology to have anywhere NEAR the capacities you assume they do.

The same logic holds true for the other big ships in the movies. They need lots of power to run the weapons they carry. Ships are built as small as you can make them, not as big.

Which says what exactly about what they're powered BY, pray tell?

The DS was a waste because you don't need to destroy the mass of a planet to terrorize people. If the Empire had killed the whole population of Alderan, but left the planet a lifeless mass, the impact would have been just as great.

Except they couldn't have done that without the DS, genius. The whole pesky there being a planetary shield in the way issue.

If you used a weapon that burned the whole surface of a planet, and used it on a lifeless world as a demonstration, people would fear it just as much as the DS. Why? Because what maters is that just as many people would be killed, by ether of them. Our world has lived in dread of the A and H bombs, not because no one could live in a city after it was hit. They could, it's that the people would be dead. The fear of the Bomb has kept the world out of a global war for more then 60 years.

Except the Empire COULDN'T DO THAT thanks to Alderaan's planetary shield.

It is also clear that the Empire did not control all it people or planets.

No kidding. Is this supposed to be news?

Alderan was not under control. You both have argued the planet had defenses. Do you think the Empire would allow a planet to maintain independent armed forces?

Since when is a purely defensive measure the same as 'armed forces'?

Some worlds were providing the rebels with capital ships, and fighters. There must have be ship yards, and factories, not under Empire control.

Your point being?

According to the Thran books within 5 years 3/4 of the Empire had fallen. Empire forces could not be as big as the fanboys say, because if there were hundreds of fleets like at Endor, each would have to have been defeated in detail.

Because-you say so. When we are explicitly TOLD that a goodly portion of imperial might decided to go 'Every man for himself' and tried to carve out a living for themselves. Prior to Thrawn there WAS no such thing as a coherent Empire anymore and even he got only a fraction of the remaining forces under his control.

I don't think your arguing that the rebels only used 1% of their forces at Endor?

No, and again, this is relevant why?

By that logic the Japanese must have had 400 fleet carries, because they only brought 4 to midway.

DO elaborate.

Your not the only ones to fall into this megalomaniac thinking. Back in 2000 I argued with some bricks on a B5 board. They argued that Earth Force must of had 200-300 Omega destroyers. I argued we could account for I think 55. I think 6 lost in action, about 10 on Sheridan's side, and 35 at the final battle for earth. I concluded they might have 60 or so. They argued there must be many more patrolling space. That's concentration of force, you concentrate your force at a deceive place and time. Economy of force is you use minimal force at undeceive points. A good strategist has to tell the difference, and weigh the value of objectives, and balance the allocation of means.

Which has what, exactly, to do with the topic at hand?

When you dismiss real world examples of failures of strategy, your missing the point that tactics change, strategy is eternal. That's why we still read Sun-Tzu, and Clausewitz. No one is strong enough to fight every one. The Mongols ruled 1/3 of the whole land area of the world.

Even if that were true (and I very much doubt it), so what?

The British controlled 1/4.

Again, so what?

The Emperor was clearly a self destructive sick person. Devious destructive people can trust no one. The decision to build the DS and disband the Senate, was an abandonment of politics and persuasion, and to rely on naked force, and terror. Not even Hitler, or Stalin did that. Both maintained at least the appearance of state institutions, and party ideology.

So did Palpatine.

Millions believed in Nazism, and millions still believe in Communism. How many people in the Empire believed in the rule of Palptine?

Octillions? Just because you're either/or willfully/glaringly ignorant of the EU doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

No ideology, not even a monarchy, promising social stability.

Happily ignoring that's exactly what COMPNOR promised.

Just a man revealed to be physically deformed, morally warped, and spiritually evil. In short a monster drenched in blood.

Which, of course, every citizen of the Empire knew about and it's not like Palpatine went to great lengths to paint himself the saviour of the Old Republic. Oh wait. Have you actually SEEN Star Wars?

May be his ultimate dream was total destruction, a true nilalist. His down fall was inevitable.

It was no such thing, given he outgunned the opposition by about infinity to one and the only reason the Imps lost Endor to begin with was Skywalker Sr suddenly developing Father feelings. There's no such word as nilalist, by the way.

As to tech, all sci/fi uses technobable your right about that. The TOS had very little. One of my complaints about TNG, was to much technobable. SW had all most none. Wonks just try to explain what they see on the screen. They try to extrapolate on what we know or think may be possible. Nothing on the screen suggests Hypermatter.

DS1 blowing up Alderaan suggests something hopelessly in excess of anything you can get out of fusion or M/AM in something the DS1's size.
The literature explicitely states hypermatter. Discussion over.

Fusion is suggested

Where?

and it is a lower tech then Matter/Antimatter.

And also totally incapable of enabling Star Wars ships to do the things we SEE them do.

Trek ships are more compact, and agile.

They're not more compact, they're simply SMALLER. That's not the same thing you know.

Their fire power is shown as more concentrated.

Like hell it is.The E-D has easily as many phaser strips as an ISD has TL turrets.

They use fewer guns with demonstrated flexibility to deal with varied threats.

Like what? ALL of the threats phasers deal with are shown to move at the same glaccial pace Starfleet ships do.

Shielding is shown more prominently, and it's flexibility is made a prominent issue.

Oo. Trek has more flashy shield VFX. This is relevant regarding shield strength how, exactly?

ST has much more on screen combat to go by.

Again, this is relevant why?

We see ships dealing with many varied threats, both natural and combat. Do you think a SSD would have survived the shock wave from the destruction of Pracsus in ST VI?

Given that there shouldn't have BEEN a shockwave using real-world physics so it was probably some subspace phenomenon or other, effortlessly.

We have seen much more limited combat in SW to drew conclusions from. After seeing ANH back in 1977 I thought big ships might have big anti ship can opener guns, but I have never seen anything on screen to suggest they do. You may have an emotional investment in believing they do, but there's no real screen evidence.

There is right in the very first ever Star Wars movie. It's where the DS1 blows Alderaan to smithereens. And we have canon literature saying that a single Clone Wars troop transport outguns the entire Alpha Quadrant. Don't blame us Wars fans for your favourite Sci-Fi franchise being pretty low on the totem pole power-wise.

Your agreement that fighters can't hurt big ships unless other ships take the shields down for them in belied by the fact that at Endor the Empires fighters attacked the rebel fleet, and the SD held back out of range.

Where how many Rebel ships were killed by Imperial fighters, pray tell?
Not that I can recall ever saying that fighters can't hurt capital ships PERIOD to begin with.

If they couldn't hurt the rebel cruisers why attack them, and put them selves at risk?

Well for starters they were ORDERED to you know.

They must have thought they could do some damage.

Or maybe they were just doing what they were told to do.

Why were the Rebels not surprised by that. Know one says "Why would they do that? Its futile".

Because unlike the Imperials, the Rebels weren't fielding any actual deadnoughts AND had the advantage in numbers?

I didn't come to these conclusion because I hate SW. I love it. I even liked the prequel movies. TESB is the best IMHO.
What I disagree with is all the bootstrapping. Clutching at strews. Planet wide shields based on a frame in an FX shot.

And about a million mentions in the EU, but hey, when has the entirety of available evidence proving you're wrong ever stopped you?

If it's some thing you have see in a frame by frame view, it's not what the film maker wanted you to see.

That changes the fact it's THERE (and backed up by the entirety of the Star Wars EU) how, exactly?

If Lucus wanted you to think the planet had shields, he would have shown it in a way you could see in normal view.

I assume he told you so personally, because if he DIDN'T, you're talking out of your ass.

I don't understand SW shields any way. The shield on Hoth protects against a bombardment, but not a ground force moving in.

So it's a planar shield instead of a dome one. So what?

In TPM shields are all round, and can stop energy, but not matter.

Energy vs particle shields. ALL of this is explained on the main site, you know.Oh and we do NOT know the Gungan shields stop matter PERIOD.

At Hoth they have to open the shield to fire the Ion cannon.

Um-no? The need to open the shield to let the fleeing Rebel vessels get away.

At Endor the DS can shoot though the shield with out knocking it down. What's with all the inconsistencies?

Given there aren't any (particle vs ray shields has been elaborated on at length and how about the Empire has the dough for first-rate equipment while the Rebels don't?`) your point is? Oh, and Trek is none to talk. Exploding bridge console from a hit to some other part of the ship that was actually stopped by the shields. I rest my case.

Just try to be logical,

I do (well I try to mostly, anyway). You don't.

Why have a web site full of rants, and say it's objective?

That'd be the üart where that website full of rants actually bothered to look at the numbers, numnuts.

Why claime credibility, by saying you figures are based on calculations. then admit the numbers are just made up?

Um-you DO know the numbers being made up is sort of UNAVOIDABLE when discussing a, you know, Science Fiction franchise, yes?
Yes, OF COURSE the numbers for Wars are made up. Just as the ones for Trek are. Doesn't change the fact that the Wars numbers are WAY bigger.

Your under lining argument seems to be ST sucks, SW is great.

My underlying argument is that Wars outguns Trek seven ways from sunday regardless of their relative entertainment values (again, talk to Stark about the EU sometime). While I ALSO happen to think Wars hasn't gone QUITE as bad as Trek did, Valen knows it got bad enough (to the point that I stopped reading it about 3/4ths through the NJO or thereabouts. Doesn't change the fact that Warsa ships outgun Trek AQ powers ones by a factor of several million.

That a rant not an argument. You guys think like the Creationists. You start with a conclusion and work backwards from there, looking for evidence to support the theory, and dismiss all counter arguments as "Hate Mail", and the author as a "Moron".

You ARE aware that's a pretty accurate description of what YOU have been doing, right?

[Batman]

Blast. Make that 'DIDN'T' have the advantage in numbers. I was trying to get across that the IMPERIALS did.

[skies]

He's already gotten to the 'politeness over logic' stage, followed by (polite) insults to Batman's character. I've got to wonder if he's just parroting Darkstar's talking points. He makes such glaring errors in discussing ST and SW episodes that I wonder if he even watched them. Is this ass ever going to debate in public, or just keep sniping through e-mail?