Who can the Entprise Kill? One on One fights VS SW ships

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-07-09 03:37pm

Admiral Griffith wrote:well, i guess. maybe an interdictor?

An Interdictor has 20 quad TL and 2 squads of TIEs.
Too much for ol'E-E

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2002-07-09 04:02pm

IRG CommandoJoe wrote:Kirk commanding a Sovereign and Thrawn in a Lancer would be cool. Hehe, Kirk would mumble very slowly...like.......this........and Thrawn would take a picture of the Soverign, hyperspace out of the arena, analyze it, hyperspace back in, get dropped off in a spacesuit, have the Lancer hyperspace out, then with a toothpick and a water gun he could find a way to destroy the Sovereign.....lol.

Thrawn's a genius, but he's not that smart. The water would boil as soon as he fires, maybe even before. Hardly effective against a starship, even if it is a Star Trek ship.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-09 04:38pm

No the Watergun is incase Thrawn gets Thirsty
Instead Thrawn launces the Toothpick at one of the Nattlese and simply watchs the reactor core overload and its one safty system not work(Does it ever work?)

IRG CommandoJoe · Post by **IRG CommandoJoe** » 2002-07-09 04:42pm

The first line was serious, the rest was to be taken as a joke. lol

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2002-07-09 05:54pm

The Enterprise-E can take down a Republic Diplomatic Cruiser.

Cyaround,
Jason

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2002-07-09 06:25pm

Wasn't it unarmed?

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2002-07-09 11:25pm

that's my point rofl..j/k

A ship that the E-E can take down is a bulk cruiser with smugglers that modified it to carry a few turbos and lasers cannons...sry if somebody mentioned already..i forgot the entire thread.

Cyaround,
Jason

John Clark · Post by **John Clark** » 2002-07-09 11:30pm

Call it a Slugging match then, No Fancy tatics just drop em 5 Km from each other and open fire

Hey, that's great. While we're at it, let's drop a gunslinger and a samurai 12 feet from each other. No fancy tactics, now!

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-07-10 02:49am

who could the Enterprise take down

the Falcon

anything smaller than a Carrack Cruiser though i think the Carrack could hold its own

the Enterprise would kick a Lancer Frigate's butt 'cause the Lancer is only armed with anti-fighter weapons

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-07-10 06:08am

Perhaps it would kick the Lancers ass, but it's just as well possible that the lancer would kick E-E's ass.
It's a pretty fair match.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2002-07-10 01:14pm

Isolder74 wrote:who could the Enterprise take down

the Falcon

Nah. The Falcon's too manueverable. It survived in the Hoth Asteroid belt, remember? It avoided the asteroids, and survived the multi-megaton shots from the TIEs and the Star Destroyer.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-07-10 01:20pm

Cpt_Frank wrote:Perhaps it would kick the Lancers ass, but it's just as well possible that the lancer would kick E-E's ass.
It's a pretty fair match.

Remember, the laser cannons on an Acclamator were 6 megatons!

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2002-07-10 02:56pm

Depends... Are we using the Trek TM's for torpedo power, allowing the Sovvie to dish out a few hundred MT's per torpedo volley? If so, a Lancer will go down after a nasty battle.

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-07-10 03:00pm

The TMs aren't canon. We shouldn't take their extremely questionable numbers for serious.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-07-10 05:07pm

Nah. The Falcon's too manueverable. It survived in the Hoth Asteroid belt, remember? It avoided the asteroids, and survived the multi-megaton shots from the TIEs and the Star Destroyer.

right i forgot about that. Han is crazy enough to try rushing the Enterprise and camp out right above the bridge and then letting 'em have it.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-07-10 05:10pm

SirNitram wrote:Depends... Are we using the Trek TM's for torpedo power, allowing the Sovvie to dish out a few hundred MT's per torpedo volley? If so, a Lancer will go down after a nasty battle.

I think most people are using Mike's estimates. Kiloton level.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-07-10 05:14pm

Depends... Are we using the Trek TM's for torpedo power, allowing the Sovvie to dish out a few hundred MT's per torpedo volley? If so, a Lancer will go down after a nasty battle.

that is if the Lancer doesn't make some critical hit and knock out the entire weapons system

if that happens (seem to happen every time) the the Enterprise doesn't stand a chance

Doomriser · Post by **Doomriser** » 2002-07-10 05:46pm

The type and firepower of a Lancer Frigate's quad lasers is a good question. Trade Federation Command Spheres (or whatever) have quadlasers that according to the ICS, put out 8 kilotons per QL. They are probably similar to the MF QL cannons, which are fighter-scale. (KT-level.) So the lancer probably has 20 KT-level quad-lasers as opposed to the larger(?) 6 MT PD laser cannons (which may resemble the side turrets on a Corellian Corvette.) It would be cool if capital ship quad-lasers are MT instead of fighter-scale KT (like the 1-2 kt LCs on a Delta-7). I guess we'll have to wait for an analysis by Wong or Saxton.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-07-10 06:37pm

the Enterprise would be able to kill the Tantive IV

this is due to the fact that it is a lightly armed diplomatic model

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2002-07-10 07:11pm

It had multiple turbolasers. The Tantive-4 would kick the ass of any Federation ship.

John Clark · Post by **John Clark** » 2002-07-10 07:50pm

Well, scuse me while I vomit. No, the TM's aren't canon. But then again, neither are any of the SW novels or manuals.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2002-07-10 08:01pm

John Clark wrote:Well, scuse me while I vomit. No, the TM's aren't canon. But then again, neither are any of the SW novels or manuals.

STFU you annoying worthless troll.

I am going to quote the Ubiqtorate(who does not exist) on this, since his posts killed all this rampant stupidity over at SB in one fell swoop:

In general address:

According to Ben Harper, of Lucasfilm, Ltd, in Star Wars Gamer #3:

Good question! We have never disavowed the existence of Marvel comics. We have, whenever feasible, included important events and characters from the Marvel comics in our other products. Some of the Marvel storylines before anyone knew what would happen in The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Obviously, in many places, those films contradicted what had happened in the comics. Which ones are more important? The films, of course. However, Lucasfilm recognizes the creativity and diversity within the Marvel comics, and feels that there is a place within the Star Wars universe for non-continuity events. You’ll notice that books recognized as Star Wars canon are marked with Era symbols (so you’ll know where they fall within the Star Wars timeline). The non-continuity books (at this point, the Dark Horse Star Wars Tales and Infinities: A New Hope comics) will soon be marked with a non-continuity symbol. Elements from Marvel which do not tread upon that which has been established in the films, novels, comics, et cetera, are being integrated into official Star Wars canon because we like them, they’re cool, the aliens will be fun to use in the RPG, and, well, we were just feeling a bit nostalgic. After all, it’s been over 20 years!

Mr Harper states that those books which are officially considered to be Star Wars canon are now being labelled with “Era symbols,” and that non-continuity (which his usage suggests to be synonymous with “non-canon”) are labelled with the “Infinities” symbol. Note further that Mr Harper states that elements from the Marvel Comics Group Star Wars comic series which do not contradict the established “facts” of the Expanded Universe are being “integrated into official Star Wars canon,” thus implicitly stating that the “films, novels, comics, et cetera” constitute “official Star Wars canon.”

In summary, Mr Harper’s statement does not in any way support the contention that the Expanded Universe lacks the status of being accurate, valid, and correct; in fact, it stands in direct contradiction to this contention, as Mr Harper considers the “facts” (such as it were) established by the “novels, comics, et cetera” to be on the same level as those established by the films – and for that reason, he lists the two categories together.

According to Sue Rostoni, of Lucas Licensing, in Star Wars Gamer #6:

Canon refers to an authoritative list of books that the Lucas Licensing editors consider an authentic part of the official Star Wars history. Our goal is to present a continuous and unified history of the Star Wars galaxy, insofar as that history does not conflict with, or undermine the meaning of Mr. Lucas’s Star Wars saga of films and screenplays.

It is interesting to note that herein canon is defined to include those books which Lucas Licensing considers to be “factual” in Star Wars, insofar as it accurately reflects the films and screenplays of Mr Lucas. This is important, in that it demonstrates that it is the stated policy of Lucas Licensing that items are considered to be part of the official continuous and unified history of Star Wars as long as they are not overruled by the films themselves.

That is to say, it is the state policy of Lucas Licensing that Star Wars literature is true, valid, accurate and correct insofar as it is not contradicted – or, more properly, does not contradict – the films themselves.

According to Chris Cerasi, of LucasBooks, on starwars.com/community/askjc/steve/askjc2001817.html:

There’s been some confusion of late regarding the ‘Infinities’ symbol, and Star Wars Expanded Universe continuity in general. Terms like “canon” and “continuity” tend to get thrown around casually, which doesn’t help at all.

When it comes to absolute canon, the real story of Star Wars, you must turn to the films themselves – and only the films. Even novelizations are interpretations of the film, and while they are largely true to George Lucas’ vision (he works quite closely with the novel authors), the method in which they are written does allow for some minor differences. The novelizations are written concurrently with the film’s production, so variations in detail do creep in from time to time. Nonetheless, they should be regarded as very accurate depictions of the fictional Star Wars movies.

The further one branches away from the movies, the more interpretation and speculation come into play. LucasBooks works diligently to keep the continuing Star Wars expanded universe cohesive and uniform, but stylistically, there is always room for variation. Not all artists draw Luke Skywalker the same way. Not all writers define the character in the same fashion. The particular attributes of individual media also come into lay. A comic book interpretation of an event will likely have less dialogue or different pacing than a novel version. A video game has to take an interactive approach that favors gameplay. So too must card and roleplaying games ascribe certain characteristics to characters and events in order to make them playable.

The analogy is that every piece of published Star Wars fiction is a window into the ‘real’ Star Wars universe. Some windows are a bit foggier than others. Some are decidedly abstract. But each contains a nugget of truth to them. Like the great Jedi Knight Obi-Wan Kenobi said, ‘many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view.’

Returning to the question at hand. Yes, Star Wars Gamer is part of continuity, though as game material, there is room for interpretation. Only specific articles marked with the ‘Infinities’ logo within the magazine should be considered out of continuity.

Fans of the old monthly Marvel Star Wars comic will be heartened to know that LucasBooks does indeed consider them part of continuity. Decades of retrospect haven’t been kind to all the elements of the comic series, but the characters and events still hold weight and are referenced in newer material whenever possible.

In order to allow unlimited freedom of storytelling, the Infinities label has been placed on the anthology series, Star Wars Tales. This means that not only can the stories occur anywhere in the Star Wars timeline, but stories can happen outside continuity. Basically, if an event appears in Tales, it may not have necessarily happened in the rest of the expanded universe. For some stories, the distinction is largely inconsequential. For others, it’s the only way they could exist (for example, there’s a Darth Vader vs. Darth Maul comic coming soon).

Mr Cerasi’s statement is to the effect that it is the official policy of Lucasfilm, Ltd, that the films themselves constitute absolute canon, or completely correct representations of the “facts” of the Star Wars story. In addition to the films themselves are other material (designated “expanded universe” by Mr Cerasi), which are considered to be in continuity with the films, though of lesser “correctness” with regard to “facts” than the films themselves.

Because Mr Cerasi consistently uses the term “continuity,” it is clear that this is a specific use of the word, and not a vague generality. The term “continuity” is defined by the 1984 edition of the Funk & Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary as “the state or quality of being continuous”; “continuous” is therein defined as “extended or prolonged without break; uninterrupted.”

In effect, Mr Cerasi has stated, then, that the expanded universe constitutes a continuous, uninterrupted part of the Star Wars saga. It is fully in union with the films themselves, and is without break from them; to relegate it to the status of inadmissible evidence due to non-canon status is to violate the stated policy of LucasBooks, and thence, of Lucasfilm Ltd, and implicitly of Mr Lucas himself.

According to George Lucas, in the introduction to the 1994 printing of Splinter of the Mind’s Eye:

After Star Wars was released, it became apparent that my story – however many films it took to tell – was only one of thousands that could be told about the characters who inhabit its galaxy. But these were not stories I was destined to tell. Instead they would spring from the imagination of other writers, inspired by the glimpse of a galaxy that Star Wars provided. Today it is an amazing, if unexpected, legacy of Star Wars that so many gifted writers are contributing new stories to the Saga.

Mr Lucas’s statement here is interesting in that it reveals that he considers the stories of the Expanded Universe to be equal parts of the Star Wars saga with his own part, the films themselves. This establishes that it is the opinion of the creator of the franchise that the Expanded Universe constitutes a valid part of the “factual” history of the saga.

These statements by persons in positions of authority with regard to the official “facts” of the Star Wars saga are consistent in upholding that the Expanded Universe is a valid part of the saga, and fail in any way to support the contention that the Expanded Universe lacks the status of being accurate, valid and correct except when in direct conflict with the films themselves. Until and unless an item within the Expanded Universe conflicts with the films, it is canonical; when a conflict occurs, the films’ evidence supersedes that of the Expanded Universe item.

The Ubiqtorate’s opinion is (or, more properly, would be) that to attempt to claim otherwise – viz., to claim that the Expanded Universe is neither canonical nor accurate, valid and correct, and therefor inadmissible as evidence – is not only contradictory of the stated policies of LucasBooks, Lucas Licensing, Lucasfilm, Ltd, and Mr Lucas, but is also wilfully misinterpretative of the various statements regarding canon and continuity.

Furthermore, the Ubiqtorate would suggest that any attempt to argue that the rules of evidence for Star Trek have any implication on the rules of evidence for Star Wars is a red herring; the rules of evidence for Star Trek are irrelevant to the rules of evidence for Star Wars.

The Ubiqtorate yields the floor.

Now do you want to go against George Lucas on what is SW or not? Fucktard.

John Clark · Post by **John Clark** » 2002-07-10 08:43pm

I beg your pardon? "Fucktard"? And there are people here calling ME a troll?!

Now, go back, you filthy word, and read that. It as much as STATES EXPLICITLY that there are materials which DO and DO NOT conflict with continuity, but even those materials which DO NOT conflict with continuity are OFFICIAL. Not CANON. You just spewed some pointy-headed poindexter's definition at me, and I'm almost sure you've never read it yourself.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-07-10 08:56pm

John Clark, stop trolling. SW novels are official, and that's as good as canon as long as their not contradicting the movies.

HDS, don't flame him till he gets bad.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-07-10 08:57pm

Isolder74 wrote:the Enterprise would be able to kill the Tantive IV

this is due to the fact that it is a lightly armed diplomatic model

It has 2 double turbolasers and 4 long range lasers. That's enough to outgun the Enterprise.