Too bad Perion's numbers are not facts. They come from a lower canon, so that makes them extremely invalid. A shadow Planet Killer is more powerful than a Star Destroyer. No shadow vessel was killed by a 500 nuke. Vorlon ships are more powerful than shadow ships. They have shields, adaptive armor and more powerful weapons.
Perion stop spamming lower canon data. The StarWars movie canon defeats the ICS canon. So your numbers are invalid. Accept it.
@QuantumNova I'm only going to reply to this once, You talk about me being dishonest yet you blatantly lie about the fact that we SAW shadow vessel chunks after the detonation of the first 500 megaton nuke at the battle of coriana six watch?v=IIpg-N_Pp-g. That you ignore this fact makes you dishonest. Sure my facts come from lower canon and if something in a higher canon such as the films directly contradict it, then they are invalidated, however, we don't see anything of the kind in the films.
@Nanofuture87 We saw Shadow vessels blown to pieces by 500 megaton nukes at the Battle of Coriana 6, and they are comperable to Vorlon vessels, Single, medium turbolaser shots on even Acclamators are worth 400 of those each.
@Nanofuture87 On screen. yes The Shadows and the Vorlons would kill everything in this video. Perion is just spouting out data that's not even used in Starwars movies or videos. I wish he stop using invalid data.
DON'T READ THIS BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY WORKS. YOU WILL GET KISSED BY THE NEAREST POSSIBLE FRIDAY BY THE LOVE OF YOUR LIFE. TOMMOROW WILL BE THE BEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE. HOWEVER IF YOU DON'T POST THIS TO AT LEAST THREE VIDEOS YOU WILL DIE WITHIN 2 DAYS. NOW YOU STARTED READING SO DON'T STOP THIS IS SO SCARY SEND THIS TO FIVE OTHER VIDEOS IN 146 MINUTES WHEN YOUR'E DONE PRESS F6 AND THE LOVE OF YOUR LIFE WILL APPEAR IN BIG LETTERS. THIS IS SO SCARY BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY WORKS
I would have to say that although star wars might win (except agaisnt the greater ships of B5 - ie vorlons, shadow, minbari, later human and ranger ships etc.) it would only be because
1 star wars was less thought out on a technologicaly logical scale
2 star wars was always meant to be on a huge scale.
@ThePianoMan173 the "less thought out" thing was to avoid cheesy technobable (in favour of cheesy, wooden dialogue, but oh well) Focusing more on what they do, rather than on how they do it (which if we knew, we'd be building it rather than writing stories about it.) We know that the Vorlons and Shadows can be taken out by 500 megaton nukes as per season 4 of B5. And B5 itself along with Zeta wing was able to take down a Centauri Primus battlecruiser without too much trouble,
Mimbari Sharlin cruisers can be taken out by single digit megaton nukes (as per the "In the Beginning" movie) though their defences are primarily ECM based rather than raw durability, still The Empire is used to ECM that affects the very fabric of spacetime. The Shadow Planet Killer has firepower roughly on par with that of a Star Destroyer, and greater than that of the Vorlon planet killer. it also has defensive weapons, something the Vorlon planet killer lacks.
@Voyager664S In the very next episode after that one Picard refuses to take the enterprise into a Warzone filled with ships using lasers. Trek lasers are only in the kilowatt to low megawatt range, races capable of more power switch to something else, like plasma, phasers, etc. The Empire is no different except they still call them lasers, in the exawatt to yottawatt range. By contrast, Phasers are the equivalent of terawatt or petawatt range depending on the material they are firing at.
cool cool this is amazing but a intrepit class ship? why you has take donte a galaxi class dreadnought @mrDarklego star trek win ever angainst star wars
@VolkerLove You would be mistaken, a Galaxy class starship is only capable of 24 megatons firepower from it's photon torpedoes and the Federation only have about a dozen of them. Star Destroyers are capable of roughly 800,000,000 megatons a second with all guns blazing, and the Empire have tens of thousands of them. In fact it's curious that one would compare the largest ships of the Federation to one of the smaller ships of the Empire. A better comparison would be A Star Destroyer and a Miranda
@jcr21iscool uh no, Babylon 5 tech is nowhere near Star Wars level tech, In Babylon 5 a 500 megaton nuke is considered a big deal, Star Destroyer engine exhaust is more destructive than that. Also EA don't have inertial dampeners or anything of the sort, Star Destroyers do.
@ninjacon64 I'm afraid I must disagree. Babylon 5 is, in my opinion, better than either Star Trek or Star Wars, mostly because of JMS's genius writing. Sure, they couldn't afford good special effects, but they made up for this through everything else.
@HiopX Weakest by Star Wars standards, enormously powerful by Star Trek, Babylon 5, and Battlestar Galactica etc standards. 5000g accelerations, Terajoule level weaponry, 200 megaton missiles/torpedoes, Tie Fighters pack a serious punch.
They really aren't, they're fragile, but pack a huge punch, and their maneuverability numbers would make them almost impossible to hit for any trek, bsg, or babylon 5 ship. Hell, in star trek, they have trouble hitting other CRUISERS that maneuvering. The phasers were never this pinpoint accurate.
@darkstatehk Unlikely to happen, as the Borg adaptation and assimilation capabilities are not infinite, we know what they cannot handle and Star Wars displays that they have access to pretty much everything or better than what the borg have never been able to adapt to/assimilatae as standard equipment.
@SuperRegic not really, comparatively Star Trek ships are FAR more advanced than Star Wars ships, and if they brought Whitestars into the battle Whitestars would STOMP a Star Destroyer.
@Verixus113 Other way around I'm afraid, Star Wars vessels are the more advanced ships, Photon and quantum torpedoes are only 24 to 48 megatons each respectively (in effective yields)
White stars can, with enough concentrated fire, take out a shadow battle crab, which would take around 10 photon torpedoes to kill.
Hypermatter reactors are capable of powering weapons that dish out firepower equal to thousands to millions of photon torpedoes and shields that can withstand the same for 30 minutes
@Verixus113 Long of the short of it, Star Destroyer would stomp on everything in sight, they have firepower equal to a shadow planet killer and can take the same kind of firepower they dish out for half an hour straight before losing shields.
@Perion I don't see how you can say a star destroyer would have firepower equal to a shadow planet killer. A single star destroyer cannot destroy a planet, while a shadow planet killer can (hence the name). Now if you want to compare it to the death star, then that's another story.
@Nanofuture87 No that's a Planet Destroyer, not a Planet Killer, a Planet Killer still leaves a "Corpse" IE the planet is still there, but it's surface is as dead as the moon. When the Shadow Planet killer leaves the planet is still there, it's just covered in craters and devoid of life. When a Star Destroyer finishes a Base Delta Zero, the planet's surface is molten slag. Different method, but once the slag cools, same result.
@Perion "No that's a Planet Destroyer, not a Planet Killer, a Planet Killer still leaves a "Corpse" IE the planet is still there, but it's surface is as dead as the moon."
Not Star Trek's planet killer, which the Enterprise took hits from. Also, Star Destroyers don't BTZ, that is just a ton of crap. I haven't even found any *C-canon* to support that crap.
@JoeHooker11 It's because the Empire is so powerful they need all the help they can get, problem is even with that kind of coalition it STILL isn't enough.
For some reasoms SW just became more popular. Because of lightsabers? Because of tons of lightsaber fights? Because it cost more money for its producer?
I choose B 5. It have absolutely great storyline. This story for all ages (d*mn! even my grandma like this story). This one is worthy of being written in books - not a show - a story (SW in my opinion is just nice show with very few worthy characters and even less touching moments).
star wars is not serious. comparing fleet battles with them is pointless as they are stupidly overpowered also they were beaten in such an implausible way it doesn't even warrant discussion. No tactical subtlety just endless talk of power=stupid, which is why debate about this always decends into idiocy because star wars was built on childish fantasy rather than mans dream and vision to travel in to space
@hcvang Far better sci fi than star trek or star wars tho.Complexity of a Robert Ludlom (Jason Bourne) with big spaceships and radical weapons. And great humour. There is one warship, all are basically robots, run by a very powerful AI called a "Mind". They get to name themselves. This ones called "i have a very large stick". All in lower case, as tho it is whispered.
i don't really know who would win, star wars has way more technology, but on star trek there shields are designed to withstand plain lasers, although as i said star wars has more technology so they may fire something more powerful, but most ships only shoot lasers
@OfficialFearClan Actually a Star Destroyer has more than twice the sublight acceleration as the Enterprise D's impulse (2400g vs 1000g) though Star Destroyers like to fly in a straight line, the Enterprise D isn't all that maneuverable either.
Star Trek Federation ship shields are designed to withstand multimegaton blasts, like up to roughly 200 before they collapse.
A Star Destroyer's shields are designed to withstand 800,000,000 megatons a second for half an hour straight before failing.
You also have to take into account that Star Trek ships are much smaller (even their capital ships are roughly half the size of the Empire's line ships), have much thinner armour (a few cm rather than 3 meters) and are made of much lighter and weaker materials. (Tritanium and Duranium vs the Neutronium hull of a Star Destroyer)
The only Trek warships that even approach ISD size are the Dominion Battleships and Romulan Warbirds, which aren't very maneuverable.
@Perion Sure, is that why the 19km long ISD was taken out by a small X-Wing? From what each show tells us, the Star Destroyers defensive capabilities are greatly exaggerated by their fans. Even with the Death Star destroyed in the Battle Of Endor the Empire still should have won if we use the fans logic about how tough the Empire is. Wrong. They were beaten down by the rag tag rebel alliance fleet. One Shadow beam weapon would one hit kill a Star Destroyer.
@danyeo for one thing ISDs are 1.6km and we have Never seen one be taken out by an X-Wing,
The Rebels were hardly rag-tag, they had technological parity with the Empire, just not numerical parity,
Remember the Shadow vessels were destroyed by 500 megaton nukes, while Shadow and Vorlon ships required some time to destroy one another using their weapons (which more than suggests that their firepower isn't 500mt per shot) Imperial and Rebel ships dish out many thousands of times that firepower.
In the sense of numbers the Rebels were rag-tag compared to the Empire, but they won because the Emperor bet the farm on turning luke to the dark side, a scenario that cannot be repeated when facing against Babylon 5 or Star Trek etc.
The closest thing we saw to a fighter taking out a capital ship was the A-wing that had a hand in crippling the Executor, which was 19km long, however the shields had already been taken down by the fleet, and a sensor globe destroyed by another pair of A-wings.
@Perion Ok, the SUPER Star Destroyer was 19km's long and did you miss the part in ROTJ when it was taken out by one small ship hitting it's bridge? Star Wars fanboys have pages of technical nonsense at their disposal but can never answer as to why that ship was taken out soo easily.
The Executor IS the Super Star Destroyer, and I already explained how it wasn't taken out nearly as easily as you think.
"At Endor, pounded mercilessly by the capital ships of the Rebel Alliance flotilla, the ship's shields, equivalent to the total power of a medium star, fail. At that moment, the Rebels are able to strafe the command tower - and with the Executor's navigation suite in ruins and defensive guns losing coordination, a careening A-wing destroys the bridge" - Complete Locations
Why did you force Starfuries to obey a psudo-aerodynamic flight envelope in space like Star War/Trek do instead of allowing them to use physically realistic fighting tactics like in the TV show?
lol, one of the highest quality scifi bull I've ever seen. Great! Though SW and B5 ware terribly lowered by the Enterprise appearance. It's like comparing original Transformers to Gobots xD.
Nova Bombs in Andromeda are roughly the same as Trilithium torpedoes in Star Trek, IE can be devastating if fired into a star, but their effect on other targets is less than stelar, if you pardon the pun.
The Hard part as with Trilithium torps is getting to the target, Andromeda Slipstream is far faster than warp, but not nearly as fast as Hyperdrive and far less reliable so interception is an issue, though the Empire vs Systems Commonwealth isn't quite as one sided as Empire vs Federation.
@i0n496 except they are mostly right, though mojo is incorrect in assuming that the Emperor would have forseen/been able to stop Doctor Who. But Doctor Who is top tier in terms of popular sci-fi tech levels.
Seriously folks why do argue over which is better? I happen to like Star Wars, Babylon 5, Star Trek. Arguing just takes away from the enjoyment of the series. What matters is the story and content in them not the petty arguments and nerd fights. All of them are part of scifi and the love and furtherment of scifi is more important than that.
It's not about which series is better, some people are curious as to which would win in a fight, Some have used various scientific methods to find out. Others are not interested in truth and would rather come up with any excuse for their favourite series to win.
I fall under the 2nd category, educate people of the 1st category and get trolled by people of the 3rd :P.
@Perion In that case I can't comment on technology. If they want to discuss who would it would come on down who has the most weapons and ships and troops, the better leaders, and the better stratagey.
Numbers alone don't always ensure victory, what matters is strength to numbers ratio.
If 25 of your troops are worth 100 of theirs, then if they are using only 50 you still have a 2 to 1 advantage in strength. even though you are outnumbered by 2 to 1.
Technology if sufficiently ahead of the other group they are being compared to, then leaders and strategy comparisons become far less important, I doubt many would think even Alexander the great would stand much a chance against the modern US.
@halorecon32 Yes, Babylon 5 is Star Trek. Here are some examples of other things that are also Star Trek: Firefly, The Simpsons, Stargate: SG1, Who's The Boss, House M.D., Twin Peaks, All In The Family, etc.
@mojohookbarb you know, star wars would win against star trek because star trek stays bound to some sense of reality. Star trek: "Oh, a black hole opened up and an enemy ship came through. why it must be because of the fluctuating warp core and the unstable fabric of the space time continuum combine with blah blah blah. Star War: why, a black whole opened up and shit came out that shoots at us. lets blow it up. STAR WARS F.T.W.
Um, actually with the Black Hole example Star Wars is more grounded in reality, since Star Trek Black Holes are just violent and unstable wormholes.
Meanwhile Star Wars Black Holes are what we know of as black holes today, Superdense former stars that don't open up and nothing comes out of, only things get pulled in and destroyed if they get too close.
But yes, Star Wars would Win, but because their technology is tens of thousands of years ahead of the Federation.
@Perion well, im not an expert in star trek, but i know enough to know that they are inferior. even the borg could be destroyed by the missiles and torpedoes. as my dad likes to say, you can't adapt to metal. or explosions.
I like to teach people and correct mistakes, since very few people realize the sheer difference in magnitude between Star Wars and Star Trek. Though sometimes I might lose a bit of my patience with people who just don't get it, either as a result of them not wanting to believe it or just being poorly educated.
@Perion i agree ppl dnt seem to want to admit how much drastically larger star destroyers are than say the enterprise and its cuz they cant handle the truth. plz no comments that say "THEY CANT HANDLE THE TRUTH" or sum unimaginative rephrasing of that line.
It's not just size that we have to factor in, but power density. IE how much power a Star Wars ship can generate vs how much a Star Trek ship can of equal volume and there the gap is even more drastically in the Star Destroyer's favour than physical size. Couple the two Together and we get something that looks like this
@mojohookbarb Everybodys always like "the empire woulda owned them!" But the death star, the most powerful tool of the empire, was destroyed by a bunch of rogue pilots in some fighters. The empire was BEATEN by a rebellion that was no where NEAR matching it in military might. I think we have to give some credit to the other sci-fi empires out there, they kick butt two and are probably better equiped to handle the empire than the rebellion was. Just saying.
@notablegoat a few corrections to your misconceptions,
1. The Rogue pilots and fighters were some of the best the galaxy had to offer, and they were all getting wasted by a handful of Imperial Defenders, only through the power of the Force and Han Solo, the best smuggler in the galaxy and an ex Imperial officer, were they able to destroy it.
The Empire was never beaten by the Rebellion, they collapsed from almost entirely internal matters, even in the film, the Rebellion just exploited this.
What caused the Empire to collapse was the Emperor betting the farm on turning Luke to the dark side, something he had done successfully with Vader, and to the Emperor the Empire is nothing more than an extension of the Sith, with the Sith taking priority. According to Lucas himself the tide of the Battle of Endor hinged on Luke's decision, had he turned, then the Empire would have won effortlessly.
However, take The Force out of the equation, and the Rebellion would have been destroyed swiftly
And considering how many Sci-fi civilizations the Rebellion could have easily wiped out without the need of the Force, that paints a very grim picture for those civilizations if the Empire ever turned their attention to them.
@Perion Regardless of the their skill, they were still a bunch of rogue pilots in fighters. I have a hard time beleiving that the Empire had no skilled fighter pilots, plus Tie-Fighters are faster than X-Wings. Not to mention, the power of the Force was really on the Empire's side, given that it had Vader AND Palpatine (two very powerful force users).
@notablegoat well from the movies alone we note that the TIE Fighters got a fair number of Rebel kills throughout the trilogy, most rebel kills against TIE Fighters were from rebels double teaming a TIE, getting on the tail of a TIE that was already on the tail of another Rebel.
Having two very powerful force users vs one inexperienced one doesn`t automatically mean the force is with you.
@Perion Now, given that it's a movie, the Rebel's victory really boils down to the fact that the good guys had to win. Excluding that, however, the Empire had apparently crappy defenses (A-A guns that can't hit sqaut, big weaknesses in the Death Star, Troopers that may as well not wear armor or try to aim their guns), and all of its power was consolidated in one man, the Emporer. When he died, the Empire was essentially beat, or so the movies implie. I'm not that impressed with the Empire now..
@notablegoat if we`re talking about just the first film, then the surface guns weren`t designed to hit small, fast fighters at point blank range. They were designed to hit larger, slower starships at longer ranges. the weakness could only be exploited by the force, due to the excessive jamming in the area. Trooper armour is designed to turn a shot that would kill you into one that would merely knock you unconcious, armour like that is worth having. but it does have weaknesses, mainly the joints.
@Perion right in fact they even say in the movies "well the empire doesnt expect a small one man fighter to be any threat" a mistake corrected with the 2nd death star.
Garetjax391 was right about the star was G canon. The movies > any other canon data on star wars. Everything else is wank and does not matter, or count. Simple as that. All these numbers I keep hearing about is all overpowered bullshit.
Garetjax391 and Perion I hope you stop argueing long enough to realise you idiots are preety much the only ones commenting here, so just have that arguement out of our lives
Way to ignore Chee's other quote regarding how the EU is not separate from George's vision of the Star Wars universe, as well as the fact that we are dealing in overall continuity of the entire franchise, not just "film only" as that would be a double standard.
We might as well do the same thing with Trek and include only the 10 movies. since 11 is part of a separate canon altogether.
You seem to lack the ability to understand that the word "continuity" and "canon" are different, do you have a spell checker?, is english your first language?, you can see that they are spelled differantly right?, that one is longer than the other and has more letters in it?.
Here is a low brow explanation that you may get:-
A Elephant (G canon) could be classified as a big grey thing (EU/continuity), but that does not mean big grey things(EU/continuity) are Elephants (G canon).
Yes, I know the difference between canon and continuity, hence why I said "overall continuity" because we are dealing with more than simply "Film only canon".nice semantics whoring by the way, since it doesn't change the fact that we are not focusing on "Film Only" but Star Wars as a whole,
Besides, that quote Quantum Nova picked comes from Christopher Cerasi, who is quite a bit lower on the totem pole compared to Chee, It's also not the full quote, both you and quantum take it out of context.
You seem to think that nonfilm only canon means you can include any old shite you like in you wank fest
But then even without film only canon saxons wank gets pissed on by G and T canon material and the only shite you have to support it is a throw away single comment that needs to be twisted into what you want it to mean anyway.
"erm erm yea they have 200 gigaton per shot fire power but coz ov ze thing and magc dey only show the fire power of a firecracker when they hit stuffz"
"The only shite you have to support it is a throw away single comment that needs to be twisted into what you want it to mean anyway."
Gee that sounds awfully familiar mr "what does she plan to do with that? blow up a small planet?"
Besides, how is "heat of a nuclear bomb in one small spot, creating a blazing fireball" either a throw away (As it's a major part of it's own entry paragraph) being twisted here?
"heat of a nuclear bomb in one small spot, creating a blazing fireball"
So we know that the pulse from a turbo laser is narrow so when it hits the energy is focused in a single spot..ANYBODY WITH EYES CAN SEE THAT...but how do you equate a fire cracker sized puff of light to a blazing fireball?.
200 gigatons of energy has to go somewhere and the fucktards saxon and wong would be up the arse of every trekie if they tried to spin the bullshit you are trying to do with that comment.
"UNLESS YOU ARE GOING SAY THAT THE FIREBALL IS GOING TO BE IN A SMALL SPOT AS WELL"
Uh, that is the whole point of the quote, in case you didn't notice the "fireballs" small as they may be, at the blast, those so called "firecrackers" as you are so fond of saying
That is not Twisting the comment at all, if anything saying that the "creating a blazing fireball" is supposed to mean a giant nuclear explosion fireball is not only twisting the words, but directly contradicting them.
Your entire argument hinges on the cherry picked interpretation of the word "blazing fireball". as well as interpreting "small spot" as referring to the bolt to which there is no proof as that being the intent, since my interpretation of it means there is no contradiction,
And considering this is the same writer who had watched the films, worked with ILM to make the book, and wrote the yield figures as well, the odds are considerably in my favour as far as interpretation goes
Hell, allow me to put the entire paragraph on here, I'm sure you'll go over it with a fine toothed comb to try and get your own way and invent a contradiction.
"Juggernauts are designed to deliver tremendous firepower in order to overwhelm well-shielded military structures, some of which can withstand a lone Juggernaut's barrage for hours. However, with an unshielded target, a Juggernaut can blast the heat of a nuclear bomb into one small spot, creating a blazing fireball"
Note I myself made the mistake of saying "focus" rather than "blast" which further supports my interpretation of the small spot being the target.
Also that it said "unshielded target" meaning that a shielded target would disperse said energy over a wide area and then through the neutrino radiators and heat sinks.
Point is, the fact that you leave it up to interpretation shows it's not explicit of a contradiction, except that you insist that your interpretation is the only one even possible.
A fucking kiloton nuke can be only a little over a dozen inches wide but can create a fucking blazing fireball you silly wanker, the comment "one small spot" is in regards to the width of the fucking beam not the size of the fireball it creates and any non sad cunt can see that.
You need to streach the word interpret ation well past its limits to get what you want out of it you sad twat.
"the comment "one small spot" is in regards to the width of the fucking beam not the size of the fireball it creates and any non sad cunt can see that."
Uh huh, except the full quote makes it quite clear that is not the case, and everyone else who's read it knows that. just because it "just doesn't feel right" to you. Doesn't mean your interpretation is the only one possible, and like I said the evidence that my interpretation is correct outweighs your personal incredulity.
It reminds me of someone who thought the theory of 4+ spacial dimensions was BS for no other reason than the fact that he couldn't wrap his head around it, even though the math for it was perfectly sound.
Hell, have you gotten around to watch Voyager "Alliances" yet? where they fire 3 Photon torpedoes at a ship hovering less than half a dozen stories above a city? You can't tell me those were low yield, because A. they fired 3 of em, and B. this is Voyager, they aren't going to waste torps.
It also doesn't change the fact that the statement was in regards to the Juggernaut, which we saw firing on screen, and once again this was written during the filming process, where the special effects would be readily viewable, and with input from ILM people.
So once again my interpretation holds far more weight, since all you have to go by is "That fireball doesn't look blazing enough to me"
Startrek cannot into hyperspace.
Muxaull 3 weeks ago in playlist inboy86 Scifi video's 2
@Muxaull They Warp normal space by up to nine factors, exceeding 5342.3 times the speed of light, and can shoot at that speed.
Idazmi7 2 weeks ago
Theres only one answer everyone : Remember, Q DID want to mate with Janeway and did adore USS Voyager... so he would let them win :P
TheLastPieceOfBacon 1 month ago
@TheLastPieceOfBacon uh no, he offered to mate with Janeway but that never happened, the only thing he adores about the crew is tormenting them.
Perion 1 month ago
@Perion He offered, that is all that matters.
Idazmi7 2 weeks ago
Too bad Perion's numbers are not facts. They come from a lower canon, so that makes them extremely invalid. A shadow Planet Killer is more powerful than a Star Destroyer. No shadow vessel was killed by a 500 nuke. Vorlon ships are more powerful than shadow ships. They have shields, adaptive armor and more powerful weapons.
Perion stop spamming lower canon data. The StarWars movie canon defeats the ICS canon. So your numbers are invalid. Accept it.
QuantumNova 1 month ago
@QuantumNova I'm only going to reply to this once, You talk about me being dishonest yet you blatantly lie about the fact that we SAW shadow vessel chunks after the detonation of the first 500 megaton nuke at the battle of coriana six watch?v=IIpg-N_Pp-g. That you ignore this fact makes you dishonest. Sure my facts come from lower canon and if something in a higher canon such as the films directly contradict it, then they are invalidated, however, we don't see anything of the kind in the films.
Perion 1 month ago
@Perion You lie about Star Wars canon, pure and simple. "however, we don't see anything of the kind in the films."
Oh yes we do. All of episode 3.
Idazmi7 2 weeks ago
Shadows or Vorlons would completely massacre every other ship in this video, especially if they brought in their planet killers.
Nanofuture87 1 month ago
@Nanofuture87 We saw Shadow vessels blown to pieces by 500 megaton nukes at the Battle of Coriana 6, and they are comperable to Vorlon vessels, Single, medium turbolaser shots on even Acclamators are worth 400 of those each.
Perion 1 month ago
@Nanofuture87 On screen. yes The Shadows and the Vorlons would kill everything in this video. Perion is just spouting out data that's not even used in Starwars movies or videos. I wish he stop using invalid data.
QuantumNova 1 month ago
Love the way no hulls were left behind during the making of this video
11JohnThomas11 2 months ago
8472 wins!
SuperLegoman36 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DON'T READ THIS BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY WORKS. YOU WILL GET KISSED BY THE NEAREST POSSIBLE FRIDAY BY THE LOVE OF YOUR LIFE. TOMMOROW WILL BE THE BEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE. HOWEVER IF YOU DON'T POST THIS TO AT LEAST THREE VIDEOS YOU WILL DIE WITHIN 2 DAYS. NOW YOU STARTED READING SO DON'T STOP THIS IS SO SCARY SEND THIS TO FIVE OTHER VIDEOS IN 146 MINUTES WHEN YOUR'E DONE PRESS F6 AND THE LOVE OF YOUR LIFE WILL APPEAR IN BIG LETTERS. THIS IS SO SCARY BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY WORKS
Ghostcapin 3 months ago
Nice video
MrKellG 5 months ago
Okey, and now .. Why the hell did I have this on my computer as a kid?!
Angelboy1111 5 months ago
if starlancer were in there they would win
zeplon10 5 months ago
Fuck it compare the Borg collective vs the empire
theskiper1 5 months ago
star wars should have sended the death star
freeway996 6 months ago
The Imperator-class star destroyer will win without a doubt....
CommissarASSHOLE 6 months ago 2
so out of scale!!
16piller16lol 6 months ago
I would have to say that although star wars might win (except agaisnt the greater ships of B5 - ie vorlons, shadow, minbari, later human and ranger ships etc.) it would only be because
1 star wars was less thought out on a technologicaly logical scale
2 star wars was always meant to be on a huge scale.
ThePianoMan173 6 months ago
@ThePianoMan173 the "less thought out" thing was to avoid cheesy technobable (in favour of cheesy, wooden dialogue, but oh well) Focusing more on what they do, rather than on how they do it (which if we knew, we'd be building it rather than writing stories about it.) We know that the Vorlons and Shadows can be taken out by 500 megaton nukes as per season 4 of B5. And B5 itself along with Zeta wing was able to take down a Centauri Primus battlecruiser without too much trouble,
Perion 6 months ago
@ThePianoMan173
Mimbari Sharlin cruisers can be taken out by single digit megaton nukes (as per the "In the Beginning" movie) though their defences are primarily ECM based rather than raw durability, still The Empire is used to ECM that affects the very fabric of spacetime. The Shadow Planet Killer has firepower roughly on par with that of a Star Destroyer, and greater than that of the Vorlon planet killer. it also has defensive weapons, something the Vorlon planet killer lacks.
Perion 6 months ago
Was soll das? Ein Laser kann nicht einmal den Navigationsdeflektor eines Föderationsraumschiff durchdringen!
Voyager664 6 months ago
@Voyager664S In the very next episode after that one Picard refuses to take the enterprise into a Warzone filled with ships using lasers. Trek lasers are only in the kilowatt to low megawatt range, races capable of more power switch to something else, like plasma, phasers, etc. The Empire is no different except they still call them lasers, in the exawatt to yottawatt range. By contrast, Phasers are the equivalent of terawatt or petawatt range depending on the material they are firing at.
Perion 6 months ago
Q play a bit and bring titan class ships from eve XD
lima785 7 months ago
Hmmm that looked a bit er crap
EdBrewster 7 months ago
@EdBrewster This was made in 1996. I'd like to see any amateur do better, lol.
Kosh800 6 months ago
cool cool this is amazing but a intrepit class ship? why you has take donte a galaxi class dreadnought @mrDarklego star trek win ever angainst star wars
VolkerLove 7 months ago
@VolkerLove if you meant to say "star trek would never win against star wars" you would be correct
Perion 7 months ago
@Perion no, I meant star wars never prevail against the ships of Star Trek is such a star destroyer can not ship to a class consisting of galaxy
VolkerLove 6 months ago
@VolkerLove You would be mistaken, a Galaxy class starship is only capable of 24 megatons firepower from it's photon torpedoes and the Federation only have about a dozen of them. Star Destroyers are capable of roughly 800,000,000 megatons a second with all guns blazing, and the Empire have tens of thousands of them. In fact it's curious that one would compare the largest ships of the Federation to one of the smaller ships of the Empire. A better comparison would be A Star Destroyer and a Miranda
Perion 6 months ago
@VolkerLove The old Enterprise can level a planet's surface, as per the Original Series episode, "A Taste of Armageddon"
Idazmi7 4 months ago
proportions are little wrong.....
haptori 7 months ago
the EA Destroyer shouldve pwnt the star destroyer
jcr21iscool 7 months ago
@jcr21iscool uh no, Babylon 5 tech is nowhere near Star Wars level tech, In Babylon 5 a 500 megaton nuke is considered a big deal, Star Destroyer engine exhaust is more destructive than that. Also EA don't have inertial dampeners or anything of the sort, Star Destroyers do.
Perion 7 months ago
should had the laser cannon sound for the SD not that wierd blur
BMWM3GTRLOVER 7 months ago
@luxuspeter no need for it.
Perion 8 months ago
babylon 5 will never be as good as star trek or star wars
ninjacon64 8 months ago
@ninjacon64 I'm afraid I must disagree. Babylon 5 is, in my opinion, better than either Star Trek or Star Wars, mostly because of JMS's genius writing. Sure, they couldn't afford good special effects, but they made up for this through everything else.
SpaceInvader42359 7 months ago 2
@SpaceInvader42359 Wow that was the most respectful way I have ever seen anyone disagree thanks!
ninjacon64 7 months ago
Tie-Fighter are the weakest out there
HiopX 9 months ago
@HiopX Weakest by Star Wars standards, enormously powerful by Star Trek, Babylon 5, and Battlestar Galactica etc standards. 5000g accelerations, Terajoule level weaponry, 200 megaton missiles/torpedoes, Tie Fighters pack a serious punch.
Perion 9 months ago
@HiopX
They really aren't, they're fragile, but pack a huge punch, and their maneuverability numbers would make them almost impossible to hit for any trek, bsg, or babylon 5 ship. Hell, in star trek, they have trouble hitting other CRUISERS that maneuvering. The phasers were never this pinpoint accurate.
chiconspiracy 8 months ago
Star Wars Galactic Empire's Imperial Star Destroyer = 1.6km long
Babylon 5 Earth Force's Omega Class Destroyer = 1.7km long
Babylon 5 Interstellar Alliance's Victory Class Destroyer = 3km long
PeoplesGeneral 9 months ago
The Borg vs Star Wars. I wonder what Chewbacca would look like with an ocular implant stuck on his face.
darkstatehk 9 months ago
@darkstatehk Unlikely to happen, as the Borg adaptation and assimilation capabilities are not infinite, we know what they cannot handle and Star Wars displays that they have access to pretty much everything or better than what the borg have never been able to adapt to/assimilatae as standard equipment.
Perion 9 months ago
Star wars would most likely win but god help them if Q pops up and decides to play a "game" lol.
AzraelofLegion 9 months ago
@AzraelofLegion dude you forgot the force
capstabkong 6 months ago
@capstabkong lol, Q isn't far from being a god. No doubt the force would be a real problem for everyone else :D
AzraelofLegion 6 months ago
while I do like babylon 5 the most I'd have to say that star wars has the best chance of victory
SuperRegic 9 months ago 10
@SuperRegic not really, comparatively Star Trek ships are FAR more advanced than Star Wars ships, and if they brought Whitestars into the battle Whitestars would STOMP a Star Destroyer.
Verixus113 5 months ago
@Verixus113 Other way around I'm afraid, Star Wars vessels are the more advanced ships, Photon and quantum torpedoes are only 24 to 48 megatons each respectively (in effective yields)
White stars can, with enough concentrated fire, take out a shadow battle crab, which would take around 10 photon torpedoes to kill.
Hypermatter reactors are capable of powering weapons that dish out firepower equal to thousands to millions of photon torpedoes and shields that can withstand the same for 30 minutes
Perion 5 months ago
@Verixus113 Long of the short of it, Star Destroyer would stomp on everything in sight, they have firepower equal to a shadow planet killer and can take the same kind of firepower they dish out for half an hour straight before losing shields.
Perion 5 months ago
@Perion The old Enterprise can level a planet's surface, as per the Original Series episode, "A Taste of Armageddon"
Idazmi7 4 months ago
@Perion I don't see how you can say a star destroyer would have firepower equal to a shadow planet killer. A single star destroyer cannot destroy a planet, while a shadow planet killer can (hence the name). Now if you want to compare it to the death star, then that's another story.
Nanofuture87 1 month ago
@Nanofuture87 No that's a Planet Destroyer, not a Planet Killer, a Planet Killer still leaves a "Corpse" IE the planet is still there, but it's surface is as dead as the moon. When the Shadow Planet killer leaves the planet is still there, it's just covered in craters and devoid of life. When a Star Destroyer finishes a Base Delta Zero, the planet's surface is molten slag. Different method, but once the slag cools, same result.
Perion 1 month ago
@Perion "No that's a Planet Destroyer, not a Planet Killer, a Planet Killer still leaves a "Corpse" IE the planet is still there, but it's surface is as dead as the moon."
Not Star Trek's planet killer, which the Enterprise took hits from. Also, Star Destroyers don't BTZ, that is just a ton of crap. I haven't even found any *C-canon* to support that crap.
Idazmi7 2 weeks ago
what typ of cgi soft where was use for this video
alienhddna 10 months ago
k n1 but a question how was u made the jumppoint?? cause this was pretty good
so have fun
MrSith14 10 months ago
lol @ the tie fighter trying to run the jump point
KakashiBallZ 10 months ago
only one star destroyer weres the fleet
JohnnyVESCSO 10 months ago
implying a star destroyer only has one turbolaser
cbob0080 10 months ago
Daleks would win. Just sayin'.
notablegoat 11 months ago 15
Anyone else noticed how it is always like BSG, ST, and B5 combined against SW?
JoeHooker11 11 months ago
@JoeHooker11 It's because the Empire is so powerful they need all the help they can get, problem is even with that kind of coalition it STILL isn't enough.
Perion 11 months ago
now you see it now you don't
przfinez 11 months ago
What is this program?
secrecyXable 11 months ago
What was the point of saying "to be continued..." in the end credits?
starflame34 1 year ago
Some actual scale would have been cool. Unless people in a galaxy far, far away are 14 foot tall freaks. :)
Slackdragon 1 year ago
B5 rules!!!!!!!!!
istimester89 1 year ago
For some reasoms SW just became more popular. Because of lightsabers? Because of tons of lightsaber fights? Because it cost more money for its producer?
I choose B 5. It have absolutely great storyline. This story for all ages (d*mn! even my grandma like this story). This one is worthy of being written in books - not a show - a story (SW in my opinion is just nice show with very few worthy characters and even less touching moments).
FuumaDarina 1 year ago
star wars is not serious. comparing fleet battles with them is pointless as they are stupidly overpowered also they were beaten in such an implausible way it doesn't even warrant discussion. No tactical subtlety just endless talk of power=stupid, which is why debate about this always decends into idiocy because star wars was built on childish fantasy rather than mans dream and vision to travel in to space
arthisuther 1 year ago
@arthisuther So true. Best comment on this video. Thankyou so much.
QuantumNova 1 year ago
@QuantumNova
your welcome
arthisuther 1 year ago
good song 'Blitzkrieg' by metallica off of kill'em all
GrEyPrEiSt 1 year ago
The scale in this vid is all wrong. A Star Destroyer is a little over twice the length of the Enterprise-E.
elhigh 1 year ago
I wonder why there are so many Star Wars fanboys. That show was a bit childish in my opinion
Austindude3954 1 year ago
Pfft in the end it's Q. The Emperor is still a finite being where as the Q are infinite. DUH!
jrc99us 1 year ago
@jrc99us except the Q don't care, so they wouldn't intervene.
Perion 1 year ago
were i can become this mode pls give me a link
XxDynamiteRiderxX 1 year ago
Somebody needs to do an Ian M Banks "Culture" series General systems vehicle.
Size of large asteroids and capable of destroying this lot from light years away. And that aint even a warship.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking sounds too all-powerful to create much drama?
hcvang 1 year ago
@hcvang Far better sci fi than star trek or star wars tho.Complexity of a Robert Ludlom (Jason Bourne) with big spaceships and radical weapons. And great humour. There is one warship, all are basically robots, run by a very powerful AI called a "Mind". They get to name themselves. This ones called "i have a very large stick". All in lower case, as tho it is whispered.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
God, this is so old, lol. Came out in what, '97?
Kosh800 1 year ago
A war of no talent.
afterzlin 1 year ago
Fuckin Metallica!!! \m/
xylaphonemaster 1 year ago
Hmmm? Interesting, but Stargate Aurora class ships and Andromeda should have been involved.
pxjxbx 1 year ago
It's too bad that Stargate was absent from this battle -- though Stargate tech tends to be more advanced, so it might have been less interesting.
Still, this was awesome -- I'm glad that I'm not the only person who thinks about this stuff.
INTJadeSpider 1 year ago
That was cool!!
shogomad 1 year ago
starfurys kick ass!
papa346 1 year ago
i don't really know who would win, star wars has way more technology, but on star trek there shields are designed to withstand plain lasers, although as i said star wars has more technology so they may fire something more powerful, but most ships only shoot lasers
sumofluffy 1 year ago
@sumofluffy Lasers can still damage Federation shields, if they have the right power.
onlypeaceindeath 1 year ago
@sumofluffy Star Wars weapons are lasers only in name, they have none of the characteristics of a L.A.S.E.R.
Perion 1 year ago
Why Voyager? Gimme USS Enterprise :)
StelarCF 1 year ago
@StelarCF Because he knew that a Galaxy-Class, or a Soverign-Class would make quick work of those ships.
KJOSCOT 1 year ago
@KJOSCOT I WANT CONNIE NOT THE GALAXY lol OR THE SOVEREIGN lol I am a real TOS liker
StelarCF 1 year ago
@KJOSCOT Galaxy Class, Sovereign Class, Constitution Class it doesn't matter, they would all be stray atoms after a single hit from a Star Destroyer.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion I very much doubt that.
1)The star trek ships are very fast and well shielded.
2)The star wars ships are generally big "hit me" signs with massive guns.
OfficialFearClan 1 year ago
@OfficialFearClan Actually a Star Destroyer has more than twice the sublight acceleration as the Enterprise D's impulse (2400g vs 1000g) though Star Destroyers like to fly in a straight line, the Enterprise D isn't all that maneuverable either.
Star Trek Federation ship shields are designed to withstand multimegaton blasts, like up to roughly 200 before they collapse.
A Star Destroyer's shields are designed to withstand 800,000,000 megatons a second for half an hour straight before failing.
Perion 1 year ago
You also have to take into account that Star Trek ships are much smaller (even their capital ships are roughly half the size of the Empire's line ships), have much thinner armour (a few cm rather than 3 meters) and are made of much lighter and weaker materials. (Tritanium and Duranium vs the Neutronium hull of a Star Destroyer)
The only Trek warships that even approach ISD size are the Dominion Battleships and Romulan Warbirds, which aren't very maneuverable.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion Sure, is that why the 19km long ISD was taken out by a small X-Wing? From what each show tells us, the Star Destroyers defensive capabilities are greatly exaggerated by their fans. Even with the Death Star destroyed in the Battle Of Endor the Empire still should have won if we use the fans logic about how tough the Empire is. Wrong. They were beaten down by the rag tag rebel alliance fleet. One Shadow beam weapon would one hit kill a Star Destroyer.
danyeo 1 year ago
@danyeo for one thing ISDs are 1.6km and we have Never seen one be taken out by an X-Wing,
The Rebels were hardly rag-tag, they had technological parity with the Empire, just not numerical parity,
Remember the Shadow vessels were destroyed by 500 megaton nukes, while Shadow and Vorlon ships required some time to destroy one another using their weapons (which more than suggests that their firepower isn't 500mt per shot) Imperial and Rebel ships dish out many thousands of times that firepower.
Perion 1 year ago
In the sense of numbers the Rebels were rag-tag compared to the Empire, but they won because the Emperor bet the farm on turning luke to the dark side, a scenario that cannot be repeated when facing against Babylon 5 or Star Trek etc.
The closest thing we saw to a fighter taking out a capital ship was the A-wing that had a hand in crippling the Executor, which was 19km long, however the shields had already been taken down by the fleet, and a sensor globe destroyed by another pair of A-wings.
Perion 1 year ago
and even that would not have been fatal had the Executor's engines not fired it into the death star and the backup bridge reacted in time.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion Ok, the SUPER Star Destroyer was 19km's long and did you miss the part in ROTJ when it was taken out by one small ship hitting it's bridge? Star Wars fanboys have pages of technical nonsense at their disposal but can never answer as to why that ship was taken out soo easily.
danyeo 1 year ago
The Executor IS the Super Star Destroyer, and I already explained how it wasn't taken out nearly as easily as you think.
"At Endor, pounded mercilessly by the capital ships of the Rebel Alliance flotilla, the ship's shields, equivalent to the total power of a medium star, fail. At that moment, the Rebels are able to strafe the command tower - and with the Executor's navigation suite in ruins and defensive guns losing coordination, a careening A-wing destroys the bridge" - Complete Locations
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion I stand corrected......... ;D
OfficialFearClan 1 year ago
Why did you force Starfuries to obey a psudo-aerodynamic flight envelope in space like Star War/Trek do instead of allowing them to use physically realistic fighting tactics like in the TV show?
JeffreyFF1976 1 year ago
@JeffreyFF1976 maybe these new Starfuries are equipped with Stabilizers/navigational gyros
more likely he just did not do the research.
Perion 1 year ago
Bad/ok ***+ starz
spoofoflife 1 year ago
Those tie fighters were waaaaaaaay to large. Nice animation.
VeritasLiber 1 year ago
lol, one of the highest quality scifi bull I've ever seen. Great! Though SW and B5 ware terribly lowered by the Enterprise appearance. It's like comparing original Transformers to Gobots xD.
xeelwarbeast 1 year ago
looks like Si-fi at War!
briyes2301 1 year ago
finally, voyager and Babylon 5 work together...
Jokie155 1 year ago
NOVABOMB from Andromeda! Final comment ! ;)
Kebbstar 1 year ago
Nova Bombs in Andromeda are roughly the same as Trilithium torpedoes in Star Trek, IE can be devastating if fired into a star, but their effect on other targets is less than stelar, if you pardon the pun.
The Hard part as with Trilithium torps is getting to the target, Andromeda Slipstream is far faster than warp, but not nearly as fast as Hyperdrive and far less reliable so interception is an issue, though the Empire vs Systems Commonwealth isn't quite as one sided as Empire vs Federation.
Perion 1 year ago
Star wars is more Powerful then startrek.
123tonysony 1 year ago
star wars should win
mrDARKLEGO 1 year ago 13
@mrDARKLEGO @mojohookbarb fucking fanboys
i0n496 10 months ago
@i0n496 except they are mostly right, though mojo is incorrect in assuming that the Emperor would have forseen/been able to stop Doctor Who. But Doctor Who is top tier in terms of popular sci-fi tech levels.
Perion 10 months ago
@Perion yeah, I know, but I HATE FANBOYS. THEY KILL US HAVING FUN.
i0n496 10 months ago
Seriously folks why do argue over which is better? I happen to like Star Wars, Babylon 5, Star Trek. Arguing just takes away from the enjoyment of the series. What matters is the story and content in them not the petty arguments and nerd fights. All of them are part of scifi and the love and furtherment of scifi is more important than that.
PATTONM14A1 1 year ago
It's not about which series is better, some people are curious as to which would win in a fight, Some have used various scientific methods to find out. Others are not interested in truth and would rather come up with any excuse for their favourite series to win.
I fall under the 2nd category, educate people of the 1st category and get trolled by people of the 3rd :P.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion In that case I can't comment on technology. If they want to discuss who would it would come on down who has the most weapons and ships and troops, the better leaders, and the better stratagey.
PATTONM14A1 1 year ago
Numbers alone don't always ensure victory, what matters is strength to numbers ratio.
If 25 of your troops are worth 100 of theirs, then if they are using only 50 you still have a 2 to 1 advantage in strength. even though you are outnumbered by 2 to 1.
Technology if sufficiently ahead of the other group they are being compared to, then leaders and strategy comparisons become far less important, I doubt many would think even Alexander the great would stand much a chance against the modern US.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion In other words, Its quality not quantity.
NANOFORGE 1 year ago
More like a mix of both.
Perion 1 year ago
TIE fighter got HUGE while i wasn't looking.
Mylesdude101 1 year ago
is babylon 5 star trek?
halorecon32 1 year ago
huh? no, it's a series from the mid/late 1990s and an excelent one at that.
Perion 1 year ago
@halorecon32 Yes, Babylon 5 is Star Trek. Here are some examples of other things that are also Star Trek: Firefly, The Simpsons, Stargate: SG1, Who's The Boss, House M.D., Twin Peaks, All In The Family, etc.
Fightosaurus 1 year ago
the emperor would have foreseen that move. i would have to say star wars would have owned all
mojohookbarb 1 year ago 7
You'd be right.
Perion 1 year ago
@mojohookbarb you know, star wars would win against star trek because star trek stays bound to some sense of reality. Star trek: "Oh, a black hole opened up and an enemy ship came through. why it must be because of the fluctuating warp core and the unstable fabric of the space time continuum combine with blah blah blah. Star War: why, a black whole opened up and shit came out that shoots at us. lets blow it up. STAR WARS F.T.W.
Mylesdude101 1 year ago
Um, actually with the Black Hole example Star Wars is more grounded in reality, since Star Trek Black Holes are just violent and unstable wormholes.
Meanwhile Star Wars Black Holes are what we know of as black holes today, Superdense former stars that don't open up and nothing comes out of, only things get pulled in and destroyed if they get too close.
But yes, Star Wars would Win, but because their technology is tens of thousands of years ahead of the Federation.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion well, im not an expert in star trek, but i know enough to know that they are inferior. even the borg could be destroyed by the missiles and torpedoes. as my dad likes to say, you can't adapt to metal. or explosions.
Mylesdude101 1 year ago
precisely
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion yup. you know, you get in alot of arguments like this. your always right in my mind. well, almost always.
Mylesdude101 1 year ago
I like to teach people and correct mistakes, since very few people realize the sheer difference in magnitude between Star Wars and Star Trek. Though sometimes I might lose a bit of my patience with people who just don't get it, either as a result of them not wanting to believe it or just being poorly educated.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion they are like night and a slightly darker night.
Mylesdude101 1 year ago
@Perion i agree ppl dnt seem to want to admit how much drastically larger star destroyers are than say the enterprise and its cuz they cant handle the truth. plz no comments that say "THEY CANT HANDLE THE TRUTH" or sum unimaginative rephrasing of that line.
1993Conner 1 year ago
Wouldn't think of it, too cliche.
It's not just size that we have to factor in, but power density. IE how much power a Star Wars ship can generate vs how much a Star Trek ship can of equal volume and there the gap is even more drastically in the Star Destroyer's favour than physical size. Couple the two Together and we get something that looks like this
watch?v=U9rLNCo_eyc
Substitute Dak with the Enterprise :P
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion yes i read i know that a star destroyer can destroy all life on a planet and leave it uninhabitable for centuries
1993Conner 1 year ago
@mojohookbarb The Doctor would've travelled back in time to before it began, and then stopped it before it ever happened.
'nuff said.
hcvang 1 year ago
@mojohookbarb Everybodys always like "the empire woulda owned them!" But the death star, the most powerful tool of the empire, was destroyed by a bunch of rogue pilots in some fighters. The empire was BEATEN by a rebellion that was no where NEAR matching it in military might. I think we have to give some credit to the other sci-fi empires out there, they kick butt two and are probably better equiped to handle the empire than the rebellion was. Just saying.
notablegoat 1 year ago
@notablegoat a few corrections to your misconceptions,
1. The Rogue pilots and fighters were some of the best the galaxy had to offer, and they were all getting wasted by a handful of Imperial Defenders, only through the power of the Force and Han Solo, the best smuggler in the galaxy and an ex Imperial officer, were they able to destroy it.
The Empire was never beaten by the Rebellion, they collapsed from almost entirely internal matters, even in the film, the Rebellion just exploited this.
Perion 1 year ago
What caused the Empire to collapse was the Emperor betting the farm on turning Luke to the dark side, something he had done successfully with Vader, and to the Emperor the Empire is nothing more than an extension of the Sith, with the Sith taking priority. According to Lucas himself the tide of the Battle of Endor hinged on Luke's decision, had he turned, then the Empire would have won effortlessly.
However, take The Force out of the equation, and the Rebellion would have been destroyed swiftly
Perion 1 year ago
And considering how many Sci-fi civilizations the Rebellion could have easily wiped out without the need of the Force, that paints a very grim picture for those civilizations if the Empire ever turned their attention to them.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion Regardless of the their skill, they were still a bunch of rogue pilots in fighters. I have a hard time beleiving that the Empire had no skilled fighter pilots, plus Tie-Fighters are faster than X-Wings. Not to mention, the power of the Force was really on the Empire's side, given that it had Vader AND Palpatine (two very powerful force users).
notablegoat 10 months ago
@notablegoat well from the movies alone we note that the TIE Fighters got a fair number of Rebel kills throughout the trilogy, most rebel kills against TIE Fighters were from rebels double teaming a TIE, getting on the tail of a TIE that was already on the tail of another Rebel.
Having two very powerful force users vs one inexperienced one doesn`t automatically mean the force is with you.
Perion 10 months ago
@Perion Now, given that it's a movie, the Rebel's victory really boils down to the fact that the good guys had to win. Excluding that, however, the Empire had apparently crappy defenses (A-A guns that can't hit sqaut, big weaknesses in the Death Star, Troopers that may as well not wear armor or try to aim their guns), and all of its power was consolidated in one man, the Emporer. When he died, the Empire was essentially beat, or so the movies implie. I'm not that impressed with the Empire now..
notablegoat 10 months ago
@notablegoat if we`re talking about just the first film, then the surface guns weren`t designed to hit small, fast fighters at point blank range. They were designed to hit larger, slower starships at longer ranges. the weakness could only be exploited by the force, due to the excessive jamming in the area. Trooper armour is designed to turn a shot that would kill you into one that would merely knock you unconcious, armour like that is worth having. but it does have weaknesses, mainly the joints.
Perion 10 months ago
@Perion right in fact they even say in the movies "well the empire doesnt expect a small one man fighter to be any threat" a mistake corrected with the 2nd death star.
1993Conner 10 months ago
@mojohookbarb Might I ask how the Emperor could have predicted something Q could do!? He's Q, he can do anything!
starflame34 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Garetjax391 was right about the star was G canon. The movies > any other canon data on star wars. Everything else is wank and does not matter, or count. Simple as that. All these numbers I keep hearing about is all overpowered bullshit.
QuantumNova 1 year ago
Garetjax391 and Perion I hope you stop argueing long enough to realise you idiots are preety much the only ones commenting here, so just have that arguement out of our lives
robloxidiot 1 year ago
Garetjax391 and Perion. Just wow. Is the epically massive nerdgasm of the century over yet? Holy shit you two.
archmagi14794 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"When it comes to absolute canon, the real story of Star Wars, you must turn to the films themselves — and only the films".
^^^Posted again to make sure everyone seen this.
I want that to be my signature.
QuantumNova 1 year ago
Way to ignore Chee's other quote regarding how the EU is not separate from George's vision of the Star Wars universe, as well as the fact that we are dealing in overall continuity of the entire franchise, not just "film only" as that would be a double standard.
We might as well do the same thing with Trek and include only the 10 movies. since 11 is part of a separate canon altogether.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion
You seem to lack the ability to understand that the word "continuity" and "canon" are different, do you have a spell checker?, is english your first language?, you can see that they are spelled differantly right?, that one is longer than the other and has more letters in it?.
Here is a low brow explanation that you may get:-
A Elephant (G canon) could be classified as a big grey thing (EU/continuity), but that does not mean big grey things(EU/continuity) are Elephants (G canon).
Garetjax391 1 year ago
Yes, I know the difference between canon and continuity, hence why I said "overall continuity" because we are dealing with more than simply "Film only canon".nice semantics whoring by the way, since it doesn't change the fact that we are not focusing on "Film Only" but Star Wars as a whole,
Besides, that quote Quantum Nova picked comes from Christopher Cerasi, who is quite a bit lower on the totem pole compared to Chee, It's also not the full quote, both you and quantum take it out of context.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion
You seem to think that nonfilm only canon means you can include any old shite you like in you wank fest
But then even without film only canon saxons wank gets pissed on by G and T canon material and the only shite you have to support it is a throw away single comment that needs to be twisted into what you want it to mean anyway.
"erm erm yea they have 200 gigaton per shot fire power but coz ov ze thing and magc dey only show the fire power of a firecracker when they hit stuffz"
F OFF
Garetjax391 1 year ago
"The only shite you have to support it is a throw away single comment that needs to be twisted into what you want it to mean anyway."
Gee that sounds awfully familiar mr "what does she plan to do with that? blow up a small planet?"
Besides, how is "heat of a nuclear bomb in one small spot, creating a blazing fireball" either a throw away (As it's a major part of it's own entry paragraph) being twisted here?
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion
"heat of a nuclear bomb in one small spot, creating a blazing fireball"
So we know that the pulse from a turbo laser is narrow so when it hits the energy is focused in a single spot..ANYBODY WITH EYES CAN SEE THAT...but how do you equate a fire cracker sized puff of light to a blazing fireball?.
200 gigatons of energy has to go somewhere and the fucktards saxon and wong would be up the arse of every trekie if they tried to spin the bullshit you are trying to do with that comment.
Garetjax391 1 year ago
@Perion
WE KNOW THE PULSE IS NARROW..
BUT WHERE IS THE BLAZING FIREBALL?
WE SEE BLAZING FIREBALLS FROM NUKES IN THE KILOTON RANGE ALL THE TIME.
BUT HAVE WE EVER SEEN A FIREBALL MADE BY A TURBO LASER THAT WAS EVEN CLOSE TO A KILOTON NUKE EXPLOSION NO MATTER WHERE IT WAS FIRED OR AT WHAT
NOPE
NO MATTER HOW YOU TRY TO TWIST IT THAT COMMENT IS TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING WE DO NOT SEE IN G OR T CANON MATERIAL
UNLESS YOU ARE GOING SAY THAT THE FIREBALL IS GOING TO BE IN A SMALL SPOT AS WELL....LOL
Garetjax391 1 year ago
"UNLESS YOU ARE GOING SAY THAT THE FIREBALL IS GOING TO BE IN A SMALL SPOT AS WELL"
Uh, that is the whole point of the quote, in case you didn't notice the "fireballs" small as they may be, at the blast, those so called "firecrackers" as you are so fond of saying
That is not Twisting the comment at all, if anything saying that the "creating a blazing fireball" is supposed to mean a giant nuclear explosion fireball is not only twisting the words, but directly contradicting them.
Perion 1 year ago
Your entire argument hinges on the cherry picked interpretation of the word "blazing fireball". as well as interpreting "small spot" as referring to the bolt to which there is no proof as that being the intent, since my interpretation of it means there is no contradiction,
And considering this is the same writer who had watched the films, worked with ILM to make the book, and wrote the yield figures as well, the odds are considerably in my favour as far as interpretation goes
Perion 1 year ago
Hell, allow me to put the entire paragraph on here, I'm sure you'll go over it with a fine toothed comb to try and get your own way and invent a contradiction.
"Juggernauts are designed to deliver tremendous firepower in order to overwhelm well-shielded military structures, some of which can withstand a lone Juggernaut's barrage for hours. However, with an unshielded target, a Juggernaut can blast the heat of a nuclear bomb into one small spot, creating a blazing fireball"
Perion 1 year ago
Note I myself made the mistake of saying "focus" rather than "blast" which further supports my interpretation of the small spot being the target.
Also that it said "unshielded target" meaning that a shielded target would disperse said energy over a wide area and then through the neutrino radiators and heat sinks.
Point is, the fact that you leave it up to interpretation shows it's not explicit of a contradiction, except that you insist that your interpretation is the only one even possible.
Perion 1 year ago
@Perion
A fucking kiloton nuke can be only a little over a dozen inches wide but can create a fucking blazing fireball you silly wanker, the comment "one small spot" is in regards to the width of the fucking beam not the size of the fireball it creates and any non sad cunt can see that.
You need to streach the word interpret ation well past its limits to get what you want out of it you sad twat.
Garetjax391 1 year ago
"the comment "one small spot" is in regards to the width of the fucking beam not the size of the fireball it creates and any non sad cunt can see that."
Uh huh, except the full quote makes it quite clear that is not the case, and everyone else who's read it knows that. just because it "just doesn't feel right" to you. Doesn't mean your interpretation is the only one possible, and like I said the evidence that my interpretation is correct outweighs your personal incredulity.
Perion 1 year ago
It reminds me of someone who thought the theory of 4+ spacial dimensions was BS for no other reason than the fact that he couldn't wrap his head around it, even though the math for it was perfectly sound.
Hell, have you gotten around to watch Voyager "Alliances" yet? where they fire 3 Photon torpedoes at a ship hovering less than half a dozen stories above a city? You can't tell me those were low yield, because A. they fired 3 of em, and B. this is Voyager, they aren't going to waste torps.
Perion 1 year ago
It also doesn't change the fact that the statement was in regards to the Juggernaut, which we saw firing on screen, and once again this was written during the filming process, where the special effects would be readily viewable, and with input from ILM people.
So once again my interpretation holds far more weight, since all you have to go by is "That fireball doesn't look blazing enough to me"
Perion 1 year ago