1189 replies to this topic

[Catamount]

Chuckie, on 09 January 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

BTW.. am I the only one that sees the early BT Universe in the Firefly/Serentity Universe..?

Maybe not BT, but there was a Firefly class in the BSG pilot

[Gustaf Brackman]

Grayson's response pretty much answers this whole argument about Star Trek and WH40K especially since Games Workshop or any other canon sites never gave technical info about most weaponary and technology in the WH40K universe so it's just guessing how much they can do and a comparison will never work like that.

[Catamount]

Gustaf Brackman, on 09 January 2012 - 10:19 AM, said:

Grayson's response pretty much answers this whole argument about Star Trek and WH40K especially since Games Workshop or any other canon sites never gave technical info about most weaponary and technology in the WH40K universe so it's just guessing how much they can do and a comparison will never work like that.

We actually had a pretty good discussion covering quite a lot about 40k, from weapon yields, and likely ranges, to industrial capacity.


But yes, we beat it to death for about a dozen pages, so it definitely is time to move on unless someone has something new to say there, and honestly, we covered a lot

[Gustaf Brackman]

From what I read most of that was just wild guessing.

[Grayson Pryde]

Catamount, on 09 January 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

We actually had a pretty good discussion covering quite a lot about 40k, from weapon yields, and likely ranges, to industrial capacity.


But yes, we beat it to death for about a dozen pages, so it definitely is time to move on unless someone has something new to say there, and honestly, we covered a lot

Yeah i read that...

But you took it to serious and noone realised that even the "facts" are just numbers that where randomly choosen.

[Catamount]

Gustaf Brackman, on 09 January 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

From what I read most of that was just wild guessing.

You're free to dispute the analysis that produced any number.

EDIT: That's why we're here!

Grayson Pryde, on 09 January 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

Yeah i read that...

But you took it to serious and noone realised that even the "facts" are just numbers that where randomly choosen.

Bah, no one takes it real seriously (well, almost no one ).


It's just a way to have some frivolous fun and practice a bit of science. Believe me, compared to the dry scientific topics I'm usually drudging through in courses, simple sci-fi physics is pretty recreational


I mean, you had to admit, there's at least SOMETHING cool about being able to take real world physical constants and math, apply them to numbers and empirical instances in a show, and see just how powerful this or that really is, or maybe you don't, but I think it's fun

Edited by Catamount, 09 January 2012 - 10:41 AM.

[Gustaf Brackman]

"40K is a story of a human civilization that tiptoed out of the muck, got a bloody nose, and crawled right back in (and so in lieu of actual stories of things that might be relevant to us, we're fed plot-induced deus ex machina crap, instead of actual stories)"

I am not sure how this is considered cool or how it is related to the " being able to take real world physical constants and math, apply them to numbers and empirical instances in a show" I mean you are just calling a whole franchise bad becuase you didn't like it not to mention how vague the description of the 40k in those two lines.

Edited by Gustaf Brackman, 09 January 2012 - 10:59 AM.

[Tarvitz]

Catamount, on 09 January 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

Oh, and you showed this so unequivocally, did you?

No, the shows did. We see time and time again in Trek that the weapons they carry usually only end up wounding people, especially in the later series. Even when it comes down to more advanced tech such as that produced by the Dominion, they have the frequent habit of only wounding a person unless they're a goldshirt. The biggest example of this can be seen in "The Ship" in which one background character apparently takes a killing shot and takes days to actually die from the wound. A more infamous one can be seen in, again, "Resistance" which has Janeway being shot full in the face by a energy weapon and yet being perfectly fine once the opening credits end.

Quote

Note that to match even that lowest end figure among what we've garnered, a 9mm pistol would have to fire over 1400 rounds/second, having energies of only ~550-700J/shot (depending on the round and firearm).

All of which you're getting by applying science to this. The problem with applying science to this is, like most series, Trek plays fast and loose with science. One of the most obvious moments, aside from accellerating up to infinite speed, is a ship escaping a black hole by flying through a crack in the event horizon.

Due to this problem i'm trying to rely upon things actually seen in each series, in part because Trek seems to work on a different law of physics than real life, and because you openly rejected the officially published tech stats of other franchises. If you're not willing to accept that of another series, there's no reason why I should accept yours.

Quote

Note that that number was actually for TNG Chain of Command (yes, there's more than one instance of this sort of vaporization; it's not a one-off thing).

Except of course that, aside from a handfull of moments this never occours. It only appears when the plot requires it.

Quote

Would you mind linking me to a 9mm pistol that can match even the middle outputs there, required to vaporize a person? Of course you can't. You couldn't even show a 9mm pistol with the capability to match the lowest canonical outputs of phasers, let alone a middling or high-end figure.

Well for one thing it wouldn't need to. It just needs to put a hole in a person and make sure they don't get back up, something which Trek phasers have remarkable trouble doing unless it's a background extra with barely any lines. And even then one of the highest bodycounts from a weapon used in a Trek episode was one which used solid bullets, which Starfleet chose not to use.

Quote

And this is pretty much the content of your posts, absurd, already-debunked and long-tired talking points that we've not only already addressed, but addressed in multiple posts, just as we've already discussed troop numbers, Trek personal shields, and most, if not all of everything else you've brought up to date.

Discussed or did you try to ram them down someone's throat? Again, we see nothing of personal shields in the episodes save for a home-made one, troop numbers are constantly suspect from the ammount of times the Federation has to draft fleet officers into ground battles and the problems it has fighting smaller powers like the Cardassians, and one on screen displays of weapons frequently are pitiful.

Quote

Did you READ the discussion we had? Of course not, otherwise you'd bring up something new.

If you didn't want to read through the whole thread, you could have asked for a quick summary, or at least made points with the caveat that they might already have been addressed, instead of treating them as unequivocal refutations to the so-called fanboy poster who's posts you clearly never even bothered to read in the first place

I'm not going to read through more of your tripe, especially if it consists of the same things i've seen from you so far, using this as an excuse to throw up bile at the mention of Star Wars or Warhammer. Considering your own posts, considerable bias and desire to see Trek beat everything than actually discuss any topic, i'd be lucky if that summary consisted of anything more than "Trek Wins, everyone else loses".

Quote

Instead, you ran in, offered a nasty characterization of us as posters, and of the posts we made, without even really bothering to read them, and this is why you are not worth having a discussion with.

I read your posts in response. All they cosisted of was you acting like a common internet troll, adding nothing to the discussion and apparently being more concerned with trying to prove how much better your favourite series is than all others. Also, you were the ones offiering nasty characterisations, I just quoted what you had already posted.

Catamount, on 09 January 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

We actually had a pretty good discussion covering quite a lot about 40k, from weapon yields, and likely ranges, to industrial capacity.

But yes, we beat it to death for about a dozen pages, so it definitely is time to move on unless someone has something new to say there, and honestly, we covered a lot

You mean you openly sneered at it, insulted it and got a great many things wrong about the canon. Or did you try and pass everything off as you being able to beat the Imperium due to subspace containment technology?

[Grayson Pryde]

It might be fun and i wont interrupt you but conversations like this makes me "double facepalm":

guy1: Warhamemr 40k ships are superior because they are bigger and have bigegr weapons."
guy2:"But the bigger weapons are useless against the Enterprise. We have shilds!"
guy1:"We have shields too."
guy2:"Your shields are useless against our weapons!"
guy1:"why? We have void shields and we can easily kill your Enetrprise over thousends of kilometers!"
guy2:"No, you cant! The Enterprise is too sneaky. And your targeting computers are ****."
guy1:"Fine then i will just use an Alpha Strike! Some weapons will hit you."
guy2:"No, the Enterprise can use Warp Speed 21! Its too fast! You cant hit me"
guy1:"Warhammer 40k ships can travel through the warp too."
guy2:"Maybe but we can fire while we are on warp speed! You can tdo that so you lose!"
guy1:"We can. We have done it with some psykers. That brings us to the warp itself. You have no defense!"
guy2:"In episode xyz they where attacked by things that came through portals so we solved that. Easy GG! Enterprise won!"
guy1:"Are you sure? I mean you know the warhammer 40k warp?"
guy2:"Yes its easy. Janeway found a methode in nearly 30mins."
guy1 mumbles:"**** they havent found something in about 30mins. In Warhammer 40k they havent found anything against the warp for about 15000years. Damn Janeway...."
guy2:"You see? Enterprise is superior!"
guy1:"But we have the chaos gods! You cant defend yourself against gods.!"
guy2:"Of cause. Q loves Picard. He will easily defeat them."
guy1:"No i found your weak point! We ahve Space Marines and trillions of soldiers and titans! Star Trek sucks in ground battles!(You know this topic was about space battles?)"
guy2:"We have phasers and personal shields. You will get ******."
guy1:"Impossible we have terminator armor that can even walk through a sun. And our bolters and laser cannons will easily penetrate your shields."
guy2:"No, our phasers have 1200000000000 MJ. And our shields too. You cant harm anyone with your crappy armor and you stoneage bolters!"


At least thats what i have read in this thread.....

So please dont tell me you discussed physics....


(Sorry for the spelling errors and the ironic touch of my post)

[Nowan123]

I voted for battletech, as much as I respect warhammer40k and EVE.
I mean, if all the inner sphere and clans stopped damn fighting each other stuff would get done
ASF is cool, dropships could fairly easily slug folks out, the only thing is the "range" which IMO in this comparison should be extended to RL-like extents

[Gustaf Brackman]

Grayson Pryde, on 09 January 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

It might be fun and i wont interrupt you but conversations like this makes me "double facepalm":

guy1: Warhamemr 40k ships are superior because they are bigger and have bigegr weapons."
guy2:"But the bigger weapons are useless against the Enterprise. We have shilds!"
guy1:"We have shields too."
guy2:"Your shields are useless against our weapons!"
guy1:"why? We have void shields and we can easily kill your Enetrprise over thousends of kilometers!"
guy2:"No, you cant! The Enterprise is too sneaky. And your targeting computers are ****."
guy1:"Fine then i will just use an Alpha Strike! Some weapons will hit you."
guy2:"No, the Enterprise can use Warp Speed 21! Its too fast! You cant hit me"
guy1:"Warhammer 40k ships can travel through the warp too."
guy2:"Maybe but we can fire while we are on warp speed! You can tdo that so you lose!"
guy1:"We can. We have done it with some psykers. That brings us to the warp itself. You have no defense!"
guy2:"In episode xyz they where attacked by things that came through portals so we solved that. Easy GG! Enterprise won!"
guy1:"Are you sure? I mean you know the warhammer 40k warp?"
guy2:"Yes its easy. Janeway found a methode in nearly 30mins."
guy1 mumbles:"**** they havent found something in about 30mins. In Warhammer 40k they havent found anything against the warp for about 15000years. Damn Janeway...."
guy2:"You see? Enterprise is superior!"
guy1:"But we have the chaos gods! You cant defend yourself against gods.!"
guy2:"Of cause. Q loves Picard. He will easily defeat them."
guy1:"No i found your weak point! We ahve Space Marines and trillions of soldiers and titans! Star Trek sucks in ground battles!(You know this topic was about space battles?)"
guy2:"We have phasers and personal shields. You will get ******."
guy1:"Impossible we have terminator armor that can even walk through a sun. And our bolters and laser cannons will easily penetrate your shields."
guy2:"No, our phasers have 1200000000000 MJ. And our shields too. You cant harm anyone with your crappy armor and you stoneage bolters!"


At least thats what i have read in this thread.....

So please dont tell me you discussed physics....


(Sorry for the spelling errors and the ironic touch of my post)

While I would say some points here about the warp and 40k in general is totally incorrect you summed it up yet again.( May I join you Atlas scouting lance oh great Steiner Mehcwarrior? )

[Grayson Pryde]

I knowthat some of the warhammer 40k stuff was incorrect and i have to apologize for teh Star Trek fails but i wanted to show the niveau of this discussion and some of my points where mentioned earlier by other people.


PS: You can join my lance but i will betray you all when the invasion comes! Clanners arent good spies.....

[Gustaf Brackman]

I am talking about the "facts" about WH40K told here are not correct what you said was just summarizing it.

PS: Well Mercneries aren't your role model for a loyal comrade anyway (Even us the Gray Death Legion)

[Catamount]

Gustaf Brackman, on 09 January 2012 - 10:56 AM, said:

"40K is a story of a human civilization that tiptoed out of the muck, got a bloody nose, and crawled right back in (and so in lieu of actual stories of things that might be relevant to us, we're fed plot-induced deus ex machina crap, instead of actual stories)"

I am not sure how this is considered cool or how it is related to the " being able to take real world physical constants and math, apply them to numbers and empirical instances in a show" I mean you are just calling a whole franchise bad becuase you didn't like it not to mention how vague the description of the 40k in those two lines.

That was the entirety of everything I said on the subject of 40k in 12 pages? Really?


Oh my...

Edited by Catamount, 09 January 2012 - 12:16 PM.

[Catamount]

Grayson Pryde, on 09 January 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

It might be fun and i wont interrupt you but conversations like this makes me "double facepalm":

guy1: Warhamemr 40k ships are superior because they are bigger and have bigegr weapons."
guy2:"But the bigger weapons are useless against the Enterprise. We have shilds!"
guy1:"We have shields too."
guy2:"Your shields are useless against our weapons!"
guy1:"why? We have void shields and we can easily kill your Enetrprise over thousends of kilometers!"
guy2:"No, you cant! The Enterprise is too sneaky. And your targeting computers are ****."
guy1:"Fine then i will just use an Alpha Strike! Some weapons will hit you."
guy2:"No, the Enterprise can use Warp Speed 21! Its too fast! You cant hit me"
guy1:"Warhammer 40k ships can travel through the warp too."
guy2:"Maybe but we can fire while we are on warp speed! You can tdo that so you lose!"
guy1:"We can. We have done it with some psykers. That brings us to the warp itself. You have no defense!"
guy2:"In episode xyz they where attacked by things that came through portals so we solved that. Easy GG! Enterprise won!"
guy1:"Are you sure? I mean you know the warhammer 40k warp?"
guy2:"Yes its easy. Janeway found a methode in nearly 30mins."
guy1 mumbles:"**** they havent found something in about 30mins. In Warhammer 40k they havent found anything against the warp for about 15000years. Damn Janeway...."
guy2:"You see? Enterprise is superior!"
guy1:"But we have the chaos gods! You cant defend yourself against gods.!"
guy2:"Of cause. Q loves Picard. He will easily defeat them."
guy1:"No i found your weak point! We ahve Space Marines and trillions of soldiers and titans! Star Trek sucks in ground battles!(You know this topic was about space battles?)"
guy2:"We have phasers and personal shields. You will get ******."
guy1:"Impossible we have terminator armor that can even walk through a sun. And our bolters and laser cannons will easily penetrate your shields."
guy2:"No, our phasers have 1200000000000 MJ. And our shields too. You cant harm anyone with your crappy armor and you stoneage bolters!"


At least thats what i have read in this thread.....

So please dont tell me you discussed physics....


(Sorry for the spelling errors and the ironic touch of my post)

Again, if you think there's something wrong with any of the previous analyses, then by all means, point out the error, whether scientific, mathematical, epistemological, whatever.


If, however, the entire point of coming in to a vs thread is to say that vs debates are pointless, well, might I point you to any of the other wonderful threads here on the MWO forums? No sense having you get dragged into a discussion that you think has no purpose, or anything

Edited by Catamount, 09 January 2012 - 12:17 PM.

[Grayson Pryde]

The only thing i want you to do is showing mercy to each other and accept that there are some points in the sci-fi universe that you cant compare to each other. Thats alll. Dont fight abou "facts"! I just want you to show some tolerance and maybe look up the other "big scince-fiction thingis" before you post any nonsense that makes other fans of these universes angry.

[Catamount]

Grayson Pryde, on 09 January 2012 - 12:59 PM, said:

The only thing i want you to do is showing mercy to each other and accept that there are some points in the sci-fi universe that you cant compare to each other. Thats alll. Dont fight abou "facts"! I just want you to show some tolerance and maybe look up the other "big scince-fiction thingis" before you post any nonsense that makes other fans of these universes angry.

That's absolutely fair enough.


One thing I would ask you to keep in mind though: A lot of us (especially Ilithi, bless him), work very hard on some of these analyses, even if, granted, some of that isn't immediately apparent, because it's sometimes recycled by citing earlier discussions we've had on these topics. That goes just as much for people who disagree with me on vs debates as well on numerous forums. All around, these discussions can occasionally turn nasty (see page 14 onward), even to the point of death threats if you go way back to the old Trek vs Wars debates (not that IS taking it too seriously!), but are generally thoughtful discussions of often very-creative applications of real world science to fiction.

I'd just ask you to keep that in mind in characterizations of these debates (not that took your caricature post as a serious insult).

Edited by Catamount, 09 January 2012 - 01:08 PM.

[Catamount]

Now, what else did you have in mind, specifically, as far as discussion?


Science fiction's a big genre; there's lots we haven't really looked at in detail

[Zakatak]

I've been making my own little sci-fi story in my head over the last month (might make it a book or a show one day). So if you guys are bored, rank this up against BSG/Battletech/Halo/Gundam. The protagonist ship is something I wanted to be achievable and believable by 2200, with minimum technobabble. I don't expect it or want to compare with Trek/Wars/40k.

Powerplant: 6.5GW Fusion (Helium-3 + Hydrogen-2)
Armor: Reflective Titanium woven with Carbon Nanotubes (35cm)
Power Supply: 34TJ Capacity
Artificial Gravity: Diamagnetism through superconducting magnets
Acceleration: 310m/s^2,or 32g (magnets, g-suits, etc half the adverse effects on crew)
Sensors: Infrared/Radar/Electromagnetic scanners (100,000km)
Defenses: EM Pulses, Antimagnets (slows incoming kinetic weapons/pushes missiles away), Chaff
Cooling: Helium-4 supercooled to -250 Celsius with Sisyphus laser cooling (ensures no energy lost to heat)
Weapons: 2TJ Coilcannon, 22 AIM-146 A/AM (25mt yield, 3600km range), 3 Defense Lasers (25GJ max)
Dimensions: (all approximate) ~90m long, ~60m wingspan, ~20m height
Mass: ~350,000kg
Crew: 12 (high g-force training, high iron diet to improve artificial gravity effectiveness)

The defense lasers can also be used for shooting down missiles or micrometeorites. All high-energy consuming parts (coilcannon/magnets/antimatter containers/lasers) are cooled for superconductivity. The coilcannon is capable of about 1 shot per second, the lasers triple that. The ship is aerospace capable, but requires a runway. The reactor cannot charge the batteries and provide thrust at the same time, so once it runs out of its 34TJ "juice", it can no longer fight. No, it is not FTL-capable. Not to start with anyway.

EDIT: nearly forgot, lasers/coilcannon output is highly variable, and the cannon launches 25kg (160mm bore) at 400km/s

Edited by Zakatak, 09 January 2012 - 03:54 PM.

[Catamount]

Hmm, that's an interesting notion, Zakatak. I like the notion of energy storage dictating how long you can fight.


How long does a ship-to-ship fight typically last? The reason I ask is because the reactor output could partly extend a fight, not by much, but if it's, say, a ten minute fight the ship is involved, it would put out an extra 4TJ of energy (better than 10% longer fighting, which isn't insignificant).


Also, just how effective are the defenses? How armored is the ship?


Also, how fast do the kinetic and missile-based weaponry travel?

Edited by Catamount, 09 January 2012 - 04:14 PM.