Jump to content

Star Wars vs Star Trek vs Battle Tech Space Battles


1189 replies to this topic

Poll: Who is the Ultimate Winner? (700 member(s) have cast votes)

Who will come out on top?

  1. Star Wars (154 votes [22.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.00%

  2. Star Trek (118 votes [16.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.86%

  3. Star Craft (9 votes [1.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.29%

  4. Battle Star Galactica (26 votes [3.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.71%

  5. Battle Tech (85 votes [12.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.14%

  6. Macross (32 votes [4.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.57%

  7. Gundam (24 votes [3.43%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.43%

  8. WarHammer40k (152 votes [21.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.71%

  9. Star Gate (12 votes [1.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.71%

  10. EveOnline (53 votes [7.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.57%

  11. Battleship Yamato (10 votes [1.43%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.43%

  12. Legend of Galactic Heros (7 votes [1.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.00%

  13. Halo (18 votes [2.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.57%

Convert to Best space ship space battles or keep current format? Choices submissions Extended to 2/11/12

  1. Convert to only space ship naval battles, ignoring civ other traits. (116 votes [25.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.05%

  2. Keep current format, full universe as deciding factor. (347 votes [74.95%])

    Percentage of vote: 74.95%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#941 Rodney28021

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 404 posts
  • LocationRural Western North Carolina

Posted 13 June 2012 - 05:32 PM

My vote is for Star Trek. There weapons and shields are more powerfull than star wars ships

#942 Catamount

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
  • 3,305 posts
  • LocationBoone, NC

Posted 13 June 2012 - 07:55 PM

View PostRodney28021, on 13 June 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

My vote is for Star Trek. There weapons and shields are more powerfull than star wars ships


Dem is fightin' words :o


BTW, I'm in western NC too (Boone area). Good to see someone else from this area :)

#943 Atomfire

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • LocationBismarck North Dakota

Posted 13 June 2012 - 08:04 PM

I would have to say that New Eden wins out due to the capacity to do economic and actual combat, remember, capsulers can come back from being podded as long as they have a clone prep'd and updated, and thats just the corps I'm thinking about for New Eden victory.

#944 Prince Ian Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts
  • LocationTasmania, Australia

Posted 13 June 2012 - 11:55 PM

^ :)

#945 Ilithi Dragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 475 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationWazan

Posted 14 June 2012 - 06:54 AM

View PostCatamount, on 13 June 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:


Dem is fightin' words :ph34r:


Yeah, you'll want to be careful, there have been some pretty vocal supporters of Wars and 40K in this thread, championing Trek may well get them riled up (even though you have the correct answer } ; = 8 ) ).


View PostCatamount, on 13 June 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

BTW, I'm in western NC too (Boone area). Good to see someone else from this area ;)


No you're not, you're just outside of Charlotte. You're only in Boone during school semesters. } ; = 8 P

#946 Catamount

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
  • 3,305 posts
  • LocationBoone, NC

Posted 14 June 2012 - 07:34 AM

View PostIlithi Dragon, on 14 June 2012 - 06:54 AM, said:


Yeah, you'll want to be careful, there have been some pretty vocal supporters of Wars and 40K in this thread, championing Trek may well get them riled up (even though you have the correct answer } ; = 8 ) ).


Ah yes, the 40k fans... "Hey mommy, when I grow up, I want to be a space marine, so I can be worse than the Khmer Rogue and the SS combined and be a mass murderer and oppressor of all sentient life! They're SO COOL!". (okay, in fairness, that was only maybe half the pro-40k posters here, but that's one half too many)

Quote

No you're not, you're just outside of Charlotte. You're only in Boone during school semesters. } ; = 8 P


SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH



View PostDamocles 1, on 13 June 2012 - 08:09 PM, said:

I'm trolling, tee-hee!


You know, normally I'd just go with "this person was never taught basic scientific curiosity as a child and probably doesn't express it anywhere else, either", but in this case, I think this poster just genuinely wasn't hugged enough as a child.

No, no, that's not it. There's too much angst there.

I think we might actually be looking at some hitherto unknown abused child of Mike Wong's here :D This poor person... just the thought of being beaten every night with a hardcover copy of the TNG Tech Manual... and being made to recite Curtis Saxton's ICS books every night (the beatings came when he got the power figures an order of magnitude off... just one in 47, it wasn't that much, honest!).


It's no wonder this person lashes out. It's okay, Damocles, we really do love you. Some day the voices will stop, I promise.

Edited by Ghost, 14 June 2012 - 08:11 AM.
Amending the record.


#947 Ilithi Dragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 475 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationWazan

Posted 14 June 2012 - 07:37 AM

View PostCatamount, on 14 June 2012 - 07:34 AM, said:

Some day the voices will stop, I promise.


Hey, my voices keep me sane... >.> They make fun of me when I talk to myself...

#948 guardian wolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Merciless
  • The Merciless
  • 1,965 posts
  • LocationOn Barcelona where the crap is about to hit the fan.

Posted 15 June 2012 - 03:47 PM

View PostRodney28021, on 13 June 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

My vote is for Star Trek. There weapons and shields are more powerfull than star wars ships

Please read arguments from before made by very knowledgeable people.... and you will find your answer, false.

View Postsentieus, on 09 June 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

A- gundam depending if there using nc-jamers like the freedom and justice.
B-halo ring but I would fire in the safety of a dysonsphere or shield world.
C-death star from starwars.
D-SDF-1 from macross/robotech

Once again Star Wars trumps just about all of those.

View PostIlithi Dragon, on 14 June 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:


Hey, my voices keep me sane... >.> They make fun of me when I talk to myself...

MARE!!!! I AM NO LONGER ALONE IN THIS FIELD...... So, when did you "snap".

Kudos if you can figure out what "Mare" means, it is pronounced "MAH-REH", I will give one hint, the motto in the bottom of my sig, is in a war song of the same language... good luck!!!

#949 Shredhead

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 1,939 posts
  • LocationLeipzig, Germany

Posted 15 June 2012 - 04:07 PM

As you necroed it... Warhammer 40k wins. That's it, all others lose. I mean, WH 40k is the Chuck Norris of Sci Fi, and if you
have a different opinion, a visit of the holy Ordo Malleus will convince you of my point. Short before your death, I fear. But nonetheless. I'm drunk. Good Night!

Edited by Shredhead, 15 June 2012 - 04:08 PM.


#950 guardian wolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Merciless
  • The Merciless
  • 1,965 posts
  • LocationOn Barcelona where the crap is about to hit the fan.

Posted 15 June 2012 - 04:11 PM

View PostShredhead, on 15 June 2012 - 04:07 PM, said:

As you necroed it... Warhammer 40k wins. That's it, all others lose. I mean, WH 40k is the Chuck Norris of Sci Fi, and if you
have a different opinion, a visit of the holy Ordo Malleus will convince you of my point. Short before your death, I fear. But nonetheless. I'm drunk. Good Night!

Once again, I will cite that you read previous arguments, and please have a pleasant rest of the evening while drunk.

#951 Catamount

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
  • 3,305 posts
  • LocationBoone, NC

Posted 15 June 2012 - 05:18 PM

View Postguardian wolf, on 15 June 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

Once again, I will cite that you read previous arguments, and please have a pleasant rest of the evening while drunk.


There being nothing to actually discuss further pending new arguments/evidence/franchises, I think I'll leave it at saying we really have already covered this to death. Although, GF, I will note that even looking past Star Wars vastly less impressive showing once EU is thrown it (it being a different and separate continuity from the SW Films, as was discussed), you shouldn't dismiss those ridiculous animes so quickly. The skill of the Japanese to infuse their fictions with ever-less plausibly and ever more wildly inflated constructs vastly exceeds our own. Remember that in something like a SINGLE SEASON of Dragonball Z, we went from people shooting megajoule range blasts out of their hands to people who could blow up planets, who were then vastly superseded a season later (by people who were vastly superseded a season after that). From what little I know, Macross is the same kind of franchise. Ship numbers and capabilities that basically just exceed suspense of disbelief.


As for 40k... it's more like the Al Qaeda of fantasy (it's no Science Fiction). It's a cynical story that champions oppression and brutality while eschewing basic human progress, where the ever-regressive "good guys" are worse than all the most blood-stained historical figures in real-world history, combined, times a thousand, cubed, and are little less the enemies of sentient life in the galaxy than those they supposedly protect against. But yeah, we've beaten that to do death too...

Edited by Catamount, 15 June 2012 - 05:21 PM.


#952 Jack Gammel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 205 posts
  • LocationZiliang

Posted 15 June 2012 - 08:14 PM

View PostIlithi Dragon, on 14 June 2012 - 06:54 AM, said:

Yeah, you'll want to be careful, there have been some pretty vocal supporters of Wars and 40K in this thread, championing Trek may well get them riled up (even though you have the correct answer } ; = 8 ) ).

View PostCatamount, on 14 June 2012 - 07:34 AM, said:

Ah yes, the 40k fans... "Hey mommy, when I grow up, I want to be a space marine, so I can be worse than the Khmer Rogue and the SS combined and be a mass murderer and oppressor of all sentient life! They're SO COOL!". (okay, in fairness, that was only maybe half the pro-40k posters here, but that's one half too many)

View PostCatamount, on 15 June 2012 - 05:18 PM, said:

As for 40k... it's more like the Al Qaeda of fantasy (it's no Science Fiction). It's a cynical story that champions oppression and brutality while eschewing basic human progress, where the ever-regressive "good guys" are worse than all the most blood-stained historical figures in real-world history, combined, times a thousand, cubed, and are little less the enemies of sentient life in the galaxy than those they supposedly protect against. But yeah, we've beaten that to do death too...


I could have sworn that this thread was dead, but I guess we're just going to insult other franchises and their fans now that everyone else is gone...

I guess I could claim that franchises like Foundation and other "hard sci-fi" series aren't real Science Fiction because they're so boring they make you want to kill yourself and I don't like them?

Edited by Jack Gammel, 15 June 2012 - 08:15 PM.


#953 Catamount

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
  • 3,305 posts
  • LocationBoone, NC

Posted 15 June 2012 - 08:32 PM

Well, you could argue that the Foundation series is bad scifi, certainly, and it would be valid, but whether something is science fiction or not has nothing to do with whether it's good or bad. 40k isn't a science fiction work for the same reason 2001: A Space Odyssey isn't a romantic comedy.

Science fiction is a franchise historically defined by story elements that challenge conventions, and above all else, create stories where the universe in question fundamentally changes from the beginning to the end of the story (among other defining properties). They're from a literary tradition that is simply different from that of, say, Campbellian Fantasy, like Star Wars, or... whatever Warhammer 40k is. I could give a lengthy explanation on everything that defines science fiction, and the history of the literature that the franchise was born out of, but honestly, if you really care that much, I'll just link one of a dozen essays on the topic by notable science fiction authors, sufficing to say, simply taking place in the future, or having space ships, doesn't make a story science fiction. Those might be scifi elements, but scifi backdrop on a very non-scifi story still leaves one with a very non-scifi story that, at its core, is antithesis to everything that particular genre of literature has been defined by.


As for whether 40k is "good", regardless of its genre, I guess that's a matter of opinion, but the story does eschew basic human progress, and does feature characters who, even when so-called protagonists, are part of organizations that are more oppressive and murderous than the worst real-world entities that have ever existed, and they are fundamentally the enemies of sentient life. Because these are sometimes, if not most of the time, portrayed as the good guys, that means that said stories do champion oppression and brutality, and again, eschew basic human progress, which is basically preached as being evil. It's just hidden on the convenient blanket excuse of "well it's what makes parties 'good' in 40k, because that's what's necessary to protect life from the warp and enemy invaders", referring, not to science and debate and open inquiry, not societal advancement, but rather a system of brutally enforced religious fundamentalism erected around the so-called "God Emperor", and the franchise never addresses these shortcomings within its setting and characters, but rather tries to pass all this off as being "cool".

I don't personally think it makes a very good story, but whether someone else does, those are basic facts of the franchise, not value judgements. Maybe that's all the makings of a great story, or maybe it's the opposite, but regardless of how one regards these story elements, they exist, though I certainly make no effort to hide my disdain for the particular franchise's story (the games themselves are actually pretty good, as games).

Edited by Catamount, 15 June 2012 - 08:45 PM.


#954 LordDeathStrike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Merciless
  • The Merciless
  • 1,456 posts
  • LocationBanished from nearly every world of the Inner Sphere on suspicions of being an assassin.

Posted 15 June 2012 - 08:41 PM

the borg cubes fleets clearly win any space based battles. they adapt and assimilated.

#955 Jack Gammel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 205 posts
  • LocationZiliang

Posted 15 June 2012 - 08:46 PM

Science Fiction:
fiction based on futuristic science: a form of fiction, usually set in the future, that deals with imaginary scientific and technological developments and contact with other worlds

Sounds simple enough to me. Not really interested in elitist definitions.

I also was not discussing the inherent value, moral or otherwise, of 40k or Star Wars or anything else.

Does it take place in the future? Does it have space-ships? Does it have advanced/magic technology? Does it have aliens? Does it have crazy abilities like psychic/empathic powers? Cool. It's science fiction in my book. Let's not forget the pulp magazines and B-rate movies which spawned the sci-fi movement in the first place.

Edited by Jack Gammel, 15 June 2012 - 08:46 PM.


#956 Catamount

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
  • 3,305 posts
  • LocationBoone, NC

Posted 15 June 2012 - 09:03 PM

Well, Jack, that's very good for "your book", but from a literary standpoint it still has nothing to do with science fiction. So if you want to run on an alternate definition of science fiction in which anything with any element of scifi is scifi, then you can do so, but neither of us is here to argue semantics. When I said 40k wasn't scifi, I meant the story was not in the spirit of the literary tradition of science fiction, and that remains true. I define it as fantasy, just like Star Wars, which is literally a textbook Campbellian Fantasy.

I am curious though, if the likes of Wars and 40k are science fiction, then do you consider a fantasy? What's the difference?

If a story that is literally, in every way, a textbook fantasy with space ships suddenly is a science fiction, then it doesn't seem like there's a difference at all; you'd merely be defining science fiction as any fantasy with any amount of technology and/or aliens, and/or an alternate time frame, and/or taking place on another planet, and/or that has aliens... etc, etc. I could call LOTR science fiction at that point.


In any case, it doesn't matter what we call 40k's genre (Tech Noir?), everything I said about it is true, to the best of my knowledge.

Edited by Catamount, 15 June 2012 - 09:07 PM.


#957 Ilithi Dragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 475 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationWazan

Posted 15 June 2012 - 10:27 PM

As Catamount noted, a story can have a science fiction setting, and still not be a science fiction story. Any science fiction author will tell you that spaceships alone a science fiction story does not make. Science fiction is ultimately, at its core, a gedenkenexperiement, a thought experiment, the continual asking of, "What if?" Science fiction also, by its nature, expresses change. The end of the story leaves the characters and/or the world in which its set in a very different state from when it started, usually questioning a lot of things along the way.

Conversely, a story with a fantasy setting can still be very much a science fiction story. Just ask Anne McCaffrey about her Dragonriders of Pern universe. It's very much a fantasy setting, but she has insisted from the beginning that it is science fiction. I'm an aspiring science fiction author myself, and at least two of the stories I am working on, including the maybe-stand-alone novel I'm currently awake at two in the morning working on that I hope to be my first published piece, have fantasy settings but are very much science fiction in terms of literary tradition.

40K has none of the elements of literary science fiction. In 40K, nothing changes, it is a perpetual, apocalyptic war, and questioning things is actively discouraged in the story's lore. 40K does not ask, "What if?" 40K asks, "What do we have to do to make all this brutality and suffering seem good?" and "How Grim and Dark can we make this?" 40K has a science fiction setting, but it isn't science fiction. It's closer to fantasy than anything else, and the 40K universe originated from the Warhammer fantasy game, so it basically IS a GrimDark ™ fantasy story, set in space. Wars is much the same way, though not quite as GrimDark: It is literally a classic Campbellian fantasy story, and it fits every single point of that literary standard.

Is calling 40K not science fiction being elitist? Certainly not! It's making a classification based on established literary standards. But don't take my word for it, here's acclaimed science fiction author, Dr. David Brin, author of the Uplift Saga, and author of Foundation's Triumph, the last book in the Second Foundation saga, on Science Fiction vs Fantasy:
http://ieet.org/inde...re/brin20110410



Now, like Catamount, I have a lot of disdain for the stories of both 40K and Star Wars, and the Campbellian story tradition in general (it's the story tradition/template of bards and minstrels that kept kings and shamans in power for thousands of years!), and especially for the moral lessons and principles they espouse, and especially those of 40K, because they are not just bad, they are downright evil, and are anathema to everything that the modern Enlightenment that has bootstrapped us out of the darkness of the Middle Ages and that represents all the hopes and dreams we have for any kind of future that isn't a reversion to that, let alone a continued betterment of our future.

#958 Jack Gammel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 205 posts
  • LocationZiliang

Posted 16 June 2012 - 04:22 AM

We could be democratic and enlightened about this. Just like the good ol' Federation. We could take a vote. Take a sample testing of 1,000 normals at the mall and ask them if they think Star Wars is sci-fi: Y or N? I would bet good money that 999-1000 would say yes.

Based on your definition, which is as much a personal opinion as my own, I could write a story about two humans and an alien female on a spaceship; they do nothing but engage in a gratuitous orgy, a baby alien hybrid is born at the end, and I could imply that the hybrid baby would change something...anything, and that would be sci-fi. Star Wars would not be sci-fi. In fact, a huge number of contemporary science fiction narratives would be excluded. Aliens, Brave New World, most of Ray Bradbury's science fiction work, any number of classic pulp science fiction stories, etc...I would say that your definition is elitist.

View PostIlithi Dragon, on 15 June 2012 - 10:27 PM, said:

Now, like Catamount, I have a lot of disdain for the stories of both 40K and Star Wars, and the Campbellian story tradition in general (it's the story tradition/template of bards and minstrels that kept kings and shamans in power for thousands of years!), and especially for the moral lessons and principles they espouse, and especially those of 40K, because they are not just bad, they are downright evil, and are anathema to everything that the modern Enlightenment that has bootstrapped us out of the darkness of the Middle Ages and that represents all the hopes and dreams we have for any kind of future that isn't a reversion to that, let alone a continued betterment of our future.


And I'm disdainful of many Star Trek narratives. I guess that means its not science fiction. I said so. On the internet. Since Trek tech is basically magic and the psuedo-White Man's Burden-trope of the Federation never changes I think I'll define it as fantasy. This has about as much relevance as 40k's morality. But why not? We're taking it upon ourselves to make sweeping declarations about other franchises we don't like.

View PostIlithi Dragon, on 15 June 2012 - 10:27 PM, said:

Conversely, a story with a fantasy setting can still be very much a science fiction story. Just ask Anne McCaffrey about her Dragonriders of Pern universe. It's very much a fantasy setting, but she has insisted from the beginning that it is science fiction. I'm an aspiring science fiction author myself, and at least two of the stories I am working on, including the maybe-stand-alone novel I'm currently awake at two in the morning working on that I hope to be my first published piece, have fantasy settings but are very much science fiction in terms of literary tradition.


You're right that a lot of Science Fiction and Fantasy have some degree of overlap. The Book of the New Sun and Book of the Long Sun or both examples of this. I would define them as Science Fiction, but I wouldn't begrudge someone who wanted to define them as essentially fantasy in nature. People can define their literature the way they want to. At least they can in enlightened countries where we have freedom of speech. McCaffrey wants to write a story about dragons and call it Science Fiction? Fine. Friedman wants to write a story that takes place on the edge of the universe and call it Fantasy? Fine. Most literature is defined as science fiction/fantasy now anyway, but I don't make sweeping assertions about it one way or another.

View PostIlithi Dragon, on 15 June 2012 - 10:27 PM, said:

Is calling 40K not science fiction being elitist? Certainly not! It's making a classification based on established literary standards. But don't take my word for it, here's acclaimed science fiction author, Dr. David Brin, author of the Uplift Saga, and author of Foundation's Triumph, the last book in the Second Foundation saga, on Science Fiction vs Fantasy:
http://ieet.org/inde...re/brin20110410


Well, that definently settles it. Can't argue with Dr. Brin. I wasn't aware that Brin was the patron-saint of Science Fiction. I thought his article was flawed, but I loved the comments.

Let's all forget that Science Fiction was born of this:
Posted Image

Edit: HA! I didn't realize that I'd chosen the edition which featured Bradbury's "I, Mars". R.I.P. Ray Bradbury.

Edited by Jack Gammel, 16 June 2012 - 05:09 AM.


#959 Catamount

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
  • 3,305 posts
  • LocationBoone, NC

Posted 16 June 2012 - 05:58 AM

Jack, I could really go into making a huge post in response to your own, but it really suffices to say that you basically missed the point of our arguments on literally every single count, misrepresenting and failing to address a single one.

#960 Jack Gammel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 205 posts
  • LocationZiliang

Posted 16 June 2012 - 06:04 AM

View PostCatamount, on 16 June 2012 - 05:58 AM, said:

Jack, I could really go into making a huge post in response to your own, but it really suffices to say that you basically missed the point of our arguments on literally every single count, misrepresenting and failing to address a single one.

Sounds like you're quitting. Cool. Guess I win. How about we let this thread finally die?



2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users