The Executor vs The Neg'var

[Mr. Oragahn]

It's hilarious how you accuse me of "nitpicking visuals" (seeing starships moving within a few hundred meters of a giant borg cube is not a nitpick), because obviously the reflection of photons is less accurate than the statements of fallible people, while at the same time basing the main (read: entire) chain reaction theory on nitpicking fancy VFX halo rings emitting from Alderaan.

Fair point!

[StarWarsStarTrek]

It's hilarious how you accuse me of "nitpicking visuals" (seeing starships moving within a few hundred meters of a giant borg cube is not a nitpick), because obviously the reflection of photons is less accurate than the statements of fallible people, while at the same time basing the main (read: entire) chain reaction theory on nitpicking fancy VFX halo rings emitting from Alderaan.

I never said you can't use visuals. That's a complete and utter red herring. My argument is that we should argue for what the story is telling us, not any individual source within the story. It would be akin to a religious zealot screaming that the part of the dogma must be followed, but ignoring the rest because it's inconvenient. Focusing primarily on the VFX effects as if they're incapable of making mistakes is in and of itself, a form of nitpicking, just with flimsy justification.

Oh yeah, and Aldeeran was stated in the EU to not have a planetary shield. Ie, I might need to dig up the source, but it was particularly stated that planetary shield would
prevent the complete and destruction of the planet, but still utterly scorch the surface of the planet, leaving it lifeless.

But I've already addressed this all before. Stop trying to tack on some sort of hypocritical
measure of my stance because you're incapable of debating with the entirety of canon
and not just trying to validate shitty VFX.

1. How do you determine when VFX is dominant over dialogue and when it isn't? You seem to take dialogue over visuals in ST whenever it suites ST, and with SW you nitpick the VFX of TCW to support ST. But if you are to claim that you're fair and balanced, what's is your method?

2. The story intention of the Death Star was largely to be enormously powerful. Lucas's drafts originally described some superlaser of several lasers amplified by a focal point; no hint of chain reaction! That would defy the point of a massively powerful planet buster being taken out by a symbolic David, would it not? When you use a writers' intent method, it supports DET; as it does when you use SoD.

3. I have, honestly been skeptical of the Alderaan planetary shield, but do you have the book and maybe the quote?

3. A planetary shield stopping the superlaser largely but it still causing an ecosystem buster implies that:

a. The Death Star is DET or a very high energy chain reaction, as even a blocked on is extinction level.

b. Planetary shields can absorb extreme amounts of energy.

I am using my iPod, so excuse the grammar.

[Mike DiCenso]

It's hilarious how you accuse me of "nitpicking visuals" (seeing starships moving within a few hundred meters of a giant borg cube is not a nitpick).

It makes sense to fight a borg cube at close range as you can far more easily stay in the targeting arc of one side of it and so reduce incoming fire, in fact if you disable some, all or just weaken the weapons on one side then doing so makes perfect sense.

It's hilarious how you accuse me of "nitpicking visuals" (seeing starships moving within a few hundred meters of a giant borg cube is not a nitpick), because obviously the reflection of photons is less accurate than the statements of fallible people, while at the same time basing the main (read: entire) chain reaction theory on nitpicking fancy VFX halo rings emitting from Alderaan.

On that "few hundred meters", which was disproven to be pure bull. Let's look again at DS9's "Emissary", when the Sisko's old ship, the U.S.S. Saratoga first opens fire on the Borg cube:








As you can see. We have a few seconds of the Saratoga opening fire and moving towards the camera, then a pan around as the UFP ship goes by the camera, which in turn brings the Borg cube into view. Using some photometrics we can ascertain the following:

Assuming 35 mm film the Borg cube (half in shadow) can measure up to 2.7 inches across the field of view, and the camera image width is about 8.5 inches. On 35mm film this would mean the Borg cube was 11 mm wide. Borg cubes are known to be up to 3 km to a side, and thus the following:

OD = Object Distance, in this case the Borg cubeship

OD / 3 km = 35mm / 11 mm

OD / 3 km = 3.181

OD = 3 km * 3.181

OD = 9.54 km

So much for the "hundreds of meters". It's nearly 10 km, perhaps a bit more than that as the Saratoga is initially shown closing in on the Borg cube while heading at the camera. So we can probably safely call it 10 km range here. Also, here is the video at YouTube. Note that after the order is given to fire, the phaser sound effect starts just a split second before cutting to the exterior scene I just analyzed, which means the range is actually greater than 10 km. Also of note, an Ambassador-class starship along with a Nebula-class starship opens fire at considerably even greater range.
-Mike

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Oh, ST ship engagement ranges are typically under 10 km, as I consistently note, but rarely under a kilometer, but there are still examples of such occurrences; the Doomsday Machine, for example. Using an iPod for the moment, so I cannot post it today.

But under 10 kilometers still proves the point, as the Battle of Endor shows engagement ranges at least in the hundreds of km's.

There are BVR ST engagements, but only in one on one or such small scale standoffs. Large space battles, which would matter the most in a ZW v ST war, has 100s of km's for SW and, by your own admission, under 10 km's for ST.

[Mith]

1. How do you determine when VFX is dominant over dialogue and when it isn't? You seem to take dialogue over visuals in ST whenever it suites ST, and with SW you nitpick the VFX of TCW to support ST. But if you are to claim that you're fair and balanced, what's is your method?

The method is case by case, and whichever supports the story. I've told you this. I will not repeat myself again. Either you're capable of understanding it or not.

2. The story intention of the Death Star was largely to be enormously powerful. Lucas's drafts originally described some superlaser of several lasers amplified by a focal point; no hint of chain reaction! That would defy the point of a massively powerful planet buster being taken out by a symbolic David, would it not? When you use a writers' intent method, it supports DET; as it does when you use SoD.

...And? There are tons, tons of ideas that are originally drafted up for stories that never make it in, even if the time and the resources allow for it simply because it doesn't always mesh with what the concept becomes. Fuck, Luke according to some sources wasn't even supposed to be human.

So why in God's name do I care about something that George discarded? Nor am I even arguing writer's intent. I am arguing for what the story has presented to us. Yes, sometimes intent could be used to settle a matter of discussion, but only when all resources are exhausted or support that concept. For example, a symbolic scene that could possibly mean two things could be settled by what the author claims it to be.

3. I have, honestly been skeptical of the Alderaan planetary shield, but do you have the book and maybe the quote?

Sure, via 2046 site:

the Dark Empire Sourcebook states the following on page 125:

"Alderaan had no shields of any kind, so it was utterly vaporized. A shielded planet that is overcome by a superlaser may "merely" have its entire surface burned off or split into several pieces. Note that planets don't have to be destroyed to be rendered uninhabitable."

You're welcome.

3. A planetary shield stopping the superlaser largely but it still causing an ecosystem buster implies that:

a. The Death Star is DET or a very high energy chain reaction, as even a blocked on is extinction level.

Or rather, it just fucks up the whole 'shunt it into hyperspace' part.

b. Planetary shields can absorb extreme amounts of energy.

Which is complete and utter bullshit. Because the effect is the same without the hypermatter formula--better even considering that the planets aren't supposed to break apart into large pieces.

But that might be in due to size or something.

[Mike DiCenso]

Oh, ST ship engagement ranges are typically under 10 km, as I consistently note, but rarely under a kilometer, but there are still examples of such occurrences; the Doomsday Machine, for example. Using an iPod for the moment, so I cannot post it today.

But under 10 kilometers still proves the point, as the Battle of Endor shows engagement ranges at least in the hundreds of km's.

There are BVR ST engagements, but only in one on one or such small scale standoffs. Large space battles, which would matter the most in a ZW v ST war, has 100s of km's for SW and, by your own admission, under 10 km's for ST.

This is an example of the dishonest that everyone complains about, and you have been citied several times for in the past 6 months. You consistantly have claimed that the Battle of Wolf 359 and First Contact battles were at a mere "hundreds of meters", and yet I have disproved that above with some simple photometrics and actual images from the only freaking episode in all of Star Trek that canonically shows the actual battle. In both cases we have ships opening fire from no less than 10 km as per what I noted above since 9.54 km is a lower limit. It is obvious that the Saratoga as well as the other two starships are firing from much longer starting ranges. The rare time that SW ships have fired at 200 km in a small fleet action was during TCW's "Downfall of a Droid", which is to date, the only such instance. All other battles in the canon of the movies and the TCW take place within very low few km to within hundreds of meters.
-Mike

[Praeothmin]

But under 10 kilometers still proves the point, as the Battle of Endor shows engagement ranges at least in the hundreds of km's.

Prove it!
Now!

You keep saying that, yet the movies don't show us these ranges at all, so you will now prove SW ships can indeed fire at these ranges, or stop mentioning this....

And ST ship ranges had been discussed many time over, and again, you ignore all the examples given, like the example in "The Wounded", with a battle of over 200 000km ranges...
Another TNG episode had the Klingon BoP open fire on the E-D at 40 000km, but they only waited for that range because of Riker's suggestion, they were ready to fire from much farther then that...

So, again, and considering your track record, provide evidence for these "hundreds of km ranges" in RotJ...

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Oh, ST ship engagement ranges are typically under 10 km, as I consistently note, but rarely under a kilometer, but there are still examples of such occurrences; the Doomsday Machine, for example. Using an iPod for the moment, so I cannot post it today.

But under 10 kilometers still proves the point, as the Battle of Endor shows engagement ranges at least in the hundreds of km's.

There are BVR ST engagements, but only in one on one or such small scale standoffs. Large space battles, which would matter the most in a ZW v ST war, has 100s of km's for SW and, by your own admission, under 10 km's for ST.

This is an example of the dishonest that everyone complains about, and you have been citied several times for in the past 6 months. You consistantly have claimed that the Battle of Wolf 359 and First Contact battles were at a mere "hundreds of meters", and yet I have disproved that above with some simple photometrics and actual images from the only freaking episode in all of Star Trek that canonically shows the actual battle. In both cases we have ships opening fire from no less than 10 km as per what I noted above since 9.54 km is a lower limit. It is obvious that the Saratoga as well as the other two starships are firing from much longer starting ranges. The rare time that SW ships have fired at 200 km in a small fleet action was during TCW's "Downfall of a Droid", which is to date, the only such instance. All other battles in the canon of the movies and the TCW take place within very low few km to within hundreds of meters.
-Mike

I consistently claim 10 km ranges. Occasionally, I say a few hundred meters, because there are examples of, for example, the Federation and dominion fleets passing through each other and firing at point blank range. Most of the time I use the 10 km figure.

But this is a red herring, because whether or not you use 10 km ranges or the occasional <1 km ranges for ST, you get figures far lower than the 100's of km's seen in the Battle of Endor, where a few dozen km's was considered to be point blank range.

And no, your TCW feats do not override the G canon ROTJ.

And no, the ROTS opening battle does not override or contradict it, because the CIS fleet was trying to invade Coruscant and capture the Chancellor in a surprise attack. How else do you expect to land ground troops?

[Picard]

Except that CIS and OR fleets were using age-of-sail era tactics and equipment (fixed broadside batteries) suited for those engagements.

And you are liar - in Battle of Endor, "point blank" range is about third of Alliance cruiser or 400 meters. Maximum possible range for maximum range at Endor is 34 kilometers. Effective range for engaging ships might be up to 6 000 kilometers, althought that is extremely genrous, due to being based on Hoth orbital cannon shots.

http://picard578.hostoi.com/startrek-vs ... asers.html

Plus, it is funny how you forget that 24th century ST vessels can fight at 200 000+ km ranges if they choose to. As for fleet engagement, we know that:
a) subspace fields interfere with sensors
b) subspace field is part of shields (ref: "Generations" display)
c) large number of ships are packed densely

So, large number of densely packed ships interferes with opponent's targetting sensors just enough to make close quarter combat a must. Option B is that they close range at high impulse and slow down just prior to actual engagement.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Except that CIS and OR fleets were using age-of-sail era tactics and equipment (fixed broadside batteries) suited for those engagements.

Given that literature confirms the loaded cannons as flak cannons, aka point defense, the only thing archaic about the opening space battle of Coruscant is manned gunners.

And you are liar - in Battle of Endor, "point blank" range is about third of Alliance cruiser or 400 meters. Maximum possible range for maximum range at Endor is 34 kilometers. Effective range for engaging ships might be up to 6 000 kilometers, althought that is extremely genrous, due to being based on Hoth orbital cannon shots.

After Lando made the point blank range statement, a view of the battle from the perspective of inside the Death Star shows both fleets several ISD lengths away firing at each other.

http://picard578.hostoi.com/startrek-vs ... asers.html

Plus, it is funny how you forget that 24th century ST vessels can fight at 200 000+ km ranges if they choose to. As for fleet engagement, we know that:

If they wish to? Were the captains in the Battle of Worf 359 just suicidal that day, then?

a) subspace fields interfere with sensors
b) subspace field is part of shields (ref: "Generations" display)
c) large number of ships are packed densely

So, large number of densely packed ships interferes with opponent's targetting sensors just enough to make close quarter combat a must. Option B is that they close range at high impulse and slow down just prior to actual engagement.

Except that the ability for the Enterprise to communicate, scan the borg cube and mark specific coordinates on the borg cube suggests that they were not being jammed, meaning that such is not an excuse for closing within ten kilometers to fire.

[Praeothmin]

you get figures far lower than the 100's of km's seen in the Battle of Endor

Prove it!
Now!

Using the same video you used, show us where we see these hundreds of km...

Also, disprove all the higher ranges seen in ST, like in DS9, in Voy, in TNG, now!

You've got one dubious example which you haven't even proven, against at least a dozen or more examples for ST...

[Picard]

Given that literature confirms the loaded cannons as flak cannons, aka point defense, the only thing archaic about the opening space battle of Coruscant is manned gunners.

Both Republic and CIS use fixed gun mounts akin to Age of Sail mounts. Got it?

After Lando made the point blank range statement, a view of the battle from the perspective of inside the Death Star shows both fleets several ISD lengths away firing at each other.

While Rebel fleet was still trying to limp to that point blank range. When they did get there, it was few hundred meters.

http://starsmedia.ign.com/stars/image/a ... 8_640w.jpg

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/given/rb/isdtower1.jpg

Seriously - did you watch the movie at all, or you are really so pathetically dishonest?

If they wish to? Were the captains in the Battle of Worf 359 just suicidal that day, then?

I already explained that part. It allows for better precision against subsystems (better combat effectivenes), limits return fire of cube (not by much) and counters any possible jamming. Try again.

Except that the ability for the Enterprise to communicate, scan the borg cube and mark specific coordinates on the borg cube suggests that they were not being jammed, meaning that such is not an excuse for closing within ten kilometers to fire.

All comunications they got from site were garbled. And once they got there standard radio was useful. Rest you need to know is in "The Wounded" episode from The NExt Generation.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Moving closer to a vessel reduces the threat of jamming? Are you trying to spew as many stupid handwaves as you can, Picard?

[Admiral Breetai]

Moving closer to a vessel reduces the threat of jamming? Are you trying to spew as many stupid handwaves as you can, Picard?

i like how you ignored a mods request for evidence my points and went right for what you thought was the easiest target

[Picard]

Moving closer to a vessel reduces the threat of jamming? Are you trying to spew as many stupid handwaves as you can, Picard?

You are idiot. Moving closer to vessel allows them to target it despite the jamming. Or you think that only communications can be jammed (and we know that both communications and sensors in ST are mostly subspace-based).