Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

[LoresLost]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

The Star Trek Universe has sheilds, deflector fields and structual reinforcement fields.

 

1. Sheilds - Absorb damage from incoming attacks and particle not defected
   
2. Deflector Fields - a energy beam that deflects particles as a velocity sheild (It produced from the dish/blue glowing area on the ships)
   
3. Structual Reinforcement - showen more in NG but mentioned in Enterprise and implyed in TOS, Used to hold the ship together (by making matter more solid)
   

 

Also note that in the SW, When the Millienum Falcon came into the rubble field it was mentioned by Han that it would require half the Fleet to reduce a planet to rubble IIRC.

[BlackSword]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

Re: Shields

 

The RotJ shield was produced by a planet based system. The first Death Star apparently didn't have the shield as the fighter craft were able to approach it without damage (though I think I remember them passing through a 'rough' spot). Also in ESB the Millenium Flacon is able to get close enough to attach to a SD while they search for Solo.

 

SW also has shield which apparently trap air, but not larger objects. The bay the Millenium Falcon and Imperial Shuttle land in are open to space, but the atmosphere is stable and is not sucked out when a ships enters the bay (though I have to rewatch RotJ, I don't remember if the troops are in place as the shuttle arrives, or if they march in as the shuttle lands.

 

Its apparent that SW has multiple types of shields depending on the goal. Planetary based shields are the strongest (the Hoth rebel base and the planet based shield protecting DS II).

 

Though I do return to my arguement in the previous thread. I think the Imperial uniforms are much better looking then the technicolor monstrosities, so I give the win to the Empire.

[Vondy]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

 

Though I do return to my arguement in the previous thread. I think the Imperial uniforms are much better looking then the technicolor monstrosities, so I give the win to the Empire.

I can live with that.

 

I do kind of like the black ST uniforms with the grey shoulders from the latter NG movies, though.

[proditor]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

Eh...one blast from a wave motion gun and these suckers are toast.

 

EDF Baby!

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

I beleive that ST Phasers would have trouble penetrating SW sheilds' date=' but the Photon Torps would easily get thru. SW Turbolasers, once they got within range, wiould shred ST sheilds. Remember one-two shots by phasers usually drops the sheild power quite a bit.[/quote']

There was a NG episode in which another craft is reported to be locking lasers onto the Enterprise, and Riker responds "Lasers?!? Those can't even penetrate our navigation shields!" Considering that 'navigation shields' are the low-level shields ships keep up at all times to deflect random space debris, I really have trouble buying that turbolasers would "shred" the Enterprise shields.

 

Further, keep this in mind: We've yet to see any Star Wars gunner, who's not using the Force, hit a target they can't see.

 

Star Trek ships are fully capable of maneuvering and fighting at superluminal speeds.

 

All the Enterprise would have to do would be keep making warp speed flybys, shooting each time, and the Imperial gunners would never be able to target her. Plus the turbolasers wouldn't be able to hit her, either, considering that she'd be outpacing the weapon's energy (light) quite handily.

 

And in regards to what someone else remarked about Star Trek ships not being able to go into warp near large masses -- that's simply not so. Only extreme gravitational desities (like black holes) present this problem.

 

In Star Trek IV, the Klingon Bird of Prey goes to warp while still inside the Earth's atmosphere.

 

In the NextGen two-parter dealing with the Klingon civil war, the ship Worf is commanding goes to warp at the edge of a star's photosphere.

 

During the original series, there are at least two instances of Kirk remarking about "warping out of orbit".

 

So being near a large mass does not prevent a Star Trek ship from going to, or remaining at, warp speed.

 

As a further 'nail in the coffin' for the Imperials, even if the Imperial ship did have shields that would stop the Enterprise from moving through them at warp speed --

 

- Enterprise drops to sublight to cross through the shields

 

- Once inside the shields, they use the transporter to drop off a magnetic bottle containing a couple of ounces of antimatter and a timer.

 

- The Enterprise crosses back through the shields and goes to warp

 

- The timer turns off the magnetic containment of the antimatter

 

- Imperial ship go boom

[BlackSword]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

I can live with that.

 

I do kind of like the black ST uniforms with the grey shoulders from the latter NG movies, though.

True, but the thread does refer to the NCC-1701A which was one of the earlier ships, so still full of technicolor goodness.

[BlackSword]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

One thing I tried to point out in the last thread was simply this: People are trying to compare fictional physics to fictional physics. They both are starting with different physical assumptions. Who knows, may the Star Wars shields are such that they stop phaser (whatever those are) and photon torpedoes. If the Enterprise appeared in the Star Wars universe, it would cease running because its physical assumptions do not work in the SWU. If an Imperial Star Destroyer appearded in the Star Trek universe, it would stop working because its physics don't match those of the STU.

 

The only physical constant in either universe is the 'plot factor.' That being: Science is only conveinant so long as it helps drive the story forward. The moment that something becomes inconveinant it is thrown out for the episode or the moment of dialogue.

[DrTemp]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

Normally these dicsussions are pointless, but not here.

 

Hey, this is an RPG system forum. Why hasn't anyone just created the stats and used the combat system to find it out? Two of three, and you know which ship is better in a one-on-one.

 

Of course, this would still require some consensus on the actual capabilities of the two ships... but at least the whole discussion would be not as arbitrary as it normally needs to be.

[Darth Sarcastic]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

ok, lets throw some napalm on the fire

 

how about Vorlons or Shadows vs the Borg?

 

 

Need I remind you what would happen if the Borg assimilated the Imperial Fleet? I have to go hit myself with bricks to get that maddness out my mind.

 

[lapsedgamer]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

And in regards to what someone else remarked about Star Trek ships not being able to go into warp near large masses -- that's simply not so. Only extreme gravitational desities (like black holes) present this problem.

 

In Star Trek IV, the Klingon Bird of Prey goes to warp while still inside the Earth's atmosphere.

 

In the NextGen two-parter dealing with the Klingon civil war, the ship Worf is commanding goes to warp at the edge of a star's photosphere.

 

During the original series, there are at least two instances of Kirk remarking about "warping out of orbit".

 

So being near a large mass does not prevent a Star Trek ship from going to, or remaining at, warp speed.

 

Actually, it was question. Thanks for pointing out those examples. I seemed to remember that limitation, but I also thought that it went away when it was convenient for the writer. Does that particular limitation apply to the SW ships?

[Mentor]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

Kirk says, "I whipped Khan, so bring on Vader."

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

Actually' date=' it was question. Thanks for pointing out those examples. I seemed to remember that limitation, but I also thought that it went away when it was convenient for the writer. Does that particular limitation apply to the SW ships?[/quote']

Sorry, I misunderstood.

 

To be honest, I don't know -- if you're just talking on-screen stuff for "canon". In the written fiction there is the Interdictor class of ships which generates an extremely dense artificial gravity field which prevents nearby ships from jumping to hyperspace...but most discussions such as this lay ground rules that disregard written fiction because often it blatantly contradicts what we've seen "on screen".

 

On the other hand, there's the comment in The Empire Strikes Back about not being able to jump to hyperspace while in an asteroid field -- which kinds of puts it back into the "maybe they can't jump near a mass" side of things.

 

On the other hand (the third hand?) given Han's comments about precise calcs needed for a hyperjump ("...or you'd fly right through a sun or bounce into a supernova, and that'd end the trip real quick, wouldn't it?"), it may be that every material object projects some kind of hyperspace "ghost" or "shadow", likely based on its realspace mass, and that you could collide with a hyperspace "shadow" just like you could the real thing. If that's the case, perhaps you can't jump to hyperspace in an asteroid field because you'd pretty much be guaranteed to fly through several hyperspace "shadows" of the surrounding asteroids.

[Vondy]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

Kirk says' date=' "I whipped Khan, so bring on Vader." [/quote']

"Apology accepted, Captain Kik."

[Vondy]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

And why, I ask, hasn't anyone thought to include the FEDS New World Order?

[Lezentauw]

Re: Enterprise NC1701A vs. Imperial Star Destroyer

 

On the other hand' date=' there's the comment in [i']The Empire Strikes Back[/i] about not being able to jump to hyperspace while in an asteroid field -- which kinds of puts it back into the "maybe they can't jump near a mass" side of things.

 

On the other hand (the third hand?) given Han's comments about precise calcs needed for a hyperjump ("...or you'd fly right through a sun or bounce into a supernova, and that'd end the trip real quick, wouldn't it?"), it may be that every material object projects some kind of hyperspace "ghost" or "shadow", likely based on its realspace mass, and that you could collide with a hyperspace "shadow" just like you could the real thing. If that's the case, perhaps you can't jump to hyperspace in an asteroid field because you'd pretty much be guaranteed to fly through several hyperspace "shadows" of the surrounding asteroids.

 

The second paragraph is correct as I understand it. Everything in real space provides a shadow in hyperspace. If a ship was to travel through that shadow, a collision would occur. It has been described that ships have created blockades to force ships out of hyperspace. All ships in Star Wars have sensors that detect for these shadows, and when they encounter one, they drop the ship out of hyperspace.