• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Star Trek or Star Wars?

Star Trek or Star Wars?

  • Total voters
    75
See, Star Wars would have won my vote, if the prequels had been better. However due to how **** they were, and how good the Star Trek reboot was.

Star Trek will become stronger then Star Wars ever was if it plays its cards right in the next few years.
 
Jetboogieman said:
See, Star Wars would have won my vote, if the prequels had been better. However due to how **** they were, and how good the Star Trek reboot was.

Star Trek will become stronger then Star Wars ever was if it plays its cards right in the next few years.
Click to expand...

Not very likely. Historically, Star Wars: A New Hope is like what Avatar would have been the CGI powering the movie had come completely out of nowhere, instead of having a decade lead up in movies like I Am Legend. We can look down on it a bit now, but the OT up to Return of the Jedi was too aesthetically revolutionary for any visual and audio experience to come close. The characters weren't exhaustive explorations of the human psyche, but they were charming and memorable, and the plots were simple enough tor restonate with every culture.
 
OscarB63 said:
Star Trek outmatches Star Wars technologically in almost every way. One Constellation class starship could lay waste to an entire fleet of star destroyers. In the episode "mirror, mirror" the ISS Enterprise destroyed the entire surface of the Halkan planet, a feat that took "The Empire" a battle station the size of a small moon to best.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sorry, not going to happen. Star wars wins the tech war. By a gigantic margin. If the empire and the federation went to war, the federation would be wiped out in weeks.
 
startrekvsstarwarstrekw.jpg
 
molten_dragon said:
Yeah, sorry, not going to happen. Star wars wins the tech war. By a gigantic margin. If the empire and the federation went to war, the federation would be wiped out in weeks.
Click to expand...

This is one of the dumbest geek arguments of all time. Why anyone would spend even half a second worrying about it has always baffled me.
 
molten_dragon said:
Yeah, sorry, not going to happen. Star wars wins the tech war. By a gigantic margin. If the empire and the federation went to war, the federation would be wiped out in weeks.
Click to expand...

But the Federation isn't the sole faction in the Star Trek universe.

After all, consider what would happen should the Borg raid the Jedi Temple for Younglings and teleport out and then assimilate them into the collective?
 
samsmart said:
But the Federation isn't the sole faction in the Star Trek universe.

After all, consider what would happen should the Borg raid the Jedi Temple for Younglings and teleport out and then assimilate them into the collective?
Click to expand...

The Empire wasn't the sole faction in the Star Wars universe either, but they became that way by being the baddest mothers around. :mrgreen:
 
Since the question has obviously come up, I would have to go with Star Trek in any war between ST and SW's forces.

Star Trek has better tech, hands down.

Teleporters alone provide vast tactical and (possibly) strategic advantages, and that doesn't even touch on the higher tech shielding, weaponry (both types and adaptability), medical knowledge/ability, computing power/skill...One could go on.
 
The Mark said:
Since the question has obviously come up, I would have to go with Star Trek in any war between ST and SW's forces.

Star Trek has better tech, hands down.

Teleporters alone provide vast tactical and (possibly) strategic advantages, and that doesn't even touch on the higher tech shielding, weaponry (both types and adaptability), medical knowledge/ability, computing power/skill...One could go on.
Click to expand...

You could also factor in the use of temporal mechanics and time travel from Star Trek. That would have great consequences on events that happened in Star Wars.
 
samsmart said:
You could also factor in the use of temporal mechanics and time travel from Star Trek. That would have great consequences on events that happened in Star Wars.
Click to expand...
True, very true.

Not to mention, I think ST travel speeds are greater than SW's.
 
The Mark said:
True, very true.

Not to mention, I think ST travel speeds are greater than SW's.
Click to expand...

Well, not necessarily...

The in-universe mechanics of FTL-travel in both universes are quite different from each other. I admit I understand very little of both, but I will try to recall what I can of both from memory.

In ST, warp drive is based on manipulations of gravity and traveling through subspace. Effectively, a ship going at warp speed is traveling to their destination - rather, they are letting gravity pull them to the destination. So they aren't pushed but rather pulled. Because of this, the gravitational pull of planets is a semi-major factor on traveling lanes.

In SW, FTL-travel is achieved through entry into hyperspace. I believe it is conjectured that spacecraft don't necessarily travel in realspace at FTL speeds but rather enter a separate dimension in which the physics of that place allows them to travel and speeds that are faster-than-light in the SW universe.

Also, if the use of "subspace" in Star Trek and the use of "hyperspace" in Star Wars is indicative of anything, FTL travel in Star Trek is dependent on traveling through a dimension on a lower order of the universe while FTL travel in Star Wars is dependant on traveling through a dimension on higher order of the universe.

The way subsapce travel works can be shown in this thought experiment. Imagine that the universe has multiple dimensions, each of which are layered. Now imagine that these layers are concentric circles. The circumferences of the "inner circles" or "lower dimensions" circles is smaller than the circumferences of the "outer circles" or "upper dimensions." So for a vessel of one dimension to shift to a lower dimension, travel through it, and then go back to the original dimension would take less time than if they traveled the same distance in their higher dimension.

Hyperspace travel works in a different ways. It relies on the alien physics of a different dimension to either 1) travel a greater distance in the same amount of time or 2) travel the same distance but in a lesser amount of time.

And while we can make conjectures and hypothesize on the differences between the two, the truth is that characters in both works travel at the speed of plot.
 
repeter said:
Tell that to my Super Star Destroyer and Death Star
Click to expand...
It would be so ****ing easy to teleport a quantum torpedo or ST destructive device of some sort into the power core of the Death Star, or a SSD – or anywhere they damn well please.

Hell, they could simply teleport all the enemy crew into space…

I have no recollection of SW shield systems being capable of blocking teleportation – Unlike ST shields.
 
The Mark said:
It would be so ****ing easy to teleport a quantum torpedo or ST destructive device of some sort into the power core of the Death Star, or a SSD – or anywhere they damn well please.

Hell, they could simply teleport all the enemy crew into space…

I have no recollection of SW shield systems being capable of blocking teleportation – Unlike ST shields.
Click to expand...

If you lasted long enough to do that, that is. The SSD has more than enough firepower to take your shields, and your ship before you can blink, and the Death Star would screw your starbase and planet so fast it wouldn't be funny....lol
 
samsmart said:
Well, not necessarily...

The in-universe mechanics of FTL-travel in both universes are quite different from each other. I admit I understand very little of both, but I will try to recall what I can of both from memory.

In ST, warp drive is based on manipulations of gravity and traveling through subspace. Effectively, a ship going at warp speed is traveling to their destination - rather, they are letting gravity pull them to the destination. So they aren't pushed but rather pulled. Because of this, the gravitational pull of planets is a semi-major factor on traveling lanes.

In SW, FTL-travel is achieved through entry into hyperspace. I believe it is conjectured that spacecraft don't necessarily travel in realspace at FTL speeds but rather enter a separate dimension in which the physics of that place allows them to travel and speeds that are faster-than-light in the SW universe.

Also, if the use of "subspace" in Star Trek and the use of "hyperspace" in Star Wars is indicative of anything, FTL travel in Star Trek is dependent on traveling through a dimension on a lower order of the universe while FTL travel in Star Wars is dependant on traveling through a dimension on higher order of the universe.

The way subsapce travel works can be shown in this thought experiment. Imagine that the universe has multiple dimensions, each of which are layered. Now imagine that these layers are concentric circles. The circumferences of the "inner circles" or "lower dimensions" circles is smaller than the circumferences of the "outer circles" or "upper dimensions." So for a vessel of one dimension to shift to a lower dimension, travel through it, and then go back to the original dimension would take less time than if they traveled the same distance in their higher dimension.

Hyperspace travel works in a different ways. It relies on the alien physics of a different dimension to either 1) travel a greater distance in the same amount of time or 2) travel the same distance but in a lesser amount of time.

And while we can make conjectures and hypothesize on the differences between the two, the truth is that characters in both works travel at the speed of plot.
Click to expand...
True.

I recall several more advanced travel methods being mentioned, however, in several episodes and movies.
 
repeter said:
If you lasted long enough to do that, that is. The SSD has more than enough firepower to take your shields, and your ship before you can blink, and the Death Star would screw your starbase and planet so fast it wouldn't be funny....lol
Click to expand...

If a bunch of X-Wing starfighters can take on the Death Star, a bunch of runabouts would destroy it faster, and would have transporters too.
 
samsmart said:
If a bunch of X-Wing starfighters can take on the Death Star, a bunch of runabouts would destroy it faster, and would have transporters too.
Click to expand...

X-wings are faster and way more manueverable than a runabout, and ST ships can't use a transporter unless they lower their shields. Furthermore, when you look at the actual name of both ST and SW shields, they are referred to as deflector shields. Their functions are also the same, so it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine that SW shields could also block transporters like ST shields.
 
repeter said:
If you lasted long enough to do that, that is. The SSD has more than enough firepower to take your shields, and your ship before you can blink, and the Death Star would screw your star base and planet so fast it wouldn't be funny....lol
Click to expand...
I recall ST offensive and defensive systems being adjustable depending on the type of defense/attack (respectively) they had to contend with.

At the same time, SW’s offensive and defensive systems appeared to be far less adaptive to the situation.

Many other factors would potentially affect the confrontation, such as the relative capabilities of the two side’s sensor systems, repair systems, power systems, etc…

On another note, one of the main reasons for the ST universe’s greater Tech levels is that the tech in the original SW movies was dreamed up at the time in question, whereas the tech in ST universe has been constantly upgraded and enhanced with the ever-growing number of TV shows and Movies about it.

If the original ST show faced off against the original SW movies, I think SW might win.
 
The Mark said:
I recall ST offensive and defensive systems being adjustable depending on the type of defense/attack (respectively) they had to contend with.

At the same time, SW’s offensive and defensive systems appeared to be far less adaptive to the situation.

Many other factors would potentially affect the confrontation, such as the relative capabilities of the two side’s sensor systems, repair systems, power systems, etc…

On another note, one of the main reasons for the ST universe’s greater Tech levels is that the tech in the original SW movies was dreamed up at the time in question, whereas the tech in ST universe has been constantly upgraded and enhanced with the ever-growing number of TV shows and Movies about it.

If the original ST show faced off against the original SW movies, I think SW might win.
Click to expand...

I agree with your analysis of the relative tech. Star Trek has gotten progressively more advanced as its timeline advances, whereas Star Wars has gotten more advanced technologically as it goes back in time. When you look at the new games coming out, and the stories of the Old Republic, their weaponry could rape the original trilogy's weapons. And the fighting styles back then would own the originals too.

I guess the difference between ST and SW is that ST becomes better as it advances, while SW continues to explain what happened before, and goes along that path.
 
repeter said:
I agree with your analysis of the relative tech. Star Trek has gotten progressively more advanced as its timeline advances, whereas Star Wars has gotten more advanced technologically as it goes back in time. When you look at the new games coming out, and the stories of the Old Republic, their weaponry could rape the original trilogy's weapons. And the fighting styles back then would own the originals too.

I guess the difference between ST and SW is that ST becomes better as it advances, while SW continues to explain what happened before, and goes along that path.
Click to expand...
There are many SW book series that fall after the original triliogy in the SW timeline. I think many of them include advances in weaponry, not too mention other developments.

I have noted that SW weaponry (at least from the Empire) seemed somewhat focused on "massive destruction". I recall in one book a mention of this ship that could, basically, fly into the core of a sun and cause it to go supernova - and survive.

Don't think ST ships could handle that - although they could likely cause a supernova with a robotic device of some sort.
 
repeter said:
If you lasted long enough to do that, that is. The SSD has more than enough firepower to take your shields, and your ship before you can blink, and the Death Star would screw your starbase and planet so fast it wouldn't be funny....lol
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for Star Wars, their targeting computers suck compared to Star Trek. In all of the SW movies, entire fleets of starships would do 18th century ship of the line tactics by using broadsides. In ST, it's more of a submarine 3D fight, but both sides can see each other provided that there wasn't any celestial phenomena around to disrupt their sensors.
 
The_Patriot said:
Unfortunately for Star Wars, their targeting computers suck compared to Star Trek. In all of the SW movies, entire fleets of starships would do 18th century ship of the line tactics by using broadsides. In ST, it's more of a submarine 3D fight, but both sides can see each other provided that there wasn't any celestial phenomena around to disrupt their sensors.
Click to expand...

In the movies, and the ship-to-ship fights from the movies are quite limited. Frankly, a better estimate of SW space weaponry would be Star Wars Empire the game. In the game, it is honestly a simple task to get more ships into a fight, and then use very basic targetting tactics to defeat the enemy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom