The Energon Pub

Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:03 am

mission of peace vs mission of conquest

Fri Nov 26, 2010 10:26 am

I'm going to go with The Empire here. Let's face it, the enterprise wouldn't hold up against a Star Destroyer for long. And a whole fleet of Star Destroyers...

News Credits: 1 · Fri Nov 26, 2010 2:58 pm

JetOptimus23 wrote:I'm going to go with The Empire here. Let's face it, the enterprise wouldn't hold up against a Star Destroyer for long. And a whole fleet of Star Destroyers...

I think the Enterprise D would give any I-class Star Destroyer a sound whooping.

Though I think the Empire would take it. Due to their use of fast fighters. No way phaser banks and photon torpedoes could could nail a swarm of TIE fighters. Star Trek battles are mostly capital ship slug-fests.

News Credits: 1 · Fri Nov 26, 2010 3:28 pm

Just like WW2, I've always imagined Star Fleet ships would be the equivalent of a battleship, while a Star Destroyer is more like an aircraft carrier, able to deploy smaller fighters against the enemy. Star Destroyer's would have to be significantly larger than their Star Trek counterparts, also giving them an advantage.

So, my money is on the carrier!

News Credits: 2 · Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:00 pm

Yeah, I'm going with the Empire here. I dunno about Star Trek ships, but it only takes a bombardment from three Star Destroyers to completely wreck the face of a planet.

Sat Nov 27, 2010 5:11 pm

Shadowman wrote:Yeah, I'm going with the Empire here. I dunno about Star Trek ships, but it only takes a bombardment from three Star Destroyers to completely wreck the face of a planet.

And TOS had General Order 24, involving the complete destruction of a planet's surface.

Anyway... stalemate. the Imperial Navy has no true map of viable hyperspace routes through the Milky Way and the anomalies of the week would quickly befuddle and/or kill them.

Meanwhile, the GFFA is simply too large and spread out for Starfleet to make any true headway. And now, I am out. because such a topic can only lead to flame wars. :HEADHURTS:

News Credits: 1 · Sun Nov 28, 2010 12:50 am

Shadowman wrote:Yeah, I'm going with the Empire here. I dunno about Star Trek ships, but it only takes a bombardment from three Star Destroyers to completely wreck the face of a planet.

And its been said [ never seen ] that Kirks first Enterprise could do the same in a matter of minutes.

That being said, I really cant give an answer here,.

Sun Nov 28, 2010 7:19 am

Watch this, star trek would pwn any destroyer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFCBwob65Nw

News Credits: 1 · Sun Nov 28, 2010 7:22 am

ebilly99 wrote:Watch this, star trek would pwn any destroyer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFCBwob65Nw

Funny.

Sun Nov 28, 2010 9:17 am

Depends really on which Starfleet we're talking about.

The 22rd Century Starfleet (from Star Trek: Enterprise) would most likely been the weakest of the Starfleets due their weaker technology and they would have the least combat experience of any of them.

They would still give the Imperial Navy a run for their money but the the Imperial Navy would win.

In the 23rd Century (from Star Trek: The Original Series and movies 1-6 and 11) I would go with Starfleet winning but just barely namely because of Captain Kirk would out think the Imperial Navy.

23rd Century Starfleet would win but just barely

In the 24th Century (from ]Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, and Star Trek: Voyager and movies 7-10) Starfleet would mop the floor with the Imperial Navy, they would have more ships, the most combat experience (the Cardassian War, and Dominion War, the fights with the Borg and Romulans) than Kirk and Archer ever did, the best technology from the Borg, and the future, and quite honestly their ships are more movable, faster, and they have better weapon systems.

24th Century Starfleet would kick the crap out the Imperial Navy.

Final verdict: Starfleet.

News Credits: 22 · Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:25 am

I'm considering only the OT of Star Wars and TOS of Star Trek here.

The ships would probably keep annihilating each other, but if Vader's ship is involved, it would most likely tip the scales, due to being one big ass ship with powerful weapons, as well as Vader himself, most likely. Remember, he could probably choke out every Star Fleet officer even if he has to do it one by one. Or does he have to be within a certain range?

If Vader and/or the Emperor are not involved, it would just be a firefight, and it would most likely be impossible to tell who would win.

Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:16 pm

Jesterhead wrote:
JetOptimus23 wrote:I'm going to go with The Empire here. Let's face it, the enterprise wouldn't hold up against a Star Destroyer for long. And a whole fleet of Star Destroyers...

I think the Enterprise D would give any I-class Star Destroyer a sound whooping.

Though I think the Empire would take it. Due to their use of fast fighters. No way phaser banks and photon torpedoes could could nail a swarm of TIE fighters. Star Trek battles are mostly capital ship slug-fests.

I have to agree with you there. TIEs may not have a huge armament but there's a ton of them and a single ship to single ship fight turns into one vs squadrons plus enemy capital ship

Thu Dec 23, 2010 6:44 pm

I'm gonna go with the Empire. They didn't control most of the galaxy for nothing.

News Credits: 1 · Thu Dec 23, 2010 7:03 pm

Praxus Prime wrote:I'm gonna go with the Empire. They didn't control most of the galaxy for nothing.

From what I understand they didnt control most of their galaxy.

News Credits: 2 · Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:43 pm

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
Praxus Prime wrote:I'm gonna go with the Empire. They didn't control most of the galaxy for nothing.

From what I understand they didnt control most of their galaxy.

Depends on what you mean by "Most." They had 70,000,000 planets under their belt at their peak. There are around 200,000,000,000 stars had planets that could support life. And while that's actually a really low percentage, realize that Felicia, Korriban, and Tatooine can all technically support life, and I think few people here would want to buy a house on any of those planets.

Still, whatever planets they didn't take were probably crappy or useless anyway. Everything else they got through deception, intimidation, or force. How many planets has Star Fleet taken by force?

News Credits: 1 · Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:48 pm

Shadowman wrote:
sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
Praxus Prime wrote:I'm gonna go with the Empire. They didn't control most of the galaxy for nothing.

From what I understand they didnt control most of their galaxy.

Depends on what you mean by "Most." They had 70,000,000 planets under their belt at their peak. There are around 200,000,000,000 stars had planets that could support life. And while that's actually a really low percentage, realize that Felicia, Korriban, and Tatooine can all technically support life, and I think few people here would want to buy a house on any of those planets.[/quopte]

There are also large areas of unclaimed space in the SW universe.

How many planets has Star Fleet taken by force?

The fact that star fleet doesnt operate that way doesn't mean it couldn't if it wanted too.

Just look at the Terran empire of the mirror universe.

News Credits: 2 · Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:13 pm

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:The fact that star fleet doesnt operate that way doesn't mean it couldn't if it wanted too.

And like I said, the Empire could have taken the rest of known space if they wanted to. It's just, why waste the effort trying to conquer Tatooine?

And no, I really doubt Star Fleet could have taken 70,000,000 planets by force. They don't have nearly enough resources.

News Credits: 1 · Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:19 pm

Shadowman wrote:And like I said, the Empire could have taken the rest of known space if they wanted to. It's just, why waste the effort trying to conquer Tatooine?

Thats an assumption based on little facts.

Meaning, theres no reason to assume the un-claimed areas of space are anything like Tatooine.

And no, I really doubt Star Fleet could have taken 70,000,000 planets by force. They don't have nearly enough resources.

I dont think I suggested a number of planets as a comparison.

News Credits: 2 · Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:38 pm

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
Shadowman wrote:And like I said, the Empire could have taken the rest of known space if they wanted to. It's just, why waste the effort trying to conquer Tatooine?

Thats an assumption based on little facts.

Meaning, theres no reason to assume the un-claimed areas of space are anything like Tatooine.

It was an example. The Unknown Regions aren't all composed of copies of Aleraan either.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
And no, I really doubt Star Fleet could have taken 70,000,000 planets by force. They don't have nearly enough resources.

I dont think I suggested a number of planets as a comparison.

I know I was.

News Credits: 1 · Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:47 pm

Shadowman wrote:
It was an example. The Unknown Regions aren't all composed of copies of Aleraan either.

Examples are based on some verifiable facts.

I know I was.

Well I'll say this.

Based on what is undeniable canon, meaning whats seen in the SW films and not the books,comics and other sources, the Galactic empire was in power for about 20-25 years.

The Mirror Universes Terran empire ruled for over 150 years.

News Credits: 2 · Thu Dec 23, 2010 11:10 pm

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
Shadowman wrote:
It was an example. The Unknown Regions aren't all composed of copies of Aleraan either.

Examples are based on some verifiable facts.

Uh, yeah, they are. Thanks for explaining that to me.

Just so we're on the same wavelength here, what I meant was some planets aren't worth taking, thus they wouldn't be counted in the number of planets the Empire has.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

I know I was.

Well I'll say this.

Based on what is undeniable canon, meaning whats seen in the SW films and not the books,comics and other sources, the Galactic empire was in power for about 20-25 years.

The Mirror Universes Terran empire ruled for over 150 years.

And the Galactic Empire never dissolved. By the time of the Yuuzhan Vong War, the Imperial Remnant still had thousands of planets under its control.

Still asking this, how many planet did the Terran Empire control?

News Credits: 1 · Thu Dec 23, 2010 11:26 pm

Shadowman wrote:Uh, yeah, they are. Thanks for explaining that to me.

Just so we're on the same wavelength here, what I meant was some planets aren't worth taking, thus they wouldn't be counted in the number of planets the Empire has.

Kool, the point I was trying to make is that we dont know how big the un-claimed areas are or if a bigger force is controling them.

And the Galactic Empire never dissolved. By the time of the Yuuzhan Vong War, the Imperial Remnant still had thousands of planets under its control.

Remember, I said "Based on what is undeniable canon, meaning whats seen in the SW films and not the books,comics and other sources"

The Yuuzhan Vong War was a series of books in which the story is set after "Return of the Jedi.There fore its status as canon is questionable.

Lucas him self likes to pick and chose what he will accept as solid canon, and changes his mind on a whim.

Return of the Jedi hevilly implies that the Empire fell at the end of the film.

Still asking this, how many planet did the Terran Empire control?

You didnt ask before.

Not counting colonies, about 120 worlds if I'm right.

News Credits: 2 · Fri Dec 24, 2010 12:30 am

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Kool, the point I was trying to make is that we dont know how big the un-claimed areas are or if a bigger force is controling them.

Uh, yeah, actually we do. (That map is incomplete, it doesn't and probably CAN'T list evert planet in the series)

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Remember, I said "Based on what is undeniable canon, meaning whats seen in the SW films and not the books,comics and other sources"

All right, well now I can immediately disregard everything you say on the matter. Expanded Universe ALWAYS comes into play in Star Wars discussions, you can't say "expanded universe doesn't count" in regards to anything Star Wars.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:The Yuuzhan Vong War was a series of books in which the story is set after "Return of the Jedi.There fore its status as canon is questionable.

No it isn't. It's canon until George Lucas says otherwise and he hasn't said otherwise.

It canon until contradicted by a higher form of canon. The books, I think, are the third tier, which is still pretty high up.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Not counting colonies, about 120 worlds if I'm right.

And I can say with absolute certainty that the Empire controlled many times that.

News Credits: 1 · Fri Dec 24, 2010 12:39 am

Shadowman wrote:Uh, yeah, actually we do. (That map is incomplete, it doesn't and probably CAN'T list evert planet in the series)

kool, never saw that before.

Where is it from and how official is it?

All right, well now I can immediately disregard everything you say on the matter. Expanded Universe ALWAYS comes into play in Star Wars discussions, you can't say "expanded universe doesn't count" in regards to anything Star Wars.

The hell I cant.

Like I said, Lucas picks and choses what he will accept as solid, and he changes his mind when he wants.

No it isn't. It's canon until George Lucas says otherwise and he hasn't said otherwise.

I argue the opposite.

If it can be dropped at a whim theres no point in investing any value to it canon wise.

And I can say with absolute certainty that the Empire controlled many times that

For far less a time, as can be derived by solid canon materials.

News Credits: 2 · Fri Dec 24, 2010 9:04 am

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:The hell I cant.

True: You can't. Saves me a helluva lot of time, too. None of your points matter if you refuse to take the EU into consideration.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:For far less a time, as can be derived by solid canon materials.

The Empire formed 19BBY...and never actually ended, and they never had less than a thousand worlds in their grasp. And that was AFTER they lost the Galactic Civil War.