Since the asteroid was of the same size as the MR, since the MR is not 15 km long, and finally since the asteroid wasn't even covering its own length over the course of a second, you are absolutely incorrect here.Stargazer wrote:Considering that the asteroid was more than a dozen kilometers in diameter, it likely was moving a several kilometers a second.Mr. Oragahn wrote:Sure... when they hit at several kilometers per second.
Don't you feel like we're a bit far from the mark as far as the Alpha relay is concerned? :)
Slow paced momentum is what ruined that relay, that is all.
Tell me if visuals from the game count more than anything other data found on Internet or from official source and I may produce some pictures proving me right.
It says a MR can't be destroyed but later says one has been destroyed. The rationalization, which is alluded to in the text in fact, is that what makes it infeasible is not the forces required to destroy the MR, but the dramatic effects resulting from such an act.What's self-contradictory? The idea that the Alpha Relay's unique energy level is what caused its system's destruction originated from you, not the codex.Aside from being self contradictory, the text is best rationalized as it's infeasible to blast a relay without hurting the systems it lies in.
However, considering the OP, this discussion about destroying relays is only relevant if Trek forces enter the ME universe through the wormholes. Considering the fleet sizes for ME and the proximity to high profile worlds (those ME fleets are literally dumped at the doorsteps of those prime worlds), there isn't much left to discuss, is there?
Trek ships aren't advanced enough to compensate for the large amount of ships from ME.
Their phase cannons and similar disruptors aren't even as powerful as the main guns on the most powerful ME ships, which already come in greater quantities, in greater sizes, with more range and so on.
OK.And I never said that the wormholes open right next to prime worlds, did I? I guess we could just say that the wormholes open on the edges of each faction's territory.
Now this thread is a bit old, so may I ask again what allows ME to move fast enough through Trek's territories?
Trek forces, in Citadel space, still have access to warp, although they have no starchart. But the ME forces lack both starcharts and mass relays.
Yes.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLF1m3lK6dICertainly not in this case, and it's fairly easy to know how and find yard stones to use as points of reference. In the DLC cutscene, we have two viewpoints to determine the distance between the SR-2 and the relay, as the ship leaves a bubble where it was. We also have the advantage of knowing that a ship launched by a relay follows the direction of the relay, at least at first when it's still in the system. It means the launching trajectory follows a vector defined by the direction which the two relay's arms point into. We see that bubble effect twice although there's one single launch bubble, because of the cut from one angle to another. The first shot lets us know where the bubble appeared in relation to the relay's length, which distance wise is quite close to the glowing ovoid center, and inside the gap between the two arms. The second shot shows how far from the relay the bubble is, because we know where the bubble would have been located if the ship had to place itself between the two arms to be launched.
You know, I'm not even sure what you're going on about here. At 2:27 we can see that the relay is many, many times longer than the Normandy SR-2. Is it really that hard to think that the relay is 15 km long based on that?
I gave you a list of visual clues that show that the two MR we saw in ME2 and ME3 aren't 15 km long.
Besides, 15,000 / 170 = 88.2353
So you need more than 88 Normandys in a row to match a length of 15 km.
Please use that with my observations from former posts to see why the 15 km claim cannot work.
The length for the Normandy-SR2, I picked it from Picard's list.
The ship in Mass Effect 2 clearly is considerably smaller. The scene with the asteroid allows us to see how large the door which Shep jumps through is. Later on, we get a view of the whole ship and the door closed. If I had to make a comparison with a modern craft, I'd say it's barely beyond the length of a Boeing 747 (about 70 m) without making any further calcs. Globally, I'd put the SR2 between 70 and 80 m long.
At 80 m, you need 187.5 SR2s in a row to complete a 15 km length, which again is totally contradicted by no less than two different cutscenes fro mtwo different games.
So it means that I can use the figures which come from the most numerous different sources. Methinks this would be in favour of the games' cutscenes then.There is no official hierarchy. It's simply canon.Does that make it superior canon or lower canon? Is there any hierarchy?
No it is not. You argued about the use of the term shield as part of your side of the argument, and I've explained why I don't think it rules out anything, as I don't believe people on the bridge in charge of the shields would always bother to say "ship's shields" instead of merely "shields", see?That's beside the point.Would they really bother though? Contextually, these are crews, it is possible that they would just say shields knowing full well that their respective captains would understand that they're talking about their ship's shields. Over the entire course of the show, they keep saying shields up, down, deactivated, down to, etc. while rarely saying "ship shields".
OK.The point is that there is no evidence that regular, ship-mounted shields and the hypothetical torpedo shields operate differently. I mean, you can pretend that they are different so you can maintain consistent head-canon, and more power to you; but the fact is there's no evidence for the purpose of a vs. debate.
Now? Have you been sleeping the whole time or something? Have I ever claimed having any solid direct evidence besides my speculation and indirect evidence based on reasoning (which was solely on the behalf of the validity of my thoughts)?So, you admit to not having evidence? At least you're being honest now.I didn't avoid providing any evidence because I made it clear it was based on logic and indirect. Otherwise I'd have gladly presented evidence, as I had no reason to withhold it.
Ok, that's not going to be useful. Trek ships merely need to warp close to those ships so much that their maneuverability puts them out of the firing arc of the main guns.The main gun takes fires every 2 seconds, at least.However, I'd like to know how the heck they count on aiming those fixed guns against ships that are so mobile as those in Trek. Speed of the projectile doesn't suffice to guarantee a hit. How long does it take to fire? Is it completely automatized as if you were playing quake with a railgun and a cheat bot that automatically fired anytime a foe crossed the crosshair?
What's the firepower of a ship like the SR2?