Trek v EU, not Trek v Films+EU

[GStone]

In the same thought of the previous poll of Trek v Wars, I was wondering what people thought of canon Trek v the EU without the films inclusions, so we don't have to worry about discussions of this point in the films contradict that EU bit. I know there is much contradiction in the EU, but I'm curious more about the general feeling people have about it.

To be more specific, Trek is just the Federation at its height (post-Nemesis) and for Wars, it's the Empire at its height, which I'm focusing to before the battle of Endor, but the DS 2 is operational, though it's construction isn't total, like we saw at the beginning of ep 6.

I'm not gonna say what I think for some time, so I'm gonna stay out of any discussions for awhile, unless we're talking of specifics for 'what's EU?'. Wars EU is what's the EU. That's simple enough. 'What's Trek' is the shows (including the remastered TOS; TAS' canonicity is still kinda vague, so it's not included unless we find out otherwise since this post was made; if a yeah or nay is discovered, it should be brought up with the source), the movies, those 2 novels.

[Nonamer]

Who wins depends on the person you ask. SW EU is vague enough that any answer is justified.

[GStone]

Which is why I'm asking in a general sense. The figures are all over the place, but there should be enough EU for everybody to give a general idea.

[AnonymousRedShirtEnsign]

What version of the BDZ is used would have a huge impact on this. If you use the post RotJ SSD burning forests and turning ponds to steam, then Trek should curbstomp the EU (unless the only firepower example you use for trek is ST:FC). If, however you use the AotC:ICS then only the highest end Trek examples are going give them a fighting chance. Also fleet size, if 200 additional ships is capable of turing the tide of a war then SW doesn't have many ships (<10000 certainly), but if they have tens of millions of ships with SSDs being the main battle ships of the Empire then it should be a cakewalk for the Empire.

[GStone]

Okay. For this thread, all the figures for the EU are valid. The reason for the discrepency between situations is because of things we aren't necessarily told. That means that, for instance, the 200 GT stuff is just as valid as TLs that make water steam and start small forest fires. To have both ends of the spectrum be true and the other points on it true, too, SW technology/tactics (and especially the tech) is easily infuenced by things that aren't readily noticable.

For Trek, all the values/calcs are valid, too, and the cause of the varying stats is something that isn't readily apparent in the environment or just isn't specified.

With that kind of guideline, are you able to make some determination?

[Enterprise E]

I would say that it would depend on who is invading who. It would be extremely out of character for the Federation to invade the Galactic Empire, so I will say that it is the Empire invading the Federation. From what I remember, the GE had 25,000 Star Destroyers, not specified as to whether or not they were all ISD or if they included ISD, VicSD, or VenSD, etc, at its height. From what I've seen in both the movies and the books, the Star Destroyers were the main ships of the line so I guess that having millions of ships coming at the Federation would be unlikely. The X-Wing series of computer games do indicate that there were more smaller ships, Nebulon Frigates of various sizes, Corvettes, Interdictors, etc., than the books and movies, but they could have just been system or sector patrol ships, or they were just easier targets for the Rebels to destroy.

This is compared to the ten thousand or so starships that the Federation can field, so I would say that the Imperial fleet outnumbers the Federation fleet. But Federation worlds have other defenses than just ships. These defenses could, and would, make an invasion of the Federation extremely costly. And there would be other concerns for the Empire, such as the Klingons, Romulans, Dominion, Borg, etc.

As for the ground battles, we know very little of the Federation so I would say that in general infantry, the Federation has better weapons and technology, but again, the Empire has greater numbers. As for Starfleet Security vs. Stormtroopers, I think that if the EU is taken into account, they'd be about even, especially if there aren't any main characters around. I would say that Starfleet Marines are better, man to man, and the MACOs, if they still exist in this scenerio, are the best of the best for the Federation and that in a battle where their numbers are close to Imperial numbers, they would win.

The thing where the ground battle gets interesting is in terms of vehicles. The Empire has the AT-AT, AT-ST, MT-AT walkers, Juggernaut tanks, Tank Droids, TIE Crawlers, etc. All we know the Federation to have on screen is the Argo buggy, which is clearly not a militarily designed vehicle, and Hoppers which are mentioned. We have references to other forces having ground vehicles, specifically the Cardassians having an Assault Skimmer and Klingons having tanks in Star Trek Canon, so it is probable that Starfleet would have such vehicles as well. However there is no information on the abilities of these tanks or other ground vehicles. However, Starfleet does have Photon Grenades where 1200 meters or so is considered a little close for use. They would very likely be effective against the Imperial vehicles.

In the end, I think that it will be a stalemate. The Imperial forces will probably be able to win the ground battles, they would outnumber the Federation forces a lot and have a lot of ground vehicles that we have seen. However, the war will not be won on the ground, it will be won or lost in space, and the Federation does have the advantage in that regard. Imperial ships may be bigger and have more weapons and probably heavier shields, but the Federation has the advantage in sublight speed, maneuverability, weapons range, and targetting accuracy. As for the power of the weapons, bolt to bolt, I would say that the two sides are equal, but Photon and Quantum Torpedoes are probably far stronger than even the Heavy Turbolasers of the Imperial starships, if we take estimated calcs from TDiC and "Broken Link" into account. In the end, an invasion would be extremely costly for the Empire, and they'd still have the Rebel Alliance to worry about, especially if they start losing a lot of ships. I think that the Empire will take a few worlds, but a Federation counter-attack will drive them back into whatever rift or wormhole brought the Empire to Milky Way in the first place. From there, there will probably be a non-aggression pact signed between the two forces.

[GStone]

From what I remember, the GE had 25,000 Star Destroyers, not specified as to whether or not they were all ISD or if they included ISD, VicSD, or VenSD, etc, at its height.

Where was this? I've heard this from people speaking of the EU for years, but I've never found where it came from. Was it one of the RPG books?

[Mike DiCenso]

I recall reading the 25,000 star destroyer number in the old Star Wars Technical Journal. Whether that predates the SWTJ or not I don't know for sure, but given that SWTJ took some of it's information from the RPG games, it wouldn't suprise me if it did come from the games first.
-Mike

[GStone]

I have the hard cover TJ, but I don't remember that. I'll recheck it. I also have the paperback visual dictionary from long ago with the occassion black line drawwing. I'll check it, too.

[Jedi Master Spock]

The figure of twenty five thousand star destroyers is also in the Thrawn trilogy. One of the post-Imperial warlords was musing on how far the Empire (his version of it) has fallen. I think that may have been the first use of the figure; it's certainly the source usually cited.

In general, I would say that the EU as a whole strongly suggests that the star destroyers are the backbone of the fleet. In general, the secondary ships are dramatically smaller than Imperial Star Destroyers; even the Victory class, which is an earlier Star Destroyer, is described as a third the overall size (900m vs 1600m); it in turn dwarfs the older Dreadnaughts and the mid-size Interdictors by a similar factor (meaning the Dreadnaughts are, considering their age, somewhere around a tenth the ship that ISDs are).

Victory SDs, Interdictors, and Dreadnaughts are portrayed as rarer than ISDs; VSDs and Dreads are also considered mostly obsolete (i.e., not fit for major front-line offensives). At the same time, these vastly overmatch the assorted frigates, corvettes, bulk cruisers, etc, that are described as making up the rest of the ships.

All told... if there are 25,000 Star Destroyers and a million other craft, I would say that 80-90% of the Imperial Fleet's non-fighter strength rests in those Star Destroyers.

[GStone]

Ah. Ya know, I've got the first 2 books of the Thrawn trilogy, but for the life of me, I could never get past the first page of book 1. I can even see them on my shelf right now. It was more the style it was written in and I never cared for the EU much growing up. I might look at them again and give it another chance, I don't know.

[CrippledVulture]

I would say that it would depend on who is invading who. It would be extremely out of character for the Federation to invade the Galactic Empire, so I will say that it is the Empire invading the Federation.

It's an interesting point both in the context of this discussion, and the Vs Debate in general. No matter how it is achieved, (a wormhole or some other weirdness) if the Empire and the Federation came into contact, it seems that the likely aggressor would be the Empire. Thus, the victory conditions are different. The Empire would be attempting to conquer the Federation while the Federation's goal would be to defend their territory. Even if they were to break character and wish to incorporate the Empire by force, the Federation wouldn't attempt to conquer an area they lack the manpower to even try to hold. Since the Empire has seldom been observed confronting external threats, this would put them at a disadvantage right off the bat. My experience with the EU is limited (Zahn's trilogy, Darksaber, one of those Rogue Squadron books, the Clone Wars cartoon, and the Knights of the Old Republic video game, if that counts), I would be interested to know if they fare well in an offensive war (I'm pretty sure it happens, or at least there is a new political entity in the RPGs somewhere).

On the other hand, the Federation has shown, time and again, that they are tenacious defenders, quick to adapt to changing circumstances, and have a wealth of experience with the unknown. Advantage Federation.

Back to the topic at hand. If I'm not mistaken, most of the mighty super weapons of the EU are rogue agents, and would be as likely to take advantage of the situation to attack the Empire as they are to help defeat the Federation.

My interest in the Vs Debate is concerned more with social aspects and tactics, in short, I am not a science-minded individual. That said, even if the Star Destroyers have the immense power that the EU often gives them, The Federation has overcome odds like this before, it is one of their defining characteristics. Weyoun and Dukat have a conversation during the Dominion War about "Federation Engineers" and the folly of underestimating them. When they first encountered the Dominion, Federation shielding could not even slow down the Dominion's weapons.

And we all know how that turned out.

The point is that this is a situation that the Federation has a lot of experience with, defending themselves against a foreign threat. The Klingons, the Romulans, the Cardassians, the Borg, the Dominion, the list goes on. The Empire is a giant, gaudy, glorified police force made to keep the planets of the galaxy in line, not to fight an all-out war.

It would be long and bloody, but the Federation would be free at the end, one way or another.

[Jedi Master Spock]

The strategic problem of superweapons is fairly simple and exemplified in the Cold War doctrine of peace through MAD. If planet-busters and system-busters start coming into play, both sides have the capability to completely devastate each other - and once the weapons of mass destruction have been rolled out by one side, they're nearly sure to be used by the other side.

The motivation for destroying systems isn't clear in a VS conflict either. The Tarkin Doctrine had fairly limited play in practice; it was intended to suppress rebellion rather than further expand the Empire.

All told, the existence of such weapons could throw military action into an uneasy truce, but conventional warfare seems fairly frequently used in both universes, so the MAD card seems unlikely to be played.

[watchdog]

I've always liked using the EU as I think it offered the most discrepencies about the debate, it's easy for warsies to pull out some high end figures based off of the EU or something, but I find just as much evidence (more I think) against their thinking in the few pieces that I'm familiar with (comics).
I do believe that the Federation could readily defend themselves from an Imperial invasion, The Empires greatest weakness is, as Luke stated in ROTJ, overconfidence. I find it rather funny that folks like Mike Wong and the like display this same trait either on purpouse or unintentionally. It was partially belief in their own supperiority that doomed the Empire, it's a Sith trait which has led to the defeat of the Sith throughout history. While Wong, Poe and others love to point out the various weaknesses they percieve in Star Trek, they ignore Treks number one strength; adaptability.

The ability to adapt to changing situations is the best weapon starfleet has, when sucessfully applied they can overcome many different challenges, aside from Grand Admiral Trawn the Empire has extreamly poor adaptability. Having said that I believe that the Federation could defend themselves very well against the Empire. I do not, nor will I ever (without real evidence) believe the 200 gt thing, its just stupid. 100 gt is supposedly the level of the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs. If 100 is an extinction level event, then what is 200? I have other reasons for ignoring these figures as well, but, the way I see it the Empire has larger ships and probably slightly more powerful weapons, but they have no maneuverability and their naval tactics suck.
I think the Federation has all the advantages in these debates mostly, I do believe that hyperdrive is probably faster than warp, but it has a very noticable limitation with the need to use detailed maps of the region that they are traveling through, and the EU has shown that a simple magnetic storm can fry a hyperdrive. I know that trek ships have better sensors and I believe they have a greater range at 300,000 km to what I think is the range of an ISD, 100,000 km (the 10 lm bit from the ICS isnt likely, thats greater than the distance from the earth to the sun). While neither side are military geniuses, I'd give higher marks to starfleet, their officers learn from their mistakes and get better at their jobs, Imperials appear to execute people for their mistakes so there is no learning curve there.
These are just some of my thoughts on this.

[GStone]

and the EU has shown that a simple magnetic storm can fry a hyperdrive.

Are you talking about Dark Empire here, where Han and co. fly through a magnetic storm in the upper levels of Coruscant? My knowledge of the EU is limited, but it is one of the few stories I did read and it's been a while since I read it.

Edit: Or were you thinking of Knights of the Old Republic 3?