The validity of Star Wars vs Star Trek in Five Minutes

[Jedi Master Spock]

For you maybe, I'm dyslexic when it comes to numbers. How exactly do you count pixels?

One at a time? :-)

But seriously, just put the image into Adobe Photoshop, then look for the measurement tool bar. Set the tool to pixels (the smaller the increment of measurement, the better), then drag it across the width (or length) of the object and you will have the approximate pixel count. Alternatively, you can enlarge the image, and count each individual pixel by hand.
-Mike

I use the GIMP. What I do is pull out the pencil tool. Click on point A, and then hold shift and hover over point B; GIMP reports the distance to B from A in pixels.

[Mr. Oragahn]

As unpopular as it is, I'm afraid I would still take the ICS book at it's word and consider it worthwhile simply because Lucas must've at least signed off on it for it to exist in the first place. I know it gives irrationally high numbers and whatnot, but unless Lucas himself comes out and says 'no, that's not right' I'd accept it as evidence. I freely admit, however, that even now that I'm really enjoying Star Trek: TNG I still maintain a pretty strong pro-Wars bias because I just enjoy it more.

The advantage we have is many fold.

First, the ICS is a lower canon source, and in this light, any claim it makes can be put in contrast with higher evidence, against the films and their novelizations (and the radio dramas for the OT).
If a strong contradiction appears, the higher sources take precedence.
Several verifications of certain figures have shown the fallacy of certain ICS claims. Knowing how the ICS figures are all related to each other, since they have to be consistent, you know that when you actually prove that firepower figure A is wrong, because you have evidence from the movies for this argument, then firepower figure B, which may not be verifiable in the higher canon sources, will also suffer from the same erroneous status.
See, source B couldn't remain correct, and still claim teratons of firepower, for example, if the figure A was proven to be wrong by many orders of magnitude, since all figures are proportional and supposedly meant to be supporting each other. It's like a network, first seen very solid, but where if you break a couple of sections, the whole network crumbles.

Secondly, the ICS, contrary to myth, has no superior canonicity to other EU sources. Not even to the story content of video games.
And there's a legion of EU references which point to far lower figures, which predate the ICS, and are unreconciliable with the ICS's data.
This largely outlines how much they were ignored, in favour of the introduced false claims made on purpose.
This outlines the issues about the validity and reliability of the ICS.

Thirdly, Lucas has repeatedly pointed out how he pays little attention to the EU. He only passes very broad and general directives to the section of his company, which role is to manage the franchise based products, notably all books, guides, games and the rest of the merchandising.
He has sufficiently proved that he does not follow the EU and can crush EU facts if he feels like he needs to. In this light, the ICS and Lucas... is not an affair of concern to us; a,d certainly not an argument against us, and all those who understand the dubious nature of certain remarkable claims.

Fourth, the way M. Saxton obtained his numbers, supposedly by looking at lower canon sources, has been looked upon, and shown flawed.
He claimed using sources such as the comics, and those have shown not supporting his numbers either.

Fifth, we can trace back most, if not all the reasonings, methods and results of group thinkings behind the beliefs which have made their way into the ICS.
They are, just at the image of the ICS claims, immensively flawed.

Sixth. Recently, an employee of LucasFilm Limited, M. Sarli, strongly argued against Saxton's work in the ICS (and this is the continuation of one of his argumentations against Saxton's claims, notably the size of Death Stars and the Endor Holocaust), and we happen to share most of his views on this matter.
M. Sarli notably pointed out that he has the full support of LFL on this matter.


Essentially, the profusion of references to the ICS, and their unquestionned use, has turned this issue into a religious affair. Objective and intelligent observations have not a place here anymore. Now, it's only about repeating the psalms of a book, which is all about miracles which have no basis and validity.
This amount of "information", if we can still use that word, is largely used by intellectually lazy or uninformed people, probably too afraid of loosing their much priviliged gain if certain claims in the ICS were shown fallacious beyond any doubt.
Worse is the treatment one gets for daring arguing the validity of the content. It did happen to be very similar to what a science man would face, by pointing out the flaws in religious scriptures, and claiming that they don't fit with observed and verified facts.
It's symptoms of inquisition, heresy and violence in debates all over.
Well, debates, which there are not, as a matter of fact.

The only reason the ICS zealots seem to loose some minor terrain at the moment is because recently, certain versus debaters grew tired of the locked situation the ST vs SW debate is in, and wanted to return to a context of information that predates the days of the Episode II and III ICS.

As a whole, it is sad, because this spoils the fact that these books are filled with very fantastic and very detailed cross sections of many classical ships, vessels and more.

[watchdog]

........

Lots of good points, I wonder how you deal with those that insist upon using the ICS and demand that you disprove the numbers beyond pointing out the lack of anything approaching the numbers in the ICS?

[Mr. Oragahn]

........

Lots of good points, I wonder how you deal with those that insist upon using the ICS and demand that you disprove the numbers beyond pointing out the lack of anything approaching the numbers in the ICS?

Truth is, I don't deal with them. Anymore.
Or in a case by case scenario, out of the traditional vs paths.
In a way of speaking, away from their main bases of operation and support groups, they are isolated and don't find the help they rely on, the kind of which they find in places filled with those who share the same beliefs.

So when they're isolated, they're weakened, intelligent people don't swallow this BS, and so those ICS preachers don't insist on it much.

Interesting thread from 2001, at Spacebattles.com. Clicky.

[Mike DiCenso]

Oddly enough, that SB thread detailing kiloton firepower for light to medium TL is fairly in-line with other conclusions:

http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... 60&start=0

It is quite a reasonble conclusion given alternative methods of scaling the asteroids being "vaporized" in TESB than those used over a decade ago by Brian Young for his TLC website.
-Mike

[SailorSaturn13]

Another thing that should be noted is that in many of these debates, Star Wars fans will cite only the highest "realistic" yields for Wars, while citing the lowest for Trek, such as citing the E2: ICS and the Star Trek Tech Manual and the TNG episode "Pegasus" for their firepower claims for Star Wars and Star Trek repectively. However, the yields stated in the E2: ICS, in my opinion, are contradicted or put into serious question not only by by what is seen in the movies, but what is seen in other stories of the Star Wars Expanded Universe itself. And as for Trek, "Pegasus" (low end calcs for the episode) and the TNG Tech Manual show low ends for Trek firepower. I could also show you examples of gigaton and level phasers in the TNG episode "Masks" and gigaton and teraton level firepower in DS9's "The Die is Cast". Not only that, but gigaton to teraton level firepower is also implied in the DS9 episode "Broken Link". Now these are high end examples for Trek, where as the Tech Manual and "Pegasus" calcs done are low end. I think that any good debator could make a convincing argument on the surface that either Trek or Wars could curbstomp the other with little effort. My personal opinion is that ship to ship, the two sides are comparable since, oddly enough, the "realistic" low end, middle end, and high end, calcs are comparable from what I see. You, of course, may have a different opinion.

I'd rather point out that Masks and The Die is Cast are two episodes which are extremely bogus when it comes to visuals, and as evidenced in this vs thread, rationalizing the visuals with science and logic is particularily brain tumour inducing.

NOT as bogus as ICS

[Mr. Oragahn]

Another thing that should be noted is that in many of these debates, Star Wars fans will cite only the highest "realistic" yields for Wars, while citing the lowest for Trek, such as citing the E2: ICS and the Star Trek Tech Manual and the TNG episode "Pegasus" for their firepower claims for Star Wars and Star Trek repectively. However, the yields stated in the E2: ICS, in my opinion, are contradicted or put into serious question not only by by what is seen in the movies, but what is seen in other stories of the Star Wars Expanded Universe itself. And as for Trek, "Pegasus" (low end calcs for the episode) and the TNG Tech Manual show low ends for Trek firepower. I could also show you examples of gigaton and level phasers in the TNG episode "Masks" and gigaton and teraton level firepower in DS9's "The Die is Cast". Not only that, but gigaton to teraton level firepower is also implied in the DS9 episode "Broken Link". Now these are high end examples for Trek, where as the Tech Manual and "Pegasus" calcs done are low end. I think that any good debator could make a convincing argument on the surface that either Trek or Wars could curbstomp the other with little effort. My personal opinion is that ship to ship, the two sides are comparable since, oddly enough, the "realistic" low end, middle end, and high end, calcs are comparable from what I see. You, of course, may have a different opinion.

I'd rather point out that Masks and The Die is Cast are two episodes which are extremely bogus when it comes to visuals, and as evidenced in this vs thread, rationalizing the visuals with science and logic is particularily brain tumour inducing.

NOT as bogus as ICS

This is different type of bogus info. In essence, they also do the same, coming with impossible feats for ships from standard forces, much to the contrary of a whole set of canon evidence.
But it's true that Saxton's writing of the E2/3-ICS is clearly influenced by bad motives, where the Trek writers back then probably just wanted to make something big without knowing their basic science.

[SailorSaturn13]

Basically, The Movies AND the EU stories could not be like they are if ICS were correct. Wow...


More important, they ignore high canon analysis, which shows for example that a tie fighter cannot even vape R2(ANH), or a cubic meter of rock (TESB)...

[Mr. Oragahn]

Basically, The Movies AND the EU stories could not be like they are if ICS were correct. Wow...


More important, they ignore high canon analysis, which shows for example that a tie fighter cannot even vape R2(ANH), or a cubic meter of rock (TESB)...

Yes, on that we probably agree. It's just funny to read those recent threads at Spacebattles, where the OP rules leave the EU out of the debate. Besides the bitching of certain members, posting in such threads, who just can't read an OP, and accept the idea that their beloved EU is kept out, it is quite fantastic to see how they more or less agree on the non-ICS like figures.

This really illustrate the complete wankery that afflicts some of them. If they accept those figures, based on the higher canon - then why the hell do they ditch them when the EU comes in?
Above all, why do they only accept the values of the E2/3-ICS, since there are several detailed references pointing out to much lower yields, in continuity with those observed in the movies?

They can't even hide behind the EU all encompassing policy, since several people and websites have been providing these EU extracts over the last years, those which fit with the films, but which clearly not please the Saxton fans.

Recently reading the OT ICS, I found a rather interesting note, which reads as follows:

STAR DESTROYER

The Star Destroyer is a symbol of the Empire's military might, carrying devastating firepower and assault forces anywhere in the galaxy to subjugate opposition.
[Here goes a short list of numbers about troops and small crafts.]
A single Star Destroyer can overwhelm an entire rebellious planet. Major industrialized worlds are assaulted with a fleet of six Star Destroyers operating with support cruisers and supply craft. Such a force can obliterate any defenses, occupying or completely destroying cities or settlements.

- Page 7.

That's already more conservative than the claim that a single star destroyed can take a civilized world on its own and reduce its surface to slag within one hour.

There's also the fact that the ICS claims that such a fleet could obliterate any defenses. Any defenses includes shields.
I let you think about the implications of this.

[mojo]

I don't claim to stay up-to-date with the debate, but I do think leaving the EU out is a ridiculous idea. Lucas himself has called it canon. It comes off as a desperate move, trying to cut it from the debate, as if Pro-Wars debaters tried to cut an entire ST series from consideration. At least cutting the ICS can be understood, since accepting it's figures ENDS the debate and it's author is a Pro-Wars debater himself.

[Mr. Oragahn]

I don't claim to stay up-to-date with the debate, but I do think leaving the EU out is a ridiculous idea. Lucas himself has called it canon. It comes off as a desperate move, trying to cut it from the debate, as if Pro-Wars debaters tried to cut an entire ST series from consideration. At least cutting the ICS can be understood, since accepting it's figures ENDS the debate and it's author is a Pro-Wars debater himself.

It's a bit harder than that. I understand where you come from, and I don't have issues if one states in his thread that the EU is to be used as evidence as well.

However, it would be cherry picking to use the EU, and decide not to use the ICS, just because we don't want to. It seems, at first hand, to be the solution, that is, stipulate that the ICS is not valid in a discussion, but you'll find that even doing that, those who live on the ICS will still engage into a lenghty debate to show that the ICS is not the only piece of evidence that supports its claims.
This will, of course, likely end badly, and depending on the website you're on, will probably see the thread being closed, or see the same usual unch of people just go brickwall with the same arguments.

So it appears to just be way simpler just to say "guys, this debate is EU free".

Besides, there just are things that make the EU, which irk me to some degree. For example, as mentionned earlier on, there are EU sources which clearly say that Sidious nearly was the uber Sith of all times.
Yet, his movie-powers pale against those of a Sith apprentice seen in a video game cutscene.

There's also the fact that Lucas can ditch any piece of the EU anytime he wants to, so this doesn't make me want to get attached, in any way, to the merchandising, especially since it's not always good, and since it has turned into giving a backstory for nearly any trinkle you see in the background during the movies.

Finally, Lucas has never stated the EU to be canon. Only representatives of certain branches of his company did, and one of them recently validated the existence of the EU friendly canon, and the purist canon.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Here's a thread where you can see how things are pretty much unbalanced.

I wouldn't like being a trekkie in such conditions. There's like a few pro-Trek actually bringing what seems to be simple canon evidence, an evidence that for some reasons, seems to be dismissed at ease by a vast vocal group at SB.com - the same lads from SD.net -, pitted against the usual bunch of warsies - those who one will identify without any problem if he's been looking at vs debates for quite some time - spreading a wave of wank like no one has seen in ages.

Amusingly, we can also see that the one making the sound points on Trek side, got banned in a way or another. I am not saying that they're all 100% correct. Everyone makes mistakes, that's quite a given. It takes, however, quite a load of honesty and wisdom to admit them.

Talking about wank, we really get gems, shamelessly quoted by Leo1 (not surprising either, considering that he's a wank emissary for SWdom - and yet, he can even make a couple of decent points from time to time, notably about the lack of tactic that would have the Feds NDF away cover used enemies)):

http://forums.spacebattles.com/showpost ... stcount=83

When a couple of posters, including Truthteller, really express their concern about the absurd wank laid by the EU to make sense of asinine designs, notably storm/clonetroopers helmets (see Thanathos' post), they get their dose of mockery and slash. Of course, Thanathos doesn't try to argue, and he's quite a friendly local, so he's spared the shit. Truthteller, on the other hand, gets the full pack.

Leo1 cites, oh surprisingly, two sources, the AOTC Incredible Cross Sections, writen by who we know, and the AOTC Visual Dictionnary, which at some point is nothing more than a suck up of the former book.

Appreciate the "facts" (my comments in orange):

---

"AOTC ICS

A clone trooper's full combat armor is the basis of an intergrated system in which the gunships [LAATs] are vital links. Individual troopers can receive command signals and relay status signals via this system. Troops also share tactical video from their helmet visors, with multispectral imaging that penetrates smoke, fog, and the airborne soil of the most explosive battle zones [observed in AotC] The robots were just standing a couple of hundreds of meters ahead of them. Oh but I guess that the clonetroopers knew they had to fire straight ahead because of all this micmac of sensors and super holoimages. Oh yes, nevermind if in the whole Star Wars, holograms are of an awful quality. I can't tell you how I'd love to get those low res, interlaced, flickering and mono colour holograms stacked in front of my eyes - no headacke, really! I also suppose that it's that same stuff, used later one for stormtroopers, that helped them see teddy bears hidding in the vegetation, a couple of meters in front of them - I mean, they didn't even see them approach, and realize that they were getting encircled! I suppose those plants are super static unbendable lifeforms.. The airtight and thermally regulated body globe is impervious to germ and chemical agents (let's remember that there's enough movie and EU evidence that stormtrooper armor, on the other hand, is not sealed by default - see RSA's examples on his website, and the Star Wars comic book titled "To The Last Man" - incidentally, this is the same book that proves that primitive lances can get through imperial armor across both ends, and kill stormtroopers - and those lances can be broken in two by stormtrooper, so they're clearly not some uber material o' doom you know...), and provides protection in space and hostile atmospheres. The armor's heat resistance allows troopers to stride through the searing interfaces of theatre shields like lifeless Battle Droids (hear! hear! their armor is so kewl that they can walk through shields, even theater shields, the same ones able to repel the troutaton cumulative firepower of Death Squadron!), as well as deflecting glancing blaster shots and damping direct hits enough to improve survival (let's have fun at the wording, and play logic here. If that kind of armor can improve survival, then it would mean cheaper types of armor could also provide chances of survival, against standard infantry level blasters - considering the real firepower of blasters when used at most standard yields and ROFs, that is, low - this is only arguing for weaker blaster yields.

Heavy blaster rifle uses video gunsight display in helmet visor and has effective range of 10km (6 miles) when mounted in tripod (oh yes, effective range of 10 km. This is getting better and better, seriously this would require a take of its own) ..."

---

"AotC: Visual Dictionary

Outfitted in their extraordinary gear, clone troopers can withstand hails of deadly projectiles or explosive blasts with impunity. Wait, in the movies, no matter the era, one shot a standard unimpressive clone/droid trooper = soldier downed, with 99.99% of the time no evidence that they're still alive. That is supposed to be impunity? I mean, at this point, why even pretend trying to be consistent with the films? They are also able to march through deflector shield barriers that would incinerate even a shock trooper. See, the same stuff, again. At this point, you wonder why they haven't equipped their missiles with that standard clonetrooper armour, instead of wasting time with turbolasers. Why not shoot kamikaze clonetroopers at your enemy, strapped with ub3rz hypermatter explosives, and going all Jihad, glory to the Emperor!?



Clone trooper body armor is made of 20 form-fitting plates of lightweight plastoid-alloy composite. Troopers receive and send battle signals via communication equipment in their helmets.

Replacing the Mandalorian flightsuit is a pressurized black bodyglove that protects against acrid vapours or even the vacuum of space (but which, according to their claims regarding the Endor ground battle, fails against primitive arrows - while we now know, thanks to HD, that it's the thick white clonetrooper armor that failed against such an arrow. At this point, should we mention the stormtrooper armor that gets cracked because these soldiers get kicked down an edge?). The distinctive shocktrooper "T" visor plate is adapeted with an enhanced breath filter for optimal operations under the often poor environmental conditions of battle."

---

The EU's take on the inner holovision provided by stormtrooper helmets (let's note that the image is labelled as "vid recording", so I'm not even sure this is what the trooper would see, and not just what an independant camera films.) Notice the quality of the claimed holo vision. Extremely detailed, full of vivid colours. Then remember that even Sith Lords don't even use such high quality holograms. There's just a few times we've seen a hologram that's not all blue, or all red. Vader's speech with the other captains, but as you remember, the video quality is poor and the different colours barely noticeable. There's the rebel holo in the Moncal ship. Hues of green, red and blue, and even yellow. Of course, they were extremely simplistic, and a big emitter was needed to project such a "high quality" holographic image.

That said, the quality of holograms in Star Wars would require a thread of its own. It's likely that that it's smaller and less power hungry to store/send low quality mono colour holograms.
However, it doesn't explain why 99.9% of holograms in SW are just hues of one colour, so that even Sith can't apparently afford high quality holos, and why basic troopers would benefit HD ready quality.

[2046]

I don't claim to stay up-to-date with the debate, but I do think leaving the EU out is a ridiculous idea. Lucas himself has called it canon.

Since when?

Reply here.

[Praeothmin]

Mr. Oraghan wrote:

That said, the quality of holograms in Star Wars would require a thread of its own. It's likely that that it's smaller and less power hungry to store/send low quality mono colour holograms.
However, it doesn't explain why 99.9% of holograms in SW are just hues of one colour, so that even Sith can't apparently afford high quality holos, and why basic troopers would benefit HD ready quality.

I've always thought the SW holograms were cheap-looking, especially when compared to the holoemitters installed on the bridge of ST ships.
But then, in a civilization that can generate Holographic, lifelike, doctors (not to mention Holodecks), that should be expected.

[watchdog]

That's already more conservative than the claim that a single star destroyed can take a civilized world on its own and reduce its surface to slag within one hour.

There's also the fact that the ICS claims that such a fleet could obliterate any defenses. Any defenses includes shields.
I let you think about the implications of this.

If I remember correctly, the one hour idea was all Mike Wong. He figured any longer and a sizable portion of the planets population would be able to escape the surface. This of course ignored the existence of tie figthers (but he doesnt think the fighters are very lethal to any large ships in Star Wars, only to Star Trek), and it suggests the absured idea that everyone in Star Wars has their own personal ship waiting in their back yard to escape with. It also ignores the fact that a whole fleet of ISD's and one SSD could'nt handle one little theatre shield on Hoth.

As for the stormtroopers, their optical abilities can easily be called into question by remembering that near the end of ESB as the rebels were about to escape from cloud city, R2-D2 fired off a thick smoke screen towards advancing stormtroops who immedeatly stoped advancing for several critical seconds, waited to fire blindly through the smoke, and then came stumbling blindly through at the last minute.

I've always thought the SW holograms were cheap-looking, especially when compared to the holoemitters installed on the bridge of ST ships.
But then, in a civilization that can generate Holographic, lifelike, doctors (not to mention Holodecks), that should be expected.

I've always found it interesting how they love to point at the holographic communications in wars and apparent lack in trek, in ST6 we see the Klingons use a holographic communictions similar to wars, exept that it was in full color (just as flickery though), and an episode of DS9 had an even better holographic comm system allbiet experimental.