Page 1 of 1
trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Sun Feb 06, 2011 12:00 am
by User1390
inspired by the thread in the technical forum on spacebattles
across star trek galaxy the necrons begin to rise and come into conflict with the borg as well as in the alpha quadrant. The necrons are the most powerful and advanced race in 40k but how do they succeed in a setting with technology that matches their own!
sub-versus
instead of a borg cube in wolf 359 and nemesis a Necron tombship attacks!
Zarek is online now Report Post Reply With Quote
Re: trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Sun Feb 06, 2011 6:28 am
by Mith
rebelzarek wrote:inspired by the thread in the technical forum on spacebattles
across star trek galaxy the necrons begin to rise and come into conflict with the borg as well as in the alpha quadrant. The necrons are the most powerful and advanced race in 40k but how do they succeed in a setting with technology that matches their own!
sub-versus
instead of a borg cube in wolf 359 and nemesis a Necron tombship attacks!
Zarek is online now Report Post Reply With Quote
Starfleet is terrified at the gigawatts of firepower the Necron ships toss out.
Oh wait, this isn't 22nd century Starfleet? In that case, Starfleet is amused by the gigawatts of firepower the Necron ships toss out, pats them on the head, and sends them to the corner.
About as intelligent as any other answer on SB.com.
Re: trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:04 am
by Lucky
rebelzarek wrote:inspired by the thread in the technical forum on spacebattles
across star trek galaxy the necrons begin to rise and come into conflict with the borg as well as in the alpha quadrant. The necrons are the most powerful and advanced race in 40k but how do they succeed in a setting with technology that matches their own!
sub-versus
instead of a borg cube in wolf 359 and nemesis a Necron tombship attacks!
Zarek is online now Report Post Reply With Quote
Mith wrote:Starfleet is terrified at the gigawatts of firepower the Necron ships toss out.
Oh wait, this isn't 22nd century Starfleet? In that case, Starfleet is amused by the gigawatts of firepower the Necron ships toss out, pats them on the head, and sends them to the corner.
About as intelligent as any other answer on SB.com.
???
Re: trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:36 pm
by User1356
Mith wrote:
Starfleet is terrified at the gigawatts of firepower the Necron ships toss out.
Oh wait, this isn't 22nd century Starfleet? In that case, Starfleet is amused by the gigawatts of firepower the Necron ships toss out, pats them on the head, and sends them to the corner.
About as intelligent as any other answer on SB.com.
They should be since we know 800 of them drops the shields of a GCS
Re: trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 10:21 pm
by Nowhereman10
Citing a statistical outlier, huh? Howabout every star surfing episode where ships handled easily 50-100 TWs for minutes on end, even when under fire from enemy ships, and the E-D in "Relics" with heavily damaged shields and main power off-line able to handle a G-type star for 3 hours for hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of terajoules.
Howabout "A Matter of Time" with phasers rated minimally in the low terawatts, yet shields can easily handle them most of the time. Or howabout "The Nth Degree" where the Cytherian probe starts to expose the E-D to 3.2 TW, but does not even come close to bringing the shields down.
Re: trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 10:51 pm
by User1356
Nowhereman10 wrote:Citing a statistical outlier, huh? Howabout every star surfing episode where ships handled easily 50-100 TWs for minutes on end, even when under fire from enemy ships, and the E-D in "Relics" with heavily damaged shields and main power off-line able to handle a G-type star for 3 hours for hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of terajoules.
Howabout "A Matter of Time" with phasers rated minimally in the low terawatts, yet shields can easily handle them most of the time. Or howabout "The Nth Degree" where the Cytherian probe starts to expose the E-D to 3.2 TW, but does not even come close to bringing the shields down.
Merely copying mith
Re: trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 1:24 pm
by Kor_Dahar_Master
InvaderSkooj wrote:Nowhereman10 wrote:Citing a statistical outlier, huh? Howabout every star surfing episode where ships handled easily 50-100 TWs for minutes on end, even when under fire from enemy ships, and the E-D in "Relics" with heavily damaged shields and main power off-line able to handle a G-type star for 3 hours for hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of terajoules.
Howabout "A Matter of Time" with phasers rated minimally in the low terawatts, yet shields can easily handle them most of the time. Or howabout "The Nth Degree" where the Cytherian probe starts to expose the E-D to 3.2 TW, but does not even come close to bringing the shields down.
Merely copying mith
Can to explain your reasoning that ignores multiple examples of quantifiable events from from quantifiable sources while focusing on a single even from a unquantifiable source (the douwd dude).
Re: trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 6:42 pm
by User1356
Kor_Dahar_Master wrote:InvaderSkooj wrote:Nowhereman10 wrote:Citing a statistical outlier, huh? Howabout every star surfing episode where ships handled easily 50-100 TWs for minutes on end, even when under fire from enemy ships, and the E-D in "Relics" with heavily damaged shields and main power off-line able to handle a G-type star for 3 hours for hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of terajoules.
Howabout "A Matter of Time" with phasers rated minimally in the low terawatts, yet shields can easily handle them most of the time. Or howabout "The Nth Degree" where the Cytherian probe starts to expose the E-D to 3.2 TW, but does not even come close to bringing the shields down.
Merely copying mith
Can to explain your reasoning that ignores multiple examples of quantifiable events from from quantifiable sources while focusing on a single even from a unquantifiable source (the douwd dude).
I will type slowly so you have a better chance of comprehending this complex idea. I am merely doing the same thing as Mith.
I never have understood why its OK to lowball everyone except for trek here, while at the same time decrying everywhere else for lowballing trek and whoever else.
Re: trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 6:56 pm
by Kor_Dahar_Master
InvaderSkooj wrote:I will type slowly so you have a better chance of comprehending this complex idea. I am merely doing the same thing as Mith.
I never have understood why its OK to lowball everyone except for trek here, while at the same time decrying everywhere else for lowballing trek and whoever else.
If you think that trek is given highball showings on here by everyone you may wanna try reading more threads.
Very few if any accept high end "skin of evil", "obsession" or "The Immunity Syndrome" clacs when they are just as canon as any other material in the series.
Re: trek versus necrons!(borg)
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:48 am
by Mr. Oragahn
It's not like the high petawatts figures have not been criticized either.
I know some people like to suggest exawatts on some bits of dialogue, but there seems to be an equivalent of amount of terawatts you know, that makes all of this even.
What we see is that phasers are a decent fraction of fully charged torps, and fully charged torps generally take down ships in a few shots. Shields are precharged (hit points in % basically, with perhaps some ability to help recharge them slowly but that's about it).
I've even seen some people here settle on yields inferior to the TM yields used outside of SFJN like if they came from a canon source. You know the 64 MT ones, without counting the omnidirectional blast, the fact that it requires all the antimatter to react properly, and that it manages to avoid the immediate decay and huge neutrino waste.