Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm pretty sure saying that something that occurred in the cannon universe of Star Trek (movie/shows) is not relevant because it discredit your point is some kind of fallacy...

Remember that the purpose of both universe is to entertain. So in both case some decisions are made because 'it'd be cooler this way!'. Arbitrary choosing what is valid or not because of that argument (and mostly influenced by your pov) simply doesn't work.

Obtuse indeed.

Obtuse is the name of the game in this thread it seems.

The original Star Trek series had longer ranged combat, and the producers/writers frequently said that they later on moved towards more close encounters because it was more fan-pleasing. As for The Next Generation, them being peaceful diplomats, every episode would basically involve the bad guys getting right up in Picard's face, making some outrageous demands, Picard trying to reason with them, until the whole thing devolves into a short-range firefight.

Regardless, looking at the stated ranges of the weapons from both in the BFG and the Star Trek technical manuals, the Imperial Fleet has the advantage on range.

focusedfire wrote:
We are dealing with stories, each written for a different purpose. It is wrong to say that the writing for something intended to be aired on tv(which calls for close proximity staging for dramatic visuals) doesn't noticeably affect how the story is written.

Evey writer that follows will be affected by this story having been represented visually. So, the visual effects most defintely affect the story.

This is true; but for the purposes of this discussion, we are treating them as if they are NOT stories. That's the whole point.

And that being so, when the Federation routinely engages powerful enemies at very close ranges, there has to be a reason for that; and no, "dramatic effect" is NOT a reason. If Federation ships had the option to stand off 300,000 km away from a Borg cube and obliterate it with super-powered torpedoes, they would do so. The fact that they DON'T do so is an indication that they are unable to, for some reason.

BeRzErKeR wrote:
This is true; but for the purposes of this discussion, we are treating them as if they are NOT stories. That's the whole point.

And that being so, when the Federation routinely engages powerful enemies at very close ranges, there has to be a reason for that; and no, "dramatic effect" is NOT a reason. If Federation ships had the option to stand off 300,000 km away from a Borg cube and obliterate it with super-powered torpedoes, they would do so. The fact that they DON'T do so is an indication that they are unable to, for some reason.

I disagree, the OP's first post indicated that this is a story driven process. To ignore such makes the entire exercise a galactic waste of time.

This being so and because we use stories as our source material then an adjustment has to be made for the biased paradigms currently in place. You do not see those debating the pro Federation side casually dismissing massive sections of the 40K timeline and alternate though established back stories to weaken the IoM's stance. We could demand that this occurs during the Horus Heresy or that this this is set during the early rogue trader timelines wher bolters were S 3 and The Imperium is using all of its military might to hold the empire together.

This is why there has to be a meeting of the minds from both sides as to the ground rules.

Omegus wrote:

focusedfire wrote:There is no proof that says that the IoM has a greater population or larger fleets than the ST universe.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

AndrewC wrote: A 64MT explosion within the hull of an IoM ship will hollow it out. (And SF get a load of rare metals for the next batch of weapons going through the replicators.)

Except we have examples of Imperial ships taking hits in the gigaton range and keep fighting. Really, you are just grasping at straws. And there is no indication the Federation uses replicators to create weapons if something as simple as a hatch requires a stop-over. There's a reason why they build ship docks instead of a huge friggin' replicator and just going "One star ship please, k thx".

You seem to have misread a word, I've bolded it for you.

Andrew

ChrissWWII wrote:
Additionally, we know that the warhead fuel is antideutrium and deutrium. We also know how much energy the reaction of one atom of antideutrium with one atom of deutrium releases. Scaling this up gives us a figure of 64 megatons. There is no way that 1.5 kg of antimatter reacting with 1.5 kg of matter can result in 690 gigatons.

Not to mention, your argument is flawed in that you assume the Federation can preform this activity with enough quantity to defeat the Imperium, but please remember, what is the likelihood that the Romulans would share their cloaking technology? More importantly, does the Federation have the industrial capacity to churn OUT enough cloaking devices and ships to defeat the Imperium? THe answer is no.

But we also know that fission is not possible outside of a star, and the energy requirements to power a lance is also not possible as it is presently know to science. Remember that science once believed that the earth was flat and the sun orbited the earth. It does your debate no credit to claim science does not support the SF side of technology while ignoring it for IoM. One has to take the written word regardless of how far fetched it seems. It is a nuance that has been granted to the IoM proponents, but not to SF supporters.

Regarding the flaw, it's not actually a flaw. Nobody knows the industrial capacity of the Federation, so the answer can't be no. The answer is neither of us know, and absence of proof can not be taken as proof. The Federation has proved capable of designing and deploying many different technologies, the phasing cloak being one(TNG), that was designed and built without any input from the Romulans. Sub space mines are another, having a mine materialise anywhere, through anything, is just scary. Cloaking devices are capable of replication(DS9). The genesis device(WroK), remember the complete plans were sent to SF before funding continued, only the research results were destroyed so that the work could not be continued.

Just for the record, IoM is too big for SF to defeat, but then SF is too tough a nut for IoM to defeat, no matter how big the sledgehammer!

Cheers

Andrew

PS I must also say this debate is a much better one than the last time!

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It is only enterprise that is alternate universe, and the new film of course.

Has some producer stated that the Enterprise series is in an alternate time line/parallel universe?

Other than episode 18 and 19, it seems more like an origin story for the federation, covering the gap
between first contact and ToS. Episode 18 and 19 of season 4 are of an alternate time line, but other than that
I can't see anything that indicates it's not part of the same time line as ToS, TNG, VOY, DS9.
Sure there are some time travellers messing up the time lines, but like in Star Trek First Contact, Enterprise saves
the day and maintains the time line well enough.

FocusedFire, I apologize if it seems I'm being obtuse. What are your suggestions for a fair and balanced confrontation between the Federation and the Imperium of Man? Additionally, I am looking at both universes with total suspension of disbelief. As such, I view all the ST episodes and 40k canon as historical documents. There is no writer to cause dramatic tension. Finally, I think you misunderstood my op. I don't want this to be story driven, but instead to get a feel for how the battles would play. In all honesty I find the constant technobabble solutions to be rather boring.

AndrewC: Well....besides the fact that we know both fusion and fission are possible outside a star (e.g. atomic and hydrogen bombs), and you are once again missing my point. My point is that the Federation has nicely explained to us how much antimatter they have in their warheads, and we can calculate out from there. The Imperium has never given us the slightest inkling of how their power generation technology works. Only that it does. That means that regardless of what current science says we have to assume that the lance works because we have seen it work. Additionally, on screen detonations of photon torpedoes do not seem to result in 690 gigatons of energy released. Torpedoes instead release much LESS energy than 690 gigatons on screen, and Paramount's canon policy holds that when the screen and the books contradict we must go with what happens on screen. Additionally, as to your industrial output claim I have to point out that at the end of the Dominion War, the Federation, Klingons and Romulans seemed to believe an unconquered or subjugated Cardassia would have the industrial output to threaten all 3 powers. This implies not only that Star Trek empires are almost completely centered on their home planet, but also that the output of even one planets industrial might can be a threat to 3 relatively intact empires, demonsrtating how low the industrial output of those empires must be.

Well lets help clarify things: Been gone a day doing rl family biz and we comeback to where we were when we I first posted so lets rehash and reconfirm.
First lets cement some things here:

Things that are conceded so far:

FTL
From the fact that no one is trying to dispute them or even come close to attempting to dispute them I think it’s a safe bet that again
I.O.M. ftl is superior due to the fact that it can cover distances in a few months that it takes feddies75 year to cross.

Putting to bed some things that are still in doubt to rest.
Ftl Sensors

1 wrote:
The Saint Omnibus page 886
'Astropathicae report parameters verified. Perturbation reads at warp modulus eleven two nine nine seven, nine AU out, tracking cogents, Concordance estimated at ninety-three minutes. Awaiting confirmation"

2 wrote:
The Saint Omnibus page 893
For the second time in less than an hour, space tore open. The reality fissure leapt and crackled like a luminous cephalopod, lashing tendrils of warp energy into real space that twisted out, fizzled and faded. Non-baryonic light flared brilliantly through the tear, backlighting the arriving ships. Monumental silhouettes, they were shot forward into real space.
They did not slow down. They were moving at cruise speed. Attack Speed.

3 wrote:
The Saint Omnibus page 894
Four ships, one of them very large. And they were moving. Point seven five light at least, cutting straight towards Herodor

Again we have a question as to the fact that they only detect the disturbance and nothing more. As you can see in quote 3 we can see that the IOm ships sensor detect the chaos existing the warp again both of these sets of information is at real time input back.

For some collaboration as to the combat FTl we take you to:

4 wrote:
Shadow Point page 175
"Surveryor contact, two AUs to starboard, and closing!

This detection again is being done in the middle of a space battle with ship maneuvering

On the next page if it helps some the IOM vessel’s captain in question does request a visual on this approaching vessels that is 2 AU’s way. This again is a showing of FTL senors.

SLT

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Full impulse is normally quoted 1/2c.

I concede to this argument I have no problem agreeing with this.

As far as the IOM slt,

Okay heres some time for a little math quiz based on the quotes:
From quote 2 and 3 we know that the chaos ships are moving at comabat speed and that it is stated as being .75 c.

But time for a little math excerise.

Xiophen wrote:
s you can see the Iom fleet parked in orbit on arround Hereden detects in real time a chas fleet arriving some 9 aus in distance away thats roughly 74.85 light minutes away or 1,346,380,836.219 km away this again is a real times sensor feed.

1,346,380,836.219 / 93 minutes = 14,477,213.29 km/minute.
14,477,213.29 km/min / 60 seconds = 241286.89 km/s
241286.89 km/s / the speed of light = 299,792.458 km / s
= 0.8 speed of light, 4/5 speed of light

So Nos your math sucks.
part 1

So here is the question do we really want to question 40k speed? Now we have this piece of logic about how Star trek ships will out fight IOM ships again. Oh yeah flirting and zipping arrond them how are they going to do that when again the IOM ships are moving almost half again as fast as your feddie ship is capable of.
This is kind of like a WWII fighter fighting a F4 phantom. Yes your WWII fighter is a somewhat more maneuverable but again the F4 is going to control the combat because even with the wider turning radius it will have made its turn long before theWWII fight can get to the turn location. The same with you IOM Cruiser will have completed its turn and have the fed vessel to front facng before the feddie can get to the location.

Combat ranges:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Uh, no. Max range of a torp at 2268 was 300k km.[conincidentaly a light second] Later torps have higher ranges - the clas 6, in use with VOY, was 8m KM. Please show your "quote" showing a 40k km range - as Ive already put the MA quotes in showing something different.

Also phasers would not attentuate at distancfe, as they are collimated beams - they dont spread. So in theory they have a fairly long range, until hit by something. the"effective" range is the limit at which you can reliably hit something when you have a beam of light moving in a straight line [yes, yes, grav lensing, but effectively straight for what we are concerned with] against ships moving without caring about inertia.

Normal ranges in bfg have every cm being a 1k worth of distance. Most IOM weapons have ranges ranging from 60 – 120 KM

Please post proof of trek ranges, I’m not doing your job and proving the ranges.. What I can find from most of the visuals we see is combat that ranges in at best 1000 km and most visually represeneted battles taking place withn a 1k km to 10k km distance with quoted range of torps being 90k. please provide proof.



FirePower
This is again the contensious point we have the Trek cannon numbers here:

Accersitus wrote:
In Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual a figure of 1,5kg of antimatter is given as the maximum warhead material of a photon torpedo. (pg. 129) Using standard physics calculations a direct 1:1 explosion would equal to about 64 megatons. Warhead materials are however premixed to achieves the level of destructive force of an antimatter pod rupture containing 100 cubic meters of antideuterium. (pg. 69) Antimatter is stored as liquid or slush on starships. (pg. 68) Density of mere liquid antideuterium is around 160 kg per cubic meter. According to this comparison the high annihilation rate energy release would be comparable to about 690 gigatons. Furthermore it is not clear if the 1,5 kg should be compared to the 200 isoton figure given on-screen, or the 25 isoton figure given in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual.

Thank you for providing the quotes from the trek manual so I didn’t have to go look them up.
For the 40k side we have this:

6 wrote:
Space Hulk rulebook, Scenario book pg.3
Four Gothic-class cruisers- Intolerable, Invincible, and Righteous Force- awaited four parsecs from target. Each ship carried 100 Hellfire nuclear missles. Each missle 122 warheads, each with a firepower of 5 GT. If boarding action fails, nuclear missles will turn a ship to dust."

Again we see the vast magnitude differences between 40k firepower and star trek fire power. Agai n picard maneuver would damage the paint job on an IOM ship. IOm weapons destroy trek ships on impact.

To a 64 megaton torp going off inside a iom ship will cause damage yet but we have 40k cruisers survie torps exploding on the outside and inside. They also repell 40k lances and battery barrages which dish out several tton of damage.

AS for weapomn speed lances are light speed weapons and weapon batteries fire weapons that travel near or at light speed. Not to forget bombardment cannoncs and Nova cannons which fire shells that travel at ¼ the speed of light and cause tton level damage in some 36k km diameters.


Teleportation:
In every 40k ship supplement and the bfg it specifically states that inorder to teleport attack an opposing ship their shields must be down this blockage include cron teleporters which areseveral magnitude more reliable and more powerful then trek teleportation.

And again admantium is describe in 40k fluff as being the hardest substance known to the IOm of the 40k it is a suppose to be super dense and hard to survive impacts from weapons that causetriple digit gton and single to double digit tton damage. WE see trek porters fail tme and time again from materials less dense.

Fleet sizes and force dispositions:

Agsin the Iom has a million world the vast majority would be considered modern world Ie woulds that are at the Macrage tech level and pop levels. It has 32k hive world all having hundreds of billions of populations. And an untold number shipyards and forge worlds. Numbers are on the iom side. Iom fleet number is 250k plus. They would only really need a crusade force the size of which they sent against the tau to curpbstomp.

edit:

oh yeah and please show proof of trek fighting at warp speeds not conjector. as it was never seen in TBG, ds9 or voy.

xiophen42 wrote:Things that are conceded so far:

FTL
From the fact that no one is trying to dispute them or even come close to attempting to dispute them I think it’s a safe bet that again
I.O.M. ftl is superior due to the fact that it can cover distances in a few months that it takes feddies75 year to cross.

Not conceded.

By the end of Voyager the Federation has attained transwarp capabilites. The IoM's trip if months instead takes weeks.

Also, IoM warp travel is not that predicatble and is often quoted as taking decades or centuries to move battle fleets acrooss a segmentum.

Okay, so one point of out six you dispute. What about the other five?

Also, transwarp was only achieved by a prototype craft that caused the pilot to mutate at the cellular level and go completely insane.

focusedfire wrote:

xiophen42 wrote:Things that are conceded so far:

FTL
From the fact that no one is trying to dispute them or even come close to attempting to dispute them I think it’s a safe bet that again
I.O.M. ftl is superior due to the fact that it can cover distances in a few months that it takes feddies75 year to cross.

Not conceded.

By the end of Voyager the Federation has attained transwarp capabilites. The IoM's trip if months instead takes weeks.

Also, IoM warp travel is not that predicatble and is often quoted as taking decades or centuries to move battle fleets acrooss a segmentum.

Proof please? and why was it not used durng the 2 movies that came after voyager.

xiophen42 wrote:Normal ranges in bfg have every cm being a 1k worth of distance. Most IOM weapons have ranges ranging from 60 – 120 KM

The math as you have posted would have the IoM limited ti ranges of 60-120 kilometers? Need a modifier for the 1cm=1k. One "k" of what? Now I would normally question such short ranges but this is GW where 1"=3' which means they have tanks with an effective range of 216 feet.

focusedfire wrote:

xiophen42 wrote:Normal ranges in bfg have every cm being a 1k worth of distance. Most IOM weapons have ranges ranging from 60 – 120 KM

The math as you have posted would have the IoM limited ti ranges of 60-120 kilometers? Need a modifier for the 1cm=1k. One "k" of what? Now I would normally question such short ranges but this is GW where 1"=3' which means they have tanks with an effective range of 216 feet.

okay here help yah some gw stated that 1 cm is equal to 1000 km. Also we have References to weapons having 12,000 km being point blank range with weapon ranges out to 200,000 km.

xiophen42 wrote:
Proof please? and why was it not used durng the 2 movies that came after voyager.

Because the Federation transwarp drive turns you into a lizard man that actually finds Cpt. Janeway attractive. In other words, you go totally insane.

focusedfire wrote:

xiophen42 wrote:Normal ranges in bfg have every cm being a 1k worth of distance. Most IOM weapons have ranges ranging from 60 – 120 KM

The math as you have posted would have the IoM limited ti ranges of 60-120 kilometers? Need a modifier for the 1cm=1k. One "k" of what? Now I would normally question such short ranges but this is GW where 1"=3' which means they have tanks with an effective range of 216 feet.

1k km. So 120,000km is the max range of a lot of the weapons.

xiophen42 wrote:

Proof please? and why was it not used durng the 2 movies that came after voyager.

Final epodode, Older Janeway time travels back(Yes The federation seems ti have intermitent accesss to time travel whenrvrt it is needed). She configures the ship for Transwarp travel and to destroy one of the borgs transwarp tunnel networks.

As to Why it wasn't used? Maybe because both episodes happened close to earth and there was no need.

FocusedFire: I'm sorry but your claim is incorrect. The future Janeway gave Voyager ablative armor, and some kind of anti-Borg weapon. She does not give Voyager a transwarp drive. Instead, Voyager travels through the Borg transwarp hub system in order to get to Earth quicker. Yes, at one point Voyager did gain access to a transwarp drive, but they lacked the ability to properly navigate transwarp space, and the ship nearly crashed.

Additionally, the time travel technology used in Endgame was not Federation technology, but Borg.

focusedfire wrote:

xiophen42 wrote:

Proof please? and why was it not used durng the 2 movies that came after voyager.

Final epodode, Older Janeway time travels back(Yes The federation seems ti have intermitent accesss to time travel whenrvrt it is needed). She configures the ship for Transwarp travel and to destroy one of the borgs transwarp tunnel networks.

As to Why it wasn't used? Maybe because both episodes happened close to earth and there was no need.

Problem I have as I recall we see the transwarp network get destroyed by voyager at the end of the episode. very little indication that it was something theycould recover. so agani proof would be need to show they recovered the technology.

@ChrisWWII-I bow to your knowledge. I haven't seen an episode since the show ended.

I will posit that the Fedrations scanner and replicators make the federation a close second to the Borg as far as adaptability. Wheb Tech is introduced to the fed they mass produce it rapidly.

I do believe that future Janeway makes mention of the Federation achieving transwarp in that episode. I can't remember if she gave them a leg up on that tech but it think it was hinted upon....
Blast, now I'm gonna have to dig up a copy and actually re-watch it. Well, Jerry Ryan was in her prime back then.

Omegus wrote:

xiophen42 wrote:
Proof please? and why was it not used durng the 2 movies that came after voyager.

Because the Federation transwarp drive turns you into a lizard man that actually finds Cpt. Janeway attractive. In other words, you go totally insane.

focusedfire wrote:

xiophen42 wrote:Normal ranges in bfg have every cm being a 1k worth of distance. Most IOM weapons have ranges ranging from 60 – 120 KM

The math as you have posted would have the IoM limited ti ranges of 60-120 kilometers? Need a modifier for the 1cm=1k. One "k" of what? Now I would normally question such short ranges but this is GW where 1"=3' which means they have tanks with an effective range of 216 feet.

1k km. So 120,000km is the max range of a lot of the weapons.

Roughly thier are some quotes thatt show longer ranges extending out to 200km will have ti find them.

focusedfire, there use to be a guy who had all of voyager uploaded on youtube. Iono if he's still around, but if he is you should be able to watch it in pretty nice quality. But yeah.....I'm a bit of a nerd with a memory that can recall exact quotes from shows and books, but can't memorize basic equations. x_X

Yeah, the Federation would be able to analyze Imperial tech fairly quickly, and potentially build working models of some....but I doubt they'd be able to train all their crews in the use of the technology before we see Guardsmen raising the Aquila over San Francisco.

Hehehehe.....I could totally imagine the Imperium and the first Federation vessel they encounter.

Captain: This is the Federation starship.....
Imperium: XENOS LOVERS! HERETICS! BURN IN THE EMPEROR'S LIGHT!
Captain: What the.... =boom=

Edit: Found it! Not the same guy, but eh... close enough.

ChrisWWII wrote:
Captain: This is the Federation starship.....
Imperium: XENOS LOVERS! HERETICS! BURN IN THE EMPEROR'S LIGHT!
Captain: What the.... =boom=

Ah, I love the smell of the righteous justice of the Emperor's Hammer in the morning.

TBH Im suprised this thread hasn't been locked by the Mods. There is some good convo and debate going on and all, but really, the same points have been brought up by both sides at least several times....several dozen that is. Mayhap this thread can be shut down and we can all get back to our regular, warhammer loving selves.

Gorgarak, I think we've managed to bring up new points as of late.....but I have to agree with you that we've got a lot of rehash going on right now.

Omegus: I almost wonder....it could be totally possible that the Federation sits a few thousand years before the Imperium. I wonder whatever became of the planets our old ST friends lived on.....Exterminatus practice?

Xiophen - the ranges have been provided for you in this thread about 8 times now. Find them.

300k km range for old 2268 torps, mark 6s have an 8m km range. Comfortably outranging the IoM.

As for engagements inside that? Already explained 5 or 6 times: when you have massively manouverable ships, your limited range and fuel projectile has a shorter effective range. And we know that while their TOP speed is higher you have so far stated NOTHING that shows your ships are more manouverable

Secondly - yields. I notice you ignore the part which states, canon, the yield is 690gigtaons?

Thirdly - speeds. Yes, Omegus, I will raise the FtL flag again - because it is relevant and because xiphus seems fit to ignore it. Xiophus - answer why they would drop to sub-c? ANswer: they wouldnt.

And guess wha t- we HAVE provided canon exampls of FtL battles. Do the posters the courtesy of, I dont know, maybe reading the earlier posts? It isnt "doing our work" when we have already done it...

FOurthly - as for my "math" sucking, well yours is worse. You have calculated how fast something would have to travel to cover the distance, but have ignored three crucial factors.

1) You have forgotten that there were 2 fleets involved, one closing on the other at .75c. So immediately you have a "halved" range - 48m km - at which they would meet assuming both are travelling at .75c to begin with. The reality is the closing point would NOT be the half way point, as they are only moving orbital veloicty to begin with.

2) You have calculated an average, not an upper bound. An average of .8c (which I have already demonstrated to be incorrect) requires you to be maintaining more than 0.9c a tthe end; unless you are supposing instantaneous acceleration?

3) Closing speeds are a difficult thing to calculate, as 2 fleets closing at .75c have a closing speed of 1c...and never any more. Good luck calculating that one

(although you dont get significant "c" effects until over 0.9c, so you should be fine with good old Newtonian mathematics until then.

Before professing others inabilty so loudly, perhaps being correct yourself would be a good idea.

ChrisWWII - what is GW policy regarding canon? They dont have one. So to be fair to both sides Paramounts entirely biased opinion is of *no relevance* to this discussion.

Otherwise only "on screen" canon can be used on boith sides - meaning IoM is a little screwed, no?

THusly I refute that you can "ignore" the story element - TV and books are a very different medium; which is why you dont get many long car chases in books! I can bet you that a film version of BFG would suddenly have them closing to point blank range, if only to make the relative speed changes seem more dramatic.

Enterprise being non-main timeline: both "B" in charge of the series stated they took advantage of the canonical changes to the timeline (riker et al appearing in the statues, both in the book version of the first warp flight and the film First Contact) to accelerate tech used in Enterprise - for example they had hand phasers, when canon these were part tested by Kirk before he became Captain. In addition there was no 100yr hiatus before we were "allowed" fast Warp travel in the main timeline, but this was possibly due to the film changing the dates for warpflight - from 2161 to 2060, to make it seem closer to home at a guess

This was partly done because, in order to be believable on screen, the technology had to lok advanced from our time - which a pre-TOS-based-tech series, if you extrapolated back, would no have done.

Transwarp - it seems we are still reliant on Borg coils / chroniton fields to avoid the "temporal stress"and the core shock from tachyon feedback, however given enough incentive (and there would be definite incentive!) I can see research being accelerated - according to canon transwarp has been worked on since Cochranes time!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Damn - forgot the sensors.

Just because they state something happens at 2AU does not mean it was receieved immediately. FOr example we have radar that can detect objects at 2 AU away, and any report we gave would "look" exactly the same as that report.

Until you find something indicating this real space sensing is faster than light (apart from psyker noting the entry of a fleet - and chaos fleets "look" substantially different when they enter - a lack of geller fields meaning the rift distortion is less, for a start ) you are assumed to have c-class sensors.

ChrisWWII wrote:AndrewC: Well....besides the fact that we know both fusion and fission are possible outside a star (e.g. atomic and hydrogen bombs), and you are once again missing my point. My point is that the Federation has nicely explained to us how much antimatter they have in their warheads, and we can calculate out from there. The Imperium has never given us the slightest inkling of how their power generation technology works. Only that it does. That means that regardless of what current science says we have to assume that the lance works because we have seen it work. Additionally, on screen detonations of photon torpedoes do not seem to result in 690 gigatons of energy released. Torpedoes instead release much LESS energy than 690 gigatons on screen, and Paramount's canon policy holds that when the screen and the books contradict we must go with what happens on screen.

Serves me right for posting when tired. Thank you for pointing it out to me, it was a mistake but not a deliberate one

The problem with fission and fusion in the 'star sense' is that we cannot harness such a source as energy at the present moment because we cannot build such a containment vessel. As you say lances and such work because the rules say they work, and are powered by fusion reactors. No explanation is required. So we can just as well apply the exact same to Federation torpedos. Photons are powered by 1.5kg antimatter and explode at 690GT. No further explanation is required.

Canon, can someone please enlighten me on this. Does not GW Canon policy only accept what is printed in their rules books and supplements? I thought the entire BL was non canon? in the sense that Rules>Fiction?

Additionally, as to your industrial output claim I have to point out that at the end of the Dominion War, the Federation, Klingons and Romulans seemed to believe an unconquered or subjugated Cardassia would have the industrial output to threaten all 3 powers. This implies not only that Star Trek empires are almost completely centered on their home planet, but also that the output of even one planets industrial might can be a threat to 3 relatively intact empires, demonsrtating how low the industrial output of those empires must be.

It is an implication that was never outright stated, so that is as much a conjecture as mine.

Cheers

Andrew

As an aside, if .75c is the cruising/combat speed of a IoM ship, that means that the turn length on BFG is 1/10th of a second

xiophen42. A 64MT explosion going off inside a IoM ship will destroy everything inside the armoured hull. What normally keeps the explosion outside, in this case, is keeping it inside. As a reference I can't help but remember the Italian Policeman who held a flashbang in his hand during a protest, by keeping his hand wrapped round it, it blew his entire hand apart, whereas had he only held it on his hand he would have probably only burnt himself.

Andrew - I'm not sure tehre was ever any "official" policy on canon, as the codexes / rulebooks change on a regular basis (and you can easily have books in production that differ on fluff, e.g. the daemons books seems to rewrite the chaos marine fluff in places) so trying to argue those as "canon" is a little tricky!

ASsuming you allow non-BFG (i.e. novels) into this debate means you both *have* to consider the narrative imperative differences between tabletop and novel based story telling and TV/Film, and the biased assumption of only TV/Film == canon is removed.

focusedfire wrote:@ChrissWWII- I don't hate Roddenberry.

I hate the politically correct thing that next generation became. Its PC, super socialist theme, and complete lack of anything resembling testosterone outside of Ryker annoys the heck out of me. I'll still watch it for some of the Q episodes and the Klingon Civil War. Both were good stories that didn't paint the screen socialist pink. Outside of those I'll watch Kirk, new or old.


I like the original the best of the series and I like the Wrath of Khan best of the old stuff. The New Trek Movie I loved.

Yep. Also liked DS9 because it was dark and reintroduced some fundamental human emotions (via the Klingons of course but oh well).

I just didnt like how DS9 went - the ending was such a let down, proper damp squib.

TNG is still my favorite, (now Sir) Patrick Stewart was such a measured Captain - complete contrast to hump-anything-green Kirk

nosferatu1001 wrote:Andrew - I'm not sure tehre was ever any "official" policy on canon, as the codexes / rulebooks change on a regular basis (and you can easily have books in production that differ on fluff, e.g. the daemons books seems to rewrite the chaos marine fluff in places) so trying to argue those as "canon" is a little tricky!

ASsuming you allow non-BFG (i.e. novels) into this debate means you both *have* to consider the narrative imperative differences between tabletop and novel based story telling and TV/Film, and the biased assumption of only TV/Film == canon is removed.

Actually you could say I would argue the opposite. BL Novels are therfor implicitly not canon as they as subject to immediate rewrite by GW at any time. Lets say that GW decide that IoM now use reactionless thrusters instead of the current reaction thrusters. That would mean that all novels are wrong. Ergo can not be used.

BFG does not claim direct hits are made when inflicting damage. As you have pointed out BFG uses broadsides of various weapons to produce an area of effect bracketing their target in the hope of catching them in it. No mention of a direct hit, same with missiles, whereas SF has the opposite aim of direct hits. Quality over quantity.

Andrew