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 know this has been done before but I kinda want to see a thread where it isn't insanely biased for warhammer 40k. (I mean honestly people just troll if they get proven wrong).
http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Apocalypse-class_Battleship
http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Retribution_Class_Battleship
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Eclipse-class_dreadnaught
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Executor-class_Star_Dreadnought

Each ship at its prime and fight in that order executor vs retribution and eclipse vs Apocalypse or a tag team match since the poll won't let me make two at the same time
tell me your reasoning behind it not just because its 40k or because its starwars or any of that bs(like using calculations from lets say the the clone wars from an Acclamator when you know that they've advanced alot since that time and that the excutor could fires a much bigger punch)

using a non scientific approach I'd tend to lean towards the 40k ships based entirely on the crew. Open war is a consent in 40k and as such the crews are much more hardened

There is only one way to find out!

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/36903/squadron-strike

I happen to have a copy of this "game" (and I use the term loosely). It's pretty much custom built to solve "universe vs universe" battles.

Now the only question is how the heck do we stat the dang things...

 ironicsilence wrote:
using a non scientific approach I'd tend to lean towards the 40k ships based entirely on the crew. Open war is a consent in 40k and as such the crews are much more hardened

remember that the eclipse has a shipboard superlaser

Utterly worthless without specifying who's writing.

I could pull quotes that put Star Wars turbolasers at subton of TNT level firepower and quotes that make 40k lance batteries multipetaton (that's over a thousand times the dinosaur killer asteroid) gods of war and vice versa.

There is very little consistency in either setting because each author mostly just writes what they think is cool and apply an art major approach to physics.

It is non-comparable. We can calculate power output of star wars weapons from the movies alone (don't need the Tech guides, even though they pretty much will match up). Unfortunately, we have no way of calculating the power output of Warhammer 40K ships, so we are basically left with:

Which is larger, 2 or X?

Where X is unknown.

I know this has been done before but I kinda want to see a thread where it isn't insanely biased for warhammer 40k. (I mean honestly people just troll if they get proven wrong).

Then you posted on the wrong forums for this goal.

You need a third option in your poll - undecided. As I pointed out, you cannot compare numbers as we have no idea the strength of Warhammer weapons.

You want a franchise vs franchise debate go post this on spacebattles.com and get at least a hundred posts, garaunteed.

Much of it will be making fun of you though.

 Kain wrote:
You want a franchise vs franchise debate go post this on spacebattles.com and get at least a hundred posts, garaunteed.

That's just mean. Why would you send anyone to spacebabies?

Are there any resources (battle fleet gothic books?) that give the specs for the 40k ships? One of the things I love about star wars is that all the specs are there and they mostly check out against reasonable scrutiny for what would be required to pull it off. I know lots of the forge world books have technical specs for tanks, but I'd have no idea where to find the specs for the 40k ones....

The most you get out of various 40K pubs is the ship's length, it's crew complement, and, at least in some of the FFG books, what the ship packs in terms of armaments and the like.

Nothing that says "this type of lance-weapon is equivalent to X suns of fusion power" or anything like that.

I'll go with the 40K ship. 40K ships are able to engage at vast distances where they can't even see each other. Star Wars ships (at least in the movies) have to be at visual range.

Dude, your not getting an unbiased answer from a 40K forum in a 40K vs X thread.
(But Star Wars whoops 40K's @$$, lol)

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I'll go with the 40K ship. 40K ships are able to engage at vast distances where they can't even see each other. Star Wars ships (at least in the movies) have to be at visual range.

On the other hand, 40K ships engage at ranges close enough that one ship shooting a giant chain at another ship and towing it into boarding action range (Ursas Claws) is considered a viable strategy.

The Super Star Destroyer ships were renowned for their Shields above all else, they actually didn't pack too much in the way of firepower - about maybe twice as much as a normal star destroyer. They did however have huge numbers of Fighters on station. Even though the SSD looks like a big ship, its actually more of a moving space station, and that is its classification.

And I re-iterate, the main deal with the SSD is an issue of #DATSHIELD, thats its main asset besides its metric size (of 17 kilometers).


In the movie the SSD was only taken out because it endured constant bombardment from an entire fleet of capitol class ships for over ten minutes to weaken its shields, so that the fighters could get a shot at damaging critical components. The hit that blew up its command tower was a lucky strike really, from a pilot who had been terminally hit by a turbolaser and decided to do a kamikazi.

As far as I know, the W H ships do not have shields. That's a huge problem.

Im not sure about the W H ships but they seemed to handle warfare abit differently and went for a mano-e-mano type of approach, capitol ship against capitol ship, since some smaller capitol ship they could just point a single gun at and blow it away. Most of the drop ships that would be issued from a Retribution class ship are designed for ground fights, not dogfighting in outer space.

So while the two big ships are trying to duke it out, the Fighters being scrambled from the SSD are hitting all sorts of critical components and tearing hull breaches in the other. Fighters cant be hit by big guns, this is one reason you use them, they are too maneuverable and its a big waste to use a huge cannon to nail 1 fighter at a time. A bunch of stinging insects.
- - -

W H never has been too specific with what kind of guns that the big ships fire. Its another one of those unsolved X things. In the Rogue Trader roleplaying game they had stats for their damage, but it wasn't normal damage system, so yet another X thing.

The guns are very large, I do think they would do more damage than a Turbolaser, but how much more is anyone's guess and it would depend on the kind of gun too (I mean are we talking oversized bolters, oversized lascannons, or oversized plasma batteries).

My guess would be that they would have Lascannon Batteries and Plasma Batteries since giant bolter projectiles would be expensive to replace, which means they're shooting similar-technology weapons. Based on the size of the weapons visually depicted on the ship compared to its size, I would say they are much stronger than the ones on the SSD but that means they do have a limit on their strength, whether they were 10 or 20 times stronger.

(Star Wars Blasters actually are plasma weapons btw, just weaker and cooler in temperature).

Though even if they're hitting harder they still have to position the ship correctly to fire.
The Turrets on the SSD fire in Arcs, they can start shooting immediately.

Its pretty close to call, I would bet in that situation one or the other would try to leave before it was over with.
I think both parties would really be more like (head tilted sideways) W T F?

Though I think somebody would fire first, the crew of the W H ship would probably think the SSD was some new Tau threat and decide to nip it in the bud. The SSD crew would consider it a threat because of its sheer size and would open fire and scramble the fighters, because they wouldnt be responding to any communications hails.

The one who opens fire first will have an advantage.


You want a good match - toss a Borg Assimilation Cube at a Retribution class ship.
Those Borg Cubes are 6km to each side, and have regeneration.
HA HA HA

====
Edit

If you're considering the Eclipse, it wins hands down because of the Superlaser.
A weapon which can blow the atmosphere off of a planet, can punch a hole through any ship no matter how big it is, and a big hole it will be. It could shoot a hole all the way through the death star and keep going.
But it is just a hole, since its just a Ship that it is hitting.
In the d20 star wars books it was rated as doing 80d6 damage, or about 280 points, but d20 has always been notorious for nerfing the crap out of weapons stats because its a "multiple hit" system (they dont like one-shotting people).

But when you're considering ships that are a few Kilometers in size having a 100-300 meter wide hole viciously blasted through the entire ship its causing more damage than just the hole, since thats alot of energy being dumped in a small space. When you shoot a man in the head with a 30-06 it does not just leave a .30 caliber hole going in and coming out again. Its kinda like when you're raped, you're just not quite the same anymore.

And it can shoot again, if it needs to.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I'll go with the 40K ship. 40K ships are able to engage at vast distances where they can't even see each other. Star Wars ships (at least in the movies) have to be at visual range.

On the other hand, 40K ships engage at ranges close enough that one ship shooting a giant chain at another ship and towing it into boarding action range (Ursas Claws) is considered a viable strategy.

But that was only the World Eaters fleets that employed those tactics, most other naval forces In 40k wouldn't even try that, hell they pretty much saw it as crude and barbaric.

 Veteran of The Long War wrote:
Dude, your not getting an unbiased answer from a 40K forum in a 40K vs X thread.
(But Star Wars whoops 40K's @$$, lol)

Dakka is theoretically not a 40k forum.

Theoretically. :p

That said, I'm going to give this one to the Imperium. Why?

Because either the Retribution's firepower is sufficient to break the Executor's back outright, or when the Executor's firepower proves superior, the Retribution will fire up the engines, come onto a direct heading, and break the Executor in half with a ram attack before flooding it with mobs and mobs of armsment and militia who will outnumber the Stormtroopers aboard the Executor 50:1.

Even if the Executor is a more powerful warship, the Retribution is a brutal monster who will employ tactics that would never even occur to the civilised Star Wars commanders.

The Retribution does have shields.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Veteran of The Long War wrote:
Dude, your not getting an unbiased answer from a 40K forum in a 40K vs X thread.
(But Star Wars whoops 40K's @$$, lol)

Dakka is theoretically not a 40k forum.

Theoretically. :p

That said, I'm going to give this one to the Imperium. Why?

Because either the Retribution's firepower is sufficient to break the Executor's back outright, or when the Executor's firepower proves superior, the Retribution will fire up the engines, come onto a direct heading, and break the Executor in half with a ram attack before flooding it with mobs and mobs of armsment and militia who will outnumber the Stormtroopers aboard the Executor 50:1.

Even if the Executor is a more powerful warship, the Retribution is a brutal monster who will employ tactics that would never even occur to the civilised Star Wars commanders.

How do you you figure considering it took every ship in the rebel fleet to take down the Executors shields and even then it took some effort. If memory serves the retribution class isnt very fast in general its not like a space marine strike crusier. Its mainly used for long range combat. civilized star wars? They enslaves a race of people by saying they were cleaning up poison why actually putting more poison into there planets atmosphere how is that civilized? This is what I was talking about when I said BS

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
The Retribution does have shields.

are they enough to survive a suerlaser? Especially since the eclipse takes out the most powerful planetary shields and basically a 1/3 of the planet

deathgod1990 wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
The Retribution does have shields.

are they enough to survive a suerlaser? Especially since the eclipse takes out the most powerful planetary shields and basically a 1/3 of the planet

Most powerful shields in Star Wars.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

deathgod1990 wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
The Retribution does have shields.

are they enough to survive a suerlaser? Especially since the eclipse takes out the most powerful planetary shields and basically a 1/3 of the planet

Most powerful shields in Star Wars.

Your point being? considering the amount of power needed to envelope a planet I would say it pretty powerful. From what I've read void shields function pretty much the same way

deathgod1990 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

deathgod1990 wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
The Retribution does have shields.

are they enough to survive a suerlaser? Especially since the eclipse takes out the most powerful planetary shields and basically a 1/3 of the planet

Most powerful shields in Star Wars.

Your point being? considering the amount of power needed to envelope a planet I would say it pretty powerful. From what I've read void shields function pretty much the same way

Do star wars shields work by distorting time and space to relocate or disperse the attack? It appears that they just absorb or "ground" the energy from the impacts.

Also, just because a lot of power is required does not mean it's powerful. It could be highly inefficient, or it could be spread so thinly that it can't resist a powerful attack.
We don't know the specifics. What could be powerful in Star Wars could be pitiful in wh40k, and vice versa.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

deathgod1990 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

deathgod1990 wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
The Retribution does have shields.

are they enough to survive a suerlaser? Especially since the eclipse takes out the most powerful planetary shields and basically a 1/3 of the planet

Most powerful shields in Star Wars.

Your point being? considering the amount of power needed to envelope a planet I would say it pretty powerful. From what I've read void shields function pretty much the same way

Do star wars shields work by distorting time and space to relocate or disperse the attack? It appears that they just absorb or "ground" the energy from the impacts.

Also, just because a lot of power is required does not mean it's powerful. It could be highly inefficient, or it could be spread so thinly that it can't resist a powerful attack.
We don't know the specifics. What could be powerful in Star Wars could be pitiful in wh40k, and vice versa.

no but like star wars shields void shields can only take so much damage before succumbing to the amount of energy being fired againist it. By your logic then 40k weapons might not have the punch to take down void shields and vice versa

deathgod1990 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

deathgod1990 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

deathgod1990 wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
The Retribution does have shields.

are they enough to survive a suerlaser? Especially since the eclipse takes out the most powerful planetary shields and basically a 1/3 of the planet

Most powerful shields in Star Wars.

Your point being? considering the amount of power needed to envelope a planet I would say it pretty powerful. From what I've read void shields function pretty much the same way

Do star wars shields work by distorting time and space to relocate or disperse the attack? It appears that they just absorb or "ground" the energy from the impacts.

Also, just because a lot of power is required does not mean it's powerful. It could be highly inefficient, or it could be spread so thinly that it can't resist a powerful attack.
We don't know the specifics. What could be powerful in Star Wars could be pitiful in wh40k, and vice versa.

no but like star wars shields void shields can only take so much damage before succumbing to the amount of energy being fired againist it. By your logic then 40k weapons might not have the punch to take down void shields and vice versa

Exactly. That's the point; void shields are meant to be tough. It takes a lot of powerful sustained fire to down one.
Also, if a star wars shield is overloaded, do they recharge? I couldn't find anything on that.

From what I understand, SW energy shields work by absorbing energy and using that energy to power themselves. Which is fairly effective, unless the capacitors take in too much energy and it goes offline.
This means that any sustained fire from any energy weapon would eventually cause it to go offline.

Void Shields don't work like that. From what little information I could find, it seems that Void Shields work by taking the energy from the attack and sending it else where. It doesn't matter if you shoot it with a billion lasguns 24/7, because the void shields will just keep dispersing that energy; it can handle it. What they do have trouble with are powerful attacks, like from Titan Killers. That's a lot of energy it has to send somewhere at once, and if it has to deal with too much of that, it has to temporarily shut down to cool down a bit.
What you will not see though, is shot breaking "through" a void shield; it'll disperse it first, and then go offline.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

deathgod1990 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

deathgod1990 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

deathgod1990 wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
The Retribution does have shields.

are they enough to survive a suerlaser? Especially since the eclipse takes out the most powerful planetary shields and basically a 1/3 of the planet

Most powerful shields in Star Wars.

Your point being? considering the amount of power needed to envelope a planet I would say it pretty powerful. From what I've read void shields function pretty much the same way

Do star wars shields work by distorting time and space to relocate or disperse the attack? It appears that they just absorb or "ground" the energy from the impacts.

Also, just because a lot of power is required does not mean it's powerful. It could be highly inefficient, or it could be spread so thinly that it can't resist a powerful attack.
We don't know the specifics. What could be powerful in Star Wars could be pitiful in wh40k, and vice versa.

no but like star wars shields void shields can only take so much damage before succumbing to the amount of energy being fired againist it. By your logic then 40k weapons might not have the punch to take down void shields and vice versa

Exactly. That's the point; void shields are meant to be tough. It takes a lot of powerful sustained fire to down one.
Also, if a star wars shield is overloaded, do they recharge? I couldn't find anything on that.

From what I understand, SW energy shields work by absorbing energy and using that energy to power themselves. Which is fairly effective, unless the capacitors take in too much energy and it goes offline.
This means that any sustained fire from any energy weapon would eventually cause it to go offline.

Void Shields don't work like that. From what little information I could find, it seems that Void Shields work by taking the energy from the attack and sending it else where. It doesn't matter if you shoot it with a billion lasguns 24/7, because the void shields will just keep dispersing that energy; it can handle it. What they do have trouble with are powerful attacks, like from Titan Killers. That's a lot of energy it has to send somewhere at once, and if it has to deal with too much of that, it has to temporarily shut down to cool down a bit.
What you will not see though, is shot breaking "through" a void shield; it'll disperse it first, and then go offline.

From what I have read about void shields they will go down under a sustained fire or a large impact. They are not invulnerable. The same principle applies to star wars deflector shields from what I've read since they essentially act in a similar fashion to void shields in that they will essentially block anything untill the shield is tapped out. Now on the Executor and the Eclipse they both tend to have overlapping shields providing cover in case of one failing. Same principle applies to the retribution and the apocalypse since they have multiple shields. Planetary shields were usually quite powerful if planets had them. Look at the rebel base on hoth it was so strong that it could take an entire fleet of star destroyers firing upon it. another example would be the Yuzzhan invasion of corruscant where it litterally took them fireing thousands upon thousands of slaves ships to start taking down there planetary shield. And yes star wars deflector shields do recharge

Yes, the Retribution and the Eclipse both have shields.

However, Star Wars shields are, according to the description of how they work above, only really effective against energy weapons. Any effectiveness against solid weapons such as torpedoes comes from them training off the kinetic energy of the torpedo so it stops dead in space and can't reach the target.

Therefore, something with the mass of a Retribution cruiser is going to plow straight through them because it still has accelleration (unlike a rocket, missile or bullet). That is, if the SW shields haven't overloaded already from absorbing the energy of the Retribution's void shields.

And yes, I say civilised. Everyone was absolutely shocked and horrified in Return of the Jedi when Wedge or whoever it was in the A-wing rammed the Executor's bridge, because it's Star Wars: You just don't do that!

Besides, that's evidence enough that a ramming attack would work. The bridge still had shields when the A-wing rammed and destroyed it. They availed it not a whit.

Tomb Ship wins.

Void Shields appear to be more powerful for several reasons.

1) They work against ALL projectiles. Including Asteroid impacts. As we can see from Empire, Asteroids>Energy shields and Star Destroyers. The only thing they don't work against are slow moving fighter craft(they have to slow down to enter) and torpedoes(which again slow down to penetrate)

2) They deflect the energy instead of absorbing it. This is the general principal to armor in general, deflect instead of absorb.

Star Wars shields are mostly useless against solid projectiles, which comprise a large portion of any 40k ship's fire.



Another advantage 40k has is the distances engagements happen at. Star Wars battles happen at VERY close range, relative to the enormity of space, in both the movies and the fiction. 40k battles are being waged with ships being hundreds of thousands of kilometers apart.

A single damaged A-wing, the size of a small car, smashed the bridge of a SSD and caused it to crash into the Death Star II. Imagine what a solid slug of iron the size of a semi-truck traveling at 100,000 KPM would do? And any 40k ship is going to be firing thousands of these slugs in a single volley.