<![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "another vs"]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/54.page JForum - http://www.jforum.net another vs http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7217929.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7217929.page GMT Re:another vs
Why? Well its simple...the technology level is completely different. Gallactica uses kinetic devices (Blast armor, flak cannons, explosive shells) whereas a Star Cruiser uses shielding and directed energy weapons. By default, any ship using shields/deflectors is blocking out the countless micrometeors and bits of matter in the universe. When those are impacted even at sublight speeds they will rip through most materials we can construct. Such shields would be more than sufficient to stop any of Galactica's kinetic weapons, and would logically be able to compensate for the radiation of their nukes...given that space is full of harmful levels of all types of radiation.

Theoretically the blast wave from a nuke detonated in space could pass through such a sheild and cause damage, but a Star Cruiser could just zap an incoming nuke with a tractor beam for less than half a second to completely alter its trajectory.

Bear in mind that Galactica is something that COULD be constructed at today's level of technology on Earth, minus the hyperdrive. A Star Cruiser is still "magic" technology. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7217956.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7217956.page GMT Re:another vs BSG just to give them a chance, so why bother asking?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7217960.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7217960.page GMT Re:another vs
 Peregrine wrote:
This is like asking "if all the guns are the same, which would win: a 1700s sailing ship, or a WWII battleship". You've already massively biased the scenario in favor of BSG just to give them a chance, so why bother asking?


Even given the same weapons systems, the defensive systems of the Star Cruiser are infinitely superior.

Going by the visuals in the respective series, Star Cruisers (Particularly Victory class) are far more maneuverable as well. One can logically assume that the propulsion system is correspondingly more advanced. Remember that they can land in a gravity well where Galactica will simply crash into the ground.

I mean unless people assume two starships will just sit there and shoot each other like WW1 battleships. Lol.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7217973.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7217973.page GMT Re:another vs Galactica from the re-imagined series and a "standard" Imperial II-class Star Destroyer (which is what is seen in the original films), the Star Destroyer would win hands down.

An Imperial II-class Star Destroyer has eight octuple barbette turbolaser batteries, fifty heavy turbolaser batteries, fifty standard turbolaser batteries, and at least 26 other laser batteries to go along with the 20 heavy ion cannons and a compliment of 72 TIE fighters (which aside from TIE/Ln fighters could include TIE Interceptors, TIE Defenders, TIE Phantoms, etc.). I know people scoff at TIE fighters because the heroes destroy them so easily in the movies, but in-universe they are a feared space superiority fighter. A Star Destroyer is also larger than the Galactica, measuring at least 1600 meters. Like previously mentioned, it also has powerful shielding which is another thing the Galactica lacks.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218045.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218045.page GMT Re:another vs BSG would actually be fairly effective as SW shields and armor are optimized for energy weapons.

In ESB we see the bridge of a Star Destroyer get obliterated by an asteroid that wasn't really all that big.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218124.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218124.page GMT Re:another vs
 Grey Templar wrote:
Actually the kinetic weaponry of BSG would actually be fairly effective as SW shields and armor are optimized for energy weapons.

In ESB we see the bridge of a Star Destroyer get obliterated by an asteroid that wasn't really all that big.

Shielding in the Star Wars Galaxy is an odd bird because of the inconsistency in effectiveness as shown in the movies.

In the original movies, deflector shields work well for the hero craft (plot armor!) and not so well for the expendable craft (I'm looking at you, Gold Squadron). In the prequels, they are powerful enough to stop a massive bombardment of artillery (like in the Battle of Naboo). Those inconsistencies aside, in-universe, deflector shields are effective against projectile weapons and direct energy weapons like lasers.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218145.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218145.page GMT another vs Okay, let's make this the official "versus" thread. No more new threads needed for various iterations, just post them in here.

If new "versus" threads get posted in the near future, please just reference this note and we'll lock them / direct folks to post in here instead. Thanks.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218195.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218195.page GMT Re:another vs
 Grey Templar wrote:
Actually the kinetic weaponry of BSG would actually be fairly effective as SW shields and armor are optimized for energy weapons.

In ESB we see the bridge of a Star Destroyer get obliterated by an asteroid that wasn't really all that big.



In RotJ one of the rebellion ships ends up crashing into a Star Destroyer bridge as well and killing everybody there as well if I recall correctly. But I'm not sure if there was some sort of "the deflecter shields are failing" loophole there or not...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218356.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218356.page GMT Re:another vs
 d-usa wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
Actually the kinetic weaponry of BSG would actually be fairly effective as SW shields and armor are optimized for energy weapons.

In ESB we see the bridge of a Star Destroyer get obliterated by an asteroid that wasn't really all that big.



In RotJ one of the rebellion ships ends up crashing into a Star Destroyer bridge as well and killing everybody there as well if I recall correctly. But I'm not sure if there was some sort of "the deflecter shields are failing" loophole there or not...


They intentionally show the shield generators(the giant balls on top) being destroyed before that happens. Also, that wasn't just any Star Destroyer, it was the Executor, Vader's SSD.


]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218358.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218358.page GMT another vs http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218360.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218360.page GMT another vs http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218419.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218419.page GMT another vs
 cincydooley wrote:
Where do ya'll get all this info on the battlements for the Star Wars ships?


Wookiepedia, which pulls it from the Technical Manuals and such.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218421.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218421.page GMT Re:another vs
 d-usa wrote:
In RotJ one of the rebellion ships ends up crashing into a Star Destroyer bridge as well and killing everybody there as well if I recall correctly. But I'm not sure if there was some sort of "the deflecter shields are failing" loophole there or not...
It was Arvel Crynyd (Green Leader) and he deliberately steered his damaged A-wing into the bridge of the Executor.

The Executor could have continued to fight even with the loss of its bridge, seeing as how it had over 5,000 turbolaser batteries, but it fell into the gravity well of the Death Star II and was destroyed.

In short, the Rebels got lucky.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218449.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218449.page GMT another vs
 Platuan4th wrote:
 cincydooley wrote:
Where do ya'll get all this info on the battlements for the Star Wars ships?


Wookiepedia, which pulls it from the Technical Manuals and such.


Suffice it to say I just rabbit holed on that site for about 90 minutes.

Thanks!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218514.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218514.page GMT another vs
 cincydooley wrote:
 Platuan4th wrote:
 cincydooley wrote:
Where do ya'll get all this info on the battlements for the Star Wars ships?


Wookiepedia, which pulls it from the Technical Manuals and such.


Suffice it to say I just rabbit holed on that site for about 90 minutes.

Thanks!


Wikipedia is bad enough.

But any Wiki for nerds will make some of us disappear for days...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218517.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218517.page GMT another vs
 d-usa wrote:
 cincydooley wrote:
 Platuan4th wrote:
 cincydooley wrote:
Where do ya'll get all this info on the battlements for the Star Wars ships?


Wookiepedia, which pulls it from the Technical Manuals and such.


Suffice it to say I just rabbit holed on that site for about 90 minutes.

Thanks!


Wikipedia is bad enough.

But any Wiki for nerds will make some of us disappear for days...


Pretty much. Sometimes I find myself closing 30 odd tabs because I've been on a site for an hour and it is just getting worse and worse, so I have to cut it off before I lose my mind completely.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218538.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218538.page GMT another vs
 motyak wrote:
 d-usa wrote:


Wikipedia is bad enough.

But any Wiki for nerds will make some of us disappear for days...


Pretty much. Sometimes I find myself closing 30 odd tabs because I've been on a site for an hour and it is just getting worse and worse, so I have to cut it off before I lose my mind completely.


I find myself going on Wikipedia to look up something completely minor and innocent. Then I start to *open in new tab* random links. Then I find out that it is two hours later and I'm reading a page of "genocide in random country and human experimentation* and wonder how the hell I ended up there....]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218545.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/615882/7218545.page GMT