Star Trek vs. Battlestar Galactica
- Thread starter Charlemagne
- Start date
-
- Tags
- battlestar galactica
Conchaga
Let's fuck some shit up
A Battlestar's armor can take point blank nuke hits. In trek, it only takes a few torpedoes or phaser blasts to knock out the shields. I'd imagine that if a Battlestar unleashed with their cannons, it'd wither ST shielding in no time. Also, trek always had their main propulsion in their outstretched nacelles. Battlestars can bug out, even when taking heavy fire. Trek ships wouldn't be able to. It's like Juggernaut Vs Superman. Juggernaut may have the strength to hold a fight with Supes, but all Superman needs to do is knock off the protection and pound away at the head. Same principle applies with BSG vs Trek. Knock out rear shielding, hit the engines, fire at sitting target, end of fight. Also, that doesn't even take into account Viper deployment and how devastating they'd be as cannon fodder and phaser distractors, letting the Battlestar get close enough to just take a trek ship to Pound Town.
My vote Trek loses.This is assuming it's the Fleet of the 12 Colonies vs the Federation. As Galactica is easily two to three times the mass of a Sovereign class starship.
My vote Trek loses.This is assuming it's the Fleet of the 12 Colonies vs the Federation. As Galactica is easily two to three times the mass of a Sovereign class starship.
Charlemagne
Holy Roman Emperor
A) This was old BSG
B) The Enterprise largely deals with nuke-level stuff for average weaponry, nukes in both BSGs were rare for the Galactica.
C) Vipers would just vaporize on shield impact.
D) Antimatter. Trek has it, BSG doesn't.
E) Enterprise could just beam a photon torpedo over into Galactica's engine room due to Galactica not having shields. Baboom!
F) The most important one of all. This was just a fanmade video. It was supposed to be for fun, not accuracy.
B) The Enterprise largely deals with nuke-level stuff for average weaponry, nukes in both BSGs were rare for the Galactica.
C) Vipers would just vaporize on shield impact.
D) Antimatter. Trek has it, BSG doesn't.
E) Enterprise could just beam a photon torpedo over into Galactica's engine room due to Galactica not having shields. Baboom!
F) The most important one of all. This was just a fanmade video. It was supposed to be for fun, not accuracy.
Conchaga
Let's fuck some shit up
So? I'm going by the longest-running source of canon.
Rare? Cylons carpet bombed the 12 colonies with nukes. The reason they were rare for Galactica was that they raided a secondary emergency weapon supply depot for munitions. The rest of the fleet had tons of nukes. Another thing is that the defense perimeter established by Galactica's cannons destroyed nukes at a distance.
No, they'd bounce off. Their lack of plasma energy weapons wouldn't be that much of a problem for the Trek Shielding. However, they'd be devastating in a ground war. Or, they could just use raptors to jump inside the shielding and deploy nukes. Either way, the smaller craft would be quite useful.
So? They were never really able to weaponize it. Every time antimatter escaped containment something went boom.
Fail. If the Enterprise were being attacked, their shields would be up. If their shields are up, they can't use transporters. Try again.
And? It's still fun debating whether or not BSG or Trek would win in a fight. I fail to see your point.
Dirk Funk
Evil Penguin
Did you forget General Order 24? Or perhaps the complete slagging of the Founder's planet in TDiC? The yield of Trek weaponry goes from an extreme low end 64 MT photon torpedo to possible 640 GT torpedoes. Sorry, but the nukes in BSG aren't anywhere near those yields.
No, Trek shielding starts from the hull outward. Also, Trek weapons are not generally plasma based. Phasers use the Rapid Nadion Effect, which is a stream of Nadion particles that cause the molecules of it's target to lose cohesion.
Photon Torpedoes are weaponized antimatter. http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Photon_torpedo
Shields can be lowered and raised rather quickly for beaming. It's been done many times. Honestly, a few low yield nukes aren't going to be much of a threat.
Conchaga
Let's fuck some shit up
Yeah, but the BSG nukes don't need to be that high-yield. Just one, in the right place, does plenty of damage. As I said earlier, BSG wouldn't need to worry about that if they are firing their defensive perimeters. Also, remember, with more than one Battlestar, the perimeter starts to become closer to 360 degrees, even on the z axis.
TNG: "Preemptive Strike" /discussion
It doesn't even really matter. Raptors could simply jump into the shuttlebay of an attacking ship, deploy a timed weapon and bug out. The resulting jumps would totally fuck a lot of shit up.
I stand majorly corrected.
Gotcha.
With a cannon barrage from a vessel that's at least twice the mass of your vessel, would you wanna get within transporter range to attempt such a tactic? The only ships in Trek that get close enough in size to stand a chance in a toe-to-toe battle with a Battlestar would be the heavier Romulan Warbirds, Kazon Warships, and Dominion Battleships.
Internet Troll
New Member
who moved this ?
Consumer
Elder Statesman
1 kg (about 2.2 lbs) of Anti-matter (and supporting matter and "mixing" hardware to bring the anti-matter into contact with the matter) = 20Megaton (rough), assuming 50% efficiency.
Note: the US "B41" type 25 MT bomb, the biggest the US ever produced, was about 10,670 lbs.
The USSR had the "Tsar Bomb" that was tested at 50 MT, the biggest man-made explosion ever, and had a theoretical max of 100MT yield and was about 27 tons in weight.
Win to Trek.
Also most nukes in space "waste" a lot of their energy radiating in all directions, if you don't have a "contact hit" only a fraction of the energy needs to be absorbed by the ships armor. Shields can also "deflect" energy before it gets to the hull if they are "tuned" to whatever form that energy is in (Or so I assume, we can do it with some EM type energy in a few frequencies with today's tech).
In addition:
In the Trek Universe the computers are fully integrated. In BSG they are not (with good in-universe reasons). That means that reaction times, fire-control solutions, and other vital calculations for fighting are going to be MUCH faster on the trek-based ships. Even with good computers in the BSG ships, they have human "links" to actually fire the weapons and do other functions, and this will slow the systems down by factors of thousands compared with a full-on Trek-style computer system.
In WWII, during the Second (Naval) battle of Guadalcanal the US and Japanese battleships had a pretty even parity in weapons and armor. However, the US had Radar, and as a result could hit the Japanese ships before the Japanese could even range on the US (although they did, eventually, but they lost). The lesson here: you can't hit what you can't see, and in space at the ranges you might be at, reaction time and calculations (like areas of probability of where an opponent might be when a sub-light weapon reaches it) are going to be vital. Slugging it out at visual range is a TV artifact (um...yeah...I know...it's a couple of TV shows...).
Note: the US "B41" type 25 MT bomb, the biggest the US ever produced, was about 10,670 lbs.
The USSR had the "Tsar Bomb" that was tested at 50 MT, the biggest man-made explosion ever, and had a theoretical max of 100MT yield and was about 27 tons in weight.
Win to Trek.
Also most nukes in space "waste" a lot of their energy radiating in all directions, if you don't have a "contact hit" only a fraction of the energy needs to be absorbed by the ships armor. Shields can also "deflect" energy before it gets to the hull if they are "tuned" to whatever form that energy is in (Or so I assume, we can do it with some EM type energy in a few frequencies with today's tech).
In addition:
In the Trek Universe the computers are fully integrated. In BSG they are not (with good in-universe reasons). That means that reaction times, fire-control solutions, and other vital calculations for fighting are going to be MUCH faster on the trek-based ships. Even with good computers in the BSG ships, they have human "links" to actually fire the weapons and do other functions, and this will slow the systems down by factors of thousands compared with a full-on Trek-style computer system.
In WWII, during the Second (Naval) battle of Guadalcanal the US and Japanese battleships had a pretty even parity in weapons and armor. However, the US had Radar, and as a result could hit the Japanese ships before the Japanese could even range on the US (although they did, eventually, but they lost). The lesson here: you can't hit what you can't see, and in space at the ranges you might be at, reaction time and calculations (like areas of probability of where an opponent might be when a sub-light weapon reaches it) are going to be vital. Slugging it out at visual range is a TV artifact (um...yeah...I know...it's a couple of TV shows...).
Charlemagne
Holy Roman Emperor
For range, long-range attacks in Trek take place at hundreds of thousands of kilometers (TNG: The Wounded).
And besides, mass has nothing to do with the scenario in this case. In one of the DS9 Mirror Universe episodes, the Mirror Defiant was seen pounding a warship at least ten times its mass. Trek ships are also much more maneuverable than BSG ships, as the 170-meter-long Defiant is seen pulling off fighter-like maneuvers. Add in the Defiant's ablative armor and quantum torpedoes, and Galactica is fucked.
Oh yeah, if we're going by 25th Century UFP, Galactica is even more screwed, as Starfleet ships can now also be armed with antiproton cannons.
And besides, mass has nothing to do with the scenario in this case. In one of the DS9 Mirror Universe episodes, the Mirror Defiant was seen pounding a warship at least ten times its mass. Trek ships are also much more maneuverable than BSG ships, as the 170-meter-long Defiant is seen pulling off fighter-like maneuvers. Add in the Defiant's ablative armor and quantum torpedoes, and Galactica is fucked.
Oh yeah, if we're going by 25th Century UFP, Galactica is even more screwed, as Starfleet ships can now also be armed with antiproton cannons.
hellgunneR
Stop Staring At The Catgirl
I'd put my bets on BSG winning. Trek are a bunch of pussies who always want to do the right thing. One surrender call from BSG and they'd back down.
BSG are a bit more ruthless as they are fighting for survival and do some morally dubious things. One surrender call off the Trek ship and they'd either blow it to pieces or strip it of any value and leave the occupants floating dead in space.
BSG are a bit more ruthless as they are fighting for survival and do some morally dubious things. One surrender call off the Trek ship and they'd either blow it to pieces or strip it of any value and leave the occupants floating dead in space.
Charlemagne
Holy Roman Emperor
Except that Trek's firepower is a few order of magnitudes higher than BSG's...
Charlemagne
Holy Roman Emperor
Also, hellgunneR, have you ever seen ST: DS9? Most of BSG's writers wrote for it originally.
hellgunneR
Stop Staring At The Catgirl
Yeah I saw Season one. But I still think the Federation lack balls compared to BSG.
BSG: Hey Trek, you are more powerful then us. We surrender.
Trek: OK, no point fighting. Lets do diplomacy.
B: Let's hang at your pad then.
T: Yes, we have nice holosuites!
One invite to the ship, assasination of the captain and various sabotage acts later
B: Boom! There it goes!
T: WTF?
B: You were a threat to the last fleet of the 12 colonies. SO SAY WE ALL BITCHES! Take the useful bits of wreckage, have a quick shag, spool up and let's bust this joint.
BSG: Hey Trek, you are more powerful then us. We surrender.
Trek: OK, no point fighting. Lets do diplomacy.
B: Let's hang at your pad then.
T: Yes, we have nice holosuites!
One invite to the ship, assasination of the captain and various sabotage acts later
B: Boom! There it goes!
T: WTF?
B: You were a threat to the last fleet of the 12 colonies. SO SAY WE ALL BITCHES! Take the useful bits of wreckage, have a quick shag, spool up and let's bust this joint.