Star Trek AP revisions

Idazmi · May 22, 2018

The current AP for the Original Enterprise states the following:

"Continent level+ standard phaser output against solid matter (demonstrates an effect of 4.3 petatons for a phaser burst - see weaponry explanation below for why this only applies to solid matter), City level standard phaser output against deflector shields (scaling from Photon Torpedoes), At least City level with Photon Torpedoes"

"Star Trek phasers work through the generation of a subatomic particle known as nadions, which according to the guidebook and script can cause "liberation of atomic nuclei, disrupting nuclear forces". Basically, it causes a reaction in solid matter that causes a semi-perpetuating subatomic destruction effect, which lasts until the particles are expended. In other words, it is the particle to energy ratio that causes the damage not the actual energy (can be seen in this source: https://www.phasers.net/2360/settings.htm - site used for current accepted hand phaser calc). This reaction is clearly seen with clean "disappearing" of objects hit by phasers, after being hit there is no more matter to react with. Phasers don't do as much damage as photon torpedoes against shields, because they focus less on raw energy output and more on damage caused by the particles which are blocked from reacting by the shields."

I see these statements as highly inaccurate: the site being referenced states that it uses the "Next Generation Technical Manual" - a well recognized recognized non-canon source that directly contradicts the Star Trek TV series in a myriad of ways. To start: in The Doomsday Machine, the Enterprise took a direct hit from the Planet Killer's main weapon with it's shields down (thus, any "exotic particle effect" would have been at play against the bare hull), and it didn't even breach the armor. If the AP were true, the ship should have been instantly atomized. While some might see this as plot armor, the U.S.S. Constellation endured a battle with the Planet Killer in the same episode, and it was in this condition afterwards:

^ The Constellatio after battle with the Planet Killer.

The hull is largely intact and bearing multiple breaches, indicating that multiple shots to the unshielded matter of the ship didn't disintegrate it. The idea that it's specifically phasers that work through "liberation of atomic nuclei" is shown to be false in The Ultimate Computer, where we see fully powered phasers fired against unshielded Federation Starships of the same class as the Enterprise, and they were not immediately destroyed by any such effect. Rather, it took several direct hits to breach the hull, and even the Excalibur - the entire crew of which was killed - was merely wrecked, and not totally destroyed on an atomic level.

^ A full power phaser impact directly against the armor of a Constitution Class Starship. No disintegration.

Ever since Star Trek's first episode, it has been made clear to the audience - through both dialogue and demonstration - that the Starship Enterprise has powerful enough weapons to destroy a planet's surface outright. The first such statement was Lieutenant Tyler stating that the Enterprise's weapons can "blast half a continent" in it's pre-refit configuration. Even in those dialogues, there is nothing implying that there is anything other than raw firepower at work - no mention of any exotic particle wizardry. Direct statements of firepower and durability in Star Trek are not hyperbolic: the characters involved are usually trained Starfleet personnel who have no reason at all to exaggerate their claims, and their statements tend to be backed by the events as they occur in the series. An example of this (one of many) would be the episode Obsession, in which the Enterprise used a simple antimatter bomb to attack a hostile creature on the surface of Tycho IV. In Star Trek, an antimatter bomb (and other antimatter weapons of any kind, including the supposedly "city level" Photon Torpedoes) generates explosive power by combining matter and antimatter - inside the bomb itself - to release gamma ray photons, not nadions. We actually see the aftermath of the Enterprise's attack on Tycho IV onscreen: the sheer energy release put a clearly visible continent-sized crater into the planet, evaporated all water on the planet's surface, and blasted away the atmosphere.

^ Here you can see Tycho IV before the blast. Take note of the clouds and bodies of water.

^ This is the aftermath. Take note of the crater, and the complete lack of clouds and bodies of water.

In A Taste of Armageddon, the Enterprise threatens to destroy "the entire inhabited surface" of the planet Eminiar VII in response to continued hostile actions from that world.

^ Eminiar VII

I've often seen this specific incident used to lowball Star Trek weapons to mere city-level firepower regardless of other demonstrations and statements. However, we know that Star Trek weapons are variable yield: phasers were set to 1/100th power during the war games sequence in The Ultimate Computer, and it was in that very episode that fully powered phasers were also fired.

In light of all that (and so much more information that it would become tedious to list it all), there's no way the original Starship Enterprise can be scaled to less than continent level in either raw firepower or unshielded durability by any logic. That's not even mentioning that the "nadions" spoken of weren't even mentioned until Star Trek's sequel series, and even now are never mentioned in reference to the original ship. I'd suggest restoring the Original Enterprise's phasers and photon torpedoes to around 6-B, as per the statement that the ship can "blast half a continent".

Aeyu · May 23, 2018

I've already recommended changing the statistics in the other Star Trek Revisions thread (where I accurately calc'ed the AP of handheld phasers). I also think that scaling based to shield frequencies is unnecessary, since it would simply scale the shields to a specific degree of durability, not lower the AP of phaser/projectile weaponry.

I disagree with 6-B as a maximum though, I think 5-B is more appropriate, since in "A Taste for Armageddo", the Enterprise's fire control system is stated to be able to destroy the entire planet several times. Perhaps a range with the ship (as it will be with humans) will be helpful, and so it could read 6-B to 5-B.

Either way, I would appreciate it if you could also give some input on that thread that I linked above. Thanks.

XING06 · May 23, 2018

@Aeyu - That's not what we scaled it to. It was b/c we originally agreed that phasers worked through the nadion particles it shoots having integral sub-atomic destruction properties which make it far stronger against solid matter, b/c it sets of a chain reaction that multiplies the damage against solid matter but is blocked from reacting by shields and later structural integrity fields.

However, Idazami is stating that the description of what nadions do is technically non-canon (which I must concede) - as I don't believe they ever stated what it does in script. I personally believe that it is how it works b/c of the visual effects of phaser (eg. harmless disapearance of matter and same effect regardless of mass of target) not matching up with pure energy weaponry, but that's conjecture - though I can support it - so I'd actually have to agree with Idazami's edit based on site rules (though there are weapons in the Trek universe that canonically work like that - see the planet killer).

I disagree with your 5-B for the Original Enterprise though b/c it does not specify in "A Taste for Armageddon" whether it means death star like destruction (5B) or simply eradication of all surface life (like how we refer to nukes); also the later and far more advanced Enterprise D required routing all its power to graviton generation (deflector shielding system) to perform it's 5-B neutron star redirection feat. Also, see the Die is Cast where it took a barrage from 15 original series level warships to vaporize 30% of the planetary crust. I'd say 6-B for the original series is the best b/c of this.

XING06 · May 23, 2018

@Idazami - Like I said to Aeyu, I actually agree with your edits based on site rules, as you are correct that the TNGTM is non-canon and most of my conclusions on how phasers work are educated guesses. Like I said I support 6B for the Original Enterprise and at least 6B and maximum effect of 5B for Enterprise D.

However, I still stand by megaton level torpedoes. Tycho IV is a clear outlier - it does that amount of damage with 1.5 oz of antimatter, but all later showings of photon/spatial torpedo damage (which have far more antimatter) are megaton level feats. Regular scaling should put it at 6-B, but there's actually script/canon sources that suggests that Trek deflectors screens are more effective against particle type kinetic energy impact (phasers) compared to radiation (what you'd get with torpedoes) so the megaton feats actually make sense.

Also, addressing your planet killer statement. That one actually canonically states it uses exotic matter to multiply it's damage effects, specifically anti-protons. It's actual kinetic energy would be much lower and the effect wouldn't affect shields (actually this is another reason I was convinced phaser nadions worked similarly - we have a canon example of a weapon that works almost exactly like that just scaled up a huge amount). The anti-protons didn't destroy the Enterprise with shields down b/c technically the Enterprise still had it's structural integrity fields, which are smaller, weaker force fields made to strengthen the structure. When they refer to structural integrity going down, they're actually refering to the field not the armor or the ship. But still as a shield system it would prevent the anti-protons from reacting.

Idazmi · May 23, 2018

Aeyu said:
I've already recommended changing the statistics in the other Star Trek Revisions thread (where I accurately calc'ed the AP of handheld phasers). I also think that scaling based to shield frequencies is unnecessary, since it would simply scale the shields to a specific degree of durability, not lower the AP of phaser/projectile weaponry.

I disagree with 6-B as a maximum though, I think 5-B is more appropriate, since in "A Taste for Armageddo", the Enterprise's fire control system is stated to be able to destroy the entire planet several times. Perhaps a range with the ship (as it will be with humans) will be helpful, and so it could read 6-B to 5-B.

Either way, I would appreciate it if you could also give some input on that thread that I linked above. Thanks.

Scaling phasers to shield frequency is ridiculous because the phasers don't gain or lose power: the target's shields gain or lose their ability to resist the phasers. The frequency shouldn't affect AP at all. That said, 5-B is much too high for The Original Enterprise: in The Paradise Syndrome the Enterprise clearly couldn't destroy an asteroid that was, according to Spock: "The size and mass of your Earth's moon" with the ship's phasers, (so it's not even 5-C) They did make an attempt to cut it in half with the ship's phasers and very nearly succeeded, putting them around 6-A at absolute maximum phaser output. It's pretty clear that when Kirk said he was going to "destroy the planet" that he meant so in the "destroy the biosphere" sense.

Idazmi · May 23, 2018

XING06 said:
Like I said to Aeyu, I actually agree with your edits based on site rules, as you are correct that the TNGTM is non-canon and most of my conclusions on how phasers work are educated guesses. Like I said I support 6B for the Original Enterprise and at least 6B and maximum effect of 5B for Enterprise D.

However, I still stand by megaton level torpedoes. Tycho IV is a clear outlier - it does that amount of damage with 1.5 oz of antimatter, but all later showings of photon/spatial torpedo damage (which have far more antimatter) are megaton level feats. Regular scaling should put it at 6-B, but there's actually script/canon sources that suggests that Trek deflectors screens are more effective against particle type kinetic energy impact (phasers) compared to radiation (what you'd get with torpedoes) so the megaton feats actually make sense.

Also, addressing your planet killer statement. That one actually canonically states it uses exotic matter to multiply it's damage effects, specifically anti-protons. It's actual kinetic energy would be much lower and the effect wouldn't affect shields (actually this is another reason I was convinced phaser nadions worked similarly - we have a canon example of a weapon that works almost exactly like that just scaled up a huge amount). The anti-protons didn't destroy the Enterprise with shields down b/c technically the Enterprise still had it's structural integrity fields, which are smaller, weaker force fields made to strengthen the structure. When they refer to structural integrity going down, they're actually refering to the field not the armor or the ship. But still as a shield system it would prevent the anti-protons from reacting.

Actually, "structural integrity fields" were not referenced this early in Star Trek lore. Even if they were, we've seen NX class and 22nd century Vulcan and Andorian ships firing on Constitution Class ships: their energy weapons were totally ineffective against the bare hull while the ship's power grid was explicitly offline due to internal sabotage. Also: how do you account for the scorched and pitted, but mostly intact hull of the Constellatio? It looks much more like the ship was blown apart by directed particle beams, which isn't anything close to what you described. Adding to that, the Planet Killer was powered by consuming the RUBBLE of the planets it left behind. Your method wouldn't leave anything behind. As for "megaton level torpedoes", take a look at what you said to Aeyu earlier:

XING06 said:
That's not what we scaled it to. It was b/c we originally agreed that phasers worked through the nadion particles it shoots having integral sub-atomic destruction properties which make it far stronger against solid matter, b/c it sets of a chain reaction that multiplies the damage against solid matter but is blocked from reacting by shields and later structural integrity fields.

However, Idazami is stating that the description of what nadions do is technically non-canon (which I must concede) - as I don't believe they ever stated what it does in script. I personally believe that it is how it works b/c of the visual effects of phaser (eg. harmless disapearance of matter and same effect regardless of mass of target) not matching up with pure energy weaponry, but that's conjecture - though I can support it - so I'd actually have to agree with Idazami's edit based on site rules (though there are weapons in the Trek universe that canonically work like that - see the planet killer).

I disagree with your 5-B for the Original Enterprise though b/c it does not specify in "A Taste for Armageddon" whether it means death star like destruction (5B) or simply eradication of all surface life (like how we refer to nukes); also the later and far more advanced Enterprise D required routing all its power to graviton generation (deflector shielding system) to perform it's 5-B neutron star redirection feat. Also, see the Die is Cast where it took a barrage from 15 original series level warships to vaporize 30% of the planetary crust. I'd say 6-B for the original series is the best b/c of this.

That statement contains three mistakes for your argument.

FIRST: That fleet contained several D'deridex class Romulan Warbirds, which are NOT "original series level" at all, being the ships that posed so much threat to the Enterprise-D on multiple occasions. The other component was Cardassian ships, which while inferior, are still a distinct threat to 24th century ships.

SECOND: the bombardment in The Die is Cast only lasted 15 seconds, and included multiple torpedoes that generated continent-spanning shockwaves. There's absolutely no reason at all to fire a continent-vaporizing weapon and follow with mere megaton weapons during a genocidal planetary bombardment. Even assuming (on no actual evidence) that the torpedoes did only 10% of the damage done, that would give them 24 gigaton yields. Any other calculation easily puts them in the teraton range.

THIRD: we directly see the type of torpedoes used on Original Series ships, as well as the ones used in TNG and DS9 onscreen, and when we compare them:

^ A TOS era torpedo casing from the Enterprise, used as a casket after the Battle of the Mutara Nebula.

^ A torpedo from Deep Space Nine.

Notice something? They are the exact same torpedo. The ships in the later eras all have faster torpedo firing rates than the Original Series era, but there's no indication that the actual torpedo munition has changed at all. (Remember: the .50 BMG was developed for the Browning .50 caliber machine gun in the late 1910s and is still used today, albeit by better weaponry with faster firing rates and better detection systems) You could claim that they improved the warhead, but that would be pure conjecture, and considering the power of phasers and how much damage the TOS ships can take - even phasers to the bare hull - it would be a conjecture purely based on visual effects, versus the rest of the lore.

Before this goes any further, look at this page:

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Attack_potency

"An alternative term for Destructive Capacity which has more direct meaning: The Destructive Capacity that an attack is equivalent to. A character with a certain degree of attack potency does not necessarily need to cause destructive feats on that level, but can cause damage to characters that can withstand such forces. We are aware that this technically violates the principle of conservation of energy, as it should logically disperse upon impact, but fiction generally tends to ignore this fact, so we overlook it as well. Also, kindly remember that Attack Potency is the measure of Destructive Capacity of an attack, and as such, is measured via its energy damage equivalent. Hence, characters that destroy mountains or islands are not automatically mountain or island level, especially if they are small. The attack potency depends upon the energy output of the attack, not the area of effect of the attack."

Emphasis mine. By using visual effects alone to lowball Star Trek's torpedoes to megaton-level, when we have direct proof of torpedoes having multi-gigaton firepower, you are effectively violating this principle. On this very website, Son Goku in DBZ is listed as a 5-B tier at lowest. If you've seen Dragonball Z or it's spinoffs in any capacity, you know that the attacks used by Son Goku and others in his class often don't destroy the planet they are standing on and have sub-megaton visual effects, yet he's listed at 5-B because he can factually destroy a planet despite those effects. Using visual effects to lowball Star Trek's torpedoes is effectively the same as trying to lowball Goku by pointing out he didn't destroy a planet during his fight with Majin Vegeta.

XING06 · May 23, 2018

@Idazmi - Oh thanks for the clarification I was actually unaware the warbirds were that class. Thanks! We can scale Enterprise-D to them then and scale Original Enterprise lower.

Anyway sorry if I seem a bit argumentative, but I'm a real-life knowledgeable member so I tend to overthink things sometimes and demand logical explanations whenever possible - especially sci-fi. I am glad to see another Star Trek fan here! Still I'm still unconvinced by 6A level torpedoes, so I'll explain why.

1) It doesn't matter that structural integrity fields weren't referenced that early; lots of authors go back to add in new stuff later (That's like saying that ray shielding and energy shielding from Star Wars doesn't exist b/c they don't talk about it in the original movies) - and the structural integrity field is canonically described as necessarily developed by spaceflight capable species b/c of the massive amount of stress and probability of hull breach presented by warp fields and spatial phenomenon. Ergo, to go to warp safely you need at least a structural integrity field if not your deflector screen.

2) In regards to when they had no power, Constitution Class ships still had advanced armor (and the fact that it was larger and had more powerful propulsion meant that it could have more or at least the same b/c they focused more on deflector shielding later).

3) Also, I can account for the scorched pitted and mostly intact hull of the Constellation by quoting the effects of the SIF ("A structural integrity reading of 100% meant that the field was accepting a maximum load of the stresses presented to the structure, and that all physical architecture was safe from that stress. As the percentage approached zero, this meant that more and more of the stress of weapons, gravity, and other phenomenon was being experienced by the hull itself rather than the force field. As the hull became damaged or breached, the SIF became less effective as the hull it was designed to hold together started to disintegrate.") Basically as SIF drops it starts to leak which lets the hull take damage and when the hull takes damage SIF becomes even less effective, but it still stops most of the effects of weaponry.

4) In addition, you are incorrect in that with the anti-proton method I described there would be nothing left. When anti-matter comes into contact with regular matter it explodes. This resulting explosion would throw away several large pieces of the target further from the target point, while the anti-matter beam continues through the target continuously causing more explosive reactions, resulting in rubble.

5) Also, I'm not using visual effects to lowball; I'm using their most consistent feats. Tycho IV is a total outlier. And canonically, by DS9 and TNG they are using quantum torpedoes, which are stated to be more powerful. Also, you went by the visual shockwaves of the Die is Cast, but in contrast the visual fireball levels are barely megaton at best so we really can't use the visual effects there due to the contradiction, relying mostly on script which show that 30% of the crust was vaporized but that was with a lot more phaser blasts and around only 6 quantum torpedoes (photons are weaker). I'm aware that the bombardment was short, which is why I called it a barrage.

6) Also, you are incorrect in that there's no reason to fire more powerful weaponry first then follow with weaker ones.Torpedoes generally have more area of effect.

Also, totally off topic, but your .50 BMG example isn't good. We do actually have better ammo compared to before; our bullets are now more accurate and we have more powerful varieties including saboted AP and HEIAP (armor piercing with an explosive-fragmentation after armor effect).

Idazmi · May 24, 2018

XING06 said:
@Idazmi - Oh thanks for the clarification I was actually unaware the warbirds were that class. Thanks! We can scale Enterprise-D to them then and scale Original Enterprise lower.

Anyway sorry if I seem a bit argumentative, but I'm a real-life knowledgeable member so I tend to overthink things sometimes and demand logical explanations whenever possible - especially sci-fi. I am glad to see another Star Trek fan here! Still I'm still unconvinced by 6A level torpedoes, so I'll explain why.

Excuse me: you - a "Star Trek fan" - were "unaware"?

^ They're only one of the most distinctive ships in Science Fiction. The mistake you made there is just as huge as not knowing what Darth Vader looks like: so how can you possibly claim to be a Star Trek fan? No mere forgetfulness can explain that level of mistake. Even considering how "knowledgeable" you truly are, an ounce of research using any Star Trek reference, episode or website reveals what those ships are in mere moments. And even if you did no research at all: they are being used during the dominion war, which takes place a century after TOS. How can you call them "original series level" knowing that?

XING06 said:
It doesn't matter that structural integrity fields weren't referenced that early; lots of authors go back to add in new stuff later (That's like saying that ray shielding and energy shielding from Star Wars doesn't exist b/c they don't talk about it in the original movies) and the structural integrity field is canonically described as necessarily developed by spaceflight capable species b/c of the massive amount of stress and probability of hull breach presented by warp fields and spatial phenomenon. Ergo, to go to warp safely you need at least a structural integrity field if not your deflector screen.

No, it's not anywhere near the same, the first difference being that ray shielding is directly mentioned in Star Wars' first movie during the briefing before the Battle of Yavin, and deflector shields are specifically mentioned by Han Solo. Second being that no one has ever mentioned structural integrity fields in reference to the Constitution Class, even upon later appearances of the ship as late as In a Mirror Darkly. Everything you just wrote about structural integrity is from the non-canonical Next Generation Technical Manual: The early Warp ships (like the NX class) had no structural integrity fields, nor any analogue to them, yet they could travel at Warp Speeds just fine. That's adding to the fact that Warp Fields don't put any physical strain on the traveling ship because they distort space around the ship instead of imparting physical inertia. Ships can actually extend their warp fields around distant objects without tearing them apart.

XING06 said:
In regards to when they had no power, Constitution Class ships still had advanced armor (and the fact that it was larger and had more powerful propulsion meant that it could have more or at least the same b/c they focused more on deflector shielding later).

So you are assuming that this armor comes with a resistance to being destroyed by "harmless disappearance of matter and same effect regardless of mass of target" when we have no evidence of that in dialogue, or even in the non-canon technical manual you like quoting so much. That's not even mentioning the fact that the Deflector Screens of the Constitution Class are demonstrated to be far stronger than the armor in every instance of their showing.

XING06 said:
Also, I can account for the scorched pitted and mostly intact hull of the Constellation by quoting the effects of the SIF ("A structural integrity reading of 100% meant that the field was accepting a maximum load of the stresses presented to the structure, and that all physical architecture was safe from that stress. As the percentage approached zero, this meant that more and more of the stress of weapons, gravity, and other phenomenon was being experienced by the hull itself rather than the force field. As the hull became damaged or breached, the SIF became less effective as the hull it was designed to hold together started to disintegrate.") Basically as SIF drops it starts to leak which lets the hull take damage and when the hull takes damage SIF becomes even less effective, but it still stops most of the effects of weaponry.

Nothing up there is a quote from any canonical Star Trek source. In actual fact, you seem to be conflating the Structural Integrity Field with proper Deflector Screens. Those two are not the same thing and they don't even function similarly: Deflector screens protect the ship from tactical weapons by deflecting incoming attacks. The Structural Integrity Field is energy-based reinforcement bracing: nothing about it would affect a weapon's ability to destroy matter on an atomic level, any more than reinforcing bars would. It's not meant to.

XING06 said:
In addition, you are incorrect in that with the anti-proton method I described there would be nothing left. When anti-matter comes into contact with regular matter it explodes. This resulting explosion would throw away several large pieces of the target further from the target point, while the anti-matter beam continues through the target continuously causing more explosive reactions, resulting in rubble.

Oh? Because I distinctly remember you saying:

XING06 said:
I personally believe that it is how it works b/c of the visual effects of phaser (eg. harmless disapearance of matter and same effect regardless of mass of target) not matching up with pure energy weaponry, but that's conjecture - though I can support it - so I'd actually have to agree with Idazami's edit based on site rules (though there are weapons in the Trek universe that canonically work like that - see the planet killer

The problem is not my evidence, nor the damage to the Constellation: it's the fact that your "theory" basically amounts to all Star Trek energy weapons doing their damage through "harmless disapearance of matter" instead of energy transfer. In that regard, you are simply wrong: Kirk had to specifically order his crew to set their hand phasers for "disruptor effect" in Obsession, - effectively debunking the idea that all phaser impacts can be chalked up to disruption.

^ Also this. There's no "harmless disappearance of matter" going on here.

XING06 said:
Also, I'm not using visual effects to lowball; I'm using their most consistent feats. Tycho IV is a total outlier. And canonically, by DS9 and TNG they are using quantum torpedoes, which are stated to be more powerful. Also, you went by the visual shockwaves of the Die is Cast, but in contrast the visual fireball levels are barely megaton at best so we really can't use the visual effects there due to the contradiction, relying mostly on script which show that 30% of the crust was vaporized but that was with a lot more phaser blasts and around only 6 quantum torpedoes (photons are weaker). I'm aware that the bombardment was short, which is why I called it a barrage.

Gotta love how you give no evidence showing Tycho IV to be an outlier. The munitions in the two images I posted are - in fact - photo torpedoes. Quantum Torpedoes are still rare in DS9 and have only used by only three ships onscreen, one of which only uses them to supplement an arsenal of photon torpedoes. Also, you said before in the thread you used to propose the change: https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/1118691

XING06 said:
Last I checked a canon photon torpedo has 1.5 kg of matter and antimatter, creating a 65 megaton explosion only with later variants detonating at a stated high of 80.

No one in Star Trek ever stated that torpedoes have an 80 megaton maximum yield, and your "1.5 kg of matter and antimatter" comes from the same non-canon tech manual.

XING06 said:
Also, you are incorrect in that there's no reason to fire more powerful weaponry first then follow with weaker ones.Torpedoes generally have more area of effect.

That's not what I said. I said "There's absolutely no reason at all to fire a continent-vaporizing weapon and follow with mere megaton weapons during a genocidal planetary bombardment" which is true because by that point, everything you're firing at is already dead. Not even mentioning the utterly loony inconsistency in your proposition that torpedoes "generally have more area of effect" than phasers - your entire position here is that phasers have 6-B scale effects while you "still stand by megaton level torpedoes" based on "using their most consistent feats" ...make up your mind already.

XING06 said:
Also, totally off topic, but your .50 BMG example isn't good. We do actually have better ammo compared to before; our bullets are now more accurate and we have more powerful varieties including saboted AP and HEIAP (armor piercing with an explosive-fragmentation after armor effect).

My point had nothing to do with lacking technological progress and everything to do with consistent usage of proven technology.

Crzer07 · May 24, 2018

Can we backward scale starship Type IV phasers to the shuttlecrafts?

XING06 · May 24, 2018

@Idazmi - OK I honestly haven't watched the series in quite a while so it wasn't a matter of not recognizing them, it was that I got mixed up and thought they were using older ship designs than they actually were b/c I was giving the example based on memory from like 5 years ago. My bad; I probably should have rewatched it before using it as an example. Seriously though no need for personal attacks.

Honestly, now I'm just bringing up the contradictions in the piece to play devil's advocate after extrapolating conclusions from the show that I think make more scientific sense. Going by site rules, you totally should scale torpedoes to shielding b/c the shields have never been explicitly affected by different types of energy. It gets implied in Relics (I believe? Man I really need to watch this stuff again) and a few other episodes but never explicitly stated in any canon source and it gets contradicted sometimes too. Again you're using the most high end feats, which is what we're supposed to use, but there's a lot of consistency issues that make me feel doubt about them so I'll just bring them up so you know (also Tycho IV is definitely an outlier though and I'll explain why below).

This is how I would defend my argument in a science debate but yeah based on site rules the upgrade is already pretty much a foregone conclusion. I'd appreciate if you still read it and replied though, as I enjoy discussing how Trek weaponry works with other fans as I find it annoyingly strange yet fascinating compared to literally any other scifi verse specifically due to how contradictory and undefined it is in the canon yet how versatile it is. I actually got into Star Trek b/c of a scientific argument on how their combat tech works.

You are incorrect in that Warp fields don't affect the hull (DS9 I forget which episode it was when they were exceeding the warp limit of the Defiant? I think they had to draw power from other reserves to the SIF) and the Voyager when they were chasing the Cochrane had immense hulls stress. Also, I believe that while structural integrity fields aren't directly referenced in ENT (I actually haven't watched ENT - this is what someone else told me - I'll try to find the episode and verify) - there was a part where they were shown to exist when the ship engineer did something to convert the recoil of their weapons to energy to reroute to and reinforce structural integrity. So yeah, I'm sure SIF's effects are canon and pretty sure they're similar to shielding (I'm rusty as hell with the canon but I'll keep searching for examples). I'm well aware that deflector screens are a seperate thing. Also, I got the quote about SIF from Memory Alpha the "canon site" so are you sure it was from the Technical Manual?

In addition, the fact is that like you said phasers do have stated disruptor functions, which are demonstrated far more than energy tranfer type effects. Literally, most every time we see a phaser it makes matter vanish without any of the effects related to vaporization or energy transfer - other than the image you posted above (which is actually again a contradiction towards the most consistent feats - seriously though that's nothing like the kill setting effect on most phasers - it looks like they used the heating setting to kill him instead of the lethal setting) and when they use phasers for more utilitarian tasks like heating/shattering rocks.

The anti-proton beam in no way contradicts what I'm saying. If we do go by the disruption theory, there's no reason to assume that nadions are a form of anti-particle/matter. They don't need to share the same effects as the planet killer, in fact they shouldn't b/c phasers don't demonstrate the explosive effect that anti-matter weapons do. If they do have an effect, it would be similar to what the tech manual states (again I know this is non-canon but it's the most internally consistent science explanation).

Tycho IV is definitely an outlier b/c they used an ounce of anti-matter to pull of a feat on a destructive level never seen again in any individual attack of supposedly higher output (a photon torpedo should definitely have a higher payload than that).

My bad on the 1.5 kg thing; you're right that's from a non-canon source. Also the 80 megatons was based off real-life antimatter and scaling from the stated difference b/w photons and quantum torpedoes. I thought quantum torpedoes were more common than that? I'll defer to your knowledge though cuz I'm rusty as hell on a lot of canon.

That's not what I said. I said "There's absolutely no reason at all to fire a continent-vaporizing weapon and follow with mere megaton weapons during a genocidal planetary bombardment" which is true because by that point, everything you're firing at is already dead. Not even mentioning the utterly loony inconsistency in your proposition that torpedoes "generally have more area of effect" than phasers - your entire position here is that phasers have 6-B scale effects while you "still stand by megaton level torpedoes" based on "using their most consistent feats" ...make up your mind already.

Also, there is no contradiction there. Like you said attack potency in fiction is often independent of area of effect, so yes I believe that phasers have 6B AP but that torpedoes generally have higher area of effect (See when the Enterprise-D tunnels through the rock surface that's easily 7B but there's the effects are entirely contained to the shaft). Phasers have adjustable AOE though so that's why I said generally, though the effect takes a while and has to be manually changed.

Again though honestly, like I said I'm just playing devils advocate now and making sure we get all the facts. I'm totally fine with 6-A to 5-B for Enterprise-D and 6-B to 6-A-ish? for Original Enterprise both phasers and torpedoes (just don't use the Die is Cast or Tycho IV as justification), b/c again the deflector shield would scale properly based on site rules (Like I said in a science debate I would support that Trek shields are vulnerable to some energy types but its never explicitly stated in canon and it gets contradicted a few times so I can't exactly use it as its not beyond all doubt).

PS You might want to add yourself to the Knoweldgeable member list for Star Trek; you've definitely got enough knoweldge of canon to do so and it would be helpful in contacting you.

PSS You want to help me make a page for the Defiant? I've been meaning to do that and I could use some help with scaling and feats as again I'm rusty on pretty much all of Star Trek. I was going to rewatch first but I just never got the time

Idazmi · May 24, 2018

XING06 said:
@Idazmi - OK I honestly haven't watched the series in quite a while so it wasn't a matter of not recognizing them, it was that I got mixed up and thought they were using older ship designs than they actually were b/c I was giving the example based on memory from like 5 years ago. My bad; I probably should have rewatched it before using it as an example. Seriously though no need for personal attacks.

The only personal attack here is a flagrant ongoing attack against my intelligence, and it continues shamelessly without the slightest shred of remorse. You expect me to believe that a self-proclaimed Trekkie thought - even for a single second - that a Dominion War starfleet was made entirely of hundred-year-old TOS era starships. Do you even realize how utterly ridiculous that sounds? Especially since the ships from those two eras aren't even similar in appearance: take a long and hard look at the pictures in my first post up there, and then compare them to the Warbird. There's no way they can be confused for each other.

XING06 said:
Honestly, now I'm just bringing up the contradictions in the piece to play devil's advocate after extrapolating conclusions from the show that I think make more scientific sense. Going by site rules, you totally should scale torpedoes to shielding b/c the shields have never been explicitly affected by different types of energy. It gets implied in Relics (I believe? Man I really need to watch this stuff again) and a few other episodes but never explicitly stated in any canon source and it gets contradicted sometimes too. Again you're using the most high end feats, which is what we're supposed to use, but there's a lot of consistency issues that make me feel doubt about them so I'll just bring them up so you know (also Tycho IV is definitely an outlier though and I'll explain why below).

So here, you are basically admitting outright that you ignored the site rules when you motioned to change the APs in the first place.

XING06 said:
This is how I would defend my argument in a science debate but yeah based on site rules the upgrade is already pretty much a foregone conclusion. I'd appreciate if you still read it and replied though, as I enjoy discussing how Trek weaponry works with other fans as I find it annoyingly strange yet fascinating compared to literally any other scifi verse specifically due to how contradictory and undefined it is in the canon yet how versatile it is. I actually got into Star Trek b/c of a scientific argument on how their combat tech works.

A "scientific argument on how Star Trek's combat tech works"? Made by whom?

XING06 said:
You are incorrect in that Warp fields don't affect the hull (DS9 I forget which episode it was when they were exceeding the warp limit of the Defiant? I think they had to draw power from other reserves to the SIF) and the Voyager when they were chasing the Cochrane had immense hulls stress. Also, I believe that while structural integrity fields aren't directly referenced in ENT (I actually haven't watched ENT - this is what someone else told me - I'll try to find the episode and verify) - there was a part where they were shown to exist when the ship engineer did something to convert the recoil of their weapons to energy to reroute to and reinforce structural integrity. So yeah, I'm sure SIF's effects are canon and pretty sure they're similar to shielding (I'm rusty as hell with the canon but I'll keep searching for examples). I'm well aware that deflector screens are a seperate thing. Also, I got the quote about SIF from Memory Alpha the "canon site" so are you sure it was from the Technical Manual?

I'm not wrong: Warp Fields don't affect the hull at all. Rather, the Warp Propulsion Units and the antimatter reactors - which supply power to the Propulsion Units - can only sustain a high output for so long before literally shaking apart with the strain of the ship's power going through them. The U.S.S. Defiant had that problem, and it didn't even need to go to Warp Speed to start shaking apart because the ship was so small. This is also the actual given reason why Constitution Class ships cannot travel safely at Warp 10.

XING06 said:
In addition, the fact is that like you said phasers do have stated disruptor functions, which are demonstrated far more than energy tranfer type effects. Literally, most every time we see a phaser it makes matter vanish without any of the effects related to vaporization or energy transfer - other than the image you posted above (which is actually again a contradiction towards the most consistent feats - seriously though that's nothing like the kill setting effect on most phasers - it looks like they used the heating setting to kill him instead of the lethal setting) and when they use phasers for more utilitarian tasks like heating/shattering rocks.

Nope. That guy was killed with a TOS phaser.

As was this android fellow. Look how similar the "wound" is.

The alien Jo'Bril, with a TNG era phaser hole through his stomach. Since he can still live like this, and was still hostile, Crusher deliberately set the phaser to disrupt and shot him again.

Adding more to that, In Star Trek 6 we see this: https://youtu.be/U5ewfyyE6DI?t=134 Hand phasers being used to assassinate Chancellor Gorkon. No vaporization, though we do see a Klingon get his arm shot off at the shoulder, and few other Klingons with grievous bloody injuries inflicted through phaser fire.

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/18300000/Odo-Gifs-odo-18331000-300-225.gif - Odo literally exploding from phaser fire.

http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s4/4x17/nightterrors018.jpg <- A man suffering from severe phaser burns, from the episode Descent Part 1.

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-95e2509f8c151612144eabe221feb642.webp <- From DS9, one of Starfleet's ground combat personnel wearing a lightly armored uniform with phaser damage.

https://alicegracey.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/clever-use-of-phaser.png <- A phaser being used to cut into a wall, causing smoke and sparks.

Your argument makes the assumption that phasers are effectively always set for disruptor effect, and that is not only not true: that whole idea is plainly ridiculous given the facts at hand.

XING06 said:
The anti-proton beam in no way contradicts what I'm saying. If we do go by the disruption theory, there's no reason to assume that nadions are a form of anti-particle/matter. They don't need to share the same effects as the planet killer, in fact they shouldn't b/c phasers don't demonstrate the explosive effect that anti-matter weapons do. If they do have an effect, it would be similar to what the tech manual states (again I know this is non-canon but it's the most internally consistent science explanation).

Oh, they don't? Care to explain these:

http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x00hd/thecagehd0651.jpg <- From TOS, a hand phaser fired against a stone barricade.

http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x00hd/thecagehd1162.jpg <- Same episode: a much larger phaser fired against a seemingly unbreakable door.

https://i2.wp.com/www.tor.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/st-trap17.jpg?resize=740,555&type=vertical <- From TOS, a hand phaser shooting a stone pillar.

http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x10/hideandq_hd_187.jpg <- From TNG, Riker shoots a rock with a hand phaser.

Those all look like explosions to me. Perhaps because they are. And the explosions are coming from Direct Energy Transfer, not some esoteric nadion particle technobabble.

XING06 said:
Tycho IV is definitely an outlier b/c they used an ounce of anti-matter to pull of a feat on a destructive level never seen again in any individual attack of supposedly higher output (a photon torpedo should definitely have a higher payload than that).

https://youtu.be/j5QIoKvlgvY?t=195 <- A single photon torpedo vs a very large asteroid. The asteroid is instantly and totally vaporized. Where, exactly, did you get "supposedly higher output" from? And how many such attacks have you even seen? You clearly didn't actually see Die is Cast, so have you seen any of the other planetary attacks in Star Trek?

XING06 said:
My bad on the 1.5 kg thing; you're right that's from a non-canon source. Also the 80 megatons was based off real-life antimatter and scaling from the stated difference b/w photons and quantum torpedoes. I thought quantum torpedoes were more common than that? I'll defer to your knowledge though cuz I'm rusty as hell on a lot of canon.

All that is mostly because the sum-total of your Star Trek knowledge comes from non-canon sources. Also: what was the "stated" difference, since your memory is so sharp? I'm not asking that for my sake: I'm asking it because I'm certain you don't remember, and also didn't bother to check.

XING06 said:
Also, there is no contradiction there. Like you said attack potency in fiction is often independent of area of effect, so yes I believe that phasers have 6B AP but that torpedoes generally have higher area of effect (See when the Enterprise-D tunnels through the rock surface that's easily 7B but there's the effects are entirely contained to the shaft). Phasers have adjustable AOE though so that's why I said generally, though the effect takes a while and has to be manually changed.

Your belief is simply not good enough. Not for this website, and certainly not for "science debate" as you put it several times in your reply. Science is not about beliefs: Science is any branch of knowledge considered a distinct field for the investigation of facts. If you are searching for what you believe to be true, instead of what is true, you will be twisting facts to suit theories rather than theories to suit facts.

XING06 said:
Again though honestly, like I said I'm just playing devils advocate now and making sure we get all the facts. I'm totally fine with 6-A to 5-B for Enterprise-D and 6-B to 6-A-ish? for Original Enterprise both phasers and torpedoes (just don't use the Die is Cast or Tycho IV as justification), b/c again the deflector shield would scale properly based on site rules (Like I said in a science debate I would support that Trek shields are vulnerable to some energy types but its never explicitly stated in canon and it gets contradicted a few times so I can't exactly use it as its not beyond all doubt).

Yeah, I'd imagine it's pretty hard to know all the facts when you can't even recognize a Romulan Warbird. And with that in mind, why on Earth are you telling me what to limit my references and justifications to? I can scale the Enterprise-D to 5-C with Riker's flippant claim that they could blow Bre'el IV's asteroid moon to pieces, and I could use the time the original Enterprise almost cut a solid rock moon in half in The Paradise Syndrome - neither of those contradict Tycho IV or The Die is Cast, so I can include them too for more perspective: your consent is neither necessary nor warranted.

XING06 said:
PS You might want to add yourself to the Knoweldgeable member list for Star Trek; you've definitely got enough knoweldge of canon to do so and it would be helpful in contacting you.

PSS You want to help me make a page for the Defiant? I've been meaning to do that and I could use some help with scaling and feats as again I'm rusty on pretty much all of Star Trek. I was going to rewatch first but I just never got the time

"Pretty much rusty on all of Star Trek". That's really good: it's like you expect me to believe you.

XING06 · May 24, 2018

Like I said I haven't watched Star Trek in quite a while so I only remember general events and I thought they were using old 23rd century warbirds with some more modern Cardassian ships b/c it was unsanctioned attack (Also, the TOS Enterprise was originally scaled from that calc so I got mixed up). So yes you should take everything I say with a grain of salt, but again I would appreciate it if you did answer my questions as I am getting back into the fandom and I want to know where I need correction. This is exactly the type of conversation that got me into Star Trek in the first place.

I am well aware that phasers have different settings; with some of them capable of direct energy transfer for attacks as you gave examples of and as seen when they use them for more utilitarian tasks like heating rocks with hand phasers. What I meant earlier by the kill setting was the maximum power setting where the person/object dissapears in a flash of light which are clearly disruption and none of the examples of direct energy transfer you give are near as strong as disruptor effects so we should keep that in mind when we consider ship-borne phasers and other weaponry. Again, that still doesn't contradict the anti-proton weaponry effect b/c like you said phasers have a regular direct energy transfer attack mode which would cause fragmentation without antimatter involvement.

I am not twisting facts to suit my theories; if I do state something that's wrong, it's generally b/c of bad memory which again I will ask patience for. I'm still fairly sure SIF works like that though, Memory Alpha is the canon site and we've generally used it as reference in the past.

The stated difference between photon torpedos and quantum torpedoes are mostly their quantity (like you said quantum torpedoes are rarer but I wasn't aware they were that rare?). It's implied they are the successor to photons though so yield should also be higher. The Technical Manual confirms this but like you said that's not canon. Also, I went back to check the 1.5 kg antimatter warhead thing and they actually enrich the explosion with the material in the casing containing the antimatter so even with the Tech Manual the base warhead of a photon torpedo can still easily reach around 700 gigatons.

Belief was the wrong word. I agree that phasers are at least 6-B scaling from shielding feats but I had doubts on the yield for torpedoes (mostly based on the fact that the Enterprise-D deflectors seem weaker to radiation - as seen in Relics and Allegiance - but you've give evidence to believe otherwise) and I know that phasers generally have lower AOE (though you are correct in that b/c phasers have different settings they can set AOE as you said for the Die is Cast).

I'm telling you not to scale it to Tycho IV specifically b/c that is without a doubt an outlier. You could literally scale using anything else but that's clearly untrue. I read your post on the Die is Cast in the other thread and I actually agree now b/c you are correct in that they can vary the effects b/c it's a tactical weapon so it doesn't need to be contained effect, in fact if they when they do use nadions on ship-borne weaponry it probably is as a way to control AOE b/c energy output should still be the same based on how their shields work.

I'm sorry if I seemed blockheaded, but I'm not trying to get you to "believe me". I'm bringing up questions that I would like to be addressed so I do appreciate your clarification. No need for the sarcasm.

As you've cleared everyhting up, could you make a more proposed AP and durability post including justifications? I've asked Aeyu to come over and help out too. Actually, we might be able to scale even higher than 6B b/c in TNG I remember they were facing an 80 year old ship but an aft shot from a phaser was able to drop it's shields by quite a bit (I think it was simulation but the point still stands). Of course, they could have shifted energy around in their deflector screen to other parts of the shield so that could explain it too but it's something to think about.

Idazmi · May 25, 2018

XING06 said:
Like I said I haven't watched Star Trek in quite a while so I only remember general events and I thought they were using old 23rd century warbirds with some more modern Cardassian ships b/c it was unsanctioned attack (Also, the TOS Enterprise was originally scaled from them so I got mixed up). So yes you should take everything I say with a grain of salt, but again I would appreciate it if you did answer my questions as I am getting back into the fandom and I want to know where I need correction. This is exactly the type of conversation that got me into Star Trek in the first place.

Which again proves that you don't actually watch Star Trek. Your knowledge comes from websites, non-canon books, online discussions that clearly had no visual aids... it's not your ignorance that angers me, it's your insistence that you are a Trekkie. This isn't any deep, hidden esoteric lore that only a few people know - any Star Wars fan knows what Darth Vader looks like, any Trekkie knows a Romulan Warbird. Even some non-Trekkies can identify a Romulan Warbird on sight. If you had seen the Original Series you would know instantly it wasn't from that simply because the style doesn't match what they had back then. If you had seen TNG, DS9, or Voyager, you definitely saw them.

XING06 said:
I am well aware that phasers have different settings; with some of them capable of direct energy transfer for attacks as you gave examples of and as seen when they use them for more utilitarian tasks like heating rocks with hand phasers. What I meant earlier by the kill setting was the maximum power setting where the person/object dissapears in a flash of light which are clearly disruption and none of the examples of direct energy transfer you give are near as strong as disruptor effects so we should keep that in mind when we consider ship-borne phasers and other weaponry. Again, that still doesn't contradict the anti-proton weaponry effect b/c like you said phasers have a regular direct energy transfer attack mode which would cause fragmentation without antimatter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VsRvLpQpFc <- Notice: in the same exchange, the Klingon gets explosive effects and "disappearance in a flash of light" from the same phaser, and the explosive effect is far bigger. By the way, no, we never see starships do the same thing with their weapons at all... except exactly once: https://youtu.be/yQcg7Y1gZtA?t=204

XING06 said:
I am not twisting facts to suit my theories; if I do state something that's wrong, it's generally b/c of bad memory which again I will ask patience for. I'm still fairly sure SIF works like that though, Memory Alpha is the canon site and we've generally used it as reference in the past.

Twisting facts to suit theories is exactly what you did when you motioned to change the AP for the Enterprise when - according to you - you were "well aware that phasers have different settings; with some of them capable of direct energy transfer (...)" You willfully ignored the direct energy transfer effects, and flatly stated without any evidence that phasers multiply their damage against unshielded targets using "a semi-perpetuating subatomic destruction effect," which is never seen used by starship weapons in any sense and actually does less overall damage in all instances compared to other settings (since it only ever destroys exactly one target). You made the information say what you wanted it to.

XING06 said:
The stated difference between photon torpedos and quantum torpedoes are mostly their quantity (like you said quantum torpedoes are rarer but I wasn't aware they were that rare?). It's implied they are the successor to photons though so yield should also be higher. The Technical Manual confirms this but like you said that's not canon. Also, I went back to check the 1.5 kg antimatter warhead thing and they actually enrich the explosion with the material in the casing containing the antimatter so even with the Tech Manual the base warhead of a photon torpedo can still easily reach around 700 gigatons.

You actually said: "Last I checked a canon photon torpedo has 1.5 kg of matter and antimatter, creating a 65 megaton explosion only with later variants detonating at a stated high of 80." That means you have a moment where someone in the canon stated that the maximum yield is 80 megatons... now it's 700 gigatons for a standard photon torpedo, using the same non-canon tech manual you got 65 megatons from.

XING06 said:
I'm telling you not to scale it to Tycho IV specifically b/c that is without a doubt an outlier. You could literally scale using anything else but that's clearly untrue. I read your post on the Die is Cast in the other thread and I actually agree now b/c you are correct in that they can vary the effects b/c it's a tactical weapon so it doesn't need to be contained effect.

And who's to say they can't "vary the effect" to get the results we see on Tycho IV? Especially since that's not even the most extreme thing they've done with antimatter bombs.

XING06 said:
I'm sorry if I seem blockheaded, but I'm not trying to get you to "believe me". I'm bringing up questions that I would like to be addressed so I do appreciate your clarification. No need for the sarcasm. Could you make a proposed AP and durability post? I've asked Aeyu to come over and help out too.

Is that not what this is, or am I missing something about how VS Battles Wiki does things?

Aeyu · May 25, 2018

I would appreciate this if we could slow down and have the list of what's being proposed explained to me.

All I know as of right now is that the D is not going to be lowballed to 5-B. A neutron star generally possesses a greater mass than our own sun, and a "fragment" of that (which, by the way, is actually the ejected core of a star, and would be more similar to an actual neutron star, as it is stated 100 billion kilograms per cubic centimeter) would be 5-A or, as I'd argue, closer to High 5-A or perhaps even Low 4-C.

Crzer07 · May 26, 2018

There was a calc about that placed them around 5-A and such but yeah, even were still debating whether phasers AP is due to atomic chain reaction or AoE

Idazmi · May 26, 2018

Aeyu said:
I would appreciate this if we could slow down and have the list of what's being proposed explained to me.

I propose to restore the APs for the USS Enterprise NCC-1701 to what they were before XING06 proposed to have them changed, since his changes were entirely predicated on false pretenses: It's been demonstrated by every comment he's made on this thread that he was not only ignoring site policy: he has grossly insufficient knowledge of Star Trek as a whole to be proposing any Star Trek related edits at all. Adding to that, I've seen his argument before on a well known and highly disreputable site known for bias as well as outright lies: but since the site rules include "Avoid talking badly about other wikis and communities" I'll refrain from mentioning it by name.

Aeyu said:
All I know as of right now is that the D is not going to be lowballed to 5-B. A neutron star generally possesses a greater mass than our own sun, and a "fragment" of that (which, by the way, is actually the ejected core of a star, and would be more similar to an actual neutron star, as it is stated 100 billion kilograms per cubic centimeter) would be 5-A or, as I'd argue, closer to High 5-A or perhaps even Low 4-C.

The crew of the Enterprise-D arranged a complex modification of their tractor beam to 'nudge' the star fragment slightly off-course: they didn't destroy it with their weapons. They tried to do something similar with Bre'el IV's moon by extending their warp field around it in an attempt to lessen it's apparent mass. While that's definitely an impressive feat, it is unrelated entirely to their tactical capabilities, so treating the feat as an attack is disingenuous. It's distressingly similar to - but far better supported than - the fraudulent tactics used by that site I referred to earlier (However, it's slightly better given the fact that the feat actually exists). My intention is not to make Star Trek powerful, but to represent Star Trek's technology as it is, with as little bias as possible.

At the level of technology it represents, Galaxy Class is far less tactically oriented than the Constitution Class, and Starfleet's Original Series Era vessels in general: Starfleet lessened it's military focus immediately after the Battle of Khitomer because the Cold War with the Klingon Empire had ended (Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country). We can see that effectively the same torpedo ammunition is used between the two classes. After the Borg and Dominion threats, Starfleet shifted focus back to more militarized designs - including a demonstrably more resilient refit of the Galaxy Class, which the Enterprise-D was not a part of, being destroyed prior to the refit.

Aeyu · May 26, 2018

@Idazami

You can tell me where the calc is from as long as you don't start to go on a rant or anything like that. Either way, I've already proposed something similar in the main revisions thread; essentially saying that the AP is reduced vs shields or anything else is incorrect for one main reason only - the shields should scale to the AP of the weaponry used on them, not the other way around.

And I'm well aware of all of that, but moving the stellar core is still an AP feat which can be used. Not to mention the D's shown on several occasions that the deflector dish *can* be utilized for offensive purposes. But, I also have the same goal in mind as far as Trek is concerned - consistency. I've helped add several profiles, and greatly expanded the profiles for the top tiers.

Anyway, a small thing - I'm not quite sure if the Galaxy-X Class Refit is canon to the original timeline, since the events in All Good Things... were averted.

And well, saying that the technology did not improve over 100 years is definitely faulty. The Type 2 phasers in the 23rd century aren't nearly as powerful as those in the 24th.

I definitely hope that you're not trying to be arbitrary about what we consider canon, though. If any information comes from officially licensed reference books, I think we should consider it canon, as said books have never been publically stated to be non-canon, especially when Viacom has supported this to be the case.

Idazmi · May 27, 2018

Aeyu said:
@Idazami

You can tell me where the calc is from as long as you don't start to go on a rant or anything like that. Either way, I've already proposed something similar in the main revisions thread; essentially saying that the AP is reduced vs shields or anything else is incorrect for one main reason only - the shields should scale to the AP of the weaponry used on them, not the other way around.

The argument comes from StarDestroyer.Net: http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Beam/NDFTheory.html

To explain the behaviour of phasers, we theory that phasers must fire special "phaser particles". These particles apparently disintegrate atoms into a shower of neutrinos. A small portion of the mass must transform into new phaser particles (probably with slightly less energy than the original phaser particle, since the chain reactions don't go on indefinitely). (...) This suggests that a phaser beam incorporates some sort of containment or suspension field to keep the particles from decaying- perhaps it is this field (possibly related to subspace?) which accounts for the ability of phasers to be effective against shields in spite of the absence of matter for the NDF reaction."

^ In short, they're saying that phasers do more damage against matter than they do against shields. Now notice what XING06 says in this thread here: https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/1144339#10

XING06 said:
@FanofRPGs

Yeah no. The AP and durability we use right now are based off the two best feats we have: namely the continental bombardment one and the tanking the planet killer. Again though like I said those both canonically rely on exotic particles to do their damage. The planet killer calc (6 exatons) uses anti-protons to react with the target matter protons to generate a self-feeding explosion that devours the planet. The phaser uses nadions, which when hitting solid matter gave a (4.4 petaton yield). However, against shields the reaction doesn't work so again we have to specify that.

Carbon-copy. Also, antimatter doesn't work like that, neither in Star Trek, nor in reality.

The site goes farther than he did, and also uses this "theory" to claim that the actual energy of the phaser changes depending on what's being shot, so instead of armor resistance to damage, they lower the actual power of the phaser to fit unstated maximum expectations. Also note the complete lack of visual examples given to support their statements, unlike my posts above. The one image that they do have that shows a phaser beam actually hitting a target (On this page: http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Beam/Beam1.html) is a doctored still-frame that looks nothing like what's seen in the movie it's from.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Beam/Phaser3.jpg <- Their "screenshot" from The Wrath of Khan, showing the Reliant's phaser strike against the Enterprise. Notice the ongoing glowing effect in the damaged area, indicating the "NDF" they speak of.

https://youtu.be/RcEHM8GFSwM?t=451 <- The scene as it appears in the film, totally lacking the glowing effect, or any esoteric effects at all. The site is basically infamous for this sort of dishonest behavior, and judging from his complete lack of Trek savvy (he didn't even know what a Romulan Warbird looked like until I showed him) I suspect that XING06 frequents that site.

Aeyu said:
And I'm well aware of all of that, but moving the stellar core is still an AP feat which can be used. Not to mention the D's shown on several occasions that the deflector dish *can* be utilized for offensive purposes. But, I also have the same goal in mind as far as Trek is concerned - consistency. I've helped add several profiles, and greatly expanded the profiles for the top tiers.

It's not an AP feat unless it affects their Attack Potency: the tractor beam is not a dedicated weapon any more than a tow cable is.

Aeyu said:
Anyway, a small thing - I'm not quite sure if the Galaxy-X Class Refit is canon to the original timeline, since the events in All Good Things... were averted.

I wasn't referring to the Galaxy-X. I was referring to the Galaxy Class ships used during the later parts of the Dominion War: they all show themselves to be able to accept multiple times the damage that would certainly kill the Enterprise-D.

Aeyu said:
And well, saying that the technology did not improve over 100 years is definitely faulty. The Type 2 phasers in the 23rd century aren't nearly as powerful as those in the 24th.

I didn't say the technology didn't improve: I said "At the level of technology it represents, Galaxy Class is far less tactically oriented than the Constitution Class, and Starfleet's Original Series Era vessels in general: Starfleet lessened it's military focus immediately after the Battle of Khitomer because the Cold War with the Klingon Empire had ended (Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country). We can see that effectively the same torpedo ammunition is used between the two classes."

Aeyu said:
I definitely hope that you're not trying to be arbitrary about what we consider canon, though. If any information comes from officially licensed reference books, I think we should consider it canon, as said books have never been publically stated to be non-canon, especially when Viacom has supported this to be the case.

Don't forget that the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual estimates a mere 1.02GW output for the Enterprise-D's entire forward phaser array, putting the Enterprise-D at roughly 8-C. Those "reference books" are non-canon for the distinct reason that they have not one blessed idea what they are talking about and - no exaggeration - contradict the show they're supposed to be referencing on almost every single page in ridiculous ways.

Aeyu · May 27, 2018

@Idazmi

Regardless, on that first part, it still translates to greater dura for the shields vs the AP of various weaponry.

On the second part, it *does* affect their AP; moving stellar objects still qualifies for the total AP of the ship. Obviously, this wouldn't scale to phasers, photon torpedoes and quantum torpedoes, which would have a different AP value, but it's still usable and valid since it is a utility. Said tow cable would be at the least 5-A were it capable of moving objects with a near-stellar mass. The fact that it can be repurposed into a weapon only increases the validity of this.

Third, is this stated in DS9? I'm not doubting you, but I'd appreciate some quotes or something to that effect. Otherwise, saying that they're more advanced is headcanon.

On the last part about the manuals, since they *are* considered official and canon to some degree by Viacom, I'm sure we can have a policy, much like other verses, wherein anything that contradicts the actual source material is completely disregarded. Thus, you don't have to worry about the 1.02 gigawatt output thing being used.

Idazmi · May 27, 2018

Aeyu said:
@Idazmi

Regardless, on that first part, it still translates to greater dura for the shields vs the AP of various weaponry.

I agree. The point though, is what that site is saying, and it's saying "lower AP against shields" and trying to justify that through a significant amount cherry-picking and lies.

Aeyu said:
On the second part, it *does* affect their AP; moving stellar objects still qualifies for the total AP of the ship. Obviously, this wouldn't scale to phasers, photon torpedoes and quantum torpedoes, which would have a different AP value, but it's still usable and valid since it is a utility. Said tow cable would be at the least 5-A were it capable of moving objects with a near-stellar mass. The fact that it can be repurposed into a weapon only increases the validity of this.

Now I see what you're getting at. I agree.

Aeyu said:
Third, is this stated in DS9? I'm not doubting you, but I'd appreciate some quotes or something to that effect. Otherwise, saying that they're more advanced is headcanon.

By then, the Federation had upgraded the Lakota's weapons and shields - Lakota being one of the far older Excelsior class design - to the point where it could rival the Defiant. We also saw before the war in Chain of Command that Captain Edward Jellico - a combat veteran - was not at all impressed with the initial condition of the Galaxy Class, and while he was in command he proposed many changes to the Enterprise-D's engineering systems and power grid that would substantially increase efficiency and redundancy: the crew protested. Judging by how they did at the battle of Veridian 3, they should have listened. Add to that the fact that Galaxy Class ships (nearly all Starfleet ships, for that matter) are highly modular, and there is little left to suggest that Starfleet did not refit the Galaxy Class to be more combat oriented after the loss of the Odyssey.

Aeyu said:
On the last part about the manuals, since they *are* considered official and canon to some degree by Viacom, I'm sure we can have a policy, much like other verses, wherein anything that contradicts the actual source material is completely disregarded. Thus, you don't have to worry about the 1.02 gigawatt output thing being used.

And that would result in most of the manual being discarded outright, which is why it's considered non-canon. Also, Viacom stating that the manual is canon has nothing to do with it's debate value since they have a profit motive: they want the book to sell.

Jockey-1337 · Jun 7, 2018

Is this thread alive?

We can make a joke version of USS Enterprise

This ship may be 2-B or 2-A because of some ridiculous calcs:

iyaerP said:
That's not even the most insane thing, that's just the highest showing for raw firepower rather than esoteric effects. Trek has single torpedo planet busting technology in the form of the Genesis device, various bioweapons capable of rendering a planet unlivable, and can even cause supernovas with a trilithium-protomatter device. The absolutely craziest thing though, comes from a throwaway line in TOS A Taste of Armageddon where the Enterprise repels a sonic attack of "12 to the 18th power decibels". Now, that sounds like a lot, but unless you're familiar with logarithmic math and how exactly it works, it can easily get overlooked just how ludicrous this number is. For comparison, the entire mass energy of the universe would only create about 700 decibels of sound. The sonic weapon from A Taste of Armageddon has that beat by SIXTEEN ZEROES on a logarithmic scale. A logarithmic scale like decibels means that to increase the decibel number by 10, you need 10x as much power. So going from 10 -> 20 isn't doubling in required energy to produce that sound, it is 10x the magnitude. Likewise, going from 10 -> 30 is 100x the magnitude. So going from 700 to 26,623,333,280,885,243,904 (the longhand form of 12^18) isn't an incrementation of 26 quintillion and change, it means that the power required to produce that effect is more than 10 to the 2.6 quintillion power times the size of the original. That is a number with 2.6 quintillion zeroes. There are no words for how unimaginably huge this number is. It can only ever be expressed in scientific notation and has no practical use outside of ridiculously giant math.

So, if we take the dialog from TOS A Taste of Armageddon as the honest truth, then the TOS Enterprise can survive 10^26,623,333,280,885,243,204 times more energy than exists in the entire observable universe.

Now. That being said, most people don't take that quotation seriously and just chalk it up to writers can't do math, but it is funny in an insane kind of way.

Source: https://forums.spacebattles.com/thr...gan-toppa-gurren-lagann.651306/#post-47751972

Idazmi · Jun 8, 2018

Jockey-1337 said:
Is this thread alive? We can make a joke version of USS Enterprise

This ship may be 2-B or 2-A because of some ridiculous calcs:

Yeah, thanks to both executive meddling and having multiple writers of varying knowledge, Star Trek tends to range from rather scientifically sound to utterly ridiculous without any warning.

Yukaphile · Dec 23, 2018

@Aeyu One thing you need to understand here is Idazmi DOES argue with headcanon. He thinks the fleet that bombarded the Founders' home planet wasn't using their full power, or at least less than 90% of their power, because it conflicts with his personal interpretation that the Enterprise-D could beat the Death Star, a Vorlon Planet Killer, nine Species 8472 bioships, Mogo from DC Comics, and many more. I suppose with that logic, the Enterprise didn't use a torpedo set to maximum yield when detonating the soliton wave because hey, they never explicitly said it was set to maximum or that Level 16 was the highest setting. With his logic, the Enterprise could replicate the technology Barclay used to amp their engines and send them 30,000 light-years all on their own. They just haven't rediscovered it yet on their own - never mind that Project Pathfinder, with Reg Barclay himself on board, couldn't replicate it.

Yukaphile · Dec 23, 2018

Oh, and you're wrong about "A Taste of Armageddon." What they said was they could destroy the "entire inhabited surface" of the planet. Obviously meaning large areas.

[Bridge]

SCOTT: Open a channel, Lieutenant. This is the commander of the USS Enterprise.

[Council Room]

SCOTT [OC]: All cities and installations on Eminiar Seven have been located, identified, and fed into our fire-control system. In one hour and forty five minutes

[Bridge]

SCOTT: The entire inhabited surface of your planet will be destroyed.

[Council Room]

SCOTT: You have that long to surrender your hostages.

Yukaphile · Dec 23, 2018

@Jockey-1337 I could ask Ryukama to create a Joke Battles Wiki profile that since the Enterprise-D repaired the rift that had broken down the multiverse that contained an "infinite" number of parallel timelines, obviously it means they're 2-A.

Yukaphile · Dec 23, 2018

...

OMG, Idazmi, are you serious?! Tycho IV? The TOS episode "Obsession?!" I only saw the original release on Netflix, so I never got the updated effects, but... are you for real?

THEY NEVER USED THE ENTERPRISE'S WEAPONS ON TYCHO IV! Not the phasers and not the photon torpedoes, it was an antimatter bomb, specially rigged to be able to take out the cloud lifeform because it was going to breed more offspring which could cross the galaxy. Kirk and Garrovick beamed down to lure it over to the device, and even the Enterprise had to pull away because of how huge the blast would be. This suggests something far past the range of their torpedoes and phasers even back then, and very possibly something they had on board in the armory for just such a purpose. So we can safely discount the "feat" from "Obsession." With that, all you have left is "The Doomsday Machine" and even Commodore Decker confirmed within the episode it had "carved up" planets over an unknown period.

Yukaphile · Dec 23, 2018

KIRK: Deactivated? Scotty, could some kind of general energy dampening field do that, and would the same type of thing account for the heavy subspace interference?
SCOTT: Aye, that all adds up. But what sort of a thing could do all that?
DECKER: If you'd seen it, you'd know. The whole thing's a weapon. It must be.
KIRK: What does it look like?
DECKER: Well, it's miles long, with a maw that could swallow a dozen starships. It destroys planets, chops them into rubble.
KIRK: What is it, an alien ship? Or is it alive, or is it
DECKER: Both or neither. I don't know.
KIRK: Matt, your log stated that the fourth planet was breaking up. You went in to investigate.
DECKER: We saw this thing hovering over the planet, slicing out chunks of it with a force beam.
KIRK: Did you run a scanner check on it? What kind of a beam?
DECKER: Pure antiproton. Absolutely pure.

Supreme-Emperor-Over · Dec 23, 2018

Photon Torpedoes are about 2 Meters Long a Little Over 1 Meter Wide and about .4 Meters High. It Would Take torpedoes to do Petatons and Exatons. Photon Torpedoes Only Weigh About 250 Kilograms so at least 80 Percent is fuel and Sensors plus the hull and containment fields. Phasers are Phased Energy Reunification Based Weapons. Lasers are Phased light weapons by amplification of radiation. they are antimatter fusion plasma or particle based weapons. lasers are a really board word that means a lot of different things. Photon Torpedoes can fit Klingons

Supreme-Emperor-Over · Dec 24, 2018

I think we should ignore overpowered feats One Tine Feats and Feats not On Screen. It would take the enterprise to maybe large country level. unless Federation starships are powered by artificial quantum singularities they would not be to overpowered.

Yukaphile · Dec 24, 2018

By Idazmi's logic, the Enterprise is 2-A because they manipulated a rift filled with an infinite number of parallel timelines. LMAO.

Yukaphile · Dec 24, 2018

I also find it ironic... was he quoting STD? That trash show? And yet dismisses Voyager? Voyager curbstomps STD to the ground.

To be clear, Ash Tyler is from STD, right?

Idazmi · Dec 25, 2018

First of all, this is a necro, just like your comment on this other thread is a necro, which you were called out on. Second, this discussion was concluded in this thread which you started and is now locked.

Yukaphile said:
Oh, and you're wrong about "A Taste of Armageddon." What they said was they could destroy the "entire inhabited surface" of the planet.

Which is exactly what I quoted in the first post up there, along with screenshots of the planet in question. Isn't that interesting?

Yukaphile said:
THEY NEVER USED THE ENTERPRISE'S WEAPONS ON TYCHO IV! Not the phasers and not the photon torpedoes, it was an antimatter bomb (...)

This was already known, and is directly addressed in the first post up there. You are making no point here.

Yukaphile said:
(...) the Enterprise had to pull away because of how huge the blast would be. This suggests something far past the range of their torpedoes and phasers even back then (...)

No, it doesn't, because both of those are powered by antimatter, just like the bomb, and both of those can damage the Enterprise just as easily. Both Photon torpedoes and Phasers can both kill a ship on proximity hits, as seen: https://youtu.be/JGn948_PXTU?t=83

Yukaphile said:
I also find it ironic... was he quoting STD? That trash show? And yet dismisses Voyager? Voyager curbstomps STD to the ground.

To be clear, Ash Tyler is from STD, right?

https://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Tyler - This is who I'm referring to: Lieutenant José Tyler, from Star Trek's first episode, ever. He said that the Enterprise could "blast half a continent" with it's weapons, verbatim. Mistakes like this - and the others you posted here - are why you should not be discussing Star Trek.

Supreme-Emperor-Over · Dec 25, 2018

than how can we comment

Supreme-Emperor-Over · Jan 8, 2019

Photon Torpedoes are 2 Meters Times 1 Meter Times.5 Meters in Length Width Height. The Antimatter is held in electromagnetic containment field in the thousands. They have on warp capabilities beyond able to fire at warp. Anti Matter Per Gram is only 1 order of magnitude more powerful than the most powerful Fusion Reactor. For example, the Death Star Had no Tick and Alderan was Annihilated in less than half a second. Real life scientists have compared Phasers to Microwave Lasers. and most Antimatter is loss in the 360 Shock wave. Mega Antimatter does not exist even in Star Trek. Warp 8 is 512 times light speed, not Billions. Star Wars Ships no not use Fusion or Laser Weapons. Fusion is a very board term. Federation uses Fusion power in her Impulse engines. The Enterprise is 5 Megatons in weight 642 Meters Long 470 Meters Wide and 195 Meters High a Maximum Warp of 9.6 for 12 Hours 14 type 10 Phasers and 3 Torpedo Launchers Antimatter Mines and Tractor Beam Projectors. She makes about 15-20 Exawatts Per Second or 5 Gigatonnes Per Second. Maximum Phaser Effective Range is 300,000 Kilometers and Torpedo Range is about 4-5 Million Kilometers.

Antvasima · Jan 9, 2019

This is an old thread. I will close it.

Star Trek AP revisions

Idazmi

Aeyu

XING06

XING06

Idazmi

Idazmi

XING06

Idazmi

Crzer07

XING06

Idazmi

XING06

Idazmi

Aeyu

Crzer07

Idazmi

Aeyu

Idazmi

Aeyu

Idazmi

Jockey-1337

Idazmi

Yukaphile

Yukaphile

Yukaphile

Yukaphile

Yukaphile

Supreme-Emperor-Over

Supreme-Emperor-Over

Yukaphile

Yukaphile

Idazmi

Supreme-Emperor-Over

Supreme-Emperor-Over

Antvasima

Maintenance worker

Similar threads

Forum statistics

Share this page