Star Trek vs Star Wars - Planetary Bombardment

[@jordith01]

The difference in tech between SW and ST is even more simple than that. The average standard-issue blaster of a stormtrooper is able to shoot and wound a person through armor. Getting shot by blaster fire may or may not be fatal. Even the heavy infantry weapons of the SW universe clearly have less power (per shot) than modern RPG weapons of today. You can duck behind cover and the heavy Gatling lasers of the Clone Army won't just blow through basic concrete without issue. STNG S6: "Frame of mind" Riker holding a /hand phasor/: "I'm setting this to level 16. Wide-field. That should destroy half this BUILDING." that is the SIDE ARM WEAPON of a Starfleet officer. It can destroy a BUILDING in a single shot. Moreover, if you're hit by a phasor set to kill, it doesn't matter where you're hit, you vaporize. If Leia got hit by a phasor in ROTJ, she'd be GONE, not just lightly wounded, and that's just the standard issue side arm of Starfleet. Put even more simply, Star Wars' tech is meant to emulate the warfare of World War 2 with dogfighting and fleets of broadside ship bombardments, using huge, exotic weapons and zerg rush style infantry. Star Trek's tech is meant to emulate an idea of how current technology will evolve in the future, with singular ships designed to be self-sustaining in the depths of uncharted space for months at a time. A Star Wars ship is meant to be part of an armada, a Star Trek ship is a fortress unto its own.

[@JAGraptor]

Yep. SW=WWII and ST=Cold War and beyond.

[@TheEventHorizon909]

Don’t forget the die is cast where a fleet of D’Deridex warbirds and galor heavy cruisers causally destroy 30 percent of a planetary crust within 3 seconds

[@redshirt0479]

It gets even better (or worse depending upon your perspective), we actually get a combination of solid figures and easily calculable statements from Enterprise. Silent Enemy: REED: This, ladies and gentlemen is a phase-modulated energy weapon. It's rated for a maximum power output of five hundred gigajoules. Enterprise was designed to carry three of them. We have one, and it's only a prototype. REED: Check the cannons. Be careful down there. The blast yield was ten times what we expected. Now the writers have some issues with joules vs watts, but since the phase cannons appear to fire in one second bursts we can probably use them roughly interchangeably. These statements combined mean that the modified phase cannons that they use until the episode 'The Expanse' have a maximum output of 5 TW or roughly 1.195 kilotons per second. Speaking of 'The Expanse', we get this gem: REED: Photonic torpedoes. Their range is over fifty times greater than our conventional torpedoes, and they have a variable yield. They can knock the comm. array off a shuttlepod without scratching the hull or they can put a three kilometre crater into an asteroid. Utilizing known asteroid densities and assuming that the torpedo detonates underground, this means that photonic torpedoes have a maximum yield of between roughly 83 and 225 megatons.

[@petrameyer1121]

Well that is what a matter-antimatter reaction does, blow up.

[@WaveForceful]

That also speaks wonders of the NX-01's polarised hull plating system. Pre expanse the Hull plating was only useful against natural hazards, it was easily defeated by a few shots from most weapons. Post Expanse, the NX-01's polarised hull plating allowed the NX-01 to easily withstand even it's own fire power for minutes. It gave it the edge it need and allowed it to withstand the beating it took at azati prime.

[@griffinflyer77]

Why are photon torpedoes so much more powerful than the phasers?

[@petrameyer1121]

Because they contain antimatter. Basically a matter-antimatter reaction is the most powerful reaction possible as it is based on Einstein's E=MC². The antimatter and the same amount of matter turn completely into energy. One gram of antimatter annihilating with one gram of matter produces 180 terajoules, the equivalent of 42.96 kilotons of TNT (approximately three times the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. One photon torpedo contains 3kg of matter and anti-matter.

[@redshirt0479]

Well in this case, it's phase cannons and photonic torpedoes and the reasoning is actually quite simple; area of effect. A beam from a phase cannon has a small cross-sectional area. This means that the energy is concentrated into a relatively small area; akin to how in real life relatively weak bullets like 5.7x28mm can penetrate body armor that could stop rifle rounds despite having less energy than 9mm Para or .45 ACP. Conversely, the photonic torpedo is an explosive and while it's putting out more energy, it's doing so over a larger area as you can't shape charge a matter/antimatter warhead. This means that a significant amount of energy is wasted because it's being thrown out into empty space. That's also part of why a torpedo detonating inside a ship is so much more devastating than impacting the hull, all of the energy is hitting the ship instead of only a portion of it.

[@Bleachsoul13]

What... what kind of piss ass orbital bombardment was that? Those Heavy Turbolasers were causing explosions around that of a hand grenade... I don't understand. Even assuming dial-a-yield, this makes no sense, even in-universe.

[@Idazmi7]

+TheBleachDoctor The only thing I can think of on that is Turbolasers may lose their energy as they pass through the atmosphere, making them poorly suited to planetary attack compared to almost anything else... though that's definitely a stretch.

[@Bleachsoul13]

Of course, the IRL reason is because Rebels has a low budget and explosion CGI is expensive, but still... I'm not sure there's an explanation that makes sense here. We've seen vehicle-mounted weapons create bigger explosions in Clone Wars, with more damage done to terrain than this Turbolaser bombardment. I hope someone comes up with a reasonable explanation, because anything I can think of that allows for decently powerful Turbolasers based off of this scene (different TBL shooting modes, incredibly durable ground) feels like an asspull.

[@Idazmi7]

+TheBleachDoctor I honestly don't think the budget had anything to do with this at all. In addition, incredibly durable ground wouldn't at all change the fact that the explosions failed to kill Kanan from a few meters away, since the blast would still be just as big, regardless of the soil.

[@Bleachsoul13]

Well the "durable ground" thing was a reference to the claim that a Turbolaser imparts all of its force into the ground, hence the small explosions. However for that to work in this case, they'd need super durable ground, since it left nothing but scorch marks.

[@Idazmi7]

+TheBleachDoctor _"Well the "durable ground" thing was a reference to the claim that a Turbolaser imparts all of its force into the ground, hence the small explosions."_ Well, turbolasers _don't_ impart all of their energy onto the target, or we'd never see any energy release aside from the target itself. That means, no shockwaves, no fireballs, and no thermal dissipation, so we can toss that entire claim out as complete nonsense.

[@lyinarbaeldeth2456]

You forgot the Cardassian/Romulan task force bombarding what they thought what the Dominion capital world in DS9. A fleet of two dozen ships ripped through the planet crust and had the mantle exposed within minutes of beginning their bombardment.

[@Idazmi7]

I didn't forget it. I have that on another video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pIaXnYx_qtuaa5o

[@lyinarbaeldeth2456]

So you have! And I stand corrected; they destroyed 30% of the planet's crust within *seconds*, not minutes.

[@kevo_chen]

I have calculated each shot to have a yield of (ignoring NDF) 6.335 Exatons (6.335 quintillion tons of TNT). Used a constant for the amount of energy needed to blow up Earth's crust = 359 Exatons. 17 Shots from the fleet resulted in 30% of the planet destroyed. 359/(17/0.3) = approx 6.335 Exatons.

[@Idazmi7]

+Kevin Chen _"(ignoring NDF)"_ NDF (Nuclear Destruction Factor) is a completely undefinable, unverifiable, and impossible-to-test hypothesis, invented by those loons at Star Destroyer Net to reduce apparent phaser yields to whatever low yield they wanted. To explain: essentially, NDF claims that targets shot by any Star Trek weapon have part of their mass "magically disappear" (yes, they say that) by "destroying the atomic nucleus" in the target. That means a mere two-kiloton laser can destroy a whole continent through 'NDF'... while the same 'NDF' has no effect on Star Wars shields, despite it's ability to obliterate entire continents made of rock. (Really, they say that, too) In essence, it's an excuse to say that Star Trek weapons magically become pop-guns when shooting at anything that isn't a planet, so they can ignore calculations like the one you just made. (6.335 Exatons severely exceeds what they want Star Trek's firepower limits to be) Star Trek itself already explains that phasers merely separate atoms from one another in a process called _disruption,_ and they only do it on a specific disruptor setting. Captain Kirk literally says *"I want four men armed with phaser two's set for disrupter effect."* in the episode "Obsession". In short: never give any thought to NDF: it's simply falsehood.

[@kevo_chen]

That is literally what I have expressed on the Spacebattles forum XD. I'm glad we cleared this up.

[@1701EarlGrey]

But Empire have 200 gigatons turbolasers! Meanwhile, entire armada of Star Destroyers cannot kill one Jedi on a hoverbike and they have problems with penetrating shields constructed by 16 year old girl...In words of great Mr. Plinkett : Oh... :)

[@Idazmi7]

And they'll still make up reasons why turbolasers are 200 gigatons, despite all evidence pointing to the contrary. That's the sad part.

[@curseofgladstone4981]

Idazmi7. The absolute highest yield i have ever seen from star wars turbolasers is low kilotons. Star trek consistantly shows at least megatkn capacity. Borg cube first encounter. Multiple planet bombardments.

[@homelessend8557]

They also lose strength after a few kilometers so that makes it worse.

[@Idazmi7]

+Dragon Warhammer Some of Star Trek's weapon demonstrations go well into the gigaton range.

[@thefirstprimariscatosicari6870]

Idazmi7 Either way I calculated the energy produced by the 20 ships in the DS9 episode "The Die is Cast". To destroy in one volley 30% of the crust the energy needed would have been of 96 Exatons, or the energy produced by the sun in half an hour. This, combined with the fact that Star Trek ships can glass planets, gives Star Trek weapons Teraton level firepower.

[@Nine-Signs]

Additional thought. Star trek weapons are accurate, fully computer guided weapons. Star wars weapons can barely hit the broad side of a barn and are often manually targeted. With the range and accuracy of a single photon torpedo, pretty much any federation ship could single handedly kill the death star, from 40,000 kilometers away.

[@zingtea]

The Rebels scene was disappointing considering that in the Thrawn novel, Star Destroyer guns are shown to cause tsunamis when fired at an ocean.

[@Idazmi7]

Which is why novels aren't considered canon.

[@zingtea]

Thrawn (2017) is actually part of the new canon.

[@Idazmi7]

That's sad. Even when they are held to keep canon, the book writers refuse to do it.

[@matthewlippy5000]

not necessarily. First, the novel makes a point of making the shop get closer to the target, mentioning several times how atmosphere lowers the power of the turbolasers. Second, as pointed out in a few other comments, Thrawn wasmt intending to crush the rebels here. if he did, he simply would have kept up the bombardment until the shield failed. Thrawn has been shown time and time again to attempt to defeat his enemies with as little collateral damage as possible.

[@Idazmi7]

+Matthew David Lippy Even so, there's no logic you can use that will make those turbolasers powerful enough to compete with Star Trek on any scale, and the Star Wars EU writers seem to hate that enough to blatantly hijack Star Trek lore onto Star Wars just to even things up. That, along with loads of pure fanwank is what makes them less than reputable.

[@kevo_chen]

Thank you so much Idazmi! I have been endorsing your point for years!

[@Idazmi7]

Then why are you thanking me?

[@kevo_chen]

Idazmi7 Sorry, for the miss type. I meant to say I have been conceding your point.

[@Idazmi7]

Ah. I see you edited your comment. You're welcome!

[@RyanKawesomeSMS]

I do agree that the Feds have a huge advantage in firepower-even the most exaggerated orbital bombardment in SWTOR only destroys civilian buildings with one shot (granted, this was 3000 years ago, but thing don't seem to have changed much in terms of technology in those 3000 years). The one thing is, in the defense of The Empire, Thrawn wasn't intending to destroy anything. They could have probably neutralized that scrap of junk that was called a "shield" in a few moments (of course, the NX would just obliterate the shield with a shot, not even touching on anything else).

[@Idazmi7]

Thrawn's fleet was using their heavy turbolasers: they don't have heavier weapons. He likely could have destroyed them by shooting incessantly, but not through using heavier guns. Also, the rebel shield had been upgraded by Sabine, who was not present. Neither Thrawn nor the Rebels could have known it's full output.

[@RyanKawesomeSMS]

In the clone wars, venator class star destroyers had several tiers of destruction in their turbolasers, from low to high settings, all on the same turret. I'm sure that if this feature wasn't put on the stock variant of the ISD, Thrawn put it in himself (and I know you will rant on about not getting this from canon or something of the sort, but I am not a scientist, only trying to point out common sense, so...) Thrawn almost overheating the shield was just a fluke designed to make some 8-year-olds overreact to nothing. I doubt that Thrawn actually meant to overheat the shield, but he most likely set the power to low anyway so that he wouldn't wreck everything if the shield collapsed in the first second or two (again, I'm speaking from common sense, here. Talk all you want about canon, I will most likely interfere anyway.) And at least give me credit on this one: A single photon torpedo from Enterprise-D would not only obliterate the shield, but glass everything in the vicinity, as well as put a large crater where the Rebel Base was. Edit: And FYI, the venator thing is actually canon.

[@Idazmi7]

+Ryan K _"In the clone wars, venator class star destroyers had several tiers of destruction in their turbolasers, from low to high settings, all on the same turret. (...) And FYI, the venator thing is actually canon."_ kzbin.info/www/bejne/bpq1dKiZfdaqqdE - That is a Venator class Star Destroyer. Just like the cannons used on battleships in WWII, these guns have a set ammunition size. _"Thrawn almost overheating the shield was just a fluke designed to make some 8-year-olds overreact to nothing. I doubt that Thrawn actually meant to overheat the shield"_ That shield was upgraded by Sabine: Thrawn has no way of knowing that, nor how powerful it is. If it hadn't been upgraded, Thrawn would have certainly killed all the rebels by accident. _"And at least give me credit on this one: A single photon torpedo from Enterprise-D would not only obliterate the shield, but glass everything in the vicinity, as well as put a large crater where the Rebel Base was."_ That's true. _"I know you will rant on about not getting this from canon or something of the sort, but I am not a scientist, only trying to point out common sense"_ The reason I only go by the canon sources, is that fans (Star Trek fans and Star Wars fans alike) are well known to add their own elements to "correct" what they don't like when it comes to technology and lore. I recently saw a video by Spacedock about Star Trek's _Battle of Maxia_ that blatantly exaggerated the ranges involved, from "point-blank" (as stated in the episode by Picard), to an absurd _thirty light-seconds._ The farthest weapon range ever seen against a moving target in Star Trek is just over *one* light-second, so there's no way that claim has any basis in fact. The facts should be truthfully reported, regardless of personal opinions.

[@Idazmi7]

+Ryan K _"Now, those "turbolaser shots" as you have called it many, many times were actually proton bombs being thrown across a few hundred meters by high-tech slugthrowers (...)"_ Which is why they shoot exactly the same glowing energy projectiles that turbolasers do, right? Because they are actually bullets. Yes, I'm being sarcastic, because there's literally no reason for me to believe what you just said here. _"You may have noticed that they are not the main weapons on the venator. In fact, they aren't even included in the stock variant, quoting the legends stuff we all hate."_ Which is why they are flying all about during every capital ship exchange in Star Wars, because they are uncommon weapons that are not the primary weapon on most ships... _"the actual main weapons in the scene you just showed me lit up an area of anywhere from (...) further supporting the idea that Thrawn wasn't shooting at full power."_ The light generated by turbolaser rounds has never been shown to indicate variation in their firepower in any case. _"Of course Thrawn didn't know the capability of the shield, that is probably why he didn't go balls to the walls in case the thing collapsed."_ An orbital heavy turbolaser bombardment *is* "balls to the walls", as you so crudely put it. _"At least there is a reason for Star Trek to be inconsistent. For example, this hypothetical conversation when Q chucked the Enterprise-D at a borg cube"_ The Borg were shown to drain away the Enterprise-D's shields _before_ the laser was used. That same laser is never shown again in any context, as it was a surgical device used to extract bits of tech intact from their targets: not a tactical system. There's no inconsistency there.

[@RyanKawesomeSMS]

In the last point, that is kind of what I said. No shields, to put it crudely. And if you won't believe that proton bombs are not turbolasers, i'll just leave you to it. For now...

[@wmiller2811]

You forgot to include the bit in DS9 when the Obsidian Order and Tal-Shiar obliterated the Dominion home planet.

[@Idazmi7]

Yes, I could have included that scene. I do have a video showing it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pIaXnYx_qtuaa5o

[@missbish1000]

Now, did that look like turbo lasers basically glassing a planet? no, it did not. Changed the power settings? show me canon proof a ship mounted turreted turbolaser can be settings changed or shut up. Oh but you can't, because their is none. if turbo lasers were so powerful as those inflated stats star warsies love throwing out the entire area around the base for miles would be nothing but smoking glass and the jedi on the speederbike would have been ashes from the first beam striking. They throw out these massively inflated stats yet their own shows deny those same stats. Funny how that works out like that.

[@Idazmi7]

It _always_ works like that.

[@missbish1000]

Yep, Yep. And their still asinine to deny even their own shows and canon even when it's put in their faces.

[@griffinflyer77]

No. They weren't out to destroy the base, they were out to harm the shield and cause the rebels fear. Tarkin wanted the rebel leaders alive, to make an example of them. Hard to capture someone alive when they are a cloud of vapor. The fact is these shots are weaker than most every shot we see and are contradicted by other canon sources. However, if we accept star destroyers can change their firepower this disparity disappears. Given turbolasers can be used in "ground support mode" with firepower to destroy hillsides, it should be obvious they can. Let me show you some quotes from some canon books. Read and weep. These books are all canon, check for yourself. In the canon Catalyst: "Krennic inclined his head in acknowledgment. "Preliminary results indicate that the energy released during the test-fire had the destructive power of the combined batteries of a qaz-class Star Destroyer." A lot of people are saying that's petaton range firepower, although I would accept Teraton range firepower. But there's more! The Force Awakens ICS said: Designed for orbital assaults and slugging matches with enemy capital ships, these turbo lasers can overload shields, punch though thick armor, and reduce planetary surfaces to molten slag. Slagging of planetary surfaces, a copy paste definition of the BDZ. Given the BDZ is canon now, this should be obvious, but some may try to argue that since the BDZ was not defined it shouldn't count. This refutes that. Yes, this may be First Order tech, but it is similar in firepower to Galactic Empire tech. Twilight Company said: Ch30 Pg300-301 wrote:The duty officers began to applaud. It was a breach of protocol Tabor could forgive - this was their triumph as much as his, and they deserved to linger on it. They deserved a reminder that they had earned their positions aboard a Star Destroyer, earned the power to ruin planets and battle fleets. Ruining planets. Not as specific, but still proof of power, especially when you see the slagging planet quotes. Ahsoka said: There were at least two Star Destroyers and a massive mining ship in orbit around the planet. The Empire definitely knew there was something it wanted beneath the surface of the icy world. The planet itself was much worse off than she'd feared. Before, it had looked like a giant white ball from orbit-uniform in color except the brighter spots where it reflected the light of its sun. It had been as striking from up high as it was on the ground, even though the great cliffs and deep crevasses that scored the planet's surface weren't visible from afar. Now it almost hurt her to look at it. Great chunks of the planet had been carved away, exposing rock and lava that boiled up from the planet's core. So at least large continents are scorched with exposed lava. So lower limit continent. Which we know took less then a day. Fairly impressive, at least Teraton range firepower. i hope this convinces you.

[@Idazmi7]

_"No. They weren't out to destroy the base, they were out to harm the shield and cause the rebels fear."_ Except the shield was designed by Sabine. Thrawn had no way of knowing how long the shield would hold without having psychic precognition. _"qaz-class Star Destroyer."_ Never heard of it. Non-canon. _"Designed for orbital assaults and slugging matches with enemy capital ships, these turbo lasers can overload shields, punch though thick armor, and reduce planetary surfaces to molten slag."_ Every Star Wars book says stuff like this, and it never ever happens in the films. That's why the books aren't canon. _"i hope this convinces you."_ It doesn't: you just copy-pasted a bunch of Expanded Universe Fanfiction.

[@griffinflyer77]

No. They weren't out to destroy the base, they were out to harm the shield and cause the rebels fear." Except the shield was designed by Sabine. Thrawn had no way of knowing how long the shield would hold without having psychic precognition. *Scanners. Yes, scanners can determine shield strength. It should be noted Federation scanners can do the same, though.* "qaz-class Star Destroyer." Never heard of it. Non-canon. starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Qaz-class_Star_Destroyer *See that in the right corner? Yeah, that says CANON. Hmmm, looks like you're wrong...again. Whether it's ignorance or deliberate lies I don't know. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.* "Designed for orbital assaults and slugging matches with enemy capital ships, these turbo lasers can overload shields, punch though thick armor, and reduce planetary surfaces to molten slag." Every Star Wars book says stuff like this, and it never ever happens in the films. That's why the books aren't canon. *starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars:_The_Force_Awakens:_Incredible_Cross-Sections *Would ya look at that! Looks like you're wrong again! What a surprise.* "i hope this convinces you." It doesn't: you just copy-pasted a bunch of Expanded Universe Fanfiction. *Nope, this is all canon. Equal canon to the movies, I might add. I suggest you look up disney canon, they changed it again. But there's still hope for you-maybe Disney will change it back. You can only pray.* Edit to add an asterisk, don't wanna confuse you.

[@NinjaKitty91_]

I'm a fan of both Star Trek and Star Wars but I gotta say that I really hope Disney never gets the rights to Star Trek. They'll ruin it even worse than they ruined Star Wars. Great video btw

[@Idazmi7]

Thank you. I agree.

[@sayedmohidulislam8102]

Disney is the death star of franchises

[@StaticSkyTV]

You call that an Orbital Bombardment? In B5 when the Centauri used mass drivers against the Narn - THAT was Orbital Bombardment

[@Idazmi7]

Impressive by Star Wars standards, not very impressive by Star Trek standards. One ship could do that damage in seconds.

[@homelessend8557]

apparently there are still people who think that star wars plasma weaponry can still crush the federation. Also, isn't there an episode where the Voyager beamed a photon torpedo into a shielded ship?

[@Idazmi7]

Yes.

[@SirBroadsword]

Actually, the Borg probe was remodulating its shields at the time, creating a window during which the torpedo could be transported. Of course, waiting for such "flickers" in the enemy shields in order to do something is a fairly common tactic in Star Trek, so I find it unlikely Star Wars ships would not also experience similar such "flickers". Not that clever tactics are even necessary when your weapons have at least 40 times the firing range and the enemy ships have no way of catching you at sublight.

[@podemosurss8316]

Sir Broadsword Well, in TFA Han uses something similar to sneak into the Starkiller base: aproaching at the same speed of the shield refrecting rate.

[@Meatisfood]

Where is the clip from VOY episode "Alliances"? Damage done by Voyagers photon torpedoes to that Trabe ship was immense.

[@Idazmi7]

That's a little too far in the future for the purposes of this video.

[@Sceth]

This isn't really a good depiction of star wars planetary bombardment. I would suggest the scene in Knights of the old republic where Malak glasses Taris. There are a lot more moments in Knights of the old republic where worlds are completely left barren. Even in the star wars comics and novels, even if they are not really canon anymore, they have scaled down death star super lasers that can take out whole junks of planets in a single shot. Weapons like a low powered death star blast in rouge one were common place. Mandalorians were even known to nuke planets with thousands of missiles instantly. Star destroyers were very powerful by themselves, but they were not over kill. They didn't need to be because Star destroyers rarely moved outside of a fleet. This isn't a debate over one star destroy vs the Enterprise. It's dozens if not hundreds of star destroyers vs the enterprise.

[@Idazmi7]

_"This isn't really a good depiction of star wars planetary bombardment. I would suggest the scene in Knights of the old republic where Malak glasses Taris."_ You suggest taking a non-canon video game above the actual canon. The answer is no. _"Even in the star wars comics and novels, even if they are not really canon anymore"_ If it's not canon, I'm not interested. _"Weapons like a low powered death star blast in rouge one were common place."_ Death Stars are not "commonplace". _"This isn't a debate over one star destroy vs the Enterprise. It's dozens if not hundreds of star destroyers vs the enterprise."_ Looking at this video, _Enterprise_ takes the win with ease.

[@Sceth]

expect Star wars has been taking from the old republic over and over. They have been working on bridging the gap for awhile. Lucas and Disney have already included places from the old republic and even had plans to introduce Darth Revan in the clone wars. You are not listening to what i'm saying you insufferable dolt. I'm saying weapons that can destroy whole countries were common in star wars, not death stars. And like most things in fiction the writers just make up shit to suit the situation. Star wars bombardments are much more realistic. Someone even made a video on youtube about how stupid and unrealistically powerful the star trek ships are. To completely destroy the surface of a planet would take more power than those ships could possibly contain. To completely destroy the crust of a planet would take something on the level of the moon impacting its surface. And in one episode the enterprise had to try and stop a moon from falling on to a planet. Not only were they not able to do that but they nearly wrecked the ship in the process. Where in star wars they have fucking huge space stations that move solar systems and black holes around called centerpoint and sinkhole station. And before you say its not canon the daughter and son were the ones that made them. and since they were made canon chances are their past deeds are canon as well.

[@Idazmi7]

_"expect Star wars has been taking from the old republic over and over."_ You're clearly desperate. The fact is, Disney owns Star Wars: including the Old Republic. That doesn't make it canon, especially since they said it's not canon. Disney cherry-picks whatever details *_they like_* and add it to the canon. Unfortunately for you, that didn't include any planet slagging. Boo hoo. _"And like most things in fiction the writers just make up shit to suit the situation. Star wars bombardments are much more realistic. Someone even made a video on youtube about how stupid and unrealistically powerful the star trek ships are."_ Do you know what antimatter is? Because Star Trek ships are powered by it, and antimatter weapons would _definitely_ be that powerful, regardless of what any angry Star Wars fan on youtube says.

[@insertcognomen]

was Taris that first planet we were on that is a well developed city? If i remember the cut scene correctly it takes several turbo laser hits to destroy a skyscraper. turbo lasers do about as much visual damage as a modern day cruise missile? where the star trek phaser destroyed a small mountain in a single shot.

[@Sceth]

How many phase cannons did enterprise have? I'm pretty sure you could count them on one hand, maybe two. Where the star destroyers had dozens if not hundreds of cannons. Also that scene where they blew up the mountain was an overload event. That knocked out their weapons for an hour if not more. But what i'm getting at is. A star destroyers destructive power is spread out over many cannons, not just two or more powerful ones. And keep in mind those skyscrapers are as tall as mountains and made of super reinforced metals.

[@thatOOM9]

It has to be said all of the over the top "calculations" made by fans of Star Wars never actually translate to on-screen feats. The turbolaser blasts in rebels exploded with little more energy than a modern day artillery shell but are supposed to be (according to stardestroyer.net) in the gigaton range of power. I should just say that I am a fan of both series infact I have been a fan of Star Wars for far longer than Star Trek.

[@Idazmi7]

And now there's this scene from the Bad Batch: kzbin.info/www/bejne/r2i9i4CQr7GqhNk Second verse, same as the first.

[@ladysassy]

Since this Star Wars, any opinions on the last Jedi trailer? It feels like empire strikes back with darkness.

[@Idazmi7]

I don't know what to make of Luke.

[@SirBroadsword]

Do you know what to make of Luke now? ^^;

[@Idazmi7]

+Sir Broadsword Star Wars Episode 8: The Legend of Korra

[@YamiFudo]

Nice work as always

[@Idazmi7]

Thanks.

[@Shadowkey392]

It's also worth noting that the Enterprise's phase cannons were not meant to be as powerful as they were when they blew that mountain up. It was the result of an overload in the power relays, I think.

[@Idazmi7]

*Repeating this for the umpteenth time:* That was the standard setting. The problem was the guns being more powerful than they thought. In the same, exact episode as the overload, the crew fixed it by taking some of the gravity plating from deck three and rebuilding the plating into a primitive inertia dampener to absorb the extra recoil. That means the "overload" is now the standard maximum setting, and that setting _barely scratches Vulcan ships._

[@magdalen67]

I like both but trek takes this wit relative ease.

[@Idazmi7]

Yes indeed.

[@leightoncressman6188]

Actually if you watch the season 3 finale from the beginning we have Tarkin telling Thrawn to take prisoners. Also the lower fire power figures doesn't negate the higher figures such as the asteroids bing vaporized in the empire strikes back which demonstrates fire power of 22.500 TW per shot for the light point defence turbo lasers and if we scale that up to the heavy turbo lasers that gives us a fire power figure of 2.8 million TW. So the reasonable conclusion is that Thrawn ordered the turbo lasers power dialled down. This is also evident by the fact that he ordered his ships to cease fire before the shield failed when he could of just kept firing but instead ordered a ground assault.

[@Idazmi7]

_"Actually if you watch the season 3 finale from the beginning we have Tarkin telling Thrawn to take prisoners."_ That doesn't change that they used the Heavy Turbolasers in the bombardment. _"(...) gives us a fire power figure of 2.8 million TW"_ Holy... what drugs are you on? First off: you should be measuring in _joules_ or _tons of TNT,_ because watts are a measurement of *_energy over time_* which is not important to explosive or impact weapons like turbolasers. Secondly, kzbin.info/www/bejne/j4iTnKicZ7GrY7M

[@johnboggs1164]

plus, you got those figures from stardestroyer.net. all that page proves is that asteroids were destroyed. the size of said asteroids is unprovable, but they couldn't have been more than about 10-15m in size. not only that, but brian young, who wrote the page on turbolaser power, stated that they were medium or bigger turbolasers, not the light PDLs. and turbolasers do not scale from one size to the next. so that whole spiel is nothing but pure bullshit

[@johnboggs1164]

another thing, that page you got those numbers from is also inaccurate and was never updated or corrected. there were no additional asteroids destroyed other than the 3 that we see the avenger semi-vaporize. brian young claimed that there were 60-100m asteroids destroyed AFTER they left the asteroid field. i wouldnt use that as a source unless you drink their koolaid too much.

[@surokthevulcan5155]

So many idiots saying that the Star Destroyers were not using max firepower. You cannot adjust the power level for turbolasers. The colors of the turbolasers did not mean what power they dished out. Blue turbolasers were effective against droids, that's why the Republic used them often. Green turbolasers are meant for ship combat

[@justarandomperson1510]

In that episode of Star Wars Rebels Thrawn wasn't trying to destroy the rebels base let alone the entire planet, he just wanted to harass them so he probably didn't have the cannons firing with maximum power.

[@Idazmi7]

Turbolasers don't have adjustable power output: they use tibanna gas canisters as ammo the same way traditional guns use shells. We can see that in action in Star Wars Episode 3 during the attack against the Invisible Hand.

[@procrastinatingpuma]

@@Idazmi7 They are bound to have some level of adjustable power output. The laser that heats up that said gas (hence, Turbolaser) would logically be able to have an increase or decrease its power. The reason why theirs are different calibers probably has to do with the volume of gas.

[@IronWarhorsesFun]

This was supposed to be about planetary bombardment, what's your point?

[@Idazmi7]

Oh come now. There wasn't any lack of clarity here.

[@IronWarhorsesFun]

Yes because it seguayed into spaceship combat. & using an unshielded asteroid for target practice is not a great comparis on. I agree that ST beats SW tech any day but you are using a clearly ST biased approach.

[@Idazmi7]

_"I agree that ST beats SW tech any day but you are using a clearly ST biased approach."_ Yeah, no. There's no other canonical Star Wars bombardment in existence, and it's nothing compared to a single outdated exploration ship test firing it's cannons. What other approach was I supposed to use: _not_ comparing them in the first place? I mean, I could have used these references instead: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pIaXnYx_qtuaa5o - That planet is toast... making it just as one-sided in Star Trek's favor. kzbin.info/www/bejne/m2evnX93h7d9nNE - That entire freaking solar system is toast, making it far more in Star Trek's favor. There's nothing in canon Star Wars that can even fractionally approach this kind of firepower except the Death Star: nothing I can do will change that unless you want me to lie.

[@lelandframe6927]

A Constitution Class Starship is definitely capable of destroying an entire ecosphere! That's what General Order 24 was meant to do! ("A Taste Of Armageddon") The only thing the Galactic Empire had that was capable of that was the Death Star, but one or two Connies could have taken it out with NO problem! One photon torpedo or phaser hit to the Death Star's emitter dish, and their main offensive armament is toast!

[@lelandframe6927]

+CMDR ritzelGdA Spock replies: "Your questionable technobabble is exceeded only by your atrocious grammar and spelling."

[@ritzelhax3842]

i'm not writing a text or an essay and insulting me won't work you're still wrong.

[@missbish1000]

A little bit of star trek canon for you from the tng episode, The outrageous Okona. Captain, they are now locking lasers on us." "Lasers!?" "Yes, sir." "Lasers can't even penetrate our navigation shields. Don't they know that?" The captain is Picard, the officer is Riker and it IS in the script and portrayed in the episode if you take the time to research it.

[@ritzelhax3842]

the borg also uses lasers and the federation losses all battle to the borg :)

[@ritzelhax3842]

CMDR ritzelGdA4 dias atrás Star Wars: Slave-1 Main guns: 64000 GW (2 kilotons per shot, 480 rpm firing rate onscreen in AOTC for time-averaged power output rather than peak output) Star Trek: Enterprise-D Main phasers: 3.6 GW Star Wars: Slave-1 Missiles: 190 megatons (tail-launched missiles; seismic charge mines are roughly 12000 megatons) Star Trek: Enterprise-D Photon torpedoes: 64 megatons max theoretical Star Wars: Slave-1 Sublight acceleration: 2500G Star Trek: Enterprise-D Sublight acceleration: 1000G Star Wars: Slave-1 Operational range: not stated (however, Obi-Wan's starfighter has an operational range of 150,000 light-years, and is probably similar). Star Trek: Enterprise-D Operational range: 2750 light-years Star Wars: Slave-1 Shield heat dissipation: not stated (however, Amidala's personal yacht has shield dissipation of 2 billion GW peak, and is probably similar) Star Trek: Enterprise-D Shield heat dissipation: 3311 GW peak Star Wars: Slave-1 Reactor power: not stated (however, Amidala's personal yacht has power output of 7 billion GW max, and is probably similar) Star Trek: Enterprise-D Reactor power: ~4 billion GW at max warp 9.6 Star Wars: Slave-1 Max hyperspace speed: not stated (however, same-day flight from core to galactic outer-rim systems requires speeds in excess of 10 million c) Star Trek: Enterprise-D Max warp speed: ~2000c (warp 9.6)

[@MaxPSVR]

I know this may not me correct but the thing about bombardment. In my mind. Is the bomb bit. When I think about planetary bombardment. I think of dropping thousands of high yield high explosives from orbit to do massive contender size worth of damage. Turbo lasers or beam weapons just won't cut it. I mean even looking to what we can do right now. The Trident project from the real world Starwars program can do much better. And that just a large mettle rod being dropped and utilising Kennetic force to create something more destructive than an A-bomb

[@Idazmi7]

Did you not watch the video to the end?

[@MaxPSVR]

yep. my Point was in regards to star wars use of Turbo lasers and calling it bombardment. its nowhere near what bombardment should be. that what their doing is just shooting things from orbit. Our own real life Star Wars program is much more devastating.

[@Wattothejunkdealer]

hey mam i dont want to discredit your video or anything but why are the star destroyers firing from the turbolasers designed to hit xwings and starfighters that are on top of the destroyer and not at the front like the capital ship destroying turbolasers

[@Idazmi7]

Those _are_ the capital ship guns. There are no larger guns on those ships.

[@Wattothejunkdealer]

Idazmi7 aight there a few other turbolasers on the side near the other ones and 3 very tiny ones and a few upfront but something to also be considered is Thrawn had orders to keep the rebels alive

[@Idazmi7]

None of that changes the fact that they were using heavy turbolasers in that bombardment.

[@Wattothejunkdealer]

Idazmi7 yeah but why would someone who has orders to keep someone alivw use their most powerful weapon

[@Idazmi7]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/q3TNnIWMbbdsb9k - Maybe because they get their asses kicked by Rebels so bloody often.

[@Nine-Signs]

All a person need do to see which has better tech is look at how each generates power. Star Wars uses fusion reactors. Star trek uses matter anti matter reactors. Both of them are permissible in physics, but fusion is inferior compared to the energy created from a matter anti matter reaction. I always imagined the reason for star wars having such huge ships is because they need the space for moon sized fusion reactors to power their "lasers" I remember one episode of TNG they commented that lasers wouldn't penetrate basic navigation shields. Also in star trek, at least until JJ took over, they always tried to cram as much real science and scientific theory into the show as possible, in star wars most things work because of fairy dust.

[@tomcatm16]

Very impressive. I consider this accurate. Considering Archers Enterprise does get it's ass kicked a lot and they'd have to resort to using such firepower just to survive against the Klingons. Whom were practically on Earths doorstep at the end of season 2.

[@Idazmi7]

Finally, we have a canonical example of a planetary bombardment from Star Wars. Not a game, or a novel: a televised show.

[@bohellan6227]

In DS9 S3E21 "The Die is Cast", the joint Romulan and Cardassian fleet perform a planetary bombardement. 20% of the planets crust was destroyed in the opening volley.

[@tomcatm16]

30% was the quote. Also, it should be noted that these ships have comparable firepower to Picards Galaxy Class Enterprise. Which has been proven to blast through planetary crust without much of a problem and even heavily damage a more advanced Borg cube in their first encounter. Which had capabilities superior to their own at the time.

[@Idazmi7]

_"30% was the quote. Also, it should be noted that these ships have comparable firepower to Picards Galaxy Class Enterprise."_ The Cardassian ships actually have substantially less.

[@tomcatm16]

Idamzi7 I thought it was due to the fact most of Starfleets newer ships had them outranged and outgunned(by better weapons coverage) including the Enterprise. My comparison is from DS9s The Way of the Warrior based on how well Dukats ship held up vs the Enterprise-D's alternate timeline encounter from Yesterdays Enterprise(TNG). Both ships were outnumbered by three Klingon Bird of Preys. I remember that Dukats' ship didn't fair as well as Picards' ship in those similar encounters.

[@KellyParks]

Excellent points

[@elderblackdragon]

Except Thrawn WASN'T attempting to kill the rebels there. Notice how he stopped the bombardment before the shield gave out. He was doing his typical screw with their heads and get them to make a mistake move. Also in that clip the weapons system was mistakenly OVER LOADED. That test fire fried the power relays and they ALL had to be replaced. It doesn't count as "regular" operations when you have to replace the power lines.

[@Idazmi7]

_"Except Thrawn WASN'T attempting to kill the rebels there. Notice how he stopped the bombardment before the shield gave out."_ Thrawn's fleet was using their heavy turbolasers: they don't have heavier weapons. He likely could have destroyed them by shooting incessantly, but not through using heavier guns. Also, the rebel shield had been upgraded by Sabine, who was not present. Neither Thrawn nor the Rebels could have known it's full output. If Sabine hadn't upgraded that shield, they'd be dead. _"Also in that clip the weapons system was mistakenly OVER LOADED. That test fire fried the power relays and they ALL had to be replaced. It doesn't count as "regular" operations when you have to replace the power lines."_ Been over this with several people already: in the very same episode, they adapted some of the ship's gravity plating into a primitive inertia dampener to handle the excess recoil, effectively making that "overload" the new standard maximum setting. That was a plot point.

[@elderblackdragon]

Wow. Some people just can accept that their beloved show isn't all that. Thrawn was a MASTER of psychological warfare. He knew exactly what effects the bombardment was having on his enemies. You are correct that the crew of the Enterprise managed to reroute the overload into the hull plating, but it was ALSO show to be a fly by the seat of your pants chance that BARELY worked. It wasn't the "new standard" for the weapon.

[@Idazmi7]

_"Thrawn was a MASTER of psychological warfare. He knew exactly what effects the bombardment was having on his enemies."_ I repeat: the rebel shield had been upgraded by Sabine, who was not present. Neither Thrawn nor the Rebels could have known it's full output. If Sabine hadn't upgraded that shield, the Rebels would be dead. _"You are correct that the crew of the Enterprise managed to reroute the overload into the hull plating, but it was ALSO show to be a fly by the seat of your pants chance that BARELY worked. It wasn't the "new standard" for the weapon."_ No: they actually took the gravity plating (not hull plating, which is NOT the same thing) and _rebuilt it into a primitive inertia dampener_ to handle the excess recoil. Put simply, they made a giant shock absorber out of excess parts and stuck it to the phase cannons. They can now fire safely without any recoil problems.

[@elderblackdragon]

You've never been sitting in what should be a safe location while listening to danger knock in the roof, have you. The shield having been upgraded has nothing to do with the psychological effect of turbolaser bolts crashing down on it. On top of that they were unable to truly test the shields prior to the bombardment. They weren't even sure it would turn on let alone hold.

[@Idazmi7]

+Andrew F. Nelsen _"The shield having been upgraded has nothing to do with the psychological effect of turbolaser bolts crashing down on it."_ Nor does psychology have anything to do with the science of firepower.

[@enforcerlucario932]

It seems there are two types of fireing cannons. Star wars is base on area laser Explosions and Star Trek is base one compress laser cannon so it dose depend on which is more productive I guess

[@missbish1000]

Another thing star wars fanboys completely ignore and pretend doesn't exist was the Grand Moff on board the death star in star wars, a new hope (first movie) saying that it would take half the imperial fleet to destroy a planet compared to the firepower of this station. (deathstar). Another thing to point out is a single Starfleet vessel can destroy an entire planet simply by destabilizing the planets core. it can be done by using a phaser to drill into the planets surface to the core and beaming a few photon torpedoes into the core and detonating them. Another little bit of canon there but the fanboys will just foam at the mouth and deny it regardless lol.

[@Idazmi7]

Actually, it was Han Solo who said that about the Imperial Fleet.

[@missbish1000]

Your right, I stand corrected.

[@johnboggs1164]

the quote is *"the whole starfleet couldnt destroy the planet. it would take 1000 ships with more firepower than has ever existed"* thats from the novel. the movie states *"the entire starfleet couldnt destroy the planet. it would take 1000 ships with more firepower than ive...."*

[@coreymicallef365]

"Another thing to point out is a single Starfleet vessel can destroy an entire planet simply by destabilizing the planets core." Then why did Nero need the red matter in the 2009 film?

[@johnboggs1164]

Corey Micallef the reboot movies are a seperate canon altogether. You cant even compare the 2 timelines.

[@GameengineerMCWS]

Nice!

[@Idazmi7]

Thanks. :)

[@GHOST-zy3ji]

Can you do Klingons vs Mandalorians?

[@Idazmi7]

I don't see what the point would be: the fact that Klingons are a threat to Starfleet makes it very clear that the Mandalorians would be massively outgunned.

[@podemosurss8316]

Idazmi7 Mandalorians rely on small commando operations. They're the Spartans of SW. Which makes them the kind of people that would try capturing the Klingon ships and using them. And the kind of people that can do enormous damage if they manage to capture a single bird of prey.

[@Idazmi7]

+Podemos URSS _"Mandalorians rely on small commando operations. They're the Spartans of SW. Which makes them the kind of people that would try capturing the Klingon ships and using them. And the kind of people that can do enormous damage if they manage to capture a single bird of prey."_ They won't capture one. In addition, even if they somehow, miraculously, managed to capture one, Star Trek's technology doesn't have the plethora of easily navigable security gaps that Star Wars ships do (like say, blind spots in the external sensors or a complete lack of automated security systems). And we saw what happened when three Klingon Birds of Prey attacked a planetary installation: they straight up lost.

[@podemosurss8316]

Idazmi7 I agree. However a hand-to-hand fight between the klingons and the mandalorians would be quite epic. Also I never said they would get it, they would try capturing it using tricks, but I don't think they would be able to.

[@floppydisksareop]

Though I understand with your stance there are a few mistakes in the video i'd like to pinpoint: 1.) The NX blowing up the mountain was due to an overload so severe it burnt out the weapon 2.) That was not an actual androian ship, it was a masked romulan drone

[@Idazmi7]

1) That was the standard setting. The problem was the guns being more powerful than they thought. In the same, exact episode as the overload, the crew fixed it by taking some of the gravity plating from deck three and rebuilding the plating into a primitive inertia dampener to absorb the extra recoil. That means the "overload" is now the standard maximum setting, and that setting *_barely scratches Vulcan ships._* 2) That's an actual Andorian ship. The Romulan drones were far less durable than that.

[@floppydisksareop]

Idazmi7 The romulan drones could wipe up the floor with the Enterprise easily, and andorians wouldn't fire on a ship with Shraan. That was a drone alright(not that it makes a difference really...) And the weapon still burnt out some conduits later, and the overload occurred first because of the alien device, not because the cannons were better than expected

[@Idazmi7]

+Don Ficko _"The romulan drones could wipe up the floor with the Enterprise easily"_ No: those drones only advantage was extreme maneuverability. In fact, one of those drones was destroyed by a couple of torpedoes from Enterprise: an andorian ship would just power through the torpedoes and not give a care. _"And the weapon still burnt out some conduits later, and the overload occurred first because of the alien device, not because the cannons were better than expected"_ Watch the episode again: In the same episode, the crew fixed the problem by taking some of the gravity plating from deck three and rebuilding the plating into a primitive inertia dampener to absorb the extra recoil. NOT by removing an alien device. That means the "overload" is now the standard maximum setting, and even that maximum power hardly dents Vulcan shields in all later episodes.

[@Bronasaxon]

Star Wars vs Star Trek- All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.

[@fluffsune]

In sheer firepower, i agree that star trek is superior. However theres a couple of things to account for. One and ill Quotr dorkly, "Magic Space Wizards." The force is actually quite strong and can prove to be an advantage as strong force users can interact with other beings on seperate ships. Not too mention a key factor that i rarely see in star trek, fighters. I rarely ever see fighters in star trek. Its one thing to have a 1v1 of capital ships, its another when theres a metric fuckton of fighters with it.

[@Idazmi7]

_"In sheer firepower, i agree that star trek is superior. However theres a couple of things to account for. One and ill Quotr dorkly, "Magic Space Wizards." The force is actually quite strong and can prove to be an advantage as strong force users can interact with other beings on seperate ships."_ Star Trek has those, too. An awful lot of them, in fact, some of which are Federation member species. _"Not too mention a key factor that i rarely see in star trek, fighters. I rarely ever see fighters in star trek. Its one thing to have a 1v1 of capital ships, its another when theres a metric fuckton of fighters with it."_ Star Trek had fighters too, but the point-defense in Star Trek is so strong that they just don't last in large battles.

[@fluffsune]

Idazmi7 you do make some valid points, however in such a large battle, there's a number of things to consider, don't get me wrong, I'm not fanboying over star wars, I just enjoy theoretical discussions like this, you can add me on discord if you want to talk more

[@USSCrazybat]

To be fair, I've always assumed that whilst weapon/shield yields outstrip anything from Star Wars, what balances things out in an engagement between two typical ships - say a Constitution/Constitution Refit against a Star Destroyer - is that the capital ships of Star Wars have sheer bulk on their side. A lot of Star Trek combat has ships targeting and disabling subsystems on their opponent, and outside of the bridge and the shield globes, that wouldn't be too effective. They could take their sweet time blasting the Destroyer into slag - but it would take a while.

[@Idazmi7]

+USSCrazybat Now that you've given your two cents, actually watch the video in it's fullness: you obviously didn't even get beyond the Star Wars clips before you typed this. If you had, you would know that blasting a Star Destroyer to slag would actually be the easiest thing for them to do.

[@USSCrazybat]

I did watch all of the video before I posted - and don't get me wrong, I am heavily in favour of Trek, always have been - but I've always wondered where the balance is between the two IPs. And what do we take as gospel? Early TNG, where a single photon torpedo could obliterate an entire ship and the Enterprise if it wasn't far away? The TOS movies, where unshielded ships could take quite a few shots and return fire? Or Nemesis, where the ships take an impossible amount of punishment? Based on your video, yes, any battle between equivalent ship classes would be a swift Trek victory, and that gratifies me as someone who's seen the same argument over and over again in favour of Star Wars (massive reactor/turbolaser/shield output). But I would be also concerned with making any hypothetical engagement entertaining and at least reasonably balanced.

[@Idazmi7]

_"I did watch all of the video before I posted - and don't get me wrong, I am heavily in favour of Trek, always have been - but I've always wondered where the balance is between the two IPs."_ If you need to ask that question, you clearly didn't watch anything: 4:05 _"And what do we take as gospel? Early TNG, where a single photon torpedo could obliterate an entire ship and the Enterprise if it wasn't far away? The TOS movies, where unshielded ships could take quite a few shots and return fire? Or Nemesis, where the ships take an impossible amount of punishment?"_ What do we take as gospel? The Civil War, in which two iron ships could fight for hours and barely get damaged, or the modern day, where a single missile cripples a titanium ship in one hit? TNG and TOS are literally a century apart, so that little attempt you made at claiming inconsistency between series is no more than a joke. You either knew that before you even typed it, or you should have. If Archer's primitive NX class explorer can outgun an entire Star Destroyer fleet that easily, nearly everything else from the later series can do the same. _"Based on your video, yes, any battle between equivalent ship classes would be a swift Trek victory, and that gratifies me as someone who's seen the same argument over and over again in favour of Star Wars (massive reactor/turbolaser/shield output)"_ Yeah: massive reactor output that barely burned some space trees. Star Wars was always giving low *showings* when compared to Star Trek, so I never too those claims seriously. Canon events always outweigh the fandom's claims. _"But I would be also concerned with making any hypothetical engagement entertaining and at least reasonably balanced."_ What balance? Star Trek's very first episode claimed the _Enterprise_ could destroy a planet's entire surface, and there's been no conflicting statement from anyone but Star Wars fanboys. Not one episode suggests that they are less powerful than that. Star Wars' first movie said it would take over a thousand Star Destroyers to do the same, so there never was any possibility of a "balanced" engagement.

[@USSCrazybat]

Alright, alright, you've clearly put a lot of thought into your argument. Can we just both agree that Star Trek's the best and move on?

[@Idazmi7]

+USSCrazybat Sure. I'm sorry if I came across as hostile: I've been debating with the fanboys so long that I sometimes get easily annoyed.

[@lucofparis4819]

Showing a bombardment from a Disney XD kid show will never appear "violent". In your footage, they even joked about it, saying Thrawn wasn't trying to kill them this time. Episode 1 : one turbolaser fires on a ship with shields down : it explodes. Anyway, what was even your point by showing random footages ?

[@homelessend8557]

Luc Fauvarque still canon. And there's no evidence that star wars can change yields of their weapons like in star trek. In fact, turbolasers weapons get weaker over time, as we see in the last jedi. Speaking of which, that was the only time we see an orbital bombardment which took 2 enormous canons to fire and still recharged slowly. This further proves that all other weapons in star wars are below subkilotons and trade the amount of firepower equal to artillery shells

[@slimysomething]

I wish Star Destroyers could slag planets. It should be cool... but it isn't.

[@Idazmi7]

Then Darth Vader would just melt Tatooine when Leia hid the Death Star plans down there.

[@nickvinsable3798]

I won't disagree with what you've shown me, especially since I've successfully built & fired an actual Star Wars Blaster (I've been sworn into secrecy of how it actually works, but I'm allowed to express its results).

[@surokthevulcan5155]

Also, the Federation was stronger. They did have the Genesis Device... wait they used to have it

[@Idazmi7]

And Genesis is mass-producible...

[@richardched6085]

Even in my "Headcanon" a single Turbolaser blast from an ISD (Rogue One/ANH Devastator Type) is around 3.6 Tons of TNT per shot (Or 15.102 Gigajoules). What we got in Rebels was about 7.96 Kilograms of TNT Per Shot (Or 33.4617077 Megajoules) From an Imperial-II Star Destroyer!!!! Sabine's Bubble Shield could probably take up to 130 Kilotons before dissipating. Any Phase Cannon or Phaser Bank is gonna CUT RIGHT THROUGH That instantaneously. If we go by Rebels logic. It would take days for 6 ISDs to Drain the Enterprise-D's Shields and that's assuming the E-D allows them to fire. However to be fair the Phasers and Photon Torpedoes also appear to be Sub-Kiloton to Low Megaton (Definitely not the exaggerated yields that Idazmi7 suggests)

[@Idazmi7]

+Richard Ched _"However to be fair the Phasers and Photon Torpedoes also appear to be Sub-Kiloton to Low Megaton (Definitely not the exaggerated yields that Idazmi7 suggests)"_ The problem with that argument is this 4:05 - That weapon is clearly shown leveling a mountain in one shot. Yet when fired against shielded warships at 4:29, they do almost nothing on impact. That is *NOT* because they are firing less powerful shots (they are literally fighting for their lives) it's because the targets are protected by energy fields. The fact that Photon Torpedoes can easily *_tear a ship protected in this way into pieces_* makes them far more powerful. I was hoping that you would be able to understand that without my intervention. If you want to go into raw science, explosions are often _less_ visually impressive in space, due to the lack of an atmosphere. All those air molecules enhance the appearance of the explosion by reflecting the released light and generating huge fireballs; there's no air in a vacuum, so the explosion seems far smaller than it actually is.

[@richardched6085]

+Idazmi7 How much Energy is required to demolish a mountain? Dialogue says that the Phase Cannons are rated at 80 to 500 Gigajoules (Sub-Kiloton) And Reed says that the blast is 10 times more powerful than just "A Little off the top" Assuming this means the power was 10 times the Theoretical Max of the Phase Cannon the Anti-Mountain Blast was 5 Terajoules (Or 1.2 Kilotons) What we see on screen would suggest otherwise. How can we even calculate Yields if the Blasts have no Splash Damage? Now yes I can see the Photon Torpedoes being a few dozen Megatons and vastly more powerful than the NX-01's Photonic Torpedoes. Should we take Dialogue over visuals?

[@richardched6085]

The Inconsistency of Star Trek Weapons is the problem. They appear to be Low to Sub-Kiloton in some episodes and are presented as Teraton Scale Weapons in others. Same with Star Wars (The ISD Destroys Asteroids in ESB but does a few Kilograms of Damage in the Rebels Episode)

[@Idazmi7]

+Richard Ched _"How much Energy is required to demolish a mountain? Dialogue says that the Phase Cannons are rated at 80 to 500 Gigajoules (Sub-Kiloton) And Reed says that the blast is 10 times more powerful than just "A Little off the top" Assuming this means the power was 10 times the Theoretical Max of the Phase Cannon the Anti-Mountain Blast was 5 Terajoules (Or 1.2 Kilotons) What we see on screen would suggest otherwise."_ You clearly never saw the episode. (thus, you cannot tell me what they said in dialogue, either) In the finale of that same episode, they modify some of their gravity-plating to absorb the recoil, so that they can _always_ fire the more powerful bursts. It's their standard firepower. That, and you _should not_ argue against what we are clearly seeing: that blast leveled that mountain, regardless of what anyone says. _"The Inconsistency of Star Trek Weapons is the problem. They appear to be Low to Sub-Kiloton in some episodes and are presented as Teraton Scale Weapons in others."_ Since you *_clearly_* didn't read what I said the first time: if you want to go into raw science, explosions are often *less* visually impressive in space, due to the lack of an atmosphere. All those air molecules enhance the appearance of the explosion by reflecting the released light and generating huge fireballs; there's no air in a vacuum, so the explosion seems far smaller than it actually is. _"Same with Star Wars (The ISD Destroys Asteroids in ESB but does a few Kilograms of Damage in the Rebels Episode)"_ And it is NOT the same in Star Wars. There has never been any orbital attack - using _normal_ turbolasers - that ever did enough damage to compare to what Star Trek does literally all the time with it's weapons: even the asteroids in TESB.

[@surokthevulcan5155]

How come the explosions were less than hanf grenade if it had the firepower of a 5000 pound bomb?

[@magdalen67]

I'm pretty sure even the nx-01 could destroy a super star destroyer.

[@Idazmi7]

Of course it could.

[@magdalen67]

Just wondering do you think that the nx-01 could destroy the entire imperial fleet or not since it has no shields?

[@Idazmi7]

That depends on how big the imperial fleet is, and whether or not you mean all at once (which is very highly unlikely to happen at any rate). It could certainly take out the Death Star easily, since it can shoot an in-flight torpedo with a torpedo: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z3aUmKSui7RrmLs

[@magdalen67]

I meant at the most efficient way possible plus the death star is over 100 time the size of the nx-01 but is a lot less useful.

[@Idazmi7]

Indeed it is.

[@homelessend8557]

I know turbolasers are weaker than phasers, but I honestly didn't think they were this weak. I just feel bad that the weapons are so much weaker than before to the point that it's not even fair

[@Idazmi7]

To be honest, it wasn't ever fair to begin with. Star Trek confirmed that the _Enterprise_ could kill a planet in the first episode ever made in 1965, and Star Wars' first movie confirmed that more than a thousand Star Destroyers wouldn't be able to do the same. The argument was basically DOA.

[@missbish1000]

On the good side however, if the writers and owners of the star wars genre can get past the everything MUST be old school canon only ideals, star wars has literally unlimited potential for advancement in all areas. Me personally, I would LOVE to see star wars tech reach a level that could compete with Starfleet and the other major races in the star trek universe, then things would get really fun ^^ .

[@Idazmi7]

+Lisa winn It would make the Star Wars fanboys even crazier, though.

[@missbish1000]

Yep, likely. As an example of just how nutzy some of them can be, I have a friend that went to collage up in the Eureka/Arcata area of California, while there he built a program specific to comparing star wars and star trek to put an end fanboys raving over data, he built the program to work independently from human interference and create it's own comparative matrix. Guess what, even TOS star trek proved to be superior in every way, he was threatened repeatedly, several attempts were made to steal the computer, naturally claims of bias, he even received a death threat. Star wars fanboys went absolutely foaming at the mouth bonkers over undeniable data and some did everything they could think of trying to silence the data. And this was years ago when computers were much less powerful.

[@renepascalsto]

Thats a massive hole you got there

[@danielwilliams233]

Nice

[@Idazmi7]

Thanks.

[@magdalen67]

the only time we ever see shields in star wars is on big ships like star destroyers like in rouge one but it only takes a couple of ion torpedoes to completely disable that ship. star trek ships laugh at ion weaponry.

[@Idazmi7]

+Monique Lyon In Star Wars, there is usually mention shields in dialogue (we hear about the shields on Admiral Raddus' ship in Rogue One and on Darth Vader's ship in Return of the Jedi, for example) but there's never any indication of weapons being even slightly hindered by them. _Star Trek: Deep Space Nine_ had very similar problems in later seasons due to all of the digital effects budget being wasted on _Voyager_ during production. That said, unlike DS9, Star Wars has no history of _ever_ showing shields, and always has a fantastic budget. In fact, do we even have proof that those were shields on that Star Destroyer at all? It doesn't look like it in the slightest: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qZPJo2mhbLdssLM

[@magdalen67]

true it is probably only the ion effect.

[@100dampf]

If there were shields on the Star derstroyers shouldn't they have stopped the disabled one from ramming the other one

[@Idazmi7]

+HundertDampf No. A shield wouldn't have made any difference to a collision of that magnitude. Not even the shield surrounding Scarif stopped the Star Destroyers.

[@sabertx3273]

HundertDampf I think that those shields were meant to deal with laser fire, not a capital ship colliding with it.

[@captblueshadow682]

though you forgot to point out that the phase cannons overloaded when they blew up that mountain, so when they attack the vulcans, ect, ect they weren't that powerful

[@Idazmi7]

In the fanalie of the same episode, they retrofitted some of the gravity plating to absorb the extra recoil from the phase cannons, so the "overload" became the standard setting.

[@captblueshadow682]

ahh ok, i haven't seen enterprise yet so i got the info from clips

[@SuperGamefreak18]

Yup those are primary turrets alright...sure it's thrawn...but he's honestly the only competent person in the empire (you can argue vader, tarkin and a few others that don't come to mind but that would take years), and lets not forget the fact that the kill a world it normally takes a small fleet of star destroyers (ships atleast 10 times the size of most federation ships) while in trek we've seen ships of a similar size vaporize planets (a certain planet destroyer from tos that wasnt even close to the size of the death star's laser).

[@Idazmi7]

I was only referring to Federation hardware.

[@zallarvandi3251]

im pretty sure a star destroyer is 700 meters to 1 mile long starships scale from 100 meters to 3 miles (look up nx 01 and enterprise J and other ship classses)

[@homelessend8557]

We should get a last star trek vs star wars vid once the rise of skywalker comes out. Judging by the newest trailer, it takes specialized star destroyers with death star technology to recreate the destruction seen with an nx-01. It's even proven in the new canon comics and shows how pathetic turbolasers really are compared to 22nd century phasers at standard yield

[@Idazmi7]

Those Sith Star Destroyers are the definition of Glass Cannons: they got mauled by regular firepower from civilian ships. Starfleet wouldn't be so easy to kill.

[@Cipher00007]

Ok so you use an example of a kids tv show vs an adults show... Hrrm that’s a bit of an unfair matchup don’t you think?? You should really be more impartial in these kinds of things, especially when it comes to two well loved franchises such as Star Wars and Star Trek.

[@Idazmi7]

It wouldn't make a difference if I used _Revenge of the Sith._ Star Wars, as a franchise, was meant for 12 year olds from the start. Star Trek was made for adults. That doesn't change the fact that standard turbolasers are basically pop-guns by Star Trek standards across the entire franchise - age group doesn't determine firepower.

[@InsultingInsinuation]

I am trying my hardest to be as non bias (I love me some star wars) as possible here but thats really hard when you put it into perspective you used clips from a live action 1900s t.v. series and a kids (lets be honest the cartoon was aimed at kids) cartoon made in 2008... there was no doubt the cartoon was gonna let the main character riding the bike live and the t.v. show can be more carefree about its action. this was an unfair comparison in specific aspects. although there arent many live action 1900s t.v. shows based on starwars for you to compair were there?

[@Idazmi7]

_"live action 1900s t.v. series and a kids (...) cartoon made in 2008 (...) although there arent many live action 1900s t.v. shows based on starwars for you to compair were there?"_ Star Trek Enterprise is from 2001.

[@InsultingInsinuation]

well ill be damned thanks for the information but the fact that it is still a live action show vs a kids cartoon (7 years apart) still stands

[@Idazmi7]

+Zack Brownell _"thanks for the information but the fact that it is still a live action show vs a kids cartoon (7 years apart) still stands"_ That doesn't change anything.

[@SirBroadsword]

@BillyBob The two big problems with your point are firstly that Rebels is very much considered canon, and secondly that there is a disturbing lack of examples of impressive starship firepower in the Star Wars canon. What we see in that Rebels clip is _typical_ (just look at how lacklustre the firepower of the ships enforcing the Naboo blockade was, for example. Only direct hits could destroy the droids repairing the shield generator. If their firepower was decent the blast of a turbolaser impact anywhere nearby would have incinerated the unprotected droids, but nope). Also, how does when they were made change anything?

[@tuscan9617]

That episode of Rebels still makes no sense..... that many star destroyers in an orbital bombardment has been seen to be able to destroy planets surfaces give maybe a few hours.... Rebels is weird, trust legends and other sources more.... Base Delta Zero, the empires orbital bombardment policy can be conducted with as little as 2 star destroyers and slag planets, but star trek and star wars weapons are on different power scales. Although the turbo lasers were probably on very low power to as not destroy the Rebels, they wanted to capture them... Disney is weird.

[@Idazmi7]

_"That episode of Rebels still makes no sense..... that many star destroyers in an orbital bombardment has been seen to be able to destroy planets surfaces give maybe a few hours...."_ Star Destroyers have never been shown to have that much firepower.

[@filipbartos7584]

First of all Star Trek technology progresses far faster than Star Wars technology does. Second of all showing anything from rebels and taking it as example is herecy. Star Wars rebels is kid show all the main characters have plot shield so they cannot die until the story allows them to. And just funny note, that fire may have been from more than one star destroyer but it was intended not to destroy the base, the orbital borbardment was used to inspire fear of Thrawn (for trekkies that is that blue guy), if Thrawn wanted the base destroyed single star destroyer would do.

[@Idazmi7]

Star Wars itself is a children's franchise, so that doesn't matter. If the writers wanted to show greater firepower, they would have had the turbolasers destroy the entire surrounding area and still had the shield hold up. Instead, that shield (which was upgraded by Sabine) _barely_ held against the equivalent of a bunch of hand grenades. The only other bombardment you could reference is in the Bad Batch, which has Venator Star Destroyers bombarding Kamino from well within the atmosphere. Neither scene shows anything matching Star Trek's average feats - nowhere close.

[@pex_the_unalivedrunk6785]

You forgot to compare/contrast the Genesis Torpedo with a Death Star... Death Star may obliterate an entire planet, but the Genesis torpedo will kil everything on & in it's crust, and is much smaller, much more transportable, and could probably be built in larger numbers(using the unstable material and not worrying about creating a stable planet full of life because it would be just used for it's destructive force in this instance.)

[@Idazmi7]

Precisely.

[@JAGraptor]

Don't forget Red Matter and Trilithium devices.

[@Cipher00007]

Nicholas Dobos Well from your description they both seem to be very different weapon systems designed to do very different things but basically with the same end goal in mind. Well the Death Star obviously completely destroys planets, but is also capable of smaller tactical strikes designed to destroy areas or smash planetary shields in a single shot. The Genesis Torpedo is designed to completely sterilise a planets surface of life similar to cyclonic torpedos from the W40K universe. So two very different weapon systems and primary functions but the same end goal. Nothing left to oppose you.

[@ldblokland463]

Now do star trek VS star wars fighter

[@Idazmi7]

That would be just as unfair.

[@galaxyclassstarship859]

Ties are completely unshielded, they're basically flying plywood boxes.

[@SirBroadsword]

Considering we've seen Star Trek shuttles and Runabouts survive sustained fire from capital ships, I think it's safe to say the SW fighters are boned in every orifice. And that's putting it nicely.

[@zallarvandi3251]

star trek ships have computer locking systems which can easily target 50 fighter and destroy them in a split second.

[@thegreatempire3882]

You do realize that this is a very poor depiction of a VS video right? Thrawn's order was to take the Rebels leaders alive, not kill them. You may want to take in that major factor. So logic dictates that the ISDs was not using their full power trying to destroy the base. You really need to read Star Wars Aftermath: Life Debt to see the full power of an ISD at work Burning/destroying the massive planet of Kashyyyk. You also need to read Star Wars Thrawn, Star Wars Tarkin, Star Wars Lord's of the Sith, Star Wars Ahsoka, Star Wars Lost Stars, and Star Wars Lord's of the Sith to get the actual full idea how powerful an ISD actually is. Not when the fleet is ordered not to kill the Rebels.

[@Idazmi7]

_"(...) logic dictates that the ISDs was not using their full power trying to destroy the base."_ They were using heavy turbolasers: the biggest guns they have. _"You really need to read Star Wars Aftermath: Life Debt"_ I'm not going to read a little-known book that no one really cares about in order to support an argument you made: it's films, shows, or nothing. _"You also need to read"_ No one cares about the secondhand books of a film trilogy.

[@thegreatempire3882]

Heavy Turbo lasers can change their power output. Also, you should care about those books that I listed due to them being cannon. You cannot do a VS video without all the facts.

[@Idazmi7]

_"Heavy Turbo lasers can change their power output."_ That has never been shown. _"Also, you should care about those books that I listed due to them being cannon. You cannot do a VS video without all the facts."_ I _can't_ do a VS video without video, and books are never, ever going to be as important as the films.

[@thegreatempire3882]

***** Actually yes, the books are actually extremely important if you want to make sense of the movies. And no, if you read the books, then you know that turbo lasers can be lowered. Here is a good example of how important the books are. What was the battle of Jakku for?

[@Idazmi7]

_"Actually yes, the books are actually extremely important if you want to make sense of the movies."_ No. In order to make sense of the movies, it's best to ignore the books, which needlessly complicate things and also exaggerate to the point of open contradiction of the lore. _"And no, if you read the books, then you know that turbo lasers can be lowered."_ They cannot be lowered: that's why they come in different sizes to engage different targets, just like modern weaponry. _"Here is a good example of how important the books are. What was the battle of Jakku for?"_ I don't care.

[@robjones9691]

Lasers vs Phasers, Phasers ie: Phased Energy weapons will win every time. Lasers function by power and the color, they extremely wasteful in terms of power use and adding a "turbo" inline with the beam cant handle or penetrate the hulls of Starfleet ships. Phasers as the name says is a beam of phased energy. The phasers initially were powered through the standard EPS conduits until one of the updates during the 5 year mission under Captain KIRK when they were changed over to be powered from the Warp engines at that time gave them even to far superior power. By the way, a Starship can destroy a sun or planets by flying through them at Warp Speed completely destroying the target while the Staship has no damage, the Bridge crew however .................

[@Idazmi7]

www.nextbigfuture.com/2014/10/destar-phased-array-laser-systems-for.html Some actual science regarding how a Phased Array really works. Also, you're wrong about ships taking no damage from warping into planets: that would instantly destroy them.

[@1Scimetar]

The comparison also needs more explenation. The Imperial star destroyers were trying to shoot through a shield. The Star Trek ship example used was an overload shot and did significant damage to the system shown, and was also not trying to power through a shield.

[@Idazmi7]

_"The comparison also needs more explenation. The Imperial star destroyers were trying to shoot through a shield."_ Some of the turbolasers missed the shield entirely and hit the soil: are you going to say the soil is made of super energy-absorbent material?

[@podemosurss8316]

It was an overload due to the fact that the phaser was only a prototype, later models on that time are far more powerful

[@LeroyJ12]

lmao, cites star wars rebels as an accurate depiction on imperial firepower.

[@Idazmi7]

Star Wars Rebels is canon.

[@johnboggs1164]

your other existing example is the avenger popping ~2m asteroids in ESB and still not completely vaporizing them.

[@electricprofessional8312]

You know what else is canon? Base Delta zero. A command issued where a stardestroyer proceeds to wipe out all life on a planet with constant bombardment in a couple of hours You are either a troll or a butthurt fanboy. Believe me I know because I love trek and starwars This video from rebels is showing small turret fire.

[@SirBroadsword]

I take it you have a more impressive example of Star Destroyer firepower? Note that, as hard as it seems to be for Warsies to remember this, the EU is non-canon.

[@Dragonmistress83]

That was only a small fleet. Clearly you have not played Knights of the Old Rebuplic

[@Idazmi7]

This channel doesn't include non-canon.

[@colinjackson9720]

"Non-canon" fanfiction, more like.

[@Idazmi7]

+Colin Jackson Exactly. Games like KOTR, and The Force Unleashed are nothing but playable fanfiction.

[@suzumiyaharuhi3438]

A Galactic-class star destoryer from the post-clone-war era is at least 6 times bigger than a Galaxy class, yet displying much less impressive firepower, which illustrates the tech difference across the universes.

[@steany2]

ST and SW are total different Universes when not even Timelines So just let it be and by the way: -You used SW Rebels (complete disney shit they don't even know how to handle it) -Grand Admiral Thrawn didn't even try to kill them he only wanted to weaken them - The last clip of ST was so old they didn't even thought about is this possible

[@Idazmi7]

Call me when you're done whining.

[@Kalebfenoir]

Thrawn's bombardment was a toying action; low rate of fire, only a handful of cannons shooting. Actual bombardment would have involved far more weapons than were employed. We see SDs using way more weapons than that in even the original movies, just to fight other ships. The NX, while using a weapon overpowered for its OWN purposes, was using the equivalent of a flashlight compared to other races. There's almost no rating system for Trek-based weapons, because they suit whatever the writers need them to, rather than having a standard of power. There's ship-based phasers that can carve a signature a centimeter wide on a planet's surface without even setting the grass ablaze, and then there's 'well, we burned the northern hemisphere off because I forgot to regulate the power distribution' that they say they can do. You can't actually compare the two universes.

[@Idazmi7]

_"The NX, while using a weapon overpowered for its OWN purposes, was using the equivalent of a flashlight compared to other races. There's almost no rating system for Trek-based weapons, because they suit whatever the writers need them to, rather than having a standard of power. There's ship-based phasers that can carve a signature a centimeter wide on a planet's surface without even setting the grass ablaze, and then there's 'well, we burned the northern hemisphere off because I forgot to regulate the power distribution' that they say they can do."_ Which means you are ignorant. Star Trek weapons, unlike Star Wars, have always been extremely adjustable. That's not plot armor, it's not a contradiction: it's a built-in function.

[@emileblais]

A heavy turbolaser at max power has an impact of 167.36 zettajoules while a phaser only does 3.6 zettajoules

[@Idazmi7]

(Looks at video) Sure, kid.

[@emileblais]

I took the officials numbers, what can I say more. And in the video Thrawn did not want to kill them, he wanted to attack them on the ground to capture them becvause that is what Tarkin wants. But don't bother answering because I know you're just a little kid trying to get attention.

[@Idazmi7]

+TheMaster FR _"I took the officials numbers"_ Star Wars never printed official yields, and Star Trek's official yields look nothing like what you just posted there. You didn't even specify the type of phaser you are referring to. _"And in the video Thrawn did not want to kill them, he wanted to attack them on the ground to capture them becvause that is what Tarkin wants."_ That doesn't change the pitiful demonstration those "167.36 zettajoule" turbolasers gave. 0.5 zettajoules would be literally *trillions* of times more powerful than the whole bombardment in that scene.

[@johnboggs1164]

what bullshit source gave you those numbers?

[@johnboggs1164]

im still waiting on your sources for your "official numbers".

[@Gellafnu111]

Ah yes, using a single, isolated, poor example from *one* SW series compared to *several* examples from Star Trek. Bias? What's that? I'm still pretty sure Star Trek trumps SW in huge-scale power levels, with personal phasers being more destructive than modern crew-served launchers, but this video is just sad.

[@Idazmi7]

There were only two examples of Star Trek bombardment in this video: the rest was to aid viewers in understanding Star Trek's powerscale. If you feel cheated, know that at the time this was uploaded, there was only this scene, the bombardment of Tipoca City (which was conducted from _inside_ the atmosphere), and the bombardment from _The Last Jedi_ (which used a unique starship).There were, and really still _are_ no better references for *orbital* bombardment in Star Wars. On another note, I was being kind: I relegated myself to Star Trek's early era (2160s to 2260s). Even if I remade the video now, even the _'Night of 1000 Tears'_ from The Book of Boba Fett episode 5 can't remotely approach the power of that one antimatter bomb, let alone casual bombardments from series that take place a century later in the timeline, like what happened in _The Die is Cast._

[@ticsabati]

rip feelings star wars always live and always will have bigger fanrate. cause star wars is super cool

[@emperortethysusdacertified8175]

The bombardment seen in Rebels is highly innacurate too the lore. Turbolasers are far more powerful then that, and no I don't mean that rediculous 200 Gigaton claim, god no. A strike from the model of Turbolaser used on ISD Mark Is, the XX-9 Dual Turbolaser Battery, should leave a smoking crater at least 30 too 50 feet in diameter per bolt and be capable of incinerating infanty, obliterating vehicles and leveling buildings with ease as that is what they were designed too do. Granted Turbolaser bolts loose effectiveness while traveling through planetary atmosphere, but for them too have a blast radius smaller then that of bolts fired from the laser cannons of *Police Landspeeders* is just rediculous. However, I will admit that what we see in Star Trek is indeed far more powerful then a lore accurate Orbital Bombardment in Star Wars is. The only thing capable of surpassing that first strike you showed would be the Death Star's Superlaser depending on its firing setting, a single reactor ignition shot would do damage comparable too the Asteroid that triggered the KT Event while a full power shot would... well, let's just say there's a reason why Alderaan is now Aldergone. I'm also not even going too talk about Starkiller's power because that thing was just plain stupid. I mean seriously, a planet turned Death Star that sucks up suns and shoots there energy out as hyperspace traveling energy beams that turn planets into stars through the use of "Dark Energy" and such? What the actual hell... At least it ain't the Sun Crusher tho, ugh, thank god that thing ain't canon any more, that damn thing was too OP for even Warhammer 40K

[@felixjohnsens3201]

You forget all, in sw the base had a fucking shield!

[@Idazmi7]

The base's shield was included in this video.

[@johnboggs1164]

whats really sad is the accuracy of the turbolasers. half or more of those shots missed.

[@Imperialstorm03]

Perhaps one of the most inaccurate comparison video.

[@rasmuslaurila7611]

im starting to get fed up with this new "canon" and no, that does count because that was kids show and they can't just destroy completely a PLANET when there is ment to be watching 7 years old kid

[@Idazmi7]

+Mr. Zupre The original Star Wars never had that problem, being rated PG and all.

[@rasmuslaurila7611]

and why there is only one clip from star wars and dozen star trek ? im starting to see moronism here

[@Idazmi7]

_"and why there is only one clip from star wars and dozen star trek ?"_ To illustrate how firepower scales in Star Trek.

[@thefirstprimariscatosicari6870]

Mr. Zupre Because Star Wars doesn't tend to demonstrate fire power so often.

[@Idazmi7]

+Sergente A No, Star Wars demonstrates it's firepower constantly. It's just pathetic compared to Star Trek.

[@thefirstprimariscatosicari6870]

Idazmi7 I meant a good demonstration of firepower of which we can feel the scale. This is one of the few times where they cannot say "but shields there, force fields here, 200 meters asteroid etcetera". In the Rebel clip they are bombarding the Rebel base and its surroundings, and we can clearly see the scale and the power of the turbolasers.