| Subject: Re: New poll (Nebula v Nebulon) |
Author:
Warspite
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 09:50:42 10/24/02 Thu
Author Host/IP: ipd54b1d5c.free.wxs.nl/213.75.29.92
In reply to:
The Divine Shadow
's message, "Re: New poll (Nebula v Nebulon)" on 04:59:10 10/24/02 Thu
>>I would find a hundred (or more) megatons quite
>>believeable. But a gigaton is a thousand megatons, and
>>that is supposedly from just one shot. If each
>>turbolaser was a gigaton, you wouldn't need a BDZ, any
>>SW frigate could devestate a planet and wipe out most
>>life in just a couple of salvos.
>
>And all those plasma cannons firing 100+ megaton shots
>sill still be much more devestating than those silly
>little photon torpedoes.
For what its worth, I've never doubted that Star Wars weapons had a more powerful yield than Trek weapons. That (generally) seems clear from the films and shows. I have questioned whether they would be effective against Trek ships, since they appear to be faster (in a tactical sense), more manouverable and have a better range than Wars ships, but that's another story.
>It takes (from Isard's Revenge) 5 full slavos of all
>turbolasers and ion cannons (that's 60 of each type)
>to take down an ISD's shields. assuming that Ion
>cannons do as much to take down shields as Turbolasers
>and that a TL fires exactly 100 megatons of energy
>then it takes 7200000 megatons to bring down an ISDs
>shields (that's 120 guns firing 100 megaton shots 5
>times), and this is very conservative so it will take
>112,500 photon torpedoes to penetrate an ISD's shields
>[7200000 megaton survivability divided by 64 megaton
>torpedo] (assuming that all 64 megatons go into the
>shields, thus making this a very kind number for the
>trek ships. Now for the quantom torps, using 7200000
>megaton survivability devided by 125 megaton torps
>(generously assuming that all 125 megatons go into the
>shields) we have 57600 torps before de-shielding.
>
>This is being very conservative for the Imperial
>shields (there is evidence that ion cannons are much
>more powerfull against shields than Turbolasers) and
>being very generous for the anti-shield strength of
>Photon and Quantom torpedoes, after all the torps
>explode releasing their energy in all directions, most
>of them not in the direction of their target, which is
>why they would be so effective against Imperial TIE
>fighters.
>
>So, the assumption that Photon/Quantom torps would be
>a devestating advantage would only be true in
>situations when you have thousands of ships each with
>thousands of torpedoes. And if I recall correctly,
>the Galaxy class sarries something to the tune of 300
>to 400 photon torpedoes.
I don't doubt your numbers, but they are from an extreme top end example. There are also extreme lower end examples. In one example (from one of the X-Wing books but I'm not sure which), a mere 22 proton torpedoes was enough to bring down the shield of a VSD. The yield of protons is debatable, I have heard 1.5kt or 1.5MT (BTM says 1.5MT). If we assume a yield of 1.5kt, the total needed was just 55kt. That is incredibly low. If the yield is 1.5MT, the total would then be 55MT, but a single photon torpedo yield of 64MT would still be able to drop the shield. In another example (Bacta War), 80 protons hit an SSD and drop its shields. If they were 1.5kt, the total yield would be just 120kt, if they were 1.5MT, it would be 120MT. That is just two photons! Even if we very generous and say the yield of protons can be varied, and multiply it by 10 (15MT per torp), it would still only take a couple of volleys from a Galaxy class (or one from an Akira or war-Nebula) to drop the shields on an SSD. In the games (which I generally I don't use because they make SW very weak), it takes about 48 protons to drop and ISDs shields.
You see the problem? There are high end examples which show that the Federation are never going to drop the shields, and there are low end examples that show that just a couple of photons will do it. I prefer to believe the truth is somewhere in between.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 