"Zero Douji" is the self-appointed nickname of a typical coward. You know the type: they have hotmail or yahoo E-mail accounts, which they pick up and discard on a regular basis so that they can spew garbage all over the Internet without having to worry about taking responsibility for it. If you do not suffer fools well, you may wish to avert your eyes. This guy is as vulgar and immature as they come. As usual, he starts by being insulting, and I make a minor effort to be half-civil but that all disintegrates quickly.
Well let me just say that I pretty much ignored your ideas after you proclaim the Stormtroopers as a highly skilled, efficient force. First of all, these grunts with their hi-tek PVC piping armor couldn't hit the broadside of a barn even at point blank range.
Their aim is actually fairly good. You seem to think that real-life aim is like "Lethal Weapon" aim where you can whip out a handgun and shoot a man from 100 yards away right between the eyes, all in the blink of an eye. People don't have that kind of aim in real life. Stormtroopers are consistently near the mark at ranges of many dozens of metres, shooting from the hip. That's pretty good- it's hard to shoot from the hip and hit anything. Their worst aim would have been in ANH, when they couldn't hit Luke Skywalker. But he had the Force, and Ben Kenobi.
Flamewar opponents can occasionally be useful as examples of poor debating tactics, and this one is no exception. Notice how he makes statements which are obviously based on emotional, subjective judgements rather than a serious thought process. If he was going to make a serious argument about stormtrooper aim, he could have tried to figure out the ranges at which they missed, the ranges at which they hit, and compare their skill to that of modern soldiers shooting from the hip.
Second of all, Star Wars is full of loop holes, yes even Star Trek has them.
If you read my "Myths" pages, you will see that I am already perfectly aware of this.
(Editor's note: "even Star Trek has them". Apparently, he subscribes to the myth that Trek leads the sci-fi world in terms of scientific realism).
I would have read your entire page.. but you started to scare me because you kept on referring to yourself and the "empire" as "us".
You've never heard of "suspension of disbelief?" Much of my site is based on it. But you obviously didn't bother reading any of it, did you?
Third, you use Star Wars Technology Vs Federation Technology. Why not use all of Star Trek's technology?
Another Trekkie who thinks that every race ever seen in the history of Star Trek will band together into a grand unified alliance to fight the Empire. Are you going to include Q too?
4th of all, I'd just beam over a large bomb into the engine room of any star wars ship and that would be the end of that.
Shields block transporters, remember? In fact, all sorts of things block transporters- certain alloys, sensor jamming systems, ionic interference, ambient electromagnetic radiation, etc.
Fifth of all, even IF "turbolasers" were more powerful then phasers, their targeting system stinks, I've seen blind guys hit more bulleyes then any "imperial starship" or stormtrooper for that matter.
Their targeting system comes close to hitting tiny starfighters, and in some cases, it actually does hit them (only one of two fighters making runs on the Executor bridge tower survives, and the casualty is killed by a shot from the side, which is a horrible angle to shoot at a moving fighter). In contrast, the Defiant repeatedly missed the 500m long Excelsior-class Lakota starship in "Paradise Lost", and the BOP in "Generations" repeatedly missed the 600m long Enterprise-D. No Imperial starship has ever been witnessed missing a 600m long target. If Imperial targeting systems are bad, then Federation targeting systems are worse.
Also I've seen too many "vs" page giving the DS the V mainly because of its main cannon, but they never ask themselves the most important question of all "what if the target was moving faster then light or even at sublight speeds instead of being a stationary planet?"
What kind of question is that? The DS is designed to destroy planets. That is what it does. You don't evaluate a hammer based on its ability to turn screws. It won't be able to hit starfighters, although it can hit starships. The fact that such a monstrous weapon can be fired off-axis at all is quite a feat.
The Death Star is a strategic weapon. It is used to attack planets. It is not used to hunt down a starship. The reason that "vs" pages like mine talk about the Death Star is that its capabilities are so extreme that its mere existence puts the lie to countless ridiculous Trekkie claims about primitive Imperial technology or limited industrial capabilities.
This last "point" was truly bizarre. Does it not occur to him that the Death Star is a strategic weapon? Do we evaluate the deadliness of a nuclear ICBM by testing its ability to hit birds?
Staw Wars = for kids
Star Trek = for adults
I think this indicates your mentality (and your spelling skills) in a nutshell. You think you can flame without admitting that you're flaming, by maligning all Star Wars fans as immature because they like a series which you don't. Oooh, you're so clever.
(Editor's note: Another Trekkie who thinks that he can win a debate about Imperial military efficiency by simply making insulting statements about Star Wars. How this relates to the relative deadliness of the two respective organizations is a mystery. It is true that Star Trek is much more pretentious than Star Wars. But it is no more realistic).
Maybe you can't hit them right between the eyes, but damn man they can't even get a body hit!
Yes they can. They get lots of body hits in Star Wars. You fixate on the times when they miss and ignore all of the hits. They hit Ewoks in ROTJ, Rebel defenders in ANH and TESB, R2D2 in ROTJ, etc. You're obviously another Trekkie who thinks that you can just eliminate all of the canon incidents which don't fit into your grand scheme.
(Editor's note: Classic example of poor debating skills. If he wants to criticize stormtrooper aim, he shouldn't exaggerate his claims by saying something which is obviously untrue, such as his claim that stormtroopers cannot score a body hit. Since lots of people die from stormtrooper blaster hits in the films, such a claim only makes him look ignorant or dishonest. Obviously, he is both ignorant and dishonest).
But since the Klingons are the Federation's allies, you can exspect them to join in as the Empire would pose as a threat to the Klingon Empire. Just beam the Klingons aboard a Stardestroyer and they'll slaughter everyone.
ROTFLMAO! Outnumbered 100 to 1, the Klingon boarding parties would get slaughtered, especially since they idiotically drop their energy weapons and use bat'leths in combat.
Shields, as in force fields? You know I don't remember any "star destroyers" with any kind of energy field.. but who' say that the empire has alloys that can block transporters, and sensor jamming systems that can jam federation transporters?
Anyone who recognizes that their technology is generally superior, based on the fact that they have achieved superior feats. That's how adults determine a level of technological advancement- capabilities. Children like yourself fixate on appearance, or "feel". Anything which reminds you of Microsoft seems to strike you as advanced.
Furthermore, some natural ores block transporters, as do natural conditions in some star systems or around some planets. It doesn't take much. As for star destroyer energy fields, they have shields. The films describe them, the official literature describes them. Clearly, you are one of those Trekkies who has never given a single thought to SW. You didn't even pay attention during the films. What do you think they are talking about when they mention their "deflector shields" during the films?
(Editor's note: This is the first time I've ever had someone actually claim that the Empire does not have shielding technology. I'm starting to wonder what drugs he was taking when he watched the films).
... the casualty is killed by a shot from the side, which is a horrible angle ...
Then thats a Loophole.
LOL! When something happens which violates your precious ideas, you simply say that it's a loophole and we should ignore it? It happened. If you don't like it, too bad. Face it- SW targeting systems have no problem hitting rapidly moving targets. But when those targets are very small (or when the gunners are going for glancing hits because they want to disable rather than destroy), they might miss. ST ships are not extremely small, nor would the gunners be going for glancing hits.
(Editor's note: Refer to George Will's quote, in my Site FAQ, about people who abhor intellectual rigor because it gets in the way of their wishful thinking. This is one of the most irritating trekkie arguments that I hear, and I hear it all the time, even from trekkies who claim to have put some serious thought into their arguments. If you have a fifty/fifty chance of hitting tiny one-man, highly maneuverable starfighters, you will be able to easily hit starships which are hundreds of metres long and no more maneuverable. Anyone can watch "Paradise Lost", "A Call to Arms", "Tears of the Prophets", "The Die is Cast", "Way of the Warrior", and other Star Trek space combat episodes to see that Federation starship maneuverability is lower than TIE fighter maneuverability. This recurring trekkie argument is almost as stupid as the common refusal to accept the enormous industrial capacity of the Empire, in spite of the monstrous Death Stars that everyone can easily see in the films).
Yes, but Star Trek ships can maneuver a helluva lot better then Star Wars ships. A Stardestroyer's targeting system would be less accurate against ST ships.
You're digging a deeper hole for yourself all the time. A ST starship is nowhere near as maneuverable as a SW fighter, and it is FAR larger. Targeting systems which barely miss tiny SW starfighters will hit ST starships effortlessly.
Seriously. I see these DS vs so-and-so-star-trek-ships and some how the big cannon is always the main reason why the DS wins. You're right, it CAN hit a Starship.... IF it was stationary..
You're forgetting about the millions of surface turbolaser turrets, which would blast Fed starships into plasma effortlessly. Even if the superlaser can't hit Fed starships, the millions of surface turbolaser turrets would grind them up.
The Death Star is a STRATEGIC weapon. It is used to attack planets.
Is that a fact, or are you just saying that?
It is a fact. Everyone knows it but you.
(Editor's note: Just when I think that my opinion of his intelligence can't sink any lower, he surprises me again. Who would dispute that the Death Star is a strategic weapon? Does he also fail to understand the distinction between nuclear missiles and assault rifles?)
Star Wars technology is primitive. Star Wars was made to appeal to stupid americans, with its simplistic plot (ripped off from Akira Kurosawa's "The Hidden Fortress") and predictable characters and cheesy acting (which explains its popularity) and wasn't made in the first place to showcase technological marvel.
Matters of taste. If you don't like SW, just admit that it's a personal preference and don't pretend that it's an objective evaluation. Do you know how many "personal taste" criticisms I could make about Star Trek, particularly the drivel coming out right now? I can make them, but unlike you, I don't attempt to use those subjective taste arguments as evidence for a technical discussion.
(Editor's note: What is this nonsense about being made to "showcase technological marvel?" Documentaries are made to showcase technological marvel. Sci-fi shows are made to tell a story, in a futuristic setting. We can wax poetic about the capabilities of a sci-fi universe, but why would we "marvel" at them? A fantastic new capability is always just a few writers' sentences away. As for SW technology being "primitive", he produces no evidence whatsoever, nor does he compare capabilities. Obviously, he goes by the common trekkie delusion that if it doesn't look plastic and Microsoft-like, it must be primitive).
It's impossible to be able to build the DS in 2 years. The Federation have a much better industrial system then the Empire. Since they lack a budget, they have no finacial limit to the construction of Starships or what have you.
This is perhaps the most poorly thought-out argument I've ever seen. It is not impossible to build a DS in 2 years. It just requires industrial capabilities which beggar the imagination. First you indicate that you are not even capable of imagining the sort of staggering industrial capabilities which the Empire has (by claiming that their feats are "impossible"), then you make the completely unfounded statement that the Federation's industrial system is much better, based on the idea that they don't have any limitations because they claim to not use money any more! Unbelievable.
I recall a long time ago, there was a guy running for president in the United States (for an independent party) who claimed that he would solve the nation's economic problems by simply printing money until everyone had enough to spare. Of course, everyone laughed at him because they understood that it isn't as simple as that. Similarly, your idea is based on the notion that if you change the manner in which you measure units of work and resources in the future, then your work and resources suddenly become limitless. It isn't as simple as that. You have the economics comprehension of my three-year old boy.
(Editor's note: Obviously, I'm getting rather fed up with his endless stream of unsupported statements. He doesn't bother providing a single shred of evidence to support any of his claims- he just keeps making dumber and dumber statements, one by one, seemingly without end).
Also the reason why the empire has more weapons technology is because the Federation is/was a peaceful. Federation technology is far superior to Star Wars technology. If they wanted to build a big ass cannon like the one found on the DS they probably could.
You say it's superior, but you have no evidence whatsoever to back you up. Not one of your claims has ever come with evidence attached. Typical ST fanboy garbage. Grow up. The DS cannon unleashes more energy in one second than the Federation has generated in its entire existence.
I warn people on the E-mail page not to bother sending insulting, unsupported garbage arguments like yours, and not to send arguments without bothering to read my page, or they can expect flames. You obviously chose not to listen to that warning. You didn't bother providing evidence for any of your claims, nor did you read my arguments before assuming that you could refute them. It is a waste of electricity to even discuss this with you.
Yadda yadda yadda, you suck dick and all that jazz. Star Wars is for kids. Quit smoking crack and eating cum, that shit really rots your brains!
I guess you must know about the health consequences of cum-eating from personal experience.
It's a shame Japan didn't kill all of you chinks back during the second sino-japanese war. Too bad gramps could only kill 3000 of you bastards back in the day. I wish he could have gotten lucky and killed your dog-eating parents and your poorly designed piece of monkey shit site would not even exsist. Damn filthy chinks.
I would insult you here, but you're already doing an incredible job of making yourself look like an idiot. I don't know if I could think of something to call you that would make you look any more like an idiot than you already do.
Oh yeah, your mom gives a mean blow job yo! also you better back up your site chink, cause you could wake up one morning and decide to update you site and realize that its been deleted..Oh yeah, if you haven't notice, this is a throw-a-way account.
Of course. After the racist slurs come the chest-pounding wannabe-macho threats. Why doesn't it surprise me that they come from someone who doesn't even have the cojones to reveal his true name or E-mail address? For you, it's apparently a lot easier to say you've got balls than it is to act like it.
Click here to return to the main Hate Mail page.