Zieg
 Corporal 
Alpha Squad Commander/Chief of Marines/Tactical Officer
Posts: 20
|
Post by Zieg on Jun 21, 2007 23:15:41 GMT -5
no, it is the weakest in RL. look up any navy site, sci-fi got it wrong, destroyers are small ships. Designed to destroy Torpedo boats not be the back bone of a fleet, see its heavy cruisers and Battleships that are the big ships, destroyers were over sized torpedo boats. made to destroy them. and thats according to alot of sites includeing actualy millitary sites and my dad, and he served on a destroyer. he said it wasint that big or well armed. but the destroyers rank in how big it is to the others is simply because the others are... well biger lol. and in space size realy is power. but invasion ships are poorly armed. Isn't Sci-fi also wrong on many things? Like that I checked, plasma weapons required cannons much bigger than any human could carry, and in any form of atmosphere would only produce a flamethrower effect anyways. So I guess we should change that due to reality too? No offense intended, but it's Sci-Fi, INTENDED to be different from our reality. Oh, and maybe they decided Destroyers maybe ought to have more of a "destroying" role anyways. No? |
|
|
|
Post by Alex Roddenberry on Jun 21, 2007 23:20:39 GMT -5
Yeah, Power wise, Destroyers are the best, or second best. Like you said they gota beabull to teak out the carriers and heavy cruisers and Battleships. but the ones you made couldent even kill a fly. They are patherick and do not live up to ther name. 'Destroyers'
|
|
|
|
Post by Nickolas Seafort on Jun 22, 2007 2:24:24 GMT -5
well they are far heavyer armed then real destroyers, and they can swat frigates pretty good, not to mention their fast as hell. And im not sure where you read plasma acts like a flamethrower, but it dosint, yes at our courent level of tech we require a build sized mechine to make a small beam.... but umm 50 years ago the same was said about computers and now look at them, and that was only 50 years ago. and as to the flame thrower thats why we has a plasma thrower. but it just takes alot of energy to hold plasma into a bolt form. or to guide it, but its possible. thanks to the electro-magnetic field plasma weapons are possible, so the weapons areint differing from reality. they are just ohhh say 200 years ahead of the time... and gee look this is set 200 years in the future!! lol sorry you will have to learn to cope with my sarcasism, it comes with being from the US.
but the destroyer stays as is. it is powerful enough for the size i made it, witch is still 10... no 15 times the size it should be? so i already beefed you up alot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex Roddenberry on Jun 22, 2007 14:38:47 GMT -5
Well compaifing the ship to RL its ether the Destroyer is weak or the other ships are too strong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nickolas Seafort on Jun 22, 2007 16:40:16 GMT -5
well, actauly RL destroyers were made to "destroy" torpedo boats because they pwned battleships. they play a key role in every navy, but they have never been heavily armed, again thats just sci-fi where their the bigest ships. That is incorrect they are infact the secend smallest. Key, but still small. and your destroyers are still alot more powerful in relation to their RL counter parts so you should be jumping for joy, not complaining, enless you want me to make them realistic?
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex Roddenberry on Jun 22, 2007 16:47:51 GMT -5
WEll anyway thats not the point. This is the third time I'm going to Ask and i dont want anybody to answer exsept Karl! Could I get interior view of othe parts of the ship?
|
|
Zieg
Corporal
Alpha Squad Commander/Chief of Marines/Tactical Officer
Posts: 20
|
Post by Zieg on Jun 22, 2007 16:51:17 GMT -5
well they are far heavyer armed then real destroyers, and they can swat frigates pretty good, not to mention their fast as hell. And im not sure where you read plasma acts like a flamethrower, but it dosint, yes at our courent level of tech we require a build sized mechine to make a small beam.... but umm 50 years ago the same was said about computers and now look at them, and that was only 50 years ago. and as to the flame thrower thats why we has a plasma thrower. but it just takes alot of energy to hold plasma into a bolt form. or to guide it, but its possible. thanks to the electro-magnetic field plasma weapons are possible, so the weapons areint differing from reality. they are just ohhh say 200 years ahead of the time... and gee look this is set 200 years in the future!! lol sorry you will have to learn to cope with my sarcasism, it comes with being from the US. but the destroyer stays as is. it is powerful enough for the size i made it, witch is still 10... no 15 times the size it should be? so i already beefed you up alot. Technological potential and laws of physics aren't the same. The reaction that has a plasma weapon to atmosphere is utterly outside of our control, unlike the size of technological capacity. The comparison is decent, but oranges and grapefruits. |
|
|
|
Post by Alex Roddenberry on Jun 22, 2007 16:53:36 GMT -5
WHAT THE HELL DID I JUST SAY! SHUT UP ABOUT THE STUPID SIZE OR W/E! I DON'T CARE ANYMORE! I JUST WANT THE INSIDE VIEW OF OTHER PARTS OF MY BLOODY SHIP!!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Nickolas Seafort on Jun 22, 2007 16:56:23 GMT -5
Actualy i just watched a show with many leaders of physics, and they all agreed that plasma could be made into a weapon for use on land, plasma can only be controled with magnetic fields, but once you can create a strong enough field you can actauly use plasma based weapons on a planet, they said its simply way beyond us. so take it up with the leading physicists not me.
he wasint talking about size of destroyers...
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex Roddenberry on Jun 22, 2007 16:58:08 GMT -5
If ether of you two post somthing here I will delete it and subtract 10 post to your post count then 50 the 100
|
|
Captain 
