Retribution Class Battleship Vs Super Star Destroyer

Retribution Class Battleship (Warhammer 40K) Vs Super Star Destroyer (Star Wars)

Fantastic fight we have on our hands here. I confess to not knowing as much about the Warhammer vessel as I do about the Super Star Destroyer. So, I’ll leave it up to those can speak intelligently on this matter.

Which craft would win?

Related Posts:

Read before commenting! We welcome constructive comments and allow any that meet our common sense criteria. This means being respectful and polite to others. It means providing helpful information that contributes to a story or discussion. It means leaving links only that substantially add further to a discussion.

Comments being disrespectful to others or otherwise violating what we believe are common sense standards of discussion can lead to the banhammer getting used. You can read more about our comments policy here.

1 2 3 4

397 Comments on "Retribution Class Battleship Vs Super Star Destroyer"

  1. Locutus April 11, 2009 at 9:24 am -      #1

    Thanks for adding my battle! \,,/, (-_-)

    My vote is for the Retribution Class Battleship.
    I believe the Retribution and her armament of massive broadside cannons, torpedoes, lance turrets, etc would rip the SSD to shreds.

    On a side note, I think the Retribution is very close to the size of a SSD. I do not believe it is only 8km long as many claim because of the sizes of some tabletop minitures.

    Here we have an Emperor Class Battleship. Try counting the massive turrets and guns this beast has around this its hull. The guns have their own guns.
    Note that the 2 Firestorm classes are very close to us.
    img13.imageshack.us/img13/9871/divineright.png

    I think this may actually be a Grand Cruiser instead of a Battleship. Not sure.
    img13.imageshack.us/img13/2644/40k021.jpg

    A Chaos Battleship compared to the 2 km frigates in the foreground.
    img13.imageshack.us/img13/883/shipgh3.jpg

    As we can see, battleships are shown to be much larger.

  2. L-W April 11, 2009 at 9:34 am -      #2

    The Retribution Class Battleship suffers the disadvantage of being less than half the size of the Super Star Destroyer (5-7Km Vs 15-19Km), but what it lacks in size it more than makes up in Planet crushing firepower and durability,

    I really cannot make a comparison on the basis of shielding, propulsion and firepower at this point in time (I’ll make a more accurate postulation tomorrow), but I’m certain that this will prove to be a titanic duel of Galactic proportions.

  3. Matapiojo April 11, 2009 at 10:39 am -      #3

    Titanic clash.

    I will come back to this after I research a bit, but I am inclined to favor the 40K vessel at a first glance.

  4. Locutus April 11, 2009 at 6:11 pm -      #4

    This is a much more accurate scale I found.
    img21.imageshack.us/img21/6691/sizes.png

  5. flyboy51 April 11, 2009 at 11:47 pm -      #5

    Hmmm. Without knowing anything about the two, Im going with the Super Star Destroyer for aesthetical purposes. lol i think it looks cooler.

  6. L-W April 12, 2009 at 2:30 am -      #6

    The following are firepower estimates of the IOM Naval mounted weaponry, using information garnered from Battlefleet Gothic:

    From what we can gather, a the offensive capacity of a ship is divided between light-heavy Batteries, Lancers (Laser cannons), Torpedoes and the Nova Cannon.

    - – -

    “the forty men pulled harder at the traversing chains, heaving the massive barrel of the macro-cannon into position amidst the clank-clank-clank of rusty gears.
    When it was open, the others bent their backs to the loading winch, ,lowering the shell, which weighed several tons, into the heart of the cannon.”

    - Battlefleet Gothic

    Weapons batteries (Otherwise known as macro cannons), loaded with a shell that weighs “several tons.” Going with the standard established velocity of 20,000 km/s for direct fire Imperial weapons weapons. At that mass/velocity, the kinetic energy of the projectile would be 400,000 terajoules, or just under 10 gigatons.

    Conservative figures point to the Battleship firing “two hundred foot” torpedoes, which would be sixty meters long. Assuming that the diameter is 1/4 to 1/5 of the length, the torpedo would yield a diameter of around fifteen meters. To be further conservative, assume a density equal to water (yeah, I’m being ultra conservative here.) The mass of the torpedo in question would be between 6,800 and 10,600 tons.

    Thus the kinetic energy of a torpedo is about 12,400,000,000 petajoules (Staggering really) with a momentum (Measured by calculating the speed and weight of the torpedo) between 6.6e16 kg*m/s and 1.05e17 kg*m/s.

    Giving a single Torpedo a staggering yield of 2963 teratons (Or 2.9 petatons – Wow).

    “A Nova cannon is a huge weapon, normally mounted in the prow of a ship so that the recoil it generates can be compensated for by the vessel’s engines. It fires a proejctile at incredible velocity, using graviometric impellers to accelerate it to close to light speed. The projectile implodes at a preset distance after firing, unleashing a force more potent than a dozen plasma bombs.”

    - Battlefleet Gothic

    Take note of how the ship has to compensate engine thrust to counter recoil – in a vacuum!

    I would generally assume “close to light-speed” to mean at least 80-90% of C. The size of a Nova cannon shell is never given precisely, but the diameter of the shell is given in other sources (Fifty meters in “Warriors of Ultramar”), though a 30 meter diameter nova cannon is mentioned. Mass can be derived by assuming the length is at least equal to the diameter, or (more probably) a multiple of the diameter (2-3x longer than the diameter, for example. A fifty meter diameter shell would be a hundred and fifty meters long).

    Example: Going by a 50×150 meter shell made of Iron (assume 30% solid, its supposed to be packed with explosive of unknown type and density) fired at .9c yields a shell mass of around 770,000 tons and and a kinetic energy rating of 90,000,000,000 petajoules (Holy shit!).

    Giving the blast of a Nova cannon (The most powerful ship mounted Imperial weapon) a staggering yield of 22 petatons. For those of you struggling to comprehend these figures, this is a yield one million times greater than the heaviest Turbolaser available to the Star Wars universe.

    Or for those less fantastically inclined, two to three million times the combined explosive power of every nuclear weapon on Earth throughout history.

    - – -

    When I said that the Imperium Battleship could make up for it’s diminutive size an maneuverability in firepower, i meant it.

  7. Space marine April 12, 2009 at 2:44 am -      #7

    img13.imageshack.us/img13/9871/divineright.png

    Im not sure a super star destroyer can even deal with that.

  8. fooby April 12, 2009 at 10:42 am -      #8

    wonder if a Retribution Class Battleship could take a ecplise star destroyer?

  9. Space marine April 12, 2009 at 4:17 pm -      #9

    “One factor for the Super Star Destroyer(Executor) to win is that it has Tie-Fighters, Tie-Interceptors & Tie-Bombers for support, the Executor class could load up to 1000 fighters if fully loaded….Think about it if these fighters were unleashed….”

    Too bad it already got blown to kingdom come and Back!

  10. Skrunks April 12, 2009 at 8:07 pm -      #10

    While those figures are pretty mindblowing, a misscalculation resulted in Three Imperial Star-Destroyers coming out of Hyperspace and crashing into the Executor. The shields held, but not without significant damage to the ship. An Imperial Star Destroyer has a mass of 25 million tons. 3 of them crashed into the Executor at light speed. That is 1.125e+27 joules for one star destroyer and 3.75e+27 for all three, or 3,375,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 J, or 3,375,000,000,000 Peta Joules. That’s 37 times the energy of the Nova Cannon, and that’s how powerful the Executor’s shields were at launch. They might have even been upgraded later on. While the Retribution has the edge in Firepower, the Executor most definantly outclasses the Retribution in Durability and Mobility.

    (My assumption is that the Nova Cannon being so badass, it’s not something Warhammer 40k ships can stand too many hits of. If a Retribution can take more then 37 hits from it’s own ubergun, then I will take back this point, lol)

  11. L-W April 13, 2009 at 1:14 am -      #11

    1) Judging from previous calculations, individual Heavy Turbolasers produce between 22-200 Gigatons, thus requiring inordinate amounts of them available to level Star Destroyer shields. A tad bit insufficient to deal with 40K void shielding, but powerful when massed.

    2) I have to question the validity of the above statement since you stated that they impacted at light speed, were they traveling through Hyperspace (Which would negate the outcome) or merely Subluminal speeds? The output really doesn’t seem that realistic or plausible not only on the basis of relativistic velocities, but *just* falls short of the energy necessary to equal the gravitational binding energy of the Earth.

    Heavier superluminal ships have been witnessed crashing into Planets just on the cusp of Hyperspace within the Star Wars universe before (The siege of Coruscant comes to mind), causing only superficial, albeit highly destructive, surface damage. The figures don’t realistically match up, especially when you count the fact that a Planetary shield, often powered by dozens of planet-wide generators buried miles underground can sustain no more than 2.2 x 10E+32 joules of energy before dissipating.

    Further more, the output present in even the heaviest of Turbolasers is woefully insufficient.

    3) Naval combat in the realms of 40K can take weeks, in the case of the Damnation Crusade, Chaos and Imperial Vessels were engaged for a whole month above a single planet before any noticeable gain was made in terms of naval dominance.

    Whilst the Nova Cannon is the heaviest weapon available, it has to be fired in conjunction with the multitude of other weapons (Which there a lot of – Larger vessels tend to have millions of gunner crews alone) to produce any significant damage to the opposing shields. It’s not uncommon to witness thousands of torpedoes per volley (Including hundreds of thousands of Cannon shells), bringing up the destructive potential to around several thousand petatons per exchange.

    Essentially this is why Naval expansion tends to be so slow, whilst ground forces are deployed the Navy can run through enough ammo to destroy a planet several times over, which is fortunately negated in losses by the Micro Dyson sphere used to supply energy. Stories even mention that in a skirmish with a Necron Tombship, an Imperial Navy Fleet utilized enough energy to put even the “Star of Terra to shame”, which still proved to be insufficient in immobilizing their opponent.

    4) In one instance (I think it may been the Damocles Crusade) an Imperial Battleship activated her void shields within the immediate proximity of a nearby Planet (Void shields should be reserved for deep space) out of sheer desperation. The force given off as the tear shaped shield impacted the surface was sufficient as to literally vaporize most of the Planet upon contact, placing the output within the realms of 240 nonillion joules (2.40 x 10E+32), or a yield of 57,000,000,000 petatons. Of course without knowing the grade, scale, rotation and composition of the Planet in question, these are only optimistic estimates at best.

    - – -

    Whilst these estimates may seem impossibly powerful and somewhat fantastical, let us not forget that this is a Universe where an Ork only has to point at you with his index finger, yell “BANG!”, and kill you with an imaginary gunshot wound that somehow materializes itself physically.

    Being fantastical, overzealous and heavy handed is the only way of surviving in the Warhammer universe.

  12. Locutus April 13, 2009 at 1:28 am -      #12

    So the Rebel ships at the Battle of Endor unleashed over 3,375,000,000,000 Peta Joules of firepower into the SSD? I doubt it.

    Sounds like another EU flaw.

  13. Locutus April 13, 2009 at 2:13 am -      #13

    Also, the Retribution Class is said to have the mobility of a cruiser.

  14. AlphaCommando April 13, 2009 at 5:09 am -      #14

    Hmm, now these are both interesting revelations…

    Now if these can both be taken at face value, personally the Star Destroyer has the durability to “take a likin’ and keep on kickin’” while the void shields of the Battleship will eventually fail under a hail of those hundreds of turbolasers. So it would certainly be an extended but ultimately futile battle for the Battleship.

    Course its even better when you consider that the SSD’s shields resisted all of those at different points and its common Star Wars knowledge to say that it places a non-linear amount of strain on the shields the more simultaneous hits are landed at once.

    On that note; What the hell sort of miscalculation would cause you to screw up that bad? The Emperor would have been in one damn bad mood if the Executor had been destroyed because of a freaking trajectory miscalculation…

  15. Locutus April 13, 2009 at 1:42 pm -      #15

    “Naval combat in the realms of 40K can take weeks”

    Yes this is very true. I read a story where an Imperial Oberon class Battleship engaged a Chaos Battleship(don’t think it said what class) near a Chaos infested planet. The two ships battled it out for at least a week. Just continuously pounding the crap out of each other. It ended with the heavily damaged Imperial Oberon ramming the Chaos ship and overloading her Warp engines. The resulting explosion obliterated both ships and completely devastated the nearby planet, wiping out all life and turning it into a Dead World.
    I’ll try and find which book it was when I have time. I got 20+ WH40k books so it’s a pain in the ass to find these battles.

  16. fooby April 13, 2009 at 4:59 pm -      #16

    just for note

    super star destroyer can mean ANY very large imperal ship : like ecplise, or sovrign star destroyers

  17. Skrunks April 13, 2009 at 5:06 pm -      #17

    “2) I have to question the validity of the above statement since you stated that they impacted at light speed, were they traveling through Hyperspace (Which would negate the outcome) or merely Subluminal speeds”

    Here’s where I got my information:

    “When the Rebels later mounted their final escape attempt, Vader once again pursued his own agenda, this time to leave a portion of the blockade deliberately weakened, allowing the Rebels to escape so that he could he lure them into a trap, again not bothering to inform Griff. Instead, the Admiral spotted the flaw by himself, sending three Star Destroyers to reinforce the breach and taking personal command of this force. The Rebels, led by Luke Skywalker, managed to defeat Griff’s fighters and escaped past his positions at the climax of the siege. He then opted for a gamble and ordered an immediate Hyperspace leap after the fleeing enemy.

    With all the required information, the plan may well have worked. As it were, however, he brought his fleet out of hyperspace too close to Vader’s flagship, the Executor, which had secretly been waiting for the Rebels at this precise spot, and the ships collided. Griff was killed and the three Star Destroyers that collided with the Executor were destroyed by the impact; the Executor lost its shields but suffered no major structural damage”

    And I assumed that before slowing down, when a ship exits or enters hyperspace it is traveling at light speed, hence why the term ‘hyperspeed’ and ‘lightspeed’ are interchangible. I once read a theory about how hyperspace worked, and the idea was that a SW ship would accelerate to lightspeed, and once pushing to the 300,001 km/s, they punch through the fabric of reality and enter hyperspace. Either way, the ships smashed into the Executor’s shield with tremendous force. Executor shields have never been peirced except from the Super Laser on the Eclipse. The Executor was never actually designed to be a practical warship, just a symbol of the might of the Empire. As such, no other ship would be able to destroy one with conventinal means. It was destroyed at the battle of Endor because they destroyed the section of shield that protected the bridge, and prompetly destyoed the bridge tower. With no control, the ship crashed into the Death Star II. And judging from the resulting fireball, I think the ship actually burrowed it’s way several kilometers into the hull of the Death Star, since we don’t actually see the ship break apart.

    “The figures don’t realistically match up, especially when you count the fact that a Planetary shield, often powered by dozens of planet-wide generators buried miles underground can sustain no more than 2.2 x 10E+32 joules of energy before dissipating.”

    A ship is a hell of a lot easier to shield then a planet. A planet’s shields are much more unstable, and with such a large surface area to cover, it’s not that hard to imagine that a ship like Executor could have shields that offer a similar degree of protection.

    3) Naval combat in the realms of 40K can take weeks, in the case of the Damnation Crusade, Chaos and Imperial Vessels were engaged for a whole month above a single planet before any noticeable gain was made in terms of naval dominance.

    If that is the case, even the Executor’s shields wouldn’t stay afloat for very long. Warhammer 40k ftw!

  18. flyboy51 April 13, 2009 at 9:33 pm -      #18

    From what i’ve read here, I’m placing my bet on the Retribution class ship.

  19. L-W April 13, 2009 at 10:19 pm -      #19

    Despite the conjecture surrounding the output of a Star Destroyer shield, even at the most optimistic of estimates you are looking at a system that cannot repel even one volley of torpedoes and artillery successfully, let alone a prolonged engagement.

    As for the Planetary shields, despite the latent difficulty associated with protecting an entire Planet, it would be a mistake to assume that they are less effective. Even smaller shields could hold off massive Imperial fleets; at the Battle of Hoth a low-grade shield managed to prevent Naval bombardment from seven Imperial Class Star Destroyers and the Executor, the combined fire power of the entire fleet could have turned Hoth to slag within minutes.

    In cases where the grade of shielding is far grander, they can be used to deflect a moon falling out of orbit, Galaxy Gun shells imploding at lightspeed or even prevent the penetration of a fleet numbered in the upper thousands (The siege of Coruscant). No ship based Shielding could compare in output.

  20. Skrunks April 13, 2009 at 11:35 pm -      #20

    Whoa whoa whoa, when did a planetary shield deflect a Galaxy Gun shell? I’ll digress the rest of the argument, but seriously, I thought the whole point of the Galaxy Gun was to penetrate such defenses from across the galaxy.

  21. Locutus April 14, 2009 at 12:20 am -      #21

    I am confused Skrunks. First you state:

    “The shields held, but not without significant damage to the ship.”

    Then later you quote your source and it says this:

    “the Executor lost its shields but suffered no major structural damage”

    ???

  22. L-W April 14, 2009 at 1:21 am -      #22

    “Whoa whoa whoa, when did a planetary shield deflect a Galaxy Gun shell? I’ll digress the rest of the argument, but seriously, I thought the whole point of the Galaxy Gun was to penetrate such defenses from across the galaxy.”

    Thus I used the term “Implode”.

    An exploding Galaxy Gun shell would have consumed the entire system, but for some reason (Apparently the reaction is reversible in this case) the trigger system can be inverted to cause an implosion, which is apparently effective when striking smaller targets such as vessels or orbiting stations.

    Whilst it’s *easier* to shield a vessel, the Empire and Republic put a lot more effort (Thus you have dozens of large generators buried deep beneath the ground) into the output and durability of their planetary shielding for one obvious reason; protecting the countless lives and resources present on a single Planet is a far higher priority than any Vessel.

  23. Skrunks April 14, 2009 at 11:27 pm -      #23

    “I am confused Skrunks. First you state:
    “The shields held, but not without significant damage to the ship.”
    Then later you quote your source and it says this:
    “the Executor lost its shields but suffered no major structural damage”
    ???”

    *ahem*

    The first time I was going on memory of the event. The second time I looked it up. Sorry about that.

    “An exploding Galaxy Gun shell would have consumed the entire system, but for some reason (Apparently the reaction is reversible in this case) the trigger system can be inverted to cause an implosion, which is apparently effective when striking smaller targets such as vessels or orbiting stations.”

    Ahh, I see. Gotta love SW logic.

    “Whilst it’s *easier* to shield a vessel, the Empire and Republic put a lot more effort (Thus you have dozens of large generators buried deep beneath the ground) into the output and durability of their planetary shielding for one obvious reason; protecting the countless lives and resources present on a single Planet is a far higher priority than any Vessel.”

    This is disputable. The Eclipse had shielding that was probably in a similar range of strength to planetary Shielding. While I agree that planetary shielding is far far stronger then any normal ship, super ships like the Executor and Eclipse, who’s whole purpose is to enforce the iron will of the Emperor and not as dedicated warships, it’s not that crazy to theorize that it’s not all that large a margin. For example, the Executor’s construction bankrupted several star systems to construct. It’s a very very inefficient use of resources, and the range of a hundred or so smaller ISDs could have been constructed for the same cost. With these super ships, the whole point is to create a monster that nobody would dare defy, in shielding, firepower and sheer size.

    Here’s what the wiki says about the Executor’s Shields: “Its shields handled much of the power generated—an amount equivalent to the total power of a medium star (3.8 × 10e26 W).”

    While I’m still a little sketchy on Watt – Joule/Minute calculations, that is 1.8e+28 Joules/M produced by the SSD. That’s almost ten times more then I what I calculated and a bit of a wrench thrown into your argument, that is unless my calculation is off. Like I said, not the greatest with W – J/m.

  24. george April 25, 2009 at 5:00 am -      #24

    the thing you said is a grand cruiser is actualy a lunar class cruiser, one of the work horses of the imperial navy

  25. EnigmaJ May 29, 2009 at 4:59 pm -      #25

    If the SSD’s shields could take the output of the sun-

    -1) How long could it take this much energy?

    -2) How long would it take for the shields to come back online?

    And also, how resistant is the ship’s hull? If the shields go down for the SSD, is it basically screwed?

  26. GUSTAV June 2, 2009 at 8:14 am -      #26

    so the ssd wins its clear now that star wars will always blow the liveing shit out of everything in this universe and the next and the ssd is more that 17km long

  27. Locutus June 2, 2009 at 10:50 pm -      #27

    “so the ssd wins its clear now that star wars will always blow the liveing shit out of everything in this universe”

    Complete Fail.

  28. Skrunks June 3, 2009 at 6:40 am -      #28

    “If the SSD’s shields could take the output of the sun-”

    Actually, it could take all of the energy released from the sun every second. Not as if the SSD was sitting near the edge of the Star, but if you took all the heat and light radiated from the Sun, turned it all into one super compressed sphere of energy, and smashed it into the SSD, then it might drop the shields. If it wasn’t for the tremendous pressure inside a Star, the SSD would be able to fly right through it.

    “-1) How long could it take this much energy?”

    I don’t the exact workings of how SW shields work. It might require sustained bombardment exceeding that of the output of our sun, or it may be possible to drop the shields with much lower energy levels stretched out over longer periods. L-W should know.

    “-2) How long would it take for the shields to come back online?”

    Agian, I’m not entirely sure.

    And also, how resistant is the ship’s hull? If the shields go down for the SSD, is it basically screwed?

    I doubt it. I remember reading somewhere the Star Destroyers had Neutronium armor. I don’t know if that means anything, since Neutronium shouldn’t be stable outside of a Neutron Star, but in almost every Sci-Fi, Neutronium is that uber-stuff that is always indestructible. Star Destroyers may have Neutronium ‘alloy’ armor plates, but not in the bridge tower (since it was smashed by an asteroid in Empire Strikes Back… had the bridge tower had neutronium armor, it would have bounced off harmlessly). That is all I know about Star Destroyer armor.

  29. Soviet June 6, 2009 at 12:47 am -      #29

    I think we all know 40K wins this one. The argument has been won, the valid points with the 40K ship.

  30. Mgunh1 June 27, 2009 at 1:59 am -      #30

    @Skrunks: Quote: “Neutronium shouldn’t be stable outside of a Neutron Star”

    Not quite true. Using *modern techniques* it is, but physicists predict that it should be able to be used in a solid form as the solid should be stable (it hasn’t yet been done, so we can not be 100% sure :P) and the predicted freezing temperature in a vacuum (correct me if I’m wrong here, it might be slightly higher) is below zero.

    New Scientist & Catalyst FTW :D

    W40k gets this one. I don’t care how much punishment your shields can take – they flicker for even a moment under the barrage of the Retribution class and you are gone. Won’t be enough left to bury you.

  31. Skrunks June 27, 2009 at 6:26 am -      #31

    Hey, if someone doesn’t have to stick up for the underdog, who will?

    I will always argue the opposing view to the majority of Factpile (unless Fanboism gets in the way) just to see what kind of evidence people bring to the front, for example… how exactly does the Imperial Navy power it’s ships? (And by Imperial I mean IoM)

  32. david July 2, 2009 at 7:41 am -      #32

    Propulsion systemsEvery Imperial ship is equipped with a plasma drive for normal propulsion through the depths of space. Running up to a third of the ship’s length, the aft section is a mass of drive tubes, engine compartments and plasma reactors.

    Most Navy ships employ warp drives to breach the barrier that separates realspace from the Immaterium and allow for interstellar travel. Implosion of these drives can lead to the creation of a warp rift.

    there we go.

  33. L-W July 2, 2009 at 11:11 am -      #33

    “Not quite true. Using *modern techniques* it is, but physicists predict that it should be able to be used in a solid form as the solid should be stable”

    No solution exists to create a solid form of Neutronium; not only would the material reform into a sphere at relativistic speeds even in a vacuum, but the gravitational binding energy of even a small quantity would rival that of our own planet. In fact if there was a feasible solution, it would consume far more energy per second than the entirety of our current population could expend in over several million years.

  34. Zervziel August 3, 2009 at 1:09 am -      #34

    Someone earlier asked how resilient a ssd’s hull was. The answer for the Executor class, is that it could take a beating and keep on going. The Eclipse, while being slightly short then the 19 kilometer Executor class had far more mass. It was heavily armored, enough so it could ram and destroy other ships with very little trouble.

  35. Necrontyr August 4, 2009 at 7:16 am -      #35

    “Someone earlier asked how resilient a ssd’s hull was. The answer for the Executor class, is that it could take a beating and keep on going. The Eclipse, while being slightly short then the 19 kilometer Executor class had far more mass. It was heavily armored, enough so it could ram and destroy other ships with very little trouble.”

    Source, please?

    If not, please save conjectures for other forums etc. as well as refraining from stating the obvious, as in saying that the Executor could “take a beating”, because there are unforgiving people within this area who may or may not take what you say and shove it deep inside orifices best left not violated.

    And I don’t think anyone would want that to happen to themselves.

  36. Space marine October 10, 2009 at 9:51 pm -      #36

    I Nominate the Retribution class battleship for the Factpile award due to several thousand Petatonnes worth of damage every few seconds.

  37. Locutus October 16, 2009 at 12:40 am -      #37

    “I Nominate the Retribution class battleship for the Factpile award”

    Same.

  38. panzeracclamator October 20, 2009 at 12:18 am -      #38

    dude, the shields of star destroyers are normally only given ~25% of the ships energy. the ships of SW can redirect an practically arbitrary amount of power to any one system.

  39. Space marine October 29, 2009 at 3:20 am -      #39

    That still doesn’t matter…Fool…With PETATON level damage…The SSD is FUCKED.

  40. PANZERACCLAMATOR November 7, 2009 at 11:04 pm -      #40

    so? the output of a full turbolaser volley is in the exaton range

  41. Inarto November 7, 2009 at 11:45 pm -      #41

    @PANZERACCLAMATOR
    One turbo laser blast can destroy a fully shielded starfighter, one lance beam goes right through the hull of an enemy ship as if it isnt there. If a turbolaser volley is in the exaton range what range would a lance volley be in?

  42. Syncourt November 8, 2009 at 1:02 am -      #42

    @Panzer
    Here’s some enlightenment from L-W, since it seems like you didn’t bother reading through the thread.
    “1. Judging from previous calculations, individual Heavy Turbolasers produce between 22-200 Gigatons, thus requiring inordinate amounts of them available to level Star Destroyer shields. A tad bit insufficient to deal with 40K void shielding, but powerful when massed.”

    “Giving the blast of a Nova cannon (The most powerful ship mounted Imperial weapon) a staggering yield of 22 petatons. For those of you struggling to comprehend these figures, this is a yield one million times greater than the heaviest Turbolaser available to the Star Wars universe.”

  43. Locutus November 8, 2009 at 1:08 am -      #43

    “so? the output of a full turbolaser volley is in the exaton range”

    The Retribution’s Void Shields would easily shrug this off. Battleships in 40k can take weeks of exaton range damage. This is why many Imperium Battleships are thousands of years old.

  44. Cpt Olimar November 8, 2009 at 1:46 am -      #44

    It makes one wonder why any ground battles exist at all….

    ARRRR IM AN UBER SPACE MARINE, I AM IN TERMINATOR ARMOR AND IM SO…

    instantly dies as the rest of the planet is decimated by starship fire.

    *that was easy*

    Yea, yea I’m am oversimplifying and stuff, but it’s a little silly at times that’s all.

  45. L-W November 8, 2009 at 2:01 am -      #45

    1) “One turbo laser blast can destroy a fully shielded starfighter”

    I see you’re abusing the no limits fallacy again, Inarto.

    No one turbolaser is the same. Some of the smaller automated turrets are specifically designed for anti-fighter, point defence and flak duties; whilst some of the larger models requiring entire crews of gunners are designed purely for blasting chunks out of other capital ships.

    Saying that all turbolasers are built for the exact purpose is the equivalent of stating that the 16 inch guns on the USS Iowa are constructed for the same duties as the .50 calibre anti-aircraft machine guns, utterly nonsensical and in defiance of common sense.

    2) “one lance beam goes right through the hull of an enemy ship as if it isnt there.”

    Lance beams usually have to be concentrated for several seconds against depleted void shields before they can penetrate.

    3) “If a turbolaser volley is in the exaton range what range would a lance volley be in?”

    According to “Shadow Point”, one beam striking an underground bunker located a dozen kilometres beneath the surface generates a yield of 14 teratons if total vaporization was the intended goal. Assuming that they merely intended to drill through and kill the occupants of the bunker, you’re looking at somewhere along the lines of two teratons per lance beam over an extended period of several seconds.

    4) “Here’s some enlightenment from L-W, since it seems like you didn’t bother reading through the thread.”

    Based on old pre-ICS information, these are the new figures:

    Acclamator medium turbolaser turrets: 200 gigatons per second
    Total output of Venator Star destroyer at maximum firepower: 860 teratons/volley
    Banking clan Frigate forward prow cannons: 30 petatons
    Providence-class Frigate heavy turbolaser: 1 teraton

    These are figures derived from twenty year old pre-Imperial vessels and are therefore clearly inferior to the capability of vessels in the Galactic Empire.

  46. Locutus November 8, 2009 at 2:04 am -      #46

    Because a nice habitable planet that can be covered with hive cities/factories and can produce billions of weapons and soldiers is worth a lot than a planet that looks like this:
    img442.imageshack.us/img442/6766/exterminatus2.jpg

  47. L-W November 8, 2009 at 2:06 am -      #47

    “The Retribution’s Void Shields would easily shrug this off. Battleships in 40k can take weeks of exaton range damage.”

    Although new fluff seems to suggest that most naval battles are completed within a few hours; although in retrospect, Warhammer novels are wildly and incredibly inconsistent, with ships surviving petaton detonations in one book, to being outright vaporized by mid gigaton torpedoes in the next.

  48. Space marine November 8, 2009 at 3:11 am -      #48

    Screw the new fluff…It wants to soften 40k up!

  49. L-W November 8, 2009 at 3:46 am -      #49

    The Codex’s nerf most of the newer factions, but the fluff has never in its entire history been consistent with the depiction of most Imperial factions.

    Everything changes dramatically with each book, from an armoured Space Marine struggling to lift a car, to a Space Marine wearing nothing more than ceremonial robes lifting a 60 ton truck loaded with refugees. From a Marine being torn to shreds by lasgun fire to an entire Marine squadron surviving beneath a megaton level orbital bombardment. From a lasgun causing minor burns at higher settings against bare flesh, to fully powered shots blasting through several meters of ice and concrete and partially vaporizing a human on the other side.

    Not even authors are consistent with their own works. In one Dan Abnett novel, a stock group of Space Marines are taken out by shrapnel from a concussion grenade, whereas “Brothers of the Snake” depicts lone Marines being partially decapitated, bisected, having limbs removed and still keep on fighting as if unhindered by wounds whilst using trucks as personal arm mounted shields.

  50. Space marine November 8, 2009 at 4:37 am -      #50

    Oh, don’t remind me about the Codex’s. And 5th edition for that matter, they really screwed up Necrons gauss weapons. Now, you can only immobilise the enemy vehicles. In 4th edition, Necrons would usually screw up vehicles so much, that opponents would just not bring them! Now, I have trouble even wreaking rhino’s.

    New Codex…Now!

  51. Inarto November 8, 2009 at 11:08 pm -      #51

    @ L-W
    I wasnt trying to say that turbolasers are only good as anti fighter weapons, it was just the only actual example of damage a turbolaser inflicts that I could find.

  52. Kata November 29, 2009 at 8:32 pm -      #52

    Necrontyr the source for the Eclipse ramming is from the weapons and ships technical manual or something along that name.

    In my opinion the Retribtion would win this, now if it was retribution vs sun crusher on the other hand.

  53. Whacko December 8, 2009 at 9:22 am -      #53

    Exact figures for anything 40K is hard to come by, everything changes continually in capability and usage. It’s seriously bugging people trying to debate by numbers, but i’ll guess Star Wars also has it’s fair share of this shit.

    Still, I give this one to the Retribution, as it has superior firepower, as i understand it, along with the ability to survive this shit for over a week. Sick.

    BTW, does a retribution carry Cyclonic torpedoes? If so how strong is it? I’ve seen it wreck a planet a shot in some discussions and would like your opinions.

  54. shaun182 December 8, 2009 at 10:37 am -      #54

    the only class of IOM ship i know always carries cyclonic torpedoes, is space marine battle barge.

    so for a retribution class ship to have them, i would imagine would determine who is command of the vessel if its navy, i dont think it will but space marine or inquistion it might.

  55. Whacko December 15, 2009 at 5:34 pm -      #55

    Well, even if we get them or not, i guess that kind of firepower could put the smack on the super star destroyer. They are anti-planet weapons after all. Got any potential yield for them L-W?

  56. L-W January 18, 2010 at 2:17 am -      #56

    “A ship is a hell of a lot easier to shield then a planet. A planet’s shields are much more unstable, and with such a large surface area to cover, it’s not that hard to imagine that a ship like Executor could have shields that offer a similar degree of protection.”

    Balderdash, for a number of reasons.

  57. Sergey January 18, 2010 at 2:58 am -      #57

    As much as I like Warhammer 40,000, the Retribution stands less chance than most of you think.

    For starters, Warhammer 40,000 ships have 3 digit teraton-2 digit petaton shielding, while normal ISD’s have 1 digit exaton shielding, so a Super Star Destroyer would have around 2-3 exaton shielding depending on it’s type. Winner: SSD

    An ISDII can throw 2.4 petaton energy per second, how much can a retribution?
    Weapons batteries= 300 TT x 12 = 3.6 PT per second
    Lances = 300 TT x 3 = 900 TT per second which comes to 4.5 PT a second. Oh no, less than twice the power of an ISD is going to really scare a SSD which can do 2-3 digit PT a second. Really sad indeed… Winner: SSD

    Durability: Well, this is where the Retribution finally wins, the SSD has around 3 meters of thick armor around it, whereas a Retribution has 10+ meters of thick armor around it. Winner: Retribution

    Now, either back your claims or leave.

  58. L-W January 18, 2010 at 3:12 am -      #58

    “Now, either back your claims or leave.”

    Who the hell are you talking to?

  59. Sergey January 18, 2010 at 3:16 am -      #59

    Not you, the people who just say the Retribution wins, the SSD is just to powerful and shielded for the small little Retribution to handle (yeah, and Warhound titans that are only 15 meters tall are smaller than 22 meter tall AT-ATs).

  60. Whacko January 18, 2010 at 10:47 am -      #60

    “For starters, Warhammer 40,000 ships have 3 digit teraton-2 digit petaton shielding, while normal ISD’s have 1 digit exaton shielding, so a Super Star Destroyer would have around 2-3 exaton shielding depending on it’s type. Winner: SSD”

    Woah, WOAH! HALT! Just how can you say that, providing no calculation or proof whatsoever? When trying to deliver precise weapon yield, you gotta be VERY specific with calcs and sources. You can’t just say “this is how it is, suck on it!”

    “An ISDII can throw 2.4 petaton energy per second, how much can a retribution?
    Weapons batteries= 300 TT x 12 = 3.6 PT per second
    Lances = 300 TT x 3 = 900 TT per second which comes to 4.5 PT a second. Oh no, less than twice the power of an ISD is going to really scare a SSD which can do 2-3 digit PT a second. Really sad indeed… Winner: SSD”

    See my last paragraph. Man, this is so not right.

    “Durability: Well, this is where the Retribution finally wins, the SSD has around 3 meters of thick armor around it, whereas a Retribution has 10+ meters of thick armor around it. Winner: Retribution”

    Fail again. No proof, but it is more acceptable IMO as you don’t go specific yields and calcs. But you fail to account for the durability of the materials. “Thick armor” might mean steel or adamantium, so it is quite the difference. Still think the Retribution got better armor though, it’s tough.

  61. Sergey January 18, 2010 at 4:25 pm -      #61

    What a lying sack of shit.

    “Still, I give this one to the Retribution, as it has superior firepower, as i understand it, along with the ability to survive this shit for over a week. Sick.”

    I love how you didn’t give proof, but now I’ll give proof: (starts with an H) torpedoes do only 610 gigatons, but it’s omni so 305 GT, and it’s states that 30 year old transport ships do 200 GT per shot:

    “These ships were armed with 4 heavy torpedo launch tubes; 24 point-defense laser cannons, rated at 6 megatons per shot; and 12 quad turbolaser turrets, each rated at a maximum of 200 gigatons per shot.[6]”
    starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Acclamator_I-class_assault_ship

    HA! A Retribution barely does more than that ship! Stop wanking the Retribution you Warhammer 40,000 shit. So, it wouldn’t matter if they used 100,000 Retributions (if they even had that much), the SSD would still win without damage. You are a liar, a fanboy, and a hypocrite.

  62. Sergey January 18, 2010 at 4:34 pm -      #62

    Even more proof:

    starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_II-class_Star_Destroyer
    Peak: >9,28 × 1024 W[5] (over 20% more power than the ISD-I

    This comes to: 2.218 PT a second, HAHAHAHA! Nothing in the Imperium Navy except the Nova Cannon can overpower that! HA! I guess you were asking for your shitty 610 GT (305 because it’s OMNI!) quote, and now I have given you proof of normal ISD’s firing 2.218 PT a second, aren’t you pissed?

    And then there is the fact that Void shields LOSE to 610 GT (305) worth of firepower. One shot from an ISD = dead Retribution.

  63. DNAz January 18, 2010 at 4:58 pm -      #63

    ummm there IS more than one gun on a ship

    as much as i like SW and 40k
    40k always on top SW second

  64. Sergey January 18, 2010 at 5:07 pm -      #64

    More Warhammer 40,000 wanking.

    So, how many torpedoes? 610 (305) x 1,000 =610 TT if firing everything at once.

    A Venator can do 870 TT/s while firing with most power into it’s turbolasers. So, no matter what, the SSD wins, FLAWLESSLY.

  65. Sergey January 18, 2010 at 5:08 pm -      #65

    Actually that would be 305 TT/s, how said is that?

  66. Sergey January 18, 2010 at 5:08 pm -      #66

    Actually that would be 305 TT/s, how sad is that?

  67. Skrunks January 18, 2010 at 8:58 pm -      #67

    Segey, what source are you using for the Warhammer 40k weapons energy outputs? Are the calculations done yourself? If so could you show us the calculations, and if not could you give us the source. If it is a site, a link would be nice, if it’s a sourcebook or a novel, could you give the title?

  68. Sergey January 18, 2010 at 9:34 pm -      #68

    Well, the 610 gigaton one was an actual output. The rest are from Stardestroyer.net, and the bombardment in “Xenos” which would last for a few minutes.

  69. Locutus January 18, 2010 at 10:19 pm -      #69

    The 610 gigaton output was from some obsolete nuclear torpedo.

  70. Sergey January 19, 2010 at 3:11 am -      #70

    And guess what, it’s on the Retribution? The rest is FAN WANKING. The SSD actually is hundreds of times more powerful than a ISD which does 2.4 PT per second, so the SSD would do 240 PT+. Yeah, I doubt your shitty Retribution can stand up to that.

  71. Locutus January 19, 2010 at 4:01 am -      #71

    Warsie rage lol.

  72. DNAz January 19, 2010 at 4:26 am -      #72

    L-W can you slap Sergey around for abit

    and im not a fanboy i like Star Wars better but easily 40K is stronger

  73. Tim January 19, 2010 at 8:25 am -      #73

    Star Wars is better in my opinion but Warhammer 40k wins out in terms of pure strength due to it’s overpowered nature. Not even the extreme Star Wars fanboys from StarDestroyer.com can say otherwise and prove it. The Galactic Empire may win out in a long term war but The Imperium of Man wins out in individual vs battles.

  74. Tim January 19, 2010 at 8:27 am -      #74

    Sorry I meant StarDestroyer.net obviously.

  75. Jwlynas January 19, 2010 at 8:51 am -      #75

    Hey, I’m as a big a fanboi of 40K as the next man, but if someone thinks that Star wars beats it and then gives evidence, allow them the benefit of the doubt until you can prove them wrong. And then be gracious if you’re right, and gracious is you’re not.

    Far too much rage around here these days.

  76. Skrunks January 19, 2010 at 4:39 pm -      #76

    I wouldn’t be so sure about that. The SSD is being seriously underestimated here. I just need a few days to get the time to get a serious post about it, but don’t expect anything less then some seriously stellar numbers. The SSD is a monster.

  77. Sergey January 19, 2010 at 10:55 pm -      #77

    I already told you, and Locutus, for someone WANKING Star Trek (to beat Star Wars juggernauts), you shouldn’t be talking. I told you, hilariously, you wankers still proved nothing except you are all fanboys. First off, a ISD’s shields regenerate at 18 teratons a second, and a Retribution uses 610 gig torpedoes in fights that devastate other ships, which is sad. So, it would take 30 Retributions to take on ONE ISD (okay it would take 60), and it would be a stalemate at best.

    See what you wankers are doing? You say Imperium beats Daleks, HAHAHA! You say Imperium beats Xeelee, HAHAHAHAHAHA! You even say Warhammer 40,000 stands a chance against Marvel, BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Want to relevance in those debates? You scream around saying Warhammer 40,000 is powerful and lies. But want to compare the Imperium to the Galactic Empire? Alright, let me go nerd mode:

    The Galactic Empire owns billions of worlds
    The Imperium of Man owns millions of worlds.

    The Galactic Empire has quintillions of citizens.
    The Imperium of Man has quadrillons of citizens.

    The Galactic Empire can communicate around the galaxy in moments.
    The Imperium of Man takes months to send a Astronomical message and get a response.

    It takes hours for the Hyperspace drive to cross the galaxy.
    It takes months (and in some novels years) to cross the galaxy with a warp drive.

    It takes 6 months to build a Death Star 900 km across for the Galactic Empire.
    It takes years to build Titans for the Imperium of Man.

    See, that is totally unbiased and the Imperium of Man still loses with no effort. And I’m a Warhammer 40,000 fan.

  78. L-W January 19, 2010 at 11:08 pm -      #78

    “But want to compare the Imperium to the Galactic Empire? Alright, let me go nerd mode:”

    We already did…Months ago.

  79. Yamato-kun January 19, 2010 at 11:37 pm -      #79

    @Sergey
    Please read the earlier posts on the thread. I think comment #7 by L-W would sufficiently enlighten you.

  80. Sergey January 19, 2010 at 11:57 pm -      #80

    2.9 PT? Pure lie, the only weapon that is a petaton weapon is the 33 PT Nova Cannon, not lances or cyclonic torpedoes ;).

    Did you say one million times more powerful than any turbolaser? If it was 22 PT (which some calcs like mine suggest a maximum of 33 PT), then the output would be 22 GT done by the strongest turbolaser, ironically, the 20 year old droid ships turned a 1,000 km moon into slag, when calculating this, it comes to a laughable 66 PT (well, you’d call it that), and this is a 20 year old ship!

  81. Inarto January 20, 2010 at 4:51 pm -      #81

    “The Galactic Empire owns billions of worlds”

    “The Galactic Empire’s territory at its peak consisted of over one million member and conquered worlds and fifty million colonies, protectorates, governorships, and puppet states streching throughout the entire galaxy stretching from the borders of the Deep Core to Wild Space” Straight from wookiepedia. Typo by any chance?

    If what Locutus said is true about that yeild coming from an obsolete torpedo then it shouldnt be counted as standard issue since it is obsolete.
    So your claiming that a nova cannon is more powerful than a torpedo that does this?
    wh40k.lexicanum.com/mediawiki/images/3/31/Exterminatus.jpg
    Are you sure that Locutus and others are being the dishonest ones?

  82. shaun182 January 20, 2010 at 5:17 pm -      #82

    wait what does it matter how many worlds either side owns, it has no real point in this debate.

    “If what Locutus said is true about that yeild coming from an obsolete torpedo then it shouldnt be counted as standard issue since it is obsolete.”

    there is no standard issue with IOM vessels unfortunately, since no one retribution class battle will be like another, in design, defence or weapons, just the older it is the better it is since, it may have survived 10,000 years of combat, and i havent seen an SSD do that yet.

  83. Syncourt January 20, 2010 at 5:31 pm -      #83

    I’m pretty sure Inarto was just rebutting a claim made by Sergey.

  84. shaun182 January 20, 2010 at 5:54 pm -      #84

    that maybe so, i was just trying to show the point that, the size of the empires has no bearing on this debate, i wasnt trying to have a go at anyone, so if i have caused offence, im sorry.

  85. Syncourt January 20, 2010 at 6:15 pm -      #85

    Oh no, well at least I didn’t take it as an offence…I just assumed that you were genuinely puzzled as to why Inarto would randomly talk about statistics.

    It seems that Sergey is bent on proving the SSD the victor here…despite the consensus of it otherwise.

    So i’ll sit back and wait until some viable statistics are brought up in defence of the SSD.

  86. Sergey January 20, 2010 at 8:08 pm -      #86

    @Inarto
    “{Star wars RPG 2nd edition revised, pg 6}
    Before you can adventure in the galaxy, you better know something about it. First off, its Big – the Empire rules billions of worlds.”

    Anyway, back to the SSD. You think Exterminatus is good? Do you know what Base Delta Zero is?

    images3.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/c/c1/BaseDeltaZero.jpg

    And that’s a VICTORY class, not an ISD, or SSD, so your Exterminatus is countered by Base Delta Zero.

    I give stats? You won’t give Retribution Battleships any stats, but I have to give some for the SSD? Alright. I have summed up that an ISD’s turbos do 20 teratons x 120 = 2.4 PETATONS a second firing it’s turbolasers!

    starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Executor

    Aside from the Star Dreadnought’s unprecedented size, the Executor’s awesome offensive capabilities set it apart from other warships,[1] bristling with more than 5,000 turbolaser batteries and ion cannons.[3] With 2,000 turbolaser batteries, 2,000 heavy turbolaser batteries, 250 concussion missile batteries, each armed with thirty heavy concussion missiles, 250 heavy ion cannons, 500 point-defense laser cannons,[12] and forty Q7 tractor beam projectors[7] along its city-like surface, the Executor was capable of reducing any planetary surface to slag[7] in a matter of hours.[42] The warship’s mere presence in an engagement alone was enough to frighten an enemy force into submission.[1]
    Darth Vader’s shuttle approaches the Executor.

    While the incredible mass of the Executor proved an advantage in terms of its firepower and the power of its defensive shields, it likewise proved a disadvantage in keeping the warship supplied—the Executor could hold far more resources than the Empire normally had available to provide. More than 100 times as massive as the Imperial-class Star Destroyer, the Executor nevertheless boasted quite a formidable complement of support vessels and instruments of ground warfare.[5]

    Standard practice set the Executor with two wings,[5] or twelve squadrons,[43] of varying TIE series starfighters, for a total of 144 ships,[5] the fighter equivalent of two Imperial-class Star Destroyers.[7] These two wings primarily comprised TIE/ln starfighters, TIE/sa bombers, and TIE/In interceptors.[4] By the year 3 ABY, the starfighter fleet expanded to include TIE/D Defenders[13] and TIE/ad starfighters.[14] The Executor also routinely hosted Darth Vader’s TIE Advanced x1.[13][15]

    Additionally, the Executor regularly maintained 200 miscellaneous combat and support ships in secondary docking bays,[6] including gunships,[20] such as Gamma-class ATR-6 assault transports for troop deployment;[14] and armed shuttles,[20] such as the Lambda-class T-4a shuttle,[4] used to transport senior officers and dignitaries.[20]

    Likewise, as a standard the Executor carried a massive army that included three prefabricated garrison bases;[1] a full corps of stormtroopers and Army troopers;[18] 38,000 ground troops;[1] and hundreds of assault walkers for planetary warfare,[5] typically including thirty All Terrain Armored Transports,[7] fifty All Terrain Scout Transports,[6] and All Terrain Personal Transports, deployed by Y-85 Titan dropships[2] and other landing craft.[4] A small armada of speeder bikes and landspeeders completed the ground arsenal.[6] In theory, the Executor could hold far more starships and troops, though such resources were never available.[5]

    HAHAHA! 2,000 turbos? That’s 400 PETATONS per second, add in the fact it has 2,000 HEAVY turbolasers too, which are 3 digit teratons, so let’s say 100 teratons, multiply that and you get 2 exatons a second, and only if it’s 100 teratons, which it’s way more than, so add them together, and you 2.4 EXATONS at the MINIMUM PER second. Did I mention all other weapons? I don’t think I have to. I forgot to add 3 digit EXATON shields or more.

    The only way you can say the Retribution stands ANY chance is to wank like you always do.

  87. Sergey January 20, 2010 at 8:09 pm -      #87

    Also, in “Hellforged”, a Space Hulk can’t take a Nova Cannon without considerable damage, and guess what would happen if a Nova Cannon would hit the Executers shields? Nothing.

  88. Megaraptor18 January 20, 2010 at 8:23 pm -      #88

    “I give stats? You won’t give Retribution Battleships any stats”

    Dude I have been looking for stats on any Wahammer weapons and machines for a month now and I can’t find shit. There are no stats on this warship.

    If so please send me a link to Warhammer weapons stats because I can’t find it.

  89. Inarto January 20, 2010 at 8:46 pm -      #89

    Where do you get your stats out of curiosity? The only star wars weapons I have seen cannon yields for was weaponry used in the clone wars. Other than those we mainly have the calculations of very smart people like L-W to go by.
    For you to simply dismiss his calculations as wank and then bring in calculations likely done by some one else and act like they were given to you by the god of sci-fi is…….sigh I dont want this to degenerate into us simply flinging insults at each other so I will just ask you to stop throwing the term wank and wanker around at anyone who disagrees with you.

    Now then with that out of the way I dont think a rule book made by west end games in 1992 is the most definitive source of star wars information. As for Base Delta Zero, while impressive it only made large craters on a planet while the cyclonic torpedo was practically blowing apart the ENTIRE PLANET. If ISD’s had that kinda fire power what was the point of the death star?

  90. Sergey January 20, 2010 at 9:13 pm -      #90

    I get my sources from what I see, and if a 20 year old CIS cruiser can turn an entire 1,000 km moon into kingdom come and back, I think it’s way stronger than a Lunar Class.

    Exterminatus is stronger than Base Delta Zero? Base Delta Zero only makes holes? What’s this? –> mirror.servut.us/kuvat/motivation/exterminatus.jpg <–
    THAT is a hole, that is round, the planet is still mostly intact, that is a HOLE, that is not "blowing apart the entire planet", and from what we see in my pic, it's doing the same thing with a freaking Victory class.

    Let's not begin to mention how the SW galaxy can easily recover from a death toll of 375 trillion (Yuuzhan Vong), it can build a ring around a solar system with no notice in loss of credits, it can build a 190 km battlestation with no notice in loss of credits, they can build another 900 km battlestation in 6 months with no notice in loss of credits. In fact… it has two satellite galaxies marked and can traverse them. They fight with 10 quadrillion clones which is 70% of the entire IoM populace.

    The SSD is too big, fast, durable, and powerful for any BATTLE BARGE, let alone a Retribution.

  91. Inarto January 20, 2010 at 9:28 pm -      #91

    Your using a de-motivativational poster of all things to prove a point…….is there any reason to believe the image used is even warhammer material? This match is not the Galactic Empire vs The Imperium of Man so listing those feats does nothing to prove your point. So basically what your saying is that what YOU see is the only evidence that should be taken seriously and anyone who disagrees is guilty of wanking? When did a CIS Cruiser slag an entire moon?

  92. Inarto January 20, 2010 at 9:32 pm -      #92

    Sorry for double post but if you would like to debate star wars vs 40k Sergey then you should take your points to the appropriate thread

  93. Syncourt January 20, 2010 at 9:43 pm -      #93

    I’d also like to know when the ’20-year old CIS Cruiser…’.

    I was about to say something similar, but inarto got to it first…so i’ll just go and say ‘ditto’.

    Just curious though, why did Sergey disregard the WH40k’s torpedo damage?

  94. L-W January 20, 2010 at 9:53 pm -      #94

    “When did a CIS Cruiser slag an entire moon?”

    He took the quote famously out of context.

    The quote states that by using their prow cannons, a Munificent-class Star Frigate can “melt-blast an ice-moon measuring 1,000 kilometers in diameter, or pierce the shields of a 10 kilometer Grade III battle station”. To melt blast an ice moon of that size would require an energy of somewhere in the 60 petaton range, but these are linear forward facing cannons, and since the vessel only annihilates 2,300 tons of fuel per second, it stands to reason that it usually takes time between recharging shots.

  95. Sergey January 20, 2010 at 9:54 pm -      #95

    Also, that Exterminatus left RIVERS, Base Delta Zero doesn’t leave rivers.

    starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Munificent-class_star_frigate#Offensive_and_defensive_systems
    “The twin turbolaser cannon was powerful enough to melt an ice moon measuring 1,000 km in diameter or pierce the shields of a 10 km-wide Grade III battle station.”

    Using this calculator and putting in the required number, the result under Melt and Ice is listed as 6.620E+7gigatons. That, after converting, is a hilarious 66.20 petatons. Of course, to be honest, this is only after a charge up time of 45 minutes using capacitors.

    Also note that both of these ships are outdated by 20 years by the time of the Galactic Empire. And this is stronger than what Lunars do.

    @Syncourt because it’s the ONLY CONFIRMED amount of damage.

  96. Inarto January 20, 2010 at 10:18 pm -      #96

    Once again you are using a freaking DEMOTIVATIONAL POSTER as proof of exterminatus fire power. You havent however proved that the image is from 40k! I have given a link from lexicanum that shows an exterminatus taking place that actually features imagery directly from the 40k setting instead of a random planet that has a large chunk blown off by some random super weapon/ colission.

  97. Sergey January 20, 2010 at 10:41 pm -      #97

    That IS the pic I’m talking about. IF YOU look at your Fire Warrior Exterminatus, there are still RIVERS. So powerful, but little rivers are TOO MUCH.

  98. Sergey January 20, 2010 at 10:44 pm -      #98

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYXj9xOUFIM

    Here, we see the planet ISN’T blown apart, it’s still there, you lied.

  99. Inarto January 20, 2010 at 11:03 pm -      #99

    Hmm turns out the pick was misslabelled. The attack on the planet was actually simple orbital bombardment not an exterminatus.

  100. Inarto January 20, 2010 at 11:05 pm -      #100

    L-W would a normal cyclonic torpedo have the same amount of power as a two stage torpedo as they have the same type of warhead?

1 2 3 4

Leave A Response

You must be logged in to post a comment.