Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Please compose all posts in Emacs.

Moderators: phlip, Prelates, Moderators General

Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Vyn » Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:29 pm UTC

Thought of this after reading through the Halo/Star Wars vs. I think it'd be a bit more fair because of closer ship equality and populations. In addition, while the two aren't the same by any means, biotics vs Force users is a somewhat closer fight.

Oh, no Reapers, too unfair.
I am Jon Stewart with some Colbert cynicism, Thomas Edison's curiousity, wrapped around a hardcore gamer sprinkled very liberally with Deadpool, and finished off with an almost Poison Ivy-esque love/hate relationship with humanity, flourish.
User avatar
Vyn
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Xanthir » Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:12 pm UTC

I don't know enough about Star Wars military capabilities, but doesn't the Mass Effect universe only have 150-200 capital ships, total? Bunches of smaller ships, but the big boys are treaty-limited to a relatively small number.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))
User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
 
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Vyn » Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:21 pm UTC

Xanthir wrote:I don't know enough about Star Wars military capabilities, but doesn't the Mass Effect universe only have 150-200 capital ships, total? Bunches of smaller ships, but the big boys are treaty-limited to a relatively small number.


In Citadel space, all four of the Council species (Humans, Asari, Turians and Salarians) have their own separate militaries. As far as I know only the humans were limited in scope and that was only because at the time they weren't a Council species, I think that restriction was lifted when Humanity got a seat. That said, I don't know how many more ships might've been built.

But there's also the Terminus Systems which don't have a central authority, yet are large enough to warrant a very real threat to the Citadel should war break out between the two. Unfortunately there's not much in the way of info on their ships, especially because it's very fragmented.

Then there's the Krogan.

I also believe the SWU has larger ships, excluding the Citadel and Mass Relays which are Reaper tech, though the mass effect drives and mass relays seem capable of faster travel than the hyperspace drives in the SWU. At least, that's what it seems to be since I can apparently react to a distress call on one side of the galaxy and be there as the enemy is arriving... last SWU book I read had a cross galaxy trip taking a few days through hyperspace.
I am Jon Stewart with some Colbert cynicism, Thomas Edison's curiousity, wrapped around a hardcore gamer sprinkled very liberally with Deadpool, and finished off with an almost Poison Ivy-esque love/hate relationship with humanity, flourish.
User avatar
Vyn
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Berengal » Tue Jun 01, 2010 11:46 pm UTC

The technological difference is vast; just look at the density of interesting stuff in the galaxies. The SW galaxy is crowded and small in time (but vast in size), while the ME galaxy is comparatively empty. In SW, anyone seems to be able to get to anywhere in just a couple of hours or days at most. In ME everyone's constrained to the preexisting relays, and going anywhere else takes an eternity, even at FTL speeds.
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.
User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
 
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Vyn » Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:49 am UTC

How does density equate to technology? Using the Mass relay system one is able to travel from one end of the galaxy to the other in minutes based on in-game time. The kicker is that the relay system is Reaper tech. But in terms of ship weaponry and shielding, both universes have shielding, though the Star Wars shields are very annoyingly vague as to what they do. Ground wise though the ME universe has a clear advantage in personal shielding, projectile weaponry fired at near lightspeed, and tremendous amounts of biotic users. Hell two entire species are capable of biotics naturally and one has biotic users through experimental mishap. Another two species have extreme biological adaptation for regeneration, making them quite irritating to kill. Then you have the Geth, something that I think would be very surprising to the SWU because I don't think they've dealt with AI that's capable of easily leaving their shell into other computers and hacking them, or other mechs/droids/ships.
I am Jon Stewart with some Colbert cynicism, Thomas Edison's curiousity, wrapped around a hardcore gamer sprinkled very liberally with Deadpool, and finished off with an almost Poison Ivy-esque love/hate relationship with humanity, flourish.
User avatar
Vyn
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Xanthir » Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:39 am UTC

Vyn wrote:
Xanthir wrote:I don't know enough about Star Wars military capabilities, but doesn't the Mass Effect universe only have 150-200 capital ships, total? Bunches of smaller ships, but the big boys are treaty-limited to a relatively small number.


In Citadel space, all four of the Council species (Humans, Asari, Turians and Salarians) have their own separate militaries. As far as I know only the humans were limited in scope and that was only because at the time they weren't a Council species, I think that restriction was lifted when Humanity got a seat. That said, I don't know how many more ships might've been built.

Nah, the three original council races have limits on their military - it's a journal entry in ME1 somewhere. I'd have to check if I have that entry in any of my current saves, or I can check the wiki. The other non-council races have a small limit on their military too.

But there's also the Terminus Systems which don't have a central authority, yet are large enough to warrant a very real threat to the Citadel should war break out between the two. Unfortunately there's not much in the way of info on their ships, especially because it's very fragmented.

True, I forgot about the Terminus systems.

Then there's the Krogan.

There *was* the Krogan, certainly?
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))
User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
 
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Vyn » Wed Jun 02, 2010 2:17 pm UTC

There are still millions of Krogan, though the wiki doesn't have exact numbers. In addition, both due to natural evolution and the data you save during Mordin's loyalty mission, there's an easy access to a genophage cure in probably very short order considering how fast the Salarians managed to modify one "1000's of times more difficult than originally making it" according to Mordin. And the Krogan are very close to total unification under Urdnot Wrex as well. They would definitely be a serious threat to any SW army.

On the ground I just don't see how the SW universe can possibly win. They do still have the space advantage though, and that might be more than enough. And you're right, I didn't realize the council races did have a limit on their militaries. They'd be outnumbered in space, but I'm not sure about outgunned by some of the new tech from Sovereign such as the Thanix Cannons... even small ones blasted right through a MUCH larger ships shields and armor in about 4 shots. And those cannons were attached to most every ship in the Turian and Human fleets, probably to be attached to the Asari ones soon. Problem is still not having any clue how strong the SW shields are comparatively. They seem to block lasers fairly well and I remember from one book that Han Solo said the best test of a ships shields besides actually shooting at it was to see if the ships shield could support it's weight with no landing gear. Can't remember which book it was though. If that's the basis then the shields are... well, rather weak considering what the ME shields are designed to stop. Supporting a ships own weight would be rather trivial for the Normandy, and the larger warships have much stronger shields.
I am Jon Stewart with some Colbert cynicism, Thomas Edison's curiousity, wrapped around a hardcore gamer sprinkled very liberally with Deadpool, and finished off with an almost Poison Ivy-esque love/hate relationship with humanity, flourish.
User avatar
Vyn
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Turtlewing » Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:35 pm UTC

Star Wars has such weaponry as the Death Star, and Suncrusher and the advantage of arbitrary FTL travel (rather that restricted to a network of constructed nodes). I should think that a Death Star type weapon used against the mass relays would prety much cripple the ability of the Citadel races to wage an effective war.

Add to that battle droids, clone troopers and the sheer number of inhabited planets in the SW universe, and you've got a situation where the star wars races can send wave after wave of expendable forces armed with weapopns of mass destruction against an enemy who desperately needs to protect a large number of inherently vulnerable and stationary targets with comparatively limited numbers.

Turn it around and have the Mass Effect univers on the aufencive and they'd have to occupy hundreds of planets without the benefit of the mass relays to get around, and against an enemy that can drop a overwhelming force of expendable infantry and armor at basicly any time. to re-enforce the worlds under siege.
Turtlewing
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 5:22 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Vyn » Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:19 pm UTC

Well that was something that was mentioned in the Codex about the Citadel and Mass Relays was the fact that they're nearly indestructible. Hell, in the first game once the Citadel was closed the entirety of the Turian, Human, and Asari fleets couldn't even scratch it. The Mass Relays are the same. Hand waved in that "it's Reaper tech." Never explained if the Citadel/Relays had kinetic barriers or if it was just super armor. Though, I'd be surprised if they didn't have in-built barriers considering the HUGE mass effect fields generated by them. Other than Eezo itself it was one of the few handwaves in the story.

And the ME ships do have FTL speeds, they can hop from system to system very quickly, the Mass Relays are just faster... a LOT faster.

On the ground though I can't see how the SWU would have an advantage. Only thing I can think of is numbers, because I'd consider the sub-light projectile weaponry better than the SW lasers, the personal shielding is a HUGE advantage, the Geth are much superior to droids, being unhackable and able to hack other synthetics as well as getting smarter when in grps. An entire race of biotics, plus more biotics among the humans and krogan, and a great many of them are able to use their omni-tools for combat as well.
Now that I think about it, wouldn't the Geth spread like a plague through the SW AI's?
I am Jon Stewart with some Colbert cynicism, Thomas Edison's curiousity, wrapped around a hardcore gamer sprinkled very liberally with Deadpool, and finished off with an almost Poison Ivy-esque love/hate relationship with humanity, flourish.
User avatar
Vyn
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby bobjoesmith » Fri Jun 11, 2010 12:46 am UTC

wtf is all this "land advantage" stuff? bomb them from orbit and move on

plus looking at ME2... my puny ship's lazors could blow up the collector ship... which had ONE (count it) ONE main gun... a Imp Star Deuce has 120... main guns

Oh and yea... projectile weapons are old and outdated 4 star wars, so thats a step ahead

its just ME2 represents a universe in which spaceflight is relatively recently found, not like the 2 million years in which races in star wars had interstellar travel. Hell, even the jedi have been round for quarter of a hundred thoiusand years.

And you kno how fast fuel burns (wtf... i just refueled! STUPID EDI! I WANT BETTER GAS MILEAG... stupid cerberus... must be descendants of GM's SUV division) in ME2? Itd take them forever and 4 years to get anywhere close to the star wars galaxy

and i remember after disembarking in ME2 the seargant was like "Issac newton is the deadliest son of the bitch in space" later adding that the dreadnought fired bullets with a force of 3 hiroshimas, or roughly 180TJ. However, quoting theforce.net, "The book Anakin Skywalker: The Story of Darth Vader explicitly states that all the Imperial vessels withstood "multi-megaton" impacts on their shields, a megaton being equal to 4.19 x 10^15J. " Meaning it can withstand +8000 shots by the dreadnought. However, consider that even a low-powered anti-fighter laser can exert power of 2000tW, which if fired for 0.1 seconds, is on par with the dreadnought's main cannon. theforce.net estimates that in an hour, 3 star destroyers could output half a billion terrajoules. Each second the star destroyer can output 46296.2963 TJ, while the dreadnought fires 3 times per second at a measely 540 TJ. This means in combat, a single star destroyer could match the fire power of 85 dreadnoughts... who most likely are not as shielded as the star destroyer

this does not take into account the 72 starfighters, including 2 squadrons of bombers

Once space superiority is established, its simple to bomb or lazorrrr key targets and mop up resistance.
bobjoesmith
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 9:32 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Vyn » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:35 pm UTC

bobjoesmith wrote:
Spoiler:
wtf is all this "land advantage" stuff? bomb them from orbit and move on

plus looking at ME2... my puny ship's lazors could blow up the collector ship... which had ONE (count it) ONE main gun... a Imp Star Deuce has 120... main guns

Oh and yea... projectile weapons are old and outdated 4 star wars, so thats a step ahead

its just ME2 represents a universe in which spaceflight is relatively recently found, not like the 2 million years in which races in star wars had interstellar travel. Hell, even the jedi have been round for quarter of a hundred thoiusand years.

And you kno how fast fuel burns (wtf... i just refueled! STUPID EDI! I WANT BETTER GAS MILEAG... stupid cerberus... must be descendants of GM's SUV division) in ME2? Itd take them forever and 4 years to get anywhere close to the star wars galaxy

and i remember after disembarking in ME2 the seargant was like "Issac newton is the deadliest son of the bitch in space" later adding that the dreadnought fired bullets with a force of 3 hiroshimas, or roughly 180TJ. However, quoting theforce.net, "The book Anakin Skywalker: The Story of Darth Vader explicitly states that all the Imperial vessels withstood "multi-megaton" impacts on their shields, a megaton being equal to 4.19 x 10^15J. " Meaning it can withstand +8000 shots by the dreadnought. However, consider that even a low-powered anti-fighter laser can exert power of 2000tW, which if fired for 0.1 seconds, is on par with the dreadnought's main cannon. theforce.net estimates that in an hour, 3 star destroyers could output half a billion terrajoules. Each second the star destroyer can output 46296.2963 TJ, while the dreadnought fires 3 times per second at a measely 540 TJ. This means in combat, a single star destroyer could match the fire power of 85 dreadnoughts... who most likely are not as shielded as the star destroyer

this does not take into account the 72 starfighters, including 2 squadrons of bombers

Once space superiority is established, its simple to bomb or lazorrrr key targets and mop up resistance.

Ok, but that's in direct contention with the other statements I read saying the best test of a shield was to see if it could it's own ships weight... which is incredibly pathetic in comparison to that. Which is more canon?

Also, I already agreed that the SWU would have space superiority, if in sheer numbers alone.
I am Jon Stewart with some Colbert cynicism, Thomas Edison's curiousity, wrapped around a hardcore gamer sprinkled very liberally with Deadpool, and finished off with an almost Poison Ivy-esque love/hate relationship with humanity, flourish.
User avatar
Vyn
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Endless Mike » Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:37 pm UTC

Vyn wrote:And the Krogan are very close to total unification under Urdnot Wrex as well.

Not in canon. The canon ending has Wrex dead.

that's why this is a difficult argument. There's one Star Wars story and universe. There's a large (if finite) number of Mass Effect stories and universes.
User avatar
Endless Mike
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Alexander The 1st » Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:00 am UTC

Endless Mike wrote:
Vyn wrote:And the Krogan are very close to total unification under Urdnot Wrex as well.

Not in canon. The canon ending has Wrex dead.

that's why this is a difficult argument. There's one Star Wars story and universe. There's a large (if finite) number of Mass Effect stories and universes.


Do you have a citation for the canon ending with Wrex's death? I can't find anything in the wikia article on him about it.
...YOU DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING...
Alexander The 1st
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:47 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Endless Mike » Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:37 pm UTC

Alexander The 1st wrote:
Endless Mike wrote:
Vyn wrote:And the Krogan are very close to total unification under Urdnot Wrex as well.

Not in canon. The canon ending has Wrex dead.

that's why this is a difficult argument. There's one Star Wars story and universe. There's a large (if finite) number of Mass Effect stories and universes.


Do you have a citation for the canon ending with Wrex's death? I can't find anything in the wikia article on him about it.

Well, if you start up a Mass Effect 2 game without an ME1 save, you get a dead Wrex. So it's as close to a "canon" ending as you can get, at any rate.
User avatar
Endless Mike
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Alexander The 1st » Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:14 pm UTC

Well, if you start up a Mass Effect 2 game without an ME1 save, you get a dead Wrex. So it's as close to a "canon" ending as you can get, at any rate.


Ah. That would make sense.

From what I've heard of it, if you hadn't started a ME1 save import, it was supposed to be based off of your answers on who died where, etc., but apparently they've decided to randomise the Kaiden/Ashley death - I thought it'd be the same for Wrex. I stand corrected. Is it the same for the Rachni?

I wonder what the cannon ending of ME2 was? In terms of the collector base, and if Grunt's still just cryo'd the entire time. or if everyone else dies, Morinth/Samara, etc. Some of them seem a bit off, sure, but I always thought Wrex lived too, so...oh, and the deal with the Geth, too.

Guess we'll have to wait and see.
...YOU DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING...
Alexander The 1st
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:47 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Endless Mike » Thu Aug 05, 2010 7:47 pm UTC

I'm pretty sure they only ask a couple questions and that there's still a number of decisions that are already decided. I mean, if you haven't played ME1, "Did you kill Wrex?" doesn't mean a whole lot to you. I think it also puts you in a relationship with Kaiden/Ashley and kills the other one. Honestly, it's only "canon" in theory. I doubt Bioware would ever give a "THIS SERIES OF EVENTS IS THE OFFICIAL STORY OF MASS EFFECT" because what would the point of that be?
User avatar
Endless Mike
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby nowfocus » Mon Aug 09, 2010 5:50 pm UTC

Right - I believe 'canon' in Mass Effect is essentially what has to happen across all games (i.e. the genophage cure being destroyed) and what happens in the books.

One of the major points of Mass Effect is that your choices affect the story.

On Mass Effect versus Star Wars - I wouldn't call the space battle for Star Wars so easily. Star Wars ships seem pretty terrible at taking kinetic impacts - which is exactly what mass effect ships are capable of dishing out.
Jahoclave wrote:Besides if you observe romance, you change the outcome. Especially if you put his/her cat in a box.

Menacing Spike wrote:Was it the copper hammer or the children part that caused censoring?
nowfocus
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 1:34 am UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Le1bn1z » Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:45 pm UTC

bobjoesmith wrote:wtf is all this "land advantage" stuff? bomb them from orbit and move on

plus looking at ME2... my puny ship's lazors could blow up the collector ship... which had ONE (count it) ONE main gun... a Imp Star Deuce has 120... main guns

Oh and yea... projectile weapons are old and outdated 4 star wars, so thats a step ahead

its just ME2 represents a universe in which spaceflight is relatively recently found, not like the 2 million years in which races in star wars had interstellar travel. Hell, even the jedi have been round for quarter of a hundred thoiusand years.

And you kno how fast fuel burns (wtf... i just refueled! STUPID EDI! I WANT BETTER GAS MILEAG... stupid cerberus... must be descendants of GM's SUV division) in ME2? Itd take them forever and 4 years to get anywhere close to the star wars galaxy

and i remember after disembarking in ME2 the seargant was like "Issac newton is the deadliest son of the bitch in space" later adding that the dreadnought fired bullets with a force of 3 hiroshimas, or roughly 180TJ. However, quoting theforce.net, "The book Anakin Skywalker: The Story of Darth Vader explicitly states that all the Imperial vessels withstood "multi-megaton" impacts on their shields, a megaton being equal to 4.19 x 10^15J. " Meaning it can withstand +8000 shots by the dreadnought. However, consider that even a low-powered anti-fighter laser can exert power of 2000tW, which if fired for 0.1 seconds, is on par with the dreadnought's main cannon. theforce.net estimates that in an hour, 3 star destroyers could output half a billion terrajoules. Each second the star destroyer can output 46296.2963 TJ, while the dreadnought fires 3 times per second at a measely 540 TJ. This means in combat, a single star destroyer could match the fire power of 85 dreadnoughts... who most likely are not as shielded as the star destroyer

this does not take into account the 72 starfighters, including 2 squadrons of bombers

Once space superiority is established, its simple to bomb or lazorrrr key targets and mop up resistance.


The question is whether or not you accept books as cannon.

Those calculations do not play out with depictions of battle in the Star Wars movies, and definately collapses in the face of the games. SW is terribly inconsistant, and I'd rather work with actual depictions from the art form rather than after-though books.

In the films, shields going down on a ship do not leave that ship open for immediate destruction. We notice this particularily in Episode III, with the very close range battle between the Star Destroyers and Droid ships. Rather, the explosions are similar to moderate artillery shells of present day.

In Episode VI, we notice that imperial armour, on the "elite" walkers on the planet surface are inequal to stopping slowly moving logs.

However, blaster fire can severely injure teddy bears.

In space battle, in Episode II, we see that lasers on Fett's ship can punch through most asteroids with relative ease. We also note that in Episode V, despite having the most powerful shields in the galaxy, Vader's subordinates are worried about taking the flag ship into an asteroid field, where they may be pelted with small rocks which, on screen, were not moving very quickly.

Finally, a word on range. All weapons seem to be "knife weapons," fired within a few kilometers of target. Evidently, they needed to be quite close to be effective.

Compare this to the Kinetic Energy Weapons on the ME dreadnoughts, which were fired at literally astronomical distances.

Basically, unless you take as cannon stuff that directly contradicts the actual movies and also the games, then Star Wars militaries would have their asses handed to them by those of the ME universe. If you are willing to add in the Expanded Universe and ammended fact sheets, then you're not really talking about the movies we're thinking of when we speak of Star Wars.
Krong writes: Code: Select all
transubstantiate(Bread b) {
Person p = getJesusPersonInstance();
p.RenderProperties = b.RenderProperties;
free(b);
}
Le1bn1z
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Endless Mike » Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:28 pm UTC

Using distances in movie space battles is pointless, since watching a ship fire lasers into black nothingness for a couple seconds wouldn't make for a good movie. Rule of Cool wins out on those. (Okay, it might, but it's not what Star Wars is supposed to be about.)
User avatar
Endless Mike
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Core Commander E-178 » Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:53 am UTC

Vyn wrote:Thought of this after reading through the Halo/Star Wars vs. I think it'd be a bit more fair because of closer ship equality and populations. In addition, while the two aren't the same by any means, biotics vs Force users is a somewhat closer fight.

Oh, no Reapers, too unfair.


No, this is far more of a curbstomp in favor of Star Wars. At least the UNSC had weapons that could make a dent in SW capital ship shields (current yield based off of latest canon info places a ship based MAC round at 1.17 Teratons per shot) well Mass Effect Dreadnoughts main gun is only 38 kilotons per shot. A single Star Destroyer could take on the entire Mass Effect galaxy (Reapers include unless you go high end for them) and not even notice.
User avatar
Core Commander E-178
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:57 am UTC
Location: Core Superdreadnought, high orbit above Core Prime

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Le1bn1z » Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:43 pm UTC

Core Commander E-178 wrote:
Vyn wrote:Thought of this after reading through the Halo/Star Wars vs. I think it'd be a bit more fair because of closer ship equality and populations. In addition, while the two aren't the same by any means, biotics vs Force users is a somewhat closer fight.

Oh, no Reapers, too unfair.


No, this is far more of a curbstomp in favor of Star Wars. At least the UNSC had weapons that could make a dent in SW capital ship shields (current yield based off of latest canon info places a ship based MAC round at 1.17 Teratons per shot) well Mass Effect Dreadnoughts main gun is only 38 kilotons per shot. A single Star Destroyer could take on the entire Mass Effect galaxy (Reapers include unless you go high end for them) and not even notice.


Again, it depends on how you draw your canon (EDIT -- that is to say, canonical media)

If you go off of the after-picture books which describe the tech stuff, yeah, Star Wars wins.

If you draw your vision of Star Wars from:

1.) The Movies (Where shielded, armoured vehicles which can deflect blasters can be blown-up by slowly swinging logs or slowly drifting asteroids) and
2.) The Video and Computer Games (where a capital ship cannon takes several hits to destroy an apartment building)

then Mass Effect would pulverise them because they've got reach on the guys, and the fire-power and shields would be at least comprable.

In any case, the Star Trek Universe would evaporate both of them witout breaking a sweat.
Krong writes: Code: Select all
transubstantiate(Bread b) {
Person p = getJesusPersonInstance();
p.RenderProperties = b.RenderProperties;
free(b);
}
Le1bn1z
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Core Commander E-178 » Mon Aug 16, 2010 10:28 pm UTC

Le1bn1z wrote:The question is whether or not you accept books as cannon.


Per the Star Wars canon policy books and games fall under C canon.

Those calculations do not play out with depictions of battle in the Star Wars movies, and definately collapses in the face of the games. SW is terribly inconsistant, and I'd rather work with actual depictions from the art form rather than after-though books.


RoTJ: 800 meter long Heavy Turbolaser bolt vaporizes and Imperial Star Destroyer right before Ackbar gives the order to concentrate all firepower on the SSD. And what in the games does not agree with the books? Their both of the same canon tier. And I hardly call SW terribly inconsistant compared to of SF like Star Trek and Halo when it comes to firepower.

In the films, shields going down on a ship do not leave that ship open for immediate destruction.


And this proves what? That they have armor that can at least withstand a few seconds/minutes before being blown apart in some cases?

We notice this particularily in Episode III, with the very close range battle between the Star Destroyers and Droid ships. Rather, the explosions are similar to moderate artillery shells of present day.


You mean the ships that had IIRC been fighting it out for several days at that point? A Ventor is rated at only 2 hours peak reactor output. Also trying to judge explosions in space is not a good idea because of the lack of atmosphere to really judge anything by.

In Episode VI, we notice that imperial armour, on the "elite" walkers on the planet surface are inequal to stopping slowly moving logs.


:roll: Wow, I didn't realize that an All Terrain Scout Walker was some bench mark by which we judge their armor. Besides all the trees did was just crush it and the grenade launcher on the side exploded. A modern Humvee most likely would have been similarly crushed.

However, blaster fire can severely injure teddy bears.


Dial-a-yield weapon. Also scene in question please, first thing that comes to mind is that one Ewok being having been killed and another checking on it to find it was dead.

In space battle, in Episode II, we see that lasers on Fett's ship can punch through most asteroids with relative ease. We also note that in Episode V, despite having the most powerful shields in the galaxy, Vader's subordinates are worried about taking the flag ship into an asteroid field, where they may be pelted with small rocks which, on screen, were not moving very quickly.


SW has two types of shields: Ray Shields and Particle Shields. The ones that deal with KE impacts are weaker than those that deal with energy weapons. Also in Episode V we see the light Turbolasers aporizing asteroids 40 meters in diameter which gives them high kiloton firepower.

Finally, a word on range. All weapons seem to be "knife weapons," fired within a few kilometers of target. Evidently, they needed to be quite close to be effective.


No, all the battles we see are forced at close range. RoTS: Republic boxs in CIS fleet under planetry shields so they can not escape. RoTJ: Ackbar consider it insane to move in so close against the Star Destroyers, going so far as to say they don't have an tactics and such for that sort of combat, and they simply moved in that close to stop second Death Star from blowing away the entire fleet.

Of course I don't doubt their rated above more than a few thousand kilometers effective range tops as of TCW show.

Compare this to the Kinetic Energy Weapons on the ME dreadnoughts, which were fired at literally astronomical distances.


Star Destroyers can easily close range by micro-jumps or simply accelerate at a steady 2300 Gs acceleration to get within range.

Basically, unless you take as cannon stuff that directly contradicts the actual movies and also the games, then Star Wars militaries would have their asses handed to them by those of the ME universe. If you are willing to add in the Expanded Universe and ammended fact sheets, then you're not really talking about the movies we're thinking of when we speak of Star Wars.


You have yet to show anything that can not be reconilied with higher canon. Also please cite the game claims and make sure they do not fall under Game Mechanics

Again, it depends on how you draw your canon (EDIT -- that is to say, canonical media)

If you go off of the after-picture books which describe the tech stuff, yeah, Star Wars wins.

If you draw your vision of Star Wars from:

1.) The Movies (Where shielded, armoured vehicles which can deflect blasters can be blown-up by slowly swinging logs or slowly drifting asteroids) and


Energy Weapon=/=KE Weapon. Also please cite the source of an asteroid destroying anything given in Episode V we see an asteroid it hit the unshielded bridge tower (type of comm. system they were using at that time requires shields being down), cut to Vader and we see the holo flinch back from what are most likely secondary explosions and then fades from an otherwise unknown amount of damage. And also the bridge is the weakest point, the novel has asteroids simply bouncing off the Avenger's hull at one point.

2.) The Video and Computer Games (where a capital ship cannon takes several hits to destroy an apartment building)


Please cite the exact scene and give a reason why we should assume their not dial the yield down. Also please make sure it doesn't fall under Game Mechanics.

then Mass Effect would pulverise them because they've got reach on the guys, and the fire-power and shields would be at least comprable.


And it doesn't really matter either way, the Empire can afford to simply keep throwing ships at them until their dead. The ME fleets can win all the battles but still lose the war.

In any case, the Star Trek Universe would evaporate both of them witout breaking a sweat.


On ME agreed but against Star Wars (outside of certain high end ST powers) the answer is no. The Empire breaks all the standard ST powers due to sheer numbers and strategic even if we throw out the higher firepower, and then the fact they are vastly more competent than any ST ground forces.
User avatar
Core Commander E-178
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:57 am UTC
Location: Core Superdreadnought, high orbit above Core Prime

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Le1bn1z » Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:46 pm UTC

The specific scene for the weaker blasters comes from the destruction of Taris by Darth Malak after the first level of KOTOR I. Darth Malak had ordered his general to destroy the whole planet and leave no survivors. During this cut cinematic scene, the Ebon Hawk escapes while the Leviathan and the rest of the fleet rain down destruction on the planet. We see the cannon blasts hitting the buildings, and damaging them. However, the damage is comprable to, say, modern heavy artillery fire.

During the confrontation between the Emporer and Luke, he tells Luke he has X number of his best troops on the moon's surface. These elite troops have, as you say, scout Walkers which are armoured enough to withstand blasters. However, they are not armoured to withstand slowly moving trees. or stones.

"Knife distance" is a relative term. Long range for SW is knife range for ME.

As you say,

SW has two types of shields: Ray Shields and Particle Shields. The ones that deal with KE impacts are weaker than those that deal with energy weapons. Also in Episode V we see the light Turbolasers aporizing asteroids 40 meters in diameter which gives them high kiloton firepower.


That would make fighting the ME Kenetic Weapons somewhat problematic for the Empire or Republic, no? The SW shields would be useless against the long-range bombardment of a ME Dreadnaught. Even the Death Star would be in trouble, it seems.

Also, keep in mind the real dominance that a ME commando crew could have against the Empire. No contest. A hundred Asari commandos would flay the Emporer with their brains. Problem solved.
Krong writes: Code: Select all
transubstantiate(Bread b) {
Person p = getJesusPersonInstance();
p.RenderProperties = b.RenderProperties;
free(b);
}
Le1bn1z
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Echochamber888 » Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:46 pm UTC

A medium turbolaser shot from a star destroyer has the destructive capability of 200 gigatons. Heavy turbolasers are in the teratons.
In comparison, Mass Effect dreadnoughts and their main guns have a destructive capability of around 45 kilotons, which is weak by Star Wars standards. In fact, Star Wars single manned fighters can produce more damage than that.

45 kilotons = 0.000045 gigatons. Star Wars shield generators have the durability to withstand week long battles using said 200 gigaton weapons.

The entire Mass Effect galaxy and their fleets, reapers included, could fire at a shielded star destroyer for weeks with their 0.000045 gigaton weapons and fail to penetrate the shields.

On the contrast, a single star destroyer could one shot any known Mass Effect ship.

And that isn't taking into account superweapons. Death Star, Death Star 2, Galaxy Gun, Centerpoint Station, etc. The latter is capable of creating black holes.

Also, there's the huge numerical difference. Star Wars consists of 100 quadrillion civilians spread out over millions of worlds, and every single star system had been mapped out by the time of AOTC. In contrast, the Mass Effect galaxy had only mapped out less than 1% of the Milky Way.

Also, there's the big different in FTL capabilities. Star Wars hyperdrive systems can propel a ship fast enough to cross the galaxy in a matter of hours. In Mass Effect it takes decades to do that using their FTL travel. Although using mass relays they could do it much faster, possibly as fast as or maybe even faster than hyperdrive, that has the weakness of being dependent on mass relays and the Citadel. A Star Wars fleet could invade and capture or destroy the Citadel, and the Citadel's defending fleet will not be able to stop that with its 0.000045 gigaton weapons.
Echochamber888
 
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:38 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Le1bn1z » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:24 pm UTC

Again, as you point out, SW shields are of a weaker type when dealing with kinetic impact. Their particle shields are good, but they seem to get into real trouple when hit by a mass.

But again, the difference, I think, comes from the SW book people realising "oh, shit, this futuristic stuff on TV doesn't look all that powerful. At all. We better sex it up in the books."

So, in the books, they decided to make the lasers and whatnot super-powered. But that doesn't stand up to what happened in the films. At all.

Sort of like the Force. In the books, Yoda manages to divert a star destroyer to crash into another. In the movies, there's no chance that was a possibility.

From the films' treatment of kinetic impact, I'd think the massive slug going at 0.01c would rip through a star destroyer, no problem.

Also, from an artistic and plot standpoint, ME is way cooler.

And has better writing and acting.
Krong writes: Code: Select all
transubstantiate(Bread b) {
Person p = getJesusPersonInstance();
p.RenderProperties = b.RenderProperties;
free(b);
}
Le1bn1z
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby bobjoesmith » Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:57 pm UTC

... basically the movies =/= real metric. You should be using the books and the expanded universe to judge these things, not just "oh it looked like x in the movies." Looking like is not a quantifiable or empirical way to determine whether or not star wars can or cannot win. However the books tend to be cohesive as series as massive as star wars tend to get. Anyone who read the expanded universe can tell, simply by sheer weight of numbers can the star wars universe win.
bobjoesmith
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 9:32 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby nowfocus » Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:20 pm UTC

bobjoesmith wrote:... basically the movies =/= real metric. You should be using the books and the expanded universe to judge these things, not just "oh it looked like x in the movies." Looking like is not a quantifiable or empirical way to determine whether or not star wars can or cannot win. However the books tend to be cohesive as series as massive as star wars tend to get. Anyone who read the expanded universe can tell, simply by sheer weight of numbers can the star wars universe win.


But the books aren't what people really think of when you say 'star wars'. These sorts of debates are boring if all it comes down too is whether or not some random author wrote "1000 gigawats" instead of "10 gigawats". Would all you conclusions be reversed if mass effect game out with a iPhone app that redid canon to have 10000000000 times more powerful everything?

Lets stick to the games for Mass Effect and the movies for Star Wars that is the core of the series. Or - in your terms - highest level G canon only please.
Jahoclave wrote:Besides if you observe romance, you change the outcome. Especially if you put his/her cat in a box.

Menacing Spike wrote:Was it the copper hammer or the children part that caused censoring?
nowfocus
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 1:34 am UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Endless Mike » Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:21 pm UTC

There, uh, is a Mass Effect iPhone app, actually. (I haven't played it, however.)
User avatar
Endless Mike
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby nowfocus » Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:02 pm UTC

Endless Mike wrote:There, uh, is a Mass Effect iPhone app, actually. (I haven't played it, however.)

Yes, I know, but not one that changes the scale arbitrarily.
Jahoclave wrote:Besides if you observe romance, you change the outcome. Especially if you put his/her cat in a box.

Menacing Spike wrote:Was it the copper hammer or the children part that caused censoring?
nowfocus
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 1:34 am UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Vyn » Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:25 pm UTC

Le1bn1z wrote:From the films' treatment of kinetic impact, I'd think the massive slug going at 0.01c would rip through a star destroyer, no problem.

Actually, to quote the Marine Sergeant Major standing outside of C-Sec on the Citadel in ME2, the slugs fired by a Dreadnought every 5 seconds are traveling at 1.13c. Don't want to nitpick but that is significantly more potent than 0.01c.

And I still just like to point out that the Asari, Krogan and biotic humans would utterly demolish any SW ground units.
I am Jon Stewart with some Colbert cynicism, Thomas Edison's curiousity, wrapped around a hardcore gamer sprinkled very liberally with Deadpool, and finished off with an almost Poison Ivy-esque love/hate relationship with humanity, flourish.
User avatar
Vyn
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Qyygle » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:28 am UTC

Umm. For the SW ships' kinetic shields, during The Empire Strikes Back, the Imperial Fleet waited in the asteroid field for long enough for several Bounty hunters hired by Lord Vader to arrive while hunting for the Falcon. I'm not sure about specifics, but for a ship the size of a Star Destroyer to sit in an asteroid field for at least a day or two and not take damage would mean they do have shielding against kinetic energy, and rather powerful ones at that. Since they were more or less searching the asteroid field too, they would've been constantly moving and coming into collisions.
Being that they do have two types of shields, I'd assume they'd be able to switch power between these shields too and being that they normally come up against ships armed with laser weapons in their own universe, they'd probably have their energy shields pull more power during a battle. If they encountered a ME ship, it might be able to get a few shots off, maybe (if the SW scanners don't pick up the kinetic weapons first) before they switch power to the other set of shields.

Just because an explosion looks like something an artillery piece today could pull off, doesn't mean they're of the same power. In the final space battle in ME2, I'm pretty sure those explosions looked a lot like artillery bursts too. Wanna know why? Because explosions look like explosions no matter what universe they're from.
Not to mention that taking the size of a Venator Cruiser into account, some of those shots probably gave off the power of a tactical nuke, even without atmosphere... and half of those booms were coming from the Invisible Hands Flak guns... the flak guns, not even the main batteries.

Knights of the Old Republic, Malak, and Taris were several millions years in the past by the time you get to A New Hope. A Leviathan class Sith Cruiser would be owned 10 times over by a Victory Star Destroyer, and that's 1/3 the size of the Imperators. It's like comparing the USS Ronald Reagan to the Normandy because they're both human ships. :[

The acting from the original Trilogy was fine. Mass Effect was made a couple years ago using new animation technology. Star Wars started in the 80's when the best they had was a few hand models and crazy sounds. Give them some credit, they did well for their time.
Qyygle
 
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:57 am UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby nowfocus » Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:23 am UTC

Qyygle wrote:Umm. For the SW ships' kinetic shields, during The Empire Strikes Back, the Imperial Fleet waited in the asteroid field for long enough for several Bounty hunters hired by Lord Vader to arrive while hunting for the Falcon. I'm not sure about specifics, but for a ship the size of a Star Destroyer to sit in an asteroid field for at least a day or two and not take damage would mean they do have shielding against kinetic energy, and rather powerful ones at that. Since they were more or less searching the asteroid field too, they would've been constantly moving and coming into collisions.

Captain Needa wrote:Lord Vader, was the last time they appeared in any of our scopes. Considering the amount of damage we've sustained, they must have been destroyed.

C3P0 wrote:Sir, the possibility of successfully navigating an asteroid field is approximately three thousand, seven hundred and twenty to one.

Kinetic shields or no, it is clearly that all ships here are vulnerable to slowly moving rocks.
Jahoclave wrote:Besides if you observe romance, you change the outcome. Especially if you put his/her cat in a box.

Menacing Spike wrote:Was it the copper hammer or the children part that caused censoring?
nowfocus
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 1:34 am UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby cjmcjmcjmcjm » Wed Sep 29, 2010 5:11 am UTC

This debate is futile because different fictional universes have different ghostwriters writing the cannon firepower of the ships and someone used a b where another used an m. A better debate would be to set each normal ship at roughly the same firepower and see how the alliance systems and use of super-weapons works out
frezik wrote:Anti-photons move at the speed of dark

DemonDeluxe wrote:Paying to have laws written that allow you to do what you want, is a lot cheaper than paying off the judge every time you want to get away with something shady.
User avatar
cjmcjmcjmcjm
 
Posts: 1116
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:15 am UTC
Location: Anywhere the internet is strong

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Qyygle » Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:10 am UTC

Yep. Just several thousand slowly moving rocks the size of small freighters hitting your ship at once might or might not do some damage. Just scratch the paint a little you know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dmy_qUSMOWY
Comparable to an asteroid field. Un-upgraded, the Normandy got wrecked. I don't seem to recall the same happening to the Falcon... Or even the freaking Ebon Hawk, a few thousand years before...
And the Imperial Fleet was still perfectly functional afterwards. After their couple day cruise in the Asteroid Field.
Qyygle
 
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:57 am UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby nowfocus » Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:54 am UTC

The falcon didn't collide with any asteroids, the Normandy did because the manoevering space was much tighter, and most of the damage was caused by the probes, not the asteroids. The movie makes it clear that a collision with an asteroid would have been fatal to the falcon.

And yes, the imperial fleet was functional, damaged but functional, after being pelted with slowly moving rocks. I wonder how they'd do against metal slugs fired at above the speed of light?? Probably more than damaged, and if you see the clip of the A-wing crashing into the destroyer, they'd probably been instantly killed.
Jahoclave wrote:Besides if you observe romance, you change the outcome. Especially if you put his/her cat in a box.

Menacing Spike wrote:Was it the copper hammer or the children part that caused censoring?
nowfocus
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 1:34 am UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Qyygle » Fri Oct 01, 2010 3:46 am UTC

The A-Wing hit the Executor after it's shields went down from the entire Rebel Fleet firing on it. Before the auxiliary bridge took control, the Death Stars gravity well pulled it into a fatal collision... so instead of a couple probes lasering it, there was a task force of capitol ships bombarding it along with fighter support. Not exactly fair odds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETFNSVNQqfE

X-wings fire proton torpedoes and A-Wings are fitted with concussion missiles, both of which are projectiles and would necessitate shields that would cover projectile weapons anyway.

The Falcon was being pursued by TIE fighters and Han was fixing the Hyperdrive when they came upon the asteroids. They actually hit several and took basically no damage before he got to the cockpit and started maneuvering. The Normandy was taking evasive action the whole time and with a single hit was damaged...

Above the speed of light? That's weird, I can see the projectiles in this clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heug7Aa5vWA

You've got parts in the battle above Corusant where flaming debris from destroyed ships collide with Venator Cruisers...(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmG4OI2stB0) and don't damage or even scratch them. I'm sure the slowly moving rocks in an asteroid field would do significant damage to a ME ship too as the Normandy already kindly demonstrated for us.
It doesn't matter if they're slow as long as they hit en-mass with consistancy.

If killing SW ships with projectiles was as easy as hitting them with things like A-Wings, the Rebels could have just use a few Kamikaze squads to wipe out the entire Imperial Fleet.

And really, Vader would just do this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIRQf0S3oD0
and the ME universe would simply surrender due to win. :D
Qyygle
 
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:57 am UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Thesh » Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:19 pm UTC

I think Star Wars would win, for one major reason: Resource Efficiency.

If you have played Mass Effect 2, you will know that in order to upgrade the ship, weapons, and technology for your team you have to completely deplete the resources of many systems of planets. Honestly, how large of navy can the races of the citadel build? Keep in mind, we aren't even talking about building a ship; We are talking about upgrading an already built ship and building/modifying small arms for its crew.
Deceiving appearance, they're dressed up as gods.
Fake that they care, their conscience is lost.
Denial their craft and riots our goal.
They lead those who follow and break those who fall.
User avatar
Thesh
Has the Brain Worms, In Case You Forgot.
 
Posts: 3697
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: California, Southern USA

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby cjmcjmcjmcjm » Thu Oct 14, 2010 4:47 am UTC

Thesh wrote:I think Star Wars would win, for one major reason: Resource Efficiency.

If you have played Mass Effect 2, you will know that in order to upgrade the ship, weapons, and technology for your team you have to completely deplete the resources of many systems of planets. Honestly, how large of navy can the races of the citadel build? Keep in mind, we aren't even talking about building a ship; We are talking about upgrading an already built ship and building/modifying small arms for its crew.

It's called "video game makes you go on stupid collecting quest to upgrade"
frezik wrote:Anti-photons move at the speed of dark

DemonDeluxe wrote:Paying to have laws written that allow you to do what you want, is a lot cheaper than paying off the judge every time you want to get away with something shady.
User avatar
cjmcjmcjmcjm
 
Posts: 1116
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:15 am UTC
Location: Anywhere the internet is strong

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Alexander The 1st » Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:45 pm UTC

cjmcjmcjmcjm wrote:
Thesh wrote:I think Star Wars would win, for one major reason: Resource Efficiency.

If you have played Mass Effect 2, you will know that in order to upgrade the ship, weapons, and technology for your team you have to completely deplete the resources of many systems of planets. Honestly, how large of navy can the races of the citadel build? Keep in mind, we aren't even talking about building a ship; We are talking about upgrading an already built ship and building/modifying small arms for its crew.

It's called "video game makes you go on stupid collecting quest to upgrade"


That, and the ship was a prototype, state of the art ship.

In ME1, they talk about how the first Normandy was more expensive than like 50 Cruisers [Citation needed] with the kind of money spent on the Drive Core alone.

In ME2, the Ship Upgrade from Jacob came from friends of his, who probably wanted some payment in exchange. You know, since there's a huge chance they wouldn't be able to gloat about the tech, nor recoup the expenses in loans/favours. They probably wanted enough to make at least 5 versions of the...armor plating, was it? - if not more.

As a last point, the Normandy stood up better than the Death Star. Or that Star Destroyer that got owned by the A-wing. So sure, they make 25-50 Normandy's before they run out of planetary resources. But by that point, hire some biotic and infiltration squads, toss in a few hundred geth each, and they could easily take down things that were cheaper than them. You get what you pay for, essentially. <_<
...YOU DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING...
Alexander The 1st
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:47 pm UTC

Re: Star Wars vs Mass Effect

Postby Steax » Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:52 pm UTC

Wait, which timeframe of the SW universe are we working with here? They're in pretty bad shape after the last battle against the Yuuzhan Vong.
In Minecraft, I use the username Rirez.
User avatar
Steax
SecondTalon's Goon Squad
 
Posts: 3037
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 12:18 pm UTC

Next

Return to Religious Wars

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests