Opponents from StarDestroyer.Net generally try to color ST-v-SW.net as the location for extremist "OMG Evil Tr3kkieZ!!!!1" arguments. While I freely admit that I stand against the attempts of a small group of fanboys to inflate Star Wars tech with the stated goal of "mak[ing] it a better comparison to Trek" tech, the fact remains that ST-v-SW.Net is a moderate site.
Let's take a moment to ponder how ST-v-SW.Net would be if it were called, say, "GalaxyClassStarship.Net" and featured the same sort of shameless slant as ST-v-SW.Net's wannabe-competitor:
- Star Trek V's journey to the center of the galaxy? Oh, that'd be standard starship top speed in case of emergencies. Sure, we've seen ships seem to top out at lower speeds, but they were just having trouble or dialling down the velocity or whatever. It doesn't matter . . . any analysis of instances of lower speeds would be evil and wrong.
Warp Drive = 20,000,000c in Kirk's era
(SD.Net and its board denizens calc SW velocities by mixing up various non-canon sources to reach millions of c speeds. GCS.Net would at least use a single self-consistent example.)
- "Parallax"[VOY1]'s trip inside a black hole? Baseline hull resiliency calculation, here we come! And it wasn't just Voyager that should've been squished in there . . . a shuttle was inside it too. Sure, we've seen shuttles break when smacking into the ground, but that's different due to some flimsy excuse we'll come up with and all repeat like a mantra. God, don't you know anything?
Starship and Shuttle hulls = roxorz
Starship and Shuttle Acceleration = millions upon millions of g
(SD.Net and its board denizens calc SW ship hull resilience based on an example of the Falcon passing close to a neutron star in one of the books. Speaking of which, if GCS.Net used Trek books then we'd have multiple examples of starships entering black holes.)
- Star Trek III and Sulu's scanning of the planet's core with the tricorder? Baseline tricorder range.
Tricorder = "Sir, my tricorder detects Imperials!" "On which planet?"
(SD.Net and its board denizens calculate Imperial sensor tech off of various outlier EU data, ignoring things like TESB's "Is that a Millennium Falcon on your hull or are you just happy to see me?")
- "Obsession"[TOS] antimatter calcs? Standard for antimatter reactors. After all, the talk of a dilithium matrix actually may serve as the explanation for the extra juice the core puts out over and above what it probably should per real antimatter, not to mention the weird radiation the Malon dealt with in VOY.
Antimatter = about 28.6 million gigatons / gram, give or take
(SD.Net and its board denizens calculate SW reactor tech by way of making false assumptions about the Death Star and then scaling down. IIRC someone once pointed out that this should result in something like 1 gigaton hand weapons, but they drop it down a bit in practice. Isn't that nice of them?)
- "The Die is Cast"[DSN3] planetary attack calcs? Standard weapons yields. Sure we've seen 'em fire with less effect, but these are precision weapons.
Torpedoes = millions of megatons per shot, or better
(SD.Net and its board denizens calculate vessel firepower via the aforementioned false assumptions regarding the Death Star, and again scale downward. They've also taken some EU data and diddled with it until they could inflate it beyond the original EU statements. And, they explicitly ignore the movie yields in favor of comic book versions of weapons shots. I'm sure GCS.Net can jack up the Trek yields even further with effort.)
. . . and so on. Oh, yeah, and while we'd give the appearance of using evidence, we'd really just be trying to persuade readers by any means necessary that Trek could beat Wars, and wouldn't be afraid to say so every once in awhile.
Only then would GCS.Net be equal and opposite.
As it stands, I'm happy to keep ST-v-SW.Net straddling the proverbial fence.