Fleet/battle style comparison across universes

[Jim]

I have often pondered the differences in the style of ship and battle plans over the different sci-fi universes. A vast majority of my thoughts fall to the differences if fighter use... but this is a quick listing that I came up with comparing ship styles technology across the main sci-fi universes. Not looking for 100% canon, nor full detail specifics, just relatively accurate general trends.


Star Trek
Capital ships: High number of medium size with medium mobility. Shields: Yes
Energy weapons: Low number high output multi-directional
Torpedos: Yes
Non energy weapons: None
Fighters: Basically no real fighter support.
Basically a dog-fighting capital ship system. A high-power, mobile slugfest. The ships fly around takins shot at each other trying to avoid getting shot and wearing down the opponents shields. Due to a lack of fighters or masive warships, the capital ships can command power on their own.


Star Wars
Capital ships: Medium number of large size with little mobility.
Shields: Yes
Energy weapons: Many low/medium power multi-directional
Torpedos: Yes
Non energy weapons: None
Fighters: Many high mobility fighters. Some shielded. Low power energy weapons, some having torpedos.
Basically a WW2 aircraft carrier system with escort. The small mobile fighters dogfight and attack typically stand-off capital ships. The capital ships will engage like battleship support. The capital ships are powerful, but their lack of mobility is a weakness which causes them to take major damage in close capital ship combat.


Babylon 5
Capital ships: Medium number of large size with VERY little mobility.
Shields: No (some low energy absorbing skins)
Energy weapons: Few high power Uni-directional
Torpedos: None
Non energy weapons: None
Fighters: Medium number of very high mobility with low power energy weapons.
(*Whitestars are an exception. Small capital ships with high mobility and high firepower, with low energy absorbing skin.)
More of a mast-ship broadside system (only head to head). The rather immobile capitalships will slug it out with one another typically causing masive damage to all ships due to lack of shields. The fighters will sometimes run the capital ships but typically fight other fighters.


Battlestar Galacta (pre-fall)
Capital ships: Low number of large size with low mobility
Shields: No
Energy weapons: None
Torpedos: High power (nuke)
Non energy weapons: Many medium power multi-directional
Fighters: Low number of medium mobility fighters with no shields. low power weapons.
Basically a WW2 aircraft carrier system, without escort. The immobility of the capital ships would cause them to try to avoid direct contact with enemy capital ships. The fighters typically fo the fighting. The lack of number of capital ships tend to lead to a flight response rather than capital ship engagement.


Stargate
Capital ships: Low number of medium size with medium mobility.
Shields: Yes
Energy weapons: Some medium to high power
Torpedos: Some high power
Non energy weapons: None
Fighters: Low number of medium mobility with no shields. Low power weapons.
A mast-ship broadside system. Capital ships tend to simply fire all weapons at each other hoping to cause the others shields to fail and therefore win the fight. Fighters do not tend to engage the capital ships, only each other.


What does everyone thing? Relatively accurate? Alteration suggestions?

[Granitehewer]

careful because versus debates tends to attract rabid fanatics and results in unpleasantries, even though this isn't one

[Jim]

careful because versus debates tends to attract rabid fanatics and results in unpleasantries, even though this isn't one

I tried to stay away from cors comparing the universes. I only used real universe style comparisons.

[Granitehewer]

yeah and its sensible stuff, but alot of net trawlers aren't as sensible as you

[RK_Striker_JK_5]

yeah and its sensible stuff, but alot of net trawlers aren't as sensible as you

Sad, but true. I've seen message boards go down in total flame wars form SW vs. ST at least.

Still, good analyses(sp) here. I can't comment on the Galactica one, though, having only seen the pilot.

[Granitehewer]

a forum or discussion board,shouldn't be used for abuse or coercion and therefore intimidating others into not writing or debating certain things, yet it happens, thankfully not here yet

[Jim]

a forum or discussion board,shouldn't be used for abuse or coercion and therefore intimidating others into not writing or debating certain things, yet it happens, thankfully not here yet

Don't misunderstand, I can trhow down with the best of them... but the board rules ask otherwise so I shall bed to their wishes.

I wasn't sure if my real life analogies were the best for each style. I tried to come with with the best natches, but someone with a keener military mind might see closer comparisions elsewhere.

[Granitehewer]

there was no misunderstanding at all, merely relief, that everyone here is sensible

[Monroe]

Here's my take:

Star Trek treats all their ships as fighters. Probably more realistic in the mobility factor. Almost like a bunch of calvary fighting each other.

Star Wars is like classical naval engagements. Because in this universe capital ships are slow fighters have a major role to play. Capital to capital reminds me a lot of old British fleet engagements where they try to cross the 'T' to bring the most guns to bear on an enemy.

Babylon 5: I agree with you here too. Fighters evolved due to sluggish of their capital ships fighters cover the weak points.

I don't know the other universes well. I think those three you did a good job annaylizing their tactics.

[Granitehewer]

In terms of the manner of their own offensive and defensive capabilities, and strategic applications, surely Battlestar Galactica and Star destroyers are more akin to the modern carriers like Kuznetsov, Invincible, CVN 78 or Nimitz class rather than the world war two aircraft carriers like the Lexington, escort carriers and battlecarriers (traditionally a japanese concept with ise's and mogamis)?
Good ideas there, you write well

[Jim]

In terms of the manner of their own offensive and defensive capabilities, and strategical applications, surely Battlestar Galactica and Star destroyers are more akin to the modern Kuznetsov, Invincible, CVN 78 or Nimitz class rather than the world war two aircraft carriers like the Lexington, battlecarriers (traditionally a japanese concept with ise's and mogamis), and escort carriers?

True on tech, but there has not been a MAJOR naval battle since WW2. Technically, even then there was limited ship to ship fighting. It basically ended up being plane to ship fighting before long. There were some battleship/Destroyer battles around the Indonesia area, but I think there was not really that much.

Therefore I was just using the idea that the fighters come out of the aircraft carriers, Star Destroyers, Battlestars, etc.

[Granitehewer]

Well i wasn't talking about 'MAJOR' confrontations, escalations, embargos, exercises or skirmishes, merely that the capabilities/applications of the aforementioned sci fi vessels would be closer to modern carriers. These carriers have seen alot of action, whether it be in the various Persian Gulf theatres, the Amur River or exercises off the Spratly islands, strait of Formosa etc, and so the warfare might not bear any semblance but the capabilities of individual ships or ship classes might.

[Jim]

True. Modern ships typically bombard land targets. This would equate to massive planetary bombardment. Star Destroyers are known for that but I do not know if Battlestars do that or not. However, in none of the universes mentioned above is planetary bombardment a norm. It's a constant threat in SW, but on B5 really showed it happening.

[Granitehewer]

you'll know more than me, i only managed a few dozen epis of B5ive

[Graham Kennedy]

I always thought B5 fighters seemed to pack more of a relative punch than in most sci fi universes. As I recall part of a squadron - four or five fighters - took out a Centauri cruiser on at least one occasion, and did it quickly too. While much combat did end up with capital ships duking it out one on one, fighters seemed to be a much more potent offensive weapon than is the norm.


And yeah, so long as we're all talking about the different combat models in use and not "well Warsie fighters would ROOL a Galaxy class!" or the like, there's no problem.