www.ditl.org

m52nickerson wrote:The Remen tactical officer might not have followed orders. That is just as likely as Worf or Laforge misreading sensors. We also know that shots were fired while were watching events inside the ships.

No, it isn't. Misreading the sensors could be due to anything from deliberate trickery on the part of the Scimitar, misidentifying various other systems as weapons, or simple interferrence from the hull, thaleron generator, etc.

Blantant insubordination is another matter entirely.

Maybe their gigantic fingernails prevented them from firing more than one or two disruptors at a time.

Watch the beginning of the Thalaron sequence if you're wondering what I'm talking about.

Rochey wrote:No, you don't. If you can't use those guns, then they have no effect on the ship's effectiveness in combat.

I'm sure that I wrote somewhere, that when you decloake you have more firepower avalible. In what tactical situation does that become usefull. Maybe when your cloake gets defeated and doesn't offer any advatage in combat. When in combat there is no longer a diffrence if you fight with your cloake on or off. In any designe you have to look into the future not the present.

Yes, the ship was designed primarily around the thelaron weapon. In addition, it was designed for combat. Hence why it was designed to allow it to stay cloaked while firing.

Well realy it was designed for combat. Than tell me why does it 52 distruptor banks but it can only fire two while under cloake. If it was fully designed for combat than while under cloake it could fire all of its weapons not only 2.

So what?

At what point would cordinated attacks render the cloake uselles. And it would be a better option to decloake and have more firepower at your disposal.

And then you risk taking more damage in return. It'd be far smarter simply to wait behind the cloak and pick them off one by one if necessary.

It was nicely shown, that more ships are effective against the Scimitar. At some point the cloake would offer no advatage, but your additional firepower would.

The only way those 47 other guns would be useful in a battle is if your power reserves were so low that you could no longer power the cloak. But if you don't have the power to run the cloak, and those 47 guns require the same amount of power as the cloak, then you won't be able to use those extra guns either. So they're still of no use.

But what if your cloake gets damagedy, disabled and beaten, than you are left with power that you can't use. At least having aditonal guns offers you aternatives.

mlsnoopy wrote:I'm sure that I wrote somewhere, that when you decloake you have more firepower avalible. In what tactical situation does that become usefull. Maybe when your cloake gets defeated and doesn't offer any advatage in combat. When in combat there is no longer a diffrence if you fight with your cloake on or off. In any designe you have to look into the future not the present.

The fundamental purpose of the Scimitar was to fight under cloak. Moreover, it was highly manoeuverable, and heavilly shielded. If it hadn't been for Shinzon's incompetence and Troi's telepathic trick, neither of which could have been specifically anticipated in the design, the cloak would never have been disabled in the first place. While I agree that assuming that the cloak would never be disabled would be a bad thing, building in a massive armament that would be useless in all but a small number of encounters is a waste of space.

Well realy it was designed for combat. Than tell me why does it 52 distruptor banks but it can only fire two while under cloake. If it was fully designed for combat than while under cloake it could fire all of its weapons not only 2.

Easy - it hasn't got 52 disruptors.

It was nicely shown, that more ships are effective against the Scimitar. At some point the cloake would offer no advatage, but your additional firepower would.

It was shown that multiple ships are effective against the Scimitar when its commander is grossly incompetent. A competent commander would have simply kept well away from the ships, and either engaged from long range or used fast passes to get in, hit his chosen target, and get out.

The fundamental purpose of the Scimitar was to fight under cloak.

But there is no way, that the Remans could know, that the cloake would be perfecte. That Sf couldn't find a way to penatreate the cloake. THey have a long history of quickly countering new developments. The Klinkon BOP, was defeated on the second encounter, the polarnon weapons were againe quicly countered, than there is the tycon detection grid,...
So they did the only smart thing. They anticipated that the cloake will be penetrated and they gave their captains an aternative.

Easy - it hasn't got 52 disruptors.

Evidence.

to anything from deliberate trickery

For wich we have no basis.

misidentifying various other systems as weapons

Given that the analize was made by an experince tactical officer. Againe higly unlikly. And do you have any examples that a something else was ever indentifyed as a weapon system.

simple interferrence from the hull, thaleron generator

Could be, but the fact that sensors picked up thaleron radiation shows that there was no interference and that the sensors worked normaly.

Alternative. They have 52 distruptors, but cant power them while under cloake.
We know that normal cloakes prevent the use of weapons and shields because of high power uses. So thise option has some backing in canon.

A competent commander would have simply kept well away from the ships, and either engaged from long range or used fast passes to get in, hit his chosen target, and get out.

You make it sound like the other captaines will not do anything. That they will not try to close the distance, that they will not try to track where the Scimitar is moving, that they will not try to cordinate their attacks,...

But there is no way, that the Remans could know, that the cloake would be perfecte. That Sf couldn't find a way to penatreate the cloake. THey have a long history of quickly countering new developments. The Klinkon BOP, was defeated on the second encounter, the polarnon weapons were againe quicly countered, than there is the tycon detection grid,...
So they did the only smart thing. They anticipated that the cloake will be penetrated and they gave their captains an aternative.

There's a little thing called "testing" that would help determine Starfleet's effectiveness at countering such things quite nicely.

Evidence.

The fact that 52 disruptors were never observed. This has been said numerous times over the course of the thread. Please pay attention.

Secondly, it is not my job to prove that there aren't 52 disruptors, it is your job to prove there are.

For wich we have no basis.

Actualy, we do. The mere fact that the sensors reported something that was clearly wrong gives credence to the idea that there was some sort of sensor trickery going on.

Given that the analize was made by an experince tactical officer. Againe higly unlikly.

Worf isn't perfect. Real life officers with decades of experience could easily make mistakes, even within their field of expertise.

And do you have any examples that a something else was ever indentifyed as a weapon system.

Could you clarify this sentance? I don't know what you're asking me.

Could be, but the fact that sensors picked up thaleron radiation shows that there was no interference and that the sensors worked normaly.

I meant interference of the type that would prevent them getting specific info. Simple and obvious info like "there's thelaron radition around here" wouldn't be affected unless the sensors were being deliberately blocked.

Alternative. They have 52 distruptors, but cant power them while under cloake.
We know that normal cloakes prevent the use of weapons and shields because of high power uses. So thise option has some backing in canon.

And then we're back to the fact that it makes no sense to equip an already hideously expensive ship with a tonne of weapons it will never use.

You make it sound like the other captaines will not do anything. That they will not try to close the distance, that they will not try to track where the Scimitar is moving, that they will not try to cordinate their attacks,..

Of course they'll try and do that stuff. But with the cloak you have a massive advantage. One that, with inteligence, could make the ship practicaly undefeatable.

Rochey wrote:

But there is no way, that the Remans could know, that the cloake would be perfecte. That Sf couldn't find a way to penatreate the cloake. THey have a long history of quickly countering new developments. The Klinkon BOP, was defeated on the second encounter, the polarnon weapons were againe quicly countered, than there is the tycon detection grid,...
So they did the only smart thing. They anticipated that the cloake will be penetrated and they gave their captains an aternative.

There's a little thing called "testing" that would help determine Starfleet's effectiveness at countering such things quite nicely.

Even testing would not guarantee absolute protection.

Evidence.

The fact that 52 disruptors were never observed. This has been said numerous times over the course of the thread. Please pay attention.

Secondly, it is not my job to prove that there aren't 52 disruptors, it is your job to prove there are.

The fact that we did not see the whole battle, proved by the fact we do not see nearly all the torpedoes fired from the Enterprise, means that we might not have seen all the disruptors firing, not that they are not there.

Since we have it from the movie that there are 52 disruptors on the scimitar and nothing but incomplete visuals of the battle there is no concrete evidence that there are not that many.

For wich we have no basis.

Actualy, we do. The mere fact that the sensors reported something that was clearly wrong gives credence to the idea that there was some sort of sensor trickery going on.

Again, you are basing this on incomplete visuals from the battle, if we go by them the Enterprise must have only had twenty or so torpedoes, we know that is incorrect.

Given that the analize was made by an experince tactical officer. Againe higly unlikly.

Worf isn't perfect. Real life officers with decades of experience could easily make mistakes, even within their field of expertise.

No Worf is not perfect, but there no solid evidence to indicate a mistake.

And do you have any examples that a something else was ever indentifyed as a weapon system.

Could you clarify this sentance? I don't know what you're asking me.

He is asking if there has ever been another time were sensors read other systems as weapons when they are not.

Could be, but the fact that sensors picked up thaleron radiation shows that there was no interference and that the sensors worked normaly.

I meant interference of the type that would prevent them getting specific info. Simple and obvious info like "there's thelaron radition around here" wouldn't be affected unless the sensors were being deliberately blocked.

....and Worf probable would had indicated some type of interference with the sensors that would have put the number of weapons in suspect.

Alternative. They have 52 distruptors, but cant power them while under cloake.
We know that normal cloakes prevent the use of weapons and shields because of high power uses. So thise option has some backing in canon.

And then we're back to the fact that it makes no sense to equip an already hideously expensive ship with a tonne of weapons it will never use.

Never use while cloaked. Now if an enemy ship is sitting there unprepared and the scimitar could uncloak, fire all of those extra disruptors and destroy the ship in one blast it would eliminate the chance of the other ship to do any damage the Scimitar.

You make it sound like the other captaines will not do anything. That they will not try to close the distance, that they will not try to track where the Scimitar is moving, that they will not try to cordinate their attacks,..

Of course they'll try and do that stuff. But with the cloak you have a massive advantage. One that, with inteligence, could make the ship practicaly undefeatable.

Unless the cloak is defeated.........never put your eggs in one basket.

Rochey wrote:There's a little thing called "testing" that would help determine Starfleet's effectiveness at countering such things quite nicely.

Hm. How do you test, how SF would counter your pefecte cloake. Remeber at long ranges, a few ly away the cloakes work fine but closer you get the more chance you have at being spoted.

The fact that 52 disruptors were never observed.

But that doesn't nagate Worf's statment.

Secondly, it is not my job to prove that there aren't 52 disruptors

Well I belive it is. Worf clearly reported a nummber. A number that none else with accese to sensor data oposed. I gave a reason, wich is based on canon facts why the Scimitar wouldn't be able to fire all of its weapons while under cloake.

Actualy, we do. The mere fact that the sensors reported something that was clearly wrong gives credence to the idea that there was some sort of sensor trickery going on.

What. The sensors worked fine. So the number must be correct.

Worf isn't perfect. Real life officers with decades of experience could easily make mistakes, even within their field of expertise.

Hm. There were how many distruptors fired 3-4. And worf reported 52. Well it's hard to make such a mistake. And there is atleast one more pearson that has acces to sensor data. thats Data, who would have corrected him if something was wrong.

Could you clarify this sentance? I don't know what you're asking me.

In all of Trek, was there ever an event where one system was indentified as a distruptor, but it later turned out it wasn't a distruptor.

I meant interference of the type that would prevent them getting specific info.

Well is there any evidence for anykind of interference. I beliv not.

Simple and obvious info like "there's thelaron radition around here" wouldn't be affected unless the sensors were being deliberately blocked.

The Scimitar was designed to destroy planets with Thalaron radiation. Now wouldn't it be better to somehow hide the thelaron than to use it as interference.
Trek sensors are subspace based. We don't know how thalaron interacts with subspace, and how would it interfer with sensors.

And then we're back to the fact that it makes no sense to equip an already hideously expensive ship with a tonne of weapons it will never use.

Firs why is the ship expensive. What do you base that upon. How does it cost compare to the warbirds. Well we don't know. What kind of materials were used in its construction. Was shinzon able to get top material or did he have to be satisfyed with something less. I belive that there is to much unknown here. So you can use superlatives for something that you can not prove.

The only problem is that the weapons will be used as soon as the cloake gets defeated. We don't know how long it would take. It could be never, or the fleet that was waiting for the E-E could have allready have something preapeared. NOw what do you do with your ship class whaen that will happen. Redesign it, upgrade it,...

Of course they'll try and do that stuff. But with the cloak you have a massive advantage.

Naturaly.

One that, with inteligence, could make the ship practicaly undefeatable.

Maybe.

I hate to intrude on your privacy here, but two quick points and then I'll let you get back to it. #1 - in general, it's nonsensical to ask for evidence of a negative quality, like the absence of something. Proof must be provided for the presence of something; otherwise, logic dictates that we can assume that something's absence.

#2 - as to this:

mlsnoopy wrote:But there is no way, that the Remans could know, that the cloake would be perfecte. That Sf couldn't find a way to penatreate the cloake. THey have a long history of quickly countering new developments. The Klinkon BOP, was defeated on the second encounter, the polarnon weapons were againe quicly countered, than there is the tycon detection grid,...
So they did the only smart thing. They anticipated that the cloake will be penetrated and they gave their captains an aternative.

m52nickerson wrote:Even testing would not guarantee absolute protection.

Do you guys realize that what you are saying basically means that, by your logic, the Romulans should have just said, "There's a chance that our cloak isn't infallible, so we might as well give up on cloaking technology altogether?" Honestly, by your reasoning, the Romulans, Klingons, etc., should all have stopped using cloaking technology well before the TNG era. There's a chance that body armor will stop a bullet - are you advocating the idea that all soldiery give up using firearms?

Mikey wrote:I hate to intrude on your privacy here, but two quick points and then I'll let you get back to it. #1 - in general, it's nonsensical to ask for evidence of a negative quality, like the absence of something. Proof must be provided for the presence of something; otherwise, logic dictates that we can assume that something's absence.

In the real world yes. We are talking about a movie. It was stated that the Scimitar had 52 disruptors. Nothing else stated in the movie would suggest different.

Mikey wrote:#2 - as to this:

mlsnoopy wrote:But there is no way, that the Remans could know, that the cloake would be perfecte. That Sf couldn't find a way to penatreate the cloake. THey have a long history of quickly countering new developments. The Klinkon BOP, was defeated on the second encounter, the polarnon weapons were againe quicly countered, than there is the tycon detection grid,...
So they did the only smart thing. They anticipated that the cloake will be penetrated and they gave their captains an aternative.

m52nickerson wrote:Even testing would not guarantee absolute protection.

Do you guys realize that what you are saying basically means that, by your logic, the Romulans should have just said, "There's a chance that our cloak isn't infallible, so we might as well give up on cloaking technology altogether?" Honestly, by your reasoning, the Romulans, Klingons, etc., should all have stopped using cloaking technology well before the TNG era. There's a chance that body armor will stop a bullet - are you advocating the idea that all soldiery give up using firearms?

No one is saying that they should have just given it up, but perhaps they build the Scimitar with a backup strategy in mind if the cloak was defeated.

m52nickerson wrote:It was stated that the Scimitar had 52 disruptors. Nothing else stated in the movie would suggest different.

Fair enough. I was only responding to the fact that you asked Rochey to prove an absence.

m52nickerson wrote:No one is saying that they should have just given it up, but perhaps they build the Scimitar with a backup strategy in mind if the cloak was defeated.

Backup planning is admirable; but to design the Scimitar with the central idea that the cloak would fail would be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Mikey wrote: Fair enough. I was only responding to the fact that you asked Rochey to prove an absence.

....and in this case the movie dialogue tells us that the Scimitar has 52 disrupors, so if someone wants to state otherwise they would have to show some type of proof.

Mikey wrote:Backup planning is admirable; but to design the Scimitar with the central idea that the cloak would fail would be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

If the cloak failed, the backups would be designed if not when.

I'm in a hurry, so I can't respond to the two major posts, I'll just respond to this since it's the crux of the whole argument:

..and in this case the movie dialogue tells us that the Scimitar has 52 disrupors, so if someone wants to state otherwise they would have to show some type of proof.

I have provided my proof already. I have also given several reasons as to why the number of disruptors Worf called out could have easily been wrong.

If the cloak failed, the backups would be designed if not when

Those backups make an already hideously expensive and complex vessel far more so. To shove on a whole tonne of weapons that will probably never see use is a massive waste of resources.
The Scimitar was designed to fight under cloak. Ergo, adding 47 more guns that cannot fire when cloaked is pointless. If the cloak is damaged beyond repair, the ship should retreat out of the combat zone (which its powerful shields would be more than able to allow it to do).

So with that in mind, we can come to one of two conclusion:
Worf was, for whichever reason you choose to pick, wrong when he called out the Scimitar's armament, and as observed the ship has far less weapons.
Or
Worf was right in his analysis, and the Romulans/Remans decided to waste a massive amount of money and resources and increase the mass, complexity and construction time of a ship that already had seriously high levels in all of those factors.

Personaly, I find option 1 to be the more plausable.

m52nickerson wrote:In the real world yes. We are talking about a movie. It was stated that the Scimitar had 52 disruptors. Nothing else stated in the movie would suggest different.

1) As Rochey has frequently stated, we have plenty of evidence - the fact that we didn't see anything like 52 weapons fired during the battle.

2) Under suspension of disbelief we have to treat the film as documentary footage of the events it depicts. In the specific case of Worf's tactical readout, we can state as fact that Worf said that the Scimitar had 52 disruptors. Not that that information is necessarily correct. People are falible. Visuals, under SoD, aren't.

To reiterate in a slightly different way what Seafort mentions:

m52nickerson wrote:....and in this case the movie dialogue tells us that the Scimitar has 52 disrupors, so if someone wants to state otherwise they would have to show some type of proof.

The movie dialogue tells us that a character states that the Scimitar has 52 disruptors. A small but important distinction. In this case, canon relates to what Worf says - not necessarily the veracity of his statement.