movies/tv Star Wars vs Star Trek

[Not_A_Replicant 109]

Star Wars all the way, but you can't forget John De Lancie

 

[nx9100 1,013]

 

 

Star Wars all the way, but you can't forget John De Lancie

 

heck yeah!  Q was ALWAYS the best character!  Got to meet John at comic con in chicago back in 2010.  he's hysterical! lol

[Not_A_Replicant 109]

heck yeah!  Q was ALWAYS the best character!  Got to meet John at comic con in chicago back in 2010.  he's hysterical! lol

I've wanted to meet John for a while, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

[Sazama Ichida 2,367]

Star Wars. No Contest lol.

[DATA EXPUNGED 324]

Well, you claim that an Imperial Class I Star Destroyer would defeat a Star Fleet Prometheus-class starship.  Please, feel free to elaborate....

 

*Giga-Nerd Mode Engaged*

 

Let me begin by saying that I am using two (canon) resources for both Star Wars, and Star Trek that give real world units in reference to their ships. For Starwars, ill be using the "Star Wars II Incredible Cross Sections" technical novel, and for Star Trek, I'll be using the "Star Trek The Next Generation Technical Manual." 

 

Now, before we delve into the numbers, I want to get something forward. Sure, in Star Trek, "lasers" are considered primitive when compared to "phasers," but in Star Trek, "Lasers" are what we encounter here in our universe. They are an Intense beam of Coherent Light that travels at the speed of light. "Lasers" in Star Wars are highly Visible solid beams of slow moving (well, you can actually see them travel) energy that almost explodes on contact. So obviously, Star Trek, and Star Wars have different ideas of what a "laser" is. 

 

Moving on. Lets look at the destructive power outputs of some of the weapons on a Enterprise Class D starship in Giga Watts (GW)

Main Phasers =  3.6 GW (there are 200 phaser emitters, clocked at 5.1 MW each)

Photon Torpedo's = 64 Megatons maximum (considering the destructive payload of 1.5 kg of antimatter)

Operational Range = 2750 Light years (considering it can travel 7 years at warp 6 before refuelling)

Shield Heat Dispension: 3311 GW max

Main Propulsion Reactor Power: 4 billion GW

 

Now lets look at the Destructive Power output of an Acclamator Class Star Destroyer

Light weapons =  300 Million GW (24 Turbo-Laser Turrets clocked at 12.5 million GW each)

Heavy Weapons = 3.2 Billion GW (12 Turbo-Laser Turrets clocked at 266 Million GW each)

Operational Range = 250,000 Light Years

Shield Heat Dispersion = 75 Trillion GW peak

Main Propulsion Reactor Power = 200 Trillion GW max

 

Now I can already hear you saying "Thats an Enterprise Class D, but the Prometheus is hundreds of times more powerful"

Well the Prometheus is not in my book (the episode where the Prometheus was unveiled came out after this book was published, im pretty sure anyway), and even so, If you were to times all of the specs of the Enterprise D by 100, it would still not mach. Besides, The Acclamator is at least 10 times weaker than the Imperial Class I Star Destroyer. Simply put, the Entirety of the Federations Fleet would get ravaged by 1 Star Destroyer fairly easily. 

 

*Giga-Nerd Mode Disengaged*

Edited March 31, 2015 by DATA EXPUNGED

[Sazama Ichida 2,367]

Star Trek was just too boring for my taste but that's just me.

[nx9100 1,013]

@@DATA EXPUNGED, very nice job on the research!  I commend you.  Now, for my rebuttal....

Yes, it is true that Star Wars ships have weapons that have much higher power levels than ships of Trek.  The big difference, however, is how they USE that power.  a turbolaser is just an unfocused blast of raw energy.  Phaser weapons don't need such high levels of power, since they are focused beams that are able to concentrate most of their energy on a single point.  I have to find the source, but I do recall reading somewhere that a Star Wars weapon is so powerful, because they loose a significant amount of energy in the transit from weapon to target.  Phasers do not have such a power drop.  But the real factor is again, how they are used.  

 

The Prometheus, as most 24th century starships, has two major advantages.  First, it's shields.  visual evidence clearly shows that Star Trek's shields are superior to those of Wars, even if only for a short time.  But that time would allow for the ship to use its second advantage, maneuverability.  Star Destroyers are slooooowwwww.......  they don't turn quickly, don't move fast at sublight, and just lack overall maneuverability.  The Prometheus would be able to survive enough hits while it simply out-flys the bigger ship, and gets in behind and below it, which I believe Star Destroyers have few, if any, heavy weapons to defend their flanks.  Those massive engine exhausts make awfully temping targets....  not to mention the main reactor that's sticking out the bottom of the Destroyer's hull.  a few well placed photon or quantum torpedoes, and it's disabled.  

 

Oh, and the Prometheus-class have their own unique advantage: Multi-Vector Assault Mode.  This allows the ship to split into 3 separate ships, all with full weapons and warp capability.  One ship becomes 3, which can quickly overwhelm unsuspecting targets.  

 

 

 

Another major advantage that would allow the Prometheus to out-maneuver the Destroyer is warp speed.  unlike hyperdrive, where the ship is effectively blind and unmaneuverable until it stops, Federation starships can still fight, communicate, and operate normally while at warp speed.  Prometheus could simply make a quick jump to warp out of the Destroyer's weapons range, turn around, jump back, switch to assault mode while at warp, and fire off a barrage of torpedoes without stopping and giving the Destroyer a chance to return fire.  they can use this to quickly get behind the Destroyer with one section, while the other two attack from the front and bottom as distractions. 

 

Yes, Wars have the numbers.  Yes, they have the power levels.  We (aka Trek) have the technology.

 

(lol, this is fun!  but off to bed now....)

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

A good Star Trek episode is one that makes you think. It's the kind of story that you will talk about with people. This is true for all of the series. They are full of social commentary. It is a thinking person's sci-fi. Star Wars is pretty much the opposite. When you watch Star Wars, you turn off your brain and enjoy the pretty special effects. It's really not even fair to compare the two. We only do so because they both have "Star" in their names. But it's like comparing Star Trek to Lord of the Rings (as was mentioned earlier). 

 

Typical Star Trek plot: The aliens seem hostile. We will use science / reason / diplomacy / appeal to humanity / force as a last resort to solve the problem.

 

Star Wars. Use the force and fight with swords. Swords! Against guns! And don't tell me that you can block blaster shots with the force. That only works when someone shoots a couple shots. It makes for good cinema, but it makes no sense. I'd like to see them block full auto machine gun fire. So basically it's an appeal to magic. Hence why it's a space fantasy, not sci-fi.

 

Jar Jar Binks. I rest my case.

[DATA EXPUNGED 324]

The Prometheus would be able to survive enough hits while it simply out-flys the bigger ship, and gets in behind and below it, which I believe Star Destroyers have few, if any, heavy weapons to defend their flanks

 

I too, commend your research, however there are two flaws with your comment about out manoeuvrability. First, Most Imperial Vessels (I mean all the vessels developed past 12 BBY ) are equipped with Tractor Beams. This would effectively keep the Prometheus in one place and let the Star Destroyer blast it with Concussion missiles.

 

Second, The Star Destroyer is slow, but it also has 4 squadrons of TIE Fighters (12 per Squadron), and 1 Squadron of TIE Bombers. And about your comment regarding Hyperspace, when you fly in hyperspace, you aren't flying "blindly," you are flying a very specific path that you designated through coordinates. Your craft is also not piloted by Humans at this point, as flying in hyperspace is done by highly advanced flight computers. Also Hyperspace is MUCH faster than Warp Speed.

 

About the Prometheus fireing out of the Star Destroyers Range, The combat range of the Prometheus is about 20 km if I remember correcly, however the combat range of a Star Destroyer is about 3,400 km in comparison.  Another asset that the Star Destroyer has is Ion Cannons, who's main purpose is disabling shields and shutting down electronics. Think of it as an EMP blast. Anyway, I'm tired and need to go to retire to my quarters for rest. I'll continue this later. 

A good Star Trek episode is one that makes you think. It's the kind of story that you will talk about with people. This is true for all of the series. They are full of social commentary. It is a thinking person's sci-fi. Star Wars is pretty much the opposite. When you watch Star Wars, you turn off your brain and enjoy the pretty special effects. It's really not even fair to compare the two. We only do so because they both have "Star" in their names. But it's like comparing Star Trek to Lord of the Rings (as was mentioned earlier). 

 

Typical Star Trek plot: The aliens seem hostile. We will use science / reason / diplomacy / appeal to humanity / force as a last resort to solve the problem.

 

Star Wars. Use the force and fight with swords. Swords! Against guns! And don't tell me that you can block blaster shots with the force. That only works when someone shoots a couple shots. It makes for good cinema, but it makes no sense. I'd like to see them block full auto machine gun fire. So basically it's an appeal to magic. Hence why it's a space fantasy, not sci-fi.

 

Jar Jar Binks. I rest my case.

For starters, Their not SWORDS (you should have said VibroBlade, then We could talk) Their called Lightsabers. Also, blasters and guns are tow different thins, but there are "Guns" In Star-Wars, however their called slug-slingers. Also, If you don't consider Star-Wars a Sci-Fi, but rather, a space drama, then what does that make Star-Trek? A space Sitcom? Also, shots fired by slug-slingers (which have much higher muzzle velocity than our real world counterparts) have been blocked by force users. We have Jar-Jar binks, yes, but you guys got Tribbles to deal with, so yeah. 

Edited March 31, 2015 by DATA EXPUNGED

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

 

 

For starters, Their not SWORDS (you should have said VibroBlade, then We could talk) Their called Lightsabers. Also, blasters and guns are tow different thins, but there are "Guns" In Star-Wars, however their called slug-slingers. Also, If you don't consider Star-Wars a Sci-Fi, but rather, a space drama, then what does that make Star-Trek? A space Sitcom? Also, shots fired by slug-slingers (which have much higher muzzle velocity than our real world counterparts) have been blocked by force users. We have Jar-Jar binks, yes, but you guys got Tribbles to deal with, so yeah. 

 

 

One, it's “they're” not “their.” Two, tribbles are great. Three, you can call them light sabers or vibrators or whatever, but they are glow stick swords. The kids love them and they make great toys. Selling toys is the main reason Star Wars exists. How many Darth Vader action figures do we need every Christmas? They've milked the same 3 movies for almost 40 years.

 

I've never heard the term “slug slingers,” but I imagine it was created so that they didn't have to call them “machine guns.” That way, they sound exotic and remind the audience that this is not our world. It really stretches the believability to imagine someone blocking a hail of “slugs” using magic, I mean, the force. The way to kill a Jedi is to flank him and shoot him. Chances are his bath robes will block his peripheral vision. Spoony has a great video where he totally destroys a Star Wars RPG by fighting logically and using the weapons given in the rules. Basically he throws explosives at the Sith. Yeah, force block a hand grenade! Or what is it called, a “boom popper?” I haven't read any Star Wars books, but I'm sure there is some scene where a Jedi indeed does stop a barrage of “slugs” with his “force.” And that's totally fine! That's the mythos of that universe. But, again, it's magic. You can claim metacloreans, but operationally it's magic. Star Trek has some crazy, off the wall stuff. There are 700+ episodes, there is bound to be crazy stuff. But typically it's based on science, or the idea that science is the answer.

 

Spock: “Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end.”

Hell yeah it is!

 

Yoda: “Do or do not, there is no try.”

Uhh, what?....

[Twilight Dirac 721]

Now lets look at the Destructive Power output of an Acclamator Class Star Destroyer Light weapons =  300 Million GW (24 Turbo-Laser Turrets clocked at 12.5 million GW each) Heavy Weapons = 3.2 Billion GW (12 Turbo-Laser Turrets clocked at 266 Million GW each) Operational Range = 250,000 Light Years Shield Heat Dispersion = 75 Trillion GW peak Main Propulsion Reactor Power = 200 Trillion GW max

 

In defense of Star Trek, these numbers are absolutely absurd and don't mesh up with anything seen in the actual movies, where nothing close to this amount of power or energy is thrown around.  Heck, we see a super star destroyer's bridge shields get taken out by the basic guns of some one man fighters in episode 6 and then the bridge along with the rest of the ship was taken out my a kamikaze collision by a single A-wing.  If that is what a few fighters can do to a super star destroyer, anti-matter weapons (which are basically hydrogen bombs on steroids are far as destructive potential goes) would rip a Star Destroyer apart relatively quickly.  And no nothing in the movies suggest the starfighter blasters are hitting anywhere close to that kind of destructive potential, as each shot would have to carry enough energy to vaporize everything within a several mile radius (and everyone in the palace hanger bay in that scene in Episode I would have instantly died as soon as Anakin pulled the trigger once).  I am obviously judging by the movies but they ought take precedent over some technical manual written by a fanboy pulling numbers out of his rear end.

 

To be fair the weapons in Star Trek do not behave like they should either.  Then again, actual space combat would be insanely deadly and weapon hits likely instantly lethal to anything they struck, rendering the tactics present in either series suicidal (anybody with brains would use drones) and weapon lethality has to be toned down for the sake of drama.  Even under these considerations though, the numbers for the Star Destroyer are ridiculous (we are talking 5 - 10 decimal points too high here, its hard to emphasize the absurdity of this if you actually know what the numbers mean).  They outclass Star Trek ships if only because the Star Trek guys actually bothered to do some research before creating their numbers (the 1.5 kg anti-matter yield looks about right) whereas the Star Wars numbers were pulled out of nowhere.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Twilight Dirac

[Kankuro 233]

Eh, I don't honestly like either that much, though I am quite familiar with Star Wars...



Live Long And Prosper.

As quoted by my father 100 thousand times when I was a kid

[nx9100 1,013]

@@DATA EXPUNGED,  lol, this is fun!  

 

Ok, tractor beams.  I could go find the various clips, but the basic point is at different times when various Trek vessels were caught in tractor beams, the crews, Star Fleet, aliens, and civilians, usually found ways to get out of them, overload the beam, send a feedback pulse, etc.  Plenty of visual evidence of this.  And, taking the Star Wars EU into account, Luke was able to escape a tractor beam in his x-wing by simply reversing direction (although is DID cause massive damage to his fighter).  The description of the beam in the novel (one of the Thrawn Trilogy), and the visual appearance in Episode IV, leads me to believe it, like most Wars technology, is inferior to its counterpart in Trek.  The Prometheus crew would quickly find a way to break it.  Gul Dukat in Deep Space Nine once said, "I've found it wise to never underestimate the Federation's technical skill." 

 

About fighters.  Wars movies make it clear that TIE fighters can be taken out by a single shot.  Granted, they are fast and hard to hit.  But the precision firing allowable using phaser weapons would render them useless.  CLICK HERE and skip to the 15 second mark.  there is a short clip of a Galaxy-class ship taking out a group of small fighter-like craft, within seconds.  Since the Prometheus is designed specifically as a combat vessel, unlike the Galaxy-class, I see no reason why it's own phasers couldn't do the same thing, maybe even better.

 

What you say about hyperdrive is correct.  By 'flying blindly', I meant that the crew cannot use sensors to scan ahead (the path was already plotted), cannot use communications, and cannot change course without dropping out of hyperspace first.  Hence, the Destroyer would not know what is waiting for it when it arrives, unless they were warned ahead of time.  A starship at warp speed does not suffer any of these disadvantages (although phasers should NOT work at warp speed, that was an error in the show.  only torpedoes).  In the Original Star Trek episode 'Balance of Terror', the original Enterprise engages a Romulan Bird-of-Prey in ship-to-ship combat.  most of the engagement takes place at warp speeds, where the Enterprise jumps to warp to evade the Romulan's plasma weapon.  If an old Constitution-class starship can do that, then a Prometheus-class would have no problem using warp to out-maneuver the Destroyer.  You can't hit what you can't catch.  And since Prometheus can split into three sections, each with full weapons and warp capability, the Destroyer would have THREE faster-then-light targets hoping around it, using their advanced sensors to locate and target key spots to drop photon torpedoes.  (again, those three engine exhausts are HUGE targets....)

[Panne 1,342]

I always found it funny that Star Trek feels the need to explain away it's sci-fi. Like they explain how everything works and star wars is like, "...uh Midi-chlorians or some shit..." I am a star wars fan more though.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Panne

[Technous285 40]

And that's presuming the Prometheus (first launched in 2374) used here ONLY has the TNG-Era Photon Torpedoes (as spec'd in the TNG Tech Manual), not the Quantum Torpedoes (as specified in the DS9 Tech Manual) we saw on the Defiant-class (2371) or Sovereign-class (2373, Enterprise-E) ships, or even been retrofitted with the OP Borg-Busters known as Transphasic Torpedoes (and the only mention of how they work is in the TNG novel "Greater than the Sum" set in the 2380's) once Voyager was home.

[nx9100 1,013]

@@Technous285,

 

you're correct, it could easily be equipped with Quantum torpedoes.  I don't want to include the Transphasic torpedoes in this comparison, since they would be too powerful (which i still doubt them a bit, more of a plot-convenience...)

Edited March 31, 2015 by nx9100

[Tao 7,599]

So I like both but i grew up watching

both and understanding the messages

of em but I will say Star Wars has better

books...

[Technous285 40]

@@nx9100,

 

I only really included the Transphasics as an example of another Torpedo tech the Prommie (my petname for the Prometheus-class) could have, but admit at how broken they would be (hence the use of OP when I described them).

Seriously, in the main timeline they just appear in 2378 after being brought back from an alternative 2404 by Admiral Janeway who cheated in getting Voyager home ASAP by going back in time 26 years with the Transphasic Torpedoes along with the Ablative Armour generator tech.

 

Speaking of Voyager, they originally estimated it'll take them about 70 years to get home at max sustainable Warp (9.975. Warp 9.985 is possible on her engines but only for short periods), which means they'd be doing ~1000 lightyears of travel per-year (70,000 lightyears from last known coordinates in the Badlands), which means they would be trekking along at around 3 lightyears per-day or about 8 hours to travel 1 lightyear at Warp 9.975.

Though in two episodes (Relativity & Scorpion Pt II), Warp 9.975 gave them 40 lightyears over 5 days (around 2922 times the speed of light) for 8 lightyears/day. On the other hand, Relativity & Friendship One gave Warp 9.975 a distance of 132 lightyears over the course of a month (1554-1721 times the speed of light) or an average of 4 lightyears/day (closer to the 70 years at 1000 lightyears/year and ~3 lightyears/day). And in The 37's, it was stated Warp 9.9 over 1 second would move them about 4 billions miles (21,473 times the speed of light), though I can hand-wave that crazy speed as to being exaggeration to impress the 1930's folks voyager had found.

 

And those speeds & Warp Factors are on the re-balanced (Warp 1 = 1c, Warp 10 = infinite velocity) TNG scale.

 

Also, we shall NOT talk about the episode-that-does-not-exist (Threshold).

Edited March 31, 2015 by Technous285

[Screw Loose 156]

Star Wars

 

I never really saw much of Star Trek, or really could get into it...

[DATA EXPUNGED 324]

In defense of Star Trek, these numbers are absolutely absurd and don't mesh up with anything seen in the actual movies, where nothing close to this amount of power or energy is thrown around.  Heck, we see a super star destroyer's bridge shields get taken out by the basic guns of some one man fighters in episode 6 and then the bridge along with the rest of the ship was taken out my a kamikaze collision by a single A-wing.  

 

No, These numbers aren't from the show, but are from the Canon books "Star Trek The Next Generation Technical Manual", and "Star Wars II Incredible Cross Sections". And about the shields, It is clearly established in both universes that shields protect from energy weapons, not physical objects. To be fair, the deflector disk on the Federation Ships do serve that purpose to some degree. 

 

Also, It's hard to pull numbers out of something (Im taking my first year Engineering right now so I have some background) that takes place in a completely different plane of existence that follows very different laws. Its a little easier with Star Trek due to the fact that it takes place here in our universe. 

Edited March 31, 2015 by DATA EXPUNGED

[nx9100 1,013]

 

 

shields protect from energy weapons, not physical objects

 

In Star Trek, shields do protect against physical objects.  There is visual evidence of shields blocking torpedo hits on both Star Fleet and alien ships.  Also, in Star Trek: Nemesis, when the Romulan Warbird gets its wing shot off, part of the wing collides with the Enterprise's saucer, and bounces off the port nacelle.  One can clearly see the energy of the shield between the Enterprise hull and the broken wing.  So, yeah....

 

Also, everypony should disregard battle scenes from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine when looking for info on shields.  In most of those battles, especially later in that series, NONE of the ships appear to have shields of any kind!  I read a behind-the-scenes about it.  they did that on purpose to keep the battle scenes moving faster, instead of having to shoot out the shields first, then show ships taking damage.  Kool action scenes, but sloppy writing....

[DATA EXPUNGED 324]

 You can't hit what you can't catch.  And since Prometheus can split into three sections, each with full weapons and warp capability, the Destroyer would have THREE faster-then-light targets hoping around it, using their advanced sensors to locate and target key spots to drop photon torpedoes.  (again, those three engine exhausts are HUGE targets....)

 

Fair Enough, The Star Destroyer would have alot of trouble actually hitting the Prometheus, but i must bring up the subject of combat range. The Star Destroyer has an effective combat range of about 250,000 km (For example, when Lando considered flying within hundreds of km from the enemy "point blank"), whereas the majority of encounters in Star Trek take place, at the most, are 100 km. While the Prometheus may be able to out maneuver the Star Destroyer, they would be well within firing range before they could act (aggressively).

 

 

Also, in Star Trek: Nemesis, when the Romulan Warbird gets its wing shot off, part of the wing collides with the Enterprise's saucer, and bounces off the port nacelle.

 

In Star Trek, "Sheilds" do not deflect physical objects, as that is the job of the navigational deflector dish. The Navigational Deflector dish also only deflects space debris. If you've seen Star Trek 6: The Undiscovered Country, the hull of the Enterprise was getting hit by torpedoes even though the shields and deflector dish were up and running. 

Edited March 31, 2015 by DATA EXPUNGED

[ThunderSaddle 56]

I voted "Star what?" because this debate makes little sense. It relies on many subjective elements and like every debate involving several groups of people with a strong sense of belonging, it usually doesn't go anywhere.

 

Now, if you ask me what series of movies I prefer, I would go for Star Wars. The Empire Strikes Back is the very first movie I remember watching and I really enjoy the Original Trilogy overall. The prequels, not so much, even if they are a part of my childhood too.

 

I think the Star Trek movies are okay (old and next gen). I've watched some episodes of the original series, I think it's okay too. But I'm not too fond of it.

[nx9100 1,013]

@@DATA EXPUNGED,  true, the Destroyers have a greater range of fire.   But again, being able to warp around the target (like Enterprise did against the Bird-of-Prey) neutralized the Destroyer's range advantage.  Since Turbolaser shots are clearly NOT faster than light, it would be difficult to hit such a target.

 

Also, I did a little digging about Star Fleet photon torpedoes.  In the Next Generation episode 'The Wounded', it is stated on screen that the U.S.S. Phoenix, a Nebula-class starship, has a Torpedo range under 300,000 km.  assuming this is limited to the weapon's design, and not ship type, the Prometheus would have a similar torpedo range, which is about equal to the Destroyer.  

 

Also, in the Voyager episode 'Human Error', it is stated that the torpedoes of 2371 have an effective range of 8 million km.  Although personally i think the 300,000 is more realistic....

 

 

 

In Star Trek, "Sheilds" do not deflect physical objects, as that is the job of the navigational deflector dish.

 

 True, the deflector move physical objects, but the shields also provide protection.  Yes, in ST6, Enterprise was taking pot-shots from General Chang (my personal favorite Trek movie, btw).  If you watch the battle scenes closely, you'll notice most of the shots do NOT pierce the hull, just cause light scorching and minor damage, except for a few shots near the end, like when it blasts through the saucer (though Scotty was yelling about shields collapsing, so yeah).  By this time, Kirk's ship is between 25-30 years old (even with refit), while Chang's Bird-of-Prey is an advanced cloak prototype.  It wouldn't be a stretch to say his weapons were just a bit more then Enterprise's older shield generators could handle.  In the same battle, we clearly see the Excelsior take a direct hit to the bottom of its saucer, yet there is NO visible damage.  Shields man!

 

And like i said, NEMESIS clearly shows debris bouncing off Enterprise-E's upper saucer and port nacelle, and you can see the shield protecting the ship.  see below...

 

 

 

Oh, just had another thought on shields.  In 'Star Trek: Generations', the Klingon ship was able to defeat the Enterprise-D by tuning their torpedoes to match the Enterprise's shield frequency, which allowed the torpedoes to pass right through the shields and blow holes in the hull.  if the shields don't block physical objects, why would they need to do that?  

 

 

(hope you're enjoying our little debate as much as i am!)

Edited March 31, 2015 by nx9100

[VitalSpark 1,830]

Alien.

 

Oh, that wasn't an option? Star Wars then.