Phasers are better than Star Wars blasters and light sabers
Debate Rounds (4)
Phasers are better than star wars blasters and light sabers. Con goes first.
To compare and contrast the various capabilities of the lightsaber, the blaster, and the phaser, we must first ascertain how each weapon system functions.
The phaser utilizes a fictional particle called the nadion, which is allegedly capable of liberating atomic nuclei . This intense sustained emission of artificially produced radiation appears to act similar to laser systems, in that the smaller the area that the phaser beam is concentrated, the greater the effect .
The aforementioned canonical physics behind the phase however, has given it some striking limitations. Firstly, the fictional radiation known as hyperonic radiation is known to "randomize" the fire of the phaser . While it is unknown whether or not this randomization is affecting the vector of the beam or the focal point, it is still enough of an issue that if the phaser is in an environment that has too high of a concentration of hyperonic radiation, the phaser is rendered inoperable . The phaser is also limited by what it can defeat in terms of materials, as both alloys of the fictional element neutronium and the dikironium cloud creature are totally unaffected by being struck by a phaser's beam . Not only were some materials unaffected by it, but the Armus could possibly feed off of the emitted radiation beam . Lastly, phasers could be sabotaged by allowing the power cells to overload and emit all of their stored energy at once .
The lightsaber is a weapon that utilizes the energy of a high-output Diatium power cell, which after being focused through a series of lenses, becomes a plasma which can then arc out of the handle to a specified length, before being attracted back into the handle .
The aforementioned physics of the lightsaber gives it superior qualities over the phaser. For one thing, there is no evidence to suggest that, unlike the phaser, high levels of nuclear radiation will not affect the functionality of the lightsaber. The lightsaber also lacks much of the limitations that the phaser has to deal with with regards to interactins with certain materials. Unlike a phaser, a lightsaber can easily penetrate very thick armor and blast doors without much difficulty . It should also be noted here that the only materials that are capable of resisting a lightsaber strike are very rare, and therefore quite expensive . Unlike the phaser, the lightsaber also lacks a material and/or creature that can "feed off of" the energy from the weapon.
A blaster (more specifically, its particle-based variant) is a weapon that utilizes a high-energy gas (the most notable gas being tibanna) that would be agitated and energized in a chamber to give the gas a high amount of energy, which was then compressed to increase the level of energy contained inside the gas which at this point is now a bolt of energy .
The fact that the blaster uses a compressed bolt of energy, rather than a continuous beam would better conceal the position of the shooter, as the origin of a blaster bolt flying past an individual should be much harder to ascertain than a continuous beam, as such a beam is simply a straight line that can be followed back to it's origin, whereas a blaster bolt is simply a moving object that is traveling at such a high rate, that one might have to watch many bolts fire at them to ascertain the exact position, which is obviously something that a person would not want to have to do.
Secondly, this type of weapon, unlike the phaser, should be much less prone to sabotage, as for the bolt to fire, it requires that the gas be moved into a XCiter to agitate the gas, before being shot out of the barrel . This is a more complex system that requires more failures to malfunction than a phaser, which only feeds plasma through a phaser emitter which is essentially just the barrel of the phaser .
The first advantage of a Phaser is over both light sabers and blasters. That advantage is versatility. Settings 1-3.5 are stun settings. setting 4 and 5 cause heating to a variety of objects. Setting 6 and 7 can cause burns on humanoids and can vaporize Noranium Carbide; a material with a boiling point of 2314 degrees Celsius. Setting 10 can kill humanoids and setting 16 can vaporize entire tunnels of rock. Then there is also a cutting setting, a phaser sweep setting which allows an entire group of humanoids to be stunned at once; a major advantage over the stun setting on blasters, the could also be made to fire a bolt of phaser energy, and can be set at a frequency to dephase things that are phased or interphased.
I contend that the versatility is a major advantage over the cut-only light saber and the kill or stun setting of a blaster.
Another advantage over blasters is that phasers are much more accurate. According to Wookiepedia blasters have a large amount of recoil causing the bolts to be less accurate. Phasers on the other hand have almost no recoil at all so they can be much more accurate.
The third advantage phasers have over blasters is that a phaser doesn't use gas to make the beam or bolt; so the user doesn't have to replace gas cartridges since phasers only require power, and there power cell lasts for a very long time even on high settings.
Now on the issue of materials that are unaffected by phasers; most blasters are also unlikely to have a great effect as they are less powerful than a phaser. The evidence for them being less powerful is that a phaser can vaporize entire tunnels of rock while the most blasters have been shown to do is causing severe burns and fires on a variety of materials.
The most significant advantage over light sabers is range. A light saber is a purely short range one purpose weapon that is optimized for combat against a single entity while a phaser is a long range weapon which can be used for many different tasks unrelated to combat and can be used against a large group of entities at once. Here's another way to think of it; whose going to win this battle a knight with no armor and a sword against an archer? The archer of course because the knight can't defend himself.
Now many people will say that a light saber could deflect a phaser beam; however this is not true or one reason: a phaser doesn't use magnetic fields. You see a light saber deflects blaster bolts with it's incredibly strong magnetic field repelling against the blaster bolts magnetic field. However a phaser beam is made out of chargeless particles which aren't affected by magnetic fields; so a light saber can't repel them.
On the issue of sabotage it still is very difficult to sabotage one and with the loading time for self destruct; there is plenty of time to get away.
About hyperonic radiation; the regenerative phaser designed by star fleet overcomes that issue.
On the comment of how a bolt of energy is harder to trace back to it's origin than a beam; a phaser can release bolts of phaser energy rather than a beam.
I'd also like to tell readers that the Dikironium Cloud Creature wasn't hurt by phasers because it could phase out of space-time; so a blaster or light saber wouldn't be effective either.
In conclusion the phasers versatility, range, accuracy, and power more than makes up for it's weaknesses and gives it a distinct advantage over the one purpose light saber and blaster.
A lightsaber can also be highly versatile. The length of the lightsaber can be adjusted to allow the user to fight at different ranges while in melee combat . Due to the modular nature of the lightsaber, it could be argued that a lighsaber could be relatively easily converted into a training lightsaber, which is a non-lethal lightsaber (thereby being the "stun" setting) generally used for younglings .
Secondly, while it is not very debatable that a lightsaber is out-ranged by a phaser, a lightsaber is still capable of closing the gap between the lightsaber wielder and the phaser wielder, as lightsabers are known to be able to deflect blaster bolts . Since blaster bolts are similar to a phaser beam, as both are highly heated, and eletromagetically charged gases (phasers being plasma, and blaster bolts either also being plasma or particle-based, but still known to bounce off magnetically shielded walls) .
Your analogy also fails here, because a knight does not wield the power of the force that most lightsaber users can, which is why (as asserted above) lightsaber wielders can deflect blaster bolts and phasers.
While you state that there is "plenty of time to get away", such a sabotage is able to cause significant damage to it's surroundings, and still managed to nearly kill three crew members .
When it comes to the hyperonic radiation, it should be noted that the asserted regenerative phaser is allegedly capable of working in radiogenic radiation, not hyperonic radiation . This regenerative phaser that you cite also was never put into production, so its true effectiveness remains unknown .
Blasters are capable of having stun settings. Some, like the GLX Firelance had such effective stun settings that they were used by bounty hunters to capture their targets alive .
Firstly, recoil does not necessarily mean that the system is less accurate. For example, many high caliber sniper rifles that utilize .50 BMG ammunition are still accurate out to 1800 meters . Accuracy might be a problem for the phaser however, as I have never witnessed any form of optical sights on a handheld type 1 or type 2 phaser.
Secondly, a phaser must use some type of gas to function, as it utilizes plasma as the main component of the beam . Therefore, a phaser is subject to the same ammo limitations that a blaster must deal with.
Thirdly, you do not cite evidence of such vaporization of tunnels.
Lastly, you do not cite evidence of the "bolt" setting on a phaser.
2. Note the ease at which players can change lightsaber crystals in many Star Wars games.
6. Chewbacca fires his bowcaster inside the Death Star's trash compactor. The rounds deflect off due to (as stated by Han Solo) the walls of the trash compactor being magnetically shielded.
"A lightsaber can also be highly versatile. The length of the lightsaber can be adjusted to allow the user to fight at different ranges while in melee combat . Due to the modular nature of the lightsaber, it could be argued that a lightsaber could be relatively easily converted into a training lightsaber, which is a non-lethal lightsaber (thereby being the "stun" setting) generally used for younglings"
A lightsaber may have adjustable length and can be converted into a training saber but that doesn't mean it's versatile. That's because of the very definition of versatile: able to adapt or be adapted to many different functions or activities. Changing sizes of blades is more of a modification than a different function and a training lightsaber is simply a variation of a normal lightsaber; and the training saber which you call the "stun setting" doesn't actually stun; according to wookiepedia it burns people it hits. So there are two different functions it has; a universal cutting tool and a weapon that can cause burns. The lightsaber hence isn't as versatile as you say.
"Secondly, while it is not very debatable that a lightsaber is out-ranged by a phaser, a lightsaber is still capable of closing the gap between the lightsaber wielder and the phaser wielder, as light sabers are known to be able to deflect blaster bolts . Since blaster bolts are similar to a phaser beam, as both are highly heated, and eletromagetically charged gases (phasers being plasma, and blaster bolts either also being plasma or particle-based, but still known to bounce off magnetically shielded walls) ."
You said that phasers beams could be deflected by a lightsaber because they're made of plasma, but that is only true of ferengi phasers. A federation phaser works by passing plasma to a phaser emitter creating a nadion discharge. You see; at no point in the process does the plasma actually leave the phaser, rather the plasma is simply the mechanism that creates the discharge; not the beam itself. The phaser beam is made of chargeless particles called nadions which "liberate atomic nuclei" to cause damage. Since the particle beam is made of chargeless artificially generated particle, it can't be deflected by a phaser. So no it will be incredibly difficult to close the gap.
"Your analogy also fails here, because a knight does not wield the power of the force that most lightsaber users can, which is why (as asserted above) lightsaber wielders can deflect blaster bolts and phasers."
That is true of blasters, but because a phaser beam is made out of nadions which as stated above are chargeless the lightsaber can't deflect phaser beams; as there is no electrical or magnetic field produced which a lightsaber can push against. So my analogy does stand in the case of phasers because if it isn't electrically charged, even the force can't save them.
"While you state that there is "plenty of time to get away", such a sabotage is able to cause significant damage to it's surroundings, and still managed to nearly kill three crew members."
Sabotage of a blaster would cause just as much damage. Also by the 24th century a self destruct would cause an explosion only a few meters wide as seen in TNG: the next phase. While it was a romulan disruptor that self destructed; Romulan disruptors are around the same power level as phasers, so it's a respectable analog. That significant damage you talk of is likely referring to 23rd century phasers.
n the point of hyperonic radiation, I did some research and found that a phaser can be modified to continually recollimate the output to work in hyperonic radiation. The modification likely isn't used during mass production because hyperonic radiation is both rare and lethal, so even if the phaser beam wasn't randomized you likely wouldn't live long enough to actually use the phaser.
"Blasters are capable of having stun settings. Some, like the GLX Firelance had such effective stun settings that they were used by bounty hunters to capture their targets alive."
True; blasters do have a stun setting but still that isn't very versatile since both modes are solely for battle.
A phaser on the other hand is very versatile because of it's many settings. On one setting it can stun things. On another it can produce a precise cutting beam for tasks requiring precise cuts. It can also heat rocks to provide light and heat, and disintegrate a great variety of materials which can be used as both a weapon and a tool. With all these settings a phaser is so versatile that it's not just a weapon, it's also a tool.
This is a quote from wookiepedia about the accuracy of blasters: "Some storm troopers were known to complain that the original E-11 had excessive recoil, leading to diminished accuracy in fire fights."
"Secondly, a phaser must use some type of gas to function, as it utilizes plasma as the main component of the beam . Therefore, a phaser is subject to the same ammo limitations that a blaster must deal with."
As I stated earlier, a phaser does not have ammo limitations because while it does require a gas to make plasma; the plasma isn't the ammunition. The plasma generates the nadions which make up the actual beam; because the plasma doesn't exit the phaser it can be reused as long as the power cell can provide energy.
Tunnel Vaporization source: Memory Alpha TNG: Chain of Command.
Bolt capability: Memory Alpha TOS: The Enemy Within.
The range of a lightsaber can be thought of as a function, as it functions to fit the user wielding it. Yoda, for example, used a short lightsaber commonly referred to as a shoto due to his small stature .
Secondly, while the training variant doesn't necessarily stun, it does serve the same purpose of a stun setting, in that it does not cause serious injury to the target (note my use of quotation marks in the precious round to indicate that the term 'stun' was a metaphor, although a hard enough strike to the head might count as a stun). As you mention, these are two different functions of the lightsaber with respect to lethality.
I do not see evidence of them being chargeless particles, and in-fact, according to the Nadion page on Memory Alpha, a Nadion-based phaser beam was used to avert a polaric ion explosion . Since the radiation from the polaric ions is what created the explosion that devastated the planet, and such radiation is ionized (the ionized particles being used for power) it can be inferred that there was a charge in the nadion phaser beam to allow the ionized rift to not explode . Therefore there is reason to believe that the phaser has a charge, and is therefore able to be deflected (or in someway interrupted) by the blade of a lightsaber.
How do you know that such sabotage would cause the same amount of damage. Secondly, a few meter wide explosion is roughly equivalent to that of an M67 fragmentation grenade, which has a fatality radius of five meters . This means that a phaser wielder with a sabotaged phaser is walking around with a grenade just waiting to go off.
Couldn't a Starfleet officer utilize a radiation suit to protect themselves while still having to deal with phaser malfunctions from the radiation? Secondly, such modifications required a chip from a specific type of android to be implanted in the phaser, and it is unknown just how long such a process would take place if the phaser wielder was lucky enough to either be, or be near such an android in the first place.
Such a stun setting isn't necessarily for battle, as a bounty hunter's target could be attempting to flee the bounty hunter. This is analogous to a modern day police officer discharging a taser at a fleeing assailant. Theoretically speaking, a blaster could be used as a torch, since all one should need to do is keep the Heter valve open slightly to allow a constant stream of Tibanna gas into the XCiter chamber to energize the gas enough that it could produce heat.
That Wookiepedia article you cite only refers to one blaster design. One doesn't point to an AK-47's accuracy and say that all guns are inaccurate. For example, the hunting blaster was a common firearm amongst the Rebel Alliance and was quite accurate as a weapon .
While it does seem to be that the plasma never exits the phaser (although no explanation is given to explain this), it must be the case that either the plasma (and therefore the gas causing it) is either slowly being whittled away by the creation of the nadion particles (law of conservation of mass/energy), or the power cell is both generating the energy to excite the gas into plasma and creating the nadion particles. The former scenario means that the plasma is limited in quantity, as the plasma would eventually be completely converted into nadions. The latter scenario requires that the power cell is being drained at a high rate, as it must generate enough energy to convert a gas into a plasma (such capability is only now just being done in modern times, and is normally only found is stars).
It should be noted that such a capability required the highest level that a phaser can fire at, which obviously means that it would have drained much more of the power cell (if not also the plasma) to accomplish such a task, not to mention that there are materials that is still couldn't penetrate at that setting .
Blasters are also capable of this, as Han Solo's blaster in particular could "blow large chunks from stone walls and smaller holes and pockmarks out of durasteel bulkheads" . Unlike phasers, there is no evidence to suggest that Han Solo's blaster was modified to increase the power, as the only modification that was made to his was to remove the optical sight for quicker drawing .
The only mention of a phaser discharging in the cited episode in act two when "[the evil Kirk] disables the transporter ionizer with a phaser shot..." . There is no evidence of a bolt or bullet-like version of the nadion beam is discharged.
I will concede that light sabers and blasters can be versatile; however it is undeniable that a phaser is much more versatile than either of them giving them the advantage.
There is actually evidence of them being chargeless in that the beam doesn't spread apart. If nadions had a charge, the beam would spread due to repulsion which is not seen. While you could argue that like blasters it may have a magnetic containment field; a magnetic field is first of all never mentioned and second in Deep Space 9 an annular confinement beam jacketed phaser beam is mentioned as new technology. The annular confinement beam is essentially the star trek equivalent of of star wars magnetic containment fields. So with nadions being used for more than a century without a confinement method, it pretty much rules out the possibility of nadions having a charge. By the way there is evidence to suggest the 22nd century phase pistol also used nadions and research hadn't even started on magnetic containment field when they went into use.
Con appears to be misinterpreting the polaric ion explosion/ rift. What happens is that the crew of voyager were attempting to open up one of the subspace fractures. The fracture started opening near one of the polaric ion conduits. The rift produced wasn't actually ionized; when the phaser was shot at the rift on the other side Lieutenant Torres; the chief engineer reported "nadion particle resistance" preventing the opening of the fracture. The context of the problem suggests that it wasn't actually an equalization of charges preventing it and that it was actually the nadion discharge interfering with subspace. Therefore there is reason to believe that nadions are chargeless and can't be deflected by a lightsaber.( Even if nadions did happened to be charged, with settings to change beam width it should be quite simple to expand the beam beyond the thickness of a lightsaber blade.)
On the issue of sabotage; what evidence do you have that a lightsaber or blaster wouldn't create an explosion just as large? Second whether it's a phaser or a blaster you'd still be walking around with a grenade "just waiting to go off"
Secondly, such modifications required a chip from a specific type of android to be implanted in the phaser.
Actually the chip from soong-type androids is stated to be able to be utilized; it was never stated they were the only thing that would work. According to memory alpha it simply needs to be a servo circuit; no special android chips required, it was simply convenient at the time to use Data's servo circuits. About the radiation suit thing; hyperonic radiation would already have been detected if they set on a radiation suit, so of course they would add a servo circuit to compensate. It's really only a situation where they are in an environment with Hyperonic radiation with no chance to prepare that this would be a problem.
"Theoretically speaking, a blaster could be used as a torch, since all one should need to do is keep the Heter valve open slightly to allow a constant stream of Tibanna gas into the XCiter chamber to energize the gas enough that it could produce heat."
First of all this is only in theory. Second of all this would take a major modification and be much less precise since a blaster isn't going to be made to make a narrow stream of gas enter the Xciter chamber since the gas is focused later on.
After doing a little more research I discovered something else wookiepedia says on the issue of accuracy: "The inherent instability of plasma gas in blasters reduced the weapon's accuracy under sustained fire."
What appears to be the most likely based on star trek canon is that the power cell ionizes the gas to produce the plasma which upon interaction with the superconducting crystal in the phaser emitter produces nadions. This wouldn't cause power cell to be drained at a high rate because like a LASER it's energy passed trough a medium generating the particles not the power itself. Also it doesn't require that much energy to ionize gas; some evidence of this is that the Geissler tube invented in 1857 created plasma (1857 also doesn't seem to modern either.) So lets introduce some math now. Helium has the highest ionization energies out of all the elements at 2370 kJ/mole; in this calculation I will be using the ionization energy of helium since it would be the maximum amount of energy that could be required to make the plasma. Phasers have a power cell made out of a substance call Sarium Krellide which has an energy density of 1,300,000,000 kilojoules per cubic centimeter. 1 mole of helium is 4 grams which should make plenty of plasma for a phaser. So theoretically using the element with the highest ionization energy we can get 1.3 billion seconds of use out of it before it needs to be recharged at the lowest setting. Of course depending on the power level and how much energy is wasted it will be less than 1.3 billion seconds use; however even with the maximum energy discharge of a phaser; 1 MW You'd still be able to use it at that energy continuously for 20 min. So actually it could last a surprisingly long amount of time without recharge even on higher settings which are rarely used anyways.
TUNNEL VAPORIZATION "It should be noted that such a capability required the highest level that a phaser can fire at, which obviously means that it would have drained much more of the power cell (if not also the plasma) to accomplish such a task, not to mention that there are materials that is still couldn't penetrate at that setting .
Blasters are also capable of this, as Han Solo's blaster in particular could "blow large chunks from stone walls and smaller holes and pockmarks out of durasteel bulkheads" . Unlike phasers, there is no evidence to suggest that Han Solo's blaster was modified to increase the power, as the only modification that was made to his was to remove the optical sight for quicker drawing ."
First off it should be noted that power levels are different than modification. Con claims that Han Solo's blaster can do this and then quotes it can blow large chunks from stone walls. That is nothing like the phasers capabilities. At just a medium power setting it can already vaporize things with a vaporization point of 2314 degrees Celsius. At maximum setting it can vaporize tunnels in rock at 20 meters per minute or on a wide field setting it can blow away Half of a large building in one shot. Yeah Han Solo can blow meter size chunks of a wall; well a phaser can blow away half of a house; no competition. Also with the speed at which it can perform this it shouldn't be too much of a drain.
A phaser does have greater power, versatility, accuracy, and range than a lightsaber or blaster. Power is shown in that A phaser can blow away half of a large building while Han's blaster; one of the most powerful can only blow chunks out of a wall. Versatility is proven by both my arguments and cons. With the blaster having less power than a phaser it is unlikely a blaster would be able to cause damage to something a phaser can't. Without plasma instabilities messing with the accuracy we know that it is going to have much better accuracy, and it's undebatable the range advantage between phasers and blaster. Con was able to prove that a sabotaged phaser can cause significant damage but can't prove that a blaster wouldn't cause the same damage. Con hasn't been able to prove that a phaser beam is electromagnetic and can deflected by a lightsaber. The Hyperonic radiation isn't very important because it is lethal and if you have a radiation suit on you would have already modified the phasers. Finally with the plasma never leaving the phaser; the phaser over comes one of the blasters largest weaknesses: ammo replenishment. With all these factors combined; it proves that phasers are ultimately better than light sabers or blasters.
While the beam doesn't spread all the time, the beam is able to spread by setting the phaser to fire a phaser sweep . Secondly, stating that a magnetic containment field wasn't there because there is no evidence of it in the form of hearsay on the show is a logical fallacy by argument of silence.
Further evidence for the charge of a phaser beam can be found in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual. To quote the book, a phaser works because "energetic plasma is pumped to a prefire chamber made out of a superconducting lithium-copper. There, it undergoes a rapid nadion effect in which strong nuclear forces are liberated. A and is released in pulses to the emitter made out of the same superconductive crystal. A beam of is released from it, at the speed of light" . Note the underlined text in the quote. The beam is both a form of electromagnetic energy and clearly has a "protonic" charge.
Therefore, due to the fact that the beam has a charge, it will therefore be adversely affected (Either deflected away from, or absorbed into) a lightsaber's blade.
Firstly, you, as pro, have the burden of proof to assert evidence for the capability of sabotaging a lightsaber.
Secondly, due to the fact that the system is self-contained (plasma arcing out, and being forced back into the hilt via magnetic containment), and that the lightsaber has energy dampeners in place to prevent energy discharges, along with the lack on examples of sabotage on the Wookipedia page on lightsabers even though the lightsaber has been used since at least 3653 BBY, it can therefore be inferred that sabotage of a lightsaber is quite difficult to achieve, if not near-impossible .
Firstly, you, as pro, have the burden of proof to assert evidence for the capability of sabotaging a blaster.
Secondly, due to the increased complexity of the system relative to the phaser (the phaser only needing to charge up plasma to accelerate nadions out of an emitter with seemingly zero moving parts, whereby a blaster must have a gas discharge into a chamber to get charged up and sent out of a barrel which involves at least the movement of the Heter valve), a saboteur would have to somehow jam the Heter valve open to allow more and more gas to build up, and then plug up the barrel/reverse the polarization of the actuating module to keep the gas inside the XCiter (unlike the phaser, which merely needs a power overload), and even then, due to the lack of examples of blaster sabotages, this hypothetical situation might not even cause the weapon to critically malfunction.
That still brings into question the availability of servo circuits, as the only one available was from an android. There was seemingly no more convenient of a way to get a servo circuit, than to utilize one that was which implies that such a modification is difficult to achieve via the shortage of materials.
Such a modification should require at most one part to keep the chamber open, which shouldn't be very difficult depending on how field-srippable the blaster is (Which if blasters are as any bit as field-strippable as real life guns, would make such a process quite simple).
Secondly, the issue of accuracy via plasma should therefore affect phasers as well, since both utilize plasma, and in-fact, due to phasers being a continuously discharged beam, rather than single bolts, such an issue of accuracy (in combination with the aforementioned lack of optical sights) should therefore make phasers less accurate.
Let the reader note that the issue of a non-lethal setting wasn't addressed by pro.
You are assuming that the plasma is made from Helium. Due to the fact that the plasma from the phaser emits a particle that doesn't actually exist in reality, it is not even known how applicable your math is. Furthermore, Sarium krelide has a energy density of such magnitude. It is not asserted that a phasers power cell has such high quality Sarium krelide. You also fail to take into account that Sarium krelide leaks less than 1.05 kilojoules per hour, therefore reducing its lifespan. Lastly, neither on the page for power cells, Sarium krelide, or phasers is any mention of the power requirements for a phaser mentioned at all, let alone 1 MW.
Firstly, what "large" is isn't specified, and secondly, this capability was only ever shown once from a type 2 phaser. Lastly, I should reiterate that such a capability is only available on the highest power setting. The standard power setting of a blaster has just as much capability to destroy "large" objects, the only difference being the time that it takes to accomplish such a task.
Due to the evidence that lightsabers can compensate for the increased range of a phaser, be just as versatile as a phaser, have less overall impairments than a phaser, and are less prone to sabotage than a phaser, I assert that a lightsaber is better than a phaser.
Secondly, due to the evidence that blasters are less prone to sabotage than a phaser, have less impairments than a phaser, are just as versatile and powerful as a phaser, I assert that a blaster is better than a phaser.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Con used sources and had more convincing arguments than Pro in my opinion. I was almost swayed by Pro, but eventually Con won with good arguments and rebuttals. My question to both debaters, is how the hell do you know all this stuff? I was amazed. Thanks for a fun read. Conduct and spelling are tied.
Vote Placed by kbub 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||2|
Reasons for voting decision: Wonderful debate on both sides. I will have a very hard time deciding. It really was well done. I hope everyone will learn to debate from you two. I'd say that I'm going to have to go to Pro for arguments. I'm going to have to say that Pro wins that phasers bypass lightsabers, though I found Con's argument that they are electromagnetic convincing, the thin beam analysis of Pro won out for me. The force argument I found irrelevant since we were talking about weapons. I did not find sabotage convincing one way or the other. Although Con did a great job defending lightsabers are versitile, I bought the argument that phasers are more so due to the multiple settings. It did not seem like blasters could cut through rocks. I don't think the training setting influenced my decision very much. Great job! Oh, as for sources, Pro please make better links.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.