I can't wait to see what Naomi Wildman future is in Picard. Voyager had her pursue a career in Starfleet.
In Kurtzman Star Trek: Picard she probably be a prostitute on Freecloud because having a bright future in Trek is the way of the past. It has to be dark and super gritty with a dash of depression.
I would not be surprised.....can see folks in the Kurtzman Federation being homeless or banks still existing or bigotry against hybrids coming next....because, you know....GRITTY!!!!!
The lack of Federation starships in Picard and the whole Starfleet being infiltrated routine
Season 1 of Disco, and a chunk of season 2 was guilty of that as welll....each time a ship was contacting Discovery, we never get to see the other ships.
> @smokebailey said: > (Quote) > > Season 1 of Disco, and a chunk of season 2 was guilty of that as welll....each time a ship was contacting Discovery, we never get to see the other ships.
Discovery in the first two episodes gave us a lockbox worth of federation ships.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Without proper worldbuilding, on the writing end it is all too easy to start slinging very iffy and implausible plot points around (VOY had a lot of the same problem btw) and solving things by contrived means instead of things that actually make sense, and sense like that happens most when characters, factions, and history are reasonably fleshed out. With good worldbuilding a setting and cast often take on a life of their own and practically write themselves.
Voyager's issue was "too many cooks in the kitchen". Too many writers with their own ideas for where to take the characters/ Main reason why Janeway's all over the place. One episode she's by the book, the next she's Kirk level Cowboy.
That chaos was caused by not doing proper worldbuilding (or rebuilding) in the first place (and worldbuilding does include important characters). The slush readers depend on the in-house writers or creators doing proper worldbuilding to know what fits and what does not. Voyager (like TNG) was pitched as a very different series than it came to be once shooting started, and no one bothered to solidify the new "world" after the old show concept was discarded.
the prequal novel really explains things a fiar bit, if you really care about the details obsessivly, read it. the complaints about world building are a bit odd when you consider Picard is only 5 episodes in.
Let's look at the first 5 episodes of TNG for world building.
These episodes are:
Encounter at Far Point part 1 and 2
the Naked Now
Code of Honour
and The last outpost
How much world building was done there?
TNG had a lot of startup problems, including having its whole original premise thrown out shortly before filming started and then had to scramble and catch up with their worldbuilding well after they should have had it nailed down, so that first season is a prime example of insufficient worldbuilding. It is the same thing that later happened to Voyager (though not to quite the same degree), after VOY already had the pilot in the can, which is why it featured things like the torpedo count that never went anywhere after that.
PIC has the advantage of a tremendous amount of groundwork already having been laid out in TNG and the movies, that should have gone a long way to free the writers to think out the details of the plot in PIC but it sounds like they took an action-movie like approach and figured the viewers would be too wowed by the visuals or whatever to think about the holes in their metaplot.
Also, "only five episodes" is nothing to sneeze at in a series that only has ten per season. With something that is essentially a miniseries plus two episodes that kind of sloppiness should not happen.
Yeah, try a few tens of billions there, @rattler2. A "few thousand" isn't a homeworld and surrounding systems, it's a single first-stage colony.
Again... I was low balling the estimate based on I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY SHIPS SURVIVED THE ATTACK! The entire fleet could save millions to billions, but after the attack and the loss of so many ships... its possible that that number was cut dramatically.
Why am I getting called out on an unknown all of a sudden? Can a couple old Magees hold millions? No. Can one large transport hold millions? No.
We do not know how many ships survived, or what class they were either. All we know for a FACT is that the rescue fleet was decimated. We don't know what survived, and in what kind of numbers. So I decided to low ball the estimate as smaller, more maneuverable ships would have had a higher chance of survival than large, slow moving transports.
They could evacuate a lot of people on normal fleet ships if they wanted to. For example a Galaxy class (which they apparently had a lot more than a dozen of considering what they show of them in the Dominion war) can hold 15,000 people in a pinch (the normal crew including dependents is around a thousand) which means if they could get ten of the things there in time they could have saved 140,000 with no preparation time at all. The ships in TNG are often huge.
But these ships are out there doing their job for the Federation. Ferrying freight, medical supplies, colonists, specialists. They are out there securing the Federation borders and protecting Federation worlds. They are out there doing multi-year exploration mission, far away from Romulan or Federation territory.
And where do these ships drop their passengers? Just beam them down on the nearest Class M planet with nothing but their clothes and ancestral sword on their back isn't going to do. 10 Galaxy Class ships might be able to lift of 150,000 people, but how long will it actually take to prepare their new settlement or integrate them in an existing one?
Seriously? While some of them are undoubtedly way beyond the borders doing their ultra-long range exploration the bulk of them are probably just puttering around doing the same things Enterprise-D was doing. Contacting them and sending them to the Romulan homeworld would be quick and trivial compared to the "rescue fleet" that was not even all built yet. I am sure they would have plenty of time to drop off the crew's dependents and maybe pick up some more security and medical people if they had time to build ships on Mars and send them all the way out to the center of the RSE (of course there that would only get them another six or seven hundred people capacity so I doubt Starfleet would have them drop off the dependents before going on the rescue).
And that is just the Starfleet troop carriers (the wartime role of the Galaxy class as shown in DS9), there must be passenger liners, civilian colony ships, smaller troop carriers, buffered freighters, and other types that could have aided in rescue efforts if they had as much time as PIC depicts to at least start the operation before the special rescue fleet was supposed to get there. The way they handled it in the show sounds very contrived and not well thought out at all (which puts it about par for the modern 40 minute or less "hour long" shows). Streaming services have a chance to reverse the trend and go back to better-thought-out scripts but they don't as far as I have seen so far.
> @phoenixc#0738 said: > (Quote) > > Seriously? While some of them are undoubtedly way beyond the borders doing their ultra-long range exploration the bulk of them are probably just puttering around doing the same things Enterprise-D was doing. Contacting them and sending them to the Romulan homeworld would be quick and trivial compared to the "rescue fleet" that was not even all built yet. I am sure they would have plenty of time to drop off the crew's dependents and maybe pick up some more security and medical people if they had time to build ships on Mars and send them all the way out to the center of the RSE (of course there that would only get them another six or seven hundred people capacity so I doubt Starfleet would have them drop off the dependents before going on the rescue). > > And that is just the Starfleet troop carriers (the wartime role of the Galaxy class as shown in DS9), there must be passenger liners, civilian colony ships, smaller troop carriers, buffered freighters, and other types that could have aided in rescue efforts if they had as much time as PIC depicts to at least start the operation before the special rescue fleet was supposed to get there. The way they handled it in the show sounds very contrived and not well thought out at all (which puts it about par for the modern 40 minute or less "hour long" shows). Streaming services have a chance to reverse the trend and go back to better-thought-out scripts but they don't as far as I have seen so far.
Sure you could pull all your frontline cruisers off their missions to save the Romulans but the question is would you want to.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
> @smokebailey said:
> (Quote)
>
> Season 1 of Disco, and a chunk of season 2 was guilty of that as welll....each time a ship was contacting Discovery, we never get to see the other ships.
Discovery in the first two episodes gave us a lockbox worth of federation ships.
I am talking of the rest of the season, we saw little to nothing.
> @smokebailey said: > (Quote) > > I am talking of the rest of the season, we saw little to nothing.
Do you have a specific example of Discovery contacting a ship and they never showing the ship?
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I'm a huge fan of Disco and Picard and a fan of the other Star Trek series aswell.
The problem with Disco and Picard is that it is realistic as opposed to the idealism of the previous incarnations. In ToS, Voyager, Enterprise and TNG we saw humanity at it's best, all of Roddenberry's idealism and best wishes for humanity's future.
DS9 began to show a darker humanity to highlight how far we have come in the future. Disco confronts the federation with situations that idealism is no defence against and challenges humanity to overcome these problems without losing itself.
Picard I think shows the reality beyond starfleet and the federation.
I'm a huge fan of Disco and Picard and a fan of the other Star Trek series aswell.
The problem with Disco and Picard is that it is realistic as opposed to the idealism of the previous incarnations. In ToS, Voyager, Enterprise and TNG we saw humanity at it's best, all of Roddenberry's idealism and best wishes for humanity's future.
DS9 began to show a darker humanity to highlight how far we have come in the future. Disco confronts the federation with situations that idealism is no defence against and challenges humanity to overcome these problems without losing itself.
Picard I think shows the reality beyond starfleet and the federation.
The other Star Trek series gave hope that we would eventually be able to evolve beyond our base desires. Picard destroyed that hope with their reliance on slave labor using Synthetics and the Federation not helping their former enemy when they needed help.
I'm a huge fan of Disco and Picard and a fan of the other Star Trek series aswell.
The problem with Disco and Picard is that it is realistic as opposed to the idealism of the previous incarnations. In ToS, Voyager, Enterprise and TNG we saw humanity at it's best, all of Roddenberry's idealism and best wishes for humanity's future.
DS9 began to show a darker humanity to highlight how far we have come in the future. Disco confronts the federation with situations that idealism is no defence against and challenges humanity to overcome these problems without losing itself.
Picard I think shows the reality beyond starfleet and the federation.
The other Star Trek series gave hope that we would eventually be able to evolve beyond our base desires. Picard destroyed that hope with their reliance on slave labor using Synthetics and the Federation not helping their former enemy when they needed help.
Voyager showed the Federation using EMHs as miners.
The Romulans weren’t a former enemy. They were an enemy. The Federation wanted to but several planets objected and threatened to leave.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
> @artan42 said:
> (Quote)
>
> Yeah, but I want actual answers. I'd even take a comic series. The KT is the first alternate timeline to last a series and not just an episode and takes place alongside a currently airing TV show to boot. It's wasted potential for both not to have some sort of link.
> We wasted a whole arc in the long played out and lifeless Mirror Universe in DSC, that would have been so much better had they ended up in the KT.
I think CBS is gonna wait to see what Noah Hawley has planned for his Star Trek movie. I’ve seen reports that this is why no one can use the refit Konnie-A
Well it's not that film specifically, just the fact any future KT films will likely use it, but yeah.
> @smokebailey said:
> (Quote)
>
> I am talking of the rest of the season, we saw little to nothing.
Do you have a specific example of Discovery contacting a ship and they never showing the ship?
Cornwall's 'cruiser'. It's spoken about but she appeared to arrive in a shuttle. This was before Lorca was Terran and before Cornwall was captured.
It's not an issue because plenty of other series have had ships never appear but smokebailey is, as usual, absolutely desperate for things to pretend are exclusive to DSC.
I would not be surprised.....can see folks in the Kurtzman Federation being homeless or banks still existing or bigotry against hybrids coming next....because, you know....GRITTY!!!!!
Kurtzman is a person not a Federation. And yes they can, just like they can in the other shows. The Bank of Bolius is a thing, they're a Federation world, and Torres is that worried about bigotry against her quarter-Klingon daughter she tries to 'fix' her Klingon genes.
The problem with Disco and Picard is that it is realistic as opposed to the idealism of the previous incarnations. In ToS, Voyager, Enterprise and TNG we saw humanity at it's best, all of Roddenberry's idealism and best wishes for humanity's future.
No it didn't. Mudd and Jones weren't the 'best of humanity', the corrupt and mad admirals weren't the 'best of humanity'. The Picard who would rather children die than Riker-Q save them wasn't the 'best of humanity'. Janeway, who sacrificed her own crew for her vanity wasn't the 'best of humanity'. The Federation that rolled over and let the Cardassians have Federation worlds and all the people on them weren't the 'best of humanity'. The Klingon-Federation collaboration to kill Gorkon weren't the 'best of humanity'. Ransom, who used sentient species to fuel his ship wasn't the 'best of humanity'.
Roddenberry was a sex and money obsessed weirdo who's purest vision comes in TMP and TNG S1&2 as actual writers managed to hack that wall of bland down come TWoK and later TNG. No Trek series has ever been a example of the 'best of humanity'.
Voyager showed the Federation using EMHs as miners.
The Romulans weren’t a former enemy. They were an enemy. The Federation wanted to but several planets objected and threatened to leave.
Yeah, that's different though because because VGR is before 2001 which is the point Star Trek has to be picked apart to atoms and every section aired for criticism where as all pre-2001 Trek is allowed to be filtered through a nice rose tinted lens where it all blurs into one amorphous blob that is 1 part Trek and 9 parts fanfiction and headcanon where everything was perfect and there were no complaints.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Without proper worldbuilding, on the writing end it is all too easy to start slinging very iffy and implausible plot points around (VOY had a lot of the same problem btw) and solving things by contrived means instead of things that actually make sense, and sense like that happens most when characters, factions, and history are reasonably fleshed out. With good worldbuilding a setting and cast often take on a life of their own and practically write themselves.
Voyager's issue was "too many cooks in the kitchen". Too many writers with their own ideas for where to take the characters/ Main reason why Janeway's all over the place. One episode she's by the book, the next she's Kirk level Cowboy.
That chaos was caused by not doing proper worldbuilding (or rebuilding) in the first place (and worldbuilding does include important characters). The slush readers depend on the in-house writers or creators doing proper worldbuilding to know what fits and what does not. Voyager (like TNG) was pitched as a very different series than it came to be once shooting started, and no one bothered to solidify the new "world" after the old show concept was discarded.
the prequal novel really explains things a fiar bit, if you really care about the details obsessivly, read it. the complaints about world building are a bit odd when you consider Picard is only 5 episodes in.
Let's look at the first 5 episodes of TNG for world building.
These episodes are:
Encounter at Far Point part 1 and 2
the Naked Now
Code of Honour
and The last outpost
How much world building was done there?
TNG had a lot of startup problems, including having its whole original premise thrown out shortly before filming started and then had to scramble and catch up with their worldbuilding well after they should have had it nailed down, so that first season is a prime example of insufficient worldbuilding. It is the same thing that later happened to Voyager (though not to quite the same degree), after VOY already had the pilot in the can, which is why it featured things like the torpedo count that never went anywhere after that.
PIC has the advantage of a tremendous amount of groundwork already having been laid out in TNG and the movies, that should have gone a long way to free the writers to think out the details of the plot in PIC but it sounds like they took an action-movie like approach and figured the viewers would be too wowed by the visuals or whatever to think about the holes in their metaplot.
Also, "only five episodes" is nothing to sneeze at in a series that only has ten per season. With something that is essentially a miniseries plus two episodes that kind of sloppiness should not happen.
Yeah, try a few tens of billions there, @rattler2. A "few thousand" isn't a homeworld and surrounding systems, it's a single first-stage colony.
Again... I was low balling the estimate based on I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY SHIPS SURVIVED THE ATTACK! The entire fleet could save millions to billions, but after the attack and the loss of so many ships... its possible that that number was cut dramatically.
Why am I getting called out on an unknown all of a sudden? Can a couple old Magees hold millions? No. Can one large transport hold millions? No.
We do not know how many ships survived, or what class they were either. All we know for a FACT is that the rescue fleet was decimated. We don't know what survived, and in what kind of numbers. So I decided to low ball the estimate as smaller, more maneuverable ships would have had a higher chance of survival than large, slow moving transports.
They could evacuate a lot of people on normal fleet ships if they wanted to. For example a Galaxy class (which they apparently had a lot more than a dozen of considering what they show of them in the Dominion war) can hold 15,000 people in a pinch (the normal crew including dependents is around a thousand) which means if they could get ten of the things there in time they could have saved 140,000 with no preparation time at all. The ships in TNG are often huge.
Problem with this scenario is that Starfleet would almost definitely want to retain said Galaxy class ships.
Think about the ships they were using for this:
A: New ships, built specifically for the purpose of providing refugee aid
B: Very old, obsolete, ships (seen in the Short Trek episode 'Children of Mars' ) most likely refitted internally to faciliate carrying as many passengers as possible
In both cases the evacuation ships would almost definitely have been dual-purpose, their primary function being to transport refugees, their secondary purpose to be brought planetside to provide shelter/resources for said refugess, since they wouldn't (initially) have wanted to just dump the refugees and run.
Actually, dump and run is exactly the right course of action in this case. The idea is to save as many people as possible, not to start a new colony somewhere. And with subspace communications it would not be some surprise for the worlds they drop off refugees on either.
Just with the Galaxy class ships alone they could have saved 14,000 people per ship per trip, so the idea thing would be to pick them up and take them to the closest worlds outside of the danger zone that could handle the refugees and then go back for more. If they had time to build ships they had plenty of time for multiple runs with whatever they had already at hand.
Pickup, dump, run back and pickup more, rinse and repeat as many times as they can before the radiation wave hits, and then, only when there are no more to rescue is it time to worry about where they will all go long term.
And there should be plenty of worlds close enough for short term handling of refugees considering the RSE was a major power at least as far back as ENT and their ships were as slow as Mayweather's family ship until their tech exchange with the Klingons in the mid 2260s so they would have a tendency to have as dense a colonial pattern as they could find or terraform words for.
I am at a total loss as to why CBS chose to go with the nonsensical way they handled the supernova thing when they had two very good disaster scenarios to take inspiration from:
Paramount got the right idea by making the Praxis disaster about their economy. Their most valuable resource literally blew up in their faces, and did massive (and doubtless very expensive) damage to their capital world on top of that. Of course they were reeling badly from that.
STO took the weird Abramsism of the FTL supernova destroying the RSE and turned it into a very believable case of the destruction of the seat of government causing a power vacuum and the RSE tearing itself apart squabbling over who would be the new imperial leader, along with colonies who would rather not be a part of the mess going their own way.
The destroy the capital and you somehow directly destroy the entire nation thing only works for tiny ones like city-states, and Hollywood has their head lodged so far up the behind of Game of Thrones (or corporate empires for that matter) that they seem incapable of realizing that.
You have a very good point in questioning whether the Federation would really want to draw off enough Galaxies and other ships to make as much of a difference as possible. In fact, that question would have been an excellent way to do have framed the pre-plot leading up to the show.
We know that Picard is very idealistic and committed to saving lives whenever possible, and that he was an admiral when the supernova happened. Imagine that with that combination he used his authority and influence to gather as many ships as possible and that it was indeed too much of a draw on the border forces. Ships scrambling to cover the gaps could be seen by an enemy (either internal, external, or a conspiracy of both) to be the perfect opportunity to strike at the heart of the Federation as inner world reserves are mobilized to the frontiers.
That would have Picard in the position of having saved a lot of Romulan lives but at the unforeseen cost of Federation lives, and being the kind of person he is Picard would have taken the majority of the heat for that and resigned in disgrace. Fast forward to the "present" of the series and everything would be the same as the Abrams-style buildup CBS went with but done in a way that is actually realistic instead. His taking what many would see as an unnecessary risk that resulted in the loss of Starfleet lives would even make his treatment when he showed up asking for a favor a lot less of a stretch than a simple bad press statement would. It could have even caused the (temporary if STO and other future glimpses of the Federation are still valid) souring of Federation attitudes seen in the show.
And even a minimally successful evacuation effort, especially one that cost him so much, would support the idea of the level of Romulan gratitude towards him seen in the show much better than a total failure would have.
On top of that, with a little thought devoted to out of the box thinking they could have Picard drawn into the infighting between Romulan factions jockeying for the top of the heap and gotten at least gotten some of their "Game of Thrones in space" that Moonves apparently wanted DSC to be.
> @artan42 said: > (Quote) > > Well it's not that film specifically, just the fact any future KT films will likely use it, but yeah. > (Quote) > > Cornwall's 'cruiser'. It's spoken about but she appeared to arrive in a shuttle. This was before Lorca was Terran and before Cornwall was captured. > > It's not an issue because plenty of other series have had ships never appear but smokebailey is, as usual, absolutely desperate for things to pretend are exclusive to DSC. > (Quote) > > Kurtzman is a person not a Federation. And yes they can, just like they can in the other shows. The Bank of Bolius is a thing, they're a Federation world, and Torres is that worried about bigotry against her quarter-Klingon daughter she tries to 'fix' her Klingon genes. > > Grrr, that GRITTY!!!!! VGR. > (Quote) > > No it didn't. Mudd and Jones weren't the 'best of humanity', the corrupt and mad admirals weren't the 'best of humanity'. The Picard who would rather children die than Riker-Q save them wasn't the 'best of humanity'. Janeway, who sacrificed her own crew for her vanity wasn't the 'best of humanity'. The Federation that rolled over and let the Cardassians have Federation worlds and all the people on them weren't the 'best of humanity'. The Klingon-Federation collaboration to kill Gorkon weren't the 'best of humanity'. Ransom, who used sentient species to fuel his ship wasn't the 'best of humanity'. > > Roddenberry was a sex and money obsessed weirdo who's purest vision comes in TMP and TNG S1&2 as actual writers managed to hack that wall of bland down come TWoK and later TNG. No Trek series has ever been a example of the 'best of humanity'. > (Quote) > > Yeah, that's different though because because VGR is before 2001 which is the point Star Trek has to be picked apart to atoms and every section aired for criticism where as all pre-2001 Trek is allowed to be filtered through a nice rose tinted lens where it all blurs into one amorphous blob that is 1 part Trek and 9 parts fanfiction and headcanon where everything was perfect and there were no complaints.
Exactly. Discovery and Picard and the Kelvin movies aren’t perfect but they are nitpicked harder than any of the other series. What Star Trek series or movie respected canon? Every one of them has made changes to the canon. Hell TOS was making up the canon and still couldn’t get it right. I’m not saying you have to like everything, I’m not a big TNG fan and I find Voyager unwatchable, but the level of nitpicking is getting ridiculous.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Without proper worldbuilding, on the writing end it is all too easy to start slinging very iffy and implausible plot points around (VOY had a lot of the same problem btw) and solving things by contrived means instead of things that actually make sense, and sense like that happens most when characters, factions, and history are reasonably fleshed out. With good worldbuilding a setting and cast often take on a life of their own and practically write themselves.
Voyager's issue was "too many cooks in the kitchen". Too many writers with their own ideas for where to take the characters/ Main reason why Janeway's all over the place. One episode she's by the book, the next she's Kirk level Cowboy.
That chaos was caused by not doing proper worldbuilding (or rebuilding) in the first place (and worldbuilding does include important characters). The slush readers depend on the in-house writers or creators doing proper worldbuilding to know what fits and what does not. Voyager (like TNG) was pitched as a very different series than it came to be once shooting started, and no one bothered to solidify the new "world" after the old show concept was discarded.
the prequal novel really explains things a fiar bit, if you really care about the details obsessivly, read it. the complaints about world building are a bit odd when you consider Picard is only 5 episodes in.
Let's look at the first 5 episodes of TNG for world building.
These episodes are:
Encounter at Far Point part 1 and 2
the Naked Now
Code of Honour
and The last outpost
How much world building was done there?
TNG had a lot of startup problems, including having its whole original premise thrown out shortly before filming started and then had to scramble and catch up with their worldbuilding well after they should have had it nailed down, so that first season is a prime example of insufficient worldbuilding. It is the same thing that later happened to Voyager (though not to quite the same degree), after VOY already had the pilot in the can, which is why it featured things like the torpedo count that never went anywhere after that.
PIC has the advantage of a tremendous amount of groundwork already having been laid out in TNG and the movies, that should have gone a long way to free the writers to think out the details of the plot in PIC but it sounds like they took an action-movie like approach and figured the viewers would be too wowed by the visuals or whatever to think about the holes in their metaplot.
Also, "only five episodes" is nothing to sneeze at in a series that only has ten per season. With something that is essentially a miniseries plus two episodes that kind of sloppiness should not happen.
Yeah, try a few tens of billions there, @rattler2. A "few thousand" isn't a homeworld and surrounding systems, it's a single first-stage colony.
Again... I was low balling the estimate based on I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY SHIPS SURVIVED THE ATTACK! The entire fleet could save millions to billions, but after the attack and the loss of so many ships... its possible that that number was cut dramatically.
Why am I getting called out on an unknown all of a sudden? Can a couple old Magees hold millions? No. Can one large transport hold millions? No.
We do not know how many ships survived, or what class they were either. All we know for a FACT is that the rescue fleet was decimated. We don't know what survived, and in what kind of numbers. So I decided to low ball the estimate as smaller, more maneuverable ships would have had a higher chance of survival than large, slow moving transports.
They could evacuate a lot of people on normal fleet ships if they wanted to. For example a Galaxy class (which they apparently had a lot more than a dozen of considering what they show of them in the Dominion war) can hold 15,000 people in a pinch (the normal crew including dependents is around a thousand) which means if they could get ten of the things there in time they could have saved 140,000 with no preparation time at all. The ships in TNG are often huge.
Problem with this scenario is that Starfleet would almost definitely want to retain said Galaxy class ships.
Think about the ships they were using for this:
A: New ships, built specifically for the purpose of providing refugee aid
B: Very old, obsolete, ships (seen in the Short Trek episode 'Children of Mars' ) most likely refitted internally to faciliate carrying as many passengers as possible
In both cases the evacuation ships would almost definitely have been dual-purpose, their primary function being to transport refugees, their secondary purpose to be brought planetside to provide shelter/resources for said refugess, since they wouldn't (initially) have wanted to just dump the refugees and run.
Actually, dump and run is exactly the right course of action in this case. The idea is to save as many people as possible, not to start a new colony somewhere. And with subspace communications it would not be some surprise for the worlds they drop off refugees on either.
Just with the Galaxy class ships alone they could have saved 14,000 people per ship per trip, so the idea thing would be to pick them up and take them to the closest worlds outside of the danger zone that could handle the refugees and then go back for more. If they had time to build ships they had plenty of time for multiple runs with whatever they had already at hand.
Pickup, dump, run back and pickup more, rinse and repeat as many times as they can before the radiation wave hits, and then, only when there are no more to rescue is it time to worry about where they will all go long term.
And there should be plenty of worlds close enough for short term handling of refugees considering the RSE was a major power at least as far back as ENT and their ships were as slow as Mayweather's family ship until their tech exchange with the Klingons in the mid 2260s so they would have a tendency to have as dense a colonial pattern as they could find or terraform words for.
I am at a total loss as to why CBS chose to go with the nonsensical way they handled the supernova thing when they had two very good disaster scenarios to take inspiration from:
Paramount got the right idea by making the Praxis disaster about their economy. Their most valuable resource literally blew up in their faces, and did massive (and doubtless very expensive) damage to their capital world on top of that. Of course they were reeling badly from that.
STO took the weird Abramsism of the FTL supernova destroying the RSE and turned it into a very believable case of the destruction of the seat of government causing a power vacuum and the RSE tearing itself apart squabbling over who would be the new imperial leader, along with colonies who would rather not be a part of the mess going their own way.
The destroy the capital and you somehow directly destroy the entire nation thing only works for tiny ones like city-states, and Hollywood has their head lodged so far up the behind of Game of Thrones (or corporate empires for that matter) that they seem incapable of realizing that.
You have a very good point in questioning whether the Federation would really want to draw off enough Galaxies and other ships to make as much of a difference as possible. In fact, that question would have been an excellent way to do have framed the pre-plot leading up to the show.
We know that Picard is very idealistic and committed to saving lives whenever possible, and that he was an admiral when the supernova happened. Imagine that with that combination he used his authority and influence to gather as many ships as possible and that it was indeed too much of a draw on the border forces. Ships scrambling to cover the gaps could be seen by an enemy (either internal, external, or a conspiracy of both) to be the perfect opportunity to strike at the heart of the Federation as inner world reserves are mobilized to the frontiers.
That would have Picard in the position of having saved a lot of Romulan lives but at the unforeseen cost of Federation lives, and being the kind of person he is Picard would have taken the majority of the heat for that and resigned in disgrace. Fast forward to the "present" of the series and everything would be the same as the Abrams-style buildup CBS went with but done in a way that is actually realistic instead. His taking what many would see as an unnecessary risk that resulted in the loss of Starfleet lives would even make his treatment when he showed up asking for a favor a lot less of a stretch than a simple bad press statement would. It could have even caused (the temporary if STO and other future glimpses of the Federation are still valid) souring of Federation attitudes seen in the show.
And even a minimally successful evacuation effort, especially one that cost him so much, would support the idea of the level of Romulan gratitude towards him seen in the show much better than a total failure would have.
On top of that, with a little thought devoted to out of the box thinking they could have Picard drawn into the infighting between Romulan factions jockeying for the top of the heap and gotten at least gotten some of their "Game of Thrones in space" that Moonves apparently wanted DSC to be.
Exactly. Discovery and Picard and the Kelvin movies aren’t perfect but they are nitpicked harder than any of the other series. What Star Trek series or movie respected canon? Every one of them has made changes to the canon. Hell TOS was making up the canon and still couldn’t get it right.
I’m not saying you have to like everything, I’m not a big TNG fan and I find Voyager unwatchable, but the level of nitpicking is getting ridiculous.
Made changes to the continuity, it's impossible to change the canon outside of a change to the IP but I'm sure it's down to the internet.
ENT caught the start of the proper internet, the KT hit the rise of FB, and DSC and PIC have hit the Twitter and YouTube lead toxic entitlement generating industry.
TOS to VGR fell just before all that which leads to selection bias as there are far more inane criticisms of ENT to PIC visible that makes fanbois think they have a lot more support than they actually do and conversely the lack of access to any information about TOS to VGR other than nostalgia just makes them retreat to the pink fluffy place where it was all perfect and Saint Roddenberry could do no long.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
I think I have too many problems with Discovery to count as a 'fan' of it. I watched Seasons 1 & 2, I don't think it's a total loss, and I will give season 3 a shot. But for now, I'll just stick to Picard, which I like more, even though it has issues.
Also, as we're only halfway through the first arc of Picard a lot of what's happened could gain/lose meaning as time goes on.
Two problems I have:
1) Starfleet as a whole are presented as an organisation of complete jerks. This isn't the Starfleet I followed across four series (was never an Ent fan, sorry). Yeah there were Admirals who were wrong like Leighton and Dougherty. And even Nechayev comes across being too dogmatic. But at the core of it all, they were on the whole a benevolent, caring organisation. Or at least doing their best to be. Now they're ultra-dogmatic bureaucrats who are possibly in league with the Tal Shiar, and everyone who matters (Picard, Raffi, Rios, Seven - presumably Riker based on the trailer) has left them. I just want to see one current Starfleet Officer be portrayed positively.
2) Grimdark. I get that murder, torture, drugs, crime, etc. were all in Star Trek before. But in Picard it's all that and sod all positivity. It's taken fringe aspects and made it the driving force of the series. I have no problem with watching dark stuff, I just personally don't think it suits Star Trek and it's not really what I was looking for from this series. It's partly a constraints thing for me. I feel like they're dismantling the world built up over 50 years of storytelling. If you don't like that world, and don't want to write within the constraints it provides, then why tell stories within that world? Why not write your own world? A fanfic writer coming up with something like Stardust City Rag five years ago would've been crucified.
Now, there could be a pay off in Picard that invalidates those criticisms since the season 1 story is only half-told, but as it stands, that's how I see it.
1) Starfleet as a whole are presented as an organisation of complete jerks. This isn't the Starfleet I followed across four series (was never an Ent fan, sorry). Yeah there were Admirals who were wrong like Leighton and Dougherty. And even Nechayev comes across being too dogmatic. But at the core of it all, they were on the whole a benevolent, caring organisation. Or at least doing their best to be. Now they're ultra-dogmatic bureaucrats who are possibly in league with the Tal Shiar, and everyone who matters (Picard, Raffi, Rios, Seven - presumably Riker based on the trailer) has left them. I just want to see one current Starfleet Officer be portrayed positively.
Starfleet's Prime Directive is literately to avoid interference even at the cost of lives. That is the founding principle of an 'organisation of complete jerks'.
Also, you single out random admirals in other series as bad eggs but assume all of Starfleet in PIC is 'in league with the Tal Shiar' rather than just assuming Oh is, like with the other series' admirals. Double standard.
I just want to see one current Starfleet Officer be portrayed positively.
Starfleet are not the focus of PIC. Picard is.
Oh, to actually get new additions to franchises to be judged by the same standards as the older ones... That'd be the dream.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Exactly. Discovery and Picard and the Kelvin movies aren’t perfect but they are nitpicked harder than any of the other series. What Star Trek series or movie respected canon? Every one of them has made changes to the canon. Hell TOS was making up the canon and still couldn’t get it right.
I’m not saying you have to like everything, I’m not a big TNG fan and I find Voyager unwatchable, but the level of nitpicking is getting ridiculous.
Made changes to the continuity, it's impossible to change the canon outside of a change to the IP but I'm sure it's down to the internet.
ENT caught the start of the proper internet, the KT hit the rise of FB, and DSC and PIC have hit the Twitter and YouTube lead toxic entitlement generating industry.
TOS to VGR fell just before all that which leads to selection bias as there are far more inane criticisms of ENT to PIC visible that makes fanbois think they have a lot more support than they actually do and conversely the lack of access to any information about TOS to VGR other than nostalgia just makes them retreat to the pink fluffy place where it was all perfect and Saint Roddenberry could do no long.
You are seriously underestimating the amount of fan communication there was across all of the Treks. Yes, Twitter and the rest are fairly new, but there have been online discussion boards since the days of dialup BBS before many even had internet access at all. Even before that there were fanzines and newsletters that ranged from almost semi-professional grade printings to mass Xeroxed or mimeographed copies of hand-typed (or even hand written) pages stapled together, and other things like conventions (the internet has pretty much killed all but a comparative handful of those) and other stuff including radio and even telephones and fans simply running into each other at random and talking. The "trekkies" were always a very, very active community, something the newer "trekkers" seem to overlook.
Star Trek fans pay a lot more attention to details than fans of other shows, as the first serious space-based sci-fi TV series it attracted all sorts of science geeks and the tradition persists even after the watering down to a generic Hollywood space show in recent years. In fact the movie Galaxy Quest heavily featured a good natured spoofing of that phenomenon.
And every Trek including TOS got hammered for gaffs and inconsistencies, especially after the movie division got ahold of Trek with their contempt for "small screen" productions and egos that demanded they "make their own mark" regardless of whether the changes made sense or not.
Contrary to what some believe the CBS Treks are not getting more criticism for the same level of compatibility-breaking nonsense compared to the rest of Trek. CBS has simply jumped onto the action movie, empty magic box bandwagon with the rest of Hollywood in recent years and that encapsulated, continuity-lite eyecandy thrillride style is naturally a trainwreck as far as a fandom who like to take apart and closely examine how the fictional world fits together, runs, and evolves is concerned.
the differance is when people nitpicked older series most people did it more for entertainment and those claiming it was "AN INSULT TO DA FANZ!" where a embaressing minority, now however fan base entitlement has set in. ` which is why after only 5 episodes people are screaming all of starfleet are romulan spies and other absurd statements.
Also, you single out random admirals in other series as bad eggs but assume all of Starfleet in PIC is 'in league with the Tal Shiar' rather than just assuming Oh is, like with the other series' admirals. Double standard.
Except they're the only Starfleet Flag Officers (or Starfleet personnel at all, actually) presented in Picard, whereas Leighton et. al. aren't the only Starfleet Flag Officers is TNG, DS9 etc. The equivalence you're trying to draw doesn't apply. If the only Starfleet Officers you see are doing X, Y and Z, then for the purposes of the storytelling within the series, Starfleet are doing X, Y & Z.
mean when you look at the admirals who actually appered, most who have a role thats more then "captain I have a new mission for you, X is cuasing trouble, go to Y and resolve the trouble" tend to exist to butt heads with the captain.
the only recurring admiral who wasn't a complete douche was Admiral Ross, And Picard woulda hated him too given he worked with S31
> @rattler2 said: > (Quote) > > [sarcasm]But... the older ones ARE the standards, and thus holy. Anything that doesn't match that is blasphemy and must be purged![/sarcasm]
Ah yes the good old "Other things did it so it must be okay"
Of course the older shows are standards. It's stupid to argue anything otherwise. Most often the first things in a series or franchise are considered the standard by which other series or franchises are judged by. We judge the star wars prequels and sequels to the original trilogy. We judge that god awful thundercats reboot to the original and the previous reboot.
Its asinine to act like that's a bad thing.
And something that needs to be brought up is JUST BECAUSE A PREVIOUS SHOW DID SOMETHING WRONG DOESN'T MAKE A NEW SHOW INCAPABLE OF BEING CRITICIZED. Something Discovery and Picard defenders like to say is "Oh so and so happened in TOS or So and so happened in Voyager so you can't really blame discovery or Picard." The thing is... yeah we can. Those shows have problems too. Nobody is acting like the original shows were untouchable but Discovery and Picard defenders sure as hell love acting like people are trying to say that.
Previous trek shows have issues. New trek shows have issues. The thing is people see MORE issues with newer treak shows. The problems with TOS and TNG and so one are usually minor enough that people can watch them without being distracted by the issues. Those shows are good in spite of their problems. The thing about Discovery and Picard however is that each show has a significant amount of issues, and the issues are so great that they detract from the shows and make them almost if not completely unwatchable.
> @westx211 said: > > @rattler2 said: > > (Quote) > > > > [sarcasm]But... the older ones ARE the standards, and thus holy. Anything that doesn't match that is blasphemy and must be purged![/sarcasm] > > Ah yes the good old "Other things did it so it must be okay" > > Of course the older shows are standards. It's stupid to argue anything otherwise. Most often the first things in a series or franchise are considered the standard by which other series or franchises are judged by. We judge the star wars prequels and sequels to the original trilogy. We judge that god awful thundercats reboot to the original and the previous reboot. > > Its asinine to act like that's a bad thing. > > And something that needs to be brought up is JUST BECAUSE A PREVIOUS SHOW DID SOMETHING WRONG DOESN'T MAKE A NEW SHOW INCAPABLE OF BEING CRITICIZED. Something Discovery and Picard defenders like to say is "Oh so and so happened in TOS or So and so happened in Voyager so you can't really blame discovery or Picard." The thing is... yeah we can. Those shows have problems too. Nobody is acting like the original shows were untouchable but Discovery and Picard defenders sure as hell love acting like people are trying to say that. > > Previous trek shows have issues. New trek shows have issues. The thing is people see MORE issues with newer treak shows. The problems with TOS and TNG and so one are usually minor enough that people can watch them without being distracted by the issues. Those shows are good in spite of their problems. The thing about Discovery and Picard however is that each show has a significant amount of issues, and the issues are so great that they detract from the shows and make them almost if not completely unwatchable.
Yes every series up to Picard has had issues. The problem is when an issue pops up in Discovery or Picard to some fans it’s the unforgivable sin and the shows are branded “Not Star Trek” even if the issue has popped up in the other series.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,577Community Moderator
Yes every series up to Picard has had issues. The problem is when an issue pops up in Discovery or Picard to some fans it’s the unforgivable sin and the shows are branded “Not Star Trek” even if the issue has popped up in the other series.
Also their complaints are FAR more visible now than they would be like when TNG started.
You are seriously underestimating the amount of fan communication there was across all of the Treks.
No I'm not. I'm saying it's now far more visible leading to selection bias. It's now visible to everybody and not just the niche market of ST fan magazines.
Contrary to what some believe the CBS Treks are not getting more criticism for the same level of compatibility-breaking nonsense compared to the rest of Trek.
Well they are. Things that are supposedly 'good' about pre-2001 Trek are now 'bad' post 2001. That's all over these forums, never mind elsewhere and is constantly pointed out. Just because you're one of the people making that mistake of pretending there's a difference doesn't mean you can pretend it doesn't exits.
CBS has simply jumped onto the action movie, empty magic box bandwagon with the rest of Hollywood in recent years and that encapsulated, continuity-lite eyecandy thrillride style is naturally a trainwreck as far as a fandom who like to take apart and closely examine how the fictional world fits together, runs, and evolves is concerned.
They haven't and fanbois should give VGR the same pull-apart they give DSC, they'll find a hell of a lot more to whine about if they approached 'close examinations' with any honesty.
Except they're the only Starfleet Flag Officers (or Starfleet personnel at all, actually) presented in Picard, whereas Leighton et. al. aren't the only Starfleet Flag Officers is TNG, DS9 etc.
Exactly, there's four active, named Starfleet officers in PIC because Starfleet isn't relevant to PIC. Romulans are, so two of those four are Romulans.
The equivalence you're trying to draw doesn't apply. If the only Starfleet Officers you see are doing X, Y and Z, then for the purposes of the storytelling within the series, Starfleet are doing X, Y & Z.
You're the one drawing an equivalence between a show that doesn't focus on Starfleet and ones that do.
The fact that they opted to make Starfleet look like a shower of twats to tell their non-Starfleet story shouldn't be immune from criticism.
Starfleet already looks like a shower of twats right from TOS. Your headcanon Starfleet might be different, but the one of the shows is made of obstructive bureaucrats and hypocrites, where the only forces for good are the main crews and the occasion guest ship.
Nobody is acting like the original shows were untouchable but Discovery and Picard defenders sure as hell love acting like people are trying to say that.
Yes they are. Because there's an imaginary line drawn at 2001 everything before is heavily mixed with headcanon to suggest ridiculous things like 'the Federation is a utopia' and anything after is then compared against the already false premise.
It is often prefaced with some pat 'criticism' of pre-2001 shows just to pay lip service to the idea that they are 'objective' and that there are issues with both before going on to show they're about as 'objective' as a politician.
Previous trek shows have issues. New trek shows have issues. The thing is people see MORE issues with newer treak shows. The problems with TOS and TNG and so one are usually minor enough that people can watch them without being distracted by the issues. Those shows are good in spite of their problems. The thing about Discovery and Picard however is that each show has a significant amount of issues, and the issues are so great that they detract from the shows and make them almost if not completely unwatchable.
Except they exactly and completely the opposite. The ability to ignore the significant issues presented in TOS-VGR are self inflicted and the ability to magnify out of all reasonable proportion the issues in ENT-PIC are entirely intentional.
Considering the only things that actually popped up in this thread specifically for legitimate criticisms barely fill a page compared to all the rest of the talk which is people lying about pre-2001 Trek presenting a utopia despite being demonstrable false. I'd say no, they do not have any issues 'so great that they detract from the shows and make them almost if not completely unwatchable'.
Yes every series up to Picard has had issues. The problem is when an issue pops up in Discovery or Picard to some fans it’s the unforgivable sin and the shows are branded “Not Star Trek” even if the issue has popped up in the other series.
The entitlement of fanbois, the idea that they get to define what is 'Trek' (or indeed any other brand) and not the people who own said brand.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
> @rattler2 said:
> (Quote)
>
> [sarcasm]But... the older ones ARE the standards, and thus holy. Anything that doesn't match that is blasphemy and must be purged![/sarcasm]
Ah yes the good old "Other things did it so it must be okay"
Of course the older shows are standards. It's stupid to argue anything otherwise. Most often the first things in a series or franchise are considered the standard by which other series or franchises are judged by. We judge the star wars prequels and sequels to the original trilogy. We judge that god awful thundercats reboot to the original and the previous reboot.
Its asinine to act like that's a bad thing.
And something that needs to be brought up is JUST BECAUSE A PREVIOUS SHOW DID SOMETHING WRONG DOESN'T MAKE A NEW SHOW INCAPABLE OF BEING CRITICIZED. Something Discovery and Picard defenders like to say is "Oh so and so happened in TOS or So and so happened in Voyager so you can't really blame discovery or Picard." The thing is... yeah we can. Those shows have problems too. Nobody is acting like the original shows were untouchable but Discovery and Picard defenders sure as hell love acting like people are trying to say that.
Previous trek shows have issues. New trek shows have issues. The thing is people see MORE issues with newer treak shows. The problems with TOS and TNG and so one are usually minor enough that people can watch them without being distracted by the issues. Those shows are good in spite of their problems. The thing about Discovery and Picard however is that each show has a significant amount of issues, and the issues are so great that they detract from the shows and make them almost if not completely unwatchable.
except when you claim "IT ISN'T TREK ANYMORE!" and then list a bunch of issues that have always been around in trek... yes your argument falls apart.
Likewise if you argue that Picard and discovery suck because "they've made trek Liberal" (an argument I've seen made in the past, not by anyone ehre but I've seen it made) it's really really a "....... have you watched trek?" moment
Comments
I would not be surprised.....can see folks in the Kurtzman Federation being homeless or banks still existing or bigotry against hybrids coming next....because, you know....GRITTY!!!!!
Season 1 of Disco, and a chunk of season 2 was guilty of that as welll....each time a ship was contacting Discovery, we never get to see the other ships.
> (Quote)
>
> Season 1 of Disco, and a chunk of season 2 was guilty of that as welll....each time a ship was contacting Discovery, we never get to see the other ships.
Discovery in the first two episodes gave us a lockbox worth of federation ships.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Seriously? While some of them are undoubtedly way beyond the borders doing their ultra-long range exploration the bulk of them are probably just puttering around doing the same things Enterprise-D was doing. Contacting them and sending them to the Romulan homeworld would be quick and trivial compared to the "rescue fleet" that was not even all built yet. I am sure they would have plenty of time to drop off the crew's dependents and maybe pick up some more security and medical people if they had time to build ships on Mars and send them all the way out to the center of the RSE (of course there that would only get them another six or seven hundred people capacity so I doubt Starfleet would have them drop off the dependents before going on the rescue).
And that is just the Starfleet troop carriers (the wartime role of the Galaxy class as shown in DS9), there must be passenger liners, civilian colony ships, smaller troop carriers, buffered freighters, and other types that could have aided in rescue efforts if they had as much time as PIC depicts to at least start the operation before the special rescue fleet was supposed to get there. The way they handled it in the show sounds very contrived and not well thought out at all (which puts it about par for the modern 40 minute or less "hour long" shows). Streaming services have a chance to reverse the trend and go back to better-thought-out scripts but they don't as far as I have seen so far.
> (Quote)
>
> Seriously? While some of them are undoubtedly way beyond the borders doing their ultra-long range exploration the bulk of them are probably just puttering around doing the same things Enterprise-D was doing. Contacting them and sending them to the Romulan homeworld would be quick and trivial compared to the "rescue fleet" that was not even all built yet. I am sure they would have plenty of time to drop off the crew's dependents and maybe pick up some more security and medical people if they had time to build ships on Mars and send them all the way out to the center of the RSE (of course there that would only get them another six or seven hundred people capacity so I doubt Starfleet would have them drop off the dependents before going on the rescue).
>
> And that is just the Starfleet troop carriers (the wartime role of the Galaxy class as shown in DS9), there must be passenger liners, civilian colony ships, smaller troop carriers, buffered freighters, and other types that could have aided in rescue efforts if they had as much time as PIC depicts to at least start the operation before the special rescue fleet was supposed to get there. The way they handled it in the show sounds very contrived and not well thought out at all (which puts it about par for the modern 40 minute or less "hour long" shows). Streaming services have a chance to reverse the trend and go back to better-thought-out scripts but they don't as far as I have seen so far.
Sure you could pull all your frontline cruisers off their missions to save the Romulans but the question is would you want to.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I am talking of the rest of the season, we saw little to nothing.
> (Quote)
>
> I am talking of the rest of the season, we saw little to nothing.
Do you have a specific example of Discovery contacting a ship and they never showing the ship?
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
even if thats the case why is that nesscarily a BAD thing?
When being hailed by a ship, we did not see the ship....sorry ,but I like the classic 'see ship on screen, get hailed...and so on' thing.
keep in mind back in TOS we didn't always see the ships the enterprise was dealing with eaither so it's hardly unique to discovery
The problem with Disco and Picard is that it is realistic as opposed to the idealism of the previous incarnations. In ToS, Voyager, Enterprise and TNG we saw humanity at it's best, all of Roddenberry's idealism and best wishes for humanity's future.
DS9 began to show a darker humanity to highlight how far we have come in the future. Disco confronts the federation with situations that idealism is no defence against and challenges humanity to overcome these problems without losing itself.
Picard I think shows the reality beyond starfleet and the federation.
The other Star Trek series gave hope that we would eventually be able to evolve beyond our base desires. Picard destroyed that hope with their reliance on slave labor using Synthetics and the Federation not helping their former enemy when they needed help.
Voyager showed the Federation using EMHs as miners.
The Romulans weren’t a former enemy. They were an enemy. The Federation wanted to but several planets objected and threatened to leave.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Well it's not that film specifically, just the fact any future KT films will likely use it, but yeah.
Cornwall's 'cruiser'. It's spoken about but she appeared to arrive in a shuttle. This was before Lorca was Terran and before Cornwall was captured.
It's not an issue because plenty of other series have had ships never appear but smokebailey is, as usual, absolutely desperate for things to pretend are exclusive to DSC.
Kurtzman is a person not a Federation. And yes they can, just like they can in the other shows. The Bank of Bolius is a thing, they're a Federation world, and Torres is that worried about bigotry against her quarter-Klingon daughter she tries to 'fix' her Klingon genes.
Grrr, that GRITTY!!!!! VGR.
No it didn't. Mudd and Jones weren't the 'best of humanity', the corrupt and mad admirals weren't the 'best of humanity'. The Picard who would rather children die than Riker-Q save them wasn't the 'best of humanity'. Janeway, who sacrificed her own crew for her vanity wasn't the 'best of humanity'. The Federation that rolled over and let the Cardassians have Federation worlds and all the people on them weren't the 'best of humanity'. The Klingon-Federation collaboration to kill Gorkon weren't the 'best of humanity'. Ransom, who used sentient species to fuel his ship wasn't the 'best of humanity'.
Roddenberry was a sex and money obsessed weirdo who's purest vision comes in TMP and TNG S1&2 as actual writers managed to hack that wall of bland down come TWoK and later TNG. No Trek series has ever been a example of the 'best of humanity'.
Yeah, that's different though because because VGR is before 2001 which is the point Star Trek has to be picked apart to atoms and every section aired for criticism where as all pre-2001 Trek is allowed to be filtered through a nice rose tinted lens where it all blurs into one amorphous blob that is 1 part Trek and 9 parts fanfiction and headcanon where everything was perfect and there were no complaints.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Actually, dump and run is exactly the right course of action in this case. The idea is to save as many people as possible, not to start a new colony somewhere. And with subspace communications it would not be some surprise for the worlds they drop off refugees on either.
Just with the Galaxy class ships alone they could have saved 14,000 people per ship per trip, so the idea thing would be to pick them up and take them to the closest worlds outside of the danger zone that could handle the refugees and then go back for more. If they had time to build ships they had plenty of time for multiple runs with whatever they had already at hand.
Pickup, dump, run back and pickup more, rinse and repeat as many times as they can before the radiation wave hits, and then, only when there are no more to rescue is it time to worry about where they will all go long term.
And there should be plenty of worlds close enough for short term handling of refugees considering the RSE was a major power at least as far back as ENT and their ships were as slow as Mayweather's family ship until their tech exchange with the Klingons in the mid 2260s so they would have a tendency to have as dense a colonial pattern as they could find or terraform words for.
I am at a total loss as to why CBS chose to go with the nonsensical way they handled the supernova thing when they had two very good disaster scenarios to take inspiration from:
Paramount got the right idea by making the Praxis disaster about their economy. Their most valuable resource literally blew up in their faces, and did massive (and doubtless very expensive) damage to their capital world on top of that. Of course they were reeling badly from that.
STO took the weird Abramsism of the FTL supernova destroying the RSE and turned it into a very believable case of the destruction of the seat of government causing a power vacuum and the RSE tearing itself apart squabbling over who would be the new imperial leader, along with colonies who would rather not be a part of the mess going their own way.
The destroy the capital and you somehow directly destroy the entire nation thing only works for tiny ones like city-states, and Hollywood has their head lodged so far up the behind of Game of Thrones (or corporate empires for that matter) that they seem incapable of realizing that.
You have a very good point in questioning whether the Federation would really want to draw off enough Galaxies and other ships to make as much of a difference as possible. In fact, that question would have been an excellent way to do have framed the pre-plot leading up to the show.
We know that Picard is very idealistic and committed to saving lives whenever possible, and that he was an admiral when the supernova happened. Imagine that with that combination he used his authority and influence to gather as many ships as possible and that it was indeed too much of a draw on the border forces. Ships scrambling to cover the gaps could be seen by an enemy (either internal, external, or a conspiracy of both) to be the perfect opportunity to strike at the heart of the Federation as inner world reserves are mobilized to the frontiers.
That would have Picard in the position of having saved a lot of Romulan lives but at the unforeseen cost of Federation lives, and being the kind of person he is Picard would have taken the majority of the heat for that and resigned in disgrace. Fast forward to the "present" of the series and everything would be the same as the Abrams-style buildup CBS went with but done in a way that is actually realistic instead. His taking what many would see as an unnecessary risk that resulted in the loss of Starfleet lives would even make his treatment when he showed up asking for a favor a lot less of a stretch than a simple bad press statement would. It could have even caused the (temporary if STO and other future glimpses of the Federation are still valid) souring of Federation attitudes seen in the show.
And even a minimally successful evacuation effort, especially one that cost him so much, would support the idea of the level of Romulan gratitude towards him seen in the show much better than a total failure would have.
On top of that, with a little thought devoted to out of the box thinking they could have Picard drawn into the infighting between Romulan factions jockeying for the top of the heap and gotten at least gotten some of their "Game of Thrones in space" that Moonves apparently wanted DSC to be.
> (Quote)
>
> Well it's not that film specifically, just the fact any future KT films will likely use it, but yeah.
> (Quote)
>
> Cornwall's 'cruiser'. It's spoken about but she appeared to arrive in a shuttle. This was before Lorca was Terran and before Cornwall was captured.
>
> It's not an issue because plenty of other series have had ships never appear but smokebailey is, as usual, absolutely desperate for things to pretend are exclusive to DSC.
> (Quote)
>
> Kurtzman is a person not a Federation. And yes they can, just like they can in the other shows. The Bank of Bolius is a thing, they're a Federation world, and Torres is that worried about bigotry against her quarter-Klingon daughter she tries to 'fix' her Klingon genes.
>
> Grrr, that GRITTY!!!!! VGR.
> (Quote)
>
> No it didn't. Mudd and Jones weren't the 'best of humanity', the corrupt and mad admirals weren't the 'best of humanity'. The Picard who would rather children die than Riker-Q save them wasn't the 'best of humanity'. Janeway, who sacrificed her own crew for her vanity wasn't the 'best of humanity'. The Federation that rolled over and let the Cardassians have Federation worlds and all the people on them weren't the 'best of humanity'. The Klingon-Federation collaboration to kill Gorkon weren't the 'best of humanity'. Ransom, who used sentient species to fuel his ship wasn't the 'best of humanity'.
>
> Roddenberry was a sex and money obsessed weirdo who's purest vision comes in TMP and TNG S1&2 as actual writers managed to hack that wall of bland down come TWoK and later TNG. No Trek series has ever been a example of the 'best of humanity'.
> (Quote)
>
> Yeah, that's different though because because VGR is before 2001 which is the point Star Trek has to be picked apart to atoms and every section aired for criticism where as all pre-2001 Trek is allowed to be filtered through a nice rose tinted lens where it all blurs into one amorphous blob that is 1 part Trek and 9 parts fanfiction and headcanon where everything was perfect and there were no complaints.
Exactly. Discovery and Picard and the Kelvin movies aren’t perfect but they are nitpicked harder than any of the other series. What Star Trek series or movie respected canon? Every one of them has made changes to the canon. Hell TOS was making up the canon and still couldn’t get it right.
I’m not saying you have to like everything, I’m not a big TNG fan and I find Voyager unwatchable, but the level of nitpicking is getting ridiculous.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I am glad that Les Moonves did not get his wish.
Made changes to the continuity, it's impossible to change the canon outside of a change to the IP but I'm sure it's down to the internet.
ENT caught the start of the proper internet, the KT hit the rise of FB, and DSC and PIC have hit the Twitter and YouTube lead toxic entitlement generating industry.
TOS to VGR fell just before all that which leads to selection bias as there are far more inane criticisms of ENT to PIC visible that makes fanbois think they have a lot more support than they actually do and conversely the lack of access to any information about TOS to VGR other than nostalgia just makes them retreat to the pink fluffy place where it was all perfect and Saint Roddenberry could do no long.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Also, as we're only halfway through the first arc of Picard a lot of what's happened could gain/lose meaning as time goes on.
Two problems I have:
1) Starfleet as a whole are presented as an organisation of complete jerks. This isn't the Starfleet I followed across four series (was never an Ent fan, sorry). Yeah there were Admirals who were wrong like Leighton and Dougherty. And even Nechayev comes across being too dogmatic. But at the core of it all, they were on the whole a benevolent, caring organisation. Or at least doing their best to be. Now they're ultra-dogmatic bureaucrats who are possibly in league with the Tal Shiar, and everyone who matters (Picard, Raffi, Rios, Seven - presumably Riker based on the trailer) has left them. I just want to see one current Starfleet Officer be portrayed positively.
2) Grimdark. I get that murder, torture, drugs, crime, etc. were all in Star Trek before. But in Picard it's all that and sod all positivity. It's taken fringe aspects and made it the driving force of the series. I have no problem with watching dark stuff, I just personally don't think it suits Star Trek and it's not really what I was looking for from this series. It's partly a constraints thing for me. I feel like they're dismantling the world built up over 50 years of storytelling. If you don't like that world, and don't want to write within the constraints it provides, then why tell stories within that world? Why not write your own world? A fanfic writer coming up with something like Stardust City Rag five years ago would've been crucified.
Now, there could be a pay off in Picard that invalidates those criticisms since the season 1 story is only half-told, but as it stands, that's how I see it.
Starfleet's Prime Directive is literately to avoid interference even at the cost of lives. That is the founding principle of an 'organisation of complete jerks'.
Also, you single out random admirals in other series as bad eggs but assume all of Starfleet in PIC is 'in league with the Tal Shiar' rather than just assuming Oh is, like with the other series' admirals. Double standard.
Starfleet are not the focus of PIC. Picard is.
Oh, to actually get new additions to franchises to be judged by the same standards as the older ones... That'd be the dream.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
[sarcasm]But... the older ones ARE the standards, and thus holy. Anything that doesn't match that is blasphemy and must be purged![/sarcasm]
You are seriously underestimating the amount of fan communication there was across all of the Treks. Yes, Twitter and the rest are fairly new, but there have been online discussion boards since the days of dialup BBS before many even had internet access at all. Even before that there were fanzines and newsletters that ranged from almost semi-professional grade printings to mass Xeroxed or mimeographed copies of hand-typed (or even hand written) pages stapled together, and other things like conventions (the internet has pretty much killed all but a comparative handful of those) and other stuff including radio and even telephones and fans simply running into each other at random and talking. The "trekkies" were always a very, very active community, something the newer "trekkers" seem to overlook.
Star Trek fans pay a lot more attention to details than fans of other shows, as the first serious space-based sci-fi TV series it attracted all sorts of science geeks and the tradition persists even after the watering down to a generic Hollywood space show in recent years. In fact the movie Galaxy Quest heavily featured a good natured spoofing of that phenomenon.
And every Trek including TOS got hammered for gaffs and inconsistencies, especially after the movie division got ahold of Trek with their contempt for "small screen" productions and egos that demanded they "make their own mark" regardless of whether the changes made sense or not.
Contrary to what some believe the CBS Treks are not getting more criticism for the same level of compatibility-breaking nonsense compared to the rest of Trek. CBS has simply jumped onto the action movie, empty magic box bandwagon with the rest of Hollywood in recent years and that encapsulated, continuity-lite eyecandy thrillride style is naturally a trainwreck as far as a fandom who like to take apart and closely examine how the fictional world fits together, runs, and evolves is concerned.
Except they're the only Starfleet Flag Officers (or Starfleet personnel at all, actually) presented in Picard, whereas Leighton et. al. aren't the only Starfleet Flag Officers is TNG, DS9 etc. The equivalence you're trying to draw doesn't apply. If the only Starfleet Officers you see are doing X, Y and Z, then for the purposes of the storytelling within the series, Starfleet are doing X, Y & Z.
The fact that they opted to make Starfleet look like a shower of twats to tell their non-Starfleet story shouldn't be immune from criticism.
As I said though, we're only 5 episodes in. What happens next could easily invalidate my problems over the presentation of Starfleet.
the only recurring admiral who wasn't a complete douche was Admiral Ross, And Picard woulda hated him too given he worked with S31
> (Quote)
>
> [sarcasm]But... the older ones ARE the standards, and thus holy. Anything that doesn't match that is blasphemy and must be purged![/sarcasm]
Ah yes the good old "Other things did it so it must be okay"
Of course the older shows are standards. It's stupid to argue anything otherwise. Most often the first things in a series or franchise are considered the standard by which other series or franchises are judged by. We judge the star wars prequels and sequels to the original trilogy. We judge that god awful thundercats reboot to the original and the previous reboot.
Its asinine to act like that's a bad thing.
And something that needs to be brought up is JUST BECAUSE A PREVIOUS SHOW DID SOMETHING WRONG DOESN'T MAKE A NEW SHOW INCAPABLE OF BEING CRITICIZED. Something Discovery and Picard defenders like to say is "Oh so and so happened in TOS or So and so happened in Voyager so you can't really blame discovery or Picard." The thing is... yeah we can. Those shows have problems too. Nobody is acting like the original shows were untouchable but Discovery and Picard defenders sure as hell love acting like people are trying to say that.
Previous trek shows have issues. New trek shows have issues. The thing is people see MORE issues with newer treak shows. The problems with TOS and TNG and so one are usually minor enough that people can watch them without being distracted by the issues. Those shows are good in spite of their problems. The thing about Discovery and Picard however is that each show has a significant amount of issues, and the issues are so great that they detract from the shows and make them almost if not completely unwatchable.
> > @rattler2 said:
> > (Quote)
> >
> > [sarcasm]But... the older ones ARE the standards, and thus holy. Anything that doesn't match that is blasphemy and must be purged![/sarcasm]
>
> Ah yes the good old "Other things did it so it must be okay"
>
> Of course the older shows are standards. It's stupid to argue anything otherwise. Most often the first things in a series or franchise are considered the standard by which other series or franchises are judged by. We judge the star wars prequels and sequels to the original trilogy. We judge that god awful thundercats reboot to the original and the previous reboot.
>
> Its asinine to act like that's a bad thing.
>
> And something that needs to be brought up is JUST BECAUSE A PREVIOUS SHOW DID SOMETHING WRONG DOESN'T MAKE A NEW SHOW INCAPABLE OF BEING CRITICIZED. Something Discovery and Picard defenders like to say is "Oh so and so happened in TOS or So and so happened in Voyager so you can't really blame discovery or Picard." The thing is... yeah we can. Those shows have problems too. Nobody is acting like the original shows were untouchable but Discovery and Picard defenders sure as hell love acting like people are trying to say that.
>
> Previous trek shows have issues. New trek shows have issues. The thing is people see MORE issues with newer treak shows. The problems with TOS and TNG and so one are usually minor enough that people can watch them without being distracted by the issues. Those shows are good in spite of their problems. The thing about Discovery and Picard however is that each show has a significant amount of issues, and the issues are so great that they detract from the shows and make them almost if not completely unwatchable.
Yes every series up to Picard has had issues. The problem is when an issue pops up in Discovery or Picard to some fans it’s the unforgivable sin and the shows are branded “Not Star Trek” even if the issue has popped up in the other series.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Also their complaints are FAR more visible now than they would be like when TNG started.
No I'm not. I'm saying it's now far more visible leading to selection bias. It's now visible to everybody and not just the niche market of ST fan magazines.
Well they are. Things that are supposedly 'good' about pre-2001 Trek are now 'bad' post 2001. That's all over these forums, never mind elsewhere and is constantly pointed out. Just because you're one of the people making that mistake of pretending there's a difference doesn't mean you can pretend it doesn't exits.
They haven't and fanbois should give VGR the same pull-apart they give DSC, they'll find a hell of a lot more to whine about if they approached 'close examinations' with any honesty.
Exactly, there's four active, named Starfleet officers in PIC because Starfleet isn't relevant to PIC. Romulans are, so two of those four are Romulans.
You're the one drawing an equivalence between a show that doesn't focus on Starfleet and ones that do.
Starfleet already looks like a shower of twats right from TOS. Your headcanon Starfleet might be different, but the one of the shows is made of obstructive bureaucrats and hypocrites, where the only forces for good are the main crews and the occasion guest ship.
The fact that your problems are already invalid as the point of comparison isn't real already invalidates them.
Yes they are. Because there's an imaginary line drawn at 2001 everything before is heavily mixed with headcanon to suggest ridiculous things like 'the Federation is a utopia' and anything after is then compared against the already false premise.
It is often prefaced with some pat 'criticism' of pre-2001 shows just to pay lip service to the idea that they are 'objective' and that there are issues with both before going on to show they're about as 'objective' as a politician.
Except they exactly and completely the opposite. The ability to ignore the significant issues presented in TOS-VGR are self inflicted and the ability to magnify out of all reasonable proportion the issues in ENT-PIC are entirely intentional.
Considering the only things that actually popped up in this thread specifically for legitimate criticisms barely fill a page compared to all the rest of the talk which is people lying about pre-2001 Trek presenting a utopia despite being demonstrable false. I'd say no, they do not have any issues 'so great that they detract from the shows and make them almost if not completely unwatchable'.
The entitlement of fanbois, the idea that they get to define what is 'Trek' (or indeed any other brand) and not the people who own said brand.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
except when you claim "IT ISN'T TREK ANYMORE!" and then list a bunch of issues that have always been around in trek... yes your argument falls apart.
Likewise if you argue that Picard and discovery suck because "they've made trek Liberal" (an argument I've seen made in the past, not by anyone ehre but I've seen it made) it's really really a "....... have you watched trek?" moment