test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

The Enterprise War. DSC Enterprise vs Kelvin-Timeline Enterprise

2

Comments

  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,848 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    I'll stick to the TOS one, that baby took a beating throughout TOS and kept on going. B)

    And I think it looks much nicer than the Disco or Kelvin. ;)

    True. The original heavily armored Enterprise lasted for 25 years or so of heavier than normal action, but the thin-skinned widow-riddled refits never seem to last more than a few years at most.

    The classic good looks probably have something to do with the more natural forms in the design, Jefferies designed it using golden ratio proportions, angles, and spiral section curves.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    > @phoenixc#0738 said:
    > (Quote)
    >
    > True. The original heavily armored Enterprise lasted for 25 years or so of heavier than normal action, but the thin-skinned widow-riddled refits never seem to last more than a few years at most.
    >
    > The classic good looks probably have something to do with the more natural forms in the design, Jefferies designed it using golden ratio proportions, angles, and spiral section curves.

    I believe the original had class 100 plot armor. Every other Connie we saw in TOS got it bad.
    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.
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,848 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    khan5000 wrote: »
    > @phoenixc#0738 said:
    > (Quote)
    >
    > True. The original heavily armored Enterprise lasted for 25 years or so of heavier than normal action, but the thin-skinned widow-riddled refits never seem to last more than a few years at most.
    >
    > The classic good looks probably have something to do with the more natural forms in the design, Jefferies designed it using golden ratio proportions, angles, and spiral section curves.

    I believe the original had class 100 plot armor. Every other Connie we saw in TOS got it bad.

    According to both Roddenberry and Jefferies it had nine inches of tritanium armor over its pressure hull actually.

    And, odd as it sounds, it had no windows except for the three on each side of the shuttlebay (just look at the internal sets). On top of that, the dialog in "The Conscience of the King" confirms that they are the only windows on the ship (Kirk mentions that he often went down there to look at the stars directly instead of on a screen, that it is the only place that can be done) despite the glowing patches all over the ship that look like windows (and notice how they look exactly like the sensor dome glows and the four big patches on the dorsal side of the saucer that are identified as sensors.

    Anyway, the TOS Constitutions seemed to be rather tough, while the refits were apparently more like glass cannons despite the better shields they had. For all its vaunted power the "refit" Enterprise got the living snot pounded out of it by a light cruiser with an amateur crew. If the newstyle Constitutions were so fragile it is no wonder just about every other class and its dog was seen in TNG but the Constitution IIs were mostly junked by then.

  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,668 Arc User
    khan5000 wrote: »
    > @phoenixc#0738 said:
    > (Quote)
    >
    > True. The original heavily armored Enterprise lasted for 25 years or so of heavier than normal action, but the thin-skinned widow-riddled refits never seem to last more than a few years at most.
    >
    > The classic good looks probably have something to do with the more natural forms in the design, Jefferies designed it using golden ratio proportions, angles, and spiral section curves.

    I believe the original had class 100 plot armor. Every other Connie we saw in TOS got it bad.

    Even the Constellation was able to still work in "the Doomsday Machine". And the Intrepid was scragged by a giant ameba, and that was from the CREW being killed. And the 4 connies from "The Ultimate Computer" were 1: un shielded against full power phasers.....and 2: a MEGA advanced computer, with the ability to think like a person, firing them. Even then, the ships will still reasonably intact. The squishy crew were the causalities.

    The Enterprise took on the galactic barrier (twice), got held by a giant hand, took on the Doomsday Machine, took a nuclear bomb at point blank range, withstood Nomad's NINETY PHOTON TORPEDO equivalent energy blasts, just to name a few things.

    The strongest the refit handled was V'ger plasma's weapons. The Mirandas were tougher, at least from what Reliant was able to take before its defeat.

    The Disco prize got a big chunk ripped out the saucer from one bomb. The Discovery could not handle simple ROCKS from tearing its hull....umm. o.o;

    The Kelvin connie, like it's captain, got it's butt beaten up EVERY TIME it fought someone.


    Also, the TMP films seems to have nerfed Phasers and Photon Torpedoes as well, don't it?
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,668 Arc User
    khan5000 wrote: »
    > @phoenixc#0738 said:
    > (Quote)
    >
    > True. The original heavily armored Enterprise lasted for 25 years or so of heavier than normal action, but the thin-skinned widow-riddled refits never seem to last more than a few years at most.
    >
    > The classic good looks probably have something to do with the more natural forms in the design, Jefferies designed it using golden ratio proportions, angles, and spiral section curves.

    I believe the original had class 100 plot armor. Every other Connie we saw in TOS got it bad.

    According to both Roddenberry and Jefferies it had nine inches of tritanium armor over its pressure hull actually.

    And, odd as it sounds, it had no windows except for the three on each side of the shuttlebay (just look at the internal sets). On top of that, the dialog in "The Conscience of the King" confirms that they are the only windows on the ship (Kirk mentions that he often went down there to look at the stars directly instead of on a screen, that it is the only place that can be done) despite the glowing patches all over the ship that look like windows (and notice how they look exactly like the sensor dome glows and the four big patches on the dorsal side of the saucer that are identified as sensors.

    Anyway, the TOS Constitutions seemed to be rather tough, while the refits were apparently more like glass cannons despite the better shields they had. For all its vaunted power the "refit" Enterprise got the living snot pounded out of it by a light cruiser with an amateur crew. If the newstyle Constitutions were so fragile it is no wonder just about every other class and its dog was seen in TNG but the Constitution IIs were mostly junked by then.

    Hence why I love 'em so much....TOS connie's are a blend of beauty and toughness. Any wonder why Scotty always compared the TOS Enterprise like that first women a man falls for. Or that a girl falls for, in my case. ;)
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,595 Community Moderator
    The Disco prize got a big chunk ripped out the saucer from one bomb. The Discovery could not handle simple ROCKS from tearing its hull....umm. o.o;

    To be fair... that was a BIG, sharp rock in a gravimetricly unstable region, and the one bomb punched through to the torpedo room if I recall correctly, and was quite a bit bigger than everything else thrown at her. Both ships were shown to be able to hold out pretty well in combat.

    Besides... ANY ship would have recieved damage from that rock. It would be like a ship hitting an iceberg. It WILL tear into the hull unless its made of neutronium, and the shields can't protect against something THAT BIG.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    Also the A took a lot of damage in Undiscovered Country before a torpedo ruptured the hull.
    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.
  • captainbrian11captainbrian11 Member Posts: 733 Arc User
    khan5000 wrote: »
    Also the A took a lot of damage in Undiscovered Country before a torpedo ruptured the hull.

    I think the A took more damage then the D took :)
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,283 Arc User
    that's because the A had functioning shields, so 75% of the damage from all those torpedo strikes was mitigated​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    Let’s not forget that phasers got buffed from TOS to TMP. Dialogue in TMP suggest that phaser Power was boosted by channeling through the warp core. This means the phasers have more of a kick.
    In WOK the Enterprise is attacked with its shields down and while there was a lot of damage she was still able to operate and fight back.
    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.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,595 Community Moderator
    You know... I'm seeing a pattern here in regards to defensive capabilities. People seem to forget certain details about pointed out instances that, omitted, seem to confirm their viewpoints. Like the instance with the Reliant damaging Enterprise so easily. As khan pointed out above, Enterprise was caught with her shields down. Not only that, but Khan knew where to hit Enterprise. The only plot hole in that, besides Khan knowing Chekov, is that Khan's knolwedge is of the pre-refit Enterprise. I suppose that many of those weak points Khan memorized are still in the same place. Not only that, he might have accessed Reliant's computer and discovered data on the refit Constitution Class.

    Now lets push forward to the battle in the Mutara Nebula. Enterprise wrecked house when she was able to get the drop on Reliant, causing significant damage and even blowing off an entire warp nacelle with combined phaser fire and a single torpedo. Once again... that is with shields down due to the Nebula.

    The only reason Enterprise lost to Kruge's BoP is because she was still damaged from her fight with Relaint and only had senior officers aboard. Not even a skeleton crew.

    And the Enterprise-A did survive multiple torpedo strikes from Chang's BoP, and only had one punch through the saucer after shields failed.
    Honestly I would have started firing Phasers in the direction a torpedo came from the SECOND a torpedo was detected. Blind firing phasers would have been better than doing nothing.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • captainbrian11captainbrian11 Member Posts: 733 Arc User
    fun fact, apparently the reason we never saw phasers fired by a ship in the trek movies after trek 2 and until generations is because when WoK came out apparently there was some legal issues with their special effects and ILM.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,595 Community Moderator
    Let me guess... look too much like Star Wars Turbolasers?
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    > @captainbrian11 said:
    > fun fact, apparently the reason we never saw phasers fired by a ship in the trek movies after trek 2 and until generations is because when WoK came out apparently there was some legal issues with their special effects and ILM.

    Do you have a source for this?
    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.
  • captainbrian11captainbrian11 Member Posts: 733 Arc User
    khan5000 wrote: »
    > @captainbrian11 said:
    > fun fact, apparently the reason we never saw phasers fired by a ship in the trek movies after trek 2 and until generations is because when WoK came out apparently there was some legal issues with their special effects and ILM.

    Do you have a source for this?


    afraid not. it's something I read years ago.
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,668 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    The Disco prize got a big chunk ripped out the saucer from one bomb. The Discovery could not handle simple ROCKS from tearing its hull....umm. o.o;

    To be fair... that was a BIG, sharp rock in a gravimetricly unstable region, and the one bomb punched through to the torpedo room if I recall correctly, and was quite a bit bigger than everything else thrown at her. Both ships were shown to be able to hold out pretty well in combat.

    Besides... ANY ship would have recieved damage from that rock. It would be like a ship hitting an iceberg. It WILL tear into the hull unless its made of neutronium, and the shields can't protect against something THAT BIG.

    Yet that DOOR somehow protected Pike......

    Make the ship out what the doors are made of.

    Also, I seen in the Remastered "The Doomsday Machine" rocks hitting the damaged Constellation and the rocks shattering.
    Tritanium is supposed to be a LOT harder than diamonds....so the rocks should not cause much issues....otherwise I, if on Starfleet ship builder staff, would NOT send a ship out if ROCKS can rip a ship hull like paper.

    The Discovery staff needs to realize to stop thinking ships will all be made of the same stuff and methods since 1950.....no, just no.
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • captainbrian11captainbrian11 Member Posts: 733 Arc User
    Not having seen the episode in question I can't say for sure how it played out but keep in mind that If you accelerate a niclkle iron astaroid the size of a basket ball up to even 0.5c you're looking at something that can hit with the force greater then any nuclear weapon we've ever developed.
  • westx211westx211 Member Posts: 42,327 Arc User
    > @smokebailey said:
    > (Quote)
    >
    > Yet that DOOR somehow protected Pike......
    >
    > Make the ship out what the doors are made of.
    >
    > Also, I seen in the Remastered "The Doomsday Machine" rocks hitting the damaged Constellation and the rocks shattering.
    > Tritanium is supposed to be a LOT harder than diamonds....so the rocks should not cause much issues....otherwise I, if on Starfleet ship builder staff, would NOT send a ship out if ROCKS can rip a ship hull like paper.
    >
    > The Discovery staff needs to realize to stop thinking ships will all be made of the same stuff and methods since 1950.....no, just no.

    This makes a lot of sense. An asteroid has a hard time generating a lot of force, it would take something like a magnetic accelerator or gravity itself to make one into a weapon. And the TOS Connie was able to take photon torpedoes to the face without too much damage(either because of shields or even hull damage) and photon shields are magnitudes more powerful than nuclear weapons.

    I think though, this might be chopped up to poor writing on discovery's part since the writers have shown either a lack of scientific understanding or a disregard for science completely for some things, so they may not have even known how powerful photon torpedoes are supposed to be(I remember they blew up a planet with like one once which is way stronger than they are normally) and while their ships can handle photon torpedoes they can't handle an asteroid? The larger the asteroid the faster it would have to go to do damage, and smaller asteroids while being able to poke holes in ships due to application of force, deflectors make the ship immune to the smaller variety. It wouldn't be impossible for an asteroid to tear a starships hull, but that asteroid would have to be going damn fast to achieve any kind of damage
    Men are not punished for their sins, but by them.
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,283 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    it wasn't ONE torpedo, it was a spread of 15+, and standard yield of a TNG photon torpedo is 64 megatons according to the technical manual (obviously, they never stated the yield in real calculable numbers in the actual series, so that's the only figure i can use)...even if the yield 100 years ago was less, they're terran torpedoes, so they're going to be stronger - hell, they may even be torpedoes specifically designed for orbital bombardment, and thus could easily be in the GIGATON range

    just ONE tsar bomb at 57Mt was enough to cause damage up to 60 kilometers away - though by that point, it had faded enough that the shockwave only broke windows - and the tremors it produced were still being felt on international richter scales on their THIRD trip around the planet

    this is a calculation of the kind of damage a 64 megaton nuclear warhead going off would cause (no idea how accurate it is - i grabbed the first calculator i could find) - an antimatter explosion going off may or may not be more damaging, because i have no idea how such explosions work
    Airburst

    Peak overpressure:20 psi
    Distance from the explosion site: 9.3 Kilometers
    Damage and injuries:Heavily built concrete buildings are severely damaged or demolished

    Peak overpressure:10 psi
    Distance from the explosion site: 14.3 Kilometers
    Damage and injuries:Reinforced concrete buildings are severely damaged or demolished. Most people are killed.

    Peak overpressure:5 psi
    Distance from the explosion site: 22.0 Kilometers
    Damage and injuries:Most buildings collapse. Injuries are universal, fatalities are widespread.

    Peak overpressure:3 psi
    Distance from the explosion site: 30.5 Kilometers
    Damage and injuries: Residential structures collapse. Serious injuries are common, fatalities may occur.

    Peak overpressure:1 psi
    Distance from the explosion site: 64.0 Kilometers
    Damage and injuries: Window glass shatters Light injuries from fragments occur.

    now imagine over FIFTEEN of those going off in a planetary atmosphere...and for the record, they did not destroy the entire planet, just badly damaged one of its landmasses

    like...discovery has MANY things wrong with it scientifically, like every other trek series...that scene was not one of them​​
    Post edited by legendarylycan#5411 on
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,668 Arc User
    fun fact, apparently the reason we never saw phasers fired by a ship in the trek movies after trek 2 and until generations is because when WoK came out apparently there was some legal issues with their special effects and ILM.

    Plus I HATED the ST2 phasers......lik sparks with that god awful grating noise....ugh! ><
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,668 Arc User
    westx211 wrote: »
    > @smokebailey said:
    > (Quote)
    >
    > Yet that DOOR somehow protected Pike......
    >
    > Make the ship out what the doors are made of.
    >
    > Also, I seen in the Remastered "The Doomsday Machine" rocks hitting the damaged Constellation and the rocks shattering.
    > Tritanium is supposed to be a LOT harder than diamonds....so the rocks should not cause much issues....otherwise I, if on Starfleet ship builder staff, would NOT send a ship out if ROCKS can rip a ship hull like paper.
    >
    > The Discovery staff needs to realize to stop thinking ships will all be made of the same stuff and methods since 1950.....no, just no.

    This makes a lot of sense. An asteroid has a hard time generating a lot of force, it would take something like a magnetic accelerator or gravity itself to make one into a weapon. And the TOS Connie was able to take photon torpedoes to the face without too much damage(either because of shields or even hull damage) and photon shields are magnitudes more powerful than nuclear weapons.

    I think though, this might be chopped up to poor writing on discovery's part since the writers have shown either a lack of scientific understanding or a disregard for science completely for some things, so they may not have even known how powerful photon torpedoes are supposed to be(I remember they blew up a planet with like one once which is way stronger than they are normally) and while their ships can handle photon torpedoes they can't handle an asteroid? The larger the asteroid the faster it would have to go to do damage, and smaller asteroids while being able to poke holes in ships due to application of force, deflectors make the ship immune to the smaller variety. It wouldn't be impossible for an asteroid to tear a starships hull, but that asteroid would have to be going damn fast to achieve any kind of damage

    The writers did not care.......these 2 past seasons of Disco shows me this, as did the special features on the DVD's, which were EXCRUCIATING to watch, mind you. Just a bunch of folks sticking their fingers into something and believing they have, somehow, made it a billion times better, when it actually done the opposite.
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • qultuqqultuq Member Posts: 989 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    > @captainbrian11 said:
    > fun fact, apparently the reason we never saw phasers fired by a ship in the trek movies after trek 2 and until generations is because when WoK came out apparently there was some legal issues with their special effects and ILM.

    You must be remembering wrong ILM made the special effects for Star Trek 2-4, TNG, and was a contributor for other movies as well.

    Perhaps you read that they were less involved by “Generations” due to the advance in availability of CGI

    Source:

    https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Industrial_Light_&_Magic


    ILM full list of involvement in Star Trek:

    Star Trek films
    Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
    Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
    Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
    Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
    Star Trek Generations (including reused footage from The Undiscovered Country)
    Star Trek: First Contact
    Star Trek
    Star Trek Into Darkness
    Star Trek Beyond
    Star Trek television series
    Star Trek: The Next Generation
    TNG: "Encounter at Farpoint" (Company credit only, credit and footage reused throughout the entire series)
    'Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
    DS9: "Explorers" (Bajoran lightship by John Knoll, otherwise uncredited)
    DS9: "The Way of the Warrior" (CGI elements in new title sequence by John Knoll, otherwise uncredited)
  • joshmauljoshmaul Member Posts: 519 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    rattler2 wrote: »
    The only reason Enterprise lost to Kruge's BoP is because she was still damaged from her fight with Relaint and only had senior officers aboard. Not even a skeleton crew.

    The skeleton crew wasn't the (semi-literal) killer. It was the automation system. As Scotty says in the film, "I didn't expect to take us into combat, you know." He was running on the assumption that it would be a simple trip from Earth to Genesis, (maybe) find Spock, and then a simple trip from Genesis to Vulcan. Klingons didn't factor into it. (Although it probably would've been an idea to mention this when Kirk called red alert rather than when the Bird-of-Prey was about to fire on them, but I guess they all got caught up in the excitement?)
    TW1sr57.jpg
    "There's No Way Like Poway!"

    Real Join Date: October 2010
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,848 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    I remember there really used to be a few rumors of conflict of interest involving IP/contract stuff around ILM, but I think they were just rumors, a dog-in-the-manger part of the weird Star Trek/Star Wars fan rivalry that was going on in the '90s and early 2000s (personally I like both so I never really understood it).

    I do know from interviews back then that Paramount was trying (rather unsuccessfully) to use techniques and visual shorthand from Star Wars to try and "spice up" TNG since their "space procedural" style came off rather dull though some of it was from even earlier.

    In fact, a large part of the sublight, both-ships-in-the-frame combat schtick came from Star Wars, the movie that Paramount wanted to challenge and cash in on so much with their own entry that they cannibalized the Phase II series to jump-start TMP before the shiny wore off at the box office, though part of it was also overthinking the original "phased laser" idea for the phaser (which they dropped between The Cage and TOS because censors would not allow them to show burn wounds and they had to go to "disintegrator" space magic to satisfy) even after the idea that it was an exotic energy of some sort instead was rapidly gaining ground in Star Trek books and fanzines.

    Either Roddenberry forgot his own rule of "use it, don't explain it" or he did not have quite as much control over the movies as people think. In fact, he often gave an example that in cop shows people do not stop and talk about how a gun works by burning chemical powder to generate gas which pushes a piece of metal down a tube to high speeds, they just shoot the things at people and the viewers have no problem grasping the idea they are weapons even if they don't know how a firearm actually works.

    Anyway, whether weapons shoot beams or bolts is not in itself the important part of creating exciting combat scenes, it is a lot of factors mixed together (sound and, weird as it might seem, texture are big parts too for instance). Sure, the bolt type is reminiscent of machinegun tracer fire but beams can evoke an atavistic gatling or flamethrower feel if done right.

    Frankly, the DSC pulse phasers are an example of bolt style done wrong. The little squeak they make can be taken as more realistic, the sound of the electronics heard from inside the ships (or even the squeek of powerful magnetic fields starting up) or whatever, and of course lasers/particle beams would not be visible in space anyway, BUT it also makes the bolts seem wimpy. Like TMP they are overthinking it to the detriment of the effect.

    The clip below suffers from the same thing to a degree (though it was very cool back in the early days of serious science fiction movies):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=95&v=IYFr3UyVpRA&feature=emb_logo

    On the other hand, the sort of hysterical sounding trill of the TOS phasers works well with the banded beams, and it sounds more like what heavy industrial power systems sometimes do (even though a lot of that is actually the cooling system spinning up in the real-world stuff). The fuzzy sound and beams of TNG phasers and the stacado hiss of WoK phasers are also a step up from the squeaky dim-and-weak looking pulses of DSC for that matter.


    As for the hull issue, dialog in DSC S2E1 says that Jett's ship was made of titanium, the metal bicycle frames are made of today, not the fictional exotic supermetal tritanium. While her ship was an auxiliary instead of a front line combat ship it would explain why DSC ships fall prey to slow-moving rocks if DSC shipwrights cut corners like the builders of the Titanic did.

    On top of that, hull breach scenes in DSC generally show the hull to be only a few inches thick in total, not a duranium pressure hull of unknown thickness covered in nine inches of heavy tritanium armor that the TOS Enterprise was supposed to be.


  • captainbrian11captainbrian11 Member Posts: 733 Arc User
    joshmaul wrote: »
    rattler2 wrote: »
    The only reason Enterprise lost to Kruge's BoP is because she was still damaged from her fight with Relaint and only had senior officers aboard. Not even a skeleton crew.

    The skeleton crew wasn't the (semi-literal) killer. It was the automation system. As Scotty says in the film, "I didn't expect to take us into combat, you know." He was running on the assumption that it would be a simple trip from Earth to Genesis, (maybe) find Spock, and then a simple trip from Genesis to Vulcan. Klingons didn't factor into it. (Although it probably would've been an idea to mention this when Kirk called red alert rather than when the Bird-of-Prey was about to fire on them, but I guess they all got caught up in the excitement?)

    the skelliton crew and the automation system is basicly Potato Potatoe TBH. as it both means the same, enteprise didn't have a crew compliment sufficant to engage in combat.
  • qultuqqultuq Member Posts: 989 Arc User
    >
    > Either Roddenberry forgot his own rule of "use it, don't explain it" or he did not have quite as much control over the movies as people think. In fact, he often gave an example that in cop shows people do not stop and talk about how a gun works by burning chemical powder to generate gas which pushes a piece of metal down a tube to high speeds, they just shoot the things at people and the viewers have no problem grasping the idea they are weapons even if they don't know how a firearm actually works.
    >

    Lot of great points...but I think you are really hitting on something here. Roddenberry had control of the Motion picture and the first few seasons of TNG. A lot of talk about his vision was written after the fact.

    Many Roddenberry plots are actually kind of weak. Far Point was a mess of a story. If Roddenberry had to create Star Trek himself without Fontana and the great help he received we would likely have 5 seasons of Kirk vs. God-men like Q, the squire of Gothos, Charlie X, The Greco-Roman pantheon,the being from Star Trek 5, and probably the actual Christian God, who I speculate Roddenberry didn’t care much for either....
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    > @qultuq said:
    >
    > >
    > > Either Roddenberry forgot his own rule of "use it, don't explain it" or he did not have quite as much control over the movies as people think. In fact, he often gave an example that in cop shows people do not stop and talk about how a gun works by burning chemical powder to generate gas which pushes a piece of metal down a tube to high speeds, they just shoot the things at people and the viewers have no problem grasping the idea they are weapons even if they don't know how a firearm actually works.
    > >
    >
    > Lot of great points...but I think you are really hitting on something here. Roddenberry had control of the Motion picture and the first few seasons of TNG. A lot of talk about his vision was written after the fact.
    >
    > Many Roddenberry plots are actually kind of weak. Far Point was a mess of a story. If Roddenberry had to create Star Trek himself without Fontana and the great help he received we would likely have 5 seasons of Kirk vs. God-men like Q, the squire of Gothos, Charlie X, The Greco-Roman pantheon,the being from Star Trek 5, and probably the actual Christian God, who I speculate Roddenberry didn’t care much for either....
    >
    >
    >

    I shudder when I think about what Star Trek II would have been about if TMP was a greater success.
    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.
  • qultuqqultuq Member Posts: 989 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    Well then again. Empaths are still interesting right. We have Bones, the emotional voice of reason. Kirk the 60s man between the voices of emotion and logic. Spock in his quest for understanding humanity. And the Troi figure or Iilia.. the emotionally superior being.

    In some ways the mycelial concept is also strikingly both alien and human. As much as I am opposed to the science fiction of it--poor Hawking, who loved Star Trek, and probably is shaking his fists in hell.

    But the Mycelia reflect an advance in our human concept of being. We now recognize the bacteria in our bodies and our gastric systems control us in ways we didn't acknowledge in the past. Evidence for biomatter on Mars will likely show that there is some interplanetary pollination. Tardigrades can live in vacumes. Right even this is playing with science and philosophy in interesting ways.

    So I think too as Empathetic psychology--now dubbed "mindfulness" has raised since the 60s Star Trek under Roddenberry would have played with that. And maybe ultimately Star Trek is really supposed to deal with these "heady" or "cerebral" concepts of what it is to be human. Less than the question of do Vuclans have forges, and are Iconians from Ionia or Icons, and are Terrans related to the god mother Terra...although Rodenberry seemed to like mythology as much as New Age philosophy and humanism.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    > @qultuq said:
    > Well then again. Empaths are still interesting right. We have Bones, the emotional voice of reason. Kirk the 60s man between the voices of emotion and logic. Spock in his quest for understanding humanity. And the Troi figure or Iilia.. the emotionally superior being.
    >
    > In some ways the mycelial concept is also strikingly both alien and human. As much as I am opposed to the science fiction of it--poor Hawking, who loved Star Trek, and probably is shaking his fists in hell.
    >
    > But the Mycelia reflect an advance in our human concept of being. We now recognize the bacteria in our bodies and our gastric systems control us in ways we didn't acknowledge in the past. Evidence for biomatter on Mars will likely show that there is some interplanetary pollination. Tardigrades can live in vacumes. Right even this is playing with science and philosophy in interesting ways.
    >
    > So I think too as Empathetic psychology--now dubbed "mindfulness" has raised since the 60s Star Trek under Roddenberry would have played with that. And maybe ultimately Star Trek is really supposed to deal with these "heady" or "cerebral" concepts of what it is to be human. Less than the question of do Vuclans have forges, and are Iconians from Ionia or Icons, and are Terrans related to the god mother Terra...although Rodenberry seemed to like mythology as much as New Age philosophy and humanism.

    The mycelium network is based on a scientist’s research. Paul Stamets is named after him.
    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.
  • qultuqqultuq Member Posts: 989 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    khan5000 wrote: »
    > @qultuq said:
    > Well then again. Empaths are still interesting right. We have Bones, the emotional voice of reason. Kirk the 60s man between the voices of emotion and logic. Spock in his quest for understanding humanity. And the Troi figure or Iilia.. the emotionally superior being.
    >
    > In some ways the mycelial concept is also strikingly both alien and human. As much as I am opposed to the science fiction of it--poor Hawking, who loved Star Trek, and probably is shaking his fists in hell.
    >
    > But the Mycelia reflect an advance in our human concept of being. We now recognize the bacteria in our bodies and our gastric systems control us in ways we didn't acknowledge in the past. Evidence for biomatter on Mars will likely show that there is some interplanetary pollination. Tardigrades can live in vacumes. Right even this is playing with science and philosophy in interesting ways.
    >
    > So I think too as Empathetic psychology--now dubbed "mindfulness" has raised since the 60s Star Trek under Roddenberry would have played with that. And maybe ultimately Star Trek is really supposed to deal with these "heady" or "cerebral" concepts of what it is to be human. Less than the question of do Vuclans have forges, and are Iconians from Ionia or Icons, and are Terrans related to the god mother Terra...although Roddenberry seemed to like mythology as much as New Age philosophy and humanism.

    The mycelium network is based on a scientist’s research. Paul Stamets is named after him.

    Cool. I need to read it. I am more familiar with anthropological applications and object-ontology theory.

    Actually though. This Stamets is from close to my hometown. His books do not look particularly scientific--but they are interesting. A few books I own like "Mushroom at the End of the World" does make reference to him...although she does not let him do much theoretical work. I got a pdf though. I will indulge in it.

Sign In or Register to comment.