Spock was also able to hold out against Khan in Into Darkness.
Now that I think about it... they never said there was any particular strength requirement for a nerve pinch. We've really only seen Vulcans and Androids do it. Yea McCoy tried and failed in ST3, but that could be due to him kinda fighting Spock so to speak. Also he wasn't familiar with how to perform it. It looked like it was reactionary. Burnham, on the other hand, was rasied with Vulcans, and even with her human strength can at least knock another human out for at least few minutes. Vulcans seem to be able to knock people out for longer. So while she isn't as strong, I'm kinda reminded of Xena's favorite disabling tactic of cutting off blood to an opponents brain with pressure points, and she was no Greek Goddess. She was just a highly skilled warrior.
> @reafis said: > If you'd seen you captain/mentor/friend killed in front of you, would you not want to save her mirror version?
I dunno, I feel like I might have qualms with that idea after watching them nuke a bunch of freedom fighters from orbit or kill a room full of people with a weaponized fidget spinner.
actually, Vulcans ARE physically stronger than humans, as show repeatedly throughout the original series, alluded to in voyager, and so on. They're also shown in TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager as tougher than humans, Enterprise made a point of vulcan's heat and gravity being difficult for humans to endure for sustained periods, Spock's bent steel bars before with just his hands in TOS as well (and he's kind of scrawny really), also punching through walls without injuring his hands, (and Khan made a point of Vulcans being physically superior to humans in 'Space Seed'.)
Not "superhero superior," as was the direct statement form your last post. See. Amok Time (Spock won but it wasn't a case of Thor v. Kirk) and portrayals of Vulcans through VOY and ENT (most canon has chosen to overlook the "bending steel bars" thing and simply registered Vulcans as being very strong on humanoid terms.)
Second, 'Technique'. If you take a scrawny, five foot tall guy,and teach him the punching technique of Mike Tyson, then put him in the ring with Mike Tyson, what do you think is going to happen? Further, pressure points? are different between species, so trying to use moves that will subdue a human or vulcan probably won't work on a Klingon without extensive knowledge of their anatomy.
(Yes, Boxing IS a Martial Art).
Vulcan martial arts (and more to the point: Tal-shaya, emphasizing precision execution) isn't boxing and strength athletes don't make for the best martial artists. You're operating on a faulty over-generalization (taking "can help with certain body mechanics" to mean that Burnham could not have learned martial arts from Vulcans because they are stronger than her) to maintain a tone-deaf criticism of a female lead.
Outside of Kung Fu Theater, martial arts don't make you superhumanly capable in the real (or realistic) world, and proficiency is in and of itself a career at the point where your karate will win a bar-fight with rednecks that out mass you, nevermind someone whose culture's actually pushed them into learning to fight and such from an early age, who out-masses you, has equal or superior reflexes and situational awareness, superior durability with redundant organs and nerves (See: TNG's medical scan of Worf), and a tougher skeleton backed by stronger muscles.
I knew a guy who made a point of picking fights with the largest guys in bars. He always won because, while slim and wirey he understood body mechanics, motion, and physical weak points (this ain't a video game, you STR stat doesn't cover for human anatomy, developmental accommodation, and tissue characteristics.). Proficiency with martial arts isn't so reductive that physical prowess is the sole deciding factor (except in the contest of say, a mature bear, with any kind of humanoid but that's a very different clash of anatomical designs [well beyond Klingon/Vulcan v. Human. Mauling by adapted predator > derived martial arts around a tool-using limb set].) We've also seen humans fight Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons with some effect and success. They are strong but they are not unbeatable fighters which no human can possibly emulate (with less physical impact) or overcome. Your point here is, again, overgeneralizing from select qualities.
Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
I believe Burnham did. But at the same time she was carrying a lot of guilt over feeling like she failed her Captain and couldn't save her, or even recover her body aboard the Sarco. And seeing the Emperor, who happens to be a mirror image of her own Captain, willing to actually sacrifice herself to let Burnham escape... she couldn't bare the idea of seeing someone she had GREAT respect for, ie her Captain, die or be left behind AGAIN. In that one moment, Burnham didn't see the Emperor. She saw her Captain, and just reacted.
I think that moment perfectly reflected the guilt she had, and in her mind it was some way to atone for that guilt. Did it come back to bite her in the butt later? Yes, because this wasn't the noble Captain she knew, it was a dark mirror without the same morals. But in a way it allowed Burnham some peace of mind to move on from a painful event. After Qo'nos, Burnham knows full well that the Emperor is not the same woman, and I'm pretty sure if they crossed paths again Burnham wouldn't hold back. But in that one moment... she was able to do the one thing she wished she could back on the Sarco. Save Phillipa Georgiou.
I have been wondering about how this will fit into STO as I cant see how you could create a new STO character in the Discovery era and then bring them from the past Klingon war into the future Klingon war.
I wonder if they might have a separate discovery era map like they did with AoY but you either don't leave it, or leave it much later.
That would certainly keep the anti discovery people satisfied.
As an aside I still cannot see why these reasons for hating it are still used
1) It doesn't look like TOS
So you wanted them to make it look like a 1960's show with ropey effects? I can see what people are saying that its "too dark" remember that this follows on from Enterprise where Starfleet was more military because 7 million people got killed by the xindi not to mention the romulan wars. I think discovery will be the journey from that to what we see in TOS and the movies.
2) Burnham is a Mary Sue
I think someone already did a detailed video on this and she isn't. She has flaws, she isn't perfect despite being very clever. She is simply one of the most human star trek characters we have seen. If you'd seen you captain/mentor/friend killed in front of you, would you not want to save her mirror version?. She was a human effectively trying to be a Vulcan to hide the pains of the past
3)Its not Star Trek
The first 2 episodes it was as there is exploration and curiosity and Starfleet did not insta war with the Klingons. It certainly got darker after that but that's mostly because
Lorca was evil mirror lorca
. Once that was out of the way the crew certainly behaved more Starfleet. Yes Starfleet Commands actions at the end were more than questionable but they have done this before (Genesis Device, Invasive program to kill the Borg, Phase Cloaking and the Dominion War)
If you're talking about the Trekspertise video, that was a garbage video on whether or not Michael Burnham is a Mary Sue.
On this point though: Star Wars has always been "a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away." Ie. disconnected. Star Trek prided itself on difficult story telling in an allegorical context. Ie. connected. Thus the visuals of Star Wars can run independent of evolving themes and design language (it's its own thing and further separation with time adds to the distance and mystique of the setting.) Star Trek tends to follow modern themes in design cues to provide a relatable setting to its host audience (which enhances its style of story telling.)
Personally I would have just gone for the obvious explanation that Star Wars didn't look like it used cardboard/high school drama club set pieces when it first came out, though it should obviously be pointed out a mid-1960's Sci-fi TV series was never going to have the budget to look like a late-70's Movie. If TOS had released looking like TMP did then I don't think people would be complaining as much about the look. Honestly I am surprised it hasn't been retconned yet that the TOS Enterprise, at least internally, was always supposed to look like it does in TMP.
The greatest freedom is the freedom not to get involved. - Yang Wen-li
The one in TMP was actually a refit, explained that they pretty much took her apart and rebuilt her from the ground up with new technology. Hardly any piece of the Enterprise was untouched in one way or another. If she had always looked like that, then Kirk wouldn't have gotten lost on his own ship.
The one in TMP was actually a refit, explained that they pretty much took her apart and rebuilt her from the ground up with new technology. Hardly any piece of the Enterprise was untouched in one way or another. If she had always looked like that, then Kirk wouldn't have gotten lost on his own ship.
I know the one in TMP is a refit but I was trying to get two points across:
Star Wars is a stupid thing to try and bring into a debate/argument about maintaining the look decades later because:
It released 11 years after TOS started airing.
It is a movie giving it a larger budget. Also Star Wars had a fairly industrial look for its set pieces which are pretty easy to keep too years later, especially when in canon tech isn't supposed to have advanced much, if at all.
If TOS had the budget of TMP for every episode of all 4 seasons, which was never going to happen in the 60's, and had went with the TMP interior rather than what we know as TOS the complaints about DSC not looking like it fits in the era would mostly, if not entirely, be nonexistent. Would people still complain about something? Definitely, its par for the course with the newest Star Trek, but the complaints about looks wouldn't have a leg to stand on, imo, and so would either be few and far between. for those that want to try anyway, or potentially even nonexistent.
The greatest freedom is the freedom not to get involved. - Yang Wen-li
I have been wondering about how this will fit into STO as I cant see how you could create a new STO character in the Discovery era and then bring them from the past Klingon war into the future Klingon war.
I wonder if they might have a separate discovery era map like they did with AoY but you either don't leave it, or leave it much later.
That would certainly keep the anti discovery people satisfied.
As an aside I still cannot see why these reasons for hating it are still used
1) It doesn't look like TOS
So you wanted them to make it look like a 1960's show with ropey effects? I can see what people are saying that its "too dark" remember that this follows on from Enterprise where Starfleet was more military because 7 million people got killed by the xindi not to mention the romulan wars. I think discovery will be the journey from that to what we see in TOS and the movies.
2) Burnham is a Mary Sue
I think someone already did a detailed video on this and she isn't. She has flaws, she isn't perfect despite being very clever. She is simply one of the most human star trek characters we have seen. If you'd seen you captain/mentor/friend killed in front of you, would you not want to save her mirror version?. She was a human effectively trying to be a Vulcan to hide the pains of the past
3)Its not Star Trek
The first 2 episodes it was as there is exploration and curiosity and Starfleet did not insta war with the Klingons. It certainly got darker after that but that's mostly because
Lorca was evil mirror lorca
. Once that was out of the way the crew certainly behaved more Starfleet. Yes Starfleet Commands actions at the end were more than questionable but they have done this before (Genesis Device, Invasive program to kill the Borg, Phase Cloaking and the Dominion War)
Hold it...it always drives me BONKERS when someone says "you want cardboard sets,etc" anytime tos is brought up.
Phase 2, ST Continues, Axxanar, as well as In A Mirror Darkly, showed very nicely TOS looking good in modern times.
But they are still just high quality replicas of the TOS look, its still a 1960s look regardless of how high quality it is. It still works if you do the odd one or two episodes for nostalgia but you cant do an entire series based on it because they only people who would watch it are people who loved that look and that would never work for modern audiences.
I do think DIS could have done a mixture of the TOS and a more future look like enterprise did though.
As for 2, IF I lost a loved one or friend, and saw they had a counterpart in another dimension....YET are barbaric and evil, no I would not bring a space hitler, which Georgio was.
I'm not disputing that isn't evil, but could you watch someone you loved die for the second time? Even Burnham admits she couldn't watch her die again.
I said it once, I'll say it again...if star wars can get away with having the old, 1970's looks to their films...one a prequel, and one a new installment, Trek can do the same.
On this point though: Star Wars has always been "a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away." Ie. disconnected. Star Trek prided itself on difficult story telling in an allegorical context. Ie. connected. Thus the visuals of Star Wars can run independent of evolving themes and design language (it's its own thing and further separation with time adds to the distance and mystique of the setting.) Star Trek tends to follow modern themes in design cues to provide a relatable setting to its host audience (which enhances its style of story telling.)
They do very different things and I think it would take substantial changes to the objectives, themes, writing and overall style of either property (it's all interconnected) to adopt the visual mode of the other to good effect. That could be done, but then I think Star Trek would resemble a production of Isaac Asimov's Foundation series (in how it develops it setting and themes) more than what we know today (which incidentally is how I tend to write for it in the Foundry, where topical design language isn't easy. )
I know the one in TMP is a refit but I was trying to get two points across:
Star Wars is a stupid thing to try and bring into a debate/argument about maintaining the look decades later because:
It released 11 years after TOS started airing.
It is a movie giving it a larger budget. Also Star Wars had a fairly industrial look for its set pieces which are pretty easy to keep too years later, especially when in canon tech isn't supposed to have advanced much, if at all.
If TOS had the budget of TMP for every episode of all 4 seasons, which was never going to happen in the 60's, and had went with the TMP interior rather than what we know as TOS the complaints about DSC not looking like it fits in the era would mostly, if not entirely, be nonexistent. Would people still complain about something? Definitely, its par for the course with the newest Star Trek, but the complaints about looks wouldn't have a leg to stand on, imo, and so would either be few and far between. for those that want to try anyway, or potentially even nonexistent.
True.
There's also the fact that frankly Star Wars tech is relatively stagnant. Pretty sure a Naboo N-1 can still compete even against a First Order TIE Fighter. And that's just within the movies themselves. If we look at the games, it gets worse! A Jedi Civil War era heavy blaster pistol could probably compete with a DL-44 heavy Blaster Pistol from the Galactic Civil War. Hell... in one aspect tech actually slid backwards a bit as personal shields were actually common in the Jedi Civil War, whereas relatively unheard of in even the Clone Wars.
Still you're right. If Star Trek had the budget, and maybe came out 10 years later... it would have looked a LOT better. Probably as much detail as Battlestar Galactica had at LEAST.
Spock was also able to hold out against Khan in Into Darkness.
Now that I think about it... they never said there was any particular strength requirement for a nerve pinch. We've really only seen Vulcans and Androids do it. Yea McCoy tried and failed in ST3, but that could be due to him kinda fighting Spock so to speak. Also he wasn't familiar with how to perform it. It looked like it was reactionary. Burnham, on the other hand, was rasied with Vulcans, and even with her human strength can at least knock another human out for at least few minutes. Vulcans seem to be able to knock people out for longer. So while she isn't as strong, I'm kinda reminded of Xena's favorite disabling tactic of cutting off blood to an opponents brain with pressure points, and she was no Greek Goddess. She was just a highly skilled warrior.
McCoy was because his hands were old and feeble. If he'd been healthy he could have. Burnham was raised on Vulcan which canonically has higher gravity than Earth. So in theory she should be physically stronger than an average human.
Mmm... Xena canonically had "the strength of 10 men"(apparently she was in fact a demi-goddess). But that technique didn't require vast strength, and Xena wasn't the only character to use it. IIRC Gabrielle and Callisto could do it despite being normal humans.
Not "superhero superior," as was the direct statement form your last post. See. Amok Time (Spock won but it wasn't a case of Thor v. Kirk) and portrayals of Vulcans through VOY and ENT (most canon has chosen to overlook the "bending steel bars" thing and simply registered Vulcans as being very strong on humanoid terms.)
Like it or not, strength figures in. Technique matters, but if you pit somebody as experienced with a technique as someone just as experienced and with a physical edge, the individual with the physical edge will come out on top 9/10 times. Ergo, Burnham does not stack up to a Vulcan of equal experience, nor would any other human.
Vulcan martial arts (and more to the point: Tal-shaya, emphasizing precision execution) isn't boxing and strength athletes don't make for the best martial artists. You're operating on a faulty over-generalization (taking "can help with certain body mechanics" to mean that Burnham could not have learned martial arts from Vulcans because they are stronger than her) to maintain a tone-deaf criticism of a female lead.
It's not about gender, it's about species. I think Patrick stated his point in that regard pretty clearly. Stop trying to dogwhistle.
I knew a guy who made a point of picking fights with the largest guys in bars. He always won because, while slim and wirey he understood body mechanics, motion, and physical weak points (this ain't a video game, you STR stat doesn't cover for human anatomy, developmental accommodation, and tissue characteristics.). Proficiency with martial arts isn't so reductive that physical prowess is the sole deciding factor (except in the contest of say, a mature bear, with any kind of humanoid but that's a very different clash of anatomical designs [well beyond Klingon/Vulcan v. Human. Mauling by adapted predator > derived martial arts around a tool-using limb set].) We've also seen humans fight Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons with some effect and success. They are strong but they are not unbeatable fighters which no human can possibly emulate (with less physical impact) or overcome. Your point here is, again, overgeneralizing from select qualities.
Anecdotal. You do touch on the importance of technique, and do acknowledge that strength is not the sole deciding factor, but it IS a factor, and it can be decisive. Furthermore, let's look into established canon. You say Klingons v. Humans isn't so cut and dry. While true, Klingons have a distinct, natural edge. Remember Worf's broken back? Remember Dr. Crusher mentioning how Klingon anatomy has almost complete redundancy, with almost all major systems of the body having backups? While not unbeatable (as you mentioned), when you add proficiency, natural advantage, and strength together Burnham comes out looking like she was some author's pet project, as any character would, male or female.
Not "superhero superior," as was the direct statement form your last post. See. Amok Time (Spock won but it wasn't a case of Thor v. Kirk) and portrayals of Vulcans through VOY and ENT (most canon has chosen to overlook the "bending steel bars" thing and simply registered Vulcans as being very strong on humanoid terms.)
What about young Spock throwing a Klingon a couple dozen feet in Search for Spock (as an aside, if super-gravity makes Vulans super-strong, what makes Romulans super-strong)?
As this is fiction being written by multiple writers, Vulcans and Klingons are as strong as the story needs them to be. This accounts for the discrepancies you see in "relative strength". Regardless, the common theme is that Vulcans and Klingons are significantly stronger than Humans (though the specifics may differ from one story to the next).
Vulcan martial arts (and more to the point: Tal-shaya, emphasizing precision execution) isn't boxing and strength athletes don't make for the best martial artists. You're operating on a faulty over-generalization (taking "can help with certain body mechanics" to mean that Burnham could not have learned martial arts from Vulcans because they are stronger than her) to maintain a tone-deaf criticism of a female lead.
Vulcan martial arts are make believe. A handful of throw away lines regarding Vulcan fortune cookie wisdom is not a school of martial arts. In any case, Star Trek: Discovery does not mention any Vulcan martial arts to explain how Burnham could out-wrestle Voq. That was just the "Worf effect" in action, showing how our heroine is more bad-a$s'er than a Klingon. It's vapid. A better (and more Trek) solution would be out-witting Voq. Beating Voq in a contest of strength is hack writing; they just wanted a "cool action scene".
I knew a guy who made a point of picking fights with the largest guys in bars. He always won because, while slim and wirey he understood body mechanics, motion, and physical weak points (this ain't a video game, you STR stat doesn't cover for human anatomy, developmental accommodation, and tissue characteristics.). Proficiency with martial arts isn't so reductive that physical prowess is the sole deciding factor (except in the contest of say, a mature bear, with any kind of humanoid but that's a very different clash of anatomical designs [well beyond Klingon/Vulcan v. Human. Mauling by adapted predator > derived martial arts around a tool-using limb set].) We've also seen humans fight Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons with some effect and success. They are strong but they are not unbeatable fighters which no human can possibly emulate (with less physical impact) or overcome. Your point here is, again, overgeneralizing from select qualities.
Fascinating story. It has nothing to do with Burnham. If Burnham is a master of make-believe martial arts, the story needs to tell us this. The fact she beat up a handful of prison degenerates is not the same as being space Jackie Chan.
I knew a guy who made a point of picking fights with the largest guys in bars. He always won because, while slim and wirey he understood body mechanics, motion, and physical weak points (this ain't a video game, you STR stat doesn't cover for human anatomy, developmental accommodation, and tissue characteristics.). Proficiency with martial arts isn't so reductive that physical prowess is the sole deciding factor (except in the contest of say, a mature bear, with any kind of humanoid but that's a very different clash of anatomical designs [well beyond Klingon/Vulcan v. Human. Mauling by adapted predator > derived martial arts around a tool-using limb set].) We've also seen humans fight Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons with some effect and success. They are strong but they are not unbeatable fighters which no human can possibly emulate (with less physical impact) or overcome. Your point here is, again, overgeneralizing from select qualities.
one last bit. I'm going to call bullsh*t on your story. I've read the same article you're adopting as your experience,
Going to stop you right there, this is utter nonsense. I have no idea what article you're referring to and I'm going to put the burden entirely on you to justify (at any rational level) questioning the people I've known the experiences I've had with them (simply to briefly underscore an argument born from a professional understanding of human anatomy, which should provide some context for my associate). This quite simply isn't a topic a forum can address without descending into self-serving conjecture born entirely from personality reads and "what I reckon." (ie. an abysmal argumentative standard.) You want to call me a liar? Fine, I'll let that speak for itself and move onto your case.
You can't argue with biomechanics (ie. that basic humanoid anatomy and physiology is compromise of MANY different development factors which precludes sufficient adaptation to physical combat to make strength an absolute necessity in said combat. Strength helps, but strength is not deterministic), or indeed the level of outright presumption and disregard for the source material in your argument (ie. that no human could plausibly fight a Klingon in hand to hand combat, in spite of TOS, ENT, TNG, and DS9 for example. Human v. Klingon brawls is a classic for the series that have never [IIRC] required special explanations to justify.) You have drifted off topic to an outrageous degree in the defense of complaints originally tangential to an AoD thread regarding the incoming tutorial (for which explaining our ability to fight Klingons is as relevant as it is in the 2409 tutorial. We're Starfleet officers and this is a Star Trek game.)
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
You know, I'm just going to put an end to this now.
I don't care about the discussions. All I care about, in the end, is what the hell is going to happen with STO once this...expansion launches.
Meaning, the most important question: Will there be a recruitment event?
That is the only question that should be on your minds. Not the obvious failings of TRIBBLE. Discuss that in another thread.
Don't bother trying to convince people of that... Their so hung up with it not looking EXACTLY like TOS that it doesn't compute. WE know it is, but some people will refuse to accept it because its different.
I did not like the looks of TRIBBLE, not because it "didn't look EXACTLY" like TOS, but instead because it did not FEEL like Star Trek to me. It showed me a future that was dark, dismal, and completely depressing. And also, because of how the ships and equipment seemed to be BETTER than TOS. Really, what's-her-face was holding a real-time interstellar holographic chat with Sarek in the very first episode....and yet somehow the Enterprise did not have this technology available 10 years later? Did this tech somehow give a space version of the "cellphone brain cancer" that some people worry about these days? Because that's the only reason I can think of why this kind of communication would not be used. If you're going to make a preview series, at least try and attempt to have the tech in your show match up!
This plus yet another re-imagining of the Klingons (To look like some sort of Orc/Drow halfbreed, no less....they even had what I thought looked like a Spiderweb motif going on the Klingon crypt-ship. I thought this was Star Trek, not Neverwinter?), and a (for the most part) extremely unlikable crew, made it very unbearable to me.
It is actually the other way around and Discovery is hilariously low-tech compared to TOS. Yes, Discovery has Star Wars style low visual-quality holographic communicators but according to the series bible TOS had full freestanding holographic communications too though it was limited to a few special rooms.
On top of that, the viewscreens were supposed to be 3D "window" style holographic displays which is why you occasionally see people moving to the side slightly while watching things on it to change the perspective. Of course TOS did not have the budget to really show something like that in a cost-justifiable way so most of the audience never knew about it. In addition, the MARS viewers from The Cage projected an aerial image sort of like the Google Glass things did and the image followed the user's eyes to change angle which is why the image is not quite steady in the picture spot on those viewers, and the edges of the spot are fuzzy instead of sharply ending at a bezel like a non-aerial projection picture would do.
As for the instant communication part, Shenzhou was literally right on top of a subspace relay, and in TOS communication was just as instant when Kirk's Enterprise was in reasonable range of a relay too.
Despite the more 2018 look of Discovery's set dressings the TOS equipment just worked a lot better than the flashier stuff Discovery uses. Shenzhou could not see an entire large Klingon fleet bearing down on them, by the time the sensors detected them (and they were not cloaked since they were perfectly visible while arriving in the outside shot) they were already in firing range (and that is very short range indeed in Discovery). In fact, they would have probably have done better to just post someone with binoculars at the picture window at the front of the bridge.
In TOS (Enterprise Incident to be exact) sensors were able to find Spock on a ship full of Romulans by checking blood types and other biosigns. Uhura would often detect stealthy narrowbeam communications from spies on board, and no one could beam in without the transporter being detected. In Discovery on the other hand Burnham and company seem to be able beam on and off of the coffin ship with near impunity and even plant beacons which no one ever picks up. It seems it must have been sheer chance that she and Georgiou were discovered in The Vulcan Hello.
Even when they can see enemy ships they have an incredibly difficult time trying to hit them with weapons fire, my grandmother could have probably stood in an airlock hit more Klingon ships with a pistol than Shenshou and the other Fed ships did with their weapons (really, she was a good shot), though luckily the Klingons were no better or it would have been all over in the first few seconds. On the other hand, most TOS battles happened at 30,000 kilometers or greater, and they fought at both impulse AND warp speeds as the situation demanded. In fact, in The Changeling, Enterprise bullseyed Nomad (who is smaller than a kitchen trash can) with a photon torpedo at a range of 90,000 kilometers while the ship was being buffeted by fire from Nomad severely enough to knock it out of warp.
Looks aside, the ONLY thing Federation tech can do on Discovery that Kirk and company could not do as easily or easier with TOS tech was play Bill &Ted teleporting around using the spoor drive.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. you made an extraordinary claim and claimed it was a personal experience. Burden of proof's on you.
The spirit was in reasonably good fun, the fights mutually agreed to (and tacitly approved of by the venue), and no one (as far as I ever heard) suffered any notable injury (though the fights were still illustrative of the interaction between physics and biological systems. Ex. what water's compressibility means for the soft tissues of the abdomen.) It was part of the crowd (college level) and the other hobbies they saw to (relevant to this behavior.) What you're imagining is your own affair (it wasn't central to my argument, just a counter anecdote to the scenario you presented (as a vague generalization attempting to rationalize your take on fictional combat) which lead [in my post] into a reiteration of biomechanics). The further claim for me to be reading certain articles you remember from before the internet (you seriously wanted to try substantiating that I read mags like Soldier of Fortune in the 80's/90's?) which I'll hold as illustrative to your use of Discovery and the greater Star Trek franchise as reference. Your point has been predicated on a very, very narrow read of the source material and wide exclusions. Ex. fights in TOS, TNG, DS9, and ENT where Humans with and without clear combat training defeated or subdued Klingons in close combat (making Burnham v. Voq entirely unremarkable.)
Sure, the fact that AoD isn't being directly written by CBS means that many of the faults one can find with the DSC series are unlikely to be carried over out of hand (also in part thanks to this being a different medium) but in this specific case; there isn't much to fault CBS over. Burhmam did what many Trek protagonists have done (re. Klingons and many other physically superior villains) and we'll likely follow that example in AoD (being cadets...and including command)
Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Sorry but Burnham IS a Mary sue. At least in the first 2 episodes.
Point one: Everyone loves her. Aside from some idiots/racists in her school days and that one Admiral, EVERYONE loves her. She treats people like **** and nobody retaliates. Even AFTER she mutinies, when the Brig is damaged, everybody's sad that she might be dead. Then AFTER the big battle, when she should at the very least be confined to quarters, she's not only allowed on the bridge but suggests to the Captain the mission to the Klingon ship to capture the BBEG. AND goes on that same mission!
Point two: She's smarter than everyone else. Look at the first 2 episodes, EVERYTHING she says is correct. If Captain Georgio had followed her 'suggestion' to attack the Klingons, the war wouldn't have happened! She even Logic Bombs the ships computer to escape the Brig when it gets 'nearly' destroyed.
Point three: She treated differently from everyone else. She goes straight out of the Vulcan Academy into a First Officers position in Star Fleet. I don't care how good you are, NOBODY is going to put someone fresh out of school into the position of second in command of a Starship!
Point four: Plot Armor thick enough to build a Dyson Sphere out of. A Klingon Disruptor hits the ship, goes right through the ship, in just the right position to destroy the Brig and everyone in it. EXCEPT the, approximately, 100 square feet of floor space where Burnham ever so conveniently is!
So, upon reflection of the available evidence, Burnham IS a Mary Sue. She might not be your typical Mary Sue, but she's definitely a Sue. I'd suggest the Jerk Sue variant. Not your traditional Sue but a Sue all the same!
Actually, going by that Burnham is not a Mary-Sue, she is a Jedi. It makes sense, Paramount has wanted to do Star Wars since TNG so when they got the chance to tell Jedi stories with the brand tag filed off they did it (remember, it is being done by Bad Robot which is a Paramount affiliate even though they are doing it for CBS). It is sloppy at best, but that pretty much sums up modern TV sci-fi (with a few notable exceptions).
I'm going to draw the line on this rampant tangent. See previous link to Ten Forward thread for complaints regarding Discovery writing and characterization (I think you're overlooking a lot of very basic stuff but this news thread isn't the place for that discussion.)
When you go over the fights where 'humans overcame Klingons' in TOS, this was due to the use of environmental factors and a bit of, well, improvisation and luck
Humans took Klingons on in single combat without the use of guile or improvisation. Some folks fell over a table in the bar fight, but for the most part that was after being hit [notable exceptions being a Klingon throwing an officer over a table, and another presumably throwing a chair at O'Brien.] Kirk beating Khan with a pipe and the Gorn with an IED are more what you're looking for [though I don' think it's a consistent theme re. Klingons, as you suggested].
Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
well, if I create a disco toon its life will be short (happened to my jem toon). Not sure if I would have the courage again to level a new toon; when I see all the boring missions which must be done again. Even with the jem at lvl65, it was a pain in the a...
it is an average show, and that will be an average content. At the end, everybody is in peace, and we can make hugs to each others.
this game looks like more and more a dead end to me.
Comments
Now that I think about it... they never said there was any particular strength requirement for a nerve pinch. We've really only seen Vulcans and Androids do it. Yea McCoy tried and failed in ST3, but that could be due to him kinda fighting Spock so to speak. Also he wasn't familiar with how to perform it. It looked like it was reactionary. Burnham, on the other hand, was rasied with Vulcans, and even with her human strength can at least knock another human out for at least few minutes. Vulcans seem to be able to knock people out for longer. So while she isn't as strong, I'm kinda reminded of Xena's favorite disabling tactic of cutting off blood to an opponents brain with pressure points, and she was no Greek Goddess. She was just a highly skilled warrior.
> If you'd seen you captain/mentor/friend killed in front of you, would you not want to save her mirror version?
I dunno, I feel like I might have qualms with that idea after watching them nuke a bunch of freedom fighters from orbit or kill a room full of people with a weaponized fidget spinner.
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
Not "superhero superior," as was the direct statement form your last post. See. Amok Time (Spock won but it wasn't a case of Thor v. Kirk) and portrayals of Vulcans through VOY and ENT (most canon has chosen to overlook the "bending steel bars" thing and simply registered Vulcans as being very strong on humanoid terms.)
Vulcan martial arts (and more to the point: Tal-shaya, emphasizing precision execution) isn't boxing and strength athletes don't make for the best martial artists. You're operating on a faulty over-generalization (taking "can help with certain body mechanics" to mean that Burnham could not have learned martial arts from Vulcans because they are stronger than her) to maintain a tone-deaf criticism of a female lead.
I knew a guy who made a point of picking fights with the largest guys in bars. He always won because, while slim and wirey he understood body mechanics, motion, and physical weak points (this ain't a video game, you STR stat doesn't cover for human anatomy, developmental accommodation, and tissue characteristics.). Proficiency with martial arts isn't so reductive that physical prowess is the sole deciding factor (except in the contest of say, a mature bear, with any kind of humanoid but that's a very different clash of anatomical designs [well beyond Klingon/Vulcan v. Human. Mauling by adapted predator > derived martial arts around a tool-using limb set].) We've also seen humans fight Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons with some effect and success. They are strong but they are not unbeatable fighters which no human can possibly emulate (with less physical impact) or overcome. Your point here is, again, overgeneralizing from select qualities.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
I think that moment perfectly reflected the guilt she had, and in her mind it was some way to atone for that guilt. Did it come back to bite her in the butt later? Yes, because this wasn't the noble Captain she knew, it was a dark mirror without the same morals. But in a way it allowed Burnham some peace of mind to move on from a painful event. After Qo'nos, Burnham knows full well that the Emperor is not the same woman, and I'm pretty sure if they crossed paths again Burnham wouldn't hold back. But in that one moment... she was able to do the one thing she wished she could back on the Sarco. Save Phillipa Georgiou.
If you're talking about the Trekspertise video, that was a garbage video on whether or not Michael Burnham is a Mary Sue.
Seem to recall that being a reason given for why they're physically stronger.
Personally I would have just gone for the obvious explanation that Star Wars didn't look like it used cardboard/high school drama club set pieces when it first came out, though it should obviously be pointed out a mid-1960's Sci-fi TV series was never going to have the budget to look like a late-70's Movie. If TOS had released looking like TMP did then I don't think people would be complaining as much about the look. Honestly I am surprised it hasn't been retconned yet that the TOS Enterprise, at least internally, was always supposed to look like it does in TMP.
The greatest freedom is the freedom not to get involved. - Yang Wen-li
I know the one in TMP is a refit but I was trying to get two points across:
The greatest freedom is the freedom not to get involved. - Yang Wen-li
Bantha poodoo
True.
There's also the fact that frankly Star Wars tech is relatively stagnant. Pretty sure a Naboo N-1 can still compete even against a First Order TIE Fighter. And that's just within the movies themselves. If we look at the games, it gets worse! A Jedi Civil War era heavy blaster pistol could probably compete with a DL-44 heavy Blaster Pistol from the Galactic Civil War. Hell... in one aspect tech actually slid backwards a bit as personal shields were actually common in the Jedi Civil War, whereas relatively unheard of in even the Clone Wars.
Still you're right. If Star Trek had the budget, and maybe came out 10 years later... it would have looked a LOT better. Probably as much detail as Battlestar Galactica had at LEAST.
Mmm... Xena canonically had "the strength of 10 men"(apparently she was in fact a demi-goddess). But that technique didn't require vast strength, and Xena wasn't the only character to use it. IIRC Gabrielle and Callisto could do it despite being normal humans.
My character Tsin'xing
Like it or not, strength figures in. Technique matters, but if you pit somebody as experienced with a technique as someone just as experienced and with a physical edge, the individual with the physical edge will come out on top 9/10 times. Ergo, Burnham does not stack up to a Vulcan of equal experience, nor would any other human.
It's not about gender, it's about species. I think Patrick stated his point in that regard pretty clearly. Stop trying to dogwhistle.
Anecdotal. You do touch on the importance of technique, and do acknowledge that strength is not the sole deciding factor, but it IS a factor, and it can be decisive. Furthermore, let's look into established canon. You say Klingons v. Humans isn't so cut and dry. While true, Klingons have a distinct, natural edge. Remember Worf's broken back? Remember Dr. Crusher mentioning how Klingon anatomy has almost complete redundancy, with almost all major systems of the body having backups? While not unbeatable (as you mentioned), when you add proficiency, natural advantage, and strength together Burnham comes out looking like she was some author's pet project, as any character would, male or female.
As this is fiction being written by multiple writers, Vulcans and Klingons are as strong as the story needs them to be. This accounts for the discrepancies you see in "relative strength". Regardless, the common theme is that Vulcans and Klingons are significantly stronger than Humans (though the specifics may differ from one story to the next).
Vulcan martial arts are make believe. A handful of throw away lines regarding Vulcan fortune cookie wisdom is not a school of martial arts. In any case, Star Trek: Discovery does not mention any Vulcan martial arts to explain how Burnham could out-wrestle Voq. That was just the "Worf effect" in action, showing how our heroine is more bad-a$s'er than a Klingon. It's vapid. A better (and more Trek) solution would be out-witting Voq. Beating Voq in a contest of strength is hack writing; they just wanted a "cool action scene".
Fascinating story. It has nothing to do with Burnham. If Burnham is a master of make-believe martial arts, the story needs to tell us this. The fact she beat up a handful of prison degenerates is not the same as being space Jackie Chan.
Going to stop you right there, this is utter nonsense. I have no idea what article you're referring to and I'm going to put the burden entirely on you to justify (at any rational level) questioning the people I've known the experiences I've had with them (simply to briefly underscore an argument born from a professional understanding of human anatomy, which should provide some context for my associate). This quite simply isn't a topic a forum can address without descending into self-serving conjecture born entirely from personality reads and "what I reckon." (ie. an abysmal argumentative standard.) You want to call me a liar? Fine, I'll let that speak for itself and move onto your case.
You can't argue with biomechanics (ie. that basic humanoid anatomy and physiology is compromise of MANY different development factors which precludes sufficient adaptation to physical combat to make strength an absolute necessity in said combat. Strength helps, but strength is not deterministic), or indeed the level of outright presumption and disregard for the source material in your argument (ie. that no human could plausibly fight a Klingon in hand to hand combat, in spite of TOS, ENT, TNG, and DS9 for example. Human v. Klingon brawls is a classic for the series that have never [IIRC] required special explanations to justify.) You have drifted off topic to an outrageous degree in the defense of complaints originally tangential to an AoD thread regarding the incoming tutorial (for which explaining our ability to fight Klingons is as relevant as it is in the 2409 tutorial. We're Starfleet officers and this is a Star Trek game.)
You want to talk about the presumed writing problems of Discovery the show? Here's a thread in Ten Forward:
https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/startrekonline#/discussion/1242589/my-problems-with-TRIBBLE/p17
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
I don't care about the discussions. All I care about, in the end, is what the hell is going to happen with STO once this...expansion launches.
Meaning, the most important question: Will there be a recruitment event?
That is the only question that should be on your minds. Not the obvious failings of TRIBBLE. Discuss that in another thread.
It is actually the other way around and Discovery is hilariously low-tech compared to TOS. Yes, Discovery has Star Wars style low visual-quality holographic communicators but according to the series bible TOS had full freestanding holographic communications too though it was limited to a few special rooms.
On top of that, the viewscreens were supposed to be 3D "window" style holographic displays which is why you occasionally see people moving to the side slightly while watching things on it to change the perspective. Of course TOS did not have the budget to really show something like that in a cost-justifiable way so most of the audience never knew about it. In addition, the MARS viewers from The Cage projected an aerial image sort of like the Google Glass things did and the image followed the user's eyes to change angle which is why the image is not quite steady in the picture spot on those viewers, and the edges of the spot are fuzzy instead of sharply ending at a bezel like a non-aerial projection picture would do.
As for the instant communication part, Shenzhou was literally right on top of a subspace relay, and in TOS communication was just as instant when Kirk's Enterprise was in reasonable range of a relay too.
Despite the more 2018 look of Discovery's set dressings the TOS equipment just worked a lot better than the flashier stuff Discovery uses. Shenzhou could not see an entire large Klingon fleet bearing down on them, by the time the sensors detected them (and they were not cloaked since they were perfectly visible while arriving in the outside shot) they were already in firing range (and that is very short range indeed in Discovery). In fact, they would have probably have done better to just post someone with binoculars at the picture window at the front of the bridge.
In TOS (Enterprise Incident to be exact) sensors were able to find Spock on a ship full of Romulans by checking blood types and other biosigns. Uhura would often detect stealthy narrowbeam communications from spies on board, and no one could beam in without the transporter being detected. In Discovery on the other hand Burnham and company seem to be able beam on and off of the coffin ship with near impunity and even plant beacons which no one ever picks up. It seems it must have been sheer chance that she and Georgiou were discovered in The Vulcan Hello.
Even when they can see enemy ships they have an incredibly difficult time trying to hit them with weapons fire, my grandmother could have probably stood in an airlock hit more Klingon ships with a pistol than Shenshou and the other Fed ships did with their weapons (really, she was a good shot), though luckily the Klingons were no better or it would have been all over in the first few seconds. On the other hand, most TOS battles happened at 30,000 kilometers or greater, and they fought at both impulse AND warp speeds as the situation demanded. In fact, in The Changeling, Enterprise bullseyed Nomad (who is smaller than a kitchen trash can) with a photon torpedo at a range of 90,000 kilometers while the ship was being buffeted by fire from Nomad severely enough to knock it out of warp.
Looks aside, the ONLY thing Federation tech can do on Discovery that Kirk and company could not do as easily or easier with TOS tech was play Bill &Ted teleporting around using the spoor drive.
The spirit was in reasonably good fun, the fights mutually agreed to (and tacitly approved of by the venue), and no one (as far as I ever heard) suffered any notable injury (though the fights were still illustrative of the interaction between physics and biological systems. Ex. what water's compressibility means for the soft tissues of the abdomen.) It was part of the crowd (college level) and the other hobbies they saw to (relevant to this behavior.) What you're imagining is your own affair (it wasn't central to my argument, just a counter anecdote to the scenario you presented (as a vague generalization attempting to rationalize your take on fictional combat) which lead [in my post] into a reiteration of biomechanics). The further claim for me to be reading certain articles you remember from before the internet (you seriously wanted to try substantiating that I read mags like Soldier of Fortune in the 80's/90's?) which I'll hold as illustrative to your use of Discovery and the greater Star Trek franchise as reference. Your point has been predicated on a very, very narrow read of the source material and wide exclusions. Ex. fights in TOS, TNG, DS9, and ENT where Humans with and without clear combat training defeated or subdued Klingons in close combat (making Burnham v. Voq entirely unremarkable.)
Sure, the fact that AoD isn't being directly written by CBS means that many of the faults one can find with the DSC series are unlikely to be carried over out of hand (also in part thanks to this being a different medium) but in this specific case; there isn't much to fault CBS over. Burhmam did what many Trek protagonists have done (re. Klingons and many other physically superior villains) and we'll likely follow that example in AoD (being cadets...and including command)
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Actually, going by that Burnham is not a Mary-Sue, she is a Jedi. It makes sense, Paramount has wanted to do Star Wars since TNG so when they got the chance to tell Jedi stories with the brand tag filed off they did it (remember, it is being done by Bad Robot which is a Paramount affiliate even though they are doing it for CBS). It is sloppy at best, but that pretty much sums up modern TV sci-fi (with a few notable exceptions).
I'm going to draw the line on this rampant tangent. See previous link to Ten Forward thread for complaints regarding Discovery writing and characterization (I think you're overlooking a lot of very basic stuff but this news thread isn't the place for that discussion.)
PS.
or here
or here
Humans took Klingons on in single combat without the use of guile or improvisation. Some folks fell over a table in the bar fight, but for the most part that was after being hit [notable exceptions being a Klingon throwing an officer over a table, and another presumably throwing a chair at O'Brien.] Kirk beating Khan with a pipe and the Gorn with an IED are more what you're looking for [though I don' think it's a consistent theme re. Klingons, as you suggested].
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
it is an average show, and that will be an average content. At the end, everybody is in peace, and we can make hugs to each others.
this game looks like more and more a dead end to me.