StarDestroyer.Net BBS

So as we all know, adventures in the prime reality have spanned 300 years and 3 generations of various characters. What would you consider your favorite era in the franchise

For me, I grew up in the TNG era, with TNG and DS9, and it's what I think of when I think of Trek.

I grew up with Voyager. That was my Trek, until I was old enough to spot the glaring shittiness.

After that, my parents bought me the complete TOS dvd set for xmas one year. And that's been my Trek ever since.

It's cheesy, it was made with about twenty bucks and a roll of duct tape, but it has an inherent awesomeness that appeals to me the same way the original Doctor Who stories do.

Shit SFX, poor video quality, low production values. But awesome writing and characters. And a great set of stories.

TOS, because there's no 'TOS movie era' option, which is what 'I' think of when I think Trek (The Motionless Picture and 'ST V:You've Gotta Be Fucking Kidding Me' notwithstanding).

Batman, the TOS movies can count under the 23rd Century option - the opening of Generations was 2293 IIRC.

When I think Trek, I think TNG. But I voted TOS, becasue there wasn't such an air of Utopian bullshit.

TOS, but TNG is a close second. TOS Klingons and Romulans are pretty cool, but TNG had the Borg who are pretty much the best Trek villains ever (before they got declawed by Voyager).

Enterprise seemed more of a prequel to the TNG+ era than it did to the TOS era.

TNG.

What can I say? It was my Star Trek. Plus DS9 showed us that Roddenberry's utopian ideals could exist in a galaxy with real and serious problems.

Whereas Voyager mostly showed us that Starfleet still lets lunatics become captains like in TOS.

Other than Tracey who was a lunatic captain in TOS?

Other than Tracey who was a lunatic captain in TOS?

Garth, just, just... Garth.

Matt Decker (though that was less an issue of starfleet giving a crazy man a ship than a captain losing his crew and going a little nuts.)

That woman from 'Turnabout intruder.' I'm not going to resurrect the question of whether she was dropped from the captain's program due to gender bias or her insanity, but the fact that she was a serious candidate at all is distressing. Actually, she may be the 'Tracey' you refer to, I don't recall.

Bob Wesley, from 'the Ultimate Computer' for immediatly blaming Kirk for the destruction of the Excaliber. Good of him to not destroy Enterprise in the end, but c'mon man, you're there to test a computer controlled starship. When something goes wrong why would you name a human captain who was just along for the ride?

I've always harbored deep suspicions about the other captain from 'Charlie X,' who found an omnipotent child and brought him home, greatly annoyed said child and failed to warn Kirk when he had the chance. I'll grant that he did seem eager to be rid of Charlie, and commed Kirk after he was some distance away. The difference is that if he'd told KIrk in person he could be reasonably sure Charlie wasn't listening, as opposed to broadcasting his voice across the entire bridge.

Let us not forget James T. Kirk who supposedlly went on such bizarre adventures they can only be attributed to the crew of the good ship Enterprise finding some really good drugs on some planet. Meeting Lincoln anyone? Shootout at the OK Corral? The Black Knight, a ship-eating amoeba, a duplicate earth populated solely by children, time-travel, Khan, an evil android doppelganger machine, shapeshiftering salt-vampires, half a dozen god-like entities or gods whos existence cannot be confirmed by science including Apollo, planet of the romans/gangsters/nazis, absurdly powerful and cruel 'philosopers' patterned after Plato, space-hippies flying to eden, and the First Federation. Doubtlessly many, many more that a serious viewer of the show could bring up, and this is discounting the madness that occured at various starbases, with other ships around or at the behest of starfleet, in short the ones with witnesses.

Even if we discount all these, there's still his habit of beaming down alone to fight the monster of the week, or with most/all of his command staff just to look around and make sure the air is breathable, no deadly virii or something the ship couldn't detect.

Better to ask, what stable people did they give starships to in TOS?

Ahriman238 wrote: Better to ask, what stable people did they give starships to in TOS?

I don't follow your problem with Bob Wesley. Its been awhile, but I thought he initially said something to the effect of "What the devil is Kirk doing?" when the Lexington got hit with full phasers. He exercised restraint for the most part in that situation, and went by the book, requesting permission from Starfleet to destroy the Enterprise.

Decker, as you note had a breakdown, and was probably a sane man before his crew died on account of his own error.

The TOS movie Captain's were all stable. I never saw an issue with Capt. Terrell of the Reliant, as he just had the shit luck of running into Khan. Capt. Esteban of the Grissom was a bit too by the book, and over cautious, but he was commanding a science vessel. Capt. Styles of the Excelsior came across as a dick, but not crazy or incompetent. The Saratoga Captain didn't do anything wrong either.

To the original topic, TOS is my Trek. My first exposure to Trek was The Wrath of Khan. I grew up on TNG, which was airing at the time, but was also watching TOS repeats and VHS tapes concurrently. TOS always was my favorite. TOS always was more fun, had more action and had characters that held my interest. That affection for TOS has only grown with time.

Ahriman238 wrote:

Other than Tracey who was a lunatic captain in TOS?

Garth, just, just... Garth.

Yeah but upon signs his lunacy had manifested, he was immediately relieved of command and placed under arrest. Also I believe the episode implied his lunacy may have been the result of some trauma he withstood - the Antosians used 'celluar metamorphosis' to treat his 'maimed and dying' body. Either what made him maimed and dying also bereft him of his mental faculties, or the celluar metamophosis did, or some combination of the two. The Antosians had to have permanently changed Garth's body to allow him to change his appearance at will. In so doing, they could easily have made a mis-step in his brain.

Matt Decker (though that was less an issue of starfleet giving a crazy man a ship than a captain losing his crew and going a little nuts.)

Obviously he was just a lunatic and wasn't suffering PTSD due to what happened to his ship and crew.

That woman from 'Turnabout intruder.' I'm not going to resurrect the question of whether she was dropped from the captain's program due to gender bias or her insanity, but the fact that she was a serious candidate at all is distressing. Actually, she may be the 'Tracey' you refer to, I don't recall.

No she wasn't, her name was Janice Lester. I find that episode offensive and it, along with the nazi episode, are the two TOS episodes I simply will not watch. Even so she wasn't a captain, was she? So how can you add her to the idea that Starfleet employs mentally deranged people to command their starships when she was dropped from the program?

Also in 'Bread and Circuses' Merrick commented on how he tried to apply to be a Starship Captain but couldn't make the grade as well, meaning Starfleet puts a lot of effort into selecting and training their command officers, and weeding out undesirable recruits is a priority for their program.

Bob Wesley, from 'the Ultimate Computer' for immediatly blaming Kirk for the destruction of the Excaliber. Good of him to not destroy Enterprise in the end, but c'mon man, you're there to test a computer controlled starship. When something goes wrong why would you name a human captain who was just along for the ride?

Are you kidding or what? Skylon already pointed this out but Bob Wesley was competent, called SFC for orders, and intended to take out the Enterprise as it had become a demonstrable threat. He was expecting only wargames and while his first thought was to blame Kirk, how could he possibly know who was in charge of the ship? Or what had really transpired? The wargames were supposed to be a test of M5's capability to direct a ship in battle while under human supervision, but Kirk was still in command - at least that was the plan.

I've always harbored deep suspicions about the other captain from 'Charlie X,' who found an omnipotent child and brought him home, greatly annoyed said child and failed to warn Kirk when he had the chance. I'll grant that he did seem eager to be rid of Charlie, and commed Kirk after he was some distance away. The difference is that if he'd told KIrk in person he could be reasonably sure Charlie wasn't listening, as opposed to broadcasting his voice across the entire bridge.

Uh yeah except Charlie was standing right there in the transporter room so that Captain couldn't safely tell Kirk anything. He also couldn't say anything that would raise Charlie's suspicions by giving Kirk subtle hints. How exactly is this a sign of lunacy?

Let us not forget James T. Kirk who supposedlly went on such bizarre adventures they can only be attributed to the crew of the good ship Enterprise finding some really good drugs on some planet. Meeting Lincoln anyone? Shootout at the OK Corral? The Black Knight, a ship-eating amoeba, a duplicate earth populated solely by children, time-travel, Khan, an evil android doppelganger machine, shapeshiftering salt-vampires, half a dozen god-like entities or gods whos existence cannot be confirmed by science including Apollo, planet of the romans/gangsters/nazis, absurdly powerful and cruel 'philosopers' patterned after Plato, space-hippies flying to eden, and the First Federation. Doubtlessly many, many more that a serious viewer of the show could bring up, and this is discounting the madness that occured at various starbases, with other ships around or at the behest of starfleet, in short the ones with witnesses.

What the fuck are you even on about.

Even if we discount all these, there's still his habit of beaming down alone to fight the monster of the week, or with most/all of his command staff just to look around and make sure the air is breathable, no deadly virii or something the ship couldn't detect.

Yeah he was reckless, though as Patrick Degan said to me in a recent thread, this is not without real world precedent. TOS was a setting clearly inspired by Horatio Hornblower and the age of sail. Back then, Captains could and would be part of the landing party to a new shore.

Better to ask, what stable people did they give starships to in TOS?

Frankly I think all your examples are bogus and you missed the one clear example of them all: Captain Ronald Tracey of the USS Exeter. He beamed down to a planet, thought he discovered a fountain of youth in the planet's biosphere which allowed people to live hundreds of years, then decided he would use that knowledge for his own personal gain. His entire crew died off due to the very virus he wanted to harvest, and upon being stranded on the planet he then decided to arm the Comms with phasers and used them to slaughter thousands of yangs - about as clear cut violation of the Prime Directive as you can make and with the tragic consequences as a result. He tried to kill Kirk every chance he got as well, and even called Spock a devil to take advantage of the yang's superstitions.

Ahriman238 wrote:Let us not forget James T. Kirk who supposedlly went on such bizarre adventures they can only be attributed to the crew of the good ship Enterprise finding some really good drugs on some planet. Meeting Lincoln anyone? Shootout at the OK Corral? The Black Knight, a ship-eating amoeba, a duplicate earth populated solely by children, time-travel, Khan, an evil android doppelganger machine, shapeshiftering salt-vampires, half a dozen god-like entities or gods whos existence cannot be confirmed by science including Apollo, planet of the romans/gangsters/nazis, absurdly powerful and cruel 'philosopers' patterned after Plato, space-hippies flying to eden, and the First Federation. Doubtlessly many, many more that a serious viewer of the show could bring up, and this is discounting the madness that occured at various starbases, with other ships around or at the behest of starfleet, in short the ones with witnesses.

What are you gibbering about? Those events were clearly part of the real world circumstances faced by the crew of the Enterprise in the series. Yes they "met Lincoln". They also knew full-well it wasn't the "real" Lincoln but most likely an alien creature from the planet they were orbiting at the time. The "OK Corral shootout" was an illusion generated by the telepathic Melkotians and Kirk and his officers were fully aware of it. The Black Knight? Theme park automaton. The Space Amoeba: clearly observed phenomenon in the Trek universe. Duplicate Earth populated by children? Clearly observed phenomenon in the Trek universe. Time travel? Shown as practicable in Star Trek in all its incarnations so I've no idea what point you think you're making here. Khan? Encountered by the crew and part of the history of Earth in the Trek universe who did threaten the crews of two starships in separate times over thirty years. Apollo? The Enterprise crew did encounter him and they did scientifically figure out the source of his powers —and destroyed it. Unless you're going to descend into complete solopsism or deny totally suspension-of-disbelief rules, you have no argument here on any point.

What are you gibbering about? Those events were clearly part of the real world circumstances faced by the crew of the Enterprise in the series. Yes they "met Lincoln". They also knew full-well it wasn't the "real" Lincoln but most likely an alien creature from the planet they were orbiting at the time. The "OK Corral shootout" was an illusion generated by the telepathic Melkotians and Kirk and his officers were fully aware of it. The Black Knight? Theme park automaton. The Space Amoeba: clearly observed phenomenon in the Trek universe. Duplicate Earth populated by children? Clearly observed phenomenon in the Trek universe. Time travel? Shown as practicable in Star Trek in all its incarnations so I've no idea what point you think you're making here. Khan? Encountered by the crew and part of the history of Earth in the Trek universe who did threaten the crews of two starships in separate times over thirty years. Apollo? The Enterprise crew did encounter him and they did scientifically figure out the source of his powers —and destroyed it. Unless you're going to descend into complete solopsism or deny totally suspension-of-disbelief rules, you have no argument here on any point.

Ah. My apologies for being unclear. I wasn't trying to say that Kirk was insane, I was pointing out how insane all of these events must sound to someone who didn't watch or go through them. I'd be a bit suprised if some desk admiral or starfleet shrink didn't think of sending for a straitjacket while listening to Kirk's logs, only to be really suprised when the crew and sensor logs backed him up.

Yeah he was reckless, though as Patrick Degan said to me in a recent thread, this is not without real world precedent. TOS was a setting clearly inspired by Horatio Hornblower and the age of sail. Back then, Captains could and would be part of the landing party to a new shore.

Taking unnecessary risks with your own life is not a sign of psychosis. Neither is taking unnecessary risks with your life and you 2IC's at the same time. But you must admit it's not a good sign. Personally, I'm more likely to blame it on the writers.

Frankly I think all your examples are bogus and you missed the one clear example of them all: Captain Ronald Tracey of the USS Exeter. He beamed down to a planet, thought he discovered a fountain of youth in the planet's biosphere which allowed people to live hundreds of years, then decided he would use that knowledge for his own personal gain. His entire crew died off due to the very virus he wanted to harvest, and upon being stranded on the planet he then decided to arm the Comms with phasers and used them to slaughter thousands of yangs - about as clear cut violation of the Prime Directive as you can make and with the tragic consequences as a result. He tried to kill Kirk every chance he got as well, and even called Spock a devil to take advantage of the yang's superstitions.

I must have missed that one. Please tell me the warring 'yangs' and 'comms' aren't what they sound like.

Are you kidding or what? Skylon already pointed this out but Bob Wesley was competent, called SFC for orders, and intended to take out the Enterprise as it had become a demonstrable threat. He was expecting only wargames and while his first thought was to blame Kirk, how could he possibly know who was in charge of the ship? Or what had really transpired? The wargames were supposed to be a test of M5's capability to direct a ship in battle while under human supervision, but Kirk was still in command - at least that was the plan.

I may be doing Bob an injustice here, it's been a while since I saw the episode. However, as I recall it, the M5 destroyed the Excaliber, Bob calls up Kirk to demand to know what he thinks he's doing, but no one can answer because they're only receiving, the M5 won't let them transmit. Then he calls starfleet and specifically tells them that Kirk has gone mad and destroyed the Excaliber, permission to fire?

He's not so much insane as kind of slow on the uptake. He also took his sweet time in the end where they're all waiting with baited breath to see if he will realize they've regained control of the ship. But, once again, that's the writers trying to milk more drama from an already tense situation.

The TOS movie Captain's were all stable. I never saw an issue with Capt. Terrell of the Reliant, as he just had the shit luck of running into Khan. Capt. Esteban of the Grissom was a bit too by the book, and over cautious, but he was commanding a science vessel. Capt. Styles of the Excelsior came across as a dick, but not crazy or incompetent. The Saratoga Captain didn't do anything wrong either.

I have no issue with any of the movie captains, besides Styles, for being insufferable. I never said I did.


I don't know what to tell you all, except that in watching TOS I only really remember two other captains, and one previous candidate for captain, who were at all fleshed out as characters, and all three of them were nuttier than a squirrel's winter stash. I don't claim to be an expert on TOS, I think I've only seen a third or so of the show, but that's the impression I took from it. I apologize if I've offended anyone.

Though I notice no one here is exactly leaping to Janeway's defense...

TOS all the way. Perhaps with some preference for the films, as Batman said, though I would be more ambiguous about that.

TNG is the runner-up, if a fairly distant second. I do hate the utopian stuff, but for most of what I saw of the series, it felt as though the people behind it actually cared about it. Which was not so much the case later on.

I mention this over in the SGU series finale thread.

Another reason I prefer the TNG-era over the rest of Star Trek is that all three shows overlapped and led into each other. TNG set up the Bajoran Occupation, which led into DS9. Then TNG and DS9 set up the Maquis story, which led into VGR. Regardless of execution, it felt at times like a extended narrative and story arc.

I can see why one would feel that way if one had seen DS9. I, unfortunately, have not, because after the less than stellar first season, I sort of gave up on the series (to, from what I can tell, my own detriment, because I have heard quite a lot of praise for that series as it went on), and naturally, DS9 is the one part of Trek that is never reaired on german TV, and no offense, something leading into VOY is not exactly a ringing endorsement.

TNG had the advantage of better special effects and there being more than twice of it than there was of the original TOS, and I would tentatively admit that I liked TNG better than TOS (at least I don't have to stay up until 0500 to watch TNG reruns), but my preferred era are still the TOS movies.

Batman wrote:... and no offense, something leading into VOY is not exactly a ringing endorsement.

What happened was TNG planted the seeds of the Maquis conflict early in Season 7. DS9 picked up on it and reaped the harvest in late Season 2, which aired concurrently. This played back into TNG in the penultimate episode.

It's neither series' fault that VGR screwed up the set-up.

I just happen like continuity overlap; it comes from being a comics fan.

Yeah, okay, so I forgot the smiley again.
And as another comic book fan, beyond a certain point, I hate continuity overlap. Having to follow TNG/DS9 parallel is okay, having to follow DS9/VOY is NOT but only because VOY stinks to high heaven, not because it's too much trouble (if you can afford the therapy for watching VOY and I'm a gazillionaire, so that should be a nonissue). DCU, keeping straight on what goes on in the Batverse means following half a dozen titles at times. Crossover events? I've given up on even trying.

VGR and DS9 have no crossover events, aside from Robert Picardo guest starring as Doctor Zimmerman guest starring on one episode of DS9 and in an episode of VOY they have the Dominion mentioned to the Doctor. Aside from that, no crossovers.

FaxModem1 wrote:VGR and DS9 have no crossover events, aside from Robert Picardo guest starring as Doctor Zimmerman guest starring on one episode of DS9 and in an episode of VOY they have the Dominion mentioned to the Doctor. Aside from that, no crossovers.

He was, in staying with his character, referring to comic books set in DC's universe.

Out of curiousity, how many TNG/DS9 crossovers were there? Or was Birthright (part I) the only one?

Emissary was technically a crossover, because it had Picard and E-D in it.

In a sense there were also a few TNG/Voyager crossovers, with Troi and Reg Barclay.

Quark also appeared in TNG's "Firstborn".

As to VGR/DS9 crossovers, the only other real instance was the appearance of the Mirror Tuvok in Season 3's "Through the Looking Glass".