Star Trek vs. Star Wars tactical challenge.

[The Romulan Republic]

The premise of this thread is simple: Put the best the Federation and its allies have to offer, against the best the Empire has to offer.

Q will transport the best Starfleet, KDF, and Romulan commanders, one at a time, to a neutral star system, along with their command crew and all necessary personnel. In the system is a lost alien technology of incredible power. In the system are also two Alliance cruisers from Firefly (the big skyscraper-like ships), complete with fighter/gunship compliment.

The Starfleet/Klingon/Romulan crew will be placed on one vessel.

On the other, is Grand Admiral Thrawn (Legends version), with Captain Pellaon and sufficient Imperial troops from his fleet to operate the vessel.

Does the Federation or its allies have any commander who can best the Empire's greatest fleet commander on neutral ground, with equal forces? Does the answer change if its Disney canon/Rebels Thrawn?

[FedRebel]

Sisko, he personally planned and lead the major offensives of the Dominion War

It'd be an absolute brawl for sure. When Sisko is determined he will not give up...and he has no qualms about using biogenic weapons against human rebels.

If the battle is a game of chicken Ben Sisko will not flinch. So he question is...will Thrawn fold?

[NecronLord]

Yes.

The Federation, Romulan and Klingons have their own legends, they're also much more used to this style of warfare - being cut off from resupply using a single ship and its resources - and much more used to having to adapt to different technology levels, while Thrawn is well out of his comfort zone of operating with multi-thousand G accelleration fighters in a setting where reinforcements are minutes away from most battles.

Thrawn has no insight into the allied fleet's commanders so no opportunity to use his savant-superpower against them.

The 'powerful lost alien technology' is more likely to fall into allied hands, as a standard imperial crew doesn't even have a science department as far as I know.

The Allies' field of candidates contains numerous excellent individual starship captains; Pellaeon is not particularly good at commanding an individual ship, and neither is Thrawn.

Thrawn's record against numerically equal forces without the use of his superpower isn't great.

Disney Thrawn does worse, as he is normally reliant on losing battles to win the war - as this is one battle, and he can't escape into FTL, he's fucked.

[NeoGoomba]

Just give the Allies M5. Merciless and tactically brilliant.

[Crazedwraith]

If we grant ST Superior Commanders. I think SW has commanders that are going to be more used to the equipment provided.

Capships with fighter screens is SW's bread and butter.

Much rarer in ST. Though not unknown.

[FaxModem1]

I could imagine Tuvok coming up with a few zingers if in a command position, as demonstrated when fighting against the Vidians.



Thrawn wouldn't have a mole aboard his ship, so he wouldn't have that kind of advantage, but Tuvok does have a very capable tactical mind.

[The Romulan Republic]

Sisko, he personally planned and lead the major offensives of the Dominion War

It'd be an absolute brawl for sure. When Sisko is determined he will not give up...and he has no qualms about using biogenic weapons against human rebels.

If the battle is a game of chicken Ben Sisko will not flinch. So he question is...will Thrawn fold?

Thrawn will not fold if he has a reasonable chance of success, I think. With equal numbers, and no major disadvantage, he would probably hold his ground.

But Sisko did occur to me, both for the reasons said, and because from what I recall, his tactics against Eddington were actually reminiscent of Thrawn's modus operandi- using his knowledge of Eddington's psychology, and particularly his fixation with Les Miserable, to pressure him into surrendering by threatening the Marquis colonies. That was a very Thrawn-style move.

If we grant ST Superior Commanders. I think SW has commanders that are going to be more used to the equipment provided.

Capships with fighter screens is SW's bread and butter.

Much rarer in ST. Though not unknown.

Another point for the Sisko. Starfleet made us of small attack craft alongside heavy capital ships extensively in the Dominion War, and had experience fighting opponents who did as well (the Dominion attack ships). And Sisko probably has the most front-line combat experience of any Dominion War commander.

Just give the Allies M5. Merciless and tactically brilliant.

Might work, since it has no friendly ships to accidentally fire on by mistake. Still, if its programming leads it to follow predictable tactical patterns, Thrawn might see through it eventually.

Yes.

The Federation, Romulan and Klingons have their own legends, they're also much more used to this style of warfare - being cut off from resupply using a single ship and its resources - and much more used to having to adapt to different technology levels, while Thrawn is well out of his comfort zone of operating with multi-thousand G accelleration fighters in a setting where reinforcements are minutes away from most battles.

Both of them are in their comfort zone in some ways, and not in others.

For Starfleet, as noted above, they have less experience with using small fighters or gunships in concert with a capital ship.

For the Empire, yes, they are less used to operating alone and with limited resources. Legends Thrawn probably less so than most, though, given his time in the Unknown Regions. They are also, however, less familiar with learning how to operate unfamiliar tech. on short notice.

Thrawn has no insight into the allied fleet's commanders so no opportunity to use his savant-superpower against them.

I suppose he could study the design of the ships, but that would just throw him off. Or try to get them to negotiate first before engaging.

The 'powerful lost alien technology' is more likely to fall into allied hands, as a standard imperial crew doesn't even have a science department as far as I know.

True. But superweapons are the Empire's favorite gimmick, and they would at least have an engineering department, including droids.

The Allies' field of candidates contains numerous excellent individual starship captains; Pellaeon is not particularly good at commanding an individual ship, and neither is Thrawn.

That is a very good point.

Thrawn's record against numerically equal forces without the use of his superpower isn't great.

Hmm. I remember him winning quite a few fleet actions in the Thrawn Trilogy- just not ones were major OT characters were present.

Disney Thrawn does worse, as he is normally reliant on losing battles to win the war - as this is one battle, and he can't escape into FTL, he's fucked.

Probably, yeah.

[NecronLord]

Hmm. I remember him winning quite a few fleet actions in the Thrawn Trilogy- just not ones were major OT characters were present.

Yeah, he took his licks. Kirk or Picard have almost a 100% success rate.

[NecronLord]

If we grant ST Superior Commanders. I think SW has commanders that are going to be more used to the equipment provided.

Capships with fighter screens is SW's bread and butter.

Much rarer in ST. Though not unknown.

Conversely, that might mislead them. They might expect the fighters to do something to capships. Which firefly ones don't, and neither do Trek ones as a rule.

[NeoGoomba]

Thrawn was always more a strategist than a tactician in my mind, which kind of makes this a little unfair as we rarely see long-term strategy in Trek, just the tactical, immediate engagements. Is there a better analogue for SW that would work in this situation? Bel Ibis seemed to be an effective front-line leader when allowed to be. Or maybe Ackbar?

[Crazedwraith]

If we grant ST Superior Commanders. I think SW has commanders that are going to be more used to the equipment provided.

Capships with fighter screens is SW's bread and butter.

Much rarer in ST. Though not unknown.

Conversely, that might mislead them. They might expect the fighters to do something to capships. Which firefly ones don't, and neither do Trek ones as a rule.

I'm not aware of the mechanics of Firefly ship to ship combat ever being made that clear to be honest.

From the Tower ships launch gunships to try to deal with Serenity in the pilot episode Serenity, and fire directly on the derelict ship in Bushwhacked, I think that's about it. The ships in the movie Serenity are all new designs iirc, though they don't seem to have the gunship complement the Tower ships did in the series.

[The Romulan Republic]

Hmm. I remember him winning quite a few fleet actions in the Thrawn Trilogy- just not ones were major OT characters were present.

Yeah, he took his licks. Kirk or Picard have almost a 100% success rate.

In fairness to GAT, he arguably managed a draw at the Sluis Van shipyards, and he basically won the race for the Dark Force ships- those being his main successes when main OT characters were on the field against him.

But Thrawn does sometimes get overhyped, both in and out of universe, relative to his actual record.

Thrawn was always more a strategist than a tactician in my mind, which kind of makes this a little unfair as we rarely see long-term strategy in Trek, just the tactical, immediate engagements. Is there a better analogue for SW that would work in this situation? Bel Ibis seemed to be an effective front-line leader when allowed to be. Or maybe Ackbar?

Hmm.

Bel Iblis seems a competent tactician- but also lost a space engagement to Thrawn in The Last Command.

Ackbar gets talked up in the old EU, but he never struck me as an extraordinary commander in the films. His big showing is the Battle of Endor, but let's look at his performance there, examining each of his major actions in the battle:

-Orders the fleet into/out of hyperspace. Standard orders that a cadet could have given.

-Recognizes an obvious trap after Lando points it out to him- then starts shouting "Its a trap!" rather than maintaining a calm façade for the benefit of his subordinates.

-Gives some orders to move ships to different sectors. No details are clear.

-Decides (understandably, but it potentially would have amounted to conceding the war) to retreat when the Death Star superlaser is revealed to be operational- then waffles and gets talked out of it by Lando (who is the one who actually comes up with a tactic on the fly to counter the enemy's advantage of the superlaser).

-Orders fighters to attack the Death Star after the shield goes down (or was that Lando too), following the pre-established mission plan.

-Orders all remaining ships to concentrate fire on the Executor to buy time for the fighters. His first clearly useful tactical decision, but "Concentrate all fire on the enemy command ship" is a fairly obvious tactic.

-Orders the Rebel fleet to withdraw so that they won't be caught in the blast of the exploding Death Star. Sound, but hardly an indication of brilliance.

Ackbar gives me the impression of a fairly standard, by the book commander- competent within his comfort zone, but not particularly imaginative or innovative. Lando did far more to win the space battle at Endor than he did, despite only being in command of the starfighters.

If we grant ST Superior Commanders. I think SW has commanders that are going to be more used to the equipment provided.

Capships with fighter screens is SW's bread and butter.

Much rarer in ST. Though not unknown.

Conversely, that might mislead them. They might expect the fighters to do something to capships. Which firefly ones don't, and neither do Trek ones as a rule.

I'm not aware of the mechanics of Firefly ship to ship combat ever being made that clear to be honest.

From the Tower ships launch gunships to try to deal with Serenity in the pilot episode Serenity, and fire directly on the derelict ship in Bushwhacked, I think that's about it. The ships in the movie Serenity are all new designs iirc, though they don't seem to have the gunship complement the Tower ships did in the series.

Indeed. The only major example of starship combat we see in "Firefly"/Serenity is the final battle in the film, and that was a very atypical situation, and did not feature the same ship types as the show.

Logically, however, gunships should be able to damage capital ships, given the lack of shields in the setting (and that's going to be a major tactical change for both sides in this scenario- they're basically flying glass cannons). However, the effectiveness of the big ships' point defense is something that isn't really answered (you could try to extrapolate from the smaller ships in Serenity, but I don't know if that's fair, since they were fighting at point-blank range due to highly unusual circumstances).

[Eternal_Freedom]

One thing that immediately springs to mind is something I think is quite crucial - you haven't stated whether or not the Starfleet or Imperial commanders/crews have any idea of the capabilities of the Firefly vessels, or even how to operate them. Hell, there's no guarantee they'll even be able to read the language.

Now, if you want to say that they have a working knowledge of operating the ships and utilizing them effectively in combat, that's fine, but I still don't see it as anything approaching a fair comparison - you're in essence saying "What if we put a Firefly ship captained by someone who resembles Sisko/Kirk/Picard/Maxwell/Jellicoe against one commanded by someone who resembles Thrawn/Pellaeon/Piett/Sair Yonka/Ait Convarion etc. Which isn't the same thing.

You could do this with just about any other universe. You could have them on a pair of Space Marine Battle Barges, or two copies of the Roger Young from Starship Troopers, or two Glorious Heritage Heavy Cruisers from Andromeda, or two Battlestars. The problem is that you aren't really comparing the tactical abilities of either side, but rather how well they can adapt to a totally alien scenario. And in that the Federation is both advantaged and hamstrung - they are explorers, yes, but are also more inclined to negotiate, something Thrawn would probably be willing to exploit, especially if Picard is in charge. Remember that comment of his in "The Wounded" about how he lowered his shields as a gesture of good faith when negotiating with a Cardassian ship?

Honestly I really don't see this as a tactical scenario, because the Firefly universe is just too different to one that either side is familiar with.

[The Romulan Republic]

One thing that immediately springs to mind is something I think is quite crucial - you haven't stated whether or not the Starfleet or Imperial commanders/crews have any idea of the capabilities of the Firefly vessels, or even how to operate them. Hell, there's no guarantee they'll even be able to read the language.

Have you watched "Firefly"? They speak modern English, sprinkled with bits of Chinese. No problem for Starfleet officers.

You're right that it would disadvantage Star Wars commanders, unless we handwave it as Basic=English. For the purposes of this thread, that would probably be best.

Now, if you want to say that they have a working knowledge of operating the ships and utilizing them effectively in combat, that's fine, but I still don't see it as anything approaching a fair comparison - you're in essence saying "What if we put a Firefly ship captained by someone who resembles Sisko/Kirk/Picard/Maxwell/Jellicoe against one commanded by someone who resembles Thrawn/Pellaeon/Piett/Sair Yonka/Ait Convarion etc. Which isn't the same thing.

The point is to compare the capabilities of the commanders, rather than the quality of their technology, and avoid the usual Star Wars wins with a single turbolaser shot stuff.

You could do this with just about any other universe. You could have them on a pair of Space Marine Battle Barges, or two copies of the Roger Young from Starship Troopers, or two Glorious Heritage Heavy Cruisers from Andromeda, or two Battlestars. The problem is that you aren't really comparing the tactical abilities of either side, but rather how well they can adapt to a totally alien scenario. And in that the Federation is both advantaged and hamstrung - they are explorers, yes, but are also more inclined to negotiate, something Thrawn would probably be willing to exploit, especially if Picard is in charge. Remember that comment of his in "The Wounded" about how he lowered his shields as a gesture of good faith when negotiating with a Cardassian ship?

Fair points, but I don't see that those other universes would necessarily be better suited- they'd have the same problems, and some would probably advantage one side or the other more clearly by having greater similarity to their familiar tech.

Honestly I really don't see this as a tactical scenario, because the Firefly universe is just too different to one that either side is familiar with.

The intent was to give both sides equivalent technology, without giving either side the advantage of technology that they were more familiar with.

If you can suggest a better alternative, by all means do so.

[Eternal_Freedom]

The language point is iffy. Yes, I have seen Firefly, they speak English. They also speak English in Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, Andromeda and W40K, it's what TVTropes calls a translation convention. We see the languages as English, that doesn't mean they actually are English in-universe.

While I understand the point about how you want to compare the abilities of the commanders not the tech, and that's reasonable, I don't think you've grasped how the two are linked - Kirk, Picard, Sisko and so on know their ships well enough to know just how far they can be pushed (in Sisiko's case he literally built the thing), they simply wouldn't have that element with a new and completely different technology. Neither would the Imperial commanders.

Their tactical skills are based on knowing the abilities of their ships, their allies ships, and knowing or at least having a pretty good idea of the abilities of the enemy, none of which is present in this scenario.

As for how to do it better? I honestly don't know it can be done. Putting either side into an unfamiliar scenario and telling them to fight it out is difficult even with real-world comparisons, never midn fictional ones with fundamentally different technologies.

I mean, suppose I said "Who was the best Naval commander?" and did it by putting John Jellicoe, Horatio Nelson and Sir Francis Drake (for example)...in a trio of Greek Triremes? Or Alexander the Great, William T. Sherman and Arthur Wellsley competing for "best General" in a Challenger-2 main battle tank? That's what you're doing here, only it's magnified enormously by using characters from two completely different fictional universes and dumping them in a third completely different universe.

[The Romulan Republic]

The language point is iffy. Yes, I have seen Firefly, they speak English. They also speak English in Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, Andromeda and W40K, it's what TVTropes calls a translation convention. We see the languages as English, that doesn't mean they actually are English in-universe.

Fair enough, I suppose, though I think its more reasonable to assume that they are, in fact, speaking English in Firefly, and Trek, where their societies are off-shoots of modern Earth ones.

In Star Wars, they've got Basic, right?

While I understand the point about how you want to compare the abilities of the commanders not the tech, and that's reasonable, I don't think you've grasped how the two are linked - Kirk, Picard, Sisko and so on know their ships well enough to know just how far they can be pushed (in Sisiko's case he literally built the thing), they simply wouldn't have that element with a new and completely different technology. Neither would the Imperial commanders.

At least they'd be on even ground in that respect, more or less.

But perhaps it would be simpler to just say Q dumps the knowledge of the tech. into their brains. Who's better at figuring out and working with alien tech. isn't really the main point of this scenario, either. Nor is it much of a contest- the Feds. are the best.

Their tactical skills are based on knowing the abilities of their ships, their allies ships, and knowing or at least having a pretty good idea of the abilities of the enemy, none of which is present in this scenario.

Partially, yes.

As for how to do it better? I honestly don't know it can be done. Putting either side into an unfamiliar scenario and telling them to fight it out is difficult even with real-world comparisons, never midn fictional ones with fundamentally different technologies.

Just have Q mindump the info, I guess.

I mean, suppose I said "Who was the best Naval commander?" and did it by putting John Jellicoe, Horatio Nelson and Sir Francis Drake (for example)...in a trio of Greek Triremes? Or Alexander the Great, William T. Sherman and Arthur Wellsley competing for "best General" in a Challenger-2 main battle tank? That's what you're doing here, only it's magnified enormously by using characters from two completely different fictional universes and dumping them in a third completely different universe.

I'm not sure the differences are that vast, given that science fiction series such as these tend to follow some similar conventions (more than would likely be the case in reality), but I see the point.

[Eternal_Freedom]

I think the main reason most "versus" debates between franchises inevitably gravitate to weapon yields, shield strength, acceleration, FTL speeds, ship numbers etc is because with numbers (even if they are only order-of-magnitude estimates) you actually can make direct comparisons between settings. If you can say "An ISD has x firepower and it takes y energy to destroy the E-D, then an ISD can destroy z numbers of Galaxy-class ships."

Comparing people is a hell of a lot harder because it's entirely subjective. Especially since you've insisted on a completely level playing field. Which is fine for a theoretical scenario, but I honestly don't think such a situation has ever cropped up in any franchise I know of, which makes prior examples unhelpful anyway.

As for Q infodumping the needed knowledge into their heads, well that goes back to my earlier point. The Federation and Imperial commanders won't be using Federation or Imperial tactics, they'll be using Firefly tactics because that's what works with the ship's they have.

[Tribble]

I think the main reason most "versus" debates between franchises inevitably gravitate to weapon yields, shield strength, acceleration, FTL speeds, ship numbers etc is because with numbers (even if they are only order-of-magnitude estimates) you actually can make direct comparisons between settings. If you can say "An ISD has x firepower and it takes y energy to destroy the E-D, then an ISD can destroy z numbers of Galaxy-class ships."

Comparing people is a hell of a lot harder because it's entirely subjective. Especially since you've insisted on a completely level playing field. Which is fine for a theoretical scenario, but I honestly don't think such a situation has ever cropped up in any franchise I know of, which makes prior examples unhelpful anyway.

As for Q infodumping the needed knowledge into their heads, well that goes back to my earlier point. The Federation and Imperial commanders won't be using Federation or Imperial tactics, they'll be using Firefly tactics because that's what works with the ship's they have.

IMO their personalities would still matter a lot though.

For example, out of the Starfleet captains IMO Picard would most likely be the one at a disadvantage against Thrawn. While he is certainly capable of fighting when necessary he usually aims for the peaceful resolution. That's the kind of thing Thrawn would probably try to exploit, either by trying to catch his opponent off guard and attacking first, or by faking diplomacy and giving himself time to properly study his opponent before striking. While Picard would be likely seeking the peaceful resolution, Thrawn would be seeking to win, and decisively at that.

As others have noted Sisko and Kirk are more than willing to strike back immediately and hard, and I think a fight between them and Thrawn would turn into an ugly slug fest where either side could be the victor.

Of course, the most interesting match up for me would involve Janeway because who knows what she'll do? She certainly won't.

Depending on her coffee intake it can be anything from "go head and kick our ass!" to "I'll shove this ship down your throat and kill everyone before letting you win, see you in Hell!"

I'd love to see Thrawn try to psychoanalyse her during a fight.

[The Romulan Republic]

I think the main reason most "versus" debates between franchises inevitably gravitate to weapon yields, shield strength, acceleration, FTL speeds, ship numbers etc is because with numbers (even if they are only order-of-magnitude estimates) you actually can make direct comparisons between settings. If you can say "An ISD has x firepower and it takes y energy to destroy the E-D, then an ISD can destroy z numbers of Galaxy-class ships."

Comparing people is a hell of a lot harder because it's entirely subjective. Especially since you've insisted on a completely level playing field. Which is fine for a theoretical scenario, but I honestly don't think such a situation has ever cropped up in any franchise I know of, which makes prior examples unhelpful anyway.

As for Q infodumping the needed knowledge into their heads, well that goes back to my earlier point. The Federation and Imperial commanders won't be using Federation or Imperial tactics, they'll be using Firefly tactics because that's what works with the ship's they have.

IMO their personalities would still matter a lot though.

Indeed.

While I understand the point about tech. being easier to quantify and thus debate, it bothers me that many vs. debates pointedly ignore or hand wave the characters' personalities altogether. Logistics are crucial in war, but war is not purely a logistical exercise conducted by machines. Diplomacy or exploration even less so. The experiences, values, and choices of the characters in question play a role. To take some historical examples, compare, say, Grant's actions in the Civil War with MaClelan's.

For example, out of the Starfleet captains IMO Picard would most likely be the one at a disadvantage against Thrawn. While he is certainly capable of fighting when necessary he usually aims for the peaceful resolution. That's the kind of thing Thrawn would probably try to exploit, either by trying to catch his opponent off guard and attacking first, or by faking diplomacy and giving himself time to properly study his opponent before striking. While Picard would be likely seeking the peaceful resolution, Thrawn would be seeking to win, and decisively at that.

That is probably correct.

As others have noted Sisko and Kirk are more than willing to strike back immediately and hard, and I think a fight between them and Thrawn would turn into an ugly slug fest where either side could be the victor.

Sisko is the one who strikes me as being most Thrawn-like. Kirk is over-reliant on posturing and the bluff, and I think Thrawn might see through that.

Of course, the most interesting match up for me would involve Janeway because who knows what she'll do? She certainly won't.

Pity she was so inconsistently written (as was Voyager in general).

Depending on her coffee intake it can be anything from "go head and kick our ass!" to "I'll shove this ship down your throat and kill everyone before letting you win, see you in Hell!"

I'd love to see Thrawn try to psychoanalyse her during a fight.

To be fair, being turned into a salamander can't be good for one's state of mind.

[FaxModem1]

Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.

It is best to keep one’s own state intact; to crush the enemy’s state is only second best.

Keep in mind that Thrawn seems to follow the Art of War, and will avoid a battle if he can. Thrawn would be perfectly willing to engage in diplomacy in order to secure the alien military technology, working towards a joint mission to acquire the technology, while not losing a single Stormtrooper. This would be a victory in of itself. And with equal assets engaged in combat, victory is not assured.

[The Romulan Republic]

So there is at least a possibility that he could accomplish his objectives without a shot fired against someone like Picard, simply by outmaneuvering Picard diplomatically?

Mind you, Picard is probably the most formidable opponent in the diplomatic arena, and he is a man of principle- if he figures out what the Empire really is, he won't bend (though Thrawn is less obviously evil than many Imperial officers).

[LadyTevar]

Also, Thrawn and Picard have something in common, their love of alien culture. In any other life, both would happily have lived as archaeologists.

As for the Battlestar language, iirc, neoBGS was supposedly in the ancient Greek family. The original BSG may have been Mayan, Egyptian, or even proto-Gaelic.

[CetaMan]

Something like this is a bit more interesting from a versus point then the usual cherry-picking and dickwaving you get trying to do tech comparisons. Its more intuitive with a healthy dose of military tactics and psychology instead.

One suggestion for the imperials would honestly be Vader, who when paired with Yularen or other competent officers was usually able to command small forces and especially fighter forces well. Might be some personality issues with Thrawn however, both of them are domineering personalities.

Picard probably is not the best choice, especially if a ruthless imperial commander (Disney Thrawn) is used. Attempting a diplomatic move at the start seems likely and might leave them open for an initial strike, and remember partially that federation ships in themselves are somewhat an art form, as many sci-fi ship designs are. The layout, shape, colour and aggressiveness of a ship can tell you something about what they value. Not saying its guaranteed, but hey - neither is Graffiti or sculptures.

[The Romulan Republic]

Something like this is a bit more interesting from a versus point then the usual cherry-picking and dickwaving you get trying to do tech comparisons. Its more intuitive with a healthy dose of military tactics and psychology instead.

One suggestion for the imperials would honestly be Vader, who when paired with Yularen or other competent officers was usually able to command small forces and especially fighter forces well. Might be some personality issues with Thrawn however, both of them are domineering personalities.

I just assumed that the general consensus would be that Thrawn was the most capable Imperial commander, I guess. But perhaps Vader does deserve more consideration, especially since his experience and tactical acumen is further enhanced by his Force abilities.

Putting him together with Thrawn, though... yeah, I think that they'd undermine each other.

Picard probably is not the best choice, especially if a ruthless imperial commander (Disney Thrawn) is used. Attempting a diplomatic move at the start seems likely and might leave them open for an initial strike, and remember partially that federation ships in themselves are somewhat an art form, as many sci-fi ship designs are. The layout, shape, colour and aggressiveness of a ship can tell you something about what they value. Not saying its guaranteed, but hey - neither is Graffiti or sculptures.

Remember, Picard wouldn't be on a Federation ship. I gave both sides neutral ships for this purpose to negate the usual tech. disparity and make it more a test of command ability and crew competency.

But I do think Picard might be relatively easy for Thrawn to read.

[CetaMan]

Okay, so we assume they have no previous knowledge of each other then. They just get brought in as individuals onto the alliance ships by Q.