Amph [NERRRD] Observations, rhetorical questions, comments & 55 Years of Star Trek (General Thread)

Humanity was in no shape to mount an organized resistance and that's why the Borg chose that time period (plus plot contrivance).

 

Oh, I know that. I was just asking that once the Borg were in the past, why didn't they transport the drones down at that time? Easy to assimilate then, with no resistance. Instead, they try to attack Cochrane's ship from orbit, then transport over to the Enterprise.

 

The Borg did attack the planet, specifically the launch site in Bozeman, which would have prevented First Contact if it wasn't for the interference of the Enterprise-E. Combined with the destruction of the sphere severely limiting the resources available to achieve the objective, this immediately made the Enterprise-E the main obstacle to the plan and a potential asset to ensure the objective could be achieved. I suppose they could have more aggressively assaulted the planet and established a base of operations on the surface, but would such a base of operations really be that effective with only 21st Century tech. The Borg didn't even have the capability to send a subspace signal without using the Enterprise-E's deflector dish.

 

I just choose to believe that the Borg time-travelling sphere was a one-off prototype they were trying out. It's the only way it makes sense at all really.

 

Yeah totally way more generic than The Next Generation.

...

 

Not really any different than Star Trek: Voyager, either. I'm okay with the name.

 

Actually yes it is.

 

I'm fine with it because Discovery is a space shuttle. So was Enterprise... but it was named after the Star Trek ship. But it existed in the Star Trek universe. But then that means Star Trek was a show in the Star Trek universe and--

 

Yeah, I like the name Discovery. Even the design may grow on me. It's the exact placement in the timeline which is my issue, I hope it is not another prequel. They should move forwards further in the timeline, not backwards.

 

I don't mind the name, the ship design itself... the saucer is ok, reminds me of the old Miranda-class (WoK's Reliant), don't much care for the engineering section (since it looks too much like TOS Klingon ships). Maybe a better design will come in Tuesday?

I think a Department of Temporal Investigation book touched on the Borg time travel thing. Basically, as part of the Temporal Cold War, most factions aren't insane or stupid enough to give the Borg a time machine (and agents make sure to keep the Borg from getting their hands on any time travel tech on assimilated worlds). The Sphere Builders from Enterprise gave the Borg a time machine, as after they got done renovating the galaxy, Borg drones wouldn't be able to survive their new laws of physics.

 

Enterprise and Discovery were the names of several rl Earth vessels. And Discovery was the name of another famous SF spaceship. There's not much mindbending going on. The showrunners must've finally chosen the name mainly on the premise of Trek itself ("...to discover new lifeforms and new civilizations").

 

I hope that Discovery is set in the 25th Century or beyond.
If it is another prequel show or set in the 23rd Century again, i think the producers are damn ignorant of the fan base, as most fans want to see new things instead of getting more of the old, including me.

 

Yes, many ships were named Enterprise. But the space shuttle prototype was explicitly named after the ship in Star Trek.

 

Yes, I know that. A shame that ship was just a prototype. I would've loved to have seen the launch of a spaceship named Enterprise in my lifetime.

 

Part of me hopes they save it for the first manned deep space vessel, if we ever get one.

 

Considering the current shape of the US space program, that's the Biggest If ever. I'd settle for the name of the craft that return us to the Moon, if not the first Mars lander.

 

I agree with that 100%. I don't have anything against prequels per se, but when there's too much stuff to consider regarding continuity, they should better not do it.

My personal preference is also the 25th century, probably 50-100 years after TNG's end. With that, you can close some open ends from 24th century stories, for example:

* Have the Bajorans joined the Federation after the end of the Dominion war?
* Have the Cardassians rebuilt their society into something better?
* What happened to the Founders and their allies?
* Are the Klingons now a part of the Federation (as hinted in a time travel episode of ENT) or are they again at odds with the Federation?
* What's up with the Romulan Empire after Romulus got destroyed by a supernova in 2387 of the prime timeline?
* What happened to the Borg after the destruction of their Transwarp network?

There's also the possibility for guest appearances of former Trek actors. Marina Sirtis, Kate Mulgrew and Jeri Ryan already have expressed interest for a guest appearance in a new show as their respective characters Deanna Troi, Kathryn Janeway and Seven of Nine. And I guess many more actors are also interested in a guest appearance.

With a pre-TOS show, you're limited. You cannot use the Founders, the Borg or the Bajorans. And you could just use ENT-actors for guest appearances, but not any actor from the other series (unless time travel is involved, but that would already cause continuity issues).

You're also limited in creating new species, whether it be allies or enemies. Best example: The Suliban and Xindi from ENT. They did play a major role in the 22nd century, but they don't appear or even get mentioned in the other series which are set in the future.
With a 25th-century show, this isn't a problem because you can create every new species you can come up with in your mind. Same for technology. You can create a new technology for the new show, which isn't possible when it's set in the past.


But sadly, that's the "Hollywood syndrome" today. Execs and studio bosses are too afraid to invent anything original, and rather want to rehash stuff which has been successful the first time. That was, from what I know, the thinking with ENT. Paramount wanted a series more similiar to TOS with less advanced technology than the TNG era and with a captain who had a similiar character like Kirk. ENT wasn't a success in the end. Then they decided to just outright reboot TOS with the Kelvin timeline movies, turning them into action popcorn flicks, but without the soul of Star Trek. The average movie goer liked them, but they certainly split the fanbase.

And while there's a big part of the fandom who wants a new Trek series set post-Nemesis/Romulus, there's also another part who wants the series to be post-TUC/pre-TNG because "oh, then we'll get these awesome ship designs and angsty klingons". Well, we saw those ship designs in many movies and episodes, and also those "angsty klingons". Enough of it. Bring on something really new.

 

My only problem with 25th Century is that it'd step on the toes of Star Trek Online, which I love.

 

"Everyone is sick and tired of ****ing prequels" ~ Bernie Sanders