RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,550
Posts: 5,422,189
Members: 24,805
Currently online: 430
Newest member: Dylancute

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Tears of the Prophets
By: Michelle on Sep 12

New Wizkids Attack Wing Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Coto Drama Sold To Fox
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Braga Inks Deal
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Remastered Original Series Re-release
By: T'Bonz on Sep 11

UK Trek Ships Calendar Debuts
By: T'Bonz on Sep 10

Quinto In The Slap
By: T'Bonz on Sep 9

Burton On Shatner’s Brown Bag Wine Tasting
By: T'Bonz on Sep 9

New Trek Trading Card Series
By: T'Bonz on Sep 8

New Red Shirt Diaries Episode
By: T'Bonz on Sep 8


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Deep Space Nine

Deep Space Nine What We Left Behind, we will always have here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 26 2014, 02:01 PM   #16
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: A question I have to ask

grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
I don't think it's strange that it kept the same name - story wise, starfleet must've given it that name for a reason in the first place and it's significantly more important for stationary bases to maintain recognized designations that it is for Starships (which is something we've already seen several times). I do think the motivation behind the new design is bizarre. DS9 (the cardassian station) is destroyed, so let's replace it with a new starbase design that's obviously a hybrid of Federation and Cardassian design. Why? Federation design has never used those kinds of pylons - they use huge open spaces where the ships drive to the inside of the station.
Truthfully, Federation space stations, like starships, could come in many different designs--with some designs more commonly encountered than others. The new station could very well utilize pylons and other design elements that are seen on other space stations scattered across Federation space and beyond, but combined in a new configuration here.

As far the new station retaining the Deep Space Nine designation, nobody said that it was strange or even that terribly unexpected, but destroying the original just to have a shiny new one kinda reeks of what happened with the Enterprise-D, getting rid of it in Generations just for shock value or (even worse, IMO) just to a have a brand-new ship in First Contact.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2014, 07:46 PM   #17
DS9forever
Fleet Captain
 
Re: A question I have to ask

RandyS wrote: View Post
DS9forever wrote: View Post
I think a new station gives the authors a lot of new storytelling possibilities for the DS9 series (the next novel DS9 novel The Missing is out at the end of the year) but I'm cool on the new design itself - I like that the pylons allude to the old Deep Space 9 but I don't like the 'dome' area in the middle. The new runabout landing areas are cool though.

The DS9 command crew has nearly changed beyond recognition, a bit too much for me - Miles O'Brien and Nog are the only regulars from the series serving aboard.
Yet more reasons why we need novels set within the seven year run of the series.
Pocket Books don't seem interested in doing that - in the past decade I think only Hollow Men (the sequel to "In the Pale Moonlight") was set during the series.
DS9forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2014, 08:05 PM   #18
lvsxy808
Rear Admiral
 
lvsxy808's Avatar
 
Location: London
Re: A question I have to ask

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote: View Post
I haven't read it.. can someone fill me in (maybe with spoiler codes) the short version on how it was destroyed?


SPCTRE wrote: View Post
I hope nuDS9 has a conference room with a golden model of the old DS9.
IIRC, it has a specific memorial area that contains both that and a piece of the actual bulkhead rescued from the wreckage.

.
__________________
DS9-R fans! Want to know what happened after The Soul Key?

Read Deep Space Nine, Season 10
All 22 eps available to read on-screen or download and keep!
lvsxy808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2014, 09:38 PM   #19
Ithekro
Captain
 
Ithekro's Avatar
 
Location: Republic of California
Re: A question I have to ask

I seem to recall that a starbase was destroyed in the Earth-Romulan War and later rebuilt with the same name. So there would be precident to keeping the name Deep Space 9 for a base in the exact same location at the previous station.
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26 2014, 10:01 PM   #20
-Brett-
Rear Admiral
 
Re: A question I have to ask

It's okay as just some space station, but without the station itself, hardly any of the characters associated with it, or anything even tangentially related to its storylines, there's no point in calling it "Deep Space Nine".
-Brett- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 27 2014, 09:50 AM   #21
grendelsbayne
Commander
 
grendelsbayne's Avatar
 
Location: Netherlands
Re: A question I have to ask

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
I don't think it's strange that it kept the same name - story wise, starfleet must've given it that name for a reason in the first place and it's significantly more important for stationary bases to maintain recognized designations that it is for Starships (which is something we've already seen several times). I do think the motivation behind the new design is bizarre. DS9 (the cardassian station) is destroyed, so let's replace it with a new starbase design that's obviously a hybrid of Federation and Cardassian design. Why? Federation design has never used those kinds of pylons - they use huge open spaces where the ships drive to the inside of the station.
Truthfully, Federation space stations, like starships, could come in many different designs--with some designs more commonly encountered than others. The new station could very well utilize pylons and other design elements that are seen on other space stations scattered across Federation space and beyond, but combined in a new configuration here.

As far the new station retaining the Deep Space Nine designation, nobody said that it was strange or even that terribly unexpected, but destroying the original just to have a shiny new one kinda reeks of what happened with the Enterprise-D, getting rid of it in Generations just for shock value or (even worse, IMO) just to a have a brand-new ship in First Contact.
Several people have said, though, that the name should have been changed as a result of the new station - I disagree with that.

It is a fair point that we don't know what all the Federation starbases look like, but off the top of my head I don't remember any single instance of any federation construction using that kind of free standing pylons, so I stand by my original opinion that it's just weird, mainly because it's so obviously designed as an 'homage' to the original DS9 even though the original DS9 was *not* Federation built.

I do agree it smacks of shock value, which I find especially stupid since it's not even being done in a visual medium. The only thing people are getting to replace the DS9 they watched for 7 years is a handful of artists renderings. Really dumb, imo.
grendelsbayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 27 2014, 08:04 PM   #22
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: A question I have to ask

grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
I don't think it's strange that it kept the same name - story wise, starfleet must've given it that name for a reason in the first place and it's significantly more important for stationary bases to maintain recognized designations that it is for Starships (which is something we've already seen several times). I do think the motivation behind the new design is bizarre. DS9 (the cardassian station) is destroyed, so let's replace it with a new starbase design that's obviously a hybrid of Federation and Cardassian design. Why? Federation design has never used those kinds of pylons - they use huge open spaces where the ships drive to the inside of the station.
Truthfully, Federation space stations, like starships, could come in many different designs--with some designs more commonly encountered than others. The new station could very well utilize pylons and other design elements that are seen on other space stations scattered across Federation space and beyond, but combined in a new configuration here.

As far the new station retaining the Deep Space Nine designation, nobody said that it was strange or even that terribly unexpected, but destroying the original just to have a shiny new one kinda reeks of what happened with the Enterprise-D, getting rid of it in Generations just for shock value or (even worse, IMO) just to a have a brand-new ship in First Contact.
Several people have said, though, that the name should have been changed as a result of the new station - I disagree with that.
Oh, definitely the new station could have had a new name--but then it would have meant that the story of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine had ended for Pocket Books. By calling the new station DS9 too, they can continue publishing new books in the series, just with a new and better station than the old one.
It is a fair point that we don't know what all the Federation starbases look like, but off the top of my head I don't remember any single instance of any federation construction using that kind of free standing pylons, so I stand by my original opinion that it's just weird, mainly because it's so obviously designed as an 'homage' to the original DS9 even though the original DS9 was *not* Federation built.
I don't think there's any argument that the new station's configuration was inspired by the original to some degree, but some of the parts may not be totally unique just as some parts may be.
I do agree it smacks of shock value, which I find especially stupid since it's not even being done in a visual medium. The only thing people are getting to replace the DS9 they watched for 7 years is a handful of artists renderings. Really dumb, imo.
But...but...it's the kewl thing to do in Trek...
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 27 2014, 09:53 PM   #23
Richard Baker
Commander
 
Richard Baker's Avatar
 
Location: Warrior, AL
Re: A question I have to ask

I need to see more it it to decide, but I do not care for the huge bay windows in the middle- especially since the old station regularly came under attack and was eventually destroyed.
Richard Baker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 27 2014, 10:29 PM   #24
bbjeg
Vice Admiral
 
bbjeg's Avatar
 
Location: ˙ɐlnqǝu sıɥʇ uı ʞɔnʇS
Re: A question I have to ask

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
... the new station could have had a new name--but then it would have meant that the story of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine had ended for Pocket Books. By calling the new station DS9 too, they can continue publishing new books in the series, just with a new and better station than the old one...
Which is why I say they should have gone with DS9A.
bbjeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 27 2014, 11:21 PM   #25
Bad Thoughts
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Containment Area for Relocated Yankees
Re: A question I have to ask

bbjeg wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
... the new station could have had a new name--but then it would have meant that the story of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine had ended for Pocket Books. By calling the new station DS9 too, they can continue publishing new books in the series, just with a new and better station than the old one...
Which is why I say they should have gone with DS9A.
And when O'Brien is unfrozen after 100 years, gets drunk on "chewing gum," he can ask the holodeck to show him "DS9, no bloody ... ."
Bad Thoughts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2014, 05:35 AM   #26
-Brett-
Rear Admiral
 
Re: A question I have to ask

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Oh, definitely the new station could have had a new name--but then it would have meant that the story of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine had ended for Pocket Books.
That ship sailed a while ago. They might as well have made it official.
-Brett- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2014, 04:48 PM   #27
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: A question I have to ask

-Brett- wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Oh, definitely the new station could have had a new name--but then it would have meant that the story of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine had ended for Pocket Books.
That ship sailed a while ago. They might as well have made it official.
They just released a new eBook featuring Quark on the new station under the Deep Space Nine banner, so they're not done with DS9.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ClTSSOPBZN...d%2BFound).jpg
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.