Why do people keep saying Voyager weakened the Borg?

[zar]

Anwar wrote:

---

, you only suspect Schneider in the more obsessed one.

I was paraphrasing what you said:

the size chart is based on guys even more obsessed than us

I meant he's more obsessed than you or me, not more than the guy who did the chart. You're trying to do your own analysis now, but your analysis is shallow and inconclusive as I explained. I suspect both Schneider and the chart creator used more useful shots than the ultimately meaningless one you posted.

The problem is you're placing higher importance on special effects shots, which have a known history of inconsistencies (even the chart creator acknowledges this in his FAQ) and ignoring all other evidence that points to the fact that they were intended to be of the same base cube.

Anwar wrote:

---

In all Borg appearances of the Assimilation Cube, no matter how far away, it's ALWAYS been shown to be much more massive compared to the Galaxy class than VOY was to that Tactical Cube.

Nonsense.



This shot is much more informative than the VOY one you gave. There's no ambiguity about distance.

First of all, since the cube is in front of the Enterprise, we know that the distance of the Enterprise is the minimum distance the cube could be from the camera.

Not only that, but this shot continues to stretch on until both the cube and the Enterprise pass by the camera, at a steady speed. From that we learn that the cube is at least one full cube length ahead of the Enterprise and thus closer to the camera, and thus smaller. Do the simple math and this shot puts this cube at a much smaller size than both the one in Q Who and the tactical cube.

Luminus wrote:

---

Tactical Cube length: approx. 3000m
Cube variant 2 length: approx. 3000m
Cube variant 1 length: "a huge vessel" ??? Not seen again, after BOBW.

Cube variant 1 is the largest cube we've ever seen (credit to Anwar). The speculation is that borg cubes grow as new technology is added and since this cube was traveling to the Alpha Quadrant, it had grown in that time. This can actually be confirmed by Enterprise's "Regeneration" episode and TNG's "Descent" episodes.

That is why that cube in the chart is so large.

Actually the chart doesn't show any distinction between variant 1 and 2, it only has 2 cube types: Assimilation and Tactical. For the larger Assimilation cube it uses the size of variant-2: 3000M, but then it puts Tactical at 1500M which contradicts its own source.

[Anwar]

This is Trek, we use these sort of discrepancies to solve things all the time. This one just happens to fit well.

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/sc...borg_ships.htm

The article says that the Borg Cube from TNG was a "massive" ship with no specific measurements. Compared to the VOY Cubes where the specifications are given.

Hell, that shot YOU used doesn't match up with other shots in BOBW itself. Like when they fight the Cube for the first time or when they fly away from it when it's self-destructing.

[zar]

Anwar wrote:

---

Hell, that shot YOU used doesn't match up with other shots in BOBW itself.

Exactly my point!

The problem is you're placing higher importance on special effects shots, which have a known history of inconsistencies (even the chart creator acknowledges this in his FAQ) and ignoring all other evidence that points to the fact that they were intended to be of the same base cube.

You're the one who said ALL the shots from TNG ALWAYS show the cube as bigger than in VOY. You were wrong; I provided evidence. Accept it for once instead of changing the subject.

Anwar wrote:

---

The article says that the Borg Cube from TNG was a "massive" ship with no specific measurements. Compared to the VOY Cubes where the specifications are given.

He's talking specifically about the one from Q Who. The ones from BOBW and FC are the same as the ones in VOY.

[Anwar]

The article says variant one was from Q Who? and BOBW. From FC onwards the type seen were Variant 2.

Hell, the perspective used can even say that the Cube in BOBW was still massive and it's just the pursuit speeds and how fast we see them that make it seem smaller.

[T'Girl]

Anwar wrote:

---

it seems the same size in both images.

To me as well. If you look at the sizes of the docking arms (towers?) in comparison to each ship, the Enterprise Dee is clearly significantly larger than the Voyager.

Zar, use the docking arm as a fixed reference point.

zar wrote:

---

If you're going to argue that the cubes in VOY were supposed to be smaller cubes because of how big Voyager looked in the effects shots, despite every other source confirming that they were supposed to be the same size ...

What you're missing zar, is that "every other source confirming" can't actual confirm anything. Only what is in the episodes is canon. What production staff, writers, artists "intended" is completely meaningless.

... I don't know what to tell ya.

You might simply concede that Anwar is right.

[zar]

Anwar wrote:

---

Hell, the perspective used can even say that the Cube in BOBW was still massive and it's just the pursuit speeds and how fast we see them that make it seem smaller.

No, you can't say that. The cube is in front of the Enterprise. Therefore it's closer to the camera, and we know that a direct size comparison would require us to place the cube farther back to be at the same distance as the Enterprise, thus making it even smaller.

Since there is no acceleration or deceleration throughout the whole shot we can count how long it takes Enterprise to reach the same point as the cube was to determine just how far apart they are.

But even ignoring that, this obviously can't be showing what you suggest. Even if we imagine that the starships are nose to nose with the cubes in both shots, it can't possibly work out that way:

http://i.imgur.com/U0YTr.png

I scaled down the VOY image so the reference points (the starships) match up, based on the widths of the saucers. I've given this as much leeway as I can manage to, but they still come out as roughly the same size. And you're claiming that the one on the right is over twice as long.

T'Girl wrote:

---

What you're missing zar, is that "every other source confirming" can't actual confirm anything. Only what is in the episodes is canon. What production staff, writers, artists "intended" is completely meaningless.

As you've seen, the effects are often inconsistent. Sometimes they agree with Anwar's claim, but often they don't. He's choosing to ignore all the ones that don't AND dialog that suggests they aren't weaker ships AND the behind-the-scenes info, all just to defend the idea that VOY didn't make the Borg seem weaker.

Now I'm all for suspension of disbelief, but none of this flimsy justification changes the fact that VOY made no attempt to give us the impression that Voyager was up against a weaker version of cubes than before. It did just the opposite.

T'Girl wrote:

---

You might simply concede that Anwar is right.

I'm willing to do that should the circumstance ever arise.

[Anwar]

So what do you want, for them to just say "Huh, all these ships are smaller and weaker than the one that attacked Earth."?

Seriously, no wonder folks says things were dumbed down in later Trek, subtlety flies over peoples' heads!

[zar]

Anwar wrote:

---

So what do you want, for them to just say "Huh, all these ships are smaller and weaker than the one that attacked Earth."?

Seriously, no wonder folks says things were dumbed down in later Trek, subtlety flies over peoples' heads!

So you're suggesting that they intended to imply that they were smaller and weaker?

...Even though we already know from official sources that they intended the exact opposite?

[Anwar]

If they did come out and say it, would you accept that or would you just complain some more?

If it's the latter, again VOY is no-win scenario.

[zar]

Why wouldn't I accept it? I'm basing everything I'm saying on reality: what actually happened. If something different had happened, I would have naturally reached a different conclusion.

Now you, on the other hand, seem to be basing your conclusions on something other than reality. You're now claiming that the creators were subtlely hinting at the direct opposite of what they were actually trying to create!

[Anwar]

zar wrote:

---

Why wouldn't I accept it?

Because nothing VOY does is accepted by the audience? Regardless of in-show justifications or otherwise?

I mean, they showed that there were other aliens tougher than the Borg and got slammed as "Heretics" for doing so.

[zar]

Ahh, so here we are at the inevitable turning point of all these threads, where you turn the discussion over to how oppressive we critics are for comments allegedly made who-knows-when by who-knows-whom. Your very own signature Godwin's Law.

[Anwar]

In other words, you won't try to say "Of course not, if they said that the Borg ships in VOY were all smaller and weaker I'd buy that explanation!"

Thus proving my point: Nothing VOY could do would be accepted.

[zar]

Okay:

If they said that the Borg ships in VOY were all smaller and weaker, I'd buy that explanation.

In fact, I can still buy that explanation even though it didn't exist. Like I said, that's part of suspension of disbelief... You can retcon the story to make it make more sense, but you can't claim that that was deliberately a "subtle" part of it in the first place. That's ludicrous.

No, they tried to make us believe they had tougher, scarier ships, but then ended up making them feel less threatening. That answers the question in this thread's title.

[exodus]

I think many of those that say Voyager weaken the Borg aren't IMO considering replay value nor the quality of HD.

The Borg eps. viewed as stand alone eps. IMO are suspenseful and often full of drama & action, add the HD quality to it and just hearing the Borg is a thrill all over again. Voyager was always a show geared to bringing back the casual viewers TNG once had.

I think the producers and writers of the series always had this idea in mind of rewatching the series as mostly stand alone eps., which IMO still keeps the awesomeness and fear factor of the Borg intact.