Who was the more dangerous enemy, the Borg or the Dominion?

[Bry_Sinclair]

MacLeod wrote:

---

With the Borg there is no possibility of reason.

Janeway managed to form a temporary alliance with them, granted they did turn on her once the Species 8472 threat was over, but it does show that under some circumstances the can be reasoned with.

It'll just come round and bite you in the backside though.

[DAYoung]

You_Will_Fail wrote:

---

The Borg stopped making sense as an enemy when we saw just how many cubes they actually had, not to mention their ability to time travel whenever they wanted like in First Contact.

Agreed.

As an aside, I suspect the 'real Borg' (i.e. their first incarnations as unitemporal hive minds without the Queen) was simply too difficult to dramatise.

In real life, they'd be horribly threatening. In film, writers/studios want a nice, neat villain character, who is nasty enough to be a good antagonist but not so nasty that they do what's necessary to win (e.g. go back in time to right now and assimilate the bejesus out of Earth).

[You_Will_Fail]

First Contact's original script more sense regarding the strength of one cube, as it opened with the Enterprise and a fleet destroying several borg cubes as new anti-borg technology had been developed.

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

DAYoung wrote:

---

Agreed.

As an aside, I suspect the 'real Borg' (i.e. their first incarnations as unitemporal hive minds without the Queen) was simply too difficult to dramatise.

In real life, they'd be horribly threatening. In film, writers/studios want a nice, neat villain character, who is nasty enough to be a good antagonist but not so nasty that they do what's necessary to win (e.g. go back in time to right now and assimilate the bejesus out of Earth).

Perhaps they did - but in doing so simply created alternate realities where the Borg appeared in the past and assimilated Earth, leaving this one unaffected.

The Deep Space Nine "Millenium" novel trilogy mentioned the Klingons trying something similar in the 23rd century - war fleets were built and slingshotted into the past, never to be seen nor heard from again. Some suspected something went wrong and they were destroyed en route, others believed they conquered Earth in alternate realities.

[You_Will_Fail]

KingDaniel wrote:

---

Perhaps they did - but in doing so simply created alternate realities where the Borg appeared in the past and assimilated Earth, leaving this one unaffected.

Yeah because that's how time travel has always worked in Star Trek. Jeez, you're a pain.

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

You_Will_Fail wrote:

---

Yeah because that's how time travel has always worked in Star Trek. Jeez, you're a pain.

The Millenium trilogy was released in 1999. It was written by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens, who went on to write several episodes of Enterprise's fourth season.

Where do you think JJ Abrams and friends got the idea?

[DAYoung]

KingDaniel wrote:

---

Perhaps they did - but in doing so simply created alternate realities where the Borg appeared in the past and assimilated Earth, leaving this one unaffected.

But Star Trek only makes sense when we assume one or two continuous timelines (e.g. normal Trek and mirror Trek). Otherwise there's no narrative.

And in the timelines we're viewing, the Borg are strangely inept villains, who have time-travel technology but can't seem to figure out what we can: that the further back Borg go, the more defenceless and vulnerable Earth is.

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

But Star Trek only makes sense when we assume one or two continuous timelines (e.g. normal Trek and mirror Trek). Otherwise there's no narrative.

Yet Next Gen's "Parallels" explicitly describes an infinite multiverse, branching for every possible outcome of any event, anywhere, ever.

Even Stargate, which treats time travel the same as Trek usually does, describes time travel creating alternate universes in "Before I Sleep"

IMO, saying the drama of an episode or movie is ruined because "in another tineline it went the other way", is equivelent to saying that the drama's ruined because, if anything bad happens at all, why dont they use time travel to undo it later?

The infinite other possibilities don't matter to the world the characters of our story are living in, therefore it might as well be one timeline. If that makes any sense.

And in the timelines we're viewing,the Borg are strangely inept villains,who have time-travel technology but can't seem to figure out what we can: that the further back Borg go, the more defenceless and vulnerable Earth is.

Ditto Terminator.

[You_Will_Fail]

"Parallels" was basically a one-off in that sense.
Time travel in Star Trek has mostly always based itself on a single timeline which can be changed and unchanged through time travel. Stop acting as if all of Trek is based off the reboot, its beyond grating.

[DAYoung]

KingDaniel wrote:

---

Yet Next Gen's "Parallels" explicitly describes an infinite multiverse, branching for every possible outcome of any event, anywhere, ever.

Yes, but in another universe "Parallels" described the opposite.

Oh. Wait. No.

Anyway, my point is not that there isn't a multi-verse in Star Trek (or, indeed, in reality).

My point is that, when it comes to writing about the Borg in the few universes we follow, the authors often write implausible characters and plots.

If we can't speak this way, then no writing is ever bad, because in another universe the characters and plots are more plausible.

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

You_Will_Fail wrote:

---

"Parallels" was basically a one-off in that sense.
Time travel in Star Trek has mostly always based itself on a single timeline which can be changed and unchanged through time travel. Stop acting as if all of Trek is based off the reboot, its beyond grating.

Key word: Mostly.

I simply took some of the other ways Trek has used time travel (which, as I said, predate the reboot by a decade) and suggested it to reconcile the Borg having time travel technology with the Borg seemingly severely underusing their time travel technology.

Get over me. And get over the fact that Trek offers more possibilities than just the ones in the episodes and movies YOU think should count.

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

DAYoung wrote:

---

Yes, but in another universe "Parallels" described the opposite.

Oh. Wait. No.

Anyway, my point is not that there isn't a multi-verse in Star Trek (or, indeed, in reality).

My point is that, when it comes to writing about the Borg in the few universes we follow, the authors often write implausible characters and plots.

If we can't speak this way, then no writing is ever bad, because in another universe the characters and plots are more plausible.

Actually, as preposterous as it sounds (and I'll believe it when I meet my duplicate) the sci-fi style multiverse may be a real thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation

And yes, the writing of Trek is frequently inconsistant and implausible. You'll get no argument there!

[DAYoung]

KingDaniel wrote:

---

Actually, as preposterous as it sounds (and I'll believe it when I meet my duplicate) the sci-fi style multiverse may be a real thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation

Yes, that's what I was referring to.

[You_Will_Fail]

I'm sure DAYoung was aware of the theory, you didn't need to link a wikipedia article

Frankly I think sci-fi works best when we don't subscribe to the notion (and that's all it really is) that there are infinite realities

[DonIago]

I rather enjoy the Myriad Universe stories.