Yeah, Warp 10 happened in TNG and nothing odd happened to the crew. Still back by dinner
Do you think they'll keep making Abramsverse movies after #3?
- Thread starter ColeMercury
- Start date
Yeah, Warp 10 happened in TNG and nothing odd happened to the crew. Still back by dinner
Didn't Scotty admit to LaForge that he BS'd lots of the limits when he wrote the manuals?
The Warp 10 maximum speed is one of the dumbest things Rodenberry put in place for TNG, I'd rather have Warp 14 or 15 than Warp 9.9999eyeroll.
What difference does it make? It's all completely arbitrary.
To be honest, I think I'd like them to be finished after #3. I have enjoyed the last two well enough, but I've become more a fan of complete stories than ongoing series. Of course, this will depend on how #3 ends. It could remain fairly open, but I'd like the last film to know it's the last film, so that it can give us closure.
I would much rather see Trek return to TV in some form and deal with new characters.
I would much rather see Trek return to TV in some form and deal with new characters.
"Maximum warp" just seems to mean the maximum speed they have a preset for. They can force the ship to go faster if they need to.
In TOS they go about 8, maybe 9 for dramatics. In Gamesters they went up to 11.1 without alien interference and without the ship blowing up (barely, but it didn't).
It's however the hell fast they can make it go without going boom basically.
Yes.
Star Trek technology has always existed at the speed of the plot, and warp speed only as quantifiable as the number of on-screen whooshes.
STiD had a faster plot so the technology worked at a faster speed. To use this as a knock against it is silly, as faster plotting is something of which the franchise was in desperate need.
Star Trek technology has always existed at the speed of the plot, and warp speed only as quantifiable as the number of on-screen whooshes.
STiD had a faster plot so the technology worked at a faster speed. To use this as a knock against it is silly, as faster plotting is something of which the franchise was in desperate need.
A faster plot doesn't require faster speed. If the script and editing were handled differently the reliance on Ludicrous Speed could have been avoided while keeping the fast pacing intact.
A faster plot doesn't require faster speed. If the script and editing were handled differently the reliance on Ludicrous Speed could have been avoided while keeping the fast pacing intact.
Totally agree. I'm tired of the "speed of plot" excuse. Yes, I realize it applies to TOS, TNG, and nuTrek, but it comes off as lazy and unrealistic. The entire idea that STiD takes place in a 24-36 hour period is just plain dumb. Did the writers think they audience would be bored if the story covered a longer period of time?
I mean, what's the point of transwarp beaming if you beat the ship across the galaxy by only an hour or so?
Adding an extra line of dialogue noting the specific passage of speed and/or time is meaningless and unnecessarily superfluous to anyone who isn't a pedant.
It's only ludicrous speed because you perceive it to be--under the erroneous supposition that magical space ship speed must be quantified.
The time/speed the Falcon traversed the distance between Tatooine and Alderaan was the exact time and speed necessary to fit in a quick game of Dejarik and allow Luke to fiddle with his lightsaber. It was the speed of the plot and completely arbitrary.
There was, however, neither a plot nor a thematic reason to denote the time/speed/distance between Earth and Kronos. So they didn't.
It's only ludicrous speed because you perceive it to be--under the erroneous supposition that magical space ship speed must be quantified.
The time/speed the Falcon traversed the distance between Tatooine and Alderaan was the exact time and speed necessary to fit in a quick game of Dejarik and allow Luke to fiddle with his lightsaber. It was the speed of the plot and completely arbitrary.
There was, however, neither a plot nor a thematic reason to denote the time/speed/distance between Earth and Kronos. So they didn't.
World building is important. If you change the rules whenever you want for the sake of convenience then the universe that you created feels less real.
I disagree. Distances and travel times have purposefully been given a standard in the Trek universe (at least an honest effort). For all the fanwanking the writers paid in the script, it's perplexing they ignored this one element.
On that note, comparisons to Star Wars are irrelevant. We have no idea what "hyperdrive" is or how fast it goes, because no one has ever tried to explain it before.
Nonsense.
Only in your imagination.
Because the "element" was irrelevant.
Also, fanwaking? Really?
Warp drive have never been explained either--outside of 50 years of inconstancy. Show me a tech manual, and I'll show you at least one episode or film that contradicts it.
I know there are some who think everything needs to be wrapped up into a nice little uniform package of compliance. But that's just not how fiction works. Take the Bible, for example.
Then you're just tired of Star Trek - it's always worked that way.
Uh, what? Care to add more to that statement?
Trek's "World building" was haphazard.
It seems there are two camps here. The ones that want a certain modicum of continuity (what you call world-building), and the other camp that claims to eschew all notions of same. If the characters changed names and species from episode to episode, they'd chalk it up as "Fiction!", and tell the other to suck it up.
I suspect each will never see the other's point of view.
Similar threads
