Only insofar as the best crew in the fleet will have a higher chance of success if you also give them the best tools.
But if that's true, then it means that skill and tools both matter. It's a combination. Thus, if you pit two ships against each other ("against" meaning either an actual confrontation of some sort, or simply comparing their performances), then
both elements matter. Exceptional tools could make up for "only ok" skill, thus meaning that the exceptional crew equipped with only ok tools is not s shoe-in to win this contest.
When it comes down to it, then, the technical difference between a Galaxy class starship and, say, an Excelsior class wouldn't be as large as the difference between their respective crews and the staff in charge.
I disagree. There certainly is evidence that the Ent-D is supposed to have "the best", by and large, that Starfleet has to offer. There is no actual evidence that the gulf between "the best" and "the average" - or even "the best" and "the worst" within Starfleet's ranks - is so HUGE, as to imply that the difference in skill between the Ent-D crew and the
Majestic crew is so massive as to outdo the technological difference between the cutting edge
Galaxy (as of the beginning of TNG anyway) and the 79 (or more) year-old
Miranda.
(I chose
Miranda because it actually seems to perform like an upgraded but very old ship;
Excelsior, on the other hand, doesn't. Its overhaul and upgrade capacity is clearly higher - ludicrously high, if the
Lakota is any indication - so it's sort of a special case and bad for this discussion, I felt).
Absolutely they can. To use a less extreme example: if you put the DS9 crew on Sisko's old "Saratoga" and sent them in a Peak Performance style wargame against the Valiant and its red squad rookies, odds strongly favor Saratoga's victory.
Yes, but that's not what I said. "Red squad rookies" =/= "a competent (but not amazing like Picard's) crew." Of course
cadets are going to lose to seasoned veterans.
That's what I mean by "within certain limits." Apart from the fact that a Miranda class wouldn't FIT the entire crew of the Enterprise, there's something to be said for a general weight class for power parity; an Ambassdor or even an Excelsior class would kick a huge amount of ass if it swapped crews with the Enterprise-D.
Are you saying that the size and purpose of a ship DO make a difference, but technological sophistication and power output capabilities DON'T?
Outperform the Enterprise? That depends on kinds of missions it's performing. The question we're discussing is whether or not it would outperform EVERY SHIP IN THE FLEET,
It is? I'm certainly not trying to discuss that, because I don't believe
any one ship would consistently outperform
every other ship in the fleet. The Ent-D crew is supposed to be the best from within the ranks of highly capable people (Starfleet as a whole), but they are not supposed to be superhuman. They are not just going to always be flying five steps ahead of literally
everybody else.
and that depends entirely on the crew. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that there are some hotshot officers out there who are even better than Picard et al, but from what we know of Starfleet, it seems the case that if someone like that was wandering around the fleet, Starfleet would have had them assigned to the Enterprise by now.
That doesn't make any sense. You would make sure that the
Enterprise has a top of the line crew, yes. But you wouldn't route EVERY top-level officer to that one ship. That would be incredibly stupid and would seriously gut the effectiveness of Starfleet as an organization.
Sure it's both. But it's MOSTLY the people.
It IS both? Or it isn't? You've been giving mixed signals on this point. I contend that it is definitely both; if you agree, then we only part ways on just how much of a role each part plays, and just how much better than other crews Picard's really is.
The Galaxy class was already in service at the time and Enterprise was not the only one in service. Enterprise is "the strongest ship in the Federation" for reasons that have very little to do with its design.
No, not "very little." That the
Galaxy is one of the UFP's premier classes is part of the equation.
Really, when you think about it, there is no way for the Borg to
know with any certainty that these people are "the best" in the manner you are describing. How would they determine this? Scan the crew? And compare them to what? They've never encountered any other Starfleet crew. I think it's more because Starfleet
bills the
Enterprise-D as the strongest ship in their fleet. It's got a special registry, it's "the flagship", we staff it with the best officers, etc. They sell the thing as being the #1 best and most important ship they have. Which is kind of a dumb thing to do if you ask me, but the point is, they do it, and the Borg would have been aware of that (from scanning their records). This combined with scanning the ship itself and measuring its technological ability, are what lead to their declaration.
It kinda DOES, actually. It's an ontological principle of the story premise: the crew of the Enterprise is the best crew in the fleet, because Star Trek is about the best crew in the fleet. If it was about somebody else -- say, the most important space station in the Alpha Quadrant or the farthest-traveled starship in history -- it would be Deep Space Nine or Voyager.
Yes, but again, best crew by what margin? I still reject the notion that the difference between top, average, and bottom Starfleet crews is all that huge.
And "hero ship syndrome" is very much an out-of-universe thing. In-universe, there's no logical basis for the crews under Kirk, Picard, Sisko, and Janeway being exceptional special awesome snowflakes, and everybody else being "okay".
Out of universe and in-universe, it's still a given that any starship is only as good as its crew.
In the same way that any piece of equipment is only as good as those who wield it. But the quality of the equipment still matters. I'm certainly not trying to say that crew skill ISN'T very important, but it sounds like you believe it's about 90% of what determines how a ship will perform.
If the Sovereigns are stronger than the Galaxy classes, it's primarily because they are given better crews.
That doesn't make any sense at all.
How would that even work? Did the
Galaxys have the best crews of
their time? If so, did they all just transfer to
Sovereigns en masse in order to ensure that now THAT class of ships has the best crews? That's silly. And if that didn't happen, then it would be virtually impossible, logistically, to intentionally create a situation where the 2-3 ships of this new have "better crews" than the 15-20 (or however many) ships of this other class.
Besides, they wouldn't design ships around the presence or absence of an exceptional crew. They would design them around the AVERAGE Starfleet crew, since that's what the majority of officers and enlisted people in the entire fleet would be. A new ship, therefore, is going to offer technological edges over older ships of the same general type/purpose. These advances are not the be-all end-all, but they do
matter.
but without Worf at tactical and Wesley (or at least Ro Laren) at the helm, chances are it probably wouldn't.
I assume you are not being literal, and that you don't actually mean that ONLY Worf (or Wesley or Ro) is going to be able to get a high level of performance out of the ship, i.e. just those specific characters and no one else. Surely there are other tactical and helm officers on other ships that are almost as good, or even just as good.
And again, I still don't agree with how much importance is being placed on the crew. Let's say the
Sovereign, in addition to already being smaller, is much more maneuverable, due to advances in impulse engine design and thruster control. (Yes, I am making this up for this example). The increased maneuverability over the
Galaxy is more than what it should have simply by being newer and smaller; specific new systems are incorporated to make it
much more maneuverable. Then, this super-maneuverable
Sovereign, with Lieutenant Joe Schmoe at the helm, (a good, but not exceptional, helm officer) goes up against a
Galaxy, with Wesley or Ro at the helm. Now, is the
Sovereign going to run
rings around em? No. The superior skill of the
Galaxy's pilot will compensate for the discrepancy, and help keep them close. But will the
Galaxy even match, let alone outmaneuver, the
Sovereign? In my opinion, no.
