The Post-Burn Galaxy thread or "Post-Apocalypse or Slightly Used?"

[Fateor]

I'll have to rewatch as I missed that specific line - could argue they mean "remaining Klingon space" if really determined to reconcile the two but fair point

I mean... There's a lot of problems with that line in general...

Like... Did they just forget terraforming is a thing?

 

[Weyoun 251]

I mean... There's a lot of problems with that line in general...

Like... Did they just forget terraforming is a thing?

Could be - in the way modern earth is pushing back against destroying grassland/forest for urbanisation/industry for environmental reasons - that in the Trek universe they have deemed terraforming to be a practice that should not be carried out

 

[CT_Phipps]

I mean... There's a lot of problems with that line in general...

Like... Did they just forget terraforming is a thing?

Terraforming may not be an option when the entire galaxy is on fire.

But yes, I have no trouble believing all Klingon worlds were rendered uninhabitable...if the premise of the episode is finding a new homeworld.

If you had other worlds, you wouldn't need one.

No, the Klingons were Quarianed or BSGed.

 

[Fateor]

Terraforming may not be an option when the entire galaxy is on fire.

They live in a universe where Terraforming an entire planet only requires a toddler sized device.

 

[CT_Phipps]

They live in a universe where Terraforming an entire planet only requires a toddler sized device.

Yeah but Star Trek functions on the premise of, "We can do this thing in this episode that will never ever show up again and not solve the problem in the next episode. TNG's terraforming was a multi-year process that involved lots and lots of machines rather than the Genesis device that they at least invented a thing that made it unstable."

Anyway, the Klingons were members of the Federation in Daniels times so "every Klingon world was rendered uninhabitable" means that the Federation lost a world.

 

[Fateor]

Yeah but Star Trek functions on the premise of, "We can do this thing in this episode that will never ever show up again and not solve the problem in the next episode. TNG's terraforming was a multi-year process that involved lots and lots of machines rather than the Genesis device that they at least invented a thing that made it unstable."

Anyway, the Klingons were members of the Federation in Daniels times so "every Klingon world was rendered uninhabitable" means that the Federation lost a world.

Lower Decks had Genesis perfected and mass produced for use in Terraforming to the point there were Ferengi knockoff's.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah but Star Trek functions on the premise of, "We can do this thing in this episode that will never ever show up again and not solve the problem in the next episode. TNG's terraforming was a multi-year process that involved lots and lots of machines rather than the Genesis device that they at least invented a thing that made it unstable."

Anyway, the Klingons were members of the Federation in Daniels times so "every Klingon world was rendered uninhabitable" means that the Federation lost a world.

Yup. The tech was locked away in the secret warehouse.

 

[CT_Phipps]

Lower Decks had Genesis perfected and mass produced for use in Terraforming to the point there were Ferengi knockoff's.

The Ferengi selling a thing is not a guarantee it is a good thing. Especially since it was in the weapons collection of a Ferengi not the terraforming one.

Also, in PIC, they have a Genesis Device at the Daystrom Institute so it's clearly not been "normalized"

 

[Fateor]

The Ferengi selling a thing is not a guarantee it is a good thing. Especially since it was in the weapons collection of a Ferengi not the terraforming one.

Also, in PIC, they have a Genesis Device at the Daystrom Institute so it's clearly not been "normalized"

The Ferengi specifically referred to it as a device used for terraforming planets.

And it was a Genesis Mark II on display.

 

[CT_Phipps]

The Ferengi specifically referred to it as a device used for terraforming planets.

I mean it does do that.

But it was on a ship of weapons banned by Grand Nangus Rom.

 

[camdudetenger2018]

Bit of a stretch given that the Flux pretty much erased reality, and the Burn made dilithium engines go boom.

the flux did destory everything like planets space stations space ships and most species

 

[tenmei]

the flux did destory everything like planets space stations space ships and most species

But thw Burn didn't destroy reality so your comparison is massively incorrect

 

[CT_Phipps]

But thw Burn didn't destroy reality so your comparison is massively incorrect

No, that would be an Omega molecule.

 

[CT_Phipps]

A large theme of the Burn is the regression of technology, society, and attitudes that rub a lot of fans the wrong way. But at the heart of the issue is that the rebuilding requires people to learn the same lessons they learned before. I don't think that the technology of the 32nd century is much better than the technology of the 24th if not worse. The knowledge wasn't so much lost as rendered unusable. The people are back to their warlike, selfish, and feuding ways - but the dream of Starfleet and the Federation returning are inspirational.

 

[Fateor]

That might be what the writers are trying to get across.

But until they have a character come straight out and say "we used to have this technology but we lost it because of the burn". The idea runs into the problem that they also seem to have just banned a bunch of technology that used to common place.

 

[CT_Phipps]

That might be what the writers are trying to get across.

But until they have a character come straight out and say "we used to have this technology but we lost it because of the burn". The idea runs into the problem that they also seem to have just banned a bunch of technology that used to common place.

We only know time travel is banned but not forgotten.

But I'm not sure how they'd communicate that technology has gone down too other than the way they've had moments like the fact food scarcity is a much bigger issue.

 

[Nerys Myk]

That might be what the writers are trying to get across.

But until they have a character come straight out and say "we used to have this technology but we lost it because of the burn". The idea runs into the problem that they also seem to have just banned a bunch of technology that used to common place.

But until they have a character come straight out and say "we banned a bunch of technology that used to be common place..."

 

[Fateor]

We only know time travel is banned but not forgotten.

It's a lot more then just time travel.

But I'm not sure how they'd communicate that technology has gone down too other than the way they've had moments like the fact food scarcity is a much bigger issue.

The same way they did it in Andromeda, have them happen upon pre-burn tech and lament about how they don't know how to build stuff like that anymore.

 

[Russell Oviatt]

"I am not a hater but I have criticisms."
-My epitaph as a fan of Star Trek

One of the biggest controversies of Starfleet Academy is an inherited one (and I mean among actual fans of Star Trek versus the hate money machine). Specifically, the show inherited the Post-Burn era as its premise and all the assumptions that it brings. In a very strange way, it is much easier to do a sequel to the heavy continuity of the DS9/TNG/VOY era than it is to DISCO because you have, "the future is so bright, I've gotta wear shades." While the Post-Burn era is, "The future was really bright and now it's gone to hell."

I'm pretty okay with this but I feel like DISCO didn't give the Burn-Era the due to needed (and I assumed it would be a season-long time travel journey anyway and not a ditching of the 23rd century premise). After season 3, it seemed like much of the post-apocalypse galaxy storytelling was abandoned. This despite the fact we saw a Trill where there's more symbiotes than people, a Earth that was so isolationist it was at war with fellow humans in the system without knowing it, and no subspace communication system among the Alpha Quadrant so the Discovery couldn't even be certain the Federation existed.

Then kind of just acts like it's fine the next two seasons.

One thing I've been looking forward to with this show has been whether they'd lean into the Season 3 of it all and show a galaxy that had been shattered as well as give more information how it got that way or if they'd continue pretending the Burn was just a thing that didn't have lasting consequences. Thankfully, it seems to be doing the former not the latter. "Beta Test" is my favorite of the three episodes because it gives some badly needed context and at least alludes to the fact that a lot of the students come from victimized worlds.

Still, it's very much set on a paradisical world and the tone can be very...goofy.

Basically, this is a thread for discussing the Burn-Galaxy in Starfleet Academy and how well you think they can address the issue or even if they should. The post-apocalypse or whatever happened being possibly irreconciable with the upbeat wacky hijinks of Starfleet.

"I am not a hater but I have criticisms."
-My epitaph as a fan of Star Trek

One of the biggest controversies of Starfleet Academy is an inherited one (and I mean among actual fans of Star Trek versus the hate money machine). Specifically, the show inherited the Post-Burn era as its premise and all the assumptions that it brings. In a very strange way, it is much easier to do a sequel to the heavy continuity of the DS9/TNG/VOY era than it is to DISCO because you have, "the future is so bright, I've gotta wear shades." While the Post-Burn era is, "The future was really bright and now it's gone to hell."

I'm pretty okay with this but I feel like DISCO didn't give the Burn-Era the due to needed (and I assumed it would be a season-long time travel journey anyway and not a ditching of the 23rd century premise). After season 3, it seemed like much of the post-apocalypse galaxy storytelling was abandoned. This despite the fact we saw a Trill where there's more symbiotes than people, a Earth that was so isolationist it was at war with fellow humans in the system without knowing it, and no subspace communication system among the Alpha Quadrant so the Discovery couldn't even be certain the Federation existed.

Then kind of just acts like it's fine the next two seasons.

One thing I've been looking forward to with this show has been whether they'd lean into the Season 3 of it all and show a galaxy that had been shattered as well as give more information how it got that way or if they'd continue pretending the Burn was just a thing that didn't have lasting consequences. Thankfully, it seems to be doing the former not the latter. "Beta Test" is my favorite of the three episodes because it gives some badly needed context and at least alludes to the fact that a lot of the students come from victimized worlds.

Still, it's very much set on a paradisical world and the tone can be very...goofy.

Basically, this is a thread for discussing the Burn-Galaxy in Starfleet Academy and how well you think they can address the issue or even if they should. The post-apocalypse or whatever happened being possibly irreconciable with the upbeat wacky hijinks of

 

[fireproof78]

A large theme of the Burn is the regression of technology, society, and attitudes that rub a lot of fans the wrong way. But at the heart of the issue is that the rebuilding requires people to learn the same lessons they learned before. I don't think that the technology of the 32nd century is much better than the technology of the 24th if not worse. The knowledge wasn't so much lost as rendered unusable. The people are back to their warlike, selfish, and feuding ways - but the dream of Starfleet and the Federation returning are inspirational.

Which is why it's so amazing interesting to me. Utopia lacks that growth potential. People need challenges or they'll stagnate.