Spoilers TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread

[Christopher]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

In other words, anything could have happened to it. It could be part of the Federation, but then again, maybe not. If it still exists in its current form, I wonder if there is "Federation space" on all sides of it now, or if it's in an area that's kind of left alone in the 24th century... Even at only 100 light-years away, the vastness of interstellar space may mean that it's relatively left alone.

It's estimated that there are roughly 15,000 stars within 100 light-years. We now consider it likely that most stars have planetary systems. If Earth and the Federation had enough ships to visit an average of one new star system per week, it would take nearly 300 years just to visit them all even once. Exploring them all in-depth would take a lot longer.

So yes, it's quite likely that even in the 24th century, a lot of "nearby" space is still relatively unexplored or at least not routinely visited. And with 15,000 star systems, there's certainly room for a number of independent states to exist as enclaves within nominal Federation territory.

As I've said before, since space is mostly empty, it doesn't really make sense to think of an interstellar power's territory as a solid volume. More realistically, it would be the space immediately surrounding its member systems plus the regularly travelled/patrolled space lanes connecting them, more a tree or lattice structure than anything else. So different powers' territories could easily interpenetrate without really intersecting. Space is certainly roomy enough for it.

 

[Vendikarr]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

In other words, anything could have happened to it. It could be part of the Federation, but then again, maybe not. If it still exists in its current form, I wonder if there is "Federation space" on all sides of it now, or if it's in an area that's kind of left alone in the 24th century... Even at only 100 light-years away, the vastness of interstellar space may mean that it's relatively left alone.

It's estimated that there are roughly 15,000 stars within 100 light-years. We now consider it likely that most stars have planetary systems. If Earth and the Federation had enough ships to visit an average of one new star system per week, it would take nearly 300 years just to visit them all even once. Exploring them all in-depth would take a lot longer.

So yes, it's quite likely that even in the 24th century, a lot of "nearby" space is still relatively unexplored or at least not routinely visited. And with 15,000 star systems, there's certainly room for a number of independent states to exist as enclaves within nominal Federation territory.

As I've said before, since space is mostly empty, it doesn't really make sense to think of an interstellar power's territory as a solid volume. More realistically, it would be the space immediately surrounding its member systems plus the regularly travelled/patrolled space lanes connecting them, more a tree or lattice structure than anything else. So different powers' territories could easily interpenetrate without really intersecting. Space is certainly roomy enough for it.

I have to wonder how the Federation would handle two autonomous systems within its borders going to war with each other and having the fighting spreading into Federation shipping lanes.

 

[Christopher]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

I have to wonder how the Federation would handle two autonomous systems within its borders going to war with each other and having the fighting spreading into Federation shipping lanes.

Again, if the Trek universe were remotely realistic about the scale of space, the odds would be immensely against that happening, since the volume of those spacelanes would take up an infinitesimal percentage of the volume of space and thus the odds of any accidental intersection would be equally infinitesimal. Realistically the only way any ship is likely to intersect with another ship or a populated area is if it intentionally approaches it. Now, that could draw combatants to a populated star system if they had use of its resources, but beyond such logical nexus points, there's vanishingly little chance of an accidental encounter in deep space.

 

[Vendikarr]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

I have to wonder how the Federation would handle two autonomous systems within its borders going to war with each other and having the fighting spreading into Federation shipping lanes.

Again, if the Trek universe were remotely realistic about the scale of space, the odds would be immensely against that happening, since the volume of those spacelanes would take up an infinitesimal percentage of the volume of space and thus the odds of any accidental intersection would be equally infinitesimal. Realistically the only way any ship is likely to intersect with another ship or a populated area is if it intentionally approaches it. Now, that could draw combatants to a populated star system if they had use of its resources, but beyond such logical nexus points, there's vanishingly little chance of an accidental encounter in deep space.

True, but that is not the way the iterations of Star Trek has ever treated it. The Enterprises or Voyager were running into random ships all the time. They seemed to portray space as 2 dimensional, and very small, even when speaking of great distances.

Now Firefly.. they got the vast empty-ness of space right.

 

[Thrawn]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

...well, except for that scene in the pilot where they happen to run into the Reapers in the middle of said vast empty-ness. The commentary for that episode has a whole part where Joss talks about how dumb that scene is, in hindsight; it's pretty great.

 

[Ronald Held]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

Space is vast but if all races stick to the "warp highways" for travel then the odds go up significantly.

 

[Relayer1]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

I have not yet finished this but I wanted to drop in to perhaps sway someone on the fence about buying - this is a superb book.(so far).

I'm not a big fan of TOS novels in general, and after 5 or 6 TOS novels in a row I have severe TOS-fatigue.

I still have to agree with this assessment so far. I'll confirm when I finish it...

 

[William Leisner]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

Since this will only be the Most Recent Trek Release for a couple more days, I wanted to just thank everyone who has rated and commented so positively on The Shocks of Adversity over the course of this past month. I'm thrilled and gratified for the reception this book has gotten, which has been well beyond my expectations.

 

[Sho]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

^ Then it might be a good moment to mention that the response here made me pick it up as well, as the only one of this year's 5YM books so far, because I'm not a big fan of TOS in general (not that I dislike it or that I can't appreciate it, and some of my favorite Trek books have even been TOS ones, I just don't tend to actively seek them out most of the time). I ended up voting "Outstanding" - it was a strong, well-flowing read, written well-enough to be thoroughly entertaining on its own merits, rather than just on the back of TOS tropes. If you write more Trek books in the future I'll likely pick them up based on that track record.

 

[Relayer1]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

Since this will only be the Most Recent Trek Release for a couple more days, I wanted to just thank everyone who has rated and commented so positively on The Shocks of Adversity over the course of this past month. I'm thrilled and gratified for the reception this book has gotten, which has been well beyond my expectations.

Credit where due - I will be looking forward to your next Star Trek novel !

 

[Paris]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

I picked up DRG3's Allegiance in Exile, the first 5YM book i've bought in forever, based solely on his track record. I'll be doing the exact same thing with this book due to Mr. Leisner's previous two stories, Losing the Peace (Loved it!) and A Less Perfect Union, which i'm currently re-reading. Based on the reaction here, i'm sure i'll be picking up whatever William writes next as well. Keep up the great work dude

 

[Kertrats47]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

Finally published my review!

A huge recommend from me. To my mind, The Shocks of Adversity is the top pick of Trek novels so far this year.

 

[Daddy Todd]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

Outstanding. Leisner is the real deal.

I read this while undertaking a re-read of the DC TOS comics of the '80's and '90's (DC Series I are my favorite Trek comics ever) and The Shocks of Adversity fits right in with the "feel" of that era. I would love to see this adapted as a 6-part story arc, with art by Sutton & Villagran.

 

[Enterpriserules]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

My review is out here.

 

[Relayer1]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

A great book - as I've said, I'm not a big fan of 5 year mission novels and especially not as many coming together as they have this year, but there's been a couple of really good ones. This is one of them, and it really is good. The story is tight and absorbing, the characters well drawn and the result rewarding. This is about as good as TOS novels get.

I'd love to see the author with another 24th century commission...

 

[Thrawn]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

Some of you all should go leave Amazon reviews. It isn't rated very highly at Amazon right now, but we all seem to love it.

 

[Relayer1]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

Some of you all should go leave Amazon reviews. It isn't rated very highly at Amazon right now, but we all seem to love it.

Done - on Amazon.co and Amazon.com !

 

[BrentMc]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

I just finished this one and really enjoyed it. Great plot, interesting characters, good pace. I look forward to future Star Trek books by this author.

 

[Defcon]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

After not reading one page of fiction for about a month, I started with this today and finished in two sittings. Easily the best TOS novel this year (and actually in quite some time.)

 

[Paris]

Re: TOS: The Shocks of Adversity by W. Leisner Review Thread (Spoilers

Does anyone know what year this book is supposed to take place in?