Well said. And it's been an enjoyable journey throughout.
Some of the stories have been lackluster here and there, but that in itself is Star Trek. Not every show/game/story is going to be for everyone, yet beautifully all are welcome as trekkers/trekkies.
Groundhog Day
I'm kinda curious about the Badgey ground pet, but I don't want to drop Lobi on it because it might just be a vanity dud.
Typhoon Temporal Battlecruiser (T6) (curated ship stats)
Ship Details
Console – Universal: Protonic Snare Projector
Create an Energy net that expands as it travels up to 10km in your facing direction To Foes: Proton Damage up to 3x per sec (per overlapping beam) and Brief Hold
Starship Trait – Piggyback Launch Tubes
When firing any Torpedo Weapon, launch a microcharge that deals additional Kinetic Damage
Fun tangent with this blog: Did anyone else notice the typo? As far as I have seen, I think it's Fero's first typo in a blog. Gotta keep that Cryptic tradition, I guess. Hahaha
I'm not sure. Perhaps "Captain and Crew Test" isn't the right way to look at it either. ST:LD seems to do a good job of not focusing too much on one story or character per episode, so it avoids failure even if every character is "the captain".
There would have to be some way of reworking the criteria to evaluate overall balance (as mentioned elsewhere in this thread) rather than just Captain and Crew, I guess.
Regardless, that's a really good question. Hmmmm
I love this! Now you need to do an analysis like this one on Star Trek and the Bechdel-Wallace test!
TOS is already a rough rewatch with some of its acting and portrayals of the future. I can't imagine how tough it would be to rewatch it through that lens. Haha!
I realize you’re not trying to predict quality, just personal enjoyability, but I do wonder how it relates to quality.
I don't mean for this to measure quality. To each their own, as they say. After all, it is just entertainment and I'm free to watch anything else or skip this or that episode. This is all just a fun observation for me, much like a discussion on the finer points of warp theory or Federation economics.
Still, I'm glad it's something that clicked for you too. I figured there would be a number of people whose appreciation of Trek relates to this "test".
Definitely and many that fail. I wonder if it works as a measure based on percentage of the show as a whole. Then again, it really doesn't matter at all; I only noticed that I get annoyed with certain shows which overuse a single savior for the show's overall story.
I like that too. I'm not sure it would counter these "rules".
How would you propose phrasing a rule for that non-Fed criteria?
To be fair, I think every series has a lot of episodes that would fail this test, some of which were excellent, like DS9’s “In the Pale Moonlight”, and “Far Beyond the Stars” or TNG’s “The Inner Light”, but if used to assess a series, I think this could be a good metric.
Indeed, "In the Pale Moonlight" is one I thought of which fails as well. I still think it makes a good measure to see how many episodes of a show pass/fail overall. Only to see if it's really about the whole crew or mostly one character. (Arguably, early TNG comes really close to being Star Trek: Wesley while mid/late TNG comes close to Star Trek: Data.)
I wholeheartedly agree. Well said!
That was a lot of fun to watch. Thanks for providing the links to the various segments!