Are the Romulans weak?

[SolkaTruesilver]

Can I ask why everybody is dismissing the RSE as a "weak power that can't do anything against the Federation"?

The RSE's military was ready to go to war against the Federation in Nemesis, confident they could win. Now, the classic "general ripper" who overestimate his chance of winning might be a classic in fiction (and sci-fi even more), but I would somewhat trust the military competence of the Romulan High Command.

Also, do not dismiss the RSE even if Romulus got destroyed. If anything, the RSE will probably strongly survive, by virtue of having quite a high number of colonies and conquered worlds the way the CU did.

Oh, and a simple refitted mining ship is able to wipe Starfleet's entire fleet in the 23rd century. I know the power scale is higher in the end of the 24th century, but that kind of Borgified enhancement would give quite the edge to the RSE in any conflict against the Feds.

If you accept Countdown as Canon (and as it was an official prequel to the current movie, and part of it was set in the pre-timeline shift, which rates it high canon quality than your average Star Trek novel or comic book), the Narada defeated a massive fleet of Klingon ships led by the General Worf by itself, and almost destroyed Capt Data's Enterprise-E in the process.

That was with a single mining ship refited with the most advanced technology available. What if the Romulan High command decided to outfit it's entire Noxeran fleet with such technology?

[Mikey]

...and what if the Romulans converted their entire fleet to run on unicorns and rainbows?

#1 - you're talking about a timeline that might as well be fable from the POV of the DS9 universe.

#2 - even within that other universe; you're talking about a completely, awesomely, fanboy-ishly future-ized ship against a fledgling space navy.

If you accept Countdown as Canon (and as it was an official prequel to the current movie, and part of it was set in the pre-timeline shift, which rates it high canon quality than your average Star Trek novel or comic book), the Narada defeated a massive fleet of Klingon ships led by the General Worf by itself, and almost destroyed Capt Data's Enterprise-E in the process.

Bull-pucky. Novels, etc., are not canon. There is no "more" or "less" canon in Star Trek - something either is canon or it isn't... and the only things that are canon are what's onscreen. Being an "offical" prequel means nothing - 150% of zero is zero.

[SolkaTruesilver]

...and what if the Romulans converted their entire fleet to run on unicorns and rainbows?

#1 - you're talking about a timeline that might as well be fable from the POV of the DS9 universe.

#2 - even within that other universe; you're talking about a completely, awesomely, fanboy-ishly future-ized ship against a fledgling space navy.

If you accept Countdown as Canon (and as it was an official prequel to the current movie, and part of it was set in the pre-timeline shift, which rates it high canon quality than your average Star Trek novel or comic book), the Narada defeated a massive fleet of Klingon ships led by the General Worf by itself, and almost destroyed Capt Data's Enterprise-E in the process.

Bull-pucky. Novels, etc., are not canon. There is no "more" or "less" canon in Star Trek - something either is canon or it isn't... and the only things that are canon are what's onscreen. Being an "offical" prequel means nothing - 150% of zero is zero.

Wooo... Man, calm down. Try to be a little less bitchy in your post, and argument a little more.

[Mikey]

If I am "bitchy" in the process of making valid points, how exactly does that invalidate those points?

[SolkaTruesilver]

If I am "bitchy" in the process of making valid points, how exactly does that invalidate those points?

Because they might be wrong to begin with. Because saying something in an abrasive tone doesn't make what you say truer things. And that pulling insults out of a hat to try to dismiss points I brought up be childish and unethical to an argument.

The weird technology that outfitted Nero's ship was adapted stolen Borg technology, if you believe the prequel comic. I don't see why it couldn't be added to additional Romulan warships the way it was adapted to Nero's mining vessel.

There are multiple level of canon. Some can be truly disregarded as very weak canon, and some are undeniable part of the Trekverse. Just because something happened on screen doesn't make it canon ("Threshold") as it may very well be disregarded in future episode.

At the same time, story elements written to tie-in the previous timeline to the newly established one, being written by one of the main writters of the new movie, doesn't make it pure canon, but it certainly rates higher in the Moh scale of Canon Hardness than, let's say, "The Captain's Table". Hell, it could very well rate slightly below the Starfleet Technical Manual.

Canonicity isn't a binary state of "have" and "have not". It is the level of importance you will grant some Expended Universe's explanations for some Hard Canon events. Explanation that might, I would add, be more satisfying than anything Canon would often try to bring up (darn YATIs). If the topic is overly silly and ruins the Verse, then it's less canon than another element that would otherwise rates same level (Which brings us back to the "Threshold" evidence, which has been disregarded and dismissed even by the owners and writers of the franchise).

[Griffin]

Because they might be wrong to begin with.

To bad they aren't.

The weird technology that outfitted Nero's ship was adapted stolen Borg technology,

There is no canon evidence of this.

if you believe the prequel comic.

Which is a non-canon source.

There are multiple level of canon.

No there isn't.

Some can be truly disregarded as very weak canon, and some are undeniable part of the Trekverse.

Like what?

Just because something happened on screen doesn't make it canon ("Threshold")

(Genuine question, when was "Threshold" declared non-canon?)

At the same time, story elements written to tie-in the previous timeline to the newly established one, being written by one of the main writters of the new movie, doesn't make it pure canon, but it certainly rates higher in the Moh scale of Canon Hardness than, let's say, "The Captain's Table".

Nope, they're both equally non-canon, just one makes more sense than the other.

Canonicity isn't a binary state of "have" and "have not".

Yes it is.

It is the level of importance you will grant some Expended Universe's explanations for some Hard Canon events.

Which is personal canon, and personal canon is still non-canon.

[SolkaTruesilver]

Whoa. You people are really desperate about this whole "only one level of Canon"?

While this website (DITL) has on more than once occasion acknowledge multiple levels of cannonity when it came with interpretation of events, starships, species, etc... based on multiple background material, official star trek manuals, etc... Stating which took preceance over which?

(Genuine question, when was "Threshold" declared non-canon?)

Braga officially declared the episode a stinker in the DVD commentary, and the statement from characters in later episode directly conflicts with the events of that episode. Paris have been on the record stating the he's never been in Transwarp before. You can't go more into denial without breaking the 4th wall.

[Captain Seafort]

Whoa. You people are really desperate about this whole "only one level of Canon"?

If following the official definition of canon makes us desperate, then sure.

[Lighthawk]

Solka, if the current responses have you going "Whoa, come down guys." you might be part of the wrong forum. While no one is exactly standing around with a pillow in one hand and a jar of marshmallow fluff in the other to make sure their posts couldn't possibly offend anyone, no one has made any sort of attacks or even gotten to a point I'd call "cranky" for this forum. I think you might be reading a bit much into the emotions behind the posts.

[Mikey]

Because they might be wrong to begin with.

A person's statements have the same chance of being right or wrong no matter the tone in which they are couched.

Because saying something in an abrasive tone doesn't make what you say truer things.

Nor does it make them less true.

And that pulling insults out of a hat to try to dismiss points I brought up be childish and unethical to an argument.

I fonly that were what happened. I dismissed your arguments with valid points, not insults - the fact that you took them to be said in an insulting tone is a completely different matter.

The weird technology that outfitted Nero's ship was adapted stolen Borg technology, if you believe the prequel comic.

I don't, as I've never read the comic. More germane to this conversation, there is absolutely no reason to believe the comic, nor does it have any place in a discussion about canon events.

There are multiple level of canon. Some can be truly disregarded as very weak canon, and some are undeniable part of the Trekverse.

This is absolutely false. If something can be discarded, then it is not canon. If something is part of the milieu, then it is canon. Period. End of story.

Just because something happened on screen doesn't make it canon

Yes, it does. In fact, that is the very definition of what makes canon in 'Trek. That is not my opinion, that is the definition of "canon" as set by the people who have the right and authority to define such things - i.e., Paramount.

At the same time, story elements written to tie-in the previous timeline to the newly established one, being written by one of the main writters of the new movie, doesn't make it pure canon, but it certainly rates higher in the Moh scale of Canon Hardness than, let's say, "The Captain's Table". Hell, it could very well rate slightly below the Starfleet Technical Manual.

"Pure canon?" It doesn't make it canon at all. Per the definition of 'Trek canon, none of that is canon. There is no "more" or "less" canon. The material you describe rates exactly equally with the TM's... 100%, Grade-A non-canon.

Canonicity isn't a binary state of "have" and "have not". It is the level of importance you will grant some Expended Universe's explanations for some Hard Canon events. Explanation that might, I would add, be more satisfying than anything Canon would often try to bring up (darn YATIs). If the topic is overly silly and ruins the Verse, then it's less canon than another element that would otherwise rates same level (Which brings us back to the "Threshold" evidence, which has been disregarded and dismissed even by the owners and writers of the franchise).

Again, you are absolutely incorrect. What you decide to take as part of the universe, and what you decide to dismiss, is irrelevant to what is canon by the definition of canon. To restate, that definition is as follows, as defined by the folks who own the franchise: onscreen = canon; not onscreen = non-canon.

As far as "Threshold" goes - what was onscreen in the episode is canon; what the writers, actors, and producers say about it is not.

Whoa. You people are really desperate about this whole "only one level of Canon"?

Nope. We just know the definition of "canon."

Braga officially declared the episode a stinker in the DVD commentary

Braga's commentary is non-canon; what happened in the ep is canon.

the statement from characters in later episode directly conflicts with the events of that episode. Paris have been on the record stating the he's never been in Transwarp before.

Those statements are canon evidence of nothing more than what the characters stated. Obviously, their statements are at odds with the truth, because canon proves that those events did happen.

[SolkaTruesilver]

Solka, if the current responses have you going "Whoa, come down guys." you might be part of the wrong forum. While no one is exactly standing around with a pillow in one hand and a jar of marshmallow fluff in the other to make sure their posts couldn't possibly offend anyone, no one has made any sort of attacks or even gotten to a point I'd call "cranky" for this forum. I think you might be reading a bit much into the emotions behind the posts.

I believe you might be right.

I ain't used to having the explanation I bring up from someplace other than my ass compared to "outfitting a fleet with unicorn hair". Some other place on the internet would simply have pointed out weakness of the origin medium, and then either commented on something else than what they dismissed, or accept it as a "what-if" fact that isn't considered canon, but is still worthy to intellectually explore in a discussion.

But I guess this forum won't do any of that, and I get insulted for my trouble. Thanks a lot.

...and what if the Romulans converted their entire fleet to run on unicorns and rainbows?

#1 - you're talking about a timeline that might as well be fable from the POV of the DS9 universe.

#2 - even within that other universe; you're talking about a completely, awesomely, fanboy-ishly future-ized ship against a fledgling space navy.

Having the point I brought up, that was somewhat taken from a source material that isn't entirely silly, reduced to a "fanboy-ishly future-ized ship"? That's insulting.

Specially since no one here actually knows why a fucking mining ship is outfited with weaponry capable of destroying planetary defenses and Starfleet's flagfleet, while having absolutely NOTHING in common with the common Romulan design, either internally or externally, that we have traditionnaly seen in any serie or movie before.

But if you keep saying that I am at the wrong place for bringing up point for an intelligent discussion, and not accepting blatant insults, tell me so, I'll leave. I hope to be able to have a nice intelligent discussion with knowledgeable trek fans, not jerky nerds.

[Deepcrush]

I believe you might be right.

Emotions can get pretty high at times. Such is the life of being online, half of what we are reading is guess work as the to writers mood. Worry less about people's feelings and more about their points/counter points.

I ain't used to having the explanation I bring up from someplace other than my ass compared to "outfitting a fleet with unicorn hair". Some other place on the internet would simply have pointed out weakness of the origin medium, and then either commented on something else than what they dismissed, or accept it as a "what-if" fact that isn't considered canon, but is still worthy to intellectually explore in a discussion.

But I guess this forum won't do any of that, and I get insulted for my trouble. Thanks a lot.

The issue you faced here was your use of your own personal "Fan-Canon". You'll find that on DITL, doing such will earn you little more then lashings or laughing at your expense.

Having the point I brought up, that was somewhat taken from a source material that isn't entirely silly, reduced to a "fanboy-ishly future-ized ship"? That's insulting.

That's life, be thankful they got to you first. If you think that's insulting you should wait until you run into me on a bad day.

Specially since no one here actually knows why a f***ing mining ship is outfited with weaponry capable of destroying planetary defenses and Starfleet's flagfleet, while having absolutely NOTHING in common with the common Romulan design, either internally or externally, that we have traditionnaly seen in any serie or movie before.

Well for the first part, it could be that he had 20-25 years (I don't remember the absolute time) to just sit there with his ship. It would have been silly for a captain to do nothing to keep his crew busy over that time. For the second part, why don't you put a wooden ship of sail against a WWII battleship. Hell, put fifty wooden ships of sail against a single WWII battleship and just check the outcome. By the time of the fighting, Nero's ship was no longer a mining ship, she was a retro-fitted battleship with tech 200 years in advance of the ships she was fighting.

But if you keep saying that I am at the wrong place for bringing up point for an intelligent discussion, and not accepting blatant insults, tell me so, I'll leave. I hope to be able to have a nice intelligent discussion with knowledgeable trek fans, not jerky nerds.

Cry some more and send us a post card. You got the pimp hand for making up your own fan-canon and now you're upset, get over it or jump off a really tall building. Those are really the best two ways about it to solve your problem. You come to a forum built on the ideas of Trek and then you are shocked to find out that people here, well, they like trek and so you're spitting on it isn't to their liking. Intelligent discussion is a two way street, if you can't start one then you shouldn't expect others to take you seriously.

Next time, rather then declaring things you don't know you should try phrasing it as a question. That way people will know that you simply don't know what you're talking about. Hence it being a question. So rather then them jumping you about a topic, they'll try to help you understand it.

[Lighthawk]

1) Don't try the "Poor me, I just wanted to have an intelligent conversation" approach here. We get that too often, and no one here has sympathy.

2) Expect lots of hyperbole and creative exaggeration. For the most part it's not meant to be insulting. Believe me, when someone gets nasty, you'll know it. Mostly though it's just a matter of emphasis.

3) If you want to debate, debate. If someone makes a statement of opinion, challenge it. If someone claims something is fact, make them prove it. We're going to do the same to you. If all you want is to get into a "I agree" fest, this isn't the place. We discuss trek like it's a wrestling match, someone is getting taken down.

4) Going back to #1 here, keep in mind you're the new guy here. Whining about the people here being "jerky nerds", to the people here, is really only going to alienate you from the group at large, and cement a mindset of "Us vs You". Just, relax man. If someone gets snarky and sarcastic with you, give it back to them, or just ignore it. But don't whine about it.

Now if you aren't ready to run away, get your ass back into the debate and make a proper showing of yourself.

[SolkaTruesilver]

Now if you aren't ready to run away, get your ass back into the debate and make a proper showing of yourself.

All right.

And now, can someone can read more than just the point I posted regarding Countdown? I mean, you just went and pissed on the latter half of my post, while not even paying the least bit of attention fo the first half.

At least, it's canon

[Captain Seafort]

do not dismiss the RSE even if Romulus got destroyed. If anything, the RSE will probably strongly survive, by virtue of having quite a high number of colonies and conquered worlds the way the CU did.

Trek powers tend to be very highly centralised. The Federation is a prime example of this, with it's seat of government, military HQ and main construction facilities all concentrated in the solar system. The shipyards of the Cardassian system alone were considered sufficient to enable the Dominion to pose a threat to the Alpha Quadrant in WYLB. Praxis, a moon of the Klingon homeworld, was described in ST6 as their "key energy production facility", and the very minor damage it's destruction inflicted was considered sufficient to bring down the Empire. In Nemesis Remus was depicted as the Romulans' industrial base, so much so that the leader of a slave uprising there could become Praetor.

Conclusion: the central system of a Trek power is of sufficient importance that its removal would cripple the state.