Home The Bridge

Key information about the event: First Impressions - 10/12 - edited 10/10 04:49 PM ET

123457

Comments

  • BelleAnna wrote: »
    I really badly needed a fully fused 4* engineering crew member, and I thought Stamets might be close enough. He's not even close to what I need, much as I wanted the character card, so with no luck in the event pack this week I'm pretty much back on leveling the two 1*4 engineers I have.

    I feel quite deflated about this, I'd been working myself up all week about this event and now there's some goodies but not what I need. And I can't even get excited about next week because I'm literally in the dark as to whom 'may' be picked and whether they'll even have the stats I expect. It will probably be a faction event anyway and I can never do well on those. Grumpy I am.

    I wouldn't expect an engineer next week. Stamets seems to be the Discovery engineer and I can't see them having his character two weeks in a row. Sounds like you didn't get a FF Lal. She scores 879 in engineering.

    Unfortunately not ven a single star. Also, it doesn't look like there's any med crew on discovery either
  • @Lady Gaghgagh now you're going off the rails. So, what? He finds it disgusting, so do I. It's a normal reaction to a thing that you really dislike.
  • Lady GaghgaghLady Gaghgagh ✭✭✭✭✭
    BelleAnna wrote: »
    BelleAnna wrote: »
    I really badly needed a fully fused 4* engineering crew member, and I thought Stamets might be close enough. He's not even close to what I need, much as I wanted the character card, so with no luck in the event pack this week I'm pretty much back on leveling the two 1*4 engineers I have.

    I feel quite deflated about this, I'd been working myself up all week about this event and now there's some goodies but not what I need. And I can't even get excited about next week because I'm literally in the dark as to whom 'may' be picked and whether they'll even have the stats I expect. It will probably be a faction event anyway and I can never do well on those. Grumpy I am.

    I wouldn't expect an engineer next week. Stamets seems to be the Discovery engineer and I can't see them having his character two weeks in a row. Sounds like you didn't get a FF Lal. She scores 879 in engineering.

    Unfortunately not ven a single star. Also, it doesn't look like there's any med crew on discovery either

    If you don't have Lal, there are some other greats who have over 800 engineering like Tuskegee Mayweather, Subcommander T'Rul, Commander Kelby, Mirror Bashir (it is his secondary skill), and Kazon Seska can surpass 800 with starbase bonuses even if the engineering portion is at 1% bonus.

    Discovery has a doctor who we saw very briefly in the 4th episode and from what I understand he is to have more of a role in the coming episodes, so we may yet get him in this event.
    Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
    Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
    Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
    Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
  • Lady GaghgaghLady Gaghgagh ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Lady Gaghgagh now you're going off the rails. So, what? He finds it disgusting, so do I. It's a normal reaction to a thing that you really dislike.

    Not really. You can say you find foods disgusting, murder disgusting, people who chew with their mouths open disgusting, but saying something like two guys being together is disgusting is taking it to a very different level. It gives the impression of "this lifestyle is vile and should be shunned".

    Perhaps that's my bad for all of us referring to this as "guy on guy" which might imply some sexual overtone, when what I am meaning to discuss is two guys having interactions like any heterosexual guy and girl couple can have on tv. Mainly two guys being open in their identities - that's what I've been discussing this whole time.
    Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
    Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
    Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
    Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
  • On the second point, I agree. If someone finds the "gayness" disgusting, not just the sexual part (french kiss and so on), that person has issues.

    On the first...hmm...disgusting is the observer's reaction...vile is a description of the "observee" so i really can't see them as similar.
  • PS - maybe don't presume to speak for all straight men either. It is rather imprudent to do so.

    You can only really ever speak for yourself any way generally speaking which is why when people use 'we' when making a statement/opinion I always want to descend into lecture mode about it.
  • Grant77Grant77 ✭✭✭✭
    Grant77 wrote: »
    Dralix wrote: »
    you wanted to point out that it's not ok to like seeing girl-on-girl if you don't like seeing dude-on-dude...like it's hypocritical. Correct?

    Not quite.

    And with that, I'll end my participation in the off topic discussion. You can have the last word.

    As an LGBT person, what matters to me isn't people's personal preferences, it is how people express those preferences in the larger scale of what they will allow or not allow to be present.

    Liking girl on girl = fine
    Liking guy on guy = fine
    Disliking girl on girl, or guy on guy = also fine

    But...

    Saying girl on girl displays are fine to have because of your preference or even indifference to it, yet saying guy on guy displays are wrong and should not be had because of your dispreference for it, is what is hypocritical. Like or dislike whatever you want, but if you give one set of representation a free pass but not the other, you've just endorsed a double standard and that is where the hypocrisy lies.

    Guy on guy displays are inherently disgusting to straight men and I will skip over that part in any episode, but I fully support having it in Trek. This is a show for all people, not just people that are like me. Hopefully it inspires some to get into the sciences.

    I mean it's fine if you don't like it and it is fine to skip over whatever you prefer not to see for yourself. But 'disgusting' is a bit of a loaded word to throw around, because it says more than "I don't like it", it also says "And it's absolutely vile". So maybe be careful how you word that, unless you mean it is vile, then we might have a problem with you voicing that so openly.

    Perhaps not the best word choice, but it is difficult to express things like that on a forum. To a straight guy, there are few, if any, things that seem more unnatural. Most wouldn't do it for all of the money in the world. I prefer not to watch it on television, but as I said, I fully support people of all lifestyles being able to relate to someone on Trek. That's what it's all about. I hope that my gay friends are inspired by the character.
  • Grant77 wrote: »
    Grant77 wrote: »
    Dralix wrote: »
    you wanted to point out that it's not ok to like seeing girl-on-girl if you don't like seeing dude-on-dude...like it's hypocritical. Correct?

    Not quite.

    And with that, I'll end my participation in the off topic discussion. You can have the last word.

    As an LGBT person, what matters to me isn't people's personal preferences, it is how people express those preferences in the larger scale of what they will allow or not allow to be present.

    Liking girl on girl = fine
    Liking guy on guy = fine
    Disliking girl on girl, or guy on guy = also fine

    But...

    Saying girl on girl displays are fine to have because of your preference or even indifference to it, yet saying guy on guy displays are wrong and should not be had because of your dispreference for it, is what is hypocritical. Like or dislike whatever you want, but if you give one set of representation a free pass but not the other, you've just endorsed a double standard and that is where the hypocrisy lies.

    Guy on guy displays are inherently disgusting to straight men and I will skip over that part in any episode, but I fully support having it in Trek. This is a show for all people, not just people that are like me. Hopefully it inspires some to get into the sciences.

    I mean it's fine if you don't like it and it is fine to skip over whatever you prefer not to see for yourself. But 'disgusting' is a bit of a loaded word to throw around, because it says more than "I don't like it", it also says "And it's absolutely vile". So maybe be careful how you word that, unless you mean it is vile, then we might have a problem with you voicing that so openly.

    Perhaps not the best word choice, but it is difficult to express things like that on a forum. To a straight guy, there are few, if any, things that seem more unnatural. Most wouldn't do it for all of the money in the world. I prefer not to watch it on television, but as I said, I fully support people of all lifestyles being able to relate to someone on Trek. That's what it's all about. I hope that my gay friends are inspired by the character.

    Stop, please stop explaining yourself! Why do people feel the need to add the "but i support x"? You stated a personal thing, that doesn't affect anyone else but you. You really don't need the addage "but i support"...it's just like saying "some of my friends are black"...
  • Grant77Grant77 ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2017
    Grant77 wrote: »
    Grant77 wrote: »
    Dralix wrote: »
    you wanted to point out that it's not ok to like seeing girl-on-girl if you don't like seeing dude-on-dude...like it's hypocritical. Correct?

    Not quite.

    And with that, I'll end my participation in the off topic discussion. You can have the last word.

    As an LGBT person, what matters to me isn't people's personal preferences, it is how people express those preferences in the larger scale of what they will allow or not allow to be present.

    Liking girl on girl = fine
    Liking guy on guy = fine
    Disliking girl on girl, or guy on guy = also fine

    But...

    Saying girl on girl displays are fine to have because of your preference or even indifference to it, yet saying guy on guy displays are wrong and should not be had because of your dispreference for it, is what is hypocritical. Like or dislike whatever you want, but if you give one set of representation a free pass but not the other, you've just endorsed a double standard and that is where the hypocrisy lies.

    Guy on guy displays are inherently disgusting to straight men and I will skip over that part in any episode, but I fully support having it in Trek. This is a show for all people, not just people that are like me. Hopefully it inspires some to get into the sciences.

    I mean it's fine if you don't like it and it is fine to skip over whatever you prefer not to see for yourself. But 'disgusting' is a bit of a loaded word to throw around, because it says more than "I don't like it", it also says "And it's absolutely vile". So maybe be careful how you word that, unless you mean it is vile, then we might have a problem with you voicing that so openly.

    Perhaps not the best word choice, but it is difficult to express things like that on a forum. To a straight guy, there are few, if any, things that seem more unnatural. Most wouldn't do it for all of the money in the world. I prefer not to watch it on television, but as I said, I fully support people of all lifestyles being able to relate to someone on Trek. That's what it's all about. I hope that my gay friends are inspired by the character.

    Stop, please stop explaining yourself! Why do people feel the need to add the "but i support x"? You stated a personal thing, that doesn't affect anyone else but you. You really don't need the addage "but i support"...it's just like saying "some of my friends are black"...

    I enjoy Star Trek because it encourages all different kinds of people to share an experience together and perhaps even pursue a career in the sciences, which is what it did for me. It's about more than just the show. I'll continue to express that opinion whether you take issue with it or not.
  • Grant77 wrote: »
    To a straight guy, there are few, if any, things that seem more unnatural.

    Ummmm. No.

    As someone who is 'mostly' straight, and most of whose friends are absolutely straight, the only people I know who find it unnatural are north of 50 years of age, or been brought up by whichever brand of godbothering their parents felt appropriate to indoctrinate them into.

    There are few things more natural than an expression of attraction or love, and it was the likes of the puritanical Abrahamic religions forcing their beliefs on societies that was the unnatural bit. Sexuality in nature is a lot wider than just boy/girl, and we're finally emerging from another type of Dark Age and embracing that again.
  • Always try to insert other words into your sentence to see how that sounds. Replace gay with black, or short. It seems unnatural to be black, or vile to be short. You probably hadn't thought of f it that way before but that's exactly how it comes across to us.

    Now. I have Prisoner O'Brien gone from level one to level 90 in a couple of hours so at least I have that, thanks for everyone's advice! My other 1*4 is Lore and he's been at level 30 like forever so he's gonna have to start doing something worthwhile this week. Sod the events for a bit I'm doing Voyages!
  • And I just got Rianna Mayweather on a long voyage I took to make myself feel better. She is heading back to port with all the other goodies. Now in cheered up :)
  • MordackMordack ✭✭✭
    edited October 2017
    Grant77 wrote: »
    To a straight guy, there are few, if any, things that seem more unnatural.

    It doesn't bother me, although I certainly wouldn't claim to be representative of all straight men. The only thing I draw the line at are people of any gender holding hands in public, walking very slowly and taking up the entire thoroughfare.

  • @Lady Gaghgagh you can atest that i tried to save grant's behind...but he can't help dig himself deeper :D:D:D:D
  • PallidynePallidyne ✭✭✭✭✭
    Mordack wrote: »
    Grant77 wrote: »
    To a straight guy, there are few, if any, things that seem more unnatural.

    It doesn't bother me, although I certainly wouldn't claim to be representative of all straight men. The only thing I draw the line at are people of any gender holding hands in public, walking very slowly and taking up the entire thoroughfare.


    This made me smile--- as this drives me nuts as well, especially as a trails cyclist. I get y'all are in love and such, but you don't need to back up traffic.
  • V.V. ✭✭✭✭
    Oh my!
    Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, is all ancient history. Then, before you can blink an eye, suddenly, it threatens to start all over again."
  • This post is posted in "The Bridge" defined as "General discussions about STAR TREK TIMELINES." I am not in any way, shape, or form interested in reading about your sexual orientations, or your opinions about what is PC, etc. If you want to discuss that, take it to I guess "The Holodeck" and have at it. "The Bridge" is not for that. TIA.
  • IvanstoneIvanstone ✭✭✭✭✭
    It doesn't explain why he isn't SCI/ENG/SEC but still, I just say it is more likely to occur on a later version.

    I'm still baffled by the idea that there is such a thing as a two-skill Starfleet character.

    And so far 4/5 DSC Starfleet characters have only two skills.

    And just to round out my complaint, where is T'Kuvma's DIP stat.
    VIP 13 - 310 Crew Slots - 1055 Immortals
  • Lady GaghgaghLady Gaghgagh ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Lady Gaghgagh you can atest that i tried to save grant's behind...but he can't help dig himself deeper :D:D:D:D

    Yeah I know x.x The worst part is I don't think he's meaning to be any kind of way, but it just seems like there is some unearthed prejudices in himself that he does not know about or has awareness of. When he said "unnatural", it gave that away. Honestly, sounds much like my dad who would say constantly that "oh I don't mind LGBT people" then when he found out I was LGBT let me know that I was such a disappointment. Kind of the same stretch of feeling - X is okay if I don't have to ever encounter it, but if I do, it's not okay anymore.
    Ivanstone wrote: »
    It doesn't explain why he isn't SCI/ENG/SEC but still, I just say it is more likely to occur on a later version.

    I'm still baffled by the idea that there is such a thing as a two-skill Starfleet character.

    And so far 4/5 DSC Starfleet characters have only two skills.

    And just to round out my complaint, where is T'Kuvma's DIP stat.

    You think that's bad, there are still one skill characters!
    5* Scotty is only ENG!
    4* Doctor Chapel is only MED!

    Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
    Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
    Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
    Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
  • despite Lorca being a hot mess

    Truer words have never been spoken!

    I actually had huge problems with Discovery the first three episodes, to the point where I just had to keep telling myself, "It's not Trek, it's not Trek, it's just something decorated with Trek stuff!" But episode 4 started to turn it around because finally Burnham and Stamets did something that actually felt like Trek, and now I'm cautiously optimistic.

    What also helped was I read someone say that it's like a Trek episode stretched out over multiple episodes... that's why it's so dark and troubling, but by the end of the episode/season, the conflict will be resolved in an appropriately Trek way. IOW, it's a less self-contained story. In classic Trek we're used to the conflict being resolved by the end of the episode (or in the next one for a 2-parter) and Discovery will do the same thing, but take the whole season to do it, fleshing out the conflict and problems more.

    Here's hoping this description turns out to be accurate.
  • Lady GaghgaghLady Gaghgagh ✭✭✭✭✭
    Sam Reed wrote: »
    despite Lorca being a hot mess

    Truer words have never been spoken!

    I actually had huge problems with Discovery the first three episodes, to the point where I just had to keep telling myself, "It's not Trek, it's not Trek, it's just something decorated with Trek stuff!" But episode 4 started to turn it around because finally Burnham and Stamets did something that actually felt like Trek, and now I'm cautiously optimistic.

    What also helped was I read someone say that it's like a Trek episode stretched out over multiple episodes... that's why it's so dark and troubling, but by the end of the episode/season, the conflict will be resolved in an appropriately Trek way. IOW, it's a less self-contained story. In classic Trek we're used to the conflict being resolved by the end of the episode (or in the next one for a 2-parter) and Discovery will do the same thing, but take the whole season to do it, fleshing out the conflict and problems more.

    Here's hoping this description turns out to be accurate.

    I felt all of this as well and going "it's not Trek" repeatedly. My coping mechanism now is to just pretend this is all a Section 31 operation headed secretly by Lorca and his crew doesn't even know. If I pretend it is S31, it makes all of the ethical violations and rudeness palatable. Contrary to you though, I didn't care for last episode, I thought the idea of the creature and its use was so farfetched, but more than farfetched, just deus ex machina-like convenient.
    Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
    Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
    Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
    Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
  • can someone remind me where the "hide posts from this user" button is I can't seem to find it right now
    The Guardians of Tomorrow
    Protecting the galaxy's future from itself since 22XX
  • Lady GaghgaghLady Gaghgagh ✭✭✭✭✭
    jess-gay wrote: »
    can someone remind me where the "hide posts from this user" button is I can't seem to find it right now

    Click on their profile, then find the little person icon with a down arrow next to it "message" near the avatar picture. Click the person thing and there is "ignore".
    Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
    Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
    Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
    Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
  • IvanstoneIvanstone ✭✭✭✭✭
    Grant77 wrote: »
    On top of that, I don't like this spore drive concept and that actor that portrays Stamets has done a horrible job. He will be airlocked.

    Why would you airlock a character that will potentially give you dilithium and better placement in the mega-event? So far he's been easy to level except for his thirst for 2* Science Experiments.
    VIP 13 - 310 Crew Slots - 1055 Immortals
  • Shan wrote: »
    Event Name: First Impressions
    Event Type: Hybrid Event Faction (Augments - Federation) /Galaxy
    ...

    Augments
    ...
    RAF Julian Bashir
    ...

    RAF Bashir not only isn't giving a bonus, he's not even showing up in my crew selection lists!
  • Shan wrote: »
    Event Name: First Impressions
    Event Type: Hybrid Event Faction (Augments - Federation) /Galaxy
    ...

    Augments
    ...
    RAF Julian Bashir
    ...

    RAF Bashir not only isn't giving a bonus, he's not even showing up in my crew selection lists!

    Could he be on a voyage? I'm pretty sure my RAF Bashir is getting the bonus.
  • This Sisko1This Sisko1 ✭✭✭✭✭
    aqhapbcvj9ib.png
    izh3ood18zq3.png
    nuwk23va4saq.png
    No problem on my end. I just can't find a mission to use him on so he is left off for now


  • It is a shame, that as Star Trek fans, we need to find ways to "cope" with this new series. I went into it hoping I would like it, but it's simply impossible for me. I truly wish it had never come to fruition. If other Trekkies can watch this and enjoy it, they are fortunate, and I am happy for them. I wish I could. I wish something had been created that I didn't find a travesty. Unfortunately, even seeing these new characters in the game is bringing my enjoyment of timelines down. But, it is what it is, and unless everyone were to stop watching it, which I doubt, it's going to stay. And I will have to find a way to cope with it's existence myself.
  • Not sure why my last comment posted twice. Any way to delete a comment? I don't see the option under edit.
Sign In or Register to comment.