So, I guess I didn’t realize how few bonus crew of mine that don’t have a terribly strong COM skill. My immortal T’Kuvma and 2/5* Killy are pretty much it for COM-primary bonus crew for me, and the other COM slots are being filled with the likes of Mirror Garak and Stoned Tyler. Two seats is nice and all but it’s a challenge to fill them when the required skill is pretty limited outside of 5* crew.
So, I guess I didn’t realize how few bonus crew of mine that don’t have a terribly strong COM skill. My immortal T’Kuvma and 2/5* Killy are pretty much it for COM-primary bonus crew for me, and the other COM slots are being filled with the likes of Mirror Garak and Stoned Tyler. Two seats is nice and all but it’s a challenge to fill them when the required skill is pretty limited outside of 5* crew.
I noticed that, too, and I don't have Captain Killy so you can imagine how bad it is for me! I do at least have 1/5 Chancellor L'Rell, but to use her for her secondary skill seems like a squandering of her monster primary DIP skill. Same with Mirror Garak, Kol of House Kor, and anyone else with CMD as a secondary skill.
It is clearly doing well as CBS is expanding and creating two more trek shows including one with Georgiou as lead.
Actually, it hasn't done well so far. The first season numbers were very disappointing to CBS, and most industry speculation is that Disco only got a second season because Netflix essentially paid for the entirety of Season 1's production costs (and it didn't pay off for Netflix, which is why CBS had to offer the Short Treks at a steal to them after expecting to sell them for top dollar). If the numbers don't spike quite a bit with the new showrunners changing direction, it probably won't get a S3. The spin-offs are considered a desperate lunge to find something that sticks with the fans so salvage some of the development costs.
Um, could you cite your source for this?
I don't think I'm supposed to post outside links here (I forget what rules are for which forum I use), but search Youtube for Star Trek Discovery CBS Moonves, vid title is "Star Trek Discovery: The Firing of Les Moonves and the Failure of the Shorts." It pulls together a lot of the different data I'd been seeing in various reports.
Watched it..."data" is a loose term, because that's some Donald Trump-level fake news there compiled by someone who clearly has it out for Discovery. Outside of the summary of Les Moonves' departure from CBS, there's not a single piece of information in there that is based on actual facts - the breakdown of subscribers comes close, but even there it's full of speculation. It's also important to understand that CBS has never stated what they consider success for Star Trek to be. Yes, Moonves gave a target for subscribers in 2020 - but that's an overall target, and isn't being hung solely on Star Trek.
Let's also be clear - failures don't get spinoffs. Short Treks did well enough for them to invest in doing two more episodes to follow Disco S2. The Picard show, Lower Decks, potentially Starfleet Academy - all happening because Discovery is doing something right. Heck: even if you want to make the argument that all of those spinoffs exist just because CBS is trying to overcome Discovery's shortcomings (which your "source" posits), I'd love to hear the explanation for the Section 31 show headed by Michelle Yeoh as her Discovery character if Disco is doing so badly.
Also, I want to make clear: I hope Discovery rights the ship, starts paying real attention to canon, and comes back to Star Trek's roots. I really want to like Discovery, and be able to look back at S1 as the beginning seasons of the other shows before they found their footing. But they're going to need to do almost a full reset to get me there, given how far they've strayed.
I might recommend S2 then - S1 wasn't without its flaws, and they're doing a solid job of putting many of those weaknesses behind them.
Star Trek shows we know of CBS is planning:
Ceti Alpha V {And, no. Mister Montalban will not be Khan}
Reliant {Speculated to be Trek from the title being the name of a known Starfleet wessel}
Georgiou's show {Direct spin-off of Disco}
A different Section 31 show {Also Disco Era?}
Picard's show
Lower Decks
Sounds like Disco really torpedoed CBS's faith in Star Trek.
The only ones we know for sure that are in development are the Picard series, Lower Decks, Section 31 (which is the Georgiou show, not two separate ones), and a kid’s animated series I believe.
It is clearly doing well as CBS is expanding and creating two more trek shows including one with Georgiou as lead.
Actually, it hasn't done well so far. The first season numbers were very disappointing to CBS, and most industry speculation is that Disco only got a second season because Netflix essentially paid for the entirety of Season 1's production costs (and it didn't pay off for Netflix, which is why CBS had to offer the Short Treks at a steal to them after expecting to sell them for top dollar). If the numbers don't spike quite a bit with the new showrunners changing direction, it probably won't get a S3. The spin-offs are considered a desperate lunge to find something that sticks with the fans so salvage some of the development costs.
Um, could you cite your source for this?
I don't think I'm supposed to post outside links here (I forget what rules are for which forum I use), but search Youtube for Star Trek Discovery CBS Moonves, vid title is "Star Trek Discovery: The Firing of Les Moonves and the Failure of the Shorts." It pulls together a lot of the different data I'd been seeing in various reports.
Watched it..."data" is a loose term, because that's some Donald Trump-level fake news there compiled by someone who clearly has it out for Discovery. Outside of the summary of Les Moonves' departure from CBS, there's not a single piece of information in there that is based on actual facts - the breakdown of subscribers comes close, but even there it's full of speculation. It's also important to understand that CBS has never stated what they consider success for Star Trek to be. Yes, Moonves gave a target for subscribers in 2020 - but that's an overall target, and isn't being hung solely on Star Trek.
Let's also be clear - failures don't get spinoffs. Short Treks did well enough for them to invest in doing two more episodes to follow Disco S2. The Picard show, Lower Decks, potentially Starfleet Academy - all happening because Discovery is doing something right. Heck: even if you want to make the argument that all of those spinoffs exist just because CBS is trying to overcome Discovery's shortcomings (which your "source" posits), I'd love to hear the explanation for the Section 31 show headed by Michelle Yeoh as her Discovery character if Disco is doing so badly.
Also, I want to make clear: I hope Discovery rights the ship, starts paying real attention to canon, and comes back to Star Trek's roots. I really want to like Discovery, and be able to look back at S1 as the beginning seasons of the other shows before they found their footing. But they're going to need to do almost a full reset to get me there, given how far they've strayed.
I might recommend S2 then - S1 wasn't without its flaws, and they're doing a solid job of putting many of those weaknesses behind them.
Star Trek shows we know of CBS is planning:
Ceti Alpha V {And, no. Mister Montalban will not be Khan}
Reliant {Speculated to be Trek from the title being the name of a known Starfleet wessel}
Georgiou's show {Direct spin-off of Disco}
A different Section 31 show {Also Disco Era?}
Picard's show
Lower Decks
Sounds like Disco really torpedoed CBS's faith in Star Trek.
The only ones we know for sure that are in development are the Picard series, Lower Decks, Section 31 (which is the Georgiou show, not two separate ones), and a kid’s animated series I believe.
It is clearly doing well as CBS is expanding and creating two more trek shows including one with Georgiou as lead.
Actually, it hasn't done well so far. The first season numbers were very disappointing to CBS, and most industry speculation is that Disco only got a second season because Netflix essentially paid for the entirety of Season 1's production costs (and it didn't pay off for Netflix, which is why CBS had to offer the Short Treks at a steal to them after expecting to sell them for top dollar). If the numbers don't spike quite a bit with the new showrunners changing direction, it probably won't get a S3. The spin-offs are considered a desperate lunge to find something that sticks with the fans so salvage some of the development costs.
Um, could you cite your source for this?
I don't think I'm supposed to post outside links here (I forget what rules are for which forum I use), but search Youtube for Star Trek Discovery CBS Moonves, vid title is "Star Trek Discovery: The Firing of Les Moonves and the Failure of the Shorts." It pulls together a lot of the different data I'd been seeing in various reports.
Watched it..."data" is a loose term, because that's some Donald Trump-level fake news there compiled by someone who clearly has it out for Discovery. Outside of the summary of Les Moonves' departure from CBS, there's not a single piece of information in there that is based on actual facts - the breakdown of subscribers comes close, but even there it's full of speculation. It's also important to understand that CBS has never stated what they consider success for Star Trek to be. Yes, Moonves gave a target for subscribers in 2020 - but that's an overall target, and isn't being hung solely on Star Trek.
Let's also be clear - failures don't get spinoffs. Short Treks did well enough for them to invest in doing two more episodes to follow Disco S2. The Picard show, Lower Decks, potentially Starfleet Academy - all happening because Discovery is doing something right. Heck: even if you want to make the argument that all of those spinoffs exist just because CBS is trying to overcome Discovery's shortcomings (which your "source" posits), I'd love to hear the explanation for the Section 31 show headed by Michelle Yeoh as her Discovery character if Disco is doing so badly.
Also, I want to make clear: I hope Discovery rights the ship, starts paying real attention to canon, and comes back to Star Trek's roots. I really want to like Discovery, and be able to look back at S1 as the beginning seasons of the other shows before they found their footing. But they're going to need to do almost a full reset to get me there, given how far they've strayed.
I might recommend S2 then - S1 wasn't without its flaws, and they're doing a solid job of putting many of those weaknesses behind them.
Star Trek shows we know of CBS is planning:
Ceti Alpha V {And, no. Mister Montalban will not be Khan}
Reliant {Speculated to be Trek from the title being the name of a known Starfleet wessel}
Georgiou's show {Direct spin-off of Disco}
A different Section 31 show {Also Disco Era?}
Picard's show
Lower Decks
Sounds like Disco really torpedoed CBS's faith in Star Trek.
The only ones we know for sure that are in development are the Picard series, Lower Decks, Section 31 (which is the Georgiou show, not two separate ones), and a kid’s animated series I believe.
I thought Lower Decks was the animated one...?
There are two different animated shows in development.
Even the 3 seat shuttles mostly have 1 skill for each seat. This is horrible
But DB solved the "and" problem by not having any of them. I think it is an interesting experiment. My only complaint would be how few missions have diplomacy when mirror garak and chancellor L'Rell have diplomacy. But I found a couple diplomacy missions to use. Would be good if it had a couple science and engineering missions but Kol helps a lot once you lvl him up. I can see how difficult this event would be for others as most of the Discovery people with good Command are legendaries. I am using all legendaries except my two mirror garaks.
It is clearly doing well as CBS is expanding and creating two more trek shows including one with Georgiou as lead.
Actually, it hasn't done well so far. The first season numbers were very disappointing to CBS, and most industry speculation is that Disco only got a second season because Netflix essentially paid for the entirety of Season 1's production costs (and it didn't pay off for Netflix, which is why CBS had to offer the Short Treks at a steal to them after expecting to sell them for top dollar). If the numbers don't spike quite a bit with the new showrunners changing direction, it probably won't get a S3. The spin-offs are considered a desperate lunge to find something that sticks with the fans so salvage some of the development costs.
Um, could you cite your source for this?
I don't think I'm supposed to post outside links here (I forget what rules are for which forum I use), but search Youtube for Star Trek Discovery CBS Moonves, vid title is "Star Trek Discovery: The Firing of Les Moonves and the Failure of the Shorts." It pulls together a lot of the different data I'd been seeing in various reports.
Watched it..."data" is a loose term, because that's some Donald Trump-level fake news there compiled by someone who clearly has it out for Discovery. Outside of the summary of Les Moonves' departure from CBS, there's not a single piece of information in there that is based on actual facts - the breakdown of subscribers comes close, but even there it's full of speculation. It's also important to understand that CBS has never stated what they consider success for Star Trek to be. Yes, Moonves gave a target for subscribers in 2020 - but that's an overall target, and isn't being hung solely on Star Trek.
Let's also be clear - failures don't get spinoffs. Short Treks did well enough for them to invest in doing two more episodes to follow Disco S2. The Picard show, Lower Decks, potentially Starfleet Academy - all happening because Discovery is doing something right. Heck: even if you want to make the argument that all of those spinoffs exist just because CBS is trying to overcome Discovery's shortcomings (which your "source" posits), I'd love to hear the explanation for the Section 31 show headed by Michelle Yeoh as her Discovery character if Disco is doing so badly.
Also, I want to make clear: I hope Discovery rights the ship, starts paying real attention to canon, and comes back to Star Trek's roots. I really want to like Discovery, and be able to look back at S1 as the beginning seasons of the other shows before they found their footing. But they're going to need to do almost a full reset to get me there, given how far they've strayed.
I might recommend S2 then - S1 wasn't without its flaws, and they're doing a solid job of putting many of those weaknesses behind them.
Star Trek shows we know of CBS is planning:
Ceti Alpha V {And, no. Mister Montalban will not be Khan}
Reliant {Speculated to be Trek from the title being the name of a known Starfleet wessel}
Georgiou's show {Direct spin-off of Disco}
A different Section 31 show {Also Disco Era?}
Picard's show
Lower Decks
Sounds like Disco really torpedoed CBS's faith in Star Trek.
These all look promising! I don't know if they will cancel STD or not, you can never tell about these things. UPN cancelled Enterprise, and it was their #1 show, go figure.
With any luck, CBS will learn from all of the horrible terrible mistakes with STD, and apply that wisdom to the new shows.
Lest we not forget, CBS canceled Star Trek TOS in 1969, figuring it would never amount to anything. Let's hope they learn from THAT mistake!
Lest we not forget, CBS canceled Star Trek TOS in 1969, figuring it would never amount to anything.
Wasn't that NBC? (They're not the same company, are they? I'm hazy on US networks.)
'Twas and they're not.
As for the shuttle skill breakdown, I wish it wasn't so CMD-heavy but not so much because it's harder to send out shuttles with high success probability percentages and more just because there's less reason to use Discovery bonus crew. I do, however, appreciate that MED and ENG are almost entirely absent, given that they're also almost entirely absent from the pool of Discovery crew.
The lack of "and" does seem to impact success. I was getting mid to high 90's last faction at 4000VP. I'm barely cracking 90 on the 2-seat shuttles even with 3* skill boosts.
So, I guess I didn’t realize how few bonus crew of mine that don’t have a terribly strong COM skill. My immortal T’Kuvma and 2/5* Killy are pretty much it for COM-primary bonus crew for me, and the other COM slots are being filled with the likes of Mirror Garak and Stoned Tyler. Two seats is nice and all but it’s a challenge to fill them when the required skill is pretty limited outside of 5* crew.
ditto, only I don't event have T'Kuvma, I might change allegiance from KE to KCA shocking I know but at least you get three slots of bonuses so hopefully an improvement.
[was on Sabbatical/Hiatus] Currently a trialist at Galaxy SquadronSTAY SAFE and KBO
The lack of "and" does seem to impact success. I was getting mid to high 90's last faction at 4000VP. I'm barely cracking 90 on the 2-seat shuttles even with 3* skill boosts.
Well, I've found a set of seat assignments that average 95% success (note: only one two are 2-seater) so I can't personally complain, but I think this is pretty rough on mid-level players. Most of the bonus SRs are "useless", and I don't mean that being snotty, but rather, at < ~1500 bonused skill, useless compared to them normally being competitive with low-fused legendaries thanks to AND'ing. Out of the box they'll be in the 70-80% range. Averaging two low numbers still yields a low number. I think that's pretty harsh for players that don't have a stable of the right well-fused legendaries, and the CMD bottleneck limits how much can be offset by the event crew (really? Mirror Garak? Why?) There's only one purpose for that: to drive boost pack sales.
If not for points, then just from a fun perspective, this takes "yay, I get to use a bunch of my Discovery crew" and tramples all over it. I already use FO Burnham and Emperor Georgiou every day, I was kind of hoping to let some of the SRs finally shine. Leaves me very unexcited about the event.
I don't begrudge DB profit on the event but this is pretty poke-you-in-the-eye blunt without even a token attempt to create a cheaper path for players with shallower benches willing to play with the jigsaw puzzle pieces more. Not a fan at ALL of this approach.
I guess the previous event with the slew of 3 seaters was a financial success because people could purchase extra shuttle with the extra crew they had. This time they went to 2 seaters (which we haven't seen since the original faction events), I'm guessing for the same reasons. It definitely allows the faction events to be monetized to the same level as galaxy events are. I expect we'll see this as the norm for faction events going forward.
I guess the previous event with the slew of 3 seaters was a financial success because people could purchase extra shuttle with the extra crew they had. This time they went to 2 seaters (which we haven't seen since the original faction events), I'm guessing for the same reasons. It definitely allows the faction events to be monetized to the same level as galaxy events are. I expect we'll see this as the norm for faction events going forward.
Right ... though I think they won't get much past a single extra shuttle. If I were to load up the MED/SCI mission with Culber, Katrina and Grad Burnham (Saru's SEC is needed elsewhere), I could squeeze out an 87% rental shuttle. After that my success rate would drop to in the 60's% - I've never seen a shelf that steep since they started with the rentals. There just aren't enough single-skill-CMD crew available. So the good news is I don't think this event will be "won" by people buying massive numbers of rentals
The command issue isn't really an issue for whales with a broad crew base. I can send out all 8 Section 31 shuttles and get 96, 95, 95, 93, 89, 87, 85 and 84 percent as the non-boosted success rates for the 8 shuttles. I could probably squeeze out another 4 from other factions without dropping below 80%
That's the customer type that will spend money on the extra shuttles. I haven't done it (yet) in this event but I did figure out the percentages for if I wanted to do it. If I drop too far (not worried about anything other than top 1500 for event) I may send out a wave or two of 8 shuttles.
I spent 100/150 merits to thaw so many Burnhams, yet there are only 4 SCI seats (2 with MED) and 1 ENG seat across the 24 missions! I thawed out as many as 14 4* Discovery crew, yet I'm only using Lt Tyler and Armed Georgiou (if I pull multiple 3-seat S31 shuttles)! Ugh...
I spent 100/150 merits to thaw so many Burnhams, yet there are only 4 SCI seats (2 with MED) and 1 ENG seat across the 24 missions! I thawed out as many as 14 4* Discovery crew, yet I'm only using Lt Tyler and Armed Georgiou (if I pull multiple 3-seat S31 shuttles)! Ugh...
It's a mega though, so the Disco crew might be useful later on (the hybrid event most likely).
The command issue isn't really an issue for whales with a broad crew base. I can send out all 8 Section 31 shuttles and get 96, 95, 95, 93, 89, 87, 85 and 84 percent as the non-boosted success rates for the 8 shuttles. I could probably squeeze out another 4 from other factions without dropping below 80%
That's the customer type that will spend money on the extra shuttles. I haven't done it (yet) in this event but I did figure out the percentages for if I wanted to do it. If I drop too far (not worried about anything other than top 1500 for event) I may send out a wave or two of 8 shuttles.
I know, we’re saying the same thing in different ways. Yes, you can send a set of 8 shuttles but you also could have probably won easily with sleepless nights and precision clockwork as well. My CMD bench is just barely enough to fill out the shuttles with high scores and be able to stop boosting tonight, but I think i’m clearly on the hairy edge.
The extra shuttles won’t be much help for players that couldn’t have otherwise ranked handily, is what I was saying. I think they really don’t have much choice other than to drop an extra large bundle of boosts into this one and live even more by the clock. Happy to be proved wrong though. :-)
It is clearly doing well as CBS is expanding and creating two more trek shows including one with Georgiou as lead.
Actually, it hasn't done well so far. The first season numbers were very disappointing to CBS, and most industry speculation is that Disco only got a second season because Netflix essentially paid for the entirety of Season 1's production costs (and it didn't pay off for Netflix, which is why CBS had to offer the Short Treks at a steal to them after expecting to sell them for top dollar). If the numbers don't spike quite a bit with the new showrunners changing direction, it probably won't get a S3. The spin-offs are considered a desperate lunge to find something that sticks with the fans so salvage some of the development costs.
Um, could you cite your source for this?
I don't think I'm supposed to post outside links here (I forget what rules are for which forum I use), but search Youtube for Star Trek Discovery CBS Moonves, vid title is "Star Trek Discovery: The Firing of Les Moonves and the Failure of the Shorts." It pulls together a lot of the different data I'd been seeing in various reports.
Watched it..."data" is a loose term, because that's some Donald Trump-level fake news there compiled by someone who clearly has it out for Discovery. Outside of the summary of Les Moonves' departure from CBS, there's not a single piece of information in there that is based on actual facts - the breakdown of subscribers comes close, but even there it's full of speculation. It's also important to understand that CBS has never stated what they consider success for Star Trek to be. Yes, Moonves gave a target for subscribers in 2020 - but that's an overall target, and isn't being hung solely on Star Trek.
Let's also be clear - failures don't get spinoffs. Short Treks did well enough for them to invest in doing two more episodes to follow Disco S2. The Picard show, Lower Decks, potentially Starfleet Academy - all happening because Discovery is doing something right. Heck: even if you want to make the argument that all of those spinoffs exist just because CBS is trying to overcome Discovery's shortcomings (which your "source" posits), I'd love to hear the explanation for the Section 31 show headed by Michelle Yeoh as her Discovery character if Disco is doing so badly.
Also, I want to make clear: I hope Discovery rights the ship, starts paying real attention to canon, and comes back to Star Trek's roots. I really want to like Discovery, and be able to look back at S1 as the beginning seasons of the other shows before they found their footing. But they're going to need to do almost a full reset to get me there, given how far they've strayed.
I might recommend S2 then - S1 wasn't without its flaws, and they're doing a solid job of putting many of those weaknesses behind them.
Star Trek shows we know of CBS is planning:
Ceti Alpha V {And, no. Mister Montalban will not be Khan}
Reliant {Speculated to be Trek from the title being the name of a known Starfleet wessel}
Georgiou's show {Direct spin-off of Disco}
A different Section 31 show {Also Disco Era?}
Picard's show
Lower Decks
Sounds like Disco really torpedoed CBS's faith in Star Trek.
These all look promising! I don't know if they will cancel STD or not, you can never tell about these things. UPN cancelled Enterprise, and it was their #1 show, go figure.
With any luck, CBS will learn from all of the horrible terrible mistakes with STD, and apply that wisdom to the new shows.
Lest we not forget, CBS canceled Star Trek TOS in 1969, figuring it would never amount to anything. Let's hope they learn from THAT mistake!
NBC bro, and UPN apparently didn't learn, as they canceled Enterprise, it's #1 show at the time. People are quick to blame Bakula, but it was the idiots at UPN who cancelled their top show.
It is clearly doing well as CBS is expanding and creating two more trek shows including one with Georgiou as lead.
Actually, it hasn't done well so far. The first season numbers were very disappointing to CBS, and most industry speculation is that Disco only got a second season because Netflix essentially paid for the entirety of Season 1's production costs (and it didn't pay off for Netflix, which is why CBS had to offer the Short Treks at a steal to them after expecting to sell them for top dollar). If the numbers don't spike quite a bit with the new showrunners changing direction, it probably won't get a S3. The spin-offs are considered a desperate lunge to find something that sticks with the fans so salvage some of the development costs.
Um, could you cite your source for this?
I don't think I'm supposed to post outside links here (I forget what rules are for which forum I use), but search Youtube for Star Trek Discovery CBS Moonves, vid title is "Star Trek Discovery: The Firing of Les Moonves and the Failure of the Shorts." It pulls together a lot of the different data I'd been seeing in various reports.
Watched it..."data" is a loose term, because that's some Donald Trump-level fake news there compiled by someone who clearly has it out for Discovery. Outside of the summary of Les Moonves' departure from CBS, there's not a single piece of information in there that is based on actual facts - the breakdown of subscribers comes close, but even there it's full of speculation. It's also important to understand that CBS has never stated what they consider success for Star Trek to be. Yes, Moonves gave a target for subscribers in 2020 - but that's an overall target, and isn't being hung solely on Star Trek.
Let's also be clear - failures don't get spinoffs. Short Treks did well enough for them to invest in doing two more episodes to follow Disco S2. The Picard show, Lower Decks, potentially Starfleet Academy - all happening because Discovery is doing something right. Heck: even if you want to make the argument that all of those spinoffs exist just because CBS is trying to overcome Discovery's shortcomings (which your "source" posits), I'd love to hear the explanation for the Section 31 show headed by Michelle Yeoh as her Discovery character if Disco is doing so badly.
Also, I want to make clear: I hope Discovery rights the ship, starts paying real attention to canon, and comes back to Star Trek's roots. I really want to like Discovery, and be able to look back at S1 as the beginning seasons of the other shows before they found their footing. But they're going to need to do almost a full reset to get me there, given how far they've strayed.
I might recommend S2 then - S1 wasn't without its flaws, and they're doing a solid job of putting many of those weaknesses behind them.
Star Trek shows we know of CBS is planning:
Ceti Alpha V {And, no. Mister Montalban will not be Khan}
Reliant {Speculated to be Trek from the title being the name of a known Starfleet wessel}
Georgiou's show {Direct spin-off of Disco}
A different Section 31 show {Also Disco Era?}
Picard's show
Lower Decks
Sounds like Disco really torpedoed CBS's faith in Star Trek.
These all look promising! I don't know if they will cancel STD or not, you can never tell about these things. UPN cancelled Enterprise, and it was their #1 show, go figure.
With any luck, CBS will learn from all of the horrible terrible mistakes with STD, and apply that wisdom to the new shows.
Lest we not forget, CBS canceled Star Trek TOS in 1969, figuring it would never amount to anything. Let's hope they learn from THAT mistake!
NBC bro, and UPN apparently didn't learn, as they canceled Enterprise, it's #1 show at the time. People are quick to blame Bakula, but it was the idiots at UPN who cancelled their top show.
I blame the very poor and slow start of Enterprise especially the Dear Doctor episode when Phlox found a cure for a people dying and refused to give it to them. Bakula certainly did not help. I wish that Jeffrey Combs had been the captain. Would have been good if Enterprise had gotten a fifth season as it had gotten much better and had some really good episodes even if the end of the fourth season was terrible. UPN was likely going through financial problems.
Enterprise would have been cancelled anyway. UPN went under right after that. So I believe everything on UPN was cancelled when it went under.
Agreed.
UPN was so mismanaged that Enterprise was making them as much money as their entire line up combined. To cancel it was simply insane.
Its easy to blame Bakula because he was cast as Captain, but the people laying blame, after a bit of research, will quickly see that it was 100% the suits at UPN. The mismanagement of that entire network was epic.
Coombs would have made a better Captain, just for the record, he outacted Bakula in every scene they shared. Coombs also had a history in Star Trek going all the way back to TNG (I think? fact checks welcome!) But to lay the blame a Bakula's feet, when he is such a good actor, and when the show was in the #1 position, is grossly unfair.
I've never seen anyone blame Enterprise's demise purely on Bakula... is that really a thing? Obviously he was miscast, and given a badly-written part, but most of the parts suffered from poor writing, characterisation and/or casting. It was difficult for me to feel any tension whenever there was any action when a lucky shot on the bridge would have wiped out a lot of the show's problems.
Hackneyed, lazy plots, too much lowest-common-denominator targeting and treating the audience like compete idiots would be what I would blame its demise upon.
I've never seen anyone blame Enterprise's demise purely on Bakula... is that really a thing? Obviously he was miscast, and given a badly-written part, but most of the parts suffered from poor writing, characterisation and/or casting. It was difficult for me to feel any tension whenever there was any action when a lucky shot on the bridge would have wiped out a lot of the show's problems.
Hackneyed, lazy plots, too much lowest-common-denominator targeting and treating the audience like compete idiots would be what I would blame its demise upon.
And Enterprise needed to cheat a bit like Discovery does. Create a tech we have not seen before like Discovery has a spore drive. Instead Enterprise showed us worse versions of technology we already saw: tractor pull instead of a tractor beam, slow warp speeds that they kept bragging about but which just made them look lame, and a teleporter that barely works. Then they made a whole episode around each of those weaker technologies.
Instead Enterprise showed us worse versions of technology we already saw: tractor pull instead of a tractor beam, slow warp speeds that they kept bragging about but which just made them look lame, and a teleporter that barely works.
Now there was some potential, sadly completely thrown away - especially with the teleporter. TNG vaguely skirted around this specific issue in the episode with Thomas Riker, but some of my favorite Trek episodes have been ones that asked difficult questions that genuinely couldn't be answered - like, for example, does Data have rights as a living being? A lovely summation of that courtroom debate was the real question: does Data have a "soul"? What if the reason the teleporter was only used for cargo was because of the moral/metaphysical implications of creating a copy of a person, and then 'deleting' (i.e. killing) the original?
Even Voyager managed to touch upon similar subjects - even Neelix (NEELIX!) was going to commit suicide over what he thought of as an unnatural method of saving his life, and that he was no longer the 'real' Neelix. There was a tremendous opportunity there for Enterprise to have a thought-provoking episode with a question that cannot necessarily be answered. There was an opportunity there for one of the characters to perhaps be the first ever person forced to use the transporter on themselves, and then the transported character question their own existence/eligibility, and whether or not they still had their "soul". There was an opportunity for one of the actors to bother to act.
Nah, let's just have the Barbie dolls take their clothes off and get smeared with gel again, and then for the climax (well, the end) of the episode the captain will react childishly in a way that should get the crew killed or ship destroyed but somehow doesn't, and then any hidden messages or subtle characterizations will be flagrantly spelled out in the epilogue because the writers assume anyone watching that far must be an idiot.
Comments
I noticed that, too, and I don't have Captain Killy so you can imagine how bad it is for me! I do at least have 1/5 Chancellor L'Rell, but to use her for her secondary skill seems like a squandering of her monster primary DIP skill. Same with Mirror Garak, Kol of House Kor, and anyone else with CMD as a secondary skill.
The only ones we know for sure that are in development are the Picard series, Lower Decks, Section 31 (which is the Georgiou show, not two separate ones), and a kid’s animated series I believe.
I thought Lower Decks was the animated one...?
There are two different animated shows in development.
Lest we not forget, CBS canceled Star Trek TOS in 1969, figuring it would never amount to anything. Let's hope they learn from THAT mistake!
Wasn't that NBC? (They're not the same company, are they? I'm hazy on US networks.)
'Twas and they're not.
As for the shuttle skill breakdown, I wish it wasn't so CMD-heavy but not so much because it's harder to send out shuttles with high success probability percentages and more just because there's less reason to use Discovery bonus crew. I do, however, appreciate that MED and ENG are almost entirely absent, given that they're also almost entirely absent from the pool of Discovery crew.
ditto, only I don't event have T'Kuvma, I might change allegiance from KE to KCA shocking I know but at least you get three slots of bonuses so hopefully an improvement.
Well, I've found a set of seat assignments that average 95% success (note: only one two are 2-seater) so I can't personally complain, but I think this is pretty rough on mid-level players. Most of the bonus SRs are "useless", and I don't mean that being snotty, but rather, at < ~1500 bonused skill, useless compared to them normally being competitive with low-fused legendaries thanks to AND'ing. Out of the box they'll be in the 70-80% range. Averaging two low numbers still yields a low number. I think that's pretty harsh for players that don't have a stable of the right well-fused legendaries, and the CMD bottleneck limits how much can be offset by the event crew (really? Mirror Garak? Why?) There's only one purpose for that: to drive boost pack sales.
If not for points, then just from a fun perspective, this takes "yay, I get to use a bunch of my Discovery crew" and tramples all over it. I already use FO Burnham and Emperor Georgiou every day, I was kind of hoping to let some of the SRs finally shine. Leaves me very unexcited about the event.
I don't begrudge DB profit on the event but this is pretty poke-you-in-the-eye blunt without even a token attempt to create a cheaper path for players with shallower benches willing to play with the jigsaw puzzle pieces more. Not a fan at ALL of this approach.
Right ... though I think they won't get much past a single extra shuttle. If I were to load up the MED/SCI mission with Culber, Katrina and Grad Burnham (Saru's SEC is needed elsewhere), I could squeeze out an 87% rental shuttle. After that my success rate would drop to in the 60's% - I've never seen a shelf that steep since they started with the rentals. There just aren't enough single-skill-CMD crew available. So the good news is I don't think this event will be "won" by people buying massive numbers of rentals
I really hope this is not the norm...
That's the customer type that will spend money on the extra shuttles. I haven't done it (yet) in this event but I did figure out the percentages for if I wanted to do it. If I drop too far (not worried about anything other than top 1500 for event) I may send out a wave or two of 8 shuttles.
It's a mega though, so the Disco crew might be useful later on (the hybrid event most likely).
I know, we’re saying the same thing in different ways. Yes, you can send a set of 8 shuttles but you also could have probably won easily with sleepless nights and precision clockwork as well. My CMD bench is just barely enough to fill out the shuttles with high scores and be able to stop boosting tonight, but I think i’m clearly on the hairy edge.
The extra shuttles won’t be much help for players that couldn’t have otherwise ranked handily, is what I was saying. I think they really don’t have much choice other than to drop an extra large bundle of boosts into this one and live even more by the clock. Happy to be proved wrong though. :-)
NBC bro, and UPN apparently didn't learn, as they canceled Enterprise, it's #1 show at the time. People are quick to blame Bakula, but it was the idiots at UPN who cancelled their top show.
Agreed.
UPN was so mismanaged that Enterprise was making them as much money as their entire line up combined. To cancel it was simply insane.
Its easy to blame Bakula because he was cast as Captain, but the people laying blame, after a bit of research, will quickly see that it was 100% the suits at UPN. The mismanagement of that entire network was epic.
Coombs would have made a better Captain, just for the record, he outacted Bakula in every scene they shared. Coombs also had a history in Star Trek going all the way back to TNG (I think? fact checks welcome!) But to lay the blame a Bakula's feet, when he is such a good actor, and when the show was in the #1 position, is grossly unfair.
Hackneyed, lazy plots, too much lowest-common-denominator targeting and treating the audience like compete idiots would be what I would blame its demise upon.
Now there was some potential, sadly completely thrown away - especially with the teleporter. TNG vaguely skirted around this specific issue in the episode with Thomas Riker, but some of my favorite Trek episodes have been ones that asked difficult questions that genuinely couldn't be answered - like, for example, does Data have rights as a living being? A lovely summation of that courtroom debate was the real question: does Data have a "soul"? What if the reason the teleporter was only used for cargo was because of the moral/metaphysical implications of creating a copy of a person, and then 'deleting' (i.e. killing) the original?
Even Voyager managed to touch upon similar subjects - even Neelix (NEELIX!) was going to commit suicide over what he thought of as an unnatural method of saving his life, and that he was no longer the 'real' Neelix. There was a tremendous opportunity there for Enterprise to have a thought-provoking episode with a question that cannot necessarily be answered. There was an opportunity there for one of the characters to perhaps be the first ever person forced to use the transporter on themselves, and then the transported character question their own existence/eligibility, and whether or not they still had their "soul". There was an opportunity for one of the actors to bother to act.
Nah, let's just have the Barbie dolls take their clothes off and get smeared with gel again, and then for the climax (well, the end) of the episode the captain will react childishly in a way that should get the crew killed or ship destroyed but somehow doesn't, and then any hidden messages or subtle characterizations will be flagrantly spelled out in the epilogue because the writers assume anyone watching that far must be an idiot.