View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
10-24-2010, 10:11 PM
Originally Posted by Dakota2063 View Post
I know many people have differing opinions on what would be considered appropriate for A "peace loving" culture, such as the Federation, But I do disagree with the sentiment that Star fleet should never build war ships. I would like to take you through my reasoning why, and apply it to a stand point of both learning from history, and what a real Stellar empire, even a peace loving one would do.

The primary goal of any society is survival, if you lack the power to guarantee your continued existence, then your culture is doomed form the beginning, this is doubly true for any peaceful, culture. If you are not at least as strong if not stronger then your enemies, or those who wish you harm, then you can never hope to beat them and prevail. Now, I always thought of the Federation, while militarily more peaceful, an entity that was trying to conquer the galaxy, not through war, but through economics. They seek co-existence with all life, becasue they feel all life has a right to live, but co-existence requires might to reinforce. The Federation is, and will always seek a peaceful end to any hostilities, as any fight, no matter how justified, or necessary comes at a high price.

However, and I love who star fleet go around this, you still need a military might. A police force of sorts for trouble spots, but more importantly, a competent "stick". "Speak softly, but carry a big stick" is by far one of greatest quotes and sums up the idea of any peaceful society. Don't start fights, don't cause trouble, be kind and look for ways to make both sides happy, but always be ready to back up your side with force in order to prevent unnecessary conflict, and more importantly, to safe guard your way of life. The federation found a nice comprise to having a dedicated war fleet, and a dedicated peace core, and that is to combine the two into one. A powerful warship with peaceful exploration also in mind is brilliant.

Not only are your ships capable of defending them selves, but also second as a competent war ship in times of need, with out having to force into production a war ship after the call of conflict and suffer from a lack of experienced crew. A battle ship is a heavier class of war ship, just as cruiser is above frigates and escorts. Star fleet has always had it share of large war capable vessels, including several variations on battle ships and dreadnoughts. There is a canon version of a constitution styled (three engined) dreadnought in the old technical manuals that document the Federation and Star fleet from the original shows and a behinds the look at what the show was about form the creators.

I totally agree with you.

Originally Posted by Dakota2063 View Post
Any stellar entity understands the value of a pure military force, as each entity has one, but it's less of you having them and more of how you use them that will define how other entities will look at you. If you don't use your "defiants", battleships, and carriers to expand your border or use them to bully others, that will show any others that you are honorable, and yet they also know you can defend them and their interest if they did become allied with you.

I know I ranted pretty long here, but after playing many different "space Empire" Sim games and studying empires as a whole, I do have a bit of experience with trying to emulate a peaceful empire. Treaties are hard to forge, and if you are to be one of the strongest and survive, you need both the capabilities to secure victory in case of war and offer assistance to those you want as allies. I have never once won a game, even of a race to peace, with out fighting, and ultimately, their have been a few empires that I had to crush just to maintain peace with others. Sad but true.

You can't compare the Star Trek universe with a generic Sci-Fi game universe.
The Federation (humaity) has evolved into .... well it has never explained very well in the shows. But as long as they insist that they did, we should belive them.

I have myself quite a bit experience with those games and the only thing i can say is that the Trek Universe somehow must work in a different way.
Its like comparing apple with oranges, it won't work.

Realism in a Show/Game goes only that far as much as the author or game designer allows.
So the question is, does the game you are talking about, allow to be played in a "federation" way, in the first place?
Most do not. So as i stated before, you can't compare the "realism" of a Strategy game with the "realism" of the Star Trek universe.

Originally Posted by Dakota2063 View Post
I admire the Federation and it's principles, however I also know that the vision a lot of people have about it is not entirely accurate, and sometimes seems weak, becasue other have made it seem like they give in to others demands and not get involved when they should have. (Good example is several instances in the Path to 2409) Of course this is how I see the Federation. Strong capable, wise, and while favoring peaceful resolution, will fight and defend them selves if they are forced to.

After all, Name a time where a captain hasn't fired back when attacked simply becasue they didn't get direct orders from command to defend them selves.
Maybe it's just my fault because i am a fan of those times where Picard was still a Diplomat and not John McLane 2.0.

Thank you for reading.