No Right Answer: Best Star Trek Captain Ever

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4
 

Rogue 09:

Just wanted to verify, my love is for Prime Kirk, not stupid reboot Kirk. Sorry, I take that back too: It wasn't a reboot, because reboots are separated from the original story-line. This one over-rights the original, which is a blatant foul and disgusting mess.

Agree with your comments about Sisko... and Picard.

I never really got this complaint. Just how many times have parallel universes or alternate realities happened on Star Trek, and hwo many of them have been destroyed so that the Prime characters have been able to return to the way they were? And why should it matter?

The TNG episode Parallels showed that there were literally countless parallel universes that were springing up every second, and they were all put back to where they belonged once Worf figured out the solution. Those universes didn't cease to exist just because they didn't appear to the Prime characters anymore.

Or take another episode like The Visitor. Jake Sisko lived an entire lifetime without his father, wrote a couple of books, got married, lost his wife and obsessed over saving his dad from the temporal vortex. And when he committed suicide to save them both, things went back to the way they were.

But does that mean that future never happened? Or does it simply mena that by returning to the original Prime universe, that alternate reality continued on in one of the other countless parallel universes.

The way I see it, the only differences to the Prime Universe is that now Romulus is destroyed, and Ambassador Spock was presumed lost nullifying the Supernova. The rest of the universe goes on as usual, while the Narada and the Jellyfish create a parallel reality when they burst into existence near the Neutral Zone.

The black hole already threw them across time and space, from Romulus to the Neutral Zone Border a hundred and fifty years in the past. What's there to say that it didn't throw them into a new reality as well? After all, if changing the past was enough to casue Vulcan to suddenly have a moon, why is Prime Spock still alive?

I'm seeing a mirror universe setup.

In the end it doesn't matter, like Prime Spock says. Prime still happened and most likely will continue to happen, just in another reality than what the new films show us.

Rogue 09:

Ed130:

DVS BSTrD:
I would have known that if I'd ever been able to watch the series all the way through (curse you Spike TV!)THAT I remember :)
But did Q ever come back?

No he did not!

Q didn't return to the station for the rest of the series, nor did he have fun with the Defiant.

Of course Sisko had to deal with the Founders, the Vorta (especially four of the clones of Weyoun), Dukat, being a Messiah figure to the Bajorans and the Ferengi.

Yes, he did come back. He came back with Vash. C'mon people

Err... The Episode with Vash returning was the one where Sisko punched Q. It was also the only appearence of Q in the DS9 series.

Ed130:

Rogue 09:

Ed130:

No he did not!

Q didn't return to the station for the rest of the series, nor did he have fun with the Defiant.

Of course Sisko had to deal with the Founders, the Vorta (especially four of the clones of Weyoun), Dukat, being a Messiah figure to the Bajorans and the Ferengi.

Yes, he did come back. He came back with Vash. C'mon people

Err... The Episode with Vash returning was the one where Sisko punched Q. It was also the only appearence of Q in the DS9 series.

I am ashamed. I have tried so hard to forget that entire series that I had split the two of them into two different episodes. I was mixing up Q's visit to the Enterprise when he was attacked by the Calamarain, the episode where Sisko is the game and the little girl is singing about the Calamarain, and the Vash episode. My explicit apologies good sir.

Soviet Heavy:

I see a normal person who is trying to do the best he can with what he's got. Not a paragon of humanity overflowing with arrogance like Season 1/2 Picard. Picard had to have everything stripped from him by the Borg before he learned a damn thing about humility.

Not everyone in Starfleet can live up to the Federation's lofty ideals. People like Sisko show that the Federation has flws, and that it should be working towards its idealized future, rather than declaring "we are perfect, because we have moved beyond what humanity was in teh 20th century that we are criticizing."

I really respect that Ira Steven Behr and Micheal Piller were able to go this route with Deep Space Nine. Lots of people say the show is a bastardization of Gene's vision, but really, you can only stay with the morally superior humans so long before you want to see them get their faces smashed in for being such pompous jackasses.

And they managed to tell stories that Gene simply wouldn't allow when he was alive. By the end of his run with Star Trek, Gene was quickly becoming another George Lucas, vetoing numerous story ideas because they didn't conform with his vision of the future.

Was Picard a paragon overflowing with arrogance? I think that might be a fair description. However, Q was able to show him the folly of his ways, and how far humanity really had to go. It was a character arc that was really very interesting. The whole point of the Borg storyline was that not everyone could be negotiated with, and that Humanity really had a long ways to go. This came out two years before Roddenberry's death.

Starfleet captains were supposed to be the best of the best. Completely moral and resolute in their duty. You would constantly see other Captains failing this in TOS and TNG, but the shows focused on everything humanity should strive to be today. The fact that they struggled with the decisions (like following the Prime directive) was an instruction that one cannot simply rely on emotion to make command decisions, but must logically determine their course of action and should always act within the rules of the Federation, because they're there for a reason.

If Sisko was good for anything, it was to show exactly why the Prime Directive is in effect. He constantly is going back in time and purposefully getting involved and changing the timeline, he was instrumental in starting or nearly starting wars with almost every race he came in contact with (Founders, Cardassians, Romulans, and even the Klingons), and was such an asshole even the Breen decided to take him down.

In fact, if you count all the Starfleet officers and civilians who died because of Sisko's actions, he beat Kirk's record by several thousand times.

Soviet Heavy:
I never really got this complaint. Just how many times have parallel universes or alternate realities happened on Star Trek, and hwo many of them have been destroyed so that the Prime characters have been able to return to the way they were? And why should it matter?

The TNG episode Parallels showed that there were literally countless parallel universes that were springing up every second, and they were all put back to where they belonged once Worf figured out the solution. Those universes didn't cease to exist just because they didn't appear to the Prime characters anymore.

Or take another episode like The Visitor. Jake Sisko lived an entire lifetime without his father, wrote a couple of books, got married, lost his wife and obsessed over saving his dad from the temporal vortex. And when he committed suicide to save them both, things went back to the way they were.

But does that mean that future never happened? Or does it simply mena that by returning to the original Prime universe, that alternate reality continued on in one of the other countless parallel universes.

The way I see it, the only differences to the Prime Universe is that now Romulus is destroyed, and Ambassador Spock was presumed lost nullifying the Supernova. The rest of the universe goes on as usual, while the Narada and the Jellyfish create a parallel reality when they burst into existence near the Neutral Zone.

The black hole already threw them across time and space, from Romulus to the Neutral Zone Border a hundred and fifty years in the past. What's there to say that it didn't throw them into a new reality as well? After all, if changing the past was enough to casue Vulcan to suddenly have a moon, why is Prime Spock still alive?

I'm seeing a mirror universe setup.

In the end it doesn't matter, like Prime Spock says. Prime still happened and most likely will continue to happen, just in another reality than what the new films show us.

I'm glad you asked, though it's a little off topic so I'll try to keep it short. I'll answer each of your points individually as we see them in the Star Trek cannon.

The big problem as we see it is how it was explained in the move:

==============================================================================
Spock: You're assuming that Nero knows how events are predicted to unfold. The contrary, Nero's very presence has altered the flow of history, beginning with the attack on the U.S.S. Kelvin, culminating in the events of today, thereby creating an entire new chain of incidents that cannot be anticipated by either party.
Lt. Nyota Uhura: An alternate reality.
==============================================================================

From reading that, I think that Nero goes back in time, does something different, and now they're saying that it's an alternate reality. However, that's contrary to the writing for the previous series on how time travel effects the future.

Your example of Parallels doesn't negate this, because we are not saying that there are not alternate realities. Obviously, Mirror Universe and the like exist (and I waver on whether I'm thankful for that or not DS9), so that isn't the issue.

It is explained in that episode that as event occur, decisions are made, every possible outcome happens. This creates the separate universes. This does not have anything to do with time travel, which would be moving backward or forward on that timeline.

The Vistor isn't really a great example either, since it deals with Sisko more being trapped and coming back every once in awhile. The whole point of the ending is to erase what has happened by preventing destroying the link that is keeping Sisko stuck. This is about altering history, which is what I'm here to talk about today. (With examples!)

City on the Edge of Forever. One of the originals. McCoy goes back in time, does something different, and doesn't enter a new reality but completely reshapes their reality. They're stranded on the planet surface because there no longer is any Enterprise in orbit, because time has been rewritten.

Star Trek: First Contact. They're in the process of going back in time, and they actively see the earth in their timeline as being consumed by the borg. They set history mostly to rights and go back home. The point again here is that they're actively seeing their timeline being changed.

In the Voyager episode "Sabotage", Captain Braxton is leaping around,righting wrong, and hoping that the next leap with be the leap home. It's all about preserving the timeline when it has been changed. Not "oh, well. It'll all work itself out in another timeline. No harm no foul".

So this "It's an alternate reality" just seems really lazy and not in conjunction with previous cannon (and there are many more than the few I mentioned. I think Enterprise did a big thing on it.)

So our problem isn't that the Star Trek of old lost Romulus and Spock (we'll probably never see this universe again), but that they basically erased everything up to a point and started over again. Meaning that 4 series of Star Trek (24 seasons, if I'm not mistaken) were all wiped out because JJ Abrams can't do homework.

This isn't the only problem of the movie that is bad. A Nova destroying the galaxy, Romulus not being able to detect it (or being able to detect it was coming and didn't evacuate because Spock was coming???), the insane coincidences that brought the crew together, Engineering being a brewery, Kirk being a useless a-hole, etc. There were a lot of reasons to dislike the move, this is just probably the biggest.

Back to favorite captain!:

I demand a recount! I agree with Dan, but even if I didn't, he was in top shape in this debate!

WHAT ARE YOU HIDING, CHRIS

Soviet Heavy:

saintdane05:
Excuse me, but no Archer? No Sisko? No Pike? No Janeway? No Mackenzie Calhoun?

image

You need to see more Star Trek.

Calhoun is one badass motherfucker. I don't think any other person completed the Kobayashi Maru quite the way he did.

I really need to read the books about Calhoun. The Kobayashi Maru should probably be used to determine the character archetype these days, rather than provide an actual no win scenario. Didn't they discontinue it as a no-win scenario back in Star Trek II anyway?

Rogue 09:

You cannot avoid all the glaring deficiencies and idiotic actions by Sisko. He played a major part of another culture's religion without any real argument (Said he was "uncomfortable" a few times, but pretty much accepted the role specifically for the power and influence it would grant him) which is very un-starfleet of him. Oh, and for those "He was still a God" people, he joined a group of aliens (abandoning his newborn child) whose only contributions to the galaxy are living in a hole in space. Yeah, they talked a lot about helping out Bajor, but when the Cardassians came about they really weren't into helping out that much, were they?

He also had one of his senior officers betray him, and then he couldn't catch him. Sisko was so incompetent he couldn't take that "great warship he built" (that was structurally flawed to the point it could destroy itself) and capture a single person who has nearly no resources. Your great captain, ladies and gentlemen! He finally did get him to surrender, but only by threatening to murder thousands of innocent people.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I object to some of his decisions. Most of the Sisko fans seem to be in that group because of the one time he tricked the Romulans into believing the Dominion was planning an attack. I should remind everyone, though, that he pretty much failed in every part of his plan in that episode and it was Garrack who actually saved the day.

Kirk had to deal with threats from both the Romulan and the Klingon Empires. For those who say he was a glory-hound or took too much risk in away parties, let me remind you that his crew included only 400 people. Most of these were specialists in fields as disparate as psychology, ship operations, biology, etc. He always took down the best group for the job and went himself so he could actively see and work with what was going on. Typically, the people remaining on ship flew around and did nothing, as they frequently lost contact with the away team. He always left the ship in the hands of one of his senior staff, usually Scotty. There was no diplomat on board, no councilor. His 1st in command was a science specialist, the only one with expertise in a field (Riker was a good pilot, Kira was a militia fighter, Chakotay was... well... indian?). Everybody else was needed somewhere and Kirk's job was to lead. Sue him.

Oh, and Sisko's girlfriend also betrayed him without him realizing it... but it's okay, because that's the type of person you want to marry and then immediately abandon. C'mon, this guy is a moron! What do you people see in him???

I agree completely, and there was the fact that Sisko only had 2 emotions when dealing with a situation, annoyed and angry , getting up in peoples faces seemed like his only recourse when he was at a disadvantage and he was, a lot. Having him punch Q and suffer no reaction from Q was a poor writing choice that was a "see the new guy is tougher than Picard" which was a lowbrow move because it only proved Sisko was written in Picard's shadow. Same as his exchange with Picard at the beginning of the series. He barley qualifies as a captain to me because he barley ever commanded the defiant. He was busy playing Emissary, stomping all over the prime directive and being the last person to figure anything out.

Rogue 09:

Ed130:

Rogue 09:

Yes, he did come back. He came back with Vash. C'mon people

Err... The Episode with Vash returning was the one where Sisko punched Q. It was also the only appearence of Q in the DS9 series.

I am ashamed. I have tried so hard to forget that entire series that I had split the two of them into two different episodes. I was mixing up Q's visit to the Enterprise when he was attacked by the Calamarain, the episode where Sisko is the game and the little girl is singing about the Calamarain, and the Vash episode. My explicit apologies good sir.

No worries, I completely forgot about Vash in that episode and had to to a quick wiki check.

Also for everyone's viewing pleasure

Sisko or Picard. Even Janeway was better than Kirk.

Based on the Star Trek TV shows I'd vote for Sisko. He was a great character and captain. In addition he actually punched Q (see video above)

nodlimax:
Based on the Star Trek TV shows I'd vote for Sisko. He was a great character and captain. In addition he actually punched Q (see video above)

All he proved was he couldn't find Q intellectually. Q's whole bag from the very beginning was proving that humanity was a barbaric and savage race, and Sisko gave him proof. Yeah, I can totally see why you'd think he was a Grade A Captain

I don't know who the best captain was but Kirk is at the bottom of my list.

Imagine taking each captain in their prime and putting them in a round table discussion on how to deal with the Borg or the Dominion.

Kirk is a relic, fine for his time but not after and certainly not as a command officer.

Dascylus:
I don't know who the best captain was but Kirk is at the bottom of my list.

Imagine taking each captain in their prime and putting them in a round table discussion on how to deal with the Borg or the Dominion.

Kirk is a relic, fine for his time but not after and certainly not as a command officer.

Watch this video for that exact situation.
http://sfdebris.com/videos/startrek/d524.asp

In fact, everyone here should watch SF Debris Star Trek videos.

DrOswald:
I am always shocked to see how many people think Janeway was the best. She was a terrible captain from every point of view. Janeway was a Mary Sue that the writers could never allow to be wrong. 90% of her decisions as captain were idiotic. She is openly condescending to her crew and dismissive of their concerns. She is prejudice, refuses to follow Starfleet protocol when it is inconvenient and hides behind the prime directive whenever she doesn't want to do something. She promotes someone who is unable to identify shit with a tricorder to chief engineer (This is true. It happened in the episode titled "The 37's".) When Captain Picard defends the rights of a artificially created being, he argues that the superficial fact of Data's construction has no effect on his status as a sentient being. Janeway argues that we all know the doctor is no more valuable than a toaster, but lets throw him a bone to make him happy.

The only possible way Janeway is a good captain is, as inevitableFate pointed out, from a strictly in universe lore perspective. You see, The writers of Voyager had Janeway one up every captain in Starfleet history and made sure that their Mary Sue was always right, no matter the circumstance. The only possible way Janeway can be seen as a good captain is the direct result of very bad writing.

In any case, here is my list, best comes first:

1. Sisko
2. Picard
3. Classic Kirk
4. Kirk 2009 (An extremely shallow but still enjoyable character.)
------------------The line that separates good from bad----------------------
5. Archer (Enterprise should have been subtitled "rednecks in space")
6. Janeway

Don't forget that Janeway is also a cold-blooded murderer; Tuvix? Substantial portions of the Voyager crew should have been discharged from Starfleet on their return, and Janeway should have been locked away for her near-continual failures, violations, and the willful murder of an innocent sentient being.

I mean it's pretty telling that the only way they could make Janeway look good was to compare her to Ransom, a man guilty of actual genocide.

this one of those discussions where there is no right answer >. >

Definitely going with Picard. I want my captain to be level-headed and wise.

Fun fact:
The great voice of Patrick Stewart can be heard as a pirate in the role of "Adventure" in the Pagemaster.

Everyone knows that Benjamin Sisko is and shall ever be the best Captain in Star Trek. Lets look at the list:

1 - Became an actual avatar to a race of omnipotent gods and didn't let it stop him from completing his duties.

2 - Managed to steal the most badass person in Picards' crew (Worf) and finally gave him something to do other than scowl and aim weapons.

3 - Single handedly stopped or won THREE wars (Klingon/Federation, Dominion/Federation, Prophets/Pah-Wraiths).

4 - Was basically the Batman of Star trek (Started with tragedy[death of wife], became ultimate hero).

5 - Also dealt with Q and instead of getting embroiled in his shenanigans just dismissed him with authority.

6 - Cleaned up messes left by both Picard (Tom Riker / Worf / Maquis) AND Kirk (tribbles, alternate universe).

7 - Managed to deal with the beurocratic nightmare of running an open trading port serving at least THREE distinct and differing cultures at any given time and still was an awesome leader, adhering to starfleet rules.

8 - Was from New Orleans (awesome place, full of awesome people).

9 - Could cook better than anybody else in star trek. (who needs a frakkin' Replicator!)

10 - Sucessfully defended the ENTIRE quadrant from dominion invasion with JUST The Defiant.

11 - Managed to convince starfleet and THE ROMULANS to let him Borrow a cloaking device.

12 - His nemesis was also the avatar of an omnipotent race, and Sisko beat him at every turn.

13 - Discovered the Bajoran atlantis.

14 - Went back in time and became a pivotal man in the fight for equality in earths past.

15 - Oh yeah, did I mention that he did most of this BEFORE being promoted to Captain? That's right, Benjamin Sisko was a better Captain than Kirk, Picard, Archer, AND Janeway while he was still a COMMANDER!

/Discussion

For reference, my picks of who is best (other than Sisko) are as follows:

2-Picard
3-Kirk
4-Janeway
5-Archer

gardian06:

DVS BSTrD:
Fuck you Dan!
Sisko is the MAN!

But he's also not a captain, he's a commander. Janeway was a bitch.
And that's it. There was nobody else.
At all
>_>
<_<

at least Janeway didn't woos out, and call starfleet every time something bad happened. it was just her ship, and that was it. If you are going on she is a bitch because she is female then Sexist.

also if you would remember there were a few times when Kirk was demoted from Captain.

Janeway when she wasn't being written as a freaking Mary Sue came off as if somebody had thrown Captain Garth and Doctor Janice Lester into a blender for the crazy with a side order of John Gill for the stupidity. Of course to be fair to the character the Prime Directive had been twisted into a parody of itself by that time:

Kirk: Planet in danger, must save the people. (The Paradise Syndrome)

Picard: Planet in danger. Well they have no content with advanced people so sucks to be them. Next planet. What you mean Mr Data has been talking to someone on that planet? Well Prime Directive is hosed so I guess we now have to save them. (Pen pals)

As for Kirk being demoted *from* Captain-when in any of the shows or movies with Shatner did that ever happen? Removed from command yes but not demoted.

Captain Archer is way below Janeway for what it is worth.

DVS BSTrD:

Ne1butme:

He was the best commander (suck it riker) and then when he got promoted at the end of season 3, he was the best captain.

I would have known that if I'd ever been able to watch the series all the way through (curse you Spike TV!)

I would say that if you do have the free time and you feel like watching all of DS9, I'd recommend getting Netflix for a month or two. Think of it as a long rental fee, right now for me, two months is 16 dollars.

The reason I recommend it is that Netflix has every Star Trek series in full. I practically have a ritual of watching most every ST series every year or two.

I actually like DS9 the most, because it shows the Federation at times of proper war situations(also I like seeing giant fleets of ships doing battle, and ship to ship battles in general).

Sonic Doctor:

DVS BSTrD:

Ne1butme:

He was the best commander (suck it riker) and then when he got promoted at the end of season 3, he was the best captain.

I would have known that if I'd ever been able to watch the series all the way through (curse you Spike TV!)

I would say that if you do have the free time and you feel like watching all of DS9, I'd recommend getting Netflix for a month or two. Think of it as a long rental fee, right now for me, two months is 16 dollars.

The reason I recommend it is that Netflix has every Star Trek series in full. I practically have a ritual of watching most every ST series every year or two.

I actually like DS9 the most, because it shows the Federation at times of proper war situations(also I like seeing giant fleets of ships doing battle, and ship to ship battles in general).

This! Soo much this. I actually have DS9 on DVD (all seven seasons) and I watch it through at least once a year. The character progression and writing are the best in the entire franchise, by far!

Rogue 09:

If Sisko was good for anything, it was to show exactly why the Prime Directive is in effect. He constantly is going back in time and purposefully getting involved and changing the timeline, he was instrumental in starting or nearly starting wars with almost every race he came in contact with (Founders, Cardassians, Romulans, and even the Klingons), and was such an asshole even the Breen decided to take him down.

In fact, if you count all the Starfleet officers and civilians who died because of Sisko's actions, he beat Kirk's record by several thousand times.

What you say is both untrue and unfair.

First of all, Sisko never intentionally went back in time and never intentionally gets involved with any major historical events. In fact, Sisko experienced less instances of time travel than any other Star Trek captain on which a series is based on, and Sisko is the only captain who never intentionally time traveled (except maybe Archer, I haven't seen enterprise for a while so I can't remember.)

Second, Sisko was not the cause of any war. The one everyone always points to is the Dominion war, but he was not responsible for that war. The dominion was building up a massive invasion force. A war was going to happen eventually, the only question was how screwed the alpha quadrant was when it did. In fact, the Founders had already committed acts of war against the federation, such as blowing up a building on Earth. Sisko did the only sensible thing in mining the worm hole. And you will note that his action, placing a minefield in a territory you own, was not an act of war. He left actually committing an act of war to the Dominion.

And every other war Sisko was involved in was a similar situation. Yes, there was a war and Sisko was a prominent figure in each of those wars because DS9 and the worm hole were the focus of the fighting. But he is no more responsible for those wars than the Dominion war.

Rogue 09:

You cannot avoid all the glaring deficiencies and idiotic actions by Sisko. He played a major part of another culture's religion without any real argument (Said he was "uncomfortable" a few times, but pretty much accepted the role specifically for the power and influence it would grant him) which is very un-starfleet of him. Oh, and for those "He was still a God" people, he joined a group of aliens (abandoning his newborn child) whose only contributions to the galaxy are living in a hole in space. Yeah, they talked a lot about helping out Bajor, but when the Cardassians came about they really weren't into helping out that much, were they?

He also had one of his senior officers betray him, and then he couldn't catch him. Sisko was so incompetent he couldn't take that "great warship he built" (that was structurally flawed to the point it could destroy itself) and capture a single person who has nearly no resources. Your great captain, ladies and gentlemen! He finally did get him to surrender, but only by threatening to murder thousands of innocent people.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I object to some of his decisions. Most of the Sisko fans seem to be in that group because of the one time he tricked the Romulans into believing the Dominion was planning an attack. I should remind everyone, though, that he pretty much failed in every part of his plan in that episode and it was Garrack who actually saved the day.

Kirk had to deal with threats from both the Romulan and the Klingon Empires. For those who say he was a glory-hound or took too much risk in away parties, let me remind you that his crew included only 400 people. Most of these were specialists in fields as disparate as psychology, ship operations, biology, etc. He always took down the best group for the job and went himself so he could actively see and work with what was going on. Typically, the people remaining on ship flew around and did nothing, as they frequently lost contact with the away team. He always left the ship in the hands of one of his senior staff, usually Scotty. There was no diplomat on board, no councilor. His 1st in command was a science specialist, the only one with expertise in a field (Riker was a good pilot, Kira was a militia fighter, Chakotay was... well... indian?). Everybody else was needed somewhere and Kirk's job was to lead. Sue him.

Oh, and Sisko's girlfriend also betrayed him without him realizing it... but it's okay, because that's the type of person you want to marry and then immediately abandon. C'mon, this guy is a moron! What do you people see in him???

I will address your points in list format.

1. Sisko grudgingly played a huge role in an alien religion.

This is true, and it was very un-starfleet of him, but it wasn't actually violating any regulations and more importantly it wasn't necessarily wrong. The Prophets asked him to be their spokesman, and he agreed to their terms. He was sincere in his efforts, which we know because he eventually converted to the religion. It may not have been the Starfleet thing to do, someone like Picard would not have done it, but that does not make it wrong.

2. Sisko left his wife and child to become a God.

This we actually do not know for sure. The ending of DS9 was vague. I personally don't think Sisko had any choice in how that all played out or he would have chosen to return immediately. Remember, when Kasidy asked if he could return now his words were "I can't, not now." There is a better than even chance that those words were literal. He was, at that time, incapable of returning to Kasidy.

3. He had a senior officer betray him.

True, but that officer was assigned to him by starfleet and was already a Maquis at the time. This cannot be blamed on Sisko

4. Sisko was too incompetent to catch Eddington, even with the advantage of the Defiant.

Catching a skilled terrorist in their own territory among their supporters is difficult enough when you are looking within a single country or city, let alone a dozen or more planets. A powerful warship is not going to be an advantage at all unless you draw them out with a show of force, which is exactly how Sisko got him in the end. Frankly, the mistake was sending Sisko to go after Eddington in the first place. This should have been a task for Starfleet intelligence, but Starfleet answers every problem with "throw the nearest captain at it" no matter how little sense that makes.

5. The Defiant was poorly designed.

The flaws in design were relatively minor even if the results of these flaws was dramatic. It only took 2 weeks for Miles O'Brein to fix the design and actually make all the necessary changes to the Defiant, after which the design entered full production. The defiant class was a success.

6. Without Garrak, Sisko would have failed his attempt at espionage in the episode "In the Pale Moonlight."

This is absolutely true. Sisko knew that he was incapable of such sophisticated espionage, which is why he enlisted Garak. This is what a good commanding officer does. He used his influence to enlist someone who was capable of the task at hand. Garak said it himself: "That's why you came to me, isn't it captain? Because you knew I could do those things that you weren't capable of doing."

Sisko was a captain that did not subscribe to the normal Starfleet way of thinking. He certainly had his flaws, but he had several traits that I liked a lot that I thought made him an interesting character.

For example, Sisko did not see federation dogma as sacred. He was willing to honestly question his own beliefs and, even more importantly, he was willing to adjust his beliefs when they proved inadequate.

Also, he was actually tolerant and understanding of other cultures and peoples. He studied other cultures and when he saw something of value there he integrated it into his life. He read and understood the rules of acquisition, he sponsored a Ferengi entering Starfleet, and gladly participated in Klingon and Bajoran rituals. He even joined an alien religion.

Sisko is not your average Starfleet captain, which I find interesting.

Bald Sisko > Picard > Kirk > Non-bald Sisko > Sulu > Janeeway >>>>>>>> Captain "Cameron from Ferris Beuller" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Captain Deranged Hobo (AKA Archer)

This is why I'm not above basing my decision on the most baseless considerations: like who has the coolest ship.

This should really be best Enterprise Captain ever. Sisko was definitely the most badass captain of any Star Trek series. Janeway was too inconsistently written to be in the running for the best and Archer... well the less said the better.

image

Mackenzie Calhoun.

Because welding your own face back together with a plasma torch, blowing up the Kobayashi Maru in the test of the same name and actually getting the "Lock the opposing side's leaders in a room together and leave them there till they sort it out" diplomacy technique to work makes you a badass.

Also if you want to stick with cannon - toss up between Picard and Sisco for me.

Canon, not cannon.

A couple of you have made this mistake. I understand it's a simple error but try to be more careful.

As for the entire "best captain" debate, I would truly love to see Star Trek fans engage in a debate about who is the best writer (or lead writer). After all, these captains are fictional characters. For every moment of badass, every inconsistency, everything that makes you admire one character and everything that makes you view another as inferior -- all of this is the result of how the character was written by a team of perhaps a dozen or more people. It's true that the actor's performance gives it life, and the actor embodies that character, but that actor wouldn't be a 'captain' without a script and a director.

I feel it's just too esoteric to actually have that discussion. I don't know that many Trekkies who pay attention to who wrote each episode and also have a memory for that sort of thing. I know I don't.

The answer, of course, is Picard.

Janeway and Archer don't count, they became admirals ... which in the ST universe means they couldn't hack it, but use their extensive influence to bag themselves a lazy ass desk job on Earth.

The saddest thing about the New Star Trek Universe is that all the good Captains will not have ever existed. Because honestly, what universe that would allow Picard and Sisko to exist if something as traumatic on a galactic stage as the destruction of Vulcan happened?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here