[ July 27, 2001: Message edited by: Dr Phlox ]

I can't believe I actually read the entire thing. My brain hurts now...
 

And Sisko says: "Worf, don't!"
He sounds more dissapointed than alarmed. Like, "Oh no, just like last year's christmas party!!!"

[ July 28, 2001: Message edited by: Nimrod ]

First, the characterizations are way off of the actual characters. Janeway wouldn't flagrantly bump Chakotay out of his executive officer position to make room for Sisko. Likewise, I don't think Janeway would put Sisko in command of the bridge as she leaves in the Flyer. If this were to happen, Chakotay would not simply say "I'll be in engineering" as his captain dumped him for Sisko. Tuvok would not sigh or argue with Janeway over every little decision that Janeway makes. And B'Elanna would not simply allow O'Brien to just jump into messing with her engines. We know how touchy she is about those engines. Worf also would not disobey Sisko's order in order to go galavanting around the ships slashing Cardassians. In short, you need to study the characters you're writing about a lot more before you actually begin writing about them.

Second, there are some discrepencies between the series and this story. Torpedoes would not be launched by Tom Paris from the flight control station. That would be Tuvok at the tactical station. The Defiant, to the best that we know, cannot land on planet surfaces. From DS9's "Meridian," we know that the Defiant can crash on a planet. However, this is best a discussion for the Starships forum. It's also doubtful that a Defiant class starship lends itself easily to being modified for slipstream travel. The Defiant is a hardcore warship with tried and true systems. No jury-rigging allowed except under the most unusual circumstances. Also, why would Chakotay and the other Maquis on Voyager know about the Defiant? Tom Riker and a small band of his comrads did steal the Defiant once, but that was just them and not the entire Maquis. This leads to another characterization issue: Sisko has a severe dislike for the Maquis and I doubt he would specifically request that the Maquis could fight with him.

Third, the story itself is confusing and contrary to itself at times. For starters, what was the Defiant doing with slipstream technology? How did she get the technology? Why were the Cardassians chasing her and how did they get into slipstream? There was absolutely no exposition. Next, how did Worf manage to kill 300 Cardassians in a short amount of time? Worf could in no way handle that many opponents even if they attacked one-at-a-time from a single-file line. He'd be exhausted swinging that bat'leth to slash them let alone with the Cardassian fighting back. And one most realize that Worf is using a sword-like instrument against plasma-weapon carrying Cardassians. It didn't work for the Klingons in "Way of the Warrior." The entire middle section is confusing as to which ship the action is taking place on. You gave indications that things were happening on the Defiant under to have someone been to the other side and start that section with "aboard the Defiant." Add to that, there was a lot of unnecessary and unsatisfying attempts at building suspense. A prime example is in the beginning. No one can find O'Brien and then he magically turns up in the Voyager's engine room. Was he who he really was? As it turns out, yeah actually. Another scene is the "I can't find the ship" from the middle section. Where did the Defiant go? Oh, she landed on a planet nearby. There is little reason to use these dramatic ploys when there is no development on them.
 

Not accepting any sort of criticism defeats the purpose of posting it here. Flarers post their ideas, stories, and designs here in order to gauge the reaction and listen to the comments that people make about their work. Almost all of the time, those criticisms are positive and serve to improve the work. How else does one expect to get better if one does not listen to one's critics?
 

Let's use Worf as an example. He's a tradition Klingon who places importance on honor and expects all other Klingons to follow suit. He has low regard for anyone (Klingons or not) who act in dishonorable ways. This resulted in him killing Duras after Duras killed his mate and took his family's honor (TNG's "Sins of the Father" and "Emissary" and "Redemption"). He believes very strongly in the traditional Klingon upbringing and customs that surround his culture. He has oftentimes felt disconnected from his people by having grown up with humans and having his family killed early in his life. This might account for his determination to force himself to adhere to Klingon culture so much. When it comes to his son Alexander, though, he doesn't force him into the Klingon routine. In fact, in an almost human attitude, he lets Alexander choose his own path (although it took the latter seasons of TNG for him to accept this). He values loyalty highly and will remain supportive of his commanding officer, even at times when the orders run contrary to what he feels is right.

This is just the tip of the iceburg for Worf, but you can see that there is a lot more to him than being a warrior. The massive backstory that has been developed for him needs to be taken into account when writing for him. And there are backstories for all of the characters you were writing about. Some are more developed than others, but you can see the direction I'm going, right? I know it'll be impossible to completely catch up on 15 years of modern Trek to write for the characters, but watching a moderate amount of episodes will help you realize the bare minimum of these characters' personalities. It might also be helpful to search for Trek websites that include character biographies so that you can see a list of events in their lives and what effect that they might have had on them. I think StarTrek.com has a bio section somewhere.

Characterization, aside from the plot, is the most important thing to follow through on. Technological snafus and things of that nature are easily forgivable in Star Trek, having flat characters or characters acting in ways that aren't normal for them will cause unrest with the readers. One of the biggest complaints about Voyager was the lack of development for some of the secondary characters and the sometimes schizophrenic nature of Janeway's command decisions. This tended to bug the fans more than the fact that Voyager's hull was always shiney and new-looking.
 

Keep going bubba, you'll make it in the end.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but on the MSD pic in the back of my DS9 tech manual, doesn't the Defiant have landing pads? If so, why can't a small ship like that land on a planet like Voyager? Or at the very least as small planetary body such as an asteroid moon . . . say, what about the time where the Defiant crashed on a planet and wnet back in time - did it crash or did they manage to land the ship?
 

[ July 28, 2001: Message edited by: Dr Phlox ]

In my mind, it doesn't seem rational for the Defiant to be able to land on a planet. Sure, she may be small enough to do so, but I don't the think the over all design of her lends her to planetary landings. I really wouldn't see it a need for a warship. A troop transport and planetary explorer certainly would benefit as would the saucer sections on separable ships. That's why I give if I assume the Defiant has landing struts then I don't assume it's capable of planetary landing.

The DS9 episode we're all thinking about is "Children of Time" from either the 4th or 5th season. The plot is that when exploring a planet, the Defiant crew encounters their descendants. At this point in the time, the Defiant is supposed to hit a temporal atmospheric anomaly thing and be transported back in time about 200 years where the ship crashes on the planet. The Defiant was said to have crashed because the survivors and descendants used the bulk of the wrecked Defiant to build their homes and stuff.

Dr Phlox: By all means, keep writing and posting your work here. Practice makes perfect and critism is helpful. I've been writing Trek short stories and epics and parodies for many years now. I'm not going to post a lot of the earlier stuff because I don't want to subject anyone to my epic of myself and my high school buddies stealing a Galaxy-class starship to rescue our friends who were on their way to a inter-Federation high school convention/conference/competition. Bare in mind, this relied on a select few of the characters becoming one with Wesley Crusher. Yeah, that story is safely locked away where it will no longer harm anyone.
 

Going back to the Defiant, whether or not she could land on a planet surface really depends on whether one of the purposes she was built for was troop deployment. I don't think she was built for it. Her normal crew complement is around 50, and to fit them in requires the crew (except for senior officers) to share quarters. This ship only has four full decks, and a lot of room is taken up for the engineering and weapons systems. Add in the possibility of maybe 25 to 30 crew quarters, a shuttle bay, the bridge, mess hall, etc. you don't have any room left over for housing troops only they're carrying a squad of maybe 10. And ten troops isn't a heck of a lot to do anything important.

Anyway, that's why I think that the Defiant isn't capable of landing on planets. She's first and foremost a deadly warship. More of her interior is taken up by weapons systems and engineering and operations than for crew quarters. She simply doesn't have the internal volume to house a temporary troop contingent. And if she doesn't have the capacity for deploying troops, then she really doesn't absolutely need the ability to land on planets.
 

And, yes, the Yorkshire-class Denver is capable of transporting a large number of people. If I recall, the Denver was carrying about 400 colonists to settle it (or was it a terraforming mission? I can't remember). She struck a gravitic mine and the Enterprise had to go rescue the survivors. This was "Ethics," and it was the same episode where Worf snapped his spinal cord and screwball doctor with no ethics comes on board and saves him with experimental technology.