SCVN 2812 wrote:
Is it really that suprising or stupid that they do come up with crazy or stupid scenarios to give the Federation an edge considering just how many times crazy or "stupid" scenarios have been responsible for saving the day? Scenarios such as these that boggle the sane mind, are routine in the ST universe and are somewhat important because they do serve as a sort of random variable that could help or hinder the subjugation of the evil Trek universe by the rightous Galactic Empire, in most cases they can make things not so cut and dry, and what's the fun in even considering such a ridiculously uneven scenario as Wong's nauseatingly far fetched resurgent uber Empire vs a pre-Endgame (I was sickened by the bias and (as far as Star Trek goes, inaccuracy of the site, mainly the socio-political garbage, that I didn't read his fan fic and his site does not address the Endgame technology I assume he will not allow his beloved Empire to face an opponent with an actual chance in hell of winning)
Stupid and crazy scenarios are not permitted because you cannot prove them ("prove" used layman-style). The best you can do with them is say there is a weak, VERY WEAK possibility it can occur. They are also unfalsifiable - "You cannot absolutely prove that it won't be possible."
The website was mostly constructed in the pre-TM obsolescence era, so is it really so surprising it didn't have a hell of a lot on Endgame, which 'cept for the new Enterprise series is the latest thing in Trek (and chronologically, Endgame IS the latest thing they've shown us so far in Trek, AFAIK).
Other people had already repeatedly asked why he used a full-strength Empire. It doesn't matter squat. His campaign uses only 50-100 Star Destroyers in its latest incarnation. That's mighty easy to provide. The people I know that asked the question are pinned on his Hate Mail page.
Talking about his Hate Mail page, that John Riehle guy once talked about Endgame tech, namely the Batmobile armor and the transphasic torpedoes. Of course, Wong smacked him in the face.
As to whether his views on Fed socio-politics are accurate, that's up to you. After all, there are no hard cues, no bright red flags, no "Comrades."