StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Both get an Akira class starship. They do not get their old bridge crew. Who wins ?

I guess Picard wins. He is after all the better Captain. The Akiras heavy shielding and firepower will suit him as he is familiar with battleships. On the other hand the Akira classis highly maneuverable so Sisko with his experience with the Defiant could cause trouble.

On the one hand, Sisko's name sounds very similar to a shitty rapper...

On the other hand, Picard's sounds very much like Jean-Luc Retard.

I leave it to you to imagine the results.

Sisko wins, if only because we've seen him in combat more often that Picard, but also because he doesn't fool around as much as Picard. Picard has been known to not even raise shields if confronted by an irate Romulan, or return fire if fired upon. "Shall I return fire captain!" screams Worf. "Negative Lieutenant - we don't want to give them the wrong impression." says Picard.

Although Sisko's crew likes to draw out "tension" by analysing the moral dilemma of defending oneself from aggressors, Sisko himself would sooner cut loose with the phasers than bother debating. As an added bonus, Sisko doesn't even have his crew.

Stofsk wrote:Sisko wins, if only because we've seen him in combat more often that Picard, but also because he doesn't fool around as much as Picard. Picard has been known to not even raise shields if confronted by an irate Romulan, or return fire if fired upon. "Shall I return fire captain!" screams Worf. "Negative Lieutenant - we don't want to give them the wrong impression." says Picard.

Although Sisko's crew likes to draw out "tension" by analysing the moral dilemma of defending oneself from aggressors, Sisko himself would sooner cut loose with the phasers than bother debating. As an added bonus, Sisko doesn't even have his crew.

Good point. However Picard has much greater experience than Sisko. We are talking about some one who has been commanding starships his entire life.

It depends...who's writing the script, and whom does the writer favor? Either side could have trillions of DeathStars against the enemy's sole escape pod, and still lose against the pod. It's not like credibility is one of science fiction's strong points.

evilcat4000 wrote:Good point. However Picard has much greater experience than Sisko. We are talking about some one who has been commanding starships his entire life.

True. I may have been overly harsh on Picard, though I still maintain Sisko holds the upper hand. I can't really recall a battle he's (Picard) been in where he prevailed through the use of tactics (for the purposes of this debate, I assume AR episodes aren't included?).

Sisko's gotten into a lot of fights, and prevailed.

One other factor to consider in your post, there's a difference between commanding ships in peacetime (which Picard excels at - he's more of a diplomat/explorer than a war captain) and commanding ships in wartime (something Sisko's has had to deal with, and he's experienced victories and defeats as well).

Sisko was very active in the recent Dominion war.

Picard was waiting for his new ship to be certified ready and then he got sent out on patrol which did lead to some battles but not like fighting in a war.

Sisko also has the easier leap to make in motivation. He's supposedly gotten over Locutus and Picard being the same but I bet he wouldn't have to work very hard to bring that back enough as something to feed off of.

I also think Sisko has shown that he's much more ruthless than Picard. The whole murdering a Romulan Senator, framing the Dominion in order to get the Romulans into the war comes to mind.

Sisko also wins points with me for punching Q.

Sisko's a warrior.
Picard's a Diplomat and Philospher.
I thikns its obvious who wins.

Picard is not a warship Captain, Sisko is. Picard has primarily been an explorer and diplomat, Sisko has an asskicker. It all boils down to who fires first and that'd be Sisko.

Picard "we're starfleet Ben, surely we can talk this out"

Sisko "Fire!"

*Picards Akira is consumed by a huge volly of torps*

Picard "Tatical, if he fires again send a warning shot across his bow"

*Picards Akira is vapourised in the next volly*

Who can say "Fire!" faster?

Just a couple of points, that strategy master chap, didnt he rate Picard as one of the Federation's best? And Picard has commanded other ships, the Stargazer being the best example, it's not as if he's been stuck with a Galaxy class all his career. Oh, and Picard has had more experience with ships which have more than a forward firing arc, so he might have a better idea of how to use it.

Not that I'm overly biased towards Picard, but I refuse to believe that he's the strategic pansy that everyone seems to think he is, you don't get to command the Federation flagship without having some strategic capability, you don't shove a captain behind the wheel simply because he's good at talking.

The_Lumberjack wrote:Just a couple of points, that strategy master chap, didnt he rate Picard as one of the Federation's best?

Is this the same "strategy master" of the vaunted "strategy race" who was beaten by Data at alien chess?

And Picard has commanded other ships, the Stargazer being the best example,

Which got destroyed in battle, don't forget.

it's not as if he's been stuck with a Galaxy class all his career. Oh, and Picard has had more experience with ships which have more than a forward firing arc, so he might have a better idea of how to use it.

That is presumably true, if it were a factor. The question is, can he use that knowledge? If so, prove it. How many fights has Picard been in command of, used innovative tactics and won? It is important that he wins, given the premise of the OP. Try not to include AR examples such as Yesterday's Enterprise, which he likely lost anyway.

Not that I'm overly biased towards Picard, but I refuse to believe that he's the strategic pansy that everyone seems to think he is,

I hold that opinion because it is validated by the show and the stories we watch. I don't believe Picard is a strategic pansy, I know that fighting isn't his forte - diplomacy and exploration are.

you don't get to command the Federation flagship without having some strategic capability, you don't shove a captain behind the wheel simply because he's good at talking.

Starfleet is insecure in it's role as a military. It still is a military, but they have an identity crisis when it comes to military roles and objectives. Picard is supposedly in command of the Federation's flagship - so why isn't he Admiral Picard? Admiral is a flag-rank, the Enterprise is a flagship, so...?

Picard does have strategic capacity, evidence: Redemption, specifically the blockade against the Romulan resupply fleet; The Defector where he was prepared for a Romulan trap by soliciting aid from the klingons in the form of a Bird of Prey escort (why the Federation flagship can't rely on Federation escorts is beyond me); in I, Borg he was also prepared to use the Borg software-weapon (but got talked down by his idiot crew - you decide what that implies). Picard is a strategic thinker, no doubt about it. By all rights he should be an Admiral.

Unfortunately for Picard, Sisko is the sharper tactical thinker, by virtue of his combat experience. Given that the premise of the OP is based on tactical proficiency, Sisko takes it. Sisko is simply stronger when it comes to ship-to-ship engagements. Sisko downright sucks when it comes to strategic thinking, however, as evidenced by his complete lack of co-ordination in the Sacrifice of Angels. Imagine if Picard had been in charge of the Fleet there.

Stofsk wrote:

The_Lumberjack wrote: And Picard has commanded other ships, the Stargazer being the best example,

Which got destroyed in battle, don't forget.

Was it? I know the episode you mean, but I'm buggered if I can remember any of the details. But he did take on a Ferengi ship (were we told it was a marauder?) of superior firepower by rapid development of the Picard manuever. That shows quick thinking in a ship to ship scenario, not just strategy.

Stofsk wrote:

The_Lumberjack wrote: it's not as if he's been stuck with a Galaxy class all his career. Oh, and Picard has had more experience with ships which have more than a forward firing arc, so he might have a better idea of how to use it.

That is presumably true, if it were a factor. The question is, can he use that knowledge? If so, prove it. How many fights has Picard been in command of, used innovative tactics and won? It is important that he wins, given the premise of the OP. Try not to include AR examples such as Yesterday's Enterprise, which he likely lost anyway.

Fair point, I honestly don't have a clue aside from one or two, but I think you're right, there simply arent that many. There was the Battle of Xeta what'itsface with the Ferengi ship as mentioned above, but apart from that, none spring to mind.

The episode was called The Battle and I'd completely forgotten about it. Actually that was a pretty good example of Picard's tactical thinking.

This issue just got a little more murky for me. Now I'm not sure who would win. Take Sisko away from the Defiant and he might just lose. While Picard has shown he's pretty sharp in something other than a GCS (he didn't fool around on the Enterprise-E either.)

Stofsk wrote:The episode was called The Battle and I'd completely forgotten about it. Actually that was a pretty good example of Picard's tactical thinking.

This issue just got a little more murky for me. Now I'm not sure who would win. Take Sisko away from the Defiant and he might just lose. While Picard has shown he's pretty sharp in something other than a GCS (he didn't fool around on the Enterprise-E either.)

I think the reason Picard was much less likely to pick fights with the Ent-D was because he was very wary with the civilians on board. And seeing how the Ent-E does not and he has kicked much ass from what we have seen, plus the stories we hear of his great tactics that defeated a superior enemy with the Stargazer. I think Picard is highly underrated here and would take the W in this contest.

Picard was willing to fire on Phoenix in TNG The Wounded. I doubt he'd have a problem firing on Sisko in a contrived Vs. debate.

Picard can call upon the Q who can kick the Emissary's ass anyday.

Picard is not a warship Captain, Sisko is.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Soverign class supose to be the Federation's strongest "warship" class?

Stofsk wrote:

And Picard has commanded other ships, the Stargazer being the best example,

Which got destroyed in battle, don't forget.

Which is why we see it in "The Battle" TNG? Twas not destroyed but abandonded after the Ferengi incident.

Stofsk wrote:

The_Lumberjack wrote: Just a couple of points, that strategy master chap, didnt he rate Picard as one of the Federation's best

Is this the same "strategy master" of the vaunted "strategy race" who was beaten by Data at alien chess?

Data did not defeat him, he fought the guy to a standstill because he wasn't trying to win only to stop the strategy master from winnig. Also when data was playing before he lost in a couple of SECONDS.

The lame Zakdorn strategist with no patience at all (he gave up playing Data after about three or four minutes, tops)...

JME2 wrote:Picard can call upon the Q who can kick the Emissary's ass anyday.

that's a bit of a copout, actually. after all, if you think of it like that sisko could just call on the wormhole aliens. but, that's not what the debate's about, it's about whose a better tactician.


while picard may have the upper hand as far as experience goes, Sisko's got one sizable advantage. he's willing to fight dirty and use whatever tricks he can to win, while picard prefers 'honorable' combat. so in the end i think sisko would wind up coming up with some underhanded tactic that would take picard by complete surprise, and get him victory, even though picard might have the advantage for a little while.

Picard's greatest tactical victory was a desperation move that was necessary because he'd allowed the enemy to get the drop on him and nearly destroy his ship. And then the idiot left his still-functional ship drifting in space, with all of its classified technology intact for any asshole to just pick up as they passed through. Sorry, but using "The Battle" as evidence for Picard's tactical superiority is a bad idea.

On the other hand, let's not underestimate Sisko's ability to be just as much of a pompous pseudo-moralizing fool as Picard. He was often faced with obvious "kill or be killed" situations, but I seriously doubt that in peacetime, he would be above the kind of "don't provoke them" bullshit that Picard pulled. And I have yet to see evidence of Sisko's tactical brilliance either: "form up all your ships into a tightly grouped wall and charge headlong at the enemy" is not tactical brilliance.

Darth Wong wrote:"form up all your ships into a tightly grouped wall and charge headlong at the enemy" is not tactical brilliance.

Well, it does serve the purpose of maximising your firepower, especially in ships where weapons are concentrated in the forward arcs.
I'm not being contentious here, just curious, but what would you do with a fleet like that?

Frank Hipper wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:"form up all your ships into a tightly grouped wall and charge headlong at the enemy" is not tactical brilliance.

Well, it does serve the purpose of maximising your firepower, especially in ships where weapons are concentrated in the forward arcs.
I'm not being contentious here, just curious, but what would you do with a fleet like that?

When the only objective is to reach DS9 before they can open up the wormhole? Disperse the fleet and attempt to go around the enemy fleet in many directions rather than this "form up and charge headlong at them" thing. Also, ordering the fleet to concentrate their collective firepower on key targets would have been more effective than simply telling them all to fire at will. And long-range torpedo volleys would have been a good idea, rather than attempting to close to spitting range.

Darth Wong wrote: When the only objective is to reach DS9 before they can open up the wormhole? Disperse the fleet and attempt to go around the enemy fleet in many directions rather than this "form up and charge headlong at them" thing.

Right on. It's been a very long time since I've seen any episode of DS9, I forgot what their objective was.

Also, ordering the fleet to concentrate their collective firepower on key targets would have been more effective than simply telling them all to fire at will. And long-range torpedo volleys would have been a good idea, rather than attempting to close to spitting range.

That whole "close in for a dogfight" thing made for fun visuals in a TV show, but really does make no sense. Suicidal.
I think the "moving wall" could've worked with something like that, a stand-off bombardment. Funny how they have wonderful coordination and communication, but only when it serves the purposes of the plot device. Would it be so difficult to have 100 ships concentrate their fire on a single target at a time? It might seem time consuming to pick them off one, or ten, at a time, but guaranteeing kills with concentrated fire would pay off, I'd think.