Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Oh I’d argue DS9 did have its trinity....

Odo, Quark and Garak. Between them, they were the Station. All semi-divorced from their own cultures, and all kind of outsiders.

 Riquende wrote:
Enterprise was too much the 'Archer, Trip and T'Pol' show and gave everyone else on the ship a single character facet and thought "done!"

I always thought that was intentional. That after having 3 ensemble series they wanted to go back to a "Big 3" like the original.

I can't argue against Picard as the best Captain, but I think I'd rather serve under Archer. While it makes perfect sense for the Captain to stay on board the ship during an away mission, I'd feel better about it if he was out there sharing the risk like Archer. Also Picard might murder me if I got infected by the Borg! For the rest, DS9 and Voyager don't seem to be great postings compared to the Enterprise and I don't want Kirk hogging all the glory.

Pretty sure Futurama already did this, didn't they?

Given all the Captains we have seen thus far, and taking into consideration that some got MUCH more time to show their abilities, I'd actually tie Picard and Kirk.

Kirk and Picard had damn near identical qualities, but the balance between them was the opposite. Kirk could negotiate every bit as well as Picard, but seemed too anxious to find a Torpedo Solution. Picard, however, seemed the opposite. Both still have that capacity, which ties them in my book.



That being said, the one thing that I hate is that we didn't get to see more Sulu as Captain. I honestly think the debate would be over if we had.

I'm jumping in to defend Janeway.
Janeway is one of the few captains to k ow her ship and crew.
She helped contribute to solutions of the ship. She knew how her shipped operated and how to fix it, just as much as Torres did.
Not to mention, unlike other captains I feel, she would get her advice from more than her second, but from several on the ship.
She was shown to be more than an iron dictator to her crew and so self sure of herself like other captains.

The only thing I remember of Sulu as captain is that he drank tea on the bridge and not hiding in his ready room like some people!

Think I would rate Picard as the best as well both for the character and the actor, Kirk just felt too impulsive and I find Shatner to be really irritating.
Sisko I liked, I didn't like the Messiah complex as much and it didn't feel very Star Fleet.
Janeway I really didn't like on any level.
Archer I did quite like the fresh faced enthusiasm turning to hard nosed pragmatism during the Xindi war I felt was pretty decent.
Discovery's captains I all quite like butt hey get massively marked down for allowing Burnham to be the boss.

Then you do him a great disservice. It wasn't the biggest part, and we didn't get to really see the depth of where his command would go, but the snippets we got hit at potential greatness.

His knowledge of the hem leading the Excelsior to not be torn apart in the shockwave.

His uninstructed attempt at offering aid to the Klingons after Praxis exploded.

Sulu "Tell Starfleet we have no idea location of Enterprise"
Ensign "Sir?"
Sulu "You have a hearing problem, mister?!?"
Ensign "Uh, no. No, sir."

Sulu "Faster!"
Lieutenant "She'll fly apart, sir."
Sulu "Then fly her apart!!!"

No mate, drinking tea (from a proper service) on the bridge is one of the classiest things we ever see. Who cares about flying a ship into an uneven battle when you have the sheer awesomeness of tea on the bridge?

Good point, AND look at the fine china he was using to drink it.

That being said, the one thing that I hate is that we didn't get to see more Sulu as Captain. I honestly think the debate would be over if we had.

Indeed. Old Sulu just screamed BestCaptainEvah in the few scenes he had.

 ingtaer wrote:
The only thing I remember of Sulu as captain is that he drank tea on the bridge and not hiding in his ready room like some people!

Think I would rate Picard as the best as well both for the character and the actor, Kirk just felt too impulsive and I find Shatner to be really irritating.
Sisko I liked, I didn't like the Messiah complex as much and it didn't feel very Star Fleet.
Janeway I really didn't like on any level.
Archer I did quite like the fresh faced enthusiasm turning to hard nosed pragmatism during the Xindi war I felt was pretty decent.
Discovery's captains I all quite like butt hey get massively marked down for allowing Burnham to be the boss.

I dont know man.

Insaneway changed all of reality to save a couple of people because she felt they deserved to live more than the trillions of people in the old timeline, thats some messiah complex right there.

Kirk seemed very self involved.

Archer lacked any real character to me, very vanilla

Burnham is messiah complex in a nutshell

Sisko as you say, but then he was actually the messiah so it all worked out haha

Picard, remains to be seen as the new series is coming and his arc is not over.

 ingtaer wrote:
No mate, drinking tea (from a proper service) on the bridge is one of the classiest things we ever see. Who cares about flying a ship into an uneven battle when you have the sheer awesomeness of tea on the bridge?

This...so much.

Plus the bit he had in Voyager with the bit of fight between his ship and Kang's was was excellent.

 Just Tony wrote:
Good point, AND look at the fine china he was using to drink it.

Aye, but he did spill his cuppa.

That’s an exile offence, I’ll have you know

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
Good point, AND look at the fine china he was using to drink it.

Aye, but he did spill his cuppa.

That’s an exile offence, I’ll have you know

Hey now, when your ship gets hit by PART OF THE KLINGON MOON, its a pardonable offense. Just don't let it happen again.

And this? This is why your forefathers went to America, isn’t it!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And this? This is why your forefathers went to America, isn’t it!

Well to be technical, the first ones came here because they lost a minor tiff with the Prussians, Russians, and British...

DS9 was my favorite series, but Picard was definitely the best ST captain.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
As the title says.

He has much of the recklessness of Kirk, but tempered by experience.

Unlike Janeway, when tested, he does not let protocol and rules decide his course of action.

Unlike Sisko? OK, as my second fave I can’t really put a ciggie paper between the two.

But Picard is the Captain I know I would follow into and beyond the very gates of Hell. He is a man of action, a man of learning, a man of honour. He will (sensibly) week the diplomatic solution, but isn’t afraid to smash face when there’s no alternative. His stentorian tone is exactly the kind needed for both.

He is no fool, and he doesn’t suffer fools. But he has compassion all the same.

And this thread is your chance to similarly sing the praises of other Starfleet Captains. And even, who knows, change my mind...

Picard was a myth. He was some sort of human/vulcan hybrid with the best of both and the weaknesses of none.

I would say that Ben Sisko was truly the best officer in Starfleet. He didn't have the luxury that Picard did (Both the Galaxy and Sovereign class ships were paradise compared to that old Cardassian station on the frontier.)

I felt that I could relate to Ben a lot more than I could Jean Luc. Not to say that any of them are bad. In truth, all three 90s captains would probably hold places of high value in Federation history well into the 28+ century.

Picard was the Myth, that which we're told we should aspire to be. But he was cold, and often resisted any basic connections with those around him.
Ben was human, through and through. A man driven by passion and emotion, tempered by experience.
Kathryn was a scientist, a philosopher. Driven to act, and loyal.

I guess in the end I would argue they all represent what we should aspire to be.

I have to say, the best thing to come out of Discovery has to be Captain Pike. They really managed to make him be the legend he later turned into, IMO.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I have to say, the best thing to come out of Discovery has to be Captain Pike. They really managed to make him be the legend he later turned into, IMO.

I have heard similar talk from others I know. In the Reboot movies, I thought he was the strongest character in both writing and acting.