Remove ads

Shepard Quest Mk VI, Technological Revolution

Reader mode
Yog said:
That's the point. They won't be able to know if there's a ship in the system or not. Because stealth. And, as ships will be moving from system to system, they'll never know. It strongly increases risk factor.

Besides, TIR can be used for other ships and defense installations too. You could drastically decrease the number needed by making them invisible.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They're goddamn pirates, I'm pretty sure they're willing to take a risk.
Besides, I've been saying the whole time, the Cabira is our late game ship, no competition. I mentioned in my first post that using the Pydna here would let us retrofit what the Alliance wants now to what we can kill Reapers with later. We will definitely make them, no where have I said that we should change our research path, the load out I suggested was pretty much with already researched tech. Just that its not what the Alliance wants NOW.
 
Dark as Silver said:
They're goddamn pirates, I'm pretty sure they're willing to take a risk.
Besides, I've been saying the whole time, the Cabira is our late game ship, no competition. I mentioned in my first post that using the Pydna here would let us retrofit what the Alliance wants now to what we can kill Reapers with later. We will definitely make them, no where have I said that we should change our research path, the load out I suggested was pretty much with already researched tech. Just that its not what the Alliance wants NOW.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Alliance wants to have lots of ships it can afford, I agree. This can be approached in two ways: making cheaper ships, or making Alliance richer. Thus, P&P skills, which I judge to have the greatest economic impact.
 
In hindsight it's easy to understand why the alliance is wary of civilian repulsors, they are very easy to weaponise, simply pointing two repulsors at each other makes a decent explosion.
 
Yog said:
Alliance wants to have lots of ships it can afford, I agree. This can be approached in two ways: making cheaper ships, or making Alliance richer. Thus, P&P skills, which I judge to have the greatest economic impact.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
P&P will make a big impact, unfortunately we're going to be selling stuff in the next few quarters rather than years, if this boosts economic growth to say 10-15%. Aside from just how fast it will take to come in to play, the social implications are massive, the collapse in the higher education (and possibly lower education system), does the age people can hold a job decrease if they know how to do it as well as a expert, the moral guardians, the extra growth being budgeted to the navy rather than trying to simulate even more growth. Thats just 1 extra ship for every 10 each year, if we sold them a ship 80% of the previous cost thats 2. And we're looking at much more than 20% savings.

Edit: Why am I getting into this argument? My point was that the Cabira was poorly optimised as a colony defence, not that it was too expensive.
P&P is good and we should do it some time. But its not a substitute for cheaper ships.
 
Last edited:
Dark as Silver said:
They're goddamn pirates, I'm pretty sure they're willing to take a risk.
Besides, I've been saying the whole time, the Cabira is our late game ship, no competition. I mentioned in my first post that using the Pydna here would let us retrofit what the Alliance wants now to what we can kill Reapers with later. We will definitely make them, no where have I said that we should change our research path, the load out I suggested was pretty much with already researched tech. Just that its not what the Alliance wants NOW.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
To be fair, the Cabira isn't a "late game ship"; it's a mid-game ship, one we're building in a little over a year. We do need to get the Pynda paradigm shift out this year: the killer app there is the ease of upgrades, and the ability to rapidly insert new technology into existing warships. The important thing to recognize is that the Pynda model and the Cabira ship design are not exclusive ideas; in fact, the introduction of Pynda now will greatly increase the pace of adoption when the core Cabira techs are all finally developed.

Keep in mind that "Pynda" is not a ship design, or even a class of ship. It is the use of hyper-modularity to change the very idea of how a frigate is built, deployed, and maintained/upgraded. Think of is as Project Ara, but for 100-250m frigates instead of smartphones; sort of like what the F-35 was supposed to be, but not sucking because we actually have the technology to do a proper job of it. The idea is that ships built under the Pynda model are infinitely customizable and easy to upgrade; hell with a bit of lead time you could potentially customize your spaceship to your mission parameters, which if you think about it is just insane.

Compared to that bombshell, "Cabira" is relatively tame. All the Cabira is, is a recognition that a certain suite of technologies synergize like crazy, in particular gamma ray gigawatt lasers and TIR stealth systems, along with each tech's support technologies like gravitational wave detectors and the like.
 
Van Ropen said:
Rolling out the Pynda and delaying the Cabira are unrelated things, really. The Cabira is a specific grouping of techs brought together to allow a specific function - in other words, a ship type as much as it was a class.


The Pynda is a fundamental shift in how ships and ship design and ship types/classifications work, brought to the universe courtesy of hyper-modularity: We sell frames, and then things that can be mixed-and-matched to fill those frames. As our tech advances, the various bits of filling getting better.

Specific groups of synergistic filling create "builds", the Cabira just being the name for a specific "build". One we don't have all the bits of filling for, but will eventually.


So frigates? Frigates aren't just pickets and patrol boats anymore, limited to that function thanks to their size. Now you focus more on the roles you want filled, then select the build that best allows that (some builds being something you can probably get in various sizes, Frigate to Dreadnought).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

TheEyes said:
To be fair, the Cabira isn't a "late game ship"; it's a mid-game ship, one we're building in a little over a year. We do need to get the Pynda paradigm shift out this year: the killer app there is the ease of upgrades, and the ability to rapidly insert new technology into existing warships. The important thing to recognize is that the Pynda model and the Cabira ship design are not exclusive ideas; in fact, the introduction of Pynda now will greatly increase the pace of adoption when the core Cabira techs are all finally developed.

Keep in mind that "Pynda" is not a ship design, or even a class of ship. It is the use of hyper-modularity to change the very idea of how a frigate is built, deployed, and maintained/upgraded. Think of is as Project Ara, but for 100-250m frigates instead of smartphones; sort of like what the F-35 was supposed to be, but not sucking because we actually have the technology to do a proper job of it. The idea is that ships built under the Pynda model are infinitely customizable and easy to upgrade; hell with a bit of lead time you could potentially customize your spaceship to your mission parameters, which if you think about it is just insane.

Compared to that bombshell, "Cabira" is relatively tame. All the Cabira is, is a recognition that a certain suite of technologies synergize like crazy, in particular gamma ray gigawatt lasers and TIR stealth systems, along with each tech's support technologies like gravitational wave detectors and the like.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Glad to hear you two are on the same page. I still feel the Cabira is poorly optimised for the Alliance, they aren't looking for a hunter killer.
Also when I said the Cabira was a late game frigate I said that under the assumption we'll be producing Cabira MK whatevers until there aren't any more reapers. Not that it was the be all end all of ship design.
 
Alanek said:
I'm just worried that if it is split up into ten updates, updates probably won't be 10x faster. T.T
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yog said:
This is a genuine worry for me too, I have to say.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Honestly? This feels like it would help the overall update time by a not insignificant amount.

Keep in mind that 10 updates is a really bad way to conceptualize it, because not all updates are created equal. Research, for example - UberJJK has it listed as two parts, but it's not actually two updates. The first is just intro paragraph and then organized list of available techs. Only the second is an actual bit where Hoyr has to write. Curtains' numbering scheme here makes much more sense, which is why it's so much more compact than Uber's.



More general musings if @Hoyr cares about moar prattling about minutiae...


UberJJK basically took an update we currently get, and split it into:
Intro
ParSec
Expansion
Management
Research
Personal+Shiny
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
With the four middle bits numbered as two parts - vote and results - thus 10.


Curtains went with:
Intro
Production removed from Management
Research
Non-Construction Management combined with Expansion and ParSec
Personal+Shiny
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think it is a bit more sensible, and the number scheme is definitely better.


Left to me, it would probably look like:
Intro
ParSec
Production+Research
Management+Expansion
Personal+Shiny
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Or, in more depth:
  • Introduction (Update X.0) - I think everyone is on the same page here. News, Investigative Reports, Adviser Reports, etc.. Curtains' note about how this is where Revy Reacts was a good one. If any decisions made here in response to things deserve immediate results, those are Update X.0.X as a Curtains described. Otherwise, it's probably just stuff whose results should come up organically in other sections.
  • ParSec (Update X.1) - It should get a section of its own, even if it's small. Not necessarily as UberJJK described (all production should be handled together for the reason TheEyes noted), but in terms of keeping the vote for their missions distinct and making them more "real", instead of just a footnote. As it grows in size? Nice to have a separate listing of its current size, deployments, etc. As far as results go, you could have Update X.1.X (and size doesn't matter- keep it short and sweet or go in-depth if you want, the real goal here is more about organizing things into digestible chunks) but I personally favor just leaving it till the next quarter's ParSec Update. Start the update with the results from last quarter, brief updates (if any) from multi-quarter assignments, a summary of current postings and available forces, blah blah blah, and then end with a vote on new missions/deployments.
  • Production and Research (Update X.2) - These fit together, I think. Uber split them so we could have two voting sessions, but they go together for me narratively - this is what PI's work is for the quarter. Votes being gross and messy is due to how the distribution within each section is happening - if we institute a more organized Plan system for each category then a single update where we vote for both is perfectly fine. In a way, what we need to do is standardize our formatting and then split the decisions (taking advantage of Kinematics' really fucking nifty tally program). Separating this from Management is already a huge boon in terms of cleaning things up. Results are Update X.2.X, shouldn't be more than one - and that's the real meat of the writing anyways, Update 2 itself doesn't really have Hoyr writing beyond putting the list of options up.
So in the hypothetical update: Production bit opens, then you have a listing of appropriate stats (free production, cash on hand, etc) from the finance doc, get a list of outstanding orders, any suggestions or requests from our advisors, and then a list of what we can produce with prices. So, a sample plan?
[X] Plan VanRopen's Production Budget

[X] ParSec Expansion and Air Force
-[X] 100 Legionaries
-[X] 10 Tigers
-[X] 5000 Accipters (Atmospheric)
-[X] 60 Gladius (Type-C)
-[X] 120 Anti-Starship Missles (small)
-[X] 400 Hydra Missles

[X] Frigate Flotilla
-[X] 10 Pynda Hulls
-[X] 10 "Patrol Ship" Pynda Loadouts

[X] Demonstration
-[X] 1 Appia (non-Repulsor)
-[X] 1 Virgo (non-Repulsor)
-[X] 10 Dormus
-[X] 10 Cenaculum
-[X] 10 Insula (non-Repulsor)
But hey, maybe another voter see this proposal but doesn't think ParSec needs that expansion? They can vote for the other blocks. Maybe vote for some of these blocks and some of their own. By seperating by block and taking advantage of the tally programs plan creator, then things should be much prettier.

Research as the second half of the update is easy - you're again just providing intro and then a nice list of available techs and cost - which, yeah, probably would be significantly streamlined by just turning things into blocks of 50 even though I do kinda like dice. Then people propose "Research Budgets" the same way.

Your average voter is probably just voting something like:
[X] Plan UberJJK's Production Budget
[X] Plan Yog's Research Budget
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
anyways, but hopefully we will see more proposed budgets since it's so much less work to produce one of those instead of an entire vote. Accessibility in terms of providing that basic info (production, costs, RP) helps a lot too.
  • Management and Expansion (Update X.3) - This is where things could be streamlined the most - my suggestion is to make a hell of a lot of use of the Task function of the tally program for when we need to make a bunch of individual decisions (as influenced by News and choices made there, Events, etc). On top of the individual decisions, we have Hoyr pulling together a list of actions (to which people can make suggestions that he vets) we can generally choose to pursue from which we select some number X. This doesn't need to be a source of limitation just organization. Expansion works like production, really - include a purchase list, let people put together "Expansion Plans" voters can chose from. Results can be Update X.3.1 (the "real" update where this is mostly voting options), or next quarter's Update 3 (so you open with the results from last quarter's decisions and any general status of the company stuff as affected by Intro tidbits, blah blah blah, segway into pending decisions + action list).
  • Personal and Events (Update X.4) - Provide a list of possibilities (created by the players and QM, QM curated). Voters select X actions. As I've said, whether Hoyr wants to have the results be Update X.4.1 or the beginning of next quarter's Update 4 is entirely personal taste, doesn't really matter either way. Events are events.


Whatever the specifics of the breakdown, I think something like this in principle is a good call. It lets voters focus on one area at a time when voting, and let's Hoyr focus on one area at a time when writing.

On update time came up - turnover between those middle portions of the update should be pretty short, so we are basically talking about going from a 3 segment cycle to a 5 segment cycle in a way that I think should actually speed up the process once the initial bits of background organization are done.
 
Hoyr said:
[X] Ask them what they want in terms of qualitative developments. What advantages would they desire most? What is the biggest game changer?
The SA thanks you for the information. As for what they want they'd like a ship or ships that can be cheaply produced so that they can be stationed at the various colonies to defend against pirates. Quality, in this case cannot make up for the quantity of SA space and the SA will need many more warships. That said warships already take up a massive amount of the SA budget... they don't have tons of extra money to spend. Also if the design or designs that could be licensed out to the various shipyard in the SA would be good too.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It sounds like they want a ship or two per colony. Can they afford that many Cabiras in the next few quarters if sell them at cost?

Edit: And it also sounds like they want ships that don't use a lot of upkeep. Maybe include a logistics module that can produce all the necessary spare parts? But then you have to take into account that pirates might eventually get their hands on a frigate. How do you make a frigate that pirates can't use?
 
Last edited:
Curtains said:
It sounds like they want a ship or two per colony. Can they afford that many Cabiras in the next few quarters if sell them at cost?

Edit: And it also sounds like they want ships that don't use a lot of upkeep. Maybe include a logistics module that can produce all the necessary spare parts? But then you have to take into account that pirates might eventually get their hands on a frigate. How do you make a frigate that pirates can't use?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Since the Magi implant is so differnet from a standard biotic amp could we modify it to act as like a key instead of biotic? It can only be piloted by someone with a neural interface and the implant.
 
Chargone said:
...
I ment for the GM, not the players.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ah.

Not really following that either? It's the same amount of stuff, it's just being presented in a different mixture. The only change in QM's overhead would be maintaining an action list for management or personal stuff - which isn't that bad, as most of the effort is in the initial setup. Turn to turn maintainance is relatively easy, since the "update to changing circumstances" stuff would be happening every update anyways and voter proposals just take a second to vet as they are posted in the course of discussion.

...and a good thing that is, otherwise poor Imrix would probably never get to write, he'd be slaving away on Ulthuan Quest's action list forever and ever :p
 
We've been talking endlessly about ways to destroy slavers while they attack, but what about something to make it unattractive to go after Alliance colonies in the first place? Slavers are motivated by money. So if the cost/benefit ratio is negative, they go elsewhere.

Also something that is hard to ascertain beforehand, which increases the perceived risks. Either Stealthed defence satellite* capable of one-shotting Cruisers or groundbased defences that shred any transport that tries to land and is hardened enough against orbital bombardement.

*We basically just need a stealth system and a one-shot gun. It needs to be cheap and disposable so it can act like a mine.


It won't hold off Reapers or a serious military assault, but it gets rid of random slavers as they risk losing expensive ships.
 
So just to start off with I'd like to remain people that, as I said at the start of the post, my goal with that system was to break everything into as many small pieces as practical.

Because, like we've seen over the last couple pages, that gets people thinking about how the quest can be broken down and recombined into a better format.

Hoyr said:
Quick thoughts:
Hmm... that's an option. No limit on actions per section?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

For the most part no. Paragon Industries is a powerful company with a lot of money behind it. Unless we start throwing out a ludicrous number of actions there is little in game reason to limit it. It could be down for out of game reasons but with the exception of manufacturing section none of the votes have really being complex enough to put players off so I don't see a need to limit it.

The timing of events bugs me a little, but meh.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

These are just suggestions so there isn't really any reason to stick to my order. It's just what I though flowed best.

Personal actions maybe kinda small on its own... can some of these be folded together? Maybe personal action + special events?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well unless you plan on a special event happening every quarter that wouldn't really help. But in general, as mentioned above, there isn't really any problem with folding stuff together. Personally I'd go for putting the Results section of one part then the Votes section of the next together since it's what makes the most sense to me.

Still takes 3 months, not much to say until its done...

That happens a lot... I need to set up a proper log of delayed actions/events.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Hm. You do raise a good point there. Not sure what you could do to fill that out without doing forward flashes...

Hoyr said:
Well I wasn't going to change the research system unless people asked. Actions don't matter there.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'd like to see it switched over to RP in a pool rather then dice. I don't know about @TheEyes but I generally spend an hour or two optimizing the dice layout to get 95%+ certainty of completion. Cutting it down to simply allocating RP would turn that into a one job.

Production doesn't feel terribly limited by factories. So, I could limit the number of orders not individual items.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That would work except it would be kinda pointless. Look at the last update. All the manufacturing broke down into three plans:

[] Arming Parsec
[] Modular Building Demo Goods
[] PI Drone Army

Same applies to most of the previous updates. With our massively expanding production I suppose we might end up making more separate orders but I kinda doubt it.

Any I'm calling in quest vote so some one do a tally if you would.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Vote Tally : Shepard Quest Mk VI, Technological Revolution | Page 311 | Sufficient Velocity
##### NetTally 1.1.21

[X] More research is required. (100 Point Research Project: Dream Entertainment Drugs)
No. of Votes: 13
Kerfirou
Aeondrac
avatar11792
Beto
Dark as Silver
Erehwon
hcvquizibo
Portec
remulian
Sylvire
Tetsurou
Tt409
UberJJK

[X] Sure, you're proof enough that people can be that good.
No. of Votes: 11
Kerfirou
Aeondrac
avatar11792
Beto
Dark as Silver
Erehwon
hcvquizibo
Portec
remulian
Tt409
UberJJK

[X] More research is required. (100 Point Research Project: Dream Entertainment Drugs)
--[X] Focus on long-term, including multi-generational effects they might have, and their possible interaction with other substances
No. of Votes: 7
HanEmpire
AbZHz101
Alivaril
Captain Hunt
Darkcrest
Khepri14
Yog

[X] Sure, you're proof enough that people can be that good.
--[X] If he is that good, however... See into honing that brilliance. Hire tutors for him, perhaps? Bringing out the brilliance is what we do.
--[X] It pays to be wary. Run a more thorough background check. If you can't find anything on him, try searching for people using similar tactics. Logs of online championships for various games, for example. Such brilliance tends to show itself somehow. You built a perpetual motion engine for a school fair. He might have broken records and took names in war game tournaments, or written anonymous, but recognisable essays on military attics, or got responsible for a suddenly super competent street gang.
--[X] Also ask Williams opinion/see if he can run a separate background check or see if he and the SA can find anything on this guy and change your choice if he thinks it's bad one.
No. of Votes: 4
Khepri14
AbZHz101
Alivaril
Darkcrest

[X] Sure, you're proof enough that people can be that good.
-[x] Ask Williams opinion and change your choice if he thinks it's bad one.
No. of Votes: 2
Sylvire
Tetsurou



[X] Rename "Human resources" "Species resources"
No. of Votes: 1
Tt409

[X] Sure, you're proof enough that people can be that good.
--[X] If he is that good, however... See into honing that brilliance. Hire tutors for him, perhaps? Bringing out the brilliance is what we do.
No. of Votes: 1
HanEmpire

[X] Sure, you're proof enough that people can be that good.
--[X] If he is that good, however... See into honing that brilliance. Hire tutors for him, perhaps? Bringing out the brilliance is what we do.
--[X] It pays to be wary. Run a more thorough background check. If you can't find anything on him, try searching for people using similar tactics. Logs of online championships for various games, for example. Such brilliance tends to show itself somehow. You built a perpetual motion engine for a school fair. He might have broken records and took names in war game tournaments, or written anonymous, but recognisable essays on military attics, or got responsible for a suddenly super competent street gang.
No. of Votes: 1
Yog

[X] Sure, you're proof enough that people can be that good.
--[X] If he is that good, however... See into honing that brilliance. Hire tutors for him, perhaps? Bringing out the brilliance is what we do.
--[X] It pays to be wary. Run a more thorough background check. If you can't find anything on him, try searching for people using similar tactics. Logs of online championships for various games, for example. Such brilliance tends to show itself somehow. You built a perpetual motion engine for a school fair. He might have broken records and took names in war game tournaments, or written anonymous, but recognizable essays on military attics, or got responsible for a suddenly super competent street gang.
--[X] Also ask Williams opinion/see if he can run a separate background check or see if he and the SA can find anything on this guy and change your choice if he thinks it's bad one.
No. of Votes: 1
Captain Hunt

[X] Plan VanRopen's Production Budget
No. of Votes: 1
Van Ropen

[X] ParSec Expansion and Air Force
-[X] 100 Legionaries
-[X] 10 Tigers
-[X] 5000 Accipters (Atmospheric)
-[X] 60 Gladius (Type-C)
-[X] 120 Anti-Starship Missles (small)
-[X] 400 Hydra Missles
No. of Votes: 1
Van Ropen

[X] Frigate Flotilla
-[X] 10 Pynda Hulls
-[X] 10 "Patrol Ship" Pynda Loadouts
No. of Votes: 1
Van Ropen

[X] Demonstration
-[X] 1 Appia (non-Repulsor)
-[X] 1 Virgo (non-Repulsor)
-[X] 10 Dormus
-[X] 10 Cenaculum
-[X] 10 Insula (non-Repulsor)
No. of Votes: 1
Van Ropen


Total No. of Voters: 21

Winnerss are:
[X] More research is required. (100 Point Research Project: Dream Entertainment Drugs)
[X] Sure, you're proof enough that people can be that good.

Also @UberJJK when you get a moment, can you see if you can have some of the relevant information to present to players from the finance document is easy for me to grab?

Stuff like:
Current Free Production
Minimum Post Tax Free Credits (basically if all the Free Production gets used)
Maximum Post Tax Free Credits (If all the Free Production is sold)

I think the item in bold is the only one that isn't actually on the sheet unless it got added. But I'm going to need to poll those often I think.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Should be pretty easy to set up. Probably go with a tab at the front called "Simplified Finance Information" with numbers that automatically update to display the correct figures for the current quarter rather then all the quarters for maximum accessibility.

Not sure if there is any thing else I'd need to post often that the players need to see from that beautiful but arcane work. Any thing you or the @TheEyes reference often I need to show to the players?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well the entire "Product Details" sheet is kinda necessary for any of those numbers to be the least bit useful. Other then that I suppose you could do with just those figures.

TheEyes said:
Only other thing I can think of is the post-tax credit -to- unused production conversion factor; that'd be particularly useful for people looking into how much cash we give up each time we dedicate Production to something.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Good point I'll remember to put that in.

DakkaMania said:
We've been talking endlessly about ways to destroy slavers while they attack, but what about something to make it unattractive to go after Alliance colonies in the first place? Slavers are motivated by money. So if the cost/benefit ratio is negative, they go elsewhere.

Also something that is hard to ascertain beforehand, which increases the perceived risks. Either Stealthed defence satellite* capable of one-shotting Cruisers or groundbased defences that shred any transport that tries to land and is hardened enough against orbital bombardement.

*We basically just need a stealth system and a one-shot gun. It needs to be cheap and disposable so it can act like a mine.


It won't hold off Reapers or a serious military assault, but it gets rid of random slavers as they risk losing expensive ships.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Hm. Well if we assume that every planet has an average of 3 cities and the SA has a current total of 50 planets, going off the Human worlds list, for a total of 150 cities then we could put a GARDIAN tower and Arc Reactor to power it in every city for 15,225m credits. If we wanted to be more secure a trio of towers in each city would put us back 45,675m, a mere 9.7% of our total budget for this quarter.
 
UberJJK said:
Hm. Well if we assume that every planet has an average of 3 cities and the SA has a current total of 50 planets, going off the Human worlds list, for a total of 150 cities then we could put a GARDIAN tower and Arc Reactor to power it in every city for 15,225m credits. If we wanted to be more secure a trio of towers in each city would put us back 45,675m, a mere 9.7% of our total budget for this quarter.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Sweet Jeebuz. Fuck pirates, we're going Fortress Humanity.
 
Dark as Silver said:
P&P will make a big impact, unfortunately we're going to be selling stuff in the next few quarters rather than years, if this boosts economic growth to say 10-15%. Aside from just how fast it will take to come in to play, the social implications are massive, the collapse in the higher education (and possibly lower education system), does the age people can hold a job decrease if they know how to do it as well as a expert, the moral guardians, the extra growth being budgeted to the navy rather than trying to simulate even more growth. Thats just 1 extra ship for every 10 each year, if we sold them a ship 80% of the previous cost thats 2. And we're looking at much more than 20% savings.

Edit: Why am I getting into this argument? My point was that the Cabira was poorly optimised as a colony defence, not that it was too expensive.
P&P is good and we should do it some time. But its not a substitute for cheaper ships.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I wouldn't say that we'll (instantly) destroy (higher) education, at least depending on how skills are acquired. If they require a qualified "donor" to provide the skillset, then the education system will transform into one where the most talented, the very best, the super prodigies are trained to the maximum level of skill by best teachers, and then the developed supreme skills are exctracted for sale. This should at least sustain education system over the transitional period. After that? Well, higher education people shift towards doing science, basically.
 
HanEmpire said:
Sweet Jeebuz. Fuck pirates, we're going Fortress Humanity.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's by no means a perfect solution since hostiles could just stay out of range of the GARDIANs, find a nice spot behind the horizon of all the towers, land, and travel over land.

But significantly increases the time a raid takes. Because now Pirates/Slavers have to travel between their landing point and the city while remaining low enough to the ground that the GARDIAN can't be pointed at them.

That gives the Alliance a hell of a lot more time to respond and will make Alliance worlds too risky to target for the most part. Batarian "Pirates" would still attack due to political reasons but even then the chance of us the Alliance stopping them in time is still better.

Especially with us selling large numbers of Pyndas and anti-pirate loadouts.
 
UberJJK said:
It's by no means a perfect solution since hostiles could just stay out of range of the GARDIANs, find a nice spot behind the horizon of all the towers, land, and travel over land.

But significantly increases the time a raid takes. Because now Pirates/Slavers have to travel between their landing point and the city while remaining low enough to the ground that the GARDIAN can't be pointed at them.

That gives the Alliance a hell of a lot more time to respond and will make Alliance worlds too risky to target for the most part. Batarian "Pirates" would still attack due to political reasons but even then the chance of us the Alliance stopping them in time is still better.

Especially with us selling large numbers of Pyndas and anti-pirate loadouts.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think if it was that easy the Alliance would have already done it, but it certainly won't hurt. And if the Alliance stations some troops with our kit in each city, any attackers are liable to be bogged down into a bloody slog.

How hard would it be to make the GARDIAN towers semi-mobile? If they can move around a bit, it makes them harder to target from orbit as they can constantly change their position.
 
Yog said:
I wouldn't say that we'll (instantly) destroy (higher) education, at least depending on how skills are acquired. If they require a qualified "donor" to provide the skillset, then the education system will transform into one where the most talented, the very best, the super prodigies are trained to the maximum level of skill by best teachers, and then the developed supreme skills are exctracted for sale. This should at least sustain education system over the transitional period. After that? Well, higher education people shift towards doing science, basically.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If you can pay 20K to learn a degree course over the course of an afternoon, why would you pay tuition fees for three or four years? Especially given that P&P is likely a better understanding than a degree could give you.
We need a plan before releasing P&P. How much do we charge? Who do we sell it too? What will happen because of this? Just as the starter.
 
DakkaMania said:
I think if it was that easy the Alliance would have already done it
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is where the Alliance's mindset is important. To them pirates and slavers are a concern yes but not a major one.

We are only talking about hundreds, low thousands at most, of people being killed/enslaved.

Certainly not something to ignore but it's not a real priority.

Instead it's quite clear that the Alliance is fully expecting a full on war to break out between them and a major power. In thirty years they build seven Dreadnoughts and who knows how many Carriers (IE: Knock-off Dreadnoughts).

The Dreadnoughts alone would have cost them 301.5 trillion credits. For that price they could have build six and a half thousand 100 Frigates. Hell even if they went with 250m Frigates that would still be enough to permanently station eight around every single human world.

Dreadnoughts are really only good for fighting wars and major wars at that. Which makes spending so much on them a clear declaration that humanity is gearing up for a war. It's part of the reason Humans are viewed as a warlike species by the Citadel Races and why the Council was planning on pointing them at the Batarians.

So yeah colony defense isn't a major factor in Alliance policy so from their perspective they are better off spending that money building more ships, which can also be used for colony defense, to prepare for the next time they are attacked.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top