@Briefvoice thanks! Those are the last two Excelsiors for refit, yes?
I believe they are, yes.
@Briefvoice thanks! Those are the last two Excelsiors for refit, yes?
I decided on plan A, but I was waffling between more Ambassadors and the Kepler wave. We do need as many ambassadors as we can get, as fast as we can get them. However, getting out a large number of capable Keplers, quickly, seems like it will do a lot more to alleviate our event response/failure issues.
The latter point was the decision-maker for me.I decided on plan A, but I was waffling between more Ambassadors and the Kepler wave. We do need as many ambassadors as we can get, as fast as we can get them. However, getting out a large number of capable Keplers, quickly seems like it will do a lot more to alleviate our event response/failure issues.
Under current scrap-and-build mechanics the choice is between 2 to 4 prior gen ships and one current gen ship. We're not combat capped, and we're primarily limited by SR, which we only IIRC get 50% refunds on.
Not yet. Waiting for phaser arrays and perhaps isolinear computers (I think).
when are we expecting the start of the Rennie-A production, building more Rennie's and then having to refit them soon sounds like a bad use of berth space.
@Briefvoice - did I understand you correctly that you tentatively plan something like 'A' also for the next build?
1 TSF Ambassador (NCC-3909) @ 40 Eridani A Fleet Yards Berth A (ETC 2326.Q3)
5 Ambassador-class (NCC-3903, NCC-3904, NCC-3905, NCC-3906, NCC-3907) @ Utopia Planitia Berths A, C, D, E, F (ETC 2325.Q3 - Crews deduct - 2324.Q3)
3 Freighter (NCC-3614, NCC-3615, NCC-3616) @ Lasieth Craft Yards Berth 3, 4, 6 (ETC 2322.Q2)
...
Vulcan - 1 Starfleet Freighter (NCC-3610), 1 Starfleet Cargo Ship (NCC-3725)
Tellar - 1 Starfleet Freighter (NCC-3611)
Humans - 1 Starfleet Freighter (NCC-3612)
Honiani ratification coming closer, Starfleet building ships like they are going out of fashion, harsher events (that is purely subjective), perhaps Romulan/Klingon raiders, Horizon alternative diplomacy (perhaps), Hishmeri belligerence, Cardassian affiliated or conquered Ittick-Ka (now, that is pure fearmongering).What happened to NCC-3908? Did someone else start an Ambassador this quarter (it only shows commissioned ships, not started ships)
Well that is 3 freighters and a cargo ship this quarter, and at least 3 more freighters next quarter.
How many more do we need?
Er...Because we're Starfleet. We don't work through subterfuge or threats but through diplomacy.
CCF?
HE ONLY TIME TO DECOMISSION IS IF WE CAN DIRECTLY REPLACE A SHIP THAT IS PATENTLY USELESS
Ah, floating cover concept. I read long and fun notes of MOO-like PBEM game where typical fleet consisted of big, armored and heavy-gunned battleships, big, armored vacuum ships, containing as much of little guns to take out cover as possible and one point in engine only cover whose main purpose in existence was to take a hit from battleship and disappear in the blaze of glory, preventing combat engine from passing damage to allied battleships. There were also durable covers, with one point in armor, but that was deep meta. And bombardment ships, optimized not so much for breaking enemy fleet as to reducing enemy planets.The combat engine actually rewards this behavior. More ships are more targets for the engine to assign hits to the more hits are dispersed across shields. A Miranda-A being catastrophically destroyed (warp core breach) loses us 4 crew. A Ambassador loss would lose us 23ish. Losing an Miranda in the line of fire is often worth it if an Explorer isn't several damaged. In fact there were ship designs proposed to put the cheapest, most durable ships possible into vanguard phase to reduce crew losses.
Its worth mentioning that a Miranda A is about 1/3 as durable as an Ambassador for 20% of the hull cost and 17% the crew cost. That doesn't even account for evasion, which should increase the relative durability.
The Council would kick out the Commander of Starfleet who'd be stupid enough to do that.In theory, we can decomission ships in order to create a ship shortage crisis, and get extra resources for replacement.
We'd force the politicians to choose between having a shortage of ships to help, or sending out crew in "officially obsolete" vessels.
That's a bit too machiavellian for Starfleet though.
Given that you are effectively destroying government assets (compare number of ships versus population/number of planets. These are not cheap assets), while working for the government, and try to scam said government, while derelicting your duty (missing events due to scrapped ships), I'll expect you to visit Andromeda shortly.In theory, we can decomission ships in order to create a ship shortage crisis, and get extra resources for replacement.
We'd force the politicians to choose between having a shortage of ships to help, or sending out crew in "officially obsolete" vessels.
That's a bit too machiavellian for Starfleet though.