That is why I said something because as it stands I don't think that using this system/approach would result in a very fun experience. The Cardassians war would likely result in even more "useless" micromanagement and if Oneiros doesn't change his turn structure could take (RL) months if to resolve (A bit like torroars Karak Ungor problem in his Warhammer dynasty quest) considering the scale of that conflict. And then there is the fact that one of the more interesting events, the covert op operation against the Gammon superweapon, which woudl have a been a great opportunity for some interesting choices/votes as well as a choice that fits well within high command happened basically without any input from us.
Okay, insofar as this has merit, I think Oneiros's best bet is to
abstract mobilization somewhat. For example, large numbers of engineering teams could be placed under Starfleet Engineering Command and be given broad directives like "fortify Indorian space, build repair yards at Apinae and Amarkia, rush all starships that can be completed by the end of the year..."
That would save us a huge amount of micromanagement and would also make the wartime management process more 'scalable,' in the sense that it doesn't become twice as complicated to manage an emergency where twice as many teams are working.
That said, I'd actually LIKE for us to get to pick assets, among other things because it gives us control over which planets' war support we're tapping into. It's mostly just that if we've got, oh, four or six or eight engineering teams and a similar number of industry teams, constantly having to retask them among a host of similar options (rush this ship rush that ship, build outpost here, minefield here, outpost there, et cetera)... Well, that's stressful, and it involves a lot of decisions where there's no obvious wrong answer and many good answers. so people are reluctant to participate. We get more interest in picking the assets in the first place because that tends to be a statement of our priorities.
As I said the key problems in my eyes is that we have a shit-ton of decisions that in the end don't really matter as well as a severe dissonance between a narrative that suggest there might actually be a challenge and us basically breezing through every problem.
In case you didn't notice, our fleet at Ixaria took a HELL of a beating, and if Nash hadn't been in position to violate her own orders by intercepting the Imperial fleet, we could have suffered a massive, disastrous reverse. For that matter, Nash's victory in the battle wasn't guaranteed- her flagship is powerful but not invincible. And we're far from done with the war yet. I don't think your standards are very fair here.
The real question is what the Emperor was fucking doing there in the first place.
You don't send your god damn head of state to a battlefield currently invested by a superpower easily. Especially when you don't have an heir sorted out.
Hereditary monarchies don't follow those rules so consistently. A LOT of monarchies have fallen into disaster or dynastic collapse when the king went out and got himself killed.
I'm starting to get the feeling that Kortennon is going to take control and then invite the Cardassians in or something, who will be all too willing to give them favorable terms (In the short term) after all the nose bloodying we've given them lately.
Because so far, pretty much everyone has been moving in a way that they come out the king. They've lost none of their heavy assets, and for some reason, someone convinced the Emperor to take the field when they weren't 100% aware of where all of our ships were.
Um... are you even playing the same game as the rest of us? Kortennon is RIGHT IN THE GUNSIGHTS of our largest fleet. Their main system gets hit within a matter of a couple of weeks. NOTHING the Cardassians could possibly do would save their major holdings from destruction.
The trend you describe is completely at odds with what's actually been happening.
He didn't even have an heir. That's either some impressive level of delusion or he had no idea what the actual war situation was.
That, or he was just famously incompetent.
Remember, a monarch is likely to care about his own
personal fate and obligations a lot more than he does about abstract nationalism. If he has no direct descendants and dies in battle,
his troubles are over- and his troubles are extremely severe and pressing. So much so that we've been practically taking bets on when he gets overthrown, and by whom.
There aren't many things he could do to save the situation. Heroic war leadership is far from the worst choice he could make in that scenario.
I remember during the biophage we had good activity with that state of emergency and that was all about mobilizing assets. Though we did not have to deal with War Support then. There are some other differences between the two, that was the first big event like that. Since then we have had the Orion Syndicate and GBZ. Though we had about 6 years after the biophage (eneded 2304.Q1) before our next extended event with Ghost and Whisperers (started 2310.Q1). Following that we had a few quarters until Master Of Orion started. Master of Orion lead directly into the GBZ which lead directly into the Licori crisis, so I think the constant high tempo mode is part of it.
Yeah. Something's gone wrong in a campaign when "major political crisis is eaten by other ongoing major political crisis" becomes a catchphrase.
Well, it's either that or people take part in the quest for the Star Trek exploration, not to fight a war, and I need to just start pulling out more diplomatic saves
(Edit: i.e., I have more TNG than DS9 fans in here
)
Well, people want a mix. It's like, this is why everyone jumped on the
Stargazer project, and why people were so happy back in the 'skirmishing' phase of our conflict with Cardassia. Having military-political thrillers blowing up all around us all the time just becomes a disturbance.
