- Location
- Australia
I may be occupied for most of the day, but that doesn't mean I won't be cranky as all get out if people start crossing the line in here while my back is turned.
To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)
- Thread starter OneirosTheWriter
- Start date
- Sci-Fi
-
- Tags
- star trek exploration fully automated luxury gay space communism top level canon (canon) #hashtagcontent all-encompassing space amoeba cardassian boy bands cardassian magical girls darkest bureaucracy debate makes the qm cackle like palpatine hoh is an empire quest it has to be foreign infiltrators more ships ship happens singers delenda est starfleet this is not an empire quest ur waifu is collective?
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Okay. To be fair, things usually work better if I don't lead with blunt, hostile, indiscriminate negations like "you're wrong" or "that's a lie," or "Sorry, but that's not true," or "you're ignoring the issue and hoping it goes away." It does seem to make an opinion seem more negative and hostile than it otherwise would.
Including such blunt, indiscriminate negations was a mistake, so I'll try it without them, and instead try to explain myself in more detail.
My argument is as follows:
We get more ships by increasing crew recruitment. We experience more plot by pursuing the other MISC options. If the game is viewed as a simple exercise in maximizing the single variable "how many ships do we have," then obviously the option that gives us more crew is going to be strictly superior to the other options. On the other hand, that is not everyone's sole priority.
The people who are in this for the Captain's Logs, for example, may be more motivated by the desire to read Captain's Logs about cool things happening, even if that means sacrificing the opportunity to crew an extra escort this year or some such. The people who want, in-narrative, to maximize the security of the Federation may consider chasing down long term threats to Federation interests. Like a secret redoubt where our enemies could assemble a star-breaker bomb to use as a terror weapon against us. Or like unexpected political successes on the part of one faction within our current opponent's succession crisis. Or like having the means to investigate and understand the facts on the ground in the middle of that succession crisis.
That's a nontrivial fraction of the quest-goers: those who are in it for the narrative, the logs, or both, and who are prepared to sacrifice a bit of crew recruitment for the sake of interesting logs and greater security in narrative terms.
I would fondly imagine that this viewpoint isn't totally alien to your own. If it is, I'm sorry to hear that, but I ask that you please consider accepting that other people may think differently, and not mock them for enjoying something about the game different from what you enjoy.
Furthermore, vote for options other than "set Kahurangi to a recruitment drive" is NOT to "ignore the crew issue and hoping it goes away." To say so is very unfair to those one is debating with.
There are many possible states of mind one can have on the crew issue between "always hammer the "more crew!" button as hard as possible every single time" and "ignore the crew issue and hope it goes away."
When dealing with someone who voted for the recent Academy expansion (when there were many other things we wanted), in the context of the thread having already approved having an internal diplomacy team... voting for two out of three options to increase recruitment but not the third is very far from "ignoring the issue and hoping it goes away."
No, that would be voting for zero recruitment options and instead spending the resources on other things.
Including such blunt, indiscriminate negations was a mistake, so I'll try it without them, and instead try to explain myself in more detail.
My argument is as follows:
We get more ships by increasing crew recruitment. We experience more plot by pursuing the other MISC options. If the game is viewed as a simple exercise in maximizing the single variable "how many ships do we have," then obviously the option that gives us more crew is going to be strictly superior to the other options. On the other hand, that is not everyone's sole priority.
The people who are in this for the Captain's Logs, for example, may be more motivated by the desire to read Captain's Logs about cool things happening, even if that means sacrificing the opportunity to crew an extra escort this year or some such. The people who want, in-narrative, to maximize the security of the Federation may consider chasing down long term threats to Federation interests. Like a secret redoubt where our enemies could assemble a star-breaker bomb to use as a terror weapon against us. Or like unexpected political successes on the part of one faction within our current opponent's succession crisis. Or like having the means to investigate and understand the facts on the ground in the middle of that succession crisis.
That's a nontrivial fraction of the quest-goers: those who are in it for the narrative, the logs, or both, and who are prepared to sacrifice a bit of crew recruitment for the sake of interesting logs and greater security in narrative terms.
I would fondly imagine that this viewpoint isn't totally alien to your own. If it is, I'm sorry to hear that, but I ask that you please consider accepting that other people may think differently, and not mock them for enjoying something about the game different from what you enjoy.
Furthermore, vote for options other than "set Kahurangi to a recruitment drive" is NOT to "ignore the crew issue and hoping it goes away." To say so is very unfair to those one is debating with.
There are many possible states of mind one can have on the crew issue between "always hammer the "more crew!" button as hard as possible every single time" and "ignore the crew issue and hope it goes away."
When dealing with someone who voted for the recent Academy expansion (when there were many other things we wanted), in the context of the thread having already approved having an internal diplomacy team... voting for two out of three options to increase recruitment but not the third is very far from "ignoring the issue and hoping it goes away."
No, that would be voting for zero recruitment options and instead spending the resources on other things.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Silly game master, why do you think we'd wait for you to turn your back before we get snippy?
More on topic, what can we expect to happen to incomplete research and construction projects started during this State of Emergency?
I'm mocking people? I honestly don't know what I've said to deserve such a viscous response, even in the polite version, but please re-read the back and forth that you're responding to. Everything I said in the post you quoted was relevant to context in the discussion I was having.
Look, my view is that by not recruiting enough crew to cover the hulls we currently have, we will get a political crisis. That is the plot that I am trying to avoid. It has almost nothing to do with maximizing ships. I never even said a word about maximizing ships. My reasons are completely plot motivated; this is the consequence we have to deal with for having so many neat battles and getting us to the point where the Empire is falling apart.
I don't want to deal with a crew related political crisis. It won't be fun for me and it won't be fun for anyone here. I would rather let something else slide than deal with that.
Plus, you know, developing an intel asset is not exactly plot either. It's more building stuff. It interacts with plot, but a crew shortage also interacts with plot.
I hope you ditch the badly mischaracterized strawman you're arguing in most of your post because I'm not going to engage it. Please stop.
Last edited:
Why do you think it would be a political crisis in the "get hauled in front of the Council and get yelled at" mode? We've never even gotten a hint at such a thing. I would think the worst consequence would be purely practical, that maybe we can't launch some ships on time because we have to wait to crew them. Which is bad, but.... eh.
At most there might be some grumbling about it, but you know, I'm sure Sousa can explain with no more than the truth. We schedule construction years in advance, and we've been deliberately turning out hulls as fast as possible for numerous reasons well known to the council. This war came suddenly and caused a lot of casualties... whatchagonnado?
To say that we could end up not being able to put ships in service for lack of crew is a valid argument, and I respect people voting on those grounds. To say it's going to cause a political crisis is an extraordinary claim requiring a more convincing argument.
Last edited:
To run out of crew is an extraordinary situation that we've never been in before.
In previous cases where we've lost a lot of crew, we had a massive buffer available. This current crew shortage exists not just because of war loses, but because we have ran Starfleet close to the edge on crew for the past two years and planned to do so for at least the next one. In other words, the lack of buffer is a situation of our own making that the war is making critical.
We already know that crew losses are one of the big causes of war discontent and loss of war support, which is an abstraction of how happy the Council is with us.
We also know that the President has unrealistic expectations both about the consequences of war and about how Starfleet is run, and we know that she is willing to demand our resignation should these unrealistic expectations not be met.
Put all that together? How are we not to blame for an inability to crew the hulls that we chose to order? Why would the Council, or the media, or the Predident not ask questions when hulls are sitting idle? It is not a situation we want to be in.
Last edited:
I don't find that argument very convincing, because it seems to hinge on the fact that "hulls sitting idle" is a something that the Council would view with a great deal of distress. If they want to ask questions, we've got perfectly reasonable answers. As for the lack of buffer being of our own making, so what? Again, there are perfectly valid reasons for Starfleet to be turning out hulls as fast as possible, and those have even been canonized in game posts. If we're doing that, and we are, a low buffer is simply how it's going to be.
Night
Widow Null
- Location
- Hoff
Hey I made it back in time to vote.
[X][LAIO] Focus on the Laian Exploration Council - They know the local systems well, and may know of any Arcadian outposts that have gone unnoticed
[X][KED] Allow the Ked Paddah to destroy the research station debris.
[X][FRG] Assign TF 6, the Gaeni
[X][MISC] The surprising advances of House Bene are concerning, and you should try to look into them.
[X][MISC] There are rumours of an independent research house rimward of Gammon, carefully hidden away. It should be investigated.
[X][MISC] Linderley's team on Morshadd could be the nucleus of a useful asset if you can reinforce them.
[X][LAIO] Focus on the Laian Exploration Council - They know the local systems well, and may know of any Arcadian outposts that have gone unnoticed
[X][KED] Allow the Ked Paddah to destroy the research station debris.
[X][FRG] Assign TF 6, the Gaeni
[X][MISC] The surprising advances of House Bene are concerning, and you should try to look into them.
[X][MISC] There are rumours of an independent research house rimward of Gammon, carefully hidden away. It should be investigated.
[X][MISC] Linderley's team on Morshadd could be the nucleus of a useful asset if you can reinforce them.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
They are also an abstraction of how much economic resources the member worlds have to offer, the feelings of the member worlds as distinct from the council, and general popular sentiment. They are a single-variable function output that takes several disparate inputs. I don't think we can go straight from "our war support has taken single-digit hits because of crew losses" to "the Council is on the brink of calling us on the carpet." Also...
Suffice to say that we already know multiple political parties on the Council have doubts about President N'Gir's competence. If she capriciously demands our resignation because she personally has unrealistic expectations about what we can do, over a comparatively petty issue like "WHY DO YOU HAVE TO MOTHBALL A CONSTELLATION? YOU SHOULD HAVE FORESEEN THIS WAR YEARS IN ADVANCE, AND NOT ORDERED SHIPS YOU CAN'T CREW BECAUSE OF THE BIG BATTLE YOU JUST FOUGHT!"...
Well, let's just say that this sort of thing does not go over well with everyone in the political hierarchy.
Yeah, but we also don't want to be in the situation of explaining why there's a bright new planetary nebula where the Gaeni homeworld used to be. Or how "we lost the Licori" to Romulus.
I'd rather deal with a political crisis that's based on a straight-up challenge to Sousa's professional competence, than deal with a challenge based on Starfleet letting a shot get past our guard in a big way.
As Briefvoice noted, "we will get in a political crisis over this" is an extraordinary claim. We have grounds to imagine such a crisis arising.
But we also have grounds to imagine a star-breaker bomb being assembled at a secret lab five light-years from Gammon and used to blow up Gaen.
And we have grounds to imagine that due to our ignorance of Licori internal politics, the Romulans might stage a coup that turns the Licori into a firm, reliable Romulan client.
And if you think the political crisis we might face for not having enough warm bodies to crew all our Constellations is bad... just imagine how ugly it'll get if any of those things happen. That same president who'd be annoyed if we mothball one or two of our oldest ships will be livid if we straight-up lose the war.
So if the thing that's motivating you is fear of a political crisis:
1) While you have valid grounds to be thus motivated, your grounds are not stronger than the valid grounds other people have for being motivated in other directions.
2) The absolute magnitude of the crises whose fear is motivating others may be even greater than the magnitude of the crisis you fear.
3) For these reasons, the footing we have to claim to be engaged in evidence-based reasoning, and to tell the other that they are committing fallacies and stating objective untruths, is rather narrow footing. As you say, "let's not."
If I were the sort of person inclined to read viciousness into the more recent, polite version of my argument... suffice to say that I would also react very negatively to statements like "Meanwhile you're ignoring the crew issue and hoping it goes away." I happened to agree with the opinions you directed that remark against, and did not appreciate being told I was giving the crew problem the ostrich treatment when I have supported many things in an attempt to solve it.
Personally, I considered this accusation of willful blindness roughly as offensive as "that's a lie," and while that may just be me, I think you can see how it could bother someone.
I apologize for letting my claws slip out there. I see what went wrong. Let's maybe agree to take some care to avoid accidental or incidental scratches inflicted on others, shall we?
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
So I haven't read all the tens of pages of discussion yet, so apologies if this was already stated...
But the reason I'm voting for "Have retired Admiral Kahurangi start appealing for recruits for Starfleet and the member world fleets" is that the wording is open enough to allow the possibility that it's not just a one-time recruitment drive. That it could be the foundation for something more permanent, a Federation-wide recruitment coordination that could be built upon along the lines of popular recruitment-related Sousa deal options. Some extension/standardization of Federation/Starfleet academies, an extension of the MWCO, or something along those lines. This is something I've wanted for a long time (well, two years worth of in-game years, which is long time for the thread).
I don't think the lack of crew will cause a serious political crisis - some grumbling in Shipyard Ops and some Council factions, but nothing too serious. But at the same time, the mechanism with which the recruitment campaign is accomplished and how it could be built on can still be just as be as much of a "plot experience", just one less focused on the Licori.
My fourth MISC option would've been the House Bene one, but to be honest, I don't care that much about the internal politics of who wins the Arcadian Succession Crisis. As long we we're at peace with them and can guarantee that we can come up with a permanent agreement to handle their mentats, that's fine with me. Even if it is some Romulan plot or whatever.
But the reason I'm voting for "Have retired Admiral Kahurangi start appealing for recruits for Starfleet and the member world fleets" is that the wording is open enough to allow the possibility that it's not just a one-time recruitment drive. That it could be the foundation for something more permanent, a Federation-wide recruitment coordination that could be built upon along the lines of popular recruitment-related Sousa deal options. Some extension/standardization of Federation/Starfleet academies, an extension of the MWCO, or something along those lines. This is something I've wanted for a long time (well, two years worth of in-game years, which is long time for the thread).
I don't think the lack of crew will cause a serious political crisis - some grumbling in Shipyard Ops and some Council factions, but nothing too serious. But at the same time, the mechanism with which the recruitment campaign is accomplished and how it could be built on can still be just as be as much of a "plot experience", just one less focused on the Licori.
My fourth MISC option would've been the House Bene one, but to be honest, I don't care that much about the internal politics of who wins the Arcadian Succession Crisis. As long we we're at peace with them and can guarantee that we can come up with a permanent agreement to handle their mentats, that's fine with me. Even if it is some Romulan plot or whatever.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Me, I'm expecting Kahurangi's appeals to be a thing that lasts only a short time, giving us a flat boost or at most a short-lived trickle. Among other things, a significant, permanent crew trickle would be equivalent to handing us 35-40pp for free, which seems a bit... generous.
What I'm really expecting is that she does the equivalent of show up on this poster:
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm sure Lord Kitchener's mighty 'stache singlehandedly brought in hundreds if not thousands of recruits for the British Army. But it was kind of a one-time thing; it didn't result in elevated recruitment levels a decade later.
What I'm really expecting is that she does the equivalent of show up on this poster:
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm sure Lord Kitchener's mighty 'stache singlehandedly brought in hundreds if not thousands of recruits for the British Army. But it was kind of a one-time thing; it didn't result in elevated recruitment levels a decade later.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Then we simply delay our construction projects by a year or two. Do recall that Patricia Chen is accelerating ship construction in Starfleet yards; the act of slowing down from ludicrous speed will hardly be an insurmountable engineering challenge.
Frustrating? Yes, very. Resignation-worthy? Valentina Sousa is likely going to step down soon anyways, and the Council knows it. Besides, we're running low on Special Resources necessary to construct additional ships, as well as slipways in which to build them.
All that President N'Gir can accomplish by pitching a fit is to give politicians such as Stesk a free shot at her administration. After the rough handling he received during the sessions leading up to the recent war declaration, he's going to take every chance he gets to tear her career to shreds as a matter of principle.
Night
Widow Null
- Location
- Hoff
Honestly, we seem to have better grounds to imagine the latter rather than the former? We've heard nothing of a possible political crisis when running out crew, even rumors.
- Location
- Germany
- Pronouns
- He/Him
On the other hand, we also don't know the results for the other options. The Bene could just play their own game, the tramp freighter could just try to make a quick buck, and the rumors could just be rumors without substance, whereas the crew issue is guaranteed.
[X][LAIO] Focus on the Laian Exploration Council - They know the local systems well, and may know of any Arcadian outposts that have gone unnoticed
[X][KED] Allow the Ked Paddah to destroy the research station debris.
[X][FRG] Assign TF 6, the Gaeni
[X][MISC] There are rumours of an independent research house rimward of Gammon, carefully hidden away. It should be investigated.
[X][MISC] Linderley's team on Morshadd could be the nucleus of a useful asset if you can reinforce them.
[X][MISC] Have retired Admiral Kahurangi start appealing for recruits for Starfleet and the member world fleets.
[X][KED] Allow the Ked Paddah to destroy the research station debris.
[X][FRG] Assign TF 6, the Gaeni
[X][MISC] There are rumours of an independent research house rimward of Gammon, carefully hidden away. It should be investigated.
[X][MISC] Linderley's team on Morshadd could be the nucleus of a useful asset if you can reinforce them.
[X][MISC] Have retired Admiral Kahurangi start appealing for recruits for Starfleet and the member world fleets.
- Location
- Infraspace
[X][LAIO] Focus on the Laian Exploration Council - They know the local systems well, and may know of any Arcadian outposts that have gone unnoticed
[X][KED] Allow the Ked Paddah to destroy the research station debris.
[X][FRG] Assign TF 6, the Gaeni
[X][MISC] The surprising advances of House Bene are concerning, and you should try to look into them.
[X][MISC] There are rumours of an independent research house rimward of Gammon, carefully hidden away. It should be investigated.
[X][MISC] Linderley's team on Morshadd could be the nucleus of a useful asset if you can reinforce them.
Not that there's much point in voting for the first 3!
I feel that a lot of the voting for Kahurangi is as much for the sake of using her as it is for her effect – certainly that was when I was considering that option.
[X][KED] Allow the Ked Paddah to destroy the research station debris.
[X][FRG] Assign TF 6, the Gaeni
[X][MISC] The surprising advances of House Bene are concerning, and you should try to look into them.
[X][MISC] There are rumours of an independent research house rimward of Gammon, carefully hidden away. It should be investigated.
[X][MISC] Linderley's team on Morshadd could be the nucleus of a useful asset if you can reinforce them.
Not that there's much point in voting for the first 3!
I feel that a lot of the voting for Kahurangi is as much for the sake of using her as it is for her effect – certainly that was when I was considering that option.
But I was using the exact same turn of phrase as the person I was quoting...? We were having a perfectly reasonable discussion until you decided to take offense to a remark that had nothing to do with you.
I'd like an apology.
Last edited:
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
You have, in point of fact, already received it.
I can point to a number of reasons why your 'head in the sand' comment has a bigger signature on my radar than AKuz's. But to be fair, that's not sufficient reason to start leading my paragraphs around broad-spectrum, hostile, indiscriminate negations like "you're wrong" and "that's a lie." I have already apologized for doing so.
We'd be better off without such rhetorical shotgun blasts, and I shall try to remember that.
I can point to a number of reasons why your 'head in the sand' comment has a bigger signature on my radar than AKuz's. But to be fair, that's not sufficient reason to start leading my paragraphs around broad-spectrum, hostile, indiscriminate negations like "you're wrong" and "that's a lie." I have already apologized for doing so.
We'd be better off without such rhetorical shotgun blasts, and I shall try to remember that.
- Location
- Australia
Okay - no point closing the vote until tomorrow when I get home from work, so it will be allowed to stay open until then.
AKuz
Been Better
- Location
- A Rising Tide of Horrors
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Then people should vote to increase Linderly's team and put down the Tachyon nets. Those are real effects too.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
As well as continued deployment of outposts in fringe systems!
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Furthermore, the crew issue is "guaranteed..." but the amount of crew we get is not. And amount matters.
If Oneiros were giving us options with 100% certain payoffs, I think he'd arguably be remiss in his QMing. The whole point is that we don't know exactly what will happen from any of our options, so we have to make decisions based on something other than certainties.
Thors_Alumni
Proud member of Thors Class VII from Liberl
- Location
- Liberl Zemuria.
Why not give us a complete breakdown of each of the MISC choices with their Pro's and Con's? That might help to clear up some of the confusion among the fandom on this thread.