Remove ads

To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

Linked contents
To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest) Starfleet Ship Design Bureau, Refit ("To Boldly Go...")
Reader mode
Quick question: has the UNE Excelsior gotten fully repaired yet? Because offering to comp the upgrade to an Excelsior A while its in shop seems like a decent idea.
 
[X][PRIORITY] Change nothing [Weighted 1.5x]

[x][CAL] Lobby the Council (Andorians can serve as emergency responders to failed event responses in Caldonian space (-15pp)
Missed events have been costing us badly.

And with an EC ship covering the Caledonian issue narratively speaking we should get other things.

[X][EC] Pick an Explorer Corps ship to carry this out (USS Odyssey)
No-brainer. Reroll on all relevant tests, plus EC, Blooded, Captain and Mipek Bonuses.
[X][GAENI] 100sr for 150br
[X][LOG] Start 2 Starfleet Cargo Ships at Irrizizza for 8pp

Picking this because apparently the Apatia aren't going to be able to fill those berths ANYWAY.
[x][REN] Endorse the tech transfer
[X][CATS] 1 Fathership, 4 Swarmers
[X][BEE] Exchange resources with the Orion
[X][ENTER] Send the survivors to existing ships
-[X] Courageous, Odyssey, and Tarrak
Simon_Jester said:
Given Sulu's bonuses, sending Voshev might better than sending any other ship we have. Sulu gets rerolls on diplomacy tests in Federation space, and this may qualify. Sulu gets +1 Presence. Sulu gets +1 to espionage rolls, and some of the missions she undertakes may qualify.

I wouldn't hesitate to trust Sulu and the Voshev with this task.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Mbeki also has a reroll.

And a point of crew experience of Sulu.
 
Last edited:
I want the Humans to have an Ambassador class starship eventually.
Adhoc vote count started by Thors_Alumni on Jun 11, 2017 at 2:34 PM, finished with 98 posts and 31 votes.
Click to expand...
 
Finally got around to reading Heroes of the Empire, @Briefvoice . My compliments on it.

Solid, good setup, aaaand now I've got some of the classical music soundtrack from Legend of Galactic Heroes stuck in my head. :D

Void Stalker said:
Does she? I was going off the front page and Mbeki has a reroll on Diplomacy aboard the Odyssey which is why I had a preference there. Guess she does and she re-rolls hull checks. Now I am less sure as it was Mebki bonus to presence along with reroll on diplomacy that had me convinced.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Oh, Mbeki is amply qualified and just as good a choice as Sulu. I favor Sulu and the Voshov mainly because, as others have pointed out, this string of missions is relatively unlikely to pose an existential threat to an Excelsior, and the consequences of failure probably aren't going to be as bad as "Sydraxians become our mortal enemies for the next ten years." It's a good way to take one of the 'squishier' ships in the Explorer Corps and give the ship some time to level up, and the captain is well suited to the task. Odyssey, which is already Blooded and likely to become Veteran with the integration of many Enterprise crew, is the ship we want scouting the frontiers, by contrast.

pheonix89 said:
Mbeki also has a reroll.

And a point of crew experience of Sulu.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Again, it's not that Mbeki isn't qualified, it's not even that Mbeki isn't more qualified. It's that Sulu is sufficiently qualified, and her more vulnerable ship is better off dealing with this situation (where Sulu's stacked diplomatic bonuses make her more competitive), while Mbeki is on the frontiers handling diplomacy with species we DON'T already have a 400+ relationship stat with.

MTB said:
That could incite the C to attack early, and that may end bad for them.
...
So, no high risk commanders in the GBZ.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm a bit confused by what you're trying to say.

My argument is that an attempt to push the Cardassians out of the Gabriel Expanse is unlikely to work, because Cardassia is much stronger than the Sydraxians were. Just blowing up three or four of their ships a year wouldn't do it, because the Cardassians can replace three or four ships a year. To really push them out of the expanse, we'd have to take out... I don't know, almost certainly at least a dozen of their ships, maybe more. We'd have to assault multiple fully armed and operational outposts and even a full sized starbase more powerful than the Kortennon 'Goliath' gun platform that crippled two of our explorers at Gammon.

Furthermore, there's a wide band of unoccupied space between us and the Cardassian bases, much wider than the one between our base and the Sydraxian bases. We'd have to go a long way out of our territory with a heavy striking fleet to threaten them.

Now, while in theory the combined efforts of Starfleet and its affiliates could do this, it would be a huge and aggressive step. Many people within the Federation would oppose such a move, even if technically we're within our treaty rights to do it. Member world fleets would hesitate to support us strongly because of the risk of their task force(s) taking disproportionate losses in an operation that doesn't have much direct benefit for them because of how far the Cardassian bases are from the colony sites the members plan to exploit.

The strength of the defenses we're up against could easily equal the total strength of the defenses we actually fought through during the Licori War. And if our casualties pile up on the same level as during the Licori War, we'd really be in political trouble.
 
Simon_Jester said:
I'm a bit confused by what you're trying to say.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Basically - the scenario you outlined, extended by a Cardassian counterpush after the Federation attack was defeated, which might end in the Cardassian bleeding on our defenses, which would produce lots of dead crew, no definite change in the situation except for the hate, a long-simmering hot/cold war and massive political problems at home.
Therefore, no high-risk commander in Gabriel.
Seems the "..." weren't verbose enough.
 
Void Stalker said:
Thankfully the Indoria are with the Rigellians the biggest member navy after Apiata, Amarkia and Caitians and they are staying home guarding the front. In addition both the Seyek and Qloathi have formidable forces on the southern front both mobile and starbases. Having said that neutralizing or flipping the Dawiar is the best way to solidfy our southern front, though affliating the Ashidi would help even if they have a small fleet. Also a lot would depend on how quick we could rally EC ships to form a task force to counter an invasion push, that is a lot of weight coming in when that happens. It also makes a difference as to how stable Orion is, if they can send even a few ships to join with a larger task force they are ideal to reinforce the Cardassian front.

Ranking:
110+
Apiata
70's
Amarkia, Caitian, Seyek
50's
Indoria, Rigel, Orion, Qloathi

The Seyek have another 12 C and the Qloathi 16 C under construction as well.

As it is I would like to see if two of the original four are interested in sending a joint force to colonize and prospect the GBZ, maybe Human and Tellarite since Andor has concerns on the Caldonians and KBZ
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Cardassians can brush aside 50c forces given time, which is what the right attacks would buy them. Heck, they can brush aside 100c+ forces in right situations.
Simon_Jester said:
The big problem with this strategy is that it relies on one of two things happening.

1) Us not having time to redeploy forces out of the Gabriel Expanse back towards our own space, prior to the Cardassian attack. This is a valid assumption if we anticipate a "bolt from the blue" attack, but less so if we anticipate an attack that takes place as a reaction to escalating tensions that build up over the course of a couple of months.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It depends. We don't have significant listening assets down there nor any Starbase sensor arrays that report to Intelligence regularly. We don't get regular reports on Lecarre space like we do with, say, the Sydraxians. We've never been given reports of traffic on the Rimward periphery of the Ashalla Pact like we have with the Coreward areas - this is proven by us still discovering species down there. Taken together and giving the Cardassians the maximum amount of credit, it's possible they may be able to surprise us. Make it look like there's more traffic in the Gabriel than there actually is, have us anticipating a blow in the GBZ that doesn't actually come. Real life militaries have successfully used similar strategies and so much of our intel relies on signal volume that it does open us to such a vulnerability.

Simon_Jester said:
2) Alternatively, it relies on the member world fleets actually losing ships in the Expanse so that they are materially weakened. This does not seem to be happening, and if the Cardassians plan to make it happen, they have to launch a major offensive in the face of coordinated defensive action by a very large force. Plus, they'd be attacking with their own core fleet, not with relatively expendable affiliates. This is a problem for them, because the ships they'd use to grind us down in the Gabriel Expanse are the exact same force they would later use to threaten Lapycorias and Indoria.

Furthermore, the member world fleets are going to get stronger rather than weaker in the long run because of the Gabriel Expanse. The biggest limit on the Apiata fleet is resources. If the Apiata find any special resource colonies in the Gabriel Expanse, that translates directly into more Stingers. Even bulk resources may, because as we've seen, the Apiata can trade those bulk resources to people with SR surpluses elsewhere in the Federation
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Could be enough to put those ships into the yard, by forcing us into a costly attack, or maybe by expending client navies (a short term strategy, but one that could seem appealing if war is imminent). As seen in the last round of post-Lora skirmishing, we came off worse than the Cardassians did there. Yes, it does rely on stealing a march at some point, but we can't assume that we're infallible either.

Seems uncontroversial that long-term we're stronger for GBZ investment, but short-term realities are fluid. If we invest long term and don't continuously evaluate the short term, we risk missing crucial pieces. I'm not trying to discourage GBZ investment, just to point out that the tradeoffs aren't always just internal.

This is all worst realistic case talk anyway. It's likely enough that it should scare us and we should take steps to ensure it doesn't happen, but not enough to say it will probably happen, you know what I mean?
 
Simon_Jester said:
I'm not ignoring it, and the 'made up' numbers are based on my best rough estimates of how long it takes ships to hit Blooded and Veteran, an issue that is somewhat tricky to calculate. IN THEORY if I had access to Oneiros's notes about the game mechanics I could give you exact probabilities. Instead, I'm trying to make a math-based argument that uses unknown variable numbers, while providing reasonable estimates of what the values of those variables might be. The core of the argument is "we don't know which phase of a ship's career is most dangerous with respect to event failures." It depends on both the raw probability of failure and the duration of the window of vulnerability. This is a very straightforward argument to make, but it is one that is profitably illustrated by the use of numbers.

Numbers are not me claiming to be some kind of math-wizard with superior knowledge, they are me making an illustrative example on the assumption that everyone involved has at least a high school sophomore level of math competence or is willing to ask for clarification from someone who does.

So please, don't sneer. This is what it looks like when I try to communicate with you in a way that at least references math, logic, and evidence, in a situation when the evidence is only partially visible to ANY of us. If you'd rather, I could string together a long chain of rhetorical fallacies. Would that be better?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ugh. I apologize for my bad wording - you're taking offense when I didn't mean it. I meant that the numbers were unknown, and for the sake of example. I was getting annoyed that your reply I was responding to didn't mention my core "earlier is better" argument at all.

Skipping the 'Blooded' phase of a ship's career will also prevent costly near-term failures from compounding and causing us major opportunity costs down the road. The choice isn't between, say, preventing failures in 2317 and 2318 versus preventing them in 2320 and 2323. It's between preventing failures in, say, 2318 and 2320 versus preventing them in 2317 and 2318. And the failures in question MIGHT, or might not, involve diplomatic disasters. For that matter, preventing a failure in 2320 might somehow turn out to be more important than in 2318. Yes, compounding is a thing, But the rate of compounding isn't that high.

The difference in value between preventing two mistakes compressed into (e.g.) a two year period and preventing two mistakes compressed into (e.g.) a five year period may be real, but it is not obviously large. Not when so much depends on things like context, on things like whether a specific Green ship has a captain with a diplomatic bonus (e.g. Sulu and Mbeki), on what region of space a given Explorer Corps ship is assigned to and its probability of encountering previously unknown species, and so on.

[Since you're on the warpath about made up numbers, OBVIOUSLY I am not claiming to be a psychic who knows in advance when a given explorer will fail event checks. These are examples because it would be incredibly cumbersome to make the explanation without numbers to illustrate the point.]
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It looks like my wording still is confusing. When I said "aggregate", I meant that it was covering the whole veterancy period, not just the latter parts of it. So the scenarios I was comparing are, using made up times for the sake of example:

Scenario A: concentrate on improving less experienced green/blooded ships to optimize event non-failures early on
Scenario B: concentrate on improving veteran ships into elites to optimize experience gain and long-term event success

2316-2319: Overall event failure in scenario A is less than that of scenario B. It does look like we agree that the improvement of a green to blooded Excelsior reduces failure rate more than the improvement of a blooded to veteran Excelsior, and so forth. That is, while increasing stats could improve the degree of event success fairly evenly between crew ratings, there are decreasing marginal benefits of increasing stats with respect to overall event non-failure.

2316-2325 (larger period of time, includes 2316-2319 time period): Overall event failure in scenario A is greater than that of scenario B. I agree that the faster natural promotion rates of green/blooded ships vs veteran ships, means that there will be an overall higher level of more experienced ships in the long run if we, well, optimize for overall experience gain.

My core point was that the nominal 2316-2319 above is still important to optimize for, because of compounding successes and failures. Earlier is better. While we can't know the actual rate of "compounding", and a lot of surrounding context is just as relevant, it must be considered in balance against the efficiency of experience gain. You can't simply ignore it.

Do you have evidence that survival rate is actually improved? We've never yet lost a Green Explorer Corps ship to a botched event. We've lost a Blooded ship, we've had a Veteran ship blown up repeatedly but not quite destroyed. But we can hardly say that the empirical evidence indicates that ships are more likely to be lost during the Green phase of their career than during the Blooded phase. There may be a theoretical argument for why, but it would hinge on the exact risk of event failure during the Green and Blooded phases.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I was actually referring less to events (where as far as I know, there haven't been any casualty heavy or destroyed green EC Excelsiors), and more about direct combat. We've had stark examples of green Excelsiors getting mauled with heavy casualties at least 3 times in the past 3 years. Granted, the Sarek also was damaged, but at least she wasn't outright nearly crew-killed or disabled. (The Endurance, in a way, is clinging on to its namesake.) I am worried that in the event of increased hostilities in our spinward borders, not only would have to send some EC ships to help in task forces, any remaining EC ships in the area would be in danger or be forced elsewhere. An extra +1C,S,H,L would help a lot at improving survival, if not victory, in any skirmishes or battles.

edit: grammar
 
Last edited:
[X][PRIORITY] Change nothing [Weighted 1.5x]
[X][CAL] Lobby the Council (Andorians can serve as emergency responders to failed event responses in Caldonian space (-15pp)
[X][EC] Pick an Explorer Corps ship to carry this out (USS Odyssey)
[X][LOG] Start 2 Starfleet Cargo Ships at Irrizizza for 8pp
[X][GAENI] 100sr for 150br
[X][CATS] 1 Fathership, 4 Swarmers
[X][REN] Endorse the tech transfer
[X][BEE] Exchange resources with the Orion
[X][ENTER] Send the survivors to existing ships
-[X] USS Courageous, USS Odyssey, USS Tarrak

edit: tweaked the last entry to align with others
 
Last edited:
[X][CAL] Ignore
[X][EC] Pick an Explorer Corps ship to carry this out (USS Voshev)
[X][LOG] Start 2 Starfleet Cargo Ships at Irrizizza for 8pp
[X][GAENI] 100sr for 150br
[X][CATS] 1 Fathership, 4 Swarmers
[X][REN] Endorse the tech transfer
[X][BEE] Exchange resources with the Orion
[X][ENTER] Send the survivors toexisting ships
-[X] USS Courageous, USS Odyssey, USS Tarrak
 
Inserted tally
Adhoc vote count started by Thors_Alumni on Jun 11, 2017 at 4:10 PM, finished with 107 posts and 33 votes.
Click to expand...
 
okay I don't know if its me somehow or if there is a bug somewhere but I am unable to insert my Tally into my posts and it comes out on a double post. I am going to report it just to be safe since this is the third time that this has happened to me on this board.
 
as much as ppl are planning for war i am looking for growing with talk more and then building the fleet to support all that

because i do not think our wester friend have any more of a wish to start a war then we do
i think we should push the north more then the west.
secure ourself and build up for whatever some next
 
[X][PRIORITY] Change nothing [Weighted 1.5x]
[X][CAL] Ignore
[X][EC] Pick an Explorer Corps ship to carry this out (USS Odyssey)
[X][LOG] Start 2 Starfleet Cargo Ships at Irrizizza for 8pp
[X][GAENI] 100sr for 150br
[X][CATS] 1 Fathership, 4 Swarmers
[X][REN] Endorse the tech transfer
[X][BEE] Exchange resources with the Orion
[X][ENTER] Send the survivors to existing ships
-[X] USS Courageous, USS Odyssey, USS Tarrak
 
MTB said:
Basically - the scenario you outlined, extended by a Cardassian counterpush after the Federation attack was defeated, which might end in the Cardassian bleeding on our defenses, which would produce lots of dead crew, no definite change in the situation except for the hate, a long-simmering hot/cold war and massive political problems at home.
Therefore, no high-risk commander in Gabriel.
Seems the "..." weren't verbose enough.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, the problem is that the failed attack is itself a huge disaster from OUR point of view. A failed counterattack might or might not be a huge disaster from the Cardassians' point of view. The Cardassians have reason to think they are a more casualty-averse society, more willing to accept sacrifice as the price of 'victory.'

Furthermore, a counterattack against an opponent your defenses just mauled is usually much less risky than attacking the mauling defenses in the first place. So if anything, the risks are asymmetric. In the scenario where we launch a Big Push against Cardassia and lose, our side could lose the (political) war in an afternoon, with the Council decisively turning against further adventurism in the Gabriel Expanse and member worlds pulling in their forces to guard the colonies they've already secured rather than going out and looking for more. By contrast, the Cardassians almost certainly can't lose the war (political or otherwise) in an afternoon, even though the individual Guls and Legates most closely associated with a specific defeat might well lose their reputations or even their lives.

SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
It depends. We don't have significant listening assets down there nor any Starbase sensor arrays that report to Intelligence regularly. We don't get regular reports on Lecarre space like we do with, say, the Sydraxians. We've never been given reports of traffic on the Rimward periphery of the Ashalla Pact like we have with the Coreward areas - this is proven by us still discovering species down there...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We had little difficulty tracking Cardassian fleets as they assembled and maneuvered during the Grey October crisis, and we have more sensor-capable assets in that region now than we did then (i.e. a starbase at Lapycorias instead of just an outpost at 15 Themis, better coordination with the Seyek and the Indorians).

The one thing that's missing is the T'Mir's unique contribution to our signals intelligence.

I'd expect us to see large fleets massing, though obviously the possibility of a trick that methodically deceives our border sensors is not something we can totally rule out.

Taken together and giving the Cardassians the maximum amount of credit, it's possible they may be able to surprise us. Make it look like there's more traffic in the Gabriel than there actually is, have us anticipating a blow in the GBZ that doesn't actually come. Real life militaries have successfully used similar strategies and so much of our intel relies on signal volume that it does open us to such a vulnerability.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Again, not ruling it out, but let's bear in mind that we're not blind and have historically been able to track their fleets around our space with sufficient accuracy to know well in advance the approximate size of the task forces they threw at us.


lbmaian said:
Ugh. I apologize for my bad wording - you're taking offense when I didn't mean it. I meant that the numbers were unknown, and for the sake of example. I was getting annoyed that your reply I was responding to didn't mention my core "earlier is better" argument at all.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's because I honestly read it as "mitigating the event failures from Green ships for 2-3 years is more important than mitigating the event failures from Blooded ships for 5-7 years." I don't think that makes a lot of sense, honestly.

The 'compounding' argument is better, but it represents an effect that is extremely situational and hard to estimate. A ship that's out on the frontiers doing first contacts and interactions with species whose relations with us could plausibly 'go negative' from a single botched event has much more to worry about than a ship that's cruising around our internal space.

It looks like my wording still is confusing. When I said "aggregate", I meant that it was covering the whole veterancy period, not just the latter parts of it. So the scenarios I was comparing are, using made up times for the sake of example:

Scenario A: concentrate on improving less experienced green/blooded ships to optimize event non-failures early on
Scenario B: concentrate on improving veteran ships into elites to optimize experience gain and long-term event success

2316-2319: Overall event failure in scenario A is less than that of scenario B. It does look like we agree that the improvement of a green to blooded Excelsior reduces failure rate more than the improvement of a blooded to veteran Excelsior, and so forth. That is, while increasing stats could improve the degree of event success fairly evenly between crew ratings, there are decreasing marginal benefits of increasing stats with respect to overall event non-failure.

2316-2325 (larger period of time, includes 2316-2319 time period): Overall event failure in scenario A is greater than that of scenario B. I agree that the faster natural promotion rates of green/blooded ships vs veteran ships, means that there will be an overall higher level of more experienced ships in the long run if we, well, optimize for overall experience gain.

My core point was that the nominal 2316-2319 above is still important to optimize for, because of compounding successes and failures. Earlier is better. While we can't know the actual rate of "compounding", and a lot of surrounding context is just as relevant, it must be considered in balance against the efficiency of experience gain. You can't simply ignore it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Thing is, for this purpose I'm not comparing "Green->Blooded" and "Veteran->Elite." I don't regard them as commensurate.

The reason I desire one 'elite' ship is to have at least one ship available that we can be reasonably confident will not fail, assuming success was ever an option. The Enterprise-B served this role for us pretty much since game start, thanks to the ship having Nash's +1, followed by going Elite almost immediately after her captaincy ended. This, to put it mildly, paid off. Places where the Enterprise went, good things reliably happened- not good things mitigated by bad things, just plain good things. The knowledge that we could rely on the Enterprise to succeed in any situation we could reasonably hope ANY ship to succeed in did us a lot of good- consider for example the way we ended the Dawiar campaign, or our choice of tactics for ending the Celos crisis.

Since Enterprise no longer serves this role of supremely reliable fixer, I would like to make sure we retain AT LEAST one ship with the same basic capability.

But past that point, I'm simply trying to balance:
-Desire to minimize failed event checks
-Desire to maximize the impact of the +1 crew bonuses by assigning the bonuses to ships that would not otherwise level up rapidly.
-Desire to minimize the bad results of failed event checks.

The combination of sending Voshov to Caldonia, and giving the other two +1 bonuses to Odyssey and Tarrak accomplishes this goal in my opinion.


I was actually referring less to events (where as far as I know, there haven't been any casualty heavy or destroyed green EC Excelsiors), and more about direct combat. We've had stark examples of green Excelsiors getting mauled with heavy casualties at least 3 times in the past 3 years. Granted, the Sarek also was damaged, but at least she wasn't outright nearly crew-killed or disabled. (The Endurance, in a way, is clinging on to its namesake.) I am worried that in the event of increased hostilities in our spinward borders, not only would have to send some EC ships to help in task forces, any remaining EC ships in the area would be in danger or be forced elsewhere. An extra +1C,S,H,L would help a lot at improving survival, if not victory, in any skirmishes or battles.

edit: grammar
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
...Now, combat is a very different kettle of fish. Ships with veterancy perform better in combat, but not so much better that it overwhelms the risks associated with combat. Sarek was heavily damaged in battle against the Biophage, for instance- and damaged more lightly recently against the Licori. Both times this was the result of the combat engine. I don't consider the risks of deploying Corps ships in combat to be commensurate with those associated with events; one type of risk is not like the other.

Also, I'm not planning to send our Green explorers to the spinward border. We're talking about sending Voshov to Caldonian space precisely because this is deemed an unlikely place for a major war to break out with weapons capable of threatening an Excelsior. We don't seem to have much direct control over where Odyssey, S'harien, and Atuin go, but none of them seem to be recklessly hurtling into unusually dangerous sectors of our space.
 
SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
I feel member world overcommitment to Gabriel could unlock a Southern Strategy for the Cardassians. Not that UE to GBZ would automatically do that, but to explain:

The original 4 member fleets are our deep strategic reserve in case of war with the Cardassians. We're also relying on our new member and affiliate fleets to hold the line, because Starfleet garrisons aren't big enough outside the GBZ.

Now, the Apiata have increased their GBZ commitment. A third the Amarki navy (half their good cruisers at least) are committed. The Cats are sending almost a third of their strength.

We've spoken on the vulnerability of the Lapycorias/Indoria/Rethelia triangle thanks to its proximity to Cardassian space and to the distance to reinforcement from Ferasa or Amarki (Apinae is better but the Cardassians would be foolish not to tie them up).

Deplete the member fleets enough and a flanking thrust from Lecarre (likely) or possibly Dawiar (remote) space becomes viable, which would occupy the Caitian Grand Fleet, the Qloathi fleet, and remove an entire vector of reinforcement for the Indorian triangle. We'd have to reinforce against a southern push from our original four, which could delay response to an attack on Lapycorias/Indoria/Rethelia until too late. The Cardassians could easily ignore forces in the Gabriel in exchange for this, and shifting our GBZ fleet south isn't going to be quick, especially if we're expecting a northern blow too.

I think surging the Gabriel makes some sense now, but I must caution staying so heavily committed for too long.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


The thing is every indication we have is the Lecarre navy is small. Not on Risan level, but I can't imagine it being over 30 C. Their technology isn't great outside of infiltration, and they were a single planet species when we found them. Might be worth spending an intel report on sometime, but I'm not too worried about a massive attack in the south, especially once we get the Qloathi on board.
 
seyek get to be member is hole new game and that what 2 or 3 years from now

ps i always thought the orians where a lot closer if not with in klingon space
 
Last edited:
Nervos Belli said:
The thing is every indication we have is the Lecarre navy is small. Not on Risan level, but I can't imagine it being over 30 C. Their technology isn't great outside of infiltration, and they were a single planet species when we found them. Might be worth spending an intel report on sometime, but I'm not too worried about a massive attack in the south, especially once we get the Qloathi on board.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What stops the Cardassians from basing in Lecarre space though? If they felt we were weak in the underbelly and had reduced ability to detect them trickling ships in there compared to elsewhere.

Simon_Jester said:
We had little difficulty tracking Cardassian fleets as they assembled and maneuvered during the Grey October crisis, and we have more sensor-capable assets in that region now than we did then (i.e. a starbase at Lapycorias instead of just an outpost at 15 Themis, better coordination with the Seyek and the Indorians).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We were able to detect ships flying past starbases on our border in full hot pursuit mode. Going around the rimward border of our affiliates, slowly and not in full burn mode, and through an area where we have provably poor detection on account of it being mostly unmapped (we're still getting first contacts there), is much more difficult. Especially if some effort if put into maskirovka. I'll note, for example, that we lost detection of one force in Ghosts and Whispers as it entered Sydraxian space.

Slip in some extra ships to the regular convoys between Cardassia and Lecarre and how would we ever know?
 
[X][PRIORITY] Change nothing [Weighted 1.5x]
[X][CAL] Ignore
[X][EC] Pick an Explorer Corps ship to carry this out: Voshov
[X][LOG] Start 2 Starfleet Cargo Ships at Irrizizza for 8pp
[X][GAENI] 100sr for 150br
[x][CATS] 1 Excelsior, 3 Swarmers
[X][REN] Endorse the tech transfer
[X][BEE] Exchange resources with the Orion
[X][ENTER] Send the survivors to existing ships
-[X] Pick three ships to give +1 Crew Rating: Courageous, Odyssey, Tarrak
 
Last edited:
would love to know how the FDS think about SF and the other way around
can we not give them like an office or something to they can coordinate better with us

or like a liaison officer of some type
 
Redhead222 said:
as much as ppl are planning for war i am looking for growing with talk more and then building the fleet to support all that

because i do not think our wester friend have any more of a wish to start a war then we do
i think we should push the north more then the west.
secure ourself and build up for whatever some next
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm going to be honest, I can't actually comprehend what you're proposing that we do.

Redhead222 said:
seyek get to be member is hole new game and that what 2 or 3 years from now

ps i always thought the orians where a lot closer if not with in klingon space
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
For purposes of our map, they are where they are. [shrugs]

SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
What stops the Cardassians from basing in Lecarre space though? If they felt we were weak in the underbelly and had reduced ability to detect them trickling ships in there compared to elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well yes, they could mass a fleet there. But such a fleet would be highly vulnerable to detection by the Qloath, or by the sensor stations we DO have down near Caitian space (Saavik had a mission to inspect some such facilities back in 2311). It's not that this is impossible, it's that it would be a major gamble on the Cardassians' part, especially given that the Qloath are likely to side with us in the event of war. Furthermore, a fleet located at the Lecarre homeworld is a week or two from any Federation member, exposed to being isolated and destroyed...

If the Cardassians were confident of numerical superiority, trying to bulk up the threat on that flank would be a good idea. Since they're not, it becomes risky. They're going to have to dangle a big chunk of their fleet out in a place where it might get snipped off, if the Dawiar decline to fight or the Lecarre turn out to be weaklings in battle.

I'm more concerned about the Cardassians following the simpler and arguably more sensible approach of massing their forces and slamming straight into Indorian and maybe Seyek space, then letting Lecarre/Dawiar forces threaten us from the flank with at most light Cardassian support after we concentrate our fleet on the spinward frontier.

We were able to detect ships flying past starbases on our border in full hot pursuit mode. Going around the rimward border of our affiliates, slowly and not in full burn mode, and through an area where we have provably poor detection on account of it being mostly unmapped (we're still getting first contacts there), is much more difficult. Especially if some effort if put into maskirovka. I'll note, for example, that we lost detection of one force in Ghosts and Whispers as it entered Sydraxian space.

Slip in some extra ships to the regular convoys between Cardassia and Lecarre and how would we ever know?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Over time the increased level of traffic would tend to cause note. They COULD mass a fleet there, but at the very least its presence would become obvious as soon as it 'went active,' massed, and moved out. And looking at the map, Lecarre space isn't close enough to any single critical position for me to worry very much. There's a threat, but unless the Cardassians devote an overwhelming portion of their fleet (comparable to what we committed to the Licori War, including the Ked Peddah and Gaeni forces), then they're unlikely to cause enough trouble down there to be really significant compared to what's happening elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Redhead222 said:
would love to know how the FDS think about SF and the other way around
can we not give them like an office or something to they can coordinate better with us

or like a liaison officer of some type
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
All indications show a rivalry that SF is winning - we get the first contacts, for instance.

Still, under the Duranium Lady, relations improved.

Headcanon:

The diplopushes are us spending political influence to convince the council to order FDS to dispatch a team aboard a fast courier ship to the relevant location.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top