To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

pheonix89 · Jun 29, 2017

al103 said:
I'm pretty sure I'm not only one that voted on "not in the way it's presented". So it's not surprising that it's actually not rejected when other ways are on the cards.

And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that would've voted "no" even with risk of losing Sulu if there was no acceptable alternatives presented.

Also - I consider insinuation that it's "lolSulu" switch of vote demeaning to the voters.

You are correct.

My entire problem with the logistics plan was that I considered the implementation idiotic.

The peacekeeper issue was a mix of miscommunication and implementation.

Gingganz · Jun 29, 2017

[X][CARGO] Mix of Starfleet's Auxiliary Shipyard expansion and assigning Starfleet general purpose shipyard berths, supplemented by Member yards like now

[X][PEACE] Suggest building it within the FDS
-[X][FDS] Dependent on Starfleet for delivery

[X][GEAR] Should be more in line with Andorian Peacekeepers

[X][SIZE] As Proposed, 9 battalions

[X][SUPPORT] Runabouts and shuttles (will require temporary access to Starfleet Shipyard Industrial Command resources, causing some delay)

I would like the peacekeeping forces to focus heavily on missions where they help with keeping a peace that has already been negotiated, with the consent of the belligerent factions. Negotiating a peace deal sounds like a job for the FDS, so it makes sense to give them a force that helps with making sure that the deal works out.

As they are Peacekeepers, the kind of gear that the Andorian Peacekeepers have should be enough.

UberJJK · Jun 29, 2017

[X][CARGO] Mix of Starfleet's Auxiliary Shipyard expansion and assigning Starfleet general purpose shipyard berths, supplemented by Member yards like now

[x][PEACE] Suggest building it within the FDS
-[x][FDS] Dependent on Starfleet for delivery

[X][GEAR] Should be more in line with Caitian Frontier Police
[X][SIZE] As Proposed, 9 battalions
[X][SUPPORT] Runabouts and shuttles (will require temporary access to Starfleet Shipyard Industrial Command resources, causing some delay)

Wellhello · Jun 29, 2017

[X][CARGO] Look to heavily expand Starfleet's Auxiliary Shipyard production
-[X][AUX] By itself
[X][PEACE] Suggest an independent body
-[X][NEW] Organic Ships
[X][GEAR] Should be more in line with Caitian Frontier Police
[X][SIZE] Should be larger, 12 battalions
[X][SUPPORT] Runabouts and shuttles (will require temporary access to Starfleet Shipyard Industrial Command resources, causing some delay)

Looking at this, I do not believe that the metaphorical mountains of salt produced are worth it.

lbmaian · Jun 29, 2017

OneirosTheWriter said:
"I can read between the lines just fine, Admiral," notes President N'Gir as she drops a padd on the table between you. The Presidential office has been cleared out, leaving just the two of you, the two most influential people out of almost a hundred billion across the Federation. Between the two of you, the wood-panelled room seems so paradoxically stifling, crushing down around you with every square foot of emptiness around you. "This," she says, finger jabbing at the padd, "This is your doing."

The comfortable armchair is no captain's chair, the President no Bird of Prey.

You tilt your head slightly. "May I ask what this is, Madam President?"

The President smiles sourly. "Councillor Sadek is doing the numbers. We thought we had them. Something changed."

"I believe the Hawks were drumming-"

"Don't you skulk with me, Admiral," snaps Arsharra N'Gir. Her eyes are flashing fire, her finger jabs out at you this time. "Look around, it's just you and me here. If you want to play hardball, then stand up and play."

Alright then.

You take in a breath, shedding the amiability. Old instincts come to the fore, the spine straightens, the brows furrow. This woman is the vested voice of the Federation people, the guardian of the constitution you swear to uphold, the one who holds the reins of the charter that guides your life. But you will speak truth and may the devil take the hindmost.

"The Amarkian Hawks came to speak to me, and together we rallied the votes to block," you reply. Suffice to say there is no ripple of shock from the person opposite you.

Okay, so clearly Sulu did not get to talk with the President or state his thoughts in the 3 development subcommittees he was supposedly going to.

No, it actually went to a Council vote first. What the hell?

Yeah, whoever thought we'd be able to discuss this all out in the upcoming committees to avoid political fallout is wrong. Very wrong.

-[ ][PAY] BR/SR

@OneirosTheWriter, could you state the BR/SR costs for the auxiliary ships? At least for cargo ships, freighters, and super-freighters?

Regardless of the cost, we can still assume that Starfleet Logistics Command's budget is large enough to handle any expansion of transport ship construction?

[ ][SIZE] Should be smaller, 3 battalions
[ ][SIZE] As Proposed, 9 battalions
[ ][SIZE] Should be larger, 12 battalions
[ ][SIZE] Should be write-in

Right so, the Caitian Frontier Police sent 12 battalions for the Syndicate campaign, although it's not that clear what local forces they were supplementing. Regardless, the vast majority of missions I see for a Starfleet Peacekeeping force would either be a disaster relief mission or fighting alongside local forces anyway. They aren't going to be the marines we send into battle.

12 batallions worked last time, so I'm inclined to stick with that number. I am still wondering what the mechanical effects of this is though.

OneirosTheWriter said:
That would be a fairly practical use for it.

Mind you, this all isn't happening immediately, of course. There's lead-time entailed here.

Speaking of which, can you tell us when the Heavy Industrial Park will be finished?

MS-21H 'Hawke' · Jun 29, 2017

So we're loosing our Political Allies power no matter what...

*Sounds of chairs being thrown, desks being flipped, and at least 3,521 cats being set on fire*

In practice, we can work this to be fairly reasonable, but if she's proved anything: The Develoupment Party should never have anything approaching power, EVER!

I'm abstaining from this vote, the urge to burn everything down is too strong.

Random Member · Jun 29, 2017

[JK] Ask Stesk-senpai for advice.

Jenny · Jun 29, 2017

lbmaian said:
No, it actually went to a Council vote first. What the hell?

?
I'm pretty sure they're talking about counting likely votes for and against; the vote hasn't happened yet. Otherwise she couldn't rally the Expansionists and still carry the vote.

Hazard · Jun 29, 2017

Iron Wolf said:
? I don't know, why aren't we grabbing an expanded police force?

A defense purchase is a government purchase. Kind of semantical.

Because Starfleet isn't a police force, and Starfleet's experience with Federation level police/military forces is very unpleasant.

And no, it's not semantics to emphasise that the Head of Defense blocked a Defense purchase. It's be one thing if the Head of Defense blocked a government purchase in an area he has no authority in, like, say, if he blocked a purchase by the Department of Education for more transport capacity. However, if the Head of Defense blocks Defense purchase that's part of his authority, because he's supposed to be running the Defense department. And if he blocks it, why? Is it because he believes it's not needed? Is it because he believes that it would expand his department's job in ways it shouldn't be? Is it because he believes that the purchase agreement as proposed is substandard? These are relevant questions and he's in the right to exercise his authority in this field, especially when his own boss tries to drop the purchase on his head without a single warning.

remulian · Jun 29, 2017

OneirosTheWriter said:
snip

@everyone

I told you the Peacekeeper were a fine beneficial institutional deal that wont cost us anything politically and with it still a requirement we will face the consequences of a far greater political effort part of the Federation and Starfleet to get it done.

[ ][GEAR] Should be more in line with MACOs (war-fighting capacity)

Also, MACOs, Fuck yeah!

UberJJK · Jun 29, 2017

OneirosTheWriter said:
"Block both the logistics and the peacekeepers," notes the President. "You know, I started off fairly well with your predecessor, Admiral Sousa, but things went sour after a time.

What exactly went sour? I mean sure we the players were pissed at her but I don't remember Sousa displaying any issues with N'Gir. The reverse isn't true sure but that came out of nowhere so /shrug.

"Compared to the benefit received-" you begin to object, but the President puts up a hand.

"I'm not a choir for you to preach to, so listen to me Admiral.

Well, this sets a lovely tone for our future interactions with N'Gir. She doesn't even let Sulu finish whatever he was going to say. For all she knows it was:
"Compared to the benefits received it is a small burden. However I've already began programs to eliminate that burden such as assigning Rear Admiral T'Far to construct new cargo ships in every berth we borrow and allocating the resources of the entire Alpine yard towards further construction."
Instead she goes on a rant about her mandate.

Incidentally:

I'm sure that Starfleet is just fine with the arrangement, because it costs you nothing.

this is yet another example of N'Gir just being flat out wrong about stuff. We've had to spend a good deal of political capital over the years to borrow those logistics resources.

"I would remind you, Madame President, that the scars of the Khitomer conspiracy run as deep within Starfleet as they do within the original four," you point out. "The role played by the MACOs that caused them to be divested from Starfleet and returned to-"

"-to the UE has left you requiring member world assets every time you want to move," interrupts the President. "Now, that suits the Amarkians, as I said, who want the justification. The Pacifists are deeply in favour of the mandatory multi-lateralism that causes. The Mercantilists are on my side, and the Expansionists didn't care and could be persuaded. As you apparently did with the Hawks. Now I'll have to pork-barrel through the nose to get this done without you."

Once again it seems N'Gir hasn't done her research. Sulu was instrumental to putting down the Khitomer conspiracy and thus the removal of the MACOs from Starfleet. Of course he'd be opposed to their return. Which is shown by:

"I can assure you, Madam President, I have no ambitions to undermining you, or political goals. I simply couldn't risk what I was being told."

The President closes her eyes for a moment and then fixes her gaze on you anew. "As President, this is my agenda, and I am going to get this done," she warns you. "I want to make this work through Starfleet. I want to make it work with you. But one way or another I'll get it done. Maybe it won't be a Starfleet group. Maybe I'll form a new third organ, maybe we'll attach it to the FDS. And I'm sure you'll just love the FDS getting mandated access to your shipyards so they can build the ships they'll need."

*Looks at my vote for the peacekeepers to be under FDS and use Starfleet resources to build their shuttles and such*
Yes Madame President I would absolutely love that!

Erandil · Jun 29, 2017

drake_azathoth said:
The reason some options may require resignation is that's it's a de facto vote of no confidence in the presidency. To press after that would risk the President's impeachment if another head of Starfleet resigns. ONE resignation's a political kick in the balls, but one the President can survive.

Firing hasn't even been discussed because it's an effecive suicide pact that would torpedo both Starfleet and the President- she'd never get re-elected after that, but she could do some nasty things. Firing more than one head of Starfleet would almost certainly see her impeached shortly thereafter.

Why exactly would you impeach the elected president when it is the not-appointed, supposedly non-political Starfleet Commander that is massively overstepping his position? In the end we (the commander) are supposed to follow the orders of the president and the council or, if we feel we can't do that, retire. We are not the boss here, she is.

The Sulu resignation would hurt her, he is a famous person and it would make a powerful point of standing for high-ideals, but if his successor would still go against the Council majority and president Starfleet would be the one who would suffer since nothing hurts an organisation like that more than the suspicion (and at this point this would be a lot more) that it views itself as being above the elected parliament/government.

Chaos Blade · Jun 29, 2017

[X][CARGO] Mix of Starfleet's Auxiliary Shipyard expansion and assigning Starfleet general purpose shipyard berths, supplemented by Member yards like now

[X][PEACE] Place under Starfleet Tactical
-[X][STAR] A robust organizational charter in consultation with the Pacifists, including authorized mission types and the requirements for deployment on each. Organic ships.

[X][GEAR] Should be more in line with Amarkian Gendarmes
[X][SIZE] Should be larger, 12 battalions

[X][SUPPORT] Runabouts and shuttles (will require temporary access to Starfleet Shipyard Industrial Command resources, causing some delay)

I think putting these forces under FDS is utter lunacy, they are diplomats first, giving them armed forces seems, even peacekeepers, is going to be rather idiotic, best case scenario they are going to be crippled by the FDS aparatus, worse case scenario, the FDS learn to love diplomacy by other means... there is too much of a doctrinal difference, so I can't see it as a good idea, AT ALL.
We could argue on independent force, but I think short term they should be under starfleet, we might want to split them at a latter time (like the USAAF became the USAF)
one thing I won't vote is on gear till we get QMs detail on each, cost/particularities and the like, or if we will be able to specialzie some Battalions to specific tasks and gear types...

EDIT: tentatively putting gear as Armakian Gendarmes, if it holds from previous descriptions, seems like the best option at the moment, might change it if/when Oneiros clarifies.

EDIT2: Modded vote per Nix's writeup

Iron Wolf · Jun 29, 2017

Hazard said:
However, if the Head of Defense blocks Defense purchase that's part of his authority, because he's supposed to be running the Defense department. And if he blocks it, why? Is it because he believes it's not needed? Is it because he believes that it would expand his department's job in ways it shouldn't be? Is it because he believes that the purchase agreement as proposed is substandard? These are relevant questions and he's in the right to exercise his authority in this field, especially when his own boss tries to drop the purchase on his head without a single warning.

No it is not.

That is something indicative of a third-world nation, not a functioning democracy where the power of the executive is invested in elected officials. The Chief of the Defense staff is answerable to the Minister of Defense, who also serves at the pleasure of the Prime Minister/President. An elected minister sabotaging a government initiative would be big news; an unelected bureaucrat doing so would be an outright scandal.

If this was remotely realistic and N'Gir wanted to not play nice, she could leak our slulking to the press and she wouldn't have to ask for our resignation because voters would drag us out of our fucking office.

lbmaian · Jun 29, 2017

anon_user said:
?
I'm pretty sure they're talking about counting likely votes for and against; the vote hasn't happened yet. Otherwise she couldn't rally the Expansionists and still carry the vote.

My point is that these "bills" are already at the point where voting was already in consideration. Before any discussion with Starfleet. That implies the details leaked about these proposals were already fairly set in stone, including the whole "borrow member fleet berths" part, without consultation with Starfleet.

Those committees Sulu was attending (if they happened at all yet)? They probably would've just been about how to implement those details (i.e. bartering for the specific member fleet berths). That it never was an option to have completely alternate details (i.e. changing from "borrow member fleet berths" to "expanding Starfleet auxiliary berths"). Otherwise, I just don't see how Sulu could NOT have raised his objections earlier before any vote counting or whatever takes place.

Hazard · Jun 29, 2017

Chaos Blade said:
I think putting these forces under FDS is utter lunacy, they are diplomats first, giving them armed forces seems, even peacekeepers, is going to be rather idiotic, best case scenario they are going to be crippled by the FDS aparatus, worse case scenario, the FDS learn to love diplomacy by other means... there is too much of a doctrinal difference, so I can't see it as a good idea, AT ALL.

The former is the desired result in that case.

Erandil said:
The Sulu resignation would hurt her, he is a famous person and it would make a powerful point of standing for high-ideals, but if his successor would still go against the Council majority and president Starfleet would be the one who would suffer since nothing hurts an organisation like that more than the suspicion (and at this point this would be a lot more) that it views itself as being above the elected parliament/government.

Or that it knows something about the elected government and it refuses to be part of it. Starfleet has a pretty good reputation Erandil, having Commanders of Starfleet resign after meeting the President, or having the candidates refuse candidacy under the current administration implies that there's something deeply wrong with the President.

SynchronizedWritersBlock · Jun 29, 2017

lbmaian said:
My point is that these "bills" are already at the point where voting was already in consideration. Before any discussion with Starfleet. That implies the details leaked about these proposals were already fairly set in stone, including the whole "borrow member fleet berths" part, without consultation with Starfleet.

Those committees Sulu was attending (if they happened at all yet)? They probably would've just been about how to implement those details (i.e. bartering for the specific member fleet berths). That it would never was an option to have completely alternate details (i.e. changing from "borrow member fleet berths" to "expanding Starfleet auxiliary berths"). Otherwise, I just don't see how Sulu could NOT have raised his objections earlier before any vote counting or whatever takes place.

When we were Sousa we were told that before raising any proposal the first thing we'd have to do is count votes, so no, that's not how it works.

Hazard · Jun 29, 2017

Iron Wolf said:
That is something indicative of a third-world nation, not a functioning democracy where the power of the executive is invested in elected officials. The Chief of the Defense staff is answerable to the Minister of Defense, who also serves at the pleasure of the Prime Minister/President. An elected minister sabotaging a government initiative would be big news; an unelected bureaucrat doing so would be an outright scandal.

Except that the closest thing the Federation has to a Minister of Defense is the appointed Commander of Starfleet. Who, as a sort of cabinet level post is expected to tell the President and the rest of the government no on occasions it's required.

UberJJK · Jun 29, 2017

Oh and I forgot to mention this early:

OneirosTheWriter said:
"I would remind you, Madame President, that the scars of the Khitomer conspiracy run as deep within Starfleet as they do within the original four," you point out. "The role played by the MACOs that caused them to be divested from Starfleet and returned to-"

Totally called this:

UberJJK said:
I think it's telling that one of the arguments against the peacekeeping force is:

My theory as to what happened to the MACOs is simple; Colonel West. In all of Star Trek the only Federation associated group I can think of with army style ranks instead of navel ones were the MACOs. If the MACOs, more then just Colonel West anyway, were revealed to have backed Admiral Cartwright's conspiracy I could easily see that being used as a justification to shutting them down.

It would also explain why some of the older councilors are unhappy with the idea of them being brought back. It even helps with why Sulu in particular was so strongly against the idea.

Chaos Blade · Jun 29, 2017

Hazard said:
The former is the desired result in that case.

so, you want to waste resources, why?
I am looking for a good explanation of why you'd want to sabotage us in that way. Hoenstly, it would be far more reasonable, efficient and honest to fight Pressident' KittyKat over this than to do that...

remulian · Jun 29, 2017

[X][CARGO] Look to expand Starfleet's Auxiliary production through the use of general-purpose berths.

[X][PEACE] Place under Starfleet Tactical
-[X][STAR] A robust organizational charter in consultation with the Pacifists, including authorized mission types and the requirements for deployment on each. Organic ships.

[X][GEAR] Should be more in line with MACOs (war-fighting capacity)
[X][SIZE] Should be larger, 12 battalions

[X][SUPPORT] Runabouts and shuttles (will require temporary access to Starfleet Shipyard Industrial Command resources, causing some delay)

One thing we know is that manpower is a crunch and while we need at the minimum 12 battalion equivalent to secure a area like say the Orions, if we have to engage in such actions in Gabriel or as a spear point in a Cardasian war we need the full fledged 12 sized force.

Also, while Caitian police are nice, going full MACO means we wont suffer as many casualties on deployment, and thus less frequent need to replace them.

This should allow us to garrison all gains in the Gabriel expanse and expect them to hold out against a Cardasian ground assault.

This shit is not only required bu t a very good security net that allows us to have better defended colonies and outposts.

So please lets go with Starfleet Tactical, 12 Battalions, MACO gear, and flood the Gabriel expanse with garrison troops.

lbmaian · Jun 29, 2017

SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
When we were Sousa we were told that before raising any proposal the first thing we'd have to do is count votes, so no, that's not how it works.

Wait really?

I can understand coming up with some overall goals and a very general plan to achieve them, and then shop around for interest to see if a concrete bill based off these plans could pass a vote.

But that's not what happened here. No, the plans leaked to Sulu were already detailed enough to include details that required expert and implementer input, when those experts and implementers were not consulted at all.

How does this process make any sense at all?

Chaos Blade · Jun 29, 2017

remulian said:
[X][CARGO] Look to expand Starfleet's Auxiliary production through the use of general-purpose berths.

[X][PEACE] Place under Starfleet Tactical
-[X][STAR] A robust organizational charter in consultation with the Pacifists, including authorized mission types and the requirements for deployment on each. Organic ships.

[X][GEAR] Should be more in line with MACOs (war-fighting capacity)
[X][SIZE] Should be larger, 12 battalions

[X][SUPPORT] Runabouts and shuttles (will require temporary access to Starfleet Shipyard Industrial Command resources, causing some delay)

One thing we know is that manpower is a crunch and while we need at the minimum 12 battalion equivalent to secure a area like say the Orions, if we have to engage in such actions in Gabriel or as a spear point in a Cardasian war we need the full fledged 12 sized force.

Also, while Caitian police are nice, going full MACO means we wont suffer as many casualties on deployment, and thus less frequent need to replace them.

This should allow us to garrison all gains in the Gabriel expanse and expect them to hold out against a Cardasian ground assault.

This shit is not only required bu t a very good security net that allows us to have better defended colonies and outposts.

So please lets go with Starfleet Tactical, 12 Battalions, MACO gear, and flood the Gabriel expanse with garrison troops.

I tend to agree with you but we are voting on speculation about the GEAR options, we really need a bit more data which each option implies, of course if they are heavily armed and armored, that doesn't mean they will deploy everywhere like *that* only that they could deploy thus as needed, so that is something to explore as well...

Random Member · Jun 29, 2017

remulian said:
[X][CARGO] Look to expand Starfleet's Auxiliary production through the use of general-purpose berths.

[X][PEACE] Place under Starfleet Tactical
-[X][STAR] A robust organizational charter in consultation with the Pacifists, including authorized mission types and the requirements for deployment on each. Organic ships.

[X][GEAR] Should be more in line with MACOs (war-fighting capacity)
[X][SIZE] Should be larger, 12 battalions

[X][SUPPORT] Runabouts and shuttles (will require temporary access to Starfleet Shipyard Industrial Command resources, causing some delay)

One thing we know is that manpower is a crunch and while we need at the minimum 12 battalion equivalent to secure a area like say the Orions, if we have to engage in such actions in Gabriel or as a spear point in a Cardasian war we need the full fledged 12 sized force.

Also, while Caitian police are nice, going full MACO means we wont suffer as many casualties on deployment, and thus less frequent need to replace them.

This should allow us to garrison all gains in the Gabriel expanse and expect them to hold out against a Cardasian ground assault.

This shit is not only required bu t a very good security net that allows us to have better defended colonies and outposts.

So please lets go with Starfleet Tactical, 12 Battalions, MACO gear, and flood the Gabriel expanse with garrison troops.

The peacekeepers are supposed to police, not serve as the first line of defence against foreign invasion. And I disagree with going with maximum size and MACO gear. We'd be seen as reviving MACO, which the Original 4 won't like. For policing duties, less heavy equipment will be enough.

pheonix89 · Jun 29, 2017

I have to wonder, is it intended that N'Gir comes off as hopelessly ignorant?

Every time we've interacted with her she says something spectacularly dumb indicating that she's not done any reading at all.

To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

Wants to be Seven Of Nine

a thirsty squirrel

Gardener of Human Happiness

anonymous user

Procrastinating Writer

a thirsty squirrel

Procrastinating Writer

a thirsty squirrel

Procrastinating Writer

Gardener of Human Happiness

Wants to be Seven Of Nine