Thebigpieman
I've got this, I think.
- Location
- United States
Did we ever get information on what infrastructure the Tauni have?
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
You know, this vote might actually work a lot better as a line-item vote structured round the set of designs it's actually plausible for us to give them. We're going to end up with a very fragmented vote here.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
Others may not follow the exact Starfleet mechanics, but they do already share some doctrines. IIRC... Klingons, Apiata, Caitians use Swarm Doctrine. Cardassians, Amarki use Combined Fleet. Romulan, Honiani use Lone Ranger. Gaeni are the only ones known with a explicitly different doctrine. Don't know about defensive/offensive doctrines, but such doctrines are still in the process of being fleshed out anyway.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Well yes, but it's not going to make a lot of sense to assume that the mechanical effects of these techs are exactly the same for minor-power species even when that would and lead to nonsensical results. It's like, certainly they're using techs with the same name as us, but that doesn't mean we need to stress over the mechanical effects of those techs on minor powers when that is not a problem we, personally, are ever going to have.
The Constitution-A is vastly outdated and requires massive quantities of SR and crew for a bad tonnage-to-stat-point. I don't want to give them bad designs; I'd just prefer not to give them top of the line combat designs in case they turn out to not be so friendly or have a darker side than we think.
In other words, I'm happy to give the Tauni a chance... but we don't know for sure yet that they won't use highly capable combat ships for evil. Hence my preference for giving them lesser combatants that still have good S and P for Event response.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
I'm not assuming they're the same. I was merely pointing out that this wouldn't work for non-tier-1 powers, and hence whatever specific version of the doctrine they use would have to be revised to fit their specific use cases. If we meet a power that - or if one our member fleets - uses Wolf Pack doctrine, they still need some viable definition of a wolf pack.
I dunno, I feel you're being nitpicky in your response here.
Well, my point was: why can't be just show them a catalog of older designs, particularly the ones that have modern refits?
Rather than sending them the modern refit designs themselves, we could send them the base Constellation, Miranda, Patroller, etc. with the promise that once we gain a better understanding with each other (read: major affiliate status), we can then share the modern refit designs so that they can easily upgrade any builds of the base ship classes.
- Location
- Actually pretty lost
But for the next 15-20 years we'll still be using Miranda-As in combat - we don't want to expose potential weaknesses.
I would be leery of doing so, because the main reason we don't want to give away our shiny toys is that a Lecarre/Romulan infiltrator will almost certainly get their fins/hands on them, and then the Cardassians/Romulansknow where to shoot that ship type to disable critical systems, where its' armour is weaker, etc. . I would think that some of those weaknesses will carry over to the refitted designs, in which case we've effectively weakened those ships in combat against these polities.
Giving them the older ships is already a pretty generous gift, to the point that the Tauni themselves are only hopeful we might agree, not expectant.
Refits cost a lot of time and resources to do. I don't see the point in dicking around like that. If you don't want to give them modern designs, then vote not to give them any designs. Giving them previous-gen designs seems to me to be the worst of both worlds.
Jenny
anonymous user
- Location
- maryland
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Risa isn't a member yet.We should totally send them the Risa corvette designs or Gaeni tech-skiff
Note that the Indorian 'Frigate' is a Cruiser.
The Indorian ships almost certainly require extremely skilled engineering - it's the only way I can personally justify how they get away with significantly better stats than their TL should suggest. (And I designed the bloody things...)
Hm.
Changing my vote:
[X][FLEET] Briefvoice
No vote on the Tauni. I can't figure out what to send.
EDIT:
Wait, I've got it!
[jk][TAUNI] Kaldar (Kadak-Tor type, without cloaking module)
Last edited:
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
But if "a Lecarre/Romulan infiltrator will almost certainly get their fins/hands on them", you're okay with giving them the Constellation-A?
I find it much more likely there's a larger security risk sending them blueprints of T1+ parts.
You're exaggerating.
First, by the time they're major affiliates, they're likely to have only built a handful.
Second, the base+refit costs of the listed ships aren't that much more expensive than the new refit build costs:
- Miranda-A: [60br 40sr 2yr + 20br 10sr 1yr => 80br 55sr 3yr] vs [60br 45sr 2yr], or 20br 10sr 1yr more expensive
- Centaur-A: [80br 60sr 2yr + 15br 15sr 1yr => 95br 75sr 3yr] vs [80br 70sr 2yr], or 15br 5sr 1yr more expensive
- Constellation-A: [70br 40sr 3yr + 25br 25sr 1yr => 95br 65sr 4yr] vs [70br 50sr 3yr], or 25br 15sr 1yr more expensive
- Patroller-A*: [40br 40sr 2yr + 15br 15sr 0.25yr => 55br 55sr 2.25yr] vs [40br 45sr 2yr], or 15br 10sr 0.25yr more expensive
- This only works with designs that have cheap refits, or designs that don't have refits that reduce costs (like Constitution-A=>Constitution-B if it existed, Hebrinda=>Hebrinda-A).
If they built, for ex, only 1 Miranda and 1 Constellation by the time we're ready to share them the modern refit designs, that would only cost a net 45br 25sr and 2yr of berth time extra. Amortized over the time between initial build and presumed modern tech sharing, that's not that large.
If we're worried about the Tauni leaking a design out before they become closer affiliates (and adopt whatever Federation security happy good feels that supposedly prevented other close affiliates from leaking), I find this to be a reasonable compromise.
* I could make an exception for the Patroller-A with just sending them the modern design, because chances are that the Patroller-A parts don't share that much commonality with modern Starfleet parts due to different base architecture.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Sorry. Sometimes the tech tree triggers my sense of excessive mechanical complexity and I get allergic, usually in the context of "how does this affect other powers?" Because it's not like Oneiros is going to create a whole new set of ship parts for, say, the Klingons or Cardassians, to allow them to actually build designs that specialize differently from ours.
That does sound like a good plan. I'm worried, though, that the complexity of the decision and fragmentation of the vote may subvert such plans.
Different folks will have difference concerns. My concern is only partially the intelligence aspect... I would find it embarrassing* if we someday have to fight Tauni ships built using designs we gave them. I simply don't want to give them anything with a C greater than 3, period. Yet at the same time I want to give them efficient, modern designs that don't need refitting.
*Understatement.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
For Federation designs? That's a pretty short list and you can get it off the front page. For affiliate designs? @lbmaian literally just did that on this very page.
- Location
- Actually pretty lost
Ah. I don't take part in the SDB, so I'm not aware of which ships have which parts.
- Location
- Cyberspace
That's the other side - they're probably not really all that up for building (or crewing) big stuff. Better to give them a design or two they can start work on now - and then, in a couple years, after some infrastructure-building and the first round of domestic vessels are out, they'd be ready for something bigger.
For example, give them the Oberth and Miranda designs now - those take two years to build and are 150kt (15br/60sr) and 655kt (60br/45sr) respectively. Assuming they have the resources, I would guess they can probably turn out two Mirandas and an Oberth (135br, 140sr, 3O/5E/6T crewing) within those two years. That's a fairly reasonable little modern-ish force, giving them some home protection and a science vessel that can let them explore their area of space (and deal with events) themselves. If they're somewhat strapped for resources or their berths are even smaller than expected, the old Soyuz design could also be supplied.
In two years, they're probably solidly in affiliate status, and they know they can trust Federation ship design. And will likely have enlarged at least one of the berths. At this point they're probably ready to build a grand flagship - a Constitution - along with a couple more Mirandas.
I suppose "Constellation, Oberth and Patroller" is close enough though.
[X][TAUNI] May Provide Constellation-A, Oberth, and Patroller-A Designs
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
What the heck, I'll try my hand at diluting the vote further (I say that, but there's actually only 5 unique TAUNI votes, soon to be 6).
[X][TAUNI] Frigate/cruiser-scale ship classes designed before the 24th century, with modern 24th century refits to be shared upon closer affiliation [Constitution-A, Constellation, Miranda, Centaur] and Patroller-A (with Betazoid permission) and Oberth
NB: Constitution-A has retconned stat line of C4 S3 H3 L3 P4 D5 100br 100sr 4yr O-5 E-4 T-4, with unknown refit availability/cost to Constitution-B.
Also, I consider it likely the Patroller-A has low parts commonality with modern Starfleet designs, and thus isn't a large security risk. And the Oberth is just the impossibly good 23rd century science ship.
[X][FLEET] 2317 Fleet Distribution without shortchanging the LBZ
[X][TAUNI] Frigate/cruiser-scale ship classes designed before the 24th century, with modern 24th century refits to be shared upon closer affiliation [Constitution-A, Constellation, Miranda, Centaur] and Patroller-A (with Betazoid permission) and Oberth
NB: Constitution-A has retconned stat line of C4 S3 H3 L3 P4 D5 100br 100sr 4yr O-5 E-4 T-4, with unknown refit availability/cost to Constitution-B.
Also, I consider it likely the Patroller-A has low parts commonality with modern Starfleet designs, and thus isn't a large security risk. And the Oberth is just the impossibly good 23rd century science ship.
[X][FLEET] 2317 Fleet Distribution without shortchanging the LBZ
Nervos Belli
Don't think this means you've won!
- Location
- Murica
I don't think sharing the Oberth is a good idea. Those things have to be using some sort of forbidden spatial warping tech to fit all the science modules in a 150 kt ship.
Thebigpieman
I've got this, I think.
- Location
- United States
The entire ship is a science lab, including the bathrooms and the transporter rooms.
Well, the bathrooms labs are needed for social experimentation and the transporter rooms pay extra close attention at the particle streams so that Starfleet can improve the reliability of its transporter systems.
@OneirosTheWriter - Going back to the new Offensive Doctrines for a second I'd suggest changing "In Excelsis" from being exclusive to Excelsiors to instead been a general bonus for last generation's Explorers. After all "In Excelsis" changes our outdated Explorers into a stop-gap Cruiser, which is exactly what we already did with the Constitutions. This generalization ensures "In Excelsis" doesn't get outdated and fits well with past trends of TBG's Starfleet.