So, when are the Engineering ships getting a similar replacement?
Probably Very Soon.

But there's no political pressure for us to replace the engineering ships, since if they don't do the job it is mostly our problem, not one for the Federation at large.

If I were more inclined to place bets, I'd bet on us being able to start projects to design fleet auxiliary classes after the auxiliary yard at Amarkia completes. The hospital ship design is getting a head-start because:

1) Political pressure from the Pacifists,
2) Starfleet Medical is screaming their head off because...
2a) They have twice as much jurisdiction to cover with their hospital ships as they did ten years ago, and...
2b) They have two less ships to do it with, being down to either four ships or five that are still in Federation space as I recall.

Other new auxiliary designs will no doubt be coming along shortly.

I assume that if there was a reason for ships to look a particular way they'd all look pretty much like that. Certainly you don't see real life navies with designs as divergent as the Cardassians, Federation, Romulans, and Borg.
Those hull designs may all reflect different priorities. We don't know what they are. We don't know what features of a Federation ship design are cosmetic, and what features are functional. Or functional in the context of a Federation design, even though there's a completely different way to do things if you decide on a different fundamental approach. Sort of like how a saw and an axe look very different even though they're both woodcutting tools and you can use either of them to cut down a tree.
 
The thing is, Starfleet's big ships seem to be the largest the Federation has. There's not a lot of evidence for big freighters, and if there are big freighters they're probably slow. Hospital ships do need to be fast, because it takes a starship weeks to cross Federation space even at high speed. If they're slow, by the time they get there the plague has already blown out of control.

So while you're certainly not wrong to suggest that we design auxiliary ships around freighter designs... there may honestly be no such designs available. Furthermore, our existing ships are nowhere near as optimized for combat as an AEGIS cruiser, so they probably lend themselves more readily to "civilian conversion" auxiliary ships.

The real open question here is whether a one-megaton generalist escort makes sense. They'll never be able to compete with two-megaton cruisers or the dozen or so Excelsiors we'll have lying around as event response ships. They likely won't be competitive in a fight because the other powers tend to build combat-optimized escorts. And they won't have that Defiant-esque ability to take a handful of cheap ships and punch out an explorer-sized enemy that cost the same amount to build*.

Basically, generalist escorts fall pretty heavily into the "master of none" downside of trying to be "jack of all trades."
________________

*For example, taking three Miranda-As against two Rennies is a reasonably even fight that might work out for us, but taking three Centaur-As wouldn't go any better and would cost more.

Generalists would be bad in a vacuum, but we have some constraints that make them more attractive.
1. Combat Cap- We have a max combat for Starfleet so we need to optimize our fleet with combat as the constraint
2. Science Floor- We also have a minimum science needed so ships that have poor Combat to Science rations are not as good for us since that forces other ships to be higher science focus
3. Science and Defense Goals- We also have Goals to reach that have given us bonuses by hitting them, and a generalist ship gets us closet to those goals than a combat focused ship
4. Escorts can in some cases add there scores to the main responding ship to an event- This gives us a better chance at succeeding, and a Centaur-A gives a bigger boost than a Miranda-A
5. Sometimes only the Escort responds despite better ships being in the sector-This will happen, we will get cases were the response rolls of our better ships will fail and we will get an escort attempting an event, and the generalist escorts are far more likely to succeed than the combat focused escort.
6. So far the difference between combat focused and generalist is resources and right now we are crew constrained more than we are resource constrained-this can change, but if we end up resource constrained then it would make more sense to build big ships which are more efficient in resource per crew, compared to small ships which are more efficient in crew per resource.
 
Generalists would be bad in a vacuum, but we have some constraints that make them more attractive.
1. Combat Cap- We have a max combat for Starfleet so we need to optimize our fleet with combat as the constraint
2. Science Floor- We also have a minimum science needed so ships that have poor Combat to Science rations are not as good for us since that forces other ships to be higher science focus
3. Science and Defense Goals- We also have Goals to reach that have given us bonuses by hitting them, and a generalist ship gets us closet to those goals than a combat focused ship
All three of these would argue in favor of Science/Presence/Defense-focused "garrison ships" that have low Combat/Shields/Hull, optimized for peacetime service rather than wartime service.

4. Escorts can in some cases add there scores to the main responding ship to an event- This gives us a better chance at succeeding, and a Centaur-A gives a bigger boost than a Miranda-A
It looks as though ships don't add their whole score, they just provide a bonus. Having a Centaur-A show up to help an Excelsior deal with an event doesn't give the Excelsior +3 to the relevant stat. If we wanted the ability to do that, we'd need to adopt Swarm Doctrine... which is, incidentally, specifically tailored to make escorts good garrison ships.

5. Sometimes only the Escort responds despite better ships being in the sector-This will happen, we will get cases were the response rolls of our better ships will fail and we will get an escort attempting an event, and the generalist escorts are far more likely to succeed than the combat focused escort.
A specialized peacetime escort would be a better choice yet in that case.

The problem is that the generalist escort is going to underperform in both roles, when competing a combat escort or a garrison escort, and quite possibly compared to a swarm of cheap "all 2's" mini-escorts.

6. So far the difference between combat focused and generalist is resources and right now we are crew constrained more than we are resource constrained...
That's because we haven't built any escorts of our own. As soon as we start building our own, the combat-optimized escorts AND the garrison-optimized escorts are likely to either be cheaper in resources AND crew compared to a generalist, or to be superior to the generalist at the same price.

I have to say, though...

Good point about the resource/crew ratios of large versus small ships, though I don't know if that will continue to hold true as Oneiros re-rewrites the ship design principles on us.
 
I'd like to point out that a Kepler with C2 H2 L3 D3 isn't a generalist escort - it's a valuable science ship with the ability to stay on station and fight off suicide shuttles and serve as AWACS without dying horribly.
 
My eventual goal would be to have each sector have its own Excelsior as a garrison ship and that's it. (Maybe a science ship as back-up.) Then all our escorts and cruisers get piled into the border zones where they look very fearsome indeed.
 
I'd like to point out that a Kepler with C2 H2 L3 D3 isn't a generalist escort - it's a valuable science ship with the ability to stay on station and fight off suicide shuttles and serve as AWACS without dying horribly.
I don't disagree, except that it might be to our advantage to deliberately 'nerf' that Defense 3 in favor of Defense 2 and boosting another stat.

My eventual goal would be to have each sector have its own Excelsior as a garrison ship and that's it. (Maybe a science ship as back-up.) Then all our escorts and cruisers get piled into the border zones where they look very fearsome indeed.
I like the idea. Although to be fair, we need a ship class capable of "filling in the gaps" for cases where the Excelsior flagship can't meet the Defense requirement singlehandedly, or other such scenarios. This might be a good role for specialist S/P/D garrison escorts or cruisers.
 
All three of these would argue in favor of Science/Presence/Defense-focused "garrison ships" that have low Combat/Shields/Hull, optimized for peacetime service rather than wartime service.
It might optimized, but those same ships would be useless if needed for a combat situation, which does happen. In addition they could get pulled into events and we sometimes fall those, which can have a second test occur, which can be combat or hull to survive. So skimping on any stat makes it more likely the ship is lost.


It looks as though ships don't add their whole score, they just provide a bonus. Having a Centaur-A show up to help an Excelsior deal with an event doesn't give the Excelsior +3 to the relevant stat. If we wanted the ability to do that, we'd need to adopt Swarm Doctrine... which is, incidentally, specifically tailored to make escorts good garrison ships.
Are you basing this off the bonus we are getting from medical ships as that is different from what we were told when we got a peek behind the screen. As far as the Swarm Doctrine, it adds an additional ship that can respond, some events can have one responder, some can have two currently. What swarm would do is change that to two and three responders. Please see below for an example where two ships added their scores to the test roll.

Sol 17 Local Anomaly Research, Sci-T, 10 Hard DC, Unplanned, Resp: 3d6=7, Sci+Def Response, USS Stalwart+Miranda+Oberth Respond, Sci-T (Stalwart+Oberth), 12 pass

Sol Sector rolls a 17, for Local Anomaly Research
This is one of the ones where you basically wing the actual narrative event, so I don't roll a sub-type. These are always Sci-T (Science Test) and +rp
The Difficulty Roll is a 10, which is a Hard DC
The 3d6 came out to a 7, and because it is an unplanned Science mission, it is a Sci+Def Response.
Stalwart rolled a 15, the Mirandas a 9, 13, 7, and the Oberth an 11. So, four ships can respond, however, for the actual mission test, they'd just get underfoot without a proper doctrine to guide them (the extra Mirandas can tow the others to safety if something goes pear-shaped though).
the Sci-T then is taken by the stats of the two best Science vessels, the Oberth and the Constellation, giving us a 7+2d6 = 12, which passes the DC 11 of the hard test for non-Explorers.

A specialized peacetime escort would be a better choice yet in that case.

The problem is that the generalist escort is going to underperform in both roles, when competing a combat escort or a garrison escort, and quite possibly compared to a swarm of cheap "all 2's" mini-escorts.

That's because we haven't built any escorts of our own. As soon as we start building our own, the combat-optimized escorts AND the garrison-optimized escorts are likely to either be cheaper in resources AND crew compared to a generalist, or to be superior to the generalist at the same price.
A specialized escort would be better than a generalist, but we would need wartime escorts to which would reduce the number of peacetime escorts allowing for fewer to respond. Crew wise I doubt there will be much difference if any between escorts of the same generation, maybe a different distribution but total crew cost would likely be within 1 of each other. Resource wise it could vary, but a generalist only requires one request to the council, not two so that is PP we are saving. It also only is one research project not two so that is research that can go into improving escort design. Finally it would only have one refit, not two so once again saving PP for other snakepit options.

What it comes down to me is that Starfleet has several roles we need to fulfill: exploration, diplomacy and defense, and we need ships that can do all three. While a generalist escort is not as good at anyone, it can be called on to do all of them. Also given time we should have at least one Explorer class ship assigned to each sector, at which point the escort is there to complement it and by having a generalist then it can help out no matter the situation. There are also benefits to good science scores since that helped us find cloaked shuttles on suicide runs during the biophage, Enterprise was doing this for the Romulan fleet since it had a much better science score than any of their ships.

I have to say, though...

Good point about the resource/crew ratios of large versus small ships, though I don't know if that will continue to hold true as Oneiros re-rewrites the ship design principles on us.
Unless it gets balanced out with the intent of crew to resource rations being the same regardless of component then it is likely that certain sizes will lean towards one or the other side of the ratio, and if we design with that in mind to have one class (for example escorts) to be crew efficient and another (say cruiser) to be resource efficient that would let us move back and forth in production based on whether we were dealing with a crew constraint or resource constraint.
 
I don't disagree, except that it might be to our advantage to deliberately 'nerf' that Defense 3 in favor of Defense 2 and boosting another stat.

I like the idea. Although to be fair, we need a ship class capable of "filling in the gaps" for cases where the Excelsior flagship can't meet the Defense requirement singlehandedly, or other such scenarios. This might be a good role for specialist S/P/D garrison escorts or cruisers.
So... the Renaissance?
 
It might optimized, but those same ships would be useless if needed for a combat situation, which does happen. In addition they could get pulled into events and we sometimes fall those, which can have a second test occur, which can be combat or hull to survive. So skimping on any stat makes it more likely the ship is lost.
Yes, but if "roll to not die" checks are most likely to occur when the main event check fails, the best defense is to not fail the main event check in the first place.

I suspect that a ship with all 2s in its combat stats and all 4s in its noncombat stats is at least as likely to survive peacetime interior garrison duty as a ship with straight 3s across the board. They'll be rolling combat stats less often than peacetime stats, so the imbalance works in our favor.

Are you basing this off the bonus we are getting from medical ships as that is different from what we were told when we got a peek behind the screen.
Enlighten me.

A specialized escort would be better than a generalist, but we would need wartime escorts to which would reduce the number of peacetime escorts allowing for fewer to respond. Crew wise I doubt there will be much difference if any between escorts of the same generation, maybe a different distribution but total crew cost would likely be within 1 of each other. Resource wise it could vary, but a generalist only requires one request to the council, not two so that is PP we are saving. It also only is one research project not two so that is research that can go into improving escort design. Finally it would only have one refit, not two so once again saving PP for other snakepit options.
The specialized peacetime escorts count very little toward our combat cap, enabling us to build more (combat-deducted by Lone Ranger) explorers.

Furthermore, if you're arguing that it's better to design one ship class than two... why not just not design the wartime escort? Our cruisers are fairly effective fighting ships, not quite as deadly as a swarm of escorts might be, but pretty good. For the upcoming generation of ship designs, we could just not have a fighting escort, using the Miranda-A or a notional Miranda-B as our "emergency war escort" design.

By the time the TNG era rolls around, our peacetime garrison escorts will still be at least adequate at what they do (peacetime garrison). We'll need a better wartime escort of course... I know! We can call it... the Defiant!

Problem solved.

What it comes down to me is that Starfleet has several roles we need to fulfill: exploration, diplomacy and defense, and we need ships that can do all three. While a generalist escort is not as good at anyone, it can be called on to do all of them. Also given time we should have at least one Explorer class ship assigned to each sector, at which point the escort is there to complement it and by having a generalist then it can help out no matter the situation. There are also benefits to good science scores since that helped us find cloaked shuttles on suicide runs during the biophage, Enterprise was doing this for the Romulan fleet since it had a much better science score than any of their ships.
A good wartime Federation ship will of necessity have good science, because two of our three main potential opponents use cloaking devices.

What it comes down to is that there's nothing but dogma telling us that it has to be the exact same ship providing the exploration, the diplomacy, and the defense, every time. Real life nations use very different kinds of ship for survey and policing in their internal territory than they use to project military power out to the edges of their sphere of influence. Why can't we?

So... the Renaissance?
Rennies have Defense 5, which is going to feel like overkill if we're committing it to fill a gap of two or three Defense points.

It's desirable to have something that is cheap, that is effective on peacetime garrison duty, and that has a defense of "about 3," but exactly what we build to fulfill this role is defined by other requirements.

These can also be the ships that we leave behind "guilt-free" during High Alert conditions to fill out minimal defense requirements in the few sectors that still have them even on high alert. Right now that role is filled by our Mirandas (which, after refit, we DEFINITELY want on the borders) and our Constellations (which aren't very good garrison ships, and which we will PROBABLY want to retire in the next 10-15 years if not sooner).

EDIT: Another reason not to use Rennies to fill in the gaps like that is that they're... not really very good event response ships. They're more likely to show up, but once they get there, they have S3 P4, not much better than a Centaur-A. I'd really love to see how cheap we can make an escort with, say, C2 S4 H2 L2 P4 D4, or a cruiser with C3 S5 H3 L3 P5 D4, or something along those lines.
 
Last edited:
Rennies have Defense 5, which is going to feel like overkill if we're committing it to fill a gap of two or three Defense points.

It's desirable to have something that is cheap, that is effective on peacetime garrison duty, and that has a defense of "about 3," but exactly what we build to fulfill this role is defined by other requirements.

These can also be the ships that we leave behind "guilt-free" during High Alert conditions to fill out minimal defense requirements in the few sectors that still have them even on high alert. Right now that role is filled by our Mirandas (which, after refit, we DEFINITELY want on the borders) and our Constellations (which aren't very good garrison ships, and which we will PROBABLY want to retire in the next 10-15 years if not sooner).
Sorry to but in, but this sounds exactly like something that we could use the Minimal Police Cutter for-I know that it gets a sort of half-hearted 'meh' from most people, but it is a second-line design from the start, so filling in gaps in our defense requirements is part of what it's there for. 'about 3' sounds like it shouldn't be too hard to achieve in terms of Defense.
 
Sorry to but in, but this sounds exactly like something that we could use the Minimal Police Cutter for-I know that it gets a sort of half-hearted 'meh' from most people, but it is a second-line design from the start, so filling in gaps in our defense requirements is part of what it's there for. 'about 3' sounds like it shouldn't be too hard to achieve in terms of Defense.
The issue is that it has stats that are likely to trigger critical existence failures.
 
1mt Escort Class-Generalist, biggest size that is still 2 years
This is honestly the worst possible design requirement we can invent.
2mt Cruisers-Good Combat ships like the Renaissance, though hopefully keeping Science and Presence close to Combat
A combat cruiser at 2mt is remarkably inefficient, too. The Excelsior is essentially a 2mt ship, remember. The design philosophy that gives us the Rennie and Connie-B needs to be dumped. I'm not saying the ships are bad, but science equal to a Centaur-A is not where we want to be. Going forward the combat cruiser concept isn't the best use of resources. We're risking ships in the peacetime for no good reason.

My opinion is that we should have the following types of designs:

- An efficient combat/reserve escort like the Miranda that is cost and crew efficient. Smaller is better if it doesn't sacrifice capability. Assign only to sectors already oversaturated with responders, or leave in unassigned pool.
- A science escort with high science, good presence, and ignoring combat and defense. Which won't be lower than 2 with Starfleet grade parts. 900kt. Make lots, they should garrison rather well in addition to pure science duties. S7 P5 D2 for example.
- A cruiser with good science and presence and reaction, and fill in the rest in combat and survivability but not the same priority. 1mt to 2mt. Our primary garrison ship, and the ship we should focus on making "enough" to cover all sectors. Especially those that cannot be crammed with explorers.
- A combat/reserve cruiser along the lines of the Connie-B/Rennie. Max 1mt (Rennie), 2mt later (Akira-type). Only produce as needed for defensive purposes, and assign to areas already saturated in explorers or garrison ships.
- A generalist explorer. Flagship / sector anchor / EC. The more the merrier, especially sectors where fighting is expected.

Note that there's no reason that our garrison ships should be terrible in combat. C4 H3 L5 would not be out of place. Just that their science and presence cannot be low, and should be focused on.

It is precisely because we have a combat cap that specialist ships are better. We get the same quantity of combat, which approximates to the same power (and more survivability), but get more of other stats.
 
Yes, but if "roll to not die" checks are most likely to occur when the main event check fails, the best defense is to not fail the main event check in the first place.

I suspect that a ship with all 2s in its combat stats and all 4s in its noncombat stats is at least as likely to survive peacetime interior garrison duty as a ship with straight 3s across the board. They'll be rolling combat stats less often than peacetime stats, so the imbalance works in our favor.

Enlighten me.

The specialized peacetime escorts count very little toward our combat cap, enabling us to build more (combat-deducted by Lone Ranger) explorers.

Furthermore, if you're arguing that it's better to design one ship class than two... why not just not design the wartime escort? Our cruisers are fairly effective fighting ships, not quite as deadly as a swarm of escorts might be, but pretty good. For the upcoming generation of ship designs, we could just not have a fighting escort, using the Miranda-A or a notional Miranda-B as our "emergency war escort" design.

By the time the TNG era rolls around, our peacetime garrison escorts will still be at least adequate at what they do (peacetime garrison). We'll need a better wartime escort of course... I know! We can call it... the Defiant!

Problem solved.

A good wartime Federation ship will of necessity have good science, because two of our three main potential opponents use cloaking devices.

What it comes down to is that there's nothing but dogma telling us that it has to be the exact same ship providing the exploration, the diplomacy, and the defense, every time. Real life nations use very different kinds of ship for survey and policing in their internal territory than they use to project military power out to the edges of their sphere of influence. Why can't we?

Rennies have Defense 5, which is going to feel like overkill if we're committing it to fill a gap of two or three Defense points.

It's desirable to have something that is cheap, that is effective on peacetime garrison duty, and that has a defense of "about 3," but exactly what we build to fulfill this role is defined by other requirements.

These can also be the ships that we leave behind "guilt-free" during High Alert conditions to fill out minimal defense requirements in the few sectors that still have them even on high alert. Right now that role is filled by our Mirandas (which, after refit, we DEFINITELY want on the borders) and our Constellations (which aren't very good garrison ships, and which we will PROBABLY want to retire in the next 10-15 years if not sooner).
I quoted an earlier post by the GM where he gave a breakdown on how he was rolling three events for that turn. One of them had an Oberth and Constellation respond and they used their combined science score (7) as a bonus to the event. Also Swarm doctrine says +1 responding ship can add its stat, not two what it does is add an additional ship to the number that can respond. As for designing the wartime escort that leaves us with a ship that is less than useful during peacetime, which has been the majority of the quest so far, and also is on the path to militarization which got Admiral Rogers into trouble.

Also for a Defiant like design, it took the Borg attack before the Federation was willing to put a ship like that into production, I am unsure we could do so now. As for real life nations having separate ships, there are different constraints with warships. For one the hazards of exploration require our exploration ships to be far tougher than those on Earth. In addition using Earth navys that need to be capable of floating on water and obey restrictions based on Earth's gravity to Starships which are working in low to almost no gravity environment and also are dealing with three dimensions instead of two is not the best guide.

The biggest ships in Star Trek are warships, in real life the biggest ships are freighters. In the 1700's it would take eight to twelve weeks to cross the Atlantic, for crossing space on exploration missions we are looking at a far longer time. In addition unlike Earth where we are designed for the Environment we cannot know the first time we go exploring a region if any of the systems are capable of resupplying our ships. Smaller ships in Trek also seem to have a lower top warp speed which limits their range. We also do not see any equivalent of cutters, though that may be filled by roundabouts (since those seem more heavily armed and have more range than shuttles) operating from starbases. If roundabouts are the equivalent of cutters (Coast Guard) than that is done at a scale below what we track.
 
What SynchronizedWritersBlock said.

Bascially, have 'garrison ships' with good science/presence, and 'fighty ships' with good combat/shields/hull. The fighty ships don't necessarily have to be actively bad at science/presence, and the garrison ships don't have to be actively bad at fighting. But a clearly delineated specialization helps us out quite a bit.

The Renaissance is a VERY good fighting cruiser at the moment, with Excelsior-level durability and near Excelsior firepower at a much cheaper price. The Miranda-A is a good fighting escort. But we don't actually have ANY ships that are really optimized for peacetime duties, despite how we talk up our peacetime mission.

What we do have are ships that are competitive as warships due to being bigger and bulkier than their foreign counterparts, and which find room to squeeze in respectable science/presence facilities.
 
My eventual goal would be to have each sector have its own Excelsior as a garrison ship and that's it. (Maybe a science ship as back-up.) Then all our escorts and cruisers get piled into the border zones where they look very fearsome indeed.

*Crisis occurs*

*Chilling silence on the bridge*

We're the only ship in the quadrant sector, Sir..."




Sure, given that it's an Excelsior, I have faith in it being able to succeed at most events. I just have worries about trying to game the system by making a high-stat ship respond to all events by starving the event generator of other ships that might randomly respond first. This distinctly reminds me of the exact same play in Rule The Waves, which this game is heavily inspired by: Park a single high-end capital ship in a region so it is forced into any combat there by the battle generator, and use it to stomp on the enemy, and god help you if the enemy gets lucky.
 
Last edited:
As for designing the wartime escort that leaves us with a ship that is less than useful during peacetime, which has been the majority of the quest so far, and also is on the path to militarization which got Admiral Rogers into trouble

Most of the fleet is already this design. It is the only design we've put into production, too. The Miranda, Constellation, Connie-B, and Renaissance. Even the Soyuz. They are all combat focused ships. I'm suggesting we keep a Miranda-type escort in production as long as it doesn't need to do event response. That's all. It's no less than what we already do.
 
*Crisis occurs*

*Cold silence on the bridge*

We're the only ship in the quadrant sector, Sir..."




Sure, given that it's an Excelsior, I have faith in it being able to succeed at most events. I just have worries about trying to game the system by making a high-stat ship respond to all events by starving the event generator of other ships that might randomly respond first. This distinctly reminds me of the exact same play in Rule The Waves, which this game is heavily inspired by: Park a single high-end capital ship in a region so it is forced into any combat there by the battle generator, and use it to stomp on the enemy, and god help you if the enemy gets lucky.
Well it is a bit different since one of the Techs under forward defense allows ships in adjacent border zones attempt to respond to events in home sectors with a penalty to response rolls, and currently all of our home sectors will have at least one adjacent border zone, some have two.

This is honestly the worst possible design requirement we can invent.

A combat cruiser at 2mt is remarkably inefficient, too. The Excelsior is essentially a 2mt ship, remember. The design philosophy that gives us the Rennie and Connie-B needs to be dumped. I'm not saying the ships are bad, but science equal to a Centaur-A is not where we want to be. Going forward the combat cruiser concept isn't the best use of resources. We're risking ships in the peacetime for no good reason.

My opinion is that we should have the following types of designs:

- An efficient combat/reserve escort like the Miranda that is cost and crew efficient. Smaller is better if it doesn't sacrifice capability. Assign only to sectors already oversaturated with responders, or leave in unassigned pool.
- A science escort with high science, good presence, and ignoring combat and defense. Which won't be lower than 2 with Starfleet grade parts. 900kt. Make lots, they should garrison rather well in addition to pure science duties. S7 P5 D2 for example.
- A cruiser with good science and presence and reaction, and fill in the rest in combat and survivability but not the same priority. 1mt to 2mt. Our primary garrison ship, and the ship we should focus on making "enough" to cover all sectors. Especially those that cannot be crammed with explorers.
- A combat/reserve cruiser along the lines of the Connie-B/Rennie. Max 1mt (Rennie), 2mt later (Akira-type). Only produce as needed for defensive purposes, and assign to areas already saturated in explorers or garrison ships.
- A generalist explorer. Flagship / sector anchor / EC. The more the merrier, especially sectors where fighting is expected.

Note that there's no reason that our garrison ships should be terrible in combat. C4 H3 L5 would not be out of place. Just that their science and presence cannot be low, and should be focused on.

It is precisely because we have a combat cap that specialist ships are better. We get the same quantity of combat, which approximates to the same power (and more survivability), but get more of other stats.
I probably should have said capped at 1mt and 2mt for Escort and Cruiser, as larger than that increases build time which is a concern, and on the old sheet it seemed that you could get higher stats for an escort that was around 1mt as opposed to a smaller size, unless that changes we will likely get Escorts and Cruisers trending to the maximum size before adding another year of construction. And for cruisers, a Renisance with a 4 science instead of 3 would not be that bad as a base version, with a refit able to boost it more later, also our Excelsior has 1 more combat than science.

As for a combat/reserve ship, I do not think we will be in a situation anytime soon where we do not want all our ships deployed on mission, be it guarding sectors or special tasks, like the Anti-Syndicate force, the T'mir when it was on intel duty and the Stargazer on a long term assignment. I can't find it right now, but the GM did say something about it either being just cruisers and escorts or just escorts that could be the second ship to respond to events, in which case we need at least one generalist per sector for that second response ship. In addition we do have a science specialist ship, currently the Oberth and latter the Kepler.

I also think you are not factoring in the extra PP cost and time it takes to make each design, so if we go with multiple specialists designs those are going to add up quick, limiting our ability to perform other actions with those resources. I also think you underestimate our ability to produce explorers, as we are basically at the point we can rotate so we are getting two a turn, which would quickly get us to the point we can assign an explorer per sector.

For me my ideal home sector fleet is
1 Explorer
with 0-1 Cruisers
0-2 Escorts
1 Science Ship
The exact amount of Cruisers and Escorts would depend on how many we need to hit defense requirments along with if we need them more in another sector (like border zones) or for special assignment.

Border zone sector fleet would have at least one Explorer and then all the ships not needed in home sector or special assignment.
 
Well it is a bit different since one of the Techs under forward defense allows ships in adjacent border zones attempt to respond to events in home sectors with a penalty to response rolls, and currently all of our home sectors will have at least one adjacent border zone, some have two.


I probably should have said capped at 1mt and 2mt for Escort and Cruiser, as larger than that increases build time which is a concern, and on the old sheet it seemed that you could get higher stats for an escort that was around 1mt as opposed to a smaller size, unless that changes we will likely get Escorts and Cruisers trending to the maximum size before adding another year of construction. And for cruisers, a Renisance with a 4 science instead of 3 would not be that bad as a base version, with a refit able to boost it more later, also our Excelsior has 1 more combat than science.

As for a combat/reserve ship, I do not think we will be in a situation anytime soon where we do not want all our ships deployed on mission, be it guarding sectors or special tasks, like the Anti-Syndicate force, the T'mir when it was on intel duty and the Stargazer on a long term assignment. I can't find it right now, but the GM did say something about it either being just cruisers and escorts or just escorts that could be the second ship to respond to events, in which case we need at least one generalist per sector for that second response ship. In addition we do have a science specialist ship, currently the Oberth and latter the Kepler.

I also think you are not factoring in the extra PP cost and time it takes to make each design, so if we go with multiple specialists designs those are going to add up quick, limiting our ability to perform other actions with those resources. I also think you underestimate our ability to produce explorers, as we are basically at the point we can rotate so we are getting two a turn, which would quickly get us to the point we can assign an explorer per sector.

For me my ideal home sector fleet is
1 Explorer
with 0-1 Cruisers
0-2 Escorts
1 Science Ship
The exact amount of Cruisers and Escorts would depend on how many we need to hit defense requirments along with if we need them more in another sector (like border zones) or for special assignment.

Border zone sector fleet would have at least one Explorer and then all the ships not needed in home sector or special assignment.

You're too focused on ship types. I designed my proposed design scheme around capabilities, ignoring classification, with the exception of doctrine bonuses. There is no reason to build to your sector fleet composition at all.

You could put design projects on a 5 year rotation and keep up with all the proposed fleet compositions.That's nothing. The argument that we can't afford it is nonsense.
 
You're too focused on ship types. I designed my proposed design scheme around capabilities, ignoring classification, with the exception of doctrine bonuses. There is no reason to build to your sector fleet composition at all.

You could put design projects on a 5 year rotation and keep up with all the proposed fleet compositions.That's nothing. The argument that we can't afford it is nonsense.
Each snakepit we have more options that we want then PP to spend, adding to the PP expenditures means something else has to be cut. In addition each design process is pulling a research team from other research for at least one, likely more than one years more so if there are multiple nodes that need to be finished instead of all the techs being in one node. As for ship types, that is an aspect of the old design system which gave each type a minimum construction time (which is why a 1mt escort take 2 years but a 1mt cruiser takes 3 years) . Also going for a 4 current design of ships, rotating which one will be replaced with a newer design it works to have one of each class along with a science ship. From there having an Explorer class as the anchor of each sector fleet since that is the one that is best able to respond to events, and then use smaller ships to both round out the defense requirements along with giving a potential second ship that can respond to events.
 
Each snakepit we have more options that we want then PP to spend, adding to the PP expenditures means something else has to be cut. In addition each design process is pulling a research team from other research for at least one, likely more than one years more so if there are multiple nodes that need to be finished instead of all the techs being in one node. As for ship types, that is an aspect of the old design system which gave each type a minimum construction time (which is why a 1mt escort take 2 years but a 1mt cruiser takes 3 years) . Also going for a 4 current design of ships, rotating which one will be replaced with a newer design it works to have one of each class along with a science ship. From there having an Explorer class as the anchor of each sector fleet since that is the one that is best able to respond to events, and then use smaller ships to both round out the defense requirements along with giving a potential second ship that can respond to events.
I'm in agreement with this. We don't need to get super specialized IMO, having one of each class (Escort, LC, Explorer, and Science) looks to work just fine.
 
If so, it would probably be a good idea to make the cruiser good at fighting but mediocre at event response (e.g. the Constitution-B), or the other way around. And for the escort to fill the opposite role.

This isn't super-specialization, it's not some moronic minmaxing where we drop some stats to 1 and crank others to 6 or 7. But it really does make sense to design ships to be good at specific things, rather than trying to come up with some kind of half-assed compromise that is OK-ish at everything.

In real life, this is exactly how people do ship design- they start with a specific, focused requirement, and everything expands logically from there. Other capabilities may well be added, but the ship is supposed to be distinctly good at one thing.

A fleet of generalists runs into problems, chief among them that the smaller ships are just weaker versions of the bigger ships; there's no clear point to having them other than "uh, we couldn't afford a bigger one."
 
Yep. Being good at everything generally happens as a side effect, or as a result of throwing absurd amounts of money at a problem. It's also something that only has happened with fighter aircraft and tanks.
 
Back
Top