To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

Kaze · Mar 3, 2017

lbmaian said:
In any case, this does verify that no stat, not even shield stat, affects the shield regen rate. This means that shield regen as currently designed benefits smaller ships more than larger ships, in proportion to ship stats.

I have to admit that I'm sort of happy I'm wrong about how it works, because Oneiros's way is far more balanced.

I should've known that couldn't be how it works too. If it had, then the Klingon Bird of Prey would have inadvertently became the single best design for combat ever. :lol

Well, at least until shield burn-through becomes a thing.

lbmaian · Mar 3, 2017

Kaze said:
Turn 62 - Ship CDF Ardok is firing upon Ship USS Saratoga
Damage roll - Hitpower 0.85 vs Shields 1.00
Ship USS Saratoga Shields reduced to 0.11
Ship 1 has taken casualties: 1/0/0 out of 3/4/4

First, are ships really meant to be able to take crew damage after shields come back up again due to regen? Because the Saratoga took casualties on Turn 62 when that's the case. The shot didn't even get through the shield too.

@OneirosTheWriter could you also explain this? 0.85*1.05 < 1.00, so no damage should've gotten through the shields to cause any casualties.

lbmaian · Mar 3, 2017

SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
How do you know it's nonsense?

I ended up simulating this in a way just to verify previous discussion. And I did it in a way favorable to the Excelsior: Excelsior gets to target-fire Miranda-As, and shield regen is ignored (also favors Miranda-As).

Other simplifications: ships fire in round-robin pattern (which infinite RNG turns should approach), and simplified damage to just [ship combat * hull dmg % * (1 - enemy evasion %)]. Actual average damage is just a constant multiplier of this on both sides, and the damage magnitude only matters for shield/hull overkill, which is negligible enough for this analysis, so this is fine.

Also assuming that Excelsiors has 6% evasion, and Miranda-A has 18% evasion.

				Excelsior	Evasion	6%	Mir-A 1	Evasion	18%	Mir-A 2	Evasion	18%	Mir-A 3	Evasion	18%
Turn	Attacker	Defender	Damage	C	H	S	C	H	S	C	H	S	C	H	S
0				6.00	40.00	50.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
1	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	50.00	3.00	20.00	25.08	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
2	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	47.18	3.00	20.00	25.08	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
3	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	44.36	3.00	20.00	25.08	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
4	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	41.54	3.00	20.00	25.08	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
5	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	41.54	3.00	20.00	20.16	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
6	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	38.72	3.00	20.00	20.16	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
7	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	35.90	3.00	20.00	20.16	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
8	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	33.08	3.00	20.00	20.16	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
9	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	33.08	3.00	20.00	15.24	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
10	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	30.26	3.00	20.00	15.24	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
11	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	27.44	3.00	20.00	15.24	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
12	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	24.62	3.00	20.00	15.24	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
13	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	24.62	3.00	20.00	10.32	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
14	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	21.80	3.00	20.00	10.32	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
15	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	18.98	3.00	20.00	10.32	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
16	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	16.16	3.00	20.00	10.32	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
17	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	16.16	3.00	20.00	5.40	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
18	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	13.34	3.00	20.00	5.40	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
19	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	10.52	3.00	20.00	5.40	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
20	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	7.70	3.00	20.00	5.40	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
21	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	7.70	3.00	20.00	0.48	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
22	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	4.88	3.00	20.00	0.48	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
23	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	2.06	3.00	20.00	0.48	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
24	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	0.48	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
25	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
26	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	5.58	37.18	0.00	3.00	20.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
27	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	5.15	34.36	0.00	3.00	20.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
28	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	4.73	31.54	0.00	3.00	20.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
29	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	3.88	4.73	31.54	0.00	2.42	16.12	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
30	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.27	4.39	29.27	0.00	2.42	16.12	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
31	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	3.97	26.45	0.00	2.42	16.12	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
32	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	3.54	23.63	0.00	2.42	16.12	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
33	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	2.91	3.54	23.63	0.00	1.98	13.21	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
34	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	1.86	3.26	21.76	0.00	1.98	13.21	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
35	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	2.84	18.94	0.00	1.98	13.21	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
36	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	2.42	16.12	0.00	1.98	13.21	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
37	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	1.98	2.42	16.12	0.00	1.68	11.23	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
38	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	1.58	2.18	14.54	0.00	1.68	11.23	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
39	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	1.76	11.72	0.00	1.68	11.23	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
40	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	1.34	8.90	0.00	1.68	11.23	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
41	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	1.09	1.34	8.90	0.00	1.52	10.14	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
42	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	1.43	1.12	7.47	0.00	1.52	10.14	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
43	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	0.70	4.65	0.00	1.52	10.14	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
44	Mir-A 3	Excelsior	2.82	0.27	1.83	0.00	1.52	10.14	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
45	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	0.23	0.27	1.83	0.00	1.49	9.91	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
46	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	1.40	0.07	0.43	0.00	1.49	9.91	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
47	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	0.00	0.00	0.00	1.49	9.91	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00

Excelsior loses, as expected. Worse, all Miranda-As survive, with one at half hull.

				Excelsior	Evasion	6%	Mir-A 1	Evasion	18%	Mir-A 2	Evasion	18%
Turn	Attacker	Defender	Damage	C	H	S	C	H	S	C	H	S
0				6.00	40.00	50.00	3.00	20.00	30.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
1	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	50.00	3.00	20.00	25.08	3.00	20.00	30.00
2	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	47.18	3.00	20.00	25.08	3.00	20.00	30.00
3	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	44.36	3.00	20.00	25.08	3.00	20.00	30.00
4	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	44.36	3.00	20.00	20.16	3.00	20.00	30.00
5	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	41.54	3.00	20.00	20.16	3.00	20.00	30.00
6	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	38.72	3.00	20.00	20.16	3.00	20.00	30.00
7	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	38.72	3.00	20.00	15.24	3.00	20.00	30.00
8	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	35.90	3.00	20.00	15.24	3.00	20.00	30.00
9	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	33.08	3.00	20.00	15.24	3.00	20.00	30.00
10	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	33.08	3.00	20.00	10.32	3.00	20.00	30.00
11	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	30.26	3.00	20.00	10.32	3.00	20.00	30.00
12	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	27.44	3.00	20.00	10.32	3.00	20.00	30.00
13	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	27.44	3.00	20.00	5.40	3.00	20.00	30.00
14	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	24.62	3.00	20.00	5.40	3.00	20.00	30.00
15	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	21.80	3.00	20.00	5.40	3.00	20.00	30.00
16	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	21.80	3.00	20.00	0.48	3.00	20.00	30.00
17	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	18.98	3.00	20.00	0.48	3.00	20.00	30.00
18	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	16.16	3.00	20.00	0.48	3.00	20.00	30.00
19	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	16.16	3.00	20.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
20	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	13.34	3.00	20.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
21	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	10.52	3.00	20.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
22	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	10.52	2.26	15.08	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
23	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	2.13	6.00	40.00	8.39	2.26	15.08	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
24	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	5.57	2.26	15.08	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
25	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	5.57	1.52	10.16	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
26	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	1.43	6.00	40.00	4.14	1.52	10.16	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
27	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	1.32	1.52	10.16	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
28	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	1.32	0.79	5.24	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
29	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	0.74	6.00	40.00	0.58	0.79	5.24	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
30	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	6.00	40.00	0.00	0.79	5.24	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
31	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.92	6.00	40.00	0.00	0.05	0.32	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
32	Mir-A 1	Excelsior	0.05	5.99	39.95	0.00	0.05	0.32	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
33	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	5.57	37.13	0.00	0.05	0.32	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
34	Excelsior	Mir-A 1	4.57	5.57	37.13	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
35	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	5.15	34.31	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	30.00
36	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	4.22	5.15	34.31	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	25.78
37	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	4.72	31.49	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	25.78
38	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	3.87	4.72	31.49	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	21.91
39	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	4.30	28.67	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	21.91
40	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	3.53	4.30	28.67	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	18.38
41	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	3.88	25.85	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	18.38
42	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	3.18	3.88	25.85	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	15.20
43	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	3.46	23.03	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	15.20
44	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	2.83	3.46	23.03	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	12.36
45	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	3.03	20.21	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	12.36
46	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	2.49	3.03	20.21	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	9.88
47	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	2.61	17.39	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	9.88
48	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	2.14	2.61	17.39	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	7.74
49	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	2.19	14.57	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	7.74
50	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	1.79	2.19	14.57	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	5.95
51	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	1.76	11.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	5.95
52	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	1.45	1.76	11.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	4.50
53	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	1.34	8.93	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	4.50
54	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	1.10	1.34	8.93	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	3.40
55	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	0.92	6.11	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	3.40
56	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	0.75	0.92	6.11	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	2.65
57	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	0.49	3.29	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	2.65
58	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	0.41	0.49	3.29	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	2.24
59	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	0.07	0.47	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	2.24
60	Excelsior	Mir-A 2	0.06	0.07	0.47	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	2.19
61	Mir-A 2	Excelsior	2.82	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	20.00	2.19

Excelsior still loses, but at least manages to kill a Miranda-A. The other Miranda-A is left unharmed.

So yeah...Excelsiors are again verified as very inefficient in combat. (And why I want to keep these Excelsiors at the event response jobs that they excelsior at.)

UbeOne · Mar 3, 2017

...Ouch, and we invested so much into Lone Ranger...

Briefvoice · Mar 3, 2017

UbeOne said:
...Ouch, and we invested so much into Lone Ranger...

No regrets!

Forgothrax · Mar 3, 2017

Nix said:
The only way they could work with what that code snippet implies about the current system is to modify how much shield strength ships regain. Tweaking the default value to be proportional to the shield stat should also be easy.

Hmm, that seems incredibly powerful. T3 Regen would then let us Regen 3L every 10 turns?

lbmaian · Mar 3, 2017

UbeOne said:
...Ouch, and we invested so much into Lone Ranger...

Keep in mind that lone ranger is not a combat focused doctrine. It's a peace-time doctrine. It helps our best ships respond to more events while keeping them a bit safer if they're alone (which is common in sector patrols). In the eventuality that we reach the combat cap, lone ranger technically allows us to build the most impressive fleet, but we'll also reach that max combat cap slower anyway with our emphasis on explorers and cruisers.

Vehrec · Mar 3, 2017

I think that it's possible if not probable that offensive doctrines might help when we get around to them. Decisive Battle will probably favor things like 'Big Guns, Big Ships' by putting damage floors on our Explorers and letting them preform 'Battle Turn Away' to retreat en mass or break targeting when things aren't in their favor, things like that. Secondary phasers might enable 'secondary strikes' for perhaps 2 or 3 combat power from ships equipped with them as well, we can't really guess what those are for at this point.

Forgothrax said:
Hmm, that seems incredibly powerful. T3 Regen would then let us Regen 3L every 10 turns?

Every N*5 turns, or maybe it will be every N*3 turns to recover 1L for a fleet with T3 regen? It certainly seems to favor the side with more ships, but if you bring more and more ships, it takes longer and longer for regen to fire off.

Thebigpieman · Mar 3, 2017

So the question comes to if we should eventually research a new doctrine for the next time we have to ramp up to war. Lone ranger has served us well but since we're banking on industrial capability rather than the individual strength of ships (going off previous discussion please correct me if I'm wrong) we're going to need a doctrine that plays to that advantage.

Void Stalker · Mar 3, 2017

The ship doctrines have less combat stuff and more general use items. What we need to do is start on offensive doctrine next research cycle as that is likely to have more combat stuff.

Briefvoice · Mar 3, 2017

Thebigpieman said:
So the question comes to if we should eventually research a new doctrine for the next time we have to ramp up to war. Lone ranger has served us well but since we're banking on industrial capability rather than the individual strength of ships (going off previous discussion please correct me if I'm wrong) we're going to need a doctrine that plays to that advantage.

Fleet Design doctrines aren't really the place to go looking for that. As @Void Stalker says, they have a little bit of combat stuff but a lot of it is non-combat, and even the combat stuff depends to be dependent on choices you made when building your fleet- far too late to change in a year or two. Unsurprisingly, Offensive Doctrines are where you get your asskicking shoes on.

tryrar · Mar 3, 2017

So the question then becomes which offensive doctrine then. I reiterate my vote for Decisive Battle, which IIRC has the best bonuses that I like.

Briefvoice · Mar 3, 2017

Incidentally, I tried seeing if we should build some Miranda-As as a substitute for our Renaissance wave, but it didn't look great. The main problem is a crew crunch, and given that we have to crew the Mirandas even sooner and given that we can expect more casualties... well.

We may actually find out what happens when it's time to crew a ship and we don't have enough people. Hopefully it just adds time on at the end after the ship is built, since there's no reason it should delay physical construction of the ship itself.

tryrar said:
So the question then becomes which offensive doctrine then. I reiterate my vote for Decisive Battle, which IIRC has the best bonuses that I like.

Eh, I want to see final versions of them before I make my call. Medical/Offensive Doctrine team next Snakepit! "The same hands that heal... also know how to kill."

AlphaDelta · Mar 3, 2017

Vehrec said:
I think that it's possible if not probable that offensive doctrines might help when we get around to them. Decisive Battle will probably favor things like 'Big Guns, Big Ships' by putting damage floors on our Explorers and letting them preform 'Battle Turn Away' to retreat en mass or break targeting when things aren't in their favor, things like that. Secondary phasers might enable 'secondary strikes' for perhaps 2 or 3 combat power from ships equipped with them as well, we can't really guess what those are for at this point.

Every N*5 turns, or maybe it will be every N*3 turns to recover 1L for a fleet with T3 regen? It certainly seems to favor the side with more ships, but if you bring more and more ships, it takes longer and longer for regen to fire off.

Well, more ships = more shots firing off in the same amount of time, which is determined by ship count.

lbmaian said:
In any case, this does verify that no stat, not even shield stat, affects the shield regen rate. This means that shield regen as currently designed benefits smaller ships more than larger ships, in proportion to ship stats.

This seems like an issue.

@OneirosTheWriter what about having a shield repowering cooldown? So whenever shields reach zero, it takes extra time to bring them back up.

chriswriter90 · Mar 3, 2017

I've read through most of the updates and been thoroughly entertained. I have four points to add.

1. A five year memorandum of new Membership Ratifications isn't really a bad thing if it allows the Federation to build up it's existing members. It might even be a good policy going forwards...
1a. Such a policy would be to put a five year memorandum on Membership Ratifications if five or more species/nations are ratified within 5 years.

2. My favorite omakes have to be the Cardassians trying to make heads or tails of the madhouse that is the Federation. I'd love to see something similar written from a Romulan or Klingon POV.
2a. In particular, I'd like to see their reaction to the Federation's steady militarism. Oh sure the Federation calls it Expansion and have deluded themselves into thinking so but they've nearly tripled Federation territory and the number of full members, tripled the size of Starfleet and the number of Excelsior-class Explorers/Battleships, released the Centaur & Excelsior designs to Member/Home fleets turning them from jokes into powerful fleets, invaded Orion territory, and have begun a border war with the Cardassians.
2b. All in 13 years. Kor, Koloth, and Kang would be so proud that the Federation found it's spine again.

3. Federation relations with the Romulans are 'Trending Peaceful.' Holy Shit!
3a. The Romulans have been dragged kicking and screaming into the 24th Century. That is the best news.

4. The Federation has both the Klingons and Romulans to back them up if things go to shit. The Cardassians and Dominion have no idea what they're in for if this trend continues.

Briefvoice · Mar 3, 2017

chriswriter90 said:
4. The Federation has both the Klingons and Romulans to back them up if things go to shit. The Cardassians and Dominion have no idea what they're in for if this trend continues.

Uh, about that.... You might want to take a closer look at some of the "Well, They Try" reports about the upcoming apocalyptic Klingon/Romulan War.

But welcome to the quest!

Vehrec · Mar 3, 2017

AlphaDelta said:
Well, more ships = more shots firing off in the same amount of time, which is determined by ship count.

Yeah, but if there's a long time between regen cycles, someone on your Swarm side is gonna get double-teamed and blown up by sheer bad luck before their shields regen.

Barring an Outraging, Critical Hit or Surprise Round mechanic(which could turn against them just as easily), Explorers really aren't gonna get the leg up on their weight in combat escorts.

This seems like an issue.

@OneirosTheWriter what about having a shield repowering cooldown? So whenever shields reach zero, it takes extra time to bring them back up.

...maybe I'm dumb but-How does that help? Because, correct me if I'm wrong here, but wouldn't bigger shield generators take longer to restart than little ones? Unless regen is equalized to some factor of L, it's just a flat advantage to smaller swarmier ships. Now if the number of points regained was equalized to like L/2, that might help a bit, ((L+2)/2 after the tech?) but I don't see how keeping stripped shieilds stripped helps big ships more than the wee ones.

Night · Mar 3, 2017

Vehrec said:
Because, correct me if I'm wrong here, but wouldn't bigger shield generators take longer to restart than little ones?

Why should they? Especially because given the parts system we use for construction a lot of the time a bigger system is just a heavily redundant set of smaller ones. Even if it's not, a bigger system should probably cope with an overload condition better.

chriswriter90 · Mar 3, 2017

Briefvoice said:
Uh, about that.... You might want to take a closer look at some of the "Well, They Try" reports about the upcoming apocalyptic Klingon/Romulan War.

But welcome to the quest!

Maybe we can referee their 'war?'

1. The non-Federation/Neutral territory within X-distance of the Klingon-Romulan border for Y-amount-of-time is declared a free fire zone, with the exception of Civilian colonies protected by Starfleet.

2. All warship classes are given point values to be awarded upon their destruction/disabling/capturing etc.

3. Whichever side has the most 'points' by the end of the time limit wins the 'war.'

4. This allows the Klingons and Romulans to throw down without leaving an apocalyptic mess for the Federation to clean up afterwards.

Nervos Belli · Mar 3, 2017

chriswriter90 said:
Maybe we can referee their 'war?'

1. The non-Federation/Neutral territory within X-distance of the Klingon-Romulan border for Y-amount-of-time is declared a free fire zone, with the exception of Civilian colonies protected by Starfleet.

2. All warship classes are given point values to be awarded upon their destruction/disabling/capturing etc.

3. Whichever side has the most 'points' by the end of the time limit wins the 'war.'

4. This allows the Klingons and Romulans to throw down without leaving an apocalyptic mess for the Federation to clean up afterwards.

Why would they agree to that? They want to be able to capture territory and resources from the other. The only way we could referee the war was if we had a fleet substantially larger than either side and had no distractions of our own. Neither are true. The only thing we can realistically do about the Klingon-Romulan war is patrol our side of the borders carefully and make sure they don't use our territory to launch a sneak attack.

pheonix89 · Mar 3, 2017

chriswriter90 said:
Maybe we can referee their 'war?'

1. The non-Federation/Neutral territory within X-distance of the Klingon-Romulan border for Y-amount-of-time is declared a free fire zone, with the exception of Civilian colonies protected by Starfleet.

2. All warship classes are given point values to be awarded upon their destruction/disabling/capturing etc.

3. Whichever side has the most 'points' by the end of the time limit wins the 'war.'

4. This allows the Klingons and Romulans to throw down without leaving an apocalyptic mess for the Federation to clean up afterwards.

Let's not go there. There was a moderately similar TOS episode involving refereed point based war and Kirk's solution involved threats of Exterminatus ... I mean General Order 24 on inhabited planets, and IIRC actual orbital strikes.

Simon_Jester · Mar 3, 2017

chriswriter90 said:
Maybe we can referee their 'war?'

1. The non-Federation/Neutral territory within X-distance of the Klingon-Romulan border for Y-amount-of-time is declared a free fire zone, with the exception of Civilian colonies protected by Starfleet.

2. All warship classes are given point values to be awarded upon their destruction/disabling/capturing etc.

3. Whichever side has the most 'points' by the end of the time limit wins the 'war.'

4. This allows the Klingons and Romulans to throw down without leaving an apocalyptic mess for the Federation to clean up afterwards.

I would love for us to be able to do that. Unfortunately, since both empires are pretty hardcore militarists and have cloaking devices, I doubt they will let us referee their battles, either side is fairly likely to try to cheat even if they were letting us referee, and both sides will be absolutely sure the other side will cheat first, giving them incentive to cheat pre-emptively.

Which is a shame because it would be awesome. GLOURIOUS, even.

Briefvoice said:
Uh, about that.... You might want to take a closer look at some of the "Well, They Try" reports about the upcoming apocalyptic Klingon/Romulan War.

The good news is, they'll have 40-50 years to rebuild from that war before the TNG era rolls around, so unless one side gets extremely stupid, by the time we really need their help they'll have recovered.

But welcome to the quest!

Yaaays! Go @chriswriter90 !

pbluekan · Mar 3, 2017

chriswriter90 said:
Maybe we can referee their 'war?'

1. The non-Federation/Neutral territory within X-distance of the Klingon-Romulan border for Y-amount-of-time is declared a free fire zone, with the exception of Civilian colonies protected by Starfleet.

2. All warship classes are given point values to be awarded upon their destruction/disabling/capturing etc.

3. Whichever side has the most 'points' by the end of the time limit wins the 'war.'

4. This allows the Klingons and Romulans to throw down without leaving an apocalyptic mess for the Federation to clean up afterwards.

This sounds all nice and neat and happy, but the thing you need to remember is that neither race is trustworthy or willing to accept defeat or being told they lost. They don't trust each other, and they don't trust us. A war game would never solve that. In this sort of situation, we would be happily arbitrating that war game while romulans were sneaky cloaked ships to attack colony worlds and klingons were doing the same.

That sort of "game" doesn't fly in the real world, which is what this is based on.

The best we can do is referree peace.

chriswriter90 · Mar 3, 2017

Nervos Belli said:
Why would they agree to that? They want to be able to capture territory and resources from the other. The only way we could referee the war was if we had a fleet substantially larger than either side and had no distractions of our own. Neither are true. The only thing we can realistically do about the Klingon-Romulan war is patrol our side of the borders carefully and make sure they don't use our territory to launch a sneak attack.

[Jk] Klingon Honor [/Jk]

More seriously, neither side seems to comprehend that the winners would drastically weaken themselves and the loosers might flee to the perceived safety of Federation Affiliation unless we point it out to them...

Simon_Jester · Mar 3, 2017

I think both sides are hoping they can somehow score a decisive, low-cost victory. Going by the historical behavior of both sides in the TOS, movie, and TNG era, his probably involves the Klingon 'warrior culture' on the rise in its first overly-aggressive incarnation, and the Romulans planning all manner of sneak attacks.
____________________________

To greatly condense the big blob of post that used to occupy this space, I really only have two questions for Alastor. Since my attempt to deduce the answers to these questions from their earlier posts led to them accusing me of deliberately misrepresenting their opinions, I can only assume that their views are very different from what I had derived from reading their posts.

1) What specific events lead you to the conclusion that (to closely paraphrase) our performance has been appalling?' Exactly which events are you referring to, and why do you think they add up to a picture of 'appalling' tactical performance?

2) What would it look like if Starfleet were performing 'well' in your eyes? How much damage would it be acceptable for us to dish out, in return for absorbing how much damage in return? What do you expect of Starfleet, that leads you to be (seemingly) so disappointed by their current performance?

[Original text of this post is available on request; I don't want to conceal it, I just want to avoid giving Oneiros even more of a headache than necessary, without simply deciding to ignore AMT and their concerns/accusations entirely]

To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

a thirsty squirrel

a thirsty squirrel

Daydreaming CPU

Not Going Gently

a thirsty squirrel

I've got this, I think.

Widow Null

Don't think this means you've won!

Wants to be Seven Of Nine

Somethin's Fucky ...