- Location
- Central Standard Time
Keep in mind transporters exist, so we could have near-zero POWs. I suspect Oneiros will roll behind the screen for this.
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 #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?
Even if we have to abandon station at Lora in short order, Ainsworth should be putting a prize crew aboard that Crew Kill ship. It wouldn't take long and the warp drive should still be up.
Last edited:
pheonix89
Wants to be Seven Of Nine
- Location
- North American Plaguelands
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Take a look at the number of surviving ships, then the number of crew not explicitly killed. There's unlikely to be room to evac everyone, especially not when under fire. Dropping what's left of your shields when under fire from a whole fleet is a terrible idea.
- Location
- Actually pretty lost
I'm not sure Starfleet is capable of repairing a fully disabled ship entirely in secret.
Hey, maybe we could offer it back to the Sydraxians in exchange for them formally agreeing not to contest our claims to the GBZ, and to stop raiding us do a better job of stopping those pesky pirates from slipping through. They're all torn up about how they owe us a ship's worth of damage - what if we gave a ship back?
They had no shields left. At all.
True. However these results are really spectacularly good. I think the Abhriec, the Atorfroil, the Avandar, the Korolev, and the Defiant may be lightly enough damaged that they can be "repaired underway" without even having to go back to a Starbase. With the Apiata force still available as a reserve, I suspect the odds will be rather too even for the Cardassians to stomach.
Here is a list of all our GBZ battle repairs ordered by ship size:
USS Shield (Miranda-A):
Hull Integrity - 26.7%, Repair Time - 6 Months
USS Challorn (Constellation):
Hull Integrity - 31.63%, Repair Time - 9 Months
USS Republic (Constitution-B):
Hull Integrity - 90.8%, Repair Time - 1 Month
USS Saratoga (Constitution-B):
Hull Integrity - 32.57%, Repair Time - 12 Months
USS Exeter (Constitution-B):
Hull Integrity - 85.8%, Repair Time - 3 Months
USS Endurance (Excelsior):
Hull Integrity - 43.58%, Repair Time - 9 Months
Straight off the bat I'd start with the nice and neat assumption that repairs followed the pattern:
If instead we ignore Hull Integrity all together and looking at how much absolute Hull needed repairing we get:
If we apply that to the most recent battle:
Edit: Thinking about it I think I found an explanation that works. Every 10pts of Hull, IE: H1, takes 3 months to repair. Oneiros could be exact and go down to the month but for the most part just rounds up to the nearest ten value. With the exception of damages less then 3.33 recurring (IE: 1/3rd of H1), which are treated as taking just 1 month.
USS Shield (Miranda-A):
Hull Integrity - 26.7%, Repair Time - 6 Months
USS Challorn (Constellation):
Hull Integrity - 31.63%, Repair Time - 9 Months
USS Republic (Constitution-B):
Hull Integrity - 90.8%, Repair Time - 1 Month
USS Saratoga (Constitution-B):
Hull Integrity - 32.57%, Repair Time - 12 Months
USS Exeter (Constitution-B):
Hull Integrity - 85.8%, Repair Time - 3 Months
USS Endurance (Excelsior):
Hull Integrity - 43.58%, Repair Time - 9 Months
Straight off the bat I'd start with the nice and neat assumption that repairs followed the pattern:
>90% Hull Integrity = 1 Month
>75% Hull Integrity = 3 Months
>50% Hull Integrity = 6 Months
>25% Hull Integrity = 9 Months
>00% Hull Integrity = 12 Months
However that obviously doesn't fit the Shield, Saratoga, or Endurance.>75% Hull Integrity = 3 Months
>50% Hull Integrity = 6 Months
>25% Hull Integrity = 9 Months
>00% Hull Integrity = 12 Months
If instead we ignore Hull Integrity all together and looking at how much absolute Hull needed repairing we get:
Republic - 2.76 @ 1 Month
Exeter - 4.26 @ 3 Months
Shield - 14.66 @ 6 Months
Saratoga - 20.23 @ 12 Months
Challorn - 20.51 @ 9 Months
Endurance - 22.57 @ 9 Months
and that does mostly fit except for Saratoga. If we ignore her then it's something like:Exeter - 4.26 @ 3 Months
Shield - 14.66 @ 6 Months
Saratoga - 20.23 @ 12 Months
Challorn - 20.51 @ 9 Months
Endurance - 22.57 @ 9 Months
>3 = 1 Month
>10 = 3 Months
>20 = 6 Months
>30 = 9 Months
>40 = 12 Months
which for the most part is fairly reasonable, although the 1 month thing is a bit awkward.>10 = 3 Months
>20 = 6 Months
>30 = 9 Months
>40 = 12 Months
If we apply that to the most recent battle:
1 Month Repairs:
CAS Abhriec - Hull 49.51/50 - 0.49 Hull Lost
USS Avandar - Hull 39.06/40 - 0.94 Hull Lost
USS Defiant - Hull 27.70/30 - 2.3 Hull Lost
USS Korolev - Hull 27.55/30 - 2.45 Hull Lost
CAS Atorfroil - Hull 27.03/30 - 2.97 Hull Lost
3 Month Repairs:
USS Republic - Hull 24.14/30 - 5.86 Hull Lost
CAS Odala - Hull 23.41/30 - 6.59 Hull Lost
USS Fidelity - Hull 11.10/20 - 8.9 Hull Lost
6 Month Repairs:
USS Kumari - Hull 39.10/50 - 10.9 Hull Lost
CAS Jolintoor - Hull 18.07/30 - 11.93 Hull Lost
CAS Abhriec - Hull 49.51/50 - 0.49 Hull Lost
USS Avandar - Hull 39.06/40 - 0.94 Hull Lost
USS Defiant - Hull 27.70/30 - 2.3 Hull Lost
USS Korolev - Hull 27.55/30 - 2.45 Hull Lost
CAS Atorfroil - Hull 27.03/30 - 2.97 Hull Lost
3 Month Repairs:
USS Republic - Hull 24.14/30 - 5.86 Hull Lost
CAS Odala - Hull 23.41/30 - 6.59 Hull Lost
USS Fidelity - Hull 11.10/20 - 8.9 Hull Lost
6 Month Repairs:
USS Kumari - Hull 39.10/50 - 10.9 Hull Lost
CAS Jolintoor - Hull 18.07/30 - 11.93 Hull Lost
Edit: Thinking about it I think I found an explanation that works. Every 10pts of Hull, IE: H1, takes 3 months to repair. Oneiros could be exact and go down to the month but for the most part just rounds up to the nearest ten value. With the exception of damages less then 3.33 recurring (IE: 1/3rd of H1), which are treated as taking just 1 month.
Last edited:
- Location
- Actually pretty lost
The odds are too even for their liking, but this is the weakest we'll ever be. Our shipbuilding capacity outstrips theirs, and we have some damaged ships in need of repairs, but they'll be back soon. Unless they're planning a huge joint strike with the Dylarians to try and improve the odds they have to strike now, or they're basically accepting defeat.
Well, the thing is, I'd feel confident taking this fleet back into combat minus the two escorts that are shot to shit. And Ainsworth, hyper-aggressive commander that she is, will probably think similarly.
Even if the Cardassians engage our TF2+Apiata+Outpost and win, they now still have to consider our TF1+Amarki crushing them on their way out.
Even if the Cardassians engage our TF2+Apiata+Outpost and win, they now still have to consider our TF1+Amarki crushing them on their way out.
- Location
- somewhere
I strongly suspect the outpost is the reason the battle lasted long enough for them to take such severe losses. We have seen before that their ROE are to retreat when the entire fleet drops below half hull strength, i. e. below 220/440. The outpost probably still had shields up when this happened, and therefore took up 120 of those 220, and the station probably took up a chunk as well. That means their mobile forces stayed long after the point where they normally would have retreated, and obviously the outpost and the station couldn't retreat, so they were disabled afterwards.
ClawClawBite
Mad Engineering!
- Location
- Seattle, WA
I count 10 crew units of Syndaxians on disabled ships and stations. Given the treaty we can't talk directly with Syndaxians. However, this may be the right time to see about making a deal with some Yirillians and sending the crews home via that 3rd party. We may be able to get parole from the crews to not fight in this war, but even if not, I think the long term goodwill is useful, and we can have some intel people among their minders practicing good interrogation methods (a.k.a. Friendship is magic for finding things out) for general background.
pheonix89
Wants to be Seven Of Nine
- Location
- North American Plaguelands
- Pronouns
- She/Her
If they strike NOW, as in Q4.M2 they're still at dangerous odds. In Q4.M3 it gets worse because the Collie Outpost is up and the Starbase construction I boosts are installed.
Also, WTF is up with that Sydraxian outpost?
Standard outposts are C4 S3 H8 L8 P4 D4 per here.
It had C6 H12 L12.
Combat is explainable by Starbase construction one, but there's no explaination for the remaining H3 and L3. They could squeeze one point of installation H and L out of base strike, but there's nowhere for the last two points outside of special actions or unique tech.
NHO
Dumb is a state of existence
- Location
- ᓚᘏᗢ
Well, based on previously written things, disabled means "Vented warp plasma successfully and not suffered Warp Core Breach"
Alastor Mobius Toth
***** ***
- Location
- Neon Ghetto
Man, that's going to be one hell of a ballad.
Probably not the one Sydraxians were counting on though
Probably not the one Sydraxians were counting on though
Last edited:
- Location
- United States
it could also be based on class size (escort, cruiser, explorer), with larger classes having higher repair times at higher damage levels.
Theunderbolt
"Prepare for trouble..."
- Location
- USoA
We should pull some ships from the SBZ for a year, it's not like they'll need them.rofl::lol
No!
Bad Bunnies!
*sprays with water bottle*
- Location
- USA
One thing is that the cardassians may have been planning a joint strike with the sydraxian which we just interrupted
- Location
- somewhere
Maybe Oneiros retconned the earlier retcon and outposts are back at the statline they had during the biophage crisis?
SuperSonicSound
Shadowmancer of the Shadow Cabal
Maybe different races have different stat lines on their outposts?
- Location
- Patriarchova
As I suspected, the Sydraxians just got lucky in the earlier skirmishes. The bigger the battle, the less room there is for RNG randomness to defy the law of averages.
That said, while I fully expected us to win this battle, I did not expect to do so without losing a single ship. Ainsworth has more than vindicated herself, and both she and the Amarki commander are to receive the highest commendations.
We do have some damaged ships though, so if I were the Cardassians this is when I'd be launching my own big push. We're going to need the Apiata to help us beat it back, so it's fortunate that they haven't taken any losses yet. We need to make sure that our remaining forces in the Gabriel are ready to support the apiata, and vice versa. Additionally, if anyone has a crazy, Sulu-esque plan on how to delay that Cardassian push so we can have more ships repaired, this is the time to share it.
@Simon_Jester your mysterious Sydraxian character could still be alive if you want. Either one of the retreating hasques could have beamed her out, or she's a Federation prisoner.
That said, while I fully expected us to win this battle, I did not expect to do so without losing a single ship. Ainsworth has more than vindicated herself, and both she and the Amarki commander are to receive the highest commendations.
We do have some damaged ships though, so if I were the Cardassians this is when I'd be launching my own big push. We're going to need the Apiata to help us beat it back, so it's fortunate that they haven't taken any losses yet. We need to make sure that our remaining forces in the Gabriel are ready to support the apiata, and vice versa. Additionally, if anyone has a crazy, Sulu-esque plan on how to delay that Cardassian push so we can have more ships repaired, this is the time to share it.
@Simon_Jester your mysterious Sydraxian character could still be alive if you want. Either one of the retreating hasques could have beamed her out, or she's a Federation prisoner.
Last edited:
I suppose it really depends on the Aggression trait of the Cardassian commander. A high-aggression commander will likely go for it, while a low one might conclude the risk is too big and they should concentrate on fortifying their current claims.
We should remember, though, that the Gabriel struggle between us and the Cardassians is unlikely to end with total "victory" or "defeat" for either side. What we're really competing over is the size of the territory we'll be able to claim and hold. The Cardassians proabbly don't expect to knock us out of Gabriel entirely and we shouldn't expect to do it to them. Instead it's going to be a struggle over lines of control until both sides are so fortified that it's time to go back to the treaty table and acknowledge the lines de facto in place.
I expect at least one or two big battles before the end to really settle things, of course.
Which makes a certain amount of narrative sense, as they were probably directed to hold the Outpost as long as there was any hope at all.
Last edited:
Difrent design philosophy. Their more combat focused then us, so why wouldn't their outposts and stations reflect that?
The Cardies wanted intelligence on our Home Fleets/Member Fleets; now they got it and wish they hadn't.
Sydraxians: Can we join you're Federation now?
Well, the linked post specifically says, "This also applies to outposts from opposing factions."
SuperSonicSound
Shadowmancer of the Shadow Cabal
Yes, I'm suggesting maybe Oneiros changed his mind.
I thought about that, it's why the first set of data is listed by size, but just compare the Saratoga and the Challorn. They are both Crusiers, have almost identical damage (both absolute and relative), and yet one takes 3 months more then the other to repair. About the only difference between the two is that Challorn is 700kt to Saratoga's 1,000kt but in that case the Endurance at a whopping 2,300kt should take waaay longer then both of them to repair despite suffering similar damage and yet despite having more absolute damage then the Saratoga still finishes 3 months faster.