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
- USA
[X][ACADEMY] Custom - Enlisted to Techs (5.45/5.45/7.05)
Also none of the current captains jump out at me as one to put on the three open slots. So I am leaning towards Revak and two of the new captains, unless we find three new captains that are amazing. Revak will give us another +5 to pp which is the resource we are constrained the most by currently.
Also for Explorer pool, at the end of year we will have 1.75 O, 3 E and 2.5 T. I would like to see if we could delay the Excelsior at 40 Erdani A by a quarter as that combined with an explorer corp recruiting drive next turn would let us staff it as the 5th explorer ship, also it would finish during normal ship ops time as well to sync construction back up.
For next Snakepit-diplo push Betazoids, as for Amarki it depends on what sort of roll we get for the last quarter of the push and the annual diplo roll. Also I think we need to do the Tellar Outpost project as that will give us D10 there before any starships are assigned so we could free up the Miranda and Soyuz class to be redeployed elsewhere.
In addition, I think we should consider building Centaur's and scrapping the Soyuz if we need the crew for them so we have less idle yards and start boosting our defense number. We will need ships to be assigned to Betazoid and Amarki once they become full members and also the general defense requirements are going to be rising.
Right now we will have 45 PP plus any gains from Q4 an Q1.
For the snakepit:
focused Diplomacy-Betazoid 10 pp
Temporary Explorer Corps Recruitment Drive 20 pp
Request expansion of Outposts in the Tellar Sector 10 pp (-1 for discount so actually 9)
Which would be 39, leaving 6 plus whatever we gain from the next two exploration. I do think we want to run at least one diplo push each Snakepit as increased affiliation and membership provide more crew, more PP, more RP, more BR and more SR with the crew and PP being the most valuable since we cannot get those from colonies.
As for refits: Centaur refit since we would get D3 from them vs D2 from Mirandas and they are quicker to build than Constellations.
Also none of the current captains jump out at me as one to put on the three open slots. So I am leaning towards Revak and two of the new captains, unless we find three new captains that are amazing. Revak will give us another +5 to pp which is the resource we are constrained the most by currently.
Also for Explorer pool, at the end of year we will have 1.75 O, 3 E and 2.5 T. I would like to see if we could delay the Excelsior at 40 Erdani A by a quarter as that combined with an explorer corp recruiting drive next turn would let us staff it as the 5th explorer ship, also it would finish during normal ship ops time as well to sync construction back up.
For next Snakepit-diplo push Betazoids, as for Amarki it depends on what sort of roll we get for the last quarter of the push and the annual diplo roll. Also I think we need to do the Tellar Outpost project as that will give us D10 there before any starships are assigned so we could free up the Miranda and Soyuz class to be redeployed elsewhere.
In addition, I think we should consider building Centaur's and scrapping the Soyuz if we need the crew for them so we have less idle yards and start boosting our defense number. We will need ships to be assigned to Betazoid and Amarki once they become full members and also the general defense requirements are going to be rising.
Right now we will have 45 PP plus any gains from Q4 an Q1.
For the snakepit:
focused Diplomacy-Betazoid 10 pp
Temporary Explorer Corps Recruitment Drive 20 pp
Request expansion of Outposts in the Tellar Sector 10 pp (-1 for discount so actually 9)
Which would be 39, leaving 6 plus whatever we gain from the next two exploration. I do think we want to run at least one diplo push each Snakepit as increased affiliation and membership provide more crew, more PP, more RP, more BR and more SR with the crew and PP being the most valuable since we cannot get those from colonies.
As for refits: Centaur refit since we would get D3 from them vs D2 from Mirandas and they are quicker to build than Constellations.
- Location
- somewhere
We need 5 SR more to start 2 Excelsiors, hopefully we'll get enough during the Captain's Log. We actually have 3 Excelsior berths available, but it's good to have one for repairs anyway.
- Location
- USA
Yeah, you are right, we also produce enough each turn to build one a turn, though we would need to expand the Academy at least once more to keep up with the crew. Still for officers and Enlisted we have a reserve in the pool built up. Hmm, we may want to subtract excelsior cost from our annual income and use the remainder to build our other ships with, and stagger production so that one comes online each year. Ideally we would have at least one Explorer ship to serve as a flagship for each world and border zone. Which would really make the lone wolf doctrine work since that gives a boost to ships by themselves or when outnumbered. Also it gives a research boost to explorer ships.
Are we sure that's wise? Ten Excelsiors is a massively top-heavy fleet, and light cruisers are somewhat more resource efficient. I get our current builds, but laying on more on top of that is... well, we need the small stuff too.
- Location
- USA
We would want one at least for each sector to serve as a flagship. They are also very good at multiple roles, so if we need a diplomatic ship or science ship they can be tapped for that as well. Ideally we would want to construct 1 Explorer class and 2 to 3 Cruiser/Escort Classes a year for a balanced fleet. Explorers have heavy shields so they take longer for combat degradation as well as opposed to cruisers and escorts.
Why do we in fact need the small stuff? Especially once Lone Ranger goes into effect, the Excelsiors will count less against our total combat score.
It's worth noting that we're moving towards a world with around five 3m t berths, four 2.5m t berths, and nine 1m t berths. Unless you plan to leave most of those empty, we will have the space to complete two Excelsiors and two other ships a year while still leaving a small and a large berth empty for repairs.
- Location
- somewhere
First, you shouldn't include the Explorer Corps when talking about the composition of our home fleets, those are entirely different issues.
Second, "top heavy" is a concept that doesn't really apply. Unlike carriers in current blue water navies Explorers don't need any support at all because they are designed to be able to operate on their own, nor do they benefit more from being teamed up with other ship types than with other explorers (unless you have Combined Fleet Doctrine which we don't). Just look at the battle of Kadesh: Two of the task forces were made up of explorers exclusively even though there were plenty of smaller ships available to form mixed groups. We could have a fleet composed 100% of explorers and the only possible problem would be not being able to split up as widely as if we had more ships (and that the QM would probably introduce new mechanics to discourge such an extreme). A single Explorer per sector isn't just not a problem, it's the opposite of a problem. We could have two explorers per sector and only slightly more smaller ships than now and it still shouldn't be a problem.
Last edited:
Because we can cover a lot more territory with them - a "battleship" is powerful but it can only be in one place at one time. And for a lot of tasks an explorer is simply overkill.
Last edited:
- Location
- Anchorage, Alaska
Because other ships will be cheaper to crank out, cheaper to crew, and can cover just as much territory for much reduced costs? Seriously, for the cost of one Excelsior we could crank out three Constellations (except for Enlisted, where the requirements are close for both classes).
Cost effectiveness is, in fact, a reason unto itself.
- Location
- Germany
The problem is that the non-Explorer ships we could build are not all that good. The Constellation is horribly outdated and very much underpowered for a light cruiser.
The Centaur may be newer, but actually has a higher resource cost than the Constellation class for slightly worse stats. So Centaurs are only worth it if we need to build ships quickly, or if we are low on personnel.
The Centaur may be newer, but actually has a higher resource cost than the Constellation class for slightly worse stats. So Centaurs are only worth it if we need to build ships quickly, or if we are low on personnel.
- Location
- Anchorage, Alaska
Doesn't change the fact that they're also a LOT cheaper per hull. We'll need to update the designs, but the fact remains that we're going to want to start cranking out LCs and Es at our earliest convenience.
- Location
- somewhere
I don't agree that 3 Constellations are better than 1 Excelsior, it depends a lot on what other ships you have available. I'd prefer 2 Excelsiors and 3 Constellations over 3 Excelsiors, but also over 1 Excelsior and 6 Constellations or even 9 Constellations. For that matter I'd prefer 3 Excelsiors over 9 Constellations.
Last edited:
I don't doubt that, but if we spend all our BR on two new explorers, we're going quite a bit away from the 1:2 or 1:3 ratio you suggest. Without any new builds, we are going to have three non-Explorer-Corps Excelsiors, which is enough for all three of our potential high-tension areas. Yes, we do want more, one in every sector would be great! But we need to balance that want against the need for other ship types. There is going to be a gap in cruiser production while we get the Renaissance research done, too, and that project is looming. Are we going to accept a 1:1 explorer:cruiser ratio for the next eight to ten years or so?
I would suggest we start one Excelsior and several Constellations and maybe an Oberth, choose whether we want to go ahead with the Constellation refit or leave it, and start the Renaissance project as soon as we can reasonably expect it to produce a ship that isn't underpowered.
Smaller ships are easier to redistribute. They more easily fill small garrison requirements in non-frontier sectors. And if the sector fleet has a good distribution of ships, it's less vulnerable to a single event taking most of the sector's defenses out of commission.
Furthermore, although an explorer-class ship has excellent capabilities, it can't be everywhere. If it's the primary component of a sector's defense, can it afford to chase down every sensor ghost? Inspect every suspicious freighter? Intercept both prongs of a pincer attack? Rescue itself from a trap?
Lone Ranger Doctrine is designed to support our explorer-class ships, yes. But mostly the Five Year Missions. And in any event, the situations where our sector fleets are going to outnumber the enemy are going to be rare, mostly to do with ships you don't want to 1v1 anyway, or when we pull in an allied fleet.
Yes, our issue is not berths, but resources. And eventually we will need those 3m berths for ships other than our explorer-class vessels. But we're talking specifically about using every last one of our BR for two Excelsiors, not producing a balance. That's specifically what I'm objecting to. It would be different if we had more resources on hand or in income.
They draw on the same pool of resources in production. Resources is the crux of the current issue I have.
I disagree. Going with 100% explorers will get us horrifically out-produced by other polities, and will also mean our explorers have to take on the jobs of 3 ships each. Although they may be the equivalent of 3 ships in combat, they cannot be in three places at once. Economics like that is the fatal flaw of going "top-heavy". We need cruisers, whether we like it or not. They are simply better for the equivalent cost. We need explorer-class ships too, but producing them exclusively will have poor results.
- Location
- somewhere
...
Me: The only problem with X would be Y
You: I disagree. If we did X we would have to deal with Y.
...
Yes? It's a large issue that I'm not letting you gloss over.
And by no means is it the only problem, as I've already explained.
- Location
- Anchorage, Alaska
You don't really acknowledge the presence of problem Y though. You say that having only Explorers isn't a problem, but fail to recognise that that would cause a chronic numbers deficiency, with us being unable to chase down problems as they come up because we have insufficient hulls to cover them all.
Nervos Belli
Don't think this means you've won!
- Location
- Murica
In terms of resources, I'll point out we have more flexibility when it comes to spending resources on Excelsiors because we can pay for it with PP. So an explorer heavy build order wouldn't be an issue if we are willing to use some pp on it.
SuperSonicSound
Shadowmancer of the Shadow Cabal
That's not at all what Nix called for, he wants a mix of Explorers but with more explorers proportionally than what would be usual. He's not pushing for only explorers.. .:/
- Location
- Anchorage, Alaska
Yes, but we're reaching a point where we'd benefit more from bringing the Cruisers numbers up. If we don't build one Explorer this turn, we could instead commission three Cruisers, and have them all ready a year earlier.
Nervos Belli
Don't think this means you've won!
- Location
- Murica
Right now I'd rather have the Excelsior honestly. Three cruisers is very inefficient when it comes to crew. If we had a severe shortage of cruisers I'd agree, but we can shift ships around to cover any increasing defense costs without much difficulty.