[X] Simon_Jester
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?
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
I agree.
But at the same time there have been a least a couple times where the frame has mattered narratively and mechanically. A Constellation instead of Centaur-A (blooded, no less) serving as the flagship in the ASTF, despite the Constellation being technically outclassed by Centaur-A. The Constitution-A being considered for the Kadeshi expedition despite being arguably outclassed by Constitution-Bs, which were not eligible. Those are the ones I remember; there could be more examples.
The old ship classes violating current ship role guidelines could be explained by some sort of expiration policy on older ship roles. Like, Constitution-A still counts as a Heavy Explorer, since the presumed 2299 tactical ship roles still considered it one, and there's a 20yr or so expiration on those old ship roles.
But the Constellation-A refits? Those are new designs - something has to give.
So...either the ship roles don't have to be enforced strictly...or we could relax the various frigate role requirements, by changing the frame requirements to "frigate frame or smaller than max frigate frame tonnage*" (if so, I hope this can be done retroactively by Oneiros without requiring a vote from us).
* Surprisingly, the latest ship design spreadsheet allows for 1050kt frigates at our current tier, but considering we haven't even researched "1mt escort design", I believe that's in error. Excluding that particular frigate frame, our max frigate frame tonnage is 900kt.
900kt plus the weight of nacelles.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
True, well for the non-internal part of nacelle weight. In practice, for small nacelles or older medium nacelles (Constellation nacelles), that adds about 50kt to total tonnage.
This just seems a place where the old designs don't have to fit. They were designed under roles that have since been updated. Tactical role is probably a future-looking designation.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
Constellation-A isn't going to be an old design, though. It'll be an old frame and nacelles, but it uses new technology.
And I hope that tactical ship roles do define what doctrinal bonuses apply to ships. Since tonnage obviously won't work anymore, and otherwise what else could be used? Yet another new system? Something completely arbitrary?
I have seen no evidence that our refits get their roles re-counted.
Were we not going to use frame type?
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
Uh, then what's all the talk about rebranding Constellation-As as garrison frigates about? Or the earlier talk about rebranding existing non-even-refit Constellations as "escorts" (now frigates). Or heck, the explicitly named "Refit Program for Constellation Escort class" in the 2313 snakepit?
You're doing an apples to oranges thing by trying to shoehorn refits into future-facing role requirements we see here. Those requirements are for new ship designs. Anything we already have the blueprint for get to happily ignore them.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
Again, Constellation-As are new ship designs. Unless we're special-casing for refits, which we have evidence from the snakepit options that is not the case, at least not fully. If you want to use the apples vs oranges analogy, this is more of a golden apples vs red apples case.
KnightDisciple
Love God. Do Right. Fear No Man.
- Location
- Midwest, USA
[X] Simon_Jester
We've been special-casing for refits since quest start, so yes?
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
I can see it that way. The refits aren't so much an attempt to make existing ships fit new desired roles (which may be impossible). They're an attempt to make existing ships do something. It's up to us to decide whether to pursue any given refit option.
That being said, the Council may well say "you don't need a 'garrison frigate' if this marvelous Constellation refit the Vulcans came up with can do all the same jobs. Sorry, we won't be funding your new design project, but hey! The Vulcans have been handing out free Docana plushies!"
[Admiral Sousa wanders away happy because Docana plushie]
Stesk: "Our xenopsychologist associates at the Science Academy predicted this would work."
They're not new designs precisely because they're constrained by the existing structure and limitations of the old hull. They cannot be expected to fulfill mission requirements like "small tactical frame" or "frigate hull" or "large operations frame" because the frames cannot be resized or repurposed. That doesn't mean the ships just cease to exist or are irrelevant or useless. It just means those ships are not what we want from a future design.
A satisfactory future design WOULD have the aforementioned features. That doesn't invalidate the idea of updating existing ships to get the maximum return on a sunk-cost investment.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
There's no way to get this definitely settled with asking @OneirosTheWriter:
Will all the Constellation-A refits still be classified as cruisers for doctrinal purposes?
If we custom design refits in the future, what determines whether the doctrinal roles would change for the refit?
Will all the Constellation-A refits still be classified as cruisers for doctrinal purposes?
If we custom design refits in the future, what determines whether the doctrinal roles would change for the refit?
- Location
- Australia
The sheet changed because the Integrated Coolant part was being abused like a rented mule =P
All of the current roles had smaller requirements once upon a time and have been updated. In a Starfleet less desperate for hulls it can put into the void, the Constellations, even the Constitution-A, may even be deemed surplus to requirements. After all, 8 crew mostly duplicating the capabilities of 5 or 6 crew frigates isn't particularly efficient.
Naturally, nothing is liable to be retired any time soon, because with all these sectors and now conflict every which way, Starfleet needs hulls like a lush needs a gin house.
Now, pretty much every refit thus far has just been bespoke, but as we go along, refits should match either existing roles, or new roles. You can designate a second-line/reserve general cruiser role for Constellations to fulfil, to reflect that they are no longer your preferred cruiser role (the Connie-B is now, and the Renaissance will be) and why, if things cool down, they should remain in service.
The Connie-B more or less fills the General Cruiser role, but given its origins were less in a carefully planned design process and more in an urgent attempt to counter the Jaldun, I think its reasonable that it strayed outside the neat and orderly system of roles.
All of the current roles had smaller requirements once upon a time and have been updated. In a Starfleet less desperate for hulls it can put into the void, the Constellations, even the Constitution-A, may even be deemed surplus to requirements. After all, 8 crew mostly duplicating the capabilities of 5 or 6 crew frigates isn't particularly efficient.
Naturally, nothing is liable to be retired any time soon, because with all these sectors and now conflict every which way, Starfleet needs hulls like a lush needs a gin house.
Now, pretty much every refit thus far has just been bespoke, but as we go along, refits should match either existing roles, or new roles. You can designate a second-line/reserve general cruiser role for Constellations to fulfil, to reflect that they are no longer your preferred cruiser role (the Connie-B is now, and the Renaissance will be) and why, if things cool down, they should remain in service.
The Connie-B more or less fills the General Cruiser role, but given its origins were less in a carefully planned design process and more in an urgent attempt to counter the Jaldun, I think its reasonable that it strayed outside the neat and orderly system of roles.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Honestly I'd argue for not trying to invent a role for the Constellation-A lives in, but we may want to invent a "reserve cruiser" role that a notional Constellation-B refit can occupy some time around 2335-40, IF we never need to retire the ships, which we probably will at some point. Or for that matter if we do retire them but want to keep them in mothballs for an emergency.
- Location
- United States
out of curiosity, and this is targeted at the ship build planning guys, do we have any hope of making the council objectives we currently have?
Federation Council Objectives:
200 Science by 2321 [Currently 124]
250 Defence by 2321 [Currently 137]
Federation Council Objectives:
200 Science by 2321 [Currently 124]
250 Defence by 2321 [Currently 137]
I think we established earlier that the proposed Pacifist-Refit Constellation would be our preferred garrison ship, regardless whether we classify it as a cruiser or frigate.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Well, if we need to invent that role to get that refit as an option again, let's do it. If we don't need to invent a role to get that refit as an option, let's not.
Yes, easily. Assuming no ships get blown up, we should make the Science requirement in 2316 and the Defense requirement in 2318.
Science is currently ~170 and Defense currently ~191, depending on whether ships in the midst of refit count to the total or not.
If by "established" you mean that some posters said so and no one else felt it was worthwhile to argue with you. No one took a vote or anything, and I don't really want them as my preferred garrison ship. I might be willing to refit the existing ones that way, but I'd never build a new one.
Last edited:
- Location
- Australia
By and large, my advice with the roles has always been to make roles to express what you need and/or want. I'll operate based on what is in the roles, after all, so this isn't the area that people should try to play mechanics shenanigans with.
To be fair, you are the first poster I am aware of to not like it.
- Location
- Australia
Clever people, those xenopsychologists!
I wouldn't build more either. I'd take the refit, but more of that shitbox? Nah.
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Docana:
"I... just wanted to be useful..."
"I... just wanted to be useful..."
Okay, but what people are pointing out is that the roles don't play well with refit ships because with refits, we either don't know whether the ship fulfills various arbitrary 'frame' requirements since frames were not a thing when those ships' stats were released... Or if we do know, we can't do anything about it. Furthermore, we don't have control over refits until we're doing refits to ships designed using the existing system, as far as I can tell.