Remove ads

To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

Linked contents
To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest) Starfleet Ship Design Bureau, Refit ("To Boldly Go...")
Reader mode
Again, this is why I think we pressingly need a "counter-mine" tech category added to the tech tree, and/or "counter-mine" techs added to the existing tech fields (say, short range sensors). I'm pretty sure mines weren't supposed to figure THIS prominently in setting warfare back when the tech tree was designed, though I could be wrong.
 
Simon_Jester said:
Again, this is why I think we pressingly need a "counter-mine" tech category added to the tech tree, and/or "counter-mine" techs added to the existing tech fields (say, short range sensors). I'm pretty sure mines weren't supposed to figure THIS prominently in setting warfare back when the tech tree was designed, though I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well we are developing an anti-mine doctrine right now. It's just taking a while.
 
Simon_Jester said:
Again, this is why I think we pressingly need a "counter-mine" tech category added to the tech tree, and/or "counter-mine" techs added to the existing tech fields (say, short range sensors). I'm pretty sure mines weren't supposed to figure THIS prominently in setting warfare back when the tech tree was designed, though I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Right now, the ship's total rounded S stat seems to be the anti-mine check. In the future, I wouldn't be surprised if it's the short-range sensors' S stat that would be responsible for this, or at least provide a bonus, like survey sensors are supposed to provide for mapping missions.

Standalone anti-mine tech seems too specific of a category, because that can open a can of worms on other anti-X techs (anti-torpedoes, anti-disruptors, etc.) - bundling it with ship component tech and/or doctrine tech is a better idea IMO.
 
Adding a +1 to detecting mines tech to sensors could be a decent solution. And if we want to create techs to buff mines, then I'd lump it in with torpedo technology. Having a whole new tree is overkill.
 
SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
It seems to me either:
1. Something to include in offensive doctrine or
2. Something to account for when we're designing ships
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It seems more of a technology issue than a doctrinal one to me, at least if you're coming up with countermeasures that apply to all species and not just anti-Licori measures. I know nothing of ship design so I'll stay quiet on that idea.
 
Nervos Belli said:
It seems more of a technology issue than a doctrinal one to me, at least if you're coming up with countermeasures that apply to all species and not just anti-Licori measures. I know nothing of ship design so I'll stay quiet on that idea.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What I mean is that technology is covered by improving the S score on ships, or by making that S score more accessible.

Doctrine can apply to minefields generally. I'm certain we have developed similar doctrinal procedures to deal with naval mines in real life.
 
Such procedures most certainly do exist.

lbmaian said:
Right now, the ship's total rounded S stat seems to be the anti-mine check. In the future, I wouldn't be surprised if it's the short-range sensors' S stat that would be responsible for this, or at least provide a bonus, like survey sensors are supposed to provide for mapping missions.

Standalone anti-mine tech seems too specific of a category, because that can open a can of worms on other anti-X techs (anti-torpedoes, anti-disruptors, etc.) - bundling it with ship component tech and/or doctrine tech is a better idea IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My own view is that given that mines are a very specific threat that basic common sense suggests there are or should be ways to counter, in a way that 'torpedoes' or 'disruptors' are not, it would be justified to have SOME counter-mine techs. Again, we have counter-cloak techs in the tree, legacies of preparing against the Romulans and Klingons. This wouldn't be significantly different in my opinion.

Briefvoice said:
Well we are developing an anti-mine doctrine right now. It's just taking a while.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's a doctrine, and it'll help I'm sure, but:
1) I have a stinging suspicion that like our anti-Biophage doctrines it will have limited effect after this specific conflict, and
2) At most it represents the effort of one person leading a modest team for several months. We can do better.

I mean you'd expect the Ked Paddah to already HAVE a counter-mine doctrine since they've known about minefields like these for years; they're conservative, not stupid and unable to react to threats. And I doubt we'll learn that all their ships have Science 1 or something, either. But it isn't making them able to sweep these particular mines very reliably. They could be doing better. So can we.
 
I will say this: with how powerful defensive measures such as reinforced outposts and mines can be, even excluding Licori super-science, I'm now more confident on the defensive prospects of Indoria and Apinae to resist or at least greatly punish a Cardassian blitzkrieg.

On the other hand, it's also easy to see how war between two major powers, like Klingon-Romulan and the future Cardassian-UFP, can grind down into a stalemate.

Home field advantages, man
 
Do our members have the antimatter production facilities to supply these fields of massive bombs though? You need many tonnes of the stuff to make a field with these kinds of damage numbers, not the grams that go into a torpedo.

Iron Wolf said:
...~40x that on average, or 2.4 GT. That means we're looking at ~500kg of antimatter or a 400 ton fusion device, making some generous assumptions. :V
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If this is right, half a tonne per mine - how many mines to a field? How many fields in a home world solar system?

The Arcadians either have some massive antimatter factories in their home system, or they have been stockpiling for decades...
 
Last edited:
lbmaian said:
I will say this: with how powerful defensive measures such as reinforced outposts and mines can be, even excluding Licori super-science, I'm now more confident on the defensive prospects of Indoria and Apinae to resist or at least greatly punish a Cardassian blitzkrieg.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We really got to get that Indorian starbase ordered if there's pp to spare in the snakepit.
 
Goat said:
Do our members have the antimatter production facilities to supply these fields of massive bombs though? You need many tonnes of the stuff to make a field with these kinds of damage numbers, not the grams that go into a torpedo.



If this is right, half a tonne per mine - how many mines to a field? How many fields in a home world solar system?

The Arcadians either have some massive antimatter factories in their home system, or they have been stockpiling for decades...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Galaxy Class Total Output - Notes

Anti-Dueterium needs to be made it pretty sizeable amounts. I think it's fairly clear that by the time of Starfleet, they've figured out how to produce anti-matter pretty efficiently and effectively.

(And the other important note, of course, is that this isn't Hard Sci-Fi, it's technobabble sci-fi :V)
 
Last edited:
Reads the page.

So a Galaxy has somewhere between 2,000 tonnes and 10,000 tonnes of antimatter. Guess the numbers are not out of the realm of possibility. Still more 'spare' antimatter production than I would expect for the Arcadians.
 
Goat said:
Do our members have the antimatter production facilities to supply these fields of massive bombs though? You need many tonnes of the stuff to make a field with these kinds of damage numbers, not the grams that go into a torpedo.

If this is right, half a tonne per mine - how many mines to a field? How many fields in a home world solar system?

The Arcadians either have some massive antimatter factories in their home system, or they have been stockpiling for decades...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If our enemies can do it, so can we.

Other possibilities include BIG damn fusion bombs- my headcanon Sydraxians actually use straight-up nukes (albeit pure fusion devices) in their torpedoes, for instance, but with technobabble stabilized metallic hydrogen to save space and volume. Or exotic technobabble explosives more potent than fusion but less potent than antimatter. We know there are plenty of kinds of power sources and unstable materials out there, so there may well be plenty of non-Standard Model choices for what to fill a naval mine with.
 
Well, this particular house is the one I would expect to have the most Antimatter for their high powered SCIENCE.
 
Simon_Jester said:
My own view is that given that mines are a very specific threat that basic common sense suggests there are or should be ways to counter, in a way that 'torpedoes' or 'disruptors' are not, it would be justified to have SOME counter-mine techs. Again, we have counter-cloak techs in the tree, legacies of preparing against the Romulans and Klingons. This wouldn't be significantly different in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The occasional +1 against mining bundled in a tech node is fine with me - I just have doubts it warrants a separate tech node branch.

I mean you'd expect the Ked Paddah to already HAVE a counter-mine doctrine since they've known about minefields like these for years; they're conservative, not stupid and unable to react to threats. And I doubt we'll learn that all their ships have Science 1 or something, either. But it isn't making them able to sweep these particular mines very reliably. They could be doing better. So can we.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Arms race between mine-detection and mine-hiding tech.

Briefvoice said:
We really got to get that Indorian starbase ordered if there's pp to spare in the snakepit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Absolutely. Hopefully we can get a Betazoid-style MWCO deal here.

But I'm pessimistic about the pp we have now ... speaking of which, I'll need to double check the past updates and update my audit ledger when I have the time. Last I updated it in the MWCO, we were at 170pp, and I believe we've been hit by at least 10pp since.
 
lbmaian said:
The occasional +1 against mining bundled in a tech node is fine with me - I just have doubts it warrants a separate tech node branch.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't disagree. I mostly just want to be sure we get something, even if only so that it becomes an arms race technologically. Mines are turning out to be an incredibly important facet of in-game warfare that we were entirely blind to and unaware of prior to the conflict in the Gabriel Expanse- I mean, we knew mines existed but we didn't have reason to think they were going to be this big a part of all our fleet battles.

SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
Then we get to do event response :V

But there are border areas even if we don't want to mine home systems. Or military installations. I see a use for them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There's certainly a use for them. The flip side, though, is that as in real life, mining an area has implications. First, it creates a permanent no-go zone. Second, maintaining a minefield does involve a certain amount of work, assuming you care about the mines' reliability and about being able to sweep or deactivate them yourself when you need to. Third, that zone exists as a constant reminder of the militarized nature of the area- which is likely to be unpopular within the Federation.

While the Federation clearly has minelaying technology and presumably has had it for some time, I wouldn't generalize that to say that the Federation would make particularly heavy use of mines themselves.
 
Simon_Jester said:
part of all our fleet battles.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

All your fleet invasions. This comes up when you attack strongpoints of major powers, not in general open space fleet battles. It's come up recently because you have considerable power advantages over the Sydraxians and now the Arcadians, so they have to play it as defensive and asymmetrical as they can.

I might pad out Base Strike doctrine with extra anti-mine techs, something to help differentiate it with Decisive Battle and Wolf Pack.
 
OneirosTheWriter said:
All your fleet invasions. This comes up when you attack strongpoints of major powers, not in general open space fleet battles. It's come up recently because you have considerable power advantages over the Sydraxians and now the Arcadians, so they have to play it as defensive and asymmetrical as they can.

I might pad out Base Strike doctrine with extra anti-mine techs, something to help differentiate it with Decisive Battle and Wolf Pack.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If you're finalizing offensive doctrines could we get it onto the research slides page by the time Ex Astra comes around? This might be the year we finally buy an offensive doctrine team in Snakepit.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top