Random Member
Gardener of Human Happiness
- Location
- Behind You
Denying us resources and wrecking the Risan fleet so it can't support us elsewhere.
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?
pheonix89
Wants to be Seven Of Nine
- Location
- North American Plaguelands
- Pronouns
- She/Her
It's not meaningfully accessible for their clients.
Oh, sure, the Dawair or Lecarre can hit it in theory but they're going to be busy keeping the Catians, Andorians and Ferasa/Andor Sector Starfleet from taking their home systems.
Oh, sure, the Dawair or Lecarre can hit it in theory but they're going to be busy keeping the Catians, Andorians and Ferasa/Andor Sector Starfleet from taking their home systems.
The Risan fleet is ... basically irrelevant, and they don't have assets in place to do that. The Ashalla Pact Members on that front are going to be busy playing defense.
Last edited:
It would be a useful tool to basically hold the planet hostage. Not overtly, but implicitly.
Like, why did the Dominion conquer Betazed? What did it achieve them? The Federation and actually, most other polities too, must respond to threats to densely populated worlds.
Plus, the Caitian fleet and Ferasa Sector fleet are the prime reinforcements for Rethelia. If they're tied up then other places will fall.
Like, why did the Dominion conquer Betazed? What did it achieve them? The Federation and actually, most other polities too, must respond to threats to densely populated worlds.
Plus, the Caitian fleet and Ferasa Sector fleet are the prime reinforcements for Rethelia. If they're tied up then other places will fall.
Last edited:
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Building anything like that many berths would be ridiculously wasteful. Especially since:
1) Berths there are potentially vulnerable to Cardassian attack in the opening phase of a war. The risk is worth it, but only up to a point.
2) Each extra berth at the Apinae yard is going to get more and more expensive, to the point where if we build several berths at Apinae, we might well be able to afford two berths elsewhere for the price of one at Apinae.
2) The only benefit we have from building more berths at Apinae as opposed to other places is that ships damaged near Apiata space get repaired faster. This doesn't help us as much if the fighting is, say, down around the Seyek homeworld; towing a damaged ship back to Amarkia would be safer and about as much work as towing it to Apinae in that case.
pheonix89
Wants to be Seven Of Nine
- Location
- North American Plaguelands
- Pronouns
- She/Her
The thing is that those aren't Cardassian fleets that would be doing it. They're Dawair fleets. And the Cardassians will have an extremely hard time getting the Dawair to leave their home system open to make a run on Risa.
Also, every war plan I've seen assumes that the Catian and Ferasa sector fleets are deployed to counter the Dawair fleet. It doesn't do anything to tie up forces we expected to be free.
- Location
- alphen aan den rijn
wondering something could we maybe think about lending out like 1 or 2 berth we are not using to say someone else so that they can use it?
because i think i saw 4 open berths last round? do like lend 2 out to the others? maybe i am thinking maybe PP or something in return??
because i think i saw 4 open berths last round? do like lend 2 out to the others? maybe i am thinking maybe PP or something in return??
Do we really get enough ressources from Risa to make that move worth it? I would also question whether destroying the Risan navy is worth having all these ships out of position during the conquest and the garrisoning afterwards. We can just swoop in with some of our reserves and free them if they dont leave enough hulls there.
Any ship wasting their time around Risa is a ship that isnt threathening Rethelia though.
I don't agree with such war plans, because they hold no viable method of reinforcing the southern CBZ. What will in my opinion, have to happen, is a shuffle like Andor and Andor Guard -> Ferasa, KBZ -> Risa, RBZ -> KBZ/SBZ, LBZ -> SBZ, Caitian Grand Fleet and Ferasa -> cover Arqeniou -> Rethelia, Qloathi Senatorial Fleet -> partial strength to Rethelia.
Forgothrax
Not Going Gently
- Pronouns
- He/Him
If the Cardassians are being their asshole selves to the Bajorans, though...
Probably a mix, would be my guess. New construction due to more resources from the GBZ, refits, and building lots more shipping. The latter makes the sheer number of berths make more sense.
Eh... -wiggles hand- not really. A military grade warp core, nacelles, and impulse costs <15sr. That will generate enough power for the rest of the ship easily.
I also just went and generated a 1mt freighter design on the sheet using a cruiser frame. 50/30 cost and I know that the sheet isn't made for civilian ships either. With a 900kt frigate frame, I can almost get it to 25sr. Uses Miranda nacelles so I know it'll be at least as fast as a Miri.
It is, but given the above, what would be the premium on a cargo ship or freighter?
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
Well, not as long as a UP expansion costs 4pp less and gets us both at 3mt and a 1mt berth!
UP expansion costs are just crazy cheap, or non-UP Excelsior berth costs are just too expensive.
I'm not sure you can use the old GBZ status post, since they seem to be superseded by the info in the 2314 logistics test. Even the logistics of recent GBZ status reports are dubious, since some of the lines there look like copy&paste of earlier ones (like what the heck is that "13 Small, 1 Bulk Cargo" line there, which hasn't changed since 2314, supposed to mean?).
It's also unclear whether Oneiros is still modeling each cargo trip in a bottoms-up approach (complete with different send and return manifests!) as is indicated in the GBZ status posts, or instead now abstracting it all into totals with route penalties and divvying that up in a top-down matter as is indicated in that logistics test post.
Hmm, I'll try to draw out some rules from that logistics test...
It's true that we won't have to calculate the current needs of the logistics loops - and I'm glad for that. However it's still useful to estimate how much we'll need in the future. Which although kinda sucks, isn't actually as bad as it sounds, since we can estimate our construction plans over time, and can then use the known logistics costs of each line item to calculate the totals over time.
- Location
- alphen aan den rijn
on the cargo / freighter thing (same, not the same? don`t know or much care)
should we not be building more ships that can build stuff rather then cargo / freighter ship ? i might be missing something i have done so before?
should we not be building more ships that can build stuff rather then cargo / freighter ship ? i might be missing something i have done so before?
- Location
- Central Standard Time
Well, they're out of our control.
We do not control the auxiliary branch.
- Location
- alphen aan den rijn
so all that is now out of our hands? must have missed that update, good then
Control over the Auxiliary build process has always been out of the players hands.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
Okay, an analysis of the 2314 logistics test on how to calculate cargo requirements per logistics loop, and the resulting cargo ship & freighter requirements:
Supply loop (formerly, fleet support) is pretty straightforward. Add up listed Sm and Blk costs for each ship and stationary defense (starbases, outposts). No need to handle "cargo trips" or "route penalty" that's needed for the other logistics loops (see below). The only wrinkle is that stationary defenses are excluded if they're at homeworlds. Or possibly major worlds, but this post indicates its limited to homeworlds - I infer from this that the Shrantet III starbase requires engineering ships for construction while the Indoria starbase doesn't. That is engineering though, so dunno if that homeworld vs major world distinction applies here.
Engineering projects, as alluded to above, are a bit of an unknown. We have the GBZ examples, but they seem to use the bottom-up auxiliary ship modeling that I'm not sure is still in use. There are also hints from the snakepit, and that post I just linked above.
Industrial loop (formerly, industry network) is more complicated:
1) Take total BR and SR income, across member world contributions, mining colonies, trade agreements, etc., and divide by 5 to get the total Blk and Sm annual requirements
2) Cargo ships operate on (1/6 * given route penalty)-year trips, so multiply this by the total Blk and Sm annual requirements to get the total Blk and Sm needed per trip across the assigned cargo ships - these are the final requirements here
3) Assign the cargo ships to meet the requirements established in (2)
Feeder loop (formerly, feeder network) is the most complicated - it's basically the industrial loop calculation with a changed (1):
1a) Take total BR from "source" income* - that's the total Blk annual requirements**
1b) Sum the total SR and RP from "source" income* - that's the total Sm annual requirements
1c) edit: For non-Starfleet, there's also minor worlds that each contribute 4 Blk and 8 Sm annual requirements (although UESPA for some reason has 7 Sm instead of 8 Sm per minor world)
2) Same as industry loop's (2)
3) Same as industry loop's (3)
* "Source" income is thetotal income minus the member world contributions, i.e. income from mining/research colonies, trade/research agreements, any early omake rewards, relevant snakepit options, and relevant commodore/admiral bonuses
** I can't directly match the various 2314 logistics test income figures with the 2314 edition of my audit ledger, but they come pretty close, and could partially be explained by missing/gaining a colony/bonus here or there. The only exception is the feeder loop's BR income - it's ~40br too high, which indicates to me that Oneiros is erroneously using a BR tech bonus of 10 rather than 5 here.
Another thing to note: The BR/SR bonuses we get from tech are factored into the raw BR/SR, rather than only the refined/final BR/SR. That means that, e.g. Collie, which has base income of 10br/yr 15sr/yr, actually has a raw ore income of 15br/yr 25sr/yr, resulting in 15blk and 25sm per year (which is then divided by 6 into bi-months, multiplied by route penalty, and divvied into cargo ships & freighters). Fortunately this is something that corroborates with the GBZ status posts:
- Collie's base income is 10br/yr 15sr/yr
- GBZ status updates show the 15br/yr 25sr/yr raw income requiring 15blk 25sm
Trunk loop (formerly, trunk network) doesn't matter to Starfleet's logistics - it only matters to member fleets/nations, since it's just the trade between major worlds.
Each logistics loop looks like they're independent, each requiring their own pool of assigned cargo ships & freighters. That is, the "rounding" of cargo requirements happens at the logistics loop level. You don't sum up the cargo requirements across all the logistic loops, then divvy this total into cargo ships & freighters.
edit: took another look at the "source" incomes, and I can exclude trade agreements and misc from it - the oddly high BR source income was just throwing me off
Supply loop (formerly, fleet support) is pretty straightforward. Add up listed Sm and Blk costs for each ship and stationary defense (starbases, outposts). No need to handle "cargo trips" or "route penalty" that's needed for the other logistics loops (see below). The only wrinkle is that stationary defenses are excluded if they're at homeworlds. Or possibly major worlds, but this post indicates its limited to homeworlds - I infer from this that the Shrantet III starbase requires engineering ships for construction while the Indoria starbase doesn't. That is engineering though, so dunno if that homeworld vs major world distinction applies here.
Engineering projects, as alluded to above, are a bit of an unknown. We have the GBZ examples, but they seem to use the bottom-up auxiliary ship modeling that I'm not sure is still in use. There are also hints from the snakepit, and that post I just linked above.
Industrial loop (formerly, industry network) is more complicated:
1) Take total BR and SR income, across member world contributions, mining colonies, trade agreements, etc., and divide by 5 to get the total Blk and Sm annual requirements
2) Cargo ships operate on (1/6 * given route penalty)-year trips, so multiply this by the total Blk and Sm annual requirements to get the total Blk and Sm needed per trip across the assigned cargo ships - these are the final requirements here
3) Assign the cargo ships to meet the requirements established in (2)
Feeder loop (formerly, feeder network) is the most complicated - it's basically the industrial loop calculation with a changed (1):
1a) Take total BR from "source" income* - that's the total Blk annual requirements**
1b) Sum the total SR and RP from "source" income* - that's the total Sm annual requirements
1c) edit: For non-Starfleet, there's also minor worlds that each contribute 4 Blk and 8 Sm annual requirements (although UESPA for some reason has 7 Sm instead of 8 Sm per minor world)
2) Same as industry loop's (2)
3) Same as industry loop's (3)
* "Source" income is the
** I can't directly match the various 2314 logistics test income figures with the 2314 edition of my audit ledger, but they come pretty close, and could partially be explained by missing/gaining a colony/bonus here or there. The only exception is the feeder loop's BR income - it's ~40br too high, which indicates to me that Oneiros is erroneously using a BR tech bonus of 10 rather than 5 here.
Another thing to note: The BR/SR bonuses we get from tech are factored into the raw BR/SR, rather than only the refined/final BR/SR. That means that, e.g. Collie, which has base income of 10br/yr 15sr/yr, actually has a raw ore income of 15br/yr 25sr/yr, resulting in 15blk and 25sm per year (which is then divided by 6 into bi-months, multiplied by route penalty, and divvied into cargo ships & freighters). Fortunately this is something that corroborates with the GBZ status posts:
- Collie's base income is 10br/yr 15sr/yr
- GBZ status updates show the 15br/yr 25sr/yr raw income requiring 15blk 25sm
Trunk loop (formerly, trunk network) doesn't matter to Starfleet's logistics - it only matters to member fleets/nations, since it's just the trade between major worlds.
Each logistics loop looks like they're independent, each requiring their own pool of assigned cargo ships & freighters. That is, the "rounding" of cargo requirements happens at the logistics loop level. You don't sum up the cargo requirements across all the logistic loops, then divvy this total into cargo ships & freighters.
edit: took another look at the "source" incomes, and I can exclude trade agreements and misc from it - the oddly high BR source income was just throwing me off
Last edited:
Its accurate to the logistics test too:
Feeder network is clearly just our colonies only, and is straight SR(+RP?) and BR values times the route penalty. This is divided by six because apparently we can make 2 month round trips no matter what and the distance is abstracted to the route penalty.
Each 25 income colony adds 31 cargo, divided by 6, or 5.2 units a year. So each takes about 0.5 transports on this network. That means we need about 1.5 transports commissioned each year to keep up with 3 colonies a year.
In both networks the BR goes to Blk and the SR goes to Sm.
From these we can conclude that a ratification that increases income by 25 or a 25 income mining colony will add 10, or a transport per two months, or 1/6 of a transport every year. A ratification that adds 50 income would add 1/3 of a transport per year. Going to 150% war economy would add 4 transports per year to our 2314 total.
A pace of two ratifications and one 300 affiliate a year post-moratorium will require almost an additional 0.5 to 1 transport per year to keep up. One ratification and one 300 would be 0.3 to 0.5 or so.
So we need about two transports in an even mix of freighters and cargo per year to keep pace, ignoring fleet expansion, plus what we're in the hole by. That means have two cargo ships and three freighters under construction at all times, plus be working on about the same number extra for about a 6-9 years to dig our way out.
If we ever switch to war economy we'll need an additional 10 to 16 transports, but I can understand covering that by federalizing.
Feeder network is clearly just our colonies only, and is straight SR(+RP?) and BR values times the route penalty. This is divided by six because apparently we can make 2 month round trips no matter what and the distance is abstracted to the route penalty.
Each 25 income colony adds 31 cargo, divided by 6, or 5.2 units a year. So each takes about 0.5 transports on this network. That means we need about 1.5 transports commissioned each year to keep up with 3 colonies a year.
The industry network uses our total BR and SR income but divides it by five to represent refined goods. There's a massive route penalty for distance, but the division by five makes the transport a lot easier.
In both networks the BR goes to Blk and the SR goes to Sm.
From these we can conclude that a ratification that increases income by 25 or a 25 income mining colony will add 10, or a transport per two months, or 1/6 of a transport every year. A ratification that adds 50 income would add 1/3 of a transport per year. Going to 150% war economy would add 4 transports per year to our 2314 total.
A pace of two ratifications and one 300 affiliate a year post-moratorium will require almost an additional 0.5 to 1 transport per year to keep up. One ratification and one 300 would be 0.3 to 0.5 or so.
Finally, fleet support is purely additive, are per year costs that must be filled by occupying the transport for the full year, and the main costs are clear.
So we need about two transports in an even mix of freighters and cargo per year to keep pace, ignoring fleet expansion, plus what we're in the hole by. That means have two cargo ships and three freighters under construction at all times, plus be working on about the same number extra for about a 6-9 years to dig our way out.
If we ever switch to war economy we'll need an additional 10 to 16 transports, but I can understand covering that by federalizing.
Last edited:
- Location
- somewhere
So we're on a good way with the 4 cargo ships and 5 freighters currently under construction, though with the hospital ship prototype ship nearing completion and engineering ships also in short supply we need some more berths for auxiliary ships in general.
Though as I've said before, I don't think total Starfleet transport independence is necessarily a goal. We might look for something like borrowing no more than X% of member world shipping instead,
Not that this stuff doesn't remain deadly boring and obscure to all but a very few, so when I say "goal" I would hate to actually have it be the Starfleet Ambition or anything.
Yes, I think the main thing though is just to remember that ordering resource colonies equals freighters and cargo ships just like we should remember that building berths equals academy expansions. Remembering this and taking steps towards it whenever we get the chance will keep the ball rolling in the future.
I'd also like some slack in our auxiliary berths much like we occasionally have slack in our shipbuilding berths, but that all should be possible.
Also construction projects and fleet expansion aren't calculated either.
The writers wanted to use Vulcan but the Corporate Overlords said NO.
TheDanishLord
Viking Warlord
- Location
- Denmark
the Treaty of Algeron was made in 2311 in canon so do that mean we can make use of cloaking device technology?
Random Member
Gardener of Human Happiness
- Location
- Behind You
No, the Council still forbids it.
TheDanishLord
Viking Warlord
- Location
- Denmark
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
If I'm translating Redhead222's text correctly, I think he's talking about engineering ships. If we buy the new "Reorganise Starfleet Engineering Command" snakepit option, then we'll gain more control over engineering projects and we might be allowed to schedule engineering ship builds. Oneiros is still working on the details.
It's not clear to me what economic mobilization level directly impacts with regards to logistics. If I had to make an educated guess, just from its description, I'd say:
- the income multiplier is directly applied the industrial network (since that operates on total income)
- leave the feeder loop alone (already extracting resources as quickly as possible)
- likewise leave the supply loop untouched (ships and structures need same supply as usual)
- could potentially draw down the trunk loop upon sufficient logistics strain (helping to lead to eventual post-war economy crash)
edit: There's also some drawing from the resource stockpile in higher economic mobilization levels, which could be modeled as an infusion of resources into the industrial loop (possible surge of cargo reqs), and ... something to do with trunk loop and post-war economic crash mechanics?
edit2: I'd expect must of the post-war economic effects to be due to the hugely ramped up major world BR/SR income (assuming mining colony income isn't increased), rather than from logistics strain or reducing the resource stockpile.
I'm also not sure if Starfleet is directly affected by mobilization level. In the Arcadian Crisis, we had a separate mobilization system specific to us - mobilization points, which cannibalize Starfleet or member resources, including federalizing cargo ships and freighters, thus using up war support. That specific system, however, wasn't very popular, so we may see something different next time. But the point stands that Starfleet may not follow the direct [industrial loop] income multiplier mechanic.
Last edited:
Why are you so excited about cloaking devices in the first place? I'd vote against them if we could research them.