We don't really need a huge rush of berth construction. Unless we're planning building Mirandas, we're can only just barely our all our existing berths next year, although having a couple extra for auxiliary builds or ship repairs is useful. I'd be happy with just 2 more berths year after year.

Also food for thought:

Getting a second ratification might cost 180pp, but with some basic analysis, over the 5 or so years of back-to-back ratifications, that initial investment will yield:
- about 2 BR mining colonies worth of BR
- about 1 SR mining colony worth of SR
- about 2 Academy Developments purchased simultaneously (alongside the annual Academy Development purchases, which is normally an impossibility)
- about 15-20pp discount, plus 15-20rp
- get Seyek onboard faster for preparations as suggested by the Defense Readiness Report
- get coreward major affiliates faster, avoiding some Horizonite influence risk
- reduce some redundant diplomacy events for 500 relations affiliates
- get presidentladycat to spit out a hairball (which seems to be a plus for most of the players...)

I am opposed on what I view as ethical/precedent-setting grounds as well as the cost. I hate the idea of butting in on the fates of billions of people so Fleetness can get a better budget faster.

Let's remember there are good reasons not to have two new members a year. Bringing in a new Member requires an enormous amount of logistical, diplomatic, and political work. It requires a review of laws and trade regulations. It requires psychological preparation for new citizens, and a media blitz campaign to make everyone aware of what it means to be a Federation citizen. It's a big, big deal and doing one a year is pushing it.

And you want to double all this work? Worse, you want it done sloppier, faster, with less care, and with less experienced people on the job because you can't have your best people in two places at once.

Narratively this is a huge imposition and will result in additional fuck-ups and problems, guaranteed. So balance all those benefits to Starfleet against that.
 
I see no benefit over delaying the HBZ for the berths and an obvious downside - that we won't have a Border zone fending of Horizon for a year

We can't staff it.
We've committed to supporting Nash's attack; I'm expecting a fluid campaign to erupt, not just a single battle after which everyone can go home. We've decided to go on the offensive. The last time we did, against Sydraxia - a rather weaker industrial power - it took over a year between Deva (when we first went on the attack) and Lora (when we wrecked the Sydraxian fleet). Do you really expect us to win against a rather stronger power in that much less time? Or do you intend to not sustain our offensive?
So since functionally, we won't have a force to cover the border zone, would we even effectively have the zone until next year anyway?
 
I just don't think we have the ships to crew a new border zone this year as i expect to have ships in for repair after our GBZ offensive. Also getting the berths sooner gives us repair berths for our excelsior.

I promise you, I can find the ships. It's doable. Case in point, we just pulled over 30 ships for the GBZ offensive and didn't leave a single sector below its minimum defense. We will likely have ships in for repair, but I'm pretty sure at least three or so will come back intact!
 
It's called snorting Acturus Psych Dust and SELLING shit kid! Sure I just shaved a year off my life expectancy but live fast, die with a beautiful woman by your side in an aircar crash caused by you having a drug-induced heart attack and slumping over the controls

"I want to pass away peacefully in my sleep like my Grandfather. Not screaming like the people in his aircar"
 
You know what?
Let's try this. I've got the bones of a plan here, just gotta trim some fat...

[X][TECH] Aerocommando Research Corps (Sk 3, Personal Equipment)
[X] Plan Yathcha's More Realistic Dream
  • Request a Sweeping Tactical Review, which will clear all roles and allow them to be redefined en mass, 50pp
  • Request Research Colony Tolinar VII, 7pp, 5 (7) rp/yr, 4 turns
  • Request Mining Colony at An Arai V, 8pp, 10 (20) sr/yr
  • Request new Shipyard at Orion, 53pp (12 turns, 1 2mt Berth, 2 1mt Berth)
  • Request Academy Development, 50pp (Gain +.5 Officers/Enlisted/Techs throughput)
  • Request Service Academy Development, 15pp (Gain +1 Enlisted throughput)
  • Request new Tech Team to be added to your Ship Design Bureau, 40pp - Ship Design: Escorts and Shields
  • Request new Tech Team to be added to your Ship Design Bureau, 40pp - Sensors and Ship Design: Explorers
  • Request new Tech Team to be added to your Ship Design Bureau, 40pp - Warp Technology and Ship Design: Cruisers
  • Request focused Diplomacy on a potential member species, 20pp (One affiliate or prospective race will undergo accelerate diplomacy) - Sydraxia
  • Sponsor efforts for a Major Shipyard Preparations to pave the way for a Utopia Planitia style shipyard, 4 turns, 75pp - Alukk
  • Sponsor efforts to create additional Critical Ship Infrastructure on another world, 50pp - Broken Chains
  • Acquire additional resources to establish a Horizon Desk for Starfleet Intel, 30pp (Gain +1 Dedicated Horizon intel report, enables Foreign Analysis)
  • Develop Celos Medical Centre for 20pp, 8 turns
498 pp, 10 saved for next year.

What are your reasons for putting the Infrastructure in Broken Chains? Apinae was suggested as location in the tactical stuff to make our supply lines less vulnerable, thus sponsoring it there seems better.
 
We can't staff it.
We've committed to supporting Nash's attack; I'm expecting a fluid campaign to erupt, not just a single battle after which everyone can go home. We've decided to go on the offensive. The last time we did, against Sydraxia - a rather weaker industrial power - it took over a year between Deva (when we first went on the attack) and Lora (when we wrecked the Sydraxian fleet). Do you really expect us to win against a rather stronger power in that much less time? Or do you intend to not sustain our offensive?
So since functionally, we won't have a force to cover the border zone, would we even effectively have the zone until next year anyway?

There seems to be some confusion about this:

The Republic was a test of our reaction patterns. Well, I intend to give them a reaction. I request temporary reinforcements to launch an offensive into the Enio subsector and clear it out over the next quarter.

Sincerely,
Rear Admiral Nash ka'Sharren
Sector Command, Gabriel Border Zone

This is a one quarter campaign. That is explicitly ka'Sharren's plan. A lightning strike to do what damage she can, and then send the reinforcements home. That is what the QM told us and that is what we should base our planning and decision-making on.

Yes, we do not intend to sustain the offensive. Good idea, bad idea, idea that leaves you throwing up in your mouth... but that is the plan. Please don't argue about an alternate reality where we have an alternate plan!

I would never have voted to send that many ships if they were going to be gone for a year.
 
Last edited:
If you want some particular tech available at a particular date you can just advocate for it in the thread directly, if you get a consensus for it I will take it into account for planning. If we need new teams for that I will say so.

I think it's pretty clear cut that we're going for a 2319 frigate. No one has really shown that 2323 is a significant improvement in exchange for 4 years. (+1H at best)

Necessary parts, keeping in mind your parts post in the SDB:

1050kt Frigate Frame (???)
T3 Frigate Subframes (???)
T3 Lightweight Frames (???)
T3 Phasers (2324 iirc)
T3 TCU/Cores (2322)
T3 Impulse (2323?)
T3 LR/Nav sensors (2324?)
T3 Labs (2322)
T4 Sickbays (2324)
T3 Deflectors (2323)
T3 Fuel (2323, competing with Impulse?)

Was targeting a 2325 start.
 
I am opposed on what I view as ethical/precedent-setting grounds as well as the cost. I hate the idea of butting in on the fates of billions of people so Fleetness can get a better budget faster.

Let's remember there are good reasons not to have two new members a year. Bringing in a new Member requires an enormous amount of logistical, diplomatic, and political work. It requires a review of laws and trade regulations. It requires psychological preparation for new citizens, and a media blitz campaign to make everyone aware of what it means to be a Federation citizen. It's a big, big deal and doing one a year is pushing it.

And you want to double all this work? Worse, you want it done sloppier, faster, with less care, and with less experienced people on the job because you can't have your best people in two places at once.

Narratively this is a huge imposition and will result in additional fuck-ups and problems, guaranteed. So balance all those benefits to Starfleet against that.
Remember that bringing in two members only narrowly lost by 3 council votes last year, with both the Expansionists and Pacifists in favor of it. It's not like we would be imposing our own priorities in disregard of political consequences, we would just be slightly swaying the balance towards a very valid political viewpoint that might very well have prevailed without our help if we hadn't done so much to help N'Gir.
 
I am opposed on what I view as ethical/precedent-setting grounds as well as the cost. I hate the idea of butting in on the fates of billions of people so Fleetness can get a better budget faster.

Let's remember there are good reasons not to have two new members a year. Bringing in a new Member requires an enormous amount of logistical, diplomatic, and political work. It requires a review of laws and trade regulations. It requires psychological preparation for new citizens, and a media blitz campaign to make everyone aware of what it means to be a Federation citizen. It's a big, big deal and doing one a year is pushing it.

And you want to double all this work? Worse, you want it done sloppier, faster, with less care, and with less experienced people on the job because you can't have your best people in two places at once.

Narratively this is a huge imposition and will result in additional fuck-ups and problems, guaranteed. So balance all those benefits to Starfleet against that.

Then I can count on you voting against allowing multiple ratifications per year, if the expansionists return to power? :V
 
I promise you, I can find the ships. It's doable. Case in point, we just pulled over 30 ships for the GBZ offensive and didn't leave a single sector below its minimum defense. We will likely have ships in for repair, but I'm pretty sure at least three or so will come back intact!

There seems to be some confusion about this:



This is a one quarter campaign. That is explicitly ka'Sharren's plan. A lightning strike to do what damage she can, and then send the reinforcements home. That is what the QM told us and that is what we should base our planning and decision-making on.

Yes, we do not intend to sustain the offensive. Good idea, bad idea, idea that leaves you throwing up in your mouth... but that is the plan. Please don't argue about an alternate reality where we have an alternate plan!

I would never have voted to send that many ships if they were going to be gone for a year.
Unless someone can point out why @Briefvoice is incorrect, I'm willing to take his word for it.
 
There seems to be some confusion about this:



This is a one quarter campaign. That is explicitly ka'Sharren's plan. A lightning strike to do what damage she can, and then send the reinforcements home. That is what the QM told us and that is what we should base our planning and decision-making on.
That was ka'Sharren's plan. Then we gave her a significant pile of reinforcements, and gave Cardassia time to make her own buildup. I don't know that we will be able to free up the reinforcements, not unless we manage a really strong victory.

... and to an extent, I kinda want to fight a more sustained campaign, set the Cardassians further back.
 
I promise you, I can find the ships. It's doable. Case in point, we just pulled over 30 ships for the GBZ offensive and didn't leave a single sector below its minimum defense. We will likely have ships in for repair, but I'm pretty sure at least three or so will come back intact!

And would that give us enough event coverage? I know we can do it in terms of D, but part of our ship deployment has been to have enough ships so that we can respond to every event and I don't think we can keep that up this year with adding a new zone and ships going into repair in the aftermath of an attack.
 
We can't staff it.
We've committed to supporting Nash's attack; I'm expecting a fluid campaign to erupt, not just a single battle after which everyone can go home. We've decided to go on the offensive. The last time we did, against Sydraxia - a rather weaker industrial power - it took over a year between Deva (when we first went on the attack) and Lora (when we wrecked the Sydraxian fleet). Do you really expect us to win against a rather stronger power in that much less time? Or do you intend to not sustain our offensive?
So since functionally, we won't have a force to cover the border zone, would we even effectively have the zone until next year anyway?
We've actually got a decent chunk of refits and new builds finishing over the next nine months.

Plus, it's going to be a short campaign. Either the Cardassians commit to a decisive engagement with Nash's bigass fleet, or they DON'T and she removes their infrastructure.
 
This is a one quarter campaign. That is explicitly ka'Sharren's plan. A lightning strike to do what damage she can, and then send the reinforcements home. That is what the QM told us and that is what we should base our planning and decision-making on.

Yes, we do not intend to sustain the offensive. Good idea, bad idea, idea that leaves you throwing up in your mouth... but that is the plan. Please don't argue about an alternate reality where we have an alternate plan!

I would never have voted to send that many ships if they were going to be gone for a year.
That might possibly have held if we had voted for the immediate counterattack (and even then clearing out the subsector out over a quarter does not necessarily mean they would be sent back right afterwards), but there is no reason to think it applies to the option we actually voted for, that explicitly wasn't ka'Sharren's plan. At the very least the plan we voted for (which involves waiting until the end of Q2) implies 3 quarters, one to get the ships there, at least one for the operation and one to send the ships back, more likely more now after both sides had more time to prepare. And as already mentioned there is nothing at all guaranteeing that it would even be possible to send the ships back after a quarter of action if that still was the plan. Those ships might be destroyed, need long repairs or the situation could continue to escalate.
 
Staffing an HBZ aside, it's unclear how much of a help it'll be against the diplomacy. That makes me view it as something that can wait anyways, I think, especially since we raided the Rigel piggybank hard. We probably want a high-P ship in both an HBZ and Rigel anyways [BAEpler -- i mean, kepler when].
 
[X][TECH] Aerocommando Research Corps (Sk 3, Personal Equipment)

[X] [COUNCIL] Plan Random
-[X] Request a Sweeping Tactical Review, which will clear all roles and allow them to be redefined en mass, 50pp
-[X] Request Research Colony Tolinar VII, 7pp, 5 (7) rp/yr, 4 turns
-[X] Request Mining Colony at An Arai V, 8pp, 10 (20) sr/yr
-[X] Acquire additional resources to establish a Horizon Desk for Starfleet Intel, 30pp (Gain +1 Dedicated Horizon intel report, enables Foreign Analysis)
-[X] Reorganise a Starfleet Command from a Rear Admiral position to a Vice Admiral position, 30pp for Medical
-[X] Request new Tech Team to be added to your Ship Design Bureau, 40pp [Warp Tech & Cruiser Design]
-[X] Request new Tech Team to be added to your Ship Design Bureau, 40pp [Shields & Frigate Design]
-[X] Request Academy Development, 50pp (Gain +.5 Officers/Enlisted/Techs throughput)
-[X] Request Service Academy Development, 15pp (Gain +1 Enlisted throughput)
-[X] Request focused Diplomacy on a potential member species, 20pp [Sydraxians]
-[X] Request focused Diplomacy on a potential member species, 20pp [Licori]
-[X] Request focused Diplomacy on a potential member species, 20pp [Yrillians]
-[X] Request Cruiser berth at Utopia Planitia, 16pp (6 turns, gain new 2m t berth) [Can take multiple times, +5pp per subsequent build]
-[X] Request development of Lasieth Craft Yards, 12pp (4 turns, gain 1 new 1m t berth) [Can take multiple times, +5pp per subsequent build]
-[X] Request development of Intazzi Shipyards, 18pp (4 turns, gain 1 new 1m t berth) [Can take multiple times, +5pp per subsequent build]
-[X] Request new Shipyard at Indoria, 28pp (12 turns, 1 1mt Berth)
-[X] Develop Leas Akaam Medical Centre for 20pp, 8 turns
-[X] Develop Celos Medical Centre for 20pp, 8 turns
-[X] Sponsor efforts to create additional Critical Ship Infrastructure on another world, 50pp (Apinae)

Total cost: 494 pp
If someone finds something good for the remaining pp, that'd be nice.
 
Staffing an HBZ aside, it's unclear how much of a help it'll be against the diplomacy. That makes me view it as something that can wait anyways, I think, especially since we raided the Rigel piggybank hard. We probably want a high-P ship in both an HBZ and Rigel anyways [BAEpler -- i mean, kepler when].
We pretty much want it to change the overall narrative theme of Horizon events, so that instead of them sending ships in and having ambassadors yelling about how much the Federation sucks on the steps of the forums before we even know about it, it's about us escorting them to where they say they're headed and actively refuting any lies. They're forced to be less aggressive in their attempts to undermine us if they know they're going to be escorted across our space.

The Listening Posts support this by seeing them coming and preventing attempts to sneak in, and we can't have them without a Border Zone.
 
Vulcan Worlds:

...and in electoral news that is pending a Level 0 diagnostic of Solitude's electoral machines, a rare and unexpected ray of light for the Hawks, as T'Prinit-P loses her seat to Hawks T'Jal.
How about the odds of Solitude electing a "seamstress" to their slot? Would she be a scandalous "Vulcan" Hawk councilor?
[blinks HARD]

[Vulcan Hawk candidate running for Solitude appears in Simon's brain]

I know exactly who she is and what she's like- someone from Sarek's generation, or a little younger. Drafted her for my "2235 game" concept as a recent war hero.

Have we already checked if this new councilor is a romulan seamstress in her background??
 
[X][TECH] Aerocommando Research Corps (Sk 3, Personal Equipment)

[X] [COUNCIL] Plan Random

Regarding the Nashplan, yeah, we are planning on a limited offensive, tit for tat and all that, but the Cardies and their friendslaves also get a vote and we could end up in a more comprehensive conflict.
Honestly, I very much prefer to wait a year before we go for the Horizon Border zone, well, at least till next snakepit.
 
How many ships do we have that are being commissioned before the next snakepit.?
 
We've had multiple Accessions in a year, @Briefvoice, and we've never had a problem. Plus, we're basically pushing a few Councilors to fall in line, not changing an entire party.
 
Back
Top