It would be rather stupid to let them keep their listening posts if they had any and didn't already evacuate them, and even stupider to allow them to resupply them. Listening posts are manned. Knowing where resource deposits and habitable planets are isn't a tactical advantage, only a strategic advantage if one side is going to exploit them later, which I don't think we are very likely to do any time soon, and the locations of star systems are trivial to detect at long range. Occasionally unusual features of a system can provide a gimmick advantage in that system, but that applies only if you can lure an enemy to that system. 24 and 26 Enio clearly don't have such a feature that they know of, otherwise they would already have used it against us.
We've already seen in Ghosts and Whispers that listening posts are easy to conceal, and we know that they don't require constant supply, more in the 1/year category. Scouted systems and scouted space has been pointed out several times in the tactical report to be an advantage - are you claiming more expertise than SF Tactical in this? Even with 24 and 26 Enio as strong points, the Cardassians still have a terrain advantage because they've explored this sector and we haven't. Remember, during the campaign, there were "flanking systems" that did hold military advantage even if they weren't used in that campaign. The simplistic view that only the features and defenses of 24 and 26 Enio matter is false. Heck, we even know that reinforcements with low-S will have trouble traversing the Badlands in time to reinforce a defending fleet in the Enio subsector. That describes most of the Apiata and Amarki fleets!
Our ships in Enio are only "pinned" in the sense that the place they are going to be in case of an attack is predictable, they can still attack anywhere they choose. That's the main reason the Cardassians would be more or less forced to attack there first, because the ships aren't "pinned" offensively.
Starships in this quest aren't even remotely like cavalry, they are like motorized infantry. The ability to travel at warp is never used during a battle (until they retreat). A 1 in 8 chance of needing to fight an actual battle is such an enormous advantage compared to a 1 in 1 chance of needing to fight an actual battle. If that 1 in 8 chance was considered a major problem for them wars wouldn't be a thing at all.
The option you are voting for amounts to letting them take Enio as soon as they are ready to make a somewhat serious effort. Arguing that a short while of defending Enio halfheartedly will provide a shprt while of protection to those subsectors isn't much of an argument against making a proper effort.
Mid term there are three options:
- We let them build a starbase in Enio.
- We keep attacking them in Enio every time they try to build a starbase there, taking a minefield to the face every time, until we are lured into a trap or just get unlucky and lose most of our GBZ fleet, precisely the thing you argued made trying to keep Enio non-viable. And remember, you already admitted fixed that defenses work well when you can force the enemy to attack you.
- We keep Enio.
Either you admit that we would let them build a starbase in Enio, or you need to argue that 2. is better than 3.
We don't know what special rules the Cardassians are operating under infrastructure wise but we know that they already built two starbases to support their GBZ activities and did that concurrently with a huge shipyard expansion program. The new system wasn't in place then, but the new system is supposed to formalize the ad hoc reasoning and estimation that was already used before, clearly the Cardassians aren't supposed to have less than 20% of the infrastructure capability of the Federation so there definitely are going to be some special rules or tweaks for them.
Ships defending Enio
are pinned, because
aren't going to take offensive action, and in fact we gave up 45 Gabriel and never even considered hitting 67 Gabriel. We would be restricted by the stipulations of the ongoing vote, which tell us that our ships ought to be used to hold the Enio subsector.
A 1 in 8 chance that you lose your fleet because you run headlong into a superior force is
unacceptable. That is the core concept a defensive fleet in being - you can't predict where the enemy is, so aggressive actions are restricted. Offensive operations in real life
have been limited by intelligence disadvantages exactly like this, and it takes a great deal of intel work and slow building of advantages to overcome the uncertainty. I will reference Ghosts and Whispers, where T'Lorel was unable to operate in the Straits of Themis because of an intel disadvantage, and additionally Ixaria, where Ka'Sharren resolved an intelligence uncertainty and won a war. The Morshadd-Gammon-Ixaria triangle is the same distance as Enio-Dorsata-Firefly, too.
Certainty and uncertainty are the pivots around which operations turn, and enemies whose locations are unknown are paralyzing even at odds like 1 in 8. Some commanders may take the risk, but it is in fact a major risk, not an auto-take. And in order to prosecute a raiding strategy, they have to take that risk repeatedly, over and over.
And yes, I do prefer hitting a starbase under construction. We have the intelligence advantage
in scouting a fixed location while they have a disadvantage in trying to count fleets whose locations are unknown. In addition, because they must commit to a single system, we can use time to prepare an assault force. The advantage of uncertainty is on our side in scenario 2, while it is working against us in scenario 3. As to whether they can afford the starbase, every sign we have is that their logistics are pushed to the limit right now.
Your argument was that we were starting from a higher level there, now you switched to arguing that we won't be stuck at the very low existing level forever (though with only a half-team for the Caitians it will feel like it's going to take forever). Which is of course true but not an argument why defending Dorsata and Firefly is supposed to be better. And if a single starbase can cover both Dorsata and Firefly it should also cover (most of) Enio. Yes, the one singular advantage of defending a subsector with a member presence is that you can link up with that member. That doesn't come remotely close to balancing out needing to defend three subsectors instead of just one.
And how do you suggest we defend those sectors without any risk of losing a large chunk of the fleet? Just let them keep raiding us until they win? Split up and virtually guarantee eventual defeat in detail, just without one decisive battle?
The only remotely viable way to defend the Dorsata, Camden and Firefly subsectors from attacks from Enio would be a counterattack to destroy whatever bases they would be using to launch the attacks. Which of course means risking losing a large chunk of the fleet.
So the only choices are to keep them from having bases in Enio by playing whack-a-mole until we end up losing a decisive battle, or to keep them from having bases in Enio by controlling Enio. I very much prefer the second option because it's them who will have to cross the minefields, and the current Cardassian fleet is very badly equipped for doing that.
We have far more teams working on defenses in other sectors than we would in Enio, and we don't need to be everywhere. We use uncertainty to paralyze action, but if they chose to take raiding action anyway, as long as we prove that we can hit
some raiders, the raiding strategy becomes unviable. I reject the false dilemma offered because it's premises are incorrect.
If you say the Cardassian fleet is badly equipped to pass minefields, it's even more badly equipped to pass the Badlands.
