- Location
- Australia
Only if I'm lazy
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?
Is McCoy retiring this year?
pheonix89
Wants to be Seven Of Nine
- Location
- North American Plaguelands
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Lolno.
Miranda-A's aren't even that good at combat any more. All they can do is act as extra hulls in heavy metal and maybe vanguard.
They cost 2/3 as much mats and about as much crew as a Centaur-B ... and 3 Miranda-A's are totally outclassed by 2 Centaur-Bs.
Fallenblades643
Seeker of the Divine Taste
I favor plan C, Its the same average number of hulls added, while maintaining a steady continuous build up of Cruisers. While rapidly adding 4 new hulls to event response.
I just feel that having 4 ships in 2 years is more important at this point in time the 4 hulls in 3 years.
I just feel that having 4 ships in 2 years is more important at this point in time the 4 hulls in 3 years.
The words you're trying to say are 'ablative armor' and 'sacrificial lamb.'
The impression I am under is that the members really will have to tell us what they want to out of a Miranda-B refit - a useful combat hull or a cheap response hull. The two are exclusive, as the estimated refit price of making the Miranda more combat worthy is around half the price of building a new Miranda. Whereas we can make it a slightly better responder for not much cost.
Starfleet itself, baring emergencies, is more likely to sit back and design a new replacement class taking advantage of the newer frames to make a small cheap combat design - but it won't be a Miranda.
Starfleet itself, baring emergencies, is more likely to sit back and design a new replacement class taking advantage of the newer frames to make a small cheap combat design - but it won't be a Miranda.
Empty yards give plenty of room for any repairs, letting you hire out the space for auxiliary builds/other polities, lets you build up a resource stockpile.
It's not wasted, just differently optimized.
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
Plan A is out the window as far as I'm concerned. We have a 10 Freighter/5 Cargo ship shortfall at the moment, not taking at a minimum the "free" 1 Freighter option is negligent. Whilst we do have our auxiliary shipyards the long construction times mean that for them to get u out of our logistics hole by themselves is the work of many decades. I'm not sure that having Starfleet being a brake on member world logistics (due to borrowed assets) for that long is a good thing.
I'd like to see us picking up the 2 free (excepting opportunity cost of berth space) Cargo ships if we can.
I'd like to see us picking up the 2 free (excepting opportunity cost of berth space) Cargo ships if we can.
- Location
- Infraspace
Those are words he's trying not to say.
Can't be done without putting regular construction behind schedule, but I wouldn't worry so much. We have actually been getting lots and lots of construction done in member berths.
Right now in Member berths we have:
6 freighters under construction
1 Super-freighter under construction
6 cargo ships under construction
In our dedicated Lasieth auxiliary yard we have:
3 freighters under construction
1 cargo ship under construction
(note the Ferasa yard opens in six months with 5 new berths)
In regular Starfleet berths we have:
2 cargo ships under construction
1 freighter under construction
1 super-freighter under construction
For a grand total of:
9 cargo ships
10 freighters
2 super-freighters
Frankly that 10 freighter/5 cargo ship shortfall doesn't look too scary! The work of decades my butt; we'll have that made up in about 2.5 years at this rate.
To be fair, 6+ months ago our transport shortfall was terrifying.
I'm still waiting on the logistics update for this year to update the logistics prediction sheet, but back when SYO and MWCO happened we were looking at about a need of 12 more cargo ship builds and 3 more freighter builds over the next ~4 years to catch up. That's over and above the ones under construction and with a single ascension predicted, not the double ascension we got.
So it's manageable, definitely. It's gotten better this year, not worse. But to say that we can relax because we have ships under construction is perhaps downplaying things a bit.
So it's manageable, definitely. It's gotten better this year, not worse. But to say that we can relax because we have ships under construction is perhaps downplaying things a bit.
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
In 2.5 years we'll have more infrastructure, ships, colonies and member worlds to service, so by the time that construction comes out of the slips the logistic goalposts have been moved by the game.
I'm not massively invested in going all logistics all the time, but I think we need to remember that:
- our logistics needs will expand as the Starfleet does.
- our logistics needs will expand as the Federation does.
- the potential to lose ships exists (events and/or GBZ).
- our shipping needs would increase in an emergency (i.e. increased mobilisation level).
So I'd advocate picking up at least a Freighter and a Cargo ship whenever we can.
I don't know how far we will take it, but for members, they only feel comfortable when they have twice the required transport shipping - this gives them a big enough buffer that losing a few hulls to whatever or the increased shipping needs of a war time economy are still manageable.
I mean, look at the shipping losses the Klingons and Romulans have had in their (so far) five year war:
Romulans
Auxiliary Loses : 74
Civilian Ships : 9
Cargo Ships: 39
Freighters : 18
Super-Freighter : 1
Engineering Ships : 6
Prospecting Ships : 1
Klingons
Auxiliary Loses : 76
Civilian Ships : 5
Cargo Ships : 39
Freighters : 19
Super Freighters : 1
Troop Transports : 3
Research Cruiser : 1
Engineering Ships : 6
Prospector Ships : 1
Colony Ships : 1
Take these kind of losses and spread them around our members and see how many are crying poor.
I mean, look at the shipping losses the Klingons and Romulans have had in their (so far) five year war:
Romulans
Auxiliary Loses : 74
Civilian Ships : 9
Cargo Ships: 39
Freighters : 18
Super-Freighter : 1
Engineering Ships : 6
Prospecting Ships : 1
Klingons
Auxiliary Loses : 76
Civilian Ships : 5
Cargo Ships : 39
Freighters : 19
Super Freighters : 1
Troop Transports : 3
Research Cruiser : 1
Engineering Ships : 6
Prospector Ships : 1
Colony Ships : 1
Take these kind of losses and spread them around our members and see how many are crying poor.
Those losses have been remarkably even.
When you add up all the numbers, it is incredibly close to even across the war. Especially since it is being run by Oneiros tossing dice.
The Klingons have lost more combat hulls, but when you add up the C scores they actually come out to be the same, 272. Total crew on the lost vessels is close to even as well.
It truly is a repeat of WW1 in space, with the main fronts hardly moving and attrition rates that see new construction struggling to match.
Now, this will change. The Klingons transport system and crew quality are both having issues in keeping up the build rate, while the Romulans are only holding on the main fronts by throwing cruisers into the pyre - someone is going to crack and we don't know which one will be first.
The Romulans do have quite a capital surplus, but we don't know if they are on the front, in repairs, or being held back by politics.
AKuz
Been Better
- Location
- A Rising Tide of Horrors
- Pronouns
- She/Her
ALWAYS BET ON RIHAN!
> : D
*Patriotically waves Raptor Banner*
(No, I'm not allowed near the Romulan/Klingon war, why do you ask?)
UbeOne
Daydreaming CPU
- Location
- Philippines
- Pronouns
- She/Her
The Federation.
- Location
- Actually pretty lost
Whilst we would never seek to enable a war IC (and I'm confident if we had the oppurtunity to put an end to the appalling loss of life we'd jump on it) from a purely selfish viewpoint this is the ideal outcome - both sides are attempting to absorb the other so as to challenge the Federation, but are instead rapidly grinding each other down. I half suspect that by the time the war ends, the victor will be no better off than if they hadn't gone to war in the first place. I thus expect any year now the War report will be discussing Phyrric victories.
Last edited:
- Location
- Infraspace
Maybe they'll realise that the only way to overcome the Federation is to ally with each other. 
AKuz
Been Better
- Location
- A Rising Tide of Horrors
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Maybe they'll realise that the only way to overcome the Federation is to ally with each other.
Nah, we remember what happened last time we did that.
Speaking of which... *Staples flier for "Quarity D7s, Bearly used" to thread.