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?
Little idea for using Constellations
What is their strong side? D from nacelles and S from scientific equipment, right?
What if we go to a member fleet that has outdated vessels in 750kt range and say "Guys, change your mid term priority and develop a refit of your ship that will use salvaged Constellation parts"? I mean take a 750ktish ship, convert it to a 4-nacelle configuration, move sensors\labs etc. Then add modern level weapons and shields and we get a nice way to refit while saving BR and SR for the cost of retiring crew hungry and fragile cruiser.
What is their strong side? D from nacelles and S from scientific equipment, right?
What if we go to a member fleet that has outdated vessels in 750kt range and say "Guys, change your mid term priority and develop a refit of your ship that will use salvaged Constellation parts"? I mean take a 750ktish ship, convert it to a 4-nacelle configuration, move sensors\labs etc. Then add modern level weapons and shields and we get a nice way to refit while saving BR and SR for the cost of retiring crew hungry and fragile cruiser.
- Location
- Austin, TX
Huh. Weird, given the whole 'really, we want you to take them' chat from the ISC from a while ago. *shrug*
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
This may explain why three of the species most eager to snap up the retired Connies are the ones most specifically likely to plan for war:
1) The Apiata, on the front lines of a future war with Cardassia...
2) The Ked Peddah, on the front lines of a prospective war with the Harmony AND directly in the line of fire if the Breen start harassing the Federation...
3) And the Amarki, who will cheerfully push and shove to get to the front lines of a future war with whoever.
On the other hand, if so, then it's kind of painfully ironic that we're retiring the 'for war' Connies at the exact same time that tensions with Cardassia tick upwards; general war with Cardassia is almost certainly MORE likely to occur in the 'post-Chrystovia' era of 2324-2333 than it was to occur in the 'post-Celos' era of 2313-2322. Of course, the post-Celos era contained the certainty of limited warfare in the Gabriel Expanse, complicating the calculation.
Many though not all of the other Constitutions we're pawning off to member worlds may be "for sale" in the sense that an interested minor power could still procure, for example, the Amarki Connies if they wanted to convert them for some other purpose. You're right that most of the ships won't be, as I implied, doing nothing... but if someone looks at an Apiata light tender rebuild of the Constitution-B in 2330 and says "gee, I want something like that," they may well be able to arrange either to procure a Connie for the purpose, or to new-build one of their own.
One thing we see with the Connies is that once it starts making sense to retire Green ships to free up crew for other ships, the Blooded versions of the same ship are likely to follow shortly. The performance gap caused by a +1 to all non-Defense stats just isn't that good.
One of the advantages of a parasite tender is that the statline matters less, as long as the tenders have enough speed to disengage from a threatening enemy force.
I would too, but it's pretty far at odds with the Starfleet modus operand we see at least going as far back as TOS- "one crisis, one ship." Mutually dependent ship squadrons aren't really in line with our doctrinal choices.
Also, existing tender designs are crew-heavy, which is a practical problem for us.
Notably, all of T'Mir's successes revolved around being small, slow, quiet, and high-Science. Blazingly fast skirmisher designs aren't a fitting successor; an explorer commemorating her achievements might be but wouldn't be a replacement.
Remember that T'Mir started the quest as a humble C1S5H1L2P1D1 science vessel and only began rising to memetic badass status after a prolonged stint spying on the Cardassians and, well, passing Science tests.
A Kepler can pass any Science test T'Mir can. Unless there are hidden mechanics for ship size influencing stealth and so on, a Kepler is perfectly capable of doing what a crack crew aboard a highly customized Oberth like T'Mir can accomplish. I would not be so quick to denigrate the class.
Night
Widow Null
- Location
- Hoff
You begin too late! T'Mir was present for all three battles in the Kadesh system, and shared honors with Challorn for having fought the T'Seren over Huckleberry VIII, which in turn provided important data during the Battle of Solitude.
There's even an omake about it, where we first met Samyr Kanil.
Last edited:
- Location
- Aotearoa
The Comet is a blazingly fast skirmisher. The Kepler is a fine garrison frigate. Designs like the Outrider/Project Spectral are Covert Ops Science Ninjas. Think Normandy SR2. Having high-D is at least in part so they're also useful in Skirmish while they minesweep.
However, one of T'Mirs' distinctions was the extremely lengthy border mission, after which it required a year refit. It was probably pretty hard on the crew. D also represents endurance, not just ship speed- so you might see in the design lessons Starfleet learned about the benefits its Special Ops/Intelligence ships being able to conduct extended, unsupported missions solo.
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- He/Him
True, what with Lone Ranger doctrine and all, but Starfleet has been increasingly interested in multiple-ship taskforces; I have to wonder if we're going to run the numbers and decide we should switch to Swarm doctrine in the future. Of course, as you then point out:
I have to agree with you; this is the biggest stumbling block for any efforts by Starfleet to adopt tender designs.
Even if I do think it would be kind of cool to send a 5-6 megaton behemoth on a Five Year Mission with a passel of parasite craft.
pheonix89
Wants to be Seven Of Nine
- Location
- North American Plaguelands
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Not swarm, combined arms.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
That depends on what bonuses we favor; I vaguely recall discussion earlier in the thread about the subject. Combined Arms, as I understand it, has a focus on benefiting the ship design process rather than combat or event resolution.
Forgothrax
Not Going Gently
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Combined Fleet sucks almost as bad as LR. Better than Lone Ranger for combat at least but you might as well go for Swarm for that.
- Location
- Outside the Box
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Incorrect. I keep seeing people underestimate the benefits of our improving ship stats, so lemme put up this neat-looking chart:
Ok! This one actually shows the dice you could roll instead of just the probability percentages, so that's very nice. Anyways, event challenges are 2d6+bonus, which, as most everyone here probably knows, means you roll two six-sided dice and then add the numbers together. Now, most event tests are Science or Presence tests. A Green Constellation-A has S4 and P3, while a Blooded one has S5 and P4.
Let's say the USS Example has to face a very difficult Presence test and needs 12 or higher to succeed. If Example is a Green ship, then is adds its Presence score of 3 to the 2d6 roll. That means it must roll a 9 or higher in order to succeed; anything lower will be a failure. The probability of rolling a nine, ten, eleven, or twelve is as simple as adding up the percentages in the chart: 11% + 8% + 5% + 3% = 27%, so a 27% chance to succeed. (Or more accurately, 27.78%.) That's really bad! Our Captain is not very likely to seduce the spy and prevent civil war! But what if the Example was a more experienced ship and had earned Blooded status? With a Presence score of 4, instead of needing to roll 9 or higher, we need to roll 8 or higher. That improves the chance of success from about 27.78% to 41.67%. That not-so-good looking +1 looks much better as as 13.89% increase in the chance of success.
An example on the other end of the spectrum: The USS Example has to search a very boring spacerock to find someone's misplaced (plastic) pink flamingo. It is an easy science mission that needs only 8 or higher to succeed. With a Science score of 4, the only way they can fail is to roll a 2 or a 3. A mere 8.34% chance of our Starfleet officers and their fine ship having a transporter accident that reactivates the flamingo's hidden murder circuits. If the ship were Blooded and instead has S5, then the chance of failure shrinks to a mere 2.78%. (Chance of success goes instead from 91.66% to 97.22%).
There's another way of looking at things: For two six-sided dice, there are 36 total combinations possible. (1/36 is around 2.78%.) There's only one dice combination that equals 2, but there are two combinations that equal 3, and three rolls that can equal 4, all the way up the the six possible combinations that will add up to 7. If you are playing any game where you need to roll 8 or higher, then there are 15 dice combinations that you need to aim for (out of 36.) Now if you have an ability that gives you a +1 bonus, you can add 6 more dice combinations to the pile. (15/36=41.67% and 21/36=58.33%) The closer a roll is to needing a seven, the bigger the difference a +1 makes. And a +2 bonus is even bigger.
P.S. I think I might enjoy explaining things. Even if they might be things everyone already understands. I might be harboring a secret bad habit here...
- Location
- Aotearoa
A few factors are coming together for me-
-Some mechanics experts express dissatisfation with the bonuses of the Lone Ranger doctrine, apparently it's mechanically sub-par.
-Explorer Corps difficulties are suspected to have increased, perhaps especially in the L60+ Padani Danger Zone.
-We're just sending off our first long-range long-term unsupported Task Force of Explorer ships, under the EC umbrella, rules and MO.
...
Multi-Ship Explorer Corps Five (Seven? Ten?) Year Mission 'Task Forces' when?
With ships in the grouping able to provide mutual support bonuses to EC checks, like the garrison mutual support mechanic, while also encountering their own Events.
Maybe that's a use for the Heavy Explorer/Light Explorer dichotomy? Either an EC TF is lead by a Heavy Explorer with a few attendant Light Explorers, or consists of a small 'swarm' of Light Explorers.
[Padani approval]
-Some mechanics experts express dissatisfation with the bonuses of the Lone Ranger doctrine, apparently it's mechanically sub-par.
-Explorer Corps difficulties are suspected to have increased, perhaps especially in the L60+ Padani Danger Zone.
-We're just sending off our first long-range long-term unsupported Task Force of Explorer ships, under the EC umbrella, rules and MO.
...
Multi-Ship Explorer Corps Five (Seven? Ten?) Year Mission 'Task Forces' when?
With ships in the grouping able to provide mutual support bonuses to EC checks, like the garrison mutual support mechanic, while also encountering their own Events.
Maybe that's a use for the Heavy Explorer/Light Explorer dichotomy? Either an EC TF is lead by a Heavy Explorer with a few attendant Light Explorers, or consists of a small 'swarm' of Light Explorers.
[Padani approval]
Last edited:
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
Adele Chatsworth:
"Not inaccurate."
[My headcanon is that T'Mir didn't spend literally the entire time deep within Cardassian space, if only because it would be unsafe for them to send complex messages and SIGINT from such places, but the ship never did more than briefly rendezvous with a supply ship in or near the Federation border during the entire time. This is in line with how explorers on their five-year missions usually DO at least briefly rendezvous with supply stations and take on new personnel during a five-year mission, they just don't spend weeks in drydock getting service done.
See, the thing is, our cruisers pass the supermajority of their event checks, especially when you don't count "missed the Defense check to respond to the event at all" as a failure since Blooded ships don't get a boost to their Defense rolls.Incorrect. I keep seeing people underestimate the benefits of our improving ship stats, so lemme put up this neat-looking chart:
Ok! This one actually shows the dice you could roll instead of just the probability percentages, so that's very nice. Anyways, event challenges are 2d6+bonus, which, as most everyone here probably knows, means you roll two six-sided dice and then add the numbers together. Now, most event tests are Science or Presence tests. A Green Constellation-A has S4 and P3, while a Blooded one has S5 and P4.
Let's say the USS Example has to face a very difficult Presence test and needs 12 or higher to succeed. If Example is a Green ship, then is adds its Presence score of 3 to the 2d6 roll. That means it must roll a 9 or higher in order to succeed; anything lower will be a failure. The probability of rolling a nine, ten, eleven, or twelve is as simple as adding up the percentages in the chart: 11% + 8% + 5% + 3% = 27%, so a 27% chance to succeed. (Or more accurately, 27.78%.) That's really bad! Our Captain is not very likely to seduce the spy and prevent civil war! But what if the Example was a more experienced ship and had earned Blooded status? With a Presence score of 4, instead of needing to roll 9 or higher, we need to roll 8 or higher. That improves the chance of success from about 27.78% to 41.67%. That not-so-good looking +1 looks much better as as 13.89% increase in the chance of success.
An example on the other end of the spectrum: The USS Example has to search a very boring spacerock to find someone's misplaced (plastic) pink flamingo. It is an easy science mission that needs only 8 or higher to succeed. With a Science score of 4, the only way they can fail is to roll a 2 or a 3. A mere 8.34% chance of our Starfleet officers and their fine ship having a transporter accident that reactivates the flamingo's hidden murder circuits. If the ship were Blooded and instead has S5, then the chance of failure shrinks to a mere 2.78%. (Chance of success goes instead from 91.66% to 97.22%).
There's another way of looking at things: For two six-sided dice, there are 36 total combinations possible. (1/36 is around 2.78%.) There's only one dice combination that equals 2, but there are two combinations that equal 3, and three rolls that can equal 4, all the way up the the six possible combinations that will add up to 7. If you are playing any game where you need to roll 8 or higher, then there are 15 dice combinations that you need to aim for (out of 36.) Now if you have an ability that gives you a +1 bonus, you can add 6 more dice combinations to the pile. (15/36=41.67% and 21/36=58.33%) The closer a roll is to needing a seven, the bigger the difference a +1 makes. And a +2 bonus is even bigger.
P.S. I think I might enjoy explaining things. Even if they might be things everyone already understands. I might be harboring a secret bad habit here...
We don't really know what's going on under the hood of the event engine, but it's pretty clear to me that either the DCs the ships are passing tend to be pretty low, or it takes multiple failed rolls to blow an event check. While you're totally right about your statistical analysis as such, the reality is that our ships are pretty close to the "beam up the flamingo" end of the scale on most of their missions, which means that the +1 bonuses are mostly doing things like reducing the probability of failure from 10% to 5% or something. That's GOOD, possibly even great- I bet that Nash's +1 to all stats during her five-year missions aboard the Enterprise had a lot to do with why Enterprise basically never failed a mission and never lost any crew points to a failure. Whereas even Veteran ships like Courageous and [i}Sarek[/i] were suffering losses to the tune of a unit of crew every few years, and Green Explorer Corps ships like S'harien, well, oh Q no.
The thing is, in statistical terms this is good, but the question is, is it good enough to justify keeping around a ship that can be profitably replaced by another ship. Like, is it worth statistically increasing the risk of losing a unit of crew to 5% per year instead of 2.5% per year, if the price of doing business is keeping three whole crew units locked down aboard the ship on a semi-permanent basis? Because that's what we're looking at when (for example) comparing a Constellation-A to a Centaur-B. That's the kind of calculation we're making. And such calculations are at best non-trivial.
+1 to all stats is great, but it's not necessarily so great that it justifies (for instance) keeping two ships in service with crew that could otherwise be spread out among three ships.
- Location
- Australia
You know, with the mothballed ships, we're going to have to figure out where to put the Captain that was going to the Lexington...
Forgothrax
Not Going Gently
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I will note that @Alliterate has done a +1SP +2D refit with 2/2/2 crewing for 25/25 for Consties in 2328. That's not overly expensive for at least the Blooded ones and is close enough to CBs (+1O) to not be overly onerous. The Blooded ones will compare decently to the Kepler for lower crew costs (+1CD -1SL, 2/2/2 vs 2/3/4).
Last edited:
- Location
- Aotearoa
While we're all obviously speculating to some extent, IIRC some of the mechanics-analysis types have expressed the opinion that there may be 'degrees of success' on (some?) event checks: the simple pass, with (progressively?) better bonuses if you beat the minimum score by certain thresholds.
At which higher-stat ships would again have an advantage.
Thanks for the shout-out, but really @sunrise did all the hard work of crew reduction and deserves any credit going.
All I changed was to take their refit, and not do the expensive update of the nacelles and instead update the fuel tanks, for a net +2D instead of +3D.
Edit- they're also still a Cruiser, so re. the Kepler comparison, have the doctrine +1 Cruiser bonus to event response D-checks.
Last edited:
We federalized a lot of ships so the captain can move to one of those as we do not know what ship had the captains come along with the federation process.
Well of course. Without those unique quad-nacelles, who wants a Constellation?
Do not worry Yoyodyne has promised that a the improved quad-nacelles will be ready if ordered by starfleet for the Constellation-B
Using the data in the Deployments update and factoring in the winning votes from MWCD I've updated my Diplomance sheet. Key Notes:
Membership:
The Laio are pretty assured to reach Membership level at the coming Snakepit. They are just 4pts away and the annual Affiliates roll will easily cover that.
Alliance:
With a Snakepit roll (~+20) and Diplomatic Push (~+120) there are two races within plausible reach of Ally status:
With just a Diplomatic Push (~+30) there is only one race pleasurably within reach of Affiliate status:
Membership:
The Laio are pretty assured to reach Membership level at the coming Snakepit. They are just 4pts away and the annual Affiliates roll will easily cover that.
Alliance:
With a Snakepit roll (~+20) and Diplomatic Push (~+120) there are two races within plausible reach of Ally status:
- Ashidi - 51pts
- OSA - 94pts
Shanpur - 124pts
With just a Diplomatic Push (~+30) there is only one race pleasurably within reach of Affiliate status:
- Dreamers - 15pts
- Licori - 49pts
Last edited:
We have a TF working on the Ashidi:
Task Force: Reassure
Mission: Resolve the "Cardassian Threat" tag on the Ashidi, reassure them of the Federation's commitment to their defense, Ally them, and fight any incursions by the Obsidian Order.
Mission #2: If TF completes before last quarter 2324, move on to new mission. New mission is to Resolve [Cosmozoan Lifeform: 85/100] and Resolve [Alien modes of Communication and Thought: 0/300] tag on Dreamer Collective.
Commander: Huth fop Makpol - Reroll first two failed Diplomacy rolls each year, at -1 to the reroll.
And the Shanpur got a ISC Alliance: 0/300 tag this year so its 424 to alliance for them.
Argh. I specifically remembered to check for that one yet somehow missed it. Fixed.
I think we should do the following diplopushes this year:
Dreamers: Get them affiliated and i like to see a dreamer at the academy
OSA: Will get +16 from the ship transfer, so after 74 points on the general reputation will start working on their Horizon Influence tag.
Gorn: We are fighting the Cardassians for influence here and should support this.
Allupii: if allowed, we want to get a secure base for the fleet we send over there
Trill: Getting the Trill as allies will provide a base close to the Gorn and ruby eyes folly to support our work in that region of space.
Dreamers: Get them affiliated and i like to see a dreamer at the academy
OSA: Will get +16 from the ship transfer, so after 74 points on the general reputation will start working on their Horizon Influence tag.
Gorn: We are fighting the Cardassians for influence here and should support this.
Allupii: if allowed, we want to get a secure base for the fleet we send over there
Trill: Getting the Trill as allies will provide a base close to the Gorn and ruby eyes folly to support our work in that region of space.
- Location
- alphen aan den rijn
as fun as dreamers are they are no priority to me
somehow getting the licori back on speaking terms is however an interesting thing!
the other 2 are nice and help ofcourse
so lets see:
gorn
licori
ashiadi
bolians
iccti-ka
would me my picks for slow diplomatic drip reasons
somehow getting the licori back on speaking terms is however an interesting thing!
the other 2 are nice and help ofcourse
so lets see:
gorn
licori
ashiadi
bolians
iccti-ka
would me my picks for slow diplomatic drip reasons