Remove ads

To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

Linked contents
To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest) Starfleet Ship Design Bureau, Refit ("To Boldly Go...")
Reader mode
@.@ I don't understand this vote at all...

Thinking of just voting for the one with counter-intel in its name because we keep getting fucked over by lacking that.
 
I know how you feel. I really like this quest but I don't really get the system all that well. Thankfully most votes have either a decisive winner or enough debate that you can get a feel for the relative merits of the two plans under consideration.
 
Simon_Jester said:
Okay, so what is this plan researching that you didn't select to research? If they've dropped something you want to try, it must be in favor of something else.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Compared to my plan it's doing Klingon Research (currently not a priority at all IMO), TOC weapons (won't finish any techs any time soon, so not relevant for an Ambassador project starting in 2310 or anything else we are likely to do within the next decade) and Escort Science (the current crew requirements make a custom science ship a very unattractive choice until we have researched some crew saving techs, we would be better off with an Oberth refit). So the only mid term relevant thing actually lost is sightly less competent Cardassian research (that won't make a difference for counter intel). The long term things we can just research later anyway so there isn't really anything lost there either, they aren't something we need to rush.

The advantages of my plan are much faster Lone Ranger doctrine research and preparation for starting the Ambassador project soon.
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure @OneirosTheWriter is going to adjust crew reqs for things like science ships, we AREN'T going to be starting the Ambassador 2010, or probably even 2015, so weapon research becomes relevant, and the Klingon thing was just temporary. I'm sure some adjustments will be made based off feedback
 
tryrar said:
I'm pretty sure @OneirosTheWriter AREN'T going to be starting the Ambassador 2010, or probably even 2015
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Of course we aren't starting it 3 centuries ago, but so far no one has actually made a good argument why we shouldn't start it in 2310. With the warp core test sheet we can design a 100% reliable Ambassador with 280 br and 150 sr cost and only tier 4 design techs.

My plan is better for a later Ambassador design too, because it gives us a better chance of finishing T2 Explorer techs first, Starship contruction and weapons would probably be T1 by then in either case. It keeps either an early or a late Ambassador open as options.
 
Last edited:
The Research Voting phase in Summary

There are different types of research, like Computing, or Sensors.

Each of those has different Nodes, for want of a better term. Basically every frame in the Accordion is a node you can research. Expand the frame to see what goodies are on each node.

Research is selected as one Tech Team to one Tech Node.

Higher skilled tech teams make faster progress.
Teams have different Types they like to research.
Teams working within the Type like like to research make faster progress.

Complete nodes to get goodies.
 
Last edited:
Been messing about with a University of Betazed logo
 
Answering in the general thread because this is very relevant to the current vote.
lbmaian said:
Because I don't see the need for an Ambassador so early
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

  • We had a bad need for the Ambassador ever since at least 2302, we know the Romulans already had their Ambassador equivalent in service then.
  • A replacement for the Excelsior class was already one of the options for our ambition in 2301, along with one for the Constellation, so it's likely considered outdated as well. If we don't start the ambassador project within a few years that might earn us council disapproval like they started voicing disapproval about still using the Constellation this year.
  • Most importantly, getting the Ambassador earlier means using it for 5YM earlier. We know events roll stat tests with 2d6. Across the range where both success and failure is possible increasing the tested stat by 1 means increasing the chance of success by an average of 37%. If you look at the increasing successes of our Explorers with their growing stats and the relatively hard time the Miracht with its less experienced crew has we can somewhat reasonably assume that more or less translates to 37% more rewards, maybe a bit less because auto successes could be a thing and this is using dodgy statistics (I'll take another stab at this later). Even 20% better rewards a year early would be absurdly valuable. Another way to look at it is that it's the equivalent of having Nash ka'Sharren as Captain for free, except even better and in addition to the normal Captain bonus.
  • A stock Excelsior has a 40% chance to win against a Lorgot-type Cardassian Battlecruiser, a stock Ambassador has a 85% chance to win.
Even just a single of these points would be enough to prove that we do need the Ambassador, together they mean we desperately need it, there isn't any single other thing we need so much as 10% as badly as the Ambassador, now that we have started the Renaissance project.
at least not to the point where we need to have a very long ship design project.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You mean you never? The majority of the time is spent on the prototype in any case.
If we need a bunch of fudge/reliability tiers for a 2310 design (sounds like we need 4+), that's an opportunity cost. I'd rather avoid a lot of years of fudge/reliability until we get more research teams, where the relative opportunity cost of the extra ship design time is lessened.

So I have a preference for focusing on more general ship design/construction techs that help all ship types, and when we do identify a critical need for a new class of a ship type, we'll shift gears towards the specific ship design for that ship type.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This sounds like you expect the ratio in effect between a tech team year spent on a specific ship project and a general project to be low, maybe something like 2:1. I'd estimate it as well over 10:1, in some cases over 50:1. Given how relatively rare new classes are going for general techs as replacement for design techs (rather than in addition) makes little sense.
I'm also leery of relying on the current ship design spreadsheets, especially the warp core test spreadsheet, since I believe there are bugs and oversights in it, as I've pointed out before, that could change the picture again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If those make the Ambassador non-viable we should just ask for the canonical Ambassador, like we did with the Renaissance.
 
Last edited:
UbeOne said:
...Except the canonical Ambassador won't fit our 3mt berths.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That would be one of the things that need to be fixed to make it work with the canonical date, the next berth size is 2330s tech so it couldn't have been needed for a ship that would have entered service in 2325, meaning prototype construction started in 2319.
 
[X] Base Plan Renaissance and Counter Intel

Because I want Kuznetsova's team on Cardassian Analysis for a couple of story ides that are in my head > : V

(That and I think we should have Cardassian counter-intel sooner rather than later)
 
AKuz said:
(That and I think we should have Cardassian counter-intel sooner rather than later)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We'll get it at exactly the same time with either team, that's the only reason why I was even willing to consider switching teams. It's the other techs in Cardassian Research techs that could be delayed, though with inspirations and interaction bonuses it's pretty likely they aren't either.

Why would the stories need to happen between now and 2309.Q2 (when they'd be switched out in any case), as opposed to somewhere between 2307.Q3 and 2308.Q2 when they were already working on Cardassian Analysis?
 
Last edited:
OneirosTheWriter said:
Because there's now a wide world of choices out there and you don't all have to pick the same techs in your plans *shakes fist*
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well, I want to know his reasoning to see if I missed something.

On a related note, once you're done with the research tree, can you please post an image/SVG (or better, a DOT file) of the tech tree in the research megapost, so we can get a holistic view of the tree?

Nix said:
Even just a single of these points would be enough to prove that we do need the Ambassador, together they mean we desperately need it, there isn't any single other thing we need so much as 10% as badly as the Ambassador, now that we have started the Renaissance project.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I agree that a stock Excelsior is inferior to the Lorgot, and improved events are always helpful. But I'm willing to gamble on two things:
a) The Lorgot is not as common as our Excelsiors and that majority of our FYM Excelsiors will have decent chance of beating a Lorgot
b) I'm expecting an Excelsior refit to come within a couple years that will beat the Lorgot (and improve event rolls), and that we can refit the existing Excelsiors way before any Ambassador finishes

That's why I don't think the Ambassador is as critical as you're making it. At least not "must start in 2310" critical. I'm willing to delay it at least a year.

Nix said:
This sounds like you expect the ratio in effect between a tech team year spent on a specific ship project and a general project to be low, maybe something like 2:1. I'd estimate it as well over 10:1, in some cases over 50:1.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is something I need actual examples for. It's hard to extrapolate say 5 years in the future and see what the differences from accumulated ship design research makes for a particular goal class, especially if you're trying different research prioritizations. How many fudge tiers are trimmed off, or alternatively what stats could be incremented. I tried with the Excelsior and Constellation a while back, extrapolating to 2311 and I was already uncomfortable with the assumptions I was making (they're in the SDB thread).

Nix said:
Given how relatively rare new classes are going for general techs as replacement for design techs (rather than in addition) makes little sense.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I don't want to just focus on general ship design tech - I do want explorer ship design tech too. It's just that if I'm forced to choose between the two, I judge the relative utility (especially considering research times) of the tier 1 general ship design tech to be comparable to the tier 2 specific ship type design tech for that specific ship type, and overall greater utility in terms of all ship types (escort, cruiser, explorer).

Now in this particular case, the tier 1 explorer techs are 1 turn away from completion, so yeah, it's really tempting to go for that.

We're also really behind on weapon tech, so even if we will get minimal benefit with initial research, it's tempting to try to shore that up.

It's also tempting to try to align all our ship design techs to come in waves, so that tiers across various research categories complete together, but with the small randomness and the chaos of switching and new teams, we probably won't have that luxury often.

(Again, a research planning spreadsheet would be really nice...)

Nix said:
If those make the Ambassador non-viable we should just ask for the canonical Ambassador, like we did with the Renaissance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Eh, I'm not sure that's going to fly. If the ship design spreadsheet simply isn't ready yet and we're clamoring for a workable Ambassador design, the Oneiros could just as easily pause the quest a bit until the spreadsheet is ready as giving us a prepackaged design ala the Renaissance. And if we do get such a prepackaged design, the 3.1mt may be non-negotiable.


I'm going to vote for Nix's plan for now over Briefvoice's plan, but mostly because of the low hanging fruit it's completing, rather than the "Ambassador is critically needed" justification.

I'm avoiding the Void Stalker's plan, because I'd rather punt the offensive doctrine choice right now, and the Cardassian counter-intel has 25% chance of completing this turn regardless of the team, and we can change our mind next year to prioritize full tier completion if needed.

[X] Plan Lone Ranger, Counter Intel and Ambassador Prep
 
Last edited:
Nix said:
We'll get it at exactly the same time with either team, that's the only reason why I was even willing to consider switching teams. It's the other techs in Cardassian Research techs that could be delayed, though with inspirations and interaction bonuses it's pretty likely they aren't either.

Why would the stories need to happen between now and 2308.Q2 (when they'd be switched out in any case), as opposed to somewhere between 2307.Q3 and 2308.Q2 when they were already working on Cardassian Analysis?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Sorry, it was a tongue in cheek joke.
 
lbmaian said:
On a related note, once you're done with the research tree, can you please post an image/SVG (or better, a DOT file) of the tech tree in the research megapost, so we can get a holistic view of the tree?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
One was already posted on the SDB thread.

However, I have attached an updated SVG to this post.
 

Attachments

  • Tech Tree 2.svg
    Tech Tree 2.svg
    183.4 KB · Views: 34
OneirosTheWriter said:
One was already posted on the SDB thread.

However, I have attached an updated SVG to this post.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Oh I thought that was unfinished, since you asked for feedback on missing techs, and we pointed out some stuff (transporters/holodocks/tractor-beams, bland minerals, whatever else was mentioned).

At least, having this as an SVG is a large improvement.

edit: also, please post this (or whatever finalized version) to the research megapost so it's easy to find.
 
Last edited:
lbmaian said:
I agree that a stock Excelsior is inferior to the Lorgot, and improved events are always helpful. But I'm willing to gamble on two things:
a) The Lorgot is not as common as our Excelsiors and that majority of our FYM Excelsiors will have decent chance of beating a Lorgot
b) I'm expecting an Excelsior refit to come within a couple years that will beat the Lorgot (and improve event rolls), and that we can refit the existing Excelsiors way before any Ambassador finishes
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If an Excelsior refit becomes available we'd of course get it as well, but I don't expect a refit to measure up to an Ambassador. We'd probably get something like +1S +1L +1P, which would halve the disadvantage in events and bring it up to 50% chance against a Lorgot (or some other mix of similar value). It wouldn't change the need for the Ambassador much. Also we've had the option to ask for the Ambassador project for a long time now, we don't know when a refit will be available for the Excelsior, the method that seems to have been used for the other refits (reconstruct at current techs without design savings and see what fits in without changing scale or power) would suggest that we currently can't do a worthwhile refit. The fastest way to change that would be researching more or less the same techs I'm suggesting.
That's why I don't think the Ambassador is as critical as you're making it. At least not "must start in 2310" critical. I'm willing to delay it at least a year.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I didn't put 2310 as the latest possible date but as the earliest, my picks are also better for a 2311 or 2312 start and equivalent for a later start.
This is something I need actual examples for. It's hard to extrapolate say 5 years in the future and see what the differences from accumulated ship design research makes for a particular goal class, especially if you're trying different research prioritizations. How many fudge tiers are trimmed off, or alternatively what stats could be incremented. I tried with the Excelsior and Constellation a while back, extrapolating to 2311 and I was already uncomfortable with the assumptions I was making (they're in the SDB thread).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
10 points(1 level) of design savings can buy us -5% sr cost, -5% x2 frame weight (about as good as -3% x2 to all stat weights), +2.5% warp power, -5% power savings to all stats, -6% shield power use and some other stuff.

Let's compare that to a really good project, 2310s Shipboard Computing:
22 / 30 Targeting Computer II (2% weapon weight reduction)
22 / 30 Revised Type-IV Duotronic Core (Ship Main Computer Core II) (1% Science weight/power savings)
27 / 30 Majel 3.1 (Ship Operating System II) (1% warp core power improvement)

It takes 3 times as long, each of the improvements is a lot weaker than one level of design tech and there are a lot fewer of them. A ratio of 10:1 is probably very generous, even when you account for us not always using all design techs at the same level for reliability reasons. And this is one of the very best general techs, not a marginal one that might actually be dropped/delayed.

I don't want to just focus on general ship design tech - I do want explorer ship design tech too. It's just that if I'm forced to choose between the two, I judge the relative utility (especially considering research times) of the tier 1 general ship design tech to be comparable to the tier 2 specific ship type design tech for that specific ship type, and overall greater utility in terms of all ship types (escort, cruiser, explorer).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You seem to have misunderstood me, general explorer techs would be general techs in the terms I was using, not a design tech for a specific ship (= "fudge factor").

Eh, I'm not sure that's going to fly. If the ship design spreadsheet simply isn't ready yet and we're clamoring for a workable Ambassador design, the Oneiros could just as easily pause the quest a bit until the spreadsheet is ready as giving us a prepackaged design ala the Renaissance. And if we do get such a prepackaged design, the 3.1mt may be non-negotiable.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The spread sheet was originally only intended for custom designs. Given that the Ambassador has been an option for several years the fact that we in quest canon have the technology necessary to build the Ambassador assuming a dedicated research project of reasonable length will take precedence over softer facts like what exactly fits into what berth (the Constitution already demonstrates some leeway there), the exact tonnage of the Ambassador, and what tech exactly is needed for what berth size. It definitely won't be retconned as having been impossible all along.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top