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
pheonix89 said:
@Briefvoice
@Void Stalker
Two points gained on one subtech aren't going to get anything done any faster. However, finishing [T2] 2310s Shipboard Computing one turn faster means starting on the crew reducer in [T3] Automated Ship Systems one turn faster. Or jumping over to [T3] 2320s Research Centers one turn faster.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's two points to the limiting tech in the next project (costs 40 compared to 20 for the other tech), and 2+4+8+8+8+5+5 = 40, so there is a 50% chance (probability of getting inspiration exactly one time during the first two years, will get it a second time automatically in the third year) of finishing that project a year early due to those 2 points. Which means 1pp per colony a year early, a quite substantial benefit (probably something like 15 pp by then).
 
Last edited:
Nix said:
It's two points to the limiting tech in the next project (costs 40 compared to 20 for the other tech), and 2+4+8+8+8+5+5 = 40, so there is a 50% chance (probability of getting inspiration exactly one time during the first two years, will get it a second time automatically in the third year) of finishing that project a year early due to those 2 points. Which means 1pp per colony a year early, a quite substantial benefit (probably something like 15 pp by then).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I stand corrected. I hadn't run the numbers in quite that much detail.
 
Iron Wolf said:
You know @Nix, if you just swapped around the teams doing these two tasks:

-[] Starfleet Tactical Command - Games & Theory Division: Cardassian Research
-[] Lt-Cdr Kuznetsova's Tiger Team: Lone Ranger Way of the Elephant

...I'd switch my vote.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Looking at the numbers, it would make sense to make the swap. To hit 25 for Way of the Elephant, at least two of the three years need to be 9s.
 
HearthBorn said:
Looking at the numbers, it would make sense to make the swap. To hit 25 for Way of the Elephant, at least two of the three years need to be 9s.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Not sure what you mean. We get nine points without inspiration bonus kicking in when the Tiger Team does doctrine work. +3 Doctrine/Analysis from Heidi Eriksson.

Edit: That otherwise very useful table you made forgot about Rinias ch'Vohlet (Andorian, 66, all techs under the Ship Design or Ship Construction areas gain +2 research)
 
Last edited:
pheonix89 said:
Not sure what you mean. We get nine points without inspiration bonus kicking in when the Tiger Team does doctrine work. +3 Doctrine/Analysis from Heidi Eriksson.

Edit: That otherwise very useful table you made forgot about Rinias ch'Vohlet (Andorian, 66, all techs under the Ship Design or Ship Construction areas gain +2 research)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Thanks! I'll try to find time to double check the numbers and bonuses, and update it.
 
Iron Wolf said:
You know @Nix, if you just swapped around the teams doing these two tasks:



...I'd switch my vote.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
And lose @Briefvoice's vote and probably others? For making a change that makes the plan very likely strictly inferior? No, thanks. Even if I didn't disagree with it making a change at such a late stage involving something many people probably specifically choose to vote for isn't something I'd do in anything but extreme circumstances.
 
Last edited:
fasquardon said:
Right, the Rennie is the long-term solution.

But we still have a Cardassian situation now, and the Council may well have been worrying about what would happen if there were serious clashes before the ConnieB is ready in numbers.

fasquardon
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
well, I WANTED to do the ConnieB earlier, but I was outvoted. and now, not only are we getting them later, we're not gonna be keeping them...

thanks lots guys...
 
We were never going to keep them. From the start they were only going to be around until we started rolling out the much better Renaissance in enough numbers to replace them.

It's not our fault you thought otherwise.
 
Nix said:
And lose @Briefvoice's vote and probably others? For making a change that makes the plan very likely strictly inferior? No, thanks. Even if I didn't disagree with it making a change at such a late stage involving something many people probably specifically choose to vote for isn't something I'd do in anything but extreme circumstances.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I suspect you are overestimating how much of people's vote for your plan is predicated on Tiger Team covering Way of the Elephant instead of Games and Theory.
 
I'm thinking about doing another xenology omake about the Gaeni. I'm trying to search back through the thread to figure out if we already knew about them at the start of the quest, or if we made first contact since then. Anyone remember?
 
Leila Hann said:
I'm thinking about doing another xenology omake about the Gaeni. I'm trying to search back through the thread to figure out if we already knew about them at the start of the quest, or if we made first contact since then. Anyone remember?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Enterprise made first contact with them, I think in 2303.Q2. Might have been Q3.
 
The only ship class currently active we'll probably be keeping in play near indefinitely is Excelsiors, actually. Everything that can compete with it statwise is way up the tree, and all of them but the Intrepid have some catch (cost, crew, size) that makes Excelsiors still situational competitive as builds.

But retiring the class? Not happening.
 
pheonix89 said:
The only ship class currently active we'll probably be keeping in play near indefinitely is Excelsiors, actually. Everything that can compete with it statwise is way up the tree, and all of them but the Intrepid have some catch (cost, crew, size) that makes Excelsiors still situational competitive as builds.

But retiring the class? Not happening.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Personally I'd like to slowly replace them with Ambassadors, but I have no problem keeping them around if the voters feel otherwise.
 
Wair, we want to scrap/mothball the Connie-B while we still have 7 Constellations? Why?

OK, the Constitution uses a bit more crew, but it is a highly superior ship, even compared to a refit Constellation.
 
So are you curious what our total fleet Combat and Total Fleet Science would like like for "Build Plan Eight Connie-Bs"? I have completed a worksheet that tracks that. First, here is the build plan.

Now what are the fleet totals for number of ships, combat, defense, and science? (Note; for these purposes a ship out of service for a refit is consider "gone" and not contributing to any total.)

 
MS-21H 'Hawke' said:
well, I WANTED to do the ConnieB earlier, but I was outvoted. and now, not only are we getting them later, we're not gonna be keeping them...

thanks lots guys...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We ordered them only 1 year after the first year they were available, so at most we could have had them one year sooner.

Iron Wolf said:
I suspect you are overestimating how much of people's vote for your plan is predicated on Tiger Team covering Way of the Elephant instead of Games and Theory.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm voting for the plan that hits all three tech paths in Lone Ranger.

MS-21H 'Hawke' said:
But now we actually loose them, where they could have been decent rear gaurd cruisers for a bit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not sure what you mean by "lose them". We're building (at least) 8, and I expect those 8 will stay in service until the QM starting having them break down like the Soyuz did.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top