lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
Is Earth in charge of Tellarite Excelsior requests?
This is also outdated.
Early 2306: Sci-Fi - To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest) | Page 173
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 Earth in charge of Tellarite Excelsior requests?
This is also outdated.
Early 2306: Sci-Fi - To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest) | Page 173
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
Like this?
Or maybe also distribute the formerly central region around Galus V to the Apinae and Amarki sectors? Or the entire old CBZ?
Isn't there supposed to be that new super-paranoid species somewhere there?
- Location
- somewhere
Looks like our action ended up being "build outposts in Apinae sector".
Oops.
Yes, but I don't know where to put them. Somewhere in the south and below the average plane, but beyond that?
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
[Votes coming soon]
We shouldn't pretend that NOT engaging with the neutrals on our own borders is a decision we can make without serious opportunity cost. Neglecting the Dawiar diplomatically (and consequently, being ignorant of their culture and their troubles with the Caitians) cost us a ship, for instance. Maybe not an especially valuable ship, but still a ship.
Just researching a few doctrine techs is not going to make a million tons of our ship equal to two million tons of theirs. And if we try to go far enough out on the reliability curve that we CAN do that, our ships will go 'boom' before they ever encounter the enemy.
The Cardassians have or could easily obtain battleships that can take on two of our best escorts, on roughly equal terms. We have battleships (explorers) that can take on two of their best escorts, likewise. Lone Ranger capitalizes on those advantages. It isn't a magic wand that makes it irrelevant when a quarter of your ships blow up before the war even begins due to their poor reliability.
Just because you don't think the difference between a 2% chance of disaster and 3% is significant, doesn't mean that a 20 or 30% chance isn't significant.
New shipyards compete with new fortifications, new ship design programs, new research teams, and so on.
New ships only really compete with other ships we could be building with the same crews and raw materials instead.
The threat is that there are a lot of ways that a Romulan-Klingon war could draw us INTO conflict rather than keeping us out of it. Maintaining our own neutrality, especially with Klingon loose cannons bouncing around and who knows what factions of Romulans trying to manipulate us, is going to be tough.
It's not, but what WILL happen isn't enough for us to make any plans based around it. The reality is, if we want the Yrilians or the Qloath or whoever to be on our side, and NOT on the Cardassians' side, we really ought to take specific action to make that happen. Failure to make that happen can and will cost us.
We shouldn't pretend that NOT engaging with the neutrals on our own borders is a decision we can make without serious opportunity cost. Neglecting the Dawiar diplomatically (and consequently, being ignorant of their culture and their troubles with the Caitians) cost us a ship, for instance. Maybe not an especially valuable ship, but still a ship.
If you actually look at what the bonuses associated with Lone Ranger are, you will note that no, they do not enable us to win battles at 2:1 odds against ships of comparable tonnage. They make it easier for us to, say, fight two one-million ton cruisers with one two-million ton explorer, but that is a completely different thing.
Just researching a few doctrine techs is not going to make a million tons of our ship equal to two million tons of theirs. And if we try to go far enough out on the reliability curve that we CAN do that, our ships will go 'boom' before they ever encounter the enemy.
Lone Ranger isn't a "be outnumbered" doctrine. It's a battleship doctrine.
The Cardassians have or could easily obtain battleships that can take on two of our best escorts, on roughly equal terms. We have battleships (explorers) that can take on two of their best escorts, likewise. Lone Ranger capitalizes on those advantages. It isn't a magic wand that makes it irrelevant when a quarter of your ships blow up before the war even begins due to their poor reliability.
Okay, but don't pretend that it is remotely a good idea to have ships with 70-80% reliability ratings. Even if that gave us +2 to all stats across the board (and by your numbers it doesn't), there are a lot of situations where that just wouldn't matter compared to the constant frustration of having to replace ships and crew lost to random accidents.
Just because you don't think the difference between a 2% chance of disaster and 3% is significant, doesn't mean that a 20 or 30% chance isn't significant.
The resources we spend to build new shipyards, and the resources we spend to build new ships, are actually different things and are not especially interchangeable.
New shipyards compete with new fortifications, new ship design programs, new research teams, and so on.
New ships only really compete with other ships we could be building with the same crews and raw materials instead.
- Location
- Germany
And that in turn will be easier if we can say we are busy with a war on the Cardassian border. Everything can work together if the Cardassians are nice enough to escalate at the right moment.
- Location
- Australia
Your Queens are most pleased.
It mentioned in the Captain's Log that it completed the "cube" between Qloath, Dawiar, and Risa.
aledeth
The Flesh is Weak
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[x] Briefvoice
They've done the work of planning the optimal shipbuilding plan to get us here, I see no reason not to give them their choice of ship names.
@OneirosTheWriter You are on FIRE today, 4 updates in 5 hours?
They've done the work of planning the optimal shipbuilding plan to get us here, I see no reason not to give them their choice of ship names.
@OneirosTheWriter You are on FIRE today, 4 updates in 5 hours?
- Location
- Anchorage, Alaska
While your counter points have merit, there's a few flaws. First, I have neither the time, nor the inclination to aquire and use the spreadsheet, which is true for a large chunk of the voters here. Did you know that the design sheet has gone through multiple iterations already?
And while your right that I should have gone through the design thread first, I was discouraged by the fact that every design posted adheres to the 97-98% gold standard, and that some of the more vocal contributors regularly insist that anything lower is practicaly inviting a ship to blow up every year, I didn't think they'd particularly care about one plebs opinion.
So I decided to go over their heads, and get the opinions of a WHOLE BUNCH of plebs, instead. One reason for that is because, as the end users and primary voting base, you are very influential to what the ships will end up looking like.
Another reason is, despite being the end users and primary voting base, you guys are CRIMINALLY uninformed.
Do you remember when the Renaissance was declared unbuildable? Do you know why that was? It was because it's reliability was in the low 90s.
AND NOBODY SAID ANYTHING. I've already found someone who would have been willing to approve it as is, but they never had a chance to say that, because all the design thread said here was ''ope, can't be done', and everyone took that at face value!
If Oneiros hadn't arbitrarily raised the reliability to 98% (which, again, is there gold standard) than they would still refuse to build it, despite our need over here for a new cruiser, because it didn't MEET THEIR STANDARDS!
*Pause for breath*
Look, I get having a separate design thread to avoid clutter, but when that thread withholds important information, deliberatly or otherwise, forgive me if I decide to put that decision back in the hands of the primary thread.
Chew on that and get back to me, I need to make some fries with all this salt I'm apparently generating (maybe some popcorn).
Last edited:
UbeOne
Daydreaming CPU
- Location
- Philippines
- Pronouns
- She/Her
- Location
- somewhere
Neither of the captain's Logs that mentioned them included the words cube or Risa as far as I can find? Not that it matters since I have the info now.
That was actually discussed in this thread. This discussion started around here and went on for several days and dozens of pages. You were actually involved so I'm not sure how you forgot.
Low 90s reliability is unbuildable.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
The only recent mention of the word "cube" I found refers to the Caitian-Dawiar war:
- Location
- Australia
... huh. I must have clipped it out at some point...
Derek58
Rocket Punch is Best Punch
- Location
- Getter Valhalla
Don't be ridiculous. It's just fine.
You're forgetting (or neglecting to mention) that there's a whole other roll to determine what kind of Hilarious Breakdown we get, and the chances of really serious damage are very low.
Last edited:
- Location
- Anchorage, Alaska
Thank you!
...not what I was looking for, but if enough people agree, I'll accept it!
...Yay?
Easy, I have a terrible memory, and the topic drifted to the merits of various ship refits. Interestingly, opinions seem to have drifted since then...
Last edited:
AKuz
Been Better
- Location
- A Rising Tide of Horrors
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Apparently the Millenium Falcon was always a speshul snowflake one of a kind accident from the moment she caused an accident on the assembly line from being too awsum
[x] Briefvoice
Our ships need to function not merely so they don't explode, but so they can carry out the necessary functions of Starfleet. If there are three ships in a sector, it's not acceptable to take one off station every so often to deal with a breakdown. More than just ship hulls are at stake.
... no, they turned two races we bearly had any relations with against us. the former had less then a 100 relations, and the latter was a first contact situation. there was a third one that also got turned against us that , which was also a first contact situation.
They have a hard time turning anyone with more then 100 relations with us. IE, more then a passing fimilerality with us. not affiliates. As long as we stay on top of their efforts, and push the members with the lowest relations/closest to the borders first, we should be able to prevent them from snapping up anyone else (that we have already met). keep pushing a member until they reach afilliate status might not be the optimal strategy in this situation.
Derek58
Rocket Punch is Best Punch
- Location
- Getter Valhalla
Yes, I'm aware of that, but you're seriously exaggerating the consequences of occasionally needing to repair some damage to our ships.
We've all ready had a couple cases of ships needing repairs in the quest, some even serious repairs, and we dealt with them being in drydock just fine.
- Location
- somewhere
So secretive that they managed to redact strategic information beyond the 4th wall...
- Location
- madison
a seven to eight percent chance of a malfunction translates into a very low chance of actually breaking down during an event, not only would a ship have to break down the same year an event came up in it's sector, but during the specific quarter the event took place. Conversely +1 to a relevant stat is a significant increase in a ship succeeded in resolving whatever disaster it's responding to.