To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

[Random Member]

Something interesting I wanted to comment on. Cardassia is in "j", the far spinward edge of the map. Cardassia has nothing to the spinward of their home world. Everything else is tailwinds ("east" rather than "west"). Isn't that a little odd? You would think they would spread out evenly from their home world rather than in only one half of the available space.

What is spinward of the Cardassians that has them so frightened they don't dare expand that way?

(I mean, maybe the QM just didn't want to go off the map. But it's fun to take that fact and speculate about what it means.)

Click to shrink...

I'm going to say it's the Breen.

 

[lbmaian]

I dislike the coordinate change because it throws off all previous map coordinates in the rimward half of the map (including basically every location described in the recent Ghosts and Whispers crisis).

Rationalizing a system purely for the sake of symmetry, in a way that interferes with past usage, without actually making any new desirable feature possible, is generally not a good idea. Most people (a few vocal complainers aside) will have less trouble accommodating to an illogical but consistently illogical system than they will to an illogical system that used to be illogical one way, but is now pseudo-logical in a slightly different way.

It might work here just because people will forget the old versions of your map ever existed and so on, but I don't think it's a good idea on general principles.

Click to shrink...

Only a couple of the map coordinates used in the recent crisis would have been affected.

All the old maps are still being listed in Nix's map post, and a small coordinate change can easily be mentioned.

Ah. Sorry, I misremembered.

That's less of a problem in the sense of "retcon," but it's still kind of unnecessary. It's "symmetric" in the sense that the number one corresponds to the letter A, but now we're just pretending the number zero does not exist because it somehow makes us uncomfortable to have a 'zero row' but no 'null column.' I don't think that makes a lot of sense.

Click to shrink...

If you're creating a grid labeling system using letters and numbers that for whatever reason has the "origin" in the middle of the map instead of some corner like normal, how would you do it? You either don't use 0, or you arbitrarily assign one grid square next to origin point as 0<null> where <null> stands for whatever the "letter" would be between a and A.

edit: Maybe <null> could be '@' if we're going by ascii code

 

[Random Member]

[X] Nix

 

[sebsmith]

What is spinward of the Cardassians that has them so frightened they don't dare expand that way?

Click to shrink...

I actually have a partial list of the races it might be for an omake I'm starting on. The following races/states are probably spin-ward:

• Trill
• Ferengi Alliance
• Breen Confederacy
• Tzenkethi Coalition
• Talarian Repulic

I also have the following groups down as 'who the hell knows where they are actually from':

• Gorn
• Tholians
• Xindi
• The Children of Tama
• Sheliak Corporate (probably rimward)

I'm probably still missing some, but these ten should give a few ideas.

The big ships cannot be everywhere at once.

Yes, they are individually the most powerful ships in known space, but they can't be everywhere at once. Plus, with the combat rules of one ship pew pew phasering no more than one other ship per action, the giant combat scores very much run into the problem of ludicrous overkill against anything that isn't a real peer-weightclass opponent.

I'm not saying go full swarm, but the dramatically increased ability to put warp cores into space (rather than boots on the ground) afforded by actually building midsize cruisers rather than nothing but the hulking giant explorers and science ships cannot be underestimated. The Federation's gonna grow, we already have three very militaristic empires on our borders that all need protecting, and on top of that a need for effective police action of Federation Space.

Explorers are grand. They're big, beautiful and the most amazingly enduring ships our people can build, but they are vastly outsized hammers to most problems.

Click to shrink...

It's worth noting that we look to hit our combat cap in about a decade under our current build schedule. We could probably extend that to a decade and a half with a good combination of defense doctrine and ship building, but that limit is still approaching. Unless you're asking us to build C4 or lower cruisers, we will actually get more ships from building Excelsiors under Lone Ranger. Swarm + Fleet-in-being only gets about a hundred Centaurs, while Lone Ranger + Forward Defense can get as many as 85 Excelsiors. The argument that we will get substantially more ships long term by building cruisers instead of Excelsiors appears to be fundamentally untrue.

 

[NHO]

[X][COUNCIL] Plan Counselors and Projects

 

[Nix]

Something interesting I wanted to comment on. Cardassia is in "j", the far spinward edge of the map. Cardassia has nothing to the spinward of their home world. Everything else is tailwinds ("east" rather than "west"). Isn't that a little odd? You would think they would spread out evenly from their home world rather than in only one half of the available space.

What is spinward of the Cardassians that has them so frightened they don't dare expand that way?

(I mean, maybe the QM just didn't want to go off the map. But it's fun to take that fact and speculate about what it means.)

Click to shrink...

Todamak (no coordinates given) is probably spinward of Cardassia, it doesn't seem to have any mining colonies supplying it so maybe they just didn't find as many resources in that direction and therefore didn't bother expanding there.

 

[lbmaian]

Right now we have two people who want the change and two who don't. I mostly just care that it going to be consistent from here on, so I hope to get clear feedback one way or another.

Click to shrink...

I'm mostly annoyed that I didn't get a chance to influence the decision in the couple hours between making the labeling system and Oneiros just taking the latest version.

 

[Simon_Jester]

If you're creating a grid labeling system using letters and numbers that for whatever reason has the "origin" in the middle of the map instead of some corner like normal, how would you do it? You either don't use 0, or you arbitrarily assign one grid square next to origin point as 0<null> where <null> stands for whatever the "letter" would be between a and A.

edit: Maybe <null> could be '@' if we're going by ascii code

Click to shrink...

The problem is, there is no origin point, there is an origin square It would be better to have a 'null' symbol for the letter, sure, but there is no 'null' letter, while there is a 'null' number. We cannot be consistent about this while using both Arabic numerals and the Latin alphabet. It's unfortunate, but it really is not worth redefining the map coordinates over. Especially not by resolving the conflict through bastardizing the Arabic numerals by having a numerical sequence progress "4, 3, 2, 1, -1."

 

[ClawClawBite]

[X][COUNCIL] Plan Counselors and Projects

Councilors yes, new border zone no, less strong opinions on other matters, and no one is even suggesting a geani diplomatic push.

 

[Tasoli]

Treaty of Algeron merely formalised the informal policy of the Council.

Ix-nay on the Oak-clay.

Click to shrink...

That sounds really arbitary. I mean Why would Council care what kind of equapment we use in our fleet? Or why can't that change if Hawkish group gets bigger support? It is not like omage particle or some other WMD. What is next are they going to forbid torpedos next?

Puting Cloak on a forbidden list witouth giving us a chance to change it is arbitary taking away agency from player base.

I would like to suggest you re-exemine your tought process in this. Because it sounds like it is forbidden because you don't want to write about cloaks rather than any logical in game reason.

 

[Simon_Jester]

It's worth noting that we look to hit our combat cap in about a decade under our current build schedule. We could probably extend that to a decade and a half with a good combination of defense doctrine and ship building, but that limit is still approaching. Unless you're asking us to build C4 or lower cruisers, we will actually get more ships from building Excelsiors under Lone Ranger. Swarm + Fleet-in-being only gets about a hundred Centaurs, while Lone Ranger + Forward Defense can get as many as 85 Excelsiors. The argument that we will get substantially more ships long term by building cruisers instead of Excelsiors appears to be fundamentally untrue.

Click to shrink...

I'm pretty sure the combat cap is a moving target as a function of how many member worlds there are- the alternative would seem rather unfair because Defense requirements would grow while Combat caps wouldn't.

Also, it is very unclear how long it'll take us to build up to our combat cap with Excelsiors or notional "pocket explorers" with Excelsior-like stats. Those ships are so expensive that it'll take a good deal longer to build up to combat cap with them. So at best we'd have to build up to cap with escorts and cruisers, then gradually replace them with 'pocket explorers' at great resource and considerable crew expense.

 

[lbmaian]

Can you show me, using the ship design sheet, an explorer (even a militarized one) that would reliably defeat a squadron of escorts with equal total cost in crew and resources? Using the same technology level for both ships?

Click to shrink...

I've kinda been avoiding commenting about this, because I don't feel comfortable making strong claims about fleet composition vs fleet composition battles and resulting casualty probabilities without actually simulating it.

I already think our current or planned fleet mix is fine, that the lone ranger doctrine that we've invested a couple years into suits it well enough, and that we'll be able to switch to other doctrines decades down the line whenever necessary because we can absorb the cost then. Until then, I'm not going to make a fuss about it.

The problem is, there is no origin point, there is an origin square It would be better to have a 'null' symbol for the letter, sure, but there is no 'null' letter, while there is a 'null' number. We cannot be consistent about this while using both Arabic numerals and the Latin alphabet. It's unfortunate, but it really is not worth redefining the map coordinates over. Especially not by resolving the conflict through bastardizing the Arabic numerals by having a numerical sequence progress "4, 3, 2, 1, -1."

Click to shrink...

I'm aware of the difference between an origin point and an origin square - that's why I was making the distinction between a grid labeling system vs a Cartesian coordinate system.

My point is that I would prefer to not even have an origin square. That there actually is an origin point (Sol) that we're defining the grid labels around, not at. Then we would be counting grid squares away from the origin point. That in turn implies there should be no "0" grid square in whatever counting systems we're using (where counting system includes letters (A,B,C) and Arabic numbers (1,2,3)).

 

[Simon_Jester]

Then why use numbers for our grid labels at all? Why not just replace the numbered coreward/rimward axis with letters and have sector names like Bb and aa?

If we're going to use numbers, we should treat them like numbers.

 

[Nix]

Then why use numbers for our grid labels at all? Why not just replace the numbered coreward/rimward axis with letters and have sector names like Bb and aa?

If we're going to use numbers, we should treat them like numbers.

Click to shrink...

Because it would make it more difficult the keep the axes apart. -3a can't be confused with -1c, but ca can easily be confused with ac.

 

[Yorick's Skull]

[X][COUNCIL] Plan Odds and Ends

Counselors and Miranda's are my basic requirements, and I hold few strong opinions on other positions for this Snakepit.

 

[lbmaian]

Then why use numbers for our grid labels at all? Why not just replace the numbered coreward/rimward axis with letters and have sector names like Bb and aa?

Click to shrink...

I would actually be fine with not using numbers, but using the same counting system for both axes would just generate confusion.

Unfortunately, there aren't many counting system that are easily recognizable. I mean, there's greek, hebrew, and various asian counting systems, but they're not well known by English speakers. Roman numerals are understandable but are too verbose.

Furthermore, such a change would be much larger than just getting rid of 0 and would invalidate all previously given locations. I'm compromising the IMO minor confusion of making a small minority of already specified locations invalid with a better system for the rest of the quest.

edit: With all that said, although I'll grumble about the coordinate nonsense, I can have some headcanon that justifies the zero somehow.

Like maybe it's a legacy of UE's original system, where Sol was actually its own small sector labeled 0A, and when revamping the system for the Federation as whole, they decided to keep that. So when someone asks where subsector Sol is in, they'll say 0A.

If we're going to use numbers, we should treat them like numbers.

Click to shrink...

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "treat them like numbers", because numbers are treated in many different ways. For counting purposes, numbers almost always start from one. After all, when you're listing things, you don't start with 0 (unless you're a C programmer ).

 

[Simon_Jester]

Okay, there are by my count FIVE plans. I've tried to lay out summaries, both so I can decide how to vote myself, and so that the morning voter rush has a chance to figure it out.

To organize it a bit, everyone has diplomatic pushes, most people have both mining colonies, everyone founds the MWCO, and most people do Miranda refits. After that, it gets more complicated and I'll have to do some analysis.

Spoiler: Plans, Summarized

Plan Odds and Ends (HearthBorn)

-Diplomatic Push: Yrillians/Bajorans/Dawiar/Qloath
-Both Mining Colonies
-Found MWCO
-Free Miranda Refit

-Betazoid Counselors
-Starfleet Intelligence Vice-Admiralty.
-New Tech Team: Starbase/Weapons

Plan Industrial Expansion (Nix)

-Diplomatic Push: Yrillians/Rigellians/Dawiar/Qloath
-Both Mining Colonies
-Found MWCO
-Free Miranda Refit

-Starbase [CBZ: Lapycorias]
-Starbase [Sol-Sector: Vega]
-Budget Increase
-Explorer Corps Recruitment Drive

Diplomacy and Bureaucracy (Erandil)

-Diplomatic Push: Seyek/Kadeshi/Dawiar/Bajorans
-Both Mining Colonies
-Found MWCO
-NO MIRANDA REFIT.

-Starbase [CBZ: Nonspecified Location]
-Budget Increase
-Betazoid Counsellors.

Plan DS (DarknessSmiles)

-Diplomatic Push: Seyek/Qloathi/Dawiar/Yrillians
-Both Mining Colonies
-Found MWCO
-Free Miranda Refit

-Betazoid Counselors
-Sydraxian Border Zone
-Budget Increase

Plan Counselors and Projects (SynchronizedWritersBlock)

-Diplomatic Push: Gretarians/Dawiar/Yrillians/NO FOURTH
-NO MINING COLONIES
-Found MWCO
-Free Miranda Refit

-Budget Increase
-Explorer Corps Recruitment Drive
-Betazoid Counselors
-Starbase [CBZ: Nonspecified Location]

Since the MWCO is universally shared by all plans it can be dropped for comparison purposes. The Miranda refit is widely supported and I for one consider it critical- I'd consider voting for a plan that started a different useful ship project, but not one that starts NO ship project. So in my next elimination round, @Erandil 's plan "Diplomacy and Bureaucracy" goes. I will note for others' benefit that the plan diplomatic-pushes the Bajorans and, uniquely, the Kadeshi, and includes a budget increase, a CBZ starbase, and Betazoid counselors.

So of the four remaining plans, and dropping the MWCO and Miranda refits:

Spoiler: Plans, Summarized and Abridged

Plan Odds and Ends (HearthBorn)

-Diplomatic Push: Yrillians/Bajorans/Dawiar/Qloath
-Both Mining Colonies

-Betazoid Counselors
-Starfleet Intelligence Vice-Admiralty.
-New Tech Team: Starbase/Weapons

Plan Industrial Expansion (Nix)

-Diplomatic Push: Yrillians/Rigellians/Dawiar/Qloath
-Both Mining Colonies

-Starbase [CBZ: Lapycorias]
-Starbase [Sol-Sector: Vega]
-Budget Increase
-Explorer Corps Recruitment Drive

Plan DS (DarknessSmiles)

-Diplomatic Push: Seyek/Qloathi/Dawiar/Yrillians
-Both Mining Colonies

-Betazoid Counselors
-Sydraxian Border Zone
-Budget Increase

Plan Counselors and Projects (SynchronizedWritersBlock)

-Diplomatic Push: Gretarians/Dawiar/Yrillians/NO FOURTH
-NO MINING COLONIES

-Budget Increase
-Explorer Corps Recruitment Drive
-Betazoid Counselors
-Starbase [CBZ: Nonspecified Location]

@DarknessSmiles has the only plan that requests a Sydraxian Border Zone this year.

I oppose founding the SBZ this year, because I think it's premature, as I detailed in earlier posts. I don't think the Sydraxians are a 'great power' such that we need a designated sector just to cover our border with them. So I am, with apologies, dropping his plan from the next elimination round.

Spoiler: Plans, Summarized and Abridgeder

Plan Odds and Ends (HearthBorn)

-Diplomatic Push: Yrillians/Bajorans/Dawiar/Qloath
-Both Mining Colonies

-Betazoid Counselors
-Starfleet Intelligence Vice-Admiralty.
-New Tech Team: Starbase/Weapons

Plan Industrial Expansion (Nix)

-Diplomatic Push: Yrillians/Rigellians/Dawiar/Qloath
-Both Mining Colonies

-Starbase [CBZ: Lapycorias]
-Starbase [Sol-Sector: Vega]
-Budget Increase
-Explorer Corps Recruitment Drive

Plan Counselors and Projects (SynchronizedWritersBlock)

-Diplomatic Push: Gretarians/Dawiar/Yrillians/NO FOURTH
-NO MINING COLONIES

-Budget Increase
-Explorer Corps Recruitment Drive
-Betazoid Counselors
-Starbase [CBZ: Nonspecified Location]

Of the plans, @Nix has the only one that doesn't bring in Betazoid counselors this snakepit, @SynchronizedWritersBlock the only one that has no mining colonies, and @HearthBorn the only one that doesn't request a budget increase AND the only one who doesn't do an Explorer Corps recruitment drive.

Hearthborn wants zero starbases, SynchronizedWritersBlock wants one, and Nix wants two.

HearthBorn has, uniquely, a slot for making Starfleet Intelligence a vice-admiralty and requests a new tech team.

Everyone wants to push the Yrillians and the Dawiar. HearthBorn wants to push Bajorans and Qloath, SWB wants to push the Gretarians, and Nix wants to push the Qloath and Rigellians (ensuring they join the Federation either this year or next).

...

Now, I disagree with HearthBorn on the following issues. One, I think pushing the Bajorans may be a mistake, especially when we're doing it at a time when the Cardassians have (temporarily) a fleet stronger than Starfleet AND when they have just been humiliated by the Kadak-Tor incident. They may well decide that us trying to recruit the Bajorans is the last straw, and attack us before we have a chance to grow too big for them to defeat.

I think the "Starfleet Intelligence vice-admiralty" idea is interesting. The catches are:
1) While I've been an opponent of Linderley's all along, he's only been in office a year, and the most recent crisis offered him very little of an opportunity to show himself as being good for anything. I don't want to replace him yet when he hasn't been given a fair chance.
2) I don't want to cause still further shakeups in Starfleet Intelligence if I can help it. Promoting another rear admiral from outside Intelligence over Linderley's head and effectively sending him back to his desk as a counterintelligence chief would be a major disruption, arguably more major than zh'Rhashaan's resignation and Linderley's appointment were in the first place. Even having Linderley resign entirely would be disruptive.

Until and unless I have reason to think my fears about Linderley effectively wrecking the agency by focusing too heavily on counterintel and not enough on the mission at hand are truly and fully vindicated, I am not going to advocate going to extreme lengths to replace him.

For all these reasons, I'm dropping HearthBorn's plan. That leaves, once again trimming out things that are identical (budget increases, EC recruitment drives, diplomatic pushes on Yrillians and Dawiar...)

Spoiler: Plans, Summarized and Abridgedest

Plan Industrial Expansion (Nix)

-Diplomatic Push: Rigellians/Qloath
-Both Mining Colonies

-Starbase [CBZ: Lapycorias]
-Starbase [Sol-Sector: Vega]

Plan Counselors and Projects (SynchronizedWritersBlock)

-Diplomatic Push: Gretarians/NO FOURTH
-NO MINING COLONIES

-Betazoid Counselors
-Starbase [CBZ: Nonspecified Location]

So it comes down to (for me) the following: is it better to go with Nix's plan and push Rigellians and Qloath, found two mining colonies and build both starbases?

Or is it better to go with SWB and push Gretarians, found one starbase, and recruit the Betazoid counselors?

I'm going to be honest, I think I'm with Nix on this one.

[X][COUNCIL] Plan Industrial Expansion.

 

[Derek58]

Could someone post a current tally please? I would, but can't on the PC I'm on.

 

[Algalon]

[X][COUNCIL] Plan Industrial Expansion.

No mining colonies is a huge mistake. We know the Spooonheads depend largely on BR, so we should claim those Colonies even if only to deny them to the enemy.

They also have a bunch of Colony Ships ready, so they might be ready to stake their claim soon.

Same for not pushing diplomatically. More affiliates also means more resources of any kind. Plus we know the Cardies will turn them into proxies if we don't first. The Gretarians are safe being approached as they lack a military, though I'd like to court them soon anyway.

 

[lbmaian]

@Simon_Jester's analysis is helpful, though I reach a slightly different conclusion at the end when comparing Nix's and SWB's plans.

- I think the current coreward defenses will be sufficiently fortified within 6 turns (same time a Starbase would finish) by at least some of our new 3 Excelsiors (1 is UE), 3 Connie-Bs, and refit Centaur-A.
- I'm mixed on the mining colonies - we don't need the BR, but I would like to at least claim Gamma Canidae V in neutral territory (Lapycorias VII is within CBZ territory so is less important). Willing to compromise on this though.
- If we didn't pick up Qloath just last quarter, I would've wanted a diplo push on them, but now I think both Seyek and Qloath are secure enough. Rigellians vs Gretarian, I'm undecided on. I have the feeling events + annual diplo rolls will net us Rigellians by 2 years at minimum and 1 year optimistically, so I don't think they're critical.
- I really want the Betazoid councillors, since I feel there's a lot of narrative potential beyond the mechanical bonus it supplies.

So:

[X] SynchronizedWritersBlock

 

[aledeth]

-snip-

Click to shrink...

You also missed @CircleTheSkies plan here: To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest), though if you weren't considering plans with only one vote that'd explain it.

I honestly like their plan the best due to the Diplo focus on the Kadeshi and Sotaw who we've been content to ignore ever since they've been introduced, and all the other components of it are things I like a lot. I don't see a need for the BR colonies, and prefer the Councilors over the MWCO. Problem is it has no chance of winning at this point so tactical voting means SWB's plan is the next best thing. =/

[X][COUNCIL] Plan Counselors and Projects

 

[Leila Hann]

I'm torn between Nix and SWB. On one hand, I really, really want us to stop putting off the Betazoid Counselors, and I'd rather wait a couple years between accepting new full members. on the other, I don't want the spoonheads to get those BR colonies, and two starbases is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[Simon_Jester]

If we can get a few other things out of the way, like the ship refits and the MWCO, it is almost certain that the Betazoid counselors will be selected. We have a lot of "I've been meaning to get to that" projects that have hung around for five years or so, and the counselors are only one of those.

You also missed @CircleTheSkies plan here: To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest), though if you weren't considering plans with only one vote that'd explain it.

Click to shrink...

It's more that I'm not sure CircleTheSkies is aware of some of the thinking that's been going on, and I think he's missed a few important facts.

I honestly like their plan the best due to the Diplo focus on the Kadeshi and Sotaw who we've been content to ignore ever since they've been introduced...

Click to shrink...

The Kadeshi and Sotaw are in the Romulan Neutral Zone and we're really, really trying not to alienate the Romulans at the moment. Us trying to build up relations with proxies in the Neutral Zone is perhaps one of the few ways we could convince the Romulans that we really don't see them as friends.

If you think the Cardassian reaction to us reaching out to the Dawiar might be bad (which is why Circle dropped it from his plan), the Romulan reaction to us reaching out to the Sotaw will be worse!

I feel like Circle picked the species he did to push just by picking their relationship numbers, not by looking at their geographic position on the map, or what we know about their capabilities and strategic situation.

and all the other components of it are things I like a lot. I don't see a need for the BR colonies...

Click to shrink...

The real purposes of the colonies are:
1) Deprive the Cardassians of access to the bulk resources at those sites. This is important because their economy and fleet (unlike ours) appear to be resource-limited rather than crew-limited. If we don't want them to grow rapidly, we need to do whatever we can to block their access to mining sites.
2) ALL mining colonies will ultimately provide valuable political and scientific benefits as we develop more tech.
3) The mining colonies in question are strategically placed, and permit us to claim a stretch of strategic space between our current territory and that of the Seyek. This in turn makes it easier for us to limit and control Cardassian ability to push into our space and interfere with our affairs far to trailward.

and prefer the Councilors over the MWCO.

Click to shrink...

The Betazoid counselors are good, but they don't have a massive, transformational impact. Better coordination with the member world fleets could make a huge difference in wartime.

On a general note, I would really like @OneirosTheWriter to give us some clue of what has been done involving Federation diplomacy with respect to the Kadeshi and the Sotaw, myself. We haven't pushed them for a number of fairly good reasons that are as sound now as they ever were... but does that mean that the entire Federation has had literally zero interaction with these two species for the past six or seven years?

I mean, I'm not asking for detailed intel briefings here, but the equivalent of the minimum knowledge that a Federation official could get by looking at the equivalent of Wikipedia in their off time would be nice.

The very existence of 'relationship scores' that can be tracked suggests that there is ongoing commerce, interaction, and cultural exchange, even with neutral polities we don't "push" very often. But since we don't control the 'routine' Federation diplomacy, it's become so invisible to us that people are starting to do odd things. People are suggesting pushes on species we really, really are better off keeping neutral, just because otherwise we never hear from them or talk about them.

 

[Kelenas]

[X] SynchronizedWritersBlock

 

[Simon_Jester]

Do you have any particular reasons for favoring that plan? I'm curious.