It's possible that I'll change it to a Set Global Policy or scrap entirely and stick to votes like the other three, casting the deciding vote for a member facing a choice.

I think it's a very interesting vote to have, but it might be best presented more as: "Here are some areas where you think Member Worlds are being shortsighted or missing something. Which one would you like to push and what would you tell them?" With write-ins also being allowed.

It preserves some of the open-ended nature of it, but gives concrete areas of member world weakness where we would push them to improve.
 
[X][BETA] Centaur-A Focus
[X][AMARKI] Focus on building Amarkian Modern Cruisers
[X][CATS] Excelsior

The Amarki escort argument won me over.
 
I'd rather BETA go Miranda so they can save up for the Renaissance.
Honestly, a bunch of relatively cheap escorts that nonetheless have good Defense/Science/Presence suites is probably a better match for Betazed's needs than a bunch of crew-heavy Rennies.

Huh, if the Amarki, or another member, come up with a ship that's better than our state of the art for the niche can we just start building those and skip a research cycle?
Maybe, but I wouldn't bet on it. And the political cost might be high. I remember there being discussion of us starting to build Rialas instead of Excelsiors, and that was what came up in that context.

[][BETA] Miranda-A Focus

Reasoning: Betazed really, really doesn't need a dedicated battle fleet in their strategic position.
Uh... then why would they build Miranda-As? The only thing refit Mirandas are really any good at is fighting. They're inferior for event response compared to a Centaur-A, because they have lower Defense, lower Science, and drastically lower Presence. The whole point of the Miranda-A is that it's a "cheap and nasty" escort design with about as much combat punch as a Centaur-A, on a cheaper, stripped-down platform.

It's worth noting that In Universe, the Reneisance class hasn't left the shipyard even on trials yet-we have great expectations of the design and it simulates in a way that checks all the little boxes, but do we trust it to be problem-free enough to roll the design out to all our member states and say 'this is what you need.'?
Even the Constitution-B represents an advance over the Betazoids' and the Amarki's pre-existing cruiser designs. And we pretty much KNOW those are going to work.

ETA: and based on Oneiros' posts, I get the feeling that our 50 PP to the Development faction will be eaten by a new Starfleet Logistics Command which we'll need to build our own freighters, hospital ships, and other support vessels for.
Well, that wouldn't be so bad.
 
Having to start building our own infrastructure could be fun, and I wouldn't mind the extra complexity. The ships are also probably pretty heavy BR and light SR due to the lack of advanced equipment, and so work well with our current resource situation.
 
ETA: and based on Oneiros' posts, I get the feeling that our 50 PP to the Development faction will be eaten by a new Starfleet Logistics Command which we'll need to build our own freighters, hospital ships, and other support vessels for.

Oh that's a good point. It may not have been an option in previous snakepits, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a snakepit option this year.

Well, there probably already is a Starfleet Logistics Command right now, just to service all our starbases and other infrastructure, but increasing its scope or having us utilize our berths for building civilian vessels for member fleets is still valid.

It's possible that I'll change it to a Set Global Policy or scrap entirely and stick to votes like the other three, casting the deciding vote for a member facing a choice.

Ah...I totally forgot about that vote :oops:

I'll edit a vote in after thinking about it for a bit.
 
Uh... then why would they build Miranda-As? The only thing refit Mirandas are really any good at is fighting. They're inferior for event response compared to a Centaur-A, because they have lower Defense, lower Science, and drastically lower Presence. The whole point of the Miranda-A is that it's a "cheap and nasty" escort design with about as much combat punch as a Centaur-A, on a cheaper, stripped-down platform.
Because I copied the wrong line, that's why.
 
I'd rather them have a Rennie or two for emergencies then Miranda for anything else.
Uh... who said anything about Miranda-As for the Betazoids? Not me. They're about as close to a pure combat escort as the Federation is likely to build for a long time. What I was advocating were Centaur-As.

The Betazoids are going to struggle to crew Renaissances. Right now they are (proportionate to their small economy) long on resource stockpile but short on crew. Building a few Centaur-As in the interim caters to that, and gives them pretty good event-response ships that can take the pressure off their blatantly obsolete and flimsy Patrollers.

Whereas each Rennie represents about as much effort (proportionately) for Betazed as a Riala does for the Amarki: roughly three years of their national productive capacity. I don't think the Betazoids will ever build more than one or two of them as flagships, among other things because they're going to have to replace their Patrollers sooner or later whether they like it or not.

Their cruiser design isn't good (except in Presence), but at least it's got a stat line comparable to the Centaur-A overall so it doesn't urgently need replacement.
 
I'm hoping our 50PP gets the Starfleet Corps of Engineers out of hibernation.

[X][BETA] Centaur-A Focus
[X][AMARKI] Focus on building Amarkian Modern Cruisers
[X][CATS] Fathership
 
Last edited:
People who are actively against changing any of the priorities should vote

[][PRIORITY] No change

or something like that to make it clear. Otherwise it will be hard to tell whether or not to implement the plurality vote.
 
[X][PRIORITY] Amarkia Mid Term to Focus on more cargo shipping
[X][BETA]Centaur-A Focus
[X][AMARKI] Focus on building Centaur-As
[X][CATS] Excelsior

Standardization is good. Unless they have a design that is particularly filling a gap in our capability, we should start member worlds on the road to conforming to Starfleet designs as soon as possible.

Normally standardizing would net many benefits in terms of economies of scale, as they'd be able to use the much larger Federation-Industrial complex to outfit their ships, probably driving down 'costs,' such as they are. I don't think if this is reflected in the mechanics though. :p
 
Last edited:
[X][PRIORITY] Amarkia Mid Term to Focus on more cargo shipping
[X][BETA] Centaur-A Focus
[X][AMARKI] Focus on building Amarkian Modern Cruisers
[X][CATS] Excelsior
 
[X][PRIORITY] Amarkia Mid Term to Focus on more cargo shipping
[X][BETA] Miranda-A Focus
[X][AMARKI] Focus on building Centaur-As
[X][CATS] Excelsior

Standardization is good. Unless they have a design that is particularly filling a gap in our capability, we should start member worlds on the road to conforming to Starfleet designs as soon as possible.

Normally standardizing would net many benefits in terms of economies of scale, as they'd be able to use the much larger Federation-Industrial complex to outfit their ships, probably driving down 'costs,' such as they are. I don't think if this is reflected in the mechanics though. :p
But it also prevents members from experimenting with new design methods or technologies that are more suited to the member world. I would like for our member worlds to be capable of trying out new ideas without being constrained to conforming to the designs Starfleet currently has. The advantage for them trying their own ideas is that if the ideas work, we can easily take the aspects that work well and integrate them into the design ethos for Starfleet itself, and if the idea doesn't work, it will quickly find itself discarded due to a superior alternative. Besides, we are a Federation, not a monolithic entity like our neighbors, and should act as such. As for production, each member world would likely alter the design anyways to suit their purposes anyways (see the B-25 in WWII) so expecting them to become completely uniform is an exercise in futility.
 
Standardization will hurt in the short to mid run, as crews have to be trained on Starfleet-designed layouts, systems, etc. They can no longer swap in crew and officers as easily. Once they're to the point where they're starting to phase out old racial design in favor of modern Starfleet designs, it turns the other way.

Something like the Excelsior over the Fathership is possibly too soon, in these terms. Like, most of our newer members seem to be testing the waters with the Centaur-A, which is absolutely ideal. I don't think it's a huge deal, but letting our members build smaller Starfleet designs before moving to our flagship designs in a slow, many-decades transition overall, will help ease the issues that swapping design philosophies might cause.
 
But it also prevents members from experimenting with new design methods or technologies that are more suited to the member world. I would like for our member worlds to be capable of trying out new ideas without being constrained to conforming to the designs Starfleet currently has. The advantage for them trying their own ideas is that if the ideas work, we can easily take the aspects that work well and integrate them into the design ethos for Starfleet itself, and if the idea doesn't work, it will quickly find itself discarded due to a superior alternative. Besides, we are a Federation, not a monolithic entity like our neighbors, and should act as such. As for production, each member world would likely alter the design anyways to suit their purposes anyways (see the B-25 in WWII) so expecting them to become completely uniform is an exercise in futility.
Must... resist... Borg... reference...
 
[X][PRIORITY] Amarkia Mid Term to Focus on more cargo shipping
[X][BETA] Centaur-A Focus
[X][AMARKI] Focus on building Amarkian Modern Cruisers
[X][CATS] Excelsior
 
But it also prevents members from experimenting with new design methods or technologies that are more suited to the member world. I would like for our member worlds to be capable of trying out new ideas without being constrained to conforming to the designs Starfleet currently has. The advantage for them trying their own ideas is that if the ideas work, we can easily take the aspects that work well and integrate them into the design ethos for Starfleet itself, and if the idea doesn't work, it will quickly find itself discarded due to a superior alternative. Besides, we are a Federation, not a monolithic entity like our neighbors, and should act as such. As for production, each member world would likely alter the design anyways to suit their purposes anyways (see the B-25 in WWII) so expecting them to become completely uniform is an exercise in futility.
Using the B-25 as an example is pretty weird because I somehow doubt the various Mitchells were noticeably different in the way an Excelsior and Fathership are.

The United States and Canada are both Federations. Does the Texas National Guard have indigenous designs? Even the EU has moved to more standardization as the years drag on (although maybe they are a bad example rn given the current political climate :V).

There's really no 'experimenting' they can do that can't be replicated by bringing in their doctrine and design crews into the Federation. Which they already are. It's pretty weird to suggest that would be the case, or that they couldn't use Federation designs to test new tech.
 
There's one huge category of experimentation the member worlds can do that we've made an institutional decision to pretty much ignore: doctrine. We're heavily invested into Lone Ranger, not just in mechanical terms but in psychological terms. There is no realistic chance of other design doctrines being seriously investigated in the foreseeable future.

If we want to have even a clue what a Swarm or Combined Arms fleet would look like, and what kind of designs would best fit that, we may have to trust the member worlds to investigate that. Maybe we'll learn something from watching the Caitians and Apiata implement a different doctrine with ships that suit their needs, rather than just trying to force them to implement it with ships that suit our needs.

[X][PRIORITY] Amarkia Mid Term to Focus on more cargo shipping
[X][BETA] Centaur-A Focus
[X][AMARKI] Focus on building Centaur-As
[X][CATS] Excelsior

I strongly oppose having the Betazoids build Miranda-As. They're cheaper, but they're cheaper because they are less useful as peacetime ships.

Furthermore, the resources they 'save' for the Betazoids to later build Renaissance-class cruisers are limited, and not in the categories where the Betazoids really need to conserve their resources.
 
Last edited:
There's one huge category of experimentation the member worlds can do that we've made an institutional decision to pretty much ignore: doctrine. We're heavily invested into Lone Ranger, not just in mechanical terms but in psychological terms. There is no realistic chance of other design doctrines being seriously investigated in the foreseeable future.

If we want to have even a clue what a Swarm or Combined Arms fleet would look like, and what kind of designs would best fit that, we may have to trust the member worlds to investigate that. Maybe we'll learn something from watching the Caitians and Apiata implement a different doctrine with ships that suit their needs, rather than just trying to force them to implement it with ships that suit our needs.

Lone Ranger is a fleet design doctrine, not a ship design doctrine. It has very little to do with specific ship designs.

There is nothing about the Excelsior or the Centaur-A that is designed for a doctrine choice. For that matter, I see no evidence that Fatherships and Swarmers are built around doctrine choices.
 
The best/worst thing about the Centaur-A is that it's a trash ship in resource efficiency terms. A modern-tech replacement with the exact same stats would cost 75 BR and 45 SR today. That's if we went straight to building the prototype, no research involved. Granted, 1O 2E 3T (because of 3 science), but there's something to be said for it just not being very cheap. I know it's the best ship we can recommend to member worlds right now, but I don't feel it's a very efficient one given that they have very limited budgets.
 
I actually think that after Ambassador our next design should be a better escort, which will hopefully resolve this problem. I guess what it comes down to is that specifically for Betazed, the Miranda-A and its combat focus are simply unacceptable, while for the Amarki, the alternative is to build the Hebrinda-class, which is even more bloated than the Centaur-A.
 
Yeah, I agree that the C-A is the best choice today. But let's not delude ourselves into thinking it's a good design to recommend to member worlds over longer term.

The Renaissance is actually a rather good escort replacement, what with being impossible to build for its costs.
 
Back
Top