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
OneirosTheWriter said:
Quarter as well.

Same yard. Same class. Same start quarter.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
One side effect of this is that it incentivizes us to keep "singleton" berths as the ones we free up for "odd man out" stuff like refitting ships and repair work. The duo/trio sets of one and three megaton berths at Vulcan and Utopia Planitia become our main production nodes (once again)
 
It occurs to me that the basic problem with all these "spend pp to accelerate construction" plans is that it applies to two possible cases:

1) Regular ships. Here it doesn't help much, because spending 10pp on ONE SHIP, or rather on having one ship one year sooner, is rarely going to pay off. About the only thing that can ever pay for itself that quickly would be an Explorer Corps ship, which at least has a reasonable chance of paying off 10pp worth of benefits in a year. But our ability to get more Explorer Corps ships is limited by crew recruitment, not by our supply of the ships themselves.

It would be silly to spend, say, 50pp to accelerate five Rennies so they complete in two years rather than one.

2) Prototypes, because it takes painfully long to build them and we are unable to start other ships of the new class until the prototype is done, so speeding things up is much more advantageous. Here, it actually helps significantly to spend 10pp and get a single ship sooner. But you've already told us to expect bad consequences from rush-building prototypes.

As a result, people who accelerate ship builds at a pp cost almost never get picked unless there's an ulterior motive in play.
 
San Fran Fleet Yards-pair of 1 mt berths
40 Erdani A(Vulcan)-pair of 3mt and 1mt
Ana Font(Tellar)-none
Lor'Vela (Andor)-none
UP-3 3mt and 3 1mt.
We have 1 3mt, 2 2.5mt and 2 1mt berth that can not have the bonus be applied, the rest of our current yards can.

San Fran Fleet Yards has 2 connie-B's finishing 2312.Q4

Eridani A has a 2 year gap between Excelsior builds which will be hard to sink short of using it to repair damaged Excelsiors. It does have two Connie B's finishing 2313.Q1.

UP has two 3mt berths freeing up 2312.Q2 and 2 1mt berths freeing up 2312.Q2 as well. The 3rd mt Berth frees up 2313.Q1. If her ability worked for refits I would say do two Miranda refits there to keep it busy for three quarters. Still leaving them idle for three quarters to start 3 excelsiors at UP in 2313 may be worth it.
The 3rd 1mt berth is the renisance, so we can work the 1mt berths by doing refits to be ready for a triple renisance build and shave off 3 quarters.
 
Last edited:
[X][SYO] Rear Admiral Patricia Chen
Simon_Jester said:
It occurs to me that the basic problem with all these "spend pp to accelerate construction" plans is that it applies to two possible cases:

1) Regular ships. Here it doesn't help much, because spending 10pp on ONE SHIP, or rather on having one ship one year sooner, is rarely going to pay off. About the only thing that can ever pay for itself that quickly would be an Explorer Corps ship, which at least has a reasonable chance of paying off 10pp worth of benefits in a year. But our ability to get more Explorer Corps ships is limited by crew recruitment, not by our supply of the ships themselves.

It would be silly to spend, say, 50pp to accelerate five Rennies so they complete in two years rather than one.

2) Prototypes, because it takes painfully long to build them and we are unable to start other ships of the new class until the prototype is done, so speeding things up is much more advantageous. Here, it actually helps significantly to spend 10pp and get a single ship sooner. But you've already told us to expect bad consequences from rush-building prototypes.

As a result, people who accelerate ship builds at a pp cost almost never get picked unless there's an ulterior motive in play.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hmm, does Chen's bonus apply to prototypes? Obviously the Ambassador prototype would be far too expensive to build two of them, but the next escort design might be cheap enough for getting it 6 months earlier being worth paying the prototype cost twice.
 
Nix said:
Hmm, does Chen's bonus apply to prototypes? Obviously the Ambassador prototype would be far too expensive to build two of them, but the next escort design might be cheap enough for getting it 6 months earlier being worth paying the prototype cost twice.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The more important question would be: do we actually WANT to build pairs of prototypes? They ARE prototypes for a reason...
 
We can refit our ships to take up our shipbuilding time, can't we? That'll help extend our crew time.
 
Even without the bonuses

[X] [SYO] Rear Admiral Patricia Chen

Seems to be well qualified to be a vice admiral. The other two candidates seem useful, but don't have the breadth of experiance, and are not people we want to bring with us in front of the council. Ask not what your Vice Admirals can do for you. Ask what they can do for the Dog and Pony show.
 
[X][SYO] Rear Admiral Patricia Chen

Goat said:
A massive ship building time reduction WILL make any crew/resource shortfalls more of an issue though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Night said:
...though this is going to make our crew problems so much worse.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That just allows for retiring old desingns instead of "but we MUST refit them because we can't build newer replacement".
...
Just getting it after all those refit pushes stings.

I wonder if we can pull members fleet modernization too...
 
Last edited:
A couple things on the subject of ship design and builds while it's relevant and while the results of my event tabulation are still percolating.

Lone Ranger doctrine suggests that one explorer can respond to each event and the one other responding ship with best stats can assist them. I reviewed the bonuses of each ship design doctrine and LR's really are very good, so I doubt we'll be swapping.

I'm unsure exactly how ship assignment works when there are multiple events but there have been cases when other ships are "busy" and that's how you get Mirandas investigating anomalys they can't handle. RIP USS Lion.

There's some incentive, therefore, to:
- Post two explorers per sector. This means that there is always an explorer available as backup for a second event. Obviously the cost is far too much right now, but at around the time of the Ambassador roll-out, perhaps. At least for sectors where we'd expect important events.
- Especially post two explorers per Forward Defence border zone. Once we have the FD +event techs, the more explorers we have garrisoning border zones the better as each will respond to separate events under Lone Ranger doctrine.
- Have the ships that respond in backup to the explorer be a cruiser. If we're only getting one explorer in response, then the second best ship should ideally be the best we can put forward.
- Garrison with garrison-focused cruisers rather than garrison-focused escorts. Cruisers benefit from +1 to response rolls under LR. They are also will generally have better stats. We've been building tough cruisers that can handle themselves in a scuffle, and the canon statlines seem to lean that way, but I would suggest moving away from that in the future to generalist cruisers with good S and P even if their combat ability or defence score is less. The Cheron has been setting the flagship example for this type.
- Specialize escorts away from the Defence stat, so that when they do respond, it's only to events they're designed to handle. Alternately, once garrison requirements are overflowing, leave some escorts unassigned if they aren't specialized, or stack non-specialized escorts in zones where multiple explorers are likely to respond to everything and they'd only come as backup.

Basically, I am suggesting that instead of a 2325 garrison escort, we built a 2325 garrison cruiser, either 1mt, or possibly just ignoring that and going for larger like 1.2 or 1.5mt. Science escorts and spammable cheap escorts are still good, but the garrison escort seems questionable to me when size significantly constrains capability.
 
So I've been playing out the consequences of this in my shipbuild, and it's just like you'd think....

NEED MORE CREW.

Also, you end up wanting to start four Excelsiors in one year.
 
SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
A couple things on the subject of ship design and builds while it's relevant and while the results of my event tabulation are still percolating.

Snip: Doctrine/SDB/Events Blabbing
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Forward Defense also allows border zone fleets a chance to respond to home sector events. Also the Cheron is still an explorer class, and has a grade of experience, part of why it is so good. But yeah having a second generalist ship to add the response would be solid. For example an Excelsior with a Centaur-A or Connie-B has a combined +8 to S or P rolls.

Briefvoice said:
So I've been playing out the consequences of this in my shipbuild, and it's just like you'd think....

NEED MORE CREW.

Also, you end up wanting to start four Excelsiors in one year.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
4? I see we have 3 and 2 for berths that can start parallel Excelsiors, really only need to synch up in yard berths. Like UP, if we hold for three quarters on A and C then B frees up and we can run 3 excelsiors there. Eridani A though is out of sync by 3 years though. Also I think you want to plan on the 3mt San Francisco Fleet yard berth being the one for the Ambassador prototype since that does have a paired berth.
 
OneirosTheWriter said:
Okay, updated as per the audit after it checked out.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

@OneirosTheWriter, I went ahead and did a ship-by-ship audit. It's not really important, but I did find some things that you missed:

USS Enterprise: additional +25 relations with Kadeshi and gained that Kadeshi journey opportunity
USS Sarek: New Mining Colony Option, Corvo System, +5 (10) sr/yr, astounded Amarki
USS Cheron: reduce Corruption value on Nor'Orion
USS Gale: 1 Tech casualty (not sure if this should be included there, but if the FYM losses are included, why not?)

The most important thing here is that new Corvo System +5 (10) sr/yr mining colony option, if you're actually using these ship-by-ship tallies for determining future snakepit options. Just want to ensure that that new option is not forgotten about.

Briefvoice said:
So I've been playing out the consequences of this in my shipbuild, and it's just like you'd think....

NEED MORE CREW.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yup, crew income-related snakepit options are now more important than new berths in my opinion: Academy expansions, retiring Seruk or introducing VA Personnel position, hopefully something else pops up
 
So for 2312 shipyard ops:
San Fran Fleet yards-2 1mt berths opening 2312.Q4

Eridani A-3mt open 2312.Q1-start Excelsior (will finish in 2316.Q1, berth B has an Excelsior finishing 2315.Q1)

Lor'Vela-1mt open 2312.Q2 (no other 1mt berth at facility)

UP-2 3mt berths finishing in 2312.Q2 (third 3mt berth at UP is open 2313.Q1 so if we wait we can run 3 Excelsiors at once here)
2 1mt berths finishing 2312.Q2 (third 1mt berth opens 2314.Q1-renissance prototype)
 
Void Stalker said:
So for 2312 shipyard ops:
San Fran Fleet yards-2 1mt berths opening 2312.Q4

Eridani A-3mt open 2312.Q1-start Excelsior (will finish in 2316.Q1, berth B has an Excelsior finishing 2315.Q1)

Lor'Vela-1mt open 2312.Q2 (no other 1mt berth at facility)

UP-2 3mt berths finishing in 2312.Q2 (third 3mt berth at UP is open 2313.Q1 so if we wait we can run 3 Excelsiors at once here)
2 1mt berths finishing 2312.Q2 (third 1mt berth opens 2314.Q1-renissance prototype)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I have a somewhat different proposal....



So, how this works is that when the Eridani-A 3mt berth opens up, we put the Kearsage repair in it. This plus a Centaur-A filler allows us to "synch up" that berth with the other one producing an Excelsior so that they can begin new builds at the same time in 2315. Meanwhile we use the two 3mt berths in UP opening up Q2 to begin twin Excelsior builds.

Eridani A-3mt open 2312.Q1-Kearsage repair
Lor'Vela-1mt open 2312.Q2 - start Constitution-B
UP-2 3mt berths finishing in 2312.Q2 - Start 2 Excelsiors
UP-2 1mt berths finishing in 2312.Q2 - Miranda refits
SF-2 1mt berths finihsing in 2312Q4 - Miranda refits.
 
I was wondering how the current builds line up. Seems good to me.

Edit:
Let's see if I've got this right.
Bonus only applies to parallel new builds:

Explorers:
Begin 2 Excelsiors in 2312Q2 at UP - finish 2315Q1
Begin 1 Excelsior in 2313Q1 at TP - finish 2316Q4 (no bonus)
Begin 1 Excelsior in 2314Q1 at SF - finish 2317Q4 (no bonus)
Begin 2 Excelsiors in 2315Q2 at 40E - finish 2318Q1

Cruisers:
Begin 2 Rennies in 2314Q2 at SF - finish 2316Q2
Begin 3 Rennies in 2314Q2 at UP - finish 2316Q2

Escorts:
No new builds scheduled.

The crew supply is going to really be hit hard in 2315-7 with 5 Rennies looking for crew in late 2315 and then 3 Excelsiors in late 2316/early 2317.

I assume UP will be building 2 or 3 more Excelsiors after the current build (depends on if Ambassador prototype?) and if the yards are doing serial Rennie production (so another 5) that is another 2-3 Excelsior and 5 Rennie crews in 2317-2318 on top of the above.

For those tracking crew numbers, how short are we?
 
Last edited:
[Vulcans stare for a moment]

"So... what you're saying is... after we complete Stargazer, we just... don't build another Excelsior right away?"

Patricia Chen: "That's right. You do something else for a while. Live a little. Reconnect with the little ships."

Vulcans: "...Logical!"

Or maybe we could do an Oberth instead of a Centaur-A; a few more science vessels wouldn't hurt. As it stands we have so few of those that we're deploying them almost entirely for the military utility of their sensors. We want them doing SCIENCE! too. The poor Gaeni have never even seen one of our Oberths, and the Indorions could probably find a lot of advantages to our advanced sensors helping them expand their industries, for instance.

wkz said:
The more important question would be: do we actually WANT to build pairs of prototypes? They ARE prototypes for a reason...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They're prototypes because they're the first ship of a class that we've specifically decided we want after a complex, detailed design process. I wouldn't worry too much.

al103 said:
[X][SYO] Rear Admiral Patricia Chen

That just allows for retiring old desingns instead of "but we MUST refit them because we can't build newer replacement".
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Honestly, we'd want to refit the older ships before mothballing them anyway, because in case of a war or other emergency, we'll need every ship we can get and we might as well get the best ships we can.

Having a larger fleet is nearly always advantageous compared to having a smaller one, as long as we stay below the combat cap. So I'd still recommend doing everything in our power to keep (refitted) old ships in service while building the new ones, unless there is genuinely no other way to crew the new ships.
 
Briefvoice said:
I have a somewhat different proposal....



So, how this works is that when the Eridani-A 3mt berth opens up, we put the Kearsage repair in it. This plus a Centaur-A filler allows us to "synch up" that berth with the other one producing an Excelsior so that they can begin new builds at the same time in 2315. Meanwhile we use the two 3mt berths in UP opening up Q2 to begin twin Excelsior builds.

Eridani A-3mt open 2312.Q1-Kearsage repair
Lor'Vela-1mt open 2312.Q2 - start Constitution-B
UP-2 3mt berths finishing in 2312.Q2 - Start 2 Excelsiors
UP-2 1mt berths finishing in 2312.Q2 - Miranda refits
SF-2 1mt berths finihsing in 2312Q4 - Miranda refits.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What are you planning to do with UP 3mt-B though? It seems like that would be better to synch up with the other two 3mt berths at UP for running 3 excelsior's at 3 year build times with the san fran fleet yard being open for the ambassador prototype once it comes time.
 
Void Stalker said:
What are you planning to do with UP 3mt-B though? It seems like that would be better to synch up with the other two 3mt berths at UP for running 3 excelsior's at 3 year build times with the san fran fleet yard being open for the ambassador prototype once it comes time.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

RAW, that probably doesn't work.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top