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
[x][NAME1] Shallash

It's a Tellarite name, a well know hero there, and it's not Miracht again. Should smooth things over a bit.

[X][CREW] Explorer Corps

[X][NAME2] Defiant

[X][NAME3] Valiant




UberJJK said:
It was part of a mechanics revision that took place ages ago. I guess @OneirosTheWriter never updated that bit of the front page. Here is the relevant quote:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That revision is also incorrect. It is explained later that D+S or D+P is rolled for unplanned events specifically.

Narutosramen said:
So, one solution I propose is something like a "wolf pack" mentality. Where everything but our explorers group up in wolf packs as a standard operating procedure and respond to events together. Say one science ship and one combat ship and one presence ship form a wolf pack, and they go everywhere together and do everything together. This will mitigate risks for our "standard" starfleet vessels, and if explorers do get a ship response they'll get a whole wolf pack as a response. This may reduce the number of events we're able to respond to at one time, but it should provide the ships we have with a generally more positive outcomes from events. Our explorers (except for the unlucky Miracht and Courageous events) seem to be holding their own for the most part.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It was explained that responding in patrol groups is an advantage of Combined Arms fleet design doctrine. Which we did not choose.


lbmaian said:
I thought that there was only one possible event per sector per turn?

Well, I know there are doctrinal bonuses that allow ships to respond to events outside of their sectors, but they do so at a penalty I believe.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We have had multiple events in a sector multiple times. As many as three at once.

Simon_Jester said:
In combat, small ships with good Defense get an "evasion chance" to dodge enemy hits, thus making them last longer.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Pending revision, the effect of D on evasion is marginal. The D stat actually does more for big ships than small ones, small ship evasion is mostly a function of their small size.
 
[x][CREW] Explorer Corps

[x][NAME1] Odyssey

[X][NAME2] Defiant

[X][NAME3] Valiant

[X][BUILD] Base Plan 1 Connie-B, 4 Miranda-A, 1 Excelsior
 
[X][BUILD] Plan 1 Connie-B, 4 Miranda-A, 1 Excelsior

[X][CREW] Explorer Corps

[X][NAME1] Odyssey

[X][NAME2] Defiant

[X][NAME3] Valiant
 
Briefvoice said:
So can someone who has been keeping up with the ship design changes tell me, what is the actual outlook for starting the Ambassador research? Do we know when it will be practical and how long it will take?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well the ship-design changes haven't stopped yet, but right now we can't build Ambasador until new weapons technology unlocks by the look of things. Combat is capped at about 5 right now with the current phasers and torpedoes, as deminishing returns kick in long before the Ambasador gets to what it 'should' have. The actual 'research the ship' phase? I have not a clue how long that will last, but if it takes 2 years for a Cruiser, then 2-3 years would be what I would expect, and I would lean towards the high-end there.
 
Vehrec said:
Well the ship-design changes haven't stopped yet, but right now we can't build Ambasador until new weapons technology unlocks by the look of things. Combat is capped at about 5 right now with the current phasers and torpedoes, as deminishing returns kick in long before the Ambasador gets to what it 'should' have. The actual 'research the ship' phase? I have not a clue how long that will last, but if it takes 2 years for a Cruiser, then 2-3 years would be what I would expect, and I would lean towards the high-end there.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

How can combat be capped at 5 when even the Excelsior class manages a combat of 6? I thought a lot of all this effort was to be able to back-design current ships.

EDIT: See, this feels like one of the things @Simon_Jester was complaining about, where we deprioritized Weapons research for a number of years and all of a sudden it's the choke point for developing new Explorer ships.
 
Last edited:
Briefvoice said:
How can combat be capped at 5 when even the Excelsior class manages a combat of 6? I thought a lot of all this effort was to be able to back-design current ships.

EDIT: See, this feels like one of the things @Simon_Jester was complaining about, where we deprioritized Weapons research for a number of years and all of a sudden it's the choke point for developing new Explorer ships.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ask @AlphaDelta , they're the one who reported this.

Well it is the chokepoint because we are lagging severely in that category compared to traditional federation 'hats' like diplomacy and neglecting secondary areas with our early research-weapons weren't going to be prioritized for the first five years or so and now we're just going to have to bite the bullet and live with our computers being incredible and a decade ahead of everyone elses' while our weapons lag about ten years behind. We'll finish turn-of-the-century development this turn, unless something weird happens, right? Unless we get several new weapons teams as soon as we get 2010s Phaser and Torpedoes, we'll probably still lag a bit at the end of the game, no mistakes there.
 
What's frustrating here isn't that our weapons are crude. It's that we can't design a ship with the same firepower as an Excelsior, despite the new ship being bigger than an Excelsior and presumably having access to the exact same technologies.
 
Simon_Jester said:
What's frustrating here isn't that our weapons are crude. It's that we can't design a ship with the same firepower as an Excelsior, despite the new ship being bigger than an Excelsior and presumably having access to the exact same technologies.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeangst said:
I thought we were on schedule for a 8 Combat Ambassador by 2313?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Briefvoice said:
How can combat be capped at 5 when even the Excelsior class manages a combat of 6? I thought a lot of all this effort was to be able to back-design current ships.

EDIT: See, this feels like one of the things @Simon_Jester was complaining about, where we deprioritized Weapons research for a number of years and all of a sudden it's the choke point for developing new Explorer ships.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It has everything to do with the new ship spreadsheet being incomplete and needing additional iteration on the base stats and even the formulae. In addition, Ambassador parts or even parts we have researched but not used are not listed yet. So an Ambassador design is impossible without using Excelsior parts.

I'll add that I managed to make an Excelsior-stat escort, so C6 ought to be possible.

If you have additional questions we should really go to the SDB thread with them. Questions that are directly about the design spreadsheet is exactly why it exists.
 
Simon_Jester said:
What's frustrating here isn't that our weapons are crude. It's that we can't design a ship with the same firepower as an Excelsior, despite the new ship being bigger than an Excelsior and presumably having access to the exact same technologies.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well yes, we haven't been able to hit the sweet spot that lets us build the Excelsior while also putting the kibosh on things like micro-Enterprises or other crazy designs. The spreadsheets are still very much in flux and the QM only just got back to work on them.
 
Okay, I played with the sheet more and I am proposing a third plan that I that gives us a Constitution-B build and two Centaur-A builds!

[X][BUILD] Base Plan 1 Connie-B, 2 Miranda-A, 2 Excelsior, 2 Centaur-A
-[X] San Francisco 1mt-1 @ Q4: Centaur-A
-[X] San Francisco 1mt-2 @ Q4: Centaur-A
-[X] 40 Eridani A 3mt-A: leave open for Kearsage repair
-[X] Lor'Vela 1mt @ Q2: Constitution-B
-[X] Utopia Planitia 3mt-A @ Q2: Excelsior
-[X] Utopia Planitia 3mt-C @ Q2: Excelsior
-[X] Utopia Planitia 1mt-1 @ Q2: Miranda-A refit [Eketha]
-[X] Utopia Planitia 1mt-2 @ Q2: Miranda-A refit [Calypso]




I believe this is very doable with our resources and gets us a lot of ships fast.

[x][CREW] Explorer Corps

[x][NAME1] Odyssey

[X][NAME2] Defiant

[X][NAME3] Huascar

[X][BUILD] Plan 1 Connie-B, 2 Miranda-A, 2 Excelsior, 2 Centaur-A
 
Last edited:
SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
It has everything to do with the new ship spreadsheet being incomplete and needing additional iteration on the base stats and even the formulae. In addition, Ambassador parts or even parts we have researched but not used are not listed yet. So an Ambassador design is impossible without using Excelsior parts.

I'll add that I managed to make an Excelsior-stat escort, so C6 ought to be possible.

If you have additional questions we should really go to the SDB thread with them. Questions that are directly about the design spreadsheet is exactly why it exists.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not asking for the details, just whether the Ambassador design that @Nix proposed when he made his "Ambassador Design Starting in 2313" Research Plan is still viable.
 
Briefvoice said:
So can someone who has been keeping up with the ship design changes tell me, what is the actual outlook for starting the Ambassador research? Do we know when it will be practical and how long it will take?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Right now, my test builds are looking good for Stats and cost, but massively expensive in crew. There were some discussions of having 'automation' that lets you buy down crew for more cost, but that is not implemented yet.

Also, while I'm posting.
[X][BUILD] Plan 2 Centaur-A, 3 Miranda-A, 1 Excelsior
 
Night said:
Look, if you want non-European ships we can probably do better.

Huascar for a start. Probably the most accomplished ship of the Ironclad Age. (Only serious competition is Carondelet, who is nearly as obscure for being a brown-water ironclad.) Lucky if the name is recognized outside South America.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'd be up for a USS Huascar.
 
When are we planning to start naming explorers after Betazoids, Caitians, and Rigellians? (We already got an Amarki, right, or am I misremembering?)
 
Vote change:
[X][CREW] Explorer Corps
[X][BUILD] Plan 1 Connie-B, 2 Miranda-A, 2 Excelsior, 2 Centaur-A

[x][NAME1] Discovery
[X][NAME2] Defiant
[X][NAME3] Valiant

@Briefvoice - You need to edit in:
[][BUILD] Plan 1 Connie-B, 2 Miranda-A, 2 Excelsior, 2 Centaur-A
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
into your post in addition to the Base Plan vote for it to actually count.

Remember:
[] Base Plan "Name" tells the tally you are creating a plan​
while
[] Plan "Name" tells the tally you are voting for said plan.​
 
Briefvoice said:
Okay, I played with the sheet more and I am proposing a third plan that I that gives us a Constitution-B build and two Centaur-A builds!

[X][BUILD] Base Plan 1 Connie-B, 2 Miranda-A, 2 Excelsior, 2 Centaur-A
-[X] San Francisco 1mt-1 @ Q4: Centaur-A
-[X] San Francisco 1mt-2 @ Q4: Centaur-A
-[X] 40 Eridani A 3mt-A: leave open for Kearsage repair
-[X] Lor'Vela 1mt @ Q2: Constitution-B
-[X] Utopia Planitia 3mt-A @ Q2: Excelsior
-[X] Utopia Planitia 3mt-C @ Q2: Excelsior
-[X] Utopia Planitia 1mt-1 @ Q2: Miranda-A refit [Eketha]
-[X] Utopia Planitia 1mt-2 @ Q2: Miranda-A refit [Calypso]




I believe this is very doable with our resources and gets us a lot of ships fast.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Hmm, this costs 100 more SR and builds one more Centaur-A earlier (and thus costs O-1 E-2 T-2 more quickly). Delays the Miranda-A refits, but those are the lowest priority builds anyway.

I like it - a best of both worlds solution. I'll mention it in my original post to increase its visibility.

You need to actually vote for the plan with a followup "[X][BUILD] Plan 1 Connie-B, 2 Miranda-A, 2 Excelsior, 2 Centaur-A" though, since if you only specify the base plan, it only creates the plan but you yourself haven't voted for that created plan yet.

[X][CREW] Explorer Corps
[X][BUILD] Plan 1 Connie-B, 2 Miranda-A, 2 Excelsior, 2 Centaur-A
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top