On starfleet and exploration vs blowing things up

[Sionnach Glic]

You mean the war that Federation won becuse of their diplomatic skills.

Uh, the Federation won because they had infected the Founders with a virus. The Dominion agreed to back down in exchange for the cure.

Against an enemy that had unlimited man power and record ship building speeds. The war where the Dominion rammed more ships then shoot out of space.

The Federation did not win on their own. They had the Klingons helping them from the start, and even had to trick the Romulans into helping them out to have any hope of winning. Even then, they weren't doing great.

And if I'm not mistaken no gsc was destroyed since Odesey.

I'm sure there were plenty lost during the war.

[sunnyside]

On the subject of having explorers/diplomats/warships instead of a single multirole vessel. I think an issue with this is that it would seem to take a lot more resources to make three ships with equivalent capabilities because you'd have to duplicate redundant systems.

Sort of like having three cars instead of one SUV.

The only advantage to that is when a hologram goes nuts or the crew of one ship turns into animals or whatever there are two seperate independent ships out there. However I'm not sure how often that happens outside of the enterprises. Also depending on how much you save in resources making multirole ships they might just consider it worth it to lose a few.


And while I don't know how often it matters I think it's rather politically expedient to have multirole ships. What's that you say? You need a diplomat and a venue to host negotiations? Well we'll send you our best diplomat in a ship with full accomodations for all parties involved....... a Soverign. Oh look he found something with the ships advanced scanners! And wouldn't you know it now he's shooting stuff!

[Mikey]

You are correct, Sunnyside, and I'm not saying that there should be equivalent peacetime and wartime fleets. I am saying that there has to be A number of warships, which would be less resource-intensive than building exact duplicates and upgrading them for wartime.

[mlsnoopy]

Uh, the Federation won because they had infected the Founders with a virus. The Dominion agreed to back down in exchange for the cure

They won beacuse Sisko was the "emisery".
They didn't get a piric victory becuse Odo was a friend.

The Federation did not win on their own. They had the Klingons helping them from the start, and even had to trick the Romulans into helping them out to have any hope of winning. Even then, they weren't doing great

They are great "diplomats".

I'm sure there were plenty lost during the war

Gsc formed the back bone of the fleet that took back DS9 and that attacked chintoka. They performed well. Are good ships.

I forgot the Breen.

[Sionnach Glic]

They won beacuse Sisko was the "emisery".
They didn't get a piric victory becuse Odo was a friend.

Although I haven't seen the episode in a long time, but in What You Leave Behind I'm pretty certain it was due to the plague that the Dominion backed off. IIRC, the Emissary took out one of the Dominion's fleets, but that was hardly the act that won the war.

They are great "diplomats".

Uh, how is that at all related to the points I made? I point out that the Federation had to ally with other powers or trick them into fighting the Dominion, to which you reply that they are good diplomats?

Gsc formed the back bone of the fleet that took back DS9 and that attacked chintoka. They performed well. Are good ships.

They could still be a lot better. If Starfleet had had a GCS-sized ship devoted purely for combat around, their losses wouldn't have been nearly as high.
As for the Galaxy class being a good design; you have seen TNG, right? They're by far the most accident prone and flawed ships in sci-fi history.

[mlsnoopy]

the Emissary took out one of the Dominion's fleets

Remember how Dukat tried to open the wormhole using the (phawreig jlajfjjlkdsng). To wormhole was blocked first by the mine field than by the profets.

Uh, how is that at all related to the points I made? I point out that the Federation had to ally with other powers or trick them into fighting the Dominion, to which you reply that they are good diplomats

Well they are not good diplomats but are good "diplomats".

They could still be a lot better. If Starfleet had had a GCS-sized ship devoted purely for combat around, their losses wouldn't have been nearly as high.
As for the Galaxy class being a good design; you have seen TNG, right? They're by far the most accident prone and flawed ships in sci-fi history

Every ship in scifi could be better. But considering the TNG and the DS9, in DS9 they performed well.

[Monroe]

Grouping ships together, like what Monroe is suggesting, sounds good on paper but could kill any negotiation. A show of force like that shows you have a full time military ready to kill at a moments notice. Many would take this as a threat to "join or die". It also gives the impression of an invasion force. A single ship on the other hand wouldn't seem as threatening even if it had the same firepower.

What's wrong with more threatening?

[Blackstar the Chakat]

Grouping ships together, like what Monroe is suggesting, sounds good on paper but could kill any negotiation. A show of force like that shows you have a full time military ready to kill at a moments notice. Many would take this as a threat to "join or die". It also gives the impression of an invasion force. A single ship on the other hand wouldn't seem as threatening even if it had the same firepower.

What's wrong with more threatening?

You may make them react with their own show of force. It can lead to war. Remember the Cuban missle crisis? Some madman parked a few dozen warheads off the coast of Florda and it almost resulted in World War III. Had someone not backed down that's exactly what would've happened. How would you feel if someone parked a half-dozen warships in your local harbor to negotiate? Compare that to a single warship. Which feels more threating? Which is more likely to cause your country to retaliate?

[RK_Striker_JK_5]

The thing about Trek space is, it's effed up. You need a scientific element to Starfleet ships, or they simply won't be prepared for the element X they'll encoutner, or the time vortex, or the doorway to the Naruto-verse...

And you need the ability to defend yourself if a first-contact mission goes awry, too.

[Mikey]

You may make them react with their own show of force. It can lead to war. Remember the Cuban missle crisis? Some madman parked a few dozen warheads off the coast of Florda and it almost resulted in World War III. Had someone not backed down that's exactly what would've happened. How would you feel if someone parked a half-dozen warships in your local harbor to negotiate? Compare that to a single warship. Which feels more threating? Which is more likely to cause your country to retaliate?

You're using a flawed paradigm. Put it this way: what would you rather see anchored in your harbor to negotiate - the Calypso, a couple of D-E's, and a frigate or some such support craft; or, a single ship like the USS Missouri with her turrets trained on your harbor office?

In that case, I sure as hell WOULDN'T want the single warship from your scenario.

[mwhittington]

It does kinda depend on whether or not your weapons are trained and ready to fire at a moment's notice. "I call it aggressive negotiations."

[Blackstar the Chakat]

A single ship is much easier to defeat. A powerful enough explosive, strapped into a civilian ship could put a big enough dent to force them to at least retreat.

[Mikey]

True. Which may also be construed as a reason to NOT bring a single ship. However, what we're all missing is that no single policy covers all the possible situations. It is true that there are times when a non-threatening stance is called for; it is just as true that there are situations in which a stronger display is more appropriate.

[Captain Seafort]

Depends on the ship. If you take modern warships, some nutter in a dingy can do a lot of damage. A battleship is a lot more resilient. Since Trek uses the battleship model of naval warfare rather than the aircraft carrier model, the big ship would have the advantage over several smaller ones. It goes back to the endless Prommie debates.

As for the best way to negotiate if you want to send a message to someone to do as the Federation aks or else, do it the way the British Empire used to. Send a gunboat to do the actual talking, with the unspoken understanding that there's a sizable battle fleet waiting over the horizon in case of trouble.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

I cannot believe I'm saying this, but I agree with Seafort on this. One negotiating ship, with back-up in the area to prevent the other guys from thinking they can blow it up without retaliation, should be enough as a general rule. Of coarse you may need to adapt for certain situations, but it should work as a baseline.

From the other guy's point of view, the guys with the ships are testing the water and showing their willingness to negotiate by risking one ship, but also shows they aren't stupid enough to not have reinforcements nearby, and don't want to blow you away if the negotiation isn't going the way they want. Or at least gives the first impression to that effect, and first impressions are important. This can usually generate an amount of respect for the guys with the ships.