Crew

posted on August 23rd, 2009, 9:30 pm

A high crew count for medium-large Klingon ships would make sense becasue of the inevitable abundance of Marines. Not all ships, though; vessels like the B'rel and K'Vort only have a crew of about 12-24.

posted on August 23rd, 2009, 10:54 pm

There is a point in here.

It's ridiculous that a dedicated boarding ship, the Vupta, has only 200 crew to do the boarding. You need to go for the Mixed Tech Klingon/Borg Vutpa to get a semi-decent 425 crew.

A boarding ship should have enough people to board stations ( NOT Borg stations, though ) so two or three ships have a reasonable chance of getting the station.

I think that when you refit/upgrade the Vutpa to boarding ship, the crew count should sensibly increase. I'm not asking for a crew capacity of 1000, but a stock Vupta could have the base 200, an upgraded boarding Vutpa 300, and leave the MT Klingon/Borg Vutpa with 400, if balance is the issue.

I usually find the Fed ships somewhat lacking in crew, to the point that I usually (in single player) prolong purposely the game so I can get a fleet of 6-8 Galaxies for boarding, basically builder capture. I think don't need to comment on how many warp ins you need to get 8 Galaxies. 

posted on August 23rd, 2009, 11:24 pm

IMO all big semi-civilian ships, like the galaxy, sovereign, and the d'deridex should get a crew boost, i'd say a doubling should suffice.

posted on August 24th, 2009, 12:32 am

The sovereign is not a semi-civilian ship. It is a warship, same breed as defiant, just bigger and on the same scale as the galaxy class.

[Tyler]

posted on August 24th, 2009, 1:07 am

Last edited by Tyler on August 24th, 2009, 1:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

The Galaxy is also not semi-civilian. Civilians may live aboard it, but the ship is pure Starfleet. Even the School was run by a Starfleet officer.

I certainly don't see the D'deridex Class as having any relation to anything civilian.

posted on August 27th, 2009, 7:09 pm

Just the design suggests them to be semi-civilian not canon ... but you should know that i seldomly care about canon when I talk about realism or my beliefs what should be. 

Did you never shake with laughter, when you saw armed yachts be declared as military vessels; that a galaxy is cruising in cirical territory with 1,3 crewmembers per meter of lenth, in times where every machine could be automated? No? But perhaps then you are not a person, who laughs about the thouht, that adam and eve truly ate physicly existing fruits from the tree of knowledge.

Well, I believe we watch two different series when retrieving the same audiovisual data named StarTrek.  Perhaps it is too supercilious of me, when I want Fleetops to correct the flaws of StarTrek.

posted on August 28th, 2009, 10:09 am

Did you never shake with laughter, when you saw armed yachts be declared as military vessels; that a galaxy is cruising in cirical territory with 1,3 crewmembers per meter of lenth, in times where every machine could be automated? No? But perhaps then you are not a person, who laughs about the thouht, that adam and eve truly ate physicly existing fruits from the tree of knowledge.

Everything atuomated? Starfleet tried that, over 400 people died when the AI controling the ship fucked up.

posted on August 28th, 2009, 3:13 pm

Good point Tyler .  Remember, the Enterprise D was an "everything" ship. It had labs, and hospitals and gyms, plants, schools, holodecks, weapons, shields, replicators, guest quarters, stellar cartography, a bar , could split in two and still function almost fully as two ships, and still enough room for warp nacelles, antimatter-matter reactors, and however much space the containment field system took up for that. Starfleet was the military, but also exploration, and I was not counting, but in all of the TNG series, wasn't the ammount of crew lost by the Enterprise D (not counting any altered timelines) less than 100?

Compare this to a Galaxy class meant for wartime, Weapons, Shields, replicators, warp engines, power system. I don't know how many crew members that would need, but it sounds like less than all that in the paragraph above.

The Defiant class is OK for crew when it is being borded with regular transporters because of its speed, but in one match I was stole 6 of them because of the Tavara warbirds marines. Can 75 marines realy fit on a ship that is designed for a crew of 50, that has 80? I'm just wondering if the Devs think it is balanced, because it turned the tide for that match, from a stalemate. Mabey some kind of defence against the first marine attack?

( I am also not trying to get the defiant with less crew, a battleship should be tough to board)

posted on August 28th, 2009, 3:38 pm

Everything atuomated? Starfleet tried that, over 400 people died when the AI controling the ship fucked up.

Not that way ... that would be something likee the ATR2107.    You have some unfortunate way of putting things in the most supid way possible, tyler.

An example: The mist crew on a flighter-carrier tiday is used for maintenance. Repairing, reloading guns, sweeping floors, peeling potatoes ... those things become automated one after the other. Thus a normal fighter-carrier will ave a quarter of its crew in the next 30 years. Asides vom ideals like giving a possible authority to the Computer, which is of course dangerous (and I still dont get, why you lay such stupid statements into my post - do you want to provoke or are you drunk?), it is possible to reduce the crew for all the operations to a handful of people, and especially far beyond 1000. Thu it is valid to critizise the idea of the galaxy being a exclusive military vessel.

@ locutus
If you are right about 100 crew an the galaxy, then i revoce my assumptions about that the galaxy should be a semi-civil vessel and will reduce my critizism to the strange cross-section and the inadequatly large saucer.

I agree with your point about the defiant.

posted on August 28th, 2009, 7:22 pm

also remember TNG episode.. yesterday's Enterprise
where Tasha said:

that it was the first Galaxy-class battleship built by the Federation and that Enterprise can transport as many as six thousand troops at once.

posted on August 29th, 2009, 6:45 pm

Oh, I was just saying it only lost 100 people in the series, a testament to the crew's ability to keep themselves and the civilains safe, despite being a "semi-civil" ship sometimes thrust into hostile situations.
I guess the reason they wanted to have so many crew is because if they spent less time on designing machines to take care of the other machines, they could spend more time designing the machines that would do the other work. The designers obviosly would know how to fix them. Star Trek is a world, compared to this one, where there are no resource crisises, and there are new inventions poping up every month. If every second invention was a machine to take care of the last one, the federation would progress so slowly, even the klingons would attack them because they were so far behind.
Just trying to think of why they would do that, because it is a good point. Also why Tyler's point had merit was because Starfleet never wants any deaths, so why risk something with machines like the M5, or anything related.

posted on August 30th, 2009, 12:13 am

Yeah, M-5 had a couple of problems. But, the D'derix being a civilian vessel?  forget that! Galaxy vessels had civilians, (When not in combat missions) but there was saucer separation that could evacuate the families.  Given the Romulans war-like nature I bet they would have no civilians on board any active vessels what-so-ever. Especially not a warbird near the neutral zone or anything.