From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 01:25:49 -0500
Subject: Naval Quality Poll [ Long but worth it I hope ]
I'll advance a slightly different standard to what beth suggested, though along the same lines. Here is what one might want to rate a Star Navy upon. Note the rating charts at the end are based on my conceptions of how the historical antecedents molded together to form what we appear to have in the modern GZGverse so are subject to debate. Crews: 1) Training - How well was the crew trained? How often? How qualified and current were the instructors and techniques? How pertinent was the training? A rating of 1 indicates a crew rarely or poorly trained. A rating of 5 indicates a crew that trains constantly with state of the art technology and instruction techniques constantly modified to reflect current operational experience by quality instructors. 2) Professionalism - What are the traditions of the service and how do its members carry themselves? Do they carry out their duties reluctantly given the risks or willingly and even enthusiastically? Do they fear the job and its dangers or do they relish the work and the challenge? Does the service have a tradition of soldiering on in the face of anything with a stiff upper lip, or of cutting and running at the first sign of spine in the enemy? A rating of 1 means a very reluctant crew or a crew from a navy with a history of defeat and no confidence. A rating of 5 means a confident crew willing to enthusiastically tackle even dangerous work and with a lot of belief in their own abilities. 3) Experience - Has the average crew likely never fired a shot in anger? Or has every crew in the service been to hell and back? Will they panic at the sight of the enemy due to too little experience or too much? Or will they carry on like veterans even as the hull caves in from missile impacts? A rating of 1 means an inexperienced and nervous crew, or perhaps a crew beaten to the point of being broken. A rating of 5 means almost a fatalistic sense of apathy that allows the crew to operate like a well oiled combat machine or alternately showing only that spark of fear that makes men perform at 110%, but that does not control them. 4) Spirit - Are the crew drawn from warrior cultures that train from youth in martial ways? Or are they from a culture of pacifism? Are they the kind to take a kick in the teeth as a signal to stay down or to get up, rip off the leg, and beat the offender to death with it? A rating of 1 means a group of p'tah unworthy to crawl the bilges of a Klingon garbage scow, whereas a rating of 5 means a crack crew of Warrior-Poets, singing as they meet the foe in mortal combat. (Okay, I wax unduly poetic, but you get the idea). 5) Uniformity - How uniform is the distribution of training, experience, etc. across their Navy? A rating of 1 implies that their are bastions of high skill and cess pits of low skill commonly scattered across their forces. A rating of 5 implies a very even distribution, with no one area having more than its share of great crews, or of bad ones. Officer Corps: 1) Training - as above, except as it applies to their officer corps (command rank) 2) Professionalism - ditto 3) Experience - ditto 4) Freedom To Act - How much freedom to act are officers below flag rank granted? Can a Captain start a war based on a suspicion? Can he cross a border to attack an enemy fleet that has not yet done anything but collect? Or is he afraid to alter his orders to transfer baby food from planet Gerber to planet Pampers even though the Evil Zargothian Death Hordes have piled across his borders and headed for his fleet base? A rating of 1 implies extreme timidity, where officers fear the repercussions of their actions and will not alter even their most minor of orders without higher authority. A rating of 5 implies Captains who don't fear to take command of small planets if the need arises. 5) Uniformity - as in the example for crew Flag Ranks: 1) Training - as above, but as it pertains to flag rank officers and covering such things as large scale wargames, simulations, live fire excercises, etc. 2) Professionalism - similarly so 3) Experience - ditto 4) Freedom to Act - Admirals and the like are political beasts, and this represents how much they feel free to act without the authority of those higher on the political food chain. A rating of 1 implies political hacks, a rating of 5 implies a relative impugnity to outside influence and a freedom to act as necessary. 5) Uniformity - similar to that above, how uniform is the level of flag rank skills across the upper echelons of the Star Navy? 6) Strategic Insight - A special skill of flag officers and those involved in the big picture. Can the Admiral be suckered with a simple yet apparently valuable target a sector away, thus exposing a flank? Or is the Admiral likely to appear to take the bait while actually suckering the force that lays a trap for him? Can the Admiral see moves within moves within moves, or is he lucky to spot broad strategic trends? Is he subtle and perceptive, or obvious and straightforward? A rating of 1 suggests a low level of insight - a straightforward player with little subtlety and little depth of perception. A rating of 5 suggests a player of so many levels of games most of us would be lost trying to catalogue them. No act is for such a person an unmotivated act.... Fleet Vessels: 1) Maintenance Quality - A rating of 1 here implies crews or techs just barely give the ship enough attention to keep it spaceworthy, whether from incompetence, apathy, or actual antipathy. A rating of 5 implies the techs take great care of the ships, with excellent skills, and this is enhanced by great efforts from motivated crews. Tip top fighting ships. 2) Maintenance Frequency - A rating of 1 implies this Star Navy either through calumny or through situation presses its ships to or beyond their normal operational limits without proper maintenance on an on-going basis. A rating of 5 implies more-than required maintenance leading to minimal wear. 3) Design Quality - A rating of 1 implies some fool who failed engineering school drew the plans on a napkin, got a marketing guy, and sold the plans to the NAC Admiralty. A rating of 5 implies some genius who failed engineering school because the Philistines couldn't appreciate him drew an incredible design on a napkin, got a marketing guy, and sold his plans for the Uberkillership to the NSL Naval Design Board. 4) Average Operational Life - A rating of 1 means ships of this force, for whatever reason, tend to drop out of service in 60-75% of the projected normal operational life. A rating of 5 means often times the force manages to squeeze 200% of the operational life out of its aging yet somehow still effective vessels. Now, having come up with these categories, let me suggest some quality levels Crew TRAIN PROF EXP SPIRIT UNIFORMITY NAC 4 4 4 4 4 One of the best all around NSL 4 4 3 4 3 Good, but less uniform than the NAC FSE 3 3 3 3 2 Of kind of varying quality ESU 2 3 4 3 2 varying quality, but have fought in a lot of spots NI 3 3 3 4 4 smaller, but good IF 2 2 3 3 1 given to feudal structure RH? <I have no idea> IC? <ditto> OU 3 3 2 3 3 good navy, but can't fight too much JAP 4 3 1 3 3 almost never has to fight SWISS 3 3 1 2 3 good navy, doesn't get out much LLAR 2 2 2 3 2 poor and often harried UNSC 4 3 3 3 3 A force with potential yet unrealized FCT 2 2 2 4 2 A little Texican *style* in space KNG 3 4 2 3 4 Small, professional, doesn't fight much though PAU 2 2 4 3 3 Lots of fights, but not backed with lots of bucks KRAVAK 4 4* 4 5 2 * - For different reasons ... GHURKA 1 3 2 5 4 very small, poor, and little skilled in ships New French 2 2 2 3 4 =========================================================== Officer Corps TRAIN PROF EXP FREED UNIFORMITY NAC 4 4 4 3 4 very professional officer corps, but some timidity (politics) NSL 4 4 3 4 4 second best in space FSE 3 3 3 3 3 ESU 3 3 4 2 3 big, but more variable than the NAC NI 3 3 3 3 4 good, but aware of their limits IF 2 2 3 3 2 variable with the caliph in question RH? <I have no idea> IC? <ditto> OU 3 4 2 3 4 a good force, high standards JAP 4 4 2 2 4 well trained, very disciplined SWISS 3 3 2 3 3 LLAR 2 2 2 3 2 poorly funded, hard pressed UNSC 5 3 2 3 3 great training, big future once experience acquired FCT 3 3 3 4 2 some good leaders in this lot KNG 3 4 2 4 4 small force with confidence in its officers PAU 2 2 3 4 2 not the best disciplined KRAVAK 4 4* 5 3 2 (as above for note) GHURKA 2 4 2 3 4 aspire to RN standards New French 2 3 3 3 4 small cadre of good men ============================================ Flag Officers TRAIN PROF EXP FREED UNIFORMITY STRATINS NAC 4 4 4 3 4 3 sometimes too political or timid or arrogant NSL 3 4 3 4 3 4 dangerously effective FSE 3 3 3 3 3 3 best in fighter warfare ESU 2 3 4 3 3 4 good at what they do if allowed by commissars NI 2 3 2 4 2 3 not a very big flag staff IF 1 2 2 4 1 1 often the caliph, with little training RH? <I have no idea> IC? <ditto> OU 2 3 2 3 4 3 good solid mid power JAP 3 3 1 2 4 3 smart, but restricted SWISS 2 3 1 2 4 2 small staff, rarely tried LLAR 2 2 2 3 3 2 thrown at the job UNSC 3 3 2 2 3 3 not bad, ways to go yet FCT 2 2 3 5 2 4 some smart cookies, don't play by rules KNG 3 4 2 4 4 3 small effective flag staff PAU 1 2 2 3 2 2 not well versed in large fleets KRAVAK 3 4* 3 4 2 4 dangerous, but not as much in large forces GHURKA 1 3 1 3 4 1 haven't really got this yet New French 1 3 2 3 4 3 a bit of background helps the NFR ================================================ Space Fleet: MAINTQ MAINTF DESIGNQ SERVLIFE NAC 4 3 2 3 should have hired better designers NSL 4 3 4 3 good german engineering FSE 3 3 3 3 ESU 2 2 3 3 they run em long n hard NI 4 3 3 4 stretch to last IF 2 1 2 2 not the pick of the litter RH? <I have no idea> IC? <ditto> OU 3 3 4 4 built to last because they must JAP 4 4 4 4 hey, it's Japanese hardware! SWISS 3 3 4 3 good designers, also make watches LLAR 2 1 2 3 don't know how they last UNSC 3 3 4? not around long enough yet FCT 4 3 3 3 take care of yer star hoss! KNG 4 4 3 4 sharp bunch PAU 2 2 2 4 it runs, sort of. KRAVAK 3 3 3 3 nothing special, just alien GHURKA 2 4 2 4 kept working by frequent reworking New French 3 4 3 4 another small power working on long lifespans Final thoughts: Professionalism isn't always lower than you'd expect because a nation wants it so. It is sometimes hard to make work. Same goes for training - it doesn't reflect always a poor attitude - sometimes just poor tech or budget or time alloted. And sometimes a limited freedom to act is a result of politics... such as scarcity of supply. This colours strategy, but doesn't make bad officers or admirals. Anyway, as usual, I welcome counterpoints. Hope this was of some interest. G'night list. T.