Headlines Stardate 20406.01

HEADLINES

Site Reorganization!

Undoubtedly many of you have already noticed some of the changes on the board in how the ships are organized. Let me explain, in full, the changes and give you a heads up on the why of what we’re doing. Please understand the reorg is still a work in progress and some of what is reported below may change.

The very first idea we’re working with here is to getting rid of the multiple fleet concept. No longer will there be a 1st through 8th fleet. Instead, all of the ships from the various fleets will be dropped into one pool of ships. You will see the content on the site change to match the one fleet concept.

In lieu of the fleet concept, we will be working with a group concept where like ships, with similar mission styles, are grouped together. For instance, the Copernicus and the Yeager make up the 3rd Exploration Group because, though they are different ships, they share similar mission and capabilities. Right now, we’re primarily using Battle Groups and Exploration Groups. However, other types of groups may be added in the near future such as Carrier Groups, Marine Battle Groups, or Science Groups.

Though each group will have a group commander, I have not completely decided what their responsibilities will be. Right now, it’s likely the Group Commanders will be administrative positions responsible for auditing point charts and captain’s logs. It’s also likey they will not be directly in the chain of command. Those specifics are yet to be hammered out. Points will flow pretty much as they always have from the DH’s to the FO’s to the CO’s. From the CO’s, they will go to the group commanders and then to the CINC for posting. It’s possible that points may also go through the Chief of Star Fleet Operations, but that hasn’t been determined at this point.

It’s probable that a new position will be created to replace the existing Fleet Commanders. Right now, I’m calling that position the Chief of Star Fleet Operations. We haven’t filled that position yet, but it will likely be one of the existing fleet commanders. The Chain of Command will probably run from the DH to the FO to the CO to the CSFO. Again, this hasn’t been set in stone yet and will be dependent upon how much authority we are going to give the group commanders.

Now let me discuss why these changes are being made.

1. From an administrative standpoint, it is easier to manage the ships in smaller groups. At the end of the month, when point tables are due, the group commanders will audit only 3 tables instead of the current 5 that the fleet commanders do. It’s also felt that with smaller groups, it will be easier for the group commanders to know what’s going on in their group. In short, a more responsive chain of command. (That’s the hope, at least.)

2. Creatively, it allows us more flexibility in regards to mission types. Under the old, fleet, system, ships of the second fleet should have, primarily, been dealing with the Romulans. Under the new system, we can take a group and send them to Cardassian space for one set of missions and take the same group to Breen space for the next set of missions. In other words, the groups are not tied ‘geographically’ to any one location. In addition, groups can combine to form Task Forces for joint missions/plots. This will aid us with organization on the board because we can create a Task Force topic and place any ships involved in that task force’s mission under that topic. It also allows crews that haven’t had the opportunity work together because of fleet divisions the chance to interact.

3. The Fleet/Fleet Commander was something devised from the very beginning of the site. As the site has grown and continues to grow, it’s important to keep pace with the changes growth brings. For example, if we used the original rank tables from the beginning of the game, we’d have several admirals and more captains than lieutenants. As the site grew, we determined the point chart had to change. The same thing has happened here. We’ve grown to 8 ships and are almost ready for our 9th. The old Fleet Commander system, though not a bad system, cannot meet the requirements placed upon it. Why? Because there are too few fleet commanders that can devote the time necessary and have the outright skill to perform in that position.

The site’s constitution is being completely rewritten to explain each position, including the new ones. However, it will take time to rewrite that document.

Rank and Position On the Site

I have said in the past that if you’re playing strictly for points/position, then you’re playing for the wrong reason. While I still believe that, I also understand that almost everyone wants to move up and eventually become a FO or CO on the site. However, just because you achieve the rank of Commander, does not mean you will simply be placed in a command position automatically. First Officer candidates are selected on the recommendation of the Group Commanders and the Chief of Star Fleet Operations. Essentially, a list is forwarded to a CO in need of a FO and they choose from that list. It is a competitive process with no guarantees you will be selected regardless of what your rank is. There have been numerous LCdr’s selected over Cdr’s to become FO’s. In the end, it’s the CO’s choice who they take as FO.

On a related note, I’d like to open a discussion about our current rank structure. Note: I’m bringing this up here because of a discussion taking place on the VBB board.

When I first suggested capping players at a certain rank, my first choice was NOT to cap at commander. Instead, my thought was to cap at LCdr. My reasoning there was that department heads should be either Lt’s or LCdrs and the Cdr rank should be reserved for the FO/CO position as it is a command rank. When I sought counsel about capping the players at a certain rank I was advised by several sources to cap at Cdr because LCdr might be too low and several of you might get upset. Particularly those of you that were close to Cdr in points.

After seeing the discussion on the VBB board, I decided I’d bring the issue before you, the general membership and let you decide where you would like the cap to fall.

My thought is this: LCdr should become the cap rank with each rank afterwards a new cap rank. In other words, a player would be capped at LCdr until selected as a FO. At that time, their cap becomes Commander. They cannot be promoted to Captain until they are awarded command of a ship. A Captain would be capped until the occupy a position that requires their promotion to Commodore (For example, a Group Commander) After Commodore, a player could progress normally as the admiralty ranks require a considerable amount of time to progress.

Again this is just an idea that I’m throwing out for you to consider. I will run a poll on the VBB board that will basically be a membership vote to either keep it the way it currently is, or to change it to the suggestion above. I also welcome a free debate of this issue here.

After the voting was finished, the majority voted to adopt the LCdr rank cap.

Using the Chain of Command

If you want a problem solved, please use the chain of command and give us a little time to work it out. It may take a week or two, but it will get resolved to the best of our ability. If the problem is ongoing month after month and you’re not being heard, contact your Group Commander. If that doesn’t work, contact me. The chain of command is there for a reason, but you need to use it and give us a reasonable amount of time to respond.

I understand that no one wants to play in an atmosphere that makes them unhappy, but you have to realize that everyone on the site has a real life including school, work, family, friends, etc. When there is a problem, it takes us time to resolve it. We have to email the parties involved, get all the stories straight, identify what the issue is, then resolve it. This takes time. If you expect to come to us with a problem and have it fixed in a day, you’re asking for the impossible. The players on this site cover many different countries and continents and we all can’t be online at the same time to resolve an issue immediately.

It has also come to my attention that several people have been going around the chain of command to try and get what they want when they have been told no by the people they are supposed to contact, or they simply don’t want to take the chance of being told no. You need to use the proper chain of command to get your questions answered. If you’re contacting a fellow player about becoming an AI, or another GM to request being a GM, or sending a mission outline to a CO rather than the VCINC, you’re not using the proper chain of command. If you’re not sure who to ask, ask in Red Alert in the FAQ section and you will be pointed in the right direction.

The "I Quit" Syndrome

Lately there has been an influx of players threatening to quit the site or their positions on the site for one reason or another that they are unhappy about. As anyone who has worked in the Academy knows, I feel that the established players and new players, are the life blood of Federation Space. However, when you email myself or one of the CO’s or FC’s with a problem and your opening sentence is a threat, you’re basically trying to blackmail the person into making sure your problem is resolved, or else you’re leaving.

More often than naught, the first time I hear about an issue is when someone threatens to quit or resign their position/membership. Simply put, that’s a childish way of dealing with a situation and my tolerance for that approach has pretty much faded to nil. My response will likely be to address that individuals concern to the best of my ability and then accept their resignation. On the surface, the may seem harsh, and maybe it is. However, that’s the way it’s going to be.

On a related note, in the past I have bent over backwards to not punish those who quit or abandon their characters under the rules of the Constitution. The Constitution states that if you quit with the intent of not returning, you forfeit your rank and points and must start over again. If you abandon your character, (not posting for over 30 days without contacting anyone to explain), you forfeit one rank per month until you return. Every time this has happened, I have compromised and allowed players to return with little or no penalty at all. I don’t like playing the bad guy but these rules will now be enforced. Far too many players have summarily quit, only to return later and email me saying they didn’t really mean it. This creates problems for me, the Personnel Officer, the CO’s and the other players on the site. It’s not fair to them, it’s not fair to me, and it’s not fair to the site as a whole.

Ship Specification Submissions

Over the last few months, I have received several suggestions for new ships to be added to the Federation Space lineup. Let me give you some guidelines so you know what I’m looking for and what I’m not looking for.

1. First and foremost, if you are sending me ship submissions directly, you are sending them to the wrong person. You need to send them to Cmdr Thrawn who is the site’s Commander of Star Fleet Engineers. He will review the ship and should give you some direction. If he’s got something he thinks we can use, he and I will discuss adding it to our content.

2. If you’ve designed a super attack dreadnaught planet killing battleship of doom that can fire 300 photons in .01 seconds, has 3948 pulse phaser cannons, self-replicating Tri-Quantum ablative armor and is powered by 18 singularities contained in a bay the size of a shuttle, then you’ve got about a 0% chance of introducing that ship on this site. This is an extreme example, I know, but you’d be surprised by some of the ships I’ve received. If you haven’t figured it out yet, I’m not keen on the super ship idea. The characters need to be the focal point. They will make the ship great even if you’re on a scout with only one bank of 4 phasers.

3. If you really want to design a new ship, you have to look for something that fills a role we don’t currently have. I’m not interested in introducing a new type of heavy cruiser. We’ve already got that. Show me something new. A police ship might be smaller than a frigate, but it’s something we don’t have. An ore freighter might not be glamorous, or even armed, but no where on Federation Space are there specifications for such a ship.

4. Use our existing ships as templates to guestimate size and firepower.

5. If you have any questions or need further guidance, don’t hesitate to contact either Cmdr Thrawn or myself.

Current Projects

Once a month, I am going to post a current projects listing that will let all of you know what we are working on. This is, in part, a suggestion of Captain Valiant’s and Cmdr Otlan’s.

Here is what we are currently working on:

1. Around the Galaxy - Tourist guide pointing out certain hot spots, like Risa, Lake Armstrong on the moon, etc. Basically places to note for some historic or touristy reason. More fluff than anything.

2. Non-Playable Ship Spec/Classes page. Freighters, Troop Transports, Police ships, etc.

3. Federation Organizational Chart - President to Council, elected officials, etc. Basically a Federation TOE.

4. Descriptive locations for each Division Headquarters.

5. Star Fleet's Mission/Vision.

6. New Logos for the groups.

7. Reorging the content portion of the site so information is easier to find.

8. Build in a search function within the content portion of the site to make things easier to find. A google for the site, if you will.

9. Continuing work on a site wide plotline set to begin very soon.

10. A complete rewrite of the constitution to bring it inline with the reorg and as a general update.

11. Continue work on the ‘How to be a CO Manual.”

12. Creating enlisted rank pips unique to FS. (Possibly using a suggestion made by Meor as a basis.)

Okay, I think that’s enough for now. New things seem to pop up all the time. You should see this list updated around points time. If not, don’t hesitate to ask about it.

If anyone has any questions or comments about anything I’ve covered, please don’t hesitate to post them here. I’ve tried to be as complete as I can, but I’m sure there will be questions about the reorg. Please remember that the reorg is still a work in progress and though we have a good basis, not every detail has been worked out.

Thanks for your time!