Hard Light Productions Forums

General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Dilmah G on August 11, 2008, 07:05:40 am

Title: Fleet Size?
Post by: Dilmah G on August 11, 2008, 07:05:40 am
Can anybody tell me the average size of a GTVA Fleet, in particular the 3rd and 4th Fleets. I need to knoe for a campaign im making
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: nvsblmnc on August 11, 2008, 07:11:44 am
It's never really made clear in the campaign.

I do remeber that the NTF destroyed 80% of a system's forces with casualties of 80,000, but I don't know if that was a full fleet or not.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Dilmah G on August 11, 2008, 07:14:02 am
Hmmm, well I was really looking for the number of ships in a fleet, and I dont knoe how many people are on board per ship
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: karajorma on August 11, 2008, 07:25:53 am
It's never really made clear in the campaign.

I do remeber that the NTF destroyed 80% of a system's forces with casualties of 80,000, but I don't know if that was a full fleet or not.

Quote
36 hours ago, the NTF launched a full-scale offensive in Epsilon Pegasi, taking the GTVA 6th Fleet by surprise. Commanding his forces from the NTD Repulse, Rear Admiral Koth leads the rebel advance. With 75 percent of our forces in this system decimated, the regional death toll since the incursion now exceeds 80,000.

At 10,000 a destroyer and 6,000 a corvette that still adds up to quite a few ships.


Especially if you're kind of pedant who insists that means that 80,000 is the crew of 7.5% of the fleet. :p
 
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 11, 2008, 07:48:26 am
Try counting the number of ships escorting the Colossus in the intro cutscene and Colossus cutscene. ;7

I reckon a destroyer, two to three corvettes, three to four cruisers and perhaps five to ten squadrons. The Aquitaine had about four or five squadrons, according to Their Finest Hour's briefing.

The Orion can hold up to 10 000 officers and crew (who are willing to die for Neo-Terra). A corvette should be able to hold 4000 to 6000. Cruisers...I don't know, 500? :nervous:

AWACS, freighters, transports and gas miners should hold about five to ten people. Medical frigates should be capable of about 1500.

...and of course, the Colossus has space for 30 000.

I think Vasudan large ships should be operated by more Vasudans, since their interiors are like...whoa. :jaw:
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Dilmah G on August 11, 2008, 08:02:58 am
Try counting the number of ships escorting the Colossus in the intro cutscene and Colossus cutscene. ;7

I reckon a destroyer, two to three corvettes, three to four cruisers and perhaps five to ten squadrons. The Aquitaine had about four or five squadrons, according to Their Finest Hour's briefing.

The Orion can hold up to 10 000 officers and crew (who are willing to die for Neo-Terra). A corvette should be able to hold 4000 to 6000. Cruisers...I don't know, 500? :nervous:

AWACS, freighters, transports and gas miners should hold about five to ten people. Medical frigates should be capable of about 1500.

...and of course, the Colossus has space for 30 000.

I think Vasudan large ships should be operated by more Vasudans, since their interiors are like...whoa. :jaw:


Hmmm, i see.

Well as I'm on a roll, what do you think's the possibility of the Shivans being a gasmining species, ill copy paste the command briefing from one of missions in my campaign


Shivan Theory?

After careful study of Shivan tactics, the Security Council has deduced some motive for the Shivans actions in the Capella System. Based on intelligence gathered by the Vasudans during their stint in the Nebula in which the first Sathanas was encountered, the Shivans appear to mine the Nebula Gas to power their ships, and possibly an economy. The Security Council believes that in order to power the large number of Sathani, the Shivans were running short of deposits within the nebula. In order to create more deposits, the Security Council believes that the Shivans destroyed the Capella Star, forcing it go supernova, and creating a large number of deposits. However skeptics argue that the creation of new deposits is not a reasonable cause to sacrifice a dozen Sathani. However we have reason to believe the Shivans populate a large number of systems, and during the GTVA's reconstruction period, the Shivans developed and mass produced the Sathanas. While this is not a very heartening piece of information for the GTVA, it explains the presence of many Sathani in the nebula. Unless the GTVA can counter this threat, we will be forced to sidestep the Shivans for the time being. However with the Economic Crisis in Vega, the Terran and Vasudan Economies will have to expand, and all eyes are on the GTVA to come up with a system ripe with resources. However, In Short, we believe Shivan Motives are to power a constantly thriving fleet and/or an economy. To do this, the Shivans rely on the creation of the deposits via the destruction of stars. However when this does not happen, the Shivans must make it. While doing this, they have become the protectors and destroyers of life. The Shivans have shown a quality many species before it have not. Discretion. By using discretion, the Shivans were able to drastically rebuild and expand their fleet, but were also wary of disturbing ill-developed life, or species that were not capable of space travel. When the Lucifer was destroyed, all Shivan ships quickly dissappeared from contested systems. The Shivan retreat allowed the Shivans to expand and multiply in a fashion that has not been observed since. It is also quite possible that the Shivans had arrived in the Sol system many centuries before Terrans acquired space travel, and simply bypassed the system because of its lack of nebula deposits. However had the Ancients stumbled upon the Sol system, they would've surely eliminated Terrans as a species long before GTA was formed, as they showed no intention of making Alliances with other species. While it is not clear wether the Shivans have made alliances with other species or in contact with any other species, it seems clear that their paramount objective is to acquire nebula deposits, however it may not be clear wether the extermination of species is part of their overall objectives. It may be so, or it may be that the Shivans suspect us to be mining their deposits, or that we are a reincarnation of the Ancients.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on August 11, 2008, 08:13:25 am
Fenris / LEviathan should have more crew than an Aeolus (500??) but miners should have about 45. Based on department crews. Specialists etc. Science vessels should have the same'ish.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 11, 2008, 09:25:56 am
I reckon a destroyer, two to three corvettes, three to four cruisers and perhaps five to ten squadrons. The Aquitaine had about four or five squadrons, according to Their Finest Hour's briefing.
I'd say there'd be a lot more than that per fleet, or the NTF would have the equivalent of 10 fleets (possibly more in terms of corvettes and cruisers). Personally I tend to think there'd be about 3-4 destroyers per fleet, with maybe ten corvettes and a lot of cruisers.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: colecampbell666 on August 11, 2008, 09:37:11 am
Thing, either 100000 per fleet, or 1000000 is kara is right. That makes 3 destroyers, 10 corvettes, and 20 cruisers. or 30 destroyers, 100 corvettes, and 200 cruisers. Which is highly unlikely.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 11, 2008, 09:46:03 am
I reckon a destroyer, two to three corvettes, three to four cruisers and perhaps five to ten squadrons. The Aquitaine had about four or five squadrons, according to Their Finest Hour's briefing.
I'd say there'd be a lot more than that per fleet, or the NTF would have the equivalent of 10 fleets (possibly more in terms of corvettes and cruisers). Personally I tend to think there'd be about 3-4 destroyers per fleet, with maybe ten corvettes and a lot of cruisers.

I'm not sure myself, because FS2 states that the Aquitaine is the leader of the 3rd Fleet, which might imply that it's the only destroyer in the fleet, or that there are other destroyers, only that they do not lead, or are all Orions.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: colecampbell666 on August 11, 2008, 10:13:06 am
Well the Psamtik and Memphis are part of it, IIRC.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 11, 2008, 10:15:45 am
Well the Psamtik and Memphis are part of it, IIRC.
No, the Psamtik's with the 13th Vasudan Battlegroup.

I'm not sure myself, because FS2 states that the Aquitaine is the leader of the 3rd Fleet, which might imply that it's the only destroyer in the fleet, or that there are other destroyers, only that they do not lead, or are all Orions.
I tend to think that the Aquitaine just leads, it's not like it's the only destroyer/Hecate-class ship in the fleet.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: bfobar on August 11, 2008, 12:55:56 pm
Thing, either 100000 per fleet, or 1000000 is kara is right. That makes 3 destroyers, 10 corvettes, and 20 cruisers.

This seems reasonable for a fleet, it not a bit low on the cruiser end.
Also in the navy, the process of sending ships back to port for rest, repair, and rearm takes up a significant percentage of the ships, so it isn't like that many ships can be out all the time since they'll have to dock and repair.

The death toll is a little misleading though, since the game implies that marines are used to take planets, and if a NTF orion jumps a fleet troop convoy then the fleet loses a whole lot of lives in just a few small ships. There are enough similar situations that you can't really connect ship count to death count.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: nvsblmnc on August 11, 2008, 01:16:46 pm
The 80,000 figure wasn't meant to be a definitive reply.  I just didn't have much time (I was just about to start working). 

I do get the feeling that, at least in FS2, corvettes are on the rise.  I'd expect a handful of destroyers (not more than 4, even assuming that fleets operate on multiple fronts simultaneously) and a significant, but decreasing number of cruisers.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on August 11, 2008, 03:21:46 pm
I think Vasudan large ships should be operated by more Vasudans, since their interiors are like...whoa.

       The Vasudan interior is quite frankly pretty stupid in my opinion. One ship at a time is brought up on a thruster controlled platform to launch? How realistic is that???

   
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: ShadowGorrath on August 11, 2008, 03:39:36 pm
GTD Aquitaine, GTD Delacroix ( destroyed ), GTD Phoenicia, GTD Carthage, GTD Mesana, GTD Bastion ( decomissioned ). Unless stated otherwise, can they be from the same fleet? I mean, battles are system-wide, so I think it's safe to assume that we only see the tip of a fleet. And the running NTF fleets were small by then, heavily damaged ( a lot of ships destroyed ? ). It can probably be said that the fleets are much larger, and we see only small parts of them ( you don't see all the battles, game limitations, avoiding BoEs, etc. ).
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Bob-san on August 11, 2008, 03:51:58 pm
I think Vasudan large ships should be operated by more Vasudans, since their interiors are like...whoa.

       The Vasudan interior is quite frankly pretty stupid in my opinion. One ship at a time is brought up on a thruster controlled platform to launch? How realistic is that???

   
I'd go with the 4-destroyer estimate. In fringe fleets, I'd have to say a max of 2 destroyers. On the other hand, my opinion is that the NTF's fleets would be more destroyer-focused than the GTVA's fleets, as they would be able to appeal to the generation running the fleets and likely to some of the officers controlling the fleets. A few coups, killing or otherwise expelling anti-NTF officers, would result in many men and many large ships, but a lack of experienced officers. Promotions of enlisted and the officers (bring them up a few steps) would probably result in a bit higher morale and more reason to join the NTF, versus staying at a low rank and salary with the GTVA. No doubt, the call to join the NTF was strong (evidence is the systems that revolted and the entire fleets that revolted), so I'd say many of the GTVA's own ships would also revolt. And, it's not like you need that many people to take over a ship. Eliminate your strongest competition and appeal to the rest. If nothing else, you can kill experienced officers and kill morale. Plus, it's hard to sacrifice 8,000 of your own people to stop 2,000 that sympathize. It's unlikely that the GTVA would destroy its own ships, and destroyers are difficult ships to destroy. By extension, it's likely that the Colossus was staffed primarily Vasudans, for risk of NTF revolt.

So then--I'd say the Terran fleets have 4 battleships or so each in main systems, 2 or so in fringe systems. The NTF's fleets would have 6-8 battleships or so in each fleet, and a general lack of smaller ships when compared to the GTVA.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: NGTM-1R on August 11, 2008, 10:18:17 pm
The Vasudan interior is quite frankly pretty stupid in my opinion. One ship at a time is brought up on a thruster controlled platform to launch? How realistic is that???

Very, from a damage-control perspective. It minimizes the ship's vunerablities launching and recovering fighters. Not so much from a rapid launch perspective, but FS destroyers don't seem to understand the concept of launching more than a few wings anyways.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: WMCoolmon on August 11, 2008, 11:15:33 pm
Seems a bit odd to send the Aquitaine to frolic about in the nebula alone if Admiral Petrarch was responsible for 3 other destroyers back in Gamma Draconis or Capella.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on August 11, 2008, 11:21:06 pm
The Vasudan interior is quite frankly pretty stupid in my opinion. One ship at a time is brought up on a thruster controlled platform to launch? How realistic is that???

Very, from a damage-control perspective. It minimizes the ship's vunerablities launching and recovering fighters. Not so much from a rapid launch perspective, but FS destroyers don't seem to understand the concept of launching more than a few wings anyways.

       Well, it would make more sense if the ship could actually launched a wing, or even two groups of two in quick succession instead of just the one. But it doesn't seem to have anywhere near that capability. But I'm not sure if we've seen wings of Vasudan craft launched in the official campaigns or not.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 12, 2008, 12:59:32 am
Seems a bit odd to send the Aquitaine to frolic about in the nebula alone if Admiral Petrarch was responsible for 3 other destroyers back in Gamma Draconis or Capella.
There was the GTD Delacroix, you remember?
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: FreeSpaceFreak on August 12, 2008, 02:11:46 am
Yeah, and most of the other destroyers were fighting the NTF anyway.

I'm with the 3 to 4 destroyers estimate, and the 3rd fleet was probably reinforced (hence 6) because it was in a war.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: eliex on August 12, 2008, 02:16:27 am
Shouldn't the 3rd Battlegroup where Alpha 1 flies in only be at half it's strength at the beginning of FS2? They were fighting the NTF and the Shivans at the same time right?
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Dilmah G on August 12, 2008, 03:27:48 am
Seems a bit odd to send the Aquitaine to frolic about in the nebula alone if Admiral Petrarch was responsible for 3 other destroyers back in Gamma Draconis or Capella.

Let alone the Flagship, seriously though, GTVA protocol must prohibit against that somewhere, I mean when was the last time deploying the Flagship into a nebula was a tactically sound option, especially when as you pointed out, the CO is responsible for 3 other destroyers. If the flagship takes a hit thats the end of it for the 3rd Fleet
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: ShadowGorrath on August 12, 2008, 04:11:47 am
But Command would still be perfectly safe in 3rd fleet HQ, giving everyone their "Incomming jump signature!". The flagship role would be given to another ship, or they'd recomission the Bastion.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 12, 2008, 04:34:44 am
They won't recommission the Bastion, Shadow, because the powerplants of the destroyer are stuck to using laser turrets.

Perhaps they sent the Aquitaine and Psamtik into the nebula so that the names of the destroyers will be written down in history books. :drevil:
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: karajorma on August 12, 2008, 05:05:25 am
Seems a bit odd to send the Aquitaine to frolic about in the nebula alone if Admiral Petrarch was responsible for 3 other destroyers back in Gamma Draconis or Capella.

I tend to take the opposite point of view. You'd want an admiral in the nebula because it's a completely unknown sphere of operations and you're very likely to be sending other ships in after the Aquitane as soon as you can shake them loose from other duties. You'd want an officer on site to deal with the situation as it developed.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Dilmah G on August 12, 2008, 05:11:28 am
Seems a bit odd to send the Aquitaine to frolic about in the nebula alone if Admiral Petrarch was responsible for 3 other destroyers back in Gamma Draconis or Capella.

I tend to take the opposite point of view. You'd want an admiral in the nebula because it's a completely unknown sphere of operations and you're very likely to be sending other ships in after the Aquitane as soon as you can shake them loose from other duties. You'd want an officer on site to deal with the situation as it developed.

hmm and based on my stint as a navy cadet, the flagship was traditionally the lead ship anyway so sending in the Aquitane would be traditionally correct, and btw the Flagship is the Ship from which the Admiral of Fleet is present and flying the Admiral's flag, and was named so because that ship would be flying the Admiral's Flag, hence Flagship, and as such the title of Flagship could not be handed or carried over to any other ship unless Petrarch is aboard

Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 12, 2008, 05:13:06 am
Seems a bit odd to send the Aquitaine to frolic about in the nebula alone if Admiral Petrarch was responsible for 3 other destroyers back in Gamma Draconis or Capella.

I tend to take the opposite point of view. You'd want an admiral in the nebula because it's a completely unknown sphere of operations and you're very likely to be sending other ships in after the Aquitane as soon as you can shake them loose from other duties. You'd want an officer on site to deal with the situation as it developed.

hmm and based on my stint as a navy cadet, the flagship was traditionally the lead ship anyway so sending in the Aquitane would be traditionally correct, and btw the Flagship is the Ship from which the Admiral of Fleet is present and flying the Admiral's flag, and was named so because that ship would be flying the Admiral's Flag, hence Flagship, and as such the title of Flagship could not be handed or carried over to any other ship unless Petrarch is aboard

I was thinking that the GTVA trusted Admiral Petrarch to handle the unknown in a way that would ensure the protection of everyone in the GTVA. Maybe that's why they sent his ship in first.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 12, 2008, 10:07:53 am
 The Aeneas was mentioned to be in Deneb. The Delacroix was mentioned to be in the nebula. The Vengeance was mentioned to be in Capella (multiplayer mission). All three of these destroyers could be part of the 3rd Fleet.

Alternatively, "fleet" might be a misnomer. Perhaps each destroyer is assigned to a fleet, but exercises a degree of autonomy too.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Bob-san on August 12, 2008, 04:47:34 pm
I don't think so. 3-4 destroyers in a typical fleet would seem right to me. Remember that in the US Navy, the Captain of the ship has ultimate control over his/her ship. By extension of that, I'd say it's safe to say individual destroyers were trusted with their missions. You don't pick any old Joe Schmo to Captain a destroyer, and having a dozen admirals with various levels of experience and number of skills leading about four dozen destroyer captains, probably eight to ten dozen corvette captains, probably twenty dozen cruiser captains, and a few dozen more station commanders and many other commanders and captains on planets, moons, and everyone else.

It's not like a captain trusted to a large ship needs direct orders when in "white" operation. If it's on "black" ops, odds are they'll not answer to anyone in a normal tactical field. So, I'd have to say there are three types of fleets--Terran fleets, Vasudan battlegroups, and GTVI groups. Anyways--as for the nebula, you do want an experienced officer commanding many ships. The Nebula was seen as a war theatre without civilians. Effectively, no civilians mean that whatever a military commander wants to do to secure the situation, they can. The fleets would be moving daily, and there would be no base to defend. Stuff happens fast--and perhaps a pilot won't have a regroup point for days later. Remember the wing that disappeared? Perhaps they got lost and GTVA operations changed regroup points to protect their fleets.

Also, remember fleets are not contained to a single system. Odds are central fleets (the strongest) will also reach our to reinforce and blanket the areas protected by other fleets. If you have 8 destroyers in a major system and no war in it, odds are (I'd say) you'll reinforce systems one or more jumps out with your additional destroyers.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: WMCoolmon on August 12, 2008, 08:29:31 pm
Seems a bit odd to send the Aquitaine to frolic about in the nebula alone if Admiral Petrarch was responsible for 3 other destroyers back in Gamma Draconis or Capella.

I tend to take the opposite point of view. You'd want an admiral in the nebula because it's a completely unknown sphere of operations and you're very likely to be sending other ships in after the Aquitane as soon as you can shake them loose from other duties. You'd want an officer on site to deal with the situation as it developed.

hmm and based on my stint as a navy cadet, the flagship was traditionally the lead ship anyway so sending in the Aquitane would be traditionally correct, and btw the Flagship is the Ship from which the Admiral of Fleet is present and flying the Admiral's flag, and was named so because that ship would be flying the Admiral's Flag, hence Flagship, and as such the title of Flagship could not be handed or carried over to any other ship unless Petrarch is aboard



In general, I'd think that you'd want to keep sector fleet heads in their sector in order to coordinate all operations. Since the GTVA was in a time of crisis, dealing with the NTF, and the Colossus hadn't been deployed yet, sending Admiral Petrarch to the unknown nebula accessible only via the poorly-protected Knossos gate makes little sense if he's going to serve as an advance scout. Especially when the GTVA has every reason to suspect that the place is crawling with Shivans and not some unknown threat.

While his experience does seem a considerable asset, the rate of communication between systems and the ability of the GTVA to field experts on any given tactical or strategic subject from anywhere else in the GTVA makes it seem a bit silly to risk someone whose inherent position forces them to maintain ties and concentration on a certain field of space apart from the area that they would be most at risk in. That seems like a difficult position to put Petrarch in, since a Shivan attack force could disrupt a planning session with regards to the NTF, whereas it would otherwise be a note on the daily report from the Aquitaine.

However, given the presence of the other destroyer(s) in the nebula, I'm beginning to suspect that Command was expecting the Colossus to basically massacre the NTF rebellion (Which it dead) and that they would immediately open a second front in the nebula and begin an offensive action against the Shivan forces there, until they understood the Knossos portal and for as long as they could, with the plan being to wear the Shivans down far enough away from the core systems that the Shivans would be stuck licking their wounds. Meanwhile, if possible, the Knossos technology could be used to reestablish contact with Earth and begin shipping weapons and material from the manufacturing plants there in order to maintain order in the GTVA, further freeing up modern ships to join in the Shivan offensive. The ridiculous overpresence of the Colossus would keep any anti-Vasudan sentiment at bay should the Sol forces choose to attempt to fan the ashes of the NTF Rebellion, as well as serve as a deterrent against any further offensive by any Shivan forces that made it through the portal.

Hence the 3rd Fleet would effectively be relocated to the nebula, and Petrarch and Khafre would serve as co-commanders for the forces in the nebula.

EDIT: Still another possibility is that vessels whose crews had not been so fervent as Admiral Koth's would be redeployed from NTF systems to the nebula, putting the crew in a position where any kind of mutual hatred towards the Vasudans would get them killed. However, I'm kind of skeptical that the GTVA would do that, with Bosch present in the nebula - although that may be why the Colossus offered to pursue him through the jump portal. (Envisioning the Colossus trying to operate in the nebula always seemed a bit insane to me, let alone trying to catch a capital ship as nimble as the Iceni.)

Given the massive focus of the GTVA on repelling another Shivan incursion, based on the size of the fleets we're postulating, I would have little trouble believing that the GTVA High Command would choose to use NTF forces as cannon fodder to prevent another Shivan invasion if it could rely on them.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: WMCoolmon on August 12, 2008, 08:58:54 pm
Carrying this forward some more (despite the OT nature of this line of reasoning), the effects would be as devious as they would be beneficial to the GTVA.

With the opening of the Sol node at the time of war with the Shivans, the GTVA wouldn't need to invade Sol, it wouldn't need to sign any peace treaties, or do anything whatsoever - except agree to send the Sol forces to assist in the combat against the Shivans.

Sol, as the GTVA would expect, would feel more than a little isolated after being cut off for 32+ years. But fresh off of the memories of the defeat of the Lucifer, at the last second by GTA forces, Sol would be overconfident of its ability to take on the Shivans. It would actually want to send its forces away to combat them, as doing so would bring it a certain measure of popularity and power that it hadn't enjoyed since it was the top dog of the GTVA. Thus, Sol would eagerly send its best and brightest out to combat the Shivans on the distant frontier beyond Gamma Draconis.

Except that's not what would happen to them. Once redeployed under GTVA control, those forces would be sent to fringe systems and assigned the most menial duties possible. Forces would receive intense training in GTVA battle tactics and would begin the process of reintegration with GTVA Command. All of this would happen under the guise of 'modernizing' the Sol fleets.

Naturally, at some point Sol would realize what was happening and begin to protest. However, the GTVA could cite the less-advanced technology of Sol ships, as well as the inexperience of its fighter crews, as reason enough to withdraw Earth forces from the front lines. Small compromises could be made, where isolated squadrons of Sol ships or a couple capital ships could be sent to the front, closely assisted by GTVA forces. But Earth would not become the hero that the former GTA leaders desired it to be - quite the opposite. Its military power would be quietly disbanded and reintegrated into the GTVA. If Earth protested and threatened to rebel, threat of naked force could be used to keep their defense forces in line, as it would have stripped itself of all but the basic defenses for combating the Shivans. Finally, attempting to hold a populace hostage or openly bombarding defenseless civilized worlds would create a sentiment of outrage against the Sol forces which had been charged with their defense.

When the war ended, the GTVA forces would return as victors. The earth forces would have remained at home, facing little danger except the occasional pirate or ex-NTF raid. The few forces that did experience combat would receive medals from and be inducted into the GTVA. With its power base gone, its military forces gradually being absorbed into GTVA sector fleets, and no hope of ever achieving victory as a coherent military force, Sol would pose no threat to the power of the leaders of the GTVA.

And, of course, the Shivans would be defeated or in remission, leaving the GTVA more time to rebuild, rearm, and advance.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on August 12, 2008, 09:12:07 pm
    That of course assumes that Sol's ships are less advanced. Depending upon how many wars are fought in Sol, and the general sentiment or policy after the defeat of the Lucifer, their tech may meet or exceed that of the GTVA.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: WMCoolmon on August 12, 2008, 09:55:01 pm
I really don't think Sol would experience the same upheaval that the rest of the GTVA did when it was cut off. To make a long analysis short: Sol would have existed on its own, by itself, for thousands of years. The rest of the GTVA would have had Sol to rely on for their entire existence (and all communications protocols and military functions and governmental things would assume Sol as the center of society).

Or another example: Say the US was cut in half and the west could no longer communicate with the east. On the east side, the Federal government in Washington D.C. remains in control. All of the states report to it; the military reports to it; all of the central legal and judicial stuff remains intact. There is centralized response to the critical economic and logistic problems caused by splitting the country in half.

On the west side, it's total chaos. Who's the dominant state? California has the largest economy, but Colorado has the military connections. The eastmost states have the most history. Up above the state level, there is no government. Somebody has to take charge, organize, and come up with a system that everybody agrees upon - probably based on the government back in Washington D.C. But that'll take time, and there will be lots of disagreements, and lots of people saying that this thing is biased, and people saying that we need to do things better this time, and so on and so forth. Meanwhile, all kinds of court cases will get decided, laws will get interpreted, inter-state government organizations will form to handle interaction, all with the assumption that they are THE top dog. And it's entirely possible that the states won't be interested in giving up so much power now that they have their independence, and will instead form a loosely-affiliated confederation.

So to summarize, I think Sol would be fairly stable by the time the GTVA reestablished contact.

Still, you're right that they could have better technology. I rely on that assumption because (1) it makes the plan work and (2) I expect that GTVA Command would underestimate the preparation of Earth forces. It's demonstrated overconfidence on many occasions and it's human nature to remember things as they were when you haven't seen them for a long time. I doubt that's what people would actually say, but you'd probably have Command making decisions based on several different reports, and picking the one that seemed the most 'realistic'.

Still, let's play on that. The GTVA opens the portal to earth and finds a technically superior fleet. Assuming that they're still not interested in sharing power, there's a few options they could use.

One is to claim that tactics and strategy have evolved since then, and that the GTVA has superior military intelligence and analysis from Shivan forces. Also that GTVA forces are more battle-experienced. Thus Earth forces could be kept off of the front lines and kept from gaining any glory to rival the GTVA. However, it's pretty weak. The first thing people will say when they see the shiny new Earth ships is, get them to the front lines. Keeping them around when they could obviously be used (and save the lives that people in the GTVA care about, at the cost of lives that people in the GTVA don't even know about) could get some public backlash going, and the Sol forces would be in a much stronger position to force the GTVA into letting them get their way.

Another is to get Sol to sign on as a signatory under the GTVA. In fact, this could already have been done under BETAC, by having some low-ranking government guy fill in for the president "...during a time of crisis, when the president and other reigning government officials are incapacitated or so rendered incapable fulfill any official duties for an indefinite period of time..." and sign the Sol government up for it whether it liked it or not, to add some legitimacy to the document. However, that wouldn't really fly either, if Sol really wanted to come back as the Terran head of the GTVA. Still, the peer pressure would be a pretty powerful tool - the GTVA could paint earth as uncooperative and refuse to deal with it or allow military forces passage through its system. Then start blaming things on Earth if the war started to go badly, and force it to give up portions of its military technology in exchange for cooperation.

The GTVA could stand aside, send the Sol ships to the front, and let them die fighting - whether by actual failure or by some kind of cooked-up "communications failure" due to "unexpected technical difficulties in the nebular environment." But that runs the risk of an outpouring of sympathy for Earth. However, it would hurt Sol's appearance as a leader, somewhat, if its forces rushed in and got themselves killed. It also wouldn't be in a good position to stage any kind of subtle or unsubtle military coup. So it's a mixed bag.

Or the GTVA could stage an incident, have the Sol forces engage in combat with the Vasudan forces, play on fears of a resurgence by the NTF, and blockade and then invade Earth in order to "maintain the peace" (No, this is not meant to be a commentary on current events). Presumably numerical superiority and the Colossus would get the GTVA through this one, or they'd be screwed and would get their asses kicked by Sol, while the Shivans encroach upon the retreating GTVA fleets in the nebula and wipe out the GTVA (and then Sol) from the other direction.

But who knows, maybe I've got the GTVA all wrong and they just wanted Earth to come in and solve all their problems. :D
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Mars on August 12, 2008, 10:21:05 pm
lol @ Colorado having better military connections than Cali
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: ShadowGorrath on August 12, 2008, 10:47:19 pm
I'm pretty sure that GTVA Terrans would be glad if Sol took the head position of GTVA's terrans. After the Great War, the GTA collapsed and divided into system states/blocks. Thus the GTVA doesn't have a terran government. Only the mixed security council and the Vasudan Imperium. Vasudans would probably be against the terrans to reunite with Sol and have their government as strong as the Vasudan one. If not stronger.

Though Sol's government would be illegal to the GTVA, acording to BETAC.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 12, 2008, 11:12:07 pm
I'm pretty sure that GTVA Terrans would be glad if Sol took the head position of GTVA's terrans.
I doubt that, I'd trust Barack Obama more than David Cameron if I was American, and I'd trust David Cameron more than Barack Obama if I was a Brit (of course, Brits understand the USA more than the USA understands Brits :P).

What I'm saying is, I wouldn't trust the old GTA. The old GTA fell, and towards the end was filled with corruption (If it was properly organized the GTI wouldn't have rebelled). The GTVA was a miracle, when the Terrans were half-dead they formed a new Alliance with the Vasudans, which made both species stronger and more prosperous. The GTVA leaders are to thank for that miraculous transformation, I seriously doubt I would welcome some freaking weirdo from Sol who I haven't heard about for 32+ years.

After the Great War, the GTA collapsed and divided into system states/blocks. Thus the GTVA doesn't have a terran government. Only the mixed security council and the Vasudan Imperium.
The GTVA was an excellent government. The Vasudan Imperium, IMO, does not represent all of the Vasudans, only the Vasudan royalty (ie. Khonsu II, since he was one of the most important dudes during the formation of the GTVA). So, IMO, the Vasudans aren't completely represented in the GTVA either, they have to rely on either the Emperor to do what they want or the General Assembly to do what they want. Of course, this would be better if the Emperor was just a guy in the General Assembly, but it seems the Chief Thundercloud doesn't like being on the same level as his advisors.

Vasudans would probably be against the terrans to reunite with Sol and have their government as strong as the Vasudan one. If not stronger.
The Terrans watched the Vasudans miraculously rebuild while they struggled during the early Post-Great War Reconstruction era. Unless the Terrans are a second-rate population or something, I doubt the Vasudan majority would be so unfair to say that the Terrans are not allowed to return to Sol. Additionally, it is described in the Earth entry that returning to Sol remains a "high priority". If the Vasudans didn't like this, then it wouldn't be a "high priority", it would be like a "disputed goal" or something like that. So no, I don't think the Vasudans would have a problem with the Terrans reuniting with Sol. They trust that Sol will be integrated into the GTVA, not the GTVA integrated into Sol. And given that I don't think that the Vasudans are that politically powerful anyway, I doubt there would be too much problem anyway.

Though Sol's government would be illegal to the GTVA, acording to BETAC.
Remember, the peace has only been maintained since 2358: Only 9 years of centralized BETAC power, which means these rules could easily be waved if need be (to avoid war at all costs).
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: NGTM-1R on August 12, 2008, 11:34:24 pm
While his experience does seem a considerable asset, the rate of communication between systems and the ability of the GTVA to field experts on any given tactical or strategic subject from anywhere else in the GTVA makes it seem a bit silly to risk someone whose inherent position forces them to maintain ties and concentration on a certain field of space apart from the area that they would be most at risk in. That seems like a difficult position to put Petrarch in, since a Shivan attack force could disrupt a planning session with regards to the NTF, whereas it would otherwise be a note on the daily report from the Aquitaine.

Except, perhaps, that there are good human reasons to send Petrarch to the Nebula. Also I think you give him a bit too much credit, as being commander of 3rd Fleet and assigned to deal with the Shivans, he would be seperate from those dealing with the NTF. Those concerns stream together at a higher level then a fleet commander.

If, indeed, he is a fleet commander.

Because if you accept the premise of multiple destroyers in a fleet...then there are probably divison commanders, and those people are probably Admirals.

If the GTVA isn't following the practice of some navies and assigning an Admiral to command their most important units. (Japan, for example, assign admirals to command battleships; this makes a relative degree of sense, too, if there are multiple captain slots aboard. A US CVN usually has no less then three captains aboard; the skipper, the air group commander, and the engineering officer. It may have more.)
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: wistler on August 13, 2008, 09:44:39 am
Hi everyone  :)

Does anyone know if anyone less then an Admiral has been seen commanding a Destroyer. The only ones i know about our Admiral Khafre aboard the GVD Psamtik, Admiral Petrarch aboard the Aquitaine, Admiral Shema from the Bastion and Vice Admiral Koth aboard the NTD Repulse.

If only admirals serve aboard Destroyers then sending Petrarch to the nebula wouldn't be such a big deal, sure its the Flagship but with two or three other admirals left in 3rd fleet to oversee operations against the NTF then all orders don't need to be coming from the Aquitaine. Sending an Admrial seems like a very smart thing, after all with the logistics of exploring such a alien environment as well as it being a joint Terran Vasudan operation, having a flagship admiral there with first hand accounts to base his decisions off seems quite prudent.

I doubt the Vasudans would deny the Terrans a chance to reconnect with their homeworld, after all the Vasudans know what its like to loose one. If anything was to split the bonds between the two races it would have been the racially motivated NTF rebellion, not finding Sol.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 13, 2008, 11:33:46 am
I don't know of any, but the Repulse was captained by Rear Admiral Koth.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: WMCoolmon on August 13, 2008, 09:34:04 pm
When you say it that way, it's no wonder he was pissed off enough to rebel. :p

Since the NTF was a military dictatorship, by all accounts, I wouldn't be surprised of the normal rank structure was altered somewhat to make way for Bosch to be the highest-ranking person around.

Still, wistler makes a good point. I can't think of anyone in command of a destroyer who wasn't an Admiral. I can't think of a destroyer with an identified commander that wasn't a flagship of some fleet, either.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Stormkeeper on August 13, 2008, 09:38:54 pm
I think the main problem we have here is that we're not sure of the GTVA's rank structure, so its easier assume that destroyers are commanded exclusively by Admirals. If we knew more of the command structure, it'd be easier to determine the fleet composition and size of the GTVA fleets.

But I doubt every destroyer is commanded by rear admiral and above. Maybe the ones we see are all commanded by rear admirals and above, but there could be destroyers captained by .... well ... Captains.

If we assume every destroyer is captained by an Admiral, then the GTA's taskforce mentioned in Awakenings would have like ... 19 Admirals or something. 16 Reliant-class destroyers and 3 Orions. Also, the number of cannonical destroyers we see, if each was captained by an admiral, that's a very big command group.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 14, 2008, 12:31:54 am
I was thinking in terms of JAD2:EB, where...
Spoiler:
Commander Ko Mander captained the GTD GeeTeeDee.

Or even JAD:SSE, where
Spoiler:
Captain was the captain of the GTD Sasquatch.

There's no reason to call a captain a captain if he does not, or did not formerly, have command of a ship (Captain Hook; Captain Jack Sparrows; etc.).
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Mars on August 14, 2008, 12:39:54 am
Because captain is a rank? Traditionally yes, captain was captain of a ship. However it's a military rank, one that's not just used in naval forces.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Stormkeeper on August 14, 2008, 12:41:18 am
Because captain is a rank? Traditionally yes, captain was captain of a ship. However it's a military rank, one that's not just used in naval forces.
Traditionally, anyone of rank captain other than the actual captain was temporarily promoted to the rank of major for the voyage, so that there would be only one captain on board the ship.

Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 14, 2008, 12:58:55 am
Because captain is a rank? Traditionally yes, captain was captain of a ship. However it's a military rank, one that's not just used in naval forces.
Traditionally, anyone of rank captain other than the actual captain was temporarily promoted to the rank of major for the voyage, so that there would be only one captain on board the ship.

:wtf:

But then again, it does make things simpler. If the ship ever gets hailed in the open sea, there won't be a quarrel among captains. :drevil:
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on August 14, 2008, 01:39:46 am
Because captain is a rank? Traditionally yes, captain was captain of a ship. However it's a military rank, one that's not just used in naval forces.
Traditionally, anyone of rank captain other than the actual captain was temporarily promoted to the rank of major for the voyage, so that there would be only one captain on board the ship.

      Hmmn, I thought they were promoted to commodore.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: WMCoolmon on August 14, 2008, 02:28:55 am
Commodore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_(rank)) is a naval rank, while Major is an army rank. So you're both right.

Captain page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_(naval)).
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on August 14, 2008, 03:09:53 am
     How does the USN work exactly? Carriers are typically escorting by a number of other ships. I mean, in BSG Rosalyn describes the rank of Admiral as someone who "commands more than one ship". Each destroyer I imagine would have numerous corvettes and cruisers as escort. So each GTD or GVD destroyer would essentially lead a small fleet of their own. Theoretically. So if I don't know if in the USN the Carrier commanders are Admirals? Not that the GTD is necessarily based on the USN of course. The ship naming schemes are all out of wack. But it is Admiral Petrach, not Midshipman Petrach, leader of the Vega fleet! Maybe each fleet only has one Admiral. But perhaps all the other destroyers are Rear or Vice Admirals??
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: wistler on August 14, 2008, 05:10:06 am
I would doubt that only Admirals can command a Destroyer. The GTVA would have to have a promotion every time they wanted to make a new Destroyer which would make a very top heavy chain of command, but yeah i haven't come across a canon destroyer commanded by anyone less then admirals.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 14, 2008, 05:13:52 am
Hey, I know one Admiral who doesn't command a destroyer. In fact, I know an Admiral that flies fighters around. Alpha "Cheater" 1.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 14, 2008, 09:21:21 am
Hey, I know one Admiral who doesn't command a destroyer. In fact, I know an Admiral that flies fighters around. Alpha "Cheater" 1.

Uhh, that's not canon, Snail. Even on the highest difficulty level in the main campaign, I don't think you can make it to Admiral.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: colecampbell666 on August 14, 2008, 09:28:53 am
Yeah, you can.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on August 14, 2008, 09:30:28 am
I'm sure i've made it before, but can't remember on how many playthroughs.
 *would check the wiki but doesn't care enough to*
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 14, 2008, 09:36:49 am
I'm sure i've made it before, but can't remember on how many playthroughs.
 *would check the wiki but doesn't care enough to*

Um, right. :nervous:
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on August 14, 2008, 09:38:34 am
To see in the tbl how many points it takes to reach admiral.
*newspapers AE's nose* no...on your rug.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 14, 2008, 09:39:45 am
*newspapers AE's nose* no...on your rug.

Hunh? :confused:
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: colecampbell666 on August 14, 2008, 09:41:47 am
I'm sure i've made it before, but can't remember on how many playthroughs.
 *would check the wiki but doesn't care enough to*
I think that may have been on SquadWar.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on August 14, 2008, 09:46:48 am
Nope on Squadwar, i was ONE freakin ullysses kill away from making Commander when PXO died.....
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 14, 2008, 09:48:45 am
Nope on Squadwar, i was ONE freakin ullysses kill away from making Commander when PXO died.....

Wow. It must've died quite suddenly then. :(
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on August 14, 2008, 09:51:55 am
It happened between my net sessions. BAck then 56k dial-up was mucho-expensiev.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on August 14, 2008, 09:53:51 am
At least you got to play PXO. I was born too late to experience it myself. By the time I have the Internet connection and the game, PXO was already dead for almost half a decade. :(
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Bob-san on August 14, 2008, 03:34:57 pm
I'm pretty sure I flew on PXO once, and I know I tried many times more. :lol: Other than that, it could just be that we only ever saw Admirals because Alpha 1 was always assigned to a squadron that ended up in major assaults. Who captained the Colossus? And remember that we're talking about gigantic militarizes... millions strong operating hundreds of gigantic ships.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on August 14, 2008, 03:47:50 pm
And remember that we're talking about gigantic militarizes... millions strong operating hundreds of gigantic ships.

       And you base that on what? Other than opinion that is.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Bob-san on August 14, 2008, 03:58:25 pm
And remember that we're talking about gigantic militarizes... millions strong operating hundreds of gigantic ships.

       And you base that on what? Other than opinion that is.
10,000 people per destroyer, several destroyers per fleet, 12 or so terran fleets, 12 or so vasudan battlegroups, the Big C, all the corvettes, all the cruisers, all the transports, all the military installations, and then adding to that the support personal on planets and everywhere else. Also remember the scaling factor... ships in space are much larger than our own ships in the water. Also don't forget other branches such as GTVI, which would add a few percent (maybe) of the GTVA's personal.

Edited for typo
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Stormkeeper on August 14, 2008, 06:48:26 pm
Who captained the Colossus?
I think this is a very good question. Who captained that monster?
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on August 14, 2008, 10:37:01 pm
Who captained the Colossus?
I think this is a very good question. Who captained that monster?

         Some bald headed guy.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 14, 2008, 11:56:43 pm
         Some bald headed guy.
Head-CM1 ain't bald.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: colecampbell666 on August 15, 2008, 07:39:11 am
No, the bald black guy was 3rd Fleet HQ.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 15, 2008, 07:50:38 am
You mean Terran Frakking Command?
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: colecampbell666 on August 15, 2008, 08:07:03 am
No, that was Samuel L. Mutha****in Jackson.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: NGTM-1R on August 15, 2008, 01:44:30 pm
But it is Admiral Petrach, not Midshipman Petrach, leader of the Vega fleet! Maybe each fleet only has one Admiral. But perhaps all the other destroyers are Rear or Vice Admirals??

I'm pretty sure Petrarch is stated to be a Vice Admiral, which makes perfect sense from USN standpoint, as he has a fleet command. Task force command usually devolves upon a rear admiral, or the most senior captain, depending on its importance and the availability of a more senior officer to command it. A full admiral is usually a theater commander, or the commander of a fleet that is significantly larger than normal.

There are also a variety of administrative or shore posts that merit a rear or vice admiral, but we have no clue as to those for the GTVA.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: colecampbell666 on August 15, 2008, 05:33:57 pm
What's the ranking? Vice<Admiral<Rear?
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Droid803 on August 15, 2008, 05:41:21 pm
Admiral > Vice > Rear
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Stormkeeper on August 16, 2008, 11:41:06 am
[V] forgot to leave behind a detailed GTVA command structure.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 16, 2008, 10:22:02 pm
[V] forgot to leave behind a detailed GTVA command structure.
Or just didn't want to/couldn't be bothered.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Droid803 on August 16, 2008, 10:25:43 pm
Most people just assume something similar to modern day wet navies.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Dilmah G on August 16, 2008, 11:05:09 pm
Most people just assume something similar to modern day wet navies.

Well there isn't exactly a good reason to change the structure of the navy just based on a new environment similar in operation to an atmospheric theatre of ops. It's not like there's anything dramatic that should be changed (Why make a new rank just because there's no water, the Navy still functions as a cohesive, organised, disciplined unit). But I mean rank is there as a discplinary/ chain of command/assosciation component, so unless there's a need to change disciplinary structure, the rank system probably wouldn't change, other than some subtle changes, such as new periods of service for officers and such
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Snail on August 17, 2008, 01:20:11 am
Well, that, and it's 300+ years in the future.
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on August 17, 2008, 02:08:13 am
Well, that, and it's 300+ years in the future.

         300 years ago they were using the same ranks. Were they not?
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Dilmah G on August 17, 2008, 04:32:04 am
Well, that, and it's 300+ years in the future.

         300 years ago they were using the same ranks. Were they not?


Damn right they were!

We've had navies for over 1000+ years, and for at least 400-500 of those years, we've had relatively standardized officer ranks. For the simple reason that- IT WORKS

If it ain't broke, don't fix it
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: NGTM-1R on August 17, 2008, 02:49:27 pm
300 years ago they were using the same ranks. Were they not?

Open to debate, but the Royal Navy had a rank structure fairly similar in place for higher ranks. Junior officer ranks have evolved a good deal over the last 300 years, but on the other hand, it could be argued that they were more "formalized" then "evolved."
Title: Re: Fleet Size?
Post by: Dilmah G on August 18, 2008, 04:02:27 am
300 years ago they were using the same ranks. Were they not?

Open to debate, but the Royal Navy had a rank structure fairly similar in place for higher ranks. Junior officer ranks have evolved a good deal over the last 300 years, but on the other hand, it could be argued that they were more "formalized" then "evolved."

Exactly, its all in the interest of maintaining a disciplined, cohesive, effective unit. If the ranks didn't change much (There is the notable absence of many modern officer ranks in FS2, it is possible these are in place of longer minimum periods of service in the GTVA ranks), it is evident that the rank system works. The GTVA (possibly) eliminated many of the 20th-21st Century Officer Ranks in the interest of streamlining the system. This helps when orders are passed down the ranks, this would most likely be highly effective in ships such as the Colossus, in which there are increasingly large numbers of hands aboard as many important orders have a much simpler filtering process and with the amount of Officers required to staff many GTVA Capital Ships, it simply isn't practical to have to account for over nine different levels of authority on the bridge. A more streamlined rank structure such as the GTVA's also helps to prevent a top heavy chain of command, but rather equalises ranks, as after the rank of Lieutenant, the number of people occupying ranks above should (logically) be dramatically lower, as ranks such as Flying Officer and Sub-Lieutenant present in Modern Navies are folded into the Ensign, LtJG and Lt ranks