I feel like the Worf of DS9 or TNG would be incredibly skeptical that the Federation would ever start a war. on the other hand, whose to say what he's been through since them, he was pretty down at the beginning of Way of the Warrior. I believe that if he felt the Federation was unjust, he'd probably go right ahead and blow federation ships apart, and do his best to kill Marines. Starfleet crew and civillians however, I think he would try to take prisoner or some other minimalist approach.

You are describing tactics and capabilities among Starfleet that I don't think we've really seen before, coordinating fire and tactical feeds and such, is that a little artistic license, based on watching the show, is it a change instituted by the militarizing of some aspects of Starfleet, or what. Does the Venture of the E-D's bridge layout? that is what I was imagining when Sorenson was working at his bridge station. Also, do they have those little peregrine fighters, or is the Venture too full of combat shuttles.

I have taken quite a bit of artistic license when it comes to multi ship actions yes. In the show they show next to nothing of squadron or greater level coordination. Their fleet actions seem little removed from the tactics of a mob or riot. 'Shoot everything that isn't us' is about the best they have managed at this level. I have always had a hard time accepting that, even though it does seem accurate when everything else about Star Fleet is taken in account. This book is giving me an opportunity to rectify this itch I've had. As well as a whole lot of other ones. My thoughts are as follows:

1, This is a first person perspective. In a TV show they show the entire bridge at once and would tend to show the overarching moments that allow the viewers to follow the action with the minimum amount of content. The battles from Sorenson's perspective are quite different to that of the TV shows audience. He is the Executive Officer of a multi megaton vessel with dozens of departments and hundreds of crew members. He is the one that is responsible for the ship operating at full capacity therefore he is going to be checking every detail he can, as well as making sure that only the information that the Captain really needs gets reported to the Captain. This gives the reader the possibility of learning far more of the details involved than the viewers of a TV show.

2, There is a short note in the most recent chapter that Star Fleet had begun organizing it's ships into squadrons after the Dominion war. Part of the 'lessons learned' phase that gave us the Marines. If they can learn well enough to basically create a whole new service I'm sure they can learn well enough to implement at least a little coordination.

3, I have probably read way to much David Weber to simply accept that a fleet of starships are no better than a gaggle of really big and expensive soccer hooligans.

Yeah, Venture has the exact same bridge layout as the Enterprise. With the notable exception that the chairs now have seat belts.

As to the Peregrine I can say that I had actually forgotten about them or I would have had them involved in this battle. But they would not be carried by the Venture. Except for an absolute minimum of regular shuttles the ships normal operations require they have nothing but Marine assault shuttles. In fact they have modified the ship to be able to cram in more assault shuttles for the Marines as a stop gap measure until the Marines can get a few dedicated starships of their own. This leaves no room for anything extra. At least not anything as large as a Peregrine.

---

"When in doubt, assume everything is fucked."
"Life is better when you have a stick."

To be honest, Star Trek in general has done rather poorly at showing any sort of fleet-level actions. Generally the focus is on one-on-one or one-on-a small number type of combat. Larger operations tend to be, as you pointed out, little more than mobile mobs, with the occasional "everyone shoot at this spot" commands.

Even the Klingons and Romulans, who are far more warlike than the Federation, fall prey to this. Don't recall much of Dominion tactics from DS9, but my impression is that it was similar.

Of course, one would hope that after all but getting their backsides handed to them more often than not in the operations that Starfleet has participated in, that someone in the command staff would wise up and look at some historical references. Even tactics from the Victorian-era navies of the world would be better than what they're doing. The only thing keeping Starfleet from getting completely overwhelmed seems to be the fact that all of their opponents are similarly backwards, tactics-wise, as they are. Which is really sad.

There's actually a great analysis of Federation battle tactics (or lack thereof) on the main page of SDN. Goes into great deal of what is wrong and why.

After a bit of hunting around, I found the files you mentioned. interesting, very interesting. And sad, very very sad (but true)

I agree that they never looked good.

Another show which I wondered about was Babylon 5. Fleet actions in that always seemed to make use of formations etc. (wherever possible), with many small ships in close escort formation around one or two big ones being perhaps the most universally popular (from humans to vorlons), but I was never really sure how close to realistic these might generally be tactically, rather than just looking pretty. Any views?

Deebles: I assume they are about as realistic as any fleet action shown on TV. Not very. They do make it look good though and I can freely admit I haven't done a very thorough analysis of the tactics employed on B5, so for all I know they might match up to the limits that are imposed upon them by their technology and culture.

And as to the wonderful piece on the main site comparing Star Wars, Star Trek and real world fleet tactics I have read it several times and the conclusions are spot on with one exception in my opinion. Culture. No reference is made to the prevailing culture that has been preventing Starfleet from taking advantage of the communications capabilities available to them. I think then Commander Riker said it best, and I paraphrase: "Combat training? We don't need no stinking combat training." In my version of the world the Dominion war was a strong enough wakeup call that people actually started looking at Starfleet as a military organization again. At least in terms of their priorities and the effect the changed priorities have on their training. From what has been seen on the show there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the hardware being employed. They have shown the capacity for communications links any US Navy warship would envy, and now they are actually starting to ask such questions as: How can we be more efficient? What can we do to win faster and with less casualties What is our most important job?. These and other questions, combined with the whopping they took in the Dominion war, have forced them to take a good long look and try to formulate answers that make sense. The aforementioned seat belts are just one example of how their thinking has changed.

---

"When in doubt, assume everything is fucked."
"Life is better when you have a stick."

Well in real world navies for centuries, battle line or wall of ships was the main fleet formation. Starting with the WW 1 era, the large capital ships at the center surrounded by escorts was the norm, mainly due to the need to defend the bigger targets from small PT boats, and later from aircraft and guided missiles. Even today, the fleet formation is still the same. One or two large aircraft carriers surrounded by cruisers, destroyers, frigates, and a few submarines running scout up front. Only today the fleet is spread out to reduce the impact of a nuclear strike but the principle remains. You need small ships with point defense to protect the capital ships at the center.

In space I would presume it's the same thing. You have capital ships that are powerful, but with a big bullseye painted on them. You have an enemy capable of firing nuclear and antimatter torpedoes, and (except for Star Trek), fighters that can carry those torpedoes and ram them right down your throat. Having a screen of smaller ships is mandatory in that kind of environment. Also keep in mind large energy and particle weapons. If a Battleship lobs a phaser blast at you, better to hit an expendable destroyer than the flagship. The only difference I can see is that in space, it's 3D...so you'd need a sphere of escorts instead of a ring.

I can only recall a handful of times in all of the Trek-related shows, movies, etc., where they made any effort at all to utilize the true "3D" nature of space combat. The first one being in "The Wrath of Khan" during the final battle between the Enterprise and the Reliant.

I realize that a lot of it has to do with making sure the audience can keep up with what's going on and all that, but it says a lot of not-nice things about how badly tactics and true maneuver-based combat. The more this thread goes on, the more I realize that a lot of sci-fi ship-to-ship combat seems based solely on 18th to 19th-century naval combat.

Which begs the question - is it possible to reflect true, honest-to-goodness fleet-action space combat in a manner that both reflects some manner of realism and also doesn't leave you average viewer (face it, we're a niche group in the eyes of those who make these things) a gibbering pile of drool reaching for the remote control because their head hurts?

It all depends on how the main artillery is mounted, really.

Sailing ships of the line had their batteries mounted on the broadside, later battleships had centreline gun-turrets that could bring all guns to bear on the broadside and a much smaller number to bear fore and aft. A line of battle ahead maximises firepower for both types of ship (while also minimizing vulnerability for reasons I shall not go into here). It also makes fire-control for the fleet rather easy; each ship fires at the corresponding one in the enemy line.

Galleys, on the other hand, had their main guns mounted in the bows so that they could shoot only directly ahead. Fleets of galleys used a line-abreast formation to maximise their firepower, and typically modified this to a crescent formation with the center pulled back and both tips of the line pushed a bit forward so that the enemy fleet could be enveloped for a close-quarter (ie. boarding) action.

There is also the early period of fighting sail, prior to about 1650, where ships tended to mount a credible number of guns pointing in all directions (but more on the broadsides, obviously - sheer practicality dictated this). Melee combat was the norm then - this allowed smaller ships to gang up on bigger ones, something that is not possible in a line-ahead formation (tactical control in melée was obviously lost as soon as combat was joined!). One consequence of a line of battle ahead is that each ship that is present in the line has to be big enough to at least survive against the biggest enemy ship of the line, which poses a minimum limit on what is a useful battleship and relegates everything smaller to a merely supporting role in a fleet battle.

From what I've seen, starships in SW/ST at least seem to be more of the galley-type configuration (most of the firepower points ahead of the ship, limited firepower on other points) than broadside-type configuration, or a melée-type configuration at best (most firepower ahead, but significant firepower can be brought to bear all-round). ISDs certainly fit the bill here.

I suspect that a "wall-abreast" would be the preferred initial formation for the battlewagons, possibly devolving into a melée as the fleets closed. In a melée smaller combatants could make a useful contribution too.

It's a bit more complicated than just the placement of the artillery though. The relative effectiveness of the weapons versus the armor. The relative maneuverability of the ships in relation to the tracking speed and range of the weapons. The level of training one could expect from the crews of the ships. The amount and clarity of the communications between ships. The relative difference in values of large ships versus small ships. These all play enormous roles in determining the value and application of fleet and lower level formations.

In the case of this book they are using a mix of unit and individual tactics. They are splitting their fleet up into mutually supportive squadrons who are all under the command of a single officer. Each squadron is expected to follow the overall plan formulated by the admiral and his staff before the battle. During the battle they are expected to conform to the fleet admirals orders (duh) when the situation changes. They do not however expect the admiral in charge of the entire fleet to tell individual squadrons or ships who to shoot at. The squadron commanders are free to chose their targets as well as the exact details of their squadrons maneuvers as long as they remain within the parameters set by the fleet admiral. The reasoning is simply that it is more efficient to have 4-8 ships shooting at individual targets in succession than to have individual ships spreading their fire over the entire enemy formation.

---

"When in doubt, assume everything is fucked."
"Life is better when you have a stick."

Yes... for sailing ships of the line the sides of the ship were very conveniently far more sturdy than either the bow or - especially - the stern, so line-ahead combined the strongest offense with the strongest defence. For the more modern battleships, putting the broadside to the enemy minimized the chance of getting hit in the first place, simply because the enemy's fire was far more likely to be off in range than in direction, so it paid off to present the minimal "target depth" to him so you didn't catch the slightly too long or too short shots. Same effect though; line-ahead broadside-to was a good thing defensively as well as offensively. Besides... if a ship designer knows that one aspect of the ship is going to be pointed towards the enemy in combat (because all the guns are there, for example!), he is likely to bolt on some extra armour there, just in case somebody shoots back!

This was a major problem for wet-navy ships... in general, a sailing ship of the line physically _could_not_ shoot at anything other than the ship directly opposing it in the enemy line; the guns could not be trained far enough fore or aft at combat range. Battleships could train the guns, no problem, but then there was the nasty problem of telling _your_ shell-splashes around the enemy target of choice from everybody else's shell-splashes around the same target, making it very hard to correct fire to actually hit the damn thing instead of just poking holes in the water... which tended to make "ganging up" on single ships in the enemy formation ineffective. Not to mention the fact that if everybody is shooting at enemy A, enemies B C D and E are left in peace to do target-practice on your own ships at their leasure, without any interference at all. Again, a bad thing. Improved fire-control helps with the first problem, but nothing can be done about the second except actually shooting back. Spreading your fire has the upside of keeping all the enemy ships busy dodging incoming, if nothing else. And you never know, a single lucky hit on a critical component such as a fire-control rangefinder or main battery turret can make a world of difference. A battleship might even go kaboom if hit just so. Just ask the Hood.

Mondo, the problem with making space combat realistic is that the ships would be firing at each other from such a huge range, all you would see are small blips and flashes of lights.

Actually, the Hood's problem was that it was outdated by the technology. Her decks weren't designed to withstand the sort of plunging fire that the Bismark (and other "modern" warships of the era) utilized. But your point still stands - instead of having lots of holes blasted in her (lightly armored) decks, all she needed was one particularly unlucky one to seal her fate.

The ships of Starfleet tend to have a similar vulnerability. You can pound the snot out of them, generally, and they'll tend to survive. Unless someone happens to sneeze in the vicinity of the warp core - then it's core breach time. This is something that ships of earlier eras didn't suffer from - TOS-era ships could be reduced to little more than scrap, and the antimatter would remain fat and happy. One has to wonder what sort of benefits the TNG-era vessels gained that required such a reduction in operational safety standards.



True, very true. Not that I wouldn't be ecstatic if someone had the courage to do something like that. Still, I'm sure that some sort of compromise between the dictates of reality and the needs of dramatic presentation could be reached... not that it's likely to actually happen. But I can still dream...

I think it's more an issue of being complacent in your technology than any real benefits. One thing that always bugged me was how open and vulnerable the warp core was. I mean in one of the first episodes of TNG a rogue Klingon was able to hold the ship hostage by pointing a handgun at it. How is that a benefit? Do you really need the core exposed all the time for maintenance? If you have to work on it that often, maybe you should design a better core. That and the ejection system never working when it's needed.... Some other examples:

Forcefields to replace medical quarantine, hull breach, brig / jail barriers, and even simple windows. What if the forcefield fails, eh? I'd rather have a hard steel bulkhead than a forcefield anyday if forced to choose between the two.
Using transporters for everything and only having a handful of shuttles (Titanic, anyone?)
The Borg. Always trying to beat the Borg by enhancing your technology (despite knowing how quickly they'll adapt), rather than strapping a warp engine on a small asteroid and aiming it at the cube.

I could go on, but I think they just think that "more advanced is better" and if it becomes too advanced it can't possibly fail.



I think BSG did it allright. Most of the weapons they had were short-range missiles and kinetic weapons, so what you saw was actually somewhat realistic.

With regards to the warp core exposure, that's not THAT insane. The Klingon got into a very secure area in the middle of a secure ship. At that level you shouldn't NEED to armor-plate everything, because only authorized personnel are supposed to be there. If I got into the reactor control room of a US Navy ship, I could probably hold things hostage with a handgun too.

---

Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker

Well I guess it depends on your definition of "secure". Navy ships have armed marines and security checkpoints, which Federation ships don't. The reactor on a Navy ship is actually heavily armored and would take much more than a handgun to set off a fission explosion or a meltdown. Sure you could shoot something in the cooling system but there are backups and failsafes for that. I wouldn't trust the failsafes on a Federation ship...core ejection system anyone?

Huh? they have core ejection systems, the Enterprise D dumped it's core in Drumhead, and Voyager was dropping hers so often the Delta Quadrant thought she had diarrhea.

Core ejection systems on Federation starships seem to fail just as often as not. The ejectors went offline when the Enterprise had its little run-in with the Bozeman, and also apparently during the "Generations" movie (otherwise they would have used it when the coolant system blew, no?).

Regarding the security issue, even if one we to manage to get into the reactor control room of a modern nuclear-powered vessel, there's not all that much you can do in there that would result in the total destruction of the ship. It's not like you would have access to the reactor itself from that location. And even if you did, the reactors tend to be built rather sturdily - it's a warship, after all. They're designed to survive things like cruise missiles and such without resulting in a catastrophic failure. Heck, there are submarine reactors sitting on the ocean floor, that have survived the destruction of the vehicle itself, that are (according to the military, at least) still intact.

Even in the TOS era, ships seemed to be made of sturdier stuff. Federation ships regularly got the living snot pounded out of them and there were no core breaches, even when the damage inflicted was severe enough to wipe out the crews. Somewhere along the lines Starfleet engineers seem to have forgotten what things like "safety standards" and such actually are.

To drag this back to the story at hand, it almost seems like certain segments of the Federation have become so enamored of their technology (represented by their starships) that they consider any non-technological approach to be "barbaric" or "uncivilized." This goes hand-in-hand with the unfathomably naive belief in their own moral superiority. They seem to be totally unable to accept that some times the only way to get through to someone is to whack them upside the head. Diplomacy is all well and good, but to disregard the use of military force because it's "uncivilized" is a diplomatic failure all unto its own. Especially when you consider all of the militant civilizations that the Federation regularly comes up against. Kirk may not have been the most diplomatic of captains, but he at least understood that there were times when you have to punch out your opponents instead of trying to treknobabble them to death.

I'm not sure how useful this is, but when you guys were talking about Starfleet combat models, and concentrating fire on one ship to knock it out of action before working on the others, I thought of something I read awhile ago, Lanchester's Square Law (quick'n'dirty definition fifth paragraph down here, more complete definition here, but then that lead to reading about the newer, perhaps more applicable to Star Trek, Salvo Combat Model.

Actually, Star Trek ships seem to kind of fall into a middle ground, leaning towards the Salvo Model, but with shades of the Lanchester Laws...

Personally, I think concentrating fire on a few ships at a time makes sense, but in most cases I'm bad at justifying my beliefs, even to myself, so I'll let people better at that talk about that.

---

Yes, I know my username is an oxyMORON, thankyou for pointing that out, you're very clever.

MEMBER: Evil Autistic Conspiracy. Working everyday to get as many kids immunized as possible to grow our numbers.

'I don't believe in gunship diplomacy, but a couple of battleships in low orbit over my enemy's capital can't but help negotiations.'

Actually Reckless, that's perfect. When I sat down and started figuring out exactly how the Federation would go about improving their fleets effectiveness both of the Lancaster law's as well as my own perceptions of the theoretical capabilities of their C4I systems gave me starting point. After discussing the topic with friends we settled on the 'concentrated fire' model for the new and improved Star Fleet for several reasons.

1: Ships in the Star Trek universe can take a large number of hits from the vast majority of weapons systems before being rendered combat ineffective.

B: The possibility of a lucky hit taking out the ship is surprisingly low during combat. The majority of catastrophic warp core breaches shown are the result of either overwhelming systems damage or unforeseen engineering issues. (Of course most of the 'unforeseen' issues should damn well have been foreseen by the designers and engineers working on the ships.)

III: There is no technological reason they should have as bad coordination as they are displaying. Their C4I systems are outstanding as well as their sensor capability. This lead us to conclude that they had some cultural or social reason for not using their systems as well as they could. (Lack of training from an aversion to war fighting. Not as large a problem in my post dominion Star Fleet as it is in TNG or Voyager.)

Four: The primary protection for most ships are their shields, very little damage can reliably penetrate them as long as they are up. It happens but is not something to be relied upon when Murphy is applying the K.I.S.S. principle. The ships themselves are relatively speaking soft targets once the shields are taken down.



The conclusion is therefore that they should do everything they can to reduce the enemies capacity to do damage by eliminating offensive weapons as fast as possible. Spreading the fire would maximize the time it would take for the enemy shield to be taken down thereby allowing the enemy ships the longest time to defeat the friendly ships shields in return. By concentrating their fire on picked targets their shields can be taken down in the shortest possible time thereby causing a reduction of fire on friendly shields and maximizing the time between the start of the engagement and the loss of friendly weapons and ships.

Or something like that...I don't have all my notes in front of me right now but that should explain my reasoning behind the tactics involved in this little book.

---

"When in doubt, assume everything is fucked."
"Life is better when you have a stick."

Concentrating on one target has also added benefits.
I'm not quite sure just HOW exactly ST shields work, but going with my understanding of physics the energy they take has to go somewhere. Concentrating fire on single targets could very well overwhelm the "surge capacity" of the shield, creating a momentary opening allowing weapons fire to slip trough, or (and evidence of this can be seen in the shows) transmitting a surge back to ship's systems creating nice distractions for crew and command to worry about other than shooting back.

Damn you, I thought this was an update!

Interlude II

The conference room was buried deep within what was possibly the most ancient structure the Admiral had ever visited. The millions of tons of rock above his head held a certain solid reassurance after his recent journey into space. Smiling slightly at the familiarity of the thought, he crossed to the head of the table, directly underneath a large map of the planet. His subordinates stood at respectful attention as he sat down. What few of them had been allowed to gather here.

“Please be seated, ladies and gentlemen.” They each found their seat rapidly and sat down. Their faces turned to the head of the table, their expressions attentive.

“I'm sure that all of you have good covers in place to explain your current absence, however I have always felt that we should avoid pushing our luck, so I'll get right to the point. The war with the Klingons is going well, well enough that I believe we managed to avoid the critical point our analysis section pinpointed. Their fleets are being slowly driven back in space by Starfleet. Their allies have started abandoning them to avoid having us come down on them, and last, but certainly not least, we enjoy a complete superiority against them on the ground. Whenever we can bring in the Marines at least.”

The Admiral paused and looked around at the gathered officers, searching for any hesitation, any doubt. His satisfaction at finding none was clear to those that had been gathered. “As we speak, 6th Fleet and our deployed Marine companies are taking out the Fa'Rov system's defenses and industrial capacity. They are also rescuing Ambassador Worf, and capturing as many among the systems leadership as they can find.”

He let his gaze sweep across the room. Taking in the officers in front of him. This could never have been possible if they had stuck to the methods Sloan and his predecessors had followed. While it was true that one person in the right place at the right time could change the course of history. An organization could create the right time and the right place on it's own. If they tried hard enough they could even create the right person.

The problem with the expansion of the organization was of course that it was far more visible now than it had ever been, and he and his colleagues had no doubt what would happen if their secrets were to be revealed. He had taken steps to insure the continuation of Section 31 and it's mandate should that happen, however he himself would not be in a position to enjoy it.

“Now, however good this news may be, it is not the reason we are here today. One of our sources has provided information that the resistance to several of the new policies has begun to strengthen in certain individuals. In fact, we are receiving reports that seem to indicate a possibility of outright treasonous activities taken in support of domestic goals. We have also seen a few indicators of more troubling developments. Though nothing firm has been noted yet though, so we cannot act preemptively. Even The treasonous activities I have spoken of are nothing more than a few meetings between Federation personnel and persons from the Klingon embassy. Most definitely nothing we could leak to the Inspector General and have them run with an official investigation.” The Admiral paused to let the limitations they all operated under sink in properly.

“In addition to this we have lost track of a few individuals with connections to the security and engineering tracks. We have no hard information on what these individuals may be doing or where they might be. I bring this up simply because the individuals in question are very close to some high level elements within the opposition. Old Academy friends, family members, connections like that. Just as with the connections noted between the opposition and the Klingon embassy there is effectively nothing we can do at the moment. I would however like you all to keep a lookout for any new information regarding these individuals. What we can also do is to step up our surveillance of the individuals we have identified at this time. Orders to that effect have been sent out to the intelligence cells already assigned to the situation. Warning orders have also been sent out to those cells that are in positions to support the currently active cells should the need arise.” The Admiral paused and looked around the room.

“Are there any questions?” A Captain further down the table cleared his throat.

“Sir, how old are the reports you mention?”

“There has always been non-official contact between Federation personnel and foreign embassy staff. The meetings I mentioned have only been brought to our attention after the Federation personnel in question had first had meetings of a clandestine nature with individuals we have identified as belonging to groups in opposition to our current activities. It should also be mentioned that most of the groups in opposition to us have begun taking on a more organized structure, compared to the almost entirely social nature they had maintained for so long. School mates and club memberships for the most part.”

The Captain nodded in understanding, his question answered. At the other end of the table a Commander raised his right hand and was acknowledged by the Admiral.

“Sir, what, besides the close connections to other conspirators, makes the missing persons important enough for us to actively look for them?”

The Admiral tapped a few controls on the desk in front of him and the map of the world behind him was replaced by the image of a thin man with thick black hair dressed in the uniform of a Starfleet security Lieutenant Commander.

“This is Lieutenant Commander Mona Driscol. She graduated from the academy security program in 2372. She spent the next few years following a quite normal career track. In 2375 she had a run in with Bajoran seperatists that left her with a shattered spine and her left leg amputated just below the knee. After she got out of the hospital she applied herself to a study of more direct combat methods than are routinely taught at the academy. She even studied a few historic combat methods. When the marine program was getting started she was approached as a possible source of information and advice in the formation of the marines. She refused. She not only refused she got quite agitated at the idea of dedicated armed troops. She explained in detail that her interest in the subjects was from her personal history and that while security could profit from some of what she had learned, any dedicated combat troops would be a violations of the peaceful principles upon which the Federation had been founded.” The Admiral paused his briefing to let the information settle with his audience before continuing.

“She is very good at personal combat, both armed and unarmed. She has also studied unit tactics and methods with quite some depth. If she had been recruited she would have been at least a platoon commander at the moment. Her intimate knowledge of these subjects is fairly uncommon in the Federation and very nearly unique within the opposition. She is most definitely someone we want to keep track of. I assume that answers your question Commander?”

The Lieutenant Commander, deep in thought, nodded. “Yes, sir. Thank you.”

The Admiral waited for a few moments, but no other questions were forthcoming. He stood up from the table, prompting the other men, women and others to abandon their chairs and stand to attention.

“The meeting is adjourned.”

---

"When in doubt, assume everything is fucked."
"Life is better when you have a stick."

So a few lessons I have learned writing this story:

1, Don't take so damn long to write it. Nothing you have planned at the start is going to hold up for several years.
B, Butt In Chair, Hands On Keyboard is hard when you are as lazy as I am.
III, All first drafts suck. Including what I have posted here. Learn to look through the crap to what it could be when you have polished it.

I'm sorry this is just an interlude and not a full chapter. As noted in lesson 1 just about every idea except the core of this story has changed since I first started writing it. I'm pretty sure it will be a better story for the changes. Unfortunately the changes necessitate info dumps such as this so the ending isn't completely unexpected. Unexpected in a bad way. I will finish this damn story eventually. Try to have patience with me while I learn how to do this writing stuff.

---

"When in doubt, assume everything is fucked."
"Life is better when you have a stick."