Relax wrote:Sigs wrote:
If the SLN had a choice between more SD's or forts what do you think they would choose? They keep a reserve of 8,000 SD's and 2,300 in active commission as well as thousands of lighter ships. The League does not see a need to maintain defences because it is the biggest most powerful nation around and they know it. Forts are a defensive weapon by their very nature and do not have the prestige that SD's have and if I'm not mistaken most of the Fleet 2000 changes were predominately cosmetic in nature aka make them look cooler rather than more combat effective. This means that it would be more prestigious for them to have a few hundred more SD's than having forts on any but the most essential sites and even then those forts might be obsolete.
If we are talking about Haven, Manticore or Grayson it would be different because all 3 nations have 20 years worth of combat experience so they will go for forts when forts are called for, but the league has not fought a war in centuries and thus does not think like them.
According to your logic, the USA doesn't build Frigates, LCS's, or have programs for a cheap light fighter or a cheap submarine... A universal truth, POLITICIANS are always looking to increase THEIR slice of the pie they get to dole out in guanxi, etc. Same reason we are still building M1 Abrams tanks even though the Pentagon has not wanted to build any for the last 10+ years.
Do not look for logic and reason to rule in reality. This is a naive ideal. Rather look to Nepotism, power, and $$$ to rule in most cases.
The SLN does not worry about defence, if the choice is between SD's or forts, they will choose SD's not because SD's are more useful or efficient but because the SD's are more prestigious and in line with belief system of the SLN.