Subject: Re-evaluation of Tactical Doctrine & Capital Ship Acquisition

Log Entry:

The recent engagement with the pirate band proved… costly. While we secured a victory, it was far from clean. We encountered three pirate cruisers, supported by a swarm of frigates - a configuration we are ill-equipped to handle efficiently. The Phoenix and her sister frigates, Bite, Claw, Tear, Rip, Raptor, fought bravely, but the focus fire from the cruisers was brutal. Our five frigates managed to cripple two of theirs, but only after absorbing considerable damage. Using the Asteroids from their training, they avoiding most of the fire. After all frigates don't generally need point defence since they are fast and small.

The Phoenix herself took a near-crippling blow to her port engine nacelle, requiring emergency repairs. If the enemy had different intel. If I had not bought a makeshift generator. If I had not ordered Anya to better integrate it within the system, making a smoother overload bear in the ambush. I, no we all could have died. A Disastrous outcome.

It is clear now that our current fleet composition is inadequate for engaging larger, more organized pirate threats. I thought it was enough to protect Hydra, Mule and Tanker. Which is was, unless specifically targeted like this. The fleet lacks the punch and tactical flexibility required for these more serious confrontations. The concept of an effective supporting vessel capable of pushing our advantages and negating theirs was brought into sharp focus.

The Missing Piece:

The Phoenix, while capable in a brawl, was hampered. Supporting the frigates meant splitting my attention and resources between protecting them from the smaller pirate vessels and engaging the larger cruisers. If I had a carrier at my disposal, this entire engagement would have unfolded differently. I could have used the carrier's fighter complement to harass the cruisers, divert their fire, and even out-maneuver them. The anti-fighter screen they provide would allow my frigates to more freely engage the support ships without having to look over their shoulder. In essence, it could have acted like a highly mobile, armored, force multiplier.

New Directive:

If you spot this story on Amazon, know that it has been stolen. Report the violation.

The conclusion is undeniable: we need a carrier. A capital ship that can act as a mobile base, provide aerial dominance, and project power far beyond what our frigates are capable of. Immediately upon return to Port, I've initiated the process of carrier acquisition. Preliminary budget requests have been filed, and I’ve devoted a significant amount of my off-duty hours to reviewing available specifications.

Carrier Selection - Holographic Catalogues:

The options, as presented on the fleet procurement network, are numerous. I've spent hours on the hologram, sifting through the various models. It’s immediately apparent that not all carriers are created equal:

* The 'Goliath' Class: Heavy armor, numerous point defense turrets, and a large fighter complement. Appears to be a 'behemoth' design with a focus on brute strength and survivability. Its fighter bays are the most extensive, offering a diverse range of fighters, including heavy interceptors and bomber squadrons. It seems ideal for a head-on engagement but boasts the slowest speed and lowest maneuverability. Perhaps best suited for long-term engagements.

* The 'Zephyr' Class: A light, fast carrier with a focus on speed and agility. Its armor is thinner, but it boasts impressive maneuverability and would fare better with hit and run tactics. Equipped with smaller, but a more modern selection of fighters, with a focus on speed, they’re better suited for quick strikes and interdiction roles. Its point defense seems adequate, but not as potent as the Goliath's. More versatile at the cost of protection and firepower.

* The 'Bastion' Class: A mid-range option; a balance of armor, speed, and fighter capacity. The Bastion holds a mid-sized fighter complement that offers versatility within its confines. Its a 'jack-of-all trades' design that looks to be a comfortable 'just right' choice. It has a decent point defense system, but it wouldn’t be able to stand up to large amounts of enemy fire for extended periods of time. Seems to be a good all-around pick.

Fighter Analysis:

* Interceptors: Primarily used for air-to-air combat and escort duty. Fast, agile, but generally lightly armed.

* Bombers: Heavily armed, slow, but capable of delivering devastating blows to capital ships.

* Support Fighters: Specialized craft designed for electronic warfare, jamming, or providing targeting data.

Next Steps:

I will need to analyze our existing logistical capabilities and personnel requirements in relation to each carrier class. The 'Goliath' is tempting, but its size might be prohibitive without a significant budgetary boost. The 'Zephyr's' fragility is a concern, and in our current state, the 'Bastion' seems like the most logical choice. I am going to order more intelligence on the systems for which each carrier is best suited to maximize efficacy.