Starfleet Design Bureau

Sagarmatha-class Explorer [2175]
Mass: 290,000 Tons
Single Target Rating: 25
Multi-Target Rating: 13

-Average Damage: 15
-Max Sustained Damage: 30
-Alpha Strike Damage: 56
-Coverage: 100%
-Maneuverability: Medium-Low
Even with 6 phaser banks and 2 torpedos, this isn't really going to approach the stats of the Sagarmatha thanks to manueverability. It will be considerably stronger than the Cygnus, though, and if it'll really be that plentiful it'll probably count for a lot.
 
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers

I'm not worried about how it could eat into Thunderchild II build numbers, this design IS the Thunderchild II. Having a ton of these as our base with torpedoes also means that we have a lot flexibility for the role of whatever we do next.
 
It is, factually, a heavy capital ship as of the current day, at he price point of a much cheaper vessel due to our economising on unnecessary bells and whistles. It masses 400, 000 tons, larger than any ship to date, it mounts a heavy armament, and has resilience and shielding commensurate with its size. There is no reason to expect it to be much less able to take and receive lumps than anything we might produce at the present day. Will it be quite as good as a fancy-schmancy explorer we design with newer shields or top-of-the-line systems in a decade? Of course not, but that does not matter, because we can build two or more of these for the price of one of those, and quantity has a quality all of its own.

It does not effect military infrastructure negatively. It uses a fair chunk of it across the production run of the ship, during which time we are not doing anything else with that capacity unless we are in a war, in which case it is explicitly stated it won't make much difference, because we'd probably swap over to predominantly Selachii class escorts anyway. This has been confirmed explicitly with the QM.

The ship size bloat is not just a federation thing though. If the update says this is a light cruiser we shouldn't randomly claim it has abolished the need for anything bigger than light cruisers just because it's bigger than past ships. Our likely foes are also going to scale up their next generation ships. I can buy the idea that we won't design a new 1st rate heavy cruiser until the next conflict is looming though.

An A- cost and C- infrastructure for a B- tactical rating is hardly an "L". That's an incredible low cost design, that has average impact on our construction capabilities and an above average combat capability. That is a phenomenonal accomplishment by any measure!

I'm very unconvinced at this brick's ability to put its on paper letter grade to use considering its manoeuvrability. But I guess it's better if it has the coverage to compensate for it even if it stresses infrastructure.


I'm not mad if we vote 6 phasers for coverage because it's what we locked ourselves into but honestly I'm kinda confused at why this is even a vote. I basically read last round's vote as already choosing that design.

I'm very opposed to turning around towards torpedoes after choosing to not buy the engines needed to aim them though. So I guess it'll have to be.

[X] 6 Phaser Banks
 
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers

I'm not worried about how it could eat into Thunderchild II build numbers, this design IS the Thunderchild II. Having a ton of these as our base with torpedoes also means that we have a lot flexibility for the role of whatever we do next.
Ironically, it doesn't really stand up to the Thunderchild either even if we go with max phasers and torpedos.
Thunderchild-class Dreadnought [2158]
Mass: 280,000 Tons
Single Target Rating: 20
Multi-Target Rating: 14

-Average Damage: 14.2
-Max Sustained Damage: 25
-Alpha Strike Damage: 42
-Coverage: 100%
-Maneuverability: Medium
Manueverability really matters.
 
Whilst not ideal as a frontline combatant when (and it will be when, going by the sheer number/disposition of these we'll have) that does come six phasers will lend themselves quite nicely to the defence of the Galileo.

Six phasers plus two torpedoes mean that they'll be a heavy combatant second only to the Sagarmatha (1 below in average damage, 6 below in maximum sustained damage and 8 below in alpha strike)!
Given that we'll most likely be getting (imo) at least Sagar+2/4 this represents a massive increase in Starfleet's combat capabilities, with a minimal decrease in engineering or science (which this ship already looks like it'll be basically maxing out), which with a Klingon empire that likely sees us as worthy foes is something we need, to buy time if nothing else.

Given the Klingon penchant for raiding, and the presence of cloaks in their fleet (iirc), it seems reasonable to assume that whilst multi-BoP raids will represent the majority of rear line actions we cannot rule out a battlecruiser or two deciding to play Bismarck far behind the frontlines.
 
Last edited:
Whilst not ideal as a frontline combatant when (and it will be when, going by the sheer number/disposition of these we'll have) that does come six phasers will lend themselves quite nicely to the defence of the Galileo.

Six phasers plus two torpedoes mean that they'll be a heavy combatant second only to the Sagarmatha (1 below in average damage, 6 below in maximum sustained damage and 8 below in alpha strike)!
Given that we'll most likely be getting (imo) at least Sagar+2/4 this represents a massive increase in Starfleet's combat capabilities, with a minimal decrease in engineering or science (which this ship already looks like it'll be basically maxing out).

Given the Klingon penchant for raiding, and the presence of cloaks in their fleet (iirc), it seems reasonable to assume that whilst multi-BoP raids will represent the majority of rear line actions we cannot rule out a battlecruiser or two deciding to play Bismarck far behind the fleet.
This is also a good point; Klingons like doing that kind of thing almost more than the Romulans do. Having the full armament it can fit will definitely help hedge against Suddenly K'Tinga if the Klingons (or even just some Klingons) feel like being bold.
 
Because we don't want these things out being Frontline warships. The design brief and Starfleet's current need is for a better Science vessel that can provide second line combat capabilities. If we turn this into a monster combatant at huge infrastructure cost, then everyone who has a say in anything will demand it be taken off science duty where all that combat potential is wasted and put into Frontline service.

Which means Starfleet won't have the science ship it needs, and will have something less capable than a true Explorer, but is close enough and expensive enough to disincentivize building a proper Explorer.

This logic simply does not follow. We have the same number of hulls either way, for the same total cost rating. We have a large number of Selachii class ships from the last war, not to mention our Sagarmathas and other ships, so it's not like there's some gap in our patrol fleet.

There is nothing stopping ups from operating them in the exact same way, and in peacetime, their primary job is as science vessels. All being much more powerful combatants does for them is mean that they could safely be sent on scientific missions along our borders if we wanted, safe in the knowledge that outside of wartime, they can defend themselves against any likely scenario. But we don't have to do that if we don't want to.

Nothing is forcing our hand here.
 
Given the Klingon penchant for raiding, and the presence of cloaks in their fleet (iirc), it seems reasonable to assume that whilst multi-BoP raids will represent the majority of rear line actions we cannot rule out a battlecruiser or two deciding to play Bismarck far behind the frontlines.
Let's be real here: If even two of these are set upon by a wolfpack of BoPs behind the lines, at least one if not both are going to die. If a battlecruiser ambushes this hull alone, it's going to die no matter what weapons we stick on it.
 
I think two torps would add a lot to the design but I'm willing to vote in line with my prior fiscal conservatism.

[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
[X] 6 Phaser Banks
 
Last edited:
Let's be real here: If even two of these are set upon by a wolfpack of BoPs behind the lines, at least one if not both are going to die. If a battlecruiser ambushes this hull alone, it's going to die no matter what weapons we stick on it.
I mean, the full armament version is pretty close to a canon-Connie, and those did fine against K'Tingas/D-7s. I wouldn't expect it to be an easy fight, but I wouldn't call it an impossible one either.
 
Let's be real here: If even two of these are set upon by a wolfpack of BoPs behind the lines, at least one if not both are going to die. If a battlecruiser ambushes this hull alone, it's going to die no matter what weapons we stick on it.
Possible, but distinctly unlikely with two fully armed ships. Keep in mind you'd be looking at about 1.75x Saga combat power between them.

And? If we stick torpedoes onto it it has a much better chance of damaging it enough for force a repeat of the end of the Bismarck. Combat capability crippled and running for home.

Either it will get home or it will get hunted down by another Galileo, or two. And either way it'll end up being useless for further raiding.
 
Last edited:
Ironically, it doesn't really stand up to the Thunderchild either even if we go with max phasers and torpedos.

The Galileo has the same average and multi-target damage as the Thunderchild, and is within firepower point or two in everything else, despite mounting vastly fewer torpedoes and being (relatively) much cheaper to build. It also masses over a hundred thousand tons more, and Defence Rating scales with mass. Add in the fact that it has shields and a Thunderchild does not, and the comparison it is not even close. A Galileo would brutalise a Thunderchild.

A Sagarmarha would be a a much chancier prospect due to shields, but this ship is within 75% of most of its firepower stats against a single target, and actually edges it out in multi-target damage rating, whilst again, being vastly cheaper. And that extra hundred thousand fifteen tons is going to give it a defence rating ~33% higher given how we've seen it scale with tonnage, which is roughly what it loses in most firepower scores.

Being roughly in the same weight division as our last-generation explorer, whilst costing significantly less, is a pretty excellent place for a workhorse line combatant built to bulk out Starfleet in peacetime.
 
Ironically, it doesn't really stand up to the Thunderchild either even if we go with max phasers and torpedos.

Manueverability really matters.

I'm not sure what numbers you're looking at but it's pretty close right down the line except for a better alpha if we go with torpedoes as I'm voting for. Like this would be what I'd expect from a refit aimed at making the design easier to manufacture and giving it more utility without a weapons upgrade.

Thunderchild6 Phaser Banks+2 Torpedoes
Coverage100%100%100%
Single Target Rating201218
Multi-Target Rating141214
Average Damage14.21214
Max Sustained Damage251224
Alpha Strike421248
InfrastructureC-D-
Tactical RatingB-A
 
Last edited:
Back
Top