Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
Tank man said:
Best to go

[X] UFS Hoshi Sato

As it's a valid format.

Gonna also vote for this because it's a good choice.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, my thought was basically that this is the first real Science vessel designed for the Federation and naming it for the woman who is possibly most responsible for the Federation even being a thing is well worth doing. It really cannot be overstated how important the creation of the Universal Translator was, for letting the Federation exist and keep existing.
 
Mechanis said:
, we made design choices early on to save costs, then choked on actually spending when tactical came along because the people who were actually reading the whole post got shouted down by people who skimmed and bandwagned and so the word "cost" and immediately turned off their brains. So we basically ended up building the frigate option the size of a cruiser, and are basically only going to get away with it because those cost saving measures mean it's about the same cost to manufacture.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Overly reductive and somewhat revisionist imo Those cost savings resulted in a hull that would have found it very difficult to use torps on anything it was meant to fight due to lack of combat maneuverability.
 
Staff Notice -- Right on the line. I know you tried to soften it with a mispelling but not everyone is going to take it that way. -Apocal
Skippy said:
Speaking entirely honestly, the fact that you recognise this was a possibility, and bring it up explicitly as an example of a bad outcome we dodged, is bewildering and vaguely frightening to me.

Honestly I don't mean that as a pejorative. I mean that attempting to fathom the logic behind this statement is like trying to comprehend the mind of Cthulhu.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No, I was saying "if ijjits hadn't shouted down those of us who weren't, we could have had an amazing ship instead of just a good one, for the same costs, in the same numbers."

But we were, we do, and we have.
The Galileo, whatever we end up calling it, isn't a bad ship, as far as the science goes; it definitely helps shore up some of the noted weaknesses of the Sagas.

But it could have been an amazing ship, a backbone of the Starfleet for decades to come that would have had future designs compared even unfavorably for decades to come, and that didn't happen.
 
Mechanis said:
he whole post got shouted down by people who skimmed and bandwagned and so the word "cost" and immediately turned off their brains
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Mechanis said:
No, I was saying "if ijjits hadn't shouted down those of us who weren't, we could have had an amazing ship instead of just a good one, for the same costs, in the same numbers."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

For the love of god could you tone it down? I take OFFENSE at your accusations that I "turned off my brain" when I voted against using the torpedo launchers. I read the brief, looked at what we were making, and decided that torpedoes were not needed. Just because the majority of other people did not draw the same conclusions that you did does not mean we are people without functioning minds.

There was a frankly excessive effort to argue for the torpedoes. Including a mod censured mass ping. So you can't argue that people didn't see your bloody arguments.

Please accept that maybe, just MAYBE that I am not a "ijjit"? Which I assume is a creative misspelling of idiot.
 
Last edited:
[X] UFS Kea
[X] UFS Taqi Ad-Din
[X] UFS Agricola

For reference, Kea are notorious for being rather destructively inquisitive when bored. The signs saying not to feed them are there for a Reason.
 
Mechanis said:
No, we made design choices early on to save costs, then choked on actually spending when tactical came along because the people who were actually reading the whole post got shouted down by people who skimmed and bandwagned and so the word "cost" and immediately turned off their brains. So we basically ended up building the frigate option the size of a cruiser, and are basically only going to get away with it because those cost saving measures mean it's about the same cost to manufacture.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We got B- Tactical. It is already NOTICEABLY better in combat than Starfleet actually expected out of this design. This is objective fact, by word of QM.

Because the average is C. We went BEYOND what Starfleet was expecting for a combatant.

There is no good reason to complain that we didnt instead get a B+.
 
Look, man, I just wanted the torpedoes to blow up subspace anomalies. Y'all got way too invested one way or another on whether or not we could blow up subspace anomalies.

@Jalinth, @Mechanis, maybe it's time to step away from the made up spaceships for a little bit. Or at least give it a rest. I'd like to not have to step away again.
 
Even if none of my picks win out, given the number of ships here whatever gets picked could be the start of Starfleet's Royal Navy borrowed tradition of having a few themed names then basically slapping whatever else they can think of in there (see many of the named Galaxies).
 
[X] UFS Europa

I'm not personally a huge fan of ships named after people, so going with Europa. And yes, I recognize that arguably it's still named after a person but with extra steps involved, but oh well.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top