Linked contents
What we know is that Klingons are rolling out warp 7 ship that are marginally better than our current designs, these are probably their newest generation.
our best response is to show they are a generation and half behind in warp tech than holding back advances to refresh old designs that where designed to have a focus to prolong their active service.
[X] High-Performance Injector System (Size Reduction) (Type-4 Nacelle: +Max Warp) (Refit -> Incompatible)
I used to think that. And no, it doesn't. The supply chain for *more* is much more than you think.
Take the ur-example for this, the T-34 tank. It was objectively terrible, and inferior to any other tank on the field. Fielding as many as they did required cutting corners, needing a lot more supply chain and trail, and additional supplies to keep it going.
The sheer astrography redeems this a bit, but if your enemies can defeat your ships in say 2:1, then they can attempt more easily a defeat-in-detail approach. Whereas, if you are working with peer or better ships, your enemy has to commit more ships to defeat them, and they will always be a threat where they can be deployed, letting you retain the ability to use them strategically.
Therefore:
[X] High-Performance Injector System (Size Reduction) (Type-4 Nacelle: +Max Warp) (Refit -> Incompatible)
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
[X] High-Flow Injector System
- Location
- USA
So I just realized something.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the High-Performance Injector has requirements that appears to render the nacelles incompatible with ship built for the old Warp 7 Nacelles, completely going straight to incompatible if I'm reading it correctly. So if we do go with the High-Performance Injector, it would've made the Horizontal Core a pointless choice.
Welp, I'm glad I voted for, and that most voted for, the Vertical Core.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the High-Performance Injector has requirements that appears to render the nacelles incompatible with ship built for the old Warp 7 Nacelles, completely going straight to incompatible if I'm reading it correctly. So if we do go with the High-Performance Injector, it would've made the Horizontal Core a pointless choice.
Welp, I'm glad I voted for, and that most voted for, the Vertical Core.
Most likely we wouldn't have the choice of HPI if we went for Horizontal Core.
- Location
- USA
A valid possibility. Thanks for responding. I did ask to be corrected after all.
- Location
- USA
[X] High-Performance Injector System (Size Reduction) (Type-4 Nacelle: +Max Warp) (Refit -> Incompatible)
- Location
- USA
[X] High-Performance Injector System (Size Reduction) (Type-4 Nacelle: +Max Warp) (Refit -> Incompatible)
Shame, but needs must.
Shame, but needs must.
[x] High-Performance Injector System (Size Reduction) (Type-4 Nacelle: +Max Warp) (Refit -> Incompatible)
It's obvious that the Vertical type warp core is the way of future progress, so the Fleet might as well bite the bullet and commit early on in the game to it. It'll mean a bit of pain up front with a younger and more capable fleet being the end result.
It's obvious that the Vertical type warp core is the way of future progress, so the Fleet might as well bite the bullet and commit early on in the game to it. It'll mean a bit of pain up front with a younger and more capable fleet being the end result.
Last edited:
- Location
- United States
[X] High-Flow Injector System
Just a heads up, due to the space between the bracket and the X it won't count your vote.
Theunderbolt
"Prepare for trouble..."
- Location
- USoA
[X] High-Performance Injector System (Size Reduction) (Type-4 Nacelle: +Max Warp) (Refit -> Incompatible)
Given that the next design will be being worked on while there has been significant design time already applied to this new engine there should be able to build it to support the specs of the new engine's energy output.
That in itself is probably worth doing as it will allow a number of live test bed for new systems to be run for those components before the first designs that their essential for hit the drawing boards.
If it's not possible to future proof the next design to allow a refit however it just means not doing it now will have the problem just be shifted a generation down the line and the refits will still be needed but possibly on larger ships as materials sciences and integrity sciences advance further.
With the size of the Federation growing though I think the extra speed on some vessels will absolutely be required for maintaining response times for emergencies.
It might be possible for a faster ship to extend it's warpfield around older slower ships to bring them along at least for smaller ones providing at least some tactical flexability for fleet actions.
That in itself is probably worth doing as it will allow a number of live test bed for new systems to be run for those components before the first designs that their essential for hit the drawing boards.
If it's not possible to future proof the next design to allow a refit however it just means not doing it now will have the problem just be shifted a generation down the line and the refits will still be needed but possibly on larger ships as materials sciences and integrity sciences advance further.
With the size of the Federation growing though I think the extra speed on some vessels will absolutely be required for maintaining response times for emergencies.
It might be possible for a faster ship to extend it's warpfield around older slower ships to bring them along at least for smaller ones providing at least some tactical flexability for fleet actions.
[X] High-Performance Injector System (Size Reduction) (Type-4 Nacelle: +Max Warp) (Refit -> Incompatible)