Linked contents
I would rather go tougher with a smaller hull than bigger with a cheaper hull.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Five defense for 1.5 cost seems pretty reasonable. As long as we resist the urge to gold plate in the future, maybe stick with a fairly focused phaser array or sacrifice some speed or hull space, this seems like a worthwhile purchase.
- Location
- United States, CA
More armor = ships more likely to need repair instead of replacement.
Electro-Ceramic Plating (200kt): 38 Defense. [4.5 Cost]
Duranium Alloy (200kt): 43 Defense. [6 Cost] [Canon: Constitution-class]
13% more armor for 33% more cost is that worth it, we need to balance cost and effectiveness as 9 nines (81) are better than 8 tens (80)
So anyways bigger is better
[X] Duranium Alloy (200kt): 43 Defense. [6 Cost] [Canon: Constitution-class]
Duranium Alloy (200kt): 43 Defense. [6 Cost] [Canon: Constitution-class]
13% more armor for 33% more cost is that worth it, we need to balance cost and effectiveness as 9 nines (81) are better than 8 tens (80)
So anyways bigger is better
[X] Duranium Alloy (200kt): 43 Defense. [6 Cost] [Canon: Constitution-class]
Last edited:
StriderInCosmos
Wanderer in the Worldsea
- Location
- Somewhere in... Terminal Dogma? I think?
With 200kt as our nominal goal, the choices here are nothing if not notable.
I can't help but agree with most early discussion. The price may be higher, but the defense is there alongside that cost, and such a hull material could make all the difference. We may not be the cheapest ship like Starfleet is hoping, but the extra armor could easily make the difference in how many lives are lost in a given engagement. Duranium has my vote.
I can't help but agree with most early discussion. The price may be higher, but the defense is there alongside that cost, and such a hull material could make all the difference. We may not be the cheapest ship like Starfleet is hoping, but the extra armor could easily make the difference in how many lives are lost in a given engagement. Duranium has my vote.
So. I think Starfleet has their wires crossed more than a little. They want a durable, and punchy heavy cruiser that can say "Fuck off and stay gone, pls" to a Klingon D7 and other threats of its tier, but they want to penny pinch ("The cheaper, the better"). Penny pinching might fly for frigate sized hulls, but a heavy cruiser? Uh huh...>_>
But in relation to cost metrics, hm. Duranium Alloy provides ~13.1% more defense than Electro-Ceramic Plating but costs 33% more. I'm not certain that is worth the expense?
But in relation to cost metrics, hm. Duranium Alloy provides ~13.1% more defense than Electro-Ceramic Plating but costs 33% more. I'm not certain that is worth the expense?
I think the message is that they want a cruiser powerful enough to deter the Klingons, but they want it as cheaply as they can get.
The goal isn't unlimited tactics score. It is getting over the bar for as little cost as we can, but where exactly the bar IS is unknown to both us and Starfleet.
I am of the opinion that the way to do that is high maneuverability and a heavy forward facing armament.
The extra defense from the hull material will likely be critical because this thing needs to survive an ambush from a bird of prey long enough to swing around and put phasers on it.
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- Him/He/His
Hm... That's a good point. Is 13.1% actually significant as a change?
- Location
- Actually pretty lost
Honestly, I think they're correct. They may not know the Four Year War total defeat scenario is looming, but they're seeing increased Klingon aggression and saying "build us a capable combatant that we can build en masse, even if it has to skimp on non-combat features."
We should be looking to boost tactical scores at the cost of science and logistical functionality here. We can always refit them later, when the Federation isn't teetering over the abyss.
EDIT: Fixed autocorrupted "en masse".
Last edited:
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
[ ] Duranium Alloy (200kt): 43 Defense. [6 Cost] [Canon: Constitution-class]
Well this is a no-brainer, as for cost savings, @Sayle - have you considered that when the older ships are decomissioned, there may be some systems in them that could be refurbished and fit in the newer ships? My first thought was if we did that with the torpedo launchers, we could use the refurbished launchers in the rear and then have 2 rapid fire in the front.
Well this is a no-brainer, as for cost savings, @Sayle - have you considered that when the older ships are decomissioned, there may be some systems in them that could be refurbished and fit in the newer ships? My first thought was if we did that with the torpedo launchers, we could use the refurbished launchers in the rear and then have 2 rapid fire in the front.
Well, it could mean the difference between being able to tow back a heavily damaged ship after a nasty scrap or S&R ships finding a gutted wreck, I suppose.
I think we should forgo rear photon torpedoes and just make her maneuverable enough that she can stay on target with her forward weapons.
It can be the difference of how many systems go offline when some birds of prey decloak and bracket it with torpedoes.
It can be the difference of how many systems go offline when some birds of prey decloak and bracket it with torpedoes.
Last edited:
[ ] Duranium Alloy (200kt): 43 Defense. [6 Cost] [Canon: Constitution-class]
"33% more for 13% more defense" would be a line I'd give more credit to if it was the price of the final ship that would be increased by 33%. The hull is one of the cheapest parts; we're probably going to see a final cost around 50. Certainly more than the 15 or so that it would take for 1.5 cost to increase the cost of the ship by more than this increases its defenses.
"33% more for 13% more defense" would be a line I'd give more credit to if it was the price of the final ship that would be increased by 33%. The hull is one of the cheapest parts; we're probably going to see a final cost around 50. Certainly more than the 15 or so that it would take for 1.5 cost to increase the cost of the ship by more than this increases its defenses.
I'd agree; torpedoes are likely to be the most expensive part on this ship, especially if we go for the new shiny ones.
Last edited:
I.. would rather wait on that until we get closer to the vote. Keep our minds open. I do not agree, though, it's depending on our cost and such when we get there.
- Pronouns
- Him/He/His
I mean, is it though?
Sure, it doesn't cost much, but that doesn't necessarily mean the boost is particularly significant.
Hm. Suppose it doesn't matter much either way with the numbers. No reason not to go for the defense.
I mean, this is the Constitution-class. The Enterprise. Are we really going to skimp on science for the Enterprise?
The Klingons really like their alpha strikes from cloak. Extra defense is the easiest way to survive that, and at 1.5 cost this is a spectacularly cheap source of it.
NavySeel
"I don't know what I'm doing."
- Location
- Places
Skimp, no, but the priority needs to be combat with how things are looking.
If we can get it to a science score of around 8-10 I'd be happy.
[jk] Gold-plate this baby
I'm inclined to go for the nice armor as well.
