Linked contents
Honestly I have somewhat mixed feelings on that ruling on a thematic level as Star Trek quite explicitly depicts an arms race between Federation sensors/detection methods and enemy cloaking, including Federation starships using ingenuity and their onboard scanning systems to attempt to detect cloaked ships as a matter of standard procedure. This is what makes for an interesting hunter-versus-hunter dynamic similar to submarine warfare. Adding a Sensors/Electronic Warfare score to our other Tactical scores would make a lot of sense, and also create some interesting trade-offs. More advanced computers/sensors having tactical effects has even been a thing in other Star Trek quests Sayle has run on SV - From the Ashes to be specific.
But yeah, that is definitely 100% accurate as far as the quest goes.
But yeah, that is definitely 100% accurate as far as the quest goes.
I mean we can still max out maneuverability on 4 Type-2 up to 250kt, and be on the high end well past that. The Type 3 will once standard let us do it well above that on three impulse engines, and with 4 Type-3's in the 300-400kt range. We could comfortably make a proto-Excelsior in the 2260's.
I'd actually bet that the canon Constitution uses Type-2 impulse thrusters(or did when it was built). The reason is that we took the impulse thrusters as soon as they were available back on the Sagramatha and therefore the Type-3 was accelerated. I don't think Starfleet would have taken a theoretical/experimental impulse thruster on the Constitution.
I don't think its as nice as that in terms of cost. My presumption is that 4 cost is for a dual bank of phasers, so we'd save 4, not 8 cost. With the canon constitution using 2 Type 2's, we'd be 4.5 more expensive there, so we'd eat all the phaser savings.
Last edited:
Well, we'll have to see on the thrusters. There are other places they may have jumped the gun, and only two Type-2s would make for quite a ponderous ship, although it's definitely not impossible. But the "bank" of phasers is as far as I'm aware is comprised of two emitters per bank, which means they would cost 8 each.
Yeah, but the upgrade choice was 12->18 and the canon choice was 18->24. The last-gen phaser options dealt 6 and 9 damage per emitter, max two emitters firing. That maps exactly to us having 12 damage banks before the upgrade, and canon having 18 damage banks.
We'll see in the armament vote.
Last edited:
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Sagarmatha already had a torpedo pod for aft torpedoes. We have the technology.
Yeah that's a fair point, although it wasn't hugely slow either, you see it zipping around sometime. Unsure.
Hmmm, this is something we should check, because if one Phaser Bank = two beams, it means we can actually only fire one Phaser Bank at a time. But you may be right. If that's the case then at least we don't need so many of them, but yeah, the savings on two banks versus three is halved.
Alectai
Speaks Words of Wisdom... On occasion
Feels like a Medium Manueverability I think, when it's zipping, it's usually in Warp, which works on different rules, the Connie's just a speedster by nature.
God, for all Picard was a scuffed project, I loved letting it see what the Enterprise-D could actually do with a modern budget and a straight, honest fight. A heckin' chonker like that moving the way it did was amazing.
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I see the time cops and I don't recognize their authority. Fuck 'em.
Mechanis
Confirmed Extremely Screwed
- Location
- Absconding with Alacrity
... phasers can be powered by fusion reactors. the issue is not the total power requirements. the issue, again, is power load. The EPS grid can, to put an arbitrary number on it, transfer 10 Energy Units at any given time. if a phaser takes 4 power units, than only two can be fired at once if you are powering them with the main EPS grid.
The proposed solution is "Build a dedicated 4 energy unit feed completely separate from the main grid from the Warp core (which for all practical purposes generates "Yes" energy units), thereby entirely separating the load of the phaser from that of the main system", or "Put a fusion reactor that generates 4 energy units under the phaser bank and hook a direct feed to it."
The Warp Core generates far, far more energy than the ship can ever use at one time, the limiting factor is the ability to transfer that energy out of the core, through the ship, and to the phasers.
In fact, phasers are so low energy that the Klingon War Timeline version of the Galaxy class, from the timeline where the Federation never made peace with the Klingons in Kirk's time, was using physical power cables to power its phasers (and other assorted systems) and didn't even have an Electro-Plasma system.
So no, I have not in fact been talking out my ass when presenting "here are two different ways we can solve that problem with the technology we already have that need only for us to change how we lay out the dang power grid, a change which is even reasonable to be doing at this time since we're having to drastically change things around the Warp Core anyway."
And of course we just got engine nerfed too, grumble grumble, the whole point of doing the Type Three early was to get the ZOOM on only one or two engines. Otherwise I would have argued against it for the Archer.
It's just. It really feels like we're getting railroaded into "Canon designs were the optimal choice, and we have repeatedly retconed things to ensure that after you already committed to non-canon options" which is, well, feels bad.
It's starting to feel uncharitable when people say non-canon options feel unviable when some of our most successful designs in the quest have been arrowheads and orbs.
Really does feel like it's just time to just take a breath, let the vote go through, and calm down and reset.
Really does feel like it's just time to just take a breath, let the vote go through, and calm down and reset.
Last edited:
KleverKil'Vanya
Ortillery Operator
The rules have changed several times after they do really well is the issue people are putting forward, which means we get shoved back towards canon every time we try and make different stuff.
- Location
- Earth
I understand that some of you have concerns. But if the thread is filled with constant grievances and hostility we're not going to have a quest for much longer.
We've seen the same points made over and over again from both sides. Just let the vote play out.
Last edited:
cokerpilot
Here comes the rain.
[X] 140 Meter Thin Saucer (140,000 Tons) [Canon: Constitution-class]
KlavoHunter
THOU SHALT WORSHIP NO GODS ABOVE ENTERPRISE!
And that scene proves that Starfleet evasive maneuvers involve things like "sitting still" or "curving ultra-slowly to the right".Honestly my biggest gripe is just
Oh look, the Connie actually can fire more than two phasers at the same time when it has Movie Budget and not TV Show Budget.
A-mazing.
It's probably best to pretend this one didn't happen.
The current tweak to the rules made the canon saucer slightly worse and the non-canon half-saucer slightly better.
Like I don't think it's a huge deal either way FWIW, but it might be good to take a step back and chill.
The two phaser thing is an outside limitation and in universe explanations reflect that.
If someone has a easy to use method for the QM to get 3D damage zones, custom weapons placement, arcs, overlap, and damage and can make that work with a 2D ship model (from MS paint) for blindspots then maybe we can see something with a ton of customization and detail.
It's a forum quest. There's always going to be some approximations and course corrections. The source material is inconsistent and full of retcons, given our metaknowledge why wouldn't a quest have similar issues to avoid breaking the setting.
If someone has a easy to use method for the QM to get 3D damage zones, custom weapons placement, arcs, overlap, and damage and can make that work with a 2D ship model (from MS paint) for blindspots then maybe we can see something with a ton of customization and detail.
It's a forum quest. There's always going to be some approximations and course corrections. The source material is inconsistent and full of retcons, given our metaknowledge why wouldn't a quest have similar issues to avoid breaking the setting.
The revote happened(when, iirc, the canon option was winning) because of a stat change that makes the non-canon option better, because it doesn't waste thrust with 4 engines? If you want the non-canon option to win, vote for it? The Type-3 will have its place, just maybe not right now on this ship.
Phasers have been limited to 2 firing max since the Sagramatha. When we were given the design option for the Type-2, it was explicit that it would only allow for 2 to fire at a time. There hasn't been some sort of campaign against our ships, just that the QM was ill for months and is refamiliarizing with the systems. Requiring 4 thrusters for max and 3 for high is reasonable if the bigger kea required 4 for high and didn't have a max option.
Wait, people are actually going for a Full Saucer? On a warship?! TREACHERY! HERESY! SAN FRANCISCO PLOT! THIS IS NOT THE WILL OF THE GREAT ORB!
A warship has a Half Saucer.
Ignore the Thunderchild. She was a Romulan Kneecap Privilidge Revocation Vessel. Hence Full Saucer.
[X] 140 Meter Half-Saucer (140,000 Tons)
A warship has a Half Saucer.
Ignore the Thunderchild. She was a Romulan Kneecap Privilidge Revocation Vessel. Hence Full Saucer.
[X] 140 Meter Half-Saucer (140,000 Tons)
- Location
- Australia
What you don't want to make a Klingon Forehead Revocation Vessel this time?
[X] 140 Meter Half-Saucer (140,000 Tons)