Linked contents
- Location
- in between
Good. The less ability this... thing... has to do anything but fight, sooner we can get rid of it.
Last edited:
NSMS
Probably evil, unfortunately.
- Location
- A rapidly widening tear in the fabric of reality
Okay, look. You don't like this design. We get it. That doesn't mean you need to throw a tantrum and whine about it in the thread.
- Location
- in between
I'm not whining about it. I just want it over with.
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] Integrated Secondary Hull (200,000 Tons) [2 Forward Launcher Max]
[X] Underslung Secondary Hull (180,000 Tons) [3 Forward Launchers Max] [+0.2 Sprint]
SFB Mantra: Speed is life.
Edit: On the naming scheme for this class. Why not go with Excalibur, one of the original twevle? Harking back to the Arthurian mythos isn't bad basis for a class of ships that is intended to defend the Federation.
Then you could start naming them after swords out of Myth/Stories.
Excalibur
Durandal
Hrunting
Joyeuse
Kusnanagi
Harpe
Zulfiqar
Gram
Asi
Anduril
SFB Mantra: Speed is life.
Edit: On the naming scheme for this class. Why not go with Excalibur, one of the original twevle? Harking back to the Arthurian mythos isn't bad basis for a class of ships that is intended to defend the Federation.
Then you could start naming them after swords out of Myth/Stories.
Excalibur
Durandal
Hrunting
Joyeuse
Kusnanagi
Harpe
Zulfiqar
Gram
Asi
Anduril
Last edited:
This is our first warp 8 capable starship, it's going to have a long service life unless there's some fundamental problem with it.
And wanting to cripple it so it can't serve for as long as it otherwise could is the definition of a tantrum.
StriderInCosmos
Wanderer in the Worldsea
- Location
- Somewhere in... Terminal Dogma? I think?
Will we even be able to afford to get rid of it, however? If we win the war with this ship, we'll need time to rebuild infrastructure, crews, civilian populations, shipyards and refineries destroyed as tactical targets. All the sort of construction and material need that takes away from just throwing new, unspoiled hulls together. Like it or not, there's a better-than-good chance that whatever ship we build is going to need to stick around for a while, even if just for the sake of having more than just a few hulls in space.
NSMS
Probably evil, unfortunately.
- Location
- A rapidly widening tear in the fabric of reality
I'm sorry, but you are. It might not be intentional on your part, but when you non-constructively complain and make a fuss about things that have already been decided just because you don't like them? And do it in basically every post you make? That's whining.
- Location
- USA
Given that people are currently discussing having two standard and one rapid launcher, which has less Dakka than two rapids, I'm not so sure about that.
And I said going into this that I didn't want to do the Connie for the exact reasons we are getting into. I expected the salt.
Anyways, I can live with any of these. All of them seem viable even if Integrated does kinda need double ra...
Hey, a thought, dont we also have to worry about AFT torpedoes? That is gonna add at least one more launcher to any plan we make.
I dont expect it to win, but I want it.
[X] Integrated Secondary Hull (200,000 Tons) [2 Forward Launcher Max]
Possibly, it was last edited 11min ago.
NSMS
Probably evil, unfortunately.
- Location
- A rapidly widening tear in the fabric of reality
Aft torpedos we can probably get away with much less investment in; those are more for shots of opportunity and discouraging pursuit. I don't think the canon Connie even had any, in fact.
According to Sayle some variants did (I.e. the Defiant) but the Enterprise herself didn't.
Is there any reason we couldn't go 1 standard and 1 RF launcher on the integrated option? If the RF is worth 2-3 standards then that would give the chunky option the firepower of 3-4 standards which is about where everyone was looking.
The other designs could have 3 standards, the firepower of 4-5 standards with 1 RF, or more if we blow the budget.
I know weapon options aren't really something we can bank on but if the ship has to be a little goofy to be affordable and packs in a 1 and 1 that wouldn't be the end of the world (especially if a RF roll turns out well).
The other designs could have 3 standards, the firepower of 4-5 standards with 1 RF, or more if we blow the budget.
I know weapon options aren't really something we can bank on but if the ship has to be a little goofy to be affordable and packs in a 1 and 1 that wouldn't be the end of the world (especially if a RF roll turns out well).
StriderInCosmos
Wanderer in the Worldsea
- Location
- Somewhere in... Terminal Dogma? I think?
I'd say there's a case to be made for an aft torpedo launcher, rapid-fire or otherwise. If a engagement begins with our rear to an oncoming enemy vessel, a design with it can give the offending attacker a good opening pop on the jaw before it turns about.
NSMS
Probably evil, unfortunately.
- Location
- A rapidly widening tear in the fabric of reality
I'd be tempted to put 1 basic torpedo and 1 phaser on the rear, personally. That's not a heavy investment, but it means it can threaten and deal consistent damage to anything which enters the rear arc. I'd be tempted to just stick two phasers there, but then it'd be unable to engage front and rear simultaneously, which is bound to be necessary at some point.
Horologer
Incertae sedis
- Location
- a risen sea
[X] Large Secondary Hull (190,000 Tons) [Canon: Constitution-class] [3 Forward Launchers Max]
I'm going process of elimination on this one, honestly.
The thread went with the option that lets us mount four impulse engines on it specifically so we could move more mass, so I'd prefer not to take the underslung option. The extra sprint is nice, but I'm not really keen on losing a potential module for it, since I think we're already going to be strapped for space as it is.
And while the largest option is also tempting, the thread also went with the half-saucer to get more torpedo tubes, so I'm also not keen on giving up any of the tubes we paid for.
I'm going process of elimination on this one, honestly.
The thread went with the option that lets us mount four impulse engines on it specifically so we could move more mass, so I'd prefer not to take the underslung option. The extra sprint is nice, but I'm not really keen on losing a potential module for it, since I think we're already going to be strapped for space as it is.
And while the largest option is also tempting, the thread also went with the half-saucer to get more torpedo tubes, so I'm also not keen on giving up any of the tubes we paid for.
If you can't find anything remotely productive to say, don't say anything. "I think this is a mistake" is fine. Wishing for a bad result because you don't like it is not.
DualFront
Perhaps, this is Hell
We're planning to make the ship fast enough that it shouldn't need an aft launcher.
Also, another thing everyone is assuming is that the canon rapid-launcher was triple-burst - Do we if it was, or was it just the double-burst version? If it was the latter we can probably get by with just three standard launchers, but if it was the former we will definitely want add in a rapid launcher.
Last edited:
- Location
- America
We're mounting 4 engines on it. Why stop to fire the rear torpedo at all? If the decloak behind, just go
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c60G6lI3Zhg&ab_channel=Avelancer
And use the alpha strike from the get go.
2228: Project Constitution (Impulse Engines)
[X] Underslung Secondary Hull (180,000 Tons) [3 Forward Launchers Max] [+0.2 Sprint]
With the underslung secondary hull complete and configured you can now deal with the remainder of the primary hull that has been previously unallocated. One happy element of aiming for a lower-mass design is that three Type-2 engines will be more than sufficient to maximise the design's manoeuvrability and sublight power.
This beneficial result does present something of a conundrum. Two standard thrusters at the port and starboard sections of the saucer section will be perfectly adequate in meeting your acceleration standards, even exceeding them by a small factor. In addition to being minimally expensive it will allow you to reconfigure the aft spaces to maximise useful systems like cargo, an extra shuttlebay, or whatever you might care to put there.
Alternatively the installation of an extra Type-2 engine directly amidships will give the project as much thrust as the spaceframe can handle. The extra space involved will certainly impinge on the area and sacrifice internal volume you could otherwise have used, but the tactical considerations may be worth the cost. While you may still be able to fit some useful auxiliary modules there, something the size of a shuttlebay will be decidedly off the menu.
Of course a fourth redundant thruster could be installed to redistribute the engines back to port and starboard, again preserving the internal space. Your inner designer hurts a little at the waste, but it's still less expensive than upgrading to the Type-3s.
The final option is to use a pair of Type-3 thrusters. In terms of performance and space-saving this is the best of both worlds, meeting both your maximum possible thrust profiles and preserving the aft of the primary hull for other functions. The downside is cost, as you expect that even putting aside the upfront expenses in the first build order that the final models of the Type-3 will cost an additional 60% of the currently mature and streamlined Type-2s.
[ ] Two Type-2 Thrusters (33 -> 37.5 Cost) [Medium-High Maneuverability]
[ ] Three Type-2 Thrusters (33 -> 39.75 Cost) [Very High Manoeuvrability]
[ ] Four Type-2 Thrusters (33 -> 42 Cost) [Very High Maneuverability]
[ ] Two Type-3 Thrusters (33 -> 45.5 Cost) [Very High Manoeuvrability]
You are currently under your expected budget.
Two Hour Moratorium, Please
With the underslung secondary hull complete and configured you can now deal with the remainder of the primary hull that has been previously unallocated. One happy element of aiming for a lower-mass design is that three Type-2 engines will be more than sufficient to maximise the design's manoeuvrability and sublight power.
This beneficial result does present something of a conundrum. Two standard thrusters at the port and starboard sections of the saucer section will be perfectly adequate in meeting your acceleration standards, even exceeding them by a small factor. In addition to being minimally expensive it will allow you to reconfigure the aft spaces to maximise useful systems like cargo, an extra shuttlebay, or whatever you might care to put there.
Alternatively the installation of an extra Type-2 engine directly amidships will give the project as much thrust as the spaceframe can handle. The extra space involved will certainly impinge on the area and sacrifice internal volume you could otherwise have used, but the tactical considerations may be worth the cost. While you may still be able to fit some useful auxiliary modules there, something the size of a shuttlebay will be decidedly off the menu.
Of course a fourth redundant thruster could be installed to redistribute the engines back to port and starboard, again preserving the internal space. Your inner designer hurts a little at the waste, but it's still less expensive than upgrading to the Type-3s.
The final option is to use a pair of Type-3 thrusters. In terms of performance and space-saving this is the best of both worlds, meeting both your maximum possible thrust profiles and preserving the aft of the primary hull for other functions. The downside is cost, as you expect that even putting aside the upfront expenses in the first build order that the final models of the Type-3 will cost an additional 60% of the currently mature and streamlined Type-2s.
[ ] Two Type-2 Thrusters (33 -> 37.5 Cost) [Medium-High Maneuverability]
[ ] Three Type-2 Thrusters (33 -> 39.75 Cost) [Very High Manoeuvrability]
[ ] Four Type-2 Thrusters (33 -> 42 Cost) [Very High Maneuverability]
[ ] Two Type-3 Thrusters (33 -> 45.5 Cost) [Very High Manoeuvrability]
You are currently under your expected budget.
Two Hour Moratorium, Please
Last edited:
- Location
- America
[ ] Three Type-2 Thrusters (33 -> 39.75 Cost) [Very High Manoeuvrability]
[ ] Two Type-3 Thrusters (33 -> 45.5 Cost) [Very High Manoeuvrability]
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT0NxtDl43Q&ab_channel=AceCombatFan
just fuck logic.
[ ] Two Type-3 Thrusters (33 -> 45.5 Cost) [Very High Manoeuvrability]
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT0NxtDl43Q&ab_channel=AceCombatFan
just fuck logic.
Last edited: