Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
Rockeye said:
IIRC in world war 2, shore defenses weren't necessarily considered a great idea because it cost nearly as much to build large shore guns as to build a battleship, and they are immobile and unable to be properly concentrated for a pitched fight- Vulnerable to defeat in detail. I wonder how Starbases and defense satellites fare on this kind of spectrum in Star Trek.

[X] Biosciences Ship
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
In fairness, the warp core and nacelles are a SIZABLE chunk of the budget here.

And reliant on a very rare strategic resource.
 
Rockeye said:
IIRC in world war 2, shore defenses weren't necessarily considered a great idea because it cost nearly as much to build large shore guns as to build a battleship, and they are immobile and unable to be properly concentrated for a pitched fight- Vulnerable to defeat in detail. I wonder how Starbases and defense satellites fare on this kind of spectrum in Star Trek.

[X] Biosciences Ship
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, the Cardassian defence satellites seemed to do really good in the Dominion War.

If Satellite wins I'd love to build something like the Mjolnir from Freespace 2.

 
Adhoc vote count started by RedWake on Oct 29, 2024 at 3:16 PM, finished with 189 posts and 78 votes.
Click to expand...
 
Rockeye said:
IIRC in world war 2, shore defenses weren't necessarily considered a great idea because it cost nearly as much to build large shore guns as to build a battleship, and they are immobile and unable to be properly concentrated for a pitched fight- Vulnerable to defeat in detail. I wonder how Starbases and defense satellites fare on this kind of spectrum in Star Trek.

[X] Biosciences Ship
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
IRL fixed defences are barely worth the trouble, but in soft Sci-Fi land that's not necessarily the case. Some absurd proportion of a ship's cost is its warp drive, so a satellite might feasibly be cost effective for defending a single system against pirates and small raids.

I wonder if it'll have a thruster? Not needing to go to warp doesn't mean dodging wouldn't be helpful in a firefight. Heck, if these things are unmanned, maybe slapping a Type-3 on 5000 Kt satellite would let it fly about in ways that'd make an Excalibur jealous?
 
Last edited:
Deathbybunnies said:
IRL fixed defences are barely worth the trouble, but in soft Sci-Fi land that's not necessarily the case. Some absurd proportion of a ship's cost is its warp drive, so a satellite might feasibly be cost effective for defending a single system against pirates and small raids.

I wonder if it'll have a thruster? Not needing to go to warp doesn't mean dodging wouldn't be helpful in a firefight. Heck, if these things are unmanned, maybe slapping a Type-3 on 5000 Kt satellite would let it fly about in ways that'd make an Excalibur jealous?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Having a full size thruster takes it from being a satellite to being an in-system Monitor.
 
[X] Biosciences Ship

[X] Defense Monitor

If we make a defense monitor we can actually make a ship that's a proper tapered cylinder or cone shape with sloped armor! And decks laid out so the thrust is below the feet!
 
Last edited:
At least in strategy games, I've generally found fixed defenses to be either insanely effective or borderline useless. If your enemy isn't military focused or they're lagging behind, fortifying a location will keep them out entirely. If they're even close to on par with you, they can concentrate their forces enough to overwhelm your fixed installations with barely any time or casualties. Plus, you have to defend everywhere while the enemy can choose where they attack.

All in all, I'd say it's generally only worth it for discouraging casual raids, or if you can massively build up on a choke point or a vital location.
 
Fixed defences come and go in effectiveness, but considering it was mentioned how Star Trek is more like WW1 era dreadnaughts and torpedo boats rather than WW2 era aircraft carriers and bombers, they're probably not that bad off. A ship's a fool to fight a fort and all that.
 
Thinking about it, there's basically two paradigms for satellites.

If they're automated we can skimp out a lot, just make tons of them that can be thrown around an orbital to provide a lot of harassment fire. Force attackers to turn to deal with them and split their fire dealing with what are ultimately cheap and disposable distractions. The downside is automated ones can be hacked or jammed.

If they're crewed we need to invest more into defence because we value the lives of the people on board, so it means we have to make a lot less but make each one more of a small combatant in its own right.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top