Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
You could try for a size comparison, one TOS module could be expanded into a 2x2 or 3x3 size module for TNG ships, more useful but more space wasting. You could also do fixed modules or swappable modules. Easy to replace as needed but you loss 1/5 its rating.
 
Skippy said:
I would be tempted to keep things as simple as possible, probably by simply eyeballing what spaces should get X number of modules, and be willing to fudge things a lot so that scores feel right. Fundamentally given how the system is already abstracted in terms of representing the inside of a 3D ship via a 2D view, I don't think that adding too much complexity in the name of fidelity is necessarily a positive here. So long as the end result gets total Science scores that feel sensible, and provides interesting choices for voters, I think that's the main goal.

Also:







A friend shared this tweet with me today and I thought it was both funny and rather interesting. May go some of the way to explaining why Earth in Star Trek has such an abiding respect and love for the name Enterprise. The link is above but I've also included a screencap below in case it requires a login to view:
Also interesting to note that ramming the enemy when all else fails is apparently a bit of a tradition for ships bearing the name Enterprise!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
*Cries a few manly tears*
*Salutes*

History shall never forget the name...

Enterprise.
 
KlavoHunter said:
Bored History Student, circling C for everything: "Yeah yeah... lemme guess, the Enterprise did it."
History Teacher, predatory gleam in eye: "Ah, but which one?"
Student: *death groan*
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
To be fair, sometimes Voyager did it. It was the delta quadrant, stuff got freaky.

Really, Voyager dealing with all the NONSENSE of the Delta Quadrant is a callback to the era of Those Old Scientists. And have I mentioned how much I love the Intrepid class? :p
 
TheShadowDeamon said:
Found this interesting looking beauty on FB:

View: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/xeGQZKVczyXcMYHH/?mibextid=K35XfP
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Looks like that Facebook post doesn't play well with some browsers.
Here's the image that post was showing.
Misha Siegfield said in the Facebook group "Star Trek: Ships of the Line"
"Another practical-style render, this time featuring my Hazard class attack cruiser, USS Halsey. Modeled and rendered in Blender, post process in Adobe Photoshop."
 
robofin117 said:
Looks like that Facebook post doesn't play well with some browsers.
Here's the image that post was showing.
Misha Siegfield said in the Facebook group "Star Trek: Ships of the Line"
"Another practical-style render, this time featuring my Hazard class attack cruiser, USS Halsey. Modeled and rendered in Blender, post process in Adobe Photoshop."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes, I could easily se us creating something like this. Actually it looks a bit like a short stack full hull Excalibur class with the catamaran style nacelles and a Miranda torpedo pod
 
robofin117 said:
Looks like that Facebook post doesn't play well with some browsers.
Here's the image that post was showing.
Misha Siegfield said in the Facebook group "Star Trek: Ships of the Line"
"Another practical-style render, this time featuring my Hazard class attack cruiser, USS Halsey. Modeled and rendered in Blender, post process in Adobe Photoshop."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
TheShadowDeamon said:
Yes, I could easily se us creating something like this. Actually it looks a bit like a short stack full hull Excalibur class with the catamaran style nacelles and a Miranda torpedo pod
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


This looks very much like an SDB-pilled version of the Miranda.

Including fitting four torpedo launchers onto it LMAO
 
Big shooty ships make me happy okay. I'm sure we could find a use, maybe crack a few moons for mining purposes.

Realistically maybe it's 2 forward and 2 backwards RFLs but they put them in a pod because they wanted to put something else in the main hull section
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't mind a forward RFL in the rollbar with a paired phaser bank.

The added bottom rollbar could have the backwards facing pair. :V
 
landcollector said:
So hear me out on this...
Quad RFL pod.
Yes, I know that'll likely result in only 2-4 hull count tranches at a time.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Skippy said:
The design and naming of the USS Sto-vo-kor Express generated some controversy when it was presented to the Federation Council.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I like it, I really do. :)

On a slightly less humorous note, we could probably make a pretty mean and cheap patrol ship, go for a full saucer or something and trade module space for 4x standard forward photon launchers. Would be almost as nasty as the Excalibur-class. It'd be a decent-sized ship, but still, hull and sublights are cheap. At the very least it'd curbstomp any lone BoPs or D6s that stray into our territory.
 
robofin117 said:
Looks like that Facebook post doesn't play well with some browsers.
Here's the image that post was showing.
Misha Siegfield said in the Facebook group "Star Trek: Ships of the Line"
"Another practical-style render, this time featuring my Hazard class attack cruiser, USS Halsey. Modeled and rendered in Blender, post process in Adobe Photoshop."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hah, looks a lot like the old Abbe class from Jackill, but with secondary hull. People saying it has four photon launchers are wrong, as it has another four pointed aft, plus 'countermeasure' launchers along the edges of the pod.

Howie Day did a more reasonable version called the Krakatoa, which is intended as a sensor net and subspace relay tender, although it still has the tubes. It's a bit more of our style of overbuilding something that should be fairly simple.


View: https://x.com/howieeday/status/1722081389930262656/photo/1
 
Last edited:
Remove ads
2235: Project Darwin (Shields) New
  • Threadmarks
    • Project Darwin is formally accepted by the SDB with a small launch party for the team and plenty of cake. Between mouthfuls of chocolate your designers begin discussing their more off-the-wall ideas and wishlisted features for the class of ship you've just committed to constructing, almost none of which will be included. But these are the seeds that will soon germinate and grow into the skeleton of what you build here today - a not inappropriate metaphor for a vessel that will be so focused on the science and cataloguing of living things. But before you can even work on the spaceframe you need to make a key decision: the shield system. The cost of installing emitters and power conduits is not insubstantial, and to have a true sense of just how much the spaceframe will ultimately require in raw expenditure is very much reliant on just what you decide here.

    The Type-1 has finally been displaced by the new covariant emitter design, though the fundamental principles of the graviton shell remain fundamentally the same. Through plenty of testing on the laboratory and industrial level it has justified a full depreciation of its predecessor and you are now mandated to fit the now-standardised technology on all future designs. The new light shield grid is capable of matching the old standard model and seems the obvious choice for keeping costs down for the Darwin. On the other hand the standard emitter density would match even the heavy grid aboard the new Excalibur-class in terms of base output, which is not a defensive ability to be sneered at. Ultimately it is a question as to which is more important: cost or capability. Starfleet hasn't given you any budgetary red lines on this project, although obviously the cheaper the better, and the shield does constitute a significant entry on the balance sheet.


    [ ] Covariant Light Shield Grid
    [ ] Covariant Standard Shield Grid

    Emitter TypeSizeShield Power/100ktCost/100kt
    Type-1 CovariantLight157.5
    Type-1 CovariantStandard2011.4


    Two Hour Moratorium, Please
     
    Last edited:
  • New
  • Threadmarks
    • Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top