Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
Kinda wish I voted for the defense satellites instead now. Oh well, spilled milk and all that.

That being said, even if the Darwin isn't going to be part of the Four-year War, with the heavy ship losses among the lighter ships, I can see Starfleet using them as tactical patrol ships against the surge in post-war piracy that is bound to come up. Will probably vote for the 2x2 arrangement later, since the RFL isn't that much better for the drastic cost increase, and the more replacement ships we can push out the better.
 
Also, I'm suddenly wishing we had done the satellites.
It didn't even occur to me that they would be much faster to design and be done before the war began.
But no point dwelling on it, that's just how hindsight works.

Edit: Ninja'd
 
Model DC.14F said:
Will probably vote for the 2x2 arrangement later, since the RFL isn't that much better for the drastic cost increase, and the more replacement ships we can push out the better.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Alpha with the 2x regulars (and forward phaser) is 54 or 69% of the canon Connie. Or 49% of the Excalibur alpha.
Alpha with the 1x RFL (and forward phaser) is 72 or 92% of the canon Connie. Or 65% of the Excalibur alpha
 
[ ] Two Forward Torpedoes, Two Aft (Cost: 53 -> 62) [-1 Modules]

We are in the middle of a war, and if something gets behind us I don't want them to be able to put phasers up our tailpipe at liberty.
 
Shard said:
[ ] Two Forward Torpedoes (Cost: 53 -> 57.5)

I think we would really like that extra module slot for superior science capabilities.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So we just got an update that clearly demonstrates that lack of combat power is deadly and you want to ignore it and keep low level weapons? No the way forward is Maximum firepower!

[ ] Forward Rapid Launcher, Two Aft Torpedoes (Cost 53 -> 69.5) [-1 Modules]
Damm the loss of module space this is more important!
 
We decided to forego an Aft Phaser so we need something for rear firing arcs.

[ ] Two Forward Torpedoes, Two Aft (Cost: 53 -> 62) [-1 Modules]

Save the RFLs for Excalibur production right now.
 
Just want to say kudos for making a Quest for Star Fleet Shipdesign and Production so engaging.
 
Alectai said:
Jeebus, so much for thinking we had a good economy, they built dozens on D7s in 8 years?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think it depends on how much of the Member navies still exist. The Andorians were basically peers of the Federation fleet in our previous war in in 2195 and the Tellerite and Vulcan fleets were still notable powers in their own right. The member navies have probably lost ground in relative strength in the 45 years since, but on the other hand we've added new members at the same time, who probably have their own legacy equipment.
 
Just feedback - I don't think weapon systems have ever had a module cost before, nor do I think we got a warning about this prior to the phaser vote. This is, I feel, exactly a decision we should have made as a single phaser/photon vote like the majority of weapon system votes before this. In not combining the votes I feel like what should have been in universe knowledge of cost was hidden from players. There was information we needed and the in universe characters should have had during the phaser vote that we didn't have.
 
Have to admit being blindsided by that, I thought we were doing better so feeling a bit lied to.

I was making decisions on the phasers based on the idea we'd have rear photon launchers. The loss of the module really hurts, didn't expect that, but it does make a certain amount of sense. Either way I always needed rear torpedoes and we saved elsewhere specifically for this purpose.

[ ] Forward Rapid Launcher, Two Aft Torpedoes (Cost 53 -> 69.5) [-1 Modules]
 
Fouredged Sword said:
Honestly I think we will get more of them with just two forward launchers because the rapids are all going to be slated for Excaliburs.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We'd probably see 12% more ships with the cheaper option, yeah. Depends how much capability we think is lost if we don't buy that extra torpedo.

I think it's worth noting that the Newton are implied to need an Excalibur to blast D6s first for their firepower to count. The improved phasers are nice, but I don't think they're enough to make the Darwin a sufficient threat to D6s - and the Klingons have enough D6s that I don't think we want to need to send Excaliburs after them.
 
They always have had a module cost before, it's just that we were not warned about it.
A big part of the debate with the kea class not getting a torpedo was the fact that we thought it might scrape in an extra science module without it.
Being told of the cost on this one is very handy, and it's a great help.

I do sometimes wonder if the last step of the build though would be an optional "change one minor synergy thing in hindsight" but I think it also would be a very very messy vote.

Fouredged Sword said:
Just feedback - I don't think weapon systems have ever had a module cost before, nor do I think we got a warning about this prior to the phaser vote. This is, I feel, exactly a decision we should have made as a single phaser/photon vote like the majority of weapon system votes before this. In not combining the votes I feel like what should have been in universe knowledge of cost was hidden from players. There was information we needed and the in universe characters should have had during the phaser vote that we didn't have.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
MonkeyTypewriter said:
I think it depends on how much of the Member navies still exist. The Andorians were basically peers of the Federation fleet in our previous war in in 2195 and the Tellerite and Vulcan fleets were still notable powers in their own right. The member navies have probably lost ground in relative strength in the 45 years since, but on the other hand we've added new members at the same time, who probably have their own legacy equipment.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

My reading is that in the TOS years the Federation was more than happy to say "sure, come on in!" to any warp-capable civilizations who wanted to join and met the pre-requisites. By TNG the advanced technology you'd get access to by joining and what I read as an increased level of centralisation of military and economic power to the Federation Council vis a vis the Member Worlds meant things became more selective. The significance that the Four Founding Members of the Federation were all major or becoming major regional powers in their sector of space can't be overstated.

Fouredged Sword said:
Just feedback - I don't think weapon systems have ever had a module cost before, nor do I think we got a warning about this prior to the phaser vote. This is, I feel, exactly a decision we should have made as a single phaser/photon vote like the majority of weapon system votes before this. In not combining the votes I feel like what should have been in universe knowledge of cost was hidden from players. There was information we needed and the in universe characters should have had during the phaser vote that we didn't have.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

They always did, but I'm now making an effort to flag up where the only place I can put a system is definitionally going to eat up enough space to knock out a module space.

Ramble said:
Also, can we get an option for one RFL forward
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Adding now.
 
Last edited:
Sayle said:
My reading is that in the TOS years the Federation was more than happy to say "sure, come on in!" to any warp-capable civilizations who wanted to join and met the pre-requisites. By TNG the advanced technology you'd get access to by joining and what I read as an increased level of centralisation of military and economic power to the Federation Council vis a vis the Member Worlds meant things became more selective. The significance that the Four Founding Members of the Federation were all major or becoming major regional powers in their sector of space can't be overstated.



They always did, but I'm now making an effort to flag up where the only place I can put a system is definitionally going to eat up enough space to knock out a module space.



Adding now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Think the price is wrong for the single rfl. Appreciate the choice though, it's a good balance.
 
Given the post mentions major strikes coming close to member planets (if not the founding members) I imagine there's going to be an at least brief post-war resurgence of large member navies.

Might also end up with another bureau alongside SanFran (perhaps Andorian given their traditional military focus/culture, though could be just about anyone who came under or close to the Klingon guns) just combat monofocused, to try and help address Starfleet's poor tactical (ship) situation.
 
Last edited:
Yeah we got real fucking cocky by the end of the Excalibur writeup, so this update was a much needed reality check.

You can't count on a single tactical focused design to defend the Federation, every ship needs to be capable of contributing in a crisis. If those Keas and Archers had more teeth on them the initial Klingon attacks wouldn't have rolled us so badly.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top