Starfleet Design Bureau

All SanFran products are lemons, my cat could do better. 👀
Time to reset the timeline again and strangle them in the crib like we did to Yoyodyne after they failed us one too many times.

So, what tactical-focused design existed OTL that deterred the Klingons from this conflict, that we somehow neglected to invent? Because it looks like all the canon designs were dogshit that somehow deterred the Klingons.
 
Last edited:
[X] Forward Rapid Launcher, Two Aft Torpedoes (Cost 53 -> 69.5) [-1 Modules]
Okay this out of the way its time to make quotes and answer them.
[x] Two Forward Torpedoes (Cost: 53 -> 57.5)

Low cost and more space for science. At the same time, it has enough firepower to defend itself from threats.
No it hasn't did you somehow misread the latest update? Starfleet got fucked. loosing that many ships in a few months hurts. So we should totaly build better armed vessels to forestall a repeat of the circumstances that lead to it in the first place.

No Excaliburs were explicitly named as lost in the Four Years War, so there was a voting contingent who convinced themselves that that meant a) no Excaliburs were lost in the Four Years War, period, and b) that no losses by the Excalibur-class in turn meant we threw back the initial strike and didn't get severely injured in the process.

Losing almost a third of Starfleet's existing ships in the first year of the war was not within their expectations.
Thats their fault, I and others repeatedly screamed about underguned/armed vessels and where shouted down because Science/engieering or wathever was more important. This is what that got them!
Not even the first year, more like the first "4-7 months".

Anyway, recent events have made it crystal clear that, should the Federation survive this in a recognizable state, we can no longer afford to keep the pre-war doctrines. We need a significant sized arm of the overall Fleet to be dedicated to War capabilities for our own continued existence and which needs updated or refit to the most modern tech feasible for the spaceframe every 20-30 years at the longest.
You know almost a year ago I posted this:
Having a a fully dedicated core of home defense ships inside Federaton territory ready and able to smash wohever starts shit is point in fact cheaper than not having dedicated warships and spending weeks/months recalling all the multi role explorers to form a battlefleet. We see the loses the Federation takes for not having such a defense multiple times.

From yesterdays enterprise we know that a Klingon first strike with presummarily cloaked ships on the Federations Industry leads to a surrender in circa 25 years of total war. Something that is not possible if a dedicated home fleet could stop such a deep strike.


There is just the problem that I and some others do not like the Multi role stuff and we are trying to get a doctrine shift for dedicated designs in quest.
And was told i am wrong and it is not the starfleet way.
Tactically, the Excalibur has performed well, but it should also be noted that the Excalibur's exceptional warp speed and long range are critical strategic advantages. I remain extremely confident in the Excalibur's capability to be the sword of the Federation.

[x] Two Forward Torpedoes (Cost: 53 -> 57.5)
[x] Forward Rapid Launcher (Cost 53 -> 65)

The lack of a rear torpedo launcher without module loss is somewhat disappointing, but let's not get distracted from our design goal by blind panic - the Darwin won't win this war for us. That's what the Excalibur is for. The first Darwin probably won't even be built until after the war is over.

And it will be quite capable at combat for its size either way. Even just the forward phasers and two torpedoes isn't a bad armament for a ship this small. Let me emphasize that: This is a small ship.

Which matters, since it means we will need all the interior space we can get to meet the primary design goal. Sacrificing a module would be a mistake.
Okay, as per Sayle, this is our first Postwar ship after the four year war mauling we are getting. And your grand solution to our underguned and weak fleet is to keep them undergunned and weak? That just means we invite another war in a few years because we still look like an easy target!
 
We definitely shouldn't be slapping rapid-fire launchers on a design where we've been cost-cutting, reducing max warp and sublight speed etc because we're getting negative synergy, a malus on its effectiveness. Save the expense for our next design where we can build it from the ground up to be a real nasty fighter.
That's what we said for like five designs in a row and now here we are. Besides, I don't think we should be relying on standard tubes on any of our designs at this point. We've seen pretty clearly that if a ship doesn't have a rapid tube it's worthless against a D6, and that's not going to change over time.

Pretty much all our ships need to be if not dedicated warships at least competent in a fleet action, and right now we have all of a dozen warp 8 ships. We can't afford to waste cores on a second-line vessel.
 
will not enjoy sitting through three to four more war updates where we feel completely impotent.
eh, I feel like we got warning after the Archer, we took our shot with the Excalibur, and now the die is cast and we just get to see how it plays out while we work on the next thing. I'm content so far that the Callies have made a significant, positive difference, and doubtful we could reasonably have expected more from them (though I remain a little surprised by quite how badly we're outnumbered).
we designed the Skate, Thunderchild and Selachii all during wartime
Design process gets longer as tech advances; I never really expected wartime builds to be a thing, particularly in a relatively short conflict like the Four Years War- the Earth-Romulan War was over five years (October 2155-November 2160) at a much lower tech level.

(While the Federation-Kzin War was only three and a half, it was also a fairly one-sided stomp after the opening exchanges- the Kzinti were absolute idiots to pick that particular fight- and we didn't design any ships during that war that deployed in time for it- the Selachii was launched three years before it even started.)
it is frankly "You should all be court-martialled" levels of insane to suggest we would do nothing
...I've rewritten this next bit about ten times because while copying your phrasing is poetically tempting I couldn't figure out how to avoid it being personal attacks/flaming Sayle explicitly stated that:
you have already provided all you can for the war effort.
and unless you're suggesting they outright lied to us then I don't know where you're coming from or how to engage with your reasoning.
 
All SanFran products are lemons, my cat could do better. 👀
Funnily enough I think the fact that they do such basic expected designs would have partially mitigated the effects of our much more impressive but more expensive designs. having only six extra ships every time we've designed to ship might have meant we had that little bit more density to hold back the golden age of piracy.
I think our ships are much better at say smashing back the Klingon offensive but absolutely are overkill for hunting down Raiders only strong enough to strong arm individual unsupported colonies.
 
So, what tactical-focused design existed OTL that deterred the Klingons from this conflict, that we somehow neglected to invent?
I think it was less 'a design that would have solved our problems' and more a problematic combination of being much better at expanding then the canon Federation, *and* having a large capability gap given the long development time of Warp 8 drives and their lack of backwards compatibility. Presumably the canon Starfleet was both more mobile with more Warp 8 drives in service at this time, and less dispersed because it had less volume to cover.

So we have a somewhat obsolescent fleet that needs to be dispersed trying to put out fires, and while the economy of the Federation has grown, a lack of centralization or perceived need means the central government isn't necessarily gaining that much revenue from the economic expansion, let alone Starfleet seeing commensurate growth.
 
Okay, as per Sayle, this is our first Postwar ship after the four year war mauling we are getting. And your grand solution to our underguned and weak fleet is to keep them undergunned and weak? That just means we invite another war in a few years because we still look like an easy target!
I agree, while it pains me, I went to give the current ship all the torpedoes as fast as we can load them vote.
 
My view on 4y war.
The way i see it this is on the admiralty:

1- there are not enough ships period. Either there was a banking on the home fleets to carry alot of weight of someone dropped the ball

2- it sure looks like the loss or obsolescence of the heavy fleet and light elements without replacement was a critical reason for Klingons to push the go button the warp 8 was just the cherry on top. This bureau has been pushing for at least a ship from each bracket since before the kinzi war but there was mysteriously never a will or budget from the fleet for such a project.

3- is very clear that 2 design bureaus are not enough to cover on the required time all the federation needs for new designs this is not on us.

4- our philosophy was always to at least follow the brief and try to maximise the required field.

5- the reason the archer is what it is was to avoid a duplication of effort with San Francisco that was building a combat engineer and also it's not our fault that the radiant that would be a critical element on the roster was a massive fumble by San Francisco.

Any way for this ship
[X] Forward Rapid Launcher, Two Aft Torpedoes (Cost 53 -> 69.5) [-1 Modules]
 
Static defenses are a monument to the stupidity of man - George S. Patton.

I don't know what y'all expected to do with the defense satellites, because defense satellites suck. Their first appearance, "They wouldn't have helped anyways if they were online."

Do you think we're really going to design a better defense satellite than San Francisco?

If the answer is "Yes", then we can just write off all SanFran products as underperforming lemons that cannot be trusted with anything important.

The entire premise of the quest falls apart if the things we make are not notably more effective than what gets made in the background by NPCs.


I mean... we did. We knew the Four-Year War wasn't going to go well for us. We didn't have all of the specifics, but this isn't some massive surprise or anything.

yes and no, we had the context clues to deduce it was going to be a bad time if not how much of a bad time, nor how impactful the Excalibur's would be in the war. Unless figuring out what is needed based on those context clues is an intended part of this game, then the consequences of the war should have been spelled out before we started the next project.

To be clear, I'm not annoyed at how the war went, I'm annoyed that we are finding out how the war went midway though the next ship we're building rather than before we picked what to build next. Like I said, the details of the wars course would absolutely have impacted what we would want to build and how we would build it.
 
Last edited:
Funnily enough I think the fact that they do such basic expected designs would have partially mitigated the effects of our much more impressive but more expensive designs. having only six extra ships every time we've designed to ship might have meant we had that little bit more density to hold back the golden age of piracy.
I think our ships are much better at say smashing back the Klingon offensive but absolutely are overkill for hunting down Raiders only strong enough to strong arm individual unsupported colonies.
Kinda have to hope some inbetween (or tactical, at least initially) focused bureau pops up after the war. We always tend to go very high best in category, and as you say SanFran always tends to go for 'as expected and no more'/Jack of all trades and master of none, so a bureau to make the Miranda to our Constitution* (to give a comparison we'll all understand) would be rather beneficial to Starfleet.

*Or perhaps a Nebula to our Galaxy would be a better comparison, since you'd still have SanFran around making 24th century variant Miranda's or New Orleans/the like.
 
Last edited:
The Radiant feels like their attempt to be us, and they were not good at it.

I think all the proposed reasons the Klingons went after us so hard are right, but the biggest factor was what we were explicitly told. They needed a target to unify against, and we were slower than they are.

Think about how smug the Excalibur makes you feel, how we know it can out speed a D7 and destroy it easily in a fair fight. How cocky it made everyone. Then crash build dozens you need to justify the use of, an empty treasury vault and the need to solidify a reputation.

I have no doubt that the fact we stopped them at all, even for just a month, was a huge shock to them.
 
The Radiant feels like their attempt to be us, and they were not good at it.
To be fair, the main factor letting it down was its speed (iirc), which was due to the warp core. If we'd gone for the prime timeline style warp 8 engine, well, it probably wouldn't have been equal to the Excalibur, but I think it'd have done a hell of a lot better than it did.
 
and unless you're suggesting they outright lied to us then I don't know where you're coming from or how to engage with your reasoning.

I am suggesting that this was decided on a whim and can also be very easily changed on a whim, because that is the truth.

It was - and I am going to be completely honest here because I have already said this privately to @Sayle - a poor decision not to give players either a war project for some sort of dedicated warship, or to have the Darwin be ready for the war. There is nothing stopping us from recognising that and fixing it.

(In fairness, I think it was also largely an unintentional decision.)
 
Personally I think we should make a warship every so often, like a dedicated one, like sure muity purpose is good in all but I think we need to design detected ships to do interior patrols and general defense duty, preferably sorta cheap ships so we can pump then out like there is no tomorrow. Like perhaps every 10 years or so we update the design to have the new tech. Not to nessarely build it but to have the design blue prints on stand by just incase something goes horribly wrong.
 
To be fair, the main factor letting it down was its speed (iirc), which was due to the warp core. If we'd gone for the prime timeline style warp 8 engine, well, it probably wouldn't have been equal to the Excalibur, but I think it'd have done a hell of a lot better than it did.
In hindsight it's somewhat telling that the people that normally go for Mr reliable went for a Rapid Response Cruiser that was damn the costs we need to respond to emergencies.
It honestly didn't occur to me that they did that because starfleet was suffering so many non-stop emergency's With Pirates amongst its colonies. That's been a bigger surprise to me than the Klingons
 
Personally I think we should make a warship every so often, like a dedicated one
I feel like this post is somewhat relevant here.

During the Cold War the USN had a number of designs for ocean escorts (frigates, basically) to be mass produced during wartime that were basically the initial design dusted off every half decade or so and updated based on new technologies/threat dimensions.

Something like that where we rapidly fill out a basic design 'now' (more likely post war, but still) and then just dust it off/update if when war is on the horizon, letting the yards just mass produce it during wartime, would probably be quite useful for Starfleet.
Plus, we're kinda over the warp core hump right now, and until we get to phaser arrays that's the last big design upset that'd have us making radical changes. At least imo.

It'd let us keep around a basic mobilisation frigate design to pump out during wartime and also give a little bit more juice for 2-4 year periods where we're kinda locked in on something else.
 
especially if phasers are now going to be scaled by mass; the Darwin is lighter than the Newton.
Wow, wait a sec, when did this happen?? Another phaser mechanic update?? Are these getting threadmarked, because if our military technology mechanics keep changing we kinda need to know for voting purposes.

[X] Forward Rapid Launcher (Cost 53 -> 65)
[x] Two Forward Torpedoes (Cost: 53 -> 57.5)

Not sacrificing science on the altar of fear. If you wanted aft dps, you should have voted for the phaser. :V
Yeah, this thread's turning into a group psychology study; we don't have a coherent long-term agenda so come up short, then we suddenly react in fear (suboptimal, we missed 3 votes that would've made this ship quite a tough little cookie), now it looks like we might be overcompensating, then we'll go back to having no long-term agenda and our capabilities again become unfocused and come up short. This is a post-war design, I'm all for going heavy armaments, but we've decided against having warp 8 sprint speed or aft phasers, so it doesn't make sense to max out the concentration of armaments budget here. Why oh why can't people come up with a coherent plan?

We could however next make a very heavily armed warp 8 utility cruiser (super-cruise config, enhanced range, some cargo space, optional general science, something like 4 fore 2 aft torpedo launchers, maxed out sublight speed) with our latest warp and military technology, phase out the Cygnus class once and for all and make something even better than the Newton. But somehow people want to pimp out our survey ship, which is a dedicated science and survey ship, now that we've crippled its ability to fully participate as a warship. Sigh.

And then when we realize we need something that can hit hard, the dreadnought idea comes out again. So our forces are even more concentrated and vulnerable to attrition by a numerically and technologically superior foe.

No it hasn't did you somehow misread the latest update? Starfleet got fucked. loosing that many ships in a few months hurts. So we should totaly build better armed vessels to forestall a repeat of the circumstances that lead to it in the first place.
Spamming weapons everywhere isn't the answer either. We need more weapons yes, no argument. But we also need something of a coherent plan so that designs with the highest speeds and near our borders etc are mounting the bulk of our best shields and weaponry. Sticking all these weapons on a survey ship will help, sure, but it's not the best place for them. It won't even be released until after the war. It also has sharp limitations on max speed that hamper its ability to participate in front line actions. By the time it's deployed in full on conflict the v4 nacelles or warp 9 drive may be deployed, making it even more obsolescent.
 
The Radiant feels like their attempt to be us, and they were not good at it.

I think all the proposed reasons the Klingons went after us so hard are right, but the biggest factor was what we were explicitly told. They needed a target to unify against, and we were slower than they are.

Think about how smug the Excalibur makes you feel, how we know it can out speed a D7 and destroy it easily in a fair fight. How cocky it made everyone. Then crash build dozens you need to justify the use of, an empty treasury vault and the need to solidify a reputation.

I have no doubt that the fact we stopped them at all, even for just a month, was a huge shock to them.
Fun thought: The Klingons probably had no idea about the Excalibur's specifications and capabilities when they decided to start the war. Heck, they may not even have known the Callies exist!

And after the battle of Pharos Seven, they still don't know... because the Callies left no Klingon survivors.
 
Last edited:
In hindsight it's somewhat telling that the people that normally go for Mr reliable went for a Rapid Response Cruiser that was damn the costs we need to respond to emergencies.
It honestly didn't occur to me that they did that because starfleet was suffering so many non-stop emergency's With Pirates amongst its colonies. That's been a bigger surprise to me than the Klingons
Likewise, I'd known that the Orion's were becoming a problem/we were increasingly coming into contact with them, but the sheer scale of things was a total surprise.

Why there a pirate resurgence? was the constable that was doing an amazing job obsolete now?
It's a small and slow design (and the better part of 100 years old) produced in somewhat limited numbers and seems to mostly be used around the larger colonies/homeworlds of later members.

The Orion's meanwhile have some rather big and incredibly fast (warp 10+) designs.
 
Last edited:
It was - and I am going to be completely honest here because I have already said this privately to @Sayle - a poor decision not to give players either a war project or to have the Darwin be ready for the war. There is nothing stopping us from recognising that and fixing it.

I'm not seeing the wholehearted support for that idea or the sense of grievance from people that justify that kind of change, especially when decisions on the Darwin were driven by the thesis that it wouldn't affect the war. How would the people who predicated their choices for impulse drives and phasers (and torpedoes, for that matter) feel if suddenly actually it was relevant. That sort of thing.

The reality is that the Klingons could have been 1/5th the size of Starfleet and the battle of K-5 and most of the territorial losses would have happened identically. It's just the nature of a widely diffused military being subjected to schwerpunkt before being able to assemble its own forces. The Klingons are in fact a peer/superior power to the Federation militarily, so things are going to get worse before they get better, but there are methods to fighting a stronger enemy, especially when they're the ones who have to come to you.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top