Im pleasantly surprised that a majority of voters stayed the course with regards to 10x launchers
[X] 6 Phaser Banks (Type V) [Damage: 32] [60% Coverage] [Cost: 129]
The cost is getting kinda stupid and we haven't chosen sufficient synergies for it to be fully optimized. Our ship is plenty agile and to be blunt we've never had fast ships sitting in our blind spots. Even if we can only hit it 3 out of 4 rounds it's basically getting, what, 2 torpedoes to the face every round? Nothing light enough to exploit that is going to live for more than a few seconds.
That its not happened before is no protection against it happening in the future
Its generally not a great idea to underestimate an enemy with a techbase thats at least marginally in advance of ours
Nor are the Klingons the only potential OPFOR, just the most recent
Cost is looking higher than original projections but its still less than twice that of an Excalibur, or a K'tinga, or a Miranda
We're still within our remit, I think
Speaking of, what are we feeling for torps, dual rapids for a six-salvo? Quad type-4s? Not sure how many mounts we'll have to work with, but two's a reasonable number.
WoG is that we can expect 2x launchers forward.
So probably Type 4s
No, because we actually do have a budget backed up by explicit quest text and warnings. I looked and you blew it on every single vote
before the weapons votes.
Once again, the canon 190kt Connie with medium speed and 18% coverage was an era defining ship. We're faster then that, would have over 3x the coverage at 60%, and have like double the HP?
In canon the Connies were commissioned in the 2240s
The Klingon D7s werent built until the 2250s; here they are already obsolete
The Klingon War was in the 2250s
This isnt canon, and the longer the quest goes on, the more they diverge and the less thats a useful comparison
"It's only 10 extra cost, we need 200% manueverability."
Followed by people deciding to compromise on the thing we're supposed to be building for because oops, there's not much slack left in the budget.
I expect people to learn absolutely nothing from this.
[X] 10 Phaser Banks (Type V) [Damage 32] [100% Coverage] [Cost: 149]
It IS only 10.
If we hadnt taken it, we wouldnt even have a real choice now; we would be obliged to take maximum coverage
Now we have the option to save 20 points of cost because we spent 10 pts beforehand
I dont think its wise, but its an option
I mean, the one directly behind the ship should be covered by the torpedo launchers, and if the ship is moving forward anything trying to stay in the flank blindspots will have a rough time staying there.
That's probably not simulated, though.
Rough doesnt mean they cant do it, though
The new B'rel worries me enough that
I could live with 4x 15 degree blindspots, which is what would happen if we were allowed to split the difference and buy 8x Phasers. But I think 3x 45 degree blindspots is just asking for it when both the Romulans and Klingons favor high speed, high agility designs in their warships
And the Romulans in particular have a history of bushwhacking single Starfleet ships with wolfpacks
It's a 15% increase in total ship cost to cover three small blind spots that require a slight rotation that will immediately Blow Away anything small enough to actually fit in that spot
This makes assumptions about current and nextgen Klingon shield tech thats probably a little optimistic
Overall I wouldn't be surprised if a Type-V straight up drops a D7's shields.
It bears pointing out that none of the ships in those quotes were fresh by the time the Joyeuse popped them
Especially when this thing has stupid levels of shielding and is surprisingly nimble. We haven't even got to torpedoes yet. I'm gonna vote for at least 3 fore Type-IV launchers, preferably 4. I want this to evaporate a K'Tinga if it meets one, or be able to split fire from its launchers and frag 2 of anything less meaty than a D7 war cruiser.
But, I'll try not to be bitter. This is a vote, and I shall endeavour to respect it. Perhaps I'm wrong about my choice anyway, it's always educational to find out an assumption is incorrect. Maybe this'll be so capable Starfleet will still order a few, because the value it brings is so great. Maybe the Gorn or Tholians will see one hanging around, and immediately say, "Actually, we've got housework to do, we can't party this weekend, sorry."
We haven't even got to modules yet, either.
Someone has previously asked the QM about this
We are probably not getting more than 2 launchers in any aspect, forward or aft
I presume we could go all rapid launchers for a total of 48 cost, but this is not a heavy explorer or a dreadnought, so Type 4 Standards are way more likely for 20 cost
I can't help but feel that 150 Cost is a threshold for being too expensive, and going to 149 Cost here means we're going to sprint right past it when we add the torpedoes.
So was the Excalibur for its time; we only got its initial cost barely below 100 points by accepting some significant compromises in shielding and weapons coverage, and now the projected cost of the first tranche of Mirandas is more than 90% of the production cost of a new Callie, as per
@Strunkriidiisk.
The Federation appears to have figured out that buying better capabilities upfront is less expensive than getting your fleets scragged, losing half your colonies and having a member planet occupied
Then paying for the cleanup
More seriously, theres at least 20 years between the Excalibur and the new cruisers, and significantly more capabilities
Those cost
