0t4n1z3r019
Member of the HAFPTG
- Location
- Philippines
[X] 6 Phaser Banks (Type V) [Damage: 32] [60% Coverage] [Cost: 129]
Linked contents
Can you show the posts where command says "you have an explicit mandate to drop engineering at will"
If not, then Science is the only stat that has been explicitly been deemphasized in text, as they've asked for a line ship and not told us we're free to dump engineering.
I'm not going to play semantics with the text and the strength of phrases like "explicit mandate". The overall direction we've gotten from Command does not say dump engineering over science, no matter how people want to twist it.
Last edited:
...That's exactly what you've been doing though?
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I'm not saying to dump engineering. I am saying that there isn't enough engineering to fill this boat.
When command was saying that we can dump science, it was in service of tactical considerations, which are rather less of a problem when one considers that we've built our largest ship to date.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't take some cargo, for example. But we still have notable holes in ship capability in matters scientific that we don't have for engineering.
- Location
- National Capital Region, USA
[X] 6 Phaser Banks (Type V) [Damage: 32] [60% Coverage] [Cost: 129]
Wrt modules, the Cost of Peace update says "Areas of Vital Interest". Perhaps the write-ups in the upcoming posts will shed more light on what Starfleet is looking for in non-tactical capabilities...
Chargone
Invisable operator
- Location
- New Zealand
Given the likely limits on launcher numbers and the utter superiority of the type 4 over the rapid fire launcher (it's cheaper per damage unit, among other advantages), I think it's safe to say overspending on torpedoes is unlikely to be a problem this time, so worry about that doesn't need to be much of a consideration when deciding on phaser numbers.
Well, I hope it's safe to say that. Some people are just as unreasonable about overdoing the torpedoes as others are about cutting costs.
Well, I hope it's safe to say that. Some people are just as unreasonable about overdoing the torpedoes as others are about cutting costs.
Last edited:
[X] 10 Phaser Banks (Type V) [Damage 32] [100% Coverage] [Cost: 149]
slybrarian
Creature of Fable
- Location
- A Far and Sunless Land
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] 6 Phaser Banks (Type V) [Damage: 32] [60% Coverage] [Cost: 129]
Though the next pure warship should be an updated roll bar Excalibur with 4 forward type 4 torpedoes.
No, but don't dump useful stuff for speculatively useful science facilities.
Outside of expanded cargo bays, extra antimatter storage, I'm struggling to think of what we could put in that's engineering. Fabrication workshops, I guess, but as I understand it those have mostly depreciated (though they were an option for the Excalibur, so eh).
Last edited:
More shuttles, shuttle cargo dock, actual fabrication facilities instead of a workshop, maybe some fancy new transporters or replicators.
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Christ no. I don't want to have to deal with the self-repair argument again.
Flight deck/cargo like Archer's? If we get a more unique engineering option we should take it as well. With the maxed cruise this is the best (expedited) supply ship we're going to have.
Last edited:
Shuttle cargo dock is one I hadn't really thought about, so fair enough on that (assuming we're just adding cargo storage specifically to our shuttlebay, extra shuttles have flown by now). And given the space where we could put an expanded cargo bay that might synergise decently.
Transporters would likely just upgrade by default, but I guess if we got an option for cargo/bulk transporters that could be interesting.
This isn't really a massive engineering ship with volume to spare, so a fabrication workshop - an option for the Excalibur, is probably as far as we can go for it.
We're a few decades early for replicators, need to wait until about 2300 for them.
Besides engineering there are probably also modules used for diplomatic missions that could be useful to include (especially since Star Fleet lacks any ships focusing on that kind of thing right now). Well that and morale focused modules for the crew.
- Location
- USA
[X] 6 Phaser Banks (Type V) [Damage: 32] [60% Coverage] [Cost: 129]
You know if nothing else, the heated arguments we have here show that Sayle has done an excellent job getting us to care.
You know if nothing else, the heated arguments we have here show that Sayle has done an excellent job getting us to care.
Just saying it now, outside of us deciding to make a dedicated diplomatic ship I feel that the only time we're going to get the option for diplomatic modules is in explorers, which this isn't really.
cargo, shuttles, fabrication, crew quarters, short term survey labs, expanded medical?
the archer has shown that extra computing wasn't at all useful for engineering. antimatter would be useful for long term future proofing and extended war deployments, but if this gets a refit they can rip out cargo room to make that happen? the thread hates them but they are one of the most useful modules for wartime imo...
the archer has shown that extra computing wasn't at all useful for engineering. antimatter would be useful for long term future proofing and extended war deployments, but if this gets a refit they can rip out cargo room to make that happen? the thread hates them but they are one of the most useful modules for wartime imo...
Last edited:
- Location
- USA
Given we have the fastest cruise in the fleet for the foreseeable future, I heavily encourage at least one cargo module for high speed crisis delivery.
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I'm gonna keep banging on for pharmacology/covering areas of scientific research not covered by the Attenborough and Kea.
This is basically just Miranda+. We don't want to be Miranda+, Command's going to be up to its knees in 'good enough' Mirandas.