- Location
- Outside the Box
- Pronouns
- She/Her
What was the vote called for? The current tally has 69 for the cargo bay to 68 for the shuttlebay. Not 68 to 65.
Linked contents
I think Cargo won.
I looked at the vote tally earlier and I think it was 68 to 65 like Sayle said? I think a few people are going back and changing their votes.
Shard
One and Many
- Location
- Malaysia
I was thinking something like this:
2x Cruise Nacelles (Cost 14~15)
1x Small Warp Core (Cost ~4)
Cost 18~19
Light Shields (Cost 7.5/100kt)
Duratanium Alloy Hull (Cost: 3/100kt)
A 400kt Hull (10.5x4 = 42 Cost)
Cost 60~61
1x Type 3 Thrusters (Cost 5)
2x Forward Type 4 Launchers, 1x Aft (Cost 15)
10x Type-5 Phaser Banks (Cost 50), ~100% coverage
Total Cost ~130
Phasers 36 Damage
Shields 95%x 400,000kt x 15/100kt = 57
Hull ~80
Efficient Cruise ~6.2
Maximum Warp ~7.4
~A metric ton of module space
Onionjones
Silicon Dreaming
- Location
- The Snack Zone
So, cargo won right?
I started counting after the moratorium ended. Cargo bay won. It won anyway even by counting from threadmark to threadmark, but it won more from the two-hour-after mark.
I think this is predicated on the cargo bay being an instant regret option. Mainly I'm not seeing how this translates to the Expansion+ option. Carrying big cargo is a genuinely helpful function, as is some basic support functions. For it to be expansion+ it would have to be some sort of colony-specific aid module. But there's lots of stuff that having a rapid cargo option is useful for. Deploying large modules (maybe not finished defense satellites, but definitely the components to be assembled on site), hyper-controlled substances (biomemetic gel?), neutronic fuel, and just general cargo transit. Complete fusion reactors for colonies because the infrastructure to assemble them doesn't exist there. All sorts.
But I just don't see the causal link in how having the capability automatically translates to more colonies and a more overstretched Federation. There's been a narrative that the Federation expanded too fast and that caused the Four Years War, but that's true not because the Federation expanded so much more than canon (a little bit?), but primarily because Starfleet had 60% the strategic range because the legacy fleet was unable to slot in the Warp 8 Engine.
As for the burnout - a little bit? But that's mainly future-anxiety related stuff because I need to plan out the new UI and then probably do a whole writeup on the statblock, what affects what, rework some of it to be more transparent into what feeds into what, etc. Just need to get through the Federation and then can take a break while working that through.
Last edited:
My point is you could make this same exact ship, but spend 4 more cost to upgrade the warp core to a large warp core and the cruise speed goes up about 50%. Maybe that puts Starfleet in an era of long necked swan ships, but the cruise advantage of large cores is so great I have a hard time justifying Starfleet building a ship that doesn't have one.
I know it's not on the brief and ship based tractor emitters would probably do better (to say nothing of the cargo bees), but it'd look really cool if there was a manipulator arm (like those ones some variants of the drydock has) that could pop out from just below one side of the extra large cargobay
Worth noting that between the Saladin and Kea, that was a total of 28x ships specced for survey/science
The Saladin was Tactical A-, Science C-. Production run of 16
Kea was Tactical B-, Science S. Production run of 12
That doesnt hold a candle to the combined 70-plus ship production run of engineering ships that came immediately afterwards (4x Radiants + 30x Newtons + 40x Archers) but its not nothing either
I strongly disagree
The meta explicitly favors as large a ship as you can build within the limits of your current impulse drive technology.
Phaser efficacy scales to ship mass, and so does shields, while hulls are cheap as fuck
EDIT
Closest vote Ive seen in a long time
Last edited:
Yes and no. Bigger ships are more cost effective, but they cost more. Starfleet has some number of hulls they need to put in space to do the jobs that need to be done, and while better hulls at times can be made to more than one hulls worth of work it's not something you can completely rely on.
Starfleet needs to decide on how many ships it needs and then look at the state of their economy and calculate how big of a ship they can build and still get enough hulls, then build the biggest viable ship within that budget.
Last edited:
Also worth noting that Hull costs are a flat cost; 3 points total, not 3 points per 100kt
The bulk of the costs involved in shipbuilding are in items that remain constant regardless of ship size
Your hull, warp core, nacelles and weapons suite will cost the same regardless of if they go on a 100kt hull or a 500kt one, with the advantage that the bigger hulls have nastier phasers
The major cost variables atm appears to be shield costs and impulse drives
Onionjones
Silicon Dreaming
- Location
- The Snack Zone
Its definitely not nothing, that's why putting the Federation into a niche, which at this point definitely needs a replacement, gets us definite orders instead of a more nebulous "Starfleet definitely needs this" when in actuality it may be too expensive for that role and get way less orders
its the safer route for ensuring orders, cargo/engineering specialization may work, potentially even better, but survey/science in general definitely has ships to replace here
Relevant:
The Archer has 50% coverage, and Medium Maneuver
Tactical C-
A 150kt cruiser that couldnt beat a single lastgen BoP weighing 30kt
And as the setting moves into the Warp 8 age and beyond, and as Federation space continues to expand, those rear area safe spaces where the Archer used to operate are going to be within range of enemy cruisers
And we wont be able to spare ships to babysit
So when we build an Archer successor in several decades, we're going to have to devote a lot more effort to its tactical relevance
Starting with its hullform
We werent aiming for bare minimum orders though, we are competing for mainline cruiser
Even a 2:1 split with the Mirandas over the next four decades is like 130-150% the combined production run of the Keas + Saladins, and we might still be able to squeeze in enough Science modules to be relevant in the survey role until the Excelsiors come along, which would allow us to also replace the Saladins in that role
Last edited:
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
I think the Archer Orb was a good choice for the mission brief, we simply didn't give it enough Phasers. When we do the successor we should do an even bigger orb, more guns, front & rear MK 4 torpedoes and better shields.
If we make it big enough, we could fit 2-4 large cargo pods inside the orb and the external docking could be for the mega container this time.
If we make it big enough, we could fit 2-4 large cargo pods inside the orb and the external docking could be for the mega container this time.
Orb shape is explicitly a shitty hullform for an effective combat vessel though, nothing changes that.
Its relative sucks ness will decrease when we get strip phasers, however. Additionally a secondary hull like the Olympic class has would likely also add quite a bit to combat utility, at least compared to the stump the Archer has.
Funnily enough, by my count of the decks in the ball of the Olympic, it may actually be slightly smaller than the Archer's ball.
Funnily enough, by my count of the decks in the ball of the Olympic, it may actually be slightly smaller than the Archer's ball.
Last edited:
darkstarling
Brilliantly Crazed
- Location
- Columbus, Ohio
- Pronouns
- He/Him
My fave is the Intrepid. My oddball fave is the Olympic. My problematic fave is the Enterprise JIts relative sucks ness will decrease when we get strip phasers, however. Additionally a secondary hull like the Olympic class has would likely also add quite a bit to combat utility, at least compared to the stump the Archer has.
Funnily enough, by my count of the decks in the ball of the Olympic, it may actually be slightly smaller than the Archer's ball.
Got to ask why cargo won?
darkstarling
Brilliantly Crazed
- Location
- Columbus, Ohio
- Pronouns
- He/Him
It was down to the wire the whole time but cargo was a bit ahead and pulled further ahead after the vote closed
Because cargo was the more liked choice? But yeah we get a shitton of Mirandas with extra shuttles but the option to transport speciality cargo faster and safer was just better.
Medical ship. All I can find says it was poorly armedIts relative sucks ness will decrease when we get strip phasers, however. Additionally a secondary hull like the Olympic class has would likely also add quite a bit to combat utility, at least compared to the stump the Archer has.
Funnily enough, by my count of the decks in the ball of the Olympic, it may actually be slightly smaller than the Archer's ball.
Which suggests that even strip phasers didnt help very much
Ngl I want a Secondary hull like that on a future ship.Its relative sucks ness will decrease when we get strip phasers, however. Additionally a secondary hull like the Olympic class has would likely also add quite a bit to combat utility, at least compared to the stump the Archer has.
Funnily enough, by my count of the decks in the ball of the Olympic, it may actually be slightly smaller than the Archer's ball.
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I only see two possible phaser strips on that entire hull, of course it's poorly armed.
I think orb primary hulls are going to be a bust going forward. My hope is for a triple hulled ship with large secondary hulls. The saucer is then essential the weapons mount hull and the secondary hulls contain the modules.
SPEEZ TRUCK!!!!!