- Location
- Florida
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
Linked contents
- Location
- New York
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] Aft Deflector (Industry 2 -> 32) [2 Torpedo Tubes +1 Optional] [2 Cannons + 4 Optional]
Endorfinator
Awkwardly Social
- Location
- California
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
Sarpedon
Knight Errant
- Pronouns
- He/Him
It's used for engines because the design on the whole is more massive. The "optional" weapons cost more and are not included in the quoted figure.
Alectai
Speaks Words of Wisdom... On occasion
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
Two forward launchers is sufficient, and we can strap on at least two more phase cannons while keeping it at Stingray costs, while also having some room to stretch somewhere.
Two forward launchers is sufficient, and we can strap on at least two more phase cannons while keeping it at Stingray costs, while also having some room to stretch somewhere.
The hulls are euqally maneuverable. There are no hidden extra costs outside of the optional weapons meaning a full loadout forward deflector costs 30 Points and has 2 tubes and 4 guns.
Meanwhile the equally as fast/maneuverable aft deflector gets 3 tubes, and 6 Guns costing 43 Industry.
In comparison the stingray fully upgunned with photonics costs 33 Industry and carries 6 gun and 2 Torpedoes. So yes more guns and more torpedoes on a improved design are Worth it.
The forward defloctor ship is a suicede sleed par exellence that will die in droves.
Last edited:
- Location
- Most likely California
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
Probably going to vote for some of the optional cannons thought.
Probably going to vote for some of the optional cannons thought.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
Two forward launchers is significantly better than I thought we'd get!
Two forward launchers is significantly better than I thought we'd get!
- Location
- France
- Pronouns
- She/They
The aft deflector version has literally no survivability increase. They're equally thin light ships. This is just insulting rhetoric relying on hoping your readers are too stupid to take offense. None of the difference is in defensive capacity.
- Location
- in between
[X] Aft Deflector (Industry 2 -> 32) [2 Torpedo Tubes +1 Optional] [2 Cannons + 4 Optional]
Mrgh. Don't really care much about this choice, but higher performance if possible.
Mrgh. Don't really care much about this choice, but higher performance if possible.
chaotic-logic
possible impossibility
- Location
- unknown
[X] Aft Deflector (Industry 2 -> 32) [2 Torpedo Tubes +1 Optional] [2 Cannons + 4 Optional]
- Location
- SEAsia
- Pronouns
- Thou
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
- Location
- Hollister
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
Driven by Apathy
Formerly known as Brain_Caster
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
As an aside, I really like the look of that ship. Let's hope they'll prove as effective as they're stylish.
Both are thin-skinned suicide sleds. So is the Stingray. The difference is, Project Selachii has a higher chance of not being hit. And the cheaper forward deflector version puts fewer eggs into one basket, meaning a less severe loss of firepower when the dice land poorly and one is destroyed.
As an aside, I really like the look of that ship. Let's hope they'll prove as effective as they're stylish.
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
- Location
- United States
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
NavySeel
"I don't know what I'm doing."
- Location
- Places
If we could get it I would love an aft torpedo tube, but the extra industry just seems a bit too much to achieve it.
It would really suit the hit and run wolfpack fighting style it's likely to have, to be able to fire behind it.
But that would come to 11 industry, 8 for the rear deflector and 3 for the torpedo tube, which is just too much.
I'd probably take it even for 5 or 6 but 11 is almost half the cost of the full ship with the forward deflector. (That's before optional guns, which I want.)
It would really suit the hit and run wolfpack fighting style it's likely to have, to be able to fire behind it.
But that would come to 11 industry, 8 for the rear deflector and 3 for the torpedo tube, which is just too much.
I'd probably take it even for 5 or 6 but 11 is almost half the cost of the full ship with the forward deflector. (That's before optional guns, which I want.)
So, it's time to decide what to vote for, and I think the lens I'm going to use to look at things here is frontal firepower, as focusing as much firepower as possible is essential for breaking through Romulan shields. It's worth noting here that according to the description, the Front Deflector configuration has only one cannon which can fire frontally, and cannot mount more, as far as I'm aware. (EDIT: The update actually says it can only mount one on the nose; other cannons may also be able to fire frontally.) The Aft Deflector configuration, by comparison, should be able to mount at least one additional front-firing cannon.
If we go with the Forward Deflector, I think we will want at least three cannons, which makes the cost 28 Industry. If we go for the Aft Deflector, then I think we want the extra torpedo launcher (otherwise why bother) and one extra optional phase cannon which can fire frontally. That makes the total 37 Industry. So the Front Deflector configuration will be 12% more expensive than a Stingray, and the Aft Deflector is 48% more expensive.
Some more numbers would be helpful here, so I decided to make a table.
Source on figures: I tried to work it out myself, by looking at the stats for our various designs, failed, and then bugged @Sayle until he made a formula for me to do it. 
In summary, it seems like the difference in alpha strike potential between a Front Deflector Selachii and the Aft Deflector variant is... less than I thought? Presumably in-fiction the ship's manoeuvrability allows it to bring other guns to bear after delivering a torpedo volley. (Apparently the way it works mechanically is that Max Sustained Damage is based on the highest damage number from all facings, and then for Alpha Strike the torpedo burst damage value is added to this.) Both classes offer a significant improvement over the Stingray class, and apparently a lot of this is to do with engines.
So going and finding these figures has actually made me change my intended vote here, I think. Initially I was solidly leaning towards the Aft Deflector on the assumption that everything firing frontally would make a major difference in the Alpha Strike/MSD values, but looking at the numbers... I think the best course is a Front Deflector design with two additional optional cannons.
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
(Also worth noting that these are calculated against a single target. The Selachii does not actually have 3/4 the firepower of a Thunderchild, it is just better able to mass it against a single Warbird. @Sayle has mentioned creating different "Single Target" and "Multi-Target" ratings to account for this.)
If we go with the Forward Deflector, I think we will want at least three cannons, which makes the cost 28 Industry. If we go for the Aft Deflector, then I think we want the extra torpedo launcher (otherwise why bother) and one extra optional phase cannon which can fire frontally. That makes the total 37 Industry. So the Front Deflector configuration will be 12% more expensive than a Stingray, and the Aft Deflector is 48% more expensive.
Some more numbers would be helpful here, so I decided to make a table.
Firepower Comparison
Stingray (Refit) | Selachii (Front Deflector) | Selachii (Aft Deflector) |
|---|---|---|
2 Atomic Torpedo Tubes | 2 Photonic Torpedo Tubes | 3 Photonic Torpedo Tubes |
2 Phased Cannons | 1 Pulsed Phase Cannon (Front Arc), 2 PC Side/Aft | 3 Pulse Phased Cannon (Front Arc) |
Average Damage: 2.25 Max Sustained Damage: 6 Alpha Strike: 12 | Average Damage: 4.375 Max Sustained Damage: 12.5 Alpha Strike: 22.5 | Average Damage: 5.3125 Max Sustained Damage: 15 Alpha Strike: 30 |
25 Industry | 28 Industry | 37 Industry |
In summary, it seems like the difference in alpha strike potential between a Front Deflector Selachii and the Aft Deflector variant is... less than I thought? Presumably in-fiction the ship's manoeuvrability allows it to bring other guns to bear after delivering a torpedo volley. (Apparently the way it works mechanically is that Max Sustained Damage is based on the highest damage number from all facings, and then for Alpha Strike the torpedo burst damage value is added to this.) Both classes offer a significant improvement over the Stingray class, and apparently a lot of this is to do with engines.
So going and finding these figures has actually made me change my intended vote here, I think. Initially I was solidly leaning towards the Aft Deflector on the assumption that everything firing frontally would make a major difference in the Alpha Strike/MSD values, but looking at the numbers... I think the best course is a Front Deflector design with two additional optional cannons.
[X] Forward Deflector (Industry 2 -> 24) [2 Torpedo Tubes] [1 Cannon + 3 Optional]
(Also worth noting that these are calculated against a single target. The Selachii does not actually have 3/4 the firepower of a Thunderchild, it is just better able to mass it against a single Warbird. @Sayle has mentioned creating different "Single Target" and "Multi-Target" ratings to account for this.)
Last edited:
Enthusiast#117
This is not the Profile you are looking for
- Location
- United States
[X] Aft Deflector (Industry 2 -> 32) [2 Torpedo Tubes +1 Optional] [2 Cannons + 4 Optional]
The aft deflector gives us additional choices I find much more interesting in comparison.
If we play our cards right I think we can squeeze out some more maneuverability.
The aft deflector gives us additional choices I find much more interesting in comparison.
If we play our cards right I think we can squeeze out some more maneuverability.