Linked contents
Arimai
Curmudgeon
[X] 0: Large Saucer (380,000 Tons)
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
Continous phaser strips on that saucer, the saucer edge would be the most powerful banks. Supplemented with rapid fire dedicated Aegis cannons and missiles would be perfect supplement to shields.
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
Continous phaser strips on that saucer, the saucer edge would be the most powerful banks. Supplemented with rapid fire dedicated Aegis cannons and missiles would be perfect supplement to shields.
Last edited:
- Location
- Somewhere in the Ashes
- Pronouns
- She/Her
SaltyWaffles
I am dissapoint, son
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Space stations, cargo vessels, multiple types of warships (there is no way in hell the Federation will forget how calamitous a lack of preparedness is after Romulus launched an alpha strike of cobalt nukes against Earth and then launched a follow-up strike that did significant damage as well, on top of nuking Alpha Centauri).
Hell, our current military preparedness is distressingly lacking. Sure, we technically won the war, but we have no idea if Romulus is trying to prepare to win the next one. Deterrence is far, far cheaper than actually having to fight an all-out war. And Romulus is not the only potential threat out there (looks at the Klingon Empire).
LunaMoth
Wings of Kynareth is my comfort song...
- Pronouns
- He/They
Kind of hope we do these next, we have only worked on spaceships so I don't know about the space station, but the quests name is Starfleet Design Bureau which implies it doesn't only work on spaceships. I think the QM wants to focus on the ships, and if that's the case, I think working on a shuttlecraft or runabout design eventually could be cool.
- Location
- United States
[X] 0: Small Saucer (200,000 Tons)
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
I would like to diverge somewhat from the boring federation aesthetic that makes most ships look basically the same and having a small saucer and a big body seems like it could do the trick for something at least partially novel.
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
I would like to diverge somewhat from the boring federation aesthetic that makes most ships look basically the same and having a small saucer and a big body seems like it could do the trick for something at least partially novel.
[X] 0: Large Saucer (380,000 Tons)
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
Being able to cut down on hull mass means increasing maneuverability or reducing engine requirements for the same amount of capability, both of which are huge benefits. Also, if it turns out to be kind of a boondoggle, well, not every single design can be a winner.
I joked about the prototype which has nothing work right, but those designs, in retrospect, are often important stepping stones towards success. A failed design happens sometimes, and unless it's a turbo-failure that simply doesn't work, having shortcomings gives a ship character even if it's disappointing.
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
Being able to cut down on hull mass means increasing maneuverability or reducing engine requirements for the same amount of capability, both of which are huge benefits. Also, if it turns out to be kind of a boondoggle, well, not every single design can be a winner.
I joked about the prototype which has nothing work right, but those designs, in retrospect, are often important stepping stones towards success. A failed design happens sometimes, and unless it's a turbo-failure that simply doesn't work, having shortcomings gives a ship character even if it's disappointing.
[X] 0: Large Saucer (380,000 Tons)
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
- Location
- France
- Pronouns
- She/They
[X] 0: Large Saucer (380,000 Tons)
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
Even if we fail the prototype rolls, the next generation of it will have the fixed version and this is such a long term benefit I'm willing to roll the dice.
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
Even if we fail the prototype rolls, the next generation of it will have the fixed version and this is such a long term benefit I'm willing to roll the dice.
- Location
- west
Let's stuff all the experimental and prototype stuff on in this.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
[X] 0: Large Saucer (380,000 Tons)
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
Electro-ceramic seems worth the risk. For the saucer size, I freely admit I'm voting Large because we just did a big-secondary-hull, small-primary-hull ship, and I'm here for variety.
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
Electro-ceramic seems worth the risk. For the saucer size, I freely admit I'm voting Large because we just did a big-secondary-hull, small-primary-hull ship, and I'm here for variety.
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Just musing, and it's not like this really matters since we look to be going ahead on EC hull regardless...
There's only really one 'fail state' - if one accepts the premise that there are only three outcomes per metric (functionally correct, though there might be some granularity), those being more/equally/less protective and more/equally/less expensive than tritanium (as a baseline), the only outcome where the new hull is strictly worse than existing composites (more expensive/less protective) is only a 1-in-9 chance with every other outcome being at worst a sidegrade to tritanium or ditanium.
There's only really one 'fail state' - if one accepts the premise that there are only three outcomes per metric (functionally correct, though there might be some granularity), those being more/equally/less protective and more/equally/less expensive than tritanium (as a baseline), the only outcome where the new hull is strictly worse than existing composites (more expensive/less protective) is only a 1-in-9 chance with every other outcome being at worst a sidegrade to tritanium or ditanium.
- Location
- United States
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] 0: Large Saucer (380,000 Tons)
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
[X] 1: Electro-Ceramic Hull Composite (-20% Mass) [Experimental] (Two Success Checks: Cost/Defense)
KlavoHunter
THOU SHALT WORSHIP NO GODS ABOVE ENTERPRISE!
Hey, could you remind me what the Cygnet's roles were again? I forgot, but I bet it's really important for this conversation.
- Location
- Lake Wobegon
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
And there's the ramping-up to the hundred-year cold war.
- Location
- Somewhere in the Ashes
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Firepower and durability on par with the NX, but smaller, cheaper, and MUCH faster.Hey, could you remind me what the Cygnet's roles were again? I forgot, but I bet it's really important for this conversation.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
Hmm...not quite.
First off, this is assuming an equal 1/3 probability of each of the outcomes, which seems like a very, very large assumption to me, although it's a big thread and it's possible I missed a QM statement to that effect somewhere.
Secondly, it's assuming that success and failure will affect stats by the same 20% increments as the existing difference between Di- and Tritanium. This is a fairly reasonable assumption to make for comparison purposes.
Thirdly, it's assuming that failures won't be catastrophic. This is...probably an okay assumption to make...?
Fourthly...okay, look, let's claim for the sake of comparison that Ditanium has a Mass/Defense/Cost ratings of +1/-1/+1 and Tritanium (as our current "standard" material) has +0/+0/+0 and have a quick table of the nine possible outcomes:
We're looking at:
2/9 downgrade
2/9 sidegrade (one of which is good and one of which is bad for this project specifically)
5/9 upgrade (of varying degrees)
For this project specifically, a 1/3 chance of a downgrade is higher than I'd like, but I still think it's worth the risk.
cost → ↓protection↓ | fail: cost -1 (worse than Tritanium) M / D / C | neutral: Cost +0 (=Tritanium) M / D / C | success: Cost +1 (=Ditanium) M / D / C |
fail Protection < Tritanium, = Ditanium | +1/-1/-1 Obvious downgrade-1 vs Tri: +M -D -C -2 vs Di: =M =D -2C | +1/-1/+0 Downgrade- ditanium stats at tritanium price.+0 vs Tri: +M -D =C -1 vs Di: =M =D -C | +1/-1/+1 Sidegrade in general, but downgrade for the explorer specifically; literally just prettier ditanium.+1 vs Tri: +M -D +C +0 vs Di: =M =D =C |
neutral Protection = Tritanium, > Ditanium | +1/+0/-1 Sidegrade in general, but good (IMO) for our flagship explorer project specifically.+0 vs Tri: +M =D -C -1 vs Di: =M +D -2C | +1/+0/-1 Modest upgrade with near-universal applicability.+1 vs Tri: +M =D =C +0 vs Di: =M +D -C | +1/+0/+1 Significant upgrade with universal applicability.+2 vs Tri: +M =D +C +1 vs Di: =M +D =C |
success Protection > Tritanium, >> Ditanium | +1 vs Tri: M+ D+ C- Upgrade with limited application due to cost, but definitely good for our flagship explorer project.+0 vs Di: =M +2D -2C | +1/+1/+0 Significant upgrade with near-universal applicability.+2 vs Tri: +M +D =C +1 vs Di: =M +2D -C | +1/+1/+1 A miracle material.+3 vs Tri: +M +D +C +2 vs Di: =M +2D =C |
2/9 downgrade
2/9 sidegrade (one of which is good and one of which is bad for this project specifically)
5/9 upgrade (of varying degrees)
For this project specifically, a 1/3 chance of a downgrade is higher than I'd like, but I still think it's worth the risk.
Yeah, so, for some reason I thought ditanium was cheaper than tritanium, rather than being the same price. So the table's crap and the conclusions are mostly crap. See here for an accurate version by @Strunkriidiisk
Last edited:
- Location
- Somewhere in the Ashes
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Sure... But you're ignoring the guaranteed 20% mass savings. That turns the sidegrades into upgrades and the downgrades into sidegrades.Hmm...not quite.
First off, this is assuming an equal 1/3 probability of each of the outcomes, which seems like a very, very large assumption to me, although it's a big thread and it's possible I missed a QM statement to that effect somewhere.
Secondly, it's assuming that success and failure will affect stats by the same 20% increments as the existing difference between Di- and Tritanium. This is a fairly reasonable assumption to make for comparison purposes.
Thirdly, it's assuming that failures won't be catastrophic. This is...probably an okay assumption to make...?
Fourthly...okay, look, let's claim for the sake of comparison that Ditanium has a Mass/Defense/Cost ratings of +1/-1/+1 and Tritanium (as our current "standard" material) has +0/+0/+0 and have a quick table of the nine possible outcomes:
We're looking at:
M / D / C
M / D / C
M / D / C
-1 vs Tri: +M -D -C
-2 vs Di: =M =D -2C
+0 vs Tri: +M -D =C
-1 vs Di: =M =D -C
+1 vs Tri: +M -D +C
+0 vs Di: =M =D =C
+0 vs Tri: +M =D -C
-1 vs Di: =M +D -2C
+1 vs Tri: +M =D =C
+0 vs Di: =M +D -C
+2 vs Tri: +M =D +C
+1 vs Di: =M +D =C
+0 vs Di: =M +2D -2C
+2 vs Tri: +M +D =C
+1 vs Di: =M +2D -C
+3 vs Tri: +M +D +C
+2 vs Di: =M +2D =C
2/9 downgrade
2/9 sidegrade (one of which is good and one of which is bad for this project specifically)
5/9 upgrade (of varying degrees)
For this project specifically, a 1/3 chance of a downgrade is higher than I'd like, but I still think it's worth the risk.
Though it's kinda up to the QM, I wonder if (if this design turns out well) we could kickstart the whole "same saucer/nacelles but no secondary hull" more producible thing a bit early. If nothing else I imagine the fleet yards and cooperation with the design bureau might end up proposing it.
The only long range explorer that I can think of that didn't have this are the Ambassador class (and you could easily handwave that with a nebula but Ambassador parts), and technically the Sovereign class (which LD or something will probably change up) though it's a bit different from the norm.
The only long range explorer that I can think of that didn't have this are the Ambassador class (and you could easily handwave that with a nebula but Ambassador parts), and technically the Sovereign class (which LD or something will probably change up) though it's a bit different from the norm.
KlavoHunter
THOU SHALT WORSHIP NO GODS ABOVE ENTERPRISE!
What I was meaning to say, with a full replicator serving of sarcasm, is that after commissioning the Cygnet class, I don't think we are at a grave tactical deficit any longer.
The Cygnet has shields, she has phasers and photonics, and she's got solid maneuverability. If we get blindsided by a war we don't have foreknowledge of, the Cygnet will keep the Federation alive until we make a new Dreadnought or Warbird design to commence elbow-dropping alien nutsacks.