Linked contents
[X] 6 Phaser Banks
This is a fair point, I had completely missed that.
Ultimately this is still a "Make it better for a cost which does not effect us in the current circumstances" tradeoff, so it does not change where I think the best decision lies but still, fair point.
I will say that "decently armed" still seems to me indicative that it's hardly going to be a problem if the ship is actually well-armed, which is a position which has been taken in the past.
I mean... is it "feature creep" when you get a 50% off coupon offered on your shopping at the supermarket?
Like if we were talking about suddenly making this an explorer, or have an onboard factory or something, I'd get the argument better but like... it's positive-sum, in an aspect that we're explicitly asked to do as part of the design. The Cygnus had torpedoes, and that's what we're being asked to iterate on.
- Location
- Outside the Box
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Off-topic, but yes. Every time. Supermarkets use sales to make you buy more stuff, like that expensive ice cream you'd normally never get, but it just happens to be BOGO today...
So my position is that a B- is decently armed, we want this vessel to focus on its science mission and not get pressed into service as our primary combat cruiser, and it would be excellent if we had the infrastructure to take what we've learned on this mid-range science ship and roll right into a Heavy Cruiser for border security.
Since it was at the bottom of the previous page.
We do not loose any hulls if we go for 6 phasers and 2 torpedos, we're unlikely to loose any auxiliary slots given this is basically a slightly smaller Connie refit and we know where the torpedos for that go.
What we do get is a combatant second only to our top of the line explorer in greater numbers! At a time where we've likely rocketed up the Klingon's worthy foe (to raid and war with) metre considerably!
Since we're at peace this is the perfect time to go for a big ship (which we have) with lots in the way of weapons (which we're hesitating on); there isn't going to be a weapons production bottleneck.
There is literally no reason not to go for 6 phasers and 2 torpedos.
This is where the torpedoes will most likely go. Unless Sayle gives us some weird new specialist sensor that needs to run uninterrupted up the outside of the neck it's unlikely to consume any auxiliary slots.
We do not loose any hulls if we go for 6 phasers and 2 torpedos, we're unlikely to loose any auxiliary slots given this is basically a slightly smaller Connie refit and we know where the torpedos for that go.
What we do get is a combatant second only to our top of the line explorer in greater numbers! At a time where we've likely rocketed up the Klingon's worthy foe (to raid and war with) metre considerably!
Since we're at peace this is the perfect time to go for a big ship (which we have) with lots in the way of weapons (which we're hesitating on); there isn't going to be a weapons production bottleneck.
There is literally no reason not to go for 6 phasers and 2 torpedos.
This is where the torpedoes will most likely go. Unless Sayle gives us some weird new specialist sensor that needs to run uninterrupted up the outside of the neck it's unlikely to consume any auxiliary slots.
[X] 6 Phaser Banks
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
I want the photon torpedoes, but I also want the potential for an extra aux slot to put in more science.
I am not concerned too much about having a weapons bottleneck that means we don't produce these in as many numbers during a war. This isn't a ship we should be building during a war. We should be cranking out frigates that are just as punchy but cheaper during a war.
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
I want the photon torpedoes, but I also want the potential for an extra aux slot to put in more science.
I am not concerned too much about having a weapons bottleneck that means we don't produce these in as many numbers during a war. This isn't a ship we should be building during a war. We should be cranking out frigates that are just as punchy but cheaper during a war.
Shard
One and Many
- Location
- Malaysia
4 Phasers 2 Torps/6 Phasers No Torps both have tactical scores of B-.
However the 6 Phaser banks has an Infra score of C- while the 4 Phaser/2 Torp has an Infra score of D+.
So there are real costs to picking 4 Phasers/2 Torps. On top of internal space costings + Torp/Low Maneuverability/Low Usability issues. This makes a non-torpedo design superior on multiple fronts compared to a torpedo design.
However the 6 Phaser banks has an Infra score of C- while the 4 Phaser/2 Torp has an Infra score of D+.
So there are real costs to picking 4 Phasers/2 Torps. On top of internal space costings + Torp/Low Maneuverability/Low Usability issues. This makes a non-torpedo design superior on multiple fronts compared to a torpedo design.
It makes our ship much better at the job we very explicitly want them to be good at, for no significant cost to us.
We will be able to hit our required Science rating and then some either way, given the internal space and our advanced computers. Decent firepower, unlike auxiliary capabilities, is actually in our design brief. Realistically I think we can probably go for mostly all-Science and grabbing one auxiliary capability, maybe two, plus torps.
Please refer to the statements by the QM on what the Infrastructure Costs actually mean, and why they are not especially relevant unless we are trying to design and build another capital ship whilst the Galileo is still in its production run.
There's an element of opportunity cost, but given we aren't planning on the Thunderchild Mk. II for our next design because that would be actively silly without a pressing reason or better weapons... the actual cost is negligible.
It's not within the next five years. If this becomes our mainline combatant, we're going to need to continue producing them through the next war, which means that we won't be able to afford to build other ships.
This means that if we want to build the Thunderchild Mk II in our next conflict, starfleet infra will tell us that all their production is taken up by mainline warship orders, try again later.
On the other hand, when the next war starts we have a swarm of ships all with two torpedoes that can fleet up into a deathball and alpha strike the crap out of stuff because there are so damned many of them. We don't need to build as many dedicated warships because we built very war capable ships during peacetime.
With that logic I am going to amend my vote to just the 6/2.
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
We are not going to produce them in the next war, by Word of QM; we would just pump out Selachiis. We will produce a single order of these ship, which is not going altered in size whether we go for torps or not. Missing the torps makes these ships worse and provides no tangible benefit whatsoever.
Would it be helpful to quote these posts again? I really wanted everyone to have the best information to make this decision, and it kind of seems like the same misundrestndings keep cropping up.
- Location
- Illinois
- Pronouns
- He/Him
By that metric though, if we don't build the GALILEO as a mainline combatant, we'll just need to build something else for that role right now, which will also prevent us from building a new capital ship when war comes. I think it's far more reasonable to build these as a heavy cruiser, and then perhaps design an explorer we build one of every few years.
Driven by Apathy
Formerly known as Brain_Caster
[x] 6 Phaser Banks
4 Phasers are also worth considering, but considering the ship's lack of sublight maneuverability, I just don't feel comfortable leaving it with significant holes in its firing arcs.
As for torpedos, those are a toy best suited for our more nimble ships.
4 Phasers are also worth considering, but considering the ship's lack of sublight maneuverability, I just don't feel comfortable leaving it with significant holes in its firing arcs.
As for torpedos, those are a toy best suited for our more nimble ships.
Here are the posts by @Sayle on the Industrial cost:
To summarise:
- Torpedoes do not effect the final cost rating of the ship.
- Torpedoes do not really effect the number of ships we will build.
- In wartime, torpedoes would theoretically slightly reduce the number of Selachiis we could build if we were Galileo-maxxing in our wartime build composition. But realistically we would not do that, so it does not actually make much of a practical difference.
- It would be a serious issue if we tried to build the Thunderchild Mk. 2 whilst we were still building Galileos, but we probably (almost certainly) aren't going to.
So the Infrastructure Cost is a real cost, and in different circumstances with a different mix of ships, could be very relevant. It's just not a cost in this specific unusual situation we find ourselves in right now, when we have a lot of Selachiis already, want a workhorse combatant, have just finished a war and hope not to be in another in the next five years (touch wood), and are not planning on designing a dreadnought or explorer in the next five years. In those circumstances, the cost is much less, because we aren't using those production lines for much else.
I pray and hope that this can put the cost argument to bed, and people can find a better reason to dislike the torpedoes, like losing a slot. This is at least technically true. However, given the size of the ship and the likelihood of having at least one slot for auxiliary capabilities, losing one module slot is unlikely to hurt our Science score at all.
To summarise:
- Torpedoes do not effect the final cost rating of the ship.
- Torpedoes do not really effect the number of ships we will build.
- In wartime, torpedoes would theoretically slightly reduce the number of Selachiis we could build if we were Galileo-maxxing in our wartime build composition. But realistically we would not do that, so it does not actually make much of a practical difference.
- It would be a serious issue if we tried to build the Thunderchild Mk. 2 whilst we were still building Galileos, but we probably (almost certainly) aren't going to.
So the Infrastructure Cost is a real cost, and in different circumstances with a different mix of ships, could be very relevant. It's just not a cost in this specific unusual situation we find ourselves in right now, when we have a lot of Selachiis already, want a workhorse combatant, have just finished a war and hope not to be in another in the next five years (touch wood), and are not planning on designing a dreadnought or explorer in the next five years. In those circumstances, the cost is much less, because we aren't using those production lines for much else.
I pray and hope that this can put the cost argument to bed, and people can find a better reason to dislike the torpedoes, like losing a slot. This is at least technically true. However, given the size of the ship and the likelihood of having at least one slot for auxiliary capabilities, losing one module slot is unlikely to hurt our Science score at all.
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
Gotta feed that military-industrial complex, and the fact that we accidentally stumbled into making a heavy cruiser that is pretty good at everything save for its limited agility means we might as well take advantage of it.
Gotta feed that military-industrial complex, and the fact that we accidentally stumbled into making a heavy cruiser that is pretty good at everything save for its limited agility means we might as well take advantage of it.
Which makes no logical sense in any way. Your ideal, a 6 Phaser 2 Torp all the SCIENCE! hull, somehow keeping an A- cost rating (I guess Infra means little to nothing in your eyes so not bothering to include it anymore), speaks to wierd stuff happening with the back-end of the design process as a whole.
.. Look, I'm not super happy with that, but it makes sense. Cost is "the civilian economy has to spend this", but Infra is "the military infrastructure has to spend this". And torps are.. military only.
That said, I don't think Infra being D- is a terrible thing. I just don't want to do it too often.
Cost is how much it taxes the civilian industry.
Industry is how much it taxes the military industry.
Industry is not a major consideration for a ship we intend to build during peacetime when and we have military industry slack.