Thanks!
The Large Core Rennie-A definitely hits the "better at Vanguard" mandate, and adds anti-Cloak sensors for border patrols (to in part compensate for the slightly-lower S?)
+2C +1S +1H +2H +3S +2R.
The additional crew might be a headache, perhaps?
We are able to 'free' crew in a few years with an Isolinear Ex-B refit, and/or perhaps an Isolinear Miri too.
(I think I posted that T8 P11 Amby here, too, alongside a possible refit in the post with the Envoy-H.)
Faster, more Evasive Miri-Escort, taking 'sensors and speed Comet design lessons', with 1T crew... but
P0.6 isn't so nice.
Edit: and may in fact reasonably Not Be Allowed for us as it fails what was the Emergency Response criteria required of all Starfleet vessels.
Edit 2: So some C4S3R6 Escorts.
Just like the Excelsior, there are some choices regarding the Miranda refit. Here the benefits of waiting for Isolinear are that you get a slightly more durable, all-rounder of a ship, save 1T crew, and likely pay more SR (15SR vs 10SR for the 2325 tech refits).
It's just not necessarily any better for what-I-presume-is-important to a theoretical Escort role than leaving the already-decent T2 Informatics core in place, crew aside.
These are making the assumption that while we [want/need/have been advised/begged to make] a Miranda-Escort refit, as we're Starfleet we're not looking to tank presence to P0. Three part refits really don't give the scope of old for improvement.
+1CSHL +2PE -1R -1OET. Well worth it I would say. It would be quite soon after RenA, but the stats speak for themselves, and pacifists would probably love the far less warship-y statline. There are some concerns about allowing rapid refits like that, but I do not share them, as pulling a ship off duty for a year + the berth time and BR/SR costs seem like sufficient limiters for how often we would refit ships to me.
@Alliterate Since the thread's voting for a Miranda-B refit immediately, well... I understand upping it's capability at event response, but how much can you get out of a war-focused design? Can you increase its durability? (Since their main role in a fleet battle is basically to draw enemy fire.)
@Alliterate Since the thread's voting for a Miranda-B refit immediately, well... I understand upping it's capability at event response, but how much can you get out of a war-focused design? Can you increase its durability? (Since their main role in a fleet battle is basically to draw enemy fire.)
Yeah yeah, sober analysis says 'design them to be better escorts', but...
For fun, some unique Miri-B refits:
Vanguard, Skirmish/rapid-response, Raw Firepower. #2 & #3 come with bonus higher evasion; #3 comes with weird crew cost ("Briefvoices hate this! Empty out your officer pool with this one weird trick!").
Half the SR cost, woo! But all you're getting is a better-protected ship that can see a bit better.
Is it, though? We building 20 Comets right now, which fill the escort role and have similar crew and sr costs. The Comets are able to fufill multiple roles as most of our ships do, but the Mirandas come from the same era as the Oberths. Come 2327.Q2 and the Mirandas as escorts will arguably be obsolete.
Just because there's a better ship doesn't mean the older design is useless, especially if it's noticeably cheaper. The Comet is nice, and I want to keep building them, but we need something affordable to launch in great enough numbers to fill non-frontline duties.
Just because there's a better ship doesn't mean the older design is useless, especially if it's noticeably cheaper. The Comet is nice, and I want to keep building them, but we need something affordable to launch in great enough numbers to fill non-frontline duties.
Uh... that's what the Comet is for. Again, we're building 20 of them, compared to our current Miranda fleet of 19 ships. Mirandas haven't been able to keep up with non-easy event response for years now. Even if we decide the Miranda-B refit should be improving its event response, it'll still be behind our Comets and Centaur-Bs. As for Mirandas being cheaper, a Comet costs roughly 1.5 times as much resources and crew while having over double the stats.
I hope we never build another new Miranda-anything.
You can't really compare the 70SR of building a new Comet with the 10SR of refitting a slow outdated ship (admittedly into a faster outdated ship). Existing is a big virtue.
(Until it's not, and you should have been scrapping and recycling)
But we will be Federalising another dozen or more Miris in the next few years, so it's a not-inconsiderable number.
Thats one reason I was thinking about the possibility of Variant-ing it.
It might make sense to order a design in 2326 Snakepit, despite coming prior to Isolinear, so we've something newish to build in 2330-1 or so when the prototype is out, but before the Isolinear designs complete prototype. I've also been told we need lower-crew designs to balance out Shipbuilding.
So what should a 2326 ship be?
It needs to be quick to develop to hit the build window- so a Frigate. (Cruisers will also benefit from waiting for Counterpunch doctrine).
Also a limited-run, niche role- this will probably only ever be single-wave.
Not massively better under Isolinear would be nice, but is a challenge- Isolinear is good.
So, given I heard the GMs are thinking about this as well-
We're setting up the two branches of the Army Peacekeeping- so what features might a dedicated Starfleet Peacekeeper support ship have?
Plenty of storage, for supplies, or as Peacekeeper troop transport and their equipment.
Replicators, to be able to produce anything required on-site.
P6, for missions where Peacekeeping overlaps with FDS missions- nationbuilding type stuff.
Small enough to operate in-atmosphere, for close support like a Constellation. Also ties in with a 900kt size, so members can build it in 750kt berths.
Shuttles, for where that's not practical.
Sickbays are a must, but a full medical pool shipboard hospital would be a bonus.
Adaptive life support- maybe to support very alien physiologies receiving treatment in the hospital, or while transporting refugees?
Maybe low supply? Even 0, so as to be able to deploy in places with shattered infrastructure.
Decent speed, and extended mission endurance to be able to stay on-site for extended periods.
And low enough crew and cost to be reasonable.
So, please find for your consideration this New Orleans project Relief-class Peacekeeper Support Vessel proposal, using 2325 tech (orderable this 2326 Snakepit):
(Yes, I did somewhat- but not entirely- make up the criteria to match the ship I designed )
Notably, Isolinear Automation cores can't be put on Frigates, so an Iso Ops core version would actually increase the Officer crew complement here.
I have other less capable, cheaper options based around this concept, down to 50SR 1O 1-2En 1T, but those don't do P6 FDS nationbuilding, hospitals and all that good stuff. Or same as above but faster, -1L +1E +1R with a Response deflector instead of Tactical. Or larger, 1.1Mt, S4 E9 R8 with anti-cloak/minesweeping.
Any thoughts? Especially from GMs on any relationship between ship weight and atmospheric operation capability, or the fit for a dedicated Peacekeeper ship role?
EDIT:
Some of those alternatives-
PK Budget, no hospital, no fancy life support. -1T, P3 so two of these are a FDS mission.
Bigger option, atmospherics?. HF Sensors, but mostly just a bit more capable and faster.
Swap Response deflector to Tactical for a tougher +1L -1ER
Really liking the idea of a Peacekeeper class ship. Recall we voted for a "Forward Defense" deployment on the peacekeepers, keeping them scattered in small bases out near the edges of Federation territory so as to quickly deploy where needed. Under that circumstance, having their own dedicated frigates is a huge plus.
Using a phaser part without torpedoes (like the "Primary Omni-Directional Phaser Array") means it won't cost 0.5 SP, correct? I think a ship meant to go in-atmosphere probably shouldn't carry torpedoes since past any space defenses those can be WMDs. And this ship shouldn't need the shield-penetration or crit chance. Keep the torpedoes for all our other ships IMO.
Aside that, I like the idea of a hullform designed to go in-atmosphere, but does that need any mechanical stuff to make it work or can it just be allowed since the ship's small enough?
Using a phaser part without torpedoes (like the "Primary Omni-Directional Phaser Array") means it won't cost 0.5 SP, correct? I think a ship meant to go in-atmosphere probably shouldn't carry torpedoes since past any space defenses those can be WMDs. And this ship shouldn't need the shield-penetration or crit chance. Keep the torpedoes for all our other ships IMO.
Aside that, I like the idea of a hullform designed to go in-atmosphere, but does that need any mechanical stuff to make it work or can it just be allowed since the ship's small enough?
Because that is spending SR, which could instead be spent on something less mechanically dubious than ships leaving behind a trail of supplies.
The point of that design is like 75% in the names of the parts chosen. It's just nice that I was able to use the right parts to get a statline that adds up.
You sure about that? If the Federation Peacekeepers are going to be scattered in numerous penny packets, it might make sense to build a respectable number of ships for them.
You sure about that? If the Federation Peacekeepers are going to be scattered in numerous penny packets, it might make sense to build a respectable number of ships for them.
Well, it was more that absent other incentives, any 2326 design would tend to be limited to a single wave or so, because of the significantly better 2328 Isolinear designs would be following it.
Discussion of the Peacekeeper ship was kind of a separate clause.
Still, don't underestimate the numbers of frigates we could push out in a dedicated single wave.
This base Rennie design:
