Remove ads

Starfleet Ship Design Bureau ("To Boldly Go...")

Reader mode
Derpmind said:
How much P can fit on a cruiser platform? A cruiser can fit more of the other stats to not be as specialized as a P frigate, and might also reach higher P. Plus, we won't need to spam P specialists like we're doing with our Keplers, since they'll be for task forces instead of garisoning our many sectors.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The point of the Prepler design is to do it as a variant, meaning that we could deploy it within the next few years instead of the 7+ year new hull development cycle.

In addition, cruisers do not necessarily have higher stats. Frigates can have very large individual subframes; a 1500kt cruiser has only a slightly larger Operations subframe (the primary SP component site) than the Kepler. A fast design study shows I could probably fit P11 on a 1500kt cruiser. Could probably give it CSLH4 L5 D6ish as well. Its also going to take an extra year to build, another 30-40SR, and probably close to twice the crewing. If you want a specialist, a Frigate is the way to go.
 
Whether a P specialist is better as a Frigate or a Cruiser probably depends on whether we have time and perceived need more than anything else.

A P Frigate will be cheaper, quicker to build and require less crew.
A P Cruiser will have more total other stats, and can act as a Task Force Leader.

So, it comes down to how many do we want to build and how soon do we expect to build them. And you cannot say we build them now, as we have a minimum of 5+ years before the prototype can leave the building slip, unless the GMs let us do a Kepler-variant and skip the design/prototype stage - that is still probably 2+ years.

If we envision having fleets of these and filling out task forces with them, then the Frigate is probably a better deal.
If we envision only have a few, then the cruiser version as a task force leader is probably the better deal.
 
Where also getting 3 patrol cruisers from betazed, 2 of them are P5 one is refited to P6 that can act as diplomatic TF leaders.
with isolliniar and T3 diplomatic packages a refit giving them P8 is possible.
 
Last edited:
Forgothrax said:
TBG Ship Designer

My preferred design. S5 so it can still do Kepler science (better than anything else except Oberth and Excelsior/Amby), P10 for Max diplomancing.

Prepler | Evasion Chance: 21.86% Warp Core Breach Chance: 36.50% | Parts: SWB 1.25 Iso + 1050kt Cruiser (3/19/2018, 10:54:00 PM)
C[2.00] S[5.03] H[2.15] L[4.05] P[10.14] D[5.18] | [99.85]br [92.37]sr | O[1.35] E[2.57] T[2.92] | [2 5/12]years
Power[126.03/129.82] Internal[898.55/900.00]Tactical[109.55/225.00]Operations[392.20/405.00] Hull[33.00/135.00]Engineering[125.00/315.00] Warp Core[103.80/225.00]
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

One year later with T4 replicators and replacing more parts we can get +1D for the same cost:

D6 same cost with T4 replicators
C[2.03] S[5.05] H[2.17] L[4.04] P[10.22] D[6.08] | [102.89]br [93.02]sr | O[1.50] E[2.50] T[2.80] | [2 5/12]years
Power[124.42/128.61] Internal[898.85/900.00] Tactical[109.55/225.00] Operations[387.10/405.00] Hull[33.00/135.00] Engineering[130.00/315.00] Warp Core[104.20/225.00]
 
lbmaian said:
This reminds me: @anon_user can we have a competition on the Betazoid Patrol Cruiser-A refit design? Or at least choose which of these refits you've designed before?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A complete replacement of parts with 2322 tech gives:
2322 max P
C[2.15] S[3.00] H[3.07] L[4.04] P[8.02] D[7.01] | [107.55]br [80.12]sr | O[1.62] E[2.43] T[2.13] | [3]years
It keeps only 10SR of old parts so a 45SR refit, we probably want something cheaper even if there are only 3 of these and as it is a betazed design no more are allowed to be build.
Ill try some cheaper refit in a few hours when i have more time
 
Are we even allowed to replace everything in a ship but the superstructure and call it a refit?

Should we be?
 
Last edited:
Forgothrax said:
*Looks at the CentaurB*

Yeah, about that...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Wasn't Centaur A a legacy design we have back engineered and then refit? I would expect some leeway there.

If we start doing variant refits though (which we should I think, lots of potential there), that would result in some really strange ships.
 
Last edited:
Goat said:
Whether a P specialist is better as a Frigate or a Cruiser probably depends on whether we have time and perceived need more than anything else.

A P Frigate will be cheaper, quicker to build and require less crew.
A P Cruiser will have more total other stats, and can act as a Task Force Leader.

So, it comes down to how many do we want to build and how soon do we expect to build them. And you cannot say we build them now, as we have a minimum of 5+ years before the prototype can leave the building slip, unless the GMs let us do a Kepler-variant and skip the design/prototype stage - that is still probably 2+ years.

If we envision having fleets of these and filling out task forces with them, then the Frigate is probably a better deal.
If we envision only have a few, then the cruiser version as a task force leader is probably the better deal.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Actually, I'd argue that a cruiser variant is superfluous.

Frigates are, ironically, our best option for specialists because they have oversized subframes (a 900kt frigate has a 405kt ops subframe, a 1500kt cruiser has a 450kt ops subframe, and a 1050kt frigate has 472kt of space in it's ops subframe). As a result, frigates are and remain our best specialists, pound for pound. A cruiser presence specialist and a 1050kt presence specialist are both likely to have a similar SPD score. The cruiser might have an extra point of S and be mildly more durable... neither of which are probably worth the extra 30-40SR, additional build time, and double the crewing.

We aren't going to be building large fleets of these things. We need generalists for most peacetime response and we see more S checks than P checks, it seems. As a result, this is a ship for task force use primarily. I doubt we will need more than half a dozen of these. We will have 20+ Keplers by the end of the decade and given that those have P5 we will have more than adequate coverage for most TFs (it helps that Keplers have high SPD and thus should accrue veterancy like nobody's business).

That really leaves the primary use for a cruiser over a frigate being command facilities. High P scores are most important when used for opposed P checks (AKA, fighting over affiliates like the Harmony offensive and the Cardassian/Gorn upcoming conflict) although I'm sure they help for unopposed checks. Given that we are unlikely to build large fleets of these high-P vessels, they are most likely going to see use in the task forces opposing other major powers... which are high-priority TFs that are likely going to be led by one of our 30+ Excelsiors or the number of regular fleet Ambys we're building. The number of times where we don't have a high-powered Explorer to lead the fleet but absolutely need a sky-high P score are going to be minimal. Worst comes to worst, it's not like we're lacking in Rennies to helm the TF.
 
patrol cruiser cheaper refit
C[2.07] S[3.00] H[3.07] L[4.04] P[8.02] D[7.12] | [107.19]br [79.64]sr | O[1.74] E[2.59] T[2.15] | [3]years
Same stats but this keeps the T1 shields and adds 3 more instead of replacing them and keeps the computer core, SIF, impulse drive, MA/injectors and ESP the same(about 20SR in total). For a refit cost of 40 SR
A science module can be added if the MA/injectors are upgraded to T3 to provide the needed power.
 
Last edited:
Forgothrax said:
High P scores are most important when used for opposed P checks (AKA, fighting over affiliates like the Harmony offensive and the Cardassian/Gorn upcoming conflict) although I'm sure they help for unopposed checks. Given that we are unlikely to build large fleets of these high-P vessels, they are most likely going to see use in the task forces opposing other major powers... w
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I see one more use for high P ships in combination with a high D: responding to P events from border zones and the theater fleets but at one for each we need less then 20 ships for that.
 
Remove ads
Betazoid Defence Force RFT - Betazoid Cruiser Refit
  • Threadmarks
    • The Betazoid Defence Force has issued a Request for Tender looking for refit options for their cruiser (TBG Ship Designer)

    Article:
    A modernisation refit is required for the Betazoid cruiser.

    A succesful refit program will be one that:
    * Does not exceed 40/35 refit cost
    * Does not increase crew requirements by more than two in total.
    * Enhances the ability of the ship to operate independently.
    * Maintains the ship's identify as a best-in-grade diplomatic envoy.
     
  • Threadmarks
    • So, must increase P and D, preferably increase S and L, if possible? C and H not really cared about?
     
    OneirosTheWriter said:
    The Betazoid Defence Force has issued a Request for Tender looking for refit options for their cruiser (TBG Ship Designer)

    Article:
    A modernisation refit is required for the Betazoid cruiser.

    A succesful refit program will be one that:
    * Does not exceed 40/35 refit cost
    * Does not increase crew requirements by more than two in total.
    * Enhances the ability of the ship to operate independently.
    * Maintains the ship's identify as a best-in-grade diplomatic envoy.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    what is the last year of tech we can use?
    if that is 2322 we can use T2 diplomatic packages(if we can fit that in the budget).
     
    30SR +1E
    C[3.05] S[4.02] H[3.07] L[4.03] P[7.21] D[6.34] | [112.47]br [86.26]sr | O[2.25] E[3.23] T[2.35] | [3 3/12]years
    refit cost
    40br 35sr

    And once we got isolinniar and T3 diplo:
    C[3.17] S[4.26] H[3.16] L[4.07] P[9.00] D[7.07] | [111.38]br [93.69]sr | O[2.23] E[3.13] T[2.28] | [3 3/12]years
     
    Last edited:
    30sr, no changes in crewing. Possible D6 refit pending...

    DiploRen | Evasion Chance: 20.59% Warp Core Breach Chance: 36.50% | Parts: SWB Speculative Parts 2322-1800ktcruise (3/23/2018, 11:14:15 PM)
    C[3.06] S[4.02] H[3.07] L[4.05] P[7.08] D[5.05] | [109.93]br [81.19]sr | O[2.10] E[2.94] T[2.47] | [3 3/12]years
    Power[121.30/122.26] Internal[994.28/1000.00

    TBG Ship Designer
     
    Last edited:
    downgraded the SR sensors to T3
    DiploRen | Evasion Chance: 20.59% Warp Core Breach Chance: 36.00% | Parts: SWB Speculative Parts 2322 No Checkboxes (4/23/2018, 7:39:13 AM)
    C[3.04] S[4.01] H[3.07] L[4.03] P[7.21] D[6.34] | [112.47]br [86.26]sr | O[2.25] E[3.23] T[2.35] | [3 3/12]years
    Power[122.49/129.35] Internal[999.73/1000.00]
    was using to modern SR sensors, replaced them with T3 ones.
     
    Did a cheap for its stat gain ambassador refit(2326):
    33.87 SR refit
    C[10.17] S[10.15] H[7.04] L[9.11] P[11.02] D[11.16] | [309.34]br [249.66]sr | Refit [43.06]br [33.87]sr | O[6.25] E[6.75] T[5.77] | [4 9/12]years

    With L10(more T2 shields), 44.97 SR refit:
    C[10.17] S[10.15] H[7.04] L[10.01] P[11.02] D[11.16] | [318.79]br [262.80]sr | Refit [50.31]br [44.97]sr | O[6.53] E[6.82] T[6.07] | [4 9/12]years

    The same refit with L11(T3 shields), [59.56 SR refit :
    C[10.17] S[10.15] H[7.04] L[11.04] P[11.02] D[11.16] | [315.24]br [258.42]sr | Refit [60.36]br [59.56]sr | O[6.26] E[6.75] T[5.78] | [4 9/12]years
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top