Remove ads

Starship Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
Skippy said:
New torpedoes seem like an obvious win. If there are teething issues, it's also presumably easier to swap back to older torps until they're sorted out, rather than swap a major system of the ship.

The dorsal launcher itself is honestly a bigger risk IMO, but I think it's worth trying?

Ultimately a lot of the impetus here is that we need a major qualitative upgrade in our weapons to fight the Borg. That's why this project was rushed inti being, and not the existing refits and designs we already had on the slate.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is what I (want to) agree with pretty much. We're trying to balance making something with long term use that has tactical use right now. Spend on the tactical and response times but go standard elsewhere.

But, I also don't like taking the reduced firing arc. Seems like it'd be going against what we've done so far in having a ship that can take advantage of its large main firing arc via its considerable agility and acceleration. Keeping a wide arc might be worth considering even with normal torpedoes given we might not be able to use the increased ROF on the new launcher if we're dancing on the edge of our phaser firing arc. The normal launcher would also give good use cases later against more conventional opponents that don't need cutting edge tech.

So, torn pretty much.
 
Last edited:
Wootius said:
This is what I (want to) agree with pretty much. We're trying to balance making something with long term use that has tactical use right now. Spend on the tactical and response times but go standard elsewhere.

But, I also don't like taking the reduced firing arc. Seems like it'd be going against what we've done so far in having a ship that can take advantage of its large main firing arc via its considerable agility and acceleration. Keeping a wide arc might be worth considering even with normal torpedoes given we might not be able to use the increased ROF on the new launcher if we're dancing on the edge of our phaser firing arc. The normal launcher would also give good use cases later against more conventional opponents that don't need cutting edge tech.

So, torn pretty much.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Unfortunately the Sovereign-type launcher requires dedicated infrastructure, and almost certainly uses the advanced Intrepid-class torpedo payload.

On a different note, went back to the completed LCARs and added engine glows.
 
[ ] Torpedo Launcher (Prototype), Type-6 Torpedoes (Prototype) (Experimental)

Given that we went for the impulse option that lost us our aft tubes I think we're going to end up outside of the torpedo firing arc before we end up outside of the phaser arc even with the normal tubes.

So that makes the choice more of a wider forward arc + slow fire speed/narrow forward arc + fast fire speed. Given that we went for the Type 10 impulse engines with the possibility of off-axis thrust I'm leaning towards the second since we could theoretically get them on bearing fast by just aiming the whole ship. But that also relies on the other prototype working without too many problems that reduce maneuverability, and also raises all of the issues that being forced to mostly aim the ship at a target like it's a spinal mount gun creates, so I could see reasons to be hesitant about going for them.
 
Sayle said:
But now you've come to the difficult choice of weapons system. While the Defiant Project is seeing very high sustained damage output from the new phaser cannons, you don't have the space for the notably extended profile of particle concentrators and linear accelerators needed for each cannon.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Wait isnt Sabre class bigger then Defiant?

How come it dont have space for phase cannons?
 
Wootius said:
But, I also don't like taking the reduced firing arc. Seems like it'd be going against what we've done so far in having a ship that can take advantage of its large main firing arc via its considerable agility and acceleration. Keeping a wide arc might be worth considering even with normal torpedoes given we might not be able to use the increased ROF on the new launcher if we're dancing on the edge of our phaser firing arc. The normal launcher would also give good use cases later against more conventional opponents that don't need cutting edge tech.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The Saber should be fast enough to be able to reorient to compensate for the smaller firing angle.

But that hopes the engines work as expected.

012345 said:
Wait isnt Sabre class bigger then Defiant?



How come it dont have space for phase cannons?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...



Defiant was purposely built around them iirc
 
Last edited:
012345 said:
Wait isnt Sabre class bigger then Defiant?

How come it dont have space for phase cannons?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Each of the Defiant's four phaser cannons is the size of a normal torpedo launcher and quite a bit longer. Most of its winged bulk is dedicated to them rather than just the warp nacelles.

KreenWarrior said:
@Sayle do we have another vote for phasers after this or has that been decided by the saucer section? Because I think I'd rather go experimental with the phasers to keep the theme.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Your spaceframe is based around the Type-X, so phasers are already accounted for.
 
Skippy said:
New torpedoes seem like an obvious win. If there are teething issues, it's also presumably easier to swap back to older torps until they're sorted out, rather than swap a major system of the ship.

The dorsal launcher itself is honestly a bigger risk IMO, but I think it's worth trying?

Ultimately a lot of the impetus here is that we need a major qualitative upgrade in our weapons to fight the Borg. That's why this project was rushed inti being, and not the existing refits and designs we already had on the slate.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I agree with this quite a bit, the only real question is if we want to place even more hopes on the new impulse engines to reorient for a reduced firing arc compared to current standard. Honestly, the choice appears to be full standard or full prototype for the torpedoes, the middle ground just seems wild.
 
I think moratorium passed?
[X] Torpedo Launcher (Prototype), Type-6 Torpedoes (Prototype) (Experimental)

I wonder if this launcher/torpedoes are compatible with quantum and transphasic warheads.
 
[X] Torpedo Launcher (Prototype), Standard Torpedoes

I feel like this might be the best option, both now and as a placeholder for when the new fancy warheads becomes standard.

Presently though, I just worry about how much space both a new type of launcher and untested warheads would be taking, especially when there's a noted potential of needing new storage standards for the experimental torpedoes.

We don't have a lot of room for unexpected spacing issues to pop up; maybe it could've been better on the dedicated saucer option, but even then...
 
[X] Torpedo Launcher (Prototype), Type-6 Torpedoes (Prototype) (Experimental)

This ship is supposed to be a response to the Borg incursion, and shoving the most advanced weapon systems on it seems like a pretty reasonable choice. Since the torpedoes are experimental there is the chance of problems popping up, but that is simply the chance we have to take in this scenario.
 
Experimental tech can also potentially crap-out our Maintenance/Manufacture scores, which I figured we want to keep at least moderate on these smaller, more mass-produceable vessels.
 
[X] Torpedo Launcher (Prototype), Type-6 Torpedoes (Prototype) (Experimental)

Wootius said:
This is what I (want to) agree with pretty much. We're trying to balance making something with long term use that has tactical use right now. Spend on the tactical and response times but go standard elsewhere.

But, I also don't like taking the reduced firing arc. Seems like it'd be going against what we've done so far in having a ship that can take advantage of its large main firing arc via its considerable agility and acceleration. Keeping a wide arc might be worth considering even with normal torpedoes given we might not be able to use the increased ROF on the new launcher if we're dancing on the edge of our phaser firing arc. The normal launcher would also give good use cases later against more conventional opponents that don't need cutting edge tech.

So, torn pretty much.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Empress_Boog said:
I agree with this quite a bit, the only real question is if we want to place even more hopes on the new impulse engines to reorient for a reduced firing arc compared to current standard. Honestly, the choice appears to be full standard or full prototype for the torpedoes, the middle ground just seems wild.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I suspect the firing arc is not likely to be a huge issue given the ships manoeuvrability, and also given the meta considerations of how votes are laid out. Votes tend to be along the lines of an implicit contract where "More capability in this area" is pitted against "More risk of some new component having unexpected issues and driving up production costs. So it would be odd and kind of contrary to the pattern to go "Oh no, you buffoon, you absolute imbecile, this thing clearly framed as accepting a new prototype in exchange for expanded firepower actually just made your net firepower worse.".

I think that the bigger risk is just the ventral a launcher having unexpected technical problems, like any novel component.

Hmmm, actually, I have an idea for how to split the difference here...

@Sayle, could we go for the new torpedoes, but in standard launchers?
 
Last edited:
A high RoF with a low firing arc is the exact opposite of what we want in a highly mobile hit-and-run attack ship. I would maybe go for the standard launchers with the experimental payload, but that's not an option.

[X] Standard Tubes, Standard Torpedoes
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top