Remove ads

To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)

Linked contents
To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest) Starfleet Ship Design Bureau, Refit ("To Boldly Go...")
Reader mode
lbmaian said:
I'd follow the quest along, although I'm not sure if I'll have the time (or rather, knowledge and research) to participate. I keep hearing things about how Honorverse goes to shit several books down the line, so that's disinclined me from reading the series.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Read up until Ashes of Victory, it's a natural end point after the rot has set in but well before the patient dies. The first couple of books in the series are actually free online.

[X][WG] A Fleet Battle (Cost 2pp/Explorer, 1pp/Cruiser, 1pp/2 Escorts)
-[X] Goal: Improve coordination between Federation GBZ forces against Cardassians (some tactical bonus of some sort?)
-[X] "Union" side: Hebrinda [Hebrinda-A, Kaldar analog] + Republic [Connie-B, Jaldun analog] + Challorn [blooded Constellation, Combat Takaaki analog] + Yukikaze [blooded Centaur-A in neighboring Apinae sector, Combat Takaaki analog] - totals C18 H12 L16
-[X] "Confederation" side: Abhriec [Riala] + Telzziadriz [Little Queenship] + Gerzzi [Stinger] + Triada [Stinger] - totals C18 H9 L20
-[X] Cost: 1*2 explorer, 3*1 cruisers, 4/2 frigate (treating Challorn as a frigate since it's being used as one here) = 7pp
 
[X][WG] A Fleet Battle (Cost 2pp/Explorer, 1pp/Cruiser, 1pp/2 Escorts)
-[X] Goal: Improve coordination between Federation GBZ forces against Cardassians (some tactical bonus of some sort?)
-[X] "Union" side: Hebrinda [Hebrinda-A, Kaldar analog] + Republic [Connie-B, Jaldun analog] + Challorn [blooded Constellation, Combat Takaaki analog] + Yukikaze [blooded Centaur-A in neighboring Apinae sector, Combat Takaaki analog] - totals C18 H12 L16
-[X] "Confederation" side: Abhriec [Riala] + Telzziadriz [Little Queenship] + Gerzzi [Stinger] + Triada [Stinger] - totals C18 H9 L20
-[X] Cost: 1*2 explorer, 3*1 cruisers, 4/2 frigate (treating Challorn as a frigate since it's being used as one here) = 7pp
 
[X][WG] A Fleet Battle (Cost 2pp/Explorer, 1pp/Cruiser, 1pp/2 Escorts)
-[X] Goal: Improve coordination between Federation GBZ forces against Cardassians (some tactical bonus of some sort?)
-[X] "Union" side: Hebrinda [Hebrinda-A, Kaldar analog] + Republic [Connie-B, Jaldun analog] + Challorn [blooded Constellation, Combat Takaaki analog] + Yukikaze [blooded Centaur-A in neighboring Apinae sector, Combat Takaaki analog] - totals C18 H12 L16
-[X] "Confederation" side: Abhriec [Riala] + Telzziadriz [Little Queenship] + Gerzzi [Stinger] + Triada [Stinger] - totals C18 H9 L20
-[X] Cost: 1*2 explorer, 3*1 cruisers, 4/2 frigate (treating Challorn as a frigate since it's being used as one here) = 7pp
 
Simon_Jester said:
Actually, reading the discussion, several people thought of it. However, most people did not regard it as an urgent priority. Engineering ships aren't designed to fight in combat or pass event checks, so they don't pressingly need top of the line stats. It would be nice to develop a new engineering ship, but the only real hole engineering ships create in our fleet deployment isn't "we don't have advanced enough engineering ships," it's "we don't have enough engineering ships of any kind."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If the ships are fine but we can't afford enough/can't pump them out fast enough, would it be worth looking at an Engineering design that doesn't improve the stats but instead focuses entirely on costs/build time? Or do tech advances always just lend themselves to stat improvements? (If they do, that seems like something of an oversight to be honest.)
 
[X][WG] A Fleet Battle (Cost 2pp/Explorer, 1pp/Cruiser, 1pp/2 Escorts)
-[X] Goal: Improve coordination between Federation GBZ forces against Cardassians (some tactical bonus of some sort?)
-[X] "Union" side: Hebrinda [Hebrinda-A, Kaldar analog] + Republic [Connie-B, Jaldun analog] + Challorn [blooded Constellation, Combat Takaaki analog] + Yukikaze [blooded Centaur-A in neighboring Apinae sector, Combat Takaaki analog] - totals C18 H12 L16
-[X] "Confederation" side: Abhriec [Riala] + Telzziadriz [Little Queenship] + Gerzzi [Stinger] + Triada [Stinger] - totals C18 H9 L20
-[X] Cost: 1*2 explorer, 3*1 cruisers, 4/2 frigate (treating Challorn as a frigate since it's being used as one here) = 7pp
 
Personally, I'd like to see us throw in a Caitian ship into the mix as well, get them some experience in joint operations with the Apiata and Amarki... but that might make this a bit too costly, pp-wise.
 
Deathbybunnies said:
If the ships are fine but we can't afford enough/can't pump them out fast enough, would it be worth looking at an Engineering design that doesn't improve the stats but instead focuses entirely on costs/build time? Or do tech advances always just lend themselves to stat improvements? (If they do, that seems like something of an oversight to be honest.)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We don't design auxiliary vessels. They have their own (abstracted) departments, budgets and chains of command. If Aux Command wants us to fork out a research team to design them a new Engineering hull - they will ask for it. Until then, out of our hands.

When Aux Command came to us regarding a new hospital ship, all we really contributed was a research team and a voted directive on size (frigate, cruiser or explorer sized, with fewer hulls as the size went up). The voters choose cruiser, so the new hospital ship design - the prototype is still under construction in the Aux Yards - is based on the Rennie hull.
 
Last edited:
anon_user said:
Personally, I'd like to see us throw in a Caitian ship into the mix as well, get them some experience in joint operations with the Apiata and Amarki... but that might make this a bit too costly, pp-wise.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I considered it, but we don't know what ships the Caitians are actually sending (although we can make an educated guess), and when next year they'll be able to send the ships. Cost was the other factor behind not adding more ships - 7pp is already slightly more than last year's 6pp "T'Mir dooms Betazed" war game.
 
So, just playing around with the sheet today, in the context of yesterday's discussion around Tactical Operations...

1) Would anyone like a C11 Amby? Because once we have phaser arrays and burst torpedo launchers, we can have one for basically no change in SR or crewing. Could probably do +1 S/P/L as well because by that point we will be able to fit up to 3300kt of ship into a 3000kt berth and thus can use the extra ~227 of internal space. Arrays would take around 14 years with generic teams and boosting every year, but if we could pull one of the Skill 2 generic weapons teams once they mature, it would take less time (10ish years or so, maybe?). Burst Launcher should be done by the end of the decade. Sooo... we're gonna have a heckofa refit.

2) If we wanted to, probably around the mid 2320s (depending on how research goes) we could replace the Excelsior-A with a 1500kt cruiser that has the same stats, 4/5/4 crewing and costs 160br, 115sr. I haven't tried to optimize it very hard because I'm not SWB, but I'll bet he could get 4/4/4 crewing with automated frames (not on the sheet yet) and probably lop off 10-15sr while he was doing it. Given that BR is basically a nonissue as far as resources go, it would basically be +20-25sr (depending on how well the design to be optimized) and +1O/T over the Rennie for Excelsior-A stats. Wouldn't benefit as much from Lone Ranger, but it would put much more capable ships on the front lines.
 
Last edited:
Forgothrax said:
So, just playing around with the sheet today, in the context of yesterday's discussion around Tactical Operations...

1) Would anyone like a C11 Amby? Because once we have phaser arrays and burst torpedo launchers, we can have one for basically no change in SR or crewing. Could probably do +1 S/P/L as well because by that point we will be able to fit up to 3300kt of ship into a 3000kt berth and thus can use the extra ~227 of internal space. Arrays would take around 14 years with generic teams and boosting every year, but if we could pull one of the Skill 2 generic weapons teams once they mature, it would take less time (10ish years or so, maybe?). Burst Launcher should be done by the end of the decade.

2) If we wanted to, probably around the mid 2320s (depending on how research goes) we could replace the Excelsior-A with a 1500kt cruiser that has the same stats, 4/5/4 crewing and costs 160br, 115sr. I haven't tried to optimize it very hard because I'm not SWB, but I'll bet he could get 4/4/4 crewing with automated frames (not on the sheet yet) and probably lop off 10-15sr while he was doing it. Given that BR is basically a nonissue as far as resources go, it would basically be +20-25sr (depending on how well the design to be optimized) and +1O/T over the Rennie for Excelsior-A stats. Wouldn't benefit as much from Lone Ranger, but it would put much more capable ships on the front lines.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Its tempting, but postponing the Amby to take advantage of expected tech breakthroughs sounds like it could lead down a very slippery slope. You might be able to convince me to postpone the Ambassador prototype, but you'll have your work cut out for you.

New heavy cruiser in the 20's sounds nice, but that's still a decade away. I'll probably vote for it when we get there though.
 
Last edited:
C11 might rocket us up the combat cap too much but it is good to see what gains we will get by unlocking phaser arrays. Can probably bump it up by 1 and reduce weight there to use elswwhere.
 
Void Stalker said:
C11 might rocket us up the combat cap too much but it is good to see what gains we will get by unlocking phaser arrays. Can probably bump it up by 1 and reduce weight there to use elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If we just wanted +1C, we can put in burst launchers. +10SR but otherwise no change. Like Oneiros said, we could fairly easily do a refit within the next few years to bump up to C9. If we don't have refit functionality on the sheet within a few IC years, I might ask if we could do a quick design update to add burst launchers and geologic sensors to the Ambys after the prototypes, since we'll have geosensors by 2317 and burst launchers may be done by then depending on if Inspiration lands there or not.
 
Forgothrax said:
If we just wanted +1C, we can put in burst launchers. +10SR but otherwise no change. Like Oneiros said, we could fairly easily do a refit within the next few years to bump up to C9. If we don't have refit functionality on the sheet within a few IC years, I might ask if we could do a quick design update to add burst launchers and geologic sensors to the Ambys after the prototypes, since we'll have geosensors by 2317 and burst launchers may be done by then depending on if Inspiration lands there or not.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My thoughts were we can go phaser arrays but just reduce the number of that is allowed and pack in additional sensors or other such items to try and keep S and other stats up.
 
Interesting thing about Phasers: They disintegrate stuff and are very precise. A photon lance is a weapon only (and a demolition tool I suppose), while y phaser can make a tunnel, cut a hole in a wall, disintegrate dangerous materials, be a weapon, and more besides. It does not cause an explosion, irradiate the surroundings, or overpenetrate. I am pretty sure that this is why the Starfleet uses them, not because they are the most powerfull ship based weapon they could have.
Disruptors and phasers are both nadion beams, but disruptors lack the precise modulation that gives phasers their versatility. This saves up on delicate equipment and processing power, and gives more of a punch for its size, but is mostly useless outside of a fight or imprecise demolition.
 
Last edited:
Also IIRC a Photon lance is a weapons system that you build a ship around. Not a weapon system that you're adding to a ship.

So by building a Photon lance armed ship you're saying "This vessel's only purpose is as a warship. All it does is kill" which is probably a sentiment that earns us it's just for being considered
 
[X]WG A 2v2 with any Ships, including member world ships - 2 modern Catian Swarmers vs 2 Stingers

Don't we plan to purchase some expensive options at the next snakepit? I don't really see the fleet battle as worth 7pp.
 
Enerael said:
Interesting thing about Phasers: They disintegrate stuff and are very precise. A photon lance is a weapon only (and a demolition tool I suppose), while phaser can make a tunnel, cut a hole in a wall, disintegrate dangerous materials, be a weapon, and more besides. It does not cause an explosion, irradiate the surroundings, or overpenetrate. I am pretty sure that this is why the Starfleet uses them, not because they are the most power ship based weapon they could have.
Disruptors and phasers are both nadion beams, but disruptors lack the precise modulation that gives phasers their versatility. This saves up on delicate equipment and processing power, and gives more of a punch for its size, but is mostly useless outside of a fight or imprecise demolition.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If that's true, shouldn't it be possible for a phaser to don't do the precise modulation and use more power than could be used precisely modulated?
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top