it's strange that the Klingons aren't giving us any shit over this issue. When two Federation cruisers warp into a system and go "ROMULANS COMING WE'LL DEFEND YOU" I'd expect the klingons to tell Starfleet to make like a tree and get the fuck out, not to warp in a fleet to fight alongside them.
it's strange that the Klingons aren't giving us any shit over this issue. When two Federation cruisers warp into a system and go "ROMULANS COMING WE'LL DEFEND YOU" I'd expect the klingons to tell Starfleet to make like a tree and get the fuck out, not to warp in a fleet to fight alongside them.
There's what you as a Klingon tell everyone you'd do when you're bragging some safe night in some safe system, and then there's what you actually do when a Romulan fleet is breathing down your necks.
There's what you as a Klingon tell everyone you'd do when you're bragging some safe night in some safe system, and then there's what you actually do when a Romulan fleet is breathing down your necks.
That's why you definitely warp in a fleet. Either the Romulans show up and you have a good old fashioned throw down with the Romulans, or they don't show up and you have a good old fashioned throw down with the Federation.
So to repair the Charon would require:
[USS Cheron dry-docked for 3 turns - Repair costs of 20 Bulk Resources and 40 Special Resources are required to restore the Cheron to working order. 1 Pt of Officers, 2 Pt of Enlisted, 1 Point of Technicians killed in the blast]
I assume 3 turns means 3/4 of a year, not 3 years. Guys... I think it's worth repairing. Constitution class ships are still really great. They're not worth building from scratch these days because of their high time, resource, and crew requirements, but we're still talking about a Combat 5, Defense 5 ship. If we could build Excelsiors faster it might be different, but I don't see us decommissioning the Charon until we have at least another three Excelsiors in the fleet. Maybe not until we have another 4. That's going to be a while.
That's why you definitely warp in a fleet. Either the Romulans show up and you have a good old fashioned throw down with the Romulans, or they don't show up and you have a good old fashioned throw down with the Federation.
Ships abandoned and self-destructed, escape pods collected by the Romulans as they fled. Those that couldn't make it out take the honourable way out as expected of Romulans.
In light of the recent situation with the Romulans, the Starfleet Office of Naval Architecture has a proposal to present: Project "I", a modular ship design family of light cruisers, available using current technology.
Cruiser I:
Cruiser I takes inspiration from Cruiser R. She retains the same combat capabilities in her primary and secondary modules, including Class-V phaser banks and Mk.IV shields. The scientific package has been cut down, and the overall speed reduced, relative to our goals with Cruiser R, but Cruiser I is still superior to the Constellation class in every mission save the scientific (and even then, with a higher speed, Cruiser I can survey a region faster).
Details can be seen below:
(Weights are shown in kilotons)
[In simplified terms, she's rated at C5 S2 H3 L4 P3 D4, with a cost of 100 br and 80 sr]
Science I:
This design replaces the primary combat modules with science modules, providing a superior scientific suite to any ship class in Starfleet. The secondary combat modules remain in place, with class-II phaser banks and Mk.II shields. The hull is less efficient at warp due to the altered weight and shape, resulting in a slower ship - but still relatively fast, matching our other escorts and light cruisers, and far superior to the Oberth in speed.
Once again, details:
[C2 S6 H3 L2 P2 D3, 105 br 75 sr]
Project completion time should take no more than four years from inception to initial ship deployment. Thanks to the modular design, we expect to save time on prototyping.
Concerns have been raised about the excess firepower of Cruiser I. Two options have been proposed to address this. Cruiser I-1 and Cruiser I-2 are direct reductions in combat capability, on the same base hull. Project J involves a new hull design entirely.
Concerns have also been raised that our assessment of the benefits of modular technology is optimistic. A more conservative option is proposed: Project K
@OneirosTheWriter for the update the +1 to threat level and +10 to combat level have not been applied yet. Also the +1 to presence for the enterprise has not been applied yet
@OneirosTheWriter for the update the +1 to threat level and +10 to combat level have not been applied yet. Also the +1 to presence for the enterprise has not been applied yet
Does the sheet say anything about crew requirements? Also, I don't like that the Cruiser has such a high combat rating compared to defense, shields and hull. We are limited by total combat ratings so a high combat rating ratio hurts us. An ideal cruiser would look more like a Niagara ratio-wise.
Does the sheet say anything about crew requirements? Also, I don't like that the Cruiser has such a high combat rating compared to defense, shields and hull. We are limited by total combat ratings so a high combat rating ratio hurts us. An ideal cruiser would look more like a Niagra ratio-wise.
Does the sheet say anything about crew requirements? Also, I don't like that the Cruiser has such a high combat rating compared to defense, shields and hull. We are limited by total combat ratings so a high combat rating ratio hurts us. An ideal cruiser would look more like a Niagra ratio-wise.
The sheet does not say anything about crew requirements.
The Niagara-class is way off, rather than almost ready for service, unfortunately.
We could simply cut the combat rating on Cruiser I to 4 or 3.
Cruiser I-1:
C4 S2 H3 L4 P3 D4, 968kt, 100 br 75 sr
Cruiser I-1b:
C4 S3 H3 L4 P3 D4, 1000kt, 100 br 80 sr
Cruiser I-2:
C3 S2 H3 L4 P3 D4, 943kt, 95 br 75 sr
[I can't adjust science up on Cruiser I-2, due to the effects that the lower combat rating has on the energy requirements for Presence.]
I will do whatever I have to do to stop this from being produced. Federation vessels should always be able to take a hit, then another hit, and then some more hits, and still have their shields.
I will do whatever I have to do to stop this from being produced. Federation vessels should always be able to take a hit, then another hit, and then some more hits, and still have their shields.
I will do whatever I have to do to stop this from being produced. Federation vessels should always be able to take a hit, then another hit, and then some more hits, and still have their shields.
Project completion time should take no more than four years from inception to initial ship deployment. Thanks to the modular design, we expect to save time on prototyping.
Some fiddling with the scale, and I have a better combat:defense ratio, and a tougher hull, all for a lower cost.
Cruiser J:
C3 S2 H4 L4 P3 D4; 100 br, 75 sr
Science J:
C2 S6 H4 L3 P2 D2; 100 br 80 sr
Science J is slower, due to the perceived need for the same hull. If I don't have to worry about matching the hull rating to keep this a modular design with Cruiser J, then...
Science J-1:
C2 S6 H3 L3 P2 D3; 993 kt; 100 br 80 sr
