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
SynchronizedWritersBlock said:
Getting put on trial seems Demora Sulu's thing so far. Almost like some people might be trying to go after her as a political target, when they have an excuse.

I can't imagine why.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You'd think they'd stop given how poorly it works.

Dealing with a political trial in affiliate space is a P test, espionage related, in federation space. That's +2P and a reroll from her captain's bonuses.
 
Night said:
Rangers are close quarters monsters, where War Plate is a bit too large and unmanuverable to cope with them inside a tight corridor. In something more open it's probably more even.

Compare Space Hulk vs. regular 40k tabletop.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah that or the guy might have been 4 v 1'd by the ranger team. At this rate though, we might as well make it an ambition to have the Yan-Ros and Honiani enter the Federation at the same time with all the joined events that have been cropping up.
 
Trying to put the Torpedo Fairy on trial for something that exploded seems like a much better idea. I mean, this explosion clearly wasn't her fault, but... she's got a certain guilty until proven innocent thing going.
 
LaggPlaguedDuke said:
At this rate though, we might as well make it an ambition to have the Yan-Ros and Honiani enter the Federation at the same time with all the joined events that have been cropping up.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is very VERY good idea actually both narratively and politically. Yan-Ros are Honiani not!ClientState/close ally/uplift project after all.
 
OneirosTheWriter said:
I don't think that "if it was one of my explosions it would have blown up the whole colony" is a great way of framing your legal defence :V
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If I wanted to do X, we wouldn't be discussing an ATTEMPTED x is actually a workable defense on occassion.

But given T'Rinta's chops, a dissection of why the explosion physically could not be her fault is more likely.
 
Redhead222 said:
never did understand why SF build the ships the way they did. always looked hella fragile
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Methinks the in-universe justification is a mixture of multi-species aesthetics, warp-field dynamics and performance / efficiency thereof, distinct non-combat bent, and general lack of usefulness of heavy armor in favor of shields at their given technology level.

Basically, Starfleet designers wanted a shape that has good warp ergonomics (because the vessels spend like 80% of their lifetime in FTL or something), outright screams "I'm not a combat optimized vessel" at first sight because diplomacy, and ultimately relying on useful amounts of armor as opposed to shields would have made the whole design have an unacceptable amount of dead mass for their purpose so they might as well play around with the physical shape a bit.
 
SakSak said:
Methinks the in-universe justification is a mixture of multi-species aesthetics, warp-field dynamics and performance / efficiency thereof, distinct non-combat bent, and general lack of usefulness of heavy armor in favor of shields at their given technology level.

Basically, Starfleet designers wanted a shape that has good warp ergonomics (because the vessels spend like 80% of their lifetime in FTL or something), outright screams "I'm not a combat optimized vessel" at first sight because diplomacy, and ultimately relying on useful amounts of armor as opposed to shields would have made the whole design have an unacceptable amount of dead mass for their purpose so they might as well play around with the physical shape a bit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Honestly, there's no way to justify the absurd diversity in ship designs we see in Trek. Realistically the most efficient design would just get copied until everyone's ships were more or less the same shape.

Its just an aesthetic conceit of the setting that you need to suspend your disbelief for.
 
Last edited:
OneirosTheWriter said:
Captain's Log, USS Avandar, Stardate 26094.5

We had to destroy a series of compromised automated phaser platforms in the orbital defences to get through, that damned Basilica on our tail, until the Basilica of Lakhept herself intervened. With a very narrow margin, we dropped the Ranger Team at the foot of the Koliate Tower, and trusted them to finish their part of the task, while we explained the situation to anyone who would listen. There was a brief stand-off in orbit, but the crew of the traitor ship has woken up to what was happening and relieved the Captain.

The conspiracy has been broken wide open on the planet, though it is causing enormous ructions through Honiani society and dredging up old debates.

[Gain +10pp, gain +25 with Yan-Ros, +25 with Honiani]

-
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I am very glad we had an Excelsior on duty in Rigel sector. I'm not sure a lesser ship could have pulled this one out.
 
Leila Hann said:
Honestly, there's no way to justify the absurd diversity in ship designs we see in Trek. Realistically the most efficient design would just get copied until everyone's ships were more or less the same shape.

Its just an aesthetic conceit of the setting that you need to suspend your disbelief for.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think there's more to it than that.

With ships and aircraft, hydrodynamics and aerodynamics are such huge constraints that they demand that every ship or plane have basically the same hull shape. We have reason to think that insofar as there are ANY constraints on "astrodynamics," they have more to do with the shape of the force fields surrounding the ship than they do with the ship itself.

Real life ships have cookie-cutter similar designs because everyone is optimizing for the same thing using broadly similar technology, subject to many constraints. Which means they do it the same way.

In Star Trek, there are many different groups striving to optimize for different things using broadly similar technology, with relatively few constraints. This is not going to be as likely to force everyone to do things the same way. Indeed, it would be surprising if everyone did things the exact same way under such conditions.

It's like, airplanes are subject to many design constraints with few variables, but houses are subject to few design constraints with more variables.

All airplanes have a big more or less tubular body with two wings and engines pushing backwards, because that's the only way to do it. Alternatives are not merely less useful for a specific purpose like "cargo plane" or "fighter plane," but for ALL purposes. But houses can look very different in different places, depending on whether they're optimized to be warm in winter or cool in summer, what the economical local building materials are, or whether the local economy promotes single-family or shared dwelling places, and there are entirely valid variations on the theme that look quite different from any normal dwelling place such as 'mobile homes' and 'tents' and 'mansions' and 'castles.'
 
Simon_Jester said:
I think there's more to it than that.

With ships and aircraft, hydrodynamics and aerodynamics are such huge constraints that they demand that every ship or plane have basically the same hull shape. We have reason to think that insofar as there are ANY constraints on "astrodynamics," they have more to do with the shape of the force fields surrounding the ship than they do with the ship itself.

Real life ships have cookie-cutter similar designs because everyone is optimizing for the same thing using broadly similar technology, subject to many constraints. Which means they do it the same way.

In Star Trek, there are many different groups striving to optimize for different things using broadly similar technology, with relatively few constraints. This is not going to be as likely to force everyone to do things the same way. Indeed, it would be surprising if everyone did things the exact same way under such conditions.

It's like, airplanes are subject to many design constraints with few variables, but houses are subject to few design constraints with more variables.

All airplanes have a big more or less tubular body with two wings and engines pushing backwards, because that's the only way to do it. Alternatives are not merely less useful for a specific purpose like "cargo plane" or "fighter plane," but for ALL purposes. But houses can look very different in different places, depending on whether they're optimized to be warm in winter or cool in summer, what the economical local building materials are, or whether the local economy promotes single-family or shared dwelling places, and there are entirely valid variations on the theme that look quite different from any normal dwelling place such as 'mobile homes' and 'tents' and 'mansions' and 'castles.'
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm pretty sure the rigors of space travel would impose a similar set of limitations and optimization factors.

Maybe there'd be a few different ideal ship shapes for different tasks, but nowhere near the diversity we see in Trek.
 
TyrialFrost said:
I'm hoping as the 'easy' targets get hardened Cardassia will have to back off giving us more time. At the moment of the four clear lanes of attack only the GBZ would hold.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah.

The wargame that I'm planning in the Omake is supposed to be in-universe justification for the massive buildup that we'll need to take.

Result: Federation holds, but in an expensive victory.
Leila Hann said:
I'm pretty sure the rigors of space travel would impose a similar set of limitations and optimization factors.

Maybe there'd be a few different ideal ship shapes for different tasks, but nowhere near the diversity we see in Trek.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Get your logic out of my Star Trek!

:V
 
Leila Hann said:
I'm pretty sure the rigors of space travel would impose a similar set of limitations and optimization factors.

Maybe there'd be a few different ideal ship shapes for different tasks, but nowhere near the diversity we see in Trek.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It might be that the internal technobabble parts do all look very similar, since those are the parts that are actually important for dealing with warp, space travel, etc.

On the other hand, If there's no constraints on shape for space travel then you'd optimise to be least restrained by entering/moving in atmosphere, unless you deemed that to be so unimportant an edge case that looking pretty to your species was more important. (Which, given political considerations, it might be.)

EDIT: Though if you attempted to maximise volume whilst minimising surface area (for shielding, armour, etc.) you'd end up with a sphere.
 
Last edited:
AlphaDelta said:
Yeah.

The wargame that I'm planning in the Omake is supposed to be in-universe justification for the massive buildup that we'll need to take.

Result: Federation holds, but in an expensive victory.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Seems a little suspicious to have wargames that result in a per-determined conclusion, and then announce that's a justification for doing what you want to do.

EDIT: Maybe we don't actually "need to take" this massive build-up you're advocating!
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top