Science 8, other stats 4 (D 5 would be nice, H 3 or P 3 is acceptable). Compromised reliability is quite acceptable as long as the warp core is reliable.
....So, basically an Intrepid then. Good to know. We'll be doing the Kepler
The Techs in Way of the Anchor definitely seem to encourage stacking stats on our bigger ships. Getting an effective +2 R for responding to events is a pretty massive boost, right?
No need to be so condescending. You asked a question, they answered.
The issue is you're asking for a nerfed Intrepid class, but the only thing we're able to produce with the tech we have on an Escort Hull is a buffed Oberth (Kepler, whatever we're going to call it). The tech just isn't there for what you want to have, and won't be for decades.
...sorry, I got a little pissy that he wanted the impossible. I apologize
*sigh*
It's possible we might be able to squeeze in one or two stat impovements, but unfortunately nothing on the scale Nix is hoping for.
Slip of the pen there; I was referring to the as-built Centaurs that actually need a refit.
Yeah. The Intrepid is a 700-kiloton ship, the same general mass as a Centaur or a Miranda. Look at the stat line for ships like that, even the best we can do with a carefully optimized design... we are a LONG way from anything with a stat baseline of 4, regardless of whether we can or cannot buff a single stat to eight.
Very possibly, but not by much.
The events the improved Constellations may enable us to pass might well go a long way towards winning back some of that political will in the long run.
What are you talking about, we could design an escort with the lower end of the mentioned stat line right now. It would have reliability issues and I'd want to get general tech up a bit first to get reliability over 90%, but if it came push to shove I'd pick 83% reliability over trying to keep the Kepler around until 2370.
I don't know how I missed this, but this plan has my full support.
No, we don't want ANYTHING sub 95% reliability. I don't care a bout "funny events" because that happens only 40% of the time, while 60% of the time we are missing a ship for at least 3 months(if not more) are out some resources, and maybe even crew depending on sverity. And even with warp core 100% reliability, if we don't also have high hull reliability we can still accidentally the ship.
At this point I'd have these people settle for 95%, despite what I'D prefer
I'd be quite happy with 94% reliability on a science ship. Even if every single time meant 3 months out of action 1/4 * 0.06 = 0.015 so it would only miss about 1.5% of all events. Having higher stats will make much more of a difference than that.
Yes, why would that possibly make any difference? 1.5% of events missed across all ships in exchange for higher stats and better success chance across all ships. For defense fleets group reliability makes some sense to talk about because one missing ship means the whole group has a problem, but for science ships?
