- Location
- Australia
[X][BUILD] 2322 A: 1 Ambassador, 9 Keplers, 1 Renaissance, 3 Centaur-B Refits, 2 Excelsior Refits, 1 Hospital Ship
[X][AUX] Unity Shipyards
Oberth?
[X][AUX] Unity Shipyards
Oberth?
To Boldly Go... (a Starfleet quest)
- Thread starter OneirosTheWriter
- Start date
- Sci-Fi
-
- Tags
- star trek exploration fully automated luxury gay space communism top level canon (canon) #hashtagcontent all-encompassing space amoeba cardassian boy bands cardassian magical girls darkest bureaucracy debate makes the qm cackle like palpatine hoh is an empire quest it has to be foreign infiltrators more ships ship happens singers delenda est starfleet this is not an empire quest ur waifu is collective?
I'd like to get the research bonus in this year's research turn, though....
pbluekan
Somethin's Fucky ...
- Location
- Trumpistan
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Hmmm, true... Would we want to place it on a more front line ship? Like the ones in the Hishmeri task force? Seems right in a narrative sense, and we wouldn't want it anywhere near the Horizon. Cardies are also an issue, but less of one.
pheonix89
Wants to be Seven Of Nine
- Location
- North American Plaguelands
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Connie-Bs are explictly not refit-albe, and testing out a weapons system mainly meant for cap ships on a frigate is DUMB.
- Location
- Australia
I didn't consider Obertha, but I'm going to have to say they won't have the EPS hookups or power reserves to handle it.
pheonix89
Wants to be Seven Of Nine
- Location
- North American Plaguelands
- Pronouns
- She/Her
- Location
- Australia
Not able to be refit. And no, the C doesn't count.
- Location
- Australia
Just to prempt, and add Constie-A and Connie-A to the list.
Come on, it would be hilarious to see the Cheron roll up on an situation, get discounted as a museum ship then open up with the latest in cutting edge phaser banks.
I want to nominate Cheron too...
because It's the Connie-B that can't be refit, no one said shit about it's geriatric but still badass older brother!
because It's the Connie-B that can't be refit, no one said shit about it's geriatric but still badass older brother!
Night
Widow Null
- Location
- Hoff
A fascinating position but not one particularly borne out by the habits of weapons testing in reality. You fit it onto the smallest ship you've got that can actually support the system, so if something goes wrong you've bricked the smallest possible ship. This is why the Russians kept testing their SLBMs on old Golf-class boats rather than others; why actual NTTBs tend to be either noncombatants (the test ship for AEGIS or Typhon was an auxiliary/the laser weapon went to sea first on an amphib/the composite mast went to sea on an amphib) or older destroyers in the USN.
Last edited:
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic
I think that that type of prototyping is covered under the 'research project' angle, Night, the work directly done by the tech teams. And that the testbeds we see on active Starfleet ships are something closer to being ready for frontline service, with a few deliberate risks admittedly being taken to assist in the progress of the research. Remember that not every technology we develop that goes into our ships gets 'testbedded' on an active duty starship.
Leslie:
"Trust me, you do not even want to THINK about trying to put one of those phaser strips in a Constitution-B. The power trunking to the phaser banks runs straight from the main reactor and that's great for firepower on a bank setup, but pants-on-head lousy for the requirements these new beasts are supposed to have. We might, MIGHT be able to gin up a plan for Cheron, maybe, but we'd have to tear apart most of the centerline to do it... ugh. Makes my head hurt to think about it."
Leslie:
"Trust me, you do not even want to THINK about trying to put one of those phaser strips in a Constitution-B. The power trunking to the phaser banks runs straight from the main reactor and that's great for firepower on a bank setup, but pants-on-head lousy for the requirements these new beasts are supposed to have. We might, MIGHT be able to gin up a plan for Cheron, maybe, but we'd have to tear apart most of the centerline to do it... ugh. Makes my head hurt to think about it."
Night
Widow Null
- Location
- Hoff
I am. Not every technology IRL gets a shipboard test phase as such. Most of the ones I mentioned were either brand-new weapons types (the laser, solid-fuel SLBMs capable of underwater launch compared to liquid-fuel launch-only-on-the-surface ones), or very large systems unlike any existing one (the composite mast, AEGIS and Typhon). A lot of stuff just sneaks aboard the next class with only shore-side testing, much like ours.
Winged One
Not the Simurgh
- Location
- definitely the ground
- Pronouns
- They/Them/It
[X][BUILD] 2322 A: 1 Ambassador, 9 Keplers, 1 Renaissance, 3 Centaur-B Refits, 2 Excelsior Refits, 1 Hospital Ship
I like Ambys, but I like being able to respond to events more.
I like Ambys, but I like being able to respond to events more.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
@OneirosTheWriter, some corrections/questions:
NCC registry numbers are currently assigned on planning date (Q1 shipyard ops results), rather than commence date, unless the former isn't available (member fleet builds). Apart from the HIP build time reduction, this is sometimes why we see a ship with a higher NCC registry number commission before a lower number.
For some reason, a NCC registry number wasn't assigned in the 2320.Q1 shipyard ops results for the scheduled cargo ship build (but with the wrong commence date - should've been 2320.Q4):
This is apparent in the 2320 EOY:
They were established as Chinook NCC-2130 @ UP 2mt-Y and Sirocco NCC-2131 in the 2321.Q1 shipyard ops results:
Er, I have this marked down as NCC-3726. Rationale:
NCC registry numbers are currently assigned on planning date (Q1 shipyard ops results), rather than commence date, unless the former isn't available (member fleet builds). Apart from the HIP build time reduction, this is sometimes why we see a ship with a higher NCC registry number commission before a lower number.
For some reason, a NCC registry number wasn't assigned in the 2320.Q1 shipyard ops results for the scheduled cargo ship build (but with the wrong commence date - should've been 2320.Q4):
It should've been assigned NCC-3726 here, so I went ahead and did so. I also remember discussing this with you on discord when I saw the proposed registry numbers on the Q3 Orion and Betazoid SF cargo ship builds, and bumped those numbers up.
This is apparent in the 2320 EOY:
Gah! You switched the NCC registries and berth assignments of these around?
They were established as Chinook NCC-2130 @ UP 2mt-Y and Sirocco NCC-2131 in the 2321.Q1 shipyard ops results:
Which one is which?!
You're missing another Comfort build (NCC-3506) in Lasieth berth 1mt-1 that commenced in 2321.Q1 and commissions in 2324.Q1. It's missing in the 2321.Q1 shipyard ops, but I confirmed with you on discord that the build did commence on Q1 that year.
As Briefvoice noted, you're missing a Super-Freighter build (NCC-3624) in UP berth 2mt-Z that commenced in 2321.Q2 and commissions in 2325.Q2. From the 2321.Q1 shipyard ops results:
Last edited:
- Location
- Australia
I wonder if arrays should reduce their actual raw C advantage in favour of doing things like degrading enemy evasion...
I'll check these when I get home.
Thors_Alumni
Proud member of Thors Class VII from Liberl
- Location
- Liberl Zemuria.
I am in favor of putting Phaser Arrays on an Excelsior since they are reasonably big enough to hold them. As for Putting the arrays on an Ambassador. I don't think it is feasible unless you want to put either the Enterprise or the Ambassador back in dock just to install them which is something I think is a really bad idea. So yes using an Excelsior is the best choice we have.
Oh and have a Tally too.
Oh and have a Tally too.
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
FYI to thread, these shipbuild plan screenshots are slightly outdated - the actual shipbuild planning spreadsheet now has updated resources and income. Most importantly, we have +25 SR. BR and crew income are also a bit higher, but they're less relevant as bottlenecks for the next few years.
Not that any of the plans were going to dip dangerously into SR anyway. Technically, it makes a new Centaur-B build possible, but berth availability is an issue around 2324.
Rather conveniently, that extra 25sr effectively pays for a phaser prototype testbed refit.
It is, confirmed by QM.
SWB just hasn't updated the intel tracking spreadsheet yet.
Fortunately it looks like Oneiros is tweaking mechanics so that group contribution is weighted more than individual ships. At least, that's the impression I got when he said there would be "a new test mechanism for handling ships operating in a team that should help Starfleet task forces a bit more".
Not only that, we can diplo push the coreward polities under competition with the Horizonites. We can't with the Dawiar. I say continue to have EC support for the TF Handshake.
It shouldn't be. Looking at the version history of the TBG Ship DB, I think on Feb 5, AKuz accidentally made it both Rru'adorr and Pleezirra blooded, when only the latter became blooded from a Captain's Log that day.
That said... Rru'adorr did participate in that CL with the event reward of 15pp. @AKuz, did you mean to make Rru'adorr blooded in the 2321.Q4.M3 captain's log?
Last edited:
- Location
- Germany
- Pronouns
- He/Him
We also sounded a Federation wide alarm.
//
@Phaser Array testbed - what was the rationale to not put them on one (or both) of the Excelsiors currently going to refit?
- Location
- United States
not needing to turn your ship (or turrets) to shoot the enemy is a major advantage.
- Location
- Australia
Ha, and it actually makes sense that the Fed threw in with arrays like that, when small or parasite craft were so popular with other factions.
- Location
- Germany
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Could the arrays be used for point defense (shooting down torpedoes, for example)?
lbmaian
a thirsty squirrel
- Location
- USA
[X][BUILD] 2322 A: 1 Ambassador, 9 Keplers, 1 Renaissance, 3 Centaur-B Refits, 2 Excelsior Refits, 1 Hospital Ship
For reasons stated by others, prioritize Keplers this year over Ambies.
As for keeping that Rennie, I like keeping a trickle of Rennie builds going on, since it's not like there still aren't combat operations going - just look at the Hishmeri situation. With crew no longer being as much of a bottleneck, Rennies are our most cost-efficient combatants. They're still decent enough event responders for their SR cost, and can double as task force leads if needed.
[X][AUX] Betazed Unity Shipyards
The BUS make a nice acronym
For this specific idea, S already counters evasion, so although not quite redundant, if feels like there should then be an evasion counterpart to phaser arrays then.
Taking a step back, what are you hoping to accomplish? That phaser arrays should be more dedicated to increasing combat capability instead of making room for other components? Two comments on that:
1) Due to part stacking inefficiency, phaser arrays technically do make increasing combat more efficient than increasing other stats by the room they make available.
2) I don't see why phaser arrays must result in higher combat capability. As an analogy, consider the historical advent of battleships. Before, ships of the line were all about broadsides, and even with the advent of armored pre-dreadnoughts, still had banks of smaller batteries. The standardization towards "all big gun" ships not only increased firepower, but the reduction of secondary armaments meant that ship could be made more armored and/or faster. (I'm not a history buff, so this analogy might not be 100% correct.)
Anyway, maybe this discussion belongs in the SDB thread?
For reasons stated by others, prioritize Keplers this year over Ambies.
As for keeping that Rennie, I like keeping a trickle of Rennie builds going on, since it's not like there still aren't combat operations going - just look at the Hishmeri situation. With crew no longer being as much of a bottleneck, Rennies are our most cost-efficient combatants. They're still decent enough event responders for their SR cost, and can double as task force leads if needed.
[X][AUX] Betazed Unity Shipyards
The BUS make a nice acronym
Well, that would require lots of redesigning... which isn't the worst thing given how far away the phaser array refits are.
For this specific idea, S already counters evasion, so although not quite redundant, if feels like there should then be an evasion counterpart to phaser arrays then.
Taking a step back, what are you hoping to accomplish? That phaser arrays should be more dedicated to increasing combat capability instead of making room for other components? Two comments on that:
1) Due to part stacking inefficiency, phaser arrays technically do make increasing combat more efficient than increasing other stats by the room they make available.
2) I don't see why phaser arrays must result in higher combat capability. As an analogy, consider the historical advent of battleships. Before, ships of the line were all about broadsides, and even with the advent of armored pre-dreadnoughts, still had banks of smaller batteries. The standardization towards "all big gun" ships not only increased firepower, but the reduction of secondary armaments meant that ship could be made more armored and/or faster. (I'm not a history buff, so this analogy might not be 100% correct.)
Anyway, maybe this discussion belongs in the SDB thread?
Last edited: