Star Trek: Death of the Federation

[Cynical Cat]

To say I don't trust Darkstar's math is an understatement. That he doesn't show any of his calculations or the assumptions he made while making them makes me even less inclined to trust the results. Just from eyeballing it, he got the length of the Jem'Hadar battlecruiser wrong.

Now, on to the meat your character sounds workable, which is a big hurdle. As someone who was given a whole swack of Known Space books by a family friend, alien female in command of a Kzinti warship set off just about every single alarm bell but your idea does seem workable which is not an insubstantial achievement.

To nitpick, you're also carrying more weapons than a Sovereign and that arsenal includes an omnidirectional missile system. While ruling on the missile system is Havoc's business, do you mind elaborating on it( specifically on its drawbacks compared to photon torpedoes) for the rest of us?

[Hotfoot]

The ship raises a lot of issues, especially given what we already have and what it is capable of itself.

1. 4 cannons, 12 beams, and 12 torps? I tried, I really did. I mean I put numbers up there and everything. But you have a ship barely larger than a Vor'cha (if even that), and you have packed on it more firepower than a Sovereign. Moreover, you've dramatically increased the firepower beyond the raw numbers because you have omnidirectional launch tubes, which essentially doubles your missile firepower (Most ships have equal numbers fore and aft, with any odd amounts generally placed fore). So basically you've got about as much forward (And really, that's constant forward, regardless of manuevering) torpedoes as an Akira, with as many beams as a Galaxy, plus four disruptor cannons.

2. Missile Defense Batteries. I actually kind of like these. Heck, there's mention of torpedo defense batteries that I've found throughout Memory Alpha, though it's never been shown on screen. However, combined with everything else? It's a bit much. I mean, missile defense and area denial of smaller ships? Hey, cool, good plan, it's not been done yet.

3. The downside of the omnidirectional missile array is not really much of a downside. Missiles are long-range weapons as is, and with the sheer amount of firepower your ship is able to put out, especially against smaller targets thanks to your beams and AAA, virtually nothing will be able to close to less than medium range unless you allow it to, save perhaps a Borg Cube.

Bottom line, you have two more weapons systems than a baseline Sovereign, which was already at the top of the heap. You do this while being smaller, somehow, and being able to always keep missiles on target regardless of your facing. Remember what I said above? About picking a role? You've not done that. Instead, you're trying to fill four roles at once (Beam boat, Blaster Boat, Missile Boat, and Area Defense). It's not going to work. Pick one. Heck you might be able to get away with two. But three, to say nothing of four? You're asking a lot.

As an addendum, I'm not fond of the arc values or missile firepower numbers. I know some people *eyes a certain marine* have put some number values on some things, but by and large this game isn't about hardcore number crunching. I'm not going to calculate out the arcs of my phasers and/or cannons/tubes/whatever to figure out where my maximum firepower is (like the 30 degrees of overlap on your arrays on the 12, 7, and 4 o'clock lines that you've set up) or how that lines up with other weapon systems per se. The missiles, I just need to know how effective they are compared to a Photon Torpedo, not megaton values, because again, we're not playing junior scientist here, however qualified some of us may be to do so.

By the way, your volleys consist of up to 144 warheads, with the average volley being about 84. That's....a lot. How that factors in to things I don't know, but it is a lot. I wish you luck in keeping yourself armed, especially since I doubt anyone makes those specialty missiles anymore.

[Dark Silver]

...it's a interesting design. But Hotfoot picked apart the issues with it I'd have.

Admittedly, I'm not one to talk, I'm packing the energy weapon firepower of a Battlecruiser or better onto a Cruiser (despite the weaknesses that provides me) - so I don't have much room to talk.



I think you'd need to pick a role for the ship Hadri, and try to focus more on that, or go for a "Jack-of-All-Trades Master of None" approach, cause it looks like your ship is just..good, at everything it has (massive missile spam, heavy beam firepower, and can deny close coverage with PD).

[Cynical Cat]

Admittedly, I'm not one to talk, I'm packing the energy weapon firepower of a Battlecruiser or better onto a Cruiser (despite the weaknesses that provides me) - so I don't have much room to talk.
.

Sure you do. You have loosely the same kind of beam power, but only 2 torp tubes not 12 double missile pods.

[Cynical Cat]

The figures for the sizes of the two TNG Enterprises are fairly consistent all over the place. The warp cores for the two also scale, with the Galaxy's warp core also being about 2.5 the size of a Sovereign's. It has been suggested that the Galaxy is a battleship design while the Sovereing is a heavy cruiser, rather than the other way around. There are even statements to the effect from one of the guys who designed the Sovereign-class (in real life). He said that in-universe it is a replacement for the Excelsior.

Every scaling I've seen hasn't suggested a discrepancy of that amount, although the Galaxy's reactor is larger. The reactor designs are also quite different during an era of significant technological advance and the amount of fuel going through either at any given moment is going to be quite small do to the whole M/AM thing. That's before we touch on the safety issues with the Galaxy's warp core certainly meriting a radical redesign. So I'm not convinced that the Galaxy has a greater power output than the Sovereign.

The Galaxy also invests truly massive amounts of mass in living quarters and civilian use areas. The Excelsior featured junior crew in bunkbeds. The Galaxy has hotel suite sized personal quarters. It's well armed and shielded, but its not a warship by any stretch of the imagination. If the Sovereign is following in the footsteps of the Excelsior then its following in the footsteps of being the premier heavy cruiser/fast battleship of a Starfleet that has had a massive increase in its military role in the years following the design and construction of the first Galaxy class vessels (the reemergence of the Romulans, the Borg, the Dominion, and so on). It's mentioned in DS9 that the Defiant is breaking new ground by being a pure warship and that ship predates the Sovereign.

[rhoenix]

Hadrian,

1. Please, please don't use Darkstar's stuff (the st vs sw site). It's been repeatedly and demonstrably proven inaccurate.

2. If you're going to use stuff that's not easily found in like STO databases, or Memory Alpha, I'll want a detailed idea of what a Kzin battlecruiser is, and can do. If the closest analogy you can base it from is a Sovereign, what makes it better or worse than a Sovereign?

3. You can missile-spam. That's great. However, missile-spam is notoriously bad at conservation of missiles, especially in an environment like this where refills are really not available. Therefore, how many of your maximum are you currently carrying, and what are their configurations?

4. You have to narrow down your ship's role from "Awesome". If you want missile spam, you're going to have to cut down on the beams, and probably your Shields of Awesome as well. If you want a proper beam boat, you'll have to cut down on the number of torp tubes you have, and probably your entire design will change.

In short, check out others' characters, and see what their ships are, versus what their weaknesses are, and their armaments.

[LadyTevar]

I will simply state that Darkstar's calculations are based on (at best) wishful thinking and (mostly) his own desire to be right. None of his calculations come close to anything Canon, and he has been known to twist canon into knots trying to justify his theories. You would be far better off searching for Darth Wong's bbs, stardestroyer (dot) net to get the true stats.

The rest... *sigh*
I have read damn near all of the Kzin-Human War novels. This will not work. They will not follow a female. You cannot even claim they won't know you're female, because their sense of smell is so good they could tell a human female was pregnant before she even knew it.

If you must use the Kzin, then make it a fully Kzin ship. Play a Named male, scream & leap like a warrior. Otherwise, go cower in the trees like a female.

[Charon]

Character write-ups are done.

[Hadrianvs]

To say I don't trust Darkstar's math is an understatement. That he doesn't show any of his calculations or the assumptions he made while making them makes me even less inclined to trust the results.

Darkstar?

I can't find volume numbers anywhere else, aside from random off-handed quotes. That site's claims to using ray tracing of 3D models is the closest thing to an actual stated methodology for volume calculations I've seen anywhere. Now for length, Ex Astris Scientia does have specific methodologies, even for resolving inconsistencies in canon. And at the very least the lengths of the Galaxy, Sovereign, Valdore, Vorcha, and D'Deridex match between those two sites.

In the absence of better sources, or evidence that the volumetrics page should be ignored out of hand, I'll make do with what I can. Volume is a better indicator of relative size than length is. Different shapes give radically different sizes for the same length, as wonderfully illustrated by this image.

Now, on to the meat your character sounds workable, which is a big hurdle. As someone who was given a whole swack of Known Space books by a family friend, alien female in command of a Kzinti warship set off just about every single alarm bell but your idea does seem workable which is not an insubstantial achievement.

Thanks, it took a lot of work to make it plausible.

To nitpick, you're also carrying more weapons than a Sovereign and that arsenal includes an omnidirectional missile system. While ruling on the missile system is Havoc's business, do you mind elaborating on it( specifically on its drawbacks compared to photon torpedoes) for the rest of us?

It is implied in the description that at closer range the missiles are easier to shoot down. The per missile yield is also lower than photon torpedoes.

1. 4 cannons, 12 beams, and 12 torps? I tried, I really did. I mean I put numbers up there and everything. But you have a ship barely larger than a Vor'cha (if even that), and you have packed on it more firepower than a Sovereign. Moreover, you've dramatically increased the firepower beyond the raw numbers because you have omnidirectional launch tubes, which essentially doubles your missile firepower (Most ships have equal numbers fore and aft, with any odd amounts generally placed fore). So basically you've got about as much forward (And really, that's constant forward, regardless of manuevering) torpedoes as an Akira, with as many beams as a Galaxy, plus four disruptor cannons.

It's four times the size of a Vorcha and twice as large as a Sovereign. If the numbers I have on hand are correct, I'll grant. Cynical Cat doesn't seem to trust them.

2. Missile Defense Batteries. I actually kind of like these. Heck, there's mention of torpedo defense batteries that I've found throughout Memory Alpha, though it's never been shown on screen. However, combined with everything else? It's a bit much. I mean, missile defense and area denial of smaller ships? Hey, cool, good plan, it's not been done yet.

If by "smaller ships" you mean fighters. I would expect that even a frigate would be no more than annoyed by it.

3. The downside of the omnidirectional missile array is not really much of a downside. Missiles are long-range weapons as is, and with the sheer amount of firepower your ship is able to put out, especially against smaller targets thanks to your beams and AAA, virtually nothing will be able to close to less than medium range unless you allow it to, save perhaps a Borg Cube.

Bottom line, you have two more weapons systems than a baseline Sovereign, which was already at the top of the heap. You do this while being smaller, somehow, and being able to always keep missiles on target regardless of your facing. Remember what I said above? About picking a role? You've not done that. Instead, you're trying to fill four roles at once (Beam boat, Blaster Boat, Missile Boat, and Area Defense). It's not going to work. Pick one. Heck you might be able to get away with two. But three, to say nothing of four? You're asking a lot.

Usually in RPGs I play either a mage-type or a jack-of-all trades. I don't like Star Trek's equivalent of a mage (science ship), so I went with jack. Now if I'm not a jack-of-all-trades but rather master-of-all-trades, then there is a problem. I'm open to suggestions to cut my ship down as necessary.

As an addendum, I'm not fond of the arc values or missile firepower numbers. I know some people *eyes a certain marine* have put some number values on some things, but by and large this game isn't about hardcore number crunching. I'm not going to calculate out the arcs of my phasers and/or cannons/tubes/whatever to figure out where my maximum firepower is (like the 30 degrees of overlap on your arrays on the 12, 7, and 4 o'clock lines that you've set up) or how that lines up with other weapon systems per se. The missiles, I just need to know how effective they are compared to a Photon Torpedo, not megaton values, because again, we're not playing junior scientist here, however qualified some of us may be to do so.

It's fluff, I like fluff. I didn't even know that I had 30 degrees of overlap anywhere. I was mostly figuring I can shoot anything with 3 phasers unless it's direcly above or below, in which case I simply rotate the ship. I can, however, put the fluff to useful purposes, such as answering your question of how missiles compare to torpedoes.

The photon torpedo is 64 MT, a quantumn torpedo is variously cited as 3 or 4 photons. Each standard missile packs 66% of a photorp's firepower, and each scatterpack has 56% of a photorp's firepower. Yields can come down if necessary, though due to ammo problems I'm not going to be throwing full missile spreads outside emergencies.

An Akira firing photorps has a forward volley of at 7 or 8 photorps. I'm pretty sure Star Trek torpedo launchers have multi-shot capability, with canon incidents of 4 torpedoes being fired per tube. Actual forward maximum volley strength for an Akira would be between 14 and 32 photorps. My maximum volley is 14.6 photorps.

By the way, your volleys consist of up to 144 warheads, with the average volley being about 84. That's....a lot. How that factors in to things I don't know, but it is a lot. I wish you luck in keeping yourself armed, especially since I doubt anyone makes those specialty missiles anymore.

Only half the racks are loaded with scatterpacks, maximum volley is 24 missiles with 84 warheads.

I am certain that without access to a munitions factory my scatterpacks are a finite resource. And even with access to a munitions factory it would be dicey because they are an exclusively Kzin design, so the factory would need retooling to make the things.

The standard missile shouldn't be that hard to replace, as they are no more technically complex than photon torpedo. Of course, my ship does not have manufacturing facilities, and the ships in our fleet that do have them will be using them for their own needs.

I was also thinking of the Starfleet Universe wherein Starfleet has a few missile ships, so I could maybe pick up reloads if we ran into a supply depot. Since we're not playing in the SFU it's up to Havoc whether that is the case or not.

[Dark Silver]

-shifts eyes-

I hate to bring up this site...because he DOES like to make up numbers on things to "fill in details" (he does the site as a in Universe access hub for the Daystorm Institute Tech Library), and when he HAS Canon information, he marks it and footnotes where he got the information from

Sooooo...yeaaahh..

http://www.ditl.org I'd use that for ship sizes and mass, more than Darkstar's website (he's been known to twist his numbers to better suit his view of what Trek is). Not that DITL doesn't do it also at times...but at least they footnote where they have the canon info and where to find it for verification.

[General Havoc]

And now for a word from the GM:

This is a reaction to Hadri's suggested ship, but I strongly recommend that everyone read it over, as it reflects my mentality for making this game work.

Hadri, I'm having some difficulties with this ship that mirror most of the comments made above. Specifically, I'm concerned about the lack of "focus" within this ship. While there's certainly nothing that says that your ship has to "focus" in anything, if it is a general dealer of destruction and death across all ranges and against all targets, then it cannot be as effective as ships that are not. It's that simple.

Megatons of ordinance and terrawatts of beam power are really just numbers, and I care little for them in this context, as I care little for where they are derived. Star Trek's canon is too fragmented, operates on too many scales, to accurately derive what the actual fire output of a Type 12 Phaser or Quantum Torpedo is. They can't even decide what Warp 10 represents. As such, we operate under a certain "range" of figures that are relative, not to raw terms like Megaton, but to one another. A Quantum Torpedo does not do 581 Megatons of damage (or any other precise yield), but does instead some 1.5-3 times more damage than a photon torpedo. As we know what the approximate effect of a photon torpedo is, we can thus derive the approximate effect of a quantum torpedo and every other thing, within a certain reason.

As such, I have to evaluate your ship not in relation to some reference material on a wiki or website or technical manual, but in relation to what I believe it will be able to do as compared to what other player ships will be able to do. And by that standard, given the enormous amount of firepower on display, energy and missile, given the omnidirectional nature of it, and the apparent capacity of this ship to project more raw fire than nearly anything else in flight... I can't accept this as it stands.

Obviously, your character is unfinished, and needs a viable weakness attached to it among other things, but even were that not the case, there is simply too much unilateral firepower here, bereft of any real weaknesses. Yes, your missiles are not terribly useful at close range. They share that attribute with any torpedo system however, and have the advantage of being both swarm-detonated at need, and fired omnidirectionally. They can be deployed against packs of small craft or against massive battleships. With (I believe) lighter warheads than torpedoes, they do not risk individually damaging your own ship at danger-close ranges, or at least not to the extent a single quantum torpedo would. And should the enemy reach a close range wherein your missiles are not useful, you have sixteen close range energy weapons to combat them with.

This will simply not do, I'm afraid. I would suggest changes to make, but first I simply need to know what your actual "focus" for this ship is. Is it a torpedo boat? Is it an escort cruiser? Does it fight with efficiency against light ships or heavy ones? Is it designed to provide fleet-scale "coverage", space-denial against missiles and small craft? Is it intended to fight alone? This is not a question you should answer as a matter of "where will I do the most DPS?" Your ship is a creation of a space-faring culture I know nothing whatsoever about. It should reflect this culture's values and prejudices. Knowing it, I should come to know the Kzinti.

Combat is an element of this game, but the game is not about the combat. If I wished to, I could throw a dozen cubes at you all in every star system you visit. Fighting those cubes would be an exercise in GM sadism and futility, and bore everyone. The purpose of combat in this game is to engage in scenes of drama and badassery, and to provide measured challenges to the players which they must overcome in pursuance of their goals, not to tally DPS quantities or outdamage your fellows.. No matter what ships you fly or how many weapons you encrust them with, you cannot fight the Borg Armada directly and win. This is not the same thing as saying that you cannot win at all. But you will not do so by simply piling firepower upon firepower.

It would certainly make my life easier if I required everyone to play stock ships of a half dozen known classes, or forced everyone to use one of the three best known races. I have chosen not to do that, because I do not care in the end how many terrawatts of power a Breen fusion cannon can project relative to a Cardassian compression coil, and I like to give players their heads. However if you wish to bring this ship into the game, I must have the following things:

1: I need an idea of what this ship is intended to do, originally if possible, in-game if necessary. Jack of all trades? Line battlecruiser? Point Defence escort cruiser? Something I've not thought of?

2: The firepower must be either scaled back to relative levels of the rest of the fleet, or the guns and missiles you are currently sporting must be defined as having that level of firepower. I do not mind if you have six phaser cannons or six hundred mass drivers each with 1% the power of a phaser cannon, so long as balance is more or less accomplished. To that end, try to use relative comparisons. I don't need to know what a missile can do in terms of megatons. I need to know what it can do in terms of photon torpedos and other Star Trek baselines. Technical schemata will only serve as guidelines here.

3: The ship MUST have a reasonable weakness, and divisions in the crew are not it. You can either make the weakness something that takes the edge off of the ship's advantages, or accentuates their weak sides. An exhaustive list would be impossible, but look on the other ships in the game for inspiration if you can't think of anything.

Do these things, and we can make this work.

[General Havoc]

Another word from the GM

I wish to make this clearer for all players, in case it has not previously been made clear.

I do not care what the technical manuals say about a given system, ship, or weapon. I do not care what the Daystrom Institute library says about these things. I do not care what arcane calculations have been made to determine these specifications. I will never care about these things.

Oh technical data is useful, of course. It can serve to give a sense of scale. It can give you ideas for clever applications that you otherwise might not be able to see. It allows you to get some rough idea for what is and is not reasonable, or where to place a baseline for your systems. It is not, however, going to be of any use as a stick to beat the GM with. As far as what your ships can physically do, take, inflict, and survive, I am relying on my intuition, and my stated explanations for how shit works in this game. Not on technical data.

I do not care what the relative sizes and masses of Sovereign and Galaxy class ships are, for instance (I mean I do care, but for stylistic purposes, not gameplay ones), nor do I care which one is properly classified as Battleship, battlecruiser, heavy cruiser, or whatnot, and by whom. In this game, a Sovereign, like a Vorcha or Valdore, is a Battlecruiser, a heavy warship packed with guns designed to inflict terrible devastation on an enemy and reduce him to non-existence. A Galaxy, however, like a D'Deridex, is a Heavy Cruiser, a larger, slower, more imposing ship, designed to be slow, heavy, and nigh-indestructible. Heavy Cruisers have no pretensions of agility, no expectations of "evasive maneuvers". They take lickings, and keep on ticking. Their weapons are usually not as potent as a Battlecruiser's, but their mass and durability are moreso, especially from correct firing angles (the front).

Now, the above probably is contradicted by many pieces of technical data. There are no doubt explanations of all of the ships I mentioned that will cite them behaving in ways, or capable of behaving in ways entirely alien to my conception of how they work. This information is of no interest to me. I have explained how these ships work in this game to everyone who has either a Heavy Cruiser or a Battlecruiser, both in person and in general.

I am prepared to accept requests for changes to these archetypes based on alterations or changes to the stock ships. I am prepared to do so for many reasons, because of plot, or player wish, or common sense, or simple rule of cool. I will not, however, do so because some technical manual told me I had to.

[Hadrianvs]

Every scaling I've seen hasn't suggested a discrepancy of that amount, although the Galaxy's reactor is larger. The reactor designs are also quite different during an era of significant technological advance and the amount of fuel going through either at any given moment is going to be quite small do to the whole M/AM thing. That's before we touch on the safety issues with the Galaxy's warp core certainly meriting a radical redesign. So I'm not convinced that the Galaxy has a greater power output than the Sovereign.

Summary of Galaxy vs Sovereign warp cores provided by Illithi Dragon in the ninth post of this thread. More detail here. Though I misremembered that the Galaxy's core is 1.5-2 times bigger, not 2.5 like with total ship volume.

The Galaxy also invests truly massive amounts of mass in living quarters and civilian use areas. The Excelsior featured junior crew in bunkbeds. The Galaxy has hotel suite sized personal quarters. It's well armed and shielded, but its not a warship by any stretch of the imagination. If the Sovereign is following in the footsteps of the Excelsior then its following in the footsteps of being the premier heavy cruiser/fast battleship of a Starfleet that has had a massive increase in its military role in the years following the design and construction of the first Galaxy class vessels (the reemergence of the Romulans, the Borg, the Dominion, and so on). It's mentioned in DS9 that the Defiant is breaking new ground by being a pure warship and that ship predates the Sovereign.

The Excelsior design is nearly a century old at the time the Sovereign entered service. We've also seen the interior of a Sovereign and it is no less luxurious than the Galaxy. And yes the Sovereign was to be the premier heavy cruiser of the fleet, the workhorse. That doesn't mean the Galaxy is not still the bruiser. It not only has a larger warp core but also bigger phasers and torpedo launchers.

Though I suppose this argument is irrelevant. For the purposes of this game we are treating the Sovereign as a line ship and the Galaxy as roughly equivalent to an indiaman: bigger but not badder. This is perfectly fine and I'm not suggesting it be changed. I was merely pointing out a curiosity werein Star Trek canon evidence seems to contradict the general impression that Sovereign > Galaxy.


EDIT - I need to not take multiple hours writing out my posts. The word from the GM wasn't there when I started.

[Hadrianvs]

4. You have to narrow down your ship's role from "Awesome". If you want missile spam, you're going to have to cut down on the beams, and probably your Shields of Awesome as well. If you want a proper beam boat, you'll have to cut down on the number of torp tubes you have, and probably your entire design will change.

What shields of Awesome? Didn't I say that the Kzin Battlecruiser can't shield-tank like a Sovereign? ... I guess I forgot, oops.

I will simply state that Darkstar's calculations are based on (at best) wishful thinking and (mostly) his own desire to be right. None of his calculations come close to anything Canon, and he has been known to twist canon into knots trying to justify his theories. You would be far better off searching for Darth Wong's bbs, stardestroyer (dot) net to get the true stats.

Since everyone is pretty strongly against that website I'll ignore it from now on. I thought at least the Trek side of it would be accurate in some points, even if the Wars part isn't.

The rest... *sigh*
I have read damn near all of the Kzin-Human War novels. This will not work. They will not follow a female. You cannot even claim they won't know you're female, because their sense of smell is so good they could tell a human female was pregnant before she even knew it.

If you must use the Kzin, then make it a fully Kzin ship. Play a Named male, scream & leap like a warrior. Otherwise, go cower in the trees like a female.

Trek Kzin are not quite like Known Space Kzin. They don't do scream and leap, their navy is noted for its professionalism, they and they are longtime allies of the Federation. They have to be used to the idea that at least other species's females aren't totally worthless. Also a significant portion of the Kzinti did object violently to the change of command. All out warfare between the crews of the Indefatigable and Blackheart Ravager was prevented only by a thin margin.

[rhoenix]

What shields of Awesome? Didn't I say that the Kzin Battlecruiser can't shield-tank like a Sovereign? ... I guess I forgot, oops.

This is one of the reasons I wanted some concrete details on this ship - however, Havoc covered all of the points I would cover about your ship excellently, so I won't parrot him.

Trek Kzin are not quite like Known Space Kzin. They don't do scream and leap, their navy is noted for its professionalism, they and they are longtime allies of the Federation. They have to be used to the idea that at least other species's females aren't totally worthless. Also a significant portion of the Kzinti did object violently to the change of command. All out warfare between the crews of the Indefatigable and Blackheart Ravager was prevented only by a thin margin.

The Kzinti were a prejudiced, war-like species who often spoke of pride and honor. Males had no respect for males of herbivorous species, such as Vulcans, or of females of any species. This lack of respect stemmed from the fact that on their homeworld, Kzinti females were simply "dumb animals".

That doesn't sound all that different to me. Do you have a different source?

You have a warship crewed by a staff that's in a constant state of near-mutiny, even during conflict. That is by definition an unreliable ally, which can be far worse than a determined enemy.

So in addition to whatever physical weakness your ship may sport, we will not be able to count on the crew of your ship in a pinch. Are you sure that's what you want to play in this sort of scenario?

[Hadrianvs]

1: I need an idea of what this ship is intended to do, originally if possible, in-game if necessary. Jack of all trades? Line battlecruiser? Point Defence escort cruiser? Something I've not thought of?

As I mentioned earlier, I tend to favour jacks-of-all-trades. However for this I was going for mostly a medium range damage dealer. It's not supposed to tank well, it should do less than optimally at close range and extremely poorly at point-blank. The AMD is a long-range defense weapon, since it targets missiles and fighters,not capital ships getting up in its face.

You mentioned species mindset? The (Trek*) Kzin area predator species so they tend to favour killing the target as fast as possible so as to minimize its chances of fighting back. In nature they did this by sneaking up and pouncing on prey, but as they evolved intelligence and higher technology they learned to do it via superior firepower. Hence the focus on the big alpha strike.

*Known Space Kzin never got past "scream and leap" until Humanity slaughtered them.

2: The firepower must be either scaled back to relative levels of the rest of the fleet, or the guns and missiles you are currently sporting must be defined as having that level of firepower. I do not mind if you have six phaser cannons or six hundred mass drivers each with 1% the power of a phaser cannon, so long as balance is more or less accomplished. To that end, try to use relative comparisons. I don't need to know what a missile can do in terms of megatons. I need to know what it can do in terms of photon torpedos and other Star Trek baselines. Technical schemata will only serve as guidelines here.

I did use relative comparisons in an earlier post. I'm sorry I got carried away with the megatonnage. I knew the yield of the photon torpedo (technically I knew that it reacts 3kg of anti-matter), used it as a basis for the missile system, and got carried away with it.

Anyway, "Each standard missile packs 66% of a photorp's firepower, and each scatterpack has 56% of a photorp's firepower. Yields can come down if necessary, though due to ammo problems I'm not going to be throwing full missile spreads outside emergencies.

An Akira firing photorps has a forward volley of at 7 or 8 photorps. I'm pretty sure Star Trek torpedo launchers have multi-shot capability, with canon incidents of 4 torpedoes being fired per tube. Actual forward maximum volley strength for an Akira would be between 14 and 32 photorps. My maximum volley is 14.6 photorps."

For the rest of the firepower, as far as I can tell the Sovereign is the ship with the most weapons bays at 26, though Immortal is modded to have 25. The current Exultant is 30 weapons bays. So it needs to come down, I can do that. To be perfectly honest I was originally going to propose a ship with 24 or 26 weapon bays, but then I thought "what the heck" and just went with the design as shown in SFCII:OP minus the two gatling phasers. I was honestly surprised when you said "looks good", maybe you weren't paying attention, maybe I miscommunicated.

The original version sacrificed the missiles in the name of sanity, but I like missiles. I don't care if that ammo is going to be hard to come by, or that I may be gimped if my magazines run out and there's no reloads to be found. Unless the other players think that I will become a millstone around their necks, in which case I will revise design, the missiles stay.

My revised proposal:

Kzin Battlecruiser Mk2
Smaller than Mk1

3 Disruptors
9 Phasers
12 Missile Racks
2 AMD
=26 hardpoints

Cannot shield or armour tank.

Magazines full (recently reloaded).

3: The ship MUST have a reasonable weakness, and divisions in the crew are not it. You can either make the weakness something that takes the edge off of the ship's advantages, or accentuates their weak sides. An exhaustive list would be impossible, but look on the other ships in the game for inspiration if you can't think of anything.

I know, "Hadri Can't Think of Anything - An inability by the author to come up with some sort of structural weakness prevents the ship design from being finished, and annoys its crew becasue they're going to be late for shore leave."

It was right there in the character/ship post. I understand I need a structural weakness. The problem is I keep drawing a blank. The only thing I could think of was malfunctioning AMD that "only fires when it damn well feels like it" which brings up the question of why even bother putting AMD on the ship at all. I'll rack my brains again and see if I can come up with something, but suggestions would also be welcome.

[rhoenix]

Alright. I've the time, so here's an idea.

You like the idea of a medium-range torpedo boat. Its strengths are not tanking (shields/armor) or agility (speed/maneuverability), but rather pure offense, with the intent of successful alpha-strikes. Okay.

Let's start with the Akira-class as a template for your Kzinti Battlecruiser.

Type: Akira-class (Heavy Cruiser)
Crew: 500 officers and crew; 4,500 personnel evacuation limit
Dimensions: Length, 464.43 meters; beam, 316.67 meters; height, 87.43 meters
Mass: 3,055,000 metric tonnes.
Speed: Warp 9.8 for 12 hours.
Armaments: Six phasers; fifteen photon torpedo launchers.

Alright, with a little find/replace and tweaking:

Type: ____-class (Kzinti Heavy Cruiser)
Crew: 500 officers and crew; 4,500 personnel evacuation limit
Dimensions: Length, 465 meters; beam, 317 meters; height, 88 meters
Mass: 3,100,000 metric tonnes.
Speed: Warp 9.8 for 12 hours.
Armaments: Six phasers; fifteen photon torpedo launchers.

That works. I really don't see a reason to get more technical or verbose than that, unless it's somehow necessary for the ship's weakness or special additional systems.

[Hotfoot]

Here's a good checklist:

1. What is your ship's ideal range?
2. How easy is your ship to hit at its ideal combat range?
3. How easy is your ship to destroy at its ideal range?
4. Is your ship likely to get the attention of the enemy?
5. What is your ship good at?
6. What is your ship NOT good at (note: not a weakness)?

[Hadrianvs]

1. What is your ship's ideal range?

Medium range, but it can fend for itself at long range and will not be a total pushover at short range, but it's at medium range that most of its weapons systems are effective.

2. How easy is your ship to hit at its ideal combat range?

Depends on what the enemy is firing. Harder with cannons and missiles, easier with beams.

3. How easy is your ship to destroy at its ideal range?

Same as above.

4. Is your ship likely to get the attention of the enemy?

If I hit them with an alpha strike, yes. Otherwise there are ships with more beams, more size, and bigger power signatures.

5. What is your ship good at?

Alpha strikes, medium and long range combat, combat sensors (to guide the missiles).

6. What is your ship NOT good at (note: not a weakness)?

It can't handle point blank range, missiles marginal at short range, only rudimentary science facilities, small endurance while on extended campaign.

[Hadrianvs]

So I was again reading through everyone's character sheets and something jumped out at me. Eiofe Kirk is described as having graduated from Starfleet in 2370, but at the same time she is "young and unsure of herself". Even if she was some sort of prodigy who enrolled at the age of 12 and graduated at 15 she would be a 43 year old woman by now.

I really like the character concept of a young officer thrust into a command position because everyone higher up the chain was killed or incapacitated. But I don't think it works with someone who is already in their 40s. That is not young in a human by any measure, at least not until the population starts counting their life spans in centuries. The oldest character I've seen in Star Trek who was depicted as youthful in attitude and demeanor was William Riker at 29 years of age.

[rhoenix]

So I was again reading through everyone's character sheets and something jumped out at me. Eiofe Kirk is described as having graduated from Starfleet in 2370, but at the same time she is "young and unsure of herself". Even if she was some sort of prodigy who enrolled at the age of 12 and graduated at 15 she would be a 43 year old woman by now.

I really like the character concept of a young officer thrust into a command position because everyone higher up the chain was killed or incapacitated. But I don't think it works with someone who is already in their 40s. That is not young in a human by any measure, at least not until the population starts counting their life spans in centuries. The oldest character I've seen in Star Trek who was depicted as youthful in attitude and demeanor was William Riker at 29 years of age.

Goodness, you're absolutely right. She'll have to fix a single number on her sheet to get the fluff and hard figures worked out properly.

So, about yours?

[Hadrianvs]

Goodness, you're absolutely right. She'll have to fix a single number on her sheet to get the fluff and hard figures worked out properly.

I was trying to be polite, sarcasm is uncalled for. If I am not allowed to comment on other people's characters then just say so and I will refrain from doing so again.

[rhoenix]

If I am not allowed to comment on other people's characters then just say so and I will refrain from doing so again.

I shall be as clear as I can without sounding like an asshole about this.

There is nothing whatsoever that prevents you from commenting on other players' ships or characters. In fact, others' comments have helped all of us round out our characters' backgrounds rather well.

However, I found it disingenuous of you to do so about the fluff of another player while the fluff and content of yours is unfinished.

Did you have any other questions or clarifications regarding your potential ship and crew?

[Cynical Cat]

I knew the yield of the photon torpedo (technically I knew that it reacts 3kg of anti-matter), used it as a basis for the missile system, and got carried away with it.

The problem with this is that figure comes from a noncanon source, albeit a respectable noncanon source (got to love the mess that is Trek's noncanon sources). On screen, we've seen all sorts of different yields.

And it was, to nitpick, 1.5 kg of antimatter with 1.5kg of matter for 3kg of mass total. The reaction is, of course, somewhat inefficient and total conversion doesn't occur, but lets not beat that dog to death.

As for weaknesses, think of something lost in combat. Maybe your nav deflector is a jury rigged half repaired mess, limiting your maximum warp speed. Maybe you have damage to maneuvering thrusters. Maybe the superstructure and shield generators on one side have been shredded and you're much more susceptible to damage in that area. Maybe internal sensors are damaged and several bulkheads are sealed shut against vacuum, making it harder to do damage control and detect bording. There's no shortage of wounds you can inflict on your ship.

[Dark Silver]

I only posted the link to DITL, Havoc, because Hadri wanted to use mass numbers, and I find DITL is a bit more realistic and believable in aspects than what the website she was using it.

I was not posting the site to say "this is how the ships should work", just as a general help for basic info that might not have been on memory-alpha or memory-beta.

If i overstepped, my apologies.