Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through June 05, 2020	25		06/05 12:37pm

Jeff,

Per your comments about a C8S-based RTN hunter retaining the disruptors; you might prefer to keep the disruptors but I'm not convinced SVC and SPP will agree from an engineering standpoint. The special sensors usually replace either heavy weapons or some combination of heavy weapons and phasers. This suggests that there may be engineering reasons why replacing drone racks with heavy weapons is impossible or at least far more problematic. Yeah, retaining all six disruptors would be nice. It might not be technologically viable, however.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 11:01 am: Edit

Hey, can’t blame a guy for trying.

Under normal circumstances, I.e. carrier group with full carrier escorts, there is less need for heavy weapons, the fighters and assault shuttles are the main strike force.

But a single CVA/SCS trying to repair, rearm and relaunch the flight groups for a second strike? Direct fire weapons might be of more use Than drones.

Y.M.M.V.

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 11:52 am: Edit

Alan, that's why I suggested the idea of replacing the Drone Racks on the C8S with Special Sensors (second post in this thread); retaining the full six disruptors.

The reference I made in that post to the Stasis Field Generator was as a way of trying to get ahead of an expected concern about powering the Special Sensors.

(And I did NOT expect the SFG comment to take on quite the life that it did, but it made for a good bit of discussion in its own right. )

TBH, the biggest potential problem with using the fighters and gunboats is their dependence on drones; a weapon type that I've always had trouble using effectively against the Andromedans. Perhaps using G1Bs?

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 12:25 pm: Edit

"security station and Klingon Marines add nothing to the mission. "

YEAH, lets just replave ALL Klingon Security stations with something useful... (yes, sarcasm)

By the way, if you are going to rip out disruptors, you would choose the center engine ones LAST. Because IIRC they have better arcs than the others...

I suspect you'd lose the wing phasers and keep the disruptors. Disr are better than phasers vs PA panels

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 12:37 pm: Edit

Mike,

I agree in principle but there may be practical problems. CAN you replace the wing phasers with special sensors? Or are there engineering problems with that approach? Special sensors usually replace either heavy weapons or some combination of heavy weapons and phasers on the base hull. That suggests that for whatever reason, a pure "replace phasers" approach may not work, though only SVC could say for sure.

There's a similar issue with replacing disruptors on the left and right engines rather than the center engine. Replacing one disruptor with a special sensor on each of the left and right warp engines does give better disruptor arcs. But now you're co-mounting a disruptor and a special sensor on an engine nacelle, requiring them to be very close together. Does that extreme proximity between a heavy weapon and a special sensor create some sort of problem? Again, only SVC could make that call.

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 12:50 pm: Edit

The D6P didn't put Special Sensors on the engines....
Seems to me, putting them on the front of the hull (replacing the wing phasers), makes more sense, considering the wiring that has to be done...

Sensors are there to find the RTN, after that, unlikely they will be of great use....

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 12:53 pm: Edit

Mike, I wasn’t trying to replace the security stations or reduce the Marne contingent. Just pointing out the neither helps in the RTN hunting mission. Both are unique on Klingon ships.

Just looking for something different on Klingon ships to be a difference compared to other empires. Just adding two special sensors to every empires CVA or SCS is boring.

At least the Kzinti SSCS has 4 special sensors.

Hey, perhaps one empire only mounted one SS on it’s RTN Hunter? Either through Limited production or negligence at the ship yard... (now where in the alpha octant did problems in ship yard production Happen!??)

Just say ‘in.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 01:00 pm: Edit

Not sure why you need something different for each empire. Some empires are better suited to having unique wrinkles than others are.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 01:53 pm: Edit

Well, yes.

I know you are right.

It is that variation that makes things interesting.

My opinion is 10 or 12 pages of RTN hunters where the ONLY difference all or most of them share is two special sensors boxes. Ho hum.

Is that a trip worth making?

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 04:52 pm: Edit

Jeff,

Yes it is a trip worth making. If we want to discuss thw class specks/guidelines we should move the conversation to that topic. Otherwise information will get lost.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 05:39 pm: Edit

On the Klingon ship I don't think they would mount special sensors on the center warp engine. All the Klingon ship from D6S to the UD7 have the special sensors on the rear hull. Remove one phaser 1 and phase 3 from each side. That retains the 2 FX disrupters with the 4 FA disrupters.