Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through June 19, 2003	25		06/19 01:54pm

Actually, I did that...

Andromedan Apocolypse Mauler

30 five point batteries. Boom.

By Xander Fulton (Dderidex) on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 02:26 pm: Edit

Well, to more accurately emulate the HMS Dreadnought, don't you think you should remove ALL the phaser-1s?

After all, the point of the ship was not to really increase the firepower, per se, but to focus the available firepower all into one specific type of battery. Made targetting and engagement doctrine much more efficient.

Also, replacing phasers with photons is just silly, IMHO.

Simply remove all the phaser-1s off the hull, keeping the ph-3s of the refits, replace drone racks with ph-3s, and add another battery of 4 photons on the other side of the saucer (I can never remember where TOS photons were - top of the saucer, or under it?).

I'd probably add another photon tube on either side of the original 4, too, bringing it up to 2 batteries of 6 - one battery on the upper saucer, and one on the lower (this would just be in the explanation text, the SSD would probably just show one large bank).

Further, you should probably note that standard doctrine would have been to fire 6 photons a turn, every turn - rather than firing all 12 at once every other turn.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 03:18 pm: Edit

Xander:

True...but making the changes to only the saucer made it easy to describe...and then having to explain not replacing the 2ndary hull phasers seemed...controversial...

Also, by limiting it to "only" 10 photons it left 25 warp power points from the engines (ignoring the AWR for the moment) leaves the ship able to power the photons and move at 16 to 17 hexes per turn (not counting impulse)...not fast but pretty good...if ore speed needed, simply don't power 1 or 2 tubes.

By adding 2 more Photons you increase the warp energy needs...and 4 more points of warp energy would drop the speed even more...if you fall below 12 hexes per turn the SSFDN would not have the speed to keep up with the force...or take advantage of favorable tactical opportunities.

Ideally it should be able to acheive the normal operating speed for a Fed task force...which would normally put the speed at 24 hexes per turn...and this ship would be 7 hexes per turn slower than that.

By David Lang (Dlang) on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 04:49 pm: Edit

Xander, that's why I suggested changeing the P-1 that aren't converted to heavy weapons to P-G

the HMS Dreadnought had heavy weapons for use against other large ships and very small weapons for use against small vessles

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 04:53 pm: Edit

Well if you are considering a Cruiser with 6-8 Photons, why don't you remove the Labs entirely, and put in AWR.

Lets face it, it's made for bombing stuff and needs the power. Not some mamby-pamby research task.

If need be, it can use 2 (?) control spaces as labs.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 04:58 pm: Edit

DavidL,

The problem with translating to SFB is that everything is effective against everything. the "small calibur" P-G's will tear a big ship up as well as a small ship.

A true small calibur weapon wouls be something like an E-rack. Or a plasma-K rack if SVC lifts the ban on such a thing.

Scott,

1 control space is all that can function as a lab.

Following the example of the DD, I'd suggest keeping 4 labs and convert 4. Or just keep 2 considering the mission.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Friday, June 20, 2003 - 11:55 pm: Edit

(R2.RC18) BOMBARDMENT DREADNOUGHT (DNB): The idea for a Bombardment ship (like the Fire Support Cruiser) is not new to the Federation. Even during the early warp years there were proponents for a ship which was designed specifically for long range photon suppression fire. One of the longest lived (and perhaps most considered) designs was that of the Bombardment Dreadnought. Opponents of a cruiser based Bombardment ship (the most common proposal) noted that cruiser hulls were too important to restrict to a specialized variant.

The Bombardment DN was proposed as a counter point to that argument. Afterall, Dreadnoughts never operated alone. If a DNB were to encounter an enemy in open space, it would use it's consorts as a screening force and slowly whittle away at the enemy from a distance with its side firing torpedoes.

Like other Bombardment variants, the DNB was never built. The reasons are not entirely clear, but one of the largest excuses was the fact that the Federation was not at war, and the expense of converting an existing (or building a DNB from scratch) was excessive. There are also reports that the ships hull (large as it was) may not have been capable of supporting the 10 torpedoes without requiring regular (expensive) hull maintenance.

The DNB must roll for shock (rating 18) anytime more than 5 Photon torpedoes are fired within 32 impulses. Add 1 for each torpedoe which was overloaded.

- Ship design by Robert Cole

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, June 21, 2003 - 10:45 pm: Edit

if the DN were refitted to have 16 photons...it could fire 4 tubes every half turn...(16 impulses) continous fire (with the equivalent heavy weapons suite of a Fed CA or DD) nonstop...

It would require 32 warp power for normal war heads or proximity warheads... a "normal" DN has 54 energy points (45points from the warp engines) it could "cruise" at 10 or 11 hexes perturn and still have 7 points (or so) for various house keeping needs (like life support)...The ability to shoot 8 photons per turn would be significant...and somebody made a comment recommending changing the labs (or most of them) to AWR could effectively almost double the operating speed of the ship.