Our Ship - Beam Weapons

[Deepcrush]

Are you trying to pretend you didn't understand me? It's an end-around to try and avoid the downside that had already been set.

I preposed a vote on the matter, thats all. Teaos set it but there is another acount to consider. Are you saying that Teaos can't edit or update his design thoughts?

We're not talking about intentional flaws; we're talking about a system of checks and balances to make this a thought-out and critically-reasoned process rather than a fanboy jerk-fest.

How is it a jerk-fest, its a system that has been seen to work and has been showed in progression. The check and balance is that the lance can't hit anything up close and most likely sucks at hitting anything small even if its in the target arc. A weapon that could end up useless half the time if not used properly.

PS - the pulse cannon which you said didn't have enough range of motion would have better ones than the lance. That would only be magnified by the range at which it would be expected to fire. As I said, I wouldn't nay-say having ONE, assuming part of the role of the ship is anti-installation; but to say we could have one without serious effects on other aspects of the ship design is crazy.

If this is an end-around for you I'd hate to see what counts as effort on your part. Anytime a system is where enemy fire can reach it counts as a downside.

Are you trying to pretend you didn't understand me? It's an end-around to try and avoid the downside that had already been set.

Also, why does it have to have a downside? Are we trying to make something that isn't the best we can make it? Should we make something with an intentional flaw just for the sake of saying that we didn't make the ship as strong as we could have?

We're not talking about intentional flaws; we're talking about a system of checks and balances to make this a thought-out and critically-reasoned process rather than a fanboy jerk-fest.

PS - the pulse cannon which you said didn't have enough range of motion would have better ones than the lance. That would only be magnified by the range at which it would be expected to fire. As I said, I wouldn't nay-say having ONE, assuming part of the role of the ship is anti-installation; but to say we could have one without serious effects on other aspects of the ship design is crazy.

Better range of motion but very poor reaching range. Why would you build a ship that is slow to move and turn then give it a weapon that requires you to move and turn? Think about it for a sec, you'll see it.

[Deepcrush]

So, I guess we're assuming that the phaser lance has more range than a standard phaser, and disregarding that the ship turns like a Zeppelin. It would only be useful against near-stationary targets.

Where in AGT did they use it at any greater range than a standard phaser? The FX don't seem to indicate either way.

;;The more powerful a focused beam, the farther said beam can reach. I'm not disregarding anything, if fact i'm planning on it. The ship is meant to attack without mercy. The lance gives it a chance to knock out large targets that may be a threat to it leaving only small ships that would need to be in the dozens to match it.

I don't think the uber-slow phaser lance is going to hit much of anything though; the QT's have a better chance, and can perform heavy bombardment.

Did just fine against the Negh'vars and unlike QTs the lances isn't going to run out of ammo as chakat already said.

[Tsukiyumi]

Did fine when mounted on a considerably more manuverable ship. Teaos was also specific that our massive armor would make this thing super-slow. I say we go for more arcs; otherwise, smaller ships will simply get out of the firing arcs, and use thrusters to maintain position while slowly beating down the shields.

The concept of this was that we can't just have the best of everything with no drawbacks; it doesn't work like that in reality, and there's no reason it would work here, either. I already reiterated the fact that one lance will take 70,000 out of 200,000 available Terawatts. I agree that we could power it down, and re-route, but if there's nowhere to route to, it's moot.

[Deepcrush]

Did fine when mounted on a considerably more manuverable ship. Teaos was also specific that our massive armor would make this thing super-slow. I say we go for more arcs; otherwise, smaller ships will simply get out of the firing arcs, and use thrusters to maintain position while slowly beating down the shields.

So I take it your thought is to have a battleship with only one phase? You're not putting much thought to this are you? I'll say this again for those not paying attetion (God I feel like I'm teaching again)... The lance is only here for taking out large targets that would be able to withstand standard phasers and is in no way the only weapon on board. The fact that we will end up with between 10 and 15 type XII phasers means that if someone wants to sit still then they can die relaxed.

PS, the E-D was doing anything other then moving straight ahead when she was shooting yet, still did just fine.

The concept of this was that we can't just have the best of everything with no drawbacks; it doesn't work like that in reality, and there's no reason it would work here, either. I already reiterated the fact that one lance will take 70,000 out of 200,000 available Terawatts. I agree that we could power it down, and re-route, but if there's nowhere to route to, it's moot.

Again, you just pointed out a draw back so why are you saying there isn't any draw back? Are you tired or just spent to much time around Chakat? Even with the lose of 70k you are still left with 130k which means that even if you kept the lance charged you are still putting out more phaser fire then the Uprated Sov. That is unless you're saying the Sov has only one phaser as well and all that power comes from one array?

[Mikey]

I don't think we'd "lose" whatever power the lance takes, because there won't be too many times that we'd be in a position to use the lance and the "normal" phasers at the same time. If our ship's role will include anti-installation missions, then the lance is perfect. However, it's use IS limited; and we'd certainly have to pay for it, in terms of volume taken, etc.

[Teaos]

Ok for anyone who cares I voted for 200TW power run off the core. I think that since during battle the weapons are pretty much the only thing running that stability shouldn't be a problem. It also frees up the most internal volume.

The Lance will be mounted in the ship. In AGT the lance was on the out side since it was an addition and may not have fitted inside. Since our ship is being designed around the stuff we want in it the Lance would be placed inside. In universe this can be explained as Starfleet not wanting to place a new and expensive weapon in danger. Also since this is the first deployment of the weapon on a ship it will need more maintenance which is a lot easier with it inside the ship. Out of universe it is so the massively powerful gun has a good down side to it, a little bit of vulnerability is not a down side considering our massive shields and armour.

Now since it seems 200k TWs has won if anyone would like to design a weapons configuration I will start a new poll in a day or two with the different sets and we can vote on which one we like.

Now since our ship doesn't have a shape yet since I felt it better to decide what we want in the ship then build the hull around it rather than cram stuff into an existing hull we have to guess a little. We know the ship is Sovereign size with a general Federation feel to it (Smooth line, longer than it is wide, nacelles at back (but probably pulled forward and covered on at least one side by the ship)

So here's my configuration:

200,000 TerraWatts

1 x Phase Lance 70,000 Terra Watts

This will be mounted right down the main body of the ship with the barrel sitting close to the top of the saucer.

It is used for anti-station and anti-emplacement destruction, due to its size it is not really suited to attacking ship unless they are equally big and slow as the whole ship has to move to aim the gun and our ship is not very agile.

The presence of the big gun up front will discourage the enemy sending their battleships for a head on assault thus breaking up fleet lines.

5 x Rapid fire pulse fire canons (Turret mounted) 75,000 Terra Watts

These weapons are to pound away at the shielding and hulls of enemy ships who come in close to attack avoiding the Lance. Due to their poor aiming they are best suited for knocking out the shields of Frigates and Destroyers.

I would mount two of these weapons on the under side of the hull on opposite sides to provide cover for the under side of the ship and provide covering fire for our nacelles should enemy ships try to come at them from the bottom. The guns would be set so the firing arc is along the length of the ship offering maximum coverage.

The second set will be placed on the forward section of the saucer to knock out advancing ships. These guns would be placed so the arc is along the horizontal thus covering the front and sides on the ship.

The final one would be placed on the backside of the saucer to provide cover for the back of the ship, This would be placed so the arc is along the horizontal so as to attack ship attacking from behind.

Being mounted in turrets offers greater firing arc but at the cost of protection, they rely on the ships formidable shielding to protect them.

7 x Type XII Phaser arrays. 52,500 Terra Watts

One will be placed on either side of the back of the ship proving a full firing arc of both sides of the ship.

Two more will be on the under side one forward and one back to cover the under side.

Another two will be on the forward saucer on either side providing forward, side, and top firing cover,

The final one will be paced high on the back of the saucer covering the back of the ship.

1 x Type VIII 1,500 Terra Watts

Placed on the top of the saucer it cover the front and top of the saucer section.

[Tsukiyumi]

The concept of this was that we can't just have the best of everything with no drawbacks; it doesn't work like that in reality, and there's no reason it would work here, either. I already reiterated the fact that one lance will take 70,000 out of 200,000 available Terawatts. I agree that we could power it down, and re-route, but if there's nowhere to route to, it's moot.

Again, you just pointed out a draw back so why are you saying there isn't any draw back? Are you tired or just spent to much time around Chakat?

Please point out where I said there was NO drawback to having a massive power-draining uber-weapon that can only be used against slow moving targets LIKE A NEGH'VAR. Are you tired, or has your brain stopped interpreting text?

Even with the lose of 70k you are still left with 130k which means that even if you kept the lance charged you are still putting out more phaser fire then the Uprated Sov. That is unless you're saying the Sov has only one phaser as well and all that power comes from one array?

What the hell are you talking about? Just adding in imaginary arguments is called a "strawman", right? I never SAID THAT THE SOV HAS ONE PHASER ARRAY. Where the f*ck did you pull that from? (I really don't want to know: it's rhetorical, asshole)

130k would be more overall phaser firepower than the Sov, yes. I'm looking at whether the new ship will be a siege weapon or a powerful fleet augment. The lance would be great for the former, and would have some use during the latter, though less. A weapon that can only fire once per minute or so, no matter how powerful, is still less useful when facing 10-30 ships at once.

And, do we have any mechanism for number of Type X - XII arrays possible, or can I just say " Stick on UBER PHASORZ EVREWHERE!" and that counts as an option?

Just to clarify things.

[Teaos]

The phaser arrays do have equipment inside the ship but it is not of large enough size to worry about internal volume. The maiin issue is the power supply which we delt with (increased the size of the WC)

[Tsukiyumi]

Teaos: a good configuration, if we are to use the Phaser Lance. I still think the extra power could be used to power more Type XIIs, but whatever the vote says, we go with, right?

[Blackstar the Chakat]

The concept of this was that we can't just have the best of everything with no drawbacks; it doesn't work like that in reality, and there's no reason it would work here, either. I already reiterated the fact that one lance will take 70,000 out of 200,000 available Terawatts. I agree that we could power it down, and re-route, but if there's nowhere to route to, it's moot.

Again, you just pointed out a draw back so why are you saying there isn't any draw back? Are you tired or just spent to much time around Chakat?

Please point out where I said there was NO drawback to having a massive power-draining uber-weapon that can only be used against slow mving targets LIKE A NEGH'VAR. Are you tired, or has your brain stopped interpreting text?

I think he's just lost his mind and turned into your typical fanboy in every sense of the word.

[Teaos]

Teaos: a good configuration, if we are to use the Phaser Lance. I still think the extra power could be used to power more Type XIIs, but whatever the vote says, we go with, right?

Yeah I was thinking something like that but if we knock out the phase lance we get 9 new phaser arrasy which is again a bit to much to be realistic. I think a way to explain it away is that the lance needs to be kept "warm" and thus always needs power being funneled into it.

For my configuration, honestly I'd like another two phaser arrays at least. So that either means adding another 20k TWs so removing the back facing turret and replacing it with two phasers. I'll see what other people do first.

Be interesting to see if someone makes a configuration with out the Lance. While mine has full coverage for the weapons its not exactly strong in some places.

[Tsukiyumi]

I'm thinking of a configuration like yours, with 5 more Type XIIs (37,500 TW) three forward arc, one ventral, one dorsal, plus two more pulse phaser turrets (30,000 TW) forward dorsal/ventral.

[Teaos]

Yeah I have an idea for a second configuration where I have 6 foward facing canons to really rip apart shields backed by 4 phaser arrays to finish them off. The rest of the array can be spread around the ship for cover fire.

[Teaos]

Here is my anti fleet configuration.

10 x Rapid fire pulse canon turret mounted 150,000 Terra Watts

Positioned with four on the forward dorsal surface of the saucer to rip through enemy shields, two on the ventral forward saucer section, two on the back of the upper saucer section covering the back and the last two on the bottom of the ship facing back covering the bottom of the ship.

The high number of these guns coupled with the fast firing rate will be able to rip through even the strongest shielding. With six forward facing canons they are capable of through out a wall of phaser bolts knocking any size of ship. The other phasers offer coverage for the back and underside of the ship finishing off any ships that may make it past the forward canons.

6 x Type XII phaser arrays 45,000 Terra Watts

Two placed on the forward ventral saucer, two on the ventral forward saucer, one on the back ventral saucer with the final one on the back ventral of the saucer.


This provides coverage to the whole ship while still focusing the most fire power to the front of the ship to rip through the enemy lines allowing support vessels to pick off weaker targets as the heavy guns take down the capital ships.

This configuration is more suited for fleet actions as it can rip through enemy shields like a hammer with the multiple canons while the type XII's can cut through the hulls and smaller craft. The majority of the fire power is focus forward with only cover fire else where.

[Sionnach Glic]

Sounds good to me.