FT: Star Trek designing

I can't help it.  I tried to avoid designing ships based on that 
show, but it keeps sucking me in.  Besides, I have lots of 
miniatures used for SFB, SFBM, and STTCS (Fasa's); and many people 
like the show as well.

So here is my ideas about representing some ST ships and a new system
I'd like to add;  it, or something similar, may have been suggested 
already.

How about shielded "armor"?  It would represent the degrading
effects of shields as seen in the show and is also repairable in
combat.  Treat as armor except that it costs 3 points, it also
must precede any regular armor on the armor row.  It would also
provide some shielding vs photon torpedoes (pulse torpedoes)
and the occassional missile.  The symbol would be a circle,
just like armor, with an 'S' inside.

Another thought for lack of fighters and why missiles do not
seem to be a threat: any "phaser" (beams, no matter the class) 
can shoot at fighters and missiles.

Here are my concepts for ST style ships, I didn't use my shielded
armor idea.  Pulse torpedo = photon torpedo (that was easy).  
Class-3 beam weapon = disruptor (wait until I'm done).	
Heavy phaser = class-2 beam, light phaser = class-1.  
Btw, I've only considered the Federation and Klingons;
very few fighters or missiles are used (they are rarely seen in ST).
Feds use level-2 screens on cruisers and larger, Klingons use
only level-1.  This would give the Fed ships more staying power
since the Klingons' main weapon is treated as a beam weapon.
Feds use more armor, Klingons prefer more weapons (I kept all hull
strengths as Average).	Fed ships' thrust speed is 4, Klingons'
is 6.  But I have a dilemma: I'm in the middle of designing a
Klingon DN and I'm torn between the thrust-6 or thrust-4 with a
lot more weapons (+2 disruptors with 120 degree arcs, +2
heavy phasers, and +2 armor).  The little bit of Klingon in me
says "more weapons!".  :)  Or should I stay with the thrust-6?
This is a DN, afterall, used more for brute strength that 
positioning.

So, I'll provide my list of ship designs.

Fed CA, 84 mass, 282 points.  Thrust-4, average strength hull,
level-2 screens, 7 armor, 3 FC, 2 PDS (or should be 2 class-1s?),
2 pulse torpedoes, 3 class-2s with 180 degree arcs each.

Klingon D7, 80 mass, 262 points.  Thrust-6, average strength hull,
level-1 screens, 4 armor, 2 FC, 2 class-3s with 60 degree arcs 
(disruptors), 2 class-2s with 180 degree arcs, 2 class-1s.
(PDS?  bah, defenses are for losers)

Why?  The Fed CA is tougher than the Klingon D7 which it seems
to be shown in the show (TOS).	But the Klingons make up for it
with the smaller ships I designed (and why you see more of them,
besides the sfx costs).  I tried putting class-3s on the Fed CA
as that main phasers but couldn't get them to fit properly.
One class-3 didn't seem to be enough, and 2 with 180 degree
arcs was just too much mass.  Also, I liked reserving the class-3
as a disruptor and keeping phasers to class-2s and class-1s.

Fed DD, 44 mass, 148 points.  Thrust-4, average strength hull,
level-1 screens, 4 armor, 2 FC, 1 PDS, 1 pulse torpedo, 2 class-2s
with 180 degree arcs of fire.

Klingon Bird of Prey, 48 mass, 157 points.  Thrust-6, average 
strength hull, level-1 screens, 4 armor, 2 FC, 1 class-3 (60 degrees),
2 class-1s.

Looks like the DD might have an edge, but the class-2s only overlap
in the F arc.  So if the BoP can maneuver to the side then
the firepower is even.	And if the BoP can maneuver so its main
weapon bears but the DD's does not, well.. good-bye DD.  Yeah,
the reverse is true but the BoP has a little more manueverability.

I tried to make the BoP 10 more points than the DD so that a
Fed force of a CA + 2 DDs vs a Klingon force of a D7 + 2 BoPs
would be even in points.

I've designed a Fed DN: 180 mass, 602 points, double weaponry & 
PDS on the CA and add a class-2 (360) + 2 class-1s, 13 armor.

No missiles for the Klingons, you ask?	Get that SFB influence
out of your mind.

Glen