Re: FT: ST designing

Thanks for the comments.  My rebuttals:

> 
> >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.
> 
> Just use standard armor, change ignore armor weapons so they don't
> ignore it.
> 

Armor isn't totally ignored, screens are by pulse torpedoes and
missiles.
Is normal armor repairable in combat?  I suppose you could make it
so (this sounds familiar? :)).	
All I did was up the cost by a point (equal to shields) and
distinguish it from regular armor.
Screens in FT are all or nothing, I wanted something to represent 
a degrading defense ("Shields are done to 42%, Captain!").

> >
> >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.
> 
> Fighters & FT captital missiles are rare in real star trek, photons
> are actually missiles.
> 
> >
> >Here are my concepts for ST style ships, I didn't use my shielded
> >armor idea.	Pulse torpedo = photon torpedo (that was easy).
> 
> I'd use ER SLM's, its more like the photons you see in the show
> long range guided missiles. IIRC the range of a photon is vastly
> greater than a phaser, as its a standoff warp capable weapon.
> 

You cannot use point defense against pulse torpedoes, and you
can against missiles.  Yes, I know, change the rules so PDS
do not exist (blech).  I like pulse torpedoes as photons.
Generally, if you limit phasers to class-2 beams then pulse 
torpedoes are longer ranged.  "Class-3" phasers could exist
on larger ships (BB+) and bases.
Yes, some ST shows and movies show a photon torpedo package,
but pulse torpedoes can be done similarly.

> >Class-3 beam weapon = disruptor (wait until I'm done).
> 
> Railgun
> 

They're not in the FB.	Also, my impression is that they are not
balanced.

> >Heavy phaser = class-2 beam, light phaser = class-1.
> 
> Phaser classes map to beams
> 

That's what I did, from class-1 to class-2 for cruisers
and smaller.  I should change my Fed DN so it has a couple
"really heavy" phasers in the front (class-3s).

> >Btw, I've only considered the Federation and Klingons;
> >very few fighters or missiles are used (they are rarely seen in ST).
> 
> Agreed
> 
> >Feds use level-2 screens on cruisers and larger, Klingons use
> >only level-1.
> 
> How does this tie in with shield armor, they should be the same
> system? I agree the feds are tougher in defence.
> 
> >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.
> 
> In TOS the big E could out manuver most other ships though.

Why do I recall that the Klingons usually were making passes
at the E?  Sometimes it was because of some plot device
(warp engines down, can't ruin our ambassadors luncheon, etc :))
but my impression is that those K cruisers had maneuverability
on the E but not the firepower or defenses.  When the E did
make a maneuver it was more of a surprise or a matter of
tactics ("attack plan Delta, Mr. Sulu", I'm paraphrasing).
There's only a 2 point difference in thrust, anyway.

> 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.
> 
> I'd go T4
> 

Thanks, I did.

> >
> >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.
> 
> PDS don't fit the background IMO.
> 2 FC's (main bridge and aux control)
> 

I changed the PDS to class-1s, which can work as point defense
in the normal rules (I recall one episode where the E easily took
out some planetary based missiles with phasers).

3 FCs for staying power.  Scotty may be a miracle worker
but players can get lucky and knock two out easily, and
the damage control can get unlucky and not fix any.
Hmmm, it would be more cinematic, though.

> >
> >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)
> 
> in TOS they only have disruptors, no secondary armament
> 

Cheaper sfx (IMHO).  I suppose all beam weapons on a K ship could
be considering disruptors of varying size.

> >
> >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.
> 
> Missing photon

Sfx again (IMHO).  I considered it (a pulse torpedo is the same 
mass as a class-3 beam) but wanted to keep a definite K flavor.
It could be a variant (or mine is the variant).
I also didn't include a cloaking device, one can be added
by removing the screen, reducing the thrust by 1 and upping
the cost.  I don't know the cost change since Armageddon Outfitter
(thanks to whoever!) has a different cost than the FB.
Btw, I think the FT's cloaking device is too large IF based
on ST.	Kirk carried it aboard the E when he stole it.
Make it mass 1, points 50 (yes, I know, change it in my game).

Has anyone noticed if any Romulan ships ever fired a shot in TNG
or later series?  Maybe in a DS9 big battle scene but with all
that's going on it was hard to notice any such details.

Glen