Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
04-06-2012, 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
None of that changes the fact that the secondary hull would lose the main impulse engines (which are on the primary), plus all the weaponry that is on the primary, shield generators, etc.
Shields are emitted from the surface - those black lines following the contours of ships and highlighted by the Aegis set are the emitter lines. The Stardrive already projects the shields that protect it, and keeps those shields.

It also has its own impulse engine. It's only equal to one of the two on the Saucer, but the saucer is more than twice the size of the stardrive, giving the separated stardrive a superior trust:mass ratio. Because the fusion reactors on the saucer provide a miniscule percentage of the ship's power, the stardrive also has an immensely superior power:mass ratio.

As for weapons, it loses two phaser arrays and gains the ones in the separation plane. There's a misconception among fans that longer arrays are stronger, but it's not supported in the shows, instead it's the power put into them. That power comes primarily from the warp core, and is backed by the stardrive's vastly improved power output - nearly equal to the combined ship but with none of the science, medical, and recreation facilities and vastly less mass placing demands on that output.



Quote:
As for the multi-vector, again, the reality is that it becomes 3 ships, each easier to take down, without gaining any firepower. It might be useful if you have multiple targets that you need to deal with simultaneously, but other than that.....
You actually do gain firepower. The model seen in the show nearly doubled it's phaser arrays separated. Weaponry is directly related to surface area. You gain a substantial amount of surface area.

The separated ships also exploit a weakness demonstrated in the entire Romulan fleet, hence why its experimental shakedown cruise was along the Neutral Zone and why the Romulans rightly freaked out about that fact. All of their canon ships from that timeframe (D'derix, Mogai, and Scimitar) are big, ponderous, slow, and forward armed. They are solidly superior to any similar sized cruiser in the Federation fleet, but are almost defenseless against attacks from multiple high speed targets. A Galaxy-class is a poor enough match for a D'derix that it's the one enemy Picard consistently backed down from. But a group of two or three Jem'hadar attack ships could consistently disable if not destroy a warbird.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
04-06-2012, 10:02 AM
You need to see it like this:

The Galaxy Class was build in a time of relative peace, only fighting a low intensity war with the Tzenkethi and the Cardassians at the time when the planning of the Galaxy began.

That reflects upon the Galaxy class (and other ships from that era) having not only starfleet personnel, but also civilians / families aboard.
That however also meant that if a Galaxy class was expected to go from empty space directly into battle (read: not a "show of force" situation, the ship would need a way to allow for a quick and painless evacuation of all the non-combatants... Hence the saucer separation was added to the ship. The only time we did in fact see this happen directly was the first episode of TNG.

Later with the Borg attacks, and then the Dominion wars, ships designed for combat were starting to roll out. Non-combatants were removed from the existing ships for their own protection, and the need for the saucer separation became less urgent, so rather than leaving behind 2 impulse drives with the fusion reactors as well as 2 phaser arrays, Galaxy classes stopped using the separation during combat, because all personnel were in fact combatants.

However, the tactical advantage of the separation was undeniable (as shown by the successful diversion by Riker against the Borg) led to the more advanced MVAM, where a ship using one bridge only (unlike the Galaxy class) could combat several angles of the same ship, or add 3-fold firepower to the same side.
Unlike the Galaxy, each segment of the Prometheus had it's own warp core, powering not only the weapons, but allowed each segment to serve as a fully functional, independend vessel.

This served both as combat element as well as advanced lifeboat, because unlike the Galaxy (as some have pointed out), any segment would be able to pursue or run from an enemy.

However, it makes very little sense that the Galaxy X would have saucer separation. The Phaser Lance is tied directly into the warp core, so if the saucer was to seperate, it would become useless. The GalaxyX was refitted for war, and as such there would be very few non-combatants aboard.

It's only natural that Starfleet would focus on select ships to develop upon those technologies, and add them to future ships.
There are limits however.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
04-06-2012, 10:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyX View Post
Multi Vector assult mode
Oh you mean the exact one shown on the Voyager Episode "Message in a Bottle"?

Quote:
Saucer Separation
Oh you mean the one shown on the The Next Episode "Encounter at Farpoint"?

Quote:
Chevron Separation
Yes, that is the only one that Cryptic actually given to a new design, and one that is seeming based on the Galaxy-Class so its no wonder it have it, separation dates back to The Motion Picture were Probert created the lines in the Refit for a possible scene and said lines can be found present on several ships (Excelsior refit and Ambassador).

Quote:
But seriously Guys we need to get a hold of ourselves here before we start having Mirandas, defiants, and klingon birds of prey with saucer seperation. or Nebula class that has Flyable Mission pod separation.
The only ship Cryptic added Saucer Separation so far was the Odyssey, the previous two canonically have separation abilities.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
04-06-2012, 10:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hevach View Post
Shields are emitted from the surface - those black lines following the contours of ships and highlighted by the Aegis set are the emitter lines. The Stardrive already projects the shields that protect it, and keeps those shields.
Shield generators individually have limited strength. If nothing else, they act as redundant generators in the event some get knocked out, which does happen.

Quote:
It also has its own impulse engine. It's only equal to one of the two on the Saucer, but the saucer is more than twice the size of the stardrive, giving the separated stardrive a superior trust:mass ratio. Because the fusion reactors on the saucer provide a miniscule percentage of the ship's power, the stardrive also has an immensely superior power:mass ratio.
You became an expert on actual starfleet power systems, when? Either the secondary loses or the primary has next to nothing while on its own. Pick one. They are mutually exclusive.

[quote]As for weapons, it loses two phaser arrays and gains the ones in the separation plane. There's a misconception among fans that longer arrays are stronger, but it's not supported in the shows, instead it's the power put into them. That power comes primarily from the warp core, and is backed by the stardrive's vastly improved power output - nearly equal to the combined ship but with none of the science, medical, and recreation facilities and vastly less mass placing demands on that output.

Which means that the ship loses out of the weapons in the separation plane, which could have been positioned so as to be always available. No matter how you look at it, the ship loses hardpoints by the way it is designed. As for power put into weapons, presumably any given weapon still has an upper limit. The lance on the Galaxy X is a spinal mount. If power put in was the only limiting factor, or even the major factor, any given bank on that ship could have been usable as a lance. Furthermore there are references in episodes of smaller ships having 'only defensive phaser arrays' or the like. Again, arrays vary in max power output.

And you still haven't addressed the increased vulnerability of the primary hull... you know.. the part of the ship you are allegedly trying to protect?



Quote:
You actually do gain firepower. The model seen in the show nearly doubled it's phaser arrays separated. Weaponry is directly related to surface area. You gain a substantial amount of surface area.
You are losing an entire saucer section and gaining what.. the top of a pylon (on the Connie or Galaxy)? And even on the multi-vector, the vast majority of the surface area does NOT have hard points, so the surface area you are gaining is not giving you a lot.

Quote:
The separated ships also exploit a weakness demonstrated in the entire Romulan fleet, hence why its experimental shakedown cruise was along the Neutral Zone and why the Romulans rightly freaked out about that fact. All of their canon ships from that timeframe (D'derix, Mogai, and Scimitar) are big, ponderous, slow, and forward armed. They are solidly superior to any similar sized cruiser in the Federation fleet, but are almost defenseless against attacks from multiple high speed targets. A Galaxy-class is a poor enough match for a D'derix that it's the one enemy Picard consistently backed down from. But a group of two or three Jem'hadar attack ships could consistently disable if not destroy a warbird.
Even the secondary is a lot larger than a Jem'hadar attack ship. Not to mention the Jem'hadar ships were implied to be superior in tech.... Romulan ships are designed to fight on their terms. From surprise. Their doctrine is built accordingly. The larger ships are also not helped by the fact every space battle was turned into a point blank dogfight. Even in TOS the doctrine was generally to sit and play giant hardpoint (which makes a lot of sense on at least some levels... if you can always retreat, you can use the extra energy for weapons and/or shields).

Each section acting independently just means you target the one with the primary drives. If they all have equal drives, then they are sacrificing a lot of space (and thus capability) for redundant systems.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
04-06-2012, 10:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by f2pdrakron
Oh you mean the exact one shown on the Voyager Episode "Message in a Bottle"?
Looked cool... not sold on it as a doctrine.

Quote:
Oh you mean the one shown on the The Next Episode "Encounter at Farpoint"?
Where it was completely useless and if the enemy really was trying to kill them, the saucer wouldn't have gotten far enough to be saved? And then they never used the tactic again until the Enterprise was being destroyed in Generations, and then only as a giant escape pod?

Not sold on that as a practical doctrine either.. at least not in game terms...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
04-06-2012, 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hevach View Post
The K'Tinga's separation was a lot like the Constitution's if I remember my soft canon correctly. You could separate, but reconnecting would require an extended layover at a starbase. You wouldn't normally do it unless you were going to lose the other part of the ship anyway. The Defiant's nose could do the same thing, but that worked the opposite way - the rest of the ship was the lifeboat and the nose carried the ship's remaining torpedoes and antimatter to serve as a final holdout weapon to destroy or disable the threat.

The Galaxy-X production model could still separate. It was the same model, after all. Same ship for that matter. The Sovereign was designed to allow it as well, despite never actually doing it on screen, and the Odyssey has the same triangular connection plane the Sovereign appears to. It's been a feature of the Enterprise line since the 1701, though being able to reconnect afterwards only came with the D.
The Klingon "Boom Seperation" was from Star Fleet Battles. The Klingons would use "slave" races to crew the aft of the ship, and in cases of mutiny, the bridge officers could seperate the boom and self destruct the remaining aft of the ship to counter the mutiny.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
04-07-2012, 03:13 AM
I'm no expert in Star Trek ship engineering but don't the Nacelles have some sort of propulsion?

So the Saucer would be dropped off before the battlefield and the Star Drive would warp to the Battle.

As for the MVAE, these things aren't tiny like the Defiant they are nearly as big as the Enterprise E, and when you decide not to put in a bunch of living quarters, Labs and Holodecks you may end up with more space.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
04-07-2012, 04:32 AM
think of it this way

Carrier:

-fighters can be directed and function as a remote AI weapon
-HUGE ship with weaponry to compensate for its massive bulk and turnrate
-carries have MASSIVE armour bonuses and can be pretty darn hard to even hurt when fighters are deployed
-carriers can go static (hold still) in combat and reasonably expect to survive combat
-fighters can target multiple targets under player direction


Separated ships:

- Separated allies function as Non controllable individual ships
- separation is to improve turnrate and cut a "carrier" size ship into two escorts
- both (all) parts bar the player controlled auto target the players target automatically
- ship sections under AI suck....because the AI sucks



I would sooner take on a MVAM escort one on "one" than a carrier any day of the week, fighters can buzz you to death while you basically throw wadded paper at the carriers stupendous hull armour.

On the other hand a MVAM escort Vs a Carrier...that's a fun fight to watch...

...well until the carrier captain directs his fighters and own considerable fire power toward the player controlled ship section and wipes it off the map.


remember individual fighters are squishy...in a squadron though, kiss your shields and armour goodbye and even if you manage to kill em all momma carrier is still around to kick you in the engineering section until you are very very dead
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
04-08-2012, 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyX View Post
But seriously Guys we need to get a hold of ourselves here before we start having Mirandas, defiants, and klingon birds of prey with saucer seperation. or Nebula class that has Flyable Mission pod separation.
The BoP and Nebula class seperation big made me laugh a lot.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
04-08-2012, 10:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
Where it was completely useless and if the enemy really was trying to kill them, the saucer wouldn't have gotten far enough to be saved? And then they never used the tactic again until the Enterprise was being destroyed in Generations, and then only as a giant escape pod?
.
No, they *never* used Saucer Separation aside from Farpoint and Generations. Except in "The Arsenal of Freedom" (to get the majority of the crew to safety if the Stardrive section is destroyed). And "The Best of Both Worlds" (where the saucer actually made an attack run as well). So, yeah, *never* used it aside from those two times.. and those *other* two times..

As an aside, using the saucer for an emergency escape (to get away from the warp core and take as much crew as possible) does make some sense. However, the way it was introduced in TNG made it a dopey gimmick. And, MVAM is just *another* dopey gimmick. But, it's canon, so there we are.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:27 AM.