Akira class idea.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 12:33 am

Thats how it currently reads.

Basicly, replace the 'explosive dust' with what the current abilities tittle says........ torpedo barrage. Every 9 secs, what I belive is the current refire rate of this ability, have the Akira pump out a number of torpedos for the same ammount of damage of the current ability.

It would allow the Akira to appear more like the true torpedo cruiser it is in cannon, while at the same time not creating any balance issues.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 12:39 am

Last edited by Tyler on December 2nd, 2010, 12:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

Replacing it with a multi-target torpedo should be easy to do. It would be better to add a couple more launcher hardpoints specifically for this, like a couple on the saucer. I am neutral on it.

Canon, not cannon. Speaking of torpedo launchers, the Akira shouldn't have aft launchers according to the creator (they are all fore, port & starboard).

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 1:17 am

it has single tubes, either in the saucer or rollbar I cant remmber which, that fire port/starboard, plus it's rollbar as you mentiond has tubes for foward/aft, and we know for a fact it has saucer tubes as it's been seen in movies.

Personaly, I say make the Dominion mixed tech version the standard (dual tubes).

As it ranks up, dont increase the damage or the rate of fire of the torpedos, just increase the number of torpedos.

Visualy, it spams torpedos. Balance wise, same damage as before.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 1:27 am

It has no aft launchers; 7 forward launchers in the pod, 8 forward/port/starboard in the saucer.

A listing made by model inspection and creator interview:

A Star Trek: The Magazine article, (the one that had the interview with the ships designer) listed the torpedo placements. The location of the tubes was given in the article, and is as follows :
Pod: 7 total, 4 in upper section of pod, 3 in lower section, all face forward
Saucer: 7 total, 3 forward below the front shuttle bay doors, 4 in dorsal surface, 2 port, 2 starboard. The latter four face out to port and starboard, respectively. Finally there is 1 in the lower hull section, just below the deflector dish.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 2:09 am

Just looking at the model implies there would be at least SOME aft tubes. Thats something that even vanilla bridge commader got right.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 2:17 am

Visual inspection confirmed aft ones don't exist. The second image looks like concept art, though it still fits the 'no aft launcher' part.

Attachments

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 2:46 am

Sure looks like, even from that angle, it has some aft tubes in that pod.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 2:53 am

Yeah, though things that look just like a torpedo launcher without actually being one isn't unheard of. Galaxy Class have a pair of indents at each side of the Deflector that also resemble launchers. If those aft things are launchers, it would increase the number to 21.

Considering the Galaxy visual thing and the creator saying it has 15 that don't fire back, those things probably have some other purpose.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 2:56 am

Tyler wrote:Yeah, though things that look just like a torpedo launcher without actually being one isn't unheard of. Galaxy Class have a pair of indents at each side of the Deflector that also resemble launchers. If those aft things are launchers, it would increase the number to 21.

Considering the Galaxy visual thing and the creator saying it has 15 that don't fire back, those things probably have some other purpose.

That or they're the same as on the Miranda class, some of the tubes are capable of fore OR aft fire.

Fact is that even the Defiant has an aft torpedo tube, why wouldnt the torpedo crusier have an aft tube.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 3:04 am

Fact is the creator said they don't and they never fired aft, it doesn't necessarily need to make sense. The same as with it only showing 3 phasers, which is also poor coverage.

The Constitution has (according to a tech manual) a form of 'ribbed grill' behind the 2 launchers that acts like a form of specialized thruster to deal with recoil. If the Akira has 7 launchers in the front that are like the Constiution's old single-shot version, those holes could be the same as that grill.

It's not like we haven't seen Starfleet use things that are bigger than they really need to be, like the Sovereigns massive Impulse engines.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 4:43 am

Well other officalish sources such as Bridge Commander give it some aft torps, I'm not saying it would have that many aft, but if it gets even port/starboard coverage it should have a few aft.

As for the phasers, it has poor phaser coverage because it focuses on torpedo power, thats the whole point of it.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 7:06 am

Bridge Commander isn't official, anymore than Armada 2 is official. The official source is the creator, who says it has no aft launchers. Whether oit makes sense or not, that's how he designed the ship.

Poor phaser coverage isn't a requirement of a torpedo cruiser, especially since it means it cannot fight ships behind it.

Admiral T'Var D. Bassia

198 posts

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 12:46 pm

simple way to end this matter.. REFIT with aft launchers. :p

as for why stock Akira has no aft launchers SF wanted all Akira Captains to be Klingon and never run from the enemy :p

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 6:07 pm

Could be, but doesnt really makse sense either, since torps can cause proximity damage to the launcher (as mentioned in TNG, at least one other time, and by common sense) this you'd need to stay manuvering with it.

And tyler were does he say no aft photons ?

Odds are the guy just forgets to mention them.