Prometheus as an Experimental Warp-In

posted on February 28th, 2010, 4:07 pm

or we could have the prommie without mvam, write the backstory as starfleet abandoned mvam because it was rubbish and the prommie became a normal cruiser. but because mvam systems were removed, other advanced systems were added, such as quantum pulses/torps or additional shields or faster engines or some other special that can be thought up.

posted on February 28th, 2010, 4:43 pm

i guess you could claim mvam was abandoned by starfleet because it proved to be too buggy with power consumption whiched caused shields and or weapons to randomly go offline or for power relys to burn out during the seperation/integration process

posted on February 28th, 2010, 5:45 pm

Well, when one section gets destroyed, what do the other 2 do? I think the losses are diabling the whole shi, because it must back to the shipyard, waiting for a new module (and 200 new officers). I think, those ships will be more in the dock than in free space.

They went back to the massive design and switched instead to the philosophy, to build in module bays so that this ship can be equiped for multi-puroses.

posted on February 28th, 2010, 6:40 pm

maybe it could could be refitted so that the ship doesnt split anymore, but instead it flips open (dont know if it is the right word for "aufklappen) in the front so that it looses its sleek form and speed, but gains access to additional phaser stripes and torpedo tubes.

posted on February 28th, 2010, 8:44 pm

i love your first Idea, where the ships become AI controlled "Fighters"

that would be awesome

posted on February 28th, 2010, 8:49 pm

Well, we already have a fighter-ship, havent we?

posted on February 28th, 2010, 9:52 pm

Well, we already have a fighter-ship, havent we?

I think this is a little different...

posted on February 28th, 2010, 9:53 pm

yeah, it would be cool, because these ehipe would work in tandome with your ship, and "guard it"

posted on February 28th, 2010, 10:06 pm

Hmmm...... Experimental Warp-in could use an offensive boost. Though I still believe that hte Prometheus Class is still in limited production due to the fact that only a few decades ago the first prototpe was stolen (they probably were trying to improve it so it won't get snatched easily). Though one thing I'd imagine is that maybe the Prometheus, instead of so many special weapons, why not give it a boost in the defense and offense? Those stats make it look like a cruiser when in fact it should be a battleship, or battlecruiser at minimum.

posted on February 28th, 2010, 10:30 pm

Hmmm...... Experimental Warp-in could use an offensive boost. Though I still believe that hte Prometheus Class is still in limited production due to the fact that only a few decades ago the first prototpe was stolen (they probably were trying to improve it so it won't get snatched easily). Though one thing I'd imagine is that maybe the Prometheus, instead of so many special weapons, why not give it a boost in the defense and offense? Those stats make it look like a cruiser when in fact it should be a battleship, or battlecruiser at minimum.

Well, I think it fits in perfectly if it is a limited vessel. Experimental warp-in suggests that it isn't used vastly, and uses new equipment. This is supported as well by the fact that its a warp-in, showing its a ship in small numbers.

posted on February 28th, 2010, 10:32 pm

/my thoughts exactally

@ gamer
  I thought TUN had gone back to his old avatar when I say your post

posted on March 1st, 2010, 1:26 am

Hmmm...... Experimental Warp-in could use an offensive boost.

Screw your Fed-boost!!!!

  Right now you choose experimental if you WANT super defense.  You choose normal for better offense.


 
I don't understand.  If you want the Prommie in the game and you know that MVAM not being practical is the reason for it being left out, why not suggest a Prommie WITHOUT MVAM?  I would just like to see it in the game.  I don't care two dumps about MVAM and the devs/guide list excellent reasons why MVAM is impractical.

  Just ask for it without MVAM .

posted on March 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

In Star Trek MVAM is really not that sensible, as combined shields are an obvious advantage. MVAM in the Star Trek universe is rather for the beauty of itself.

In Trek, Shields around multiple ships (seperate or together) are worse because you have to stretch them around something larger. A smaller ship with the same shield type would be more durable because it takes less power to use the shield with more left over to reinforce it when weakened.

MVAM is also for numbers, which can be very dangerous.

[mimesot]

posted on March 1st, 2010, 4:07 pm

Last edited by mimesot on March 2nd, 2010, 12:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

I quite don't understand you.

In terms of energy output:
If you have 3 cores, for ease say they each can provide sustaination of 10 PetaJoule shield capacity, you can sustain a shield of 30 PJ capacity when the ships are coupled. If you suffer heavy fire of lets say an equivalent 25 PJ you are down to 1/6 shield capacity, but your hull is still not exposed. If you have 3 ships of 10 PJ capacity and again are suffering the same attack and the damage dealt is diverted intelligently by the enemy the distribution will be 10PJ + 10PJ + 5PJ, thus 2 ships are naked (and prety much dead next) and one at 50% capacity.

Fazit: After that attack, when using no MVAM there is one shit left having still some shields and full firepower. When using MVAM there's only one ship part left, with has only a third of the firepower of the whole ship.

In terms of shield "bubble" surface:
Its true that the bigger the bubble, the more difficult it is to sustain shields, as the surface of the bubble grows with the bubbles size. To be exact the energy consumption rises with the average "diameter" of the bubble(s). Lets say, the 3 parts had an average bubble diameter of 300m (the parts are not so much smaller), the coupled ship 414m. First case: E-consumption ~ 3*300² ~ 270 000, second case 414² ~ 171 000

Fazit: Only when compound-ships are built of units really much smaller than the coupled ship in a very non-compact manner, splitting into several parts provides a more efficient shield configuration. For a borg cube made of 8 smaller cubes this would be the case. Edit: Pure BS

Concerning targetability:
If the single parts of the ship are rather compact the angular area (the amount of space the ships visibly cover) they cover might be not much larger than that one of the whole ship. In case the computers are fast enough (well todays computers are, so they probably will in FO times), and targeting more than one object is not a problem (well, today it is not, so why should it be ever), angular area is the only quesion in targetting. Unforunatly the MVAM of the prometheus offers more visibly offered areas to attack.

In a ne shot-kill-universe this would of course be completly opposite, as having more targets to deal with gives one the needed nanoseconds to drop your load.

posted on March 1st, 2010, 6:36 pm

This is actually the first viable way that i have heard of implementing mvam. However i am not a big fan of mvam so maybe the ship could be made without it.

Starfleet was impressed with the vessel itself but thought that the negative effects caused by being able to split the ship into 3 parts outweighed any potential befits.