Our Ship - Beam Weapons

[Blackstar the Chakat]

Well, if we vote on everything then why aren't we voting on where to place the lance?

Inside
Pro - Better protection for the lance
Con - takes up internal volume

Outside
Pro - Takes up little internal volume
Con - Runs risk of taking damage if you lose your shields.

To fix the external problem you could add extra armour but it would still be a prime target for enemy weapons.

It just seems to be an end-around to try and have a super-mega-death-ray with no downside.

It would take up more energy that could be used for phasers covering other areas of the ship. The lance doesn't have the same coverage as the traditional arrays so we'd be stuck with fewer arrays forced to cover more areas, possibly resulting in blind spots

[Deepcrush]

It just seems to be an end-around to try and have a super-mega-death-ray with no downside.

If this is an end-around for you I'd hate to see what counts as effort on your part. Anytime a system is where enemy fire can reach it counts as a downside.

Also, why does it have to have a downside? Are we trying to make something that isn't the best we can make it? Should we make something with an intentional flaw just for the sake of saying that we didn't make the ship as strong as we could have? I'd prefer to be smarter then SF when it comes building our ship but what's yours is yours. This is a powerful weapon that can be used to great effect and doesn't have to cost a heavy price on the ships remaining volume. That's logic of purpose not stick sitting.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

I think the forums ate this post so I'm reposting it again just in case...

It would take up more energy that could be used for phasers covering other areas of the ship. The lance doesn't have the same coverage as the traditional arrays so we'd be stuck with fewer arrays forced to cover more areas, possibly resulting in blind spots

[Tsukiyumi]

I'm leaning toward the idea of a number of pulse cannons in the forward arc.

[Deepcrush]

But the lance is a weapon of option. Point the front of your ship at a big target and hammer away. You don't have to use the lance and in fact shouldn't if the fight has gotten up close and personal. Thats what the type XIIs are for.

The lance is there to crack targets that would normally be able to survive hits from a standard phaser.

[Deepcrush]

I'm leaning toward the idea of a number of pulse cannons in the forward arc.

Short range with no targeting?

Not on a battleship. This big bird isn't going to be turning on a dime. Any heavy weapon you use needs to have some good range on it.

[Tsukiyumi]

Even having one lance would take up nearly half of our phaser power. A wall of QT's can do the job of heavy bombardment, and handle smaller targets. Pulse phasers are a good trade-off, IMO. Teaos said 12% arcs, so four of them would cover half of the ship.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

Even having one lance would take up nearly half of our phaser power. A wall of QT's can do the job of heavy bombardment, and handle smaller targets. Pulse phasers are a good trade-off, IMO. Teaos said 12% arcs, so four of them would cover half of the ship.

The QTs take up internal volume and have limited ammunition as opposed to a lance which is only limited by the ship's own power supplys

[Tsukiyumi]

And the QT's can track and follow smaller targets, not to mention not having a 3-5% firing arc. Teaos was clear that the (very slow) ship would have to manuver to fire a lance. It would only be useful against large targets like starbases or Cubes.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

And the QT's can track and follow smaller targets, not to mention not having a 3-5% firing arc. Teaos was clear that the (very slow) ship would have to manuver to fire a lance. It would only be useful against large targets like starbases or Cubes.

Have we ever actually seen QTs track and follow smaller targets?

[Mikey]

If this is an end-around for you I'd hate to see what counts as effort on your part. Anytime a system is where enemy fire can reach it counts as a downside.

Are you trying to pretend you didn't understand me? It's an end-around to try and avoid the downside that had already been set.

Also, why does it have to have a downside? Are we trying to make something that isn't the best we can make it? Should we make something with an intentional flaw just for the sake of saying that we didn't make the ship as strong as we could have?

We're not talking about intentional flaws; we're talking about a system of checks and balances to make this a thought-out and critically-reasoned process rather than a fanboy jerk-fest.

PS - the pulse cannon which you said didn't have enough range of motion would have better ones than the lance. That would only be magnified by the range at which it would be expected to fire. As I said, I wouldn't nay-say having ONE, assuming part of the role of the ship is anti-installation; but to say we could have one without serious effects on other aspects of the ship design is crazy.

[Tsukiyumi]

And the QT's can track and follow smaller targets, not to mention not having a 3-5% firing arc. Teaos was clear that the (very slow) ship would have to manuver to fire a lance. It would only be useful against large targets like starbases or Cubes.

Have we ever actually seen QTs track and follow smaller targets?

First Contact springs to mind; Data only missed the Phoenix on purpose, and it was damn small (though admittedly not evading). I don't think the uber-slow phaser lance is going to hit much of anything though; the QT's have a better chance, and can perform heavy bombardment.

[Deepcrush]

Even having one lance would take up nearly half of our phaser power. A wall of QT's can do the job of heavy bombardment, and handle smaller targets. Pulse phasers are a good trade-off, IMO. Teaos said 12% arcs, so four of them would cover half of the ship.

The QTs take up internal volume and have limited ammunition as opposed to a lance which is only limited by the ship's own power supplys

Agreed, also the lance doesn't have to drain power. At the point where you are to close to use it you switch to the standard phasers. The only reason this would be a problem is if for some reason you cant tell the WC to stop powering the Lance. That would be bad, but I dont' think we have that problem.

[Deepcrush]

And the QT's can track and follow smaller targets, not to mention not having a 3-5% firing arc. Teaos was clear that the (very slow) ship would have to manuver to fire a lance. It would only be useful against large targets like starbases or Cubes.

Or as in AGT targets at long range where the targeting arc doesn't cause as much trouble. Besides, thats why its here. For breaking heavy targets. You wouldn't use this thing on a Bug or BoP.

[Tsukiyumi]

So, I guess we're assuming that the phaser lance has more range than a standard phaser, and disregarding that the ship turns like a Zeppelin. It would only be useful against near-stationary targets.

Where in AGT did they use it at any greater range than a standard phaser? The FX don't seem to indicate either way.