DiTL-Style Akira for review

[Shran]

From http://www.ditl.org/ I present the USS Gryphon. I don't know how close this is to the "real" Akira, as the folks at Daystrom do a lot of speculation.

Then again, don't we all?

Akira -Class Specifications (Daystrom)

Production Data
Origin: UFP
Class/Type: Akira-Class Heavy Cruiser
Year Launched: 2363

Hull Data
Structure 37
Size/Decks: 7/15 Decks
Length/Beam/Height 464m/87m/317m
Complement: 500/1700/4500
200 Officers
300 Enlisted

Operational Data
Transporters: 4 standard, 4 cargo, 4 emergency
Cargo Units: 70
Shuttlebays: 2
Shuttlecraft: 7 (size 2)
Tractor Beams: 3
Seperation System: No
Sensor System: Class II (+2/C)
Operations System: Class IB
Life Support: Class IB

Propulsion Data
Impulse System: Type 4A-E (.85c)
Warp Systems: Type 8E (8/9.6/9.982)

Tactical Data
Phaser Arrays: Type X (x3/E)
Penetration: 9/9/8/0/0
Photorps: Type II (X15/E)
Penetration: 12/12/12/12/12
Quantum: Mk1 (X1/E)
Penetration: 12/12/12/12/12
Deflector Shield: Class 5C
Protection/Threshold: 15/1

Miscellaneous Data
Manuever Modifiers: +1C, -2H, +1T
Traits: None

I'm certain this is overpowered, especially by comparision to the old LUGTrek version. Daystrom claims those 15 torp tubes. That bit was apparently mentioned in an episode...

[Phantom]

A good design. Not sure about 15 Photorps though. Certainly didn't seem to be that heavily armed in FC.

[Lancer]

AFAIK the 15 torpedo tubes thing was originated by Alex Jaeger, who designed the Akira CGI for ST:FC. In an interview he stated that he designed the Akira as a carrier and with 15 torpedo tubes in mind - none of which we ever get to see in the movie or in any of the Akiras in DS9.

[Flamestrike]

15 torpedo tubes?!

Good God, man... If those babies can burst-fire like the Enterprise's in TNG you could kiss a borg cube bye-bye... Especially if you're using Quantorps...

YIKES.

[Doug Burke]

Just some observations on your design...

Originally posted by Shran
Structure 37

Additional Structure due to left-over space can onyl be transfered over in 5-point lots. Thus, if you had 5 excess space, you could raise your structure by 5 points.

Operations System: Class IB
Life Support: Class IB

Not sure how these are supposed to translate into the system types listed in the NG. Unless they're supposed to be Class 1 systems with a Reliability rating of B. If so, I don't know if such a modern vessel would really have such low-grade systems.

Impulse System: Type 4A-E (.85c)
Warp Systems: Type 8E (8/9.6/9.982)

I have to assume the E's are the Reliability ratings... In any case, you should probably have gone with the Type Class 4B impulse system, as the 4A has the same cost and the same speed, but can only be on a Size 5 or smaller ship. Your Reliability will be worse, but what can you do?

Phaser Arrays: Type X (x3/E)
Penetration: 9/9/8/0/0

Penetaration for 3 Type X phasers should be 5/5/4/0/0. The onyl time you total the Offensive pwoer of ALL weapons is to determine the reliability of your weapons systems. The Penetration values are figured by system type.

Photorps: Type II (X15/E)
Penetration: 12/12/12/12/12

I, personally find the "15 photon torpedo launchers" figure to be gross overkill. But that's me. Again, the penetration should only be 10/10/10/10/10. You might want (to more accurately show the pwoer of the torpedoes involved, lower the total number of launchers and go with a more powerful torpedo type. Look at eh Galaxy and the Intrepid...

[/quote]Quantum: Mk1 (X1/E)
Penetration: 12/12/12/12/12[/quote]

Penetration shoudl be 4/4/4/4/4. See above explanation for why.

Manuever Modifiers: +1C, -2H, +1T

You didn't add in the maneuver modifiers from the ship's size and just listed the base modifiers for a Cruiser. As a size 7 ship, the Akira would have +5 to allocate amongst the three types of maneuvers. And a Cruiser would have a maximum possible of +3 C, +2 H, and +4 T.

I'm certain this is overpowered, especially by comparision to the old LUGTrek version. Daystrom claims those 15 torp tubes. That bit was apparently mentioned in an episode...

Overpowered on the weapons, but other wise actually rather underpowered (Ops Systems, Sensors, etc.). As for the 15 launchers thing, that was from the designer of the ship, and has not been mentioned or shown onscreen, so it's technically non-canon...

[Don Mappin]

Wow, Doug sure is on top of things.

To mirror what he said, you’ve got a couple problems with your design:

1. Illegal structure
2. Crappy components that go out with 1-2 hits.
3. Improperly calculated offensive/penetration values
4. Waaaaay too many weapons (well, unless that’s what you want). You purchase arcs of coverage or effective firepower—not literal numbers.
5. You’re going to get spanked big time with a threshold of 1.

[Cmdr Powers]

Don's right. Doug's right.

That having been said, I just got home and logged on to read this thread- right after I had just finished roughing out the Akira class with my spanking new, wonderful, Narrator's Guide.

Thanks for pointing out the numbers problems. I had made many of the same mistakes he did. Now corrected.

As for the weaponry and so forth- I think you have to look at how these are handled with the examples in the NG. It is apparent that even if you had 15 torpedo tubes, you would no more list them all than you would show the 18 phaser turrets on the uprated Constitution. Instead, you abstract these figures to approximate how the ship works dramatically.

Therefore:

Akira Class Heavy Cruiser
Commissioned 2368
Size 7 (464m), Structure 30, Spaces 94
Crew 500, Decks 17
Cargo 70 units
Operations and Life Support: Class 4, 7.5 E
Sensor Systems: Class 4, 4 E
Shuttle Bays: 5 (extends through saucer fore & aft) 10
35 size of small craft
Tractor Beams: 2, 1
Transporters: 4 Personnel, 4 Emergency, 3 Cargo, 2
Propulsion Systems:
Impulse: Class 7, .92c, 6 D
Warp: Class 8, 8/9.6/9.982, 8 E
Tactical Systems:
Beam Weapons: Type X (x3/D), 15, 5/5/4/0/0
Missile Weapons: Type VI Photorp (x4/D), 20,
Mark 1 Q-Torp, (x1/D), 6, 6/6/6/6/6
Deflector Shields: Class 6, 17/4, D 14
Maneuver: +2C, +0H, +3T

Total Spaces 93.5

I have to say that I'm totally impressed with the NG! I've had it eight hours now and other than a few spelling typos, it rocks! Me and a buddy sat at a coffee shop and ran a mock combat between a Constitution and a D-7 and had a great time. You guys done good!

[Lancer]

Somehow I had a feeling Cmdr Powers would show up in a thread with "Akira" in the title.

Scotty, I think Operations and Life Support are bought seperate and not in one step. While both use the same table (9.6) to determine cost and reliability, buying these systems are two distinct steps in starship construction. (These values are rounded down, from what Don said in another thread.)


Funny thing is I sat down to create an Akira myself last night. Here it is:

Akira Class Heavy Cruiser
Commissioned 2368
Size 7 (464m), Structure 35, Spaces 89 (89used)
Crew 500, Decks 17
Cargo 70 units
Operations: Class 3E (6Sp)
Life Support: Class 3E (6Sp)
Sensor Systems: Class 3 D (3Sp)
Shuttle Bays: 5 (extends through saucer fore & aft) (10Sp)
35 size of small craft
Tractor Beams: 2, (1Sp)
Transporters: 4 Personnel, 4 Emergency, 3 Cargo, (1 Sp)
Propulsion Systems:
Impulse: Class 6, .9c D (5Sp)
Warp: Class 8, 8/9.2/9.8 E (8Sp)
Tactical Systems:
Beam Weapons: Type X (x2/D), 4/4/4/0/0 (10Sp)
Missile Weapons: Type VI Photorp (x5/D), 7/7/7/7/7 (25Sp)
Deflector Shields: Class 6, 17/4, D (14Sp)
Maneuver: +2C, +0H, +3T

[Cmdr Powers]

Aye, Laddy! Ye done fine!

I think you've got it just about right. I noticed you picked up on how I wanted to show 'our' ship. This could easily be USS Vanguard with the defect of Battle Damaged thrown in (did you notice that there is an Intrepid-class Vanguard in the NG? We'll ignore that...)

[Lancer]

Originally posted by Cmdr Powers
Aye, Laddy! Ye done fine!

Thanks.

I think you've got it just about right. I noticed you picked up on how I wanted to show 'our' ship. This could easily be USS Vanguard with the defect of Battle Damaged thrown in (did you notice that there is an Intrepid-class Vanguard in the NG? We'll ignore that...)

Actually I tried my hand at converting the USS Galahad from my round-the-table game. As I don't agree with the 15torps & thru-deck-carrier thing mine looks a bit different then the one above.
Once I was finished I realized that someone here would bring up the topic, so I thought it couldn't hurt to be prepared for uch an occasion.

[Shran]

I'd wondered about the "5 structure limit" thingie. And yes, I did regret putting such lousy Ops and LS components in... but not until I got to work and got to thinking about it.

I like the most recent version... I think I'll update my sheet to rhyme with that one.

Please, Someone else check out Daystrom, see if they aren't smoking something...

Thanks, Guys!

[Doug Burke]

Originally posted by Lancer
Scotty, I think Operations and Life Support are bought seperate and not in one step. While both use the same table (9.6) to determine cost and reliability, buying these systems are two distinct steps in starship construction. (These values are rounded down, from what Don said in another thread.)

That is correct, Lancer. Two separate systems, two seaprate costs....

[Weyoun11]

Interestingly enough, and not all too surprising in the Trek universe, the game Bridge Commander lists different Akira weapon specs as 8 Type X phaser arrays and 6 photon torpedo tubes (4 facing fore and two aft). Personally those specs work for me it seems much more balanced. 15 torpedo tubes sounds way to excessive.

[Cmdr Powers]

Apparently we are not to be allowed to debate how an Akira works on this board. That having been said, if you go by what has been shown in the movie and the TV, the Akira class operates much like any other starship in the Star Trek universe.

So forget what you've seen in Starship Spotter, Star Trek: the Magazine, Star Trek: Armada, Star Trek: Dominion Wars, etc. Just make your Akira with a 'reasonable' amount of phasers and photorps with a fore and aft shuttlebay at the least.

And that seems to be the party line. Anyone who wishes to debate it elsewhere let me know. eagle707@bellsouth.net

(To Doug and Don: I am sorry. I had no idea that fighters and the Akira descriptions were as taboo as discussing Marines.)

[Doug Burke]

Cmdr Powers, I think you misinterpreted the purpose of my posts in the Fighters thread. The subject is not taboo. Nor, really, is the subject of Marines. These discussions just have their proper place. Whether they exist or not has absolutely nothing to do with starship construction and the rules for it.

I don't have any problem with people wanting to make Akira-carriers or fighter squadrons. I have said repeatedly that I would never try to prevent you doing so for your game and sharing the designs in this forum. That's what it's here for.

What I do take exception to is having an idea all but shoved down my throat in an inappropriate forum. If you want to debate the existence of Carriers and Fighter Squadrons and provide proof to back up your opinion, fine. But please do so in Star Trek Chat.