Page 14 of 30

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:24 pm
by Coalition
Reliant121 wrote:Say the a legion of borg cubes come along. Sovereigns are good, but not good enough. For starters, the only way it took down the Scimitar was because of the ramming and Data blowing it up inside. And thats Romulan Tech. if the borg came en masse, the Sovereign would not be quite enough.
Borg cube = 28 cubic kilometers of assimilating death. (1 cubic kilometer = 1 * 10^9 cubic meters)

Sovereign = ~700 meters long, ~250 meters wide, ~90 meters tall (to make the math easy). Assuming that is a solid rectangle, that is 15,750,000 cubic meters.

A Borg cube is ~1700 times bigger than a maxed volume Sovereign. Even with equal technology, the Borg cube dedicating 99% of its volume to nothing, and the Sovereign being a full warship, the Borg cube is still 17 times as powerful.

Seriously, whenever a Borg cube comes by, you should be seeing hundreds of modern ships dying in the battle.
Reliant121 wrote:The more firepower you deliver in the preliminary shots, the more damage you cause. That could possibly cause enough damage to make the shields falter. And did the cube in FC adapt?
I figured the Borg cube took damage steadily during the combat, and was itself damaged by the time it got to Earth. Combine that with the fact that the Federation was scatter-gunning it (instead of concentrating fire), the Fed ships themselves are damaged, and you have a tough fight. Now the Enterprise comes in, full strength, and Picard hears the Borg mention their weak point. He tells the entire fleet to focus fire on the weak point, and boom.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:40 am
by m52nickerson
Captain Seafort wrote:
m52nickerson wrote:Again you are discounting the fact that in the Defiant's situation the Jem'Hadar most likley would not have gotten past the Sov shields.
Yes they would have - that encounter occurred before the Feds figured out how to block JH weapons.
Ok, but had it been after they would not have gotten through the shields.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:54 am
by Mikey
That's unknown. And te fact is, there are lots of naval weapons that wouldn't penetrate a Ticonderoga's armor - that doesn't make the Tico a battleship.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:09 am
by m52nickerson
Deepcrush wrote: Its still a battleship, and one that can eat apart Starfleet's first dedicated warship.
Which was how much smaller, and not a battleship?
Again, you're trying to twist the facts at hand. The ship was still more then a match for SFs best...
Yes, because of a single piece of tech. Are you also going to argue that the Breen ships were better before the energy weapon was rendered nil.
Oh, right, a ship more powerful then any known ship of any class or race. Right, I guess we shouldn't have to worry about that one... :roll:
Since how much of its mass is not used for tactical systems?
Thats your opinion. But, if you want your opinion to matter on this, you have to prove that a Negh'var is inferior to the Sov.
That is right it is my opinion, and pretty much the opinion of the main part of this site since the Sov is rated higher overall. Your opinion carries no more weight then mine since you can't prove that a Nagh'var could beat a Sov.
Yes, from the Ep Darmok. They had a ship able to bitchslap the E-D.
At what point in the episode is that established?
In a layman's terms... YES! The idea of a battleship is that it is packed FULL 9as in no space left over full) of weapons and covered in as much armor as they could fit. ie... Defiant but supersized.
The no true Scotsman....battleship argument. So any ship in which you can put more armor on can't be a battleship. You can always put on more armor unless you get to the point were the ship is a block of armor.
A hole is your hull is a bad thing. A hole 10m long as in the one behind the bridge in the conference room counts as a BIG hole.
Well it has worked so far, and remember the Sovs armor is not it's primary defense.
No one, its what we know as an example.
No one, we are? What are you taking about?
Ok, I'd ask you to think about the statement but I don't want you to hurt yourself. But, just to be on the safe side. You want me to prove to you that the maximum power generated is the maximum amount of power avalible for use?
No I want you to prove that making more powerful phaser and shields is as simple as making them bigger.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:12 am
by m52nickerson
Mikey wrote:That's unknown. And te fact is, there are lots of naval weapons that wouldn't penetrate a Ticonderoga's armor - that doesn't make the Tico a battleship.
If those bug fighter weapons had the power to knock down the Sovs shields there is no way any other fed ship would have stood a chance and the Federation would be no more.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:13 am
by Deepcrush
Umm, could you fix that up a bit... I'm not sure what I'm supposed to respond to... :lol:

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:15 am
by m52nickerson
Sorry, I fixed it I had one stupid tag in the wrong place.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:18 am
by Deepcrush
Don't worry, I've done that too.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 5:13 am
by Deepcrush
Which was how much smaller, and not a battleship?
Doesn't matter. Its still a battleship. Heavy armor and heavy weapons. You need a battleship to face something like that.
Yes, because of a single piece of tech. Are you also going to argue that the Breen ships were better before the energy weapon was rendered nil.
They were better. They carried an advantage. It doesn't matter where that advantage comes from or leads to. Its still an advantage.
Since how much of its mass is not used for tactical systems?
Doesn't matter. Its still more then a match for anything the UFP is fielding.
That is right it is my opinion, and pretty much the opinion of the main part of this site since the Sov is rated higher overall. Your opinion carries no more weight then mine since you can't prove that a Nagh'var could beat a Sov.
So then this means that if you don't know if you can match a ship from another race. Common sense says build a ship that can. A battleship!
At what point in the episode is that established?
The entire episode was spent watching the E-D get knocked around while giving almost nothing in return.
The no true Scotsman....battleship argument.
What is the point of this statement? I'm an American, not a Scotsman.
So any ship in which you can put more armor on can't be a battleship. You can always put on more armor unless you get to the point were the ship is a block of armor.
Nice little twist out of context there. Very cute. But still doesn't take the point away from the main subject. The Sov has HOLES in its armor. A battleship or just a dedicated warship (like the Defiant) would be bow to stern armor plate. If you have room to add weapons or armor then you need to add them. That is the point of a battleship. To stack it with so much firepower that you're shocked the damned thing even moves without falling apart.
Well it has worked so far, and remember the Sovs armor is not it's primary defense.
How well is that again? Was it when the Sona started beating on them or when the Scimitar started cutting huge holes in her? You fail to understand that its not about making either the primary defense. But to build a balance between them.
No one, we are? What are you taking about?
Sorry, it should read...
No one is, we are? What are you taking about?
No I want you to prove that making more powerful phaser and shields is as simple as making them bigger.
Though this has been covered.... The crew of the E-D (Best of Both Worlds) used the Nav Deflector to focus the power of the Warp Core as a weapon. Now, they were able to do this with something that wasn't built for use as a weapon. Now figure that if they built it as a weapon... wait... they did... in AGT we saw the E-D with a weapon that was fed straight from the Warp Core and was able to punch holes into a Negh'Var.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:02 am
by Reliant121
okay, I'm gonna leave this debate because I am more confused than anything at the moment.

Fun while it lasted, and thank you participants for a good argument.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:20 pm
by m52nickerson
Deepcrush wrote: Doesn't matter. Its still a battleship. Heavy armor and heavy weapons. You need a battleship to face something like that.
I ment the Defiant class is not a battleship. I know the Dominon ship is one. My point was that we see it defeat a smaller ship not a Sov.
They were better. They carried an advantage. It doesn't matter where that advantage comes from or leads to. Its still an advantage.
This is just going to be were we disagree, I don't see ships that get blown apart farely easy as being better just because of a single system.
Doesn't matter. Its still more then a match for anything the UFP is fielding.
You know this because it was able to capture an Intrepid class?
So then this means that if you don't know if you can match a ship from another race. Common sense says build a ship that can. A battleship!
We don't know, that does not mean the Federation doesn't. Again the fact that they have not built a larger ship then the Sov speaks to that. Unlike you I do not believe that Federation is a bunch of morons.
The entire episode was spent watching the E-D get knocked around while giving almost nothing in return.
Do you know why that was, it was because the E-D was showing restraint. They were doing everything in their power to get Picard back short of an all out battle.
What is the point of this statement? I'm an American, not a Scotsman.
A "no true Scotsman" argument were any example of something, in this case battleships, that does not fit your definition is not a battleship. You said that if you could put more armor on a ship it is not a battleship. Since you could almost always put more armor on a ship, nothing can ever live up to your definition.
Nice little twist out of context there. Very cute. But still doesn't take the point away from the main subject. The Sov has HOLES in its armor. A battleship or just a dedicated warship (like the Defiant) would be bow to stern armor plate. If you have room to add weapons or armor then you need to add them. That is the point of a battleship. To stack it with so much firepower that you're shocked the damned thing even moves without falling apart.
So you just totally discount the Sovs shields or the armor it does have. Again, back to the logicl fallacy that is the "No ture Scotsman". You could almost always add another gun, or more armor. You could add it until the ship could hardly move. Just because you don't does not mean a ship is not a battleship.

Battleship definitions - "any of a class of warships that are the most heavily armored and are equipped with the most powerful armament" or "Any one of a class of warships of the largest size, carrying the greatest number of weapons and clad with the heaviest armor."

By those definitons the Sov is a battleship as it does have the greatest armament of any class in the federation, and the greatest greatest armor when you count both the armor and the shields.
How well is that again? Was it when the Sona started beating on them or when the Scimitar started cutting huge holes in her? You fail to understand that its not about making either the primary defense. But to build a balance between them.
Even the best battleships under enough firepower will see its armor fail. The Sov with its shields and armor still took a hell of a lot of damage. Were did the Scimitar cuts holes in the E-E other then the bridge, were by the way were no windows. Not only that but for what was an almost direct hit on the bridge the armor/hull was strong enough to prevent the entire bridge from being destroyed.
No one is, we are? What are you taking about?
Deep do you even remember what you were arguing? You said that no one was saying the the Sov did not have armor, but that is what we see. I responded with the statement "no one, we are?" to the fact that you stated that no one was arguing that point, then you argured the point.
Though this has been covered.... The crew of the E-D (Best of Both Worlds) used the Nav Deflector to focus the power of the Warp Core as a weapon. Now, they were able to do this with something that wasn't built for use as a weapon. Now figure that if they built it as a weapon... wait... they did... in AGT we saw the E-D with a weapon that was fed straight from the Warp Core and was able to punch holes into a Negh'Var.
They were able to use something that was designed to output large amounts of energy, the Nav Deflector, to output a even larger amount of energy and just about destroy the deflector in the process. Just the same as you could overload phasers to the point of destorying them. If anything the Deflector "weapon" was tried not only because of it massive power output, but the thought was the borg would not be ready for it. The crew know from it's first encounter with the Borg, were the E-D's phasers blow chunks out of a cube, that weapons the borg had not seen before did lots of damage.

As got the AGT the phaser lance was in a future very much created by Q. There is no evidance that the Federation has, or ever will develop such a weapon.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:39 pm
by Mikey
m52nickerson wrote:
Mikey wrote:That's unknown. And te fact is, there are lots of naval weapons that wouldn't penetrate a Ticonderoga's armor - that doesn't make the Tico a battleship.
If those bug fighter weapons had the power to knock down the Sovs shields there is no way any other fed ship would have stood a chance and the Federation would be no more.
Umm... OK. That means nothing, because you are once again reversing course when confronted with a statement, but I'll reiterate.

The point is not whether a bug could or couldn't knock down a Sov's shields. The point is that even if it weren't; a patrol boat not being able to knock down a cruiser doesn't make said cruiser a battleship.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:45 pm
by m52nickerson
Mikey wrote:Umm... OK. That means nothing, because you are once again reversing course when confronted with a statement, but I'll reiterate.

The point is not whether a bug could or couldn't knock down a Sov's shields. The point is that even if it weren't; a patrol boat not being able to knock down a cruiser doesn't make said cruiser a battleship.
Your absolutly right it does not. The whole point was started by Seaford trying to say that since the armor on the Sov was weaker then on a Defiant the Sov could not be a battleship. My point was the while the armor on the Sov may not be a strong as the Defiants the Sov overall protection is still much greater.

I was never trying to say, "look a bug fighter can't take down a Sov, so it is a battleship". I appologize if that was not clear.

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:56 pm
by Mikey
K. But I think Seafort's point is better paraphrased as "If the Sov were a battleship, it would have equivalent armor to the Defiant."

Re: Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:07 pm
by m52nickerson
Mikey wrote:K. But I think Seafort's point is better paraphrased as "If the Sov were a battleship, it would have equivalent armor to the Defiant."
Alright.