Topic: Stupid OP Question of the year  (Read 8038 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Roychipoqua_Mace

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • Gender: Male
Re: Stupid OP Question of the year
« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2008, 05:01:08 pm »
Kind of off-topic, but are ISC ships a lot different in SFC than in SFB?

I haven't seen any official ISC SSDs, but only those at Smiley Lich's site. Some of the ISC ships there seemed like they had more and heavier weapons but less engine power, compared to SFC.

Offline Julin Eurthyr

  • Veltrassi Ambassador at Large
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1057
  • Gender: Male
  • Back in Exile due to Win 7 - ISC RM/Strat Com.
Re: Stupid OP Question of the year
« Reply #21 on: December 06, 2008, 06:20:21 pm »
Kind of off-topic, but are ISC ships a lot different in SFC than in SFB?

I haven't seen any official ISC SSDs, but only those at Smiley Lich's site. Some of the ISC ships there seemed like they had more and heavier weapons but less engine power, compared to SFC.

Just like every other "stock" SFC ship (and most of the OP+ ships), they are 100 accurate box-for-box conversions from SSD to game...  Now, while the box counts may be the same, the ships play a lot differently from SFB -> SFC, and the ISC's no different in that reguard...

The I-CCZ is 209 in the board game no wonder it is an over powered oil can in SFC it is 229.

The reason it is 229 in SFC is the "I-torp tax".  Per SFB, an ISC ship can only fire 1 "rear firing F-Torp" (aka I-torp) at a ship per turn.  Due to coding limitations, the limits are one torp "per hardpoint, per turn"... Since it's possible for the CCZ to offload all 6 Pl-Fs over the course of 3 turns instead of only 3 over 3 turns, it's BPV was increased to compensate.

AKA: Koloth Kinshaya - Lord of the House Kinshaya in the Klingon Empire
S'Leth - Romulan Admiral
Some anonymous strongman in Prime Industries

Offline Calbeck

  • Pointy-Headed Pony-Boy
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Gender: Male
  • Yeah, I'm a Unicorn. Deal.
Re: Stupid OP Question of the year
« Reply #22 on: December 07, 2008, 12:41:14 pm »
As a general rule, a Command Cruiser is a Heavy Cruiser which is built from the keel up to perform command functions, primarily including a Flag Bridge and heavier weapons loadout (to assist in the continuing survival of those on the Flag Bridge).

A Battle Cruiser, however, is usually defined as maximizing the Cruiser-class hull (again, from the keel up) for purely military purposes, which may (and often does) include actually extending the hull to allow for more space.

From there, you have your various variants.  ;)

Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2690
  • Gender: Male
Re: Stupid OP Question of the year
« Reply #23 on: December 07, 2008, 06:04:56 pm »
How would you know it is from the keel up as that is not how ships are built today is modular construction meaning each part of the ship is built seperately and welded together.I don't think ships of Star Trek are built that way.

Offline Calbeck

  • Pointy-Headed Pony-Boy
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Gender: Male
  • Yeah, I'm a Unicorn. Deal.
Re: Stupid OP Question of the year
« Reply #24 on: December 08, 2008, 08:52:05 am »
Without overly belaboring the point, it's a simple turn of phrase meant to convey the notion that something is built for a specific purpose.

Ravok

  • Guest
Re: Stupid OP Question of the year
« Reply #25 on: December 08, 2008, 02:37:25 pm »
How would you know it is from the keel up as that is not how ships are built today is modular construction meaning each part of the ship is built seperately and welded together.I don't think ships of Star Trek are built that way.

 Oh for Petes sake Age!! how do you know?? Built any Star Ships latley?? ::)

 What kind of of idiots would they have designing them, if the cant be refitted or upgraded??

 They have Warp Technology,but can't grasp an idea our military has been using for the last 60 plus years??? ::)