DEFIANT vs. UPGRADED EXCELSIOR CLASS
Chris Cracknell
: IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been down
: for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
: have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
: barely. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
: weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
: Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~~^
You have to keep in mind that both ships in that battle were fighting to
disable not destroy so it's not exactly a fair determination of either
ship's firepower.
Of course I've never believed that the Defiant was the most powerful ship
in the fleet. It's just the most powerful ship of it's size in the fleet.
CRACKERS
(Pulling punches from hell!!!!!)
Bryan E. Esquire
I'm sure that a lot of you remember me as one of the most "vocal"
advocates of Defiant's battle prowess, right? Well, sad to say, the era of
Defiant being the most powerful of Starfleet has probably come to an end.
Well, DS9's "Paradise Lost" proves that Starfleet has definitely
been upgrading its ships. Whether it was just that one Excelsior class
ship or the entire fleet, I don't know, but it proves that Defiant has
met it's match.
The USS Lakota was defintiely taking a pounding in itself, and the
fact that the Lakota couldn't defeat the Defiant was because of it's
ablative armor.
IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been down
for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
barely.
O'Brien states that Lakota definitely has more powerful weaponry
than standard Excelsior class ships --3 phaser bursts knock the Defiant's
shields to 60%. Not bad.
But to give Defiant some credit, to utterly bring an enhanced ship
to it's knees and be 1/3 the size of it's saucer sections defintiely says
something about the power of Defiant. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
Also, one BIG problem.. Wouldn't the battle have gone a LOT FASTER
(as if it wasn't quick enough) if the prefix code was used?!! I'm
nitpicky, I guess.
--
--
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Marc Escuro [R] @@ They reach into your room,
Bryan E. Esquire @@ Just feel their gentle touch.
Bucko @@ When all hope is gone, you know
bas...@cats.ucsc.edu @@ Sad Songs say so much
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Chung, Peter W.
[snip]
>
> Well, DS9's "Paradise Lost" proves that Starfleet has definitely
>been upgrading its ships. Whether it was just that one Excelsior class
>ship or the entire fleet, I don't know, but it proves that Defiant has
>met it's match.
Did it really? After watching the episode, it was clear that neither party
wanted to destroy one another, they were fighting with phasers set on
lower settings to disable rather than destroy. The Lakota didn't use her
quantum torps, although we did see the Defiant fire one of her aft
torpedoes (which missed).
> The USS Lakota was defintiely taking a pounding in itself, and the
>fact that the Lakota couldn't defeat the Defiant was because of it's
>ablative armor.
Yes, that's true. However what if the Lakota increased phaser power or contact
duration? (I'm avoiding the use of q-torps in this instance since it is clear
the Lakota didn't want to blow up the Defiant and vice-versa).
> IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been down
>for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
>have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
>barely.
In this case, yes. Kinda makes me wonder if the writers planned this.
> O'Brien states that Lakota definitely has more powerful weaponry
>than standard Excelsior class ships --3 phaser bursts knock the Defiant's
>shields to 60%. Not bad.
But I'm getting confused to as which type is the "real" Excelsior-class.
> But to give Defiant some credit, to utterly bring an enhanced ship
>to it's knees and be 1/3 the size of it's saucer sections defintiely says
>something about the power of Defiant. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
>weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
>Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
That's very hard to call. If they were *really* fighting, then the
Lakota would have opened fire at a much greater distance, getting in far
more hits before Defiant got close enough to effectively use her phasers.
And if the Lakota attempted to deny the Defiant good firing solutions
by maneuvering, then Defiant would be hard pressed to get good hits in.
Of course, we're ignoring that the Lakota is an old ship refitted with
new weapons while the Defiant is a new ship with new weapons.
Analysis? If they were really fighting, Defiant would gain the edge if
it got close-enough to shoot. If the Lakota (or any ship for that matter)
could keep Defiant just out of arms-reach, then they would have the
advantage. (None of this is new, though.)
> Also, one BIG problem.. Wouldn't the battle have gone a LOT FASTER
>(as if it wasn't quick enough) if the prefix code was used?!! I'm
>nitpicky, I guess.
I asked the same question. Or if the Lakota attempted to tractor (at least
try) the Defiant while she wasn't aiming at the Lakota (like in TNG's "The
Battle") or Defiant tucking into a firing blind-spot on the Lakota
since Defiant is relatively small enough to do so, like below the secondary
hull, behind the deflector array and under the torp launcher of the Lakota.
Dwight Williams
Bryan E. Esquire (bas...@cats.ucsc.edu) writes:
> I'm sure that a lot of you remember me as one of the most "vocal"
> advocates of Defiant's battle prowess, right? Well, sad to say, the era of
> Defiant being the most powerful of Starfleet has probably come to an end.
>
> been upgrading its ships. Whether it was just that one Excelsior class
> ship or the entire fleet, I don't know, but it proves that Defiant has
> met it's match.
>
> fact that the Lakota couldn't defeat the Defiant was because of it's
> ablative armor.
> for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
> have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
> barely.
> than standard Excelsior class ships --3 phaser bursts knock the Defiant's
> shields to 60%. Not bad.
> to it's knees and be 1/3 the size of it's saucer sections defintiely says
> something about the power of Defiant. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
> weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
> Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
> (as if it wasn't quick enough) if the prefix code was used?!! I'm
> nitpicky, I guess.
I won't address anything but the last point of your comments here...
I seem to recall Leyton claiming to have told the Lakota to assume that
the Defiant crew had all been replaced by Dominion operatives. I assume
that changing the prefix code would have been part of SOP in cases where a
starship is assumed to "gone renegade" and begun actively hunting other
UFP Starfleet vessels. Such procedures may even date back to the
Reliant-Enterprise battles in ST II.
--
Dwight Williams(ad...@freenet.carleton.ca) -- Orleans, Ontario, Canada
Cliff Lum
ad...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Chris Cracknell) writes:
>
> Posted: 12 Jan 1996 18:17:08 GMT
> Org. : Hamilton-Wentworth FreeNet, Ontario, Canada.> : IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been
> down
> : for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too
> would
> : have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage --
> but
> : weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster
> than
> : Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
> ~~^
>
> You have to keep in mind that both ships in that battle were fighting to
> disable not destroy so it's not exactly a fair determination of either
> ship's firepower.
>
> Of course I've never believed that the Defiant was the most powerful ship
> in the fleet. It's just the most powerful ship of it's size in the fleet.
> CRACKERS
> (Pulling punches from hell!!!!!)
Well put it this way, the Defiant was made to take on the BORG.
Do you think the Modified Lakota is a better ship than the Borg's?
cliff
John Nelson
>
>
> I'm sure that a lot of you remember me as one of the most "vocal"
>advocates of Defiant's battle prowess, right? Well, sad to say, the era of
>Defiant being the most powerful of Starfleet has probably come to an end.
>
> Well, DS9's "Paradise Lost" proves that Starfleet has definitely
>been upgrading its ships. Whether it was just that one Excelsior class
>ship or the entire fleet, I don't know, but it proves that Defiant has
>met it's match.
As evidence that the entire fleet is being upgraded, the Defiant was fit with
ablative armor, "Quantum torpedoes" seemed to pop up all of the sudden, DS9 is
armed to the teeth, and when the Klingon Fleet attacked a few episodes back,
the "task force" sent in to help out DS9 was only 6 ships. Somehow, I doubt
that was all they could find at the time. (Recall that Picard scrambled
together a fleet of *20* ships to "stop the flow of supplies" from the
Romulans to the Duras during the Klingon Civil War.)
> The USS Lakota was defintiely taking a pounding in itself, and the
>fact that the Lakota couldn't defeat the Defiant was because of it's
>ablative armor.
Also, they weren't exactly trying to kill each other. The Defiant was aiming
for weapon systems and the Lakota was go for engines. Nonetheless, the Lakota
still knocked off the Defiant's shields, something which Gem'Hadar and
Cardassians alike never managed to do. If, though, there were trying to kill
each other, the battle would be much more interesting because they would be
using their 'quantum torpedoes'. In this case, my bet is still on the Defiant
because it is more agile.
> IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been down
>for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
>have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
>barely.
>
> O'Brien states that Lakota definitely has more powerful weaponry
>than standard Excelsior class ships --3 phaser bursts knock the Defiant's
>shields to 60%. Not bad.
>
> But to give Defiant some credit, to utterly bring an enhanced ship
>to it's knees and be 1/3 the size of it's saucer sections defintiely says
>something about the power of Defiant. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
>weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
>Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
>
> Also, one BIG problem.. Wouldn't the battle have gone a LOT FASTER
>(as if it wasn't quick enough) if the prefix code was used?!! I'm
>nitpicky, I guess.
This isn't nitpicky at all. Only command-rank personal are supposed to even
know about them, so its highly unlikely that a bunch of changlings would have
known to change the codes on the Defiant. The crew of the Lakota should have
tried to use the codes first, and then realized that the Defiant's crew
weren't changlings once the codes didn't work.
Daniel Moscovitz
> : for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
> : have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
> : weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
> : Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
>
> You have to keep in mind that both ships in that battle were fighting to
> disable not destroy so it's not exactly a fair determination of either
> ship's firepower.
>
> Of course I've never believed that the Defiant was the most powerful ship
> in the fleet. It's just the most powerful ship of it's size in the fleet.
>
> CRACKERS
> (Pulling punches from hell!!!!!)
What is tecnically the most powerful ship in the federation fleet? The
most powerful class?
Daniel Moscovitz
dm...@fast.net
DJ6624
jem hadar ships attacking it and the galaxy got destroyed its self and the
defient destroyed how many when it went to the gamma quadrent.
DJ
I have a question why doesn't Voyager go to the worm whole in stead of
going to the alpha quadrent dirrectly
George Lianeris
Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
> Don't forget for about a minute the Defiant just sat there
> taking hits from the exelsior. If they wanted to destroy the
> lacota they could have easily but they did not want to kill
> starfleet officers.
>
The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
shields.
--
Lt. Cmdr. George Lianeris CSS Cathawk, Tactical/Security Officer
Captain George Lianeris CSS DreamStar, Commanding Officer
George Lianeris
Chris Cracknell (ad...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca) writes:
> DJ6624 (dj6...@aol.com) wrote:
> : A galaxy class starship and three runabouts couldn't destroy one of free
> : jem hadar ships attacking it and the galaxy got destroyed its self and the
> : defient destroyed how many when it went to the gamma quadrent.
>
> 1) The captain of the galaxy class ship was a twit.
>
> 2) At that time they had no data on Jem Hadar fighters. They knew nothing
> about thier shield configurations, their weapon power, their
> manouverability, etc.
Well, if you remember, the Dominion was expecting SF to send something
thru to get Sisko. They were waiting for the Odyssey, and had probably
sabotaged her.
>
> 3) The first time the Defiant went up against the Jem Hadar it was
> subdued very quickly without damaging any Jem Hadar ships. If the Jem
> Hadar had wished to destroy her she would be destroyed.
>
Damn right.
> The reason the Defiant has done such a good job against the Jem Hadar
> lately is because Starfleet has more technical and stratigical data on
> the Jem Hadar ships. Also when the Romulan/Cardassian fleet was destroyed
> it was because they were suprised and surrounded. The Defiant sneaked up,
> got in, and got out. The Jem Hadar were more interested in destroying the
> Romulan and Cardassian ships.
>
Damn right again :)
> No one is arguing that the Defiant is not a powerful ship. But I highly
> doubt it's the most powerful ship Starfleet has got. It's certainly the
> most powerful ship of it's size in the fleet and is probably more
> powerful than many other larger ships. And it would certainly be more
> cost effective and efficient to send a fleet of 10-20 of them into a
> battle than to send in 5 galaxy class ships.
>
I definately agree with your conclusion here, although I would think
that a Galaxy-Defiant (well, not necessarily Galaxy, but maybe Nebula or
something up there, in any case) class combo would rock a Warbird (I'm
talking about just two ships here), or, a larger combined fleet would rock
a Borg cube. You have to consider the volume of firepower a large ship
can add as a long-range firepower carrier. The E-D has 250 torps, more
than enuf to kick any ships butt (Borg excepted). So, you'd have a Defiant
do some close-in footwork with it's phasers, and leave the dwelling and
torp-lobbing to a Galaxy or something similar.
> I guess what is needed is a war games episode like that one Hathaway TNG
> episode pitting the Defiant against a Galaxy Class ship. That will put an
> end to the "The Defiant Is The Best" camp.
>
Amen!
> CRACKERS
> (Cool, but not best from hell!!!!)
james mularadelis
: In article <4d68j4$e...@main.freenet.hamilton.on.ca>,
: ad...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Chris Cracknell) writes:
: >
: > Posted: 12 Jan 1996 18:17:08 GMT
: > Org. : Hamilton-Wentworth FreeNet, Ontario, Canada.
: > : IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been
: > down
: > : for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too
: > would
: > : have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage --
: > but
: > : barely. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
: > : weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster
: > than
: > : Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
: > ~~^
: >
: > You have to keep in mind that both ships in that battle were fighting to
: > disable not destroy so it's not exactly a fair determination of either
: > ship's firepower.
: >
: > Of course I've never believed that the Defiant was the most powerful ship
: > CRACKERS
: > (Pulling punches from hell!!!!!)
: Well put it this way, the Defiant was made to take on the BORG.
: Do you think the Modified Lakota is a better ship than the Borg's?
: cliff
Has anyone seen a tech sheet on the Defiant? From previous
engagements with Klingons and the Dominion ships it would appear that
the Defiant could destroy a ship with a volley of phaser bursts.
Maybe I missed it, but, where are all the other ships protecting
earth? Usually you have at least one of your latest weapons platforms
protecting your headquarters.. It just seemed odd that no other
starships were in earth orbit, especially when the planet's power grid
failed.
jim
DEVILFISH
writes:
>A galaxy class starship and three runabouts couldn't destroy one of free
>jem hadar ships attacking it and the galaxy got destroyed its self and
the
>defient destroyed how many when it went to the gamma quadrent.
That's because one ship destroying another that could destroy another
doesn't mean that the original ship could destroy that shi and furthermore
the Odyssey was not firing at full power and you should really try to use
punctuation in your posts.
Chris Cracknell
: A galaxy class starship and three runabouts couldn't destroy one of free
: jem hadar ships attacking it and the galaxy got destroyed its self and the
: defient destroyed how many when it went to the gamma quadrent.
1) The captain of the galaxy class ship was a twit.
2) At that time they had no data on Jem Hadar fighters. They knew nothing
about thier shield configurations, their weapon power, their
manouverability, etc.
3) The first time the Defiant went up against the Jem Hadar it was
subdued very quickly without damaging any Jem Hadar ships. If the Jem
Hadar had wished to destroy her she would be destroyed.
The reason the Defiant has done such a good job against the Jem Hadar
lately is because Starfleet has more technical and stratigical data on
the Jem Hadar ships. Also when the Romulan/Cardassian fleet was destroyed
it was because they were suprised and surrounded. The Defiant sneaked up,
got in, and got out. The Jem Hadar were more interested in destroying the
Romulan and Cardassian ships.
No one is arguing that the Defiant is not a powerful ship. But I highly
doubt it's the most powerful ship Starfleet has got. It's certainly the
most powerful ship of it's size in the fleet and is probably more
powerful than many other larger ships. And it would certainly be more
cost effective and efficient to send a fleet of 10-20 of them into a
battle than to send in 5 galaxy class ships.
I guess what is needed is a war games episode like that one Hathaway TNG
episode pitting the Defiant against a Galaxy Class ship. That will put an
end to the "The Defiant Is The Best" camp.
CRACKERS
ERIC HOLLER
>Well put it this way, the Defiant was made to take on the BORG.
>Do you think the Modified Lakota is a better ship than the Borg's?
>cliff
A fleet of Defiants was meant to take on the Borg. I think this
episode showed the Defiant at the exact right power levels. One of
the most powerful ships in the Fleet but not some "SuperShip" (I know
we can paint a big red S on the side.) The Defiant has a job to do,
its fast, manuveralble, and packs a hell of a punch (Maybe as much as
a Galaxy). Its the perfect swarm weapon.
The Lakota's levels make perfect sense. Starfleet has taken to using
modular spaceframes as starships, that way its easy to upgrade a
component. Thats how they use designs like the Excesior for 100 yrs.
And as Tech advances it gets smaller. The space frame once needed to
haul around a class X phaser emmiter's may be 50% smaller today then
10 years ago. I'd bet that the Standard Excelsior in DS9s time would
so overpower the Excesiors of TOS movie time that it would not be fun
to watch. Heck I'd bet with Tech improvements the Excelsior's of
today pack as much punch as the Galaxy did back in the early days of
STTNG (i mean it all , Raw power, Phaser power, Shield power). If
they can stuff a Galaxy into the Defiants Space Frame, imagine what
they can do with the room in and Excesior.
Of course this dosn't mean spaceframe design shouldn't change.
Galaxy's shape helps make a more efficeant warp field and maybe there
are some technologies that have to be caried by a Galaxy or bigger.
One of the great discoveries of this battle was the Dorsal array on
the Defiant. Beam based phasers not pulsed. Perhaps put there to
provide 360' coverage?
***************************************
Eric Holler * Eho...@in.net*
Systems Manager * Vuln...@aol.com (Sue me I like the people.)*
Top Secret Location * a couple others I've forgotten in old age.*
*******************************************************************
"On the net in search of a good cup of coffee and a witty Sig."
with respect to Jack K. (No, not Kennedy.)*
Chung, Peter W.
>
[snip]
>
>One of the great discoveries of this battle was the Dorsal array on
>the Defiant. Beam based phasers not pulsed. Perhaps put there to
>provide 360' coverage?
I'm 80% certain that the beam phaser you refer to is phaser fire from
the Lakota, not the Defiant. The Defiant appeared to only use her
pulse phasers and aft torpedo launcher in "Paradise Lost". But I will
double-check to be sure.
Phil Paradias
George Lianeris
Eli Erlikhman (eerl...@chat.carleton.ca) writes:
> George Lianeris (ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
>
>> Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
>> > Well for the relatively tiny size of the Defiant it's amazing
>> > it can take down large ships like the exelsior, cardassian
>> > galor class. The Defiant is one of the most powerfull ships in
>> > the alpha quadrant, although I think there must be more
>> > powerfull ships out there. For instance a galaxy class ship can
>> > also be upgraded like the lacota, or a romulin warbird.
>> >
>> The Lacota had nowhere near the kind of firepower a Galaxy starship has,
>> even if it got type X phaser banks. Wanna know why? A Galaxy class has
>> way more emitters than the Lacota could hope to have. Also did you notice
>> that the Lacota's phasers where used in pulses to knock down Defian't shields?
>
>> I think that the Odyssey's and runabout's phasers were sabotaged. The
>> Defiant wasn't doing too well against the Lacota's shields-if it wasn't
>> for the Defiant's armor, it would have been gone before it had dropped the
>> Lacota's shields. The Admiral and the Lacota's Captain obviously thought
>> so.
>
> Didn't they say that Lacota was even in worse condition than Defiant just
> before the fight was over. So defiant was winning.
>
> Defiant could destroy Lacota with one more shot but Worf said it is not an
> optoinn. Also Lacota did have much more caulties than Defiant did.
Oh, come on Eli. Remember how many hits the Defiant took while it was
turning? The Lacota would fire it's qtorps and they'd kill each other.
No winner. Also the Defiant might be destroyed while turning, before it
had a chance to fire on the Lacota. Remember, the Lacota was in worse
shape than Defiant, but the Defiant wasn't doing so well either. It's
that BS armor that saved it. Also, did you notice that Cpt. Benji was
using her weapons right? She pulse fired the Lacota's phasers, the best
known way to penetrate shields.
>
> Also Defiant can not be thje most powerfull ship just because its size.
> But it has the most effictive weapons in a fleet.
>
Wait a sec. We just SAW that the Defiant isn't all that effective at
all. If it wasn't for it's armor, the Lacota would have killed it before
Defiant had dropped the Lacota's shields. The Defiant is the most
effective ship of it's SIZE, but not in the fleet.
>> --
>> Lt. Cmdr. George Lianeris CSS Cathawk, Tactical/Security Officer
>> Captain George Lianeris CSS DreamStar, Commanding Officer
>
>
> "The Truth is usually just an excuse for lack of imagination."
> - Garak
> Eli Erlikhman
> eerl...@chat.carleton.ca
Robert Oliver
In the intial stages of the battle Defiant DID just sit there and take
fire from Lakota.
> it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
> just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
Lakota herself was one shot away from destruction.
> Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
> use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
Considering that Lakota barely moved and Defiant was whipping around
I doubt that Lakota's torps would have been able to hit Defiant.
> Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
> shields.
The port shields were knocked to 60% almost immediately but the overall
shield system hung in there and took a grat deal of firepower. As I
recall Lakota did most of the firing and Defiant generally took a lot
of hits compared to what it dealt out.
The most important thing to remember in this battle is that neither
side was going for a kill. If they were Defiant could have backed off
and fired everything she had at one of Lakota's warp engines (big,
long and obvious targets) and taken the ship out fairly quickly.
Chris Cracknell
: Well put it this way, the Defiant was made to take on the BORG.
: Do you think the Modified Lakota is a better ship than the Borg's?
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
You're under the mistaken assumption that the Defiant was made to take on
the Borg single handedly. We've seen the Defiant take a severe beating on
more than one occasion. The Defiant wouldn't stand a chance against a
Borg ship. The Defiant is an experimental ship, the idea is that a fleet
of them would be able to take on the Borg, not a single ship. The Defiant
is smaller than regular starships and presumably is cheaper and faster to
manufacture. As Sisko said, it was made for one purpose and one purpose
only, fighting. It's not an effective exploration vessel, it's not an
effective science vessel. It makes a great scout ship (especially equiped
with a cloak) and it makes a good fighter.
I doubt very much that it's the most powerful fighting ship in Starfleet.
I'm sure a galaxy class ship could defeat it and it's probably an even
match for the upgraded Excelsior class ship. But a fleet of 10 to 20
Defiant vessels would be more effective in a fight than 5 Galaxy class
ships and would probably be a lot more cost efficient and quicker to produce.
i don't believe that the Defiant is the greatest ship in terms of fire
power that starfleet has to offer.
CRACKERS
(And it's ugly too from hell!)
Adam Brown
>> Also, one BIG problem.. Wouldn't the battle have gone a LOT FASTER
>>(as if it wasn't quick enough) if the prefix code was used?!! I'm
>>nitpicky, I guess.
>
In my opinion, the prefix code seems to be one of the most misunderstood
pieces of Star Trek technology. Not that I have all the answers, but I
never thought of the prefic code as a weapon. Its not a series of
numbers that, when transmitted, cause StarFleet ships to automatically
drop their shields. Instead, it is meant to protect the computer of a
Starship. In that sense, it is sort of like a virus protection program,
today. It prevents access to important ship functions from exterior
sources. In the Wrath of Kahn, Kahn was expecting the transmission of
the Genesis specs. As such, he allowed the RELIANT computer to recieve
an incoming transmission. The purpose of the prefix code is to stop
someone from sneaking conflicting orders into a ship's computer. Kirk,
by sending the prefix code, essentially unlocked the door to the RELIANT
computer allowing him to order it to drop shields.
If this explanation is correct, it explains why we don't see the prefix
code used as a weapon, including in Paradise Lost. In order to make
effective use of the code, there would have to be communication between
ship computers. I don't see how Worf (or the Lakota Captain), would
allow a ship he was fighting access to his computer.
Phil Paradias
George Lianeris
even if it got type X phaser banks. Wanna know why? A Galaxy class has
way more emitters than the Lacota could hope to have. Also did you notice
that the Lacota's phasers where used in pulses to knock down Defian't shields?
I think that the Odyssey's and runabout's phasers were sabotaged. The
Defiant wasn't doing too well against the Lacota's shields-if it wasn't
for the Defiant's armor, it would have been gone before it had dropped the
Lacota's shields. The Admiral and the Lacota's Captain obviously thought
so.
--
Phil Paradias
enterprise-D if it had the chance. Assuming it is not upgraded
like the exelsior. The enterprise lost against 2 klingon birds
of prey for god sakes, and the defiant easily destroyed 5 jemm
hadar ships in 1 battle.
Ian Montgomerie
> Also, one BIG problem.. Wouldn't the battle have gone a LOT FASTER
>(as if it wasn't quick enough) if the prefix code was used?!! I'm
>nitpicky, I guess.
Prefix codes can be changed. The ONLY reason Kirk used a prefix code, and it
worked, was because Khan wasn't Starfleet, and so didn't know the code even
existed, and didn't know how to change it. He couldn't find the override,
either.
Albert Ko
On Sat, 13 Jan 1996, Daniel Moscovitz wrote:
> Chris Cracknell wrote:
> >
> > Bryan E. Esquire (bas...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
> > : IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been down
> > : for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
> > : have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
> > : barely. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
> > : weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
> > : Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
> > ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~~^
> >
> > You have to keep in mind that both ships in that battle were fighting to
> > disable not destroy so it's not exactly a fair determination of either
> > ship's firepower.
> >
> > Of course I've never believed that the Defiant was the most powerful ship
> > in the fleet. It's just the most powerful ship of it's size in the fleet.
> >
> > CRACKERS
> > (Pulling punches from hell!!!!!)
>
>
> What is tecnically the most powerful ship in the federation fleet? The
> most powerful class?
>
> Daniel Moscovitz
> dm...@fast.net
>
After starting that long thread on the Defiant (is/isn't hot) the general
objective consensus is that the Defiant probably has the highest peak
power rating for it's warp core. However, the Galaxy class has the
highest continuous power rating. In terms of close range weapon power,
the Defiant is one of the best in the business.
The only problem would be for it to do structural damage to its opponent's
ship. Especially if it were significantly larger, the pulse phasers
wouldn't do too much. Its long-range ability is not that great and the
firing arc is also a problem. Although its ablative armor and cloak help.
The Galaxy has the best long-range combat capability due to its superior
torp launchers. If a competent captain were at the helm, using full
advantage of the Galaxy's capabilities. It could take on any ship with
no problem. Even the new Klingon flagship. (i.e. if Picard ever used
the Picard Manuever, literally, not facetiously)
Just my humble opinion.
Albert
Ian Montgomerie
>In article <4d599a$n...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, bas...@cats.ucsc.edu (Bryan E. Esquire) writes...
>[snip]
>>
>> Well, DS9's "Paradise Lost" proves that Starfleet has definitely
>>been upgrading its ships. Whether it was just that one Excelsior class
>>ship or the entire fleet, I don't know, but it proves that Defiant has
>>met it's match.
>Did it really? After watching the episode, it was clear that neither party
>wanted to destroy one another, they were fighting with phasers set on
>lower settings to disable rather than destroy. The Lakota didn't use her
>quantum torps, although we did see the Defiant fire one of her aft
>torpedoes (which missed).
I could have sworn that it hit the starboard warp nacelle.
>> The USS Lakota was defintiely taking a pounding in itself, and the
>>fact that the Lakota couldn't defeat the Defiant was because of it's
>>ablative armor.
>Yes, that's true. However what if the Lakota increased phaser power or contact
>duration? (I'm avoiding the use of q-torps in this instance since it is clear
>the Lakota didn't want to blow up the Defiant and vice-versa).
>> IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been down
>>for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
>>have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
>>barely.
>In this case, yes. Kinda makes me wonder if the writers planned this.
>> O'Brien states that Lakota definitely has more powerful weaponry
>>than standard Excelsior class ships --3 phaser bursts knock the Defiant's
>>shields to 60%. Not bad.
>But I'm getting confused to as which type is the "real" Excelsior-class.
>> But to give Defiant some credit, to utterly bring an enhanced ship
>>to it's knees and be 1/3 the size of it's saucer sections defintiely says
>>something about the power of Defiant. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
>>weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
>>Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
>That's very hard to call. If they were *really* fighting, then the
>Lakota would have opened fire at a much greater distance, getting in far
>more hits before Defiant got close enough to effectively use her phasers.
>And if the Lakota attempted to deny the Defiant good firing solutions
>by maneuvering, then Defiant would be hard pressed to get good hits in.
I don't know where this "Defiant has a short range" thing. One Klingon ship
not destroyed at long range, after another ship was not destroyed at _short_
range just because they didn't hit anything vital, does not a pattern make.
Eli Erlikhman
> Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
> > Well for the relatively tiny size of the Defiant it's amazing
> > it can take down large ships like the exelsior, cardassian
> > galor class. The Defiant is one of the most powerfull ships in
> > the alpha quadrant, although I think there must be more
> > powerfull ships out there. For instance a galaxy class ship can
> > also be upgraded like the lacota, or a romulin warbird.
> >
> The Lacota had nowhere near the kind of firepower a Galaxy starship has,
> even if it got type X phaser banks. Wanna know why? A Galaxy class has
> way more emitters than the Lacota could hope to have. Also did you notice
> that the Lacota's phasers where used in pulses to knock down Defian't shields?
> I think that the Odyssey's and runabout's phasers were sabotaged. The
> Defiant wasn't doing too well against the Lacota's shields-if it wasn't
> for the Defiant's armor, it would have been gone before it had dropped the
> Lacota's shields. The Admiral and the Lacota's Captain obviously thought
> so.
Didn't they say that Lacota was even in worse condition than Defiant just
before the fight was over. So defiant was winning.
Defiant could destroy Lacota with one more shot but Worf said it is not an
optoinn. Also Lacota did have much more caulties than Defiant did.
Also Defiant can not be thje most powerfull ship just because its size.
But it has the most effictive weapons in a fleet.
> --
> Lt. Cmdr. George Lianeris CSS Cathawk, Tactical/Security Officer
> Captain George Lianeris CSS DreamStar, Commanding Officer
Eli Erlikhman
much bigger ship and it has much more resources to draw on. That is
Lacota transfer a much more energy to shields from unneccessary systems in
comparison to defiant.
So if we have a prolonged battle like in "Paradise Lost" Locata has an
advantage. In general the longer the battle the less chances Defiamt has
in beating a bigger ship.
So if Defiant was fighting to kill Lacota from very beginning it would
probably Destroy Lacota.
Chris Cracknell
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
The Enterprise D was not so much destroyed by a couple of BOPs as it was
by a plot device.
CRACKERS
(Excuse to get a new model from hell!!!!!!)
Chris Cracknell
: What is tecnically the most powerful ship in the federation fleet? The
: most powerful class?
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
Beats me, but I'd say the Galaxy class ship is a prime contender.
CRACKERS
(power from hell!!!!!!!!)
MORRISON KEITH MURRAY
>In my opinion, the prefix code seems to be one of the most misunderstood
>pieces of Star Trek technology. Not that I have all the answers, but I
>never thought of the prefic code as a weapon. Its not a series of
>numbers that, when transmitted, cause StarFleet ships to automatically
>drop their shields. Instead, it is meant to protect the computer of a
>Starship. In that sense, it is sort of like a virus protection program,
>today. It prevents access to important ship functions from exterior
>sources. In the Wrath of Kahn, Kahn was expecting the transmission of
>the Genesis specs. As such, he allowed the RELIANT computer to recieve
>an incoming transmission. The purpose of the prefix code is to stop
>someone from sneaking conflicting orders into a ship's computer. Kirk,
>by sending the prefix code, essentially unlocked the door to the RELIANT
>computer allowing him to order it to drop shields.
>If this explanation is correct, it explains why we don't see the prefix
>code used as a weapon, including in Paradise Lost. In order to make
>effective use of the code, there would have to be communication between
>ship computers. I don't see how Worf (or the Lakota Captain), would
>allow a ship he was fighting access to his computer.
Probably true. The Phoenix fighting the Cardassians would be a possible
exception, unless the Cardassians snuck the code though using a fake sensor
signal that would go to the computer automatically.
--
Keith Morrison
t0...@unb.ca
Albert Ko
On 14 Jan 1996, Robert Oliver wrote:
> > The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
>
> In the intial stages of the battle Defiant DID just sit there and take
> fire from Lakota.
Also, you must take into account that the Lakota did not use long-range
advantage with its weapons and the Defiant didn't use its cloak.
>
> > it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
> > just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
>
> Lakota herself was one shot away from destruction.
True, because it was a phaser battle from close range. And most of us
should know by now that it is pretty stupid to get that close to the Defiant.
However, they had no choice becuase of their mission.
>
> > Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
> > use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
>
> Considering that Lakota barely moved and Defiant was whipping around
> I doubt that Lakota's torps would have been able to hit Defiant.
Actually, Federation torps on the larger "capital" ships such as the upgraded
Excelsior carry an advanced targeting and tracking system and are not
likely to miss.
> The port shields were knocked to 60% almost immediately but the overall
> shield system hung in there and took a grat deal of firepower. As I
> recall Lakota did most of the firing and Defiant generally took a lot
> of hits compared to what it dealt out.
That is because you forgot to account for the Defiant's torps. The
Lacota never used its torps. So the while the Defiant made strafing runs
of several volleys followed by a torp launch, it sat still and used
upgraded buy not Galaxy/Nebula class phaser emitters.
> The most important thing to remember in this battle is that neither
> side was going for a kill. If they were Defiant could have backed off
> and fired everything she had at one of Lakota's warp engines (big,
> long and obvious targets) and taken the ship out fairly quickly.
>
Actually, I think they may have targeted the power systems. Hitting the
warp nacelles usually puts a hurt on Warp drive and ship power. And
you're suggestion of backing off is not good at all. First, the Defiant
would have had to run making it vunerable to attack from the rear not to mention
that the Lacota was trying to stop the Defiant. The Defiant played its
strategy as well as it could, taking advantage of it's miniscule size, while
the Lacota never manuevered (the failing of all capital ship captains) and
didn't use torps. Sound familiar. If it was a Nebula, the Defiant wouldn't
have had a chance. I really think that they should give Defiant
continous beam cannon ability. It would have allowed it to do some major
damage to the Defiant much more quickly to the Lacota's superstructure.
The mass of the Lacota saved it from destruction and the ablative armor
on the Defiant saved it.
Albert
a.k.a. @Ensign Emerson Cheng
FTL Engineering Specialist
Starfleet Academy (unassigned)
[currently looking for new PBEM ST RPG]
George Lianeris
Sahir N. Siddiqui (sah...@menger.stevens-tech.edu) writes:
> In article <DL6JD...@freenet.carleton.ca> ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (George Lianeris) writes:
>
> The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
> just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
> use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
> shields.
> The Defiant didn't use any of its photorps either. Basically, the
> Lacota was fighting offensively, thinking that the Defiant was the
> enemy, while the Defiant was only acting defensively without trying to
> destroy the Lacota.
The Lacota was also fighting to disable, and it didn't use it's qtorps.
Defiant did. All in all, if the Lacota had used it's qtorps in would have
won.
George Lianeris
Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
> I bet though that the Defiant could kill easily the
> enterprise-D if it had the chance. Assuming it is not upgraded
> like the exelsior. The enterprise lost against 2 klingon birds
> of prey for god sakes, and the defiant easily destroyed 5 jemm
> hadar ships in 1 battle.
>
Galaxy would have more of those. Defiant would be dead meat. Also, the
Lacota was the only shielded ship the Defiant has ever attacked (guess it
took them all by surprise or something)
The E-D was captured by the two Birds of Prey because it was *ambushed*.
If Riker had known that the two BOPs were intending to fire on the E-D,
the E-D would have won. Remember that the E-D took on 3 K'Vort class
cruisers and destroyed one, and very likely another.
George Lianeris
Eli Erlikhman (eerl...@chat.carleton.ca) writes:
> When you compare Defiant to Lacota you have to remember that Lacota is
> much bigger ship and it has much more resources to draw on. That is
> Lacota transfer a much more energy to shields from unneccessary systems in
> comparison to defiant.
>
> So if we have a prolonged battle like in "Paradise Lost" Locata has an
> advantage. In general the longer the battle the less chances Defiamt has
> in beating a bigger ship.
>
> So if Defiant was fighting to kill Lacota from very beginning it would
> probably Destroy Lacota.
>
have killed it before defiant had gotten into phaser range (exaggeration
here). The Lacota can whip up a torp+phaser volley combo that would kill
any ship within a few seconds. Defian't can't do that. Defiant has to
set up an attack run, and from what we've seen in earlier episodes, I'd
say that it can't put out as mush firepower as the Lacota in one pass, and
the Lacota would kill Defiant while it was turning to set up another run.
Worst case scenario: Mutual annihilation
Best case scenario: Lacota wins (that's assuming defiant doesn't use
the cloak)
Marc Feliciano
in "The Die is Cast" and "Way of the Warrior", but for some reason they
could not seem to evade a single shot from the Lacota. That makes no sense.
Also, just because the defiant is smaller, does not mean that it's phaser range
is significantly less than the Lacota's, but it might be less. I don't u
understand why the e Defiant didn't just do strafing runs like it did before
which were more successful and less likely ti leave them a target.
If only the writers could be more consistent.
--
Marc Feliciano
"Second place is the first loser!"
DEVILFISH
Montgomerie) writes:
>
>I don't know where this "Defiant has a short range" thing. One Klingon
ship
>not destroyed at long range, after another ship was not destroyed at
_short_
>range just because they didn't hit anything vital, does not a pattern
make.
But it is the only example of anything taking Defiant type phasers at long
range. We also know Defiant doesn't have a chance of hitting anything
that can evade in any way whatsoever at long range. Giving it effective
long range fire wouldn't help anything. Although I imagine that Q-torps
have a nice range to them, that really isnt much consolation when your
taking phasers and photons up the wazoo.
Chung, Peter W.
>In article <DL6JD...@freenet.carleton.ca> ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (George Lianeris) writes:
>
> The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
> it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
> just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
> Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
> use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
> Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
> shields.
>----
>The Defiant didn't use any of its photorps either. Basically, the
>Lacota was fighting offensively, thinking that the Defiant was the
>enemy, while the Defiant was only acting defensively without trying to
>destroy the Lacota.
Uhm. If you watch closely, the "defensive" fighting Defiant does fire
her aft torpedo launcher. So, yeah, the Defiant was using her torpedo
armament.
Mok-yi Chow
bet if the Lakota had launched the Quantum (sp?) Torperdo, Defiant
would've been long gone :)
: I'm sure that a lot of you remember me as one of the most "vocal"
: advocates of Defiant's battle prowess, right? Well, sad to say, the era of
: Defiant being the most powerful of Starfleet has probably come to an end.
: Well, DS9's "Paradise Lost" proves that Starfleet has definitely
: been upgrading its ships. Whether it was just that one Excelsior class
: ship or the entire fleet, I don't know, but it proves that Defiant has
: met it's match.
: The USS Lakota was defintiely taking a pounding in itself, and the
: fact that the Lakota couldn't defeat the Defiant was because of it's
: ablative armor.
: IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been down
: for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
: have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
: barely.
: O'Brien states that Lakota definitely has more powerful weaponry
: than standard Excelsior class ships --3 phaser bursts knock the Defiant's
: shields to 60%. Not bad.
: But to give Defiant some credit, to utterly bring an enhanced ship
: to it's knees and be 1/3 the size of it's saucer sections defintiely says
: something about the power of Defiant. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
: weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
: Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
: Also, one BIG problem.. Wouldn't the battle have gone a LOT FASTER
: (as if it wasn't quick enough) if the prefix code was used?!! I'm
: nitpicky, I guess.
: --
: --
: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
: Marc Escuro [R] @@ They reach into your room,
: Bryan E. Esquire @@ Just feel their gentle touch.
: Bucko @@ When all hope is gone, you know
: bas...@cats.ucsc.edu @@ Sad Songs say so much
: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
--
_____ _____ _ _ _ _____ _ __
|: ||: __||:|/~/|:`\/' ||: ||:`\| |
|: O ||: |__ |: < |: ||: O ||: |
|__|__||_____||_|\_\|_|\/|_||__|__||__|\__|
. Ackman . myc...@netcom.com .
Sahir N. Siddiqui
The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
shields.
----
The Defiant didn't use any of its photorps either. Basically, the
Lacota was fighting offensively, thinking that the Defiant was the
enemy, while the Defiant was only acting defensively without trying to
destroy the Lacota.
-s
--
Sahir N. Siddiqui Res: (201) 217-0952
PO Box 5176, Hoboken NJ 07030 ))))
oo-)
Email: sah...@menger.eecs.stevens-tech.edu :_/
Dave Miller
>Well put it this way, the Defiant was made to take on the BORG.
>Do you think the Modified Lakota is a better ship than the Borg's?
Better at what? Most of the problems that the Defiant has shown
wouldn't even be a problem against the Borg. Some folks point out
that the Defiant's phaser accuracy isn't the greatest. Well, it
doesn't HAVE to be to hit a Borg cube. Maybe the Defiant IS hurting
for aft weapons. It was designed as an attack/defense ship. If a
single ship retreats from a battle with the Borg, the Borg don't give
a damn. Their goal is the homeworld. The Borg will only be
interested in a ship if that ship is in their way, or if that ship has
something unique to offer the Borg (such as a potential intermediary
like Picard/Locutus, or intelligence about a species suitable for
assimilation). Therefore, the ability to successfully cover a retreat
probably was not high on the list of design priorities for the
Defiant. They probably have all the aft weapons that they
would need against the Borg.
Plus, I suspect that the Defiant was designed to work as a member of a
pack. A wolfpack of about five Defiant class ships would be a VERY
dangerous......maybe even a match for a single Borg cube. It may be
questionable whether or not a single Defiant could defeat a single
Warbird, but I am convinced that five Defiants could defeat five
Warbirds......simply because I think that five small Defiants could
work as a unit better than five Warbirds could.......eliminating each
other's weapons blind spots (if any), and using their small size to
swarm around a single Warbird, quickly obliterating it, while the
other four Warbirds are unable to unleash their own weapons without
inflicting damage on their own ship. This way, a wolfpack could
simply pick off one ship at a time. However, if five Galaxy class
ships faced off against five Warbirds, these Galaxy class ships
wouldn't be able to gang up nearly as well on a single ship at a time
and effectively ignore the others, sinply because the Galaxies would
be in each other's way. It would quickly break down into five
separate Galaxy class vs. Warbird battles......and the result would
likely be mutual destruction.
The Defiant's design makes a lot of sense for a ship designed to act
as a member of a small group intended to attack a large ship or a
group of large ships. However, as an independent warship, it has its
problems. Still, it has a reasonably decent record.
Dave Miller
***********************************************************************
* "Iluvatar arose a third time, and his face was terrible to behold. *
* Then he raised up both his hands, and in one chord, deeper than the *
* Abyss, higher than the Firmament, piercing as the light of Iluvatar,*
* the Music ceased." J.R.R. Tolkien; THE SILMARILLION *
***********************************************************************
Chung, Peter W.
>Don't forget for about a minute the Defiant just sat there
>taking hits from the exelsior. If they wanted to destroy the
>lacota they could have easily but they did not want to kill
>starfleet officers.
>
And don't just forget a minute that the Lakota had the option to
open fire at a greater range, with a greater chance of hitting and
with lethal force, something that the Lakota AND the Defiant had
restricted themselves from doing. Don't get ahead of yourself here.
Look at the big picture.
Chung, Peter W.
>George Lianeris (ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
>
[snip]
>
>Didn't they say that Lacota was even in worse condition than Defiant just
>before the fight was over. So defiant was winning.
Yes and no. They were at a draw. Presumably the Defiant was carrying
only photorps since they got to fire one. However, the Lakota, could kill
the Defiant just as easily as the Defiant could kill the Lakota.
>Defiant could destroy Lacota with one more shot but Worf said it is not an
>optoinn. Also Lacota did have much more caulties than Defiant did.
Remember the same applied for the Lakota as well, and given the dialogue
sequence, the Lakota had the option earlier than the Defiant. The other
thing is that the Lakota has a higher crew density. If you considered the
numbers, then 20 casualties out of 500 on the Lakota is 4%, while 4 casualties
out of ~55 on the Defiant is 7.27%. (I must be playing games way too much).
Objectively, this episode really didn't tell us anything about what these
ships could have done under *actual* combat conditions.
Ian Montgomerie
>Bryan E. Esquire (bas...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
>: IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been down
>: for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
>: have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
>: barely. Also, if Worf wasn't "targetting
>: weapons and engines," I'm sure Lakota would have been out of it faster than
>: Defiant would have been (because of the armor).
>~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~~^
>You have to keep in mind that both ships in that battle were fighting to
>disable not destroy so it's not exactly a fair determination of either
>ship's firepower.
>Of course I've never believed that the Defiant was the most powerful ship
>in the fleet. It's just the most powerful ship of it's size in the fleet.
Well actually it IS the most powerful in the fleet, because it had the New and
Improved weapons. Now, however, the rest of the fleet is catching up, because
other ships have New and Improved Weapons as well. Apparently an upgraded
Excelsior class ship still can't match Defiant, but a Galaxy or Nebula class
ships with New Improved Weapons would definitely outmatch Defiant. It's clear,
however (from O'Brien's surprise at the Lakota's firepower) that Starfleet has
just begun to upgrade its existing ships, the Lakota may have been the first.
Ian Montgomerie
>I doubt very much that it's the most powerful fighting ship in Starfleet.
It is until they equip a Galaxy or Nebula class ship with the same new weapons
the Lakota has.
>I'm sure a galaxy class ship could defeat it and it's probably an even
>match for the upgraded Excelsior class ship.
No, it's quite clear that it is more than a match for an upgraded Excelsior
class ship. The Lakota had a good amount of time to pound on Defiant before
Worf even got it together and fought back, but the Lakota _still_ lost (at
least, she was in worse shape than Defiant at the end).
>i don't believe that the Defiant is the greatest ship in terms of fire
>power that starfleet has to offer.
Actually, it has performed WAY better than anything else Starfleet has in
combat. Even at its most incompetent, Defiant easily outperformed Galaxy-class
ships (in both the Jem'Hadar test and the Ancient Klingon Bird of Prey test).
Ian Montgomerie
>Chris Cracknell (ad...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca) writes:
>> DJ6624 (dj6...@aol.com) wrote:
>> : A galaxy class starship and three runabouts couldn't destroy one of free
>> : jem hadar ships attacking it and the galaxy got destroyed its self and the
>> : defient destroyed how many when it went to the gamma quadrent.
>> ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
>>
>> 1) The captain of the galaxy class ship was a twit.
>>
>> 2) At that time they had no data on Jem Hadar fighters. They knew nothing
>> about thier shield configurations, their weapon power, their
>> manouverability, etc.
> Well, if you remember, the Dominion was expecting SF to send something
>thru to get Sisko. They were waiting for the Odyssey, and had probably
>sabotaged her.
There was no mention of any sabotage, Odyssey's systems were functioning just
fine, except that the Jem'Hadar were blowing the crap out of them.
>>
>> 3) The first time the Defiant went up against the Jem Hadar it was
>> subdued very quickly without damaging any Jem Hadar ships. If the Jem
>> Hadar had wished to destroy her she would be destroyed.
>>
> Damn right.
Damn wrong. Defiant, in The Search when it first faced the Jem'Hadar,
destroyed one of the attacking Jem'Hadar ships. It took around 1 second of
firing even though Defiant was already heavily damaged, and Doctor Bashir was
at the firing controls (not that it matters, because fire control is
computerized).
>> The reason the Defiant has done such a good job against the Jem Hadar
>> lately is because Starfleet has more technical and stratigical data on
>> the Jem Hadar ships. Also when the Romulan/Cardassian fleet was destroyed
>> it was because they were suprised and surrounded. The Defiant sneaked up,
>> got in, and got out. The Jem Hadar were more interested in destroying the
>> Romulan and Cardassian ships.
>>
> Damn right again :)
Damn wrong. Actually, there were at leat 5 Jem'Hadar ships closing on Defiant.
After she destroyed the first two ships, mostly by surprise, two more
Jem'Hadar ships started firing on Defiant while others closed from the side.
Defiant withstood (and dodged) their fire for some time while it closed to 500
meters and then destroyed them. Another Jem'Hadar ship was following them, and
they damaged it with a Quantum Torpedo.
>> I guess what is needed is a war games episode like that one Hathaway TNG
>> episode pitting the Defiant against a Galaxy Class ship. That will put an
>> end to the "The Defiant Is The Best" camp.
Hardly, since Defiant would kick butt. Defiant has a 30 year advantage in
level of technology. Ships with MODERN technology, like Lakota, can put up
more of a fight, and a modernized Nebula class, as an example, would indeed
outgun Defiant. However, the standard "old" Galaxy class design doesn't equal
Defiant's combat abilities (primarily its firepower and armor, Defiant's
shields don't seem much morer powerful than average).
Ian Montgomerie
>Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
>> Don't forget for about a minute the Defiant just sat there
>> taking hits from the exelsior. If they wanted to destroy the
>> lacota they could have easily but they did not want to kill
>> starfleet officers.
>>
> The Defiant didn't just sit there.
Yes, it did "just sit there". The Lakota fired first, getting in several good
shots, taking Defiant's shields down to 60%. It then got in at least three
additional hits (seen in the impacts on the Bridge), while the Defiant's crew
debated what to do. Finally, Worf said "we fight", and Defiant turned to
attack. By this time, its shields had already taken a beating.
>The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
>it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
>just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
>Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
>use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to.
First, Lakota wouldn't have been able to use Quantum Torpedos because Defiant
was above, then to the side, then above it again, not in the torpedos firing
arc. Second, _neither_ ship was shooting to kill. Defiant fired one measly
quantum torpedo, which hit one of Lakota's warp nacelles. It was exclusively
targeting weapons and engines, just as Lakota seemed to be doing.
> Also
>Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
>shields.
Not necessarily. Weapons don't do any directly comparable amount of damage per
hit.
Lakota's shields were apparently knocked down even faster, since by the end,
Defiant was doing badly but Lakota was even worse.
Ian Montgomerie
>Well for the relatively tiny size of the Defiant it's amazing
>it can take down large ships like the exelsior, cardassian
>galor class. The Defiant is one of the most powerfull ships in
>the alpha quadrant, although I think there must be more
>powerfull ships out there. For instance a galaxy class ship can
>also be upgraded like the lacota, or a romulin warbird.
yeah. Defiant's power is, for the most part, due to better technology. It
apparently has more power in "absolute" terms than an Excelsior class ship
(since even with new tech, an Excelsior class doesn't match Defiant), but once
Starfleet upgrades its Galaxy and Nebula class ships, they should have more
firepower (Ambassadors too, now that I think of it).
Ian Montgomerie
>Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
>> Well for the relatively tiny size of the Defiant it's amazing
>> it can take down large ships like the exelsior, cardassian
>> galor class. The Defiant is one of the most powerfull ships in
>> the alpha quadrant, although I think there must be more
>> powerfull ships out there. For instance a galaxy class ship can
>> also be upgraded like the lacota, or a romulin warbird.
>>
> The Lacota had nowhere near the kind of firepower a Galaxy starship has,
>even if it got type X phaser banks. Wanna know why? A Galaxy class has
>way more emitters than the Lacota could hope to have.
That's totally irrekevant, since Lakota's phasers are not in emitter arrays.
They are fixed-point cannons, which function totally differently, and thus
can't be compared. Newer ships had array-based designs (like the Galaxy), but
all TOS ships, such as the Excelsior class, were designed around single-point
phaser cannons, without multiple linked emitters. It does not appear that
phasers must be in emitter arrays to be powerful, since a very small portion
of starships seen (Federation ships only, and only the Galaxy, Nebula, and
Ambassador classes at that) had multipoint emitters.
> Also did you notice
>that the Lacota's phasers where used in pulses to knock down Defian't shields?
Lakota did not use its phasers in pulses. They sure looked like _beams_ to me,
a red line of energy going all the way from emitter to target. They also
lasted up to a second or so (initial attack).
> I think that the Odyssey's and runabout's phasers were sabotaged.
A singularly foolish conclusion, since there would have been mention if the
phasers had not been operating at full efficiency.
> The
>Defiant wasn't doing too well against the Lacota's shields-
Actually, the only data on how well Defiant did against Lakota's shields was
the fact that by the end, Defiant was the less-damaged ship. Which sort of
favors Defiant.
>if it wasn't
>for the Defiant's armor, it would have been gone before it had dropped the
>Lacota's shields. The Admiral and the Lacota's Captain obviously thought
>so.
Since they had a pretty devastating first strike, of course they thought so.
The two ships were really pretty close, with Defiant having a definite
advantage in armor, and in firepower too. However, since Defiant hesitated a
good 15-20 seconds before it even fought back...
Eli Erlikhman
Gine be a break George, it seems you hate everything new and all good
ships are old one or the ones in your imagination (Dreamstar).
Defiant has advanyages and disvantages. Some people think it is the best
ship there is some do not.
One thing for sure it IS a good match for anything
Feds/Cardies/Dominion/Romulans/Klingons/Ferengies have to offer.
Most battle outcomes of Defiant with top notch ships will depend on
circumstances.
In case of battle between defiant and lacota, both ships were trying to
disable each other so there is no exact way to tell which one is better.
However if you consider the fact that Defiant is small and much easier to
build for Feds than anything else ( just because of its size) it is the
best design for a warship.
If feds will go into a war they will star building defiant class ships.
A dozen defiants can easily take out a dozen big feds ships if they use
their size and manuverability to their advantage.
ERIC HOLLER
>In article <DL6JD...@freenet.carleton.ca> ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (George Lianeris) writes:
> The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
> it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
> just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
> Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
> use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
> Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
> shields.
>----
>The Defiant didn't use any of its photorps either. Basically, the
>Lacota was fighting offensively, thinking that the Defiant was the
>enemy, while the Defiant was only acting defensively without trying to
>destroy the Lacota.
>-s
>--
>Sahir N. Siddiqui Res: (201) 217-0952
>PO Box 5176, Hoboken NJ 07030 ))))
> oo-)
>Email: sah...@menger.eecs.stevens-tech.edu :_/
Defiant Launched Phototorps during its first pass. Pulse phasers,
beam phasers, aft torpedo.
**************************************************
Eric Holler * Eho...@in.net*
Systems Manager * Vuln...@aol.com (Sue me I like the people.)*
Top Secret Location * a couple others I've forgotten in old age.*
**************************************************
"On the net in search of a good cup of coffee and a witty Sig."
with respect to Jack K. (No, not Kennedy.)*
ERIC HOLLER
>>
>Actually, I think they may have targeted the power systems. Hitting the
>warp nacelles usually puts a hurt on Warp drive and ship power. And
>you're suggestion of backing off is not good at all. First, the Defiant
>would have had to run making it vunerable to attack from the rear not to mention
>that the Lacota was trying to stop the Defiant. The Defiant played its
>strategy as well as it could, taking advantage of it's miniscule size, while
>the Lacota never manuevered (the failing of all capital ship captains) and
>didn't use torps. Sound familiar. If it was a Nebula, the Defiant wouldn't
>have had a chance. I really think that they should give Defiant
>continous beam cannon ability. It would have allowed it to do some major
>damage to the Defiant much more quickly to the Lacota's superstructure.
>The mass of the Lacota saved it from destruction and the ablative armor
>on the Defiant saved it.
>Albert
>a.k.a. @Ensign Emerson Cheng
> FTL Engineering Specialist
> Starfleet Academy (unassigned)
> [currently looking for new PBEM ST RPG]
Actually the Defiant has continus beam capacity, if you look closely
at the first run the Defiant (your bearing 00 .00 from Defiant)
crosses from Lakota port. D fires pulse phasers, rolls to expose her
top siide (dorsal?) and fires a continuous beam phaser, then rolls to
her port and fire the aft torp tube which hits the Nacelle strut..
Albert Ko
Ugh, guess what? "New and Improved Weapons"=old and miniaturized weapons
made to fit the Lacota. The Galaxy and Nebulas have two arrays full of
those stupid emitters not to mention high volume torp launchers that can
fire ten torps at a time from out of the Defiant's own weapons range.
I'm getting REAL tired of writing the same rebuttals over and over again
so read my other posts. Point is the Defiant is no match for larger
ships. If it had beam phasers? Different story.
Albert
Chung, Peter W.
>ad...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Chris Cracknell) wrote:
>
>>I doubt very much that it's the most powerful fighting ship in Starfleet.
>
>It is until they equip a Galaxy or Nebula class ship with the same new weapons
>the Lakota has.
Doesn't matter, we never saw the Lakota at full strength, and neither did we
see the Defiant either.
>
>>I'm sure a galaxy class ship could defeat it and it's probably an even
>>match for the upgraded Excelsior class ship.
>
>No, it's quite clear that it is more than a match for an upgraded Excelsior
>class ship. The Lakota had a good amount of time to pound on Defiant before
>Worf even got it together and fought back, but the Lakota _still_ lost (at
>least, she was in worse shape than Defiant at the end).
Good amount of time? About 6 phaser hits (and arguably not even full power)
is how many hits it took to get Worf to shoot back. Technically, both ships
were in very bad shape in the end. "One good hit would have finished her off"
applied to both ships.
>>i don't believe that the Defiant is the greatest ship in terms of fire
>>power that starfleet has to offer.
>
>Actually, it has performed WAY better than anything else Starfleet has in
>combat. Even at its most incompetent, Defiant easily outperformed Galaxy-class
>ships (in both the Jem'Hadar test and the Ancient Klingon Bird of Prey test).
At its most incompetent? The worst was in "The Search" and it LOST. When was
the last time it was incompetent?
Chung, Peter W.
>ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (George Lianeris) wrote:
>
>
>>Chris Cracknell (ad...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca) writes:
>>> DJ6624 (dj6...@aol.com) wrote:
>>> : A galaxy class starship and three runabouts couldn't destroy one of free
>>> : jem hadar ships attacking it and the galaxy got destroyed its self and the
>>> : defient destroyed how many when it went to the gamma quadrent.
>>> ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
>>>
>>> 1) The captain of the galaxy class ship was a twit.
>>>
>>> 2) At that time they had no data on Jem Hadar fighters. They knew nothing
>>> about thier shield configurations, their weapon power, their
>>> manouverability, etc.
>
>> Well, if you remember, the Dominion was expecting SF to send something
>>thru to get Sisko. They were waiting for the Odyssey, and had probably
>>sabotaged her.
>
>There was no mention of any sabotage, Odyssey's systems were functioning just
>fine, except that the Jem'Hadar were blowing the crap out of them.
Given the knowledge we had of the Defiant's sabotage in "The Adversary" and
examining the clues in "The Jem'Hedar":
1. Odyssey's shields were ineffective against the phased poleron beam, despite
the ship's attempt to utilize different portions of deflector frequencies.
2. The runabouts weren't getting blown up, despite in "TDIC" we see Jem'hedar
ships literally vaporizing larger Keldin-class ships.
There is enough evidence here to be very suspicious of sabotage. A Dominion
device is very subtle and can go completely undetected, even if observed
initially be a good engineer like O'Brien ("Adversary").
>
>>>
>>> 3) The first time the Defiant went up against the Jem Hadar it was
>>> subdued very quickly without damaging any Jem Hadar ships. If the Jem
>>> Hadar had wished to destroy her she would be destroyed.
>>>
>> Damn right.
>
>Damn wrong. Defiant, in The Search when it first faced the Jem'Hadar,
>destroyed one of the attacking Jem'Hadar ships. It took around 1 second of
>firing even though Defiant was already heavily damaged, and Doctor Bashir was
>at the firing controls (not that it matters, because fire control is
>computerized).
You're all partially right. The Jem'hedar could have easily destroyed the
Defiant in "The Search". The Defiant did destroy one Jem'Hedar ship
who made the mistake of flying in front of the Defiant. It was approx.
3 phaser volleys to destroy the Jem'hedar fighter (out of around 6 volleys)
and that does not include the time the Defiant took to maneuver into a
possible firing solution.
>
>>> The reason the Defiant has done such a good job against the Jem Hadar
>>> lately is because Starfleet has more technical and stratigical data on
>>> the Jem Hadar ships. Also when the Romulan/Cardassian fleet was destroyed
>>> it was because they were suprised and surrounded. The Defiant sneaked up,
>>> got in, and got out. The Jem Hadar were more interested in destroying the
>>> Romulan and Cardassian ships.
>>>
>> Damn right again :)
>
>Damn wrong. Actually, there were at leat 5 Jem'Hadar ships closing on Defiant.
Uhm, they were closing on Odo's runabout. The Defiant had the advantage of
being able to lock and fire phasers before the jem'hedar could relock
their weapons.
>After she destroyed the first two ships, mostly by surprise, two more
>Jem'Hadar ships started firing on Defiant while others closed from the side.
Uhm, not exactly. Yes the Defiant got 2 of Odo's pursuers with 10 phaser volleys.
She turned and engaged another ship and killed it with 4 out of 10 volleys.
From 50km (yeah, pretty close) she had many glancing hits from the fairly
slow phased-poleron beams. At 500m she opened fire, killing one ship with
3 out of 6 volleys and the second with 5 out of 5 volleys, but she was so
close she ended up ramming the hulk of the jem'hedar ship. The 3rd ship in
that group turned around and began to pursue the Defiant but was hit by the
aft torpedo launcher. It was presumably a photon torpedo. All in all,
because her shields worked (just like Odo's runabout) the Defiant was able to
take minimal damage and get out. Amazing how well things can go if the shields
worked.
>Defiant withstood (and dodged) their fire for some time while it closed to 500
>meters and then destroyed them. Another Jem'Hadar ship was following them, and
>they damaged it with a Quantum Torpedo.
>>> I guess what is needed is a war games episode like that one Hathaway TNG
>>> episode pitting the Defiant against a Galaxy Class ship. That will put an
>>> end to the "The Defiant Is The Best" camp.
>
>Hardly, since Defiant would kick butt. Defiant has a 30 year advantage in
>level of technology. Ships with MODERN technology, like Lakota, can put up
>more of a fight, and a modernized Nebula class, as an example, would indeed
>outgun Defiant. However, the standard "old" Galaxy class design doesn't equal
>Defiant's combat abilities (primarily its firepower and armor, Defiant's
>shields don't seem much morer powerful than average).
Overall firepower, even an old Galaxy-class can deliver far more and far
greater range because she is basically a big torpedo carrier. Up close,
and if they can hit, however, the Defiant has more firepower.
Chung, Peter W.
>If I remember correctly the Defiant was quite good at evading phaser blasts
>in "The Die is Cast" and "Way of the Warrior", but for some reason they
>could not seem to evade a single shot from the Lacota. That makes no sense.
Not exactly. The Defiant is good at erratic maneuvering from weapons fired
at a distance. The "3rd-world" Cardassian phaser targetting systems suck,
even runabouts can break their target lock (from the training sim Nog was running
to be a Starfleet cadet.) The advanced Jem'hedar phased poleron beam travels
at less than the speed of light, giving time for any ship, sufficiently
maneuverable to avoid getting directly hit. If you watch "The Die is Cast"
the Defiant does get hit, but they are glancing hits. The Klingons, having
limited arc fixed-forward disruptor weapons miss all the time, even at
big ships like the E-D in "Generations". So it was very consistent that a
Federation capital ship, with all her phasers (light speed weapon) and
cool targetting systems to get a 100% accuracy. Very consistent indeed.
>
>Also, just because the defiant is smaller, does not mean that it's phaser range
>is significantly less than the Lacota's, but it might be less. I don't u
>understand why the e Defiant didn't just do strafing runs like it did before
>which were more successful and less likely ti leave them a target.
The Defiant's limitation is her accuracy at long-range. Her pulses could
easily travel the same distance any other phaser can travel, but she doesn't
necessarily have the precision maneuvering ability required to hit a moving
target 1/5th of a light second away, while other ships which have aimable
phasers do have that ability. However, with the new addition of a single
aimable phaser beam emitter on the dorsal of the Defiant, this gives her
something to use against targets off-centreline and at a potentially longer
range.
>
>If only the writers could be more consistent.
>
They've been more consistent with the Defiant than with the Galaxy-class.
Chung, Peter W.
>ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (George Lianeris) wrote:
>
>
>>Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
>>> Don't forget for about a minute the Defiant just sat there
>>> taking hits from the exelsior. If they wanted to destroy the
>>> lacota they could have easily but they did not want to kill
>>> starfleet officers.
>>>
>
Defiant was maneuvering, but she was not returning fire.
>shots, taking Defiant's shields down to 60%. It then got in at least three
>additional hits (seen in the impacts on the Bridge), while the Defiant's crew
>debated what to do. Finally, Worf said "we fight", and Defiant turned to
>attack. By this time, its shields had already taken a beating.
But by how much? We know each side was adjusting their phaser power levels
to not "over-penetrate" the other ship. It is very risky to fire a full
power weapon at any ship, especially it's engines. One "lucky" full power
hit would have resulted in an explosion.
>>The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
>>it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
>>just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
>>Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
>>use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to.
>
>First, Lakota wouldn't have been able to use Quantum Torpedos because Defiant
>was above, then to the side, then above it again, not in the torpedos firing
>arc.
More correctly, the Defiant was too close for the torpedo to be fired without
the risk of the torpedo missing and hitting the Lakota. Torpedoes fired from
capital ships have been known to have exceptional maneuverability, as seen
in ST6:TUC.
>Second, _neither_ ship was shooting to kill. Defiant fired one measly
>quantum torpedo, which hit one of Lakota's warp nacelles. It was exclusively
>targeting weapons and engines, just as Lakota seemed to be doing.
It looked more like the warp pylon. But yeah, Defiant seemed to not hold back
as much, using a torpedo.
>> Also
>>Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
>>shields.
>
>Not necessarily. Weapons don't do any directly comparable amount of damage per
>hit.
Especially in this episode.
>Lakota's shields were apparently knocked down even faster, since by the end,
>Defiant was doing badly but Lakota was even worse.
Not by much. Both ships were succeptible to "one good hit". Too bad neither
wanted to inflict it.
Chung, Peter W.
>st...@jane.uh.edu (Chung, Peter W.) wrote:
>
>>In article <4d599a$n...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, bas...@cats.ucsc.edu (Bryan E. Esquire) writes...
>>[snip]
>>>
>>lower settings to disable rather than destroy. The Lakota didn't use her
>>quantum torps, although we did see the Defiant fire one of her aft
>>torpedoes (which missed).
>
>I could have sworn that it hit the starboard warp nacelle.
I stand corrected. The photorp did hit the starboard warp pylon.
[snip]
>
>>That's very hard to call. If they were *really* fighting, then the
>>Lakota would have opened fire at a much greater distance, getting in far
>>more hits before Defiant got close enough to effectively use her phasers.
>>And if the Lakota attempted to deny the Defiant good firing solutions
>>by maneuvering, then Defiant would be hard pressed to get good hits in.
>
>I don't know where this "Defiant has a short range" thing. One Klingon ship
>not destroyed at long range, after another ship was not destroyed at _short_
>range just because they didn't hit anything vital, does not a pattern make.
Well, those are the examples we are given. However, the range limitation is
more from her fixed forward phaser design that limits the effective range
(it can shoot far, but not with any accuracy beyond a certain point defined
by how fine the ship can maneuver to aim at a moving target at long range.)
However, with the introduction of the new continuous beam phaser on the
dorsal mount of the Defiant, this will enhance her range somewhat, although
it doesn't have the same punch as 4 phaser pulses. But if the phaser beam
got a long enough dwell time...
Chung, Peter W.
>> The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
>
>In the intial stages of the battle Defiant DID just sit there and take
>fire from Lakota.
Well, the Defiant was maneuvering, not sitting there. The Lakota was the one
sitting there.
Defiant took approx 5 phaser hits before returning fire.
>
>> it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
>> just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
>
>Lakota herself was one shot away from destruction.
Yes, "one good hit would finish her off."
>> Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
>> use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
>
>Considering that Lakota barely moved and Defiant was whipping around
>I doubt that Lakota's torps would have been able to hit Defiant.
You probably could tell that to General Chang and his hot rod BOP in
Star Trek 6. That BOP was moving much more than the Defiant. However,
the Defiant was in way too close for torps to be used unless the Lakota
decided to get some range or the Defiant moved farther away.
>> Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
>> shields.
>
>The port shields were knocked to 60% almost immediately but the overall
>shield system hung in there and took a grat deal of firepower. As I
>recall Lakota did most of the firing and Defiant generally took a lot
>of hits compared to what it dealt out.
Not exactly. The Lakota hit the Defiant with approx 15 phaser beams. The
Defiant hit with approx 9 out of 13 phaser pulse volleys (of 4 phaser pulses)
and 2 phaser beams and 1 photorp.
>The most important thing to remember in this battle is that neither
>side was going for a kill. If they were Defiant could have backed off
>and fired everything she had at one of Lakota's warp engines (big,
>long and obvious targets) and taken the ship out fairly quickly.
Backed off? If it were the Defiant they should *get closer* to minimize
phaser fire from the Lakota and use her pulse phasers at their best range,
*up-close*. But I agree with you, this battle doesn't say much since
no one was really fighting.
Timo S Saloniemi
>bas...@cats.ucsc.edu (Bryan E. Esquire) wrote:
>> Well, DS9's "Paradise Lost" proves that Starfleet has definitely
>>been upgrading its ships. Whether it was just that one Excelsior class
>>ship or the entire fleet, I don't know, but it proves that Defiant has
>>met it's match.
>
>As evidence that the entire fleet is being upgraded, the Defiant was fit with
>ablative armor, "Quantum torpedoes" seemed to pop up all of the sudden, DS9
>armed to the teeth, and when the Klingon Fleet attacked a few episodes back,
>the "task force" sent in to help out DS9 was only 6 ships. Somehow, I doubt
>that was all they could find at the time. (Recall that Picard scrambled
>together a fleet of *20* ships to "stop the flow of supplies" from the
>Romulans to the Duras during the Klingon Civil War.)
The fleet Picard assembled was apparently >50% un-battleworthy. The second
largest ship in the fleet, USS Sutherland, was partially inoperational,
and there were 100-yr-old Constellations and Antareses in the fleet as
well. A six-ship fleet of all muscle (didn't we see a Galaxy, two obliga-
tory Excelsior Classic (TM)s and an Avenger aka torp-Miranda?) seems like
a natural response by the new mean and lean Starfleet.
>> IMHO, if Defiant got in one more shot, Lakota would have been down
>>for the count, but if Lakota got in one or two more, then Defiant too would
>>have been out, but the armor would defintitely give it the advantage -- but
>>barely.
>>
>> O'Brien states that Lakota definitely has more powerful weaponry
>>than standard Excelsior class ships --3 phaser bursts knock the Defiant's
>>shields to 60%. Not bad.
Is the name Lakota Anglo-Saxon, or do we finally have some extra-ter-
restrial influence in Starfleet? Or is this another one named by the
Native American lobbyists within Starfleet? Also, does the Lakota fire
TNG phasers (yellow) or original TOS/TFS ones (red/violet)?
>> Also, one BIG problem.. Wouldn't the battle have gone a LOT FASTER
>>(as if it wasn't quick enough) if the prefix code was used?!! I'm
>>nitpicky, I guess.
>
>This isn't nitpicky at all. Only command-rank personal are supposed to even
>know about them, so its highly unlikely that a bunch of changlings would have
>known to change the codes on the Defiant. The crew of the Lakota should have
>tried to use the codes first, and then realized that the Defiant's crew
>weren't changlings once the codes didn't work.
Probably there is a standard practice of disabling a renegade ship's
prefix codes or changing the codes of the rest of the fleet. At least
someone *must* have read the logs of late Capt Kirk, unless he edited
out his embarrassing fight with the Reliant in STII... What is more
annoying is that the runabouts get stolen all the time, and there
is no mention of a prefix code.
Timo Saloniemi
.sigless and proud of it!
Albert Ko
On 15 Jan 1996, Chung, Peter W. wrote:
> In article <SAHIRNS.96...@menger.stevens-tech.edu>, sah...@menger.stevens-tech.edu (Sahir N. Siddiqui) writes...
> >In article <DL6JD...@freenet.carleton.ca> ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (George Lianeris) writes:
> >
> > The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
> > it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
> > just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
> > Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
> > use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
> > Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
> > shields.
> >----
> >The Defiant didn't use any of its photorps either. Basically, the
> >Lacota was fighting offensively, thinking that the Defiant was the
> >enemy, while the Defiant was only acting defensively without trying to
> >destroy the Lacota.
>
> Uhm. If you watch closely, the "defensive" fighting Defiant does fire
> her aft torpedo launcher. So, yeah, the Defiant was using her torpedo
> armament.
>
Thank you for getting your facts straight, the Defiant is no match for a
capital ship (or ship-of-the-line) and is completely outclassed by them.
Albert
George Lianeris
Ian Montgomerie (nstn...@fox.nstn.ca) writes:
> ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (George Lianeris) wrote:
>
>
>>Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
>>> it can take down large ships like the exelsior, cardassian
>>> galor class. The Defiant is one of the most powerfull ships in
>>> the alpha quadrant, although I think there must be more
>>> powerfull ships out there. For instance a galaxy class ship can
>>> also be upgraded like the lacota, or a romulin warbird.
>>>
>> The Lacota had nowhere near the kind of firepower a Galaxy starship has,
>>even if it got type X phaser banks. Wanna know why? A Galaxy class has
>>way more emitters than the Lacota could hope to have.
>
> That's totally irrekevant, since Lakota's phasers are not in emitter arrays.
> They are fixed-point cannons, which function totally differently, and thus
> can't be compared. Newer ships had array-based designs (like the Galaxy), but
> all TOS ships, such as the Excelsior class, were designed around single-point
> phaser cannons, without multiple linked emitters. It does not appear that
> phasers must be in emitter arrays to be powerful, since a very small portion
> of starships seen (Federation ships only, and only the Galaxy, Nebula, and
> Ambassador classes at that) had multipoint emitters.
Oh, let me guess...your physics buddy told you they're cannons, right?
WAKE UP IAN!!! They're arrays till you prove they're not cannons.
They're directed weapons, unlike the Defiant's. Sure as heck look like
array to me.
>
>> Also did you notice
>>that the Lacota's phasers where used in pulses to knock down Defian't shields?
>
> Lakota did not use its phasers in pulses. They sure looked like _beams_ to me,
> a red line of energy going all the way from emitter to target. They also
> lasted up to a second or so (initial attack).
>
Well, why don't you get a low power laser, fill a room with smole, and
fire a 1/10 second laser pulse. It sure as heck won't LOOK like a pulse,
because in your little mond it's the look that defines the difference
between a pulse and a beam, so you'll say it's a laser beam, while anyone
who knows a shit about physics will tell you it's a _PULSE_. The
difference between a beam and a pulse is mathematical, NOT visual. Live
with it.
>> I think that the Odyssey's and runabout's phasers were sabotaged.
>
> A singularly foolish conclusion, since there would have been mention if the
> phasers had not been operating at full efficiency.
>
So? A computer system could be easily rigged to show everything working
peachy-keen while it wasn't. Done it hundreds of times to a few of my
friends self-adjusting/diagnosing computer tracking algorithms. These
algorithms are complicated enough, although they're in symbolic form, that
if you know what you're doing, no one can tell they've been sabotaged
until they realise their weapons aren't working...provided they survive.
Take the gun of an M1 tank. It's aimed using an LR/D and a ballistic
computer. Have the computer add randomly a bit of extra lead one time and
a bit of lag the other, and the gunner will never figure it out, but it
gives the impression that the crew is either incompetent or that the
computer is inadequate, and in worst cases, people might think it's the
wind's fault. And no, no one will notice...you even fix the checksums...
>> The
>>Defiant wasn't doing too well against the Lacota's shields-
>
> Actually, the only data on how well Defiant did against Lakota's shields was
> the fact that by the end, Defiant was the less-damaged ship. Which sort of
> favors Defiant.
>
LESS is a relative term. Defiant still had to maneuver to get a kill,
while the Lacota could land the few deadly phaser hits it needed to kill
Defiant. Which sorta favours the Lacota.
>>if it wasn't
>>for the Defiant's armor, it would have been gone before it had dropped the
>>Lacota's shields. The Admiral and the Lacota's Captain obviously thought
>>so.
>
> Since they had a pretty devastating first strike, of course they thought so.
> The two ships were really pretty close, with Defiant having a definite
> advantage in armor, and in firepower too. However, since Defiant hesitated a
> good 15-20 seconds before it even fought back...
>
Defiant *didn't* have a definite advantage in firepower. Otherwise the
Admiral would have sent *two* upgraded Excelsiors, since he had a lot
riding on the Lacota's ability to stop Defiant. If Defiant's firepower is
so good, then those 20 seconds wouldn't have made a difference. Defiant
would have been dead if it wasn't for the armor, which is total BS (but
since it's on screen, I'd rather explain it than debate it-hey, who thinks
that the armor has extra SIF support???).
George Lianeris
Eli Erlikhman (eerl...@chat.carleton.ca) writes:
> George Lianeris (ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
>
>> Eli Erlikhman (eerl...@chat.carleton.ca) writes:
>> > When you compare Defiant to Lacota you have to remember that Lacota is
>> > much bigger ship and it has much more resources to draw on. That is
>> > Lacota transfer a much more energy to shields from unneccessary systems in
>> > comparison to defiant.
>> >
>> > So if we have a prolonged battle like in "Paradise Lost" Locata has an
>> > advantage. In general the longer the battle the less chances Defiamt has
>> > in beating a bigger ship.
>> >
>> > So if Defiant was fighting to kill Lacota from very beginning it would
>> > probably Destroy Lacota.
>> >
>> Yeah? I tell you, if the Lacota was fighting to kill Defiant it would
>> have killed it before defiant had gotten into phaser range (exaggeration
>> here). The Lacota can whip up a torp+phaser volley combo that would kill
>> any ship within a few seconds. Defian't can't do that. Defiant has to
>> set up an attack run, and from what we've seen in earlier episodes, I'd
>> say that it can't put out as mush firepower as the Lacota in one pass, and
>> the Lacota would kill Defiant while it was turning to set up another run.
>> Worst case scenario: Mutual annihilation
>> Best case scenario: Lacota wins (that's assuming defiant doesn't use
>> the cloak)
>
>> Lt. Cmdr. George Lianeris CSS Cathawk, Tactical/Security Officer
>> Captain George Lianeris CSS DreamStar, Commanding Officer
>
> ships are old one or the ones in your imagination (Dreamstar).
Neck or knee? :) You know very damn well that my imagination is a heck
of a lot more technically accurate than ST.
Defiant was slapped together in half a year. No extensive planning, no
production problems (comp cores and warp coils). A ship like that can't
be so powerful. The last ship that was built like that in real life was
destroyed just cuz she was overgunned. She ripped her self apart when the
guns fired.
>
> Defiant has advanyages and disvantages. Some people think it is the best
> ship there is some do not.
>
It IS good, but it's not the best.
> One thing for sure it IS a good match for anything
> Feds/Cardies/Dominion/Romulans/Klingons/Ferengies have to offer.
>
> Most battle outcomes of Defiant with top notch ships will depend on
> circumstances.
> In case of battle between defiant and lacota, both ships were trying to
> disable each other so there is no exact way to tell which one is better.
>
Yeah, right. Here's a way: If you want to disable a ship that's trying
to disable you, you hit the shields with max firepower so you can disable
it first when u drop the shields. Logical enuf?
> However if you consider the fact that Defiant is small and much easier to
> build for Feds than anything else ( just because of its size) it is the
> best design for a warship.
>
Oh, I definately agree with that.
> If feds will go into a war they will star building defiant class ships.
> A dozen defiants can easily take out a dozen big feds ships if they use
> their size and manuverability to their advantage.
That's assuming the big ships won't use their long range weapons first.
And big ships CAN maneuver too, I just guess it's not so easy to show with
these models they have at Paramount, tho. For example, take one of the
WWII battleships-the big, enormous ships with 16" guns. You think they
just satr there and fired all day long while taking hits? No, they would
successfully evade and kill destroyers and torpedo boats, which could kill
the battleship with one good torp (both destroyers and torpedo boats can
launch torps). The firepower a torpedo boat packs in a torpedo is
considerably more accurate than the battleship's guns, because the torp
boat is tiny, maneuvering and fast, but the torpedo boat has to set up an
attack run, EXACTLY like the Defiant.
Result: To find the torp boat you find out in which direction the wind
is blowing while the battleship goes on blasting at other ships. Now,
someone mentioned a swarming...would work if the Defiant's could get close
enough with little or no damage.
Albert Ko
On 14 Jan 1996, Phil Paradias wrote:
> Don't forget for about a minute the Defiant just sat there
> taking hits from the exelsior. If they wanted to destroy the
> lacota they could have easily but they did not want to kill
> starfleet officers.
>
Ugh! Why do people not listen! Anyways, to clarify, the Defiant did take
hits, true. But it never pulled its punches. If you watch one of the
Defiant's passes, it launches qtorps at the end of one of its attack
runs. The Lakota never fired a qtorp probably because they knew that it
would definitely do too much collateral damage (dead starfleet
officers). Another thing is that the Lakota was forced to stay close to
the Defiant taking away its weapon range advantage and giving the Defiant
use of its main weaponry, its phasers. Truthfully, I find the Lakota perfectly
capable of destroying the Defiant with no problem (as long as the Defiant
doesn't cloak).
Albert
Albert Ko
On 14 Jan 1996, Phil Paradias wrote:
> I bet though that the Defiant could kill easily the
> enterprise-D if it had the chance. Assuming it is not upgraded
> like the exelsior. The enterprise lost against 2 klingon birds
> of prey for god sakes, and the defiant easily destroyed 5 jemm
> hadar ships in 1 battle.
>
Are you kidding me! No way! Lets put this in relative terms with the
Lakota. The Lakota doesn't have the kind of firepower the Galaxy has due
to the fact that the Galaxy has those two massive rings of emitters, not
single emitters. Throw in the ability to fire omnidirectionally with all
the emitters of an array and you have the Defiant's shields DOWN in three
bursts, not a wussy 60%. Oh yes, and don't forget that the E-D can
launch twenty phototorps at the Defiant at once, from out of the Defiant's
weapon range. Lets see, can we say Defiant toast. OK if the Defiant
were able to sneak in with it's cloak (doubtful with Data and Geordi's
extensive knowledge on detecting cloaked ships) and get one attack run
off. The sheer massiveness of the E-D would make the damage minimal. If
you don't take out all the dorsal and ventral phaser emitters and both
fron and rear launchers in a single pass (impossible!) the Defiant is
still toast. (Oh yes, Riker would probably find some BS way to disable
the Defiant with some gimick).
Albert
Albert Ko
On 15 Jan 1996, Sahir N. Siddiqui wrote:
> In article <DL6JD...@freenet.carleton.ca> ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (George Lianeris) writes:
>
> The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to aim
> it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
> just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
> Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
> use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
> Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
> shields.
> ----
> The Defiant didn't use any of its photorps either. Basically, the
> Lacota was fighting offensively, thinking that the Defiant was the
> enemy, while the Defiant was only acting defensively without trying to
> destroy the Lacota.
> -s
> --
Actually, the Lacota was attempting to stop the Defiant, and the Defiant
was trying to stop the Lacota from stopping it. Hmm, if you got that it
basically means noone was really using aggressive tactics, just fought
each other to disable. If the Lacota fought offensively, it would have
fired qtorps at long range. Oh BTW, the Defiant certainly did use
qtorps, in one pass it hit the warp nacelles with phasers and turned away
while firing a qtorp.
Albert
Albert Ko
On Mon, 15 Jan 1996, George Lianeris wrote:
>
> Eli Erlikhman (eerl...@chat.carleton.ca) writes:
> > When you compare Defiant to Lacota you have to remember that Lacota is
> > much bigger ship and it has much more resources to draw on. That is
> > Lacota transfer a much more energy to shields from unneccessary systems in
> > comparison to defiant.
> >
> > So if we have a prolonged battle like in "Paradise Lost" Locata has an
> > advantage. In general the longer the battle the less chances Defiamt has
> > in beating a bigger ship.
> >
> > So if Defiant was fighting to kill Lacota from very beginning it would
> > probably Destroy Lacota.
> >
> Yeah? I tell you, if the Lacota was fighting to kill Defiant it would
> have killed it before defiant had gotten into phaser range (exaggeration
> here). The Lacota can whip up a torp+phaser volley combo that would kill
> any ship within a few seconds. Defian't can't do that. Defiant has to
> set up an attack run, and from what we've seen in earlier episodes, I'd
> say that it can't put out as mush firepower as the Lacota in one pass, and
> the Lacota would kill Defiant while it was turning to set up another run.
> Worst case scenario: Mutual annihilation
> Best case scenario: Lacota wins (that's assuming defiant doesn't use
> the cloak)
>
> --
> Lt. Cmdr. George Lianeris CSS Cathawk, Tactical/Security Officer
> Captain George Lianeris CSS DreamStar, Commanding Officer
>
Finally, someone with some sense! (Sorry, but I'm getting real sick of
those people who think the Defiant is so hot, BTW I started that thread
for a reason) Anyways, the cloaked Defiant scenario would probably end
in mutual annhilation most likely. The Lacota's sheer mass would allow
it to survive an attack of qtorps and phasers from the Defiant (should be
read phasers to damage and qtorps to destroy ship sections). Then the
Lacota could retaliate with a dimpling manuver and probably cause a warp
core breach. Most likely, the Lacota would have its core breached by the
Defiant and then the Defiant has its core breached in turn.
Albert
DEVILFISH
>> The Defiant didn't just sit there. The Defiant had to maneuver to
aim
>
>In the intial stages of the battle Defiant DID just sit there and take
>fire from Lakota.
>
>> it's weapons and the Lacota didn't. Don't forget that the Defiant was
>> just barely saved by it's BS armor. If it wasn't for the armor the
>
>Lakota herself was one shot away from destruction.
And? The point isn't that Defiant could have won, its that its not the
all powerful ship some dildos tried to say it was.
>> Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota
didn't
>> use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
>
>Considering that Lakota barely moved and Defiant was whipping around
>I doubt that Lakota's torps would have been able to hit Defiant.
Ha! Yeah George and we'll have a farm and a dog. Actually the defaints
supreme manueverability was a bit lacking. Did you see that pathetic loop
she pulled to get another shot in? Ha.
>> Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8
hits=no
>> shields.
>
>The port shields were knocked to 60% almost immediately but the overall
>shield system hung in there and took a grat deal of firepower. As I
>recall Lakota did most of the firing and Defiant generally took a lot
>of hits compared to what it dealt out.
You're finally starting to get it aren't you? That's the whole friggin'
point! Defaint is going to take four hit from an enemy to every one she
gets in because of the inneffectiveness of it's phasers at long range and
it's need to manuever.
>The most important thing to remember in this battle is that neither
>side was going for a kill. If they were Defiant could have backed off
>and fired everything she had at one of Lakota's warp engines (big,
>long and obvious targets) and taken the ship out fairly quickly.
And Lakota could have used qtorps and taken out Defiant quite easily,
what's your point?
Dwight Williams
> In article <4dg049$5...@nntp.hut.fi>, tsal...@vipunen.hut.fi (Timo S Saloniemi) writes...
>>In article <4d9e0j$s...@nntp.pinc.com> John Nelson <rmi...@pinc.com> writes:
>>>bas...@cats.ucsc.edu (Bryan E. Esquire) wrote:
>>
>>
>>Is the name Lakota Anglo-Saxon, or do we finally have some extra-ter-
>>restrial influence in Starfleet? Or is this another one named by the
>>Native American lobbyists within Starfleet?
It's a North American First Nation name: one of the branches of what
non-First Nationals called the Sioux. And I don't see the name as something
to complain about in that regard. Remember, some of us here _are_ First
Nationals and others of us have them as friends and/or relatives.
Personally, I like the diversity. 'Though I _would_ like to see a few more
non-Terran names on the ships myself on the same principle...
_What_ lobbyists?
--
Dwight Williams(ad...@freenet.carleton.ca) -- Orleans, Ontario, Canada
Ian Montgomerie
>On Sun, 14 Jan 1996, Phil Paradias wrote:
>> I bet though that the Defiant could kill easily the
>> enterprise-D if it had the chance. Assuming it is not upgraded
>> like the exelsior. The enterprise lost against 2 klingon birds
>> of prey for god sakes, and the defiant easily destroyed 5 jemm
>> hadar ships in 1 battle.
>~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
>The Enterprise D was not so much destroyed by a couple of BOPs as it was
>by a plot device.
Yes, but still, Defiant does do better in battle, and it was, acocrding to Gul
Dukat, the most powerful warship in the quadrant. He said this in the presence
of Sisko and an Obsidian Order agent, neither of whom contradicted him. This,
compared with Defiant's good battle performance, means that _at that time_ it
was the most powerful ship in Starfleet.
Since then, new ships have been introduced. The Klingon ship Negh'Var has
appeared, and the Federation has begun to equip other ships with Defiant
technology. If a modified Excelsior can put up a good fight against Defiant, a
modified Galaxy or Nebula should be able to beat it. One of Defiant's biggest
advantage was it's 30 year technological lead. As the rest of Starfleet is
upgraded and catches up, Defiant loses its technological lead, and so ships
like Venture (Galaxy class) will become more powerful.
Ian Montgomerie
>If I remember correctly the Defiant was quite good at evading phaser blasts
>in "The Die is Cast" and "Way of the Warrior", but for some reason they
>could not seem to evade a single shot from the Lacota. That makes no sense.
In The Die is Cast, the ships firing at it were a distance away, and it jinked
up and down as it went straigh toward them. In Paradise Lost, it was much
closer to Lakota, and was flying perpendicular to it rather than towards it a
lot of the time. Also, in Way of the Warrior, the Klingons missed because
Defiant was using a modulated tractor beam.
>Also, just because the defiant is smaller, does not mean that it's phaser range
>is significantly less than the Lacota's, but it might be less. I don't u
>understand why the e Defiant didn't just do strafing runs like it did before
>which were more successful and less likely ti leave them a target.
Defiant _did_ do strafing runs against Lakota, once strafing over the top,
then once downwards. Lakota hit it either way, because it was just too close
for Defiant to evade.
Albert Ko
On Thu, 18 Jan 1996, Ian Montgomerie wrote:
> eerl...@chat.carleton.ca (Eli Erlikhman) wrote:
>
> >When you compare Defiant to Lacota you have to remember that Lacota is
> >much bigger ship and it has much more resources to draw on. That is
> >Lacota transfer a much more energy to shields from unneccessary systems in
> >comparison to defiant.
>
> Lakota has more size, but the only resource that counts is _power_. It's been
> made clear that Defiant has as much power as a much larger ship. Lakota
> probably has les overall energy output than Defiant.
Correction, energy output and how well your systems can use it.
> >So if we have a prolonged battle like in "Paradise Lost" Locata has an
> >advantage. In general the longer the battle the less chances Defiamt has
> >in beating a bigger ship.
>
> >So if Defiant was fighting to kill Lacota from very beginning it would
> >probably Destroy Lacota.
>
> Defiant could have destroyed Lakota anyway. It would have destroyed it rather
> easily if it hadn't sat there like a stone and took Lakota's shots for 20
> seconds or so.
Yes the Lakota sat like a sitting duck, but did just fine with ever using
qtorps. Had the Lakota been told to destroy the Defiant intially,
long-range combat would have probably never let the Defiant close enough
to use its main weaponry (read phasers) before its shields went down.
And I doubt that ablative armor will work against torps.
Albert
riker
>DJ6624 (dj6...@aol.com) wrote:
>: A galaxy class starship and three runabouts couldn't destroy one of free
>: jem hadar ships attacking it and the galaxy got destroyed its self and the
>: defient destroyed how many when it went to the gamma quadrent.
>~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
>1) The captain of the galaxy class ship was a twit.
>2) At that time they had no data on Jem Hadar fighters. They knew nothing
>about thier shield configurations, their weapon power, their
>manouverability, etc.
>3) The first time the Defiant went up against the Jem Hadar it was
>subdued very quickly without damaging any Jem Hadar ships. If the Jem
>Hadar had wished to destroy her she would be destroyed.
4) They didn't use any torpedoes whatsoever, even though Sisko told
Kira & friends to load extra microtorpedoes on the runabouts they were
going to use.
>The reason the Defiant has done such a good job against the Jem Hadar
>lately is because Starfleet has more technical and stratigical data on
>the Jem Hadar ships. Also when the Romulan/Cardassian fleet was destroyed
>it was because they were suprised and surrounded. The Defiant sneaked up,
>got in, and got out. The Jem Hadar were more interested in destroying the
>Romulan and Cardassian ships.
>No one is arguing that the Defiant is not a powerful ship. But I highly
>doubt it's the most powerful ship Starfleet has got. It's certainly the
>most powerful ship of it's size in the fleet and is probably more
>powerful than many other larger ships. And it would certainly be more
>cost effective and efficient to send a fleet of 10-20 of them into a
>battle than to send in 5 galaxy class ships.
>I guess what is needed is a war games episode like that one Hathaway TNG
>episode pitting the Defiant against a Galaxy Class ship. That will put an
>end to the "The Defiant Is The Best" camp.
> CRACKERS
> (Cool, but not best from hell!!!!)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the
tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will,
shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper
and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance
and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you
will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you!
Chung, Peter W.
>In article <4d9e0j$s...@nntp.pinc.com> John Nelson <rmi...@pinc.com> writes:
>>bas...@cats.ucsc.edu (Bryan E. Esquire) wrote:
>
[snip]
>
>Is the name Lakota Anglo-Saxon, or do we finally have some extra-ter-
>restrial influence in Starfleet? Or is this another one named by the
>TNG phasers (yellow) or original TOS/TFS ones (red/violet)?
The Lakota fires the newer TNG-style phasers, orange color and even sports
the TNG-phaser sound effects as it fires. So whatever upgrade they performed
it must have been to the generators, since we do not know yet if Lakota's
phaser can pulse like Defiant's yet.
Tom Miller
Ai> I think that the Odyssey's and runabout's phasers were sabotaged.
Ai> The Defiant wasn't doing too well against the Lacota's shields-if it
Ai> wasn't for the Defiant's armor, it would have been gone before it had
Ai> dropped the Lacota's shields. The Admiral and the Lacota's Captain
Ai> obviously thought so.
How do you think the runabout's and Odyssey's phasers were
sabotaged? It couldn't have been the Dominion as they didn't
know about the Federation until after "The Jem'Hadar".
What I think the reason is the Defiant didn't just outright blow
away the Lacota was because everyone assumes that all ship's
weaponary is like the Enterprises. In the last two years? since
the Enterprise blew up, Starfleet has obviously been upgrading
it's ships. I mean, if they have quantum torpedoes, why
wouldn't they put them on every ship they can. Also, phasers
have increased in power since TOS, so obviously they will
continue to increase in power. Perhaps some break-through was
made in phaser technology (the Defiant routes it's phasers
through it's warp core or something. The Lacota and other
Starfleet ships might do this too).
Tom Miller
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
Del
> > I bet though that the Defiant could kill easily the
> > enterprise-D if it had the chance. Assuming it is not upgraded
> > like the exelsior. The enterprise lost against 2 klingon birds
> > of prey for god sakes, and the defiant easily destroyed 5 jemm
> > hadar ships in 1 battle.
> ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
>
> The Enterprise D was not so much destroyed by a couple of BOPs as it was
> by a plot device.
I'll agree with you on that one. Let's face it, tje Enterprise D
fired 1 single phaser beam and a torpedo. God sake, what are those
writters doing with their life. No imaagination whatsoever.
------
Derek
"Everyone but the GIRLS"
Michael A. Bobek DVM
I think there's one big point that everyone posting here is missing, and
perhaps the most important point of all: Defiant will always win on DS9,
because they're the good guys, and it's in the script. If we were seeing a
Dominion version od the show, things might be a bit different.
Just a thought. :)
Chung, Peter W.
>st...@elroy.uh.edu (Chung, Peter W.) wrote:
>
>
>>>> Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
>>>> use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
>>>
>>>Considering that Lakota barely moved and Defiant was whipping around
>>>I doubt that Lakota's torps would have been able to hit Defiant.
>
>>Star Trek 6. That BOP was moving much more than the Defiant. However,
>>the Defiant was in way too close for torps to be used unless the Lakota
>>decided to get some range or the Defiant moved farther away.
>
Oh bull. The only modification they made was to the seeker, not the
propulsion systems on the photorp. Get that straight.
>ever manouvered to any extent in Trek? Funny, I always thought that torpedo
>manouvered because it had special sensors added. Wasn't your average torpedo.
>In TNG, photon torpedos always hit ships only within the forward arc (or aft
>arc for aft torpedos), and though they were fast, they could be outmanouvered.
Really, don't you ever wonder how maneuverable torps are when they come
out and make those radical 80 degree breakaway maneuvers to seperate in
flight like in "Yesterday's Enterprise" or in the stupid degeneration episode
where Worf's programmed torpedo makes a sharp wrong turn and missed a target
and Picard and Data ends up going after the rogue torpedo? And whatabout
"Way of the Warrior". Those Klingon ships weren't exactly sitting
still. Or how about the torpedos used to right a tectonically unstable
planet in "Pen Pals". Seemed very maneuverable there.
>With where Defiant was, to the side of and then above Lakota, the torpedos
>wouldn't have been able to hit it because according to the Technical Manual
>they can't make turns that sharp.
Yes they can...
>Actually, while Defiant was unable to avoid Lakota's phasers, its manouvers
>were ideal for staying out of the way of torpedos.
YEs, the danger was for a q-torp detonating accidently on the Lakota hereslf.
>>>> Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
>>>> shields.
>>>
>>>The port shields were knocked to 60% almost immediately but the overall
>>>shield system hung in there and took a grat deal of firepower. As I
>>>recall Lakota did most of the firing and Defiant generally took a lot
>>>of hits compared to what it dealt out.
>
>>Not exactly. The Lakota hit the Defiant with approx 15 phaser beams. The
>>Defiant hit with approx 9 out of 13 phaser pulse volleys (of 4 phaser pulses)
>>and 2 phaser beams and 1 photorp.
>
>Quantum torpedo. Quantum torpedos flash white (the visual effect in Paradise
>Lost was the same as in The Defiant, albeit minus the flashing energy of a
>disabled ship). Phototorps flash red or explode, they don't flash white.
>Defiant probably doesn't even carry photon torpedos.
Yes, Defiant does carry photorps "Adversary". And photorps did flash
white in TOS.
Chung, Peter W.
>>>>power that starfleet has to offer.
>>>
>>>Actually, it has performed WAY better than anything else Starfleet has in
>>>combat. Even at its most incompetent, Defiant easily outperformed Galaxy-class
>>>ships (in both the Jem'Hadar test and the Ancient Klingon Bird of Prey test).
>
>>At its most incompetent? The worst was in "The Search" and it LOST. When was
>>the last time it was incompetent?
>
>cloaked with its shields down, it still managed to blow away one of the
>Jem'Hadar ships. The Odyssey fought equally badly, but was unable to destroy a
>Jem'Hadar ship even though it fired many more shots.
>
You're wrong here. Technically, Defiant fired more shots at a single ship than
the Odyssey ever did in her ten minute battle. And in the end, Defiant
was boarded in 2minutes. The Odyssey was rammed after ten+ minutes.
Ian Montgomerie
>In article <DL6Mw...@cunews.carleton.ca>, eerl...@chat.carleton.ca (Eli Erlikhman) writes...
>>George Lianeris (ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
>>
>[snip]
>>
>>Didn't they say that Lacota was even in worse condition than Defiant just
>>before the fight was over. So defiant was winning.
>Yes and no. They were at a draw. Presumably the Defiant was carrying
>only photorps since they got to fire one. However, the Lakota, could kill
>the Defiant just as easily as the Defiant could kill the Lakota.
The Defiant fired a Quantum Torpedo, as is obvious from the white "quantum
torpedo flash" which resulted when it hit (as opposed to the "photon torpedo
explosion"). There's never been any indication that Defiant even HAS photon
torpedoes.
Ian Montgomerie
>When you compare Defiant to Lacota you have to remember that Lacota is
>much bigger ship and it has much more resources to draw on. That is
>Lacota transfer a much more energy to shields from unneccessary systems in
>comparison to defiant.
Lakota has more size, but the only resource that counts is _power_. It's been
made clear that Defiant has as much power as a much larger ship. Lakota
probably has les overall energy output than Defiant.
>So if we have a prolonged battle like in "Paradise Lost" Locata has an
Ian Montgomerie
>>
>Finally, someone with some sense! (Sorry, but I'm getting real sick of
>those people who think the Defiant is so hot
You mean like Gul Dukat, Commander Sisko, Starfleet, and foolish people like
them?
>The Lacota's sheer mass would allow
>it to survive an attack of qtorps and phasers from the Defiant (should be
>read phasers to damage and qtorps to destroy ship sections).
Mass is irrelevant. Defiant, or any other ship for that matter, has more than
enough power to destroy an unshielded ship. Even back in TOS days, starships
had enough firepower to destroy unshielded ships pretty quickly, even when
they had to use phasers on auxiliary power and worthless old-style photon
torpedoes. With weapons like phasers and torpedos, mass isn't relevant. Unless
you have shields up, or ablative armor (and even that doesn't last long), any
ship is toast even with weapons a lot less powerful than Defiant's. As an
example, the engineering section of the Lakota. which is all they would have
to destroy to obliderate the ship from a reactor core explosion, is about the
size of a Jem'Hadar ship.
> Then the
>Lacota could retaliate with a dimpling manuver and probably cause a warp
>core breach. Most likely, the Lacota would have its core breached by the
>Defiant and then the Defiant has its core breached in turn.
Core breaches do not happen very often in combat. Core failures generally
occur because the ship has just had major chunks of itself vaporized, so there
isn't any power left to keep even minimal containment up.
Ian Montgomerie
>>> Defiant would have been long gone. Also remember that the Lacota didn't
>>> use all of it's weapons (read: qtorps) while Defiant had to. Also
>>
>>Considering that Lakota barely moved and Defiant was whipping around
>>I doubt that Lakota's torps would have been able to hit Defiant.
>You probably could tell that to General Chang and his hot rod BOP in
>Star Trek 6. That BOP was moving much more than the Defiant. However,
>the Defiant was in way too close for torps to be used unless the Lakota
>decided to get some range or the Defiant moved farther away.
You mean the ONE and ONLY time a torpedo, which was SPECIALLY MODIFIED, has
ever manouvered to any extent in Trek? Funny, I always thought that torpedo
manouvered because it had special sensors added. Wasn't your average torpedo.
In TNG, photon torpedos always hit ships only within the forward arc (or aft
arc for aft torpedos), and though they were fast, they could be outmanouvered.
With where Defiant was, to the side of and then above Lakota, the torpedos
wouldn't have been able to hit it because according to the Technical Manual
they can't make turns that sharp.
Actually, while Defiant was unable to avoid Lakota's phasers, its manouvers
were ideal for staying out of the way of torpedos.
>>> Defiant's shields were knocked down quite fast. 3 hits=40%, so 8 hits=no
Ian Montgomerie
Chung, Peter W.
>
>
> Ai> I think that the Odyssey's and runabout's phasers were sabotaged.
> Ai> The Defiant wasn't doing too well against the Lacota's shields-if it
> Ai> wasn't for the Defiant's armor, it would have been gone before it had
> Ai> dropped the Lacota's shields. The Admiral and the Lacota's Captain
> Ai> obviously thought so.
>
>How do you think the runabout's and Odyssey's phasers were
>sabotaged? It couldn't have been the Dominion as they didn't
>know about the Federation until after "The Jem'Hadar".
If they didn't they would have never planned the whole
scenario with the "infiltrator"
>
>What I think the reason is the Defiant didn't just outright blow
>away the Lacota was because everyone assumes that all ship's
>weaponary is like the Enterprises. In the last two years? since
>the Enterprise blew up, Starfleet has obviously been upgrading
>it's ships. I mean, if they have quantum torpedoes, why
>wouldn't they put them on every ship they can. Also, phasers
>have increased in power since TOS, so obviously they will
>continue to increase in power.
IT's called escalation of firepower. If either party began
to use full power lethal shots, regardless of where they
were aimed at, you bet the other party will start firing
lethal shots as well.
> Perhaps some break-through was
>made in phaser technology (the Defiant routes it's phasers
>through it's warp core or something. The Lacota and other
>Starfleet ships might do this too).
Doesn't anyone remember that the original Constitution-IIs had
ths phaser routed through the warp core? Sheesh, the Defiant's
using tried-and-done ideas with better technology.
Chung, Peter W.
Watch "Adversary"... The Defiant was carrying a full load-out of photon
torpedoes. For "Paradise Lost", we might take it like this. If the
Defiant fired a quantum torp at the Lakota, the Lakota would have fired
a quantum torp at the Defiant. A photorp is much more variable yield
while q-torps do not have any known settings. And if you look at the
sfx used in "Starship Down", the q-torp warhead explosion looked suspiciously
like a photorp explosion.
>
>
Timo S Saloniemi
>
>Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
>> Well for the relatively tiny size of the Defiant it's amazing
>> it can take down large ships like the exelsior, cardassian
>> galor class. The Defiant is one of the most powerfull ships in
>> the alpha quadrant, although I think there must be more
>> powerfull ships out there. For instance a galaxy class ship can
>> also be upgraded like the lacota, or a romulin warbird.
>>
> The Lacota had nowhere near the kind of firepower a Galaxy starship has,
>even if it got type X phaser banks. Wanna know why? A Galaxy class has
>that the Lacota's phasers where used in pulses to knock down Defian't shields?
Well, more emitters isn't a good explanation, since even the emitters
on an Excelsior give near-4-pi coverage - why have more? Of course,
in TNG, emitters=phaser generators, so the more emitters you have,
the more you can generate phaser power. But even that doesn't help
you any if you do not have a large power source from which you can
draw that raw power - and in this respect, a Galaxy *should* be superior.
And BTW, I finally found out what the name Lakota (with a 'k') means -
apparently it's the name of the tribe(/nation?) we know as the Sioux.
Another one named by the Native American lobby of Starfleet... When, oh
when do we get to see ships named after *aliens*? One USS Gorkon in a
fleet of a multi-species political entity sounds pretty silly.
> I think that the Odyssey's and runabout's phasers were sabotaged. The
>Defiant wasn't doing too well against the Lacota's shields-if it wasn't
>for the Defiant's armor, it would have been gone before it had dropped the
>Lacota's shields. The Admiral and the Lacota's Captain obviously thought
>so.
I find it VERY unlikely that the phasers on the runabouts could have
been sabotaged. After all, a "good guy" is in charge of maintaining
those vessels - and O'Brien even seems to upgrade Nebula-class
starships passing by ("Second Sight"), so I doubt he would have
let anybody mess with his little ships - more likely he was responsible
of the performance of the Odyssey as well!
Incidentally, that makes one wonder if O'Brien IS such a good guy after
all...
Did I understand correctly that the Lakota was protecting some target
(Earth?) in the episode and thus had a valid reason not to go to warp?
If it had entered warp, Defiant would have been helpless, with its
most powerful armament inoperative at warp speeds.
Timo Saloniemi
.sigless and proud of it!
Timo S Saloniemi
>If I remember correctly the Defiant was quite good at evading phaser blasts
>in "The Die is Cast" and "Way of the Warrior", but for some reason they
>could not seem to evade a single shot from the Lacota. That makes no sense.
The reason is obvious: in the two earlier episodes, they were evading
Klingon disruptors, and we know that Klingons can't aim. In the latter,
they were facing a Federation targeting computer, and we know that those
*never* miss. (BTW, I think it's "Lakota", which AFAIK is Sioux for
"Sioux")
>Also, just because the defiant is smaller, does not mean that it's phaser
>range is significantly less than the Lacota's, but it might be less.
>I don't understand why the e Defiant didn't just do strafing runs like
>it did before which were more successful and less likely ti leave them
>a target.
Well, if Defiant has to strafe with its phasers from close range in
all other episodes, it most likely has a limited range. And from what I
hear, the Lakota still sported TOS-style single-firing-port, red-beam
phasers which have been known to be effective at warp speeds and extreme
ranges...
>If only the writers could be more consistent.
Yeah.
Timo Saloniemi
msherry
says...
>Phil Paradias (ppar...@mail.bcs.ca) writes:
I bet though that the Defiant could kill easily the
enterprise-D if it had the chance. Assuming it is not upgraded
like the exelsior. The enterprise lost against 2 klingon birds
of prey for god sakes, and the defiant easily destroyed 5 jemm
hadar ships in 1 battle.
.. The Excelsior was most probably upgraded with type X emmiters-and a
..Galaxy would have more of those. Defiant would be dead meat. Also, the
..Lacota was the only shielded ship the Defiant has ever attacked (guess
it took them all by surprise or something)
..The E-D was captured by the two Birds of Prey because it was
*ambushed*.
..If Riker had known that the two BOPs were intending to fire on the E-D,
..the E-D would have won. Remember that the E-D took on 3 K'Vort class
..cruisers and destroyed one, and very likely another.
..Captain George Lianeris CSS DreamStar, Commanding Officer
Also the klingons got access to the Shield modulation, which meant that
the E-d's shields were useless in that battle.
Phil Paradias
it does not matter that a galaxy class ships phazers are long
and ringed. Thats just fore full coverage. The lacota fought
well against the Defiant because it was massively upgraded with
some of the Defiants own systems. Quantum torpedoes, powerfull
phazers.... Plus for about a minute the Defiant just sat there
taking hits and did not shoot back untill worf finally got his
act together. Also, I don't know why so many people think the
Defiant has a short weapons range. Starfleet phazers all pretty
much have the same range, and if you remember correctly the
lacota waited untill the Defiant was close before firing. I do
think though that if starfleet can upgrade an exelsior class
ship so much then they could work miricles with a galaxy class
ship, because quite frankly galaxy class ships suck in battle.
The enterprise won maybe 5% of it's battles, the uss odessy got
destroyed and what always annoyed me was the enterprise losing
to 3 or 2 klingon birds of prey. Just to bring the delta
quadrant into this, the uss voyager seems to have the same
phazer power as a galaxy class ship, and it is losing battles
as much.
Chung, Peter W.
>
>Did I understand correctly that the Lakota was protecting some target
>(Earth?) in the episode and thus had a valid reason not to go to warp?
>If it had entered warp, Defiant would have been helpless, with its
>most powerful armament inoperative at warp speeds.
Well, in the sequence of events that happened, Lakota and Defiant approach
each other at warp (some distance apart.) Lakota, under Bantine, is ordered
by Adm. Leigh to intercept and prevent the Defiant from reaching Earth. In
the episode, Bantine is part of the conspiracy that frames Sisko as a changeling,
so there is reason to believe that although the crew of the Lakota believed
that the Defiant was manned by Changelings (as briefed by Leigh), Bantine knew
or suspected the truth. Anyway, Lakota orders Defiant to drop out of warp and
prepare to be boarded. Defiant drops out of warp, and approaches the Lakota
at impulse power with no shields up as requested. As Defiant enters Lakota's
phaser range, Lakota locks phasers on Defiant's engines. As Lakota enters
Defiant's weapons range, Worf raises shields, defying the Lakota's orders.
Lakota, realizing that the Defiant would not submit, begins to fire phasers.
Defiant takes a few hits, Worf, determines that they cannot cloak to runaway
since they would have to drop shields (and at that range, they would have been
hit). They couldn't warp away, they weren't confident that they could outrun
the Lakota. The Lakota at this point is not moving, taking a stationary
position. Worf decides to fight, and orders Defiant to target the Lakota's
weapons (and after many reviews, the Defiant is a really bad shot, the sfx
looked liked they were targetting the Lakota's power system). From here
Defiant is very close-range and maneuvers to strafe the Lakota at close-range,
while the Lakota (more-or-less) maintains its firing rate with her phasers.
However, Defiant does use her aft torp launcher....
Whether the Lakota could have fought at warp is unknown, since she got a
weapons upgrade, and the current trend is sublight combat. She fired
standard fair TNG-orang beam phasers and was armed with q-torps. So who
knows if she could have fought at warp? Or whether the crew was trained
to either...
Cluster User
ships. It was built as a test-bed for anti-borg technology. It has simply
been pressed into duty as Sisko's "big stick."
Ian Montgomerie
>> Well actually it IS the most powerful in the fleet, because it had the New and
>> Improved weapons. Now, however, the rest of the fleet is catching up, because
>> other ships have New and Improved Weapons as well. Apparently an upgraded
>> Excelsior class ship still can't match Defiant, but a Galaxy or Nebula class
>> ships with New Improved Weapons would definitely outmatch Defiant. It's clear,
>> however (from O'Brien's surprise at the Lakota's firepower) that Starfleet has
>> just begun to upgrade its existing ships, the Lakota may have been the first.
>>
>Ugh, guess what? "New and Improved Weapons"=old and miniaturized weapons
>made to fit the Lacota. The Galaxy and Nebulas have two arrays full of
>those stupid emitters not to mention high volume torp launchers that can
>fire ten torps at a time from out of the Defiant's own weapons range.
Quantum Torpedos quite probably match photon torpedos in range. Also, the
10-torpedo preload capability does not increase overall firepower. Not to
mention, the Lakota was NOT upgraded with Galaxy-class emitters. You have to
have a LARGE number of them, arranged in a row, to work. Lakota, as well as
all Excelsior class ships, uses single cannons rather than an emitter array.
>I'm getting REAL tired of writing the same rebuttals over and over again
>so read my other posts. Point is the Defiant is no match for larger
>ships. If it had beam phasers? Different story.
Maybe you're getting tired of writing the same rebuttals because they're so
idiotic, and based on such completely unwarranted assumptions, that nobody
actually buys them. I know I don't.
Ian Montgomerie
>>
>Thank you for getting your facts straight, the Defiant is no match for a
>capital ship (or ship-of-the-line) and is completely outclassed by them.
Actually, Defiant wiped the floor with most "ships of the line". It got the
better of even the heavily enhanced "Ship of the line" Lakota, and a normal
"ship of the line" Excelsior class would have been no competition at all. Then
there are those "ship of the line" Cardassian vessels, they're not that
powerful but Defiant was still thought capable of taking on a whole squadron
of them.
Ian Montgomerie
>Actually, Federation torps on the larger "capital" ships such as the upgraded
>Excelsior carry an advanced targeting and tracking system and are not
>likely to miss.
Next time you make something up, make it convincing. Photon Torpedoes on
"capital ships" like the Galaxy class, according to the technical manual,
can't make turns greater than 90 degrees at all. So, they can't hit an enemy
directly to the side or above the ship.
>> The port shields were knocked to 60% almost immediately but the overall
>> shield system hung in there and took a grat deal of firepower. As I
>> recall Lakota did most of the firing and Defiant generally took a lot
>> of hits compared to what it dealt out.
>That is because you forgot to account for the Defiant's torps. The
>Lacota never used its torps. So the while the Defiant made strafing runs
>of several volleys followed by a torp launch, it sat still and used
>upgraded buy not Galaxy/Nebula class phaser emitters.
Actually, Lakota's upgraded phasers could very easily outgun a Nebula or
Galaxy. And Defiant was seen using a grand total of one torpedo.
Ian Montgomerie
>> Gine be a break George, it seems you hate everything new and all good
>> ships are old one or the ones in your imagination (Dreamstar).
> Neck or knee? :) You know very damn well that my imagination is a heck
>of a lot more technically accurate than ST.
Actually, your imagination is almost worthless for "technical accuracy".
Photonic phasers, hah.
> Defiant was slapped together in half a year.
Actually, Defiant was launched at the beginning of season 3 of DS9, the Earth
date 2371, FOUR years after Wolf 359 (when the project was begun).
> No extensive planning, no
>production problems (comp cores and warp coils). A ship like that can't
>be so powerful.
Well, you're as wrong as can be there. Defiant's problems all came BECAUSE she
was so powerful, ie warp engines too powerful so the hull couldn't take the
stress, power emissions so high the cloaking device doesn't work fully, too
many guns for a stable design.
And there was never anything wrong with the computer cores that I recall.
Ian Montgomerie
>On 14 Jan 1996, Phil Paradias wrote:
>> I bet though that the Defiant could kill easily the
>> enterprise-D if it had the chance. Assuming it is not upgraded
>> like the exelsior. The enterprise lost against 2 klingon birds
>> of prey for god sakes, and the defiant easily destroyed 5 jemm
>> hadar ships in 1 battle.
>>
>Are you kidding me! No way! Lets put this in relative terms with the
>Lakota. The Lakota doesn't have the kind of firepower the Galaxy has due
>to the fact that the Galaxy has those two massive rings of emitters, not
>single emitters.
Actually, that assumption is incorrect. Having a fixed cannon as opposed to a
long emitter does not necessarily reduce firepower. The most powerful guns
seen on Trek recently are those of the Romulan Warbird and the Defiant, both
are cannons rather than arrays. Actually all Romulan and Klingon vessels use
fixed cannons, and they're not exactly wimps.
>and you have Defiant's shields DOWN in three bursts
Seeing as how Enterprise can't take the shields of a Jem'Hadar warship or a
Klingon bird of prey in three bursts, you're really overestimating its
firepower.
Albert Ko
On 19 Jan 1996, Chung, Peter W. wrote:
> In article <4dnhb7$l...@nntp.hut.fi>, tsal...@vipunen.hut.fi (Timo S Saloniemi) writes...
> >In article <DL6JK...@freenet.carleton.ca> ai...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (George Lianeris) writes:
> >>
> [snip]
[Snip again]
> Whether the Lakota could have fought at warp is unknown, since she got a
> weapons upgrade, and the current trend is sublight combat. She fired
> standard fair TNG-orang beam phasers and was armed with q-torps. So who
> knows if she could have fought at warp? Or whether the crew was trained
> to either...
Well, as we all should know by now. TNG warp battles involve torps
only. Phasers are light/sublight and thus would not work at warp speeds.
The Lakota was definitely carrying quantum torps but she never used
them. The Lakota also has torp launchers as do all Excelsiors do.
Albert
Albert Ko
On Sat, 20 Jan 1996, Ian Montgomerie wrote:
> Albert Ko <a-...@ux7.cso.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On 14 Jan 1996, Phil Paradias wrote:
>
> >> I bet though that the Defiant could kill easily the
> >> enterprise-D if it had the chance. Assuming it is not upgraded
> >> like the exelsior. The enterprise lost against 2 klingon birds
> >> of prey for god sakes, and the defiant easily destroyed 5 jemm
> >> hadar ships in 1 battle.
> >>
> >Are you kidding me! No way! Lets put this in relative terms with the
> >Lakota. The Lakota doesn't have the kind of firepower the Galaxy has due
> >to the fact that the Galaxy has those two massive rings of emitters, not
> >single emitters.
>
> Actually, that assumption is incorrect. Having a fixed cannon as opposed to a
> long emitter does not necessarily reduce firepower. The most powerful guns
> seen on Trek recently are those of the Romulan Warbird and the Defiant, both
> are cannons rather than arrays. Actually all Romulan and Klingon vessels use
> fixed cannons, and they're not exactly wimps.
Again, point taken. I really should have said that the array on the
Galaxies has the ability to put out more power. Of course, I know
that pulses are better on shields than anything else.
However, the nature of Romulan pulse cannons are
that they are molecular disruptor blasts which do a great deal of damage
to solid matter and shields alike. I really should have said that at
long range torps only combat, the Defiant would be at an extreme
disadvantage against the 10-at-a-time forward launcher of a Galaxy.
>
> >and you have Defiant's shields DOWN in three bursts
>
> Seeing as how Enterprise can't take the shields of a Jem'Hadar warship or a
> Klingon bird of prey in three bursts, you're really overestimating its
> firepower.
The OdDUHsee you mean, not the E-D. And remember that the E-D is stupid
as hell also. Never follows Starfleet battle protocol:
1. No evasive manuevers
2. No Torp launches
3. No BRAINS:)
My point is that the Galaxy's shielding should not be an issue because it
will never get hit by Defiant phasers. You have to remember that the
Defiant has approximately the same shield capability as the E-D also.
(If it weren't for that BS armor. . .)
Hope that clarifies a bit and help further this discussion.
Albert
Chung, Peter W.
[anip]
>act together. Also, I don't know why so many people think the
>Defiant has a short weapons range. Starfleet phazers all pretty
>much have the same range, and if you remember correctly the
>lacota waited untill the Defiant was close before firing. I do
The Lakota didn't fire because Worf ran the Defiant shields down so
the Defiant could get close enough to use her own weapons. Note
the dialogue, "Entering weapons range", and "Raise shields." It
was after Defiant raised shields that the Lakota fired. Lakota had
a phaser lock 10 seonds before Defiant herself got into weapons range.
"Paradise Lost"
>think though that if starfleet can upgrade an exelsior class
>ship so much then they could work miricles with a galaxy class
>ship, because quite frankly galaxy class ships suck in battle.
>The enterprise won maybe 5% of it's battles, the uss odessy got
>destroyed and what always annoyed me was the enterprise losing
>to 3 or 2 klingon birds of prey. Just to bring the delta
If you ever watched "Arsenal of Freedom" or "Last Outpost" or
on a slightly different timeline "Yesterday's Enterprise", and
compare them to how they fought in "Jem'hedar", "Rascals", "Generations"
you'll see a big difference in intensity.
>quadrant into this, the uss voyager seems to have the same
>phazer power as a galaxy class ship, and it is losing battles
>as much.
Surely you jest! The Voyager is a scoutship. With a loadout of
less than 30 photorps. It was made to explore, not fight.