Monday, January 18, 2010

The Nerfing of the Starship Enterprise: Part II

As a quick review of Part I, here's the short and quick list of what I consider the key elements in simulating the original Star Trek's USS Enterprise.

  1. It was a Warp Speed warship best used in combat at FTL speeds.
  2. Non-ablative Deflector shields, able to withstand (for a time) planet wrecking attacks and completely ignore attacks below certain power levels
  3. Shields were divided into at least four 'arcs' that were damaged and reinforced independently
  4. Phasers and photon Torpedos were FTL weapons. There were a number of weapon mounts pointing in different directions.
  5. The phasers were fired 'one bank' at a time in a twin beam using all the ship's offensive power in a single attack. Torpedos were launched in spreads (typically in sets of double launches) and never fired at the same time as the phasers
  6. Ship's Power was critical in how the ship operated. Often balanced between needs it could divert for increased offense or defense.
  7. Warp Factors were a cubic conversion times light speed (maybe with a constant added)
  8. It was the fastest ship in Starfleet as warp drive was power intensive. Shuttles were sublight only.
  9. The Enterprise was the most powerful, and most versatile ship in Starfleet

I'll use the above as I examine how the Ship was treated in gaming and fiction after the end of the original series.

In 1975 perhaps the single most important Star Trek related gaming publication was released. It wasn't however a game. Rather it was the Star Fleet Technical Manual (SFTM) written by Franz Joseph Schnaubelt. Written 6 years after the series ended, this one work would determine in many ways the future of Star Trek.

Schnaubelt wasn't a member of the original development team, but a fan who took to drawing and detailing things Star Trek as he saw them. He struck an agreement with Roddenberry (who thought the franchise dead) and was allowed to publish a book containing his work. The sales were impressive, and this was perhaps a deciding factor in bringing Star Trek to the big screen. It was certainly a landmark in Star Trek gaming.

It was also the beginning of the nerfing of the Starship Enterprise.

In it's defense, much of this wasn't its fault. The SFTM didn't going into operation details for the most part. It was a set of drawings, names, and background information. Not a tactical or operational work. Even so, there were two bits of information that would have a massive impact on gaming.

  • The inclusion of ship classes other than the Enterprise.

Here Schnaublet decided that Starfleet fielded other types of ships in addition to its Heavy Cruisers like the Enterprise. This made sense from hints dropped during the series and its writer's bible but they never really appeared on screen due to expense.

Thus Starfleet also had destroyers, scouts and tugs. And... it had dreadnaughts.

In the original writer's bible, it was stated that the Enterprise was a dreadnaught or battleship- but that the Federation used the term Heavy Cruiser as it was a better fit for a ship that had exploration duties as its primary role during peace time. Schnaublet missed that memo, and reduced the Enterprise to the second most powerful Star Fleet ship type.

Schnaublet in a way tried to contain the damage, saying that the Dreadnaughts were kept at a home Starbase unless the Federation went to war, at which point they would set out to heap death upon their foes. But normally they were too expensive to operate. Thus, the Enterprise was still the best the Federation had in daily operation.

That such a concept wouldn't work didn't seem to occur to him. Just consider it. Who would crew it? Would you pull experienced crews off a Heavy Cruiser and toss them under war conditions onto a ship they've never operated before? Would you maintain a 'hanger' crew who did nothing but train on simulators and thus send green crews out manning your best ships?

Has any Navy operated effectively like this? No. Did anything like this appear on any TV or movie screen before or after? No.

But it's here, and as we'll see it became an important part of the gaming world of Star Trek.

  • The SFTM defined how many and in what locations the Enterprise's weapon mounts were. For the phasers, it claimed there were three pairs. One was on the bottom of the saucer facing foward. The other top on were on the top with one facing port and the other Starboard. The twin torpedo launchers faced forward.

Now the original show used a lot of stock footage (cost was a issue), and never showed anything but the main forward phasers or photons firing. However they did say on screen that there were others. So adding them to the drawing was worthwhile

However, does that type of mounting make sense to anyone? It doesn't to me. If the ship could always turn towards a foe, you'd only need two weapon mounts- a primary and a backup. If it couldn't be counted on to make that turn (far more likely IMO for tactical reasons if no others), it should have weapons pointed everywhere.

You could sort of get away with it. After all, the Enterprise would only fire one of those mounts at a time. And if it rotated along it's axis (i.e. banked or even turned 'upside down') it could bring a weapon to bear in any direction but directly astern. Maybe that was a blind spot you couldn't fire through anyway? This never happened on screen. But one could excuse that.

That works. Well, there's a problem. If you listen to the backgroud chatter on the original show as the Enterprise goes to Red Alert, you'll hear something interesting. A report of "Aft Phasers Ready".

Years later, the blueprints for the movie Enterprise would show 18 phasers (14 in paired banks, 4 independently mount) pointing in all directions. The Enterpise TV episode "In a Mirror, Darkly" would show the aft phasers firing on an original Constitution class cruiser.

So the SFTM is wrong.

Thus the SFTM gives us two problems, but only one is a nerf. The reduction of the Enterprise to second tier breaks item #9 above. The weapon mountings are an incorrect detail that could be easily forgotten. But we'll see how that error bites us going forward.

Edit: Almost forgot something. All the ships in the SFTM have the same warp speeds. Highly unlikely, and this breaks requirement #8 above.

Next we starting examing game designs.

Part: I, III, IV, V, VI, VII, Conclusion

2 comments:

aramis said...

The deckplans attributed to Matt Jefferies show:
2 photons (Deck 3)
2x 2ph banks on deck 5 (p/s)
1x 2ph bank on deck 11 (f)

So the Ent episode showing aft phasers has to be a refit; naval tradition specifically includes armament alterations over time. And that particular enterprise is from an alternate universe, the Mirror Universe, not the prime universe.

So In a Mirror Darkly might be a refit or might be an alternate universe difference.

The "aft phasers" comment is in a season 3 episode; SVC comments on it in the SFB designers notes; he takes it as a refit to cover a weakness, fit during one of the 1701's starbase layovers. (If they had had them during Journey to Babel, they'd almost certainly have fired them as the craft went past.

Further still, we only see one warp speed combat in TOS, in Journey to Babel. Heck, there are very few ship-to-ship combat episdodes at all; one sublight battle with a romulan, one battle with a never-in-focus orion making high speed passes in Journey to Babel, One fed-vs-fed in The Ultimate Computer showing phasers cut right through minimal shields, The Tholian "fight" in Tholian Web.

We also know frm the tech manual that the DN's are later built than the Enterprise; the Enterprise is in the original 12 of stardate 0965, while the initial 12 dreadnoughts are SD 6066... well after the TM purports another 60+ CA's are built. (CAs per SFTM 16 in SD 3220, 4 on SD4444, 117 in 5930) Which puts the original series comment between 6066 and 3220... a time without DN's... and references them with suffixed Mk numbers, which would most likely indicate refits of some kind. (SFB adds an aft phaser bank to the CA in a refit, but new construction gets it inbuilt, and the refit is doable at starbases.)

Gleichman said...

Wow.

It's rare that I see so much wrongness put into a single comment. From using retcon sources (1972 blueprints and the SFTM) to justify rather than mark the changes to being completely wrong about the events of the original episodes.

Such as ignoring the Enterprise's Warp speed run from the plasma torpedo in 'Balance of Terror'.

Or it's warp 2 vs. warp 7 turn of the tables against the Klingons in 'Elaan of Troyius'.

Or the Klingon ambush of the Enterprise in the middle of interstellar space in 'Errand of Mercy'.

Or...

Nevermind, that should be enough. I don't see anything correct in your comment. Rather it is a good example of attempting to make things fit when they just don't. Dropped events, forgotten battles and examples, retconned facts.

And those types of justifications don't work. Going back and trying to retcon things to match isn't a valid approach.

One should watch the original show and takes only what it presents- nothing more. And then develop the view a reasonable person would have.

You don't try to explain away things with what was said decades later and deny the changes that were made.