Does Multi Vector Make A Difference? An Investigation - Star Trek Starship Battles

[@strivedad73]

RIP Tony Todd 😢

[@t3h51d3w1nd3r]

Ohh no I hadn’t heard, he had such an iconic voice and was in all the best sci fi shows, tng, ds9, voyager, sg1, andromeda, transformers, the flash, Orville. RIP Mr Todd.

[@skyserf]

Yes, very sad.

[@ChanticoChulo]

Very sad but we got to enjoy some of the best acting there ever was.

[@ianhirst1148]

@@t3h51d3w1nd3r Wasn't he the voice of Zoom in The Flash?

[@TrentonBennett]

Rest In Peace Tony Todd you were on hell of an actor and will be missed. RIP Worf's brother Kurn. I'm honestly surprised after all these years Multi Vector Assault mode was never revisited after Voyager. Maybe it costed too much to do visual fx wise? Who knows. I have to agree that a ship benefits greatly if it has MVA. You showed the perfect examples as to why a ship would. As far as the Hestia goes it seems the saucer does have a warp nacelles. That cut out is definitely where it pops up like on the Prometheus. After all the Hestia is an updated/upgraded version of the Prometheus.

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

Sad news about Tony Todd! That makes sense about the VFX costs, that's usually a big limit to most things. I like how we see a Prometheus class ship in Endgame as part of the fleet and in Star Trek Enterprise battling the future Sphere builders 🖖

[@Adarkane325xi]

What’s better than one ship? Three ships. 😎

[@DrOneOneOne]

Other problem with MVAM is that damage to or destruction of one the sections might make it difficult or impossible to reintegrate the ship again.

[@Renserin]

Yeah, that's one of the major drawbacks. Which is part of the reason I said in my comment that it needs to be used wisely.

[@timesthree5757]

Given that each ship has its own warp core and warp engines it seems Starfleet thought of that.

[@dahlesa]

It was so funny when the collision happened. I saw the spinning ship going into Andromeda's Galaxy at warp 9.BLUUUURRRRGGHH!

[@janhavlicek7472]

I would like to see Deathstar vs V'Ger

[@MSR-1701]

Hm...

[@alejandroruizdezuniga7582]

That would be amazing!

[@MisterMarin]

And I would like to see-saw, but I'm too old for that now. 😛

[@jacobktan]

Strengths of MVAM are that you have a lot more weaponry and more overall shield strength. The weaknesses are that you spread your damage over multiple targets or shield faces, and that if your enemy is capable of multitargeting they can attack with more of their weapons at once.

[@Andre25077]

Only in peacetime and in a post scarcity economy is building a labor intensive ship which can split in three parts a good idea. If you want to engage from multiple angles, then use three smaller ships (or two).

[@stevelapierre4776]

😨Gosh Admiral.. the Borg adapted there.. wow. I like the Hestia.. and the Ent G, , in the show, multi vector works great and look what it did , here also, for the Ent G, all those wicked phasers onto one ship is insane.. and love that can separate at warp like in the show.. loved that. depends on the ship also.. I would think, but it works.. and guess that Borg Sphere has ramming bumpers lol.. love the battle Admiral! Just notice..eeh. gosh.. 😊🖖 R.I.P. Tony Todd..

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

The Enterprise G(Eclipse) is incredible. Imagine if Starfleet had those during the Dominion War? Seperating at warp in BC may be possible, although firing at warp leads to a game crash 😂. Yesss, that ram was insane! Sad about Tony Todd 🖖

[@stevelapierre4776]

@@RetroBadgerGaming I love the Eclipse also, and went to see the last battle Picard 3 and firing on the station, I saw so many warp nacelles exactly like the Eclipse so that was hmm.. Thank you again..😊🖖

[@devastator2563]

Message in a bottle is one of the best voyager episodes, Great video LLAP to all 🖖

[@crownprincesebastianjohano7069]

The nacelles are embedded in the hull on the one section, like a Cardassian ship or the Defiant.

[@davidprinzing8059]

MVAM is a comedy gimmick. The Enterprise D could separate into two sections and attack independently but they didn't call it MVAM until Andy Dick showed up. That being said, separating the ship into several sections has a lot of utility, including attacking from multiple different angles, prioritizing attack over defense, designing ships with significant redundancies which can serve as escape vessels or even split into multiple roles during missions and even allowing ships to be more modular allowing for easier retrofitting or repairs.

[@Sky_Taor]

The whole point in Galaxy and Prometheus separation is different. Prometheus splits into three autonomous ships to fight. Or patrol, or something else like that. Galaxy (Ent.D) separates into basically military part(stardrive) and civilian life raft (saucer). So saucer can fire only few bursts of its phasers, cannot enter warp by itself(can only be thrown into warp and maintain warp 2 or some like that). And used to get unessential personal, civvies out of harm way. But Stardrive relived of sheer bulk of Saucer can use extra power for weapons, be much more nimble and form much more dense shield around itself. So "ship separetion" ≠ MVAM

[@davidprinzing8059]

@@Sky_Taor Sure, I agree that the separations were both functionally different and physically different. However, I can easily prove that MVAM is (mostly) a comedy gimmick. Firstly, it was a setup by a comedian in a comedy episode to be used during one of the many comedic moments. Secondly, tech phrases in Star Trek aren't chosen randomly as the writers tend to do their best to cite scientific sources in order to maintain continuity with both science and the Star Trek universe. Therefore, a simple test of any phrase in Star Trek is to determine if the phrase itself makes sense in the context given. Multi-Vector (more than one vector i.e. more than one ship) Assault (to attack) Mode superficially checks those boxes until you apply inverse testing to it. For example, reintegration isn't called "Single Vector Assault Mode" nor does it even make sense to use "Assault Mode" or even "Multi-Vector" as it stands to reason that using multiple ships would inherently create multiple vectors of assault when attacking, just as a single ship inherently creates a single vector of assault. Therefore, the entire phrase is a throw-away phrase meaning absolutely nothing and does not match the normal pattern of a carefully considered lexicon we have gotten used to in the Star Trek universe. Thus, the writers obviously threw it in there as a joke (and an argument could be made that the Prometheus ship design itself was supposed to be a joke). You can take this idea even further if you ask yourself the question, "If there is a MVAM, are there other modes such as Multi-Vector Mission Mode or Single-Vector High-Speed Flight Mode?". Obviously, none of these exist as it wouldn't make a lot of sense to add such useless labels to such mundane actions. At best, if you skipped past the comedy and tried to take it seriously you could say that MVAM is a computer assisted attack mode such as "attack pattern delta" which uses ship separation. It's not the design of the ship to separate nor is it the separation of the ship itself, but rather a mostly autonomous tactical attack pattern. However, in that case you should call it CASA (Computer Assisted Separated Attack) pattern which is not only a much more meaningful name for attack pattern but even the acronym itself is far better (CASA meaning Home which refers to both Voyager trying to get home and a reference to the attack pattern which prevented the Romulans from stealing the ship from it's home).

[@deepdivedylan]

I love the vector analysis of this attack mode. It eclipses all other previous studies on the subject.

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

🤣🤣🤣

[@justinmurphy2227]

The saucer's nacelle's are built in. You can see the busard collectors and chiller grills. Granted they are smaller as they are like maintainer versions.

[@XHunter442]

its amazing... Ty for the video and LLAP!

[@MAZE4]

Borg spheres, Swedish meatballs!

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

🤣🤣

[@newatlantic7228]

Such a cool concept and a pretty ship

[@retluoc]

Aside from acting as a distraction, I never saw the point of multi-vector assault. Unless... each section had an equally powerful core and equal firepower. And even then... wouldn't they be even more powerful as one? I'm thinking too hard again... back to the fight. I bet the MK5 EMH is helping on the bridge. Who would play him (or her). That's it... an AI version of Gates McFadden. 😀 Edit: That surprised me too. I guess we were right about all sections having equal power and warp capability. (Or so I've heard). Just in case they lose one, the others can rescue survivors and return to base.

[@YvanHeroux]

Multi vector assault mode is awesome! 3 sphere battle was very interesting, I was sure it wouldn't work! But yeah not bad at all!

[@MAZE4]

Multi vector assault mode would probably only be utilised if the ship had sufficient backup, obviously it would be vulnerable during the separation process.

[@dennisdenise1]

Five dreadnaught class ships from TOS era against one galaxy class.

[@RodneyBrowning]

The biggest benefit to having MVAM would likely be something that Starfleet should keep in reserve for their vessels providing primary interdiction security. It's likely not to be super fuel efficient with having multiple ships traveling as one, but would be an amazing ship to have picketing the borders. Save MVAM for any ship not being utilized for exploration, where fuel economy is necessary.

[@grieverzer0416]

Each section of the MVAM has thier own independent core and warp drives. The Saucer does have 2 small Necelles, above and below. And if I remember correctly the cores of the two stardrive/secondary hull portions join together into one large core when docked. The Saucer uses the old school horizontal style of core.

[@jyralnadreth4442]

You do see it after Star Trek Voyager....in Enterprise at the Battle Of Procyon 5 there is a Prometheus Class Cruiser fighting the Sphere builders along with a Nova class

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

What I meant was we never see multi-vector in action again after Message in a bottle. I remember seeing the Prometheus Class Cruiser in Enterprise. I always assumed by the time of that that battle they'd given up with MVAM by this point as the ship was as a whole. There was also a Dauntless Class in the background, which totally blew my mind! 🖖

[@bshilling9924]

They took the idea of saucer separation to protect family members and a life boat created Multi Vector. It makes sense it would work. You are in a battle with a stronger vessel and Multi Vector makes it so that stronger vessel has to deal with multiple targets now. Multi Vector also increases the chances some of the crew will survive.

[@Renserin]

Well, the video proves that MVAM does provide a considerable tactical advantage in a fight. Watching this, two things sprang to mind. One, I think the idea is to separate before the ship enters weapons range, that would eliminate that vulnerability. Second, it has to be used wisely. There are some situations were separating only makes you die faster.

[@brutalchicken]

So I've been diving deep into the tech stuff of Star Trek lately, namely the power sources. The warp core produces more power than a shield can use, aside from warp drive. The 'power' isn't actually electricity for the main ship systems but 'electroplasma' so the EPS grid acts like a capacitor that's filled up by plasma. The warp core can do this but so can fusion reactors. I'm guessing there isn't a major loss of power with multi-vector assault as each piece needs impulse engines and therefore would have big fusion reactors to draw power from. What it may suffer from is slower recharging of that EPS grid but theoretically even a MVAM ship in one piece could still have its major systems powered by fusion. It's just faster with the warp core. That gives ships with MVAM a role and not an 'I win" button; It can overwhelm a target's defenses but will suffer the longer a combat lasts.

[@BrianGriffinQuahog]

Yes the fusion reactors CAN power the shields and weapons without a 'warp core' however they are very limited in terms of output vs longevity. Shields are the biggest drain of power, followed closely by weapons. The issue is that that the reactors use deuterium. On most star ships the primary storage tanks are large and stored in the engineering section. There are smaller storage tanks near the reactors but once cut off from the main tanks they are used quite quickly in high energy use situations (shields/weapons/propulsion) For a combat ship having such limitation would be utterly useless. It would be like trying to race a car with a 5l tank vs a car with a 60L tank. Best example I can give you would be for you to take the Ent-D saucer section into battle in Bridge Commander. Once separated from the Engineering section it doesn't last long.

[@MisterMarin]

MVAM is Star Trek's way of saying -Command- Divide & Conquer.

[@PieEatinSuicideGrunt]

Divide your own ship to get conquered?

[@Raketenmaulwurf]

I think the tactical advantages are quite obvious. Targeting either multiple enemies at once to split up their fire, or hit a single target from different angles cannot be overstated. Ships in Star Trek HAVE individual shield sections. See the battle of the Bassen Rift or Voyagers Equinox episode, when the aliens collapsed one shield vector so fast it could not switch to backup power in time.. Archer killed Duras with the L-4 when Duras faced all his shield power to front.. The OG Prometheus even had additional Phaser arrays on the other sections that were covered when combined. So the total amount of weapon hardpoints actually increases when split up. And don't forget the increased maneuverability of the individual sections being smaller than the combined ship. But apart from the tactical standpoint: think about the increased flexibility.. Remember Michael Eddington firing on that cardassian transport sending it to crash on the planet so Sisko was forced to abandon pursuit to rescue the cardies? Prometheus like "Hold my beer i got that" POV of a certain romulan commander searching an asteroid field to find an old federation ship: Sirol: "Status on the federation ship, what are they doing?" Centurion 1: "One section is scanning an asteroid for longer than usual, they might have found something!" Sirol: "Alright let's go there and see what they..." Centurion 2: "Sir! One other section is engaging transporters!" Sirol: "Where are they?" Centurion 2: "45 minutes away at impulse" Sirol: "sigh.. where is the 3rd section?" Centurion 3: "I don't know sir, they left our sensor range 15 minutes ago" Centurion 4: "Sir, 2 sections are engaging their warp engines.." Sirol smashing his chair in rage... And the best one: Worf: "Captain! 2 Warbirds decloaking" Tomalak: "Got you Picard!! Surrender! You are outnumbered!" Picard: "Count again! Mr. Worf?" Worf: "with pleasure sir!" *Engages MVAM* 1 hour later: Klingon captain: "I heard you need help Picard?" Picard looks at the wrecks of the 2 warbirds: "Who said this nonsense???" Think about the possibilities... I would LOVE to rewrite all the Star Trek episodes to see what good ol' Prometheus would have done to save the day

[@kellyevans3254]

It looks like in game each section of the ship maintains its shield and phaser power. If “real life” splitting your ship means dividing your power resources between several ships. A good test would be counting how many torpedos it takes to collapse the shields on a given face for the ship all together vs each of the component parts. I suspect that in game MVAM is effective and useful to have, but i don’t think it would be great for combat in universe. Where i see splitting the ship apart really shining would be disaster relief operations, and scientific expeditions,, the combined ship would have more power to travel faster at warp then the ship can spilt up and perform several specialized roles in several locations at once.

[@BrianGriffinQuahog]

The 3 blue lines on the saucer near the impulse reactors are the saucer's warp nacelles. Similar in construction to the Defiant class

[@AJUniverse]

Looking at the title, considering that multi vector assault mode is designed to overwhelm the dispersive capabilities of a ship's shields, and the Borg don't rely on typical shields, my guess would be no. Also we do see it again in the Star Trek universe, on various ship classes in Star Trek Online, a part of the Star Trek universe. You're playing one of those ships in this video in fact! In case you didn't realize.

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

That's a good point. The Hestia is from STO which i forgot! Way after Voyager :-) The Hestia may have had newer style weaponry which the Borg had never encountered, but they most likely would have adapted quickly.

[@enterprise-h312]

9:00 I'd add it to the flagship, for sure. I wonder if this design gives improved fuel economy or not by essentially having a small fleet travel as one ship? I wouldn't add it to just any ship, probably too complicated, but any ship whose individual sections can survive independently (not risk reintegration problems) might benefit from this.

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

Interesting! I never considered that. It certainly could be a more efficient way of transporting multiple ships. 🖖

[@UncommonKnowledge587]

I think MVAM is great! Imagine a fleet of MVAM capable ships and they all separate, the enemy could be overwhelmed quickly 🖖

[@adamantu]

MVAM works if the sections are near equally durable and reasonably armed. It doesn't work if one section is considerably stronger than the others, which is why it doesn't work with the Galaxy class, whose saucer seperation was designed with a different purpose in mind.

[@roguerifter9724]

If nothing else when facing single targets attacking from multiple angles mean the target has to divide it shield energy, and it make it harder to the target to keep its weak points out of the line of fire.

[@danl7756]

I seem to recall there was at least one borg cube that had a type of MVAM, that'd be interesting to see in Kobayashi Maru.

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

Indeed! It's the cube from Star Trek Armada 2. I forget its name 🤣. It could seperate into 8 other cubes! 🖖

[@TonySquared09]

The clue if MVAM works is in its name. Meant to be used against a single target from multiple angles.

[@phillm156]

Anyway to get the Battlestar Pegasus onboard for some tests?

[@hardline2a]

Technically speaking, we saw multi vector assault mode with the Enterprise D in Next Gen

[@GoldenMoonOfDeltaCommentaries]

I feel like a better way to of test this would of been to put 2 of the same ship types agienst eachother but have one with its vector assulte mode engaged while the other does not

[@aquariandawn4750]

Hestia looks like one of those supercars that only like 1% of the population can afford and they're too scared to drive them out on the road

[@randylewis1779]

I love your videos

[@williamreffner6542]

The real enterprise G

[@s.patrickmarino7289]

That was fantastic, thanks! It looks like Multi vector attack is better than I thought. I would think that it might be even more effective in a multi player game. A human team could try to position the ships so that they start out all hitting the same shield, then spread out so there would always be one ship hitting that downed shield. It might take some time to work out the best tactics for multi attack. It might also take some time to work out the best tactics against it. If I might ask an off topic question, I finally showed up to my new country and in about a week or so, I will have my new home and my new lab set up. One of the things I want to do is get a Windows based computer, just to play some old games such as BC. What hardware do you recommend? Would I need to go with an older OS? I have been wanting to play the game for some time, but with an international move going on, it was not practical to get new hardware. (My lab is a mix between a few M series Macs and some Linux boxes I use to simulate servers.) Again, thanks!

[@MSR-1701]

For hilarity, using MVAM in KM with Gravity FX enabled causes the separated AI ships to go flying to the side😂😂😂😂

[@MisterMarin]

All MVAM and no KM with GFX makes AI a dull boy.

[@MSR-1701]

@MisterMarin 🤣🤪

[@MisterMarin]

@@MSR-1701 And all fools and no horses make Del Boy. ... ... ... ... ... Wait, what?! 🐴

[@MSR-1701]

@MisterMarin LOL!!

[@MisterMarin]

@@MSR-1701 Great LOL, kid! Don't get cock(ne)y! 🐓

[@charlessisnett9968]

Smaller+faster=success kaplah

[@pyronuke4768]

We see what happens when you put MVAM up against multiple weaker opponents and against one of similar strength, but for the test to be complete you should put MVAM up against a ship that is more powerful and see how that works.

[@pravusprime]

Back in the CD-ROM days of playing BC, when MVAM came out, there was an exploit you could do. Because the game is replacing one ship model with 3 new ships, you could engage as a complete ship until your shields started to wear, then split and be at 100% shields on all sections for fresh ships to battle with. MVAM as an idea is difficult to analyze simply because it has a lot of flexibility and questions of resources that can't be answered. Can a Prometheus do what an Akira, Intrepid, and Defiant together can't together or are those 3 ships better? How does that compare on resources to build and crew? In theory, the Prometheus style should have 3 sets of shield generators and 3 warp cores, which operating together should allow one set to be up and the others recharging, so it could cycle through generators and stay extremely viable in combat. That would give a tremendous advantage to staying together. On the other hand, if those shield generators aren't equal, then there could be major issues, which would also carry over in split mode (like the thunderbird on the G). Star Trek as a whole shies away from Carriers and fighters, seemingly embracing the notion across the board that bigger is better, which should make the MVAM a high risk move without a lot of support tech to remove those weaknesses or plot armor.

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

I remember that glitch! From memory as well if your seperate section had huge visual damaged it would magically repair! Your correct, MVAM is a very complex subject. There are so many situations it could work and not work. I seem to remember the Romulan Helmsman being very reluctant to even engage MVAM in message in a bottle. So it certainly wasn't without risks 🖖

[@Matthew-is7zs]

I think it has potential but needs more tweeking of the design

[@BrianGriffinQuahog]

The joined battle was a collision imo.

[@kennickel878]

Voyager's greatest sin was nerfing the Borg...got spheres going down easier than Jem Hadar fighters.

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

Yes, I mean you could say 7 of 9 helped with her inside knowledge, but when they engaged a Borg Tactical cube it got silly 😂

[@kennickel878]

@RetroBadgerGaming and then where did the Borg's famed adaptability go? Voyager's only advantage was ONE drone helping them out but, they're portrayed as so moribund that their society is completely unable to cope until it's destroyed and it's that dynamic, the complete antithesis of what was so awe inspiring and terrifying about them when first introduced, that we're stuck with to this day. Three borg spheres being a good warmup, for a ship that can't multi target at that, is wild. TNG Borg would come in one at a time. The first MIGHT be destroyed, the second damaged or disabled, and the third would see your armada as nothing more than fleas.

[@cross3052]

It's not as simple as "do I want a 9 or 3 3s". The ability to out maneuver a single target while dividing its attention makes the difference. While it's preferable to have three full power ships MVAM does have merit.

[@jeffr3773]

IDK if the game simulates this, but if it were real each section would need its own independent power source and shield generator, which because of size and energy would be much much less powerful than what a single ship combined could carry. Plus the complexity, cost, and manufacture time.

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

Each section in the game does have its own warp core and power. Although I'm not sure by how much the power magnitude changes. An older version of the Prometheus mod became very weak once seperated 🖖

[@jeffr3773]

@@RetroBadgerGaming cool thanks for explaining. I imagine to fight one of these starships, if you made a compromise to your power/weapons/shields systems at all, let alone 1/3, you'd drop from parity to not even being able to scratch it or take 1 hit. If it were real anyway.

[@fiffzek]

Is this Bridge Commander Remastered? Where do you got the mod for MVAM?

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

Yes it is! I made a video a few weeks showing how to install it 🖖

[@3foxstangs]

Enterprise j vs the regency

[@jpal0227]

What is better, 1 ship or 3/3 ships? I feel like thirding the power of the ship makes it less viable. Or for that matter, having to build 3 warp cores, 3 reactors, 3 life supports, 3x the engines, etc for a single ship sounds insanely stupid

[@rickyrage1985]

Would that work the same on Star Trek online?

[@RetroBadgerGaming]

I'm not sure to be honest. There must be a benefit to the mode though, otherwise I'm not sure why they would offer it in game(STO)

[@RokkitGrrl]

I was never fond of the multi-vector design. It just seemed like a complete waste of resources to me. I felt it was better to swarm a Borg cube with smaller, more agile attack ships.

[@81olsen]

wowo First to comment??

[@sarcasticstartrek7719]

Such a stupidly designed ship. No thought into it - and look at the impulse engines - they'd blow their output directly into the warp engines.

[@ASNS117Zero]

... just build carriers. Star Trek has never made a serious attempt at a carrier lol.