Indy

I mean it’s fine if you enjoy the game, but it really isn’t a good game at all. It’s fun in that it is a way to immerse yourself in Trek content.

This sums it up really well. I also find it to be a fun place to meet up with geographically distant friends who also like Trek. Hanging out in Quark's while chatting over voicechat is pretty great.

Over at Daystrom, this comes up from time to time. I've formed a head-canon for it as well. To quote one of my comments on a thread there regarding the explosions (and the "rocks"):

My understanding is that the "rocks" are a product of the electroplasma system being exposed to air. Whether that is some sort of coolant that is meant to seal the EPS leak in that console or some sort of EPS byproduct reacting in air, I don't remember or have a head-canon for it.

All of that said, if I form this reply into one worthy of Daystrom, then I say it is an intended safety mechanism to protect the crew against catastrophic failure of the EPS conduits.

So, the consoles are exploding from the failure of the EPS conduits and the expansion of the coolant.

Thank you for putting into words what I've been trying to weigh out regarding a Steam Deck.
I think your tech arrangement is similar enough to my own and therefore just what I needed to read in order to convince myself I won't miss not having one.

That's exactly the thought I had about it. (The sample return part.)

Perhaps also with a small containment field with its own power supply? Thus the smaller size would allow for more efficient use of such a field, whether by allowing it to be more secure while using the same power as a larger field or to sustain a smaller field for a longer time in cases of general power failure?

My understanding is that the "rocks" are a product of the electroplasma system being exposed to air. Whether that is some sort of coolant that is meant to seal the EPS leak in that console or some sort of EPS byproduct reacting in air, I don't remember or have a head-canon for it.

All of that said, if I form this reply into one worthy of Daystrom, then I say it is an intended safety mechanism to protect the crew against catastrophic failure of the EPS conduits.