You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Play nice. (This means you.)
Logins from the previous forum have been carried over; if you have difficulty logging in, please try resetting your password before contacting us. Attachments did not survive the migration--many apologies, but we're lucky we kept what we could!
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by elsyr
Best news I've heard in a while, but tempered by the fact that there have been plans intermittently for quite some time now. Any thoughts on a probability that plans will become actualities? SF is really a very good basic system, that I think with a few tweaks and expansions could be something excellent.
Besides. I'm really looking forward to adding more planes to that spreadsheet. 
Doug
Time for my annual query regarding Spitting Fire. Any plans to do anything with it? If not, would you consider releasing the plane designer tool kit you used to stat up the existing planes?
Thanks,
Doug
... and while I'm glad to finally see the Lyrans and Hydrans, I'm a little disappointed that ESGs are purely defensive systems. This seems like it would take away some of the knife-fight fun that the Lyrans brought to the party. Was it just too difficult to model the SFB effect? In the olden days, when carronades were special systems, they would have fit the bill.
Doug
I was also wondering that, but it's maybe a bit too early to ask. :oops:
Marc
Dunno about that, I've been asking since KA came out. Then again, I've been asking for more stuff for Spitting Fire for ages, too - so that means little.
Doug
Great news! And even better, now that those pesky Romulans and Gorn are out of the way, you can move on to the Lyrans and Hydrans (and Tholians)! :-)
Doug
And I should now have a PDF of GF1 on it's merry electronic way to me - bought it this morning. That should hold me over until there's a GF2.
Doug
Awesome stuff - thanks! I did not realize that the deck armor calculation was changed from GF1 to GF2. I do not have a Conway's, but I _do_ have the ship data book from SeeKreig 4 (which is out there for free), which has the deck armor stats for a pretty large sample of ships.
Doug
An aircraft supplement for GF2 could be finished in relatively short order, if there were a demand for it.
Dan:
Well, I for one would like it, but then I've been waiting forever for a Spitting Fire expansion too, so my tastes do not seem to be reflective of the masses. Anyway, supposing a supplement, would you want to do this as aircraft only, or include some additional things to widen the appeal? Or perhaps do this as part of the long awaited WWII supplement? If it turns out that there is not enough demand to do this right now, would you recommend just adapting the rules from GF1 to GF2? If so, do you have any suggestions for doing so?
Just out of curiosity - why were the airplane, sub, etc. rules removed from GF for the 2nd edition?
Doug
So Dan - what's the word? Is there a plan for a supplement to GF2 in the near term that will include aircraft (and perhaps some of the other ancillary things that were apparently in GF1 but disappeared in the new edition)? Or would my best bet be to buy GF1 and adapt those rules to GF2? If so, do yo have any suggestions for doing so?
Thanks,
Doug
There was much discussion and gnashing of teeth over this when developing SAE. Suffice to say my proffered compromise was accepted.
That doesn't mean you can't adopt the rule you propose with a minimum of fuss.
Depends on how you define "a minimum of fuss" - with Starmada X, there was not a published stable of ships I wanted to use, preferring to roll my own, so it was a pretty simple decision. That's not the case with Klingon Armada - I'll have to think about whether or not I want to recalc all of the ships (and presumably every other ship that comes out in the series) ... and lazy as I am the answer to that will probably be "no".
Doug
Question for y'all - reading through my new copy of the Admiralty edition, I see that we now have offset firing arcs (G-L) to complement the original set of arcs (A-F). Why not, though, just simplify things and do incremements of 30 degrees, designated based on a bearing dead ahead being 0 (or 360)? To avoid oddities with the hex grid, you have to stipulate that any firing arc must start and end on a multiple of 30 degrees, but that's about it. It's a nice simple change to the ship builder spreadsheet, too. I used this as a house rule for Starmada X and will probably do the same for Admiralty. The way it stands now, a weapon with an arc of C+J (the example used in the rules) which covers 90 degrees, is overpriced, since you would be paying SU cost for 2 arcs and 120 degrees, not the 1.5 arcs it actually covers.
Doug
I was just reading about coal bunkers in Robert Massie's "Castles Of Steel" last week.
The book mentions that it was the German navy's practice in the years leading up to and during WW1 for coal bunkers to always be kept at the very least half full. It does not, however, go into great detail as to why. Protection may have been a factor, but more likely it was to have a large enough coal reserve for sudden bursts of speed.
Reading the same book myself - I got the impression that it was more the latter than the former - like making sure your car's gas tank never gets below 1/2 full, just in case.
Doug
Assuming Romulan Armada does as well as KA, the intent is to keep going with more installments. Whether or not that means the Hydrans, Lyrans, or Andromedans I'm not sure yet. But the Tholians are high on my list.
Tholians and/or Neo-Tholians would be cool indeed. I was never really that fond of the Andromedans. First they were way overpowered, then they were sort of underpowered, and they always seemed like sort of a deus ex machina to me anyway. Never got into the ISC either.
Doug
I'm looking forward to seeing it - I just got KA, and I really like the way it blends the SFB and Starmada vibes (because frankly, for me the SFB vibe had been smothered under two tons of rules). RA sounds promising. Will there be a third installment, with the Hydrans and Lyrans? I've always been a big fan of the Lyrans.
Doug
Doug-
With GF2, though, you might just be stuck (until the promised "forthcoming rules" are forthcoming, anyway).
-Eric
And there's the rub - if the air rules are not to be forthcoming in the near forth then I might just buy GF1 and try to graft those air rules on. But if that's really impossible for some reason, or if their are more ruls on the horizon, then I'm content to wait for the official GF2 version.
Doug
ericrrrm wrote:So, given that subs in WWI were pretty much incapable of operating tactically with a fleet, I'd restrict them to strategic effects in a campaign. Think "mobile minefield".
Indeed. In all of the reading I've done, submarines did not play any actual role in surface ship combat (even in WW2, I don't believe any ship during a surface engagement was sunk by submarine). The THREAT of submarines is another matter entirely -- but if you want to include that in your games, it should be a C&C issue or scenario rule (like the one for Dogger Bank in King & Kaiser), not a tactical consideration.
Sounds like a reasonable way to approach things - I'll check out the scenario rules. Now, how about those aircraft rules? Looking at the old catalog entry, I see that GF1 was described as having "rules for everything from ships to aeroplanes, Zeppelins to submarines" ... seems almost like a step backwards to take all the ancillary stuff out in the new edition, unless an rules expansion/supplement is planned for the relatively near future.
Doug
Doug-
I assume you're now asking about rules, and not "Miniatures choices".
Yes I am, as I did in the original post. The title might be a bit misleading - that comma should perhaps have been a semi-colon. I'll edit the title.
Thanks for the thoughts - I was not looking for in depth (pardon the pun) sub-hunting rules, but for something that might capture sub attacks on surface ships and perhaps destroyer actions against subs. I'm a neophyte when it comes to naval history, but in the limtied research I've done so far, I seem to see many references to attempting to draw an enemy force across a barrier of mines or submarines, but now that I think of it, I do NOT see many references to it actually WORKING, at least not where subs were concerned.
Thanks,
Doug
So - how about the planes and subs? Any thoughts? Should I go buy a copy of GF1 and use the aircraft rules from there? Or will they be in a supplement (that will hopefully come relatively soon)?
Thanks,
Doug
I have a pretty small 1/2400 collection, but it contains some GHQ, Viking Forge, CinC, and Panzershiffe. If I were making a diorama, I'd go with GHQ, but for gaming (durability and simplicity), I prefer the others.
That's the way I'm leaning too - the GHQ minis are incredible, but the others (particularly the PS ships in resin) will likely survive handling a lot better, even if they are based.
Doug
I second the recommendation of its predecessor, Dreadnought, although that book actually has less to do with the ships than it does with the personalities involved with the run up to the war like Fisher, Wilhelm II, Bismarck, etc.
Fortunately, it was on the shelf at BN next to "Castles of Steel" - I'll probably pick it up next. For the nonce, though, I wanted to read more about the war and less about the battleship race that ran up to it. Massey does, however, do a great job giving insight into the personalities involved. I read his "Peter the Great" for a Russian history class in college and have read it again since just for fun - excellent book.
Doug
Just bought GF2, and I'm reading through Massey's "Steel Castles" to get into the mood for some high seas gaming! I already have a few questions, though. First, are there aircraft and/or submarine rules for GF2 somewhere? I never bought GF1, so don't know what all was included. I do, however, recall discussion of aircraft not being GF's strong suit - which implies that it at least handled them somehow. Second, what miniatures are you guys using in 1/2400-1/3000? I'm torn between the obviously fantastic GHQ models, and the more affordable and wider ranging (and probably more durable) Navwar and PanzerSchiffe pieces.
Oh - also, any recommendations for great reads on the subject?
Thanks,
Doug
That's honest enough. I was hoping for more stuff, obviously, but SF is obviously not a priority. I'm just itching to add to the spiffy excel squadron card generator I built, but I guess I'll just have to go ahead and start buying up the new Starmada stuff I want instead (the new edition of the rules and the SFB port). Maybe the new GF, as well, especially if the WWII expansion is somewhere reasonable in the queue.
Thanks,
Doug
Ok - so tell me - how does Starmada: Dreadnoughts compare to/contrast with Grand Fleets?
Thanks,
Doug
... or newsworthy on the Spitting Fire front?
Doug
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by elsyr
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
