• Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

Another issue is speeds. In SFB it was not uncommon for ships to be screaming around at Speed 20+ running from Plasmas and the like. in Starmada Speeds are considerably slower, while ranges are also a bit shorter (mostly)

Should we aim at weapons being relatively short ranged? In SFB a Ship could accelerate up and be out of even Phaser I range in a turn of movement.  Right now, if we limit Phaser I ranges to 15 it might take 2-3 turns at top speed to get out of the envelope of a stationary vessel's Phaser I.

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

GamingGlen wrote:

Doesn't matter since you can reallocate screen strength in any direction in Starmada. 

Unless you want to force screen allocation at ship design, which changes the SSD (now you have 6 Shield/Screen tracks), you won't be able to simulate SFB shielding very well.

I've been trying to avoid this discussion, since I don't want to get bogged down in conversions until the contract is finalized, but... smile

My approach would not be to "simulate" SFB/FC per se, but to present SFB/FC designs as they would be in Starmada.

So while I too would lean towards screens as a way of maintaining some of the SFB/FC flavor, I'm not sure I would see it as critical to have shields in Starmada behave just like they do in SFB/FC.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

YAY the Mountain has come to us! (lol)

Welcome to the Dark side! I agree with your note as to Screens vs Shields.

I think it is more important to preserve the "Feel" of the SFB Universe than directly copying it (After all, then why do it? If you want to play SFB, play SFB.)

Things like amalgamating weapons a bit, losing a few things like Scatter-pack shuttles and Transporter Mines...

  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 811

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

Only Warlock wrote:

You know, i have both games, Glen and the difference isn't as much as you would think. I started playing SFB with the original Pocket Edition in '80 and played continuously until '95 or '96.

of course that was 6 games  :twisted:

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

OK, Another Pass:

(346) D7 Klolode-class Klingon Battlecruiser

Hull: 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1           
Engines: 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 1 1           
Screens: 11 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1           
Weapons:
1:X 2:X 3:Y 4:Z 5:Z 6:

X: Disruptors: 5/10/15, 1/3+/2/2
[AB][AB][AB][AB]

Y: Phaser I: 4/8/12, 1/3+/1/1
Range-Based ROF; Increased Hits
[ABCD]

Z: Phaser II: 4/8/12, 1/3+/1/1
Range-Based ROF
[ACE][ACE][BDF][BDF]

Special: Hyperdrive; Anti-Fighter Batteries (4); Carrier (50); Science (10); Marines (16); Teleporters (4)

and

(328) Constitution-class Federation Heavy Cruiser

Hull: 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1           
Engines: 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1           
Screens: 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2           
Weapons:
1:X 2:X 3:Y 4:Y 5:Z 6:

X: Photon Torpedoes: 5/10/15, 1/4+/1/5
Slow-Firing; Doubled Range Mods
[AB][AB][AB][AB]

Y: Phaser I: 4/8/12, 1/3+/1/1
Range-Based ROF; Increased Hits
[ABCD][ABCD][CE][DF]

Z: Phaser III: 2/4/6, 1/3+/1/1
Range-Based ROF
[ABCDEF]

Special: Hyperdrive; Science (20); Marines (12); Teleporters (4); Cargo (22)

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

LOL yes Jimbeau it was. (I still have those first supplements, too!)

SFB suffered badly as things kept piling on. My limit was reached while fighting an enemy fleet composed of Kzinti Drone Frigates firing wave after wave of Speed 32 Drones supplemented by Scatter-packs. I think we easily had more than 100 drones on the table, it was insane. after 10 turns of dancing with Drones, I just flew my ships off the table.

  • Registered: 2006-01-17
  • Posts: 740

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

Hello everyone!

I have followed this discussion with much interest.  I have reviewed the ship designs for the Federation CA and for the Klingon D7.  I have noted the fairly short range of all of the weapons.  I suggest that the Phaser Ones fire out to either 30 or at least out to 24.  The Photon Torpedoes (& Phaser Twos) should fire out to 18, or at least 15.  The Disrupters should fire out to 24 or at least 18.   The Klingon BCs should have a max speed faster than the Federation.

The reason I think these increased ranges are better is based on several games I played in Orlando at MegaCon.  My opponent had many ships very similar to the proposed Klingon D7s.  One of my CR 1050
BBs with a range 30 main battery weapons destroyed them all.  My ship only took minor damage.  8) 

Slower ships that lack long range weapons are vulnerable to faster ships that fire farther.  Such a battle would almost be similar to WW2 USA North Carolina & Iowa class battleships fighting 1905 Predreadnoughts.  :shock:

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

Hi Beowulf!

I don't know that i agree. If we keep movement speeds Starmada-standard (i.e. Speed 6 or less) then super-long range weapons with Wide Arcs will be gods. If we keep it to 15 or less by Phasers then Maneuver is still important (In SFB anything longer than 15 range was only a point or two of damage at most anyway for Phasers)

Longer ranged weapons were generally narrower arc with long reloading times.

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

As far as Speed, in the SFB universe everyone could basically go the maximum speed if they wanted to (i.e. a Klingon D7 could go as fast as a Federation CA) the difference was in the Turn Arcs. D7 Turn mode was slightly better (by 1) than the Federation heavy Cruiser at any speed over 8.

SO, using Starmada Standard Speeds we could trick out the Klingon to be 1 faster than the Federation cruiser and by default give the Klingon BC a slightly better turn radius.

  • Registered: 2008-03-29
  • Posts: 18

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

SFB suffered badly as things kept piling on. My limit was reached while fighting an enemy fleet composed of Kzinti Drone Frigates firing wave after wave of Speed 32 Drones supplemented by Scatter-packs. I think we easily had more than 100 drones on the table, it was insane. after 10 turns of dancing with Drones, I just flew my ships off the table.

I used to do that all the time.  I don't know how many games I played over 10+ years where people would say "You play Kzinti...what's wrong with you?"  And then tear them apart in the same manner.

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

ROFL <shudder> i HATED fighting Kzinti. Almost as bad as attacking a Tholian Starbase.

  • Registered: 2008-04-03
  • Posts: 30

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

Kzinti represent, yo!

  • Registered: 2008-03-15
  • Posts: 70

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

My approach would not be to "simulate" SFB/FC per se, but to present SFB/FC designs as they would be in Starmada.

So while I too would lean towards screens as a way of maintaining some of the SFB/FC flavor, I'm not sure I would see it as critical to have shields in Starmada behave just like they do in SFB/FC.
_________________


AMEN! I'm looking forward to "official" trek designs, *not* duplicating a system I've avoided due to its complexity.

Actually...I wouldn't mind if it veered back towards the *flavor* of the later movies, TNG, Voyager, DS9, etc. Trek has always been a thinly-veiled allegory of the Horatio Hornblower and tall ships on the ocean. (Think: Wrath of Khan.)

Mines, drones, marines? When's the last time you saw that in a show?

Give me official ship designs, cool aliens, and a fun Trek universe.

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

As I understand it, Amarillo Design Bureau's Star Fleet Battles cannot use any materials after the "Original Trek" series (As part of it's licensing agreement) Thus if this proposed game does get sub-licensed to MJ12 it would have to follow the same constraints. that means no Reliant, Klingon Birds of Prey, Borg Cubes, or Voyager type ships.

Also, I imagine that one of the licensing restrictions will probably be to preserve the feel of SFB as far as how the ships are represented (Although at this point I am extrapolating. I have a fair amount of direct info on how SFB is/was licensed from people who were on the periphery of that whole situation)

  • Registered: 2008-03-29
  • Posts: 18

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

I really do think it will be cool.  I have been a huge fan of SFB since its came out, it just has never been a great fleet game, unless of course you have  a day to kill.

It will be interesting to see what the developers do with the three previously mentioned ships of this thred.

  • Registered: 2005-03-29
  • Posts: 330

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

I just read FC in response to the possible crossover and I have played SFB (a decade ago easily, I admit).  I think that to perserve the 'feel' of FC/SFB, the weapon ranges should be close to the engine rating of the ships.  Have a speed 5, weapon range 30 ship might work wonderfully in starmada, but I think that it would play 'poorly' in a game of FC.  I mean, when's the lst time you were able to go from speed 8 to speed 32 in stamada?!?

I think that screens are the way to go for SFB/FC, but I couldn't tell you how to present them.  Perhaps shields are rated for all arcs and damage is applied to shields first before any damage is done (kind of like Ablative armor).

-Bren

  • Registered: 2005-12-28
  • Posts: 195

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

Guess I'm the only one that thinks Shields is the best option.   

Use that optional rule, that allows you to increase one shield (in this case, the front one, G) by 1 but having the three others (J,K,L) on the opposite reduced by 1.

You still have maneuvering, to get to the rear half of the target.

Ship shields strengths by class would go like this (shields: G/H/I/J/K/L):
small freighter*: 1
escorts/frigates/destroyers/large freighter*: 2 (3/2/2/1/1/1)
cruisers/light carriers/Q-ship*: 3 (4/3/3/2/2/2)
dreadnoughts/battleships/large carriers: 4 (5/4/4/3/3/3)
base station*: 3
battle station*: 4
starbase*: 5

*stations, freighters, and some ships (i.e., Romulans) had equal shielding on all sides, would not use the optional rule by default.

A player can still plot a different shield to be boosted, but if he does not then it goes to the default setting for the ship.  To me, that represents a better reinforcement system than using screens since shield reinforcement wasn't that strong, unless you didn't power weapons which isn't an option in Starmada.

Screens are just a cheap, and munchkin  :wink: , way to have level 5 shielding in the direction of the enemy nearly every turn.  Besides the plotting time, there's the reduced damage which makes the game last much longer.


No matter what side of the ship you attacked in SFB, unless the shield was completely damaged, the ship still had shielding on that side.  The only way that screens can represent that is if you give all ships 20-30 screens, otherwise people will just assign 5 shields to the 2-3 sides they think will most likely face the enemy and this is not SFB-like at all.

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

GamingGlen wrote:

Screens are just a cheap, and munchkin  :wink: , way to have level 5 shielding in the direction of the enemy nearly every turn.  Besides the plotting time, there's the reduced damage which makes the game last much longer.

This may be true in a one-on-one duel, but once there's more than 2-3 ships on either side, the distribution of screens becomes much more important...

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2006-01-17
  • Posts: 359

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

I agree with screens vs. shields... for the flavor, but do understand GamingGlen... maybe a rule that you cannot leave any hexside unshielded?  As long as screens are available, you must have a minimum of one per hex.....

As I remember playing SFB, your shields attempted to regen all around...

Starmada does not have ablative shields... and it would be too complicated to try and add them to the system.

I also agree with taking out transporter mines and scatter packs..... Although a Kzinti without lots of drones kind of loses it's feel.

Nahuris

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

I agree, cricket, and nahuris that's an interesting idea (Until you get below 6 Screens on the damage chart!)

The whole thing that makes SFB unique (Other than 10.5 zillion pages of rules) is the real need for maneuver outside of weapon arcs.

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

On the notion of Drones, If we assume a Drone is a "standard" Striker flight with a count of 1, then 6 rounds would be 20 capacity (1.33 each Drone)

Normal Drone "ammo" in SFB is 4 rounds per launcher.

We could set it up so each "Launcher" is costed as a seperate "Carrier" line and each "Carrier" entry can fire 1 Drone "flight" per turn.

If we assume Each Drone is SPD 12 ATk 3+ Def 2 Double Damage

that would mean a Drone "Rack" would be 11.2 per Drone x4=44.8 (45)

So a "Standard" Drone Rack would be a Carrier (45) slot (assuming that was a Standard Drone-I'm just throwing out ideas)

  • Registered: 2006-01-17
  • Posts: 359

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

Once you are below 6 screens, you can allocate them to your choice of hex sides, but no hexside getting more than one screen... as you must attempt to have at least one screen in each hex.

The only thing that I am looking at is in Star Trek, ships only take minimal damage from phasers or disrupters until the shields go down, and then it's pretty much a matter of a few more hits, and it's over.... not sure how to retain that feel... and some of the heavier weapons tend to do damage even through shields... at least on the screen.

Per Jygro:
[I think that screens are the way to go for SFB/FC, but I couldn't tell you how to present them. Perhaps shields are rated for all arcs and damage is applied to shields first before any damage is done (kind of like Ablative armor). ]

This is one idea.....

The one thing I believe we do not want to do, is add a lot of extra rules, as that would just make it a copy of SFB.... but I would like to retain as much of the "flavor" as we can within the Starmada rules.... Maybe a weapon mod "Shield Drain"? Something that allows them to do temporary damage to shields?

Any other ideas?

Nahuris

  • Registered: 2007-09-13
  • Posts: 99

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

I think screens are a great idea for preserving the Star Trek feel.  I've been using them on my own Star Trek ship designs for that very reason.

I'm pleased to hear that the focus will be on preserving the Starmada rules and using them to replicate Star Trek space combat, rather than importing a bunch of junk (IMO) from SFB that needlessly clutters the system.

If I wanted to play SFB I would.  All I want are some "official" Star Trek ship designs that I can use to play Starmada.

  • Registered: 2008-01-09
  • Posts: 110

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

Here's a stab at a Kzinti Drone Frigate:

(333) Kzinti Frigate

Hull: 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1               
Engines: 5 5 4 4 3 2 2 1               
Screens: 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1               
Weapons:
1:X 2:Y 3:Z 4:Z 5: 6:

X: Disruptor: 4/8/12, 1/3+/2/2
[AB]

Y: Phaser I: 5/10/15, 1/3+/1/1
Range-Based ROF; Increased Hits
[ABCDEF]

Z: Phaser III: 2/4/6, 1/3+/1/1
Range-Based ROF
[ACE][BDF]

Special: Hyperdrive; Carrier (45); Carrier (45); Carrier (45); Carrier (45); Marines (6); Teleporters (2); Cargo (9)


A little bigger sized than I would like. The Carrier (45) entries are Drone racks.

  • Registered: 2005-12-28
  • Posts: 195

Re: Brainstorming: Federation Commander: Admiralty Edition

Screens.

That's like allowing a SFB player with a Fed CA to be able to allocate (if I remember my shield strengths correctly) 30+24+24+20+20+20=138 shield boxes to any side he wants.  What player is NOT going to allocate most, if not all, of the shield boxes to the two or three sides he is almost certain that will be facing the enemy?

Screens, as written, do not "feel" like Star Trek in the slightest.  Excepting a few TOS episodes where Scotty mentions a particular shield (the rear one *, can't recall if they numbered it) being down more than any other, all other times the shield rating of the ship is given as a percentage down.  No direction, no weakening of any particular side, just a total shield strength percentage is given.  Starmada's shield rating simulates that better than SFB's shield boxes, IMO. 

* Rear could mean the back HALF of the ship, not 1/6 or 1/4.


Now, screens can represent a better regular degradation than shields in that shield damage has some affect with every shield hit.
Example: Hull: 10 ...             
Screens: 18 17 15 13 11 9 8 6 4 2
Shields: 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1.
It takes 5 shield hits to affect the Shield strength in this example, where as every shield hit affects Screen strength. 

This means that the screens must be allocated as evenly as possible to equal shield strength in all directions, but that is costlier (not that it matters if every ship uses the same design criteria).  But, what player will allocate screens evenly, or even at nearly the same ratio as regular SFB ships (i.e., front shield is stronger), instead of just allocating as much as possible to face the enemy without a rule forcing them to? 



Now there are two things to consider: SFB-like, or Star Trek-like.  If you want to attract SFB players, it has to play and feel somewhat like SFB.  Since it seems that you will be restricted to the Star Fleet Universe, then SFB-like you might have to be.

IMO, SFB shielding is a poor representation of Star Trek shielding.  Starmada can do better, it's just a matter of which flavor: shields or screens.  I think shields fit better, but if some restrictions are applied to screens in how they can be allocated, then I would agree to screens being best (mostly for the damage effects), except for the extra plotting time it will take.  Imagine plotting not only your moves but also your screen allocations for your 10-ship fleet.  I'd rather not spend time allocating screens but rather get to moving ships and hearing the lamentations of my enemy's womenfolk.  smile