Topic: Why there will never be an SFC4 (Read 20654 times)

Bonk · « **Reply #140 on:** June 14, 2004, 10:49:23 pm »

Thanks for clarifying (SWAC - not AWACS, lol... similar systems only one's fictional - I was close, its been a while...) - two of em on the board was good fun, alternate flipping each one on and off till the seeking weapons run themselves out going back and forth...

(or was that legal?)

Odd, I thought the flywheel was a standard rule - I found its use limited by lack of power anyway - I guess the more experienced crew I was playing with were giving me a break as a Fed starting out... though I didn't get any breaks once I mastered the Kzin and Thols...

The crew I played against was so good at the plasma game I had to resort to the Thols, always with interesting results...

Edit: eventually they banned me from playing Thol... hehe

Bonk · « **Reply #141 on:** June 14, 2004, 10:54:25 pm »

Quote:

The swac and the flywheel especially that would of been great in the PC game.I guess it is not in there is it.I assume you are talking about the board when it comes to these things?

Yes, we're discussing features of SFB that we liked and miss in SFC.

Rod O'neal · « **Reply #142 on:** June 14, 2004, 11:25:10 pm »

Random targeting on scatter packs
Real engine doubling. ie, being able to double one engine at a time.
Variable OLs on photons.
Accurate X-1 weapons. Fast loads and pulse phasers. Fully capable X-plasma, etc... and X-batteries to go along with fixed reserve power usage instead of giving them so much permanent power with extra APRs.
Seperate the volleys for different weapons types for better Mizia effect. It's not just the PPD that should benefit from this.
Add the missing lab capabilities to go along with all those drone types.

I have a couple of "how come" questions.
Why were drone speeds changed, increased? A lot of people say that they are cheesy as they are. Wouldn't the original speeds be better balanced?

Double internals? Were the games just too fast before or was it to give a "Mulligan" of sorts so one bad tactical decision doesn't kill you?

Why so many spare parts?

FPF_TraceyG · « **Reply #144 on:** June 15, 2004, 02:15:06 am »

Drone speeds and plasma speeds were the product of playtesting on a hex map. Because of the geometric nature of a hex grid, and the control a player has by choosing which hex a drone should move into given a choice, the actual distance covered in SFC is further than SFB because the seeking weapon tracks its target in an arc. To compensate for this, seeking weapons were given a speed increase.

Double internals were added to the game simply to make it last longer. Imagine if your ship, in SFC, could only withstand half the damage it does now, most battles would be over very quickly.

The spare parts are an extrapolation of Emergency Damage Repair in SFB, which was a number equivalent to the Damage Control rating of a ship. Typically it would be 4 for a Heavy Cruiser, and this was the number of systems a ship could repair in battle. Allocating one point of power to a 'repair' system would also make repairs but these were unlimited. Repair systems are usually only found on Fleet Repair Docks and some PF Tenders, although did appear rarely elsewhere as well.

I would imagine the number of spares was increased again to the give the game longevity in combat. Unlike EDR however, spares can only be used on systems you can click on. EDR could be used on anything eg. Hull, Labs etc. The Damage Control rating of a ship also determined how fast shields would repair, not Labs as it is in SFC.

nx_adam_1701 · « **Reply #145 on:** June 15, 2004, 02:53:55 am »

I dont know about you guys but im kinda happy this red_green guy brought this topic up, Im getting quite a lesson on SFB rules and tactics, lessons that wouldnt normally be answered on the forums, thanks guys for all the info, buy the way you guys are making SFB sound, It seems you cant get bored with a fully balanced SFB game, theres just too much to learn noe try out and etc..., sounds very kool indeed...

adam out

Rod O'neal · « **Reply #146 on:** June 15, 2004, 03:44:41 am »

Thanks for the explanations folks.

Tracy, What you say sounds correct for SFC. The SFB part doesn't quite translate though in my experience. There's no way that you'd repair as many systems on a ship in SFB as you can in SFC. Maybe an unrefitted Fed with really lucky die rolls, but I doubt it.

I'm sure that you're correct for the translation to SFC from SFB by Taldren though.

As far as most battles being over quickly without double internals goes, I really think that the DAC is different. It seems that it's easier to get to the end of the excess damage track in SFC than SFB (If you take the double internals into account.). Certainly, it doesn't take twice as much damage to blow up a ship. The frustrating part is scoring a huge volley of internals and having none, or virtually none, of the weapons go away. On many occasions I've scored 90, or so, internals on a D7 without it losing a single drone or torp. Your description of a recent battle on GW2 where you scored big up close with a Hydran against a Lyran without it losing any weapons comes to mind. That's really the only part of the double internals that bugs me. I'll bet that the DAC isn't exactly right. Maybe it uses percentiges instead of exact D12 rolls to determine system hits? I've seen people try to use percentile dice in SFB and it screws things up pretty bad. Maybe trying to set the DAC to use the same hits as D12 dice is problematic. You're a programmer. So, you'd probably know better than I would if this is the case.

Anyway, thanks again. I know that it was really old questions that I asked. I hadn't ever seen an explanation for it before though.

FPF_TraceyG · « **Reply #147 on:** June 15, 2004, 03:50:37 am »

You're correct about the number of systems being repaired in SFB. As I said in my post, a Heavy Cruiser could only repair 4 systems, unlike the 15 or so repair parts they have in SFC.

I'm not exactly sure if SFC uses that same DAC that SFB does, although the mizia concept is just as applicable in both.

Rod O'neal · « **Reply #148 on:** June 15, 2004, 04:51:05 am »

Something else to add to the SFC4 wish list. All of the missing mines (captors, etc...) and hidden mines.

I hope that you 're writing all of this down Dave.

DH123 · « **Reply #150 on:** June 15, 2004, 08:19:42 am »

90 internals? Than ain't nothing. Flying Hydran on GW2 right now, getting 130 internal volley on CAs and they don't go pop!.

With D2 loadouts, it take 200-250 internals to nail a cruiser over a prolonged battle. That is the equivelant of 50 nuclear missles.

NannerSlug · « **Reply #153 on:** June 15, 2004, 09:35:38 am »

for those who are hard -core sfbers, sfb on line is your dream.

if i were you guys, i would lobby starfleet games to advance that product. i think you have a much better chance. that is not meant disrespectfully, but out of fact.

Merlinfmct87 · « **Reply #154 on:** June 15, 2004, 09:40:17 am »

True, SFBOL would be much easier to advance and modify...

But SFC could be so much more with effort...I don't like the idea of giving that up. Maybe I'm nuts.

Of course, that won't stop me from buying a subscrption

.

Merlin

FFZ · « **Reply #155 on:** June 15, 2004, 11:00:13 am »

Big thread, lots of memories of SFB.

I used to love SFB, but these days, I wouldn't have the patence to fill out Energy allocation forms each turn, or roll tons of dice, that is for a younger version of myself.

Age · « **Reply #157 on:** June 15, 2004, 11:51:01 am »

What are EDR.DAC and LABS supposed to be ?I have never seen nor never played SFB.I was always Scrabble or Monopoly and clue etc.We never had these types of board game around our when I was growing up.My big brother always kicked my you know what what them all though.He would've done the same with game lol.I would to though that our game got used a lot and did fall a part and some the pieces went missing eg.monopoly money.I would have to come to the conclusion that this possibly is the reason that ADB sells so many boards games.These board games are made out of paper and card board and will wear out after time and if the little one happen to get into it then it maybe time to replace it as something might go missing.

We all know how 2 year olds can be and think if one were to get into this board game and take something an lose it.The Scrabble game we have had in my family its on it last legs and we had to make up card board cut outs to replace some of the missing letters.This what happens to board game over time and then there is the generation gap who won't get into board games like this.It would seem to me the most popular PC games are simulator and first shooter types every time I am in a computer gaming store that is what they say.The way to open up this PC game I not to sure so that it will sell more copies.This what the market needs to look at how to get the younger generation into SFC do they want it more like SFC3 or SFC2.I am guessing that would possibly like it more like SFC3.I am however optimistic that there will be SFC4 and more to come.This would be a Glorious day as the Klingons say more blood whine to all lol.

J. Carney · « **Reply #158 on:** June 15, 2004, 12:13:29 pm »

EDR= Emergency Damage Repair- you put energy into reepairing systems and get some points for it at the end of the turn. Every system had a certian cost. When you got enough points, you could fix something.

DAC= Damage Allocaton Chart- the peice of paper that showed you which systems were hitafter internals were scored. You rolled 2D6 ans found the result on the DAC. There was a progression of ship systems beside each number to hsow what oyu had just knocked out. When all the systems of that type were destroyed, you moved to the next listed system.

Look here, it's posted on the SFB webite http://www.starfleetgames.com/sfb/sfin/DAC.pdf

Labs= Labs- places in the ship where research was done to discover things... lkike whether that shutle heading towards you at speed 6 was going to fire a phaser-3 at you and run, blossom into a scatterpack or hit you and blow up for mucho damage.

SFB don't wear out all that easy- the guy I play aganst has counters and rulebooks that are almost 10 years old now. They are still good (with a couple of pages of Errata included)- though they could be discribed as 'well-loved.' As long as you don't loose counters, you could play one set for decades.

Age, SFC3 did not do as well as the older SFB-based games. It did worse because the SFB'ers were the ones that were buying and when the game stopped being based heavily on SFB, they stopped buying it. You market to that people who buy- and that is SFB players in the case of this paritcular game.

News:

Topic: Why there will never be an SFC4 (Read 20654 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Bonk

Bonk

Rod O'neal

The_Infiltrator

FPF_TraceyG

nx_adam_1701

Rod O'neal

FPF_TraceyG

Rod O'neal

DH123

DH123

Merlinfmct87

Merlinfmct87

NannerSlug

Merlinfmct87

FFZ

Bonk

Age

J. Carney

2_X_S

Topic: Why there will never be an SFC4 (Read 20654 times)