Topic: Why there will never be an SFC4

[The_Infiltrator]

Quote:


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?  

Drone speeds I think is because SFC doesn't have lead tracking. In my experience, the speeds as they are now aren't really a problem.

As for internals, probabally; which brings up another thing for GAW, which would be an option to have a single internal game.

I'm not too fond of the magic screws myself.  

[FPF_TraceyG]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Quote:


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?

 

Lack of lead-tracking.  

[DH123]

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.
 

[Merlinfmct87]

Quote:
SFBOL is SFB played over the web. It has no automatic functions to speak of. It's only true purpose is to make it easier to play people, as you don't have to be physically present. It might also be noted that the players who play there are frequently the best in the SFB universe and any new player that starts there can expect to be awesomely humiliated on a routine basis for quite a while due to the difference in skill level (though not due to attitudes or player related problems). That's why they don't recommend you start there; it's like trying to jump straight from high school to the majors.  

Uh...

I won my first battle on SFBOL. And I ain't that good.(I'm in the middle of a SFC losing streak)

So yes, I've seen Ken Burnside there. I've also seen new players as well.

And there is a chat interface, so you can still lob off some nasty taunts. I know I got in a couple zingers .  

[Merlinfmct87]

Quote:
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.
   

Didn't FireSoul take care of this in his mod?  

[NannerSlug]

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]

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]

 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.    

[Bonk]

 

Quote:
 Drone speeds I think is because SFC doesn't have lead tracking. In my experience, the speeds as they are now aren't really a problem.

There was no real "lead-tracking" in SFB either - the drones always had to close range with each movement if possible which left very little, if any leeway for lead tracking.  

[Age]

   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]

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.

[2_X_S]

Quote:

Quote:


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?

 

Lack of lead-tracking.  

Theres just one flaw in that argument, if your ship was flying straight away from Plasma/Fast Drone you could  never been touched.  

[Age]

   I was thinking on how to attract more people to this game and aiming at the under 30 group of the population of any country.It may not sell well with pureist like your self but I was thinking on the hole of the gamers out there and those that aren't even on this forum.How could this game be mass market to them.Star Trek Elit Force is an example of this 1 and 2 it is very popular amonst the gaming community and it did well made by Activision to.I am not sure what the answer is to get more people into SFC.What I would like to see is a bigger market for SFC games other than those who play it in this forum.  

[J. Carney]

Age...

Elite Force is just one of a myriad of so-so FPS games out there- it is a copy of a copy of a copy of all the other FPS games out there and is only popular because it is familiar and requires only the intelegence necessary to 'point and click' to play.  SFC is totally different- it is supposed to be complicated, afte rall you are running an entire starship.

Don't get me wrong... I've been playing Activision games since Pitfall came out for the Atari 2600. By and large they make good product. I just don't like the way that they 'dumbed-down' SFC to make SFC3 easier to play and I do not like the way that they turned it into a 'movie game' for Nemisis instead ofkeeping it like SFB and putting the Ferengi, Cardassians and Dominion in it. Then you could have had all the weapons that the Cardies and Dominion had in Dominion Wars and fighters and some greater weapons diversity to boot.

Imagine how good a game it would have been if they had included all these things.

 

[DH123]

Quote:
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.  

I like real-time, i honestly don't think I could play this turn-based anymore.   Haven't actually played SFB in 9 years though the books make great reading and the SSD are cool Trek porn.

But Nanner is right.  With all the legal BS going on with the Trek franchise, we are more likely to see a "real-time" SFB PC game than an SFC4.    

The best hope for SFB gamers is that the Trek franchise becomes so devalued by B&B's bungling that Paramount gives up resisting ADB and let's them expand into host-based computer products.