Archive through May 26, 2002
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
New Rules:
Weasel and Scatter Pods:
Archive through May 26, 2002
Maybe they're free.
Ok, for just a minute let's forget about the "real" galaxy and take a step back to examine the play-balance issues. While the scatter-pod and weasel-pod tend to balance each other out, they are horrendous to plasma boats. The launching of a fresh scatter-pod may very well force the enemy to launch a fresh weasel-pod, combined with a few rack-launched drones. Meanwhile the plasma boys launch plasma to watch it be weaseled....over and over and over again. While seeing an almost endless stream of drones headed their way.
The whole point about requiring shuttles to do this IS to consume valuable ship resources. This in effect puts a time limit on how long someone can hide under weasels or bombard with scatterpacks. It also dictates that the captain make some hard choices about how to allocate those resources.
I think the overall effect of this would be to make battles run even longer than they do now. It will take plasma boats twice as long to pull all the weasels from a ship. Drone users would never STOP hiding behind scatterpacks.
Secondly, this inherently will affect ship BPVs almost galaxy wide. Units blessed or cursed with extra or fewer shuttles will no longer have the same mix of either. Kzinti and Klingon ships with poor bays will benefit greatly. Gorn units with large bays will hardly benefit at all. Do you REALLY want the powers that be to go through EACH and every SSD to try and figure out how much that ship has been improved or degraded?
At best, this is something that might be considered for X2, when radical new design concepts are coming about anyways. But pre-X-tech doesn't really have room for it.
Thank you Jeff. So many other players can't or won't see that.
Kevin M. McCollum
Jeff Williams (Jeff); I think your predictions are inane at best. The original proposal was to allow the replacement of an admin with one of these pods. How does that result in all your predictions? Answer; it doesn't. This is not an X2 idea anymore than chaff or flares are 21st century ideas for modern jet fighters. And if you're so upset about it, then you should put that same energy in railing against drogues and their supposed upcoming functions.
Again, maybe we should just down the entire BBS altogether.
Uh, the proposal was to replace a shuttle with a pair of these pods.
[Crow-eating mode: ON]
After re-reading the original proposal a few times I feel compelled to modify my original comments. I was under the impression that unlimited numbers of shuttles could be traded in for pairs of pods. I had missed the part where there could be no more than 1 set of each on a given ship. My apologies for the misunderstanding. This changes things quite a bit.
These are not as inherently unbalancing as I originally conjectured. However I believe the scatter-pod is grossly undervalued by at least 100%. For 5 points, I get 12 drones (BPV=12) plus the quasi-shuttles to get them into space with (BPV between 0-4, possibly higher), less the cost of the shuttle trade-in (BPV=[-2]). I count a total savings of at least 5 points, WITH the increased flexibility of having twice as many scatterpacks available from the same box as before. Of course I haven't factored speed upgrades in, but those are their own reward. The weasel pods I'm not so sure of. 5 BPV for effectively 1 (and ONLY 1) extra wild weasel sounds about fair, but it would need to born out in playtest.
As far as drogues go, I have never heard of them before and don't know what they are or are supposed to do. Should I be railing against them?
Again, I apologize for going off half-cocked. Next time I'll try to actually READ the proposal more thoroughly before dumping all over it.
There's a difference though. You get the pod, but you don't get the drones. At least that's my understanding. It's not a drone bonanza. It's just a device that allows for the multiple launching of drones. Burn the device instead of a shuttle.
I'm going to weigh in now with a few comments of my own, some of which may be offensive and might even get me banned for a time, but that's okay.
I think most everyone that reads my posts will agree that I am usually very polite and open ideas and criticism...even if I disagree. But, this rabid insistence on not posting new ideas for rules is really annoying. For those of you that object to new rules; just who made you people the "keeper of the keys" so to speak, that you can seriously call for a complete ban on new rules? In case you missed it, this board is hosted by the company that owns the very game we're all talking about, and even they don't object to discussions of new rules. So what gives? Do you think you have a monopoly on game savvy? If you don't like a rule, state why, with some examples. Then just drop it. But to say "no new rules should be posted because most of them are moronic" is just pointless, empty criticism.
Now, as it happens, I've played with this particular rule in two pick-up games, and it works okay. There are a few changes I'd make; namely, that there needs to be a limit on how many shuttles you can turn in by size class, not just a "flat rate" of 1 to 1. This way, a small ship can't just turn in it's only two shuttles for these pods; a rule that requires you to keep some shuttles seems in order. The BPV strikes me as a bit low, as well...I'd go with a BPV of 10, myself.
In a much earlier post, I did say we should wait and see what the Drogues would do. But, in no way does that mean there can't or shouldn't be discussion around this rule, or any other. It has a certain logic to it, it uses existing technology and rules, and is simple and easy to implement...it's just a matter of tweaking it a bit to give it some balance.
There are a plethura of rules in this game, and the bulk of those were not in the original edition. To hear a few of you, if you'd been around and able to post on a board like this back then, we wouldn't have many of the rules available right now, including x-tech, the many new drone modules available, the entire collection of "C" modules, and the EW rules.
Just leave it alone, guys. If people want to discuss new rules, they should be able to without prejudice, and certainly without childish name calling. Moronic, indeed.
You stupid git! It's "plethora"! And it's singular! Your momma smelled of elderberries! *phhhhthhhpp!* 
I agree, I don't see the trouble in endless discussions of new rules, gimmics, adjustments... Certainly we're often silly, but it's fun and educational, and has me daydreaming about SFB when I'm in class, bicycling, bathing... That's how slavish devotion develops. I certainly never daydream about Monopoly.
This last week, I stayed up for 48+ hours finishing school work in order to graduate. But I still read the board. At one point toward then end, I was literally falling asleep while typing, and when I woke up, I read over the paragraph and mid-sentence, the topic switched from the Ontario Library Association to Tholians and Seltorians! I was almost sorry I caught it, would have been funny to see the prof's comments... But anyway, my point is, the misshapen products of our feverish imaginations spawn a lot of new rules and systems, and there is no more harm in that than nocturnal emissions. The Steves will use their judgement and reject what should not thrive, no need for us to censor our exuberance.
We all could just make a pact to ignore moronic naysaying. If some one says this is not good and gives a reason based on the game then thats NOT moronic. In a way, over the years, New Rules have become part of the heart of the game. Frankly without New Rules then there no more game. Is ADB to just hang up SFB? Game done? End of an era?
I would like to point out a basic (though fictitious) premise of the game. It's at the beginning of the rules. A trasmition from the future was recieved back in the 1970's and was decoded. The huge files (Megebytes and megabytes)are being sorted through and the result is this space combat simulation game. So, as game history goes, new rules are the result of new translations from the original source material. As far as ADB history goes, thats how to keep the game fresh and selling new products. The SFU is a big place. Even 1000 pages of rules can't cover the huge diversity of that.
So come on....peace and SFB!
Loren:
Wait a minute... do you mean to say there's no source files being decoded in the sprawling ADB compound that is hidden somewhere in North America?
AHHHH!!!
-=Sends self to agonizer booth as world collapses around him=-
-Francois
francois@purdue.edu
(waves hand)
There are no source files. This is not the data that you are looking for.
Yes, there are more source file to be decoded. This reflects the adition of new rules and ships. Only SVC knows how much is left but the original estimate was that it would take 100 years to decode and study. (I think.) Maybe Megabytes should be changed to Gigabytes.
the 100 years was with 1970's computers... Amazingly enough, with todays computers it's closer to 150, because the bits that were interpreted as "corrupted" or "static" before have now been reinterpreted as compressed Gödel code. SVC's dark minions are assembling a Connection Machine the size of Sears Tower in the Texas wastelands.
Texas wastelands? We have wastelands?
I knew El Paso was important for something...
Actually, the original posting DOES state that the scatter pods DO come loaded with six drones, although you must pay for speed upgrades. This is in addition to the vehicle itself. Now if we were to ammend this to say that it just pays for the vehicles, and not new drones, then it probably does clock in fair at about 5 BPV.
This just might have some potential after all. I still believe the most important deal is to limit it to replacing only one shuttle with one pair of each. Otherwise the numbers of scatterpacks and weasels being floated out there gets too silly.
We all could just make a pact to ignore moronic naysaying.
We could do the same with endless proposals, but it doesnt seem to work.
Geoff,
This is an idea board...tender your resignation with the "Thought Police" and let it alone. If you don't like new ideas, then by all means, don't read them.
Orbis,
Plethora, Plethora, Plethora.
I will write this 100 times, and repeat to myself "Orbis is always right." That, and "I must spell better!"
High Five, Mike!
Wait just one second there pardners.
THere is no wasteland in Texas.......there's oil in that there sand
Mike, I was just kidding. Needed something to start a pretend fight over!
Orbis,
I know! Just teasing you. Haven't you read "Animal Farm?"
Oh, and did you get the email I sent you on your "question?"
If there are no more new rules there is no more game?
I have no idea where you came up with that idea. New rules nearly killed SFB before Doomsday. Rules just kept piling up and then the revisions to those rules kept piling up behind them. Lots of the older players here can remember when they had a great tactic and found out at some convention that it was made illegal the week before. It was very frustrating. You had to have several Captain's Logs with you and, if you purchased some of the new rules, you had to have the errata sheet out of that!
Can new rules be good and useful? Yes, if they are well thought out and balanced. Most of the proposals on this board are not.
The way to keep a game going is to bring in new players, not put out new yet inferior products. How many new players have you brought into SFB? How many players have you seen leave SFB?
Kevin McCollum,
It's so nice to know we have you available to decide which new ideas are good and which aren't. Perhaps we should all just start sending our ideas to a "Dear Kevin" column? Then, if they meet with your approval, we can post them here.
Sound sarcastic? It should. I for one remember when new rule modules such as X1 came out...players either loved it or hated it, and several in my group claimed it would ruin the game. Ditto some of the new races and weapons. I well remember the hell that was raised over Swordfish drones. These were all new ideas at one point as well.
The point is, this board was set up by ADB...not a player. They put up the entire Proposals Board thread, and SPP himself said on this very topic that that's what it's here for...to propose new ideas. To pass judgement on "most of the proposals on this board" as "inferior products" is presumptuous at best, blatant arrogance at worst. I might not agree with alot of stuff posted here, but in no way do I consider myself expert enough to pass judgement in such a flip manner.
To All And Sundry,
I think we can all see that this is starting to get heated. I recommend that we drop the discussion as to the worth of new proposals. Everyone should put aside any hopes or eagerness to get in the "last word," because, I can tell you from experience, this will just escalate into name-calling and shouting and unpleasantness, and considering how not-widespread SFB proponents are, the game needs as much unity of players behind it as possible. So please, this is not an argument (from *either* side) that is going to be won today or anytime soon. It's not worth the inevitable explosions.