In enjoyed reading this, and started compiling it into an article. Any more gripes?

SFB GRIPES and how to fix them

This topic on the BBS ran for several years and was recently "noticed" by the designers. It has some points that deserve comment. Let’s go through the gripes one by one.

ONLY COMMANDER’S IS SUPPORTED
SFB has four levels: Cadet, Basic, Advanced, and Commander’s, but only Commander’s gets any support. Every product, every scenario, every rule, every Term Paper, assumes that everybody only plays at the highest level.

SCENARIOS FOR THE ELITE
All of the scenarios (worst of all, the ones in Captain’s Log) assume that everybody has every product. There are ships included that some players do not have as they have yet to buy certain advanced modules.
What is needed (but nobody ever thinks of it) is two things. One is a list of the products you have to have to play that scenario. The other is a list of alternatives for the ships assuming only the baseline game (BS, AM, C1, C2, C3). The original topic asked for a guideline on whether the scenario would work well with the basic, advanced, and commander’s games. It appears we have always assumed that every scenario works just as well at every level. Perhaps they do not.

THE RULEBOOK SCARES NEW PLAYERS
This is an old and common gripe, and a justified one. SFB is not a game for idiots, or for the weak of heart, and surely nobody wants to be thought of as an idiot or a sissy, right? Ok, that’s not helping.
The BBS suggested we should do "SFB in a nutshell". Rather than do that, we’d just recommend Federation Commander, which in many ways is just that.

THE LACK OF THE NEXT GENERATION
People like what they’re comfortable with, which is usually what they grew up with. The people now in their 20s and 30s grew up with TNG, not TOS. Pity, as our license doesn’t cover TNG. You can probably find TNG ships all over the internet, but we cannot legally tell you where to find them. Some just give players a Federation BCJ and tell them that is Enterprise-B. Some make up their own SSDs for TNG. Given time, players realize that SFU is much more consistent and logical than TNG or TOS ever were.

THE 1980s GRAPHICS
Yes, SFB was "graphically designed" in the 1980s and new customers expect flashy color at all levels. The simple solution is to use Federation Commander.

THE SIZE OF HEXES
One player mentioned that the 5/8" hexes are too small for his fingers, and that the 1.25" megahexes are too big (the map won’t fit on the table). He suggested a map with 1" hexes. Not a bad idea, but given the potential sales and the cost of a minimum print run, it’s not terribly practical. Lots of companies make hex maps of various sizes, and you can probably find one with a diligent hunt. Ken Burnside’s company offers one with 0.96" hexes numbered to 4235. Gamex offers maps with 7/8" hexes. You could also whip up your own hex map on a computer drawing program, but printing it out would be impractical. We have a hex map file available on the website that you could print out at Kinkos at any percentage you want, or we could make it available as a "poster" on CafePress.com.

THE MIDDLE YEARS ISC
The rules for the ISC say that to use the ships in earlier periods just change the plasma-S torpedoes to plasma-G and remove the rear-firing plasma-Fs. The problem is that the resulting ship has way too much power, both for the time period of Y160-Y175, and for a ship with plasma-Gs and no plasma-Fs. The simple solution is to remove the APRs as well.

THE GROGNARDS
Some players have been playing SFB for decades, and some of them don’t treat relatively new players with much respect. We can only encourage them to be more welcoming.

THE FLYING ZOMBIES
Ships do Energy Allocation once per turn, and then fly the same even if they take severe engine damage. Rule (D22.0) accounts for this, but it is a very complex rule. Some suggest a rather simple rule: you cannot go faster than you have warp power (plus one hex of impulse) for. So if a Federation CA is cruising at speed 23 and loses 9 warp boxes, it has to drop to speed 22.

By Andy Vancil (Andy) on Wednesday, December 10, 2008 - 10:50 pm: Edit

I don't know if it's my biggest gripe, but up near the top would be Rules That Are Much More Complicated Than They Need To Be Whose Complexity Adds Little Or Nothing In Terms Of Tactical Interest.

Examples:

The non-plotted acceleration cost rule (C12.24). The rule could have just been written to say that they cost double the hexes gained (you pay for flexibility). Or it could have been written to say that you just pay 1-1 for hexes gained (flexibility adds to the tactical fun). Instead, we have the speed cap rule, which takes almost a full page to say that it usually costs 1-1 if you plot your speed change intelligently.

The Vudar Ionization System (H8.0). ADB could have just said "The idea of a weapon that required impulse power sound great at first, but playtesting showed that it didn't really work, so Ion Cannons can use any sort of power." Or, Vudar impulse engines could have been made harder to hit in the DAC. Or, the Vudar could just be stuck with a critical weakness that kept them from taking over the galaxy. (Have you seen those Vudar fighters?!?) Instead, we get another page + of rules that almost never come into play or make a meaningful difference.

By Ken Burnside (Ken_Burnside) on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 01:11 am: Edit

2) Moving in reverse. Our house rule was that movement in reverse cost double power; this got added to Fed Commander.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 01:45 pm: Edit

Responses by SVC:
=========
Scott: Fighters, why do we need so many kinds, counting variants.
SVC: There is a logical development of military equipment over time. Fighters which are competitive one year would be ridiculously overpowered in earlier years and totally useless in later years. If you don’t do the fighter upgrades, fighters simply do not work.
=========
Richard: Lyran fighters with drones
SVC: Ok, I can see that, and in a theoretical "next edition" could see replacing their drones with single-shot capsule direct-fire weapons.
=========
Richard: I wish the Feds didn't use drones either.
SVC: Too late to undo that.
=========
Richard: Gorns and Rommies. I wish the Gorns didn't use plasma-R, and the Rommies didn't use plasma-S (and used more plasma-R as a result). Originally they were unique to each race.
SVC: Just wasn’t a workable ship design that way.
=========
Piotr: Has there ever been a proposal to give Lyran fighters and drones some kind of ESG-phasing ability (opening a momentary cavity in the field allowing safe passage)?
SVC: Yes, and it was rejected. By the players. Overwhelmingly.
=========
Piotr: Oh, and in Steve's post Gripe #1 doesn't appear to have a response.
SVC: I said it was a draft.
=========
Mike: I have a file I call the "Y150 Project".
SVC: Thus speaks the man whose middle name is "middle years".
=========
Andy: Rules That Are Much More Complicated Than They Need To Be Whose Complexity Adds Little Or Nothing In Terms Of Tactical Interest.
SVC: Yeah, well. Most of the time, the "more complicated than they need to be" does in fact need to be to keep players from abusing them. As for rules with little tactical interest, just don’t use them. In a theoretical future edition, there might be something to say there.
=========
Tos: The worst rule problem is easy to fix, declare remote control fighters an optional rule.
SVC: I have yet to hear a valid explanation that this is a problem.
=========
Ken: EW Drones and ECPs.
SVC: I have discussed this silly pseudo-gripe one too many times. It’s not a problem and people who think it is are crybabies.
=========
Ken: Moving in reverse. Our house rule
SVC: Funny that Ken never mentioned this house rule until after I invented it for Fed Commander. I do believe that Ken was quite astounded at the simplicity of the solution when I told him, and said he had never thought of that before.
=========
While I’m on the subject of a theoretical new edition, I’d mention the FC concepts of simpler DAC and the "three ships shoot out of a stack" rule.
=========
Ken: Tech sloshing.
SVC: A common gripe. Ken’s idea that only Hydrans should have fighters is just silly.
=========
Ken: Mission Creep. I can remember when there were 2-3 "fast ships" for each nation
SVC: Tsk. Jean wants you to say "empire" now. It’s not the F&E players who are driving the wish for fast ships. They gripe that I shouldn’t allow more fast ships. The F&E guys went ballistic over fast CWs.
=========
Ken: Andromedans. I love the abuse I can deliver when flying them, but they really aren't good for the game on any level.
SVC: One man’s opinion. I think the game is better when you have at least one alien that really IS alien.
=========
Ken: Advanced BP combat. 'Nuff Said.
SVC: Not enough for me. We’re actually adding a new super-advanced BP unit in CL39 and planning to incorporate Star Fleet Assault as an integrated companion game.
=========
Ken: Fed Commander Gripes
SVC: Wrong topic.
=========
Ken: Normalize all the movement costs to 10ths of a movement point and track 10ths rather than 3/8ths and 1/8ths and 7/16ths. I did not sign up for Fractional Accounting, Klingon Border.
SVC: So, let me get this straight. 1/8 is a fraction. 1/10 is not a fraction. Yeah, right. Get over yourself, Ken, not everybody thinks in decimals.
=========
Loren: My biggest gripe is EW in general.
SVC: And yet, it’s the rule that the most people gripe about when it is not in use.
Loren: I've submitted a solution
SVC: So many people have "submitted a solution" to a non-problem and their biggest gripe is that I didn’t change the game they way THEY (and only they) wanted it.
=========
Loren: My next biggest gripe is I like to see some really crazy characters in the history really stir things up. Much of the SFU history is a bit too rational. And yet, it remains my hands down favorite thing to read about so I'm digging pretty deep for that gripe. Beside, I"m in a possition to do something about it, I just have to write it so good SVC can't refuse it.
SVC: Too Hollywood. Hogan’s Heroes anyone?
=========
Loren: My last gripe is that there isn't some wind fall of money that would make funds available to give SFB a production face lift (new 7/8" tournie maps, all new counters with that cool SVC art, new SSDs, the Master series complete, etc.)
SVC: Yeah, well.
=========
Richard: I think that my biggest gripe about SFB is F+E slosh--that is, there's a class in F+E, and therefore there ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A SHIP FOR IT in SFB, even if it's a less-capable version of a ship that appears EARLIER in the game history. (see Superhawk-U versus Thunderhawk.)
SVC: If the ship is useful in F&E, that means the real world admirals would have built it.
=========
Jonathan: Lack of any real organization behind ship rule numbers. I know why it's that way, and it can't be helped. But still quite irritating when you need to check on some note in the rules and can't remember what product shiprule R3.67 was in without having to look through half your stuff.
SVC: As you note, there is no way to do it any other way. As for "Can’t remember what product shiprule R3.67" was in, a simple index could do that, and we could add that to G3. I’d suggest you mention it to Petrick.
=========
Jonthan: Tech bleed. The moment I see something in a captain's log or other source I know every alpha octant race is going to have to get something functionally similiar soon.
SVC: Yeah, I was counting how many empires had SFGs the other way. Same number as the number of empires that have SWACs.
=========
Jonthan: Fed Technology Braintrust. Seems if anyone, anywhere develops anything the Feds have it.
SVC: Yeah, I got smacked by a Fed Hellbore the other day right after I got hit by some Fed plasma-S torps.
=========
Glen: ships that had lost all warp engine power
SVC: I saw that proposal and mentioned it in CL39.
=========
Tos: My gripe with EW is around scalability: It consumes a greater percentage of disposable power for smaller ships to play than for bigger ships. This gives two cruisers an advantage when engaged by an equal BPV of destroyers or frigates.
SVC: My understanding is that this reflects the real world. Check the engineering. See Alan Trevor’s message and remember what Alan did for a living. The scalability thing is probably the most accurate rule in SFB.
=========
Russell: every little rule in SFB has to be added to F&E even if it references a tactical situation in what is supposed to be a strategic level game.
SVC: Not EVERY little rule, just the ones that add something fun to F&E.
=========
Andy: My #1 SFB Gripe: I don't have time to play that often these days.
SVC: My #1 Panzerblitz gripe: I don’t have time to play that often these days.
=========