Archive through May 16, 2011
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: Star Fleet Universe Training Command:
Tips for Training SFB:
Archive through May 16, 2011
If you get all four players turning up, you might consider freeing yourself from much play by taking a Base Station and then have all the players take ships (identical ships to make it easier for them) and let them take you down.
With players teaching the new guy what to do ( warn them on the phone before hand not to say; "hey, let's get the new guy to draw all the fire on our way in") and they should have some fun trying to take down the BS.
Four CAs against one BS should be a win for them but only three ships will have a chance too!
MJC,
Thanks for the advice... I know I'm not taking a whole lot of your specific advice but it's being catalogued. 
The last session just ended up with me and two of the guys, and we stuck with Fed vs Klingon, except they switched to take the Klingons. It was standard CA vs D7 (with some refits for both, more for the Klingons to help them out some). I ran two CAs and they ran a D7 each. As is the case in the weeknight games, we were more aggressive which wasn't ideal for the Klingons, but my dice were really bad with the Photons so the end of the game had two crippled ships on each side and lightly scratched ships on each side.
It was a lot of fun.
This week I hope to have two sessions, introducing a couple of new races. I created a simple listing of the races, their weapons, strengths, weaknesses and basic tactics. I'm going to stick to the Western Theatre (GW) races as those will be more familiar to them than the Plasma ships.
One of the guys really wants to try Hydran due to the 'get close and blast em' mentality of the Fusion ships. I'm thinking Hydran against Klingon/Lyran is the likely battle though it's possible one of the players will want to play Fed, Kzinti or Tholian (the choices I gave for the Alliance races along with Hydran).
If no one takes Kzinti, I plan to introduce batteries/reserve power and mid turn speed changes in addition to the new ships' rules. If someone takes Kzinti I'll probably add Wild Weasels to the list of rules to teach (not sure it's necessary as I won't have taught Scatter Packs or Suicide Shuttles).
My real hope is that we get two games in this week, the first to introduce the new ships (and maybe not add any new rules outside the race specific rules), and the second will be a longer session on the weekend where we can take our time a bit more.
Stop thanking me.
You could try a Kzinti Vs Klingon match-up and not teach WW rules and not teach SP rules as that'll have ( particularly after the D7 B & then K refits ) lots of ability to shoot at drones without actually needing the WW on either side.
I'n not sure I'ld introduce the Tholians and the Romulans and Gorns will be more familiar to the players. Maybe a BC will need to rescue trapped BPs on the surface of a planet and leave whilst under fire from a KR and a WE. Or maybe just a shoot `em up between two Fed CARs and a K7R and WE combo.
That's an area where you might want to take a look. Using scenarios that don't automatically mean destroying the enemy to win tend to be scenarios that can end in an hour instead of a night. You might even get tham to play ( depending on the ships ) a 200 BPV winner-take-all BCH slugfest where there can be only one winner and aliances are forged and broken as needed.
The key really is to ask your players what they think they'ld be into and then go from there.
Looks like the battle will be:
Trainees: 1 Hydran + 1 Kzinti
Me: Couple of Lyran vessels
I'll probably set up two possible scenarios (the second being Klingon in place of the Lyran) but I figured the matchup should work ok as I'm pretty inexperienced in the Lyran.
I'm debating whether to go with one large ship (me) vs two smaller ones or the usual routine of light cruiser - BC level ships, two to a side (with me controlling 2). The positive with 1 vs 2 is it'll be something they haven't played before. The negative is, if I play it 'right', I'd focus on one ship first and probably take it out of the game which wouldn't be much fun for the one who got picked on.
Alternatively, if I blow someone up I could just give them a fresh ship as it'll be just a training scenario.
have you ever tryed training them with the SFB cadet training module from nexus #12 .
that always worked when i was training new people. they should reprint it.
Jerry. Check out the top of:
http://www.starfleetgames.com/sfb/sfin/sfin.htm#SFB
I am running a demo SFB game tonight for my college's gaming group. I am planning on using a modified version of the cadets rules, with the cruisers provided at the site Andy linked to above. I noticed that there is no Tholian ship in the bunch. Is it possible for future endeavors that a Tholian cruiser (and cadet cruiser) could be provided for training purposes? It shouldn't be a big deal tonight, but should someone ask about them, it would be good to have an answer.
Tim. Check out http://www.geocities.com/andypalmer/cadet-alt.html
Andy, I did see that in your site (very nice, by the way). What I was looking for something along the lines of the full-size cruisers in the training manual.
Relocating from the Origins 2007 thread.
I find that I can't reasonably teach newbies by letting them win. I just ... can't let the other guy win It's not in my constitution, heh. So I've got to set up a scenario where the other guy can hardly help but win, even if I try. Now this doesn't mean I'm going to break out all the nutty rules. I think starting with "advanced" level rules on smaller ships is ideal (the "basic" level rules are just too different). The thing about smaller ships is not that they are easier to fly, but that they play faster, because of less time rolling dice.
I also don't like a scenario where one side is given a huge handicap, at least not obviously. The new player will feel like he is being condescended at.
So, I think for training one of the best things you can do is play a "dissimilar combat" scenario. Monsters or cruise drones or something are good for the very first scenario, because you can help the newbie with his EA form and tactics. Monsters will also be a really fast introduction to the meanings of different ranges, which is the most important thing in SFB - monsters will quickly cure them of the "well, I'll fire my photons at R9, and then close to R2" problem that so many newbies have.
For the second scenario, I would recommend something like the Surprised Reversed (only a smaller version with a frigate or destroyer attacking). By this stage he should not need you to look over his shoulder and and help him basically play the game. Now he gets to fight a "real" opponent, but one he can't realistically lose to, or if he does, at least he will have done a lot of damage.
After that they should be ready for some real scenarios. I don't recommend going to tournament ships, unless your gaming group is tournament style only. There are lots of scenarios where one side is badly handicapped, but not in some obvious way. Give the new player the advantaged side and you are set.
Note, this is a different approach than if you have multiple newbies to train. In that case, a series of "Gulliver" scenarios, like "Pirates go for big game" or the Juggernaut or Death Probe, are good. The thing about these are that they allow players to get used to losing and having fun at the same time. Because, like, if the Death Probe decides to pick on you, you are pretty much just dead. And the newbie will get blown up, but he'll know there's nothing he could have done about it, so he will take it in the spirit of fun and know that next time, it will probably be somebody else's turn in the barrel.
In all cases avoid free for alls, except maybe once. No one should ever play a free for all scenario where the object is general destruction. Newbies won't be able to figure out WHY the scenarios aren't fun, they just won't like them, and then they'll stop playing.
"I also don't like a scenario where one side is given a huge handicap, at least not obviously. The new player will feel like he is being condescended at. "
Not if you make it clear that you are TEACHING them, and not PLAYING the game. The difference is staggering.
Back when I was heavily into B5 Wars, I developed a series of scenarios to teach the game. In the first one, THEY WERE THE ONLY PLAYER. They had to move from point A to point B around some obstacles. The idea was to teach them the movement rules, AND I TOLD THEM THAT.
In scenario 2, they took a big ship and I a small ship. It taught them how the weapons worked, and how to resolve damage.
In scenario 3, I had an even force, with a small number of fighters on both sides (2 flights on 1 side, and 4 on the other). They got to pick which side they would play, and I explained to them the advantages and disadvatages of each side.
By this point, they had all the main rules under their belt, and they were playing an equal battle. Not once did anyone I tried this approach with ever expressed (directly or indirectly, not even via body language) that they were felt like they were being condescended to. Some expressed exactly the opposite.
And if someone dumped a spate a rules on me and went out of their way to defeat me, I doubt I'd ever play with them. Not because I'd feel bad about losing (what chance did I have??), but rather what their behavior says to me about their personality.
When training new players, and I've trained several, I try to explain that the first game is a training scenario, and set them up with a superior ship. This lets me pull some of the more basic "moves" and teach tactics without having those moves be of the order of, "See, THIS is how I blew you up. Isn't that cool? Maybe you can try it next time, when I show you ANOTHER way I will blow you up..."
I remember one of my first games of SFB, wherein an experienced local player had me fly a version of "Recon in Force". I had a Klingon BT, and felt pretty good about it... until the entire Fed fleet showed on Turn 1 and I got my ship evaporated by a Fed BB and a full 12 ship fleet with a range-30 prox-shot alpha strike. To the obvious satisfaction of my (supposed) teacher.
While it did not chase me out of SFB (obviously), I didn't really seek out games with that particular player again.
This is the method I used for going on 12 years:
http://www.starfleetgames.com/rangers/training.htm
I use a variation on it still for my products.
When trainees got through game three, I'd do some show-and-tell bits about areas of the map, and distance calcs, as well as "working the angles" - some theory to give guidance to their practice.
After the "theory discussion", I'd let them loose on the other players in the group, and explain that they had three mulligans per game, with me or anyone else in the group.
Using a mulligan, they can ask any tactical question they liked. If it was a rules question, we pointed them at the Binder of Doom to look up themselves.
If they asked a tactical question, it could literally be "OK, in the situation we're in now, it's pretty clear you're advantaged. What could I have done to avoid this mess?" And we roll the game back however many impulses and show what the options are.
Another mulligan to ask is "OK, it's pretty clear you have a Cunning Plan, and I'm falling for it. Spill - what is it, and what can I do to bollix it up?"
The purpose is to let people focus on turning rules knowledge into tactical applications, and the mulligans are there so that the new player has a formal methodology to say "You're doing something subtle that I'm not catching. Illuminate me."
One specific trick I've discovered in training deals with the interactions of specific kinds of power and batteries (and in the case of Feds, photon torpedoes).
Use colored beads, chits, whatever. One color for warp power (possibly a slightly different shade if AWR is involved, but probably better to save AWR til they have the procedure down), one for impulse, and one for APR/Boom Impulse.
Give them a cheat sheet of which types of energy allocation require which amount of power (for the Fed noting specifically that arming energy is from warp while holding energy is from anywhere), and a reminder of the speed limits (30 Movement from Warp, 1 Movement from Impulse).
Also give them an index card with a number of boxes penciled in to represent their batteries.
Then when they do energy allocation, tell them to remove the appropriately colored beads from their pools of power (and place warp or regular power into batteries as desired).
This has the benefit of showing WHY an HET can't be done for most cruisers above speed 26, but other ships have lower or higher 'max speed' when HET_ing. For Feds, it reinforces the notion that arming photons will reduce speed.
This method isn't necessary for all players, but if someone just isn't grokking it, they may get it when presented 'visually'.
Ken Burnside - I used your Training Method to introduce SFB to a couple of the neighbors on Saturday and it worked very well. Thanks for that.
P.S. Where can I find the Sequence of Play? I was lookling in the MRB and G3 annex book, and was clearly looking in the wrong places, because I couldn't find it to show my new trainees.
Ken, try G3, Annex #2 (very close to the front of the book).
Ken Lin - Quite welcome. The key to teaching any game with the concept load of SFB is to get them to do rather than front load the information.
Will you be bringing your neighbors over to Origins this year?
Jean - there it is, thanks!
Ken, unfortunately, due to work + wife's high school reunion, I will not be able to make Origins this year, but plan on attending in 2011. What I liked best about your training method was teaching reinforcement *last*, that was a very good idea.
Heres my most recent tip for training, getting younger players who are used to instant gratification. Who find it hard to sit down and take a few hours to play a game on paper.
Was trying to teach a younger person, who was willing to at least try to play, and they actually seemed to think rolling all the dice was a bit old fashioned and took way too long. So i looked at a few iphone/ipad dice rollers to get them a mix of instant with pen and paper. My requirements were fairly simple:
1-match up 2 6 sided dice (added together)
2-roll lots of "points" of damage at once
3-simple interface
search for dice in the apps store and you almost get NSFW apps, actual explicit dice apps! took alot of searching, but i did find one that actually got the younger one to play, and it made the game go alot faster. So I thought it might help others that are trying to engage people that arent "into dice games"
dxDice, you can use basic 2d6 up to 100 times. comes back in an actual list you can check off, (or uncheck) as you "use" them. Made it so the younger person didnt have to actually physically roll the dice, just tell it how many to roll and it was done. keeping track was easier of what you used.
I know most of us older folks (come on we played in the eighties when we were in our teens), like the physical dice in our hands, but the newer generation doesnt appreciate it as much and dxDice was able to get me a playing partner local.
Fred
Um, ADB already released their own DAC app for the iOS.
http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/12032/26678.html?1304704897
I'm just waiting for the Android port.
Troy, isn't on the app store yet, I will keep looking for it and give it a chance. Based on price of course. Been using dxdice for this and other games for a while now. Works great.
Ok, it's on the app store. First impression is that they didn't follow apples guidelines at all. I was hoping the image from the other forum was a mockup, but it wasn't. Next time i hope they post some free codes on here and let some real users try it out first. I mean I was able to make the hit count go to zero with a full list of hits still shown, then was easily able to make it go negative ,with a simple test. Wow, very disappointed.
Technically I guess it works as advertised, just bugs and bad visual design. My wife even made comments to the same affect. Think I will stick to the paper version until version 2.0
Fred
Fred, tell us how you got it to do that, since we cannot get it to.
Generally speaking, don't complain without giving us enough information to tell what the actual issue is.