Archive through September 02, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
The "X" Files:
First Generation X-ships:
X1R The X-ship R Module:
Archive through September 02, 2003
Mike, I agree for the most part. As to the ebb and flow I see it a bit different but that difference is not important. I do wonder, though, what the real difference is between what I've been posting and yours. Anyway...we agree.
I don't see a treaty being the major influence of the X2 era. There will likely be treaties that suite the needs that are there anyway. So, the limit on phasers was agreed to by me for two reasons. One as an agreement between us posters as an even field for discussion. And two, as a practical solution to the problems of over gunning starships. I.e. a bigger better phaser in numbers reflective of pre-GW and GW designs.
A treaty would never work. Heck, it didn't work on Earth; it wouldn't work in a Galactic Quadrant.
So, MJC, you're basically correct in that we mostly agreed to limit the number of phasers but for somewhat different reasons (each of us, I think).
Regarding wide Neutral Zones: I don't see these being accepted by any Nation unless enforced by the Organians. It is the result of the ISC occupation and wasn't addressed fully during the Andromedan War because it took everyone greatest effort. For the various Nations to agree on leaving the neutral zones as is (without other influence) is totally unacceptable to me. I just cannot see them doing that, no way. It makes NO sense. Now, no one has directly said this should be the case but it occurred to me that it might be implied. Just MHO.
Geoff: Agree with there being alot of conflict in the neutral zones. I just see it as lots of little conflicts, and very few (if any) big ones.
Loren: RE Wider neutral zones. The old sup.2 did state that is was the organians that enforced these new wider zones, and forced everyone back to their core territories. However, the races all agreed to this and were glad of it at least for the time being as it gave them a chance to catch their breath, and rebuild. I think it is an absolute necessity that we have those neutral zones, otherwise trade wars are going to be impossible, as there won't be any neutral territory to compete over. Some ways I can see getting everyone to agree are:
- The Organians make them. Works, but it's a bit forced.
- The reduction in fleet strength from the ISC and Andro wars, combined with large devestated zones (areas on the borders that held bases or industrial worlds that have been devestated or destroyed in the back-and-forth of the GW) makes everyone agree to a temporary cease fire and widening of the neutral zones. In a way, they have to. Consider the Klingons, for example. They subjugate their worlds, and with no fleet, they can't do this very well. By pulling back and agreeing to letting these worlds stay neutral, they avoid the possibility of fighting over them yet again and leave the door open to still getting goods from these places when they re-build.
- Some other force makes the various races widen the borders; don't know what.
I don't know what SVC will pick, or how it'll go, but I'm betting he'll have those wide neutral zones. He'll have to, to have any kind of trade war period. And of all the parts of history SFB has to offer, this is the one that excites me the most. Any match-up you can dream of is going to be possible, and with X2 tech mixed in, it's gonna be a wild ride. Oh, and Loren: I haven't read all the posts in this thread yet, so if you've said any of this, I apologize for looking as though I disagree or consider it different than what you've said...I just haven't read it.
Now, as to the phaser-treaty. I think limiting phasers is going to be a complex model to follow. Consider these GW ships:
- Fed CA: 6 x P1
- Klingon D7: 9 x P2
- Lyran CA: 4 x P1, 4 x P3
All very different, and close to the same BPV. I think a treaty that limits both the number of ships by size class/type, and by BPV is a more manageable task. A 300 point Fed ship with 8 P5's is going to do fine against a 300 point Klingon with a dozen or so P1's. The key is the BPV, not how many phasers each ship has.
Mike, we are in basic agreement. The wide neutral zones are already a fact of history. It's a fact that they are there at the close of the Andro War. What happens after that...well, that hasn't been established.
My position on the environment of Y205 hasn't changed since the beginning of the X-Files threads, so it's nothing new. I'm glad we agree. I've assumed that others were just not addressing my points yet. Personally, I've always felt the historical environment to be the driving force behind the designs so that needed to be roughly established first thing. I said my peace and let it go; discussing it when others brought it up. Though, understandably, most others were more excited about the ship designs than the history. It's taken an unbelievable amount of posts but a lot of good stuff appeared. Everyone forced everyone to think out their ideas. A good think is a good thing.
I have Supp. 2 and can only see, as I stated above, the Organians holding the Nations back. They wouldn't argue much because they all would feel that the Organians would wield and even hand in the matter. With out the Organians, paranoia would erupt into aggression.
Mike, I also agree that a weapons treaty could never be effectively implemented and would be seen as impossible. Hull limitations could work. And that is also a Supp. 2 subject. To quote Supp. 2 "If we can only have a few of these then the ones we do have will be gems!"
I think the history laid out in Supp. 2 is good if incomplete.
Last thing, Mike, I’m terribly sad you haven't read some of my posts as you are definitely one of my primary target audiences. Smile intended!
Quote:And no; I don't want to see a DD with 9 P-5's. But, It would be darn hard to put that many on such a small hull, anyway, and expensive to boot.
Actually I should have said 9Ph-5s as a starting point...I'm, for 9Ph-5s on an XDD after a phaser refit!
Quote:How 'bout a Lyran Tiger with Vudar Ion Cannons and IPGs instead of disruptors and ESG's? Or a D5 with photons? Lots of possiblities.
Techslosh is a bad idea...see the overseer posts from a few days back to see how I'ld make techsloshing impossible!
Quote:MJC,
interesting that you cut the most relevant parts from my post in your response, I assume you are now giving up the notion of CVA/PFT backboned major fleets and fleet battles. That is what struck me as very flawed statements.
Your mixing my concepts.
Yes, GWs will be the backbone of the fleet. They'll act like monitors in someways but be faster and more disposable because they are GW warships and slowly being replaced by X1s and X2s.
Yes, a handful of CVs and PFTs will be running round.
Yes, they will, from time to time fall into large fleet formations.
Seriously.
One planet has a DWD, DWC & DW and another has a D7W and a D5W...the two are mouthing off about going to war over somebody's ego or some such.
If a Fed DD based ( one DDL and one SC and three other DD based hulls ) internal defense squadron is sent to intervein, it might not be enough.
Add a CVL & FFX in the role of her escort, CVA and her two escorts, a BCS and her two escorts, you might actually need a CX to lead them ( counting CVAs and their escorts as being one fewer ships per carrier under F&E current rules as I understand them ), one might need to throw in a CX just to lead them...is sent it might force the hands of the local planet to quiet down.
But would that Full Command Rating ship fleet be any more able to cool down the situation than say a 2CX, GSX, 2DDX and SCX squadron or an XCA, XDD, XFF task group?
I would think so...but I think the local governments that are silly enough to talk up war would also be silly enough to consider "quality" ships to be not as quality as they actually are.
Quote: Not dis. What I'm pointing out is that bases of supply are relevant to supply. Not a solution to shortened service life. You can only repair a unit so much, but once past its normal service life its battle worthiness will degrade considerably. I would assume that 99% of all units will have a base of supply anyways, as that is what they are defending or fighting from in most cases.
When someone says BASE, I don't assume they mean "fuel dump".
I took a base to mean, one of those things with an SSD marked with a repair boxes.
The conner cutting of war cruiser designs can be undone...we could even have a few SSDs ( although this would be less likely, we might just have cetain base values, like must work as poor crew ) of ships that have improvements to stop them being short life span ships:-
Consider a D5W with, an extra Excess Damage box, both Ph-3s removed, the boom impulse removed, one APR box removed and one of the aft transporter boxes removed...and her life expectance pushed up by a few decades through that overhaul.
A nice little ship and still a relatively cheap buy ( especially if the Klingons Empire will do it for you before they sell it to you ( at your request )).
Alternately we could make a new level of crew and apply it, say "undermanned" or some such.
Then apply the undermanned penalty to these ships ( on account of the fact that the local planets don't have the populations to support the academies ) AND the poor crew penalties ( to reflect the fact that the ships are falling apart well past their life expectancy and nothing works properly any more ) to have new capasities for these vessels with a straight BPV percentage taken from the each ship.
Quote:I'ld say blockaiding Cuba took a lot of ships, ergo, a Big fleet would be needed in the SFU for such a crissis.
What crisis? Show me a seeking weapon that can reach Sol from within the neutral zone. Poor example.
Okay, sure but if DON'TTAKETHE ANALOGYSOLITTERALLY III wants to anex the free world of DON'TTAKETHEANALOGYSOLITTERALLY IV, you might need to send a big fleet to make it known that as a world under the nominal goverance of the UFP ( or Klingon Empire or whatever ) that they should "get a grip" before the Federation gets busy.
And whos say the USA has to be Sol III in an analogy given by an Aussie!?!
Quote:A blockade would take a squadron or two of starships strung out across space interdicting frieghters and blockade runners.
Again Don't take the analogy so litterally.
What if DON'TTAKETHEANALOGYSOLITTERALLY III has 4 number of Kzinti Commando PFs, a Fed CDW & NTC and a Klingon D7W & D5W and is threaterning a full scale invasion.
Will an XCA and an XDD really be able to blockaid them from attacking DON'TAKETHEANALOGYSOLITTERALLY IV?
Can the UFP really afford to have two of her best ships waiting around for things to kick off when there are pirates actually doing more than mouthing off!
Quote:1) Is programmed Obsolence a thing that even exists in the SFU?
2) Is it something designed into warcruisers?
Via a design flaw that is accepted in construction costs, yes.
I'm not really sure if that's true.
The Liberty ships were built knowing that the average life expectancy of these ships was ONE journey from the US to the UK and yet they were still built under servey and some of them were still sailing around 30 years after the war ended!
It'ld really suck if you saved 10% of your money by cutting corners on the handful of ships that GOT LUCKY and didn't get exploded and had to scrap the ships after a few years.
So what if after nine ships you'll have the money to buy another-ship!?!
If the war ends and twelves years down the track another one starts you'll be in a right pickle cause you'll have to buy your ships all over again!
I'm not entirely convinced any Empire would design ships that had designed obsolecence and I sure as heck don't think the utilitarian UFP would do it!
Quote:A treaty would never work. Heck, it didn't work on Earth; it wouldn't work in a Galactic Quadrant.
Actually most historians agree that the TREATY OF WASHINGTON caused the Anglo-American War of 1929 to never occour.
Sure the Japanses broke free of the treay on the quite and thus were able to amass a very large fleet before the USN & RN realised what was happening, but it did stop the arms race that would have lead to war in the decade an a half after the end of WWI.
Quote:It makes NO sense. Now, no one has directly said this should be the case but it occurred to me that it might be implied. Just MHO.
I can see it happeneing with some races...Why would the Gorn and Kzinti occupy planets they once occupied and then build massive fleets to protect those planets from invasion by the UFP when they could just agree with the UFP to have those planets be free trade worlds and let their ecconomies raise thrive and thus provide the ecconomic strength to support their fleets against their real enemies.
But I can't see the Klingons or the Romulans steeping back from the averice aquistition mentality.
Quote:Now, as to the phaser-treaty. I think limiting phasers is going to be a complex model to follow. Consider these GW ships:
Yeah, but take a look at X1 phaser suites.
I would say that a Phaser limit based on hull class would be the way the treaty would work best as that would free up the races to build heavy weapons that have racial flavour.
A BPV ( even an offensive output over seven turns limit ) would just mean every race and his dog would have 12Ph-5 cruisers that were phaser boats!
Quote:A 300 point Fed ship with 8 P5's is going to do fine against a 300 point Klingon with a dozen or so P1's. The key is the BPV, not how many phasers each ship has.
Yeah but my thinbking is that these ships need not be so balanced...if the Klingon has 4 intergrated-UIM/Defracs disruptors running off disruptor caps and having a microscopic 6 impulse double broadside penalty AND the Fed has four 24 point Photons ( with the above phaser arrays ) and the Klingon comes in with a 300 BPV price tage and the Fed with a 330 BPV price tag then that's okay, infact it's good because it shows racial flavour a little more.
Quote:Everyone forced everyone to think out their ideas. A good think is a good thing.
Yeah, X2 has more posts than the rest of the proposals on the proposals board put together and that includes R10 and J2.
Quote:I think the history laid out in Supp. 2 is good if incomplete.
I don't...I want a handful of big wars...the GW powers getting involved "on the quiet" and providing the histories with something fun.
I mean if the listed fleets of the DON'TTAKETHEANALOGYSOLITTERALLY III-IV situation was messed up because a Klingon X2 fleet consisting of an XCA, 1XDD, 1 XSC and 2 XFF flying the flags of the DON'TTAKETHEANALOGYSOLITTERALLY III natioal guard tried to escort the commando vessels...it'ld make for a massive clash of the titans, but could it be kept quite enough to stop an all out war from erupting bewteen the Empire & the UFP!?!
I think it's worth telling the story and worth playing the scenario ( if anyones got the players and the time ).
Quote:I would say that a Phaser limit based on hull class would be the way the treaty would work best as that would free up the races to build heavy weapons that have racial flavour.
A BPV ( even an offensive output over seven turns limit ) would just mean every race and his dog would have 12Ph-5 cruisers that were phaser boats!
What?!!? Every race just doesn't build ships like that. They didn't in GW, they didn't in X1, and they won't here, either. Yes, in X1 they all pretty much had P-1's exclusively. But they retained their racial arc layouts. In X2, not everyone will have mono-phaser hulls. Some races may, but not all. Aren't you the one that lobbied so hard for racial flavor through phasers? You get that by type and distribution, not by some treaty limiting the numbers. And if you do limit how many they can have, THAT'S when you'll see every ship in a size class with the same phaser suite, because they'll have as many as they can pack on.
BPV is enough to start with; limiting phasers opens the door to limiting heavy weapons, drones, BP's...anything. And, I might add that the racial flavor from heavy weapons will exist regardless of what type of phaser a ship has.
The big wars will come when the Xorks show up. In the mean time big wars don't make sense, to me. That isn't to say it's impossible. The Future is not written.
The size of the ships will be dictated by play balance. Remember, it's not "The Feds" that would put 9 ph-5s on the XDD, it's "The game designers".
I also agree that very large neutral zones are the way to do handle Y205. Whether it's "the Organians" or "no race can afford to" or "fill in the blank", as long as it's plausible when it's finalized, that's fine with me.
There will be players who want to fly an NCL against an XDD, with no historical context. While it may never happen in the history, and may not even make sence, never argue with the customer. If X2 is published, X2 vs. GW has to work, and "it doesn't fit the history we published" is a cop-out.
But I'm not one to take it to the extreme that the ships have to have tournament quality balance and that there cant be some RPS matchups. Ex: X2 should stomp Andys. Every general and admiral always fights the last war over in his head.
That being said, the history is an important part of the module, since we are expanding the SFU universe.
Jeff: more agreements! Well put.
Quote:There will be players who want to fly an NCL against an XDD, with no historical context. While it may never happen in the history, and may not even make sense, never argue with the customer. If X2 is published, X2 vs. GW has to work, and "it doesn't fit the history we published" is a cop-out.
I think this is exactly what SVC had in mind when he said X2 must play well with GW. The entire game MUST be balanced. BPV is the tool that the SFU uses. Equal BPV must be equal force. Now, that is what is so darn difficult about X2! 350BPV of GW vs 350 BPV of X2 is possibly three on one as a normal thing. X2 will have to win against force dynamics 50% of the time. Now, take X2 vs. X1 or the B10K. The Force Dynamic is gone and X2 will be at an advantage! And there in lies the rub! The higher the BPV of a single unit the greater the error when dealing with different opponents of equal BPV.
The funny thing is that 350 is the best and worst level. It has the widest range of opponents possible. 400 gets a little better because a multi-ship opponent starts to become the only way to match it. 300 is better the other way as the force dynamic lessens with less or much smaller ships in the opposing team.
All in all, I still think 300 to 350 is a good target range for the big X2 cruiser, but it isn't easy!
Regarding wider Neutral Zones :
Wider NZ are there. If the Organians don't enforce them then they will shrink as the Nations recapture and rebuild. This will take time and is what I've been suggesting all along. Forget the Organians. Have the Nations generally sign a non-aggression pact. They all will go for it because they need to rebuild. Everyone is totally winded and not prepared to pick up where they left off when the ISC came. Indeed, they are far worse off than that time. So, the various Nation start rebuilding. SO planets can't wait to return to normal while others are more ambitious and require various means of "Convincing". When the Nations expand to near their old borders there will erupt dozens of clashes as old arguments spring up and conflicts arise over who really owns what. Then, just when tensions are high and eyes start looking towards war... BAM!, here come the Xorkaliens. Every one is totally off guard and each thinks it's the other attacking. Some declare war on each other until the truth is clear some 6 months to a Year later. Unfortunately for the Xorks, once the truth is out about who is attacking, the cooperation learned by the Alpha Nations against the Andros comes in right handy.
Quote:Have the Nations generally sign a non-aggression pact. They all will go for it because they need to rebuild. Everyone is totally winded and not prepared to pick up where they left off when the ISC came.
I wouldn't even take it that far.
The Nations entered into an agreed arms limitation treaty that restricted new production of ships ( and only ships ).
The limitation would probably be by tonnage and i think would probably have a limit on the phasers.
At a centerlining damage of 28 terra-joules of phaser damage and the ability all through the rest of the FA arc to inflict 21 terra joules of phaser damage ( at 80 milliom metres ), the Fed XCA can siply be excatly what it is.
Now a Fed CX could likelwise centrline 26 terra-joules and FA apply 19.5 terra-joules, so it's not that much more than a Fed CX.
That should be how the phasers are restricted, by some unit measure that is developped in the treay for the treay and never needs to be shown to the players.
A Quick outline stating that the regulartions were accurate and fair and stopped designs from being excessively dangerous ( the treaty couldn't be abused to create increadibly powerful ships if you just happen to rear centerline your target ) and that the regulations were based on output rather than phaser types and the treaty should become believeable.
What you are proposing is further that a simple Non-Agression Pack.
With the very widened neutral zone/devestated zones communication is at best via sub-space and possibly an Ambasitor.
How would your proposal be monitored by the various nations? Remember, there is huge distances of hazardous space between each of them.
I suggest letting the mission and economics restrict the design. With a simple non-agression pack the mission is not war so overgunned ships are not efficient. These ships must still be powerful but not overgunned.
From just a quick review. (I haven't had time to thoroughly read everything.)
Ppl. are talking about wider Neutral zones. Some seem to be questioning if they would apply at all since they are Sup 2. Or if the Organians had anything to do with them.
Couple of points.
1. The F&E Map has the wider neutral zones. We aren't going to get to change the F&E map. As SVC would say. Thats a Dead Horse,
2. According to GPD.
Y203 ORGANIANS declare "Era of Tranquility"
Y205 Era of Second Generation X ships and TRADE WARS begins.
So it seems logical to me that the Organians enforced the neutral zones initially.
Ken,
The F&E Map is printed as it would look at the start of the GW. IIRC, it has neutral zones only one hex wide; plenty narrow enough for one race to invade someone elses and still get home without supplies. With neutral zones 3-5 times as wide as those (as described in Sup.2), they can't make it across and back. The trade wars will require these zones, otherwise everyone simply maintains control of what they have, and any forays to get new trading rights equals an incursion into someone else's territory.
As for changes to the F&E map being a dead horse; not so. The early years module would require a change to the F&E map to play it during that period, but we have have it. Perhaps one day there will be a new F&E early years expansion; and if X2 takes of, a trade wars expansion.
Bottom line: for the trade wars to work, there must be much larger neutral zones than shown on the F&E map.
Mike the F&E Map already shows the Trade Wars borders. Those Orange Lines are the new border. The hexes between an existing border and the new Orange border line are all part of the Nuetral zone.
IE: We already have the Trade Wars map.
Ah, I see. Yeah, those work fine for what Sup. 2 described. "3 to 5 times as wide" and too wide for a ship to get across and get back. Perfect! (Funny but true: I had looked at my F&E map the other day, and sort of guessed where the borders for the trade war might be. At one point when looking at the Fed border, I thought "yeah, right about here where this orange line is...")
Quote:I suggest letting the mission and economics restrict the design. With a simple non-agression pack the mission is not war so overgunned ships are not efficient. These ships must still be powerful but not overgunned.
Agreed. With the information Ken gave about the F&E map, it's clear that X2 ships will need to be both relatively fast, and have a longer range than the standard warship. Some of this comes at the expense of weapons, so less but better weapons might be the way to go, at least from the start...sort of what we've been talking about for awhile.
THose line were inposed by the ISC and not changed during the Andro war. The Orgainians might enforce them but SVC has said that that is not written in stone.
The Era of Tranquility: Sure they declear it and it can be a major factor but it doesn't HAVE TO be. They have decleared no more war. That didn't stop the GW.
All I'm saying is there is reason to have wider neutral zones besides a unenforcable treaty or the Organians. And the facts of the alternative are already written.
There is no need to change the F&E map. All the Stars are in the same place. Borders? Well, those are historical lines, how they end up depends on how the game goes.
Who suggested a change to the F&E map, anyway?
Agreed 100%, Loren. There are many reasons for the wider borders, and no reason that the various races couldn't decide for themselves to keep them. The bottom line, though, is that these borders will have an effect on everyone's ecomony, and ship design.
Without a power from above decreeing a wide neutral zone, the powers will move into those places.
OTOH, it's not like anybody would be very hot to restart the General War either. You could have NO neutral zone and you'd only have the occasional skirmish.
I still don't understand why everybody's so bound and determined to resurrect the backstory from supplement 2. It's stupid module and we should only use bits of it that add something to the game.
Can someone tell me how keeping the races apart adds anything to the game? sure it gives you the ships you want to play with but does it give you the ships that are the most fun?
Is it the only way to get the ships you want to play with?
An alternate view of the Trade Wars era is, as I posted a ways back, to adopt the Starfleet Warlord model. We have all this new territory in the LMC to develop. The Andros kindly wiped out most organized sentient life there which means it's wide-open for whoever can get in there and develop it. The LMC would be redeveloped within an inch of its life to finance the rebuilding of the alpha Sector after 30+ years of warfare.
ADVANTAGES:
Races get unfamiliar borders, which means you can generate historical scenarios using what would previously be un-historical race combinations.
In the LMC, everyone's pushing and shoving for space without actually wanting to go to war. But since the local commanders are an unprecedented distance from their controlling authorities, you can add a "wild west" spice to the era.
Unfamilar neighbors breed both unfamiliar friends and unfamiliar enemies. The Gorns could get a little tired of the Feds patrician attitude and might find themselves more comfortable in the company of Lyrans. Perhaps the Tholian appetite for power might reemerge and the Klingons might like them better than the Lyrans. The ISC and the Feds might buddy up too. Or perhaps find some hitherto hidden nobility in the Roms.
Fleets for each race would be a mix of whatever survived Operation Unity and whatever the empires could afford to send, creating the conditions where you can have any matchup you'd care to name.
We can even introduce tensions between the major power and their colonies as the colonies get tired of working hard and seeing the results carted off to the Alpha Sector. With colonial tensions building, it'd be a perfect time for the Xorks to strike.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
I think the history laid out in Supp. 2 is good if incomplete.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MJC said; I don't...I want a handful of big wars...
Hmmm. I think I'm done here. MJC is determined to do what he wants and ignore what little established guidelines we have. And refuses to acknowledge the simple errors in his misassumptions.
Quote:I still don't understand why everybody's so bound and determined to resurrect the backstory from supplement 2. It's stupid module and we should only use bits of it that add something to the game.
Well, from my point of view, I think the history portion of Sup.2 is the only worthwile part; I like it. It makes sense to have those wider zones, as:
- They exist on the F&E map.
- Recent products like Gurps specifically refer to the Organians enforcing peace in Y203, and this fits the same information in supplement 2.
- Having the wider zones will give the perfect opportunity for the trade wars, as everyone scrambles to get goods or services from worlds they once controlled, or had taken from enemy forces in the war.
The LMC idea is okay, but it's going to be mighty hard for some of the different races to get there, and with no bases, they can't. In Op Unity, there was cooperation and assistance in getting everyone to the LMC...this cooperation will not exist, especially when everyone will be competing for their share of a dwindling pie. The Feds, for example, aren't going to let the Lyrans get to the LMC through their territory. They Klingons might let them pass, but won't let them stop for resupply. All in all, I think the supplement 2 history is okay to work with, and is at least tacitly supported by existing products.
John, first, I'm not stuck on resurrecting supp.2's history. I don't see anything wrong with it. It's not what was broken about the module. It was the ship design and the various rules. Anyway, that's enough of that. I'm posting to agree with the majority of your post.
Indeed, the LMC is a great place to develop an unbelievable amount of history. Could even turn out that the LMC ends saving the Alphas when the Xorks come like the Hydran lost colonies did when the Klingons and Lyrans conquered the Hydrans.
You make an excellent point!
This would be in addition to what's going on in the Alpha Quad. which lends to what I've proposed before. Y205 to Y210-15 would be relatively quiet years according to what I've been saying but with your idea a lot would be going on in the LMC! So, a logical history can still include non-stop action. Without the magic wand of the Organians who failed before. Why would they be able to stop us now? According to the History, they felt pretty bad about not foreseeing the Andros. Maybe they decide to move away and not meddle.
Now, that is not to say than there isn't fun to be had in the Alpha Quad. The landscape is rich with Empires recapturing territory, political intrigue, reformation of alliances and such. Perhaps even once subordinate systems might vie to build their own mini-empires with the Wyn as a model.
Might there be a UN type organization that could do battle without each member having to declare war? Not sure how that might develop but could be something in which scenarios could be built on. Perhaps it fails after a dozen battles or so.
Well, after reading Mikes post I had this thought. That UN idea above might be better served as an independent body agreed on by the various Nations to ensure Trade with the LMC via the "Alpha Express". This would be one or two trade routes that are protected by the ALMCTA (Alpha-Lesser Magellanic Cloud Trade Authority). Each race pays dues and contributes specific ships and is under sworn allegiance to the ALMCTA President. This President is elected by the ALMCTA Council which has veto capabilities with a 2/3 vote as well as impeachment power. Each Council member is a single representative from each race involved.
Now, battles and skirmishes are common and the ALMCTA rarely get involved over resources unless they are over registered claims or involve the trade routes. If a Trade route is threatened, the ALMCTA can enlist any local ship on the spot or risk arrest of the commanding authority aboard and fines.
Just a old lurker piping up here...
About the orange lines on the old F&E map: they are not there on the new (blue and grey) printing of the map. Many don't even have the older black maps anymore. Keep this in mind in case any newbies wander in. They might not know what you're talking about... ;-)
And yes, those are the Trade War era borders. They have nothing to do with the ISC as someone mentioned above.
Personally, I see 20 years of history (Y185 to Y205) that still need to be fleshed out. This is just as long as the GW. I'd love to see what gets done with 1st Gen X-ships in this period! Just look at what happened to ships from Y165 to Y185 and start imagining what may have needed to be done while fighting the Andros.
Back to lurking...
Quote:Can someone tell me how keeping the races apart adds anything to the game? sure it gives you the ships you want to play with but does it give you the ships that are the most fun?
No it also gives us some of the scenarios we want to play.
An Outerworld plant needs to protect it'self and buys a BCJ going cheap.
It then declears war on it's nearest neighbour and sends the ship o'er there.
The Federation looking to minimise the blood sheild quickly dispactches a Fed XDD to stop the BCJ in deep space.
If we left it upto the GW power to do all the fighting then it'ld either be...
My XCM fights your XCM or My 2 DDXs fight your XCA.
And that doesn't quite cover the full spectrum...wider neutral zones gives us not only the X2 ships that we want but also the conflicts we are looking for.
Quote:-------------------------------------------
Quote:
I think the history laid out in Supp. 2 is good if incomplete.
--------------------------------------------------
MJC said; I don't...I want a handful of big wars...
Hmmm. I think I'm done here. MJC is determined to do what he wants and ignore what little established guidelines we have. And refuses to acknowledge the simple errors in his misassumptions.
Hey, I'm not the only one that thinks the Supp' 2 History stinks.
I still don't understand why everybody's so bound and determined to resurrect the backstory from supplement 2. It's stupid module and we should only use bits of it that add something to the game.
Quote:Well, after reading Mikes post I had this thought. That UN idea above might be better served as an independent body agreed on by the various Nations to ensure Trade with the LMC via the "Alpha Express". This would be one or two trade routes that are protected by the ALMCTA (Alpha-Lesser Magellanic Cloud Trade Authority). Each race pays dues and contributes specific ships and is under sworn allegiance to the ALMCTA President. This President is elected by the ALMCTA Council which has veto capabilities with a 2/3 vote as well as impeachment power. Each Council member is a single representative from each race involved.
Now, battles and skirmishes are common and the ALMCTA rarely get involved over resources unless they are over registered claims or involve the trade routes. If a Trade route is threatened, the ALMCTA can enlist any local ship on the spot or risk arrest of the commanding authority aboard and fines.
I think a simpler idea might be better.
The ALMCTA has several bases along the way to the LMC.
They won't do anything about races waring in the LMC because it's not part of their charter but they have bases along the trade routes ( now if the jumping off points are deep inside the expended neutral zones then no one empire can stop other from having access ( particulalry if there is more than one jumping off point )) and reserve the right to refuse resupply to races that own ships that engage in hostilities with in their trade routes.
More over they have the power to order any and all ships in their trade routes to attack any bases being built by anyone other than the ALMCTA so as to ensure free and fair trade by all races accessing the LMC.
Quote:Personally, I see 20 years of history (Y185 to Y205) that still need to be fleshed out. This is just as long as the GW. I'd love to see what gets done with 1st Gen X-ships in this period! Just look at what happened to ships from Y165 to Y185 and start imagining what may have needed to be done while fighting the Andros.
Oddly enough this is the X1R thread and we have an X2 History thread somewhere else.
JT said:
Quote:Without a power from above decreeing a wide neutral zone, the powers will move into those places.
Exactly. And it is the "moving in" that will give us the framework for generatiing scenarios.
Race X wants to move in on a formerly controled planet. They send an XDD. Planet has a couple of XP "new national guard" ships for defence. That's a scenario.
Jeff Tonglet: YES [slams fist on desk then reacts quickly to save keyboard from bouncing coffee].
Yes, thank you!
I would suggest that 2/3 to 3/4 or the old territory is reintegrated into their respective Nations by Y225 (when everything come undone).