Archive through February 15, 2007
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Company-Conventions-Stores-Ideas: New Product Lines Development:
GENERAL PROJECTS:
New Product Suggestion Topic:
Archive through February 15, 2007
RH: I am always open to new ways of doing things, but only if they are more efficient and not simply different. I'm not at all sure which particular part of ADB needs your new system but if you can explain it better, I'll think it through. If you mean SSD checking, there really isn't a better way until you get to the point that a computer can, itself, without humans, check to see if the ship has the right number of engines, if the tractor boxes are the same color, and if every phaser has a number and a firing arc.
Robert H: Keep in mind that most of the SFU content is on a PowerMac...and most of what isn't is on an even older Macintosh. Think "grayscale monitor".
Seriously. There are people playing Federation Commander who were not alive when the first versions of "Star Fleet Battles" were published.
Micheal, yes, I know about the various platforms. I *am* one of those folks who was excited when the SFB Commanders Edition came out. 
Steve, I was thinking not so much about the checking but the overall system you use for generating graphic content. As Michael noted, and I know, lots of the stuff is on machines old enough that you possibly use them to keep the offices warm in winter , but with the many company expansions you've done, perhaps your graphic arts systems need to get a look at too, even if it does mean some re-training time at the community college.
Of course, I'm also the the guy who isn't fully comfortable checking my own groceries and sticking some card in a gas machine, tanj these new fangled ways!
RH
Quote:Of course, I'm also the the guy who isn't fully comfortable checking my own groceries and sticking some card in a gas machine, tanj these new fangled ways!
These are real bad examples of "progress". What these two examples illustrate is a company saving themselves money by making us do their jobs.
So don't feel fuddy-duddy about those two things. They aren't "new fangled", they are simply cheap. It is perfectly reasonable to resent a company being too •••• cheap to do their jobs.
[Sorry for the tangent. But I hate self-checkout with a passion.]
Mike, you are right. Terrible examples.
A company that I worked for once writes bigtime tax software. It can do it all at any level.
Accountants are, generally, stingy about business expenses. One of the things this company does is to have their sales guys show accountants that if they would upgrade their *hardware* (which the software company makes nothing from) that they would make more money, in spite of the expense (the accountants can generate more finished tax returns with better equipment).
It's a constant fight (so to speak), but understandable; no one likes change. Still, growth only occurs from change.
RH
Wow - I actually love self-checkout. You know you aren't going to be stuck behind someone who is trying to write a check and, in most cases, I can run the stuff through faster than the paid cashier can. Yeah, I get that it is cheaper, operationally, than a cashier, but also understand that that equipment is not cheap and that they have to amortize it's cost over a long period. I doubt if, in most cases, it pays for itself in less than a couple of years.
Except for gas pumps I dont like self checkout -- Im a ppl person and prefer the interaction -- I refuse to use ATM's, drive thru tellers etc (for several reasons)--
Maybe schools should make "RUR" mandatory reading, Anti-technology groups have a point up to a point --
The reason I don't use the self-check machines is simple. There are far too many times checking out with a live checker that an item rings up at an incorrect price, and has to be corrected manually. If that happens at a self-check you have to wait even longer to get a live person to come over and fix the problem, since there is generally only one person overseeing several self-check machines.
I will clarify that I only use self-checking for "Express" - i.e., I have 10 items or less. I have yet to have the wrong price issue in those cases (more likely due to the types of things I get as I do get that issue on occasion when doing the bulk shopping).
Robert H: For FC, we went to a new graphics system. For SFB we don't, and probably won't, because it's SOOOO easy to take a D7 SSD done in 1984 and "clone" it into a D7Z variant. In any case, no software that exists would do the checking for us, and the checking is 3/4 of the man-hours.
I hate self-checkout but have been forced to adapt. I haven't had wrong price issues but I have had say "unexpected item in bagging area" when all I did was sneeze.
Having been around for the initial batch of FC SSDs, I'd put te split at about 80% of the man hours is checking them.
And there's no way you could automate their construction with the tools and practices ADB has. Implementing the tools and practices for an automated system would cost more time than ADB could commit to it.
I speak from experience. I've got a mostly automated method of generating SSDs for my own games, and built the ship construction tools to do EXACTLY that from the get-go. This has imposed constraints on how AV:T and SITS and Squadron Strike SSDs are made. (And Squadron Strike's end product will have a tool that lets end consumers do ship construction and design as a web app, paying a small fee for the downloadable PDF at the end.)
I don't think anyone really groks how much labor goes into an SFB SSD or an FC SSD, making one from scratch, until they've actually done two or three. Every SFB player in the world owes Petrick a massive debt for the work he does.
I have checked SSD's for Petrick and scanned them pixel by pixel... and others found things I did not.
It is not just checking for obvious errors but to find some errors you have to know the rules and know how and why SSD's are they way they are.
It's definately a tedious job.
One SSD... pretty easy. But as you get past a few SSD checks it's gets exponantially harder.
Having made the SSDs for my playgroup, I can agree that it is a pain. Worse yet, is the fact that no matter how much time and effort you take to check your finished product, the next guy can pick out a mistake in a heartbeat.
If you are seriously contemplating redoing the SSD books, I urge you to take the time and effort to polish them off to a higher level so they will be of interest to new as well as old players.
Some suggestions:
Although I like the Federation Commander style of SSD, I can understand how this may be unfeasable. If using the current style, I would advise that you retool the existing outlines of the ships to look more like the ship they represent. Currently, many ships are close but could be a lot better.
The Crawford Box should be integrated into the Ship Data Table. My first impression is that this data was overlooked and the box was a quick fix.
All data needed during gameplay should be present (if possible) on the SSD to help prevent unnecessary reference to the rulebook or at least have the rule numbers sited. Use more graphical representations of firing arcs instead of a line stating what combination or arcs it is (like FX for example).
When I do my SSDs, I may break from the format but I try desperatly to make the SSD more functional. I start by overlaying a gridwork over a top view of the ship (usually using a painting guide) to arrainge the SSD boxes. I have an area that contains check off boxes for common Commander's Options (BPs, T Bombs, etc). I have areas to write in the current ECM and ECCM rating of the vessel. I move the Breakdown Rating down into the Turn Mode chart to free up some space in the Ship Data Table for Crawford Box items. My details for the drone racks are larger to facilitate larger than an accountants handwrighting. I've just recently started using a listing for drone reload storage since I've realized that reloads can be different than what is in the racks. My Andromedans have PA Panel displays on the sheet as well as a different system to display the hangar that accomodates any SS mix. My intention is never to reinvent the wheel but to help it spin more freely.
Steve if you are at all interested, I could email you a few selected SSDs even if for only to use as possible ideas.
I never said I was going to do all the SSD books over again, but I do enjoy the discussion.
When somebody says "all information needed for play" I would ask for some more specifics. What is it that you think is needed for play but not there? Some would think that ship names, service dates, and carrier escort groups are "required for play" but others would think these are clutter.
Yeah, I could just the see the ship name list next to the F5 SSD. 
LK: That data would be on the back side of the SSD. That way each SSD is on its own sheet of paper and I can file the SSDs any way I want.
Yeah, but that's a bit extreme. It is a matter of doubling the cost of any SSD book as normally two SSD are printed for each piece of paper.
The thing is that since you normally can make copies of SSD's just enter the data into your computer and print it on the backside of your SSD.
A lot of work but it's a lot of work for ADB too and would anyone rebuy SSD's for that.
Here a cool idea. When the Master Ship Book comes out, copy the page for a particular ship then copy the SSD to the other side.
New question. Is there a chance there will ever be a Merchant Marine module? I keep seeing Modern Marvels on the History Channel, and was reminded yesterday in a news story about the new standard for oil tankers and double hulls, and someone has an idea for the old retired single hull freighters to become pure water carriers for areas around the globe with no good drinking water supplies. (i.e. some parts of Australia lately.) So many scenarios revolve around protecting merchant shipping and mining or traders, that there is room for many interesting ship designs, including those hospital ships in F&E or mining ships with modified phasers for mining operations and extra shields in asteroid belts. Colony ships and supply ships. In your discussion in Module V there are two major items at the end of recent discussions, resupply and refueling. A module like Merchant Marines could contain preliminary rules for campaigns using this module. Just a thought. It might have some fun rules for mercenaries as well. Or be a little seedy for unscrupulous captains and traders. It just seems there are a ton of ships that could be used for a module like this and I am sure many people over the years have given ideas for ships of this type. One of the fun ones on tv lately was the converted oil tanker used by the hated DeBeers to mine for diamonds off the coast of Africa or you could have something something analagous to dredging barges, which could be used to clear safe passages into a planetary system and recover valuable minerals at the same time. A Merchant Marine just is something I think has a pretty good niche in the SFB Universe.
I dunno. I think most players would regard it as additional targets. Still, could be.
Yes; what you've just described is RPG-level stuff. In SFB, those would be just freighters with varying mixtures of Hull, Cargo, Repair, and Barracks.
How about
When the ssd is printed on the back put;
1. A power allocation sheet already filled in for that ship. This would make it easier for novice players or convention games where some players skills are in dubious states.
2. at the bottom footnotes about special rules for this ship or at least rule number references for these rules.
Just a thought
Maybe we could have rule that defines a special cargo pod that is largely NWO boxes of a sort. It would be a build your own Merchant Services pod rule.
As for Merchant Services perhaps this would be an interesting Prime Directive supplement; Prime Services. This would cover the operations of all the Non-Star Fleet options for careers in space with notes on the variations per empire.
Loren, put the Merchant Services Pod into the R11 topic, please.
Thanks for the feedback. It just seems that just as we are now developing a commercial set of ventures into space, and the existing Merchant Marine is so varied, that pods did not seem to cover the sheer amount of material that might get moved from place to place within the framework of SFB. I would bet on a varied series of ships. However, I can see the points being made that maybe the niche I was thinking about may be a bit too small. I could imagine a mining ship outfitted with a PH-3 for asteroid defense, but having a modified large phaser that could be used with precision drilling capabilities and could be used to surprise a marauder. Things like that. Did not have to be a Q-ship item, but maybe the reverse, where there is an illicit dilithium operation and the protectors happen to be some well known pirate that has special bays in the mining ship for light raiders. I guess I'll head over to see Loren's add to the R11 topic. (I will always be impressed by the ship that took the USS Cole back home, that was a neat trick.)
Hi.
After reading a recent topic over at the new boards, I thought of an area where the Star Fleet Universe might be presented in a new way - while linking to a number of games set in the universe.
Personally, I think the most interesting example of a book series that has not been covered already by an ADB product would be Forge World's series of Imperial Armour books - in particular, the example of the excellent Imperial Armour 3: The Taros Campaign. (See here for page samples.)
That book gives a complete history of a particular campaign (fought between the human Imperium and the alien Tau Empire), covering combat on land, in the skies and in space, as well as high-quality artwork and data on every major unit type which took part in the war. Also, over a dozen linked scenarios - for several game systems - track the war's progress from beginning to end.
Other Imperial Armour books cover other specific conflicts against various foes (and the earlier volumes only covered certain factions' vehicles, with no actual campaign) - but IA3 does it best.
A similar book for the SFU could pick a war (such as the Second Fed-Kzinti War, or the Four Powers' War), or a specific campaign within a larger war (such as Operation Nutcracker or Operation Remus). It could include a full writeup of that campaign, from the events leading to the action, the play-by play of deployments, battles and counter-deployments, and perhaps a few details on renowned characters who were involved in the whole affair.
Also, each significant ship type featured in the campaign would be given a page or two of art and background info (using, for example, the excellent blueprints Neale's been working on).
(The above part could be considered akin to the campaign books written by Osprey Publishing.)
Afterwards, the major events of the campaign would be presented in a series of interlocking scenarios, for various game systems (so, for example, one scenario would use Star Fleet Assault to cover a ground incursion, Prime Directive to flesh out a covert op and either Fed Commander or SFB to show the space combat).
Of course, one thing that ADB has over GW is the presence of Fed and Empire - so along with the interlocking scenarios for the other games, one could present a unique scenario for F&E, allowing the player to fight out the grand sweep of the campaign for themselves.
Depending on a name you like for referring to the series (Star Fleet Campaigns? Future History? Command the Future?) you could then go for specific titles, such as:
The Four Powers' War
The Day of the Eagle
Operation Nutcracker
Operation Remus
The Second Federation-Kzinti War
Operation Unity
or other such scenarios/campaigns.
(One thing to note is that these scenarios could be arranged so as not to overlap in terms of the ship data included - so a 'middle years' Fed scenario - such as the war with the Kzintis - could include art for the likes of the CA, CL etc, while later books would instead have art for the NCLs, NCAs and so forth - and Unity could highlight the CX et al.)
Sound interesting?
Gary