SVC,

With the ability to print modules inhouse, what about releasing the sublight rules as a mail order only product?

You could gauge the success, and if the response is favorable, it might allow you to open it up for release in the retail market.

Even better, since most people interested in the module will already have SFB's you need not include any counters.... just the rules with a parts list for anyone who wants to order maps or counter sheets from other products.

Another reason to consider it, is the chance to explain how some races built the fleets of ships that the did...namely the Fed sublight cruisers that became the ubiquitous CL class, the Romulan eagles and the Gorn sub light battle ships.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, November 06, 2007 - 11:56 pm: Edit

I think module Q would be cool...but I suspect the correct rules (especially integration of superluminal units with sublight units) have yet to actually be written.

By Andy Palmer (Andypalmer) on Wednesday, November 07, 2007 - 08:25 am: Edit

MJC. Module Q would be sublight vs. sublight. Module Y already contains the rules for sublight vs. Warp capable.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, November 07, 2007 - 10:10 am: Edit

We can do anything; we cannot do everything.

Module Q would have to be designed. Mail order only products tend to be things that got done in the normal course of doing business and a few people wanted copies. The investment in design time on Q would make mail order a less viable option than retail sales, and retail sales wouldn't pay for the effort.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, November 07, 2007 - 01:12 pm: Edit

SVC:

pity.

its the kind of thing that might come up in GURPS PD more often than a SFBs.

Thanks for answering the question.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, November 07, 2007 - 01:50 pm: Edit

I don't really see why it would come up in PD.

There are always more things that CAN be done than there is time to do them, and we cannot afford to do things only a few people want (unless there is some other reason to do the thing in question).

For example, I had to do a scenario index for FC just to keep from going crazy as people submitted SFB conversions we had already published. If somebody wanted to buy a hard copy of that, we could do it (we posted it for free instead) but only because the "work" to "create" the document had already been done for some other reason.

By Mike Strain (Evilmike) on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 - 07:01 pm: Edit

Any thought of using Full Thrust as the base system for Mod Q?

As with Starmada, you have the advantage of a large (relatively) player base, a simple game engine, and a ship design system (which could be ignored for SFB, of course).

And the FT rules are free.

Or is Squadron Strike being considered?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 - 11:11 am: Edit

No real thought of that, but if you want to email whoever does full thrust and ask them if they're interested in emailing me, knock yourself out.

Squadron Strike is new, has no real following as of yet (i.e., it doesn't bring any sigificant number of new customers to the table), and if it's Ken's 3d system, it's just too complicated (even if it's the best 3d system ever, which it is) to gain any significant number of players (due to the nature of the beast, 3d is just by definition about 27 times as complex as 2d). That said, Ken has said he wants to do a deal to print such a product, and we have said we'd talk to him about it when I'm not so buried in backlog.

By Mike Strain (Evilmike) on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 - 10:51 pm: Edit

Jon Tuffley (the owner of Ground Zero Games and creator of Full Thrust) can be reached as follows:

http://www.groundzerogames.net/index.php?option=com_contact&task=view&contact_id=1&Itemid=3

I figure since this relates to SFB, you might want to be the one to send him a 'Hi, how are ya'.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 09:35 am: Edit

This project blipped on the radar again when Bill S asked about it.

1. It is a 35 year old idea that never displayed a market potential worth pursuing.

2. I don't hate the product. It was my idea back then. But I don't see it selling enough copies to be worth the bother.

3. Give the minuscule marketing potential, no way am I gonna work on it. That's just life. I don't get to work on stuff that won't sell.

4. If somebody can do it in a way that can be printed as a PDF or POD with no counters, I will market it. But as ADB will have to make sure it works, your draft had better be really finished and professionally written. If I read the first page and find typos, universe violations, rules that make no sense, incomplete sentences, unanswered questions, etc, you get it back and can try again. If you want to pay for the counters, ok. You will get a royalty on the product.

5. I doubt any other company would be interested, but if you talk to one about it tell them we cannot sub license it to the. We have to do the marketing and sales. I am not going to contact another company but would talk to them if they contact me.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 10:37 am: Edit

Might it be better to wait until another game engine (such as Starmada, A Call to Arms, or some other such system) had an opening for this scale of combat, rather than pursuing it in SFB directly?

If the scale was more "zoomed-in" than we see with the tactical warp-based systems, I could see an alternate game engine (or even a 3D combat system) as being a better fit for this technology level. Not least since many of the other game engines have been used for (or were originally built around) non-SFU settings which focus on sublight combat.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 11:47 am: Edit

It won't sell in any system so ... whatever somebody does. I'm not going to do it myself. Leanna and Jean would kill me for spending time on this instead of Tribbles or KRAG or Starship Builder.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 11:58 am: Edit

I moved SUBLIGHT out of SFB to "other" projects.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 12:55 pm: Edit

Will it not sell because of the setting or because it's sublight? Or something else?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 01:15 pm: Edit

Not sure, doesn't really matter. It comes in so far down on the polls that next to last place is in the distance. From when it first showed up on the radar, there was never any market for it. I pushed for years, back when there were 25 tims as many active players, and nothing. No support, no interest.

Not worried. We have plenty of ideas and not every idea will sell.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 01:21 pm: Edit

25 times as many active players???

Holy crap. What happened to them all?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 01:29 pm: Edit

Moved on, got married, whatever.

25 is a guess. Could be 10, could be 33.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 07:04 pm: Edit

I think the title "Sub-Light Battles" subliminally suggests a less than exciting product (even though it's always been toward the top of my list). The prefix "sub" suggests a game that is inferior in some way to the one you could be playing. Also, little background has been published for the sub-light era (nothing to whet our curiosity) and most of the ships and weapons published to date are just watered down versions of stuff already in the game (and no longer match the current game background).

I think a more operatic title (“Dawn of Empires”, “Conquest of the Stars” or “The Great Romulan War”) would be a good starting point but what would really help would be some preview material to prove that this era is exciting on its own merits and is not just a “dumbed down” version of the “real” game. Module Y1 was a product that far exceeded my expectations introducing new rules, weapons, empires and a huge expansion of the timeline that made the Early Years distinct as an era. I think a preview or teaser along those lines would help players envision Module Q as an exciting product and attract more interest.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 07:35 pm: Edit

Perhaps a more manageable way to go about things would be to focus on each of the regional theatres of conflict in the Alpha Octant one at a time.

One could start by either looking "west" and tackling the rise of the Klingon and Lyran empires (and their gradual entanglements with the Hydrans and Kzintis); by covering the two Romulan fronts (Gorn/Paravian/Romulan and Fed/Orion/Romulan); or by looking at the pre-ISC Resource World conflicts.

(The currently-published non-Alpha settings have relatively few avenues for sublight conflict; but there was the "pre-Mæsron" Vulpa-Wallimi Colonial War in Omega, and reported struggles between the Imperium and Frigians in Triangulum's non-tactical-warp era.)


I'm not 100% sure if the sublight ships of the five pre-ISC planets looked the same from the outside as the "warp-driven" hulls you see in Module Y2 and Y3; unlike in other parts of Alpha, the W-series hulls were technically classed as new builds (since the very first tactical warp-powered ships in that region had no "warp-class" weapons). But if they did look the same, one would have a further venue for the relevant Metal Express ships (which you can see by running a search there for "star fleet battles") to be made use of already.

And speaking of Metal Express, the Terran hulls in Module Y2 are mostly drawn from that same mini line. Combine those with the sublight Terran CL and DD, and you have a battle line of currently-available miniatures to put on the table against an array of Romulan armorclads.


That said, one issue may be to figure out which weapons have been mentioned as existing already, and which may need to be worked out from scratch.

Lasers and atomic missiles are presented in "standard" SFB scale in Module Y1; while Paravian quantum blasters are mentioned, but not statted there. Can anyone remember any others?

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 07:53 pm: Edit

Gary:

For this product to have any chance of ever being published it needs to have the broadest appeal possible. That means a focus on the most popular empires (Klingons, Romulans and Federation) which is all you really need for some sort of Captain's Log preview.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 08:10 pm: Edit

For playtest purposes, I'm not so sure.


Since there are minis available to support Terran and Romulan fleets already, I'd argue that they should be the first two forces looked at in whatever game engine would be used to handle this era of combat. (Much as I would look forward to the pre-ISC factions, personally...)

Bear in mind that the Federation of this era has no unified Star Fleet to use as a base line. The Terrans would be joined at the front lines by the Vulcans (who would have phaser-1s and special sensors already), Andorians, Rigellians, and Alpha-Centaurans (and possibly the Martians?) - not counting the "wild card" provided by the Orion Enclave.

So even a file focused on the First Fed-Romulan War would have a lot to get through, before one decided whether or not to add in anyone else (like the Gorns and Paravians, who at least have a connection to the Romulans of this time period).


I think of how Federation Commander and Starmada were anchored around two different adversary empires; the Klingons on the one side, and the Romulans on the other, with batches of new empires added in a few at a time. Only in this case, the Klingons could be used to headline a "dawn of the Four Powers" (or Five Powers, if counting the sublight Carnivons) file in their own right, while the five pre-ISC factions could be handled as a single batch later on.


Between the Terran QDN, QCA, QCL, QDD, and QFF, plus the Romulan Q-series Vulture, Warbird, Hawk, and Snipe, plus whatever "mission variants" may be useful for that era, one would have enough to get the ball rolling for playtest purposes.

Once the game - whatever way it ends up being - is shown to work with those two, other factions could be built into it over time, in whatever order was deemed most appropriate by then.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 09:00 pm: Edit

If I were to write the product, I would definitely start with Klingons, Romulans and Federation, and try to add the classic races (Gorns and Kzinti). Omegans? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

No.

Don't get me wrong, I find the Omega quadrant quite interesting, but working on them before actually having a basic Sub-Light Battles product is quite the case of putting the cart before the horse.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 09:04 pm: Edit

As a first expansion (assuming such a thing ever happened), I'd put in Hydrans and Lyrans and MAYBE some of the Fed members and Carnivons/Paravians, assuming that the timeline supports that (not sure if it does). Or Borak/Peladine, I guess, if those empires actually had an official product by that point.

Michael Calhoon and I have in the past tossed ideas back and forth about a sub-light game, we have at least a little interest. Of course that was 15 years ago or something. o_O.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 09:28 pm: Edit

I didn't say anything about starting with a non-Alpha setting. Indeed, even in Alpha, I said that the pre-ISC factions (which are among the few in this era to acually have miniatures available for them to use) would have to wait their turn.


While I still think it would be best to stick with the Terrans and Romulans as the first two factions to use when testing the game system itself, perhaps a way to look at what should, or should not, join them ought to be collected into batches based on who was fighting who at his point in the historical timeline. That way, depending on how many ships could go into the first module (which is a whole other matter to resolve, and may vary widely depending on which game engine is used to present this era in), there'd be a relatively logical means of letting each batch of rivals duke it out.


Batch 1 would involve the Federation (Terrans, Vulcans, Andorians, Rigellians, Alpha-Centaurans, and possibly Martians), Orions, and Romulans.

Batch 2 would be the Gorns and Paravians, since they are historically linked to the first batch via the Romulans (if not directly with one another).

Batch 3 would be the western powers: Klingons (to include their Old King ships as well as the first "home-built" designs), Kzintis, Lyrans, Hydrans, Carnivons, and maybe some of the minor factions scattered around (Vudar, Borak, Peladine).

Batch 4 would be the five pre-ISC fleets (Korlivilar, Pronhoulites, Q'naabians, Rovillians, and Veltressai).

Depending in how many ships each group would need to offer the minimum needed to be viable (if not campaign compatible), the question of which, if any, batches to offer in the first volume would be up for question.

Perhaps one could only fit batches 1 and 2 in a single book, while 3 and 4 could go in the follow-up (if there was demand for it). Batches 1 and 3 might be too much to do all at once, and might take some of the shine off of a second module.

(And again, since there is no contact between the "west", "centre", or "east" in this time period, I don't see a reason why the Federation and Klingons - who don't make First Contact until Y85* - need to be in the same file. If FC and Starmada can survive dividing the "TV empires" into different core products, so can this project.)


But of course, if a viable game engine for such a project can't be agreed upon, the above ideas would be pretty much moot in any case...


*The Vulcans had records of the Klingon species they had gathered through their limited contact with the Old Kings, but had no idea about the rise of the Empire as a star-faring entity until much later.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - 09:54 pm: Edit

Well, if I write it, I won't do that.

If you write it, go ahead and do what you think best. :p