Archive through February 12, 2014
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Federation & Empire: F&E COMPUTER PROJECTS: F&E Cyberboard Development: Archive through February 12, 2014
By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Thursday, January 30, 2014 - 06:22 pm: Edit

Eh, I wrote the above while I was away from my computer.
It's Gathering Winds, not Eastern War.
So, to say correctly...

I am combining 601.0 "The Wind" with 624.0 "Gathering Winds" to be able to play the two scenarios simultaneously since the ISC are not deployed in "The Wind" scenario file. Anyone interested in that combined scenario, please email me.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, January 30, 2014 - 07:08 pm: Edit

You're just doing turns 1-6?

With two players, what would each player control? If you intended to follow up with the full general war, there would be a conflict of interest, as whoever controlled the Romulan/Gorn forces would be either the alliance or coalition player.

The Gathering Winds does have some problems (can't send 8 survey ships, not clear who goes first, cant build MB under a peacetime economy...) that would have to be resolved.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 07:33 am: Edit

Quote:

You're just doing turns 1-6?


Just setting up the board for turn one, just like the current 601 gsn file is set up for turn 1 of "The Wind". (I think 624 runs for 9 turns, if I'm not mistaken.)

Quote:

With two players, what would each player control? If you intended to follow up with the full general war, there would be a conflict of interest, as whoever controlled the Romulan/Gorn forces would be either the alliance or coalition player.


I agree that there definitely is a conflict of interest there. But I'd like to think that the ISC player (whether s/he be Alliance or Coalition in 601.0) would focus on the objectives at hand, and the Gorn/Romulan player would do likewise.
If you are accustomed to playing with people who don't play fairly or seek to win at all costs, I can see why this would be a pretty big concern.

Quote:

The Gathering Winds does have some problems (can't send 8 survey ships, not clear who goes first, cant build MB under a peacetime economy...) that would have to be resolved.


Right. There probably should be some extra items listed in (624.27) to address the first and last items. I always assumed it's the ISC that goes first, since they are the initiators of their expansion and the Gorns/Romulans have no reason to press eastward. (I'm not sure where the proper forum is to address those things, but I think they can be resolved by two experienced players using some common sense.)

Regardless of the mechanics of the scenario itself, the board still needs to be set up, and that's what I'm talking about with the .gsn file.
If you are saying, "Nah, not interested because I can't see a reason to play 624 concurrently with 601 because of X, Y, and Z" then you present an argument that can't be refuted...you simply aren't interested.
But if you are interested and can make it work for you and your gaming group, then I have the .gsn file set up to accommodate that.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 04:42 pm: Edit

I'm interested in playing it with you Randy.

Please pick a game name and post it on the Reports From the Front and we can get started.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 04:50 pm: Edit

Are you ok with it taking a really REALLY long time, as I'm involved in a SFB tournament (which I probably will be eliminated quickly because I suck at tournaments), playing in two campaigns, and GMing one F&E/SFB campaign?

Since 624 takes 9 turns, did you want to play both 601 and 602, or just keep going afterwards?

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 04:54 pm: Edit

Playing both 601 and 602 with 624 is fine.

I would prefer to play as the alliance + ISC.

I don't mind a slow running game, but I advise against letting it get TOO slow, as it's easier to remember what's going on if you dont take more than a few days between emails.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 04:57 pm: Edit

Well, I can only play on the weekends, and most of March I will be gone.
I'll email you the .gsn file when I'm done, which should be sometime this weekend.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 05:07 pm: Edit

Ok.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 05:11 pm: Edit

Quote:

can't send 8 survey ships



I thought you only had to send 4?

The Y168 OOB has 4 SRs out there already, and an SR built in each of the Spring turns still allows for scouts to be built in the Fall turns so long as it (the Spring SR) is immediately sent to the Distant Zone.

With four Spring turns to go through, that would allow the ISC to get the number of off-map SRs up to the 8 they have in the Ninth Fleet as of their Y186 OOB.

Unless there needs to be an errata line item clarifying (624.54). If you build SRs in both the Spring and Fall turns, do you get to keep the fall SRs as battle scouts? Or is the intent of the rule to have it so that no more than 8 SRs can be out in the Distant Zone overall?

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 08:02 pm: Edit

SRs are limited to one per year by rule (542.11). They also count against the scout limit under (624.3). If you send the SR off map on the turn you build it, e.g. Spring Y169, then you can build a scout in the Fall of Y169.

ISC SR's are limited to 8 Max in service.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 08:07 pm: Edit

Thomas, third sentence is not quite 100% true. You can build a SR and then convert other scouts. Or build a scout and convert a SR. In either case you can have a scout and send a SR offmap in the same turn. But yes you can only build one SR per year regardless and SRs count against the scout build limit.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 08:11 pm: Edit

Thomas:

Thanks for the clarification. (So the ISC can still get all 8 SRs in play by scenario's end.)

Ted:

In this case, the note on Scouts in (624.43) limits ISC scout production in that particular scenario to one per year by any means, with the specific exception of allowing them to build an SR in the Spring (if they send it off-map right away) and a scout in the Fall.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Friday, January 31, 2014 - 08:21 pm: Edit

Correct. The building of scouts is limited to one per year. Survey Ships count against the Scout limit. The exception is that if the survey ship is sent off map, you haven't used your once per year scout build.

The trade off is that you give up a CL hull to build the SR to get the bonus points for the victory conditions.

Ted, yes you could do crazy things like that, but keep in mind the ISC economy is on a peace time budget and not even a full 50% of their income in Driving Winds. They have a lot of things to pay for that are related to victory points, and that is where they will need to spend their money.

By Andrew Bruno (Admeeril) on Saturday, February 01, 2014 - 07:10 pm: Edit

Silly question:

Where does one find the capital charts & battle boards on CB?

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, February 01, 2014 - 07:18 pm: Edit

Left-click the game project tab and it has a list of those and other interesting things.

By Andrew Bruno (Admeeril) on Saturday, February 01, 2014 - 08:33 pm: Edit

Apologies for my ignorance, but I do not see a "game project tab" when viewing a CB scenario map. :(

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, February 01, 2014 - 08:48 pm: Edit

In The Wind scenario for the new Cyberboard files, the Federation 1st Fleet seems to be missing 3FF and 1 CMC.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, February 02, 2014 - 10:40 am: Edit

The tabs are near the bottom of the window not at the top like internet browser tabs are. You may to scroll the tabs to the left to find the game project tab which is always the left most tab.

By Pete DiMitri (Petercool) on Sunday, February 02, 2014 - 04:59 pm: Edit

Survey Ships don't count against scout limit according to FEDS

By Mike Parker (Protagoras) on Tuesday, February 04, 2014 - 12:12 pm: Edit

The Wind Scenario for the new Cyberboard files. The Kzinti Count's Fleet has a DIPLOMAT instead of an ADMIRAL included in its roster.

By Andrew Bruno (Admeeril) on Wednesday, February 05, 2014 - 05:17 pm: Edit

Thanks Thomas. :)

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Thursday, February 06, 2014 - 12:18 am: Edit

Checking in...Thanks guys for the feedback on the scenarios. Keep it coming. Oh and I don't mind you doting over the box a bit either.

Remember if you take the time to build a published scenario send it to me so I can have someone check it and include it in a second folder of scenarios. This is an awesome way to get to know where stuff is within the gamebox. It is also a great way for you to test the box to see if it could use more of something.

Anything we do not already have is available for you to build. I would suggest calling it out here on the BBS before you sink too much time into it so two of you don;t build the same one.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, February 06, 2014 - 07:38 am: Edit

Lar, you can cut the number of KDRs and variants of them down to 10 each. Technically we only need 3, but the MSY rules do allow for some more.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - 03:16 pm: Edit

NOTICE TO CYBERBOARD USERS:

The Seltorian (CL#45) and LDR (CL#46) Depot Level Repair Tracks do not match those on the Belligerent Depot Repair. Use the ones in the appropriate Captain's Log until an update is published.

The Vudar (CL#47) tracks will be added in the next update as well.

Lar is aware of these issues.

We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause our fellow F&E fans.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - 08:14 pm: Edit

Noted.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation