Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through June 08, 2003	25		06/08 10:03pm
	Archive through June 13, 2003	25		06/13 10:01am

Well, if you all want to exert a great deal of energy, there's still the job of factoring the Peladine ships (both the "real" ships that existed prior to the Lyran takeover, and the conjectural ships that existed only in Lyran simulators).

By Jimi LaForm (Laform) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 10:50 am: Edit

Bring em out Orsini, see what you got =)

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 11:36 am: Edit

That's just it: I haven't factored them. As I've mentioned in other threads, I'm strictly an F&E novice.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 11:40 am: Edit

OK, color me surprised, but it looks like someone else has already tackled the bulk of the Peladine ships:

http://www.geocities.com/tzeentch666/Ship_Database/Docs/pel.htm

'Course, as I'm not an experienced F&E veteran, I can't say with any conviction whether these factors are on-target or crapola....

By Michael H.Oliver (Mholiver) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 03:11 pm: Edit

So Garth ... I'm a little lost on the meaning of " third party rib-off "... I havd used a few of those ships in F&E and they work well I think.I think it add some units which are odd ball a little but it does add th the game I think.. The one Ship ( Klingon ) I listed work good and the other races can biuld that ship....it add new way of playing the game
For the broad-gorns and hefty-gorns. Used both. Or pick one

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 04:14 pm: Edit

Michael,

There used to be a couple companies that were producing "Made for SFB" modules without ADB/TFG consent. Anything and everything they did is banned from this BBS. The grey area in this are ships from sites such as PHD.... {shrug} Of course, that site provides F&E stats for their designs.


Jessica,

You know, I tried to get Ken Peters (the owner of that site) to come back over to this BBS a couple times, but I don't beleive he has. From what I gather, he and SVC "exchanged words" over something the rest of us would probably consider "silly".... {big heaving SIGH}


Garth L. Getgen

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 04:27 pm: Edit

There is a bunch of stuff under GURPS PD from a Kenneth Peters.

Same person??

By Michael H.Oliver (Mholiver) on Saturday, June 14, 2003 - 10:48 am: Edit

Well the way I see it ,we all chance the rules around our self .... We all come up with house rules and sometime these houserules work better than the rules in the rule book.. We all will like and dislike ideas...lIKE in this case... But we each pick and choose how we play the game with all whom agree in that game .... They work for me and it opened up alot of NEW idea in my playing...Its adds flavor and suprise not knowing what type of ships the other side will biuld..SO you got to think of new ways to attack and defend now for not knowing what is coming up next
All the rules started from a IDEA remember and it has grown into this game, F&E and SFB.. This what MADE this game, all the input that go into all this. I feel all IDEAS good or bad need to be look at as new ideas and we each said what we feel
I feel that not knowing what other will build DOES add flavor to the game.That is something that is missing I think

By Joe Stevenson (Ikv_Sabre) on Saturday, June 14, 2003 - 11:37 am: Edit

"We all come up with house rules and sometime these houserules work better than the rules in the rule book"

If I'm playing an RPG, that's true. But if I play F&E, I play by the rules, even in the rare instances that I disagree with them.

When I do take isssue with the rules, I try and influence the designers to change them. Sometimes it happens, and sometimes it does not. When it doesn't, I get over it and move on.

Of course, people are free to do what they will in their own home games. If you don't get your favorite rule into the game, play with it anyway in your home game, if you like.

The one down-side to playing with house rules is that if you play outside of your normal playing group, you may not find people willing to play with your version of the rules. That either stops the game from happening, causes tension, or at the very least puts you at a disadvantage, since your usual strategies may not work using the official rules. Also, I've noticed that people who play with house rules tend to forget when they write tacnotes that their tactics may not be valid (or as effective) when the official rules are applied.

Joe

By Michael H.Oliver (Mholiver) on Saturday, June 14, 2003 - 02:24 pm: Edit

I totally agree with you Joe... But a house rule does start a life of a game and other are added to it,help it to grow. Just like Star Fleet Battles
It was a idea Steve came up with and start making rules ( house rules, right Steve!). ANd other added more ideas to the game and it grow and grow because of house rules.. In a way these proposals are house rules. A idea try out on paper and on the map. We all chat about the Proposals and added on to them hoping that idea caught on and it grow from that...
SO a idea is a house rules or/and a proposals. And I war wild ideas did help win a battle

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Saturday, June 14, 2003 - 11:15 pm: Edit

Huh?? How'd this topic get turned into a discussion on house rules?? Not that I care ... I just didn't make the left turn at Albuquerque when you all did.

By Michael H.Oliver (Mholiver) on Friday, June 27, 2003 - 05:25 pm: Edit

Well talking about house rules is better rules for drinking......a good discussion ....what do you think Grath

By Michael H.Oliver (Mholiver) on Friday, June 27, 2003 - 05:32 pm: Edit

But I feel that the other sites are fair..Fpage.com...set up info from past books from SFB....And something that happen months or years ago I feel its dead issues now...I feel they do have some good Idea myself....years ago Steve say NO more races will be added to the game ..well It has grown really well, I think SFB with rules to rebuild systems and added new classes types to the games cames from house rules and other writteds.....It has helped the game a lot

By John Pepper (Akula) on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 07:05 pm: Edit

Has anybody ever came up with rules for using the Old Fed CVA in F&E? Maybe this??
CV- 1 in service the alternate design for the CVA, can be built in 171 instead of CVA and a CA, instead you get a CV and the ability to produce a DN. Factors 10(15) command 10.

By Jeff Laikind (J_Laikind) on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 11:51 pm: Edit

There was a big discussion back in June. I'm not sure what happened to the archives, but Steve may have archived the final results off-site.

By John Pepper (Akula) on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 01:44 pm: Edit

Which thread?? This one started in june and discussed the CVN.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 02:04 pm: Edit

Yes, it was argued to DEATH. I would really hate to have to go through it again.

By John Pepper (Akula) on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 03:09 pm: Edit

I don't want to go through it again:-) I just want to know the final result or at least I want to see the argument so I can get the factors right for the ship.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 12:54 pm: Edit

John P. I think that was in the old F&E Proposals topic, which got broken up into the many topics in this category. Since I opened this thread in June, I'd guess the CV(o) discussion was in the April/May timeframe.

However, to answer your question: I don't think there ever WAS a final conscientious for its F&E factors.

Garth L. Getgen

By Jeff Laikind (J_Laikind) on Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 01:45 pm: Edit

There really wasn't a final consensus, that I recall.

It basically boiled down to that the Commander's Ed CV had a lower defense than a DN based CVA.

Some people wanted the reduced fighter squadron from Commander's Ed.

Alliance players were unwilling to have the weaker CV forced on them. But, there was a strong effort to not accept any technobabble that would improve the fighter group to offset the lower defense.

And, since the old version of the CVA was Size Class 2, it may count against DN construction, but there wasn't agreement on that either. The alternative was to count against Fast ship production.

In other words, whatever you and your opponent can agree on is what you have to go with.

By Joe Stevenson (Ikv_Sabre) on Friday, November 28, 2008 - 12:15 pm: Edit

Did all these conjectural units get added (as conjectural)?

If so, this topic should be deleted.