Ideas for an ultra-lite, super-simple strategic-level game

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Federation & Empire: F&E INPUT: F&E Proposals Forum: FOLDER: Product ideas: Ideas for an ultra-lite, super-simple strategic-level game
  Subtopic Posts   Updated
Archive through July 08, 2003  25   07/08 12:35am
Archive through July 08, 2003  25   07/08 08:42pm
Archive through July 13, 2003  25   07/13 07:26pm
Archive through July 14, 2003  25   07/14 07:54pm
Archive through July 17, 2003  25   07/17 11:00pm
Archive through July 21, 2003  25   07/21 05:25pm
Archive through July 27, 2003  25   07/27 02:24pm
Archive through July 29, 2003  25   07/29 09:36pm
Archive through July 31, 2003  25   07/31 02:50pm
Archive through August 06, 2003  25   08/06 07:40pm

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 09:42 pm: Edit

Eric,

Yes. Missed that one. :)


Garth L. Getgen

By Alan Bloniarz (Dread_Pirate) on Thursday, August 07, 2003 - 08:20 pm: Edit

Eric & Garth,

Your map is coming along nicely. A couple of suggestions that may or may not have already been made:

I would like to see a color scheme representing each race rather than the 3-color Fed, Empire, or Neutral.

Also, for aesthetic reasons I kind of like the Hydran territories as Eric drew them. Were you making the change for strategic purposes?

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Thursday, August 07, 2003 - 09:22 pm: Edit

Alan, Yes, I did redo the Hydran for strategic reason. First, the capital should be (in my opinion) right next to the off-maop region. The other thing is I didn't want one region bordering on two enemy regions, as I had on the Hydran/Klingon border.


Garth L. Getgen

By Andrew Wynberg (Awynberg) on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 07:09 am: Edit

(apologies for cross-posting similar emails)

Without wanting to denigrate any of the fantastic work that you gentlemen have already put into your baby...

Hmmm...remind me of the point of this "simple and strategic" game again? Was it something like: plays twenty years of the General War in an afternoon, captures the spirit of the Star Fleet history, put players into the shoes of the supreme commanders, and allows them to make the same wise choices and foolish decisions that the "real" admirals made.

To me, this is a markedly different game to the ones being discussed in this and other folders, all of which seem to revolve around the (admittedly seductive and addictively fun) idea of building and moving individual ships around the galaxy. I wonder if it is because the strategic situation is inherently boring (ie two massive alliances slug it out until a stalemate develops - World War 1, anyone?)

Taking an 'army' perspective on "strategic" games, I'd look for a gaming model that allows players to move fleets into provinces, resolve combat using a single die roll on a combat results table, and use a simple production system.

This allows the players to focus on the big picture, and not micro-manage the war. If you enjoy micro-management, stick to SFB/F&E.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 11:35 pm: Edit

I haven't forgotten about this project ... just that life and work got in the way.

One thing I am thinking that might make it more fun is to keep the very small fleet sizes (as compared to F&E) but use a slightly modified provencial map. This would allow for more "flow" ... more room to maneuver ... instead of just a slug match. With the larger regions I created, you have little choise of where to fight .... with the smaller provences, it would add much more strategy.

I'll be on leave back to Penn. next week -- think I'll pack this and give it a go with my kid brother.


Garth L. Getgen

By David Lang (Dlang) on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 11:39 pm: Edit

Andrew, what size unit would you suggest? you are saying that 3 ship groups are to detailed, there are a lot of missions (bats busting for example) that that's about all you would send?

also remember how small the kzinti/hydran navy's are, if you make the unit grouping to large then they will start out with 1-2 groups and the coalition will be able to attack all the undefended areas with their superior numbers and the alliance won't be able to put up any defense in most places.

By Andrew Wynberg (Awynberg) on Friday, August 22, 2003 - 09:41 am: Edit

David, it's hard to describe the sort of larger unit that I propose in SFB terms, because the Star Fleet History doesn't have much of this detail. I think that it really goes back to the sort of game that you want to design. Most of the games that I play that last say six hours don't have more than about 240 counters (ie a standard magazine game, a la Strategy and Tactics). So I'd take that as my upper limit and design the game around that.

I've seen discussions where a solution is to reduce the number of units in play by 66%, ie from 3,000 counters to 1,000. I'd propose using perhaps at most 10% the number of counters, say 300 total, and calling them fleets / squadrons / whatever. So yes, (off the top of my head) the Kzinti might start with say 15 "fleets" and the Klingons with say 30 and so on. At this level of abstraction I'd suggest that you factor out BATS (maybe by increasing the movement cost of moving into an enemy province for the first time) and just worry about the starbases and major planets. So your Kzinti player with 30 units has a lot less targets to defend.

By David Lang (Dlang) on Saturday, August 23, 2003 - 02:52 am: Edit

The problem isn't the starting fleets, but the fleets after 20+ turns of builds

the klingons start with ~260 ships and the kzinti start with ~130, the lyrans ~120, the hydrans ~90

production on turn 3 is klingon 21 (plus activations), lyrans 11 (plus overbuilds), kzinti 11 (if they can afford them), hydrans 12

it's not uncommon for the kzinti/hydrans to skip building about half their allowance becouse they can't afford them so by turn 20 or so there are a LOT of ships around, and if you group them into groups larger then ~6 you end up with the kzinti/hydrans being unable to build a single unit frequently (and grouping them by 6 would have ~500 counters but eliminate basicly all choice from the small races

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Saturday, August 23, 2003 - 08:07 pm: Edit

David, Agreed. If only for the emotional level of it, I want to keep unit-size = one ship.


Garth L. Getgen

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Saturday, August 23, 2003 - 08:17 pm: Edit

I've been toying with ideas for a block (ala East Front) game of the general war, probably with card-driven mechanics (ala Paths of Glory). Carrier fleets would be expensive to get the first step, cheap or free for subsequent steps; Battle fleets would have a flat cost for each step. Kzinti force pool would be largely carrier, Gorns and Lyrans largely battle, others in various ratios. The Klingons would start with perhaps a dozen blocks in total (each border fleet and the reserves would be a full or near full battle fleet and a weak carrier fleet).

By Andrew Wynberg (Awynberg) on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 06:22 am: Edit

IMHO, my vote for a simple, strategic Star Fleet Universe game would be based on the system Columbia Games used in Pacific Victory. This would mean departing from the one unit = one ship.

By John Pepper (Akula) on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 02:09 pm: Edit

I really like the idea behind this game and I think the best way to get this moved forward would be to have a game with a new map but that used existing F&E counters.

By Bret O'Neal (Fiverdown) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 11:32 pm: Edit

Ok, I got the F&E tooo light bug.

Here is an initial view of the thoughts.
Of course everything is open to suggestion.

Basicly I'm taking F&E counters and using them to make a F&E Axis and Allies
with F&E style rules and I hope Feel. While being playable in a long afternoon.

Rules:

Command Limits. yes, no points, admirals etc.

EW: A scout is a scout, fleets w/o a scout get -1 on all attack dice, if the enemy has a scout.
Bases count as a scout.

Pinning Simplified: I don't think counting SEs fits with an afternoon play game.
soo The presence of Enemy ships/bases in an area requires a screenig force =
to 1 full battle line lead by one of the 3 best command ships in an attacking
force. (normal disclamer for ties) Note this allows 1 FF to block ~10 Se.
Counter note: this allows 25 ships to fly past a SB with 100 defenders and only send
~10 se to the Pinning battle.

Combat is based on a D12 (or divide all ships Compot in 2 and use a d6) each
ship in each side rolls 1 die for each combat round.
Both sides get to allocate/target 1 hit.
The rest is allocated by the person taking the damage.
Mallers allow 1 extra targeted attack per round.
Units with a ComPot > 12 have a crippled side, the rest don't.
Units with a ComPot > 12 have their attaks broken up into units of 8 + leftovers
ex: a K9R with a compot of 13 attacks as an 8 and a 5.
Fighters (except hvy and spec fed....) are broke into groups of 6 as appropiate.
Fighters re-generate for free after combat. Undersized FTR squads still count as a "Ship"
for kills but roll a smaller die for attack.
Drone ships: up to 2 drone ships can be used in each combat. They add their drone factor as
a combat die and can be directed upon for 3 Ship Kills worth of damage.
One ship can be in formation, (not a maller, malling) It takes 2 Ships of dir damage to kill.

Multi ship groups: aka CV groups: Take 1 ship kill for each ship in the Group.
If an entire group is not killed off, the escorts must be replaced either from strat eligable
ships (priority 1), any equivalent hull (priority 2) or next turns construction (priority 3),
The conversion is free but new builds must pay the price now or the un-escorted carrier is
lost.

PDUs are grouped into combat packs of 2 PDU for an attack factor of 6 for each
pair + 2x6 for their fighters. 2 PDU can be attacked as the 1 Dir dam attack a round.

Econ: For every 3 sectors each race can build 1 ship,
off map = 3 Sectors except Fed they are 6.
Minor Planets = 1 sector, Major Planets = 2 Sectors, HW systems are systems of planets.
Klink have no off map areas. need rule for roms or ignore "unscouted systems
This can be any ship on their schedule. Ignore Fighter factors as a part of cost.
Each race can also do 1 Conversion/Turn, 2 for Feds and Klinks, at any SB.
Any Fleet Unit Costs: PDU = 1 ship, MB = 1 Ship, BAT (upgrade) 2 Ship, SB (upgrade) 5 ship
1 Ship equivalent of build fixes 1 Cripple.

Units: Start with Basic F&E and simplify again.
Examples: Maybe too complex. 5-10 types each might be better than 15
Klink Units Available:
E4, F5, F5S, 2FV, D5, 3D5V, MD5, D6, D6M, D6D, TG-A, D7, D7C, C8, 4C8V
Fed Units Available:
FF, 2FV, FFS, DD, SC, NCL, NCD, NSC, 3NVL, CVL, Tug, 3CVS CA, CC, DN, 4CVA
Hydro Units Available:
HN, CU, SC, Kn, Ln, 4UH, TR, HR, 4CV, Rn, DG, Tug, Dg, Rn, LM, LB, Pal, 4ID
production is per schedule: with 2 Substutions/turn to the above available ships/groups,
Zin/Fed can do 2 CV groups a turn.

Initial OOB: Start with F&E 2K & hack around to balance.

Tug Missions: STN, BP/CVP(cost 1 ship to produce/replace), MB, & Base Upgrades

Multi-Base Hex battles
HW planets start with stated PDU's, all planets of multi planet systems are in one fight.
(the distance between planets in a system are irrelevant to warp speed ships)
If attacked and all PDUs are destroyed from a planet, the defender still gets to count it
for ship building purposes.

If a race loses its Capitol it has to wait 6 turns for a new ship yard to be built.
(yes initial ship production occurs at the capitols) During this time 1 FF can be
built and 1 conversion can be done.

The Map is the normal F&E map. No one gets income for disputed providences.
Ships move 6. Free Strat for new builds.

Turn Sequence.
Buy,
Combat move,
Reserve Move,
Combat resolution, (retreat for both sides is an option, no pursuit)
Retrograde,
Strat Move,
Define Reserves,
Collect Income, (at start each race starts with it's initial ship build in the treasury)

By Bret O'Neal (Fiverdown) on Thursday, April 01, 2004 - 10:00 pm: Edit

E ultra light readers digest version


Basicly I'm taking F&E counters and using them to make a F&E Axis and Allies
with F&E style rules and I hope Feel. While being playable in a long afternoon.
I have a 5-6 page write up, here is the basics.

Victory conditions:
Either all except one capitol of a side is captured or one side destroyes 14 more SBs than the other side. New construction SBs only count if they are more than 2 away from an existing SB of the same or allied race.

Coalation move first then Alliance, my initial thought is to have all races go on turn 1.

Ships available; FF, CW, CA, DN + Specality and Infrastructure units, Lyran get DW.

Specality ships:
Mallers allow the attacker a first strike attack.
Tugs can do the following
Transport up to 3 economic points between capitols
Set up/Break Down a Mobile Base
Upgrade a Mobile base to a Battle Station
Convert a Battle Station to a Star Base
Add a PDU to a planet
Act as a Battle Tug
Drone Bombardment ships that add attacks to a fleet with out actually being in the battle hex.
Carriers; carry fighters into combat. Fighters are expendable quickly replaced attrition units.

Infrastructure units are: PDU, BAT ,SB

Sequence Of Play
Economic Phase
Operations move
Allocate Resv (active player(s))
Reserve Move (defending player)
Combat resolution
Retrograde
Collect Income

Each point of economy can produce 1 ship from the races respective build schedule.
At the end of each turn the active races collects income = 1/3 the number of providences it controls. Small planets count as a providence. Large planets count as 2. Each races HW (shown as a star on the map) is a dense collection of planets and contributes the HW amount (calc via F&E2K book). Providences with the ships from 2 opposing races provide economy to neither race.

Screening:
Space is vast, the presence of opponent units in a hex does not preclude your fleet leaving a screening force and flying fight by. The size of the screening force depends on what is in the hex you are trying to get past. If it is a base or planet (with no ships present) 3 ships are required to be left in the hex. If there is a Ship in the Hex, a fleet of 10 ships must be left behind.
Note this allows a force of 24 ships to pass by a fleet of 100 by leaving 10 ships behind (who die). This also allows 1 FF to Stop a Fleet of 10 ships in its tracks. If you are moving a fleet through a hex where a previsous fleet left a screening force the second fleet does not have to leave another screeing force.


Combat general
Roll a D12 for each ship, if the number is <= the ships combat factor it is a hit.

Fighters are grouped into units of 6 for hit rolls and taking damage.
units with more than 12 compot are broken into 6s + leftovers. Ex SB is 6 attacks at 6, a Zin 3CV is 3x6, + another 6 for the ftrs.
PDUs are grouped into combat packs of 2 PDU for an attack factor of 6 for each
pair + 2x6 for their fighters.

All forces from both sides shoot each round. Person taking the casulities decides which unit dies.
Ships or ship groups with 10 (or more) attack factors (exception mallers) have a crippled side, rest of the units die in 1 hit.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 05:14 pm: Edit

How about removing 'fighters' per say and go with a tougher carrier counter. The idea would be to combine the units (ftrs/cv) into one thing.

Damage would be an all-or-nothing kind of thing yet would retain the toughness of the Carrier.

You guys can run with this bt it seems to me it would lighten up some of the issues we currently have.

Instead of: CV (6)10 / (3)5 (Potential damage points absorbed 6+10+5 = 21)
You'd have CV 14 / 7 (Potential damage points absorbed 14+7 = 21)


You could take away the escort bonus but require the damage to be on the entire number (ftrs included) for Directed Damage. Weakens the offensive punch of the CV a bit but requiring the destruction of 2/3 of its fighters gives it some staying power.

Just a thought...

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 02:41 pm: Edit

Hi guys,


Now that FC has been released, and we have a better idea about the possibilities involved in a future 'new' system (in terms of cards, panels and rules), I have thought of a few ideas which might be useful for the Klingon and Romulan Invasion core boxes.

(I had originally posted these here, but I'm putting them here for the regulars to check out!)

I can start a new thread here (Klingon Invasion ideas thread, perhaps?) if this one is unsuitable.


--------


Well, I've been thinking that when the time comes to develop the new system, the focus should be on tying it into the view of the universe that we see in Fed Commander, when it comes to ship types and what have you.

Please note these are just my own thoughts on the matter, that's it!

First suggestion - keep the same ship types seen in FC (either those we know are or will make the leap, or whatever new ships cross over between now and the time the new system arrives). Dreadnoughts, cruisers, destroyers, frigates, SBs, etc.

The new engine could be treated as a 'scenario generator' for FC - if the players wished it, they could fight a campaign with both strategic and tactical aspects (a la Medieval 2: Total War).

If fighters are kept out of FC for the foreseeable future, then they should be kept out of this too. If we have carrier groups in this game and not in FC, it'll either force the issue in FC where it might not be ideal, or throw off players who want to be able to use FC to tackle that starbase assault or fleet bust-up (Or pirate raid, for that matter).

Funnily enough, despite the working title I cooked up for the new game, the game could be made to cover the Middle Years wars quite easily - as for much of that period the Hydrans were alone in using warp-powered fighters, and there weren't a lot of historical variants anyway...


Second suggestion - factor in random monster encounters (or, if not including an Orion player, random commerce raids). Those Juggernaut and Space Dragon cards need not be left lying around, and there are a lot of Cartels out there loooking to get a five-finger discount on hard-earned empires' credits!


Third suggestion - use the same kind of double-sided map panels seen in FC to rep the Octant.

The 'normal' size map would have enough panels to equate to each of the two Fed and Empire maps (with a little modification to make the two theatres fit together smoothly - which the F&E maps do not do!) and would look pretty much like your average Fed and Empire map.

For the Klingon Invasion core box, the map panels would be laid out in portrait mode (P), like so:

P P P
P P P

Panel 1 would include the Lyrans, the WYN Cluster, and pieces of Klingon and Kzinti space, Panel 6 would include parts of Fed space, the Tholian Holdfast and the Orion Enclave, and so on.

Since there are more hexes on the panels than on the maps proper, that leaves space over for the kind of ancillary information we see on current F&E maps.

The 'megahex' map could be either a more abstracted map of the Octant... or perhaps a 'close-up' of the central fronts of each theatre.

Think of the map of the Klingon and Romulan borders in the FC rulebooks - they are rotated 90* from what we might be used to seeing in 'traditional' maps of the Octant.

The map panels would be laid out in landscape (L), to represent a closeup of the 'central front' - in this case, the Fed-Klingon border:

L L L
L L L

the Central Front.

Note that this leaves each of the races in KB on the map in KI - the corresponding 1" map in RA would again match the races in RB.

Also note that the above image is a rough crop to give a general idea of what I mean - sorry if it's not as clear as it should be!


So, the large hex sides give you the 'Klingon Invasion' and 'Romulan Invasion' to match the core titles!


And here's a thought - additional map panels including ISC, Lyran and Hydran space in 1" scale could be included in packs which feature these races (I'm imagining a Lyran-Hydran and ISC-Andro pairing), and that the smaller hex facings of the panels would assemble to form a map of the Lesser Magellanic Cloud, for Operation Unity, or for adding in the Baduvai et al!

I quite like that idea, actually...


(And of course, this would allow for Megahex counters on one side, and regular-sixed counters on the other.)


Fourth suggestion - Give each empire FC-style laminated cards for marking up fleet compositions, battle groups - and, most importantly, for tallying up (and spending) economic points!

Also, include an FC-style 'cheat sheet' with combat resolution tables and other such items.


Fifth suggestion - Treat late war ship types and races (X-ships, BBs, Seltorians, Neo-Tholians etc) and non-front line ships (National Guard, Police and more Orion ships) as material for expansions, as seen in FC.

For example, as TA will give us Neo-Tholians and Selts for FC, so a future expansion for GW could include the same ship types, along with specific 'cards' for the 312th and the Hive Ship rules (might need to port the Hive into FC, too...)

Or another expansion could plug the gaps left in peacetime (or make things more interesting in war) by extrapolating the need to keep the local Orion Cartels from running the show!


Sixth suggestion - encourage a healthy bout of diplomacy between the factions involved, in war and peace.

Since it's quite likely players may want to play free campaigns with his system (I may be wrong with this, but gamers used to the likes of Total War might) it should be assumed that options exist for players to haggle and negotiate without simply declaring war.

Since turns would hopefully take less time in such a system, more time could be left to let players practice 'jaw-jaw', as well as 'war-war'!


I have to say, this kind of game is what I have been waiting to play for about as long as I've known about the SFU - I love games like the Total War series, Imperial Glory (a Napoleonic-era TW ripoff - the campaign system is great in it, plus it's available on Mac OS X. If you have an Intel mac, you can still run the TW games if you use Boot Camp to install Windows on a disk partition, though.) and what have you - and the option to tie it into FC makes the idea even better.

I know it'll be a long time to wait to see the game, but all the same I look forward to it - the SFU game I really want to play!


---------------

After thinking about this for a while, and drawing a few rough sketches on paper while waiting for a doctor's appointment, I figured that if the first six panels made up the Eastern Theatre circa Y168 on the 'F&E' side, and the Central Front of Y171 on the 1" side, and the follow-on maps in the Romulan box mirrored this, you would need twelve 1" panels to complete a map of the entire Octant.

So, the remaining twelve could be packaged in supplements like so:

Lyran-Hydran supplement - 3 panels

1" side - Lyran Empire, Hydran Kingdom
F&E side - the 3 RTN routes leading to the LMC

Late War book (Seltorians, X-ships etc) - 3 panels

1" side - the western parts of Klingon and Kzinti territory
F&E side - the Y185 borders in the western theatre (showing the hex supplying the Hive Ship, as well as Vudar space)

Depending on how the map is laid out the WYN Cluster and LDR could end up on either set.

ISC + Andro book - 6 panels

1" side - The Interstellar Concordium, eastern Romulan and Gorn space
F&E side - a map of the LMC (with a small 'province' off to the corner, beyond the Neutral Worlds, indicating M31, for Andro players to work out RTN-based reinforcements from the home galaxy)


Gary

By Mike Ptak (Norsehound) on Wednesday, May 23, 2007 - 06:27 pm: Edit

Thinking about the SFU recently and came across my game of F&E. After some thought I remembered how confused my friends were about the game, but figured "hey, some of the concepts were cool" and started to hammer out ideas to make rules for F&E which included concepts I liked and the peices that were provided.

One idea I've had was to have ships operate in 'squadrons'. A ship's command rating determines how many ships it can have in a squadron in a given battle- and battles can have up to three squadrons participating. Restrictions on ships in formation are still present (maulers need two non-maulers to function).

Basicly, I liked the idea of managing fleets and converting them into variants, but I knew that complicated rules like supply routes and the various neuances would just bog down gameplay and bore my friends. The new rules Ideas I'm trying to illustrate preserve some of the things I think are neat while simplifying other elements.

More, if there's interest :)

By Mike Curtis (Nashvillen) on Wednesday, May 23, 2007 - 07:28 pm: Edit

Why reinvent the wheel?

By Mike Ptak (Norsehound) on Thursday, May 24, 2007 - 02:07 am: Edit

Because this wheel needs a full transmission in order to run. I want to enjoy F&E with my friends, not confuse them and confound them with the rules presented. We've played Risk, Axis and Allies, and other games of this caliber. My friends and I have been purplexed and daunted by F&E and SFB.

And I want to be able to play my games in an evening's sitting- not over the span of a week. To do this means cutting down on rules and complexity... though I still want to use the materials provided by Basic F&E to make an enjoyable game.

By Larry E. Ramey (Hydrajak) on Thursday, May 24, 2007 - 01:09 pm: Edit

Well,

I have wanted Op-Level F&E for about 10 years.

What I got was Fed Commander.

The market has apparently spoken though because FedCom sells well.

By Mike Ptak (Norsehound) on Thursday, May 24, 2007 - 05:20 pm: Edit

According to SVC though, he's doing Klingon/Romulan invasion without input or disucssion and that it might come about sometime in the next three years.

I don't have a doubt it will be an enjoyable game when it's released, but I kinda would like to have some use for my F&E components that I bought, and I'd like to play with my friends this game over the summer.

I've thought about investing in FC, but I don't have the funds ATM to do so.

By Mike Ptak (Norsehound) on Friday, May 25, 2007 - 06:27 pm: Edit

Another idea: cutting back construction

Rather than have a rigid system of what one can build, I envisioned instead "major shipyards" and "minor shipyards". Each can build, repair, or refit large ships or small ships, respectively.

For example, a major shipyard can refit a Cruiser, build a BC, or repair a CC. DNs, and Battleships, are also constructed at major yards. Mobile starbases are also.

Minor yards are for frigates, destroyers, and lesser. I haven't thought about fighters or fighter factors yet and how they'd be handled- just focusing on ships for now.

The economy is also simplified. Rather than use percentages, each planet, territory, and capital generates an income based on what standing the current nation is on (Peace, LimWar, TotWar).

For example, nations at peace produce (province/planetMinor/PlanetMajor/cap), 0/1/3/5. This reflects that most of the economy is geared for peacetime production and military spending is more of a luxury and safeguard than a concern. At wartime, it's 2/3/5/10.

I haven't balanced out the total spending of the nations so far (or the total ComPot of all forces deployed initially), but these are just ideas.

By Joe Stevenson (Alligator) on Friday, May 25, 2007 - 06:31 pm: Edit

Mike,

I don't see that as less complex for construction. In fact, it is quite a bit more complicated.

Also, we already have major and minor slipways, just as you describe. We don't have refits like SFB; these are behind the scenes. We have conversions from the base hull to variant types, but that is not a refit.

As for econ, your result is the same, but it would take MORE time to calculated. I can multiply a number by another number on a calculator in 3 seconds. In your version, you have have to add a different set of values, which you must keep straight.

Nothing you said was bad..... just in no way did it represent a scaling back or simplification

By Mike Ptak (Norsehound) on Friday, May 25, 2007 - 06:45 pm: Edit

my economy model was trying to accomplish the same thing risk does: just add. Like in risk we just count territories.

It's just ideas at this point, but as I said I'm trying to make this as simple as risk or A&A- but not borrowing the rules from said games. I suppose I can stick with the economy model present in F&E (sans the supply system, unless I can re-write the rules), so long as I can grasp it in a paragraph or two and not be daunted/lost in the rules.

because it seems to me that the rules were written to cover every single loophole and contingency. For the sake of expiedience some things have to be changed/removed, or rewritten so that they are easier to understand and don't confuse the reader.

I considered conversions 'refits'- so they are one and the same. And be aware that I only have the base version of F&E (2000 edition), so I don't have access to the rules presented in other expansions. I have seen slipways mentioned on an official download, and I thought the 'major' and 'minor' shipyard idea would be a way to simply stick the desired builds/modifications on this sheet and be done with it- the only restriction being how many yards are available for what size of ship (instead of limitations on a yearly basis by the OoB).

I suppose it's worth mentioning that I am not trying to recreate the GW specificly as a simulation. The objective of this is a free game with the possibilty of recreating the GW, but not in as exact detail as real F&E. Just SFU Strategic.

By Joe Stevenson (Alligator) on Friday, May 25, 2007 - 07:22 pm: Edit

"my economy model was trying to accomplish the same thing risk does: just add."

We do that now. But your way requires 3 separate tables of figures to use to do that addition; the current way requires 3 seconds on the calculator


"the only restriction being how many yards are available for what size of ship (instead of limitations on a yearly basis by the OoB). "

That part would be fine, except for a few noted exceptions (maulers and such)


Add a Message


This is a private posting area. A valid username and password combination is required to post messages to this discussion.
Username:  
Password:

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