Federation Commander Forum Index Federation Commander
A NEW fast paced board game of starship combat!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FC Evolution
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Federation Commander News
View previous topic :: View next topic  

How much should FC evolve to include?
All the races in the alpha octant (including Andros), but not complicated scout, fighter, and X-rules.
51%
 51%  [ 47 ]
All the races in the alpha octant (excluding Andros), but not fighters, scouts, and X-ships.
10%
 10%  [ 10 ]
X-ships
3%
 3%  [ 3 ]
Scouts
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Fighters for everybody
5%
 5%  [ 5 ]
Everthing SFB has
10%
 10%  [ 10 ]
any combonation of the above. (specify in a post, please)
9%
 9%  [ 9 ]
Omega Octant races
5%
 5%  [ 5 ]
Anything else that SFB has. (specify in a post, please)
3%
 3%  [ 3 ]
Total Votes : 92

Author Message
Ken Redington
Ensign


Joined: 08 Jun 2009
Posts: 12
Location: Detroit MI

PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Things blowing up always make things more exciting.

I do remember a NSM in Balance of Terror Seriously hurting the Big E though. Enough so it could paly dead and suck the Rom back in.

I do not miss the old commander edition blasts though. Every Andro player liked to rush a Terminator into point blank range with full batteries and panels and hope you would destroy him. More than one game was ended in a MAD situation....No winners, just lots of bits floating out there.

Adding blasts to FC would bring the tactic of blowing up a small ship near stacks of drones or fighters to kill the stack. Each large fleet would have on or two mobile drone killers just waiting to pop. Not a realistic tactic....And hard on frigates.. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bolo_MK_XL
Commander


Joined: 16 Jan 2007
Posts: 797
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nothing like rolling a cloaked Battlehawk with two enveloping G torps up to a basestation, uncloak with shields down --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Ibekwe
Commander


Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 452
Location: Manchester UK

PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A couple of ideas.

How about standardised planets? With set numbers of target locations and defending marines/fighters/DEFSATS/ground-based weapons?
The smallest would be lightly-defended outposts (a suitable target for a lone frigate), then larger and more heavily armed colonies (worth a cruiser), major worlds (a small fleet), and homeworlds (an armada).
In SFB you can do this by setting a points total and buying defences upto that limit; in FC this could be simplified to a set number of optional weapons, their number increasing at each level.
This would basically be a formalisation of SPP's Colony Evolution article for SFB. It would give an 'off-the-peg' objective for one-off games, and they could be customised to represent specific individual worlds for scenarios or 'historical' campaigns.

To go with this, like to see an inclusion of the Module M ground combat rules. They are simple and abstracted anyway, so I don't think they'd need any major changes. This would require troop-carrying freighters, and also assault variants of CWs, and/or DWHs.

Also, fighters for everybody as well as the Hydrans.

Type-H heavy drones as a surface-launched planetary defence weapon might be fun, too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1577
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can think of at least one heavier drone-like weapon I'd sooner want to see in the game system...


As regards fighters, I'd only want them to be used for empires who, for various reasons, have to have them, such as the Hivers and Souldra.

Even then, I'd want these units to be kept strictly to the hybrid-carrier concept of the current FC Hydrans, and not as a means of deploying any true carriers in vanilla FC.

Oh, and sticking with no more than the minimum array of such attrition units needed would be good, too.
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kahuna
Lieutenant SG


Joined: 23 Jul 2009
Posts: 139
Location: Spokane, WA

PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I know I'm a little late on posting here, but I wanted to cast my vote and qualify it a bit as well.

I really enjoy the game. It's streamlined and fun to play. Fleet Scale gives so many options. As long as we don't get too tedious, I'm game for any of the races. SFU has a lot of races to choose from and as long as they don't take away from the game mechanics, I'd like to see them added. A quick summary of those races I've listed below.

* ISC is a must. As you can tell by my little avatar, I'm a fan. I'm happy to see they should be coming to us.

* I don't see Jindarians as necessary, but their rules don't seem too complicated at all. Shouldn't be a big deal to add them.

* I'm worried about how Andros will be added without too much complexity. But they brought so much color to SFB that I look forward to the same in FC.

* I also find the web rules a bit bulky but I can still work with them. Don't know how else I would clean up the Tholian Web rules; haven't thought of it much yet.

* FRAX are really easy to add. Not aware of any new headaches they bring but certainly were fun in SFB.

* Other simulator races weren't too bad either. Really not too many more rules though some of those races were just wacky.

* Omega Octant needs to be far, far down the road. I'm glad it's not slated yet. Loved the variety in SFB, but wouldn't count it as a priority in FC yet.

* Fighters were just a logistic nightmare. I'm glad they are only found with the Hydrans so far. I'm ok if they stay with just the Hydrans. Worrying about all those pieces, damage points, and the stacks of doom weren't that much fun for me. Also, they always seemed over powered. I mean I could hit one with a standard photon and they kept coming. If we could come up with simplified squadrons or somethign like that so I didn't have all those darn pieces to keep track of.

* Gunboats are in the same boat as fighters. They were fun, but just another headache. Perhaps simplified flotillas at most.

* X-Ships were always fun. Don't know if we need to dwell on 1st or 2nd generation X Ships, just some X-Ship simple rules could be fun. Again, down the road though.

Pretty much I'd like to see everything that SFB had but just simplified.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
pinecone
Fleet Captain


Joined: 03 May 2008
Posts: 1865
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's exactly what I want too, I couldn't have said it better.

But I do want to see thosev other things in BoM someday.
_________________
Doomed to live in secret since discovering that the Air Force Tapes were a fantasy... Embarassed

"Your knowledge of my existence must be punished" Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
terryoc
Captain


Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 1380

PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
* I'm worried about how Andros will be added without too much complexity. But they brought so much color to SFB that I look forward to the same in FC.


Given that the PA panels are the most complex and fiddly system, there is one proposal (from Loren Knight, IIRC) that the PA panels simply be changed to shields and the PA panel boxes on the SSD be deleted. So you'd simply assume that the Andro had two shields (one forward, one rear) equal to the number of PA panel boxes x 10 (the strength of reinforced PA panels).
_________________
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan Ibekwe
Commander


Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 452
Location: Manchester UK

PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I accept that the FC Andros might have to be very different from the SFB version in terms of game mechanics to maintain playability.

That's fine. As long as they retain enough of their oddness factor - DisDevs, Sat Ships, who (what) the hell are they anyway - I don't mind if their ship cards look nothing like the SFB originals.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kahuna
Lieutenant SG


Joined: 23 Jul 2009
Posts: 139
Location: Spokane, WA

PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm totally cool with Andros being different. I too would like them to continue being odd and a bit unpredictable. I agree with you that it's the PAs that make them a hassle to play with. Shields that worked like the PAs? Not a bad thought. Would make accounting much easier. As the shields leak now, it wouldn't change much for the Andros. Allow them the ability to shift some of that damage to batteries during the End Turn and tah-dah, we've got PAs that look like shields.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bolo_MK_XL
Commander


Joined: 16 Jan 2007
Posts: 797
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 2:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I agree with you that it's the PAs that make them a hassle to play with.


Yes, but who's gonna fly them:
Players willing to make the effort to put up with that hassle ---
If a player wants their strengths, have to be willing to put up with the extra paperwork/cyphering they come with ----

Don't see any big changes needed for the port over ---
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lokirising
Lieutenant JG


Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 52
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I want fast patrol ships, aka gunboats
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Krellex
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Posts: 261
Location: RIS Boise

PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/thread_necromancy
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
terryoc
Captain


Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 1380

PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I always thought necromancers would look like Care Bears! Very Happy
_________________
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
storeylf
Fleet Captain


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1883

PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To be fair it would only have been about the 11th thread after stickies on the page. For someone who doesn't post aften it may not have been exactly obvious that it was an old thread, I don't exactly go looking at dates straight away.

Last edited by storeylf on Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:26 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3498
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thread necromancy is generally frowned upon in netiquette. However, in this forum it is acceptable if:
- The new post adds to the general discussion.
- The discussion is still relevant.

The simple fact that threads are not automatically locked after a set period of time means that we will be way more lenient on thread necromancy than other boards. So, in general, please go easy on the necromancer unless it is inappropriate for our standards. And, yes, the standards are very subjective.

That all said, I gotta agree with Terry's comment:
Quote:
I always thought necromancers would look like Care Bears!

_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Federation Commander News All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group