Overpowered Races: Relative to Which Ones?

MajerBlundor · Post by **MajerBlundor** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:54 pm

I had not seen the "Overpowered Races" thread previously and it raises an interesting question: "overpowered" relative to which ones? Historical? All?

In other words, there's the SFU fluff that tells us about battles between common foes. Opposing sides are typically Kzinti vs Klingon, Gorn vs Romulans, Feds and Orions vs everyone, etc. But have the Gorn ever fought the Hydrans? Lyrans? I don't recall seeing that in the SFU timeline but I may have missed it.

So, three questions:

1. When designing FC ships for game balance is consideration given to its typical foes or every other race in the SFU? (question for Steve/Mike I suppose).

2. Do players expect races to be balanced against every other race or just against "historical" ones?

3. Do players usually play under "you bring 200 points and I'll bring 200 points for a duel" conditions? If yes, do you try to stick to "historical" opponents or is it anything goes?

When it comes to trying to streamline rules I have no problem tweaking them while trying to stay within their "spirit". But for some odd reason I find it harder to break out of the SFU "history" or "racial character".

Plasma torps on Federation ships? No way!

Gorns vs Hydrans? I don't think so! (But maybe it happened.)

For our family matches we've been sticking to historical matches but my son is far more willing to try "anything goes".

Tim

USS Enterprise · Post by **USS Enterprise** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:14 pm

I don't really sticking to history is that important. Anything goes I'll say.

Although, ahem, I only have Klingon Border at this time.

Bolo_MK_XL · Post by **Bolo_MK_XL** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:24 pm

Newer ships in FC may be more balanced than older ships that appeared in Star Fleet Battles ---

In SFB ships, weapons and defenses were rated vs their historical opponents, why in many cases, outside that box the BPV doesn't seem to work ---

Nothing wrong with fighting on any front ---

djdood · Post by **djdood** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 10:00 pm

I've not flown against all of the empires (Tholians and Seltorians in particular - but they're both just weird), but I've never seen any huge discrepancies empire-to-empire, at even point values.

Minor things, sure (the fleet scale Kzinti frigate really suffers a bit) but nothing good tactics can't overcome.

MajerBlundor · Post by **MajerBlundor** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:05 pm

So far we've used Romulan, Federation, Klingon, and Orion ships and I feel they're pretty well balanced (we've been playing fleet scale up to dreadnought class but mostly cruisers).

In every game we've felt that it wasn't ships that won/lost the game but tactical choices. Compared to so many other games I feel FC is heads and shoulders above them with respect to balance. And within that balance there are nice contrasts...you don't fly a Klingon FF the same was as a Fed FF! I guess Steve's 25 years of design experience and gamer input truly tells with FC's balance! Well done!

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:27 am

I think that, overall, all of the published FC empires are pretty well able to fight whomever you want them to. The one possible exception is the Seltorians, who are, more than anyone else, a "one-opponent" empire.

USS Enterprise · Post by **USS Enterprise** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:46 pm

James T Kirk, Captain's Log, Stardate 7255.6, I am reading a strange Federation Commander post from the 21st century about a weird board game where you fly our starships of today into battle and debates over whether historical opponents only or all should be fought against. It is not logical to say games are just for fun. What these people did has no bearing on today. Kirk out.

(Just a joke.)