Speed Limits and the Feel of the Scenario

[storeylf]

I'm convinced that 42*30 is just the wrong size for fed com, as noted earlier so much has changed that ships are just faster and better able to do more stuff that the map size (that may have worked for SFB) just doesn't cut it with FedCom. So many ships can easily cross at high speed with power left for weapons.


The extra rules and interactions are overkill to handle something that largely seems to 'fix' one empire which can be more readily fixed by just playing on a larger map, not unlike what I was saying at the start of the thread about the gorn scenario - if you have an unbalanced scenario than balance it, not change the game.

[gar1138]

I believe that adding a Baseline Speed Limit between turns is more about properly balancing certain aspects of the game that are unbalanced now (photons, Emergency Decel, Plasma, etc) and less about making FC play like SFB. In fact, I think it should be looked at more like *restoring* Speed Limits to FC rather than adding them.

Yes, SFB has Speed Limits, and yes, it would make FC seem to play a little more like SFB. However, I think that is more of a side effect (and certainly not the goal). SFB has had Speed Limits since day one and it is one (of many) fundamental ways that it achieves proper balance. Having that overlooked when porting things to FC has unbalanced things a bit.

As FC has gone on from it's introduction, more and different tactics have emerged that weren't necessarily obvious when the game was first released. As a benefit from all this playing, some things have clearly become broken due to Speed Limits not being carried over.

I have no desire to clutter the rulebook with additional rules to bring over more SFB systems (ECM, ECCM, different drone types, warp power for movement, etc, etc, etc). No thanks. However, Speed Limits are a fundamental function of the game universe that should have been brought over during the transition from SFB.

Garrett

[The_Rock]

I'm convinced that 42*30 is just the wrong size for fed com, as noted earlier so much has changed that ships are just faster and better able to do more stuff that the map size (that may have worked for SFB) just doesn't cut it with FedCom. So many ships can easily cross at high speed with power left for weapons.


The extra rules and interactions are overkill to handle something that largely seems to 'fix' one empire which can be more readily fixed by just playing on a larger map, not unlike what I was saying at the start of the thread about the gorn scenario - if you have an unbalanced scenario than balance it, not change the game.

You do understand that making the map bigger just makes things even easier for Photon users and even worse for plasma, right?

[The_Rock]

Garrett has it 100% on point. The rule is a useful balancing tool that appears to simply be one of the rules from SFB that were overlooked or perhaps even assumed to be not that important to balance (but, see my comments on the Flywheel that make it fairly clear that Steve understands the importance of the rule to balance).

This is about balance, not about making Fed Com more like SFB. It's just the case (as, for example, when I bring up EPTs as a way to fix plasma), that when you have a balance issue that needs addressing, going to SFB as source is a good first step.

[storeylf]

You do understand that making the map bigger just makes things even easier for Photon users and even worse for plasma, right?

Plasma yes, photons I disagree with. How can anything be easier than overload on turn 1 and guarantee range 8 or less on turn 2?

[The_Rock]

You do understand that making the map bigger just makes things even easier for Photon users and even worse for plasma, right?

Plasma yes, photons I disagree with. How can anything be easier than overload on turn 1 and guarantee range 8 on turn 2?

Because it is not the end of the game. Taking a range 8 shot, even with 12 photons, involves some risk. If you give me enough room so that I don't have to slow down too much on reload turns, I can extend the reloading of full overloads over 3 or more turns. I can then increase my risk profile on the initial exchange.

Let's assume I have 2 NCA and a CS and I am facing a Kzinti with CC and 2NCAs. Under normal tournament conditions, I would get to R8 and target everything on the CC, pretty much ensuring its destruction. If you double the size of the map, I would definitely fire at two ships (splitting one of the ship's fire over two targets). That would result in a spread of games where the median result was two badly damaged cruisers, with some tail results seeing one or two largely uninjured ships and the other tail seeing one or two nearly destroyed ships.

On a single map, I cannot afford that risk profile. On a double sized map (or even better - an open map) I can.

The exchange for that is sustaining EM shifted disruptor fire for several turns while closing with the overloads. that is an easy exchange to make.

[mjwest]

Anyway, Steve has already stated that speed limits will not be adopted at all. So, all of this is just how you want to build your own special home-made rule.

The history of SFB is filled with examples of things Steve said would "never" happen that he then later changed his mind on. The shorter history of Fed Com has its examples as well. This is one I think is worth the fight since it makes Fed Com an immensely better game with almost only the addition of a couple lines of rules.

Well, you are correct that Steve is the only one who gets to decide whether something is added to the game or not. All I can tell you is what has been said before. So, go convince him it is needed and it will get added. Anything other than that is just talking.

EDIT: Oh, and, for the record, I have not touched the other message. So, if anyone is editing it, it isn't me.

[The_Rock]

EDIT: Oh, and, for the record, I have not touched the other message. So, if anyone is editing it, it isn't me.

I didn't assume you would be - or anyone for that matter - it was an explanation of what Pos. Flywheel is in SFB followed by quoting part of the rule. I really didn't understand why anyone would want to edit it, but the behavior is so odd that it almost must be human. Anyway, not important enough to fret over, just confused.

[Nerroth]

Sometimes if you try to use a character the board doesn't like, it cuts out the rest of the text you are trying to post.

That happens to me when I try to use the combined "a-e" dipthong, or a certain letter from the Greek alphabet, in other threads...

[The_Rock]

Maybe that is what is going on, though it seems odd that it would accept the character (some invisible character from the PDF cut and paste for the rule) for purposes of preview and for the first time I go to the thread, then delete it thereafter.

[ericphillips]

I sent a message through the PM recently and it looked great on the preview, but it was sent all messed up.

[storeylf]

Aye, I saw that message just after you posted it and it was like that, so I assume it was posted in that state (or one very quick edit!).

[Dal Downing]

There seems to be to different points being discussed here. One is adding a rule covering acceleration limits the other is Big Plasma weakness. We really should look at splitting the disscusion and just talking about Plasma first. Once a consensus is reached on that then pick the speed discussion back up.

Yes SVC is the only one whose opinion matters but lets see if there I'd a problem. And even if you do get a fix later for speed it probably will not stop overloaded photons from potentially one shotin opponents.

[The_Rock]

There are two different problems - plasma and acceleration limits - but only acceleration limits are being discussed here, really. There is some small overlap, but restoring acceleration limits to Fed Com has little to do with plasma, really.

[Klingon of Gor]

The argument that an acceleration limit would improve the plasma situation is interesting, and, I'll admit, one I hadn't thought of. Having given it some thought, I'm ultimately not persuaded by it.

One of the things that I treasure about Fedcom is that in, I think, about two years of playing it, I haven't been in a single rules argument. There aren't many games I can ever say that about. Fedcom just doesn't lend itself to rules lawyering. I have spent my time learning good tactics instead of learning and/or arguing about various iterations of rules. Granted, Fedcom is not a perfect game (Not much in this life ever is), but it is highly enjoyable, and I hope it stays that way.

For the record, I've been on the receiving end of a turn 8 emergency decel, although at the end of the day I blame a tactical misjudgement on my part and not the rules. In the end, I pulled it out, but it was a close, exciting game, and for a while there I was sure I was done for. I may post an AAR if time permits. There are tactical lessons to be learned. I had Klingons, my opponent had Tholians.