Point Value of Ships

storeylf · Post by **storeylf** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:12 am

I think he's trying to say that the BPV on the ships are multiplied by the figure, so a klingon ship worth 150 pts only counts as 120pts. So it effectively works the opposite to how you have it. Klingons would be a 625pt force vs a 454 pt force. So the klingons get approximatley a Heavy battlecruiser extra.

So it is more like the ongoing online tourney, though very extreme.

PS

I certainly think its a good idea. Might be a bit biased as having just lost a campaign. Me Klingon vs Fed (how many fixed maps! at a guess 27 and 3 floating! GRR!)

Tsk, such a poor memory - we only played 14 battles before ending the test campaign. A fairly even split between fixed maps (32*36) or larger location maps (uo to 70 hexes across), and a couple of floating maps. Our next campaign has been modified based on that experience to have a better default mix of open and location, with a handlful of smaller fixed maps.

Capt Jack · Post by **Capt Jack** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 5:59 pm

Yes,

Storeylf (aka" I've just side slipped, now your firing on a split sheild Lee")is on the right track.

Might be a bit extreme, but woud think fairer in smaller scale battles.

Might have to modify it for larger battles.

p.s true. poor memory. But it felt like 27 fix maps! We only played 1 true floating map.

Masat · Post by **Masat** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:55 pm

Hello Dal Downing. I agree that Romulans who never use a cloak affect game play. I also agree that Federations who never use a photon affect game play and agree that Klingons who never use a disruptor affect game play. I am sorry but I am unsure what the meaning was of your statement.

I am still unsure of In the process of making a more streamlined game over the years a few things have been skipped in the name of simplicity that are now effecting the point values. If they are effecting the point values why were the point values not changed in the beginning before becoming on sale for all? Are you speaking of only changes made after becoming on sale that are now effecting the point values? May I ask for an example please?

You say The point values are what they are and lets be honest they are not really that far off. Would you do me the honor by humoring me and give me your numbers for my chart? In this way we can tell if we agree on this also. Is a factor of 1.1 considered not really that far off? Is a factor of 1.01 considered not really that far off?

I do not believe there is enough consideration for accurate point values for my chart to become a rule even in the situation it is considered more accurate so you do not need to fear this occurrence.

I agree everyone happy is not usually possible and that is just a sad fact of life. Will people be unhappy if point values are more accurate for some other people by a chart? Is the chart what causes you to be unhappy?

Thank you Capt Jack for your response and thank you Dal Downing for your response.

Masat · Post by **Masat** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:01 pm

I am sorry my PC was behind in the posts and I did not see 3 posts.

To answer missed posts, yes that may be a little over kill there. I wrote
These multipliers I use are less than guesses, so only an example and I wanted Federation Commander forum members to tell their opinion of accurate numbers to use in the chart.

Dal Downing · Post by **Dal Downing** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 4:09 am

Masat. You missed the point about cloaking devices or I didn't convey thatone clear enough. All Romulain alredy pay a 30% Point penalty for a cloaking deevice yet I still play peopel who never usw it because it is to difficult for them to understand. Those people should be multiplying their Point Values by 0.7 to get a true feel for the Point value of those units.

Things that were left out to streamline the game are easy to find and easy to understand the reason they were left out.

Proximity Photon were left out so there for you do not need DERFACS and UIM both of which extend Disruptor Range and Accuracy. One the suface it seems pretty balance but with the Photons now getting fast loaded maybe the Targetting bonuses (UIMs) should have been left in.

Wild Weasles were left out (and yes I think they should be left out) but also Pseudo Plasma were left out because of the no secret/all open cards. Add to that withno WW you don't need Scatter Packs (again I think that was a good call.) At the same time Sabotted Plasmas were left out but this also reduced the Speed and Range of Sabotted Plasma that were added to counter late war ship like DW CW BC

Thats just a couple of things that show how streamling has also affect the way ships used to interact with each other. I will say your chart is not a bad ideal but look at the match ups it will creat. The 500 point fleets aside are we saying a fair fight is taking a Fed oCL (111) aginst a Klingon D7 (131)?

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:46 pm

Dal Downing wrote:Masat. You missed the point about cloaking devices or I didn't convey thatone clear enough. All Romulain alredy pay a 30% Point penalty for a cloaking deevice yet I still play peopel who never usw it because it is to difficult for them to understand. Those people should be multiplying their Point Values by 0.7 to get a true feel for the Point value of those units.

By rule, the cost of a cloaking device is 20%. In reality, for Romulans, the cost is more like 15%. Regardless, it sure isn't 30%.

storeylf · Post by **storeylf** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:50 pm

Dal Downing wrote: but with the Photons now getting fast loaded

What's this fast load photons?

Bolo_MK_XL · Post by **Bolo_MK_XL** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:45 pm

You blow out your batteries on Turn 1 and photons are ready to fire --

The_Rock · Post by **The_Rock** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 4:24 pm

That has been in the game since the start. If that was what was being referenced, the "now" is an odd choice of words.

Bolo_MK_XL · Post by **Bolo_MK_XL** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 5:24 pm

He probably said now because Plasmas reaching that point also ---

Kang · Post by **Kang** » Thu Jul 21, 2011 7:17 am

The other thing is that it's all balanced out. Sure, plasma ships lose their EPTs, sabots and PPTs, but Feds and Klingons lose scatterpacks and ECM drones, for example.

The clean simplicity of playing Trek-style combat with the straight weapons is great, rather than all that messing about with things like PPTs and stuff. If it's a plasma, I will deal with it as one.

The thing I love about FC is that I can just pick up the game and play, without having to spend an entire evening preparing my Kzinti with its complicated drone loadout calculations, or engage in extensive diplomatic negotiations about what game year we are playing in (not 1901, 1902, but 154 or 183

). There's one drone type. There's ships with weapons as they are without having any regard to year, refit, plus-upgrades or anything like that.

This is where FC is simple. Ok, the rules are sometimes in need of interpretation. But the complexity of rules increases exponentially with the amount of extraneous systems because they all have to account for interactions between those systems. Granted we have a lot of toys (systems) to play with in FC, but it's still clean. Let's keep it that way....

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:41 pm

My question about things like this has always been the same: Would having access to FC versions of rules for extra things from SFB be bad for FC?

No one says they would have to be used.

I know one response to this will be, "What about BoM? It will/does have many extras for FC." The counter to that are statements by those in authority that even BoM will not deal with many things from SFB.

I thought the idea for a SFB-Revolutions game system was a good one, but I guess I was in the minority because it was snuffed out quickly. [For those who don't know, SFB-Revolutions was basically an idea to attempt to take SFB and modify it in terms of the FC game engine with or without some caveats (secret energy allocation, SFB-style shield reinforcement, etc.]

Kang · Post by **Kang** » Thu Jul 21, 2011 3:09 pm

That's not a bad idea, Mike; I think a lot of groups have experimented with the concept (although not my group).

And indeed, as long as you are enjoying the game, you can use as few or as many 'house rules' as you like. In the same vein that allows you to use cloaked Klingon ships, as in the rulebook, you can also adapt SFB rules to FC as you wish. The only difficulty comes when you play with people outside your gaming group, where those house rules are not in force, for example if you decided to play in an origins tourney or similar. Then, you will not be able to rely on the tactics that work with your house rules.

Remember (and I don't want to sound patronising, because I know I'm speaking to a veteran player as well - respect!) that the main thing is to have fun. How you go about that is your own business

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Thu Jul 21, 2011 3:28 pm

Steve really doesn't want optional rules in Federation Commander proper. We do have one gray area already (scouts), but I think the intent is to keep that as the one gray area. (And even that is only because of the Federation Scout.)

Borders of Madness is where all of that stuff is really supposed to go. In a way, you can think of Borders of Madness as the set of optional rules for Federation Commander. So, that is where all of it will go.

Finally, on the idea that there are some ideas and rules that aren't even eligible for BoM, Steve has softened on that recently. He may be more willing to put stuff in BoM than he has been in the past. (No promises. But, no promises either way.)

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Fri Jul 22, 2011 2:24 am

Thanks for that clarification of what BoM is all about. I think a lot of us were thinking along those lines already, but BoM was never really referred to as "FC optional rules." It has been referred to before as almost a separate game system.

MJWest, are you the one who will be writing the FC derivations of the elements from SFB for BoM? Just wondering.