Topic: The best way to improve III

[SSCF Hooch]

Quote:
i just want t-bombs back.

 

Amen!

[SSCF Hooch]

Quote:

Hooch, where have you been during the great LoS vs. OA debates? We're ALL trying to find ways to bring a more strategic point to the game. KoraH is using modified OA rules on TNZ. The LitterBox is using modified LoS rules. There are many "in the works" projects to put closed servers together and increase the strategic depth.

's ok, during these conversations you were probably .... flipping hexes!  

   

ummm, thought that was me point lad, I can't

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Quote:
i just want t-bombs back.

 

Hey Nanner,
I thought you thought SFC3 was perfect. At least I was thinking you thought we thought that you thought that.

Just kiddin' dude....

I think
 

[EmeraldEdge]

Quote:
i just want t-bombs back.

 

That's the old game, this is the new.  You need to think outside the box.  The game had to evolve, it's a game about choices.  

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Quote:
i just want t-bombs back.

 

Sure...when I said it ...I was elitist

j/k...I think any starship captain worth his salt would quickly rig mines to be transported for use against  true cloakers like depth charges were used against subs...

call it the poor mans anti cloak

[Rondo_GE]

me too.  T-Bombs please.  

[SirWilliam]

Quote:

Quote:
i just want t-bombs back.

 

Sure...when I said it ...I was elitist

j/k...I think any starship captain worth his salt would quickly rig mines to be transported for use against  true cloakers like depth charges were used against subs...

call it the poor mans anti cloak  

I must admit I miss T-bombs too.  Also the ability to use probes as last-ditch weapons.  SFC2 definitely gave more of a feel of being in command; one could "pull out all the stops" when necessary to get out of a jam.  Taking weapons offline and fiddling with the power/shield settings is all well and good, but there's nothing like the feeling of satisfaction derived from getting out of a scrape by using a good old-fashioned jury-rig.

SW  

[DreilDrag]

I would like to have quick keys for power balancing between shield, primary and heavy weapons instead of click and draging them in battle. I use a K'Tinga when im Klingon and use 2 disrupter 3 or 4f's with 2 Ion cannons, so while the Ions are charging I have full power to the disruptors cousing more damage per disruptor shot till the Ion ready lights come on, then full power to the Ions and blast a rather big hole in the target ship before switching back to full power disruptors. Only problem though is I would also like to have a "locking" tab on the given weapon/shield bar so you cant steal power from that system by accident.  

[SSCF Hooch]

Quote:
I would like to have quick keys for power balancing between shield, primary and heavy weapons instead of click and draging them in battle. I use a K'Tinga when im Klingon and use 2 disrupter 3 or 4f's with 2 Ion cannons, so while the Ions are charging I have full power to the disruptors cousing more damage per disruptor shot till the Ion ready lights come on, then full power to the Ions and blast a rather big hole in the target ship before switching back to full power disruptors. Only problem though is I would also like to have a "locking" tab on the given weapon/shield bar so you cant steal power from that system by accident.    

Good idea too.

I guess we are saying that we want more options and control while we are in a battle.

Hooch

[NannerSlug]

Quote:

That's the old game, this is the new.  You need to think outside the box.  The game had to evolve, it's a game about choices.    

come back and talk to me when you want to discuss relevant rule set issues like range breaks, racial penalties (like why a federation cruiser MUST have a turn mode of D and a 1.0 move cost) and other things of that nature which remove common sense and things of that nature.

thanks.

[EmeraldEdge]

Hey, maybe it's not a racial "penalty", but rather a racial bonus for all the other races.  Aren't the Feds supposed to be the base race after all?  Besides, you know the conversations we are talking about, I don't think we need to go into it.  It's just odd that it's now OK and needed when you mention it, but when others do.....  Oh, well.  

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Ummm... lemme see...

...seeking weapons, electronic warfare, energy allocation, turn modes,
functional damage allocation, shuttles, fighters, ADDs, escorts, carriers,
(did I say seeking weapons?), wild weasels, chaff, functional scouts,
black holes and nebula, (did I say seeking weapons?), PFs, Gorns, ISC,
Hydrans, Mirak, Lyrans, Tholians, Seltorians, Andros, monsters, T-bombs,
feedback damage, enveloping and shotgun plasma, hey what about
the positron flywheel? (would make the Feds happy), suicide shuttles,
ground assault shuttles, sensor channels (possible to lose lock...),
control ratings, command ratings, hellbores, fusions, PPDs, TR beams,
Mizia effect (speaking of the PPD...), erratic maneuvers, ESGs,
psuedo plasma torps - but not recharging,  (did I say seeking weapons?)...

Oh right, sorry, we've had this discussion before...
No Seeking Weapons in SFC3 !?!?

We might as well get the old dice and hexpaper back out, because SFC3 is
NOT the same game series. Different game entirely. This song has been
sung a thousand times over so I'll leave it at that.

Or I could play along...
Can I be Captain Picard, please, please, pleeeeaaaaase, huh, huh, huh?
No - I wanna be Captain Picard!!! WAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!
OK, can I be Commander Sisko then? Tell me huh? No way I'm
gonna be stuck as Captain Janeway...

I'm starting to think maybe I'm too old and cynical for video games
anymore.

Looking forward to my dentures, motorised scooter and bridge club,
rajnsaj
 

[Mog]

Quote:

Quote:

That's the old game, this is the new.  You need to think outside the box.  The game had to evolve, it's a game about choices.    

come back and talk to me when you want to discuss relevant rule set issues like range breaks, racial penalties (like why a federation cruiser MUST have a turn mode of D and a 1.0 move cost) and other things of that nature which remove common sense and things of that nature.

thanks.  

For starters, all races' heavy cruisers have a move cost of 1.0 How is that a racial penalty?

As for turn modes, its swings and roundabouts. Taking the example you gave of a Federation cruiser, you have ph1s, plenty of spare internals and good shields. The standard opposition is a D7 - turn mode B, ph2s, less spare internals and weaker shielding. Looks to me like you are after the best of both worlds, and have no real interest in balance. Doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

[NannerSlug]

look, in my view it comes down to simple common sense. yes, you can call some things "racial flavoring," however i would call some of it lack of common sense.

in the real world, someone does not come up to a country and tell them that their ships must have a turn radius of x and move cost of y that is mandatory (no matter what the mass of thier ship, etc). If a ship is built that has less mass, etc, it should be able to move accordingly. Likewise, a ship that has more mass (even in the same "class") should like wise move more slowly. The automatic turn modes and what not simple are archaic - especially considering that we are playing these games on a computer.  

If we were not talking about playing a computer game, you are probably correct. However, we are using computers and whether its range breaks, mass calculation, crew interaction or targeting - the game needs (and has) to expand beyond die roll and racial penalities.

Here is a good example of what I am talking about in real life. Back in WW2 the HMS hood sacraficed deck plating to be able to go faster. It paid with a direct hit from the Bizmark. However, no one told the British that their ships HAD to be a certain way. Like wise, if the united states took, say, an old Iowa class battleship and decided to take off those huge arse turrets and replace them with lighter missile turrets - you cannot tell me that the ship would not be able to go faster or be more manervable?

common sense says that for *any* race, that a ship that is less mass or might carrying bigger engines to be able to go faster/ be more manerverable.. and for that to translate into somthing tactically. To restrict a ship simply because it has a race's name plastered on the size just doesnt make much sense to me. what does make sense to me is that each race's engines might work differently and have pros/cons.. and that each race has a different weapon set with pros/cons (beyond everyone having phasers and disruptors).

My point is simple - the game did have to evolve and should have evolved both for common sense sake - and for game play sake.

If you like the rules used for sfc1/2 and op (and there is nothing wrong with that in its self), thats fine.. but there are some of us who believe that the can be much done to improve and surpase those rules sets for many, many reasons.  To say that a game cannot be made using a rule set besides the SFB rule set IS baloney (among other things).

and mog, you are correct - i would like the best of sfc1/2/op and sfc3. i dont think there is a thing in the world wrong with that.

[DiggityDank]

Quote:

 there are some of us who believe that the can be much done to improve and surpase those rules sets for many, many reasons.

Still waiting for these improvements with anticipation since I haven't seen one yet...

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Quote:


Here is a good example of what I am talking about in real life. Back in WW2 the HMS hood sacraficed deck plating to be able to go faster. It paid with a direct hit from the Bizmark. However, no one told the British that their ships HAD to be a certain way. Like wise, if the united states took, say, an old Iowa class battleship and decided to take off those huge arse turrets and replace them with lighter missile turrets - you cannot tell me that the ship would not be able to go faster or be more manervable?
 

Nanner,

If I want to get all trek-geeky, the argument does not hold. Supposedly, these are starships built by differing ALIEN cultures. Some shipbuilder have hands, some have tentacles.... The Hoods-Bismark analogy doesn't hold because both were built by humans with the same fundamental abilities and tools.

Personally, the game is more fun when the alien ships "feel" alien to one another.

For example:
[geek mode]The "idea" of Klinks being more manuverable goes hand-in-hand with their 1000 year history of battle. Over the centuries, they have steadily improved this aspect of their technology (quick, nimble striking) at the expense of other tech (such as scanners and medical tech). [/geek mode].

Cheers, DM    

[NannerSlug]

they are there - then again perhaps you do not believe that there was a need to improve - and thats fine as well, but to say there have been no improvments is not true as well.  it is very subjective at that point - and is probably be left at that.

some people, like your self, probably want a dice-based rule set and would be happy left to pen and paper game - and that is fine (no dig intended).. but there are others who like the improvements in sfc3 which did away with range breaks or some of the less than common sense rules of the other games (like move cost restrictions which are not based on mass, etc).

additionally, that is not to say that there can be some improvments (but not the ones you are thinking of) to sfc3.. for instance.. i can see individual restriction on mass to various parts.. for instance - a particular hull can only carry upto x size of impulse engines or x size warp cores... or a particular hard point might only be able to carry x type of weapon because of where it is placed. details like that could improve some issues.. and yeah, i would like to see t-bombs. i also like the way other weapons were adjusted. i also think that some of the various components could be adjusted or miscallanious details added to the weapons for more "racial flavoring."

again though - it all is based on common sense.

[DiggityDank]

Ummm, if we wanted a dice game, why do I even own a computer?
 

[NannerSlug]

Quote:

Personally, the game is more fun when the alien ships "feel" alien to one another.

For example:
[geek mode]The "idea" of Klinks being more manuverable goes hand-in-hand with their 1000 year history of battle. Over the centuries, they have steadily improved this aspect of their technology (quick, nimble striking) at the expense of other tech (such as scanners and medical tech). [/geek mode].

Cheers, DM    

excellent point.. and per game rule sets, i think its a wonderful example... that could be why one race's engines might be better in one aspect, but not another..

[DreilDrag]

How about a quick key for reverse?