Topic: Why there could be an SFC4!! Look at Starsiege 2845!!!

[Mr. Hypergol]

I thought I would counter Red Green's bogus thread "Why there will never be an SFC4".

It's baffling why Red Green would slam SFB fans since they are mostly the only one's left supporting the SFC series and even bothering to post here.

I think SFC4 could happen if the right publisher came along and if the liscense was partitioned properly to allow the much mentioned "all eras" game that could cover the entire history of starships, wars, races, etc. in the Trek Universe.

I would like a game that took OP and expanded on that. Adding both Pre-TOS, and TNG+ eras. With the combat system based on SFB and then extrapolated into the earlier and later eras so that it makes sense relative to the SFB based system.

David Ferrell is right when he says that OP is the pinnicle of SFC. That game is now near perfect. With Firesoul's and others mods, the game is very close to fulfilling my dreams. The only thing I would want now is Tholians and Andros along with an F&E based strategic campaign generator. I envision a game like the Total War series with equally deep strategic as well as tactical gameplay.

To show you why you should never count a game series out I give you the example of another game I love that looked like it was dead for good......the Starsiege/Earthsiege series. I loved the Mecha based Starsiege (which spawned the Tribes series) and eagerly awaited Starsiege 2. Unfortunately the 3rd game in the Earthsiege series bombed commercially....mostly because it could not compete with Mechwarrior in a saturated Mecha genre. This ment that it was all but sure there would not be a Starsiege 2.

In spite of this, Starsiege maintained a rabid, if tiny, fanbase that would not give up on a sequel, just like SFC fans have not given up on SFC4. Fortunately the publisher Sierra, who aquired the rights to Starsiege when they bought Dynamics, kept a Starsiege forum going long after it looked like the game series was history. That forum is where the rabid fans continued to froth at the mouth for almost the last 5 years.

Well low and behold, I was reading my PC gamer mag a few weeks ago and what do my eyes see but an article by the title of "Starsiege Lives". "Whoa", I said to myself. Apparently the Sierra company has agreed to support the series through retail marketing of a FAN-made sequel to Starsiege called Starsiege 2845. Sierra will not pay development costs but still plans to sell the game retail from what I understand. A group of fans with the skills needed to make a Starsiege sequel will make the game free of cost for Sierra, and Sierra still gets to make money off it. Here's the website for Starsiege 2845:

http://www.mechnex.net/

Needless to say I'm pumped about this.

My point with this story however is to get us thinking about what is possible in the future for the sfc series given the fact of it's own rabid fan base and modding community's skills. All it would take for an SFC4 is the right publisher and a creative business arrangement.  Perhaps Amarillo Design Bureau will eventually wear Paramount down as Star Trek enters a slow period?  Who knows what could happen?

We will have to wait and see what happens.....it might take 5 years like Starsiege did.......it could take more. But hey, SFC is not out of the picture yet in my view.

You have SFB fans mostly to thank for that............Red Green.  
     

[The_Infiltrator]

Would you like to add anything else to my list hyper? I don't really want to think about it too much

[Age]

  The only thing I would like to see in midddle to advanced eras are Klingon ships cloaking and firing photons and a little more canon in the game like what oyu see in the TV and Movies.The Klingons and Romulans having disruptors instead of phasers.The Romulans can keep their plasma.
 That  is all I have to say for now.  

[NannerSlug]

you can never have tmp with sfb based rules. for that matter sfb is not trek. period. start with the primary weapons and work your way down from there.

does that mean there cannot be another sfb game? of course not. i would in fact encourage the marketing department to call it what it is instead of trying to wrap it up in a star trek wrapper.

[IKV Nemesis D7L]

Quote:
  The only thing I would like to see in midddle to advanced eras are Klingon ships cloaking and firing photons and a little more canon in the game like what oyu see in the TV and Movies.The Klingons and Romulans having disruptors instead of phasers.The Romulans can keep their plasma.
 That  is all I have to say for now.  

Oddly enough I was watching some of the 3rd season TNG during the weekend and a Klingon vessel was firing Phasers (as stated by Enterprise bridge crew).  What episode I don't recall.    

[FPF_TraceyG]

Quote:
you can never have tmp with sfb based rules. for that matter sfb is not trek. period. start with the primary weapons and work your way down from there.

does that mean there cannot be another sfb game? of course not. i would in fact encourage the marketing department to call it what it is instead of trying to wrap it up in a star trek wrapper.  

If I can elaborate on this... SFB 'was' Star Trek TOS canon. It began as a fledgling 'pocket' game that had all of two ships in it, a Fed CA and a Klingon D7. It then expanded, and doing so, remained within TOS cannon adding Romulans, Gorn and Kzin. As it expanded, however, what was not cannon, or rather, details not supplied within the series were added and embellished. For example, we never actually saw a Gorn ship in TOS, we have no idea what weapons it used.

Much of SFB, then, whilst attempting to stick to cannon material, is then conjectural onwards. Later, when Paramount decided it didnt like ADB, it refused any further Trek licensing and almost stopped ADB from ever publishing again.

SFBs since then has become decidedly non-Trek purely because its not allowed to publish any Trek material. I'm sure this is not a choice ADB like at all. Fasa did have a license also, and di publish some TMP stuff, but it was never a game that had the same depth, development or following that SFBs had.

ADB, on the other hand, have never actually given permission to use the name SFB in a computer game either, wanting also to hang onto the meagre copyright it managed to retain from its original license.

Politics, thats all we have here. Remove that, and SFBs would be a purely Trek game, and it would stretch from TOS to TNG.

[nx_adam_1701]

I wonder what TNG would of become if they were allowed to continue, or some how worked together, Its still hard for me the see phasers on everybody, lol, I dont know why, maybe its because I grew up with TNG and Voy, and DS9, but hey its kool to think about it, does anyone noe that episode in where a Klink fires phasers, I would love to find out about it, thx


adam out

[DH123]

Quote:
you can never have tmp with sfb based rules. for that matter sfb is not trek. period. start with the primary weapons and work your way down from there.

 

Then why is one of the Federation CX ships in Module X1 "NCC-1701-A USS Enterprise"    

[NannerSlug]

the A model is not an x-ship. SFB is roughly based on trek cannon. klingons have always had disruptors (shooting that green stuff at the enterprise) and the Enterprise has always shot phasers and photons back.  klingons and romulans never had phasers (let alone phaser 1s, 2s and 3s).

this is not a bad thing. i am simply making the distinction between the two sfb is in its own right somthing seperate. this is a major cause (at least for me) of a lot of grief. that is one thing that sfc3 does have going for it is that at least its weapons are very close to trek.

again, that is not saying that one has a game play advantage over the other. simply that they are different.

[Merlinfmct87]

Quote:

Quote:
you can never have tmp with sfb based rules. for that matter sfb is not trek. period. start with the primary weapons and work your way down from there.

 

Then why is one of the Federation CX ships in Module X1 "NCC-1701-A USS Enterprise"      

Bingo Bango Bongo.

See here: SmileyLich's SFB Page

GASP!

It's SFB for TNG!

And I don't like the idea of taking phaser's from the Klingons. Not at all. Phaser's are wayy too effecient with their damage, you take away the phasers and give them dizzys  the klingons will never stop being whipped. The energy drain alone would kill them.    

[J. Carney]

Nanner

The 'phaser's' used by the Klingons and Romulans might not be actual 'pahsers.'

Note that the Andromedians also have 'phasers,' though it says in their R-section that they are mearly 'beam weapons equivelent to phaser-2's.'

Perhaps the weapons that the other races use are similar to the phasers that the Federation used and they just began to be called phasers due to similar preformance.

And if I'm a Rom with a Plasma-R hot in the tube, you canbet I'm going to save my phasers to knock out any WW's that you kick out   !

[Crimmy]

Quote:
you can never have tmp with sfb based rules.

As was pointed out......YES...you can.

Quote:
 for that matter sfb is not trek. period.

YES it is....and it became so "offiicialy" when Paramount gave it's blessing for the creation of SFC using the SFB ruleset

Quoted from the damn box

Star trek Starfleet Command

 Using data from the BEST selling strategy board game,Star Fleet Battles, Starfleet Command puts you in the captians chair for the most amazing real-time space combat experience ever created.

 Finally, a Starship Naval game worthy of the name STAR TREK

 Inspired by Star Fleet Battles

BTW....I STILL have my beta disk for SFC3 loaded....and the splash screen specificlly credits ADB...I'll have to re-install the stock game to see it it also credits ADB.....but I'm pretty sure it does....because SFC3 STILL contains elements of the first 3 games....

Quote:
 start with the primary weapons and work your way down from there.

Looks over the "offically endorsed"  STAR TREK games sitting on my shelf...looks over SFB material....

Damn.....From the primary weapons on down....it's Trek...AND...it's SFB....

Quote:
does that mean there cannot be another sfb game? of course not.

One can only hope....and beg....and hope...and beg...and flash my check book....and bug Erik...and bug Harry Lang....and beg....and flash my check book again...etc etc..ad infinitum...

Quote:
 i would in fact encourage the marketing department to call it what it is instead of trying to wrap it up in a star trek wrapper.  

Looks at sales of the first three games...looks at the clear credit to SFB on the boxes....Is VERY glad Nanner was in NO WAY connected to marketing these games.

Could you please...for the love of god...curb you obvious disdain for BOTH ,Best selling Taldren products ,AND Taldren gaming fans who prefer the games based on the SFB ruleset.

You held the view IN PUBLIC for quite a while that people didnt play OP because of politics...when in fact you KNEW damn well it was because of campaign killing bugs...and since said bugs have been fixed ...OP IS ALL WE PLAY...

And after years...it's getting really old.

If for no other reason....do it because your a moderator...and you are disrespecting a LARGE percentage  of faithful  Taldren customers IN PUBLIC.


     

[NannerSlug]

*yawn*
 
my "disdain" is for the arrogance of *some* indiivduals and the slapping down anyone who expresses opposition to those ideas.

[GE-Raven]

Quote:
*yawn*
 
my "disdain" is for the arrogance of *some* indiivduals and the slapping down anyone who expresses opposition to those ideas.

Especially when the facts support such individuals...  Sorry Nanner... but to say SFB is not "trek" is like saying apple pie is not apples.

SFB started with trek and made a pie.  SFC 1 started with SFB and made another cobbler.

To attempt to say one is and one is not based on trek is pretty sketchy logic.  Is SFC closer to "TV and Movie Trek" Thank SFB.  Of course... it was allowed to be.  Was every starting point of the concept founded on SFB?  Yeah I think that is pretty obvious.

SFC would not be here without SFB, period.

GE-Raven
Non-SFB player  

[Merlinfmct87]

Quote:
*yawn*
 
my "disdain" is for the arrogance of *some* indiivduals and the slapping down anyone who expresses opposition to those ideas.

If you are that sick and tired about people bitching about SFC3 not being up to snuff, what in blazes are you doing here? You certainly haven't gotten warm praise and sympathy, you've had your butt chewed out(top notch job here btw).

You don't like SFC OP? Fine.

We do.

We like Complexity.

You obviously don't. Simple as that. I see no reason to make this personal. You play your games, we will play ours, and we will voice our opinions, but that above post is simply childish and moronic. I'd expect more from a two-year-old.  

[FPF_TraceyG]

Quote:
the A model is not an x-ship. SFB is roughly based on trek cannon. klingons have always had disruptors (shooting that green stuff at the enterprise) and the Enterprise has always shot phasers and photons back.  klingons and romulans never had phasers (let alone phaser 1s, 2s and 3s).

this is not a bad thing. i am simply making the distinction between the two sfb is in its own right somthing seperate. this is a major cause (at least for me) of a lot of grief. that is one thing that sfc3 does have going for it is that at least its weapons are very close to trek.

again, that is not saying that one has a game play advantage over the other. simply that they are different.  

Actually, again I must point out an innaccuracy here. During TOS, the script writer's guide used and compiled by directors for the show described the Klingon Battlecruiser as bristling with phasers, but were never actually shown to be firing in the show itself. ADB nevertheless attempted to stick to the original cannon material (as I pointed out above) and based on the script writer's guide, the Enterprise really should have been no match at all for a D7 Battlecruiser. In game terms, ADB resolved this inconsistancy by creating different types of phasers, eg Ph-I, Ph-II, Ph-III.

[FPF_TraceyG]

I might add one more interesting point here, the term "D7 Battlecruiser" was never used in the original television show at all and its first official reference to being called as such was within Starfleet Battles and is a creation by fans.
The term was later picked up by Paramount.

[nx_adam_1701]

I love phasers, but If only I had a green one, I wouldnt complain so much about it in the game, then the roms and klinks can have all the green phasers they want lol, it just doesnt feel right when I see klinks and rommies fire orange beams at ships


adam out

[J. Carney]

I can't argue with that...  

[red_green]

Quote:
I thought I would counter Red Green's bogus thread "Why there will never be an SFC4".

It's baffling why Red Green would slam SFB fans since they are mostly the only one's left supporting the SFC series and even bothering to post here.

I
You have SFB fans mostly to thank for that............Red Green.  
     

yadda, yadda

 Its fun to bash SFB players cause they take this so seriously  Plus I think just as many people play SFC3 as OP. They just don't post here. I believe that SFC3 players are made up of a younger crowd who tend to just download ships/mods and play. They still realize there playing a game  The SFB base is older, made up of people that like to play a complicated game, whoop someones azz, then come here and brag about it. The SFB fan thinks that SFB isbased on reality  

Just funning here- maybe we can somehow find something in common-wait I know StarTrek.