Topic: The next Star trek game I would Like to see is a F&E style

[Khalee]

RTS and no Armada1 or 2 does not cut it.  I mean I want the hexes and all in there.

Never understood why ADB will not do one. I almost pre ordered the FASA version of the Four years wars, but I didn't as a month or two after they announced it I think they lost their licence for star trek, Heck I still got a flier announcing it for pre order.

[Max Power]

ADB is prohibited from doing anything with the computer by paramount. There's a lengthy explanation about it on the ADB boards from Steve Cole. They cannot even put certain play aids into SFB online to speed play because paramount won't let them do that either (specifically, AI of any kind, among others).

[Khalee]

Well Paramount needs to get its head out of its rump and relise there is room for all, as I would think the more people that buy trek stuff the more fans they might make.

[Magnum357]

Ya, an SFB computer play add would be awsome for SFB or even one for star Trek.  But Paramont is very strict on this and threatens to sue ADB (or whoever owns SFB right now) if they even consider making a Computer game (even if it is just an F & E creation). 

I wonder if they would protest though if some guy made an SFB or Star Trek combat simulator (nothing fancy, just a windows based program) and gave to the public for free.  Would Paramont still object?  Hmmmmm....

[J. Carney]

Ya, an SFB computer play add would be awsome for SFB or even one for star Trek.  But Paramont is very strict on this and threatens to sue ADB (or whoever owns SFB right now) if they even consider making a Computer game (even if it is just an F & E creation). 

I wonder if they would protest though if some guy made an SFB or Star Trek combat simulator (nothing fancy, just a windows based program) and gave to the public for free.  Would Paramont still object?  Hmmmmm....

Nope, then ADB would object...

In fact, here is one made long ago by a fellow named Nand, pulled at ADB's request.

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/9049/games02.htm

[Cleaven]

Without getting into a discussion of who owns what, I would buy a F&E game which allowed for one player per empire, and was turn based. The computer game is able to speed up all the book-keeping involved, impliment real fog-of-war and strictly enforce the rules so play should be pretty quick. Really I would prefer direct connection games in real time ie just like the board game, using voice chat and byo beer. To change the game to a real time game would turn me right off I think, and would serve no purpose. And I would not want SFC integrated, simply because it can't handle the fleet battles.

And to digress slightly, I don't believe a real time simulation like SFC can handle the fleet battles. Fleets would have to be handled in a turn based system, and I agree that it would probably have to be abbreviated from the full on SFB for most people to allow the battles to be resolved in an afternoon, but with a save game it won't matter. Of course the advanced rules would be an expansion pack.

[Khalee]

Well I guess turn based would work too.

[EmeraldEdge]

Heh, the good old days of play by e-mail gaming!    Boy, did my friends and I have a good time playing some of those turn based empire building games through e-mail.

[Max Power]

You know, I'm not sure that a SFC system couldn't resolve battles on the tactical level. Some shooter games can have 40 players at once; all you need to do F&E is about 14-15 per side (and that's using every trick in the book to put ships on the line). Another way to think of it is to consider the path that the extremely excellent total war series of games uses. There is a excellent strategic layer on top of a equally excellent tactical layer. The tactical layer easily lets large formations fight in battle; if you subsituted formations for ships, something could be made to work. Another meathod would be to use the tactical layout the combat mission series of wargames uses (www.battlefront.com), which is turn based, with real time "phased" play. Basically you give orders to your units and they then carry them out in a real time phase (as the same time as the enemy), with all combat then occuring at the same time. Large scale battles well over battalion level can be simulated with no difficulty in the hardware/software level (if you can keep track of everything effectively is a different question however).

I guess what I'm driving at is that there are actually many good ways to get what we want. However, and I hate to be a downer, I doubt we ever will. Simply put, paramount has a stranglehold here that will never likely be released, barring the collapse of the company. ADB and it's products are looked at like the bastard child that won't go away and is a constant reminder of the better forgotten past. And even if this were to change, you'd have to find and convince a new company to build and then develop the game. IMO even with paramount's permission (which will likely never occur) you'd be looking at possibly a 5 to 15 year time period for this to occur, best case.

In many ways this is why I called/call Taldren idiot savants. So close, but yet so far in some ways. Genius and complete idiotcy in the same package. Hard to understand.

[Max Power]

Heh, the good old days of play by e-mail gaming!    Boy, did my friends and I have a good time playing some of those turn based empire building games through e-mail.

If you still have your rules, there's a better way to play these days, if you are interested. Actually, that goes for anyone who is interested in online play. Drop me a line and I'll explain.

[Khalee]

Never tried play by email. Played a lot of Play by Mail games till it got to expencive. But play by email sounds interesting.

[Max Power]

Never tried play by email. Played a lot of Play by Mail games till it got to expencive. But play by email sounds interesting.

Playing in real time with application sharing and a voice communication program is better. Some e-mail can also be used but reaction movement and some other functions become problematic. Again, if you've got an interest on how this works let me know and I'll show you how.

[Cleaven]

Most serious wargames around are PBEM and have this designed in from the start. That means no player controlled reaction movement or fire unless it is programmed in for each unit. The newest large scale game out is War in the Pacific and looks like being good game once the intial bugs are squashed. It follows on from an established game system and covers a huge theatre. Of course the AI is a bit poor but then all AI is these days. Nothing can be done about that. Playing others is the best option and PBEM is the easiest way to do it. And serious nutters will have a dozen email games runnng at once, all being reported to ladder clubs. Considering that it is common to have one day turn around and games requiring 30 min to one hour to make a turn that is some serious time to stare at the board and move pieces.

Anyway if you want to play serious computer wargames this is the way. Or face to face for the real board games.

[EmeraldEdge]

Yeah, it's actual computer games that we used to play, not just a set of rules that we would e-mail eachother what we wanted to do.  You take a turn using your client and mail the turn file to the host, who then runs all the turns simultaniously and then sends the result files back to everyone.  We played a number of games, VGAPlanets we played a LOT of because it had Trek and Star Wars, and Battlestar ships in it, heh.  Good stuff though.  There were some that even got into ground combat and area control on individual planets in addition to capturing planets on a stellar map.   That was a bit much for some of my guys though, they just wanted to do the space ships, heh.

[Khalee]

Most serious wargames around are PBEM and have this designed in from the start. That means no player controlled reaction movement or fire unless it is programmed in for each unit. The newest large scale game out is War in the Pacific and looks like being good game once the intial bugs are squashed. It follows on from an established game system and covers a huge theatre. Of course the AI is a bit poor but then all AI is these days. Nothing can be done about that. Playing others is the best option and PBEM is the easiest way to do it. And serious nutters will have a dozen email games runnng at once, all being reported to ladder clubs. Considering that it is common to have one day turn around and games requiring 30 min to one hour to make a turn that is some serious time to stare at the board and move pieces.

Anyway if you want to play serious computer wargames this is the way. Or face to face for the real board games.

Got a link to one of these Play by Email sites And Ill take a look see.

[Cleaven]

Most serious wargames around are PBEM and have this designed in from the start. That means no player controlled reaction movement or fire unless it is programmed in for each unit. The newest large scale game out is War in the Pacific and looks like being good game once the intial bugs are squashed. It follows on from an established game system and covers a huge theatre. Of course the AI is a bit poor but then all AI is these days. Nothing can be done about that. Playing others is the best option and PBEM is the easiest way to do it. And serious nutters will have a dozen email games runnng at once, all being reported to ladder clubs. Considering that it is common to have one day turn around and games requiring 30 min to one hour to make a turn that is some serious time to stare at the board and move pieces.

Anyway if you want to play serious computer wargames this is the way. Or face to face for the real board games.

Got a link to one of these Play by Email sites And Ill take a look see.

I'm assuming you mean a site with these wargames then an example is www.matrixgames.com and they sell War in the Pacific plus my current wargame Korsun Pocket.

Also  www.hpssims.com and www.battlefront.com but there would be half a dozen others as well.

Or do you mean the ladder clubs? www.warfarehq.com or www.theblitz.org are a couple

[Khalee]

Thanks gives me something to check out.

[Cleaven]

Of course none of those wargames are going to wow the masses and do a "StarCraft" which is what I think all StarTrek games seem to want to do. Those wargames are played by a minority group of PC gamers, and I don't see any point in twisting a good game into some RTS monstrosity because some delusional executive want's to sell it to everybody on the face of the planet. An F&E game will have limited appeal, and a bad F&E game will have no appeal, unless you always buy anything with StarTrek on it, in which case you would buy an empty box marked genuine StarTrek Space for $50.

 Anyway, make a good game and people will buy it, and they will tell their friends etc.

[KBF-Crim]

ADB is prohibited from doing anything with the computer by paramount. There's a lengthy explanation about it on the ADB boards from Steve Cole. They cannot even put certain play aids into SFB online to speed play because paramount won't let them do that either (specifically, AI of any kind, among others).

No..I think there more to the back story than we've ever been told....

Here's steves whole post....read it VERY carefully...(yes even if you read it before)....and at the end...I'll point out what you missed...hehe

********************************************
I get asked all the time: "When will you allow SFB software? What is the hold up?"

Sigh. I've only answered this question about once a week for about 20 years.
I've given the same answer every single time. But someone never heard it.
Or didn't believe it. Or thought there was some big dark secret that boiled
down to I was just being an ••••••• and didn't want to release it. Or they
just didn't want to believe that it wasn't going to happen anytime soon.
Anyway, this is the official form letter sent out something over 400 times.

Paramount says NO SOFTWARE EVER PERIOD. Not by us or anyone else.
They won't allow their property to be used, and won't allow us to allow others to
use our property. Hence, no software, period. Not sold, not given away,
not made available, not passed around the internet, nothing.
We can do the SFBOL thing as it is server based and not machine resident.

This situation remains this way until Paramount decides otherwise.
Nothing anyone outside of ADB Inc. can do will change what Paramount says or thinks or does or doesn't do.
We continue working through diplomatic channels to convince them
that such software would be beneficial, harmless, and great. But they
do not agree, will not agree, have not agreed. It is possible that they
will NEVER agree, but we will never stop trying. If anything changes,
we will announce the change and do a Request For Proposals for
the official software. We will never allow independent developers to
release such software except through ADB Inc. because Paramount
will insist on this as a condition of their approval, if they ever give it.
When the time comes, there will be one and only one such program
authorized, and we literally have two hundred different ones on file.

So, basically, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting, but if it someday
does happen, I wouldn't be surprised. Until then, Nobody can release
or publish or give away SFB software without a whole world of lawyers
landing on your head, so I would say to just put it away and forget it
and if it happens you can wait for the RFP and send it to us then.

The only thing you CAN do is use if in your own personal gaming,
in games where you are physically present as a GM or player.

I am considerably more frustrated than you are, and having to repeat
the same answer every week to somebody else who doesn't know,
doesn't believe it, doesn't want it to be the way it is, just makes me
even more frustrated. This isn't my fault, and I cannot change it.

--Steve Cole

********************************************

Now...I ofcourse dont have inside info...

But Steve GAVE you the answer......but not the one you THOUGHT he did....

Here's the reason why...

"We will never allow independent developers to
release such software except through ADB Inc. because Paramount
will insist on this as a condition of their approval, if they ever give it."

But we KNOW that's not true....ADB DID allow it....we all have the evidence on our hard drives...SFC...developed by 14 east,published by interplay...and SFC2..delvoloped by Taldren and published by Interplay...

So what steve said is clearly NOT true....they WILL allow it....but under some conditions we may never know about...

Erik did say this about how it happened:

*******************************************

Erik Bethke: The Starfleet Command brand always was owned by Paramount. This is similar for any intellectual property license. The license holder owns everything to do with the license. This is very important. For example a long, long time ago the modeler for Star Trek ships Franz Joseph ended up with the rights to the Original Series Federation and Klingon ships among other designs. He ended up licensing these designs to Amarillo Design Bureau for use in Star Fleet Battles. Fast forward 20 to 30 years and you have a situation where I had to broker a deal with SFB for their license at the same time of handling the Interplay/Paramount license without somehow conveying to SFB more say in the Star Trek franchise. This is messy and unusual. Most people would just walk away from such a legal morass. Instead myself, Interplay, Paramount and Steven V. Cole all worked together to create a framework for the SFC series. Later I re-negotiated this on behalf of Activision so this could continue.


************************************

So obviously...there ARE conditions where ADB will allow the property to be used...and there ARE conditions where Paramount will allow ADB property to be used in software....

Ofcourse this may never happen again...

(also a note to at least one of you SFC3 fans.....your game has some SFB in it too ....LMFAO )

What does all this mean?

Only that assumtions about who, will let who, do what ,with what ,are not entirely true...

Again....the evidence is right on your hard drive....SFC1 even came with cadets rules and SSD's right on the disk...

The extend forward in the SFC1 manual states:

"We have followed the spirit, if not the letter , of the Doomsday ruleset."

And

"We ask that you bear with us, give us time, play the game , and enjoy what you've been waiting 20 years for: SFB on the computer."

I think They got license for the doomsday ruleset and nothing else...but Taldren even had models for Andro's ready to go and the TRB in the code....so we can deduce that they could have put more stuff into SFC2 or OP if they had had the time to make it work right...Hell..the stock DV map even 'looks' like the F&E board...

Now I hardly think that if Paramount HATED ADB (like everyone says)....that they would have EVER approved of SFC in the first place...much less allow such a statement to be printed in the game manual...

Now understand...I would never be so bold to suggest that this will EVER happen again....but.... I would also not be so bold to predict that it would NEVER happen again...
 
I didnt mean to hijack the thread....I just wanted to through this out there...

So we cant play F&E on the computer....but when Max gets done with his system.....we will have a pretty good replica....

Thank you max for your continueing effort to flesh out your system.....I hope when its up and running that everyone will give it a try...

[KBF-Crim]

Oh..and I cant resist this...

Steve says he's never played SFC because it wont run on a mac...(he is a very public rabid mac fan)

Now think about this for a sec....

If you had designed and helped grow a dynamic gaming system for 20 years...and someone made a PC game out of it....wouldnt YOU at least try it out?

You bet yer arse you would....

Personally I think he has played SFC...but he would never admit it that....

[Magnum357]

Hey Carvey, you make me cry with those pics of an SFB windows game.   

Hmmm... if all this is true, it almost sounds like the people that designed SFC1 and Steve Cole comprimised with one another because they had a window of opportunity.  Did Steve Cole actually has some undertaking in the creation of SFC1?

[J. Carney]

Hey Carvey, you make me cry with those pics of an SFB windows game.   

Hmmm... if all this is true, it almost sounds like the people that designed SFC1 and Steve Cole comprimised with one another because they had a window of opportunity.  Did Steve Cole actually has some undertaking in the creation of SFC1?

I think all that he really did was tell Taldren what not to do... if you remember, he seemed fond of showing up on the Taldren forums to dothat to the community when we got too friskey about trying to mod something.

You'd have to ask someone a little more involved with the game's creation than me, though.

I do know that SFC was made through a very unusual and unlikely turn of events and it seemed like Cole didn't bet on the planets ever lining up like that again.

[Cleaven]

Well while we may have a very SFB like game it's missing bits, we still don't have SFB on the computer. And I don't mean SFBOL, but similar in that I don't want AI because I only want to play other people. I would like a menu driven interface with all the SFB rules and ships built in so that play would be very stream lined. If you can't do something according to the rules then the software won't let you do it. No more rules to look up and "discuss", no more gameplay mistakes and errors. Technically this would be just what that form letter describes as not possible because what I'm after is really an SFB play aid, not an SFB-like game.

The moral is that I'm really keen to stump up the money for a game that works.

[Magnum357]

Ya, I agree Cleaven.  What I don't understand with ADB is why just have SFBOL only use Tournament Rules and ships?  If Paramont is so pissy with a Computer game yet they do not mind the SFBOL (because it is server based and would not be putting a functional game on other computers) what is wrong with ADB expanding the features and rules of SFBOL to allow this? 

[J. Carney]

Ya, I agree Cleaven.  What I don't understand with ADB is why just have SFBOL only use Tournament Rules and ships?  If Paramont is so pissy with a Computer game yet they do not mind the SFBOL (because it is server based and would not be putting a functional game on other computers) what is wrong with ADB expanding the features and rules of SFBOL to allow this? 

Look at your sig, man.

"With the way Star Trek is heading, thank god I'm an SFB fan!" - Magnum357 (me)

I think that this is precisely what Paramont is afraid of!

[Max Power]

Ya, I agree Cleaven.  What I don't understand with ADB is why just have SFBOL only use Tournament Rules and ships?  If Paramont is so pissy with a Computer game yet they do not mind the SFBOL (because it is server based and would not be putting a functional game on other computers) what is wrong with ADB expanding the features and rules of SFBOL to allow this? 

You haven't been paying attention recently have you? The latest editions of SFBOL (everything past V2, which they pulled support from more than a year ago) has full functionality, with any kind of ship. There are at least 3 seperate campaigns in progress at the moment IIRC. There's a upgrade coming to another version at the end of the year as well, I think.

[kadh2000]

http://feonline.lang.hm/SFB/FE/login.cgi

This one is being done with ADB's approval.  It's still in development so if you want to play you have to register, but it does a pretty good job.  It's faithful to the 2000-2004 ruleset.

[J. Carney]

http://feonline.lang.hm/SFB/FE/login.cgi

This one is being done with ADB's approval.  It's still in development so if you want to play you have to register, but it does a pretty good job.  It's faithful to the 2000-2004 ruleset.

Could you give us a little more info on this one... like a screenshot or some gameplay info or something?

I'm glad it's in the works, but I'd like to know more about it before jumping in.

[Max Power]

The other way, which I alluded to above, is to play over the internet with an application sharing software and cyberboard (http://cyberboard.brainiac.com) software. If you have MSN messenger you have the application sharing software already. Cyberboard is a shareware program used to play out PBEM wargames. Phillipe Le Bas made up a full advanced ops F&E gameboard for it (good things do sometimes come from France). This means that the map is defined, the counters are defined (it's literally impossible to run out of counters), everything is defined. What you then do is click application sharing in MSN messenger, and choose to share the cyberboard program and any other relevant programs (accounting forms, die roller program, etc). When you do so both players will see the same cyberboard map at the same time. The player at the remote location can also take control of the cyberboard program with the permission of the player/person that owns the computer it is running from. What that means is that one player can make a move, and the other can counter his moves or make decisions, in real time. Effectively it's like being there, but you're not actually there, of course. Cyberboard, being a program that was originally designed for PBEM, also has a great deal of functionality to play in this manner. Frequently what will happen is all movements that do not require interaction between the players at the same time are done by E-mail, and only reaction movement and combat are done "face to face".

I have the full cyberboard gamebox for F&E alluded to above. If you want it, or want to see a demonstration of it, e-mail me and I send it/show you what I mean. I'll note that I can't get zonealarm pro to work with MSN and application sharing, and I have to shut it off to get it to work; you may need to shut down your firewall (if you have one) to make it work.

Edit: Oh, I forgot to mention, that all of this is totally free, of course.

[Lepton]

Ya, I agree Cleaven.  What I don't understand with ADB is why just have SFBOL only use Tournament Rules and ships?  If Paramont is so pissy with a Computer game yet they do not mind the SFBOL (because it is server based and would not be putting a functional game on other computers) what is wrong with ADB expanding the features and rules of SFBOL to allow this? 

You haven't been paying attention recently have you? The latest editions of SFBOL (everything past V2, which they pulled support from more than a year ago) has full functionality, with any kind of ship. There are at least 3 seperate campaigns in progress at the moment IIRC. There's a upgrade coming to another version at the end of the year as well, I think.

I might add to this that as far as I know ADB has every intention of adding F&E to SFBOL, so their support and development of SFBOL is continuing and on-going.

[RazalYllib]

Max, its good to see others have use the FnE toolbox for cyberboard.

I ran across it in SFC1 days before EAW was announced and dreamed of some way of seeding the battles generated on the strategic play to be resolved using the tactical interface of SFC1, despite it's limitations.

Then came EAW, and then OP.  Shame about the missing Tholians, if they were present, it would have been doable w/ a multiplayer script similar in nature the COOP Ace.  T

My initial vision was use Cyberboard to generate battle hexes that are then resolved tactically by teams of players through mplayer, I mean gamespy...  Once all the battle hexes are resolved, next phase via email/IRC/other...lather rinse repeat.

Any one else up for it?

[Max Power]

Working on such a thing now. Development is currently ongoing. If you have an interest in assisting, we have a forum for development of the concept  here: http://bozobits.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=46.

As for access and I'll add you.