Topic: What was Nanner trying to say?

[DAnahos_XC]

The jist-

Some play on D2.

Some play on D3.

Some play on D2 And/Or D3.

Some like SFC OP/EAW. Some like SFC3. Some like both.

Who gives a flying flip who plays what where and when? Can't everyone play where they want to play when they want to play and leave it at that?

(Sorry, this longtime issue is really making my head hurt.)

/back to lurking

[Rolling]

The jist-

Some play on D2.

Some play on D3.

Some play on D2 And/Or D3.

Some like SFC OP/EAW. Some like SFC3. Some like both.

Who gives a flying flip who plays what where and when? Can't everyone play where they want to play when they want to play and leave it at that?

(Sorry, this longtime issue is really making my head hurt.)

/back to lurking

Exactly.

People should be able to play what they want without being labled or put down.

[Rolling]

Age, once again you bring up the bias against people who play D3. There has been a lot of that the last few days and I see no proof of it. Just people trying to incite anger over an issue that does not exist.
As for the comments you recieved on your tactics posts... well if you are going to talk tactics without actually having used them against a human player you should grow a thick skin for the responses you will get.
As for Skyflyer's post, did you actually read it or just the title? It was humor directed at the fact that GW3 was starting at the same time as his school year. Nothing offensive, just a joke.

I will explain a first hand experience about the way people react to a person/fleet playing the D3.

When SCF3 first came out, most of the SSCF members bought it.

We practiced a little together, then decided to play in our first "real campaign".

I was approached, by a D2er on MSN, and asked if the SSCF was playing in the D3.  I said yes.

That person immediately went to the D2 forums and announced that the SSCF was now a D3 fleet.

Why?  We play a D3 campaign and all of a sudden we were a D3 fleet?  That made no sense to me.

I begin to realize what was going on.  The D2ers could not except the fact that someone, or some fleet was an SCF fleet.

They HAD to be a D2 fleet OR a D3 fleet.

I was shocked.  This made no sense to me since the person yelling about never even played SCF3 at the time.

So, yes I understand what is being said.  

You are labled a D3er exclusively if you play there, at least at first you were.

Now, on the other hand, when I first went into the D3, I felt very unconfortable.  People were ruder.

I finally realised that the player base were young squirts that had no manners.

I haven't been on there for quiet some time so I don't know how much it has changed.

You may not have felt the difference between the D2 and D3.  You may not have been fingered as a traitor of the D2, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been done.

Yes, it is two different games, and it attracts different people for different reasons.

But, we could be civil neighbors and share ideas with each other.

"May I borrow a cup of sugar?"

Kimberly

I know and you are great person Kimberly one who is warming and careing in the D2 community especialy on the old Taldren boards.The SSCF is Registeredd Fleet at the Star Trek Gamers Directory that mean nobody can use your name it is protected.That is what the STGD can do is protect Fleet Names.

Thanks, Age.

I get rather embarrassed when someone compliments me like this.

I don't know how to respond so I ignore it, but then I feel rude so I have to acknowlege it to say thank you.

Kimberly

[Cleaven]

I begin to realize what was going on.  The D2ers could not except the fact that someone, or some fleet was an SCF fleet.

They HAD to be a D2 fleet OR a D3 fleet.

Rubbish. Am I a D2er? Yes I am. Was I in anyway part of this non-acceptance of a fleet doing both? No, far from it.

Now stop painting people with broad brushes.

You were not said to have done it personally, but that doesn't mean it wasn't done.

Don't call me a liar when I experienced it first hand. 

You said D2er's. Plainly and clearly. I am one, and did no such thing. You may have had a problem with a subset of the D2 players but not all of them, at least not me. Just stick to the facts and don't include me in your stupid global generalisation.

Now if you do specifically say I (as a D2'er) was part of it (the non-acceptance) then you are flat out lying. Is that what you really want to say?

[KBF-Dogmatix_XC]

Age, once again you bring up the bias against people who play D3. There has been a lot of that the last few days and I see no proof of it. Just people trying to incite anger over an issue that does not exist.
As for the comments you recieved on your tactics posts... well if you are going to talk tactics without actually having used them against a human player you should grow a thick skin for the responses you will get.
As for Skyflyer's post, did you actually read it or just the title? It was humor directed at the fact that GW3 was starting at the same time as his school year. Nothing offensive, just a joke.

I will explain a first hand experience about the way people react to a person/fleet playing the D3.

When SCF3 first came out, most of the SSCF members bought it.

We practiced a little together, then decided to play in our first "real campaign".

I was approached, by a D2er on MSN, and asked if the SSCF was playing in the D3.  I said yes.

That person immediately went to the D2 forums and announced that the SSCF was now a D3 fleet.

Why?  We play a D3 campaign and all of a sudden we were a D3 fleet?  That made no sense to me.

I begin to realize what was going on.  The D2ers could not except the fact that someone, or some fleet was an SCF fleet.

They HAD to be a D2 fleet OR a D3 fleet.

I was shocked.  This made no sense to me since the person yelling about never even played SCF3 at the time.

So, yes I understand what is being said. 

You are labled a D3er exclusively if you play there, at least at first you were.

Now, on the other hand, when I first went into the D3, I felt very unconfortable.  People were ruder.

I finally realised that the player base were young squirts that had no manners.

I haven't been on there for quiet some time so I don't know how much it has changed.

You may not have felt the difference between the D2 and D3.  You may not have been fingered as a traitor of the D2, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been done.

Yes, it is two different games, and it attracts different people for different reasons.

But, we could be civil neighbors and share ideas with each other.

"May I borrow a cup of sugar?"

Kimberly

Kim...I don't doubt that this one person (whoever it was did this) but do you mean to tell me you think anyone, especially a majority of "D2 people" actually bought it or cared what that person popped off about?  Egads..I barely remember the incident.  It was a nonevent to me.  Granted, as a member of the SSCF, I can see where it might have been more of a meaningful event for you and your fleetmates.

I'm quite certain I never put any stock in that "report" and I don't know anyone who did.  I guess I'm a little surprised at the lasting impression that this has left on you.  Just out of curiosity...can anyone even remember who it was?  I don't...heh...but then I'm getting old.


Yes...the incident was completely stupid and shouldn't have happened.  I'm with ya there.


Just because one or two...or maybe even five people did this or believed it and perhaps felt the way you say they did, it doesn't mean that this feeling is predominant among SFC2 players. 


I doubt the idea that a fleet must either be solely a D2, D3 or GSA fleet is very popular anywhere, let alone among the "D2 players"   Heck, I can't even think of any fleets that necessarily restrict their members to playing a specific race.

[KBF-Dogmatix_XC]

Wow , and I thought the SSCF caught hell over the BF1942 Games. which although I wasn't able to play on very much, I still liked.

To the Original point, There's 4 games here Made by the same people. Why can't we be a Comm[     ] based on that alone?

I'm not sure why not, and It hasn't been Told to me where I can understand.

Stephen

The SSCF catches hell if we have an original thought and don't act like the other sheep.

Face it, people are scared when people do different things.  It makes them.... uncomfortable.

Don't be different, or you'll get fingered.

Again...I doubt seriously that this is a belief held by more than a very small percentage of the people in this community.  I believe a great many people are being just as harmed by this generalization as the SSCF has been by those that hold this minority view.





 

[KBF-Dogmatix_XC]

kim, you are 100% on the money what i am talking about. i could get real detailed and messy about a similar situation which you guys went through, but i wont.

you can have different taste and nothing makes one more right than the other.

Seriously Nanner...let's hear it.  I'm rather surprised by this.  What happened?

[Laflin]

Doggy does the wife know you have all of this free time to post?  Back to changing diapers, mister!

[KBF-Dogmatix_XC]

Doggy does the wife know you have all of this free time to post?  Back to changing diapers, mister!

Heh...I'm going back into the jungle tomorrow and I'll  pretty much be gone from any "fun" for the next couple of weeks.  I think she's cutting me some slack. 


1 poopy diaper and 2 pee-pee diapers to my credit today.

[FPF-Jem]

I guess what it come down to is that there is no Justice around here for D3ers unlike D2ers which get away with a lot the joking and the nonscense.I feel like them sometimes in the D2 forum when I explain a tactic everyone jokes about it. When I am at the Tri Mods boards when I do this they tell me the prober way to to it.The D2 communtiy doesn't do this at the Tri Mods they get warned a lot about thier behavior.

  I still intend to play OP online once I am fully set up as well SFC3 Dom Wars.There is one thing I would like to point out about myself is that I have been on forum boards for 5 months.Taldren was the first and I was there for 4.5 months.I hope this sheads some light on the subject.

Sorry about not responding to this earlier but I was playing a new game I got and was too busy to check the forums   

I can think of a couple situations in which you might of got bounced a little hard Age, but I think it was primarily because you didn't understand the way we interact in the D2 Forum, we can occasionally come across as being a little harsh in our rebuttals to those who don't know us, and in the case with the BCE because you weren't listening to what the other people were saying, and they got fed up. I hope I didn't come over as being overly harsh but that was the way I perceived it.

One thing that has helped me to acclimatize myself to various forums has been to simply watch the interaction of the community before I start to actively participate and to hold my tongue as much as possible unless I feel quite strongly or have something I think will contribute to the discussion. Also when I do goof up and/or someone bites my head off, I always try to remember that it is just a game and isn't really that important.

Again I hope you didn't take my post the wrong way, it was meant in a friendly manner.

Sincerely, FPF-Jem

P.S. I love Spell checkers, I'd make so many mistakes otherwise 

P.P.S. I agree with Doggy on the issue with the SSCF being a SFC3 fleet only, in fact it had totally slipped my mind until it was brought up again because I hadn't paid it any attention the first time

[FireSoul]

Am I the only one baffled by Kim's and Age's posts?

Only the guilty and involved will understand. 

Kim, were you on board within the forums for the people or for the game? Perhaps you should consider that these boards exist because of a game, first, and to allow people with common interest for that game to come together, second.

People don't want to be babysit, they're not here for that. They're here to come together because of games they like, and they will display their opinions and emotions in all ways.

Personally, I like you as a player and as a contributrice to this group of people, but your reaction to us and such since the mishap involving my OP+ project makes me think you were here more for the people than for the game. I would enjoy to see you online and play with us again, but not on here like this participating in a way that keeps saying that you don't want to be with us.

Be in it for the game..   (looks up at pretty graphic)..
'It's all about the game."

-- Luc
FireSoul

[Cleaven]

P.S. I love Spell checkers, I'd make so many mistakes otherwise 

But why isn't SFC (and SFB) added to the dictionary!!!!

[Rolling]

More and more people are saying they remember the incident, others refuse to believe it existed. 

Some don't want to hear that such a thing could have ever here.

And others have proven the point that you can't be different, or say anything different, without being whipped back into the line.

I've been guilty myself of having bad feelings towards the D3ers!!!  There, I'm the first one to admit it!!!

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

More and more people are saying they remember the incident, others refuse to believe it existed. 

Some don't want to hear that such a thing could have ever here

The past might havve its embarrasing moments but the point is to move on, I do think the majority of D2 players hold no ill feeling towards the D3 or D3 players at this point in time

  And others have proven the point that you can't be different, or say anything different, without being whipped back into the line.

I don't see this although there is likely a tendency for people to hold on to their views unless shaken out of them.  And trying to point out the validity of ones views is essential to any debate and debate is the cornerstone of most forums.  Now the language and tone definately needs some adjustment or it could be interpreted as "whipping" in some cases.  I'd prefer a more guiding tone with some witty retort to be more the standard, but then again I'm just trying to whip you all into line.....

I've been guilty myself of having bad feelings towards the D3ers!!!  There, I'm the first one to admit it!!!

Only because I was so longwinded in the other thread, otherwise I'd have beat ya....   But seriously, Kim, I think what you posted in this last bit is not truly what you felt.  I made the distinction on that other longwinded post that I had some distain for SFC#3 when it first appeared, but I never had the same distain for the players themselves.  I think this is what your getting at, but we should be clear about this distinction so as to give the most accurate portrayal possible, please correct me if I am wrong about this.

[Cleaven]

Hmmm, there's being different, and then there's being wrong to the detriment of others.

[Hyperion]

This is not true, and youre attributing a rather unpleasant affection to the B&P games which is unwaaranted by those who play SFC2 and OP. Some may not prefer the game of SFC3, i dont.But i do not now nor have i have i ever felt that those who want to play SFC3 "inferior". And i think its unfair to those who continue to play SFC2 that thiskind of blanket statement is made.

I'm not understanding. But it would seem that SFC3 players would generally say they are treated as inferiors on these boards. I don't see it, I kind of see it as vanilla and chaocalate, some like one some like the other.  I do know that as the cookie crumbled SFC3 has gotten the shaft support wise. But that pretty much was out of our control, and now with passing of Taldren virtually assures the continuation of "non support". Will there ever be an official patch? There certainly won't be the support that Taldren and David Ferrell have given to EAW and OP.

As far as the problems of grafting the SFC3 community into the existing SFC community, and then the further grafting of SFCC into the larger Star Trek gaming community, like attracts like. I like EAW and OP and I want to like SFC3 more but I havn't been able to complete the single player missions with a lot of understanding; SFC3 was just too much out of the box(as in thinking out of the box). The mechanics of the game are different, I didn't say worse; whixch turns me off. I do not own any other Trek games, I followed the development of KA on the old Interplay boards, but when it was released and then the team got fired or reassigned, well that was enough for me I wasn't getting a game that wasn't going to be supported. I bought SFC3 to give Taldren the benefit of the doubt and support. I enjoy watching the series but am not a consistent follower of them.  Trek gaming is not an issue for me.

Like attracts like. I do not understand a guy like Age, who  wants me wants me to ignore angular velocity by covering it up with a piece of tape. That just makes no sense to me. I would play OP with the ships as white blocks. It is nice that they look good and modders have done wonderful things, but the cool looking ships are not central to the game for me, the mechaniics are though., and the mechanics of EAW and OP make for a good game which I play more often than SFC3.

Like attracts like, there is no forcing community.

i would tend to disgree with you on that, but much of depends on how one defeines as being treated inferior?

If were talking simply about sheer numbers of people playing or mods avalible or what have you, then i think that if i played SFC# i would find a lesser overall interest in SFC3 than SFC2 or OP. But my post was in reply to part of Byzantine's Statement

Now.  My thought on Nanners point.
Most SFC2 people say they don't play SFC3 because they do not like it, it is not their cup of tea, it is not their style, it lacks things that they want.  There is nothing wrong with thinking that or saying it.  But there is that Grognard element in the SFB/SFC2 camp who say it this way - I don't like SFC3 because it lacks these things that I want/expect and it is therefore an inferior game.  Well.  There it is.  If you say the game is inferior you are pretty much saying the people who play it are inferior.
 

And i Responded

This is not true, and youre attributing a rather unpleasant affection to the B&P games which is unwaaranted by those who play SFC2 and OP. Some may not prefer the game of SFC3, i dont.But i do not now nor have i have i ever felt that those who want to play SFC3 "inferior". And i think its unfair to those who continue to play SFC2 that this kind of blanket statement is made.

As i said before this statement does not reflect of those who play SFC2 or OP in totality and its precisely this sort of blanket statement that simply throws gas on the fire. All of the merits of the respective games aside, they are two groups of people who play two different games. Further to my point simply because i or anyone may or may not a certain game system does not imply that we think poorly of anyone else that does. His statement merely widens an already opening rift between SFC2 and SFC3 players by ascribing feeling of a certain group of players (SFC2 & OP) to another (players of SFC3).

[FPF-DieHard]

kim, you are 100% on the money what i am talking about. i could get real detailed and messy about a similar situation which you guys went through, but i wont.

you can have different taste and nothing makes one more right than the other.

Seriously Nanner...let's hear it.  I'm rather surprised by this.  What happened?

It really wasn't that entertaining . . .

[Hyperion]

Hello Byzantine

Just retorting here

1.Most SFC2 people say they don't play SFC3 because they do not like it, it is not their cup of tea, it is not their style, it lacks things that they want.  There is nothing wrong with thinking that or saying it.
This is the attitude of most SFCx players and it is a fair attitude I think.  Yes, if something lacks features that I want it is inferior - for my tastes.  But other people have different tastes and that is fine.  Most everyone who has been posting recently is in this class.  And class does carry both meanings right here, it is a good thing.
 

I agree with you mostly on this one except for the use of 'inferior' and i think this is where our issue is.


 Inferior:

Low or lower in order, degree, or rank: Captain is an inferior rank to major.

1.) Low or lower in quality, value, or estimation: inferior craft; felt inferior to his older sibling.
2.)Second-rate; poor: an inferior translation.
3.)Situated under or beneath.
4.)Botany. Located below the perianth and other floral parts. Used of an ovary.
5.)Anatomy. Located beneath or directed downward.
6.)Printing. Set below the normal line of type; subscript.
7.)Astronomy.
    Orbiting between Earth and the sun: Mercury is an inferior planet.
     Lying below the horizon.

8.) A person lower in rank, status, or accomplishment than another.
9.) Printing. An inferior character, such as the number 2 in CO2.


10.) Low or lower in order, degree, or rank.
11.) Low or lower in quality, value, or estimation.
12.) Second-rate; poor.
13.) Situated below or directed downward.
14.) In human anatomy, situated nearer the soles in relation to a reference point.


Whether SFCx is inferior or not is not the issue here, the game does work. However it doesnt become a matter of 'class' because im sure that on both sides of the issue there are people pointing to the obvious drawbacks in the opposing camps own 'game'. There are always going to be some who say because game system '"X" is inferior because etc...etc but that also crosses the SFCx series lines equally.

2.But there is that Grognard element in the SFB/SFC2 camp who say it this way - I don't like SFC3 because it lacks these things that I want/expect and it is therefore an inferior game.
Cleaven is right, for some peoples tastes SFC3 is a lesser game in their personal estimation.  The problem is in the way this is said.  I preffer SFCx because I like X and/or I don't like SFCx because X  Good.  I prefer SFCx because SFCx is an inferior game  Not so good.  Bluntly, who died and made the speaker of this God so that they had a right to define superior/inferior in universal terms?  This is the attitude of a small minority but people of this type often tend to be very opinionated, contentious, and noisy.  They also tend to be the type who get banned a lot, maybe that is why this thread has been much more civil and on track.

For the time being ill avoid the issue of Grognard (ive nevr like that word)

But in your point 2:
Personal opinion is just that and when i saw the pre-release news for SFC3 on the Taldren boards it was comparable some days to a back alley knife fight,with terms like "dumbing down" and "SFC is not SFB" etc etc. What we have here today in these boards is really nothing comapred to that. However as for who has the "rgiht to define"? in terms of gameplay and game serieswe all make that detrmination on dailiy basis and not just with games but in our "real" lives as well. Why do we think that would change when we come here?

The object is debate, in this case SFC2 & OP vs. SFC3. It's a deabte that will simply go on and on with no real end. And there are always people on both sides who will make some regetable satements with regards to whether or not SFCx is piece of crap. I dont think anyone "died" on either side but if someone does in fact try to take this stance (and they are out there on both sides) if they offer what they think is proof in terms on an intellectual balance of the two games then go in and defend your respective SFC. But if some one is just Trolling dont even botherwith them, we all know this.

The point is that there are two diffrent communities here,not one. And although the "Twain" meet from time to time its not very often.

Personally they only wasy this is ever going to be solved is when (if) another SFC is put out and whether is based on SFC3 or SFC2:OP

[Hexx]

Wow and to think that I got told i should come over here and read stuff.

As a (somewhat lessr important) D2 player I've never felt or even heard anything negative about the SFC3. Personally I don't care for it, but I have promised myself that sometime soon I'm actually going to load it up again and try out some of the mods. To be honest I think many D2ers simply consider SFC3 another game, much as we'd consider Bridge Commander or Elite Force another game. It doesn't really effect us. That certainely doesn't mean that we think less of it or of the people who play it.

Kim- I'm still not sure what happened to you, I do hope you're happy(ier) playing whatver it is you're playing these days. As one of the D2ers who doesn't really care what the SSCF does with it's free time I'd love to see you back someday.

Age -as perhaps the leading contributer to the "bash Age" posts I suppose I should apologize, but I'm not really going to.
 Simply as an example (as mentioned above) the infamous BCE post- you posted it was a great ship (best BCH ). we told you it wasn't AND explained why. You told us we were wrong and that we didn't realize how to read the displays. I (I won't even use we here) said we weren't wrong , you were, and that ANYTIME YOU GOT ONLINE ANYONE WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SHOW YOU HOW TO FLY THE SHIPS.
Then you left and now seem to be complaining about the D2'ers. ( If you're not then I do humbly apologize)
At no time (that I can tell) did we say "go away" or anything rude.
It was all explained to you, and again you were told when you got online people would be happy to hook up with you and show you multiplayer tactics.
Now you're over here saying (or implying) that we should be banned?


I'm actaully not going to write anything else (yeah me!) beacause it would only contribute to this thread going way downhill..

[Byzantine]

Hi Hyperion,
I have a bad habit of using too many words to get to a point and that often clouds the issue much to my own detriment.  But I usually do have a point so...

Hello Byzantine

1.Most SFC2 people say they don't play SFC3 because they do not like it, it is not their cup of tea, it is not their style, it lacks things that they want.  There is nothing wrong with thinking that or saying it.
This is the attitude of most SFCx players and it is a fair attitude I think.  Yes, if something lacks features that I want it is inferior - for my tastes.  But other people have different tastes and that is fine.  Most everyone who has been posting recently is in this class.  And class does carry both meanings right here, it is a good thing.
 

I agree with you mostly on this one except for the use of 'inferior' and i think this is where our issue is.


 Inferior:

Low or lower in order, degree, or rank: Captain is an inferior rank to major.

1.) Low or lower in quality, value, or estimation: inferior craft; felt inferior to his older sibling.
2.)Second-rate; poor: an inferior translation.
3.)Situated under or beneath.
4.)Botany. Located below the perianth and other floral parts. Used of an ovary.
5.)Anatomy. Located beneath or directed downward.
6.)Printing. Set below the normal line of type; subscript.
7.)Astronomy.
    Orbiting between Earth and the sun: Mercury is an inferior planet.
     Lying below the horizon.

8.) A person lower in rank, status, or accomplishment than another.
9.) Printing. An inferior character, such as the number 2 in CO2.


10.) Low or lower in order, degree, or rank.
11.) Low or lower in quality, value, or estimation.
12.) Second-rate; poor.
13.) Situated below or directed downward.
14.) In human anatomy, situated nearer the soles in relation to a reference point.


Whether SFCx is inferior or not is not the issue here, the game does work. However it doesnt become a matter of 'class' because im sure that on both sides of the issue there are people pointing to the obvious drawbacks in the opposing camps own 'game'. There are always going to be some who say because game system '"X" is inferior because etc...etc but that also crosses the SFCx series lines equally.

Unclear statement and poor choice of words by me.  I should not have used 'inferior'.  My intent would be item 10 in your definition list.  I think we all keep a game ranking of some sorts in our heads, a subjective qualitative rank for our own use.  And to me the method of debate/expression is a matter of class - see part 2.

2.But there is that Grognard element in the SFB/SFC2 camp who say it this way - I don't like SFC3 because it lacks these things that I want/expect and it is therefore an inferior game.
Cleaven is right, for some peoples tastes SFC3 is a lesser game in their personal estimation.  The problem is in the way this is said.  I preffer SFCx because I like X and/or I don't like SFCx because X  Good.  I prefer SFCx because SFCx is an inferior game  Not so good.  Bluntly, who died and made the speaker of this God so that they had a right to define superior/inferior in universal terms?  This is the attitude of a small minority but people of this type often tend to be very opinionated, contentious, and noisy.  They also tend to be the type who get banned a lot, maybe that is why this thread has been much more civil and on track.

For the time being ill avoid the issue of Grognard (ive nevr like that word)

But in your point 2:
Personal opinion is just that and when i saw the pre-release news for SFC3 on the Taldren boards it was comparable some days to a back alley knife fight,with terms like "dumbing down" and "SFC is not SFB" etc etc. What we have here today in these boards is really nothing comapred to that. However as for who has the "rgiht to define"? in terms of gameplay and game serieswe all make that detrmination on dailiy basis and not just with games but in our "real" lives as well. Why do we think that would change when we come here?

The object is debate, in this case SFC2 & OP vs. SFC3. It's a deabte that will simply go on and on with no real end. And there are always people on both sides who will make some regetable satements with regards to whether or not SFCx is piece of crap. I dont think anyone "died" on either side but if someone does in fact try to take this stance (and they are out there on both sides) if they offer what they think is proof in terms on an intellectual balance of the two games then go in and defend your respective SFC. But if some one is just Trolling dont even botherwith them, we all know this.

I think I agree with what you are saying.  I need to dump that word inferior - it causes confusion.  My point: debating a game on its features and implementation of features is good (class).  To express a personal preference based on that debate is fine (class).  To say game X is inferior (ie, crappy, bad) and then leave it at that is not constructive and no good (trolling).  No, I have not personally seen any of that here by either camp but I am new.

And this, 'However as for who has the "rgiht to define"? in terms of gameplay and game serieswe all make that detrmination on dailiy basis and not just with games but in our "real" lives as well.'  this is the personal ranking described in part 1.

Basically I was just trying to say debate is good, trolling is bad.  I used too many words to say that.

The point is that there are two diffrent communities here,not one. And although the "Twain" meet from time to time its not very often.

Personally they only wasy this is ever going to be solved is when (if) another SFC is put out and whether is based on SFC3 or SFC2:OP

There are two separate games but there is enough overlap in the community to be sonsidered significant I think.  It stands to reason because of subject matter and portability of design elements (ship models etc) between the games.  I think the sharing of players and models between multiple Trek based platforms is a good thing (synergy) and I don't really understand why there should be any problems.  Which gets me to my last point.

I started this thread with no dog in the fight so to speak.  I think all versions of SFC have been or become good games in time and I think SFC/OP remains the best platform for SFB style gaming.  I have not personally seen animosity between SFC3 and SFC/OP players as groups.  But I have respect for Nanner and he seemed troubled by something.  And I did not like the way his previous thread was hijacked.  I thought with the silencing of some off-tangent voices the subject might be broached again and Nanner and others might have the opportunity to clearly state their case or grievance.

At this point in time we now have several irons in the fire (WT, UNITY, STGD, 11th Fleet).  I don't know if they are separate issues or if they are in any way related to Nanner's issue.  I do know that a number of participants in those other issues are very good at noisemaking and hijacking and so it remains an open question in my mind if Nanner has clearly stated his case or if he has been caught up in this perfect storm and nobody understands exactly what he is trying to say and why.

Because of all the smoke in the air from these other issues I am still looking for clarity.

P.S.  My wargaming started on SPI Napoleonic games so I like Grognard.