Topic: I miss the T Bomb (Read 13805 times)

Monk · « **Reply #20 on:** April 28, 2003, 07:05:30 pm »

I've been playing EAW and lurking aound here for about a year, but have never posted to this forum. So, feel free to ignore me. :-) But I'm confused by Pestalece's statement that game speed 9 in SFC is real time. It's been a VERY long time since I played SFB, but I seem to recall one turn (the time required for a phaser to recharge) equaling a minute. In EAW, that equates to game speed 5, I think. Anyway, I have tried EAW at game speeds higher than 5 and just am not digging it. You seem to lose so much of the simulation--adjusting your speed, playing with ECM, etc. The ships even look a little silly at speed 7 and up as they wiggle around the screen like they're on a fast forwarded video. I've avoided D2 for this very reason. Just can't get into the high game speeds, which is all that seems to be available. Anyway, I freely admit to being a newbie around here but I just thought I'd toss in my $.02.

Dopler · « **Reply #21 on:** April 29, 2003, 02:37:45 pm »

Quote:

Go play SFC2 then, and stop trying to make SFC3 like SFC2.

With any luck, the next great Star Trek starship combat sim will be put out by another company without any of this drag-the-game-down SFB luggage to ruin it.

Wait ...... let me check .............Yep, even after 2 and a half years its still dragging SFC2 down

wonder if you will be playing with SFC3 in 2 yr's ??????

Credo Narth · « **Reply #24 on:** May 02, 2003, 05:22:56 am »

Eh...?

sjvessey, you're obviously looking for a flame war.

Firing arcs... SFB, and SFC 1 and 2, features much wider arcs than SFC 3. They are, however, based on reality as much as on Star Trek. How often do you see Yoyager's port phaser bank firing starboard? In ST2 TWOK, the Enterprise's port phasers fire out to port, not starboard. By the design of the phaser, you could tell that it had a limited firing arc. So in the show, they can't actually fire where they want to.

Recharging phasers... Au contraire. In ST Nemesis, the Enterprise ends up with it's phaser coils burnt out. Every time a red alert is called, they charge phasers. Sure, they take a lot less time than in SFC/SFB, but think about it. Can you really prepare a 800 metre strip of phaser coils for firing in 3 seconds? I would say the show reduces this time because it's expedient, not because it reflects reality.

HETs... Never seen any ship in Star Trek perform a high energy turn. But the HET recharge rate makes sense... You make be able to turn a Galaxy on a dime using internal dampening fields and by overloading the structural integrity fields, but these would then need time to be repaired and prepared before they could next be used.

Shields dropping at warp... Didn't the Enterprise E get directly hit in Nemesis at warp? Causing her to lose warp power and hence drop in sub-light speeds? Enough said.

Low power of weapons... Try flying the Scimitar against a Valdore in Skirmish mode, I believe you'll find it has ample power. Also, why not drop your shields and try getting an alpha strike from a Warbird. Watch the pretty colours as your hull goes poof.

Star Trek ship combat compromises reality for the sake of time as well as simplicity. SFB evolved over many years as an experiment of what people could do given the technology available. Hence missiles, scatterpacks, wild weasels, t-bombs, ECM/ECCM and the like. It is very detailed, but far more accurate than any Star Trek battle.

You should try it. I reckon you'll find that not only is SFB combat different, it's also a lot better.

sjvessey · « **Reply #27 on:** May 02, 2003, 07:15:11 am »

Who is Johnny Carson? Envelope to forehead? Sorry you lost me.

Perhaps I was just being pedantic but there certainly ARE plenty of ST games that bear no resemblance to SFB. And correct me if I'm wrong but Elite Force seemed pretty successful to me. Even though success or not has little to do with the veracity of the original post.

And slap me on the wrist for using the word 'realistic' when in fact the poster I quoted said 'properly'. Seems like this is a tautology here. If you define 'proper' starship combat as that you find in SFB then of course SFB will be the only 'proper' starship combat simulator.

My point, however, is simply that SFB and all the SFC titles contain significant deviances from the series and movies purely for the sake of gameplay. In this sense, they aren't 'really' Star Trek at all and so to say that SFB is the only 'proper' Star Trek combat game is meaningless.

As for 'realistic', no I didn't mean well balanced self-consistent gameplay, I meant realistic. Neither the game nor the series is particularly realistic, and I don't just mean because the technology doesn't really exist. I mean that the use they make of the postulated technology is silly.

Hit and run raids? T-bombs? Why not just beam a bomb into the ship? Photon torpedoes? As I said elsewhere a 5 kilo antimatter warhead detonated next to a starship hull would release an energy pulse of over 100,000 terawatts, instantly vapourising everything within tens of miles of the epicentre. That's not future science, a guy from 1920 could have worked that out. Closing to within visual distance before firing off your weapons? Come on... you don't even do that in the 21st century.

Finally, if you think using the word 'crap' is crude you should head down to your local junior high and listen to what kids say in the schoolyard.

Mog · « **Reply #29 on:** May 02, 2003, 08:22:16 am »

I started playing SFC1 online in August 2000. I started playing SFC2:EAW the day it was released. I started playing SFC2:OP the day it was released. I still play EAW and OP online, and can see myself continuing to do so untill the day my computer will no longer run the software. SFC3 lasted about a week for me. It has been uninstalled and filed away under B for Bin. Point is, some people like the older games, some people like the new game. Arguing about it seems pointless to me. Attacking the games (or their source of inspiration) also seems pointless to me (Tulmahk - you seem to have replaced Nannerslug as the anti-SFB lead spokesperson around here). Just play whichever version you enjoy best and have fun.

sjvessey · « **Reply #32 on:** May 02, 2003, 09:58:17 am »

It's called 'suspension of disbelief'.

However, if you want a good (i.e. much more based in real physics) description of what future space warfare MIGHT look like, read 'The Reality Dysfunction' by a guy called Peter Hamilton.

Mentat Jon · « **Reply #33 on:** May 02, 2003, 08:02:04 pm »

I just miss T bombing,oh well I shall carry on,hit and run with transpoters,The Marine is your freind.

Cleaven · « **Reply #36 on:** May 02, 2003, 09:23:51 pm »

But I thought you were one of the few who played SFB out of a plastic bag.

Cleaven · « **Reply #38 on:** May 02, 2003, 10:40:24 pm »

That was part of the reason I decided to buy the volumes instead of just playing with my friends' gear (models too).

mbday · « **Reply #39 on:** May 04, 2003, 07:49:21 am »

I can say that I have played SFB, SFC1, SFC2, SFC2 OP. SFC3, EF, KA, SFA, and D&D.
SFB is SFB. SFC is SFC SFC2 and OP are SFC2 and OP SFC3 is SFC3 so on.
The point some poeple do not SFC3 or D&D and some poeple do.
Some people do not like SFB, SFC1, 2, or OP and some Do.
Why can't we all stop bashing each other.
Can't we all get along?
They are all games let shake hands and get on witrh life.
I like all of the games.

News:

Topic: I miss the T Bomb (Read 13805 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Monk

Dopler

jimmi7769

sjvessey

Credo Narth

Ryker

Cleaven

sjvessey

jimmi7769

Mog

jimmi7769

Cleaven

sjvessey

Mentat Jon

J'inn

J'inn

Cleaven

jimmi7769

Cleaven

mbday

Topic: I miss the T Bomb (Read 13805 times)