|
Post by Supreme Leader Vanguard on Jun 25, 2007 7:20:24 GMT -5
I think Fed - Klingon would be best for the newer players.
|
|
|
Post by ISN War Reporter (Embedded) on Jun 25, 2007 9:40:53 GMT -5
Fed-Klingon is more what the game was designed around...and better for newbies, ps: hate Rom ;D
|
|
|
Post by Evil Spock on Jun 25, 2007 20:08:21 GMT -5
I do not recommend plasma races for a campaign,.. depending on the speed of ships allowed it can be an all or nothing. If you let players build fleets that is even more troubling. I feel the base rules work really well. It has been historical that if defensive positions do not come out and fight they will starve to death. From castles to Iwo Jima. Our rules reflect that if you wish to turtle,... there is a price to pay ! Fed/Klink. It is the most balanced and fun of games. Running plasma battles bore me to death. To be honest I would probably not play in a campaign based on that. So there is your chance folks Hey I need a break from this anyways,... Early ere may put a spin on this I am not aware of,.. Rom should suck in early era and have d**n sublight warbirds for christ sakes as main fleet elements. Yes it is a fine line between providing balance to players. You can have all out even,.. it almost gets balanced by players alliances,.. almost,... Balance this game: I wonder how Van has such large ships ? I would not argue that balancing is bad, but that maybe jugdement of Van skill was off. He was Dflys wing for years and his fleet is all CA hull ships ?? Warp is having trouble fighting his equal with lesser ships. I feel balancing is important and even in the B5 I miss judged folks. Ref's do the best they can. The Dfly mixing ideal,..... try this,... the choosing of fleets and a ref setting a portion is the best mix of my rules of setting All, and Georges of setting none. Just my thoughts on all this. Nice convo though folks,..
|
|
|
Post by Maximus Plasma on Jun 28, 2007 8:04:31 GMT -5
This is a side issue. OK i was wondering if there is a a method of telling a nation of it's current Evp. Wether or not a nation has lost a site at the end of a turn So that, when you plot,the next turn . You don't spend, more than you have. For instance. on turn three a fleet takes out a base and 2 ships at a planet. On impulse three. Now on turn 4 the nation of the planet that lost the base. Has not recieved any notifacation of loss of either income or site ownership. How would that player "know" if the site was still his or had been occupied? Did i miss something in the rules?
|
|
|
Post by Maximus Plasma on Jun 28, 2007 8:12:36 GMT -5
I would like to see a one of three 2 sided wars. #1 a federation vs Lyran. # 2 a Lyran vs Hydran. Or #3 Lyran vs Mirzak. But if it is the last one it would have to be a mid era or late . Once the "mirv" warheads are on mirzak ships they really become scary! Also no advanced ships please! X ships ruin the game "IMHO" Gee get the impression i want to see more Lyrans? lol Since there seems to be a dislike for plasma battles in our group. Even though i feel the best battles are Romulan vs federation.
|
|
|
Post by Head Fur Shalafi on Jun 28, 2007 8:41:18 GMT -5
from what I've seen of the X ships the "first generation" ones (X ships that are on the CC hulls of a race for example) are not too much of a game breaker because they're all underpowered (for some reason when firesoul added them in they chopped some power off of them ) they still ARE powerful but no more so than a mid sized DN which would be about the equivalent BVP..... it's the "second generation" ships that are COMPLETELY out of whack BVP wise
|
|
|
Post by DeathFrog on Jun 28, 2007 18:57:46 GMT -5
One way around the X ships we use in Dyna is to make all the phaser X become phaser 1. Takes away a lot of the punch without making the ship worthless.
As per your question Morto: This is a side issue. OK i was wondering if there is a a method of telling a nation of it's current Evp. Wether or not a nation has lost a site at the end of a turn So that, when you plot,the next turn . You don't spend, more than you have. For instance. on turn three a fleet takes out a base and 2 ships at a planet. On impulse three. Now on turn 4 the nation of the planet that lost the base. Has not recieved any notifacation of loss of either income or site ownership. How would that player "know" if the site was still his or had been occupied? Did i miss something in the rules?
It is supposed to be that if you are not notified that they did an OC< you still control that planet and the EP on it, so you get to collect it. IF the attacking player wants to take it over(plot OC) and does, then and only then do you lose it. Just remember they cannot blockade a planet that does not have a base. If I missed anything on this please pipe in someone.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Spock on Jun 28, 2007 19:17:11 GMT -5
if turn 1 someone wins a battle on impulse 3 he does not have time to occupy it, cause occupation of a system takes a full impulse.
Both players know the results of the battle. The original player still collects ep on turn 2, until an occupation takes place, presumably sometime on turn 2. For turn 3 the EP would shift to the new player.
Nothing is missed by you Dlfy except players fighting are aware of what is going on. Only the nations involved under the current rules know who owns a planet.
This makes me think of the core hex now,... I am willing to form a joint fleet to oust Mav if anyone is interested that way intel is verifiable,..
I like two sides for the upcoming game. AOW campaign rocked. It was just two sides with large fleets and commanders on each side. It was much more cooperative and friendly. Just a thought.
I do not like X ships either and they should all be banned or as dfly says really toned down.
Seeking weapons can bog down some players online games,.. Lyran make an excellent choice for one nation of the next campaign.
|
|
|
Post by ISN War Reporter (Embedded) on Jun 28, 2007 20:10:49 GMT -5
Lyran are cool...and make for an interesting game in a Hydran/LDR vs. Klingon/Lyran way......
|
|
|
Post by Maximus Plasma on Jun 29, 2007 7:55:30 GMT -5
So my vote would be a FED VS LYRAN then i guess and i think a late era would be ok . Pay for the missels again like pirates, And see if we can introduce capturing ships for it. Oh and of course NO BLOKCADES!!!!!!!!!! Silly stupid wasteful dumbass rule!
|
|
|
Post by Lord Hellus, Council Chairman on Jun 29, 2007 8:17:58 GMT -5
If I run the next campaign, I see some rule amendments and a twist to the us vs them game. Would there be any objection to Roman and Alex Commanding each side or should I find two average players for leader roles?
|
|
|
Post by Maximus Plasma on Jun 29, 2007 11:44:29 GMT -5
Well i would after the sides are choosen. Let the each pick their own commander n chief. Any other ideas?
|
|
|
Post by ISN War Reporter (Embedded) on Jun 29, 2007 14:39:10 GMT -5
I, Roman, agree with Morty's assessment. Alex might beg to differ....
|
|
|
Post by Lord Hellus, Council Chairman on Jun 29, 2007 18:31:00 GMT -5
I picture the Sector Commander, three Division Commanders, A COMMERCE COMMANDER, i.e. freighters and escorts, and a couple of Pirate Forces. For a total of twelve players. Anyone else could be expeditionary forces assigned to the front
|
|
|
Post by Count Blademaster on Jun 29, 2007 18:39:14 GMT -5
Dude! How cool could it be if we can make up a set of rules that would actually give each of those positions something different to do! I guess that would be too complex.
|
|