Dramatic SFB: SFBdrama Digest, Vol 43, Issue 4
TJ Hooker
metaldog09 at yahoo.com
Tue Jun 12 21:04:55 PDT 2018
Midshipman's GodKing's Feds are ready to adv for turn 5!
On Monday, June 11, 2018, 10:05:41 PM PDT, Jarod Ikeda via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
I'm with Matt. I've lost count how many campaigns I've played under this system and thank him profusely for creating the software and running them. (Thanks to Frank too for starting up the Midshipman's).
I read about hidden mines and whether I like it or not, I accept it. I've always contended that mines and tbombs and ship explosions unbalance the game, but alas....
Now narrow salvo's I didn't realize they were an advanced rule and were included in this campaign. But since they are ship specific when dealing with more than one ship it helps to smooth out the binary nature of it. (ton of damage or no damage).
Those are my thoughts on it.
Keep up the good work Matt (and Frank). Without you guys I'd be forced to play tourney's only. :(
Jarod (sleepy cat)
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 6:35 PM, <sfbdrama-request at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
Send SFBdrama mailing list submissions to
sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.mattnet.org/ listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet. org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sfbdrama-request at lists. mattnet.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
sfbdrama-owner at lists.mattnet. org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of SFBdrama digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Hidden mines (Pat Hogan)
2. Re: Hidden mines (Matthew)
3. Re: Hidden mines (Boyd Steere)
4. Re: Hidden mines (Ann Monaghan)
5. Re: Hidden mines (Michael Helbig)
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ----------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 18:45:54 -0400
From: Pat Hogan <hazelnut1968 at yahoo.com>
To: TJ Hooker <metaldog09 at yahoo.com>
Cc: Ben Sh <dragoastro at gmail.com>, Randy Blair
<randyblair2 at gmail.com>, Matthew via SFBdrama
<sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org>
Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Hidden mines
Message-ID: <6873831E-82E6-462B-9BA8- 9F616A161421 at yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I agree. While there are certain options and things I would do slightly differently if I was running a campaign; I?m not running this one. I accepted the rules and live and die by them. ?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 11, 2018, at 17:18, TJ Hooker via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>
> Not sure this is up for a vote, i don't really like hidden mines either.. that being said you have entered an established campaign where the rules were also established. The game interface does allow for accurate tracking and placement of the hidden mines from the shuttle bay and you can be sure that your opponent is being literally forced to place them via the interface so there is no room for error or "meta-gaming" (aka cheating). Your assertion you MUST now track every hex and every impulse is also simply untrue, having played and watched several scenarios I can tell you it is only relevant at certain times.
>
> I personally like narrow salvos.. many do not. You used that rule, perhaps all of your opponents should let you know upfront that they wont be using it and would strongly prefer that you not use it either Ben? I would also lobby for energy balance due to damage... that we include that rule as well, as I like it, but then again, I entered an established campaign where I agreed, when I joined, to the rules, including the optional rules. I think the rules are available on the website the the admins are also readily available. Maybe just give it a try instead of walking in the door trying to change the campaign rules? Its not that bad.. :)
>
> On Monday, June 11, 2018, 1:19:14 PM PDT, Randy Blair via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>
>
> Every game I've played includes them.
> SFBOL takes care of them just fine.
>
> I vote to keep them.
>
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 3:47 PM Ben Sh via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
> I was just surprised to find out that the campaign was using hidden mine placement.
>
> This is an optional rule that I have never seen included in any SFB game in the 35 odd years I have played.
>
> It is, imho, an absolutely terrible rule. It requires tracking every hex every opponent's ship has passed through and the turn/impulse it left that hex. Ugggg!!!
>
> I propose that this rule be removed from the campaign rules.
>
> It adds nothing to the "space combat" game this is supposed to be. The game is already extremely complicated, so much so that it is hard to get a new player to play. Why make it worse for so little tactical gain?
>
> For now, I request that any opponents I play and I refrain from hidden mine placement during our games, as, of course, I will.
>
> Thanks for reading my rant.
>
> Ben Shove
> Drago Astro
>
>
> ______________________________ ______________________
> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
> http://lists.mattnet.org/ listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet. org
> ______________________________ ______________________
> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
> http://lists.mattnet.org/ listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet. org
> ______________________________ ______________________
> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
> http://lists.mattnet.org/ listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet. org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mattnet.org/ pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet. org/attachments/20180611/ 587b6fe0/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 20:03:04 -0400
From: Matthew <matt at mattnet.org>
To: sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org
Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Hidden mines
Message-ID: <95764e1c-8235-9587-1a51- c72a34a2cacc at mattnet.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"
> I was just surprised to find out that the campaign was using hidden
> mine placement.
> I personally like narrow salvos.. many do not.
> I would also lobby for energy balance due to damage...
Currently, the ship has sailed on these issues. I'd like to direct your
attention to the SFB Rules of interest
<http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org/ docs/rules.html#sfb%20rules> in the campaign.
tl;dr: Give the campaign a chance and then hit up the mailing list after
the campaign is over.
The Secret placement of mines have been part of the campaign since it's
first public game, where the Romulan player of the time had successfully
used his Jedi Mind Tricks on the rest of us, to get us to include it. As
it's optional, I'm not surprised to see that players might want it out.
But it's in, it's marked in the campaign rules as in, and so the best
recourse is to minimize it's effects on you (or maximize it's effects on
your opponents, in hopes that *they* want it out.)
Narrow Salvos are marked as "Advanced", not "Optional". Therefore the
game is already balanced with those figured into things (the same way it
is for self-generated EW.) Personally, it never crossed my mind to
remove Narrow Salvos; they seem to me to be as much part of the game as
fancy shuttles and t-bombs.
Energy Balance Due to Damage, Leaky Shields, Critical Hits, Pre-Plotted
Movement, and so on, also are not part of the game as called out by the
campaign. If you want to include some certain optional rules or leave
out some certain non-optional rules, then I'm willing to entertain a
discussion.
**However**, the middle of ongoing campaigns are not the time to go
changing the rules. There is usually a short haitus between major
campaigns (in this case, the Attrition War is a major campaign. The
other two campaigns are to support it.) That is the time to discuss
changes to the campaign structure, allowed rules, disallowed rules, and
the aim of the next campaign(s). We've successfully done that in the
past: Scenarios used to include rewards and penalties to your income
stipend, pre-laid minefields have been officially disallowed, Tugs and
pods have been added to your build lists, changes to the Command-Rating
format had been discussed and knocked out, and so on.
So let things run their course. See if you can make the current batch of
rules work for you. And then when we wrap up the current iteration, see
if you can convince the others to your thinking (and bribe them with
cookies.)
--Matt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mattnet.org/ pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet. org/attachments/20180611/ da0f3603/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 20:51:08 -0400
From: Boyd Steere <boydsteere at gmail.com>
To: Matthew <matt at mattnet.org>
Cc: sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org
Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Hidden mines
Message-ID:
<CALbJnKu+ weEaH8EYLEocMvxqNS6TidAi+aA_ R7wFPgRu5cc0Nw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
As a Kzinti player, I officially hate all T-bombs and other mines,
particularly those that are secretly placed so I can't route my drones
around them. That said, I acknowledge that this rule has been canon for a
long time and just something that we have to deal with. If it were up for
a vote (which it isn't), I'd still vote to keep the rule around. Sometimes
you have to recognize the difference between your own interests and the
interests of the game as a whole.
Now, if it were up for a vote to keep the rule that warp and impulse tacs
move very last in order, even after drones and shuttles and faster-moving
ships, then we could have a debate. :)
-Boyd
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 8:03 PM Matthew via SFBdrama <
sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>
> I was just surprised to find out that the campaign was using hidden mine
> placement.
>
> I personally like narrow salvos.. many do not.
>
> I would also lobby for energy balance due to damage...
>
>
> Currently, the ship has sailed on these issues. I'd like to direct your
> attention to the SFB Rules of interest
> <http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org/ docs/rules.html#sfb%20rules> in the campaign.
>
> tl;dr: Give the campaign a chance and then hit up the mailing list after
> the campaign is over.
>
>
> The Secret placement of mines have been part of the campaign since it's
> first public game, where the Romulan player of the time had successfully
> used his Jedi Mind Tricks on the rest of us, to get us to include it. As
> it's optional, I'm not surprised to see that players might want it out. But
> it's in, it's marked in the campaign rules as in, and so the best recourse
> is to minimize it's effects on you (or maximize it's effects on your
> opponents, in hopes that *they* want it out.)
>
> Narrow Salvos are marked as "Advanced", not "Optional". Therefore the game
> is already balanced with those figured into things (the same way it is for
> self-generated EW.) Personally, it never crossed my mind to remove Narrow
> Salvos; they seem to me to be as much part of the game as fancy shuttles
> and t-bombs.
>
> Energy Balance Due to Damage, Leaky Shields, Critical Hits, Pre-Plotted
> Movement, and so on, also are not part of the game as called out by the
> campaign. If you want to include some certain optional rules or leave out
> some certain non-optional rules, then I'm willing to entertain a discussion.
>
> **However**, the middle of ongoing campaigns are not the time to go
> changing the rules. There is usually a short haitus between major campaigns
> (in this case, the Attrition War is a major campaign. The other two
> campaigns are to support it.) That is the time to discuss changes to the
> campaign structure, allowed rules, disallowed rules, and the aim of the
> next campaign(s). We've successfully done that in the past: Scenarios used
> to include rewards and penalties to your income stipend, pre-laid
> minefields have been officially disallowed, Tugs and pods have been added
> to your build lists, changes to the Command-Rating format had been
> discussed and knocked out, and so on.
>
> So let things run their course. See if you can make the current batch of
> rules work for you. And then when we wrap up the current iteration, see if
> you can convince the others to your thinking (and bribe them with cookies.)
>
> --Matt
> ______________________________ ______________________
> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
> http://lists.mattnet.org/ listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet. org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mattnet.org/ pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet. org/attachments/20180611/ 3b99e48c/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:23:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ann Monaghan <lemay.frank at bell.net>
To: Ben Sh via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org>, Ben Sh
<dragoastro at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Hidden mines
Message-ID:
<1407282988.225862. 1528766632329.JavaMail.open- xchange at mtlgui01>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mattnet.org/ pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet. org/attachments/20180611/ eff1d7cb/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:35:35 -0400
From: Michael Helbig <admgrraven at gmail.com>
To: Ann Monaghan <lemay.frank at bell.net>
Cc: Matthew via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org>, Ben Sh
<dragoastro at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Hidden mines
Message-ID:
<CAN5mpkMQECdvCTG8_ s0oPiz9DVKLigHVua=UPeP6AZaRv6X xWg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I've known about this glitch for quite some time. That's why I try to place
once I've left the hex. Unfortunately some players actually check the
information on the counter and cry foul. Also they sometimes show up when
the person laying the mines loads a saved game. The other player can see
his control panel and all pieces listed before he loads his save.
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 9:23 PM Ann Monaghan via SFBdrama <
sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
> Agreed Ben, its a silly little rule !
>
> FWIW, I will play against Hidden TBs but I will never use this tactic.
>
> When I shove a TB out through the shuttle bay doors, I will be announcing
> such fact using the IA procedure.
>
> Besides, I like to see the sweat on my opponents brow when they realize
> they will hit the damn thing ............................ ??
>
> Note to all Hidden TB users, the SFBOL client does not quite hide it when
> you first lay it, only when your ships have left the hex of laying is the
> TB actually hidden. Chuck and I discovered this last night, also I remember
> Matt and I [ Matt more so then me ! ] also had this issue in our Thol vs
> Pel battle a month or so ago.
>
> Also, I noticed last night that if a PoT or PoS counter is in same hex as
> hidden TB, it can be seen until the counter is moved elsewhere.
>
> It seems the TB is only hidden if there is no unit/counter of any kind in
> same hex.
>
> I have informed Paul F. of this fact.
>
> Cheers
>
> Frank
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: Ben Sh via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org>
> Date: June 11, 2018 at 3:47 PM
>
> I was just surprised to find out that the campaign was using hidden mine
> placement.
>
> This is an optional rule that I have never seen included in any SFB game
> in the 35 odd years I have played.
>
> It is, imho, an absolutely terrible rule. It requires tracking every hex
> every opponent's ship has passed through and the turn/impulse it left that
> hex. Ugggg!!!
>
> I propose that this rule be removed from the campaign rules.
>
> It adds nothing to the "space combat" game this is supposed to be. The
> game is already extremely complicated, so much so that it is hard to get a
> new player to play. Why make it worse for so little tactical gain?
>
> For now, I request that any opponents I play and I refrain from hidden
> mine placement during our games, as, of course, I will.
>
> Thanks for reading my rant.
>
> Ben Shove
> Drago Astro
>
>
> ______________________________ ______________________
> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
> http://lists.mattnet.org/ listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet. org
>
>
>
> ______________________________ ______________________
> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
> http://lists.mattnet.org/ listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet. org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mattnet.org/ pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet. org/attachments/20180611/ 6bf8d987/attachment.html>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
______________________________ _________________
<a href='sfbdrama.mattnet.org'> Dramatic SFB</a> campaign chatter list
SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
http://lists.mattnet.org/ listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet. org
------------------------------
End of SFBdrama Digest, Vol 43, Issue 4
****************************** *********
____________________________________________________
Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mattnet.org/pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet.org/attachments/20180613/6ebbbf02/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the SFBdrama
mailing list