Dramatic SFB: GWO Turn 7

Sat Aug 21 03:23:47 PDT 2021

I usually try and set up a battle (scenario) or two each turn (using the Orion Observer giving information, mostly correct).
, and this turn I now may send a force toward tall enough Hydran border if they want to battle the Paravians? ( Hydrans only have about 12 ships left), the Paravians can send a carrier group with a warp signature of 2.0 to scenario 1182.

    On Saturday, 21 August 2021, 08:48:43 am AEST, Gregory Flusche <shagrat1960 at gmail.com> wrote:  

 I have thought about this for a while now. More on victory conditions and generating fun interesting battles. As well as doing as Matt wants. Generating fun stories as well, 
1 set fleet sizes.. build a legal S8 fleet with the points given. No tugs as they and other ships like Minesweepers are given in a scenario. 
2 victory conditions are set, Such as adding up EPV/BPV of kills. Using basic victory conditions, So much for a destroyed/captured or crippled ship. When one player exceeds three times or whatever of other players is the winner..  Could of course use Matts empire score as well as a way of winning.
I like the idea of getting points for what you kill. When I played ancients Miniatures, Tournament battles were judged by enemy units routed destryed or broken. You won if you had the higher kill ratio. This promoted fighting.  If you do not attack You get no points. 
You can still have allies. So you can mass more ships elsewhere. You would get points for killing units added to a scenrio such as bases and ground units. This also means getting points for killing fighters/shuttles. . 
3 each player would get so many EPV depending on the number of borders to buy replacement ships for those lost in combat.. Then the border/no border battles can matter as  Size of fleet can be determined by number of borders, ( The government will give the admiral so much to spend on a fleet ) 
4 all this means to win you must fight battles. Fleets dependent on borders.... as well as everyone having about the same EPV means more even battles to be fought, Mind You can still send what ships were you want and well it does happen. 

Just some thoughts guys.. 
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 6:01 PM Wayne Power <wdpower at yahoo.com.au> wrote:

I like the idea of a set amount of EP each turn (the EP each turn could go up or down at a campaign year end based on how many victory/loss in battle each player had)
Perhaps each empire needs to win certain types of scenarios to also advance EP.
At present in these types of Campaigns some players make small deals every now and then, others players have allies from the beginning and have them for the whole Campaign.
I think also if there could be a limit on the size of each border empire, and the overall total number of borders.    On Saturday, 21 August 2021, 06:56:45 am AEST, Majead Farsi via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:  

 yep I remember that one, and that's why I think your format would be better for encouraging players to fight a few as well. I like to do a bit of both! Maybe allowing a certain number of encounters to be resolved by diplomacy but everything else must have at least 1 shop + like your format allocated to it. It would be fair I think. For myself I have not had any alliances but have made some logical diplomacy choices depending on the random encounters where the gain and losses have been mutual.The only reason why players try for diplomacy is because they do not have enough ships to cover all borders that need covering and allocating ships to cover the ones that can be fought will leave them open to overwhelming encounters. Again your format solves that issue 😀.

Majead
On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 at 20:48, Marcel Trahan <marcel.trahan91 at gmail.com> wrote:

Majead,
I do understand the need for sporadic diplomacy based on the encounter type. But if it gets like the previous campaign, where allies were sharing 17 to 24 borders, increasing them every turn and only sending Police ships to pre negotiated borders, then it becomes unbalanced. I remember some players that had 35-40 total allied borders and enough small ships to cover half of them, those players were getting so many EPs every turn that they could send 9-10 ships fleets to the few other borders where they did not have any alliances.. I think i did not play any scenarios in the last 4 or 5 turns of the campaign. And once a few players started that process, other players had to do the same to try to keep up with the other alliances. And i was guilty as well of doing it and it is why i am not doing it in this campaign.
Currently, this campaign is still at the point where you try to outwit your opponents, Sending ships where it matters and creating interesting scenarios. If we start alliances, then, it becomes only brute force or whoever has more allies.

Marcel
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 3:26 PM Michael Helbig <admgrraven at gmail.com> wrote:

I have lately only allied with players that are almost totally incompatible with my schedule. Since changing jobs my time has gotten more flexible so need fewer allies. Also learning to enjoy the game again. 
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 2:48 PM Majead Farsi via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:

I kind of agree with you Marcel, to a certain degree. I do think that a certain amount of diplomacy has to be in it. The campaign moves forward by granting Ep's to the winner of encounters. Some encounters are fair on both sides and some are not, some have fair EP distribution some don't. This forces us to use diplomacy wherever possible. To not use diplomacy you would need to remove the variation in the EP's granted. All should be equal. All encounters give the same EP advantage. To remove diplomacy entirely then give every empire a certain amount of EP each turn, no reduction or increase and measure the campaign by another means of measuring wins and losses. By Campaign end see who has the best ratio of wins and losses and claim them as winners. 
I think your format FMJ does not get rid of diplomacy entirely but it does limit it. I would like to play a later campaign with your format where we are able to field at least small carrier groups, which would require a higher initial EP to build with.
Just my thoughts!
Majead
On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 at 17:11, Marcel Trahan <marcel.trahan91 at gmail.com> wrote:

I agree with you Majead,
But i do remember the last few campaigns where allies were building lots of cheap units, opening borders between themselve, splitting scenarios to get the most EPby sending cheap units while massing huge fleets to the few enemy borders that were left.It ended up that for the last few turns, we did not play any scenarios at all. That was my main reason behind FMJ rules.
If it goes that way, it means that alliances are the only way to go and we end up not playing any scenarios, which kinda defeats the purpose of the game.
As for myself, i don't have any allies and will not get any. I am here to play encounters and have fun.
Marcel
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 11:13 AM Majead Farsi <majeadfarsi at googlemail.com> wrote:

To prevent, that Marcel we need to adopt your encounter format which has advantages and has some disadvantages ( I think the disadvantages can be solved!) but it does create more battles. Diplomacy is part of most campaigns.
Majead

On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 at 15:43, Marcel Trahan <marcel.trahan91 at gmail.com> wrote:

The Romulan Star Empire is RTA.
Diplomacy kills the spirit of the game. It turns the campaign from a scenario generation for SFB to a who gets the most allies and builds impossible fleets to battle against.
Hope this one does not turn into a hoarding game.
Marcel
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 8:23 AM Majead Farsi via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:

Federation Horde are RTA.

On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 at 23:58, Gregory Flusche via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:

Tribunal 13 is ready to advance... unless I get more diplomatic cries
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 6:28 PM Wayne Power via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:

GWO turn 7 Y179 Orion Observer reports,
no Paravian ships at the Tall enough Hydran border area1182 Organian Treaty.

battle group Albatross moving toward the oasis planet "Lighthouse" to defend from a Gorn planet crusher.
battle group "Fire" defending one of the last Paravian convoys on the NERF border.
battle group "Sword" with a warp signature of 2.0 heading toward the Romulan border.
scattered elements of battle group Petrel at the Dino-Mites border.

    On Friday, 20 August 2021, 12:45:13 am AEST, Wayne Power via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:  

  Shearwater Albatross Petrel Paravian RTA 
Battle Groups,
Sword
Albatross
Petrel
Shearwater
Fire
    On Thursday, 19 August 2021, 02:34:49 pm AEST, Brent Stanton via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:  

 The People's Front of Hydrax is RTA.
____________________________________________________
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

____________________________________________________
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

____________________________________________________
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/20210821/9f29020a/attachment-0002.html>