<div dir="ltr">Josh I should not have closed so fast can not find your E-mail in the list. Mine is <a href="mailto:shagrat1960@gmail.com">shagrat1960@gmail.com</a></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 10:12 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sfbdrama-request@lists.mattnet.org" target="_blank">sfbdrama-request@lists.mattnet.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Send SFBdrama mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.<wbr>org</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:sfbdrama-request@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama-request@lists.<wbr>mattnet.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:sfbdrama-owner@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama-owner@lists.mattnet.<wbr>org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of SFBdrama digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: SFBdrama Digest, Vol 9, Issue 11 (Gregory Flusche)<br>
2. Era vote (<a href="mailto:a88mph@aol.com">a88mph@aol.com</a>)<br>
3. Early Voting Counts (Matthew)<br>
4. Race preference (Daniel Crispin)<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>----------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 18:01:18 -0400<br>
From: Gregory Flusche <<a href="mailto:shagrat1960@gmail.com">shagrat1960@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: Gregory Flusche via SFBdrama <<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: SFBdrama Digest, Vol 9, Issue 11<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAEoCcB5aRj0sL=<a href="mailto:pm-a4oXRm1DMgwCsE8qGhGbMyqwThqNaEjFg@mail.gmail.com">pm-<wbr>a4oXRm1DMgwCsE8qGhGbMyqwThqNaE<wbr>jFg@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
If we as a group need to vote on the use of Hidden T-bombs. Then I could<br>
vote no for hidden mine. As a old Romulan player who likes my NSMs dropping<br>
a T-bomb out the rear hatch is as good as a Hidden NSM as they tend to move<br>
around the mine. Influencing there movement.<br>
<br>
There is also hidden cloak i used to as a Romulan ask for this. Are Fed<br>
player wanted no ECM we all explained ECM is a advanced rule. I said give<br>
me hidden cloak are WWs are outlawed. We ended up playing with no hidden<br>
cloak and ECM.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 5:29 PM, <<a href="mailto:sfbdrama-request@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama-request@lists.<wbr>mattnet.org</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Send SFBdrama mailing list submissions to<br>
> <a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a><br>
><br>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
> <a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.<wbr>org</a><br>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
> <a href="mailto:sfbdrama-request@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama-request@lists.<wbr>mattnet.org</a><br>
><br>
> You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
> <a href="mailto:sfbdrama-owner@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama-owner@lists.mattnet.<wbr>org</a><br>
><br>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
> than "Re: Contents of SFBdrama digest..."<br>
><br>
><br>
> Today's Topics:<br>
><br>
> 1. Re: Campaign Tweaks (ken)<br>
> 2. Re: SFBdrama Digest, Vol 9, Issue 9 (ken)<br>
> 3. Re: Campaign Situation (Roch Chartrand)<br>
> 4. Re: Fleet limits (Matthew)<br>
><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>----------<br>
><br>
> Message: 1<br>
> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:46:58 -0400<br>
> From: ken <<a href="mailto:kengulnar73@yahoo.com">kengulnar73@yahoo.com</a>><br>
> To: Ann Monaghan <<a href="mailto:lemay.frank@bell.net">lemay.frank@bell.net</a>>, Matthew <<a href="mailto:matt@mattnet.org">matt@mattnet.org</a>>,<br>
> Matthew via SFBdrama <<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
> Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Campaign Tweaks<br>
> Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:2g1cg5735gwos9rvw4sj3di1.1507697218051@email.android.com">2g1cg5735gwos9rvw4sj3di1.<wbr>1507697218051@email.android.<wbr>com</a>><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> It may be an "optional" rule, but my point is that you can't have a rule<br>
> enforced only part of the time. Either we all use hidden mines, or nobody<br>
> does. You can't expect someone to enter a scenario expecting some tool to<br>
> be in his arsenal,? then at the start of the battle say " oh I don't want<br>
> you to use that" .<br>
><br>
> Admiral Ken?<br>
><br>
><br>
> Sent on a Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note? 3<br>
><br>
> -------- Original message --------<br>
> From: Ann Monaghan <<a href="mailto:lemay.frank@bell.net">lemay.frank@bell.net</a>><br>
> Date: 10/10/2017 11:40 PM (GMT-05:00)<br>
> To: Matthew <<a href="mailto:matt@mattnet.org">matt@mattnet.org</a>>, ken <<a href="mailto:kengulnar73@yahoo.com">kengulnar73@yahoo.com</a>>, Matthew via<br>
> SFBdrama <<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
> Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Campaign Tweaks<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Ken,<br>
><br>
> Hidden TBs is an optional rule while ECM is an advanced rule.<br>
><br>
> I'm thinking apples & oranges here........... ?<br>
><br>
> Looks like I am 0 for 2, no Y150 start and Hidden TBs is used.<br>
><br>
> This is really not a good week for me .? ??<br>
><br>
> Cheers<br>
><br>
> Frank<br>
><br>
><br>
> ---------- Original Message ----------<br>
><br>
> From: ken <<a href="mailto:kengulnar73@yahoo.com">kengulnar73@yahoo.com</a>><br>
><br>
> Date: October 10, 2017 at 7:41 PM<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> I really think that this should be an all or none issue. I do not like<br>
> the idea that a player can choose to not use a rule that they dont like.<br>
> Next will be the players who feel ecm should be an optional rule and they<br>
> shouldn't have to play against it cause they dont like it.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Hidden mines is especially important for races like the early<br>
> Romulans, you are not very likely to hit with that juicy nsm if I know<br>
> where you put it.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Admiral Ken?<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Sent on a Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note? 3<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> -------- Original message --------<br>
><br>
> From: Ann Monaghan via SFBdrama <<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
><br>
> Date: 10/10/2017 6:54 PM (GMT-05:00)<br>
><br>
> To: Matthew <<a href="mailto:matt@mattnet.org">matt@mattnet.org</a>>, Matthew via SFBdrama <<br>
> <a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
><br>
> Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Campaign Tweaks<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Looks good Matt !<br>
><br>
> My only request is to change up the Hidden TB rule.<br>
><br>
> Make it an option where both Admirals must agree to use hidden TBs, if<br>
> one says no, then hidden TBs is not used.<br>
><br>
> Thanks.<br>
><br>
> Cheers<br>
><br>
> Frank<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ---------- Original Message ----------<br>
><br>
> From: Matthew via SFBdrama <<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
><br>
> Date: October 10, 2017 at 12:59 AM<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> I have a bit of an outline for the structure of the campaign I want. This<br>
> has driven the initial version and continues to guide me with this<br>
> campaign. Additionally, there are some tweaks that have been in the<br>
> planning for this iteration for the last [couple/several] months. Finally,<br>
> I cover some of the startup variations available, which really drive the<br>
> flavor of the new campaign when compared to the previous one.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Structure first:<br>
><br>
> - No Map<br>
><br>
> This means borders are an abstraction. Wonder how a Klingon can find a<br>
> border with the Gorn? They must have met in the middle while carving out<br>
> Fed turf or worked around the Feds.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> It gives the players alot of flexibility on controlling their borders.<br>
> Don't worry that completely shutting down a border hurts you too. If you're<br>
> dealing from a position of strength, then you'll be opening up larger<br>
> borders on your other sides at the same time. The important thing at that<br>
> time is that you are shutting off a certain player from hitting you hard.<br>
> Don't want to fight against the Jindarians while playing Gorn? Close down<br>
> the Jindo border and make a larger border with the Romulans.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> - Simple econ<br>
><br>
> That means we don't track what your econ is from colonies, we don't track<br>
> supply lines, no supply-tax, no bookkeeping. I know some of you really<br>
> prefer 4X campaigns. I do to. I have one in the works (I've had it in the<br>
> works for a couple years now. Don't hold your breath.) But bookkeeping has<br>
> to be a minimum here. Just point your fleet and shoot.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> - Scenario Driven<br>
><br>
> Some campaigns are simply "Battle Generators". Others are "Chess with SFB<br>
> ships". This is the former. So scenarios drive all of the important<br>
> decisions.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> New Tweaks:<br>
><br>
> - Remove the {NO}INCOME rewards:<br>
><br>
> All of the scenarios will give and take away some amount of EPs. Your<br>
> income won't ever be touched, but your stockpile will roller-coaster.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> - Add fleet Limits<br>
><br>
> While editing the scenarios for their rewards, I'll be introducing fleet<br>
> limits on some scenarios. Particularly the common ones where it's<br>
> unreasonable to see large fleet elements. Since I am planning to keep the<br>
> CR system (I had floated the idea earlier to use the BPV cap system and it<br>
> was unpopular), My original intent was to limit the size class (and thus<br>
> limit the fleet size) allowed at certain scenarios. I might instead limit<br>
> it by Move Cost (which will have the same effect - No ship with MC greater<br>
> than 0.5 at such-and-such scenario) or by move-cost of all ships on a side<br>
> (so limit one to MC 3.0, which would be three cruisers of six destroyers.)<br>
> Other methods exist. Different scenarios might have different methods.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Possible Tweaks:<br>
><br>
> - Buy your starting fleet<br>
><br>
> At the start of the campaign, players might be given a certain stockpile<br>
> and no ships. The first turn is spent buying ships and ignoring the<br>
> scenarios (much to the chagrin of the players who draw the huge-BPV<br>
> scenarios right off). Players who enter mid-stream will probably not be<br>
> able to do this because of the one-sided benefit it gives to the player who<br>
> shares borders with the unprotected new guy.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> - Define ending conditions<br>
><br>
> I wasn't a big fan of this, but I got some push-back at the start of last<br>
> game about this. Basically, we define a set of circumstances where someone<br>
> is declared a winner. A certain income, fleet BPV, or we get to a certain<br>
> turn/year. I prefer the flexibility of saying "Player A is unreachable,<br>
> let's stop this" or "Half our player base is leaving next week. Let's call<br>
> it here and start fresh." If you guys want to set up some certain goal (and<br>
> accept that some people will set up their whole tactics on reaching that<br>
> first, regardless of the "realistic" way to handle an empire), then I will<br>
> go with that.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> - Exploration<br>
><br>
> There is no programmed-in mechanic for setting aside ships and getting<br>
> income or borders for it. But if we can hash out the boundaries of such a<br>
> mechanic, I can manually perform this. By reaching into the player<br>
> settings, I can add/remove either part of the econ, and add/remove ships.<br>
> But it would require players share their orders with me (which could be<br>
> icky if I am also playing) in order to show what ships they are<br>
> deliberately not sending to a battle. It also requires more<br>
> behind-the-scenes administration from me.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> - Weapon Status<br>
><br>
> I'm not married to the WS-Chart. But it was introduced in order to<br>
> increase variation in the scenarios and to provide the possibility for<br>
> reaching WS-III. I can roll things back to a defined-WS for each side in<br>
> each scenario, if you prefer more stability with WS.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Campaign Startup:<br>
><br>
> - Food Groups vs Historical<br>
><br>
> Traditionally I have been starting empires next to their historical<br>
> neighbors when possible, on the theory that their neighbors are better<br>
> balanced against eachother. This is a possible method to start things,<br>
> where Disruptor races only are in contact with other disruptor races. Same<br>
> with plasma races. "Strangers" (Andro, jindo, Tholian, etc) are in their<br>
> own group. Perhaps a fourth group for "core" empires with strange weapons<br>
> (Fed, Vudar, Hydran, etc). The only way to make contact outside of your<br>
> "Food Group" is to get lucky with a "NEWBORDER" reward.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> - Starting Year<br>
><br>
> There are four main eras to start things in.<br>
><br>
> General War (GW) era: this starts in Y169 +/- 3 years.<br>
><br>
> Late-War era starts at the introduction of PFs: Y180 +/- 2 years. There<br>
> is spotty support in the ship-lists for X-ships. However, this does allow<br>
> more empires to join (as the Selts have ships, the Vudar have something<br>
> besides a few base hulls to pick from, and there is a difference between<br>
> the PF Feds and the 3rd-Way Feds.)<br>
><br>
> Early Year era (EY): this starts at Y120. I only have module Y1 in the<br>
> DB, though "recently" have gotten Y2 and Y3.<br>
><br>
> Dawn of Warp era: this starts at Y60 +/- 10 years. As with the EY,<br>
> support for this is currently spotty but will improve in future iterations.<br>
> if we push back the start of the next campaign, I may have better support<br>
> for this.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> --Matt<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ?<br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>______________________<br>
><br>
> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org</a><br>
><br>
> <a href="mailto:SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org">SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a><br>
><br>
> <a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.<wbr>org</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ?<br>
><br>
><br>
> ?<br>
><br>
> -------------- next part --------------<br>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
> URL: <<a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet</a>.<br>
> org/attachments/20171011/<wbr>728b247b/attachment-0003.html><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Message: 2<br>
> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 17:46:23 -0400<br>
> From: ken <<a href="mailto:kengulnar73@yahoo.com">kengulnar73@yahoo.com</a>><br>
> To: Gregory Flusche via SFBdrama <<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
> Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: SFBdrama Digest, Vol 9, Issue 9<br>
> Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:6tc0p7j7dpjwy7uhckqfreut.1507931183494@email.android.com">6tc0p7j7dpjwy7uhckqfreut.<wbr>1507931183494@email.android.<wbr>com</a>><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Obviously,? yearly progression (turns per year) will depend on the start<br>
> date.? It might actually be fun to play with a variable timescale, start<br>
> very early with something like 5 years per turn, then as newer tech starts<br>
> becoming available shift to one turn per year, then around y160ish shift to<br>
> 2 per year, then around y175 shift to 4 per year, and finally in the y180s<br>
> to 10 or 12 per turn.? Realistically I wouldn't expect a campaign to last<br>
> this long, but it would be a fun change :)<br>
> Admiral Ken?<br>
><br>
><br>
> Sent on a Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note? 3<br>
> -------------- next part --------------<br>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
> URL: <<a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet</a>.<br>
> org/attachments/20171013/<wbr>c009c4bb/attachment-0001.html><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Message: 3<br>
> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 17:52:11 -0400<br>
> From: "Roch Chartrand" <<a href="mailto:R.Chartrand@Videotron.qc.ca">R.Chartrand@Videotron.qc.ca</a>><br>
> To: "'Matthew'" <<a href="mailto:matt@mattnet.org">matt@mattnet.org</a>><br>
> Cc: <<a href="mailto:SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org">SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
> Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Campaign Situation<br>
> Message-ID: <01d901d3446d$86b72570$<wbr>94257050$@<a href="http://Videotron.qc.ca" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">Videotron.qc.ca</a>><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
><br>
> I like the comment : Start new campaign at year we ended this on!<br>
><br>
> Y174<br>
><br>
> I'm definitely a General war year player! So any start date around Y172?2<br>
> is<br>
> good with me.<br>
><br>
> Roch C.<br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: SFBdrama [mailto:<a href="mailto:sfbdrama-bounces@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama-bounces@<wbr>lists.mattnet.org</a>] On Behalf Of<br>
> Matthew via SFBdrama<br>
> Sent: 12 octobre 2017 20:41<br>
> To: Matthew via SFBdrama<br>
> Subject: Dramatic SFB: Campaign Situation<br>
><br>
> Thank you all, who have enjoyed the last campaign(s) and said so. I<br>
> appreciate your comments.<br>
><br>
><br>
> I have not yet officially closed down the last campaign: you can still<br>
> log in and see things there. But I will be closing it down anytime in<br>
> the next week or two.<br>
><br>
><br>
> I have some administrative things to do before I'm ready for the next<br>
> campaign to begin. Mostly it's adding tog-pods to the database and<br>
> editing the scenarios in the planned ways I've mentioned earlier.<br>
><br>
><br>
> That being said, I think I'm willing to begin building the list of<br>
> empire picks and build a consensus on the era to play in. Some players<br>
> have already done so, but I have thusfar taken it informally. The first<br>
> thing I need, which may impact empire choices, is what era we are<br>
> playing in. Again, those eras are:<br>
><br>
> General War (GW) era: this starts in Y169 +/- 3 years.<br>
> Late-War era starts at the introduction of PFs: Y180 +/- 2 years.<br>
> Early Year era (EY): This starts at Y130 +/- 10 years.<br>
> Dawn of Warp era: This starts at Y60 +/- 10 years.<br>
><br>
> I can vary how many turns are played per technological year and limit<br>
> the maximum size-class allowed. Generally there isn't much call to limit<br>
> the game to (say) destroyers, so I hadn't on planned on changing it from<br>
> where it was last game. The era we decide on will affect the number of<br>
> turns per year, as some eras are very slow technologically and others<br>
> are much faster.<br>
><br>
> Frank had voted for the EY era, but bowed out because of family issues.<br>
> I will cast a vote in his favor, thinking he may be ready to come back<br>
> by the time we are ready to physically start the campaign.<br>
><br>
><br>
> --Matt<br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>______________________<br>
> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list<br>
> <a href="http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org</a><br>
> <a href="mailto:SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org">SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.<wbr>org</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> ---<br>
> L'absence de virus dans ce courrier ?lectronique a ?t? v?rifi?e par le<br>
> logiciel antivirus Avast.<br>
> <a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/<wbr>antivirus</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Message: 4<br>
> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 20:46:35 -0400<br>
> From: Matthew <<a href="mailto:matt@mattnet.org">matt@mattnet.org</a>><br>
> To: <a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a><br>
> Subject: Re: Dramatic SFB: Fleet limits<br>
> Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:f89d13bc-333d-b135-d727-6e1920538724@mattnet.org">f89d13bc-333d-b135-d727-<wbr>6e1920538724@mattnet.org</a>><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed<br>
><br>
><br>
> > I think it would be handy for me to understand the reasons behind<br>
> > fleet limits.<br>
><br>
> Primarily, Fleet limitations are to reduce the number of ships to a<br>
> level manageable by the players. Some players can't handle any better<br>
> than one or two ships, while others prefer squadrons of up to 4 ships,<br>
> while others can manage large battles consisting of 15 ships to a side<br>
> and an unending amount of seekers and attrition units. Secondarily, SFB<br>
> limits fleets to what would be "realistic" for the doctrine that ADB has<br>
> decided is correct. There are exceptions and extra requirements around<br>
> the margins to deal with game balance of certain systems (Web Casters,<br>
> Dis Devs, etc) and to showcase certain situations (the Fed's ability to<br>
> field more fighters when doing the 'Third Way', for example.)<br>
><br>
> Many campaigns attempt to create a different set of limits, usually to<br>
> limit battles to an even smaller amount of units. Occasionally there is<br>
> a wish to create a different doctrine of ship assignments. Sometimes<br>
> there are follow-on effects along these lines that are unintended.<br>
><br>
> > ... having larger scenario limits late in the campaign or by having an<br>
> > artificially lower CR limit early.<br>
><br>
> This effect is already baked into the SFB system. Very early ships just<br>
> don't have the Command Rating values to deal with large fleets.<br>
> Additionally, fighters and seeking weapons don't show up with as much<br>
> profusion until the middle-160's. The problem is pretty much solved.<br>
><br>
> When speaking of limiting ships in scenarios, I intend to create limits<br>
> to mirror a "realistic" situation. Case in point would be the Convoy<br>
> raids: Nobody would send a dreadnaught to escort a convoy. Similarly,<br>
> nobody would send a dreadnaught to attack a convoy (with the exception,<br>
> perhaps, of a "light" dreadnaught). Yet a dreadnaught might show up to<br>
> attack a colony. Particularly one with an orbital base or several<br>
> hard-hitting ground bases (a "PDU" in F&E terms.) So I intend to<br>
> selectively limit ships in certain circumstances.<br>
><br>
> --Matt<br>
><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Subject: Digest Footer<br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> <a href='<a href="http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">sfbdrama.mattnet.org</a>'><wbr>Dramatic SFB</a> campaign chatter list<br>
> <a href="mailto:SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org">SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.<wbr>org</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<br>
><br>
> End of SFBdrama Digest, Vol 9, Issue 11<br>
> ******************************<wbr>*********<br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet.org/attachments/20171014/75baa5b6/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet.<wbr>org/attachments/20171014/<wbr>75baa5b6/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 18:36:34 -0400<br>
From: <a href="mailto:a88mph@aol.com">a88mph@aol.com</a><br>
To: <a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a><br>
Subject: Dramatic SFB: Era vote<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:15f1d082503-c11-21afd@webjas-vae221.srv.aolmail.net">15f1d082503-c11-21afd@webjas-<wbr>vae221.srv.aolmail.net</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
I too wish to try the Early Era. I spent $100 on those 3 modules and would hate to see them go to waste.<br>
<br>
<br>
Also, like I said before, I would like to try the Tholian's this time around, but if I must have a second choice, make it Hydrans.<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet.org/attachments/20171014/8216ea64/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet.<wbr>org/attachments/20171014/<wbr>8216ea64/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 21:53:34 -0400<br>
From: Matthew <<a href="mailto:matt@mattnet.org">matt@mattnet.org</a>><br>
To: Matthew via SFBdrama <<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
Subject: Dramatic SFB: Early Voting Counts<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:a95600e1-b087-5922-f26f-bc386635a8da@mattnet.org">a95600e1-b087-5922-f26f-<wbr>bc386635a8da@mattnet.org</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
So I have these votes:<br>
<br>
2 EY and some secondary-preference votes<br>
<br>
5 mid-war (continue where we left off)<br>
<br>
3 GW era<br>
<br>
1 Abstain<br>
<br>
<br>
And these empire picks, in order of preference<br>
<br>
Rob: Tholian, Hydran<br>
<br>
Roch:<br>
<br>
Greg:<br>
<br>
Paul: Gorn<br>
<br>
Daniel:<br>
<br>
Ken:<br>
<br>
Micheal: Carnivon<br>
<br>
Steven:<br>
<br>
Josh:<br>
<br>
Pat: Fed (Fighters? or PFs?), Klingon<br>
<br>
<br>
Voting has not yet closed. People listed have voted. Those with empire<br>
picks have simply gotten in their picks early. Changes can be made to<br>
any of the above. If you aren't listed, then I have not tabulated your<br>
vote and you should remind me to do so. Due to the ratio of<br>
players-to-available-empires (18 players to 19 empires - some empires<br>
being unplayable in some eras), we will again allow up to two people to<br>
play the same empire. Picking an empire to play is not necessary at this<br>
point, as the era we pick may invalidate some empires.<br>
<br>
<br>
--Matt<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 02:12:46 +0000<br>
From: Daniel Crispin <<a href="mailto:calendyr@hotmail.com">calendyr@hotmail.com</a>><br>
To: "<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org">sfbdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a>><br>
Subject: Dramatic SFB: Race preference<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:SN1PR0701MB2080A8D4F6701F192A274D46C54E0@SN1PR0701MB2080.namprd07.prod.outlook.com">SN1PR0701MB2080A8D4F6701F192A<wbr>274D46C54E0@SN1PR0701MB2080.<wbr>namprd07.prod.outlook.com</a>><br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
My preferences for race selection are as follow:<br>
<br>
<br>
1. Gorn<br>
2. ISC<br>
3. Romulan<br>
<br>
Daniel<br>
<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet.org/attachments/20171015/84b8aed9/attachment.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet.<wbr>org/attachments/20171015/<wbr>84b8aed9/attachment.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
<a href='<a href="http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">sfbdrama.mattnet.org</a>'><wbr>Dramatic SFB</a> campaign chatter list<br>
<a href="mailto:SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org">SFBdrama@lists.mattnet.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mattnet.org/<wbr>listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.<wbr>org</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of SFBdrama Digest, Vol 9, Issue 12<br>
******************************<wbr>*********<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>