<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+BDfV6BSQF-FAuZquw_0+q79+fnOaiuGOz6uismgoEzBnunRA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">I was just surprised to find out that the campaign
was using hidden mine placement.</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+BDfV6BSQF-FAuZquw_0+q79+fnOaiuGOz6uismgoEzBnunRA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">I personally like narrow salvos.. many do not. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+BDfV6BSQF-FAuZquw_0+q79+fnOaiuGOz6uismgoEzBnunRA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"> I would also lobby for energy balance due to
damage...</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Currently, the ship has sailed on these issues. I'd like to direct
your attention to the <a
href="http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org/docs/rules.html#sfb%20rules">SFB
Rules of interest</a> in the campaign.<br>
<br>
tl;dr: Give the campaign a chance and then hit up the mailing list
after the campaign is over.<br>
<br>
<br>
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.)<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
*<b>However</b>*, 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.<br>
<br>
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.)<br>
<br>
--Matt<br>
</body>
</html>