Ship Designs - how about this?

[Da Boss]

We seem to be reaching a bit of an impasse in the debate on ship design - a thought struck me.

How about the "Classic" designs stay as is and any "shiny exciting new" designs go into a Supplement say for a official alt reality type SFUniverse.

This would allow:

both the SFU to keep their own designs AND
MGP to make up lots of fun new ships that continue fleet design styles but expanded or evolved greatly.

People could choose to use one or both designs in games and tournaments as they are both official?

Everybody's happy?

thoughts, comments?

 

[Cyporiean]

This was something I was going to suggest as well

 

[Jean]

As SVC stated on the BBS, pretty much the ships have to be in SFB before they can go into ACTASF. That does make the idea much more difficult to accomplish.

Jean

 

[Finlos]

I remain convinced that there exists a solution which the majority will like. I think it's important to realize that there will always be a group of people who are resistant to change simply because it's change.

Those people are not your target market here.

 

[Cyporiean]

As SVC stated on the BBS, pretty much the ships have to be in SFB before they can go into ACTASF. That does make the idea much more difficult to accomplish.

Jean

But they would be in theory the same ship, just a slightly different visual.. no different then how the 2500s are already different from the previous ships.

 

[Ryueokami]

I also posted this in another thread in regards to this.
Maybe enough spareparts for BOTH variants could be put into 1 ship/squadron/fleetbox.
So the player in question could decide on what variant he wants to use when he builds the fleet.

That way both parties woiuld have what they want (except for tournaments where both variants would ahve to be let in)

 

[andypalmer]

I'm a long time SFBer; I began playing with the Designers Edition in the 80s.

I completely see the point about the need for more variability in the miniatures.

The D6 and D7, for example. From an SFU perspective the only difference is the wing phasers. From a miniature perspective, it should be obvious which is which - a bulge, a larger wing element, something.

This is not a discussion about changing the SFU history around the ships; what is needed though is an over-emphasis upon what differences do exists between ships. Perhaps in "reality' the physical difference may not be noticeable, but from a miniature perspective, those differences should be amplified to be noticeable. In this regard, it needs to be more than just size. It needs to be "this is the D7 because of the wing bulges and this is the C7 because of the extra deck housing level on the boom." The basic form should not change, but it would not be difficult to come up with sensible differences in physical appearance which are both consistent with the attributes of the ships, but which allow those new to the universe to more easily tell the ships apart.

 

[Da Boss]

As SVC stated on the BBS, pretty much the ships have to be in SFB before they can go into ACTASF. That does make the idea much more difficult to accomplish.

Jean

Oh thats another brick wall then............. I think I shall stop bashing my head against it..............

 

[Jean]

Da Boss, that is a Paramount contract sort of thing, as I understand it. I'm sorry as I had hopes it would work.

Jean

 

[Da Boss]

No worries, these things happen - I have other projects to work on

 

[H]

No worries, these things happen - I have other projects to work on

dilgar war 3?


i share the pain, their is a huge resistance to change, adb produces a niche game in a niche market right now, ACTA could be a mainstream game in the niche market, but it comes across that their is very little desire from one side to do whats nescesary to achieve that.
I nearly made another car analogy then, i think we are going overboard on them

 

[ShadowDave]

I started SFB with the original pocket rules, played until time and a lack of other players stopped me. Always used counters, then found the miniatures were more easily available and used them for other games. Now I can use them as intended, may get new ones as time allows.

I think both sides of this argument are getting just a bit carried away with it all.
1- I want my ships to be recognisable as the models I know and love, but...
2- The original 2400 ships ARE INCREDIBLY PLAIN MODELS that could do with some improvement!

If both companies can't agree on how to do this then all the work done up to now is going to be wasted, ACTA:SF will fail and SFB will get labelled as the company that no-one wants to be connected to.

I want this game to succeed, but unless things improve I have doubts.