|
Post by ikefist on Nov 19, 2008 15:27:12 GMT -4
ledgendary assasin can kill other ledgendary officers?
|
|
|
Post by ikefist on Nov 19, 2008 15:29:20 GMT -4
sould be balanced as long as he is highest costing one some sort of die role for success
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Nov 19, 2008 15:30:58 GMT -4
I've updated the website: homepage.mac.com/cheethorne/sfb/Updates this time around: November 19, 2008 * Main Page - Campaign 7: o Added map that shows where Kirk can place his primary planet. Also shows location of other primary planets. * Rules v7: o Modified 1.3.2 - All players now begin the game with an equal number of explored hexes. o Modified 2.3.2.2 - Building Federation heavy fighter carriers can count against the PF Tender production limit. This does not apply to Federation Scout Carriers, which are still built as a Carrier) o Modified 3.6.4 - Detailed how players resolve conflicts involving two players trying to simultaneously claim a planet. o Modified 13.0 - Scans now occur after regular operational movement, but before all other types of movement. o Modified Appendix B: Added cargo box costs for Ground Bases, SAMs, and Tug Pods so they can be carried by freighters and in cargo pods.
|
|
|
Post by ikefist on Nov 19, 2008 17:11:51 GMT -4
HEY U Kevin U even look at officer idead on page 4 ? and pg 5 so unlike u not to post replie
|
|
|
Post by ikefist on Nov 19, 2008 20:21:19 GMT -4
whats the rules for Pfs in fleets with mech links but no tender
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Nov 19, 2008 23:55:32 GMT -4
whats the rules for Pfs in fleets with mech links but no tender First, you have to put the mech-links on the ships at a cost of 1 CPV per mech-link. The mech-link modifies an existing tractor on the ship. This means a ship with only two tractor beams could only have two mech-links added to the ship. Only mech-links can hold PFs, but it doesn't stop the tractor from functioning as a tractor (assuming it isn't holding a PF at the same time). So, assuming you have ships with mech-links and they aren't PF Tenders, then your ships are considered to be casual PF Tenders. This means that each group of up to six PFs counts as a ship against the command limit. Because you don't have any true PF Tenders, each PF has to be lent EW separately. Hopefully that answers your questions. HEY U Kevin U even look at officer idead on page 4 ? and pg 5 so unlike u not to post replie I don't like the idea of a Legendary Assassin, but the Legendary Trader that doubles the range of the supply point is incredible. I love it, I never even thought of that before. That ability alone would be enough for a cheap legendary officer, if we add more abilities, it will cost more.
|
|
|
Post by ikefist on Nov 20, 2008 13:40:39 GMT -4
How about a ledgendary double agent it could act like the admirals old ability but obly for one ship but the player whos agent it is gets to pick the ship
what about a ledgendary tactician givea fleet a higher reationary movment?
Ledgendary ship builder xtra cpv to build project a TURN LIKE ONE SLIP ONLY LIKE XRTA 10 OR SOMETHING
u never commented on that
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Nov 21, 2008 15:38:36 GMT -4
I think it might be too late to add more legendary officers to the rules for this campaign, but I like your idea for the Legendary Builder, Legendary Tactician, and Legendary Trader. The tactician should do a little more than just add to the reaction movement, but I can easily see where more abilities can come from.
I don't think the Legendary Double Agent would be necessary as the number of ships are so small that even one missing ship can be a huge advantage for the opposing side (much larger than if we were running around with 8-12 ships per fleet), also the Admiral still has some semblance of that ability right now (his ability to sop a Sortie mission or a Support mission out-right).
I would also like to look at giving some of the current legendary officers some sort of strategic level use. I'm not sure what, but I'd like to work out an alternative for the captain's bluff ability and give something to the Engineer to do outside of combat. The weapons officer would probably be relegated to simply giving a boost to a ship's razing potential and I can't see any kind of use for the Legendary Marine. The Legendary Ground Forces Officer could increase the number of marines / vehicles allowed on a planet.
That sort of thing.
However, since we aren't starting till the week after this coming Tuesday, maybe I do have time enough to write up these changes. What says everyone else?
Also, has anyone heard from Kirk yet on whether or not he is in?
|
|
|
Post by ikefist on Nov 21, 2008 16:07:30 GMT -4
The enginerr is simple gives one non fast ship fast ship movment if both navigator and engineer r on same ship
|
|
|
Post by ikefist on Nov 21, 2008 16:08:36 GMT -4
I Have been talking to kirk and he is not sure if he wants to play or not he was going to untill he missed last week and is not sure he like picking last by default as we,ll as we don't like the romulan changes
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Nov 21, 2008 16:54:33 GMT -4
and is not sure he like picking last by default Well, he could have just as easily rolled to pick last. I hardly see how that is a valid complaint. we don't like the romulan changes As for the Romulan changes. There are only two that apply to the Romulans exclusively: The first is the restriction that he cannot put Falcon Maulers as his Local Defense ships. This seems reasonable to me as these ships were considered to be full military ships by the Romulans and continued to be built well past the other old-series ships. The second is that the Romulans have to choose between modular ships and non-cargo tugs pods. This choice is of the same significance (probably less so) than the already introduced restriction that the Federation players have to choose (they choose between A-20 / F-111 fighters and PFs). I agree that no other race has a similar choice as the Federation and the Romulans, but no other race has been given such a completely contradictory and conjectural option. The Romulans didn't build tugs (or tug pods) because they built modular ships and the Federation didn't build PFs because they built the special heavy fighters instead. No other conjectural ship or unit is anywhere close to that level.
|
|
|
Post by ikefist on Nov 21, 2008 18:00:13 GMT -4
opps i ment HE not we i conplete agree with the changes it even sais that the romulant need special consideration for a campain becuase of all there give mes
|
|
|
Post by john on Nov 22, 2008 0:40:15 GMT -4
I don't think Kirk really disagrees with the rules either, he has been saying for a couple of campaigns now that the Romulans have too many advantages.
Personally I think the changes are consistent with other rules in the campaign for other races.
As for the rest, one word, warcrack.
|
|
|
Post by john on Nov 22, 2008 0:42:54 GMT -4
The enginerr is simple gives one non fast ship fast ship movment if both navigator and engineer r on same ship This seems pretty cool, but it is a huge advantage. I'm not sure everyone realizes yet just what kind of advantage the fast ships give a player. Though I totally sanction this rule!
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Nov 24, 2008 8:58:09 GMT -4
I have a simple solution for the Engineer. I agree that giving a non-fast ship the fast ship advantage is too good, but giving a ship +1 operational movement point wouldn't be so bad. The difference would be that such a ship couldn't use the bonus movement step that Fast (and X-ships) can use and it couldn't move twice in a single impulse.
The main use for this extra point would be moving through some combination of explored and unexplored hexes or getting some extra movement in when you are crippled. That sort of thing.
|
|