Overpowered Conversions?

graydo
Sub-Lieutenant
Sub-Lieutenant
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:04 pm
Location: northern Minnesota

Overpowered Conversions?

Postby graydo » Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:12 pm

I played a game of SFO with my son yesterday with ships that I'd converted over from Starmada AE. In one volley a heavy cruiser was able to almost entirely eliminate an enemy dreadnought. I know folks said this might be an issue with SFU conversions. I'm wondering if simply halving the number of attack dice might not be a viable fix. Either that or doubling the number of hull boxes. That game was over very quickly and it felt a lot like a western fast draw.

Blacklancer99
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:36 am
Location: People's Republic of MA

Re: Overpowered Conversions?

Postby Blacklancer99 » Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:06 pm

graydo wrote:I played a game of SFO with my son yesterday with ships that I'd converted over from Starmada AE. In one volley a heavy cruiser was able to almost entirely eliminate an enemy dreadnought. I know folks said this might be an issue with SFU conversions. I'm wondering if simply halving the number of attack dice might not be a viable fix. Either that or doubling the number of hull boxes. That game was over very quickly and it felt a lot like a western fast draw.


It is my opinion that all of the SFU conversions are "over-gunned" with the respect to the "scale" of Starmada, and the further scaling from SAE to SFO only makes it worse. I have found that games with canonical SFU/SAE ships are over very very quickly, and in fact are not interesting. However, for my own personal tastes I have found that more or less halving the numbers of weapons (in SAE games) on each ship make the games last longer and provide more enjoyment (we also adopted a house rule stating that Probes can only be fired one per turn because ripple fired probes became too "regular" a tactic to some effect).
Halving the weapons does require a bit of tweaking here and there, but the potent ships remain so, and the weaker ships are less likely to thump the biggins. There are those that like to field fleets of ships that pop like ripe grapes, but I prefer games where ships have to be beat on each other for a while before they blow (the odd alpha strike destruction not withstanding), unless they are small things that should be swatted with regularity.
Cheers,
Erik
Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable.
Mark Twain.

mj12games
Admiral of the Fleet
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3635
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 9:56 pm
Location: Denver, CO
Contact:

Re: Overpowered Conversions?

Postby mj12games » Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:32 pm

graydo wrote:That game was over very quickly and it felt a lot like a western fast draw.

It should be remembered that each game turn in SFO is 50% longer than a Starmada game turn. Thus, after 4 SFO turns, you would have exchanged the equivalent firepower of 6 Starmada turns.
Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
www.mj12games.com

JohnRobert
Captain
Captain
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 9:12 pm

Re: Overpowered Conversions?

Postby JohnRobert » Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:06 pm

I really don't understand why people think that Star Fleet Universe ships could be considered overpowered. I had recent occasion to convert a Federation New Heavy Cruiser to Starmada: Fleet Operations and it had only 66 VP. A Babylon 5 Hyperion Alpha converts at 90 VP. While the player of the Hyperion Alpha would be dependent on his fighters to cripple the Federation cruiser; so that his slow ship with its' short-ranged weapons could catch up to it, he could then finish it off with his superior firepower.
I think that what I am trying to say here is that Star Fleet Universe ships are fast and have weapons with respectible range, their firepower is modest compared to that found in many popular fictional backgrounds. This is probably as it should be. Federation ships were supposed to be designed primarily for exploration and not warfare. As to why their enemies do not outclass them, that is surely a question in economics. Even a fictional empire must pay something for its' fictional ships and will pay no more than it has to.

Blacklancer99
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:36 am
Location: People's Republic of MA

Re: Overpowered Conversions?

Postby Blacklancer99 » Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:09 am

JohnRobert wrote:I really don't understand why people think that Star Fleet Universe ships could be considered overpowered. I had recent occasion to convert a Federation New Heavy Cruiser to Starmada: Fleet Operations and it had only 66 VP. A Babylon 5 Hyperion Alpha converts at 90 VP. While the player of the Hyperion Alpha would be dependent on his fighters to cripple the Federation cruiser; so that his slow ship with its' short-ranged weapons could catch up to it, he could then finish it off with his superior firepower.
I think that what I am trying to say here is that Star Fleet Universe ships are fast and have weapons with respectible range, their firepower is modest compared to that found in many popular fictional backgrounds. This is probably as it should be. Federation ships were supposed to be designed primarily for exploration and not warfare. As to why their enemies do not outclass them, that is surely a question in economics. Even a fictional empire must pay something for its' fictional ships and will pay no more than it has to.


Just to be clear, I don't find the SFU ships over-powered as such, but over-gunned relative to their survivability. It's just my opinion, but I find that they go poof way too easily, even for a game scaled like SAE.
Erik
Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable.
Mark Twain.


Return to “Starmada: Fleet Operations”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest