EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

9 posts ยท May 26 1998 to May 31 1998

From: Jerry Han <jhan@w...>

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 12:27:36 -0400

Subject: EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

Howdy folks,

A sharp eyed player in my current PBeM game noticed that in FB, you can spend
1 thruster point to turn any number of facings, while in EFSB, you spend 1
thruster point to turn 1 facing.

Now, here's the big question: why the difference? Is it simply because most
ships in B5 seem to turn like cows? Or is there an actual play balance
difference that means I should adopt the latter system?

(Or did I and the people I've played EFSB with really mis-read the
EFSB rules and that the systems are actually the same?)

Thanks
J.

From: Ground Zero Games <jon@g...>

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 20:33:17 +0100

Subject: Re: EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

> Howdy folks,

No, you are right - the rules are different. The FB ones are like they
are
because I felt (as a result of some of the in-house testing) that
restricting the rotation was too limiting on ships with low-thrust
drives. In the end, feel free to use whichever version you are personally
happier with (for either game).

From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@t...>

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:35:58 +0200

Subject: Re: EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

> Jerry Han wrote:

> A sharp eyed player in my current PBeM game noticed that in FB,

<g> Yes, I think so. The difference is there; you haven't misread anything...
and the EFSB rules make the Centauri ships a lot more nimble
than the other reaction-drive users, while their extra thruster points
wouldn't be that huge a bonus under the FB rules.

I don't know how long one turn of EFSB combat is (it's probably somewhere, but
Jon has adopted the "1 turn ~15 minutes" timescale for FT and doesn't believe
that it'd take even a lumbering battleship more than
that to turn around completely :-)

I like the low turning rates of the EFSB ships, but I find it very
difficult to argue with Jons FB logic - especially since I too am firmly
entrenched in the 15 minute turn way of thinking...

Later,

From: Sean Bayan Schoonmaker <schoon@a...>

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:41:46 -0700

Subject: Re: EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

> Jerry Han <jhan@idigital.net> wrote:

[snip]

> Now, here's the big question: why the difference? Is it simply

[snip]

The way it was explained in the FB made perfect sense to me (pg.3). Once you
start a rotation, it keeps going till you stop it. Thus there is essentially
no difference between a 1 point rotation and a 6 point rotation. In space no
one can hear you yell, "Friction!"

This doesn't stop anyone who'd rather have it the other way to go ahead and do
so, but I think that the maneuver thrusters should be equal to the drive
rating if that's the case.

From: Samuel Penn <sam@b...>

Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 18:33:01 +0100

Subject: Re: EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

In message <199805262012.WAA21414@d1o27.telia.com>
> "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@nacka.mail.telia.com> wrote:

> I don't know how long one turn of EFSB combat is (it's probably

Going by the TV series, turns in EFSB should be quite short, maybe a minute or
so. You could always argue that it's dramatic necessity compressing time of
course, and keep the longer turns.

From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@t...>

Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 00:46:44 +0200

Subject: Re: EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

> Samuel Penn wrote:

> > I don't know how long one turn of EFSB combat is (it's probably

Not to mention that the length scale to go with the 15 min. turns is roughly 1
MU ~1000 km, and the battle scenes from the show look far more cramped than
that. (IIRC, but I have no idea where I've picked this up,
the B5 jump point is located some 700 km from the station - and there's
been quite a lot of action in that space :-/ )

So yes, 1-minute EFSB turns seem very likely. ...Jon, did you have any
conscious thoughts on this? :-)

> You could always argue that it's dramatic necessity

Well... since JMS has commented on some occasions where ships *did* maneuver
too fast (eg, the Omegas that were scared off from B5 by
Delenn's fleet - "be somewhere else", and all that - turned much faster
than they should have, but the episode was almost too long as it
was...),
I'm not sure the battles are that much compressed.

Later,

From: Ground Zero Games <jon@g...>

Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 10:31:50 +0100

Subject: Re: EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

[snip]
> So yes, 1-minute EFSB turns seem very likely. ...Jon, did you have any

Not really.:) We were just trying to get a grasp of the right "feel" of the
battles in
the show, and didn't want too many numbers getting in the way - which,
as explained in a previous post, is why we didn't go for a design system. But
yes, I'd agree that EFSB turns should be considered MUCH shorter than
"standard" FT ones, and speeds/distances are very much smaller as well.

From: Samuel Penn <sam@b...>

Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 12:17:00 +0100

Subject: Re: EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

In message <199805292349.BAA00239@d1o27.telia.com>
> "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@nacka.mail.telia.com> wrote:

> Samuel Penn wrote:

Hmm... In Severed Dreams, there's a scene while Ivonova is flying towards the
enemy starfuries, and the computer is giving a countdown of the range:
"800km... 700km...". Given the speed at which the count
drops, I'd guess both sides are closing at ~100km/s!

Anyway, it suggests range to jump gate is somewhat higher than this.

From: Ground Zero Games <jon@g...>

Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 09:11:43 +0100

Subject: Re: EFSB Vector Movement vs. FB Vector Movement

> In message <199805292349.BAA00239@d1o27.telia.com>

I wouldn't read too much into things like this - though B5 is much
better than Trek or most other shows for this kind of thing, it is still FAR
from
perfect - the dialogue often throws up minor stuff that is technically
weird. The CGI effects boys often seem to do their own thing as well,
especailly in battle scenes, which is why rating the ships for the game was so
difficult (and so open to individual interpretation).