That was a the kind of question I get from newbies in SF war games. I (now)
always tell new players who ask about nukes before a game about them ("Does he
have them?" "His side has them." "Do I?" "Is it listed?
No? I guess you weren't issued one...." interesting to watch their mind
churning after that one....
LOL! I have had new players toss nukes and blink when 'nothing happens' and
it's easy to forget that newbies don't know all the jargon. Funny
how quickly players (new/grognard) will toss Nukes in a game if they
think the othe side can't respond or is vulnerable....
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 18:20:25 +0100 Dominic Mooney
> <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> writes:
Not as an exercise in seeing how much money you've made from the Full Thrust
rules Jon;) but do you have any idea how many copies you have sold? had
printed?
Since unlike the big players out there you resisted the need to bring out a
new edition every other year! I'm just curious has to how many copies are in
circulation as a comparison to how well the rules are known.
Any one else curious?
Jeremey www.germy.co.uk
> Germy wrote:
> Not as an exercise in seeing how much money you've made from the Full
had
> printed?
Last count I heard was "more than ten thousand copies sold".
> Since unlike the big players out there you resisted the need to bring
...no, on average he does it every third year instead, without printing a
consolidated rulebook ;-) After all FB1 and FB2 were fairly major
revisions, and even More Thrust changed the turn sequence :-/
Later,
I don't know if this is an indication of how popular FT is but after playing a
game at a local convention I've got a copy on order.;^)
As an aside: Is there a "complete" B5 to FT ship conversion list available
anywhere? This lists I have seen are very old an very incomplete.
Thanks, Tim
> Germy wrote:
had
> >printed?
Is that a lot? I was just trying to see why everytime someone asks about a
space combat set of rules. Full Thrust being mentioned is a guarantee.
Jeremey
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 15:08:35 +0100, "Germ" <germ@germy.co.uk> wrote:
> I was just trying to see why everytime someone asks about a
It might have something to do with almost no _real_ competition. FT is
easy to learn and not too complicated. It has a straightforward design system.
Players like to design their own ships. In many ways, FT taps into the same
impulse that gets people buying collectible (or, put another way, "tuneable")
card games.
There are few games as easy to learn as FT, with an easy design system, while
still having an array of different weapon systems. Most games are either more
simplistic, or they don't try very hard to come up with anything even
approaching vector movement, or they are exceedingly complex. Some of them are
complex without being anywhere near as "realistic" (if you can call a game
without true vector movement, true momentum, and only in 2 dimensions
"realistic") as FT.
I like FT, but it's not quite the perfect system for me. I find the game drags
a little in pace for the tactical challenges it provides. I wish it was either
faster paced or had more tactical challenges. This probably explains why I
force certain design criteria on my home grown universes (making the weapon
layout match the model's design, concentrate on cruisers and smaller ships).
> It might have something to do with almost no _real_ competition. FT is
Players
> like to design their own ships. In many ways, FT taps into the same
card
> games.
Allan I'm not so sure. Most of what I read about people being put off FT is
the fact that the ship design bit 'is' up to the player. Games these days that
become quickly become popular are the ones you can play straight out of the
box. Look at all the Wizkids stuff. The more popular games seem to be those
where the unit stats, points values and army lists are all ready made.
To get the most out of FT takes time, which leads me back to the fact that
despite this, it still gets a mention everytime.
Your point about lack of competition might be closer to the truth.
Jeremey www.germy.co.uk
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 16:43:47 +0100, "Germ" <germ@germy.co.uk> wrote:
> The more popular games seem to be those where the unit stats, points
Except for "army lists", you get that with FT and the fleet books.
> Your point about lack of competition might be closer to the truth.
I do believe that's the main thing, along with the ease of play. The design
system _does_ let people tinker with FT and use it for sci-fi genres.
There are few "generic" games out there, most wanting to tie the rules to a
specific background. If you want to play Star Trek or B5, you are stuck buying
a rule
set that handles those genres _only_. Considering how popular Dean
Gundberg's
Sci-Fi Crossover games are at GenCon, I think this generic ability --
which
makes use of the design system -- is a big draw.
> On Tue July 8 2003 11:55 am, Allan Goodall wrote:
> I do believe that's the main thing, along with the ease of play. The
There
> are few "generic" games out there, most wanting to tie the rules to a
Heck, for me, that was the biggest draw to all the GZG games. SG, DSII
*and*
FT.
> Allan Goodall wrote:
> I like FT, but it's not quite the perfect system for me. I find the
Have you done much with the Russian-Japanese conflict universe you
created many moons ago?
Still recalling the PBeM game you ran... (All those mines!)
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 13:08:41 -0400 Flak Magnet
> <flakmagnet@tabletop-battlezone.com> writes:
<snip> I think this
> generic
I have to agree with Flak Magnet that this was the number one factor for me
too. Although ease of play is a close second. and the availability
of "appropriate" looking/equipped miniatures (if I wanted to use them in
addition to my own) for each game was the clincher.
For (6 mm) me, the DS 2 was the initial draw but the ability to fight the
space war, do the orbital assault, fight the battles, and play out the
small war skirmishes/actions was a gift from Heaven.
Gracias,
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 10:55:44 -0500 Allan Goodall
<agoodall@hyperbear.com> writes:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 16:43:47 +0100, "Germ" <germ@germy.co.uk> wrote:
Although the FT/MT/FBx scenarios thing is blessing (introduce basics,
move on to more involved) and a curse (Now that you have learned "X" we
are going to add "Y" and change to "X prime" - like the old board game
Star Ship Trooper by Avalon Hill (IIRC.)
Gracias,
Glenn - warbeads@juno.com
.
6 mm miniatures rule! Well, anyway in my mind they do!
.
> Your point about lack of competition might be closer to the truth.
I assume you mean lack of competition as in lack of 'effective'
competition - there is lots of competition in SF games out there,
especially in 'Space ship' games.
Gracias,
On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 05:59:35 PDT, Glenn M Wilson <warbeads@juno.com> wrote:
> I assume you mean lack of competition as in lack of 'effective'
As I mentioned in a previous post, it is lack of competition that does what FT
does: a generic game with simple mechanics that attempt to mimic Newtonian
physics (even if it doesn't do it altogether too accurately, and only in
2D),
and an easy to use design system. Most games are either a) not generic, b) do
not have simple mechanics, c) do not have a design system, or d) some
combination of the first three.
As for "effective competition", it wouldn't surprise me if Battle Fleet
Gothic, or even Starfleet Battles has outsold FT.
> I have to agree with Flak Magnet that this was the number one factor
I'm beginning to see a pattern here as to why FT gets applauded when people
ask what space games exist. I like you Glenn got into Dirtside first and the
main
reason was because I needed a 6mm sci-fi game that did allow me to edit
and create my own forces. I had become bored with the lack of variety with
GW's Epic game.
But what I was saying about games that you can play straight out of the box
still applies. I probably would never had bothered with Dirtside before Epic.
I was of an age where I would simply have got bored very quickly if I had to
make my own vehicles and army lists.
I guess GZG products are something to mature into (which is no bad thing). And
I see now that FT and other GZG products are popular or at least have a high
profile in the hobby because they are promoted by those of us who have finally
seen the benefits over
pre-packaged, non generic rule sets.
Jeremey www.germy.co.uk
> On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 14:35:25 +0100, "Germ" <germ@germy.co.uk> wrote:
> And I see now that FT and other GZG products are popular or at least
It's a shame, therefore, that the games are losing exposure in North America
due to GZG going mail order only. I talked to a local store about running some
FT demo games. He was all for it until he found out he couldn't get the
figures through a distributor. I've heard from other list members who have
mentioned GZG products disappearing from North American stores...
I have also had the same experience. In fact I have had store owners tell me
that I should buy games that they can get instead. The problem is that I just
found out about Full Thrust a few months ago (yes I have been living under a
gaming rock for the last several years) and was disappointed that the only way
I could get any of the related products was by mail order from overseas. I am
playing the game, and introducing it to others as well, but I am sure that I
would have a much easier time of doing so if the game and it's related
products were available in local stores.
[quoted original message omitted]
I have had a similar experience with my own favorite local hobby store. He
can't order anything from GZG (its not him, its his distributor..:(
..).
He told me to order GZG stuff direct... Jon T.... Why can't he order from you
direct? (ie: a small shipment now and then) How would his distributor know? Do
they have spys everywhere? He made it sound like his distributor would have a
fit and drop him...
Donald Hosford
I have also had the same experience. In fact I have had store owners tell me
that I should buy games that they can get instead. The problem is that I just
found out about Full Thrust a few months ago (yes I have been living under a
gaming rock for the last several years) and was disappointed that the only way
I could get any of the related products was by mail order from overseas. I am
playing the game, and introducing it to others as well, but I am sure that I
would have a much easier time of doing so if the game and it's related
products were available in local stores.
It's a shame, therefore, that the games are losing exposure in North America
due to GZG going mail order only. I talked to a local store about running some
FT demo games. He was all for it until he found out he couldn't get the
figures through a distributor. I've heard from other list members who have
mentioned GZG products disappearing from North American stores...
> I have had a similar experience with my own favorite local hobby
:( ..).
> He told me to order GZG stuff direct...
Ordering it yourself really isn't much of a problem. Mastercard or Visa will
do the currency conversion automatically. Unless you order right around the
same time as a major show, Jon will usually get the goods to you within a
couple of weeks. The shipping is about the same as the gas it would take for
me to get to the local shop, I don't have to spend the drive time, and I can
get what I want (15mm Islamics) rather than what the store happens to have
stocked up on (25mm ESU).
If your local shop is willing to support you, then of course you should
support them.
> Ordering it yourself really isn't much of a problem.
That isn't the point; we in the US *are* spoilt in just the manner Richard
suggested. Of course, I withheld my rant that he was probably spoilt having
wargame gatherings within a hundred miles on a regular basis.
It would have been unfair; I've several local shops that do yeoman duty there.
But, they do have vested interest in what's put on.
Because of that, if it's not on the shelf, if the store owners aren't showing
it to new customers, we tend not to have the fan infrastructure,
non-shop-oriented wargame clubs across the country, to flog something
big time, and people tend not to buy out of magazine ads and reviews.
Be sure to recognize the 'across the country' and 'tend not to...' refer to
trends, not individual cases.
Lastly, I'd like to point out that the question of distribution in the US
wasn't entirely Jon's decision...
The_Beast
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 07:07:22 -0400 "Laserlight" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
writes:
<snip>.
> If your local shop is willing to support you, then of course you
That's the rub for me. Closest shop (for other - local game club
politics - reasons) I no longer enter (okay - once in a year plus but
the game was one using a rules set I had asked a person to run several times)
because the implicit message is "My way or the highway" and the explicit
statements (slightly paraphrased note!) have been:
1) "Oh, a UK company other than GW? That's a cottage industry company, I only
deal with reliable companies"
2)"They don't use my distributor so I don't order from them, it's too
hard to make sure you get what you order." - Right after spending 10
minutes ripping the said distributor's shipping record/practices to
pieces in a diatribe...
3) "I don't do much 6mm since nobody plays that scale." This from a man who
has had the same plastic model boxes on his shelf for years and complains he
can't sell enough of them to make a profit."
4)"The smaller scales (referring to 20 mm and below) don't sell well." But
then he put in whole row of racks of WW2 in 20 mm and 15 mm... while the 15 mm
ancients guys have a whole second club dedicated to DBx and the
WW2 scene is either micro armor or 25/28 mm groups.
With Paypal, web sites, a VISA logo bank card that doesn't do the 'revolving
charge card interest" thing but acts like an automatic debit
card, and the excellent shipping practices of GZG/Brigade/et. al. and
other (30 minutes away are 3 plus a chain of 4 shops all over the metro area
plus a couple just across the river) shops who do order (takes longer and
might cost more but at least they do it even if they don't carry historicals
in the shops why should I use the 'local' shop?
I support the companies who support my part of the hobby. Seems fair to me.
Gracias,
> On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 14:35:25 +0100 "Germ" <germ@germy.co.uk> writes:
<snip>
> But what I was saying about games that you can play straight out of
That is true, especially for newbies (What's a 'Nuclear damper'?)
> I probably would never had bothered with Dirtside before Epic. I was
Well, I did get my first war game around 1959 and model soldiers before that
(slightly) so I do admit to having someexperience and some interests
in creating my own 'forces' for games. Especially non-optimal ones
(okay, I'm weird...)
Gracias,
Thanks, I will have to pass this on to him when I visit again...
Donald Hosford
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
> > I have had a similar experience with my own favorite local hobby
Hi all... late responding here...
> On Thursday, July 10, 2003, at 02:27 PM, Glenn M Wilson wrote:
> 1) "Oh, a UK company other than GW? That's a cottage industry
Hmm. Mongoose do a good job of being one of the bigger gaming companies now,
and they're UK based. Okay, so it's RPGs but they do have the B5, Judge Dredd
and Slaine licences.
Actually, speaking of the B5 license, I'd love to see a revised EFSB FT
rule set ;-) Tried B5 Wars and gave up - admittedly, 1st Ed. And Fleet
Action had some glitches that needed working out.
Cheers,
Hi Glenn,
> On Thursday, July 10, 2003, at 04:48 PM, Glenn M Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 14:35:25 +0100 "Germ" <germ@germy.co.uk> writes:
See the description on p6 of Power Projection: Escort ;-)
> Actually, speaking of the B5 license, I'd love to see a revised EFSB FT
> rule set ;-) Tried B5 Wars and gave up - admittedly, 1st Ed. And Fleet
Not really a vac head, but I have to say B5 wars is sooooooooo clunky! As cool
as the B5 background is (ant let's face it, it is) those rules just
seen to serve to get everything bogged down.
Though I did hear a complaint from a B5 Wars devotee that the FT conversion
was "too deadly".
FT somehow serves to bypass a lot of people's problems with Sci-Fi.
Quite why this is so I couldn't guess, but I be that's part of the success
> On Friday, July 25, 2003, at 12:32 PM, Richard Kirke wrote:
> Actually, speaking of the B5 license, I'd love to see a revised EFSB
> As cool as the B5 background is (ant let's face it, it is) those rules
> just seen to serve to get everything bogged down.
Yup. Read it, hated the mechanics. Wrong end of the scale for me with way too
much detail.
> Though I did hear a complaint from a B5 Wars devotee that the FT
<giggle> Like the ships survived easily in combat in the series.
</giggle>
ISTR that the battle when B5 declared independence ('Severed Dreams'?) ended
pretty messily and the EA forces only survived because they withdrew when the
Mimbari arrived. Would have to dig out the video tape to check though.
Or the Narn main battle fleet running into the Shadows...
Or the Battle of the Line...
Or the Alliance forces taking out the Shadow-tech Earth Alliance
ships...
Okay, so I'm sad and I own the whole series and Crusade on video ;-)
not DVD - curses!
> FT somehow serves to bypass a lot of people's problems with Sci-Fi.
Quick, clean and expandable. Something you can play in 90 minutes. It's
something we found with PP: Escort - the FT engine means you can fight
a number of battles with small ships in a few hours. Many of the alternative
games can take hours more to resolve, even when you *know* what the result
will be.
Cheers,
***
<giggle> Like the ships survived easily in combat in the series.
</giggle>
*** ;->=*
Well, anything with Shadows, prior to adding Vorlon tech, is going to tend
to be short. ;->=
Ditto earlier Earth vessels against Minbari.
However, and I forget the show, but it's where an Primus is just closing down
targeting on B5, and a G'Quon drops in. They took each other out DAMN quick!
Just remember, game time and show time are not the same. Heck, show time is
never the same across two episodes. Does it feel right? Fleet Action did
pretty good until you had to figure out damage.
Game needs a damage computer. Only time I feel like that is when I'm figuring
threshold on a really big ship in FT.
The_Beast
Dominic Mooney wrote:
> Okay, so I'm sad and I own the whole series and Crusade on video ;-)
not
> DVD - curses!
You mean "not DVD *yet*", no? AFAIK only the first two seasons are available
on DVD so far...
From: "Dominic Mooney"
> Quick, clean and expandable. Something you can play in 90 minutes.
It's
> something we found with PP: Escort - the FT engine means you can
BTW Dominic (or anyone else on the list who has or is about to have
PP:E), I'd be interested in a PBeM game--feel free to pass the word
> On Friday, July 25, 2003, at 02:05 PM, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> Dominic Mooney wrote:
The other half will kill me, plus what do I do with the 70 odd old videos?
;-p
> On Sunday, July 25, 1999, at 03:07 PM, <warbeads@juno.com> wrote:
> That was a the kind of question I get from newbies in SF war games. I
True. The one I rarely see in PP:E is players using the high intensity fire
rules. These give you nuke effect with no special defenses, but they do dump
all your missile reserves. It's all or nothing but when you know that the
enemy is, like yourself, an eggshell, then it's worth trying. But
psychologically, it very rarely happens...
Cheers,
> On Friday, July 25, 2003, at 01:04 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
> Just remember, game time and show time are not the same. Heck, show
Or turned a line abreast squadron 90 degrees ;-)