[OT] Starship - perhaps a last thought?

3 posts ยท Sep 8 2000 to Sep 8 2000

From: Barclay, Tom <tomb@b...>

Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:04:20 -0400

Subject: [OT] Starship - perhaps a last thought?

Perhaps we can close out this thread on a positive note:

1) Oerjan - as our primary number cruncher, standard bearer, and
resident
occasional prickly-pear, you make a very cogent defence of FT including
refuting some apparent misconceptions Brad seemed to have about FT (or at
least, so it came across). I think you and others have effectively pointed out
the game has always been marketed as having a sort of
"optional/generic"
feel to it, and that in many ways, it is very flexible in allowing players
to come up with their own designs/races (while living within the rules
strictures). And of course, pointing out that players will do as they will and
rules be darned. Thank you for your comments! I believe Brad may have a better
perspective on how this community sees FT as a consequence.

2) Brad (Mr. Carlson?) - Two comments.

First, congratulations on having launched a new game. It is a grand exploit
and I look forward to seeing your work at a convention. Perhaps you'd consider
attending GZG ECC IV and running a demonstration game? That would allow many
of the listers to see Starship first hand. <This is just an idea>

Second, I hope no one here has come across as offensive or combative. We gzg
listers do sometimes come across a little bit bombastic but we try to be well
behaved in general. I can see how it might seem people are picking at
your creation - not so (or at least not with any intent to do harm). I
would choose to think of it as trying to understand how your system differs
and what it offers. In some cases, we may object to a particular
characterization of FT based on your admittedly limited experience -
many of us have been involved in this community for years now and have a much
more developed sense of what the FT system is about and the values Sr.
Tuffley's games espouse. But we (generally) don't mean any harm. We just don't
like to be told what FT is or isn't <*grin*>.

General
----------

I would hope that everyone on the list is now clear on what Starship offers
- a quite flexible race/ship creation system with (it would appear) more
permutations/options than FT. Balance is (if we take the initial
reports)
not a tremendous problem - min/maxing seems minimal. Suffice to say that
until some of our people play the game, this is the best understanding we're
likely to have. Perhaps someone will buy a copy of Starship! and write the a
critical review to contrast and compare?

Hopefully, in return, Brad is clearer on the fact that FT is more generic than
he initially may have seemed to suggest. Whereas it may not offer quite so
many apparent options, it could hardly be called inflexible or restrictive.
And the FT playtesters have been through many iterations of
rules-that-didn't-see-the-light-of-day to root out balance issues. It's
a fast, fun game.

Undoubtedly, Starship! is probably an interesting game, worth a look through
or a game or two. Obviously, it offers the players flexibility and options and
texture. I think Brad said it best when he pointed out that both systems
appear to have their strengths. This is part of a live-and-let-live
approach which is the best way to look at these types of dialogic issues.

As an old AD&D DM who has bent, folded, twisted, and mutilated every ruleset
TSR ever put out, I can say that there is always someone who wants to tweak a
system, no matter how good, no matter how complex. There are systems with
greater and lesser flexibility and greater and lesser balance. FT offers a
degree of flexibility, a spirit of sportsmanship, a willingness to let the
purchaser do what he or she wants with the game. FT is fast, fun, and has a
devoted following. Starship! is obviously a different experience, probably
worthwhile in its own accord for its different flavour.

As long as we can all see that there is more than one way to approach a game
and each method comes with its own pros and cons, there is no reason a large
variety of these games can't be successful, each offering a different
experience.

Best of luck, Brad! Thank you for taking the time and effort to outline some
interesting facts about Starship!. Hopefully people will check it out to find
out more. Remember too, it is in its early stages and FT is mature... it is
quite likely that given a version or two, any hidden or
as-yet-unseen
flaws can be moderated.

And thanks again to Oerjan for standing up for the "real" nature of FT as
those of us on the list know it!

:)

From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>

Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 23:24:49 EDT

Subject: Re: [OT] Starship - perhaps a last thought?

Great summation.  As a confirmed ground pounder gamer - "Look. 'Admiral'
you clear the aerospace envelope, and get us dirtside. We'll get you your nice
pretty Starport so the heavies can come down. Of course I can't promise it
won't be bent a little. You navy guys can be adaptable, right?" I have
followed this thread quite closely and feel that no foul was intended
(although the problem of lack of 'virtual body language' had me concerned a
few times.)

Now, I won't be buying your game, but then I don't own FT either. I think
there is a place for your game in the market and if you don't make bad
business decisions that drive you out of the market (Like
Commodore/Amiga and Atari PCs...) you should go well.  This looks from
your description to be a good tournament game (which I have never done and
don't plan to start. It also looks like a good lead in to a SFRPG.

Glad to see your product generated such interest on such a proprietary
oriented list. I don't think most of the comments on the list were
intended as attacks.  This group, like the eGroups SFCONSIM-l group, can
be pretty technical focused and intensely interested (to the point of making
someone in your situation feel like they are under the microscope
- or dissecting blade - but it is in the interest of good gameing.

The local cons allow for "anything historical and anything miniatures" 2 of 3
times a year. "Here" is Saint Louis, MO, USA. Demo games are certainly
welcome. Interested? If so write me off list.

Again, welcome, hope to see a lot of your posts on space SF stuff. Wander
'down' to the ground dome too. It can get lonely being a DS2'er sometimes...

From: Brad Carlson <7sg@l...>

Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 20:33:33 -0700

Subject: Re: [OT] Starship - perhaps a last thought?

> [quoted text omitted]

[various stuff deleted throughout]

> 2) Brad (Mr. Carlson?) - Two comments.

Thanks!

> Perhaps you'd

Where and when?

> Second, I hope no one here has come across as offensive or combative.
We gzg
> listers do sometimes come across a little bit bombastic

naaaa. Strong opinions are part of the territory.

> but we try to be

So taken.

> In some cases, we may object to a particular
Tuffley's
> games espouse. But we (generally) don't mean any harm. We just don't

Understood. I have, admittedly, been a bit out of the loop -- most of my
gaming
for the last 2-3 years has been demos and playtests of FSG stuff, not
getting deep into other game systems.

> [quoted text omitted]

> Hopefully, in return, Brad is clearer on the fact that FT is more

Very true.

> Best of luck, Brad! Thank you for taking the time and effort to

And my thanks to all as well.