Hi All,
I was poking around Star Ranger's Starship Combat News site, and decided to
take a look at some of the smaller systems that I'd never heard of before.
Mistake.
Space Dreadnought 3000 (SD3K) is printed by Kallistra Limited
(http://www.kallistra.co.uk/)
I took the suggestion on Star Ranger's page and ordered through POP
Enterprises (http://www.p-o-p.demon.co.uk/). They were VERY quick and
packaged the book with great care to ensure it got to me with no damage.
It's a 48 page book with color covers and suprisingly good illustrations
throughout. There is also a cardstock counter sheet so you can play without
buying minis (this is also available as a JPG at their site).
The game is strategic in nature, not tactical. The basic game involves
conquest of a Star Centre (s.i.c.), made up of an arrangement of approximately
14 hexes, of which 3 or 4 are Supply Planets. Your fleet, made up of up to 5
Task Forces, must be victorious within 10 Time Phases
(turns).
Combat is abstracted and very simple. If two opposing TFs are within the same
hex, they fight. The ships are lined up on opposite sides of the hex. Each
ship chooses either offensive or defensive posture and a target. The target is
either destroyed or missed. If the ships of a TF are In Supply, they are much
more effective than if not. Ships may also be screened with fighters, meaning
that the fighters must be destroyed before the ship may be attacked.
Movement is also very simple. Pick a destination hex in the Star Centre. If
you can trace a path of hexes to it without going through a hex with an enemy
TF, you get there. If you must cross a hex with an enemy TF, your TF is
DESTROYED. So strategic maneuver is very important.
Supply is also a key factor. If your TF can trace a path to a friendly Supply
Planet, it is considered "in supply," and thus much more effective in combat.
If not, its combat ratings go down significantly.
Other goodies include Naval Bases, Freighters, Terminator Vessels (essentially
fire ships in the 1800's sense of the term), and oodles of Background.
There is also a campaign game which essentially links a number of Star Centres
together and adds economics and ship construction. Once again, simplicity and
fun are emphasized.
The game is supported by a rather large range of miniatures which are very
nice. I was quite surprised at the quality of the figures (which could also
easily be used for FT).
Overall:
I give SD3K a rating of 4 out of 5. I'd say that it's a MUST for anyone
looking to make a FT campaign system, not because it would make an ideal
system itself, but because it provides a large number of ideas for elegantly
solving many "complex" campaign problems.
The real key, however, is that it's a blast. Really fun and plays very
> I was poking around Star Ranger's Starship Combat News site, and
But exactly why I created SCN:)
> Space Dreadnought 3000 (SD3K) is printed by Kallistra Limited
<snip review details>
> The game is supported by a rather large range of miniatures which are
Yup, formerly produced by Pendraken. I've got a fleet of Altarian ships I'm
painting right now that will be at GenCon (along with the massive FSE fleet I
just starte basing)
> Overall:
Thanks for the review. I have't gotten around to playing it yet, but it is
definatly a different type of game than FT. Using FT for the battles
could work but how would the supply factor work for in FT terms?
> Dean Gundberg wrote:
[stuff on game snipped]
> > The real key, however, is that it's a blast. Really fun and plays
Fight more than one battle for an encounter, using the same (or surviving
forces). A supplied TF could have their ships fully (mostly?) repaired
(including hull), whereas an unsupplied force would just have to live with
whatever lumps it has taken. Includes any expendable ordnance resupplies.
Note: I haven't seen the game; this is just my off-the-cuff response to
the question.:)
Mk
> The game is strategic in nature, not tactical. The basic game
No periods, "sic" means "thus" in Latin. As in the motto of
Virginia, "sic semper tyrannis!" -- "thus always to tyrants!"
Thanks for the report, haven't had time to read it all but will this evening &
probably will buy based on your recommendation
> >The game is strategic in nature, not tactical. The basic game
I think he meant 'Spelling Is Correct' since the previous word was "Centre"
not the more common form 'Center'
> >The game is strategic in nature, not tactical. The basic
I hadn't meant to post that to the list, but since I did, and someone
replied...
"S.i.c." is not standard. When you are quoting something odd or erroneous, and
you want to advise your reader that the fault is with the original rather than
yourself, you quote it as you
found it and follow it with _sic_, always italicized and
normally in parentheses. The meaning it "I know it's wrong, but I found it
thus."
> Thanks for the review. I have't gotten around to playing it yet, but
That's a toughie.
It works very well when combat is abstracted, but becomes more difficult when
translating into tactical terms. The very simplicity of FT makes it granular.
In other words, it's hard to make a small change. You could
generalise the effects as a -1 on any "to hit" roll, allowing that it's
a sum of a great number of other factors, from crew fatigue to reduced
maneuverability.
The problem is: that's a big penalty. Though I'm of the opinion that it's not
unwarranted, I'm sure that there are those who'd disagree.
> >The game is strategic in nature, not tactical. The basic game
"Centre" is the English spelling - it's you Yanks that spell it
"Center".... ;-)
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
> "Centre" is the English spelling - it's you Yanks that spell it
By "English" spelling, you of course mean "correct" spelling .... ;-)
(ducks)
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
(_sic_)
> spelling .... ;-)
On Mon, 15 May 2000 17:48:03 -0500, "Dean Gundberg"
> <dean.gundberg@noridian.com> wrote:
> No periods, "sic" means "thus" in Latin. As in the motto of
"Centre" is the correct spelling. Only Americans spell it "center" and until
the 1920s (and the movement in the US to simplify spelling) it was spelled
"centre" too. Comes from the French, initially, because English steals from
just about every language it comes across. *S*