|
Post by finarvyn on Jan 5, 2010 16:47:19 GMT -5
Back in the 1980's there was a game by Task Force called Federation Space. Later they came up with Federation & Empire, which was technically a different game but had many of the same basic principles.
The map is a hex-map of the known galaxy. The center of the map had the Federation, with the Romulins on the right side and Klingons on the left. To the "north" of the Rumulins is the Gorn empire and to the "north" of the Klingons is the Kzinti (which appeared in the animated series). To the far left of the map is the Hydrans.
Basically, the game is a fleet-versus-fleet action. Ships are rated according to attack, defense, and movement. Most ships also have a "damaged" rating on the back of the counter, which is usually around 50% of its undamaged rating.
Whenever I run a Star Trek RPG I like to use the map from this game. It's nice to have distances given in hexes and gives me a good feel for where things are found relative to each other. This map was loosly based on the "Star Trek Technical Manual" from the 1970's.
Anyway, I'm curious as to whether others have played this and what you thought of the game.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jan 5, 2010 22:30:24 GMT -5
I haven’t, but it looks interesting. I love strategic games (i.e. more so than tactical games). Part of me is delighted at the idea of using its map in a RPG, as I really like the Starfleet Technical Manual and Starfleet Universe; however, this really has to be balanced with the TOS feel of the universe really being so vast and unknown and even uncharted. In the show, it always has the feel that Kirk and crew are really pushing the boundaries of known space; but then you go back and look at these maps and it shows Gothos, or whatever it might be, as being planted safely in the middle of “Federation Territory”. So, to some degree, IMO, what works for a board game doesn’t always work for a RPG, and vice-versa.
I couldn’t figure out what product to start with if I wanted to play Federation & Empire. It kind of seems like they only sell supplements.
|
|
|
Post by finarvyn on Jan 5, 2010 23:42:24 GMT -5
I couldn’t figure out what product to start with if I wanted to play Federation & Empire. It kind of seems like they only sell supplements. Federation & Empire has a boxed set which is the core game, plus there are a number of supplements. I have a couple copies and find them occasionally on e-bay for reasonable prices. I actually like the map for Federation Space better than F&E because it has fewer Neutral Zones between nations. Apparently I'm in the minority on this.
|
|
|
Post by finarvyn on Jan 6, 2010 14:18:36 GMT -5
Another neat thing is that Task Force Games put out a map extension in one of the issues of Nexus magazine. It has more Klingon and Kzinti space, along with a single-hex empire of guys called the Wynn. (I don't remember if they were in the animated series or not.)
It's kind of neat, if you like the FedSpace map. :-)
|
|
coffee
Lieutenant
"My chicken sandwich...and coffee." - James T. Kirk
Posts: 84
|
Post by coffee on Jan 6, 2010 14:55:12 GMT -5
The Wynn Star Cluster came from the expansions to Star Fleet Battles. They also had Andromedans and a bunch of others I don't recall. (I never liked those, and preferred to stick with the core races.)
|
|
|
Post by finarvyn on Jan 6, 2010 14:57:39 GMT -5
Thanks for the catch. I couldn't remember the origin of the Wynn or what they looked like. I just remembered them as a one-hex empire.
In general I'm not a fan of the non-canon races, either. I liked the FedSpace map, however, and the Wynn were on it...
|
|
|
Post by putraack on Jan 6, 2010 21:32:54 GMT -5
I'm also a big fan of Fed & Empire, I play it by email now. Amarillo Design Bureau is the producer, and they recently sold out of the core rulesets. That's why they are only selling supplements right now. They are working to have a revised edition (only fixes from the supplements will be added, not the new rules) out early this year.
It *is* a rich universe, IMO.
FWIW, I played Federation Space a little when it came out, but it didn't catch on with my group, and we went back to WW2 operational level games. I can't remember much about it, so it may not have been that good?
|
|
|
Post by finarvyn on Jan 7, 2010 9:21:37 GMT -5
F&E took the operational game to a high level (reminds me of Third Reich / Empire of the Rising Sun or Axis & Allies in its scope). Fed Space had a number of those same elements but the rulebook was significantly smaller and simpler. I find it interesting that the designers insist the two games aren't at all the same, becasue they are very similar to me.
|
|
Grendelwulf
Lt. Commander
Second star on the...no... To Infinity and..no.. Ah-ha! Never give up, Never surrender! THAT'S it!
Posts: 147
|
Post by Grendelwulf on Jan 7, 2010 12:35:52 GMT -5
This actually is a decent game. It’s pretty enjoyable to play. The system is not complex. A few shortcomings would be:
• No Lyrans -- Lyrans would really change the balance of power. • Federation favoritism – A common complaint I have with the Star Fleet Battles Universe is the blatant favoritism shown to the “good guys.” In this game, 1) Only the Federation gets scouts (and with that ECM capabilities and extended ZOCs). 2) “Good guy” ships are superior to “Bad Guy” ships, yet the “Bad Guys” advantage – namely QUANTITY of ships is lost with stacking rule and combat limitations. • Lack of variety – The scenarios are based on “historical” battles and I use that phrase loosely since the history is fictionalized (and once again favored the good guys). It would have been nice to have some more flexibility. With that many fleets and that big of a map, more scenarios should have been created.
But, on the otherhand, I still loved SFB! Probably because I got into playing it first.
Ciao! Grendelwulf
|
|
|
Post by finarvyn on Jan 7, 2010 13:46:26 GMT -5
No Lyrans -- Lyrans would really change the balance of power. That's one thing I like about the Lyran expansion from Nexus magazine -- it does shift the balance of power a little. Federation favoritism – A common complaint I have with the Star Fleet Battles Universe is the blatant favoritism shown to the “good guys.” In this game, 1) Only the Federation gets scouts (and with that ECM capabilities and extended ZOCs). 2) “Good guy” ships are superior to “Bad Guy” ships, yet the “Bad Guys” advantage – namely QUANTITY of ships is lost with stacking rule and combat limitations. Interesting points. Clearly, FedSpace was written from the viewpoint of the TV series, which was clearly pro-Federation, instead of trying to be universal and neutral. The TV shows clearly show one ship (Enerprise) routinely going up against multiple enemies, although she often ran rather than fought. The stacking limitation is kind of odd, but I think it can be defended somewhat from a balance point of view rather than a realism standpoint. Given the size of a hex, there is no reason why only 6 ships could fit with lots of room to spare. Part of this may come back to the original "only a dozen heavy cruisers" concept so that no reasonable Empire would ever put more than half of its fleet in one spot at a time.
|
|
|
Post by putraack on Jan 7, 2010 20:40:07 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure the stacking limit came about to prevent any or all wars breaking down to "I'll stack all my ships in one hex, and crush everything it encounters."
|
|
|
Post by finarvyn on Jan 9, 2010 11:52:26 GMT -5
Agreed. As I said, it's a game-balance issue rather than one of realism.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Apr 25, 2010 19:37:24 GMT -5
So, from what I’ve read, the Federation Space rulebook was only 16 pages, whereas the latest edition of Federation & Empire is 166 pages (not including expansions!). It’s like they have a corporate policy that more is better. Maybe it is, financially, I don’t know. You’ve got to have stuff to sell, that’s for sure. On the other hand, the “Monopoly” model seems to be pretty successful—a perpetually simple, perpetually stand-alone, perpetually unchanged game that is sold in every retail store in the world. Anyway, my point is that a 166-page rulebook is NOT an entry-level game. Not for boardgames, not for RPGs, not for wargames. This forces people like me to hunt down the original edition. I don’t mind a flawed game, because reasonable people can tinker with a game to mend the flaws. The problem is, in this case it is basically impossible to find a copy of Federation Space in any condition...
|
|
|
Post by aramis on Apr 26, 2010 4:09:24 GMT -5
I prefer Fed Space in general, but F&E, when few options are taken, can be a lot of fun.
The expanded FS map is the basis for the F&E map... but that adds also the ISC. Also, the combat factors are pretty much the same... tho F&E drops movement, since it's easy enough to remember what few don't move 6.
FS Combat is slower, more detailed, and more tactical than F&E.
It deserves a good Vassal module... just don't tell SVC.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Apr 26, 2010 10:19:46 GMT -5
Could you have a FS game that lasts months/years with all the combats being resolved via SFB? I.e. FS being used as the campaign/strategic component and SFB as the scenario/tactical component? In other words, FS as a scenario generator for SFB?
|
|