The Nerfing of the Starship Enterprise: Part V

1979 also saw the release of the first Star Trek movie. The franchise had came alive, although it was in this case more as a zombie than a Lazarus. The movie was boring, the costumes dull, and the acting even duller. It wouldn't be until the Wrath of Khan in 1982 that it would pull a foot out of the grave.

The Enterprise herself however got a great facelift. In technology and use she seemed little changed from the original, just updated. But she didn't have a chance to show her stuff outside withstanding an attack that could one-shot the Klingons.

This would the be trend for the 'original' cast movies. The ship was often little more than a set in the movie, and while she would see combat- it would always be under very special conditions making it difficult to grasp what her real capabilities may have been.

On the game side of things, 1982 saw the release of FASA's Star Trek: The Role-Playing game.

It was a somewhat interesting if not completely effective rpg. It did have some of the better setting support and a few nice adventures.

On the ship side of things, it attempted to stay much closer to the original series (and original cast movies). No Dreadnaught to be found here, nor fighter craft. And the Enterprise stood proudly at that top of the mountain in ship design.

However...

It attempted to define away the cubic warp speed, saying that in order to fight ships had to match warp speeds. The original series showed things directly counter to this, so it was a pure game construction to avoid the issue. I reject the handwave here, it's not a warp driven warship unless you show it as a warp driven warship. I'm going to be harsh on this point with the scoring below as IMO a difference that makes no different is no difference.

The Shields (like Star Fleet Battles before it) were ablative although they'd pop back up the next turn ready to absorb what they could again. This too matched nothing in the series.

And again we see ships firing every weapon they can power and bring to bear, in this case because of the free damage bonuses given them if they were powered with at least a single point.

Lastly, the game just wasn't that much fun. Its attempt to split the bridge stations between players were a failure, and the 'up/down/back up' ablative nature of the Shields crippled the design from a play point of view IMO.

To score it:

1. Failure: It was a Warp Speed warship best used in combat at FTL speeds.
2. Failure: Non-ablative Deflector shields, able to withstand (for a time) planet wrecking attacks and completely ignore attacks below certain power levels
3. Success: Shields were divided into at least four 'arcs' that were damaged and reinforced independently
4. Failure: Phasers and photon Torpedos were FTL weapons. There were a number of weapon mounts pointing in different directions.
5. Failure: The phasers were fired 'one bank' at a time in a twin beam using all the ship's offensive power in a single attack. Torpedos were launched in spreads (typically in sets of double launches) and never fired at the same time as the phasers
6. Success: Ship's Power was critical in how the ship operated. Often balanced between needs it could divert for increased offense or defense.
7. Failure: Warp Factors were a cubic conversion times light speed (maybe with a constant added)
8. Failure: It was the fastest ship in Starfleet as warp drive was power intensive. Shuttles were sublight only.
9. Success: The Enterprise was the most powerful, and most versatile ship in Starfleet

Simulation Quality: 3 of 9
Game Quality: 2 of 5
Nerf Score: 3 of 5

Part: I, II, III, IV, VI, VII, Conclusion

The Nerfing of the Starship Enterprise: Part IV

1979 saw the release of Star Fleet Battles as 'pocket edition'. The rest they say is history. The game is perhaps the single most popular and important sci-fi ship to ship game in the history of the hobby.

I used to play it all the time, often through multi-player 'campaigns' and consider myself to be something of a SFB master. It saw many supplements and editions over the years and is still in production today. Although the editions had slight differences, the game has actually seen little change in its core rules and concepts- something even D&D can't claim.

It has a well-founded rep for complexity and detail and many consider it a 'hard-core' game although IMO the basic rules aren't that bad. However when one is playing with everything, combat is often more determined by who remembers what obscure rule than by tactics.

I like the game. Really do. One of my favorites.

However, as a original Star Trek simulation it sucks.

It does have power allocation, and all the proper names. However like the Star Fleet Battle Manual before it, it took the Star Fleet Technical Manual as its model. So Dreadnaughts are in there and that opened a wedge that drove it truly where no man had gone before.

The shields are completely ablative. Hit a ship with 50 point shields with 50 1 point attacks, and that shield is no more.

It uses FTL combat with a segmented movement that HERO System would later in a way (perhaps not intended) copy. But speeds were limited to just a tad over Warp 3. Also it didn't use Warp Factors, just movement points where 1 MP = 1x light speed.

Weapons were cheap to power and fire, and you fired as many as you could at the same time (or nearly the same time).

Shuttles were FTL, and have a combat role never seen in the TV series- original or not. Indeed, I'd almost claim their use is key to any victory.

The expansions would bring in Star Fighters and carriers. Space Control Ships and Super Battleships that made the Dreadnaught look like a cutter. Missiles, Anti-Missiles and Cruise Missiles and Multi-warhead missiles. Mines. Nothing was off limits and the game became a kitchen sink of whatever its designers wanted.

And the designers wanted carrier battles in space, even going so far as to name and model fighters and weapons systems after planes and systems in the US Navy.

Sadly it quickly became a game design better suited for Star Wars than Star Trek. And on top of that it's point value system designed to produced balanced battles was a joke.

It all started off well, but the designer fell for a common enough temptation. The desire to expand and add on to a system to make more money. And to remake something according to one's own desire.

There result was a great game. But horrid Star Trek and the Enterprise become nothing more than a support ship for far sexier vessels fielded in the game.

To score it

1. Success: It was a Warp Speed warship best used in combat at FTL speeds.
2. Failure: Non-ablative Deflector shields, able to withstand (for a time) planet wrecking attacks and completely ignore attacks below certain power levels
3. Success: Shields were divided into at least four 'arcs' that were damaged and reinforced independently
4. Success: Phasers and photon Torpedos were FTL weapons. There were a number of weapon mounts pointing in different directions.
5. Failure: The phasers were fired 'one bank' at a time in a twin beam using all the ship's offensive power in a single attack. Torpedos were launched in spreads (typically in sets of double launches) and never fired at the same time as the phasers
6. Success: Ship's Power was critical in how the ship operated. Often balanced between needs it could divert for increased offense or defense.
7. Failure: Warp Factors were a cubic conversion times light speed (maybe with a constant added)
8. Failure: It was the fastest ship in Starfleet as warp drive was power intensive. Shuttles were sublight only.
9. Failure: The Enterprise was the most powerful, and most versatile ship in Starfleet

Simulation Quality: 4 of 9
Game Quality: 4 of 5
Nerf Score: 5 out 5.

Part: I, II, III, V, VI, VII, Conclusion

Look what I just got for my Morrow Project Campaign

A while back (in October) I did a little article about the Landmaster from the Damnation Alley, and the HERO System (5th edition) write-up I did for it. I had selected this vehicle for use by the players in our Morrow Project campaign.

One of the problems with such a choice was not having a proper model to use with my gaming miniatures.

Today the nice little model pictured to the left arrived in the mail.

It's made of wood, and was crafted by a company in the Philippines called eModelAirplanes.

This was a custom order (notice the Morrow Project emblem replacing the stars from the movie) produced just for me. It came unattached from the base so I could more easily use it on the gaming table.

While not as detailed as the finer plastic models (painted on windows instead of clear plastic with interior, non-rotating rocket pods, etc.), it's far better than any 'stand-in' I would use and will do the job nicely. This is especially true given that it's the correct scale.

It wasn't cheap, and it took three months. Communication was difficult at times likely due to language issues.

But all in all, I'm quite happy with the outcome.

The Nerfing of the Starship Enterprise: Part III

The first Star Trek starship game that I'm aware off (other than simple non-simulation board games) was the text base Star Trek computer game from 1971. And really, it wasn't much of a simulation either as anyone who played it could tell you.

A number of other computer-based games followed. I've played many of them, if only for a limited time as it was easy to get bored with the early computer games (heck, I get bored with much of today's). One I didn't play but only heard about was a early multi-computer (using TSR-80s) network that allowed each individual to play one of the bridge officers in a multi-player 'simulation'. I knew a guy who had the code, but between everyone we knew- there was all of one TSR-80. Computers just weren't all that common back in the day.

Reviewing any of these in details would be a waste. In the first place, they were simple games and not real attempts at simulation. And perhaps more importantly- without the code it's difficult to tell what is going on in a computer game.

So I'll pass and turn towards what I consider to be the first significant Star Trek game that wasn't computer based. That was The Star Fleet Battle Manual published in 1977.

The game wasn't really table-top. It's was instead played on the floor, i.e. you needed clear floor space 3 meters or more on the side to play. That's because you moved your ships in terms of mm, and warp 8 (at 512x light speed) was a tad over a half-metter move.

The author was friends with Franz Joseph (covered in part II of this series) and took much of his lead from The Star Fleet Technical Manual. And thus the game failed some of the requirements I've previously stated out of the gate. For example, Dreadnoughts are part of the game making the Enterprise second tier.

Well, sort of. It's hard to judge in a way. You see firing at other ships used a rather interesting mechanic. You looked at the layout on the floor and then guessed at how many degrees off of true you should fire your weapons. Then you drag out your protractor and string and see if your guess was right. If it was, you hit. Otherwise better luck next time.

This method gave smaller ships a huge advantage as your would need to be spot on with your guess if the target was at any range. As a result many thought the tiny Tholian ship to be the best in game for good reason. The Dreadnought could be powerful, if its player had an uncanny ability to judge firing angles.

The weapon systems were odd too. Photons for example opened up holes in the shields allowing for following torpedos (if any) to ignore the shields. Nothing like that was indicated in the TV show or other sources. It also allowed (and indeed, tactically required) powering and firing multiple weapon mounts.

In short, the game was a mixed bag. It did warp speed correctly, had power allocation, shield arcs, and other goodness. And it had stuff pulled out of the backside of flying monkeys (who in turn were pulled out of another backside).

It was also done without the agreement of Paramount. The game was pulled it took until 1982 for the game to be republished after terms were worked out.

Most people don't remember it, however it started the trend of using the information found in the Star Fleet Technical Manual. And it started the trend of making stuff up.

Reviewing my previous requirements, here's how the Star Fleet Battle Manual scores:

1. Success: It was a Warp Speed warship best used in combat at FTL speeds.
2. Failure: Non-ablative Deflector shields, able to withstand (for a time) planet wrecking attacks and completely ignore attacks below certain power levels
3. Success: Shields were divided into at least four 'arcs' that were damaged and reinforced independently
4. Success: Phasers and photon Torpedos were FTL weapons. There were a number of weapon mounts pointing in different directions.
5. Failure: The phasers were fired 'one bank' at a time in a twin beam using all the ship's offensive power in a single attack. Torpedos were launched in spreads (typically in sets of double launches) and never fired at the same time as the phasers
6. Success: Ship's Power was critical in how the ship operated. Often balanced between needs it could divert for increased offense or defense.
7. Success: Warp Factors were a cubic conversion times light speed (maybe with a constant added)
8. Failure: It was the fastest ship in Starfleet as warp drive was power intensive. Shuttles were sublight only. The Enterprise was the most powerful, and most versatile ship in Starfleet

So out of 9 possible points, it scores 6. A rather good score. Indeed, it was the only game of the ones I'm going to talk about in this series that got the ship speeds correct.

From a play point of view, the 'guess your angle of fire' and the requirement for a huge amount of clear playing space are seriously bad, wrecking what could otherwise be an interesting simulation.

In terms of nerfing the Enterprise, the targeting method was a serious hit, as was weapons that could bypass shields, small but horribly difficult to hit foes, and the inclusion of more powerful Federation ships.

Simulation Quality: 6 of 9
Game Quality: 2 of 5
Nerf Score: 4 out 5.

Part: I, II, IV, V, VI, VII, Conclusion

Nominated? Really?

Short break from the Star Trek series, I'll return to it quickly.

Seems I got a couple of nominations to the Open Game Table, an anthology containing 'best of the blog 2009' it seems.

It's a unexpected honor. I consider this blog rather narrow in its focus and outside the mainstream. But thanks to those who nominated Layers of Design and Why RPG Theory has a Bad Rep. I don't expect to make it into the final selection, but the notice is appreciated.

I must spend some time reading the other nominees.