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.

The Nerfing of the Starship Enterprise: Part II

As a quick review of Part I, here's the short and quick list of what I consider the key elements in simulating the original Star Trek's USS Enterprise.

1. It was a Warp Speed warship best used in combat at FTL speeds.
2. Non-ablative Deflector shields, able to withstand (for a time) planet wrecking attacks and completely ignore attacks below certain power levels
3. Shields were divided into at least four 'arcs' that were damaged and reinforced independently
4. Phasers and photon Torpedos were FTL weapons. There were a number of weapon mounts pointing in different directions.
5. 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. Ship's Power was critical in how the ship operated. Often balanced between needs it could divert for increased offense or defense.
7. Warp Factors were a cubic conversion times light speed (maybe with a constant added)
8. It was the fastest ship in Starfleet as warp drive was power intensive. Shuttles were sublight only.
9. The Enterprise was the most powerful, and most versatile ship in Starfleet

I'll use the above as I examine how the Ship was treated in gaming and fiction after the end of the original series.

In 1975 perhaps the single most important Star Trek related gaming publication was released. It wasn't however a game. Rather it was the Star Fleet Technical Manual (SFTM) written by Franz Joseph Schnaubelt. Written 6 years after the series ended, this one work would determine in many ways the future of Star Trek.

Schnaubelt wasn't a member of the original development team, but a fan who took to drawing and detailing things Star Trek as he saw them. He struck an agreement with Roddenberry (who thought the franchise dead) and was allowed to publish a book containing his work. The sales were impressive, and this was perhaps a deciding factor in bringing Star Trek to the big screen. It was certainly a landmark in Star Trek gaming.

It was also the beginning of the nerfing of the Starship Enterprise.

In it's defense, much of this wasn't its fault. The SFTM didn't going into operation details for the most part. It was a set of drawings, names, and background information. Not a tactical or operational work. Even so, there were two bits of information that would have a massive impact on gaming.

• The inclusion of ship classes other than the Enterprise.

Here Schnaublet decided that Starfleet fielded other types of ships in addition to its Heavy Cruisers like the Enterprise. This made sense from hints dropped during the series and its writer's bible but they never really appeared on screen due to expense.

Thus Starfleet also had destroyers, scouts and tugs. And... it had dreadnaughts.

In the original writer's bible, it was stated that the Enterprise was a dreadnaught or battleship- but that the Federation used the term Heavy Cruiser as it was a better fit for a ship that had exploration duties as its primary role during peace time. Schnaublet missed that memo, and reduced the Enterprise to the second most powerful Star Fleet ship type.

Schnaublet in a way tried to contain the damage, saying that the Dreadnaughts were kept at a home Starbase unless the Federation went to war, at which point they would set out to heap death upon their foes. But normally they were too expensive to operate. Thus, the Enterprise was still the best the Federation had in daily operation.

That such a concept wouldn't work didn't seem to occur to him. Just consider it. Who would crew it? Would you pull experienced crews off a Heavy Cruiser and toss them under war conditions onto a ship they've never operated before? Would you maintain a 'hanger' crew who did nothing but train on simulators and thus send green crews out manning your best ships?

Has any Navy operated effectively like this? No. Did anything like this appear on any TV or movie screen before or after? No.

But it's here, and as we'll see it became an important part of the gaming world of Star Trek.

• The SFTM defined how many and in what locations the Enterprise's weapon mounts were. For the phasers, it claimed there were three pairs. One was on the bottom of the saucer facing foward. The other top on were on the top with one facing port and the other Starboard. The twin torpedo launchers faced forward.

Now the original show used a lot of stock footage (cost was a issue), and never showed anything but the main forward phasers or photons firing. However they did say on screen that there were others. So adding them to the drawing was worthwhile

However, does that type of mounting make sense to anyone? It doesn't to me. If the ship could always turn towards a foe, you'd only need two weapon mounts- a primary and a backup. If it couldn't be counted on to make that turn (far more likely IMO for tactical reasons if no others), it should have weapons pointed everywhere.

You could sort of get away with it. After all, the Enterprise would only fire one of those mounts at a time. And if it rotated along it's axis (i.e. banked or even turned 'upside down') it could bring a weapon to bear in any direction but directly astern. Maybe that was a blind spot you couldn't fire through anyway? This never happened on screen. But one could excuse that.

That works. Well, there's a problem. If you listen to the backgroud chatter on the original show as the Enterprise goes to Red Alert, you'll hear something interesting. A report of "Aft Phasers Ready".

Years later, the blueprints for the movie Enterprise would show 18 phasers (14 in paired banks, 4 independently mount) pointing in all directions. The Enterpise TV episode "In a Mirror, Darkly" would show the aft phasers firing on an original Constitution class cruiser.

So the SFTM is wrong.

Thus the SFTM gives us two problems, but only one is a nerf. The reduction of the Enterprise to second tier breaks item #9 above. The weapon mountings are an incorrect detail that could be easily forgotten. But we'll see how that error bites us going forward.

Edit: Almost forgot something. All the ships in the SFTM have the same warp speeds. Highly unlikely, and this breaks requirement #8 above.

Next we starting examing game designs.

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