Page 29 of 29

Re: Federation Admiral Public Update

Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 11:34 pm
by PaulB
If you ask them, they'll say it's because of their license. Steve has even indicated that prior to a few years ago they could be more loose with their content, but now must create games which adhere to the same results :-P Ken Burnside posted on BGG that this stricter adherence coincided with the release of Abram's Trek in 2009, so whether they were given notice or whether it's simply precautionary because Paramount is again in the TOS era who knows (Ken also stated that he's skimmed the contents of their license with Paramount). Though I can't verify that last statement since Ken deleted his post shortly after making it. Either he thought twice about posting it, or someone asked him to take it down. But either way, his statement is in agreement time-wise with what SVC has said so I assume there is a bit of truth to it.

Re: Federation Admiral Public Update

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 11:00 am
by Shadow Warrior
As they have that unicorn of Trek licenses, one that runs in perpetuity, I don't blame them for not wanting to jeopardise it and therefore err on the side of caution. Just a shame it didn't come out until years into the project.

Re: Federation Admiral Public Update

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 9:27 pm
by PaulB
Shadow Warrior wrote:As they have that unicorn of Trek licenses, one that runs in perpetuity, I don't blame them for not wanting to jeopardise it and therefore err on the side of caution. Just a shame it didn't come out until years into the project.


Yup. And in general they have blamed VBAM devs for the lack of adherence to the universe. But it's quite apparent that these restrictions were either not in effect back in those days, or not properly communicated. Though now ADB will say that neither one is true and any fault lies with Jay & whomever else.

Re: Federation Admiral Public Update

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:08 pm
by Charles Lewis
The VBAM stats were derived from the Federation Commander ship cards available at the time (8+ years ago) and the scenarios were derived from F&E material, so I'm curious how we could possibly have deviated. If we did, since I did both the conversion and the scenario write-ups, it's all on me. 8)

Re: Federation Admiral Public Update

Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 3:00 pm
by mwaschak
Charles Lewis wrote: If we did, since I did both the conversion and the scenario write-ups, it's all on me. 8)


And since we were building a campaign system for Federation Commander it is a reasonable thing to do IMHO, especially since this is the material they mailed us to use.

Thanks,
Jay

Re: Federation Admiral Public Update

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 1:54 pm
by Charles Lewis
Clearly, we were supposed to just hand back Federation & Empire: The Exact Same Product Only Slightly Different edition.

Re: Federation Admiral Public Update

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 2:23 pm
by Tyrel Lohr
"And what's wrong with that, I'd like to know? Here we go... again!!!" :lol:

Re: Federation Admiral Public Update

Posted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 7:21 pm
by PaulB
To no one's surprise, Steve recently announced he'll just use an altered F&E combat system after the two volunteers tasked with making a new system didn't deliver:

http://www.starfleetgames.com/federatio ... &start=210

A while ago, we go to the point of replacing the original combat system (which was badly broken). I assigned two people to write a new one so I could pick between them and neither did what they promised. That threw it back on my desk and my schedule was already full. So when I get past a couple of projects I'll go see if I can strip the clutter out of the F&E system and use that.

It won't be this month, but it will be.

Re: Federation Admiral Public Update

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:01 am
by Shadow Warrior
Deep joy. Just what the world needs. VBAM powered by F&E.

Not.