Federation Admiral Public Update

[terryoc]

"...anything that's more "free form" isn't his cup of tea (or coffee)."

I believe Steve Cole's caffeine addiction of choice is Diet Dr. Pepper

[Shadow Warrior]

It's not looking good according to the FA thread on the FC forum. March is out of the question, before Origins is starting to look doubtful, maybe some hope for the autumn.

http://www.starfleetgames.com/federatio ... 34557da9e9

Sounds like it's very painful going and SVC's not doing a very good sales job by publically criticising this bit or that bit of the rules. Essentially he can't see why anyone would even want to play this kind of game when you could be playing F&E with its cast in stone rules / builds / economics / tactics.

Still, it'll get there in the end. This is double quick time compared to some ADB projects.

[mwaschak]

Yes, it has been pretty tough to stay quiet on the forums through all this. I didn't throw any curveballs as far as I can tell. What will survive to print will be fairly different than the original. But, I will not criticize business partners on the Internet. I hope my own development process has been transparent enough and that what we do here at VBAM Games is enjoyable enough to stand on its own.

Tech and command have been tossed and replaced with something close to F&E. The Intel and supply rules are essentially the same as VBAM's. We might have to drop the FA scenario generation. Adding rules to support KA and SFB has been challenging.

I will let you know what else major there might be. I really need to get back to reading Tyrel's 2e rules he sent last week.

-Jay

[Shadow Warrior]

I'm glad you said it, Jay, I didn't want to lest I was being unduly negative. Sounds like SVC is on a mission to turn FA into F&E with a different combat system, and that is not something I am interested in at all.

F&E with its fixed approach to everything is just anathema to me. And when I read SVC saying things like this is no good because it could generate a map with a planet in a different hex to one on the F&E map, or that is no good because in F&E you couldn't have this ship next to that one, I think this is a project that will find it hard to have a happy ending.

I admire your stoicism, Jay. I'm not sure I would have been as professional about it all. And then to be told it now has to be compatible with two other games as well!

[mwaschak]

Thanks. I think it is the least I can do at this point. Honestly there have been incredible amounts of frustration that are not best served venting on the Internet. We want you guys to enjoy this product and I genuinely think that if you have seen or enjoyed our games so far it is not a stretch to say FA would be very much in line with that. I kept the original versions which could show up as "optional" if anyone was interested some day.

I sent along a lot of the rewrites this week so when he gets time again maybe we can keep the project moving. These were not small rewrites either.

-Jay

[Shadow Warrior]

For sure, I'm still gagging to see FA whenever that might be, and autumn now seems to be the best guess. However, I suspect I'm not going to like the bits SVC has F&E-ised and am very intrigued at the idea of "director's cut" options showing the original vision.

Makes me laugh though that he's prefixing each section with a statement advising you to ignore it if you don't like it. Kind of missing the point of what VBAM is all about. Odd given the similar nature of Starmada, which he seems to like (or at least is less scornful of in public).

[mwaschak]

Yeah, I am honestly at a loss to explain most of it. Heck, the first paragraph of FA has the usual VBAM caveat that campaigns are different things to different people and you should treat them as modular rules. Nothing like getting your name dragged through the mud to give you some perspective on a project.

For sure, I'm still gagging to see FA whenever that might be, and autumn now seems to be the best guess. However, I suspect I'm not going to like the bits SVC has F&E-ised and am very intrigued at the idea of "director's cut" options showing the original vision.

Makes me laugh though that he's prefixing each section with a statement advising you to ignore it if you don't like it. Kind of missing the point of what VBAM is all about. Odd given the similar nature of Starmada, which he seems to like (or at least is less scornful of in public).

[prader]

Christ.

I've already got F&E and if that is what I was looking for in a campaign for FC... I'd be playing it.

I'm about to just make up my own rules for the stuff I want to be able to do that isn't already covered by VBAM 1E.

Or just play GURPS Wildcards.


Jay, you've been a real trooper. And I really would've loved to have seen FA as you envisioned it.


EDIT: You guys still rock.

[mwaschak]

Jay, you've been a real trooper. And I really would've loved to have seen FA as you envisioned it.


EDIT: You guys still rock.

Thanks guys! We really do appreciate your support and are glad you have been with us through this long process of new game development. FA was something very new for us and I think you will all enjoy the product when it goes to print. I talked to SVC and work will resume this week. I think the pace will pick up once we get to the Local Campaign rules, which are all objectives and missions.

-Jay

[Shadow Warrior]

I'm behind you all the way.

Let's just hope that itself doesn't into weeks of "this couldn't happen in F&E so I'm re-writing it" agony.

[terryoc]

Folks, you must remember that there are licensing issues here. SFU products must be consistent with the SFU background database, as part of the license ADB has with Paramount. (I don't know much about the license, but I have gathered that from following discussions on their BBS for years).

I also think the "...OCD about formats and submissions..." comment someone made is unfair. All organisations that produce documents, whether its publishers, businesses, government departments, et cetera, have strict style guides and format templates for those documents or printed products. The product has to meet these standards or it cannot be published. ADB is a small company with only 4 or 5 people and a huge amount of the work falls on Steve Cole's shoulders, so if the submitter does not get it right, it has to be fixed by him.

[Shadow Warrior]

I didn't think ADB had a license with Paramount but had one with Franz Joseph via the Technical Manual. I don't know though, just my no doubt ill-informed impression.

I think the thing is the original brief was "do a campaign system for FC using the VBAM engine" and at the last minute it changed to "do a VBAM version of F&E and, oh didn't I mention, it has to be compatible with SFB and Klingon Armada as well."

Ah well, we'll see soon enough (hopefully) then we can all decide for ourselves.

[mriddle]

FWIW on the license side..
this is from the starfleetgames.com website.
quote "Elements of the Star Fleet Universe are the property of Paramount Pictures Corporation and are used with their permission."

[mwaschak]

Sorry guys. I know this is frustrating for you as well.

-Jay

[Shadow Warrior]

According to the latest ADB newsletter, FA is now officially on hold until the autumn.