3rd Edition Rules

[welchbloke]

Lets just say I clearly am behind the times...wow...that is impressive.  I only vaguely remember the andromedian monitors with their energy absorbing panels or whatever and some kind of death ray dodad.

ah so...a light just dawned...as the next abomination, and retconprise came out they kept updating the game...  Borg cubes in SFB...

Sorry I'm still stuck back in the 1980s of the game!  Like discussing AD&D with people who play the 4th Edition.

Steve has loosely modelled the Invaders on the Andros.  I started SFB with the Captain's Edition in the early 1990s, I guess you were a Commanders Edition player?

[Steve Walmsley]

Before Starfire Assistant there was SFB Assistant written in C/DOS

I guess that was probably early to mid 1980s. I was playing SFB from the Designers edition - probably about 1980ish.

Steve

[Paul M]

Steve has loosely modelled the Invaders on the Andros.  I started SFB with the Captain's Edition in the early 1990s, I guess you were a Commanders Edition player?

I vaguely recall the captains edition coming out as we moved on to other things.  I know the person who was most keen on the game had a binder (official one) with all the rules and the hit cards.  Beyond that there were many sets of small booklets and stuff that were some years older.  I acutally started with this with game with only 3 ships (enterprise class, D7, and warbird) with the use of strings and stuff...that may have been another company of the first version of SFB.  I'm not sure what it was officially we were playing in highschool...but mainly I recall many different expansion books.  That binder with the full set of official rules was a godsend.

We had the Federation, Klingons, Kzinti, Romulans, Gorn, Hydrans, and Andomedians as races (rules and ship books) and several scenarios with "monsters."  Even later we would get together and have frigate fights (they tended to fit better our time available).

[MWadwell]

I think the last copy of SFB I got weighed in around 1000 pages. Not counting the 10 or 12 books of SSDs.

I just went out and bought Solar Starfire (6th ed) - and it comes in at 421 pages.....

Needless to say, I won't be playing Solar Starfire any time soon!

[Paul M]

What on earth got added between Galactic and Solar?  Are the rules changing or just the technology trees and stuff?

[MWadwell]

What on earth got added between Galactic and Solar?  Are the rules changing or just the technology trees and stuff?

O.K - this is just a quick skim through the index:

• Movement is 11 pages (R3rd it is 9 pages)
• Combat is 20 pages (R3rd it is 17 pages)
• R&D is 13 pages (In ISF - it is 3 pages)
• Graded Leaders is 6 pages (R3rd it is 1 page)
• Ground Combat (preparation and the actual combat itself) is 10 pages (ISF it is 6 pages)
• Tech Trees (i.e descriptions) is 58 pages (R3rd/ISF it is 28 pages - although I should point out that SOLAR goes up to SL-50, whereas ISF only goes up to TL-11)
• Advice/guides is 15 pages (there is none in R3rd/ISF)
• Tables (which is a seperate section) is 25 pages (there is none in R3rd/ISF - as they are included in the rules)
• Examples is 20 pages (there is none in R3rd/ISF - as they are included in the rules)
• Optional rules is 35 pages (there is none in R3rd/ISF - as they are included in the rules)

So, aside from the addition of some new sections (Advice and Examples), it appears that the increase in size of SOLAR is simply due to "feature creap".....

(Edit) - I can remember a review of Ultra, where reference was made to it's size. I've finally found it again (it's called "Ultra Starfire, or why nerds need sex" - http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/350559/ultra-starfire-or-why-nerds-need-sex ) - and in the review  there is the line "The manual, printed out, comes to around 400 pages (this for a rules system that started out 20 odd years ago at 12 pages, mind you!). "

So I think that Solar is just a re-work of Ultra - and Ultra is where the dramatic increase in size occurrred.....

[Paul M]

Thank you Matt.  I'm in full agreement that nerds need sex, but I am not sure I think the size of ultra/solar is related to a lack thereof of the writers.

SM2 is what: 100 pages?  The UTM is what: 30 pages?  ISF/3rdR/SM2 would be about the same size as Galactic Starfire I figure, and you need to throw in AD realisticly in there.

The rest of it, I'm not sure what is causing the "feature creep" for some of the sections but I suspect it is a combination of new things requiring new rules, and attempts to close loopholes in the rules.  In galactic what strikes me is the difference between some rules being highly detailed, yet others being exceptionally sparce.  The technological devices were basically virtually just tables.  From your list you could probably trim 100 pages from ultra/solar by either omiting things (such as advice) and editing.  But on the other hand storage space is cheap and 400 pages or 40 pages don't make that much difference, it is a question of being able to find what you need to know.  That is my biggest complaint about SM2/3rdR/AD/ISF games...you know that there was a rule about "something" but where is the damn thing?!?  At least in galactic it is only two books to look through. 

[MWadwell]

Thank you Matt.  I'm in full agreement that nerds need sex, but I am not sure I think the size of ultra/solar is related to a lack thereof of the writers.

SM2 is what: 100 pages?  The UTM is what: 30 pages?  ISF/3rdR/SM2 would be about the same size as Galactic Starfire I figure, and you need to throw in AD realisticly in there.

The rest of it, I'm not sure what is causing the "feature creep" for some of the sections but I suspect it is a combination of new things requiring new rules, and attempts to close loopholes in the rules.  In galactic what strikes me is the difference between some rules being highly detailed, yet others being exceptionally sparce.  The technological devices were basically virtually just tables.  From your list you could probably trim 100 pages from ultra/solar by either omiting things (such as advice) and editing.  But on the other hand storage space is cheap and 400 pages or 40 pages don't make that much difference, it is a question of being able to find what you need to know.  That is my biggest complaint about SM2/3rdR/AD/ISF games...you know that there was a rule about "something" but where is the damn thing?!?  At least in galactic it is only two books to look through. 

G'Day Paul,

When Fred Burton started working on Cosmic, I was involved (in a minor part) of the discussion - and one of the parts that I heavily emphasised (and still believe in) is that a ruleset should not be over 200 pages (it is unrealistic to expect newcomers to read more), and that seperating the rules into a Tactical and Strategic Rulebooks is essential.

(A little bit of background - I read ISF long before I got a copy of R3rd ed - and despite the fact that I knew nothing of the tactical side of things, I was still able to understand the rules (mostly). )

My point? That by lumping the two rulebooks together, and adding all of the "wouldn't that be neat" features, you end up with a 400 page rulebook.

A rulebook that (to be honest), despite the fact that I like Starfire - I will never read! I shudder to think what a newcomer to Starfire thinks of the rules! And that is the point that the author is trying to make in the article - you need to be a uber nerd to want to try and play Ultra (and now, Solar).


R3rd ed is 96 pages. ISF is 96 pages. SM#2 is 96 pages (although ~1/3rd of it is already incorporated into R3rd ed, and most of the rest replaces existing parts of ISF, so only ~20 pages is "extra"), SAW has no new rules, First Contact has nothing new, Alkeda Dawn has ~12 pages of new tech, SM#1 has probaby ~3-4 pages of new information (~1/2 of which is replacing existing info), and Crusade has 11 pages of new technology.

So in total, 3rd Ed has between 240 to 330 pages (depending on whether you count the obsolete information or not). Note: That this information is spread over 2 core rule books, 2 "errata" rulebooks (the SM's) and 4 scenario books.

Compare this to ~400 pages of Ultra and 421 pages in Solar (each in a single book).

[Paul M]

Here is where my Avalon Hill game background hits I guess.  But you are correct that a newcomer would find that a lot.  As you say what they need is book for the tactical game and a book for the strategic game, and I think that they could easily make the ultra/solar essentially as long as 3rdR/ISF/SM2/AD + scenario books with additional rules (say 280 pages to split the difference between your two numbers) by a bit of trimming and some editing and or professional help.

I played my first game of Starfire, using second edition rules (the pre-ISF rules) and never had read any of the tactical rules at all.  Some of my designs are probably best catagorized as "interesting."  But I could certainly run an empire.

I agree with you on the "lumping" and "wouldn't that be neat" point completely.   Far more useful than a lot of the stuff would be a few pages for the SM to the tune of "if player tries to do the following: blah blah blah" this is forbidden by rule x.x.x.  And other such things rather than a lot of advice on how to play. 

But I can't imagine why it takes 11 pages (or for that matter 9 pages) to explain the movement rules in Starfire.  And even after that trying to figure out how far a ship moves at the system level is difficult.  Try to sort out how a pod roller drops its drive field, rolls the pods and brings it up...and how long that takes in game turns.  I think a lot of this is an editing issue...or more properly the lack of a professional editor issue.

I would say worse than the size of the book for ultra/solar is the fact that it has no imagination grab like The Stars at War.  I understand why this is so...money but without something to turn the fights into something which isn't mechanical I don't see where you capture peoples interest.  The TFN racing to rescue colonists from the on coming bugs is a lot more interesting then Fleet A engaging Fleet B with a time limit.  That is what makes campaigns interesting...it is about your colony, it is about that vital system that you MUST hold to keep your lines of communication open, etc.  Yet I see nothing of that in GSF...it is all bland and dry sterile numbers.  Even things which are critical breakthru technologies don't feel like it... 

[MWadwell]

Here is where my Avalon Hill game background hits I guess.

There'll come a time, when no-one knows what that means....  (As I mentioned elsewhere, I still play the PC version of "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" - despite the size of the rulebook!)

But you are correct that a newcomer would find that a lot.  As you say what they need is book for the tactical game and a book for the strategic game, and I think that they could easily make the ultra/solar essentially as long as 3rdR/ISF/SM2/AD + scenario books with additional rules (say 280 pages to split the difference between your two numbers) by a bit of trimming and some editing and or professional help.

I played my first game of Starfire, using second edition rules (the pre-ISF rules) and never had read any of the tactical rules at all.  Some of my designs are probably best catagorized as "interesting."  But I could certainly run an empire.

I agree with you on the "lumping" and "wouldn't that be neat" point completely.   Far more useful than a lot of the stuff would be a few pages for the SM to the tune of "if player tries to do the following: blah blah blah" this is forbidden by rule x.x.x.  And other such things rather than a lot of advice on how to play. 

But I can't imagine why it takes 11 pages (or for that matter 9 pages) to explain the movement rules in Starfire.  And even after that trying to figure out how far a ship moves at the system level is difficult.  Try to sort out how a pod roller drops its drive field, rolls the pods and brings it up...and how long that takes in game turns.  I think a lot of this is an editing issue...or more properly the lack of a professional editor issue.

The problem is the feature creap. Take engines for example. There is the addition of Generation Engines, as well as a new engine type (Gt), in addition to the inclusion of Jc/J (from Alkeda Dawn). As a result of these new inclusions (and the changes in WP transiting rules), there are approximately double the options - which results in a quadruple in the complexity......

I would say worse than the size of the book for ultra/solar is the fact that it has no imagination grab like The Stars at War.  I understand why this is so...money but without something to turn the fights into something which isn't mechanical I don't see where you capture peoples interest.  The TFN racing to rescue colonists from the on coming bugs is a lot more interesting then Fleet A engaging Fleet B with a time limit.  That is what makes campaigns interesting...it is about your colony, it is about that vital system that you MUST hold to keep your lines of communication open, etc.  Yet I see nothing of that in GSF...it is all bland and dry sterile numbers.  Even things which are critical breakthru technologies don't feel like it... 

I couldn't agree more - and I notice that Steve has previously commented about reading the scenario packs for the fiction (so I'm not the only one who does this).

For anything to prosper, it needs as wide a exposure as possible - and 3rd ed had the advantage of David Weber's novels and work on the scenario books. (FYI, I've often toyed with the idea of updating the scenario books to R3rd ed - but there has been a number of factors which have continued to discourage me..... If Marvin would allow this (and I can muster the attention span logn enough to finish), I think that this would go a way to helping Starfires public visibility, due to the tie in with DW's novels. But, unfortunately, I don't think that this will ever happen.)

This resulted in a relatively wide exposure of Starfire.

However, the only recent exposure Starfire has is through the release of GSF, Ultra and Solar - which have only a small exposure to promoting new players. Unfortunately, if this is not corrected, then I can only see the number of Starfire players becoming smaller and smaller, until the game dies out..... 

[Erik L]

For a comparison, Astra Imperia weighed in at 100 pages, including fluff.

Astra Imperia 2 is around 130 pages, including fluff. (So far)

[Paul M]

I suspect that is unfortunately true...I'm not even sure who owns Avalon Hill anymore.  Is it Hasbro?  I quite enjoyed Rise and Fall...just hard to get a place to set the map up.  I've been instead been playing off and on the Grigsby Games "War in the Pacific" and "War in the East."  I'm fond of operational level games I have to admit.  Eventually though it just bogs down as 1 person can't do the job of a full staff.

I had no idea about another breed of engine.  I'm not fond of the way the generational engines were implemented.  But this is again the question of consiquences versus nifty new rule.  Even the J-I split seems much reduced in GSF.  I know that I'm not a happy camper about a lot of the way things like this were done.  I'm still unclear why there is a never ending increase in the basic hull cost of a ship, especially since you get nothing for it.  A BB hull space costs 8 MCr while a DD hull space costs 4 MCr, why?  If a BB weapons were longer ranged or something that would make sense (increased power plant size) but otherwise it seems particularily artificial.

But yes, the size of the rules goes up as the square of the features.

As far as I am concerned the interludes are only useful as fiction.  The chance you get that outcome playing the game is negligable.  But I too read the Stars at War as a story with only occasional interest in how the ships evolve over time and so on.  But in GSF...it would be hard to even write interesting fiction take for example the generation weapons..."our fleet has been upgraded now with Beta Force Beams."  Geez how do you make that sound interesting?  Even worse when they offer a whopping 3% improvement over the previous generation. 

Fluff no matter how it may seem unimportant is the hook that attracts players.  Without it the mechanical act of rolling dice and pushing counters around is not very inspiring, at least not to me.  Especially as the rules pushed the game more and more into "ESF" and "shoot on target 1 till it pops and switch to target 2...repeat ad infinatum."   This is the time where you really have to sit back and take a serious look at where complexity can add to the game experience.

Weber introduced starfire to a much wider audience, especially when you look at the fact that the H. Harringswine books were just revised Starfire anyway.  I know Marvin would swallow cynide chase it down with hemlock before admitting this but things like Steve's Rigillian campaign and Kurt's Terran Empire campaign, plus a lot of the smaller ones did a huge amount to make 3rdR popular.  People enjoyed reading them, they enjoyed talking about them, disecting the battles and so on.  It wasn't just about Rate of Return, or DPT per MCR per HS or whatever.  As well these games stress tested 3rdR and showed where the rules snap.   I've yet to see anyone doing an Alkeda Dawn write up or even talk much about the game.

One of the things I liked about Attack Vector Tactical was the setting, and I thought they would have come out with more on it but it seems to have vanished and even more dubious to me was that Squadron Strike came out with a wholy different setting rather than just giving the ability to run more than a ship to ship fight (or a couple of ships per side).  To me the loss of the setting expansion was death for the game.  Federation and Empire gains because of the setting fluff.  Master of Orion was largely driven by the fluff.  There is a huge difference to use an avalon hill reference between playing say Panzer Blitz and Tactics II.  Tactics II was just blue side versus red side.  It was generic and uninspired...in Panzer Blitz you are the Wehrmacht fighting the Soviet Hordes...or you are Defending the Motherland against the #### invaders.  3rdR is panzer blitz, GSF and later editions are Tactics II sums up my view.

[MWadwell]

I suspect that is unfortunately true...I'm not even sure who owns Avalon Hill anymore.  Is it Hasbro?  I quite enjoyed Rise and Fall...just hard to get a place to set the map up.  I've been instead been playing off and on the Grigsby Games "War in the Pacific" and "War in the East."  I'm fond of operational level games I have to admit.  Eventually though it just bogs down as 1 person can't do the job of a full staff.

Yeah, doing the nuts and bolts stuff can be a pain - which is why I play Rise and Fall on the PC.....

As far as I am concerned the interludes are only useful as fiction.  The chance you get that outcome playing the game is negligable.  But I too read the Stars at War as a story with only occasional interest in how the ships evolve over time and so on.  But in GSF...it would be hard to even write interesting fiction take for example the generation weapons..."our fleet has been upgraded now with Beta Force Beams."  Geez how do you make that sound interesting?  Even worse when they offer a whopping 3% improvement over the previous generation.

 

Yeah - Marvin (and co), in their rush to move away from the "One True Path", have instead genericised it to (as you put it with Tactics II) "Red verse Blue".

I mean, the "One True Path" was exciting - the rush to develop the next toy (be it weapon, hull size, etc), the desperation of fighting someone who had something you didn't, the joy when you develop it, and the excitement when you first use the new toy to crush your enemies.....  

Unbalancing? Perhaps. Exciting? Definitely.

Interesting to read? You bet!

(EDIT: On the chances of achieving the "historical" outcomes as described in the Interludes - that is one of the things that I would like to address if I ever got a chance to update them....)

Fluff no matter how it may seem unimportant is the hook that attracts players.  Without it the mechanical act of rolling dice and pushing counters around is not very inspiring, at least not to me.  Especially as the rules pushed the game more and more into "ESF" and "shoot on target 1 till it pops and switch to target 2...repeat ad infinatum."   This is the time where you really have to sit back and take a serious look at where complexity can add to the game experience.

Weber introduced starfire to a much wider audience, especially when you look at the fact that the H. Harringswine books were just revised Starfire anyway.  I know Marvin would swallow cynide chase it down with hemlock before admitting this but things like Steve's Rigillian campaign and Kurt's Terran Empire campaign, plus a lot of the smaller ones did a huge amount to make 3rdR popular.  People enjoyed reading them, they enjoyed talking about them, disecting the battles and so on.  It wasn't just about Rate of Return, or DPT per MCR per HS or whatever.  As well these games stress tested 3rdR and showed where the rules snap.   I've yet to see anyone doing an Alkeda Dawn write up or even talk much about the game.

Amen Brother (preaching to the choir).

One of the things I liked about Attack Vector Tactical was the setting, and I thought they would have come out with more on it but it seems to have vanished and even more dubious to me was that Squadron Strike came out with a wholy different setting rather than just giving the ability to run more than a ship to ship fight (or a couple of ships per side).  To me the loss of the setting expansion was death for the game.  Federation and Empire gains because of the setting fluff.  Master of Orion was largely driven by the fluff.  There is a huge difference to use an avalon hill reference between playing say Panzer Blitz and Tactics II.  Tactics II was just blue side versus red side.  It was generic and uninspired...in Panzer Blitz you are the Wehrmacht fighting the Soviet Hordes...or you are Defending the Motherland against the #### invaders.  3rdR is panzer blitz, GSF and later editions are Tactics II sums up my view.

You know, I think that the above paragraph is the best summation about the difference between Ultra/Solar and 3rd ed that I have ever read...... (Especially the comparison to "Red verse Blue.")

[Paul M]

With the Grigsby games "nuts and bolts" becomes "setting the altitude and search patern for 200 scout planes over the whole pacific theather..."  Yes I can let the computer do it but then I don't know it is done the way I want.  Yes, that makes no logical sense but I'm a grognard, I'm allowed to grumble about stuff that sensibly I should not be.

The problem with Balanced is war isn't.  It is a never ending race between offence and defence, offence normally leads but I'm not sure that is always the case.  I suspect there was more or less effective AA defences before aircraft were a viable threat.  In between paradigm shifting developments are then incremental improvements.  This is not easy to do in a game.  Because at the end of the day a fight between F and the original L at anything but a warp point assault wasn't a fight, it was a one sided slaughter.  No one enjoys being the one slaughtered.

The thing is to avoid making it so there is only one path that works all the time, while avoiding that all paths end up being functionally identical.  I doubt it is easy to do in practice.  But this is where I like the whole trees and knots concept from GSF.  It means it is possible to have some technology and not others.  It means you can be stuck like the KON when faced with slow development of the CM.  Its just that what is behind the whole critical knot is...a +5% improvement rather than a +3% improvement.  Break out the marching bands folks!!

On historical stuff, as much as Crusade (both the scenario book and the novel) are fun reads...you realy have to ask one question.  Why when faced with an enemy with pathetic shield technology, and huge reliance on armour that you can easily copy did the TFN delay their efforts for over a year to develop the HET, and basically make the battles one of identical ships blasting each other, when they had the Energy beam?  The Energy beam negated every theban advantage, could have been quickly refit into the TFN ships and would have enabled their offensives to start sooner.  It also would have throw the whole refit stress issue onto the thebans, who would have had to pull their ships back to remove their armour belts.  It would have meant also that the theban's fighter program would never have gotten off the ground.  The HET series itself is one of the most unbalanced weapons in the game, I have no idea why it survived playtesting.  I get the impressing Weber just liked it, because it became the über must have weapon of the game.

yes I supose preaching to the choir is correct, it is just that I don't think anyone won there.  And I'm glad you found the last paragraph useful.  I always recommend GSF to people but with the caviat the I find it bland.  But I think if the game is to thrive it needs new blood and that new blood needs to go into the new products.  Otherwise, as you said earlier the overall number of people playing will just dwindle...err...kind of like what I though happened to SFB, apparently in error (to put it mildly).

[procyon]

I've kind of sat back and read this thread for quite awhile now.
I'm surprised no one noticed that I hadn't chimed in.

As others could tell you, they ended up making me a playtester over on the SDS site - but that is not the same as selling one's soul.  I still am looking forward to NA, and hope that some day it sees fruition.  (REALLY! Just check out the number of posts...)

And the reason I have stayed quiet is I wanted to see where this would finally end up.  I kind of had a feeling, but really wanted to make sure.
I was playing Starfire back in the baggies, and have followed it since.  But I am horribly computer illiterate so what little I knew of the SF boards were the fiction I could con my Computer Eng buddies at ISU to print out for me, or the ECs they would bring me.
I was blissfully unaware of the 'social issues', as I prefer to think of them.

And it does bother me to read what is here.  Because I know some of the names from what I read long ago, and the others I know from this site and like/respect.

And I will say that with a large number of the things that have been written in this thread, I agree.

Solar is a huge rule set.  Really big.  One of my big soap boxes has been getting something a new player could play.  Still working on it.  There is a Quick Start Rules set as a free download now so you don't have to start with a 400 page block of text/tables.  There will be more in that vein.  My public soapbox for a long time has been to make SF something folks could play without digesting a huge book to start.  All my kids/wife started on the 'hallowed baggies' I still keep at home.

SF doesn't have an author like Weber anymore.  Doubt it will ever be that way again.  But most games don't have that luxury either...

And the huge jump in size occured, kind of, between Galactic and Ultra.  Elite for GSF added a bunch to it.  Ultra grew on it.  Solar is an attempt to take the issues that cropped up in Ultra over the years and deal with them -while adding a story to it.  I will admit, there has been more rules work than story.
Regardless, the rules are large.  But so was 3e/R with all its attendant supplements/packs back in the day.

I actually prefer Galactic/Ultra over 3e, but that is because at heart I am a storyteller.  3e kind of locked you into the same story over and over.  Galactic/Ultra don't have that so I can go where I want - at least a little more.  (Of course, for those that might know the rules and have read any of my Nemesis fiction - we went a LONG ways from the standard rules...)  I also didn't have to keep track of a dozen different books, printed out items, etc to play.

And for Matt, I am so glad that you maintained and brought back Kurt's stories.  But for all the 'Red vs Blue' you say - anything can be that way if you don't make it your own.  Even 3e will see both sides with the same options for weapons, ships, etc...
But Kurt could take that 'sameness/red v blue' and turn it into something else.  I try to do the same with my Nem. fiction and in our games at home.  It is all in what you put into it.  Steve had awesome fiction (EDIT -still does, just not enough...I know, I have the same problem...).  And it wasn't because he had awesome rules.  Its because he wasn't limited by them.  Fluff does hook people.  But it doens't just appear.  And you can't just generate it because you would like to (I only know that to well....).  Authors who create that sort of stuff...well, it isn't just about generating a bunch of text...
Red v Blue is from the person running the games and not creating a story for them.  Not the rules themselves (in most cases...).

But I won't argue with feature creep.  It has been the death of many things.  And I may get in hot water for saying so, but I do agree.  An old prof. of mine once said the greatest enemy of good - is 'better'.  It has turned a lot of fun games into huge masses of rules that appeal to a small group of players.  Much like Aurora.  You really have to want to deal with the mass of complexity to want to get into it.  And it isn't easy.  And SF is currently pretty heavy on it.

I don't know the solution, but I will say I have been listening.  And the first step to a solution is to admit there is a problem.


EDIT
And to Hawkeye, congrats on buying the set.  It is pricey these days.  Hope you have as much fun as the rest of us have with it...