Federation Commander

[cosmicplanes]

So I was looking into playing either the discontinued "Star Trek: Starship Tactical Combat Simulator" by FASA or Federation Commander. I decided on Federation Commander since I like the gameplay and rules much more. However I enjoyed the fact that the FASA games were set in the Star Trek movie era, and fans are still updating ship stats, as seen here for example:

http://www.ststcsolda.space/

So what ideally I was wanting to do was take and convert the ships and space stations and their stats from there into Federation Commander, but I would have no idea how to do this. I also would need a template for the ships to play with Federation Commander and perhaps more game piece customization as well. Can anyone offer me help, tips, advice on resources on how to go about doing this?

[djdood]

You could always do what quite a few people do, and just use the pretty FASA minis with FedCom ship cards and game mechanics. There is usually an SFU ship that equates close-enough to the trek movie universe FASA was based in.

For example, the ADB Kearsarge-class NCL ship card works quite well with the FASA Reliant miniature.

The problem with homebrews and conversions is that they are rarely playtested well and often end up unbalanced. They're fun to create, but often not as much fun to play (if you're the guy who ends up with the overclassed ship).

There won't be templates, etc. for the ADB products as they protect their intellectual property quite closely. You are free to work up your own for your own purposes, but sharing any of it here would violate their agreements with Paramount/CBS and would not be allowed.
_________________

[cosmicplanes]

[djdood]

[ElizabethB]

One thing I liked about FASA Trek's starship combat rules was that you could have a "bridge crew" handling the ship's functions, which was great for an RPG.

Was a bit awkward in most circumstances, though.

[cnuzzi]

I tried FASA back in the day, and greatly preferred Star Fleet Battles (there was no Federation Commander back then). I also thought that most of the ship designs - with the exception of the ones from the films - were butt ugly. I *despise* the Chandley. It's way too "tall". It just looks unbalanced to me (a lot of people seem to like it, though). The Gorn ships are wretched, blocky things. The Klingon ships...well, there was a battleship that was this fat, bloated hulk. Then there was one that had only one wing. I kid you not - it was half a ship, missing one side! The only one I really liked was a Romulan ship called the Winged Defender.

As for play mechanics, it wasn't very well thought out, and if you think Feds are overpowered in the SFU, try FASA. You literally CAN'T lose as a Fed in FASA, unless you put a frigate up against a battleship or something.

Ultimately, I think FASA appealed to people whose main concern about a Trek-based game was "Can I play the Excelsior?" And they could, and there was a really pretty picture on the counter, too. But in the final analysis, that pretty counter didn't make the game fun or interesting the way SFB was.

All of the above is IMHO, of course.

[cnuzzi]

Also, the "bridge crew" version of the game was created specifically so that the FASA Starship Tactical Combat Simulator could be used as the ship vs ship battle component of FASA's then-current Star Trek Roleplaying Game.

[ElizabethB]

[Mike]

I owned and played both Star Fleet Battles and the FASA ST Combat Simulator. The FASA game had much nicer looking components. The counters, charts, and ship displays (?) looked much more polished than the SFB materials. But the value of a game is really in the play of it and SFB had it beaten, hands down (IMHO).

Now that there is Federation Commander, there is a glitzier way to enjoy the Star Fleet Universe. My preference would be to use the FC system with all the richness of the SFB background, but that is only wishful thinking.
_________________
Mike

=====
Sandpaper gets the job done, but makes for a lot of friction.

[cnuzzi]

[ecs05norway]

One thing I liked about FASA was that they didn't try to make the individual ships balanced. A Federation cruiser might outgun a Klingon cruiser might be outmaneuvered by a Romulan ship might not be as tough as a Gorn ship etc. They didn't focus around the idea that a duel between two ships of the same class should be a 50/50 shot varying only by the difference between player skills and the luck of the dice.

I really wish SFB had taken that tack but I know it's far too late to change now.

[mjwest]

Well, actually ADB did do that. If you look at the Federation CA (not CARa+), the Klingon D7 (not D7K), the Romulan KR (not K7RB) and WE (not KE), the Kzinti CS (not BC), the Gorn CA (not BCF), Lyran CA (not CAp+) and the Orion CA (not BC), you can see that the original ships all had unique weaknesses and strengths relative to each other. But, over the years, the weaknesses were smoothed over and covered, resulting in stronger (and homogeneous) ships.

In Federation Commander, if you want to get a feel for this, get Briefing #2 (or the ship card packs associated with it) and you can try them out for yourself.

(And why did the ships evolve over the years? Because that is what the vast majority of players wanted. They didn't want rock-paper-scissors. They wanted those 50/50 match ups you are lamenting.)
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy

[Steve Cole]

I give my customers what they want, and that's what they wanted.

SFB pioneered the "no two ships equal" concept and players didn't like it.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander

[cnuzzi]

My guess is that people wanted to be able to, for example, put any CA up against any other CA (or CA equivalent, like the D7 BC or Kzinti CS). Otherwise, you would have situations like, "Oh, you're going to use THAT ship? Then I can't use the ship I usually use..."

I think players wanted it to be more about tactics and maneuver than picking a ship that took advantage of a weakness in another ship. I'm not sure which mirrors the situation in the "real world" more closely.

[Sgt_G]