Did you buy RA attack?

[Monty]

I'd buy a Gunboat pack.

[DNordeen]

I too would prefer gunboats over fighters and not interested in munchkin X-ships. If fighters were introduced, I'd prefer direct-fire fighters over drone fighters.

I've done a couple fighter battles using the playtest rules and never really liked the drone fighters. I'd recommend direct-fire only fighters. The drone fighters suffer from a lot of problems in FC

1) 1 drone per turn is a very slow launch rate
2) Range 8 launch is very hard to accomplish at speed 16 especially with only 1 drone per turn.
3) Drone fighters tend to die before launching drones unlike direct-fire fighters which at least manage simultaneous damage. Even if they survive, it's rare to survive for a second launch.
4) Without drone transfer, even if a drone fighter manages to launch a drone, it usually dies before the drone's fuel is exhausted and the drone is removed automatically.

With all that and the possible counter overload from drones, direct-fire fighters seem much more useful

[Monty]

Since these are all great ideas by core players they probably won't sell well...

[Maxwell Luther]

In theory a greatly simplified strategic game that allows you to run battles via FedCom (or ACTA:SF if the game survives long enough) is a nice idea. But isn't there the possibility of said new system cutting into the sales of F&E? Or might it bring in more players who don't like the complexity of F&E? Maybe Steve Cole can answer that better than we can.

I designed something just like that at the end of summer. You can find info on it and see the base board in this blog post...

http://jabberwocky-media.com/?p=117

[Bill Stec]

In theory a greatly simplified strategic game that allows you to run battles via FedCom (or ACTA:SF if the game survives long enough) is a nice idea. But isn't there the possibility of said new system cutting into the sales of F&E? Or might it bring in more players who don't like the complexity of F&E? Maybe Steve Cole can answer that better than we can.

I designed something just like that at the end of summer. You can find info on it and see the base board in this blog post...

http://jabberwocky-media.com/?p=117

So would that be a board game version, or an App? I am curious, because I don't own a smartphone.

[Maxwell Luther]

In theory a greatly simplified strategic game that allows you to run battles via FedCom (or ACTA:SF if the game survives long enough) is a nice idea. But isn't there the possibility of said new system cutting into the sales of F&E? Or might it bring in more players who don't like the complexity of F&E? Maybe Steve Cole can answer that better than we can.

I designed something just like that at the end of summer. You can find info on it and see the base board in this blog post...

http://jabberwocky-media.com/?p=117

So would that be a board game version, or an App? I am curious, because I don't own a smartphone.

Boardgame. Basically a return to the smaller, 1-2 hour wargames of the past, but with better design.

[Bill Stec]

Boardgame. Basically a return to the smaller, 1-2 hour wargames of the past, but with better design.

That works for me, as time is at a premium these days.

[Sean Xor]

I did buy reinforcements attack. While I liked getting new ships, I would rate it near the bottom of the Federation Commander expansions. My issues were two fold. First, I was not too big on the booster packs containing new ships as well. I liked the more optional nature of the booster packs that provided extra copies of ships for fleets and a bonus ship or two.

The booster packs containing mostly new ships made the whole product feel less like a complete product and more like something that was chopped up into smaller bits. This especially bothered me because of my second issue which is that the included scenarios required ships that could only be found in booster packs. That really added to the incomplete product feel.

Since this thread has evolved into a what kind of product do you want to see next thread, I do want to throw out what I would like to see. I would like to see Adventure Packs (or something of that nature). These would contain more unique ship cards (such as the Powerista from a recent communique) and narrative heavy scenarios that use these unique ships. I would be OK getting less ship cards if I got more scenarios to use them. I do not know popular something like that would be or if it would sale. However, I would enjoy it.

Also to chime in on other things that have been said, I would also be very uninterested in a X-ships. Battleship Attack is probably my least favorite of the attack expansions, and more "bigger and better" ships do not interest me a whole lot.

[mdauben]

I would like to see Adventure Packs (or something of that nature). These would contain more unique ship cards (such as the Powerista from a recent communique) and narrative heavy scenarios that use these unique ships. I would be OK getting less ship cards if I got more scenarios to use them. I do not know popular something like that would be or if it would sale. However, I would enjoy it.

This actually sounds very interesting! I've always been more interested in scenarios and campaigns that simple point match battles, so a product like this would be right up my alley.

[Steve Cole]

And if we had put them all in one pack, it would be $60 and people would complain. We were going to get (valid) complaints both ways and tossed a coin. Go figure.

The traditional boosters didn't work for this product as you don't need multiple copies of most of the ships. The point was to add as many ships to the game as possible in one bite.

[The Ghost]

One thought on a possible way to get more Fed Cmdr scenarios out would be scenario packs on e23, similar to the e23 ship card packs. It might provide a venue to release some additional scenarios without having the large overhead of a full up printed product.

[Steve Cole]

I don't see a big market for scenarios. Considering that we give you one free every month (plus six more in Captain's Log every year) I would think that's enough. I am maxed out on time and the time to convert a "scenario submission" into a "publishable scenario" doesn't exist without taking it away from some other product line, and the sales potential just doesn't (to my mind) exist.

Besides, we have print on demand equipment that we own inside our own building and "the large overhead of a full printed product" is just not an issue. If I wanted to do a book of scenarios and sell 23 copies of it, I could do so by printing 23 copies. The issue is not the printing overhead but sales potential buying a slice of Steve Cole time..

[Spacecowboy87]

Getting back to the original question, I bought RA and am considering buying another

[marcus_aurelius]

I am surprised it was one of the worst selling modules, it had some really nice ships.

I bought reinforcements attack and all three boosters the first time I saw them in my local hobby store. I liked the selection of ships, especially Klingon F6B, Romulan K7R, Kzinti destroyer, Hydran D7H, Lyran JagdPanther.

I will be buying another RA set in the next couple of months too.

Of course I end up buying EVERYTHING that is produced for Fed Commander anyway.

[enterprise2007]

I decided to see what all the hubbub was about so I picked up RA last night. I'm liking so far, I've looked at a few of the ships and scenarios so far. I don't mind having the booster dedicated to mainly new ships. I'd rather have variety then a bunch of the same.