$30.00
$5.00
$20.00
$15.00
Recommend
10 
 Thumb up
 Hide
46 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Federation Commander: Klingon Border» Forums » News

Subject: Federation Commander: Lost Empires Preview Ship Card Pack Is Available rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jean Sexton
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mb
This package includes six ship cards from the future product Federation Commander: Lost Empires. While Lost Empires is not yet on the schedule, we wanted you to be able to play two of the empires it will contain.

This preview includes high resolution PDFs for the:

Carnivon Heavy Cruiser
Carnivon War Cruiser
Carnivon War Destroyer
Paravian Heavy Cruiser
Paravian War Cruiser
Paravian War Destroyer

Rules unique to the Paravians and Carnivons are included; Paravian Quantum Wave Torpedo and the Carnivons' Disruptor Cannon, Death Bolts, and Heel Nippers are included in this title.

These ships are presented in high resolution. Also included are graphics for counters and the scenario Bird-Dog. Will the Carnivons be able to get to the sacred nesting sites of the Paravians?

When the product is released, this e-pack will receive the final cover, any edited rules will be updated, and any changes to ships will be reflected.

The pack is only available as an e-pack and is available from the following sources:

Warehouse 23: http://www.warehouse23.com/products/ADB4827

Wargame Vault: http://www.wargamevault.com/product/191640/

We hope you enjoy it!
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Brown
msg tools
So in the other thread you said:

ADB_Marketing wrote:

Paul, we have NEVER released a product we thought was in the playtest phase without identifying it as such. Never. To think that we would is totally unworthy of you.


And we know from the SVC's day that at least two of these ships were created just 12 days ago:

SVC's Day - August 12th wrote:

SVC work: Decided to take a break from Fed Admiral and do the FC Lost Empires Preview Pack, which meant I had to do the Carnivon CW and Paravian CW. While doing that, I created a template for ship card pack counters and for FC Turn Mode charts, which will save me a lot of time later.

http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/12032/35707.ht...

It's even described in a subsequent entry as a playtest pack.
SVC's day - August 15th wrote:

JES work: customer service, marketing, PDF uploads (plans), proofreading (scenario for Lost Empires playtest pack; Romulan MSSB).


So with all of this in mind, I'm wondering why the word "playtest" is neither in the title nor even the description for this product. You do know that preview and playtest mean different things right? Saying that edited ships and rules will be updated does not mean that these ships and/or rules are largerly (or totally) untested.

You swore up and down that you'd never sell something without identifying it as playtest material yet less than a month later you've done exactly that.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jean Sexton
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mb
Paul, the item went out to staff and they said it was fine. The ship conversions were straightforward from existing, well-tested SFB ships so there was no need for extensive playtesting. The rules have been out for quite some time, so they are playtested.

Please remember that SVC's Day is off-the-cuff and may not reflect the final decision on the item. Since he posted back on August 15, staff approved the preview and everything worked. The pack moved from playtest to preview.

So, no, it isn't playtest. We don't specifically ask for feedback. And yes, if by some weird chance something is found, we'll fix it.

And most certainly I did not break my word.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Brown
msg tools
Nerroth wrote:

Alternatively, if the rules were deemed to still need more playtesting before they could be locked in, could an option be to assemble the material from Captain's Log into a "Lost Empires Playtest Pack", akin to those currently available for Omega and the LMC?

And if so, would it be better to offer more Ship Cards for fewer empires (say, four for two), or to do fewer for more (say, two for four) instead?


SVC wrote:

Send me an email and I will get it done. Jean wants stuff to upload.

http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/12033/33340.ht...

ADB_Marketing wrote:
Paul, the item went out to staff and they said it was fine. The ship conversions were straightforward from existing, well-tested SFB ships so there was no need for extensive playtesting. The rules have been out for quite some time, so they are playtested.

Please remember that SVC's Day is off-the-cuff and may not reflect the final decision on the item. Since he posted back on August 15, staff approved the preview and everything worked. The pack moved from playtest to preview.

So, no, it isn't playtest. We don't specifically ask for feedback. And yes, if by some weird chance something is found, we'll fix it.


The fact that you neither call it a playtest pack nor ask for feedback doesn't mean that it isn't being released in a state of testing. Lost Empires isn't even on the schedule, are you claiming that these races and their associated rules will not see testing between today and whatever year this product comes out? If so, why does the description concede that changes may be later made to the ships or rules?

Clearly it is still in a non-finalized, playtest state and is simply not labelled as such. That's made implicit by the caveat it may be changed. The problem is, that such a state should also be explicitly stated.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jean Sexton
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mb
Paul, what one fan wrote on August 12, does not define a pack. It is because we understand what "playtest" means that we changed the in-house "call name" of the release to "preview." The rules have been tested, the original ships have been tested in SFB (and as I stated, the conversions from that are straightforward) and some were released in B&W earlier for playtest in FC, which they passed. That means this title isn't a playtest module where we ask for feedback, but a preview of two empires that will appear in Lost Empires.

It is not on the schedule because we are working on the next release now and until it is finished, we won't lay in plans for what comes next. That doesn't automatically mean that rules that were released earlier are still considered "playtest."

We included the caveat because we know that we are not perfect and a typo or a mistake might have crept in (such as "the the" or a missing word). Obviously, the final cover won't have "Preview" on it. We wanted our fans to know that if such a mistake were made through human fallibility, that we'd update the preview so they'd have the most current version. Gracious, saying we'd fix anything that got updated isn't saying it is a playtest product.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adrian Hague
United Kingdom
Bristol
Bristol
flag msg tools
RAWKET LAWNCHA!!!
mbmbmbmbmb
Sweet, looking forward to their eventual physical release
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy W
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Cool looking forward to this - recently rekindled my playing of Fed Commander - some catch up purchases to do mean time but like the taster here.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Brown
msg tools
ADB_Marketing wrote:
Paul, what one fan wrote on August 12, does not define a pack. It is because we understand what "playtest" means that we changed the in-house "call name" of the release to "preview." The rules have been tested, the original ships have been tested in SFB (and as I stated, the conversions from that are straightforward) and some were released in B&W earlier for playtest in FC, which they passed. That means this title isn't a playtest module where we ask for feedback, but a preview of two empires that will appear in Lost Empires.


These rules aren't described as playtest in the description for Captain's Log #48 either where they first appeared in FC.

FEDERATION COMMANDER
Three new scenarios, four new ships, rules for Carnivons and Paravians, eight new battle group tactics, three new Command Notes, FCOL.p

http://www.starfleetstore.com/issues-3051-c-17_45/captains-l...

So you can call it what you want but it is what it is.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jean Sexton
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mb
Paul, most new ships and rules published in Captain's Logs are not in an official product. Until they appear in an official product, they are all playtest.

And no, we don't say that in every Captain's Log. We believe our readers are clever enough to figure out that if it isn't in a product yet, it is in playtest. As those pages make up such a tiny proportion of a magazine, the magazine itself is not a playtest.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Brown
msg tools
ADB_Marketing wrote:
Paul, most new ships and rules published in Captain's Logs are not in an official product. Until they appear in an official product, they are all playtest.

And no, we don't say that in every Captain's Log. We believe our readers are clever enough to figure out that if it isn't in a product yet, it is in playtest. As those pages make up such a tiny proportion of a magazine, the magazine itself is not a playtest.


Is that how you solicit playtest reports? By not telling people it's being playtested? Great strategy.

And Captain's Log is not an official product anymore?
Even though your description for Captain's Log specifically calls it an "Expansion Module for each of our various product lines"

Starfleet Games Website wrote:

Captain's Log is the official journal of the Star Fleet Universe. More than a magazine, it is in one way an expansion module for each of our various product lines, and in other ways is the primary means of communication between the company and you, the gamers.


Yeah, it's pretty much established that you regularly sell untested material without explicitly disclosing it as such. Whether it's a few pages in Captain's Log or "Preview" pack the effect is the same.

Ironic business philosophy for a company which has repeatedly badmouthed another developer for not testing a product.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Bakija
United States
flag msg tools
Q: Are we not men?
mbmbmbmbmb
Akalabeth wrote:
So with all of this in mind, I'm wondering why the word "playtest" is neither in the title nor even the description for this product. You do know that preview and playtest mean different things right?


You do know that when a product description says:

Quote:
When the product is released, this e-pack will receive the final cover, any edited rules will be updated, and any changes to ships will be reflected.


That is about the same thing, right?

Quote:
Saying that edited ships and rules will be updated does not mean that these ships and/or rules are largerly (or totally) untested.


It does if you are paying attention.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Bakija
United States
flag msg tools
Q: Are we not men?
mbmbmbmbmb
Akalabeth wrote:
Yeah, it's pretty much established that you regularly sell untested material without explicitly disclosing it as such.


If you are someone who regularly purchases such things, or follows the production system of this company, it is reasonably clear what is or is not tested or untested or "official". If you aren't someone who regularly purchases such things, why would you possibly care?

7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jean Sexton
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mb
Paul, no, Captain's Log isn't a product for any one line (please note in your own quotation it is the "official journal," not an "official product."). Yes, it expands games through playtest rules. It is the primary means of communications with our gamers. As I wrote earlier, we believe our gamers are clever enough to figure that out. We've always gotten feedback from them regarding the new material, so they obviously do understand it.

With respect, since I have stated our position, my time is best spent elsewhere.

12 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K A
United States
Tulsa
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Paul,
I don't understand why a person who has such a deep mistrust and lack of respect for a game company and its personnel would continue to follow each of its developments with such devotion. If you are continuing to buy their products you must like the final results which speaks well of the process' outcome. If not, this seems like such a waste of energy with so many other games in the market.
9 
 Thumb up
2.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Brown
msg tools
ADB_Marketing wrote:
Paul, no, Captain's Log isn't a product for any one line (please note in your own quotation it is the "official journal," not an "official product."). Yes, it expands games through playtest rules. It is the primary means of communications with our gamers. As I wrote earlier, we believe our gamers are clever enough to figure that out. We've always gotten feedback from them regarding the new material, so they obviously do understand it.


Your official SFB expansions are called Modules.
You described Captain's Log as an "Expansion Module" for all your games.

How you are presenting it is pretty clear and it's not in the manner you're claiming above. For a company to assume that their players will 'figure it out' is basically confirmation that you're not being upfront about the content. Hey maybe they'll figure it out AFTER they buy it, right?


bakija wrote:
Akalabeth wrote:
Yeah, it's pretty much established that you regularly sell untested material without explicitly disclosing it as such.


If you are someone who regularly purchases such things, or follows the production system of this company, it is reasonably clear what is or is not tested or untested or "official". If you aren't someone who regularly purchases such things, why would you possibly care?


So you believe it's the fault of the consumer if they unwittingly buy something which at first glance, appears to be a fully tested product? Or if they buy a magazine described as an "expansion module" which includes playtest not described as such?

You assume two realities. Someone who is an ADB grognard. And someone who doesn't buy their products at all. But if someone who doesn't know starts to purchase, how many books do they need to spend money on before they realize what's tested and what's not? They shouldn't need to buy ONE book without knowing. It should be explicit in the description.

The major Star Fleet Battles books are called "modules". The description for Captain's Log calls it an "expansion module" for all games. This is the opposite of suggesting it's untested material.

Fact is ADB claims to hold to certain standards but facts tell another story. They simply have a schedule to release content and they push out whatever is available whether it's tested or not.

GamePlayer wrote:
Paul,
I don't understand why a person who has such a deep mistrust and lack of respect for a game company and its personnel would continue to follow each of its developments with such devotion. If you are continuing to buy their products you must like the final results which speaks well of the process' outcome. If not, this seems like such a waste of energy with so many other games in the market.


The last major expansion for Federation Commander came out in 2012. The ship card epacks are woefully lacking in content compared to what else is on the market. Exactly how many products do you think I'm buying?

I'm mainly just following development for FA because I'm still curious how it will turn out.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Rodriguez
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Folks, folks! Stop feeding the trolls and eventually they go away!
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Gallo
United States
O'Fallon
Missouri
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
danrodz wrote:
Folks, folks! Stop feeding the trolls and eventually they go away!
Or start a new thread...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Brown
msg tools
martimer wrote:
danrodz wrote:
Folks, folks! Stop feeding the trolls and eventually they go away!
Or start a new thread...


Well someone ought to. Most of these forums haven't had a post in two years or more. For all the people advocating this game in their responses there's basically no one actually talking about it here or on the ADB forums.

From August 19th to yesterday, the daily post count on the Forum according to SVC's day has been 2,2,1,1,1,0,0,2. Not exactly hopping, is it?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Bakija
United States
flag msg tools
Q: Are we not men?
mbmbmbmbmb
Akalabeth wrote:
How you are presenting it is pretty clear and it's not in the manner you're claiming above. For a company to assume that their players will 'figure it out' is basically confirmation that you're not being upfront about the content. Hey maybe they'll figure it out AFTER they buy it, right?


If you are someone who is paying attention to what this company does, i.e. checking out their web forum, following along with their product lines, occasionally reading their journal? None of this is remotely confusing or difficult to figure out, unless one is being purposefully obtuse and/or ignorant. The products that are "official" products are easy to suss out as such. The products that are "previews" or "playtest" material, even when it is being sold rather than given away? Also very easy to figure out.

bakija wrote:
So you believe it's the fault of the consumer if they unwittingly buy something which at first glance, appears to be a fully tested product? Or if they buy a magazine described as an "expansion module" which includes playtest not described as such?


No, I believe it is the fault of someone who is being willfully ignorant to get bent out of shape about things that are not something worth getting bent out of shape about.

As noted, if one is paying attention to this company remotely, the things you are concerned with aren't really an issue. Things in an issue of Captain's Log? Clearly indicated as being either "official", actual new content, or things that are experimental or for playtesting. One *can* certainly get confused by the difference, but usually only as the result of not paying attention. Or being willfully ignorant.

The product in question *here*? It is called a "preview" pack. And comes with information that when they are moved to "official" market, the rules might change. One *might* look at this and say "Goodness! This is clearly a fully tested, official product!", but only if they don't understand what the words "preview" and "When the product is released, this e-pack will receive the final cover, any edited rules will be updated, and any changes to ships will be reflected" mean. Or they are being willfully ignorant.

Quote:
You assume two realities. Someone who is an ADB grognard. And someone who doesn't buy their products at all. But if someone who doesn't know starts to purchase, how many books do they need to spend money on before they realize what's tested and what's not? They shouldn't need to buy ONE book without knowing. It should be explicit in the description.


It is very easy to figure these things out. Unless one is being willfully ignorant. This company has been doing what it has been doing for 30+ years. Is their system perfect? No, no it is not. But it works for them. And the vast majority of people who buy products from them have no trouble at all figuring out what is or is not playtest material. In fact, I'd suspect that *most* people buying stuff from this company are very happy to have access to untested "playtest" material to try out and see if it works. And given that "playtest" material is generally easy to figure out that it is, in fact, "playtest" material, and also generally pretty inexpensive, folks are happy to buy it. And try it out. And then look forward to seeing how it actually turns out when it is "official". As that is how folks who buy stuff from this company tend to operate. Do all of them do that? No, but probably most of them.

Quote:
Fact is ADB claims to hold to certain standards but facts tell another story. They simply have a schedule to release content and they push out whatever is available whether it's tested or not.


Why do you care? Do you play these games? If you do, do you actually have trouble figuring out the things that you are concerned that people are going to have trouble figuring out?

Quote:
The last major expansion for Federation Commander came out in 2012. The ship card epacks are woefully lacking in content compared to what else is on the market. Exactly how many products do you think I'm buying?


So then don't buy them. You know what they are. You know what their purpose it. If you feel that they are woefully lacking in content, why are you even paying attention, let alone putting this much effort into complaining about things that are imagined problems?
7 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Bakija
United States
flag msg tools
Q: Are we not men?
mbmbmbmbmb
Akalabeth wrote:
From August 19th to yesterday, the daily post count on the Forum according to SVC's day has been 2,2,1,1,1,0,0,2. Not exactly hopping, is it?


What "forum" are you referring to, exactly?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Brown
msg tools
bakija wrote:
Akalabeth wrote:
From August 19th to yesterday, the daily post count on the Forum according to SVC's day has been 2,2,1,1,1,0,0,2. Not exactly hopping, is it?


What "forum" are you referring to, exactly?


The Federation Commander Forum:
http://www.starfleetgames.com/federation/phpbb2/

The Discuss BBS has more activity, around 15 posts per day, but the majority of that isn't FC. On a good day you will get 4-5 posts on FC, average is probably 1 or 2 and half of those are SVC not players.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Bakija
United States
flag msg tools
Q: Are we not men?
mbmbmbmbmb
Akalabeth wrote:
The Federation Commander Forum:
http://www.starfleetgames.com/federation/phpbb2/

The Discuss BBS has more activity, around 15 posts per day, but the majority of that isn't FC. On a good day you will get 4-5 posts on FC, average is probably 1 or 2 and half of those are SVC not players.


Ah, ok. The discuss BBS gets considerably more activity than 15 posts per day (in the last 24 hours, there have been 85 posts). But it is true that there isn't a lot of FedCom discussion.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Brown
msg tools
bakija wrote:
Akalabeth wrote:
The Federation Commander Forum:
http://www.starfleetgames.com/federation/phpbb2/

The Discuss BBS has more activity, around 15 posts per day, but the majority of that isn't FC. On a good day you will get 4-5 posts on FC, average is probably 1 or 2 and half of those are SVC not players.


Ah, ok. The discuss BBS gets considerably more activity than 15 posts per day (in the last 24 hours, there have been 85 posts). But it is true that there isn't a lot of FedCom discussion.


15 was based on SVC's own accounting of the posts per day:
http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/12032/8668.htm...

Averaging up those totals is turns out to be 14 per day. Though with that total, maybe the 14 is all fan posts and not SVC. So might be 20ish per day if SVC posts 5 times for example. The count of the FC forum may be in the same way, so would be 1-2 not counting SVC's replies.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Bakija
United States
flag msg tools
Q: Are we not men?
mbmbmbmbmb
Akalabeth wrote:
15 was based on SVC's own accounting of the posts per day:
http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/12032/8668.htm...


I'm pretty sure those are *his* posts per day (i.e. *he* made 17 posts on the last day of that discussion), not the number of posts on the BBS per day. You find that out by hitting "search" and looking for "posts in the last day", or whatever.

The Discuss BBS is a pretty active place. I mean, yeah, FedCom doesn't get a lot of action there (SFB and F+E get the most). But there are a lot of folks and a reasonable amount of regular discussion. And is the best place to get info about ADB games.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jean Sexton
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mb
The count that Steve provides on the BBS is the number of active threads each day. Each thread may have multiple posts. By my count, we usually average about 50 posts a day. (I just checked and last week the average was 49.7).
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.