Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

Stellar Conquest» Forums » General

Subject: Differences between the Metagaming edition vs. the Avalon Hill edition? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Sean Shaw
United States
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I recently went back over my Stellar Conquest, which is still a great game, if a tad long in book keeping. I took a nice long look over it before getting it packed up, and started to wonder the differences between it and the Avalon Hill edition. Metagaming version has a paper chart (thick paper though), small chits (the norm for the period), charts for keeping track of stats, and two very small cheap little dice.

I gather that in the AH version Dreadnaughts were renamed D-Stars? The Avalon Hill version had a board (AH seemed to be really nice in that they had all sorts of actual boards for their boardgames as opposed to the paper of other companies, or even the cheap cardstock boards that are used by GMT today), did it have the usual for chits?

Did it have bigger dice? At least normal sized dice? It looks like it had a bit more color then my Metagaming copy.

Just things I wondered as I looked at my copy.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bob Blanchett
Australia
Clifton Hill
Victoria
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
this may help..
http://grognard.com/info/stellcon.txt
there are a few articles about but thats it gamewise.. productionwise I cant tell as ive never seen a MG copy
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sean Shaw
United States
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks. Ironically I've never seen the AH version except in pictures, just have the Metagaming version. It's not the original but the one printed around four years after the original one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Gilmore
United States
Mississippi
flag msg tools
I have the second version of Stellar Conquest by Metagaming and the Avalon Hill version of Stellar Conquest. There are also optional rules including a solitary version that you will lose within the first four turns. Whoever designed the solitary version did a terrible job. The optional rules are good and help the game. My understanding of the first version of Stellar Conquest was that there were planet combinations that gave whoever drew it too much of an advantage. I have never seen the first version. It would be nice if someone developed a computer version of this game. I like strategy games that do not require quick reaction time.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Alexander
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
A couple I haven't seen mentioned:

The AH version puts several restrictions on Transports built by conquered colonies: they can only be used to start new colonies or reinforce other conquered colonies of the same original race, and they have to be escorted by a warship or they revert control.

In the MG version, once you've researched the appropriate technology, it costs 2 I.P. to build a special Transport equipped to land on Barren planets. In the AH version, you get that tech for free in every normal Transport you build from that point on. (Transports already on the board don't gain the ability in either version.)

In the AH version, a colony being attacked can unconditionally destroy any or all of its own factories after any combat round, provided it hasn't been conquered yet. In the MG version, a colony can't reduce its factory count below its population this way.

Similarly, once a colony is conquered, the AH version lets the conquering player destroy factories arbitrarily but limits population destruction to fleet strength. The MG version only allows free destruction of factories if the planet has more than it can run, and requires fleet bombardment to destroy both population and factories below that number.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Hernandez
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Besides eliminating the extra cost for colony transports with CET (Controlled Climate Technology in the AH version), two other important changes lurk in the research and build costs: CCT (Avalon Hill) costs 25 vs 30 for CET (Metagaming); and Planetary Shields (Avalon Hill) cost 30 to build vs 20 for Planetary Force Screens (Metagaming).

These are significant changes, though not unbalancing. In particular, the rapid acquisition of PFSs in the Metagaming edition meant that DNs (DStars) would barely see action before being reduced to siege warfare (which was a standoff as besieged planets cannot build ships) or breaking sieges.

Another significant change is the use of "command posts" to indicate how far your ships can travel (before USR is researched).

Other changes were cosmetic: different ship silhouettes between the Metagaming (boxed) and AH versions; escorts were renamed corvettes, attack ships became fighters and dreadnoughts "death stars" (guess what movie was popular then?). Ditto minor changes in one or two technology names, and some rearrangements in the tables. The AH star cards were printed in full color and look very nice; they also provided four sheets that had a task force display and all the information from the player data sheets on them.

The counter mix is considerably different. I am going to upload a file comparing the three versions. I'll just say here that the AH version has 130 counters per player, while the Metagaming boxed set has 120 and the original edition 100. The counters in the Metagaming boxed set are actually very nice and have the counter color on the back, too; they are the same size as the AH counters, only not as thick.



Phil
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
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.