RE: Starting a Demo?

Date sent:  8-JUL-1996 08:42:10 

>Several people have suggested using Star Trek or Star Wars as
backrounds
>because they're both familiar. I've never run a demo game, but it seems
to me
>that SW might be better than ST.  Trek ships, weapons, etc. all behave
>differently from standard FT, and there are a lot of Trek-fanatics out
there
>(no offense intended) who might be apt to dismiss FT as being a poor
Trek
>simulation. (ie -- "shields don't act like that," or "why can't I do
this
>maneuver when Picard did it in such-and-such episode" and so on.) Has
anyone
>experienced this?

>Scott Field

With the 'Hard Core' trecker, you can experience the 'Hood' syndrome.
(The
one where in Naval wargames ALL british ships blow up due to 'lucky'
hits
to ammo storage). This is because ST eps are solved by plot lines (or
plot
loopholes) and not by a straight out slugfeist. I usually know enough
about
the episode to counter any attempt to use it as an excuse to do
something
outside the game. (eg the 'Picard maneuver' is now so commonly known
that
all ships carry equipment to monitor micro-pressure variations as a
standard part of their scanners. And the only reason it worked in the
episode anyway was because they didn't want to blow the ship up 8-) ).
But still, you can't have the complex 'role playing' as part of a
'simple'
fast paced game.

In fact, at the end of the day, ST weapons do not behave any differently
from FT weapons. The only difference is in the descriptions. (With TNG
and the Films, ships with shields up can, and do, take damage).

I'd be sceptical about using fighters as part of a participation game
for
beginners.

+-------------------------------------+--------------------+
| Adam Delafield, I.T. Officer	      | Bolton Institute,  |
|				      | Eagle Tower,	   |
| E-mail : ad4@Bolton.ac.uk	      | College Way,	   |
| Phone  : +44 1204 528851 (ext 3163) | Bolton, UK.	   |
| Fax	 : +44 1204 399074	      | BL3 5AE.	   |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------+