From: martimer@mindspring.com (Martin W Gallo)
Subject: My Impressions of Silent Death

David, (and anybody else who reads this)

I have enjoyed Silent Death since it came out many years ago. The system
has its quirks and stupidities, but it also has some great ideas. It can
play fairly quickly (although it is prone to boring interludes if the
players aren't interested in keeping it moving).

I have not played SFB for over a decade, but if memory serves me correctly,
SD is a faster game to play and allows for higher ship densities (per
scenario and per player). Of course, that holds true for fighter (and
slightly larger ships) combat. Dreadnaughts (and other multi-weapon ships)
can occasionally bog things down with lots of die rolling and weapon
effects. To SDs credit, even the larger ships can play faster than SFB,
because the system is less cumbersome.

Good things about SD include few rules arguments, as the rules are pretty
well written and there are not as many of them as in SFB. It does not take
more than a few minutes to teach someone how to play, but it can take a
couple of games to understand how to play well (much like SFB the
interactions between ships and ship systems/weapons are at the heart of the
game). There is no pre-turn planning or energy allocation (makes the game
MUCH faster/easier to play).

My biggest gripe about the system is the initiative system. The player/side
that wins initiative has a TREMENDOUS advantage, and can often win the game
based on this (in one turn, or sometimes two). There is little in the way
of balance in this regard, and I have seen heavily
outnumbered/outgunned/outclassed sides win a battle because they got
initiative two turns in a row. It makes the game too luck based, IMO.

My second biggest gripe is the movement system - it is not vectored and is
extremely gamey. It does allow for a faster game, and is fun to play (this
is science FICTION after all).

I have toyed with the idea of fixing both of these problems through the
years, but never get the momentum to do so. Most of the time, I am playing
with guys who are not really interested in all that 'hard science' stuff,
they just want to play a game. Silent Death is a good GAME (so is SFB,
although that is based on 2nd Ed rules w/out a lot of expansionism). Now
when I am playing, I just buckle down, and play the game, doing my darndest
to ignore the complete lack of any science.

If I can get my local group interested, I am going to introduce them to
Shooting Stars - a much better fighter game.

Anyway, both games require some planning in order to play well, although
less so with SD than SFB. In SD much of the decision making is done for you
by the initiative dice. If you win, you get to be on the offensive. If you
lose, you just try to stay out of weapons range.

Marty

Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make them
all yourself.

If a train station is where the train stops, what is a work station?