Galactic Conquest Rulebook/R&D Additions/Corrections

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Galactic Conquest: Galactic Conquest Rulebook/R&D Additions/Corrections
  Subtopic Posts   Updated
R & D Projects  0   10/17 11:34am
Archive through January 27, 2009  25   07/11 10:31pm
Archive through June 29, 2012  25   07/02 07:58am

This topic includes official clarifications, additions, and changes to the Galactic Conquest Rulebook as pertain to all Universes or Universes 1 and 2. It also includes officially-approved, public-knowledge Research & Development projects. Changes that only affect Universe 3 are in the U3 Forum. Only information from the GMs or their designated poster should appear here. Questions should go in the Campaign Q & A.

Banter is subject to deletion.
By ROBERT l cALLAWAY (Callaway) on Friday, June 29, 2012 - 11:58 am: Edit

mainly played as new construction only,

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Friday, June 29, 2012 - 12:30 pm: Edit

I agree with Rob- I can't say I've ever considered using a BSSY for anything other than new construction.

Barring Jean or John asking for reconsideration, I'd say the time/cost ratio is the same- 50% longer, 30% more EPs.

By Bennett Eugene Snyder (Planner) on Saturday, June 30, 2012 - 07:10 pm: Edit

Thought as much.

By John D Berg (Kerg) on Sunday, July 01, 2012 - 08:06 pm: Edit

I agree with 30% more EPs, but is the 50% more time even relevant?

It takes 1 seg to convert now right?

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Monday, July 02, 2012 - 07:58 am: Edit

Correct, John. Building SC4 ships takes 2 turns instead of 1 (or 1.5). I was postulating that it would take 2 segs, not 1.

It isn't a big deal. I was just aiming for consistency.

By John D Berg (Kerg) on Monday, July 02, 2012 - 08:50 am: Edit

Lets just go with continuity....

BSSY conversions take 2 seg and 30% more EP.


By ROBERT l cALLAWAY (Callaway) on Monday, July 02, 2012 - 09:06 am: Edit

so a zero conversation still cost zero

By John D Berg (Kerg) on Wednesday, July 04, 2012 - 08:49 am: Edit


By John D Berg (Kerg) on Wednesday, July 11, 2012 - 09:22 pm: Edit

It has never happened but here is the official ruling:

(D2.25) Any RX's waiting for movement to happen so they activate, get triggered on impulse 12, even in the absence of an external trigger.

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Monday, August 13, 2012 - 10:19 pm: Edit

Clarification of B11.85 with regards to various corner cases-

The addition of SABOTs is not covered in the rules. They should be treated like drone speed upgrades. R1 units, including bases were not specifically covered.

B11.85) When a drone or plasma armed ship is built (for multiple turn builds, the "build" turn is the turn that the unit was finished, not started) as new construction, if the current drone speed (or SABOT plasma) is higher due to upgrades, then the ship’s EPV must include the price of the speed upgrade. Assume all drone racks have type-I drones for EPV purposes. Existing ships will automatically, and instantly, have any speed upgrades for no cost. Note that fighters and gunboats do not get drone speed upgrades (C20.400). R1 units, unless specifically excepted do not pay for nor get the advantage of these update. Bases that are size class 4 or larger, including ground and space based models, are treated like warships- they get the BPV bump at the applicable time(s) and must pay for it if built after that time.
Short form of the above:
size class 5 or smaller- never
size class 4 or larger- R2 and R1 bases- yes
size class 5 bases, R1 units not specifically included- never
SABOT and drone speed upgrades are "free" for existing things when the clock says the upgrades happened, and must be paid for things completed on or after that time.

I think I got all the corner cases (thanks are due to Lucky Coleman for coming up with many of them). Rationale for why things are the way they are- R1 units (other than bases) have minimal combat use and are typically not provided the "best" stuff. Making the GM recalculate MM income for the upgrades (and few points it would change things) seemed excessive. Monitors one could argue either way, I went with "no". Bases clearly come into play more often, are typically military grade, and have more moderate numbers (I hope there are not any civilian bases that this artificially bumps up). SC5 bases I lumped in with the already excluded SC5/6 units.

By Jean Sexton (Jsexton) on Tuesday, August 21, 2012 - 08:38 am: Edit

Please remember, no banter or rules proposals go here. This topic is for official information only.


By John D Berg (Kerg) on Tuesday, January 28, 2014 - 08:59 am: Edit

C30.25, replace "are allowed." with "are allowed, however both empires must have one FT in the pool. If both empires don't each have at least one FT in the pool, then the trading pact is dissolved."

C30.27 If empire has more FTs in its end of the TP pool than major systems, then any income over the amount it would have gotten with a number of FTs equal to to its major system count counts against its economic aid limits (B10.55). Example: If the Gorns (5 majors) had a trade pact with the Federation (10 majors), and they had 8 FTs in their pool, the first 100EPs would not be subject to the aide limits, but the income from the 6th, 7th, and 8th FTs (60EPs) would count against the limits. If their income was under 240EPs (perhaps due to being subject to economic exhaustion), the full value of the extra FTs wouldn't be available.

This corrects the absurd issue of one tiny empire gaining 1000s of EP by simple map/FT manipulation.

By John D Berg (Kerg) on Wednesday, July 02, 2014 - 01:28 pm: Edit

C22.45) If at any time during the turn a foreign but allied SQ enters your space it is subject to the (C22.40) calculations. If the payment for being an expeditionary fleet is not made, then for the duration of the time it is NOT in its own space it will be subject to "inactive" status penalties (see E2.551). It will not count as being "in supply."

By Sebastian Palozzi (Sebastian) on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 - 09:17 pm: Edit

Hello All,
I'm not a player (yet) but I'm reading the rules and I have a couple of questions: (B2.30) lists a probability that a convoy will be defended as 1d6 or 2d6 et c. How exactly is this table used? Are we looking for a '1' on a roll of 1d6?

Also, is there such a thing as a Sequence of Play for GC? I have seen the combat sequence of play but I haven't seen a SOP for the GC turns.

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 - 11:09 pm: Edit

The xD6 rolls are x or less on a six sider (not the standard notation I've seen in other systems). The sequence of play is on the list of things to write up, although generally speaking one can read between the lines and figure out when things happen.

By Jean Sexton (Jsexton) on Thursday, October 30, 2014 - 05:41 pm: Edit

Star Fleet: Galactic Conquest Is Now Available from Multiple Sources

Admiral, the Federation has promised us a dreadnought-led fleet to help us beat off the Gorn-Romulan Coalition. Where do you wish the Federation ships to go? Remember, we don't want them to see that new planet we are developing on their border!

We are releasing Galactic Conquest, the newly updated Fifth Edition of the most famous campaign rules in the Star Fleet Universe. Use these rules in the official campaigns or to build your own campaign. Includes everything! Conquest, exploration, alliances, diplomacy, construction, technology development, ships, bases, and a thousand more things.

This campaign system is designed to use with Star Fleet Battles (it might work with other game systems if you go to some effort) and assumes you either create your own map or use the map provided by the campaign gamemasters. This new edition includes an extensive index, making it easy to track down exactly what you want to know.

The new edition of the book is available as a PDF from

Warehouse 23:

DriveThru RPG:

Wargame Vault:

It is also available in print from your local game store or directly from ADB:

Add a Message

This is a private posting area. A valid username and password combination is required to post messages to this discussion.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation