Is rulebook version 5C still the current one?

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 01:39 am: Edit

Ryan- yes. While there are some corrections on the BBS, that rulebook is the latest one.

I have been collecting various related things as I find them (I find the occasional corner case that was not previously considered) for a future rulebook update (no discussions of such at this time). If you or someone else has items that you feel need to be adjusted/addressed, feel free to contact the rules committee (John, Jean, Lucky, and I) or your GM.

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 02:00 am: Edit

Mike- C17.16. The example seems to imply rounding down for R&D projects (so 0-4 = 0; 5-9 == 1; ...). Is this correct?

By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 09:34 am: Edit

I would hope there would be a minimum of one available each turn.

By Charles "Lucky" Coleman (Mwmiyd) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 09:36 am: Edit

Haha, well John Steele. I'll be passive at least till 160. There is a neutral zone treaty in place. I guess a TP with you is out of the question as we can't enter it without starting a war.
On the other hand. AA37 and T34 are claimed by the Klingon Empire. Any Empire entering those systems will be considered an enemy to the Klingon Empire.

Klingon Emperor
Qapla'

By Mike Incavo (Kavo) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 11:16 am: Edit

(C17.16) The amount of active R&D projects an empire can allocate EPs towards each turn will be limited to 1 project for every 5 major systems owned. There is no limit to the number of started (inactive) projects. Example; Empire A has 11 major system, they have 5 R&D projects started, they may only allocate EPs to 2 of those 5 projects each turn.

Assume less than 5 systems still allows for one project. Can't screw the little guys too much.

By Mike Incavo (Kavo) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 11:17 am: Edit

Do we need to talk to Jean about getting a seperate U6 thread started on here?

By Mike Incavo (Kavo) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 11:19 am: Edit

I have more guys that want in but all slots are full. Anyone interested in taking on a second Admiral? I know the empires are small to start with... Let me know.

By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 11:36 am: Edit

Make a couple of the NPCs bigger and slap them against the map edge?...of course it would need to be the north map edge.

By Charles "Lucky" Coleman (Mwmiyd) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 11:39 am: Edit

I can take an Admiral

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 11:48 am: Edit

I would suggest that we do set up a U6 folder (locked) and subfolders similar to:
Banter
Announcements (locked to Mike only?)
Maps (if you wish me to keep going my screen capture maps)
Campaign Q&A (perhaps)

By Jean Sexton (Jsexton) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 11:57 am: Edit

You cannot lock a topic to a person. Let me see about getting you a topic set up.

By John Stiff (Tarkin22180) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 12:03 pm: Edit

Yes, a U6 folder, etc is needed.

Yes, keep the screen capture maps. Some players' computers cannot read the .gbx files.

By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 12:42 pm: Edit

Question: Does an LSO make the ship he is on act as a military scout for the purpose of exploring OMAs?

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 02:31 pm: Edit

A map will be forthcoming tonight. John, you could try upgrading to MacOS, Linux, or just about any version of UNIX I expect. They all can use WINE to run Cyberboard. :-)

Kurt- I'll get back to you after we (rules committee) hash this out in email. I can see why you are asking, but it isn't clear (to me) what the game designer's intent is.

By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 03:19 pm: Edit

The second half of that question would be: If the LSO does create a military scout for the purpose of surveying OMAs, would a LC or LA acting as a LSO do the same?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 06:53 pm: Edit

I really enjoyed Howard B's Galactic Conquest article in CL51. It's good "bathroom reading" as even I was unaware of all the moving parts in a GC campaign. You have a lot of ways to spend your money, and never enough money for everything you need to do, let alone the things you want to do, and just forget all of the things you could do with infinite cash. It's good reading, thought-provoking, even for people who never have an never will play GC. It even gave me some ideas of things to add to Fed Admiral.

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Friday, April 29, 2016 - 09:39 pm: Edit

Mike,

My Kzinti file was corrupted. Can't open in word, opendoc, wordpad, or notepad and get readable text.

Ryan

By John Stiff (Tarkin22180) on Saturday, April 30, 2016 - 12:44 pm: Edit

Hi Kurt,

Regarding your LSO question (and followup question). As a player, I would say yes. However, I admit that I have not tried it myself, so I don't know. I will wait for the rules committee decision.

John

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Saturday, April 30, 2016 - 10:02 pm: Edit

Generally speaking, a LC can sub for a generic legendary officer, so if a LSO can do it, the LC can too.

As the Romulans with a scout problem, I'm trying to keep a low profile since this would change my abilities substantially.

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Saturday, April 30, 2016 - 10:05 pm: Edit

As to the GC article in CL51- much of it is from whole cloth. Parts of it are based upon an analysis a few of you have seen I've been doing of the U5 Romulans this month (which was in turn inspired by doing my tax return). We may see a version of that analysis in the next 5 year report, albeit with less detail.

By John Burton Steele Sr. (Johnbsteele) on Sunday, May 01, 2016 - 08:48 pm: Edit

Mike

The Federation can use another Admiral.

By John Burton Steele Sr. (Johnbsteele) on Wednesday, May 04, 2016 - 04:36 pm: Edit

May the 4th be with you!

By John Burton Steele Sr. (Johnbsteele) on Wednesday, May 04, 2016 - 04:43 pm: Edit

Lucky... The Federation must keep the neutral zone free of ridge heads until the treaty no longer exists. Entering the zone and bothering entities that have requested this or that from the flat heads while the treaty is in effect would release the Kracken.

By Charles "Lucky" Coleman (Mwmiyd) on Wednesday, May 04, 2016 - 07:31 pm: Edit

John, I agree.. Don't enter the neutral zone and we'll all be happy.