Archive through February 26, 2018
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: Rules Questions:
SFB Rules Q&A:
Archive through February 26, 2018
Question about building a Federation force including a CVBG: If the two carriers are an SCS and a BCS, can both ships use all of their fighters (<= 60 fighter equivalents) or do you have to go in short a few fighters to keep the total fighter equivalent <= 48?
Jamey Johnston:
From the (S8.0) Patrol Scenarios, this may help
(S8.327) Federation Third Way: If the battle is set in Y181 or later, a Federation force may have as many as 48 fighters (heavy fighters counting as two fighters) in four squadrons. This can be as many as 60 fighters if one of the carriers has an oversized squadron (i.e. two squadrons counting as one). This can only be done if the Federation is using a carrier battle group (S8.283). Example: A Federation SCS group (A-20 squadron, F-14 squadron, F-18 squadron) in a CVBG with a Federation CVD group (two squadrons of F-18s).
Yep, read that. I am definitely specifically talking about a CVBG, and the part that I am unsure about is the Oversize Squadron. In fact the example is specifically confusing, in that it mentions that the CVD group (two squadrons of F-18s) but if it's an oversize squadron, would it not be one squadron of 24 F-18s, and thus qualified? My question runs to the intent of the rule, in that a BCS has a "squadron and a half" and paired with an SCS the total would be 4.5 squadrons, is the intent of S8.327 meant to allow the Federation to exceed the normal 4 squadrons-worth of fighters when using a CVBG? If not, it seems odd that a SCS+BCS would otherwise be allowed to operate together (taking up your Size 2 and BCH "slots" of course) but having to go in short a few fighters because of the (possible) limit of 48 vs the 54 total carried in this example.
Jamey Johnston:
The two squadrons on the CVD COUNT as one squadron for purposes of the number of allowed fighters, i.e., the 24 fighters count against just 12 fighters against the over all limit.
HOWEVER, for the effects of various other rules, principally electronic warfare, they count as their normal two squadrons. Thus the 24 fighters include two electronic warfare fighters, each of which is able to lend to its "squadron," and the carrier must generate two separate pools of electronic warfare points for purposes of lending each "squadron" electronic warfare.
Note that as the battle progresses and casualties occur the carrier might eventually amalgamate (as an example) the four remaining fighters of one of the squadrons with the six remaining fighters of the other squadron into a single squadron for all purposes.
So the term "oversized squadron" simply means that at least two squadrons on a particular carrier count as one squadron of 12 fighters against the total, but it does not free the fighters of that carrier from other rules respective to fighters.
Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification on Oversized Squadrons. Back to my original question, part of the problem is I've come back to the game after a long hiatus (>20 years) and until I get my copy of Module G3 (it's in the mail!) I've been limited to my copy of Module G1, which does not include the OS tag. FWIW I'm allowing the Fed player in this case to use all the fighters, as the last phrase of the section is "or just use common sense." My common sense tells me that a Fed CVBG of SCS+BCS should be able to use all of its fighters, even if it is a tad more than 48 equivalents and neither ship was given the OS tag (although I would not be surprised to open up G3 and see that the BCS was tagged as such).
Jamey Johnston:
I fear the BCS is not tagged as having an oversized squadron because one of the general rules it that an oversized squadron cannot consist of a mix of heavy fighters and normal fighters. Specific rules override general rules, and the Hydran Cavalier-X is currently the only carrier in the game allowed to count its heavy fighters and size one fighters as an "oversized squadron" (an advantage granted because of both the "X technology" and to keep the "Hydran flavor" of having fighters).
But neither the Federation Space Control Ship nor the battle control ship carry "over sized squadrons."
That makes sense, totally. Unfortunately that means that if you want to build a CVBG of SCS+BCS that is S8 legal, you have to short a few fighters to bring the total fighter equivalents to <= 48 per S8.327. I don't think I'd be horribly upsetting the balance by letting that number go to 54 in this case though, which is where the full compliment of those two carries weighs in. I realize that isn't "to the letter" but it feels fairly common sense to allow any (otherwise legal) CVBG bring all their fighters as long as no other carriers or independent fighter groups are present in the force. We'll see how it goes this weekend!
But just to confirm my understanding, let's say I wasn't feeling generous to the Fed player in this case and wanted to be letter legal. S8.327 specifies up to 48 fighter equivalents in 4 squadrons. But these two carriers technically have 5 squadrons. Legally, we can remove a max of 5 (18*0.25) FEs from the BCS, leaving us with a single F-14. Does that make it impossible to meet S8.327 with these two carriers, or could you short a single F-14 from the SCS as well and be "legal?" e.g. combining F-14s from both ships into your fourth squadron for purposes of these limits?
Jamey Johnston:
Under (S8.312) you could remove 25% of the fighters from each 'fighter group" of a carrier, a "fighter group" being all of the fighters operating from that carrier. The SCS has 36 fighter equivalents, so you could remove 9 fighter equivalents from it. The BCS has 18 fighter equivalents, so you could remove 5 (4.5 rounds up to 5) fighter equivalents from it for a total of 14 fighter equivalents (maximum you could remove). As the two carriers together have 54 fighter equivalents, you would need to remove six fighter equivalents, which could be done by dropping three heavy fighters, or six size size one fighters, or any combination that results in six fighter equivalents being removed, but note that only five of the needed six equivalents can be taken from the BCS (might be two heavy fighters and one F-14, or one heavy fighter and three F-14s, or five F-14s), the other must come from the SCS (or all could come from the SCS, i.e., you could delete say six F-18s).
If you deleted 6xF-18s, wouldn't you still be in violation of S8.327 though?
Quoted for the relevant bit:
"a Federation force may have as many as 48 fighters (heavy fighters counting as two fighters) in four squadrons"
And removing 6xF-18s would leave you with 48 fighters in 5 squadrons, would it not?
If you can combine fighters across ships into squadrons though, you could then meet S8.327 if you removed 6xF-14s, as that would leave you with a total of 12xF-18, 12xF-14 (split across the two ships though), 6xA-20, and 6xF-111.
If you can't count them that way, then I think a SCS+BCS CVBG actually is impossible? Although conceptually such a group makes sense to me.
Jamey Johnston:
I fear you are correct, all of which means there is literally no way to have the two carriers operate together as a group, as there is no way under the rules to eliminate one of the squadrons. While you could leave out five F-14s on the BCS, the remaining sixth would still constitute in and of itself a "squadron."
That's what I thought was the case! Too bad, really. Conceptually the SCS+BCS CVBG seems "logical" as a Fed equivalent of an opposing PF-heavy force. I guess what you'd most likely see would be the SCS+NVH as your CVBG, and then a good ol BCG (or whichever flavor you prefer) in the BCH slot.
SPP could F&E Rule (518.46) resolve the issue if the SWAC in question is an E3 Heavy SWAC? In F&E it would be possible for the Federation to have a maximum of 5 squadrons of fighters. 4 from the Third Way (502.93), and 1 squadron of 12 standard (6 Fighter Factors in F&E) from the E3 SWAC.
(518.46) Fighter Control Mission: One (and only one) SWAC in each battle force could be assigned to this mission in a given battle round. The effect is to allow an increase in Federation fighter strength above the normal limit of three squadrons (or of four squadrons in the “Third Way” rules).
Follow up to my previous post.
The BCS contributes 2 squadrons to the CVBG. One of 6 F-14s, One of 6 F-111s.
The SCS contributes 2 squadrons to the CVBG. One of 12 F-14s, one of 6 A-20s.
The E3 controls the squadron of 12 F18s from the SCS.
Thomas Mathews:
Currently in SFB the rules for SWACS (J9.0) and carrier battle groups (S8.283) have no enabling text to allow the situation.
Got another (hopefully quick) question. Just got my copy of G3 and noticed the F-111M listed as 27.5 points with a DFR of -2, but near as I can figure it should be 28.5 and have a DFR of 0? Is the data in G3 correct (and if so, why?) or should it be in the errata? The rules I have for Megapacks would suggest +50% BPV (19x1.5=28.5) and they reduce DFR by 2 but cannot reduce it below 0.
Jamey Johnston:
The dog fight rating issue was reported a while ago in the after action and noted to be fixed (not the only bomber or heavy fighter where that error crept in). No one has previously reported the issue with the BPV, but you are correct that it should be 28.5, and this has been noted to be fixed.
For general scenario victory purposes, my understanding is that General availability drone speed upgrades are included in the value used for calculating victory (ship damaged/disengaged/crippled etc.)
My question has to do with order of operation for swapping in Type-IV drones.
Let's go with a C7 as an example, in a scenario set in Y180. You can (but do not have to) upgrade drones to -F speed for 1 point each, you have 24 spaces with Type-I drones included. So basically you can end up with a BPV anywhere between 180 (no upgrades) to 204 (all drones upgraded to F). If you swap some drones out for Type-IV, is that done first, making the total BPV less? i.e. if you swapped all drones out for Type-IV-F drones only, would the BPV then be 192? This is sort of how I've been assuming that works. But if that's the case, the real question is that if you are using an X-ship, do you reduce the BPV by 1 for each pair of one space drones you swap for a 2 space?
You pay for each space of drones so you do not save by swapping for Type IV drones. You can swap them out later.
Also note that if you play in Y180 you have to pay for fast drones. During transition years between slow and medium (Y166-167) and medium and fast (Y178-179) you have the option to upgrade a percentage of your drones to the newer speed.
Also, I admit I do not remember how many Type-B drone racks a C7 has. If it has four then you do have 24. If it has two then you only pay for the spaces in the racks and not for the reloads. Sorry if that is a superfluous comment.
Also no, you do not reduce the BPV of an X-ship by swapping out drones.
Xenocide:
1) OK you pay by space. I thought that you paid per drone. In a theoretical ship with a theoretical rack that holds only 2 spaces, it would be +2 BPV for fast drones, even if you trade them in for a single Type-IV-F
2) I don't think this is accurate, see FD2.454
3) Yes, sorry should have just said 4x type B racks. So 24 spaces, +24 BPV if using fast drones
4) Noted. Since you pay by space this question was rendered irrelevant 
All this now brings up another question. On a Federation ship with mixed type G and B racks (I'll use the BCG for this example, which has 2 of each), does the ship BPV increase by +20 (to 200) to use Fast drones even if some or all of the spaces of the G racks are ADDs?
IIRC with G racks you pay for the speed upgrades on any spaces that are not ADDs no matter what their size is (dogfight drones, single, or double spaced).
The same holds true with ADD racks where you replace some ADD rounds with dogfight drones.
I do not have my rulebook with me but I am 99.9% certain you cannot voluntarily use slower drones than the year indicates unless you buy extras beyond what are in the racks. There was a discussion years ago over allowing someone to voluntarily use slower drones in certain situations where they might be advantageous like fighting Tholian web or battling in asteroids but that was a special case. I do not recall if it was ever resolved.
X-ships got rid of the problem by allowing you to select from all standard speeds every time you launch a drone.
Makes sense on the G-rack. Really it's just the Type-IV that makes it awkward, because 1/2 space drones speed upgrades are half the price of a 1 space, but 2 space drone speed upgrades are not double.
Your recollection about using slower drones is correct, it's from S2.11, which mentions slower speed drones may be used if tactically appropriate.
And FD2.454 seems to clearly make it optional, this is the relevant sentence from that rule:
"A drone-using ship used during a period when
medium- or high-speed drones are used is not forced to purchase
those faster drones (which in effect increases their BPV)."
And after some digging around in the rulebook, I did actually find the rule reference for one of my original questions, it's:
(FD2.225) When upgrading speed and exchanging sizes of drones,
take the least expensive result.
That means that it isn't based purely on spaces, each swap of two Type-1-Fs for a Type-IV-F would essentially save you 1 BPV. Although I believe that you are right in that this probably does not lower the printed BPV of an X-ship.
So I think I have this right:
A C7 (4x Type B rack) with all Type-I-F drones would be +24 BPV, but if you put a single Type-IV-F into each rack, you would only add +20.
Jamey Johnston:
For a "General Scenario," i.e., one using a "SG" rule number, yes, you can use (FD2.454) and select slower speed drones. Most scenarios that are "historical" (and that includes some "general scenarios" because the opposition did not appear in an earlier period) the rules on drone speeds [usually the (S__.432) rule number] will specify the drone speed. Because the start of the scenario balance point is that the ship had that speed of drones in its racks. Spare drones purchased above that can be that speed or something slower. (Why your C7 was carting around those ancient type-II drones is between you and your supply officer if you choose to use Commander's Option Points in Y188 to purchase type-IIs as spare drones, for example.)
X-ships do not get to availale themselves of "drone point turn-ins" even in a "non-historical general scenario." You can decide to replace your spiffy "X" drones with non-X drones, but you get nothing for it (other than amusing or bemusing your opponent with your peculiar drone selection), your X-ship still costs as a fully functional X-ship as if it was using its spiffy "X" drones. It is an "X" ship.
As to swapping drone frames on your C7, you can swap the type-I drone frames for type-IV drone frames before applying any speed upgrades. See (FD2.225).
I think I have been paying for speed upgrades wrong for over a decade then as I did not take a discount for picking Type IV drones. Then again I rarely use double spaced drones.
Still, oops, sorry for the bad answer there.
Jon Murdock:
In the end, double space drones work best when you have plans and tactics for using them, but in general, when you have a lot of drone launch platforms available, you need to always take at least one, or a few. The point is to never let your opponent think that all drones used by you will be single-space four points to kill 12-point warheads. You want him to be to some degree sweating what the drones are, and calculating how many "identification attempts" he can make with his labs, and perhaps diverting special sensors.
While taking nothing but type-I drones means you have plenty of drone ammunition and taking all type-IVs means you run out faster, it is always best to see him sweating whether or not the drone he did not identify is a type-IV, and maybe diverting more defensive efforts than he should.
So it is almost (to me, anyway) always worthwhile to have a type-IV or two somewhere in the mix (and, yes, sometimes it is best if they are all type-IVs, just depends on what kind of mind game you are playing with your opponent).
I rolled a type-IV out of a G-rack once, and my opponent didn't bother to lab it or shoot since "dogfight drones only do two damage".
An unidentified too-slow drone can also attract a lot of excess phaser fire after your opponent cleverly calculates how many armor modules it must be carrying to move that speed. (Of course, once he figures out you're using antiques and stops annihilating them with alpha strikes, switch in an actual armored beast that will survive a token phaser shot.)