Archive through March 25, 2019
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: Rules Questions:
SFB Rules Q&A:
Archive through March 25, 2019
As noted, I was wrong to say that the Hydran Hybrid ships cannot buy extra deck crews.
Rule (R9.R4) does not preclude them from doing so, it only precludes them from operating heavy fighters and says that they do not need to be escorted.
There is no rule that I can find that says specifically that hybrid ships cannot buy deck crews. Neither (J4.816) or (S3.2) provides such a prohibition.
Rule (R9.R4) is pretty clear that Hydran Hybrid ships are carriers, except that they cannot use heavy fighters, and do not need escorts.
I wish I had a 100% track record, but I am human and sometimes make a mistake. I do have a track record of admitting when I am wrong and trying to fix my mistakes.
So if you can show me a rule at this juncture that says I was right when I said Hybrid ships could not buy deck crews, I will admit I am wrong in acknowledging my apparent error in saying they could not.
But (R9.R4) supports that they can, and while (J4.623) comes under the sub heading of "casual carriers," it is at pains to say that Hydran hybrid ships are carriers, not casual carriers.
As to your disengagement question, I believe Wayne Douglas Power has answered.
Thanks Steve
I think D17.71 should be part on the D3.0 rules at the same level as the Maximum/minimum/no sheilds rules. It is one of the few realistic way to protect a weak sheild from the devastating effect oh HB's.
Just food for thought
Marcel
Hi Steve,
Thanks for clarifying. My apologies if my post came off negative. I was just confused because I thought Hydran Hybrids could actually buy deck crews for exactly the reasons you state. Now its clear. As a Hydran player in a campaign, this is very good news for weapons status 1 and 2 situations.
Hi Wayne and Steve,
Sorry for missing the g7.28 section. Didn't think to look under the tractor section, just read the disengagement section multiple times and couldn't figure it out.
Thanks.
Jarod
Hello another question:
Can Kzinti ships buy UIM's with CO's?
Jarod,
in Annex #6 Commanders Options you can only purchase extra UIM Modules for ships that already have UIM.
Note that only Kzinti X-ships have UIMs. Other Kzinti units do not.
Confirm on UIMs. Basically only the Klingons, Lyrans, LDR, WYNs and Orions use UIMs outside of X-Technology. The Kzintis and Tholians only get them with X-Technology.
Question re phaser caps.
CA has 6 phaser 1s so a cap of 6.
Situation A,
It takes a blast and loses 3 phaser 1s but fires nothing in return.
Cap is now at 3 I believe ?
Situation B,
Same CA loses 3 unfired phaser 1s on LS but fires 2 RS phasers that were not destroyed.
Cap is now at 1 I think ?
Thanks.
Cheers
Frank
I'm pretty sure that's the case as well.
Total Phaser capacitor capacity is enough to fire every phaser on the ship for a full turn; one point of capacity for each Phaser 1, Phaser 2, and Phaser G, one half point for each Phaser 3, and two points for each Phaser 4.
The destruction of a Phaser results in the loss of Phaser Capacitor equal to the amount that the lost Phaser requires to fire for the turn.
I do have a question of my own regarding capacitance and loss due to damage...
The situation is similar to what Francois presented; a Federation CA has a total of six Phaser ones. During a fight, it starts a turn with its capacitors fully charged. During that particular turn, it fires its two LF+L Phaser 1s at a target. It is then hit by a Hellbore volley that penetrates the #3 shield. Damage allocated says it loses two phasers. The only phasers in the arc the damage came in from are the two RF+R Phaser-1s.
Assuming no other damage, at this point, does the ship have two points of power remaining in a four point Capacitor, or can the ship have FOUR points of power in its four point Capacitor?
My intuition says it reasonably should be the former, but we all know how valuable those extra two points of power can be... 
The phaser capacitor has a capacity of 6 in your example, regardless of firing phasers of that capacitor.
Destruction of any phaser on the CA in your example reduces the capacitor capacity by one.
Firing phasers does not reduce the capacity, only the power left in the capacitor.
You can always assume the empty capacitor space is destroyed first. Specific capacitor space is not really associated with specific phasers. See rule H6.3.
Francois Situation B: depends on the order. If you first lost 3 phasers to damage (3 pts left in capacitor), then fired 2 phasers, you would have 1 pt left in the capacitor. If you fire 2 at the same time as (or before) you lose 3 phasers to damage, then you would have 3 pts left in the capacitor.
Jeffrey: You would have 4 pts left in the capacitor. You fire 2 phasers (4 pts left in capacitor), then lose 2 phasers to damage, you can assume the lost capacity is what was already fired. So you are left with 4 pts in the capacitor.
Each phaser contributes capacitor space, but you don't need to keep track of which capacitor element goes with which phaser, it is all one capacitor, and the energy can slosh around wherever it has space to go.
Situation B is not clear. Were the phasers destroyed on the same impulse that your phasers were fired or were they fired later.
If the capacitor was full at 6 and you fire 2 and 3 are destroyed on the same impulse you have 3 points left in the capacitor (2 were fired and 1 was lost as the capacitor it no longer big enough).
If the weapons were fired after the damage was sustained you have 1 point left (3 points lost in damage and 2 used).
Francois Lemay:
I can confirm what has been said, with one caveat.
If the ship has six phasers, and three of them are fired, then the capacitor is still holding (assuming it was fully charged beforehand) three points of energy. If you then lose three phasers, you can choose to lose the lost capacitor capacity as three empty, two empty and one powered, one empty and two powered, or all three of the powered elements.
There is a fairly obscure reason why you might choose to lose the powered part of the capacitor (honestly), but I am only mentioning that you do have the choice to lose the powered parts of the capacitor so that the answer is complete.
Why exaclty would you choose to lose a powered part of a capacitor?
Sounds like a good term paper submission.
I know SPP is always looking for more...
I thought the idea was part of Andro tactics. Lose a powered portion of the capacitor to reserve capacity to transfer power out of the batteries freeing up a little room in the batteries.
Most likely requires a very unusual set of conditions where the Andro fired phasers on the same impulse the Andro loses phasers and there is enough Andro left after damage to shuffle power out of the batteries.
Like I said, fairly obscure, but Richard Wells got it.
EDIT: To be clear, this concept only really matters when the damage is taken on Impulse #32. If an Andromedan takes damage in the middle of a turn, and decides he wants to empty some power from the batteries by firing phasers, he can simply fire the phasers from the batteries under (H6.22). The thing is that while phasers are subject to being used only once in a given turn, and not within a quarter turn of a previous turn, phaser capacitors are not.
Thanks SPP and all !
I have been playing it all wrong.
When my 6 phaser capacitor CA lost 3 unfired phasers to damage and fired 3 undamaged phasers, I accounted for 6 power used from my capacitor giving me an empty capacitor instead of the 3 it now seems I get !
All that extra power now !!!!!!!!!
Sweet !
Thanks again !
Cheers
frank
Francois Lemay:
As has been noted, sequence matters.
If on Impulse #3 your capacitors are full and you fire three phaser-1s, and on that same impulse you have three phaser-1s destroyed, yes, you can choose to lose the three points of capacitor that you just emptied.
If on Impulse #3 you take damage that destroys three phaser-1s, and your capacitor was full, you lost three charged capacitor points, and on Impulse #4 when you fire the remaining three phaser-1s, your capacitors will then be empty.
If on Impulse #3 your capacitors are full and you fire three phaser-1s, your capacitor would then be half empty. If on Impulse #4 you take damage that destroys three of your phasers, you can choose to lose the three empty capacitor points, so you still have three points of power in your capacitor. This is true whether the three lost phasers were the ones you fired on Impulse #3, or are the three you have not fired yet, or any combination of the two (two fired phasers and one unfired phaser lost, or two unfired phasers and one fired phaser lost).
In short, when you lose phasers, it is always your choice if the lost phaser capacitor capacity is the empty part, or the still powered part.
As noted, about the only time someone will choose to lose a powered part of a phaser capacitor (when a choice is available) is an Andromedan that is looking to get energy out of his panels at the start of the next turn and needs someplace to drop battery power to make more room to do so.
Noted re sequence of damage.
Thanks so much !
Cheers
Frank
Question re Klingon Deep Space Fleet [DSF] and Internal Security Forces[ ISF].
I see some smaller ships are listed as being in ISF service. When these ships get called up to help the DSF and figured for deep space use, is there a cost to do so ?
Example, E3 has R10 disruptors in ISF but R15 in DSF
The cost, if any, to get the extra 5 hex range is ?
Thanks.
Cheers
Frank
IIRC, Frank, the MSC has separate sections for DSF and ISF. There ought to be different BPV in each section, if there is a difference.
Waitaminit... Lemme get off my lazy keester and get it...
Lessee... ISF E3... Here it is... 42 BPV.
HEY!! I think I just figured out what the ultimate question of Life, the Universe, and EVERYTHING is!!
()
Okay, okay... DSF E3... Also listed as 42. However, the right most column has a note identifying her as an ISF ship, so maybe there's something to that. Lemme check the E4 for both...
Regular E4 is listed as 55 points and the E4I is listed as 50. I don't have my SSDs handy. Is there some other difference between those two ships? I don't remember any off the top of my head.
What does the F5 say? Lessee... 71 and 68 for standard and ISF.
Hey, Frank, it looks like there really IS a small difference, possibly due to disruptor range. Then again, does the Empire allow ISF to have UIM or DERFACS (not that the latter would be used on these ships)?
Another thing to think about is whether the ships would be modified to DSF standards if/when the Empire orders them transferred from the ISF. My guess is no.
Here's why...
By its very nature, I'd be inclined to think that such a call-up would be done only as an emergency, such as if the mothballed reserve can't be called up quickly enough. As such, any updating that MIGHT be done would be done on the ships being activated from mothballs, instead of pulling the ISF ships into otherwise crowded docks for this sort of modification.
On top of that, who's minding the unwashed masses if the ISF ships are being used in that role? For this reason, I'm guessing that any transfers from ISF to DSF would be on a short term basis.
This is, however, just a guess on my part, and I'm (very) often wrong, so PLEASE don't take my word on it. However, if it seems reasonable, please feel free to take credit for it within your group...
Cheers
Jeff
Thanks Jeff. Still not sure if there is a cost difference or not ?
One other question re drone control now.
A Free Trader installs a drone rack .
How many drones can it control , six or 3 ?
I seem to recall freighters with drone racks installed can only control 3 since rack is not part of original ship !?
Thanks.
Cheers
Frank
Well, Frank, there's nothing specific in the ship description, so I'm thinking that the general rule would apply.
The rule in question (F3.211) says that ships without drones or plasma torpedoes can only control a number of seeking weapons equal to half their sensor rating, and that anti-drones don't qualify as a type of drone for this purpose.
Perhaps wrongly, but with regards to the Free Trader itself, I've been under the impression that the "Optional Weapon Mount" doesn't represent a "Modular Weapon," but is supposed to represent there being a number of different models of Free Trader, and their self-defense capabilities are one of those differences between models.
For that reason, I would assume that a Free Trader that has a drone rack in its option mount has a fire control system that's able to control a full six drones, where one that has a phaser has a different model of fire control system; one that can only control three.
(Again, PLEASE don't just accept what I say; I'm wrong FAR too often. )
You can look at the empire specific ship descriptions in the Master Starship Books and you will see in the case of the Free Traders that if a seeking weapon is taken in an option mount the ship can control six seeking weapons under (F3.21), but if it does not then it can control three seeking weapons under (F3.211).
Thanks SPP [ and Jeff ! ]
Reposting my question re the Klingon ISF and DSF cost difference if any.
Thanks.
Cheers
Frank
*********************
Question re Klingon Deep Space Fleet [DSF] and Internal Security Forces[ ISF].
I see some smaller ships are listed as being in ISF service. When these ships get called up to help the DSF and figured for deep space use, is there a cost to do so ?
Example, E3 has R10 disruptors in ISF but R15 in DSF
The cost, if any, to get the extra 5 hex range is ?