Archive through May 30, 2019
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: Rules Questions:
SFB Rules Q&A:
Archive through May 30, 2019
I echo Richard's sentiments; we've known each other for a long time - I wouldn't say such things to a stranger. He knows that it's all good humor.
No offense offered and none taken.
And SPP is right - it's easy to misapprehend when all you can see is a cold word on the screen.
Likewise, while I've not met any of you personally, I still regard you all as friends and would not deliberately say anything to hurt any of you.
(The ships you're flying, on the other hand... 
IMO, we're a community with the singular identifiable characteristic of an appreciation for a particular game universe. We share with each other the particulars of our mutual passion and, at least for me, I take joy in the exuberance I read in the posts we share.
(... And at this point, I can almost hear someone shouting, "ANDERSON, THE THESAURUS IS NOT A CLASS OF GORN SHIP!!" )
On a more serious note, it was with that exuberance that I posted my thoughts about the limited escorts, Charles. I didn't really mean anything by it; it was just "One of those Tangents" that, due to my personal peculiarities, I'm prone to going off on. At worst, it was meant as nothing more than playing "Devil's Advocate," and I hope the self-deprecating humor I (try to) put in a good number of my posts helps to convey a desire for friendship within the community.
Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say I am friends with someone just because we post in the same community.
Generally some sort of friendship requires more interaction than that.
Respectfully, Richard...
We're gamers.
How much real interaction do we have with people?
Seriously, I understand why you wouldn't go so far, but as I've posted before, I'm just kind of an oddball who sees things with a different view, and yes, I do regard you, and everyone else who posts on these boards as friends.
Does that mean if any of you who posts on these boards is going to be visiting my neck of the woods, I'd be happy to pick you up from the airport and let you stay at my place while you're here, even if your plans are just to do "Touristey Stuff," and at most I'll serve as a taxi?
Actually, yes it does; I've done it before.
I dunno about you, but I have a lot of interaction with people. Sometimes too much, really.
Costco doesn't count.
Perhaps, Glenn, perhaps not...
From my own experiences, I HATE the uncomfortable feeling of people staring at the back of my head.
(Correction: I hate the feeling that I'm THINKING people are staring at the back of my head; there is a difference...)
Anyway, to avoid that, whenever I'm in line (and you KNOW you wait in line at the Costco check-out ), I will almost invariably start chatting with the folks behind me, usually starting with a joke, maybe make some comment about a headline on one of the tabloids (if at a grocery store). The small talk is usually punctuated by laughter and it makes for a pleasant wait.
It was in that vein that I posted the comment above as much as it was the stereotype of gamers.
I went into costco once and experienced anxiety for the first time in my life (except when I had to deal with heights). Never will go there again.
But, I suppose you're right. To each their own.
Question re cancellation of an ESG field.
Looking at G23.33, says a cancellation must be done on the impulse before its released.
If not done before imp 4 [within 1st 3 imps of announcmenet] , the ESG must be released on imp 4 or can it be cancelled on imp 4 anyway during ESG stage ?
Thanks
Cheers
Frank
Exactly what it says on the tin man.
It says 'before', so 3 is before 4, but 4 is not before 4.
Was just relaxing with Module J and a question came to my (alleged) mind...
Hypothetical situation...
Dogfight. For sake of this presentation, let's say it's a Z-1 in a dogfight against an SAS. Both shuttles have "Good" pilots.
The Z-1 player announces his/her attempt to breakaway (J7.711)
The SAS player, having managed to get IN to a dogfight set-up does NOT wish to Breakaway.
Dice are rolled. Z-1 player rolls a 5. Modifiers are...
... Pilot Rating: 0
... Shuttle Dogfight Rating: +2
... Speed Rating: 0
... Special Rating: +2
Overall rating: 9
SAS player rolls a 3. Modifiers are...
... Pilot Rating: 0
... Shuttle Dogfight Rating: +3
... Speed Rating :+3
... Special Rating: +0
Overall rating: 9
Per Chart (J7.66), BOTH shuttles are Advantaged.
HOWEVER, because the Z-1 pilot delcared his/her intent to Breakaway, per rule (J7.711), he/she MUST Breakaway.
Maybe it's just me missing something, but are the effects of rule (J7.662), the "Head On Encounter" still in effect as the Z-1 pilot (in this case) is executing his/her separation maneuver, or does (J7.71) take precedence?
In other words, does the potential for a head-on collision remain? Is the SAS permitted a parting shot?
Or, in this case, is the Z-1 permitted to escape by the skin of his/her teeth, relatively unmolested?
It's kind of an idle question for me (not once in over thirty five years of SFB have I ever used rule J7), but it is something that kind of jumped out at me.
My intuition says the Z-1 can escape unmolested, but is likely to be challenged again VERY soon by the SAS...
Jeffrey George Anderson:
Per (J7.662), after the head-on encounter is resolved the Z-1 can breakaway. Rule (J7.71) requires the Z-1 to have the advantage, but both were advantaged, resulting in "0" head on pass which basically means neither had the advantage. But you are going to have to resolve the head-on pass.
Separate AFTER the head-on encounter.
Makes sense.
Ironically, if I understand the rules correctly, it just may have been better if the player flying the Z-1 had rolled a 4 instead of the 5...
... IF I understand things correctly.
As I understand it, if they survived the possibility of a head-on collision (as per rule J7.6621), then they may try to shoot eachother. Phaser fire is resolved under rules (J7.52) and (J7.662) as...
Die roll 1-3: 4 damage points
Die roll 4: 3 damage points
Die roll 5: 2 damage points
Die roll 6: 1 damage point
Also, per rule (J7.53), the SAS may fire ONE of its type VI drones, which would hit on a die roll of 1-4, but the Z-1, would NOT be able to launch one of its drones in its own defense (unless it were loaded with type VI instead of the chart listed type I; something I personally DON'T see happening).
On the other hand, had the player flying the Z-1 rolled a 4 instead of a 5, s/he may not have been able to separate, but would have been in a MUCH better position in the fight; their rear phaser would have been able to fire according to chart with rule (J7.663) exactly as per the chart listed above, giving them a 50% chance of crippling the SAS.
Meanwhile, the SAS would have only a 1 in 6 chance of hitting with the Type-VI drone, and its phaser would only do 2 points of damage on a die roll of 1, 1 point of damage on a die roll of 2, and would have missed altogether on a die roll of 3 or more.
Under those circumstances, the best option for the player flying the SAS would have been to let the Z-1 separate.
Jeffrey George Anderson:
If you are going to get into a dogfight, you better weigh the risks carefully.
Agreed.
Indeed, ANY time you get into a fight of ANY sort, the risks have to be weighed carefully.
At any rate, the whole "Z-1 vs. SAS" got me thinking of what it might take to have such a dogfight, and from there came a potential story idea...
It revolves around the captain of a Kzinti CVE during the early days of the General War trying to interdict Klingon supply lines in his people's space. With only SAS aboard (the AAS, with their Type I drones, would probably have been more useful, but they're also more useful for other, bigger carriers), he figures he'll have to rely on his ships guns more than the fighters.
Anyway, he runs into a lone F-S. Thinking it an easy kill, he moves in, only to have it start disgorging Z-1 fighters. Knowing such a carrier MIGHT be used as part of a planetary assault, and thinking that alone made it worth risking his ship to kill, he moves in for the fight.
Given the relative comparisons between the two ships, IMO, the best option for the Kzinti would be to have their fighters, once launched, engage in erratic maneuvers while maintaining some better distance from the ship, only dropping the EM to fly in and swat down a Klingon drone that might be getting too close.
Meanwhile, the CVE itself uses ECM to protect itself while retrograding and using long-ranged, perhaps 9 to 12 hexes would give the best exchange, to damage/wear down the Z-1 fighters and sandpaper the AuxCVLs shields.
The only time to charge in would be when the Z-1 fighters numbers had been reduced, and those remaining were already damaged. THEN, perhaps, the SAS would form a wedge to protect the CVE as it charged in. The Z-1s might opt for a closer ranged Ph-2 shot at the carrier, but those which delay to get a REAL close shot would be challenged to dogfights as a way of keeping them occupied while the CVE flew by them unmolested...
(At least, that's something I think MIGHT be a reasonable use of the (J7) rules...)
Okay, it undoubtedly has tons of holes in it, but if y'all have skilled writers who are looking for ideas and you think this screwball one has potential (and yes, I know that's a LOT of VERY iffy iffs), feel free to toss it around.
Hello a couple of questions on fighter and carrier operations.
Is there a limit to # of fighters an Uhlan Carrier can recover a turn, an impulse?
I just read all of J1.6 and I don't see anything that details any limitations in number of fighters, just the usual, speed etc. restrictions. By reading the rules literally, it means that if all 16 figthers are in hex of uhlan and the fighters are same or slower speed than Uhlan, all 16 could land same impulse? Not sure if that is right so want to clarify.
What is the ratio of ST-H to ST-2 on an Uhlan?
The SSD shows 4 STH. Is that the limit?
Also the ever present what Hydran ships can buy deck crews question.
The Uhlan clearly can buy limit of 4 deck crews with CO's.
I believe it was determined recently that a hybrid carrier (Hydran DE+ in this case) can also buy deck crews using CO's?
Thanks,
Jarod
Jarod Ikeda:
I am away from the office, so I will have to verify these provisional responses on the morrow.
The Uhlan I think has a single bay that is a "tunnel deck," meaning it has two hatches for normal launch and land operations. Each hatch can either launch or land a shuttle/fighter every two impulses. Thus an Uhlan can land two fighters every two impulses.
The number of Stinger-H facilities shown on the SSD is the limit. You can convert Stinger-H facilities to Stinger-2 facilities, but you cannot convert Stinger-2 facilities to Stinger-H facilities.
Yes, Hydran hybrid carriers can purchase the allowed four extra deck crews.
The Uhlan has two bays and can land a shuttle in each bay on any impulse for a total of two. Note the (J1.50) restriction requiring an impulse without launching or landing after landing so that landing all the fighters will take most of a turn.
The number of ST-H shown on the SSD is the maximum; (R9.F4) has a note to that effect.
I will leave the deck crew question to others.
Jarod Ikeda:
As noted in previous posts, my memory is not what it was.
Richard Wells is correct that the Uhlan has two bays (not the tunnel deck I thought). Basically every shuttle bay comes with one (1) hatch unless the ship description (which includes notes under the admin shuttle tracks on the SSD) says otherwise. So if a ship has three shuttle bays, each bay has one hatch, for a total of three, but each hatch is dedicated to its one bay. If a ship has three bays, and bay #1 can hold one shuttle, and bay #2 can hold five shuttles, and bay #3 can hold five shuttles, you can land three shuttles every two impulses ONCE (once bay #1 landed its shuttle it has no room for additional shuttles short of overcrowding). You cannot continue landing three shuttles every two impulses claiming there are three hatches because bay #1 only has space for one shuttle. By the same token, if you needed to land five shuttles, and bays #1 and #2 were already full, it is going to take you 10 impulses to land the five shuttles into the empty bay #3.
Thanks everyone for the responses.
I recall an every other impulse rule for launching shuttles, but couldn't find the same every other impulse restriction on landing a shuttle.
Where is theblanding restriction in the rulebook please?
(J1.50) LAUNCH RATE
This is a cut and paste from the eMRB, not shouting.
A. David Merritt is correct. The text of rule (J1.50) begins "A given shuttle bay may not launch or recover more than one shuttle during any given impulse or two consecutive impulses, except as specified herein or in the individual ship descriptions." Thus any given hatch (there are some exceptions such as the very large hatch on the back end of the Federation CVA) can in any given period of two impulses land (recover) one shuttle or launch one shuttle. It cannot do both operations during any two consecutive impulses.
There ARE exceptions other than hatch size, that is to say an enemy shuttle crashlanding aboard your ship is not bound by when you last landed (or launched) one of your own shuttles and can do so on the same impulse you are performing those operations (J1.634).
Thank you David and Steve. My apologies for missing J1.50. From memory I knew launch was only every other impulse, but didn't realize the recover rule was in the launch section.
Drogues...
came up in a game. You can not buy a drone drogue unless your ship uses drones. As i read the rules that is correct.
Plasma ships use the plasma D drogue are the heavy plasma F drogue.
Can any plasma ship use a plasma D drogue? even one with out plasma Ds?
can any plasma ship use the plasma F drogue? Even one who does not have plasma Fs are even plasma such as a Mauler are a scout?
On OEW..
A ship is cloaked. Enemy ships are going to over run cloaked ship. A non cloaked scout gives OEW to the enemy ships. They fire on the cloaked ship. Does the firing ships get a EW modifier firing at the cloaked ship?