Archive through June 09, 2020
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: Rules Questions:
SFB Rules Q&A:
Archive through June 09, 2020
Wayne Douglas Power:
The mine damages the shield that is facing the mine as the first sentence of (M2.501) says. The ship in hex 0902A will be damaged on its #5 shield, the ship which triggered the mine will be damaged on its #2 Shield, as its #2 shield is facing the mine in hex 0820 when it entered hex 0721A.
Macel Trahan:
You were exposed as a Q-ship when the armor was hit. If the damage was small enough, you might avoid exposing the ship with shield reinforcement, but once the shield goes down and armor is hit, the game is up.
Question regarding a PFT and its PF's in a patrol scenario.
When you buy a PFT, you use the economic value of the PFT. What about the PFS/PFL/PF. which value do you use? Economical for all of them, economical for PFS and combat for the other PF or combat BPV for all of them?
Steve Petrick:
Thank you for the answer on mine explosion and shield facing. The campaign I am involved in is doing the mine damage correctly as you have noted.
(I was a little confused with mine hex and mine detection zone)
All good
Found an answer to my multiple power grid questions.
Demorak's planetary defenses (as described in Module C3A) include two planetary hexsides that each have multiple power grids (each hexside had 8 bases organized into 2 power grids).
Marcel Trahan:
Economic for the PFS, combat for the rest.
Douglas Saldana:
There is no set limit by rule on ground bases on a hexside. It is mostly a matter of the scenario design. There are guiding principles. Demorak is a minor planet in Federation and Empire, but also a capital planet, which lets it beat the limit for a minor planet. Defenses should reflect the importance of the planet and not exceed what Federation and Empire allows.
Question regarding HN and OL status.
By putting 2 points of power in a Hell Nipper, you get the extended range.
When firing at SC 6 and 7 units with a HN with 2 points of power in it, do you roll on the 2 power line and the cost of each HN shot becomes 0.5 instead of 0.25 or do you use the 1 power line at the cost of 0.25? Can a HN be used on SC 6 & 7 at extended range?
Rule is not clear about OL HN and SC 6&7 in the rulebook.
Marcel Trahan:
The Heel Nipper cannot be overloaded (E24.37).
The additional point of power only allows the Heel Nipper to engage targets at Range 2 (E24.211) in addition to Range 1.
Each such shot requires that the Heel Nipper expend 0.25 points of energy, and can only be used against size class 6 and 7 targets.
So, to make sure that i understand correctly;
If i put 2 points of power in an HN, i can fire it 4 times per turn at SC 6 & 7 using the (power 2) line instead of the (power 1) line at the cost of 0.25 per shot
If i put 1 point of power in an HN, i can fire it 4 times per turn at SC 6 & 7 using the (power 1) line at the cost of 0.25 per shot
Marcel Trahan:
Yep.
Under annex 6, we can buy additional BP's, commandos and heavy weapons squads.
Are we allowed to by 10 extra Boarding parties, 2 additional Commandos and 4 additional Heavy Weapons squads?
Are the additional Commandos and/or Heavy Weapons squads part of the 10 BP limit or in extra?
Marcel Trahan:
You can buy a maximum of 14 extra boarding parties, provided two of the extra boarding parties are commando squads and two of the extra boarding parties are heavy weapons squads squads.
Or Engineers. IIRC, engineers can replace HWS.
AND if you are aiming for a "board and capture" attempt, engineers can help a lot. Personally I wish they had some other extra thingy.
And if using Advance Boarding Party combat, they get to shine!
Yes, 10 BPs, 2 Engineers, and 2 Heavy Weapons can make up the 14 maximum.
Wayne Douglas Power:
No. Engineers count against the limit of heavy weapon squads, not against the limit on Commando Squads.
J16.22 says "The dogfight rating of a megafighter is reduced by two points, but not less than zero."
Module G3's Master Fighter Chart lists the megafighter versions of fighters as having a DFR that drops below zero if the fighter has a DFR of 1 or 0.
For instance, the A-10 has a DFR of 1, but the A-10M has a DFR of -1.
My reading of J16.22 tells me that an A-10M should have a dogfight rating of 0. Am I mistaken? Is G3 in error?
Shawn Gordon:
The rule is correct. The Module G3 entries are in error and a result of my not checking the rule when I was doing the chart. I have marked it to be updated in Module G4. This is a known error and was admitted at the time.
A question regarding PA panels & transporters.
Can an Andromedan ship pick up a crew unit or an object using its own transporter from a planet or through a down shield from a galactic base without dropping its panel or do they have to drop their panels to be able to transport something in?
Marcel
Steve Petrick:
Thank you for the correction.
(going to the booth now, to learn to remember to check rules before posting).
All good
Good question, Marcel. Rule (D10.525) says, "Andromedan ships can use transporters... to carry out hit-and-run raids (D7.8), with their PA panels active."
It later on says, "If an Andromedan ship were allied to a Galactic ship, the Andromedan ship could use its transporters to move people or objects between ships; otherwise it would have to drop a bank of panels to allow the Galactic ship to use its own transporters."
From these, it appears that, yes, Andromedans can pick up a crw unit or an object using their own transporters from a planet or through a down shield from a galactic base without dropping its panels.
Note the word "allied." They can help but can't kidnap or steal.
An Andromedan can carry out normal transporter operations through its PA Panels. The cannot carry out normal transporter operations through the PA panels of another Andromedan ship. To transport with another Andromedan requires that BOTH use their transporters to transport a single object/boarding party/crew unit, etc. An Andromedan hit-and-run raid may require than something be brought back (command crew for questioning/eating, after all, no one knows what happens to them, or technology to be examined or eaten, maybe Andromedans have interesting diets?). In any case, the question of hit-and-run raids through PA panels was addressed a long time ago in the scenario "A Visitor From Andromeda" which includes hit-and-run raids to capture command crews.
It is not, however, addressed in the rules that Galactic Transporters can cooperate with Andromedan transporters, but I tend to think not. For a Galactic to board and Andromedan ship (or provide something to an Andromedan ship) with its own transporters requires the Andromedan to drop facing PA panels, or to use its own Transporters.
I have a question regarding special sensors and a unit that does not have labs, IE Andro SAT. Can the SAT use 1 bridge as a lab in conjunction with a special sensor to do G24.25 Identifying seeking weapons?
Can a special sensor be used to give O-EW to a plasma torpedoes that has its own tracking?
Marcel
Marcel, the ship description for the Eel (R10.16; Module C2) states (in part), "The Eel can use both bridge boxes as labs; this is an exception to (G4.31)."
I could find nothing in the rules in either Lab Substitutions (G4.3) or Identifying Seeking Weapons and Shuttles (G24.25) that would prohibit Andromedan "Labless" Sat Ships from using their Special Sensors in accordance with (G24.25).
The only limitations I could see were if the Andromedan needed to use their "Emergency Labs" for other purposes on that turn, such as (D14.0) Emergency Damage Repair.
As far as using a Special Sensor to "Loan" OEW to a Plasma Torpedo that has its own tracking, the only reference I could find was that "A scout cannot lend EW points to a seeking weappon (even a seeking shuttle), but can lend ECCM to the unit guiding that seeking weapon" (G24.214). Maybe it's just because I'm half asleep, but that looks like a blanket prohibition on loaning to ANY seeking weapon, whether it's controlled by another unit or if it's on its own tracking.
HOWEVER, I'm most definitely NOT an expert. If anyone out there knows better, please feel free to make me look like a second-rate idiot. 
Marcel Trahan:
I would point out that a Scout is allowed to lend itself ECM (if it were the target), and a scout can lend ECM to the unit the seeking weapon is targeted on (if other than the scout). So there is not much need to lend OEW to the seeking weapon.
And it avoids the nastiness of "Lend OEW to the Controlling Unit, lend OEW to the Seeking Weapon, Lend ECM to the Target, Target generates six points of ECM" such that the seeking weapon has 24 points of EW to penetrate, but has its own three points of ECCM reducing this to 21 points and the controlling unit has six points of ECCM so it is reduced to 15 points of ECCM, but is also being lent six points of ECCM, so it is reduced to nine points of ECM, and six points of ECCM is lent to the seeking weapon so it has three points of ECM to still penetrate.
Seeking weapons cannot be lent EW, but their controlling unit can and their targets can..
SO,
If you are a plasma ship launching a plasma and that you are receiving O-EW from an enemy scout, it is better to just release the plasma to its own tracking, since your seeking weapon is now not affected by the offensive EW generated by the enemy scout. And then, the scout O-EW has no effect anymore. It makes O-EW almost useless against plasma races for countering heavy weapons. I think it should be allowed to lend O-EW to a seeking weapon that has its own tracking since the launching ship is not guiding it anymore.
I am still waiting for an answer regarding the use of labs in conjunction with Special Sensors as requested earlier for ships without lab and with Special Sensors