SPP,

Shouldn't the 170 upgrade be to Plasma-S..
Expect a typing error there....

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, July 07, 2020 - 04:45 pm: Edit

Jeff Anderson:

Rule (R13.R3) includes the following sentence: "(It appears that the ISC ships always had swivel mounts.)"

The phaser-3 Refits began in Y165, and the prototype of this class would have appeared in Y166. It is possible that a ship appeared without the refit (which ran from Y165 to Y168 at which point it was standard).

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, July 07, 2020 - 05:05 pm: Edit

Mark S. Hoyle:

Edited the message, was obviously interrupted in mid typing as I was saying "upgraded to plasm-Ss" and "ungraded the plasma-Gs to plasma-Ss," so I edited to say "Upgraded the plasma-Gs to plasma-Ss."

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Tuesday, July 07, 2020 - 06:56 pm: Edit

SPP, weren't the rear firing Plas-Fs restricted to the L+LR/RR+R arcs??

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, July 07, 2020 - 07:04 pm: Edit

Stewart Frazier:

Yes, just been so long since I played an ISC ship (or against one) and my memory is not what it was. I have edited the message to correct the firing arcs.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, July 08, 2020 - 01:26 pm: Edit

@SPP: Out of curiosity, did you find a published rule on the fact that fighters effectively have fixed rails (track FA but launch out of the nose)?

If not, suggest that a clarifying rule be provided in J4.21 to indicate that a seeking weapon always has a fixed launcher (must be placed in the same direction as the fighter).

Thanks,
-T

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, July 08, 2020 - 02:20 pm: Edit

Ted Fay:

As noted, I took the issue to SVC, and got a ruling, and at some point we will include it in an updated rule, but for now the ruling is the ruling. As I noted, no one asked that in the previous 40 years. Some players assumed the fixed nature from the explanation, and some went with the general rules, and each group did not think to ask if they were right or wrong. So finally, we had the question, and I could not find an answer and went to SVC, and before I could explain my own interpretation, he responded that the fixed launch was correct, so as I noted he was not influenced by my own interpretation (however much my opinion was in alignment with his response).

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, July 08, 2020 - 03:05 pm: Edit

SPP: Thank you. Just to be clear, the only real question at this point was whether my rule search was thorough enough; it appears that it was. I look forward to the next update with the published clarification.

-T

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, July 08, 2020 - 04:08 pm: Edit

I thought it obvious that if I went to SVC for a ruling, it indicates that my own search for an definitive answer met with no success, and that whatever research you had done, I had to do my own before I would go see SVC.

By Peter DiMitri (Pdimitri) on Friday, July 10, 2020 - 10:22 am: Edit

(S4.12)


• Carriers may have completed two turn’s activity by their deck crews,and two of their fighters may be launched and placed on the board within two hexes of the carrier as a Combat Space Patrol. If fighters are deployed, the fighters and the ship must have the same facing and the speed of the ship on the “previous turn” cannot exceed the maximum speed of the fighters.

Are these 2 fighters assumed to only have 2 turns of Deck Crew Activity, meaning that they aren't fully armed even if they are on Combat Space Patrol? Or are they fully armed?

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Friday, July 10, 2020 - 11:13 am: Edit

I believe the CSP can be fully armed.

By Peter DiMitri (Pdimitri) on Friday, July 10, 2020 - 01:58 pm: Edit

Fighters armed with Plasma D and plasma F are already armed under weapons status 2 and 3. If the carrier in question also has the Sabot refit for its ready racks, is the initial load of the fighters also assumed to have Sabot?

If they have to pay to arm it, it would make the sabot on plasma fighters really hard to use, just looking at the numbers of fighters and D and F torps.

(FP11.213) Ships never enter a scenario with sabot torpedoes loaded.

I note that it says ships, not fighters. Any clarification would be appreciated.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, July 10, 2020 - 02:22 pm: Edit

Peter DiMitri:

In response to your first query:

The Combat Space Patrol is fully armed, and your remaining deck crews have two turns of deck crew activity, which means if the carrier had eight fighters and you bought the maximum four extra deck crews with commander's option points that each fighter remaining on the carrier can have four (4) deck actions completed (six fighters each with two deck crews working on them for two turns).

If you did not buy the extra deck crews, then the remaining six fighters can have a total of 16 deck crew actions performed on them before the scenario starts (Eight Deck Crews times two turns equals 16 actions on the six remaining fighters).

Note that the fighter ready racks for the two fighters on combat space patrol are empty, and you might (in either case) direct some of the deck crew actions to reaming one of both of the ready racks of those fighters.

As to your second question, the combat space patrol fighters are fully armed and can have sabots, but the ready racks are not armed with sabot torpedoes, and if at WS-III with all of the fighters armed they are not armed with sabots unless you apply the power to them before they launch. Note that special scenario rules can change this, and obviously if Sabot torpedoes are available and the scenario begins with all the fighters launched (or arriving on the map for a strike) they can be armed with sabots.

By Peter DiMitri (Pdimitri) on Friday, July 10, 2020 - 02:32 pm: Edit

SPP:

Thank you so much for your quick reply!

By Peter DiMitri (Pdimitri) on Friday, July 10, 2020 - 05:26 pm: Edit

As a follow up, would the fighters on combat space patrol also be able to have additional stuff like fighter pods on them? For instance, extra EW pods.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, July 10, 2020 - 06:04 pm: Edit

Peter DiMitri:

The ready racks have the fighter pods for the fighter pod rails and are loaded with them. At WS-III you can have a fully armed Stinger-F, i.e, the Stinger-F may have just two pods which might be EW pods, or might be phaser pods or ground assault pods or cargo pods. But a Z-YCM at WS-III is going to have eight (8) rails. Two of the rails might have type-IIIMW drones, or type-I drones, or type-VI drones or Pods. Four of the rails might have type-I drones or type-VI drones, or pods, and two of the rails might have pods (they can only carry pods on the pod rails).

But at lower weapon status, obviously you can arm the Stinger-F with two pods a lot sooner than the Z-YCM is going to be fully armed.

But the pods are part of the loading of the fighter and are on the ready rack (depending on what pods you selected to have loaded on the ready rack). All size-1 fighters have two pod rails and can have those pods loaded. Plasma-D armed fighters can (just like the drone armed fighters) substitute pods for plasma-Ds (they cannot be carried on plasma-K only rails just like they cannot be carried on type-VI only rails). And you do not have a lot of pods in the pod stockpile of the carrier (each fighter comes with five pods, and you can purchase extra pods with commander's options).

By Peter DiMitri (Pdimitri) on Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - 09:27 pm: Edit

Thank you again SPP.

Another question.

Tholians cast a free-standing web with a strength of 12. When it becomes solid on impulse 31, sabot plasmas are already in the hex.

So, Sabots get 2 moves on impulses 32,4 and 8, and 1 move on impulses 1,2,3,5,6,7 for a total of 12 movement points generated by impulse 8 (the strength of the web).

Do the plasmas leave the web on impulse 8 or do they have to wait until the next impulse?

It seems pretty clear to me that they leave on impulse 8, but my opponent seems to think that they leave on impulse 9.

Any clarification would be appreciated.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - 09:47 pm: Edit

Pretty sure you lose one movement per point of strength of web, ie a strength one web stops your plasma for one movement.

If this is the case, you don't leave until your 13th movement. I imagine the rule clarifies whocj way this is, web rules are old as dirt now.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, July 23, 2020 - 12:05 pm: Edit

Peter DiMitri:

When a unit enters a web hex, whether the web was fully formed or was forming a solidified around it (whether it moved into the forming web hex or was already in the forming web hex from a previous impulse), it becomes stuck (call this Impulse #1). The impulse it was stuck in the web does not count for accumulation.

On the following impulses, when the unit (plasma torpedo in this case) is called on to move it accumulates movement points for moving out of the web. If the web were strength 12, it would have to, over a period of 32 impulses, accumulate 12 movement points. When it accumulates the 12th movement point, it has satisfied the requirement, and on the 13th movement point it can exit the web.

To clarify, think of a web of strength one. If you did not have to accumulate one movement point before you could leave it, then it would effectively be strength Zero. So it is going to catch the unit and interrupt its movement for one impulse.

By Peter DiMitri (Pdimitri) on Friday, July 24, 2020 - 08:49 am: Edit

SPP,

Thank you for your response.

By Charles H Carroll (Carroll) on Sunday, July 26, 2020 - 01:43 pm: Edit

Ok I know Steve Petrick will hate me but I really hate tractor tricks. However if I have to use them as he has repeatedly said lol. In a fleet engagement here is a thought.

3 Romulan SKAs tractor each other...as in two use tractors on different SKAs. Causing all 3 to be tractored. On imp 32....all 3 ships now move.

Next turn. Maintain tractor. Now all 3 ships will move...one moves...and drags the rest. Just stating this out of order.

First you have tractor rotation. All are the same size. So you can only move them closer or away. They are all in the same hex.

Now however this would have to happen...to need no extra power...ship 1 with a tractor...shoves ship 2 forward 1. Ship 2 which has tractored ship 3 now shoves ship 3 forward one. Then they all move forward one as required by the ship that now gets its movement. So....according to this. We moved...1 extra move for the normal over the turn end tractor movement. And 1 ship got an extra move forward...and the second ship got a 3rd move forward. So the three ships moved 1 hex. 2 hexes and 3 hexes respectively. At which point tractors are dropped...weapons are hot and before the ship or ships that had been at range 2 can react...ships are now at range 1 range 0 and range 1 on the opposite side of the fleet they were chasing.

Not saying this is the wisest choice in most battles. But...I see no reason why this could not be done. Just a tactical consideration for people to think about lol. Imagine the possibilities.I who hate tractor tricks but am required to accept them am certainly considering a number of things.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Sunday, July 26, 2020 - 03:52 pm: Edit

I find this confusing.

Just so I understand what is going on here...

3 Romulan SKA tractor each other? I could see it if a Romulan SKA had two tractor beams, then it could tractor two other SKA.

What I do not understand is SKA#1 tractors SKA#2, and, at same time SKA#2 tractors SKA#3. I was Under the impression, that if A ship is tractored, the only function It could use its own tractor for is negative tractor beam (setting up an energy auction.)

I will have to review the rules. I honestly thought the rules prevent this sort of thing.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandar) on Sunday, July 26, 2020 - 04:48 pm: Edit

True SKA#1 can Trac SKA#2 but no 2 can not trac no 3 but SKA 1 can trac both. I do think however that ship 3 does not get any moves are some such yea confusing

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Sunday, July 26, 2020 - 05:04 pm: Edit

Didn't a similar "Speed/movement" discussion, with just 2 ships happen about a month ago.....

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, July 26, 2020 - 05:41 pm: Edit

If more than two ships are involved in such a thing, only the two largest ships get to move and do so at the move cost of ALL the ships involved.

So, in this case the move cost is 1.5 and one of the three SKA's movement does not count. You'd have to consult the rules to figure out which, I'm assuming it is covered as this is a very old rule.