Good question Jeff.
If DEFSATs can only orbit planets, an Admiral or 2 in our campaign will have to adjust their deployment !

Cheers
Frank

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Sunday, January 10, 2021 - 05:13 pm: Edit

(R1.15G) around planets or moon

By Charles H Carroll (Carroll) on Sunday, January 10, 2021 - 05:23 pm: Edit

Thanks Steve Petrick

I know that is the normal interpretation. But as your reply indicates, because of the transporter rule. Line of sight is not always the factor. So I wondered if it could be done.

The other questions about firing though. With a planet this is obvious. You have a base on one side of the planet. Defsat is on the other side directly opposite. So no line of sight. But with a moon. In that situation. Does the moon block line of site(Not to the base but an approaching drone). Or is it like lock-on is a 50/50 possibility? It appears that moons do not completely stop what would with a planet be considered shooting through the planet. Instead there is a 50/50 chance you can shoot an approaching drone or ship that should be through the moon.

Anyway that was part of the other questions. The rest was along the line of every impulse a drone could be shot at in such a situation you had to roll to see if you had lock on. One person suggested that only if you were going to shoot you had to roll. Which was not my interpretation.

Chuck

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, January 11, 2021 - 12:39 pm: Edit

I hope these answer the questions:

(P2.3221) Small planets and large moons have only a 50% chance of breaking the lock-on (P2.232) of either/both unit. Roll for this every impulse that the planet is in the direct line between the ships. If the lock-on is broken, it cannot be re-established until the planet is out of the direct line.

(P2.3225) A base on a planetary surface cannot lock-on targets outside of its firing arc; see (P2.62).

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Thursday, January 14, 2021 - 06:08 pm: Edit

question came up and we couldn't reach agreement on the rule.

mines are in 1803 and 1903.
Ship is in 1904 with TM not satisfied. Slip mode is satisfied.

Can ship slip into 1803 and take mine in 1803 on #6 and mine on 1903 on number 2 shields?

Doesn't seem logical to me. The BIG reason this matters is the #1 was down... And he had already taken damage that removed all the "padding" on his C7. I was chasing that darn thing with a single stinger and DWS and if he just takes shield damage he'd gut me. Otherwise he has no chance.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Thursday, January 14, 2021 - 06:24 pm: Edit

Ahhh, One - how did that C7 get into 1904 without the mine in 1903 (at least) going off (speed 4 under a weasel)?
Two - why not slip into 2003 and just take 1903 on his #6 (unless you're in that direction and have active weapons)?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, January 14, 2021 - 06:41 pm: Edit

Mike Grafton:

First, the ship can only trigger one (1 ) mine on any single hex of movement.

(M2.441) Each unit can only cause one mine to trigger for each hex of its movement, even if several mines are in the same or adjacent hexes. Once one mine has been triggered by one moving unit, that same unit cannot trigger any other mines on that impulse.

Depending on which mine is triggered by the movement, the damage is on the shield facing the mine:

(M2.53) SIDESLIP: If a unit sideslips (C4.0) into a hex containing a mine and sets off that mine, the shield facing the hex entered takes the damage, not the #1 (or #4) shield.

Assuming your Heading is A (you did not provide the heading, I am extrapolating from your stated damage) you have to determine a random order for the triggering, for the mines.

(M2.442) If more than one mine is available, determine the order in which they will be rolled for randomly before rolling for any one mine. Obviously, a mine that will not accept a given target will not be rolled for, and this may reveal some data about its targeting instructions.

I am ignoring the concept that you somehow did not trigger either of the mines when you initially entered their detection zones. (Maybe they only just went active after being placed by transporter, two turn arming cycle, maybe the laying units only just left their two hex safety zone.)

So you Side Slipped into Hex 1803, and under (M2.53) if the mine in hex 1803 triggers, it will explode off your #6 shield. If the mine in 1903 triggers, it will explode off your #2 shield, again per (M2.53).

I hope this helps.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Thursday, January 14, 2021 - 06:53 pm: Edit

Mike Grafton:

The ship will Triger only one of the mines.
(M2.501) normally the #1 or #4 direction of movement,
(M2.53) Sideslip, the shield facing the hex entered takes the damage

edit, was writing at same time as SPP

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Thursday, January 14, 2021 - 07:15 pm: Edit

edit

By Charles H Carroll (Carroll) on Wednesday, January 20, 2021 - 02:11 pm: Edit

Question about Base Stations and the like. A base station has 2 Hanger modules shown and a PF module on the SSDs. Several of us have looked through the rules. And though F&E has a rule about how many can exist. In SFB there does not appear to be any real rule that we could find defining the max number. Reason I am asking is if you have two and a PF module. I see no reason not to have 3 Hanger Bays. The 3rd just replaces what is effectively a bigger hanger bay with a smaller hanger bay.

While as was pointed out to me, power modules are a tremendous asset for Bases. It still leaves the question. Is there a rule answering this inside of the SFB Rules. At the year we are at and for a long time to come, PFs are not possible. So Power Modules or Hanger is what we have to work with.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Wednesday, January 20, 2021 - 03:40 pm: Edit

Charles,

You can use three (but the base has limited power and with some fighter combinations you may find your base having trouble reloading weapons.

(R1.3E) Generally, most base stations had one hanger bay module and two cargo pods. After PFs were invented, most species based six PFs (in a PF module) at many of their base stations; many had only fighters for local defense. Some Federation Base stations had as many as three hanger bay modules.

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Wednesday, January 20, 2021 - 03:45 pm: Edit

I'd have to break out the rule books, Charles (and in all fairness I really ought to), but I do remember pretty clearly that there are two types of Base Augmentation Modules; Type-A and Type-B. Type-A modules, which include Power Modules, Hangar Modules, and PF modules (among others) are ones that increase the combat capability of the stations they're attached to, and are limited in number.

The Base Station can have up to three Type-A modules and up to six modules all told (of both Type-A and Type-B). I also recall (although less clearly) that Base Stations (and Battle Stations and Sector Bases) are limited to no more than one squadron of standard (Size-1) fighters and either one squadron of Heavy Fighters (Size-2) OR one flotilla of Gunboats.

Within these rules, it appears you may have two Hangar Bay Modules (and the full squadron of fighters) and one Power Module, if you so choose.

Again, though, this is according to my memory and it can be a little faulty.

By Charles H Carroll (Carroll) on Wednesday, January 20, 2021 - 03:51 pm: Edit

Jeff well maybe? The standard SSD shows 2 hanger modules and a PF Module.

Now not being a fighter expert...which is one reason I going this way in the campaign I am in, I am not sure what a full squadron would be. From your comment I assume that is 12 fighters. Or 6 heavies. And then another 6 PFs.

But I am looking for a specific rule in the rule book somewhere that states this. Everything I have looked at seems to not exactly set limits so much other than 3 hanger type modules 1 of which is usually? a PF module.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, January 20, 2021 - 04:55 pm: Edit

Charles H. Carroll:

Base Station (and Battle Station, and Sector Base) has docking positions that can handle a maximum of three type-A modules See (R1.3C) (for base stations) which links back to (R1.1B) for explanation.

The SSDs show the most common late war augmentation modules for combat stations (generally near the front). But there are more augmentation modules. And a scenario may define the base has others for some reason (no more than six total can be active, and a player or two in the past has attempted to use augmentation modules without docking them to the base and been told NO, I will not go further).

About the only limitation on a module spelled out is the number of power modules (two for a starbase, one for all smaller bases). (PF modules might be spelled out somewhere).

Generally you might have a base where the threat is thought low and has no fighter modules. A little more threat and a Hangar with a flight of six fighters for local security is sent. A little more threat and a second module and sis more fighters are sent giving the base a full squadron. The Remaining Class A space is a power augmentation module. If the threat is deemed some what serious, a heavy power augmentation module. But that is all three Class A augmentation modules, and the Admirals may argue that the base's repair capabilities need to be reinforced so one of the modules has to go to accommodate a repair augmentation module (also a class A module).

By Charles H Carroll (Carroll) on Wednesday, January 20, 2021 - 11:26 pm: Edit

Ok so there is no specific rule that says you could not have 3 Hanger Modules with Fighters. But people normally run 1 or 2 and then a Power Module. I am saying this because...3 type A Modules...which Hanger Modules are...would mean you could have 3 Hanger Modules.

Thanks Steve Petrick

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Thursday, January 21, 2021 - 10:02 am: Edit

Good morning,

The discussion above reminded me of a couple of questions that have come up, and as long I am posting, I thought I would post several:

Q1: When a base has more than one fighter module, is each module run independently or are they run collectively? For example, Annex #6 limits purchases of additional deck crews to four, but would that be four for each hanger module or four for the base collectively?

Q2: Similarly, at Weapon Status II, a carrier may have two fighters already launched. Would that be two per module or two for the base as a whole?

Q3: Rule G4.3 allows a ship without labs to use a control box as a lab. Does this include PFs, Interceptors, and Mobile Weapons Platforms?

Q4: If using the Andromedan Module C3A, GC6.4 allows them to use NSMs per the t-bomb rules. Is the NSM identifiable as such when teleported or is it a generic "bomb" such that an opponent doesn't know if a t-bomb or NSM appeared? Is GC6.42 correct that an NSM costs the Andromedans six points? They are typically eight points.

Thanks

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Thursday, January 21, 2021 - 02:00 pm: Edit

John,

Q3: Yes. Rule (K0.11) says that PFs are ships and operate as ships unless specifically excepted. Rule (K3.11) says interceptors are small PFs, so (K0.11) should still apply. MWPs would require more looking up, but based on my last reading of those rules are likely undefined as they do not explicitly state they operate as either PFs or ships. However, since they have an explicit "bridge" box, I assume they still get the benefit of (G4.3).

Q1 and Q2: Augmentation modules are not units. As such, they are merely a component of a unit and operate as a part of the larger whole. As such the base is the unit in question for the rules, so limits are for the base, not the modules.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, January 21, 2021 - 03:53 pm: Edit

John M Willaims asked on 21 January 2001: Q1: When a base has more than one fighter module, is each module run independently or are they run collectively? For example, Annex #6 limits purchases of additional deck crews to four, but would that be four for each hanger module or four for the base collectively?

ANSWER: Mike West essentially answered this one. The base is regarded as the carrier when the module is added to it. Whether you hang one or two or three on a base station, or four or five or six on a starbase, the combined BPV is used to purchase commander's options and the limits on them apply to the whole, so whether it is a lowly commercial platform with one hangar bay module or a lofty stellar fortress with six hangar bay modules, it can only have four (4) extra deck crews (not 24 in the case of the stellar fortress, just four).

Q2: Similarly, at Weapon Status II, a carrier may have two fighters already launched. Would that be two per module or two for the base as a whole?

ANSWER: Again, Mike West is correct that it is Just two. Whether your base is, again, that lowly commercial platform with one hangar bay module or the prestigious stellar fortress with six hangar bay modules..

Q3: Rule G4.3 allows a ship without labs to use a control box as a lab. Does this include PFs, Interceptors, and Mobile Weapons Platforms?

ANSWER: Again, Michael West is correct. There is no rule that says "units smaller than Federation Express boats cannot use (G4.3)." If you have a bridge box, but have no lab boxes, you can use the bridge box as a lab. Small freighters and large freighters use this, as does the Federation Express, and fast patrol ships and Interceptors and, yes, even Mobile Weapons Platforms can access tis rule.

Q4: If using the Andromedan Module C3A, GC6.4 allows them to use NSMs per the t-bomb rules. Is the NSM identifiable as such when teleported or is it a generic "bomb" such that an opponent doesn't know if a t-bomb or NSM appeared? Is GC6.42 correct that an NSM costs the Andromedans six points? They are typically eight points.

ANSWER: The NSM is a "generic bomb," the only way you find out (really find out) is if you are close enough to trigger it (not recommended). Seriously if you could tell the difference there would have been a dummy of it rather than relying on standard dummies.. The cost of the NSM is, in fact, a typo for which I take full responsibility, I failed to note the character I typed was a six instead of an eight.

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Thursday, January 21, 2021 - 05:52 pm: Edit

Thanks, SPP & Mike.

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Friday, January 22, 2021 - 09:02 pm: Edit

So in F&E, we have been debating a Fed. HDW-Z configuration, which has 4x F-111s.

I thought Fed HDW's couldn't have external mech links for F-111s. Has that changed?

And if it has, does that allow an HDW-E to have a F-111 mech link to reload F-111s?

By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Monday, January 25, 2021 - 03:08 pm: Edit

Can a mauler with more than one battery bank with power fire at multiple targets in one impulse?

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Monday, January 25, 2021 - 03:50 pm: Edit

I think rule (E8.12), which states that "The mauler may be fired once in each impulse..." prohibits that.

HOWEVER, certain Maulers, such as the Sparrowhawk-F (R4.19) and Lyran Sabre-Tooth Tiger (R11.21) have two mauler indicator lines on their SSDs, suggesting separate weapons. Perhaps they can fire at two different targets.

As far as the different banks on the SSD go, I think it's for rule (E8.321), which states "Batteries must be discharged in complete groups; all of the batteries in a group must discharge all of their power, including fractional points of power."

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Monday, January 25, 2021 - 04:38 pm: Edit

The two mauler lines ultimately represent a single weapon. For example, the Romulan KRM ship description refers to a right mauler and a left mauler, but then has a parenthetical which says: "In point of fact, the two maulers are fired as a single weapon and the left/right distinction is effectively meaningless."

By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Monday, January 25, 2021 - 04:39 pm: Edit

Jeff, thanks. I missed (E8.12) when I scanned the rules.

I can be wrong, but I think the multiple mauler indicators are more for artistic value than functionality.

I'm open to correction.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, January 25, 2021 - 10:36 pm: Edit

artistic, yes

The left/right distinction is effectively meaningless.