Archive through December 10, 2021
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: Rules Questions:
SFB Rules Q&A:
Archive through December 10, 2021
Question re Death Bolts using ECM.
Is this ECM indicated on the DB itself at time of launch or hidden for the DB and revealed at time of fire on the DB ?
Thanks.
Cheers
Frank
Frank Lemay:
I would honestly swear I had read somewhere that it take effect on launch, but as I cannot find that reference, I would have to say the rules take precedence, and it takes a turn, so on launch they are vulnerable, but at the end of that turn they are protected by em.
The death bolt has none of the verbiage of the ECM drone. Basically the death bolt that has ECM is known at launch and by how much ECM it has (1, 2, 3, etc.) and is separate from all other deth bolts. If two or more death bolts are in the same hex, each is known by its own ECM and does not provide any cover for any other death bolt.
SPP: re: fighter EM, did you mean impulse?
Sigh. Yes.
SPP, I believe you are thinking of J1.26:
"Shuttles may be launched on Erratic Maneuvers (i.e., begin performing EM at the instant of launch)."
Related question: does the same apply to Andromedan satellite ships? G19.442 says: "A satellite ship may begin using EM immediately (same impulse) upon launch by transporter or displacement device."
If the Sat Ship has to wait until the point in an impulse when EM typically takes effect, then launching by transporter would mean that the opponent gets one "free shot" after launch by transporter, but not after launch by displacement device.
Yes, that is what I was looking for, but I thought it would be in the Advanced Missions rulebook where (C10.0) is introduced, not in the Basic rule Set rulebook. Ah well. My mind is obviously deteriorating. Sigh.
Frank Lemay:
The text in J1.62) makes it plain that all shuttles (not just fighters) can be launched under erratic maneuvers (some lose some of their functions, like EW fighters or SWAC shuttles, if erratic on launch and while they remain erratic) from the instant of launch (impulse of launch).
Frank,
(FD20.502) Except for ECM, all of these modifications can only be detected by the actions of the given death bolt or by the death bolt being identified (F1.4).
Thanks you SPP !
Cheers
Frank
John M. Williams:
If it says that satellite ships are able to begin EM on the "same impulse" that hey are launched, then obviously they would be protected by EM during that impulse. I think the rule you cited is clear on that subject.
by SOP in module G3 EM come in effect in step "6E post combat segment" and displacement devices operates on step 6D5. So as John said "opponent gets one "free shot" after launch by transporter(step 6B9), but not after launch by displacement device"
Riccardo Perni:
Specific overrides general, and the specific rule cited says: "G19.442 says: "A satellite ship may begin using EM immediately (same impulse) upon launch by transporter or displacement device." "IImmediate" provides no delay. Whether the Satellite ships launched by displacement or by transporter.
Thanks, SPP! My satellite ships appreciate the confirmation!
SPP: ok, good to know! I tought the "... immediately (same impulse)... " was referring to the fact that the activation of EM must be be announced in step 6A4 (before the satellite ship launch) actually giving (in case of transporter launch) two impulses of "free shot"
Launching shuttles/satellite ships is a (sort of) exception to the usual 1-impulse delay. You don't have to declare a unit that is not on the board will begin EM next impulse, but because of the specific rule that they can be using EM on impulse of launch, they can be.
As a side note, SPP mentioned that EW fighters cannot loan EM while erratic, so a strategy that I have developed is I will allocate for a base/carrier to have 4 ECM loaned to a squadron, so that when they are launched under EM they immediately accept that loan source and have 10 ECM. This helps keep them alive, and then if they are going to engage high ECM enemies, I'll have the EW fighter run full ECCM (not loaned) and on impulse before firing, announce dropping of EM, and then on impulse of firing I'll have the fighters change their loan source to the EW fighter. They drop from 10 ECM to 2, but go from 2 ECCM to 6 at the same time, and while they are vulnerable now they all are firing anyway so all good 
term Paper?
Another Satellite Ship question:
G19.47 says that two motherships can use transporters to transfer a SS directly from one ship to the other. G19.473 says that this can be detected and must be announced.
Q: What must be announced? Merely that "something" was directly transferred from mothership A to mothership B, or must exactly what was transferred be announced?
All you know is the two ships moved a satellite ship, and which ship lost one and which ship gained one. You do not know the type of satellite ship, but the energy drain is detectable [the power to move the satellite ship varies by size (G19.41) and (G19.471)]. You will also bnknow what the rules are that apply to that ship as given in (G19.47) *8 un==impulse delay, only once per turn, etc.) which might help somewhat.
Thanks, SPP.
However, per our conversation a few weeks ago, didn't we decide that launching a satellite ship more than once per turn was legal as long as the 8 impulse rule for launches and recoveries was followed?
Jay
John M; Williams:
See (G19.474) which specifically says no satellite ship can be transferred"than once per turn."
Sorry, I was thinking of a possible launch after transfer as a "second launch." You are correct that only a single ship-to-ship transfer is allowed.
Question re MRS assignment to a MON.
Can a MON with a fighter pallet be allowed to buy a MRS using COs ?
Thanks.
Cheers
Frank
Good question, Frank.
While I can't speak for ADB on the matter, my take on rule (J8.51) is that it specifically mentiones that, while the Aux-CVA is authorized to carry one, the Aux-CVL (which, like a Monitor with a Carrier Pallet, carries a full squadron of twelve fighters) is not mentioned.
Also, rule (J8.512) specifically limits the number of MRS available to a front line fleet. This all leaves me with the "Feeling" that it is VERY unlikely that any of the empires, with the possible exception of the WYN, would ever allow a resource as valuable as a MRS to be assigned to a Monitor, even one operating a carrier pallet, when such an asset would be most likely be better employed aboard a "More Worthy" vessel.
(Between us, while not the same, since the fighter squadron on a Monitor Carrier Pallet is a full squadron of twelve, it can normally be expected to have an EW fighter as part of its squadron. While that fighter can't conduct the (J8.41) EW Support for Ship mission, it can (probably) more easily keep up with the fighter squadron for the (J8.43) Fighter Squadron EW support mission.
(Additionally, the fighter squadron can theoretically have one or two craft carry (J11.42) Sensor Pods, allowing them to accomplish the (J8.31) MRS Science Mission.
(In short, while I LOOOVVE MRS, I would make the argument that, in the case of this ship and its equipment, they're not the incomparable or irreplaceable wundertools they might seem, and perhaps the CO points that would be necessary to invest in having one might be more effectively spent elsewhere?)
Jeff,
In our campaign, MRS availability is soley based at battle time.
Empires do not need to buy x amount of MRS and then assign to ships as needed.
Our ships use their CO allotment to buy a MRS.
The only restriction is no more than 3 MRS per battle to qualifying ships.
Cheers
Frank
Interesting, Frank. Kinda makes me want to invoke (J8.515) and say, if Tugs (generally see as little combat as would a Monitor) can have a ready rack for an MRS, JUST IN CASE they're assigned a Carrier Pod, then yes, it seems reasonable that a Monitor with a Carrier Pallet ought to be allowed to operate an MRS as well.
Federation Tug (R2.8) with a Light Carrier Pod (R2.57) appears to be authorized to have/use an MRS.
Anyhow, within campaign rules of YOUR campaign, it sounds like it ought to be allowable, but in the general context of non-House Rules, I'm less confident. 
However, as I so often say, I'm not part of ADB, Inc. and anything I may say with regards to the rules can NOT be taken as official.