| By Robert Russell Lender (Rusman) on Thursday, June 12, 2025 - 11:12 pm: Edit |
Ken,
Thanks for the heads up on R1.1G5. Certainly not an official answer. But I recall seeing somewhere that units in later time periods have upgraded systems at no additional cost (Transporters, Tractor beams etc). Maybe the Plasma's are treated the same way.
Russ,
They are damaged on Flag bridge hits. Maybe their repair cost is the same? Seems about right to me but of course this is not an official response.
| By Russ Simkins (Madcowak) on Friday, June 13, 2025 - 11:16 pm: Edit |
Appreciate the responce Rusman. Solid callsign & middle name.
I fudged my way past repairing ATF this time but perhaps Mr. Kasinski would be kind enough to add the oversight to his errata reports
-with gratitude,
the other Russ!
| By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Wednesday, June 18, 2025 - 07:29 pm: Edit |
Russ,
Those are in the Y-Series rules as an example see YG8.0. Module Y1 page 13.
| By Russ Simkins (Madcowak) on Monday, June 23, 2025 - 01:39 am: Edit |
Quote:By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Wednesday, June 18, 2025 - 07:29 pm: Edit
Russ,
Those are in the Y-Series rules as an example see YG8.0. Module Y1 page 13.
| By Robert Russell Lender (Rusman) on Wednesday, June 25, 2025 - 10:48 am: Edit |
I believe that is the case. Ken was replying to me.
Also, I do go by my Middle name "Russ".
Cheers,
RusMan
| By Andrew Granger (Captaincf) on Tuesday, August 26, 2025 - 10:17 am: Edit |
Quick question regarding drone construction: If I wanted to add ATG to a Type-I or Type-IV drone and increase the speed to 20, would it cost 1 point per drone?
| By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, August 26, 2025 - 11:31 am: Edit |
Correct: 1/2 point for ATG on the frame (FD10.23) plus 1/2 point for medium speed (FD2.1).
Note that the ATG makes the resulting drone Restricted Availability (FD10.62), and the medium speed would be Limited Availability (FD10.63) in Y165 (FD10.65). While the cost of upgrading from the starting type-I-S drones are the same for the resulting M-H regardless of type, the type does matter for calculating the mounting unit’s special drone availability under (FD10.6).
| By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Thursday, August 28, 2025 - 09:03 am: Edit |
According to (G25.4), half of a base's cargo space can be filled with supplies, including mines, at half of their normal BPV. What is the "normal" BPV of both sizes of explosive mines?
| By Frank Lemay (Princeton) on Thursday, August 28, 2025 - 02:25 pm: Edit |
Question re ESG interaction.
Lyran FF in 1622E has an R2 ESG active.
Tholian PC in 1322B, currently R3 to the Lyran FF.
Last imp of the turn, the Lyran FF moves forward and the ESG ends up in the same hex as the PC, the PC then moves forwards as well.
Which shield takes the ESG ram , the #1 or the #2 ?
Thanks.
Cheers
Frank
| By Frank Lemay (Princeton) on Thursday, August 28, 2025 - 02:57 pm: Edit |
Question re ESG interaction.
Lyran FF in 1622E with R2 active ESG.
Tholian PC+ in 1322B, currently R3 to the Lyran FF
Last imp of the turn, Lyran FF moves forward to 1523E with the ESG entering the same hex as the PC+.
PC+ also moves forward to 1421B staying on the ESG ring.
Which shield gets hit , the #1 or the #2 ?
Thanks.
Cheers
Frank
| By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, August 28, 2025 - 04:23 pm: Edit |
John, see Annex #6: large mines are 8 points and small mines are 4 points base.
| By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, August 28, 2025 - 05:00 pm: Edit |
Frank, as both units are moving, (G23.571) controls and whichever ship is scheduled to move first via (C1.313) moves and field contact is judged and damage determined (but not resolved). In this case, it will always be the FF as the PC+ is nimble. So the FF moves to 1523E and per (G23.513) the ESG strikes the PC+’s #2 shield. Note this will be true even if the PC+ were to turn to C and move into hex 1422 (truly “jumping the field”). However , if it were to turn to A and move into 1321, then (G23.572) would apply and there would be no contact between the PC+ and the ESG and damage determined on the FF’s movement would be negated.
| By Frank Lemay (Princeton) on Friday, August 29, 2025 - 05:32 pm: Edit |
Alex,
Thanks, that was what my partner Tom was saying.
I figured it would be the #1 due to the FF moving forward and in my mind, the #2 was not a factor.
My SFB training continues !
Thanks again Alex.
Cheers
Frank
| By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Friday, August 29, 2025 - 05:41 pm: Edit |
ESGs are one of the trickier rules in the game, particularly in this circumstance, where the fine detail of the game runs into the gap between simulating things happening simultaneously and the need to have everything happening in specific sequences.
| By Frank Lemay (Princeton) on Friday, August 29, 2025 - 06:38 pm: Edit |
Alex,
Follow up question.
It is imp 32 and the ESG hits on a split shield, lets say #5 and 6, which shield takes the hit.
Does the owner of the ship decide as per D3.43 ?
Thanks.
Cheers
Frank
| By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Friday, August 29, 2025 - 07:06 pm: Edit |
This is a case where it depends on if both units are moving or not. If they are (G23.513), the facing shield is determined by the positions after the unit that moved first by (C1.313) has moved but the other unit had not, unless the units are fully tied under (C1.313), in which case it is judged from the position of the non-ESG having moved first.
So the shield being hit would depend on the angle of approach and movement precedence of the units involved - and could strike a different shield than direct-fire weaponry during the same impulse. This is because an ESG field is a gross effect whose impact depends on the approach courses to that moment (thus determining who moved first that impulse) while resolving split-shield direct fire involves looking at how courses are tending after that moment.
| By Frank Lemay (Princeton) on Monday, September 01, 2025 - 11:36 am: Edit |
Thanks again Alex !
Cheers
Frank
| By Gregory S Flusche (Vandar) on Sunday, September 14, 2025 - 12:59 pm: Edit |
Trying to find BPV cost of PFs. Economic/combat. When purchased for patrol battle. I keep thinking some were you buy them at economic not Combat but cannot find anything
| By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Sunday, September 14, 2025 - 05:28 pm: Edit |
The scout PF is purchased at economic BPV per (G24.35), everything.
| By Mike West (Mjwest) on Monday, September 15, 2025 - 09:06 pm: Edit |
Except for scouts, all ships are "purchased" for their combat BPV. All ships award victory points for their enemies based on their economic BPV.
So, PFs cost more to add to your squadron, but result in fewer victory points when damaged or killed.
(Scouts, including PF scouts, are "purchased" for their combat BPV if they are alone. Otherwise they are "purchased" for their economic BPV.)
| By Gregory S Flusche (Vandar) on Tuesday, September 16, 2025 - 01:04 pm: Edit |
So, it is for victory points. That means they are really not that great added to a force. At 40 BPV each plus Mech links. Cheaper than a CA or DW. Something to think about I suppose.
| By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, September 16, 2025 - 03:54 pm: Edit |
You spend about 300 BPV (before refits, drone speed upgrades, etc) for a full flotilla, but it only gives up about 220 victory points. That’s denying the enemy 80 victory points out the gate.
| By Gregory S Flusche (Vandar) on Tuesday, September 16, 2025 - 04:51 pm: Edit |
The PFT uses one command point. Even if it is in the scout slot. More firepower for a spot.
| By Gregory S Flusche (Vandar) on Wednesday, September 17, 2025 - 09:13 pm: Edit |
I was looking at Drogues.
Paravian drogues. G34.0 A seeking weapons drogue with three quantum wave torpedoes.
I at first thought this would be a heavy weapons drogue. Yet it does say seeking weapons drogue and not heavy weapons drogue. The cost difference is 4 points. I am hoping for it being the 10-point seeking weapons drogue.
| By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Tuesday, September 23, 2025 - 09:30 pm: Edit |
According to (G25.4) BASE CARGO, half of a base's cargo capacity, not counting augmentation modules or pods, can be filled with "supplies" (as opposed to Commander's Options) at 50% of their “normal” BPV. The rule specifically mentions that T-bombs are acceptable supplies, which is good since they are the subject of my question.
A base has T-bombs filling half its cargo boxes, but has not used any of its own T-bombs. Ships in the base's defending fleet have used their T-bombs. Would the base player have to transfer the base's ready-to-use T-bombs to the ships and then break out more T-bombs from storage to refill its own T-bomb racks, then repeat, or can the base transfer the cargo T-bombs directly to the ships in need, maybe after having transferred one or more to satisfy the (G25.41) breakout requirements? In short, what is the fastest legal way to get those T-bombs out of the cargo boxes and onto the ships that need them?
I also have another question. (G52.4) says the "supplies" can be bought at 50% of their normal price. What is the normal price of a T-bomb? Annex 6 has T-bombs priced at 4 BPV if purchased as Commander's Options, but (M6.31) has individual small mines costing 1 BPV. That's a big difference if you're filling cargo boxes with small mines. (M3.0) equated T-bombs with small mines, so no quibbling over definitions.
I can understand arguments for each case. For the (M6.31) case of 1 BPV per T-bomb before halving, the mines are not deployed yet, requiring effort to get them where they are wanted. For the Annex 6 argument of 4 BPV per T-bomb, you get to put them where you want/need them after they are transferred to the ships.
| By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Wednesday, October 01, 2025 - 08:42 pm: Edit |
Would a web, globular or otherwise, when forcibly reduced to zero aggregate strength by web breakers immediately be dissolved and have to be respun, or does (G10.43) still apply?
If the web doesn't dissolve, does a web with an aggregate strength of zero have the strength necessary to keep a "sack of rocks" from dispersing? Specifically, in a situation like scenario (SH110.0), if the Seltorians were to destroy an asteroid anchor before reducing a layer of web to zero aggregate strength, not just strength zero, would the sack of rocks disperse? This would allow the Seltorians to create an irreparable gap in an anchored web thus breaking it.
No rules I have found mention an aggregate strength zero web, nor are any examples given concerning a web forcibly reduced to an aggregate strength of zero. Some references are about strength zero web, and the rules cover globular webs not being able to be reinforced until completed, but still refer to them as strength zero. Unless I read the rules wrong, any web longer than one hex with an aggregate strength of one is a zero-strength web.
| By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, October 02, 2025 - 04:07 pm: Edit |
(E15.32) says “A web reduced to zero is destroyed immediately (it cannot be reinforced)” in reference to web breaker damaged scored versus the aggregate strength points. As such, it seems it would work as follows:
Web breaker damage that reduces the aggregate strength to less than 1 per hex of web but not zero (e.g. 17 points in a 20 hex web) results in a strength 0 web and starts the (G10.43) clock for the web dissolving. The web hexes are all still present and counting as web hexes (albeit strength 0). The asteroid anchor remains a legal anchor point, even if reduced to a “sack of rocks” - (G10.1314) only addresses the sack dispersing if relived of anchor status, and never checks for the strength of the web.
Web breaker damage that reduces the aggregate strength to zero immediately destroys the web: all web hexes cease being web hexes, counters are picked up, anchors are relived, etc.
Several rules mention they don’t apply when a web has strength zero, (G10.61) and (G10.7).
| By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, October 02, 2025 - 04:11 pm: Edit |
And note that any contiguous group of web hexes, regardless of layout or anchors, is a single web which calculates its strength and takes web breaker damage as a singular whole - web breakers would collapse the entire web, not segments of it.
| Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |