Can the Flagship Escort Group rules (318.42) be used to protect ships that are normally not part of groups like scout and stasis ships from raids?

By Paul Edwards (Pablomatic) on Monday, August 06, 2012 - 09:22 am: Edit

Thomas,

Thank you for the clarification. I guess (320.22) is the relevant rule: "Fighter-PF Raids are conducted by one carrier, SCS, or PFT and its escorts." What I believe you are saying is that technically the drone ships aren't PFTs, so they can't do a PF raid, only a drone raid (which would leave the CPX available for interception battle but not the raid). So no 48 compot (or for the Kzinti 52 compot) combined PF/drone raids v. slow units I guess.

By Paul Edwards (Pablomatic) on Monday, August 06, 2012 - 09:42 am: Edit

What are the proper factors for the NHBH and FHBH?

Should they be 9*8H and 8*8H, or do they still have 2 extra regular fighters, making them 9*8H*2 and 8*8H*2? Obviously in the second case they cost 4ep to convert from standard NHB and FHB (pay for 2 more unusable fighters), while in the first case conversion to heavy fighters would be free since they start with 8 regular fighters.

This question has come up in the F&E Vassal thread.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, August 06, 2012 - 07:37 pm: Edit

Jose, No, only the ship designated as the flagship in a given battleforce can use the Flagship Escort rules (318.42).

Also my understanding is that the FEGs (318.42) are automatically dissolved after each combat round, but be reformed in the next one to "replace" lost escorts in the combat hex. But at the conclussion of the last round of combat all FEGs (318.42) are dissolved with no further effect on game play until the next time the units in question enter a standard combat hex.

The Free Scout slot is automatically the (defense factor of the ship + 1 (self defense bonus)) * 3 for the effect of being a "formation bonus position under (308.531). While the free scout doesn't contribute it's compot, other scouts in the battle force do contribute their compot as well as their EW levels. Those scouts also get the +1 self defense when being directed up. This was one of the driving forces behind the scout carriers.

By Jose R. Barreto (Jbarreto) on Monday, August 06, 2012 - 08:02 pm: Edit

Thanks Thomas,

Raids have taken a toll on scout/battle tugs in my current game, so I was looking for ways to make them less of a target next game.

By Stewart W Frazier (Frazikar2) on Monday, August 06, 2012 - 08:33 pm: Edit

Paul, unknown until the SPBH (SPV?) design is finalized...it might be that they (FH/NH) just use the N module...

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, August 08, 2012 - 10:24 am: Edit

Deleted by author. Question answered by looking at the SIT.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, August 08, 2012 - 04:40 pm: Edit

So what is the current state of the rules on "Replacing Non Standard Fighter Squadrons from Other Sources of Fighters"? I know at some point in the past, it was ruled that a "Fighter Factor is a Fighter Factor" (which means, uh, something?). And that at some point in the past, fighter squadrons would somehow magically transform into something else. But in reading the 2K10 rulebook, specifically looking for clarification, well, I found none.

Ok, so say I have a Fed CVB with a squadron of F15s (8 fighter factors, comprising a single squadron). It loses its squadron of F15's to damage. In the hex, there are two carrier tugs, each with a 6 point fighter squadron (12 total factors, 2 squadrons). Between rounds, the CVB wants to get new fighters. What happens?

A) One of the CVTs sends a squadron of 6 fighters to the CVB. It magically transforms into an F15 squadron worth 8 points.

B) One of the CVTs sends a squadron of 6 fighters to the CVB. It doesn't magically transform into an F15 squadron, and stays at 6 points (effectively making the CVB into a CVS for that round) and 'cause the CVB now has a fighter squadron on it, it can't get any more fighter factors added (i.e. it stops at 6).

C) One of the CVTs sends a squadron of 6 fighters to the CVB, and then the other CVT sends 2 more of its fighters to the CVB, giving the CVB 8 new fighter factors (that used to consist of 12xF15s, and now consist of 16xF18's, but that isn't important).

D) Something else I haven't considered?

This scales up to the Fed CVA as well, which has 15 fighter factors (that I think is a squadron of 9 and a squadron of 6? Or 8 and 7?).

Up to this point, in my recent game, I have just been using a Fighter Factor as a Fighter Factor (i.e. answer "C" above), as that is my memory of where the rules settled at some point in the past. But now that I'm actually looking for a rule that clarifies this in the newest rulebook, yeah, I got nothing.

Thanks!

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, August 08, 2012 - 05:17 pm: Edit

Peter, not an official answer, but I think it's just as "magical" as you have indicated. It just works. The only exceptions are the heavy fighters, including the F-111s. Those have to be tracked separately.

I think it's just a mechanism to prevent more record keeping.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, August 08, 2012 - 07:30 pm: Edit

Ted wrote:
>>Peter, not an official answer, but I think it's just as "magical" as you have indicated. It just works. >>

In which sense? The sense of "A" (i.e. 6 fighter factors become 8 fighter factors) or the sense of "C" (i.e. a single squadron of fighters worth 8 compot is replaced by 1 and 1/3 squadrons that are 8 compot)?

Like, I'm not worried about the sense that it makes (I don't care that things are magical and non-sensical). I'm just trying to figure out what the actual, official rule is.

But thanks for the reply that might get me closer to the actual answer :-)

By Stewart W Frazier (Frazikar2) on Wednesday, August 08, 2012 - 07:37 pm: Edit

a "Fighter Factor is a Fighter Factor" so it's C

Once the CVB has 8 factors, they are considered 12 F15s (although you always have the option of using only loading 12 F18s [6 factors])...

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, August 08, 2012 - 07:55 pm: Edit

Ok. So if the CVB loses 8 fighters (i.e. the squadron), it just gets filled in by whatever other 8 fighter factors are available (i.e. 6 from one CVT and then 2 of 6 from the other CVT, in the example). And when the CVA loses 15 fighters (i.e. 2 squadrons), it can just get refilled by any 15 fighters in the hex (which is 2.5 squadrons from the average carrier).

Ok, cool. So a fighter factor is just a fighter factor. And the only time that the weird squadrons need to be accounted for individually is for determining ship equivalents (i.e. 24 fighters off of Fed CVBs still only count as 3 SEQ, not 4 SEQ as the same 24 fighters would count if they were on 4x Fed CVS).

Thanks for the clarification.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Wednesday, August 08, 2012 - 08:49 pm: Edit

...efficient staff officers make sure you get your F-15s...

By John Robinson (John_R) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 09:19 am: Edit

Got to love those staff/logistics officers.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 10:44 am: Edit

---

Quote:

Ok, cool. So a fighter factor is just a fighter factor. And the only time that the weird squadrons need to be accounted for individually is for determining ship equivalents (i.e. 24 fighters off of Fed CVBs still only count as 3 SEQ, not 4 SEQ as the same 24 fighters would count if they were on 4x Fed CVS).

---

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 10:53 am: Edit

Ted, the A-20s which are also different from other Federation Heavy Fighters. 10V = 1 squadron. These must be tracked separately as well.

By William Jockusch (Verybadcat) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 11:25 am: Edit

Did I miss a ruling on the flagship questions Paul and I were asking a few months back? For example, this one:

Is it legal to have a line consisting of two Klingon F5 and a Lyran CW? The argument for this being illegal would be that the CW both has to be the flagship (302.33) and cannot be the flagship (as it is from the minority race).

Do the rules really intend to ban this line?

There were several similar/related questions. If it would be helpful to the person issuing a ruling, I could collect them.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 11:45 am: Edit

Thanks, Thomas, I didn't know that. That being said, my list of specific exceptions wasn't meant to be exhaustive, only the list of principles was meant to be complete. Hopefully I got that.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 11:46 am: Edit

---

Quote:

Is it legal to have a line consisting of two Klingon F5 and a Lyran CW? The argument for this being illegal would be that the CW both has to be the flagship (302.33) and cannot be the flagship (as it is from the minority race).

Do the rules really intend to ban this line?

---

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 11:47 am: Edit

Ted wrote:
>>Yes, but. The "but" comes with the introduction of F-111s and heavy fighters, which I don't think you're using since you're playing vanilla F&E2K. These fighters have to be tracked separately. >>

Yeah, luckily, most of the exceptions aren't applicable in basic F+E 2K10 (i.e. heavy fighters, F-111s, Pol CV fighters, Hydran X fighters). So for my purposes, a fighter factor is a fighter factor. Which is good, as that is how I've been playing it all along, but the other day, I figured I'd comb through the new rulebook to make sure, and, well, I was met with resounding ambiguity.

Thanks for the answering!

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 11:54 am: Edit

Peter, heavy fighters such as the F-111, A-20 and other empires standard heavy fighters should be marked with a ‡ in the 2010 rulebook to indicate they are in the expansions.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 11:55 am: Edit

Peter, right - but even in vanilla F&E2K you still have to be concerned about avoiding operating fighters on CVs of different empires (but for Klingon/Lyran) and of course the exceptions for pin counts and squadron size for a few ships in the basic game (which you already pointed out).

And, you're welcome.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 12:13 pm: Edit

Will, the line is legal as either F5 can command the other two ships and must under (302.321). The Lyran CW cannot be the flagship, but could be given the formation bonus slot if desired. See (308.71).

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 01:49 pm: Edit

Excerpt from (302.321): "...The flagship must be from the empire which provided at least 50 percent of the total ships in the Battle Force. If this is impossible (e.g., the top three command ships are Lyran, the only other ships in the hex are Klingon, and the Minimum Force rules require enough ships that the Lyran flagship would be outnumbered) then the “minority foreign flagships” are excused from the flagship selection process."

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, August 09, 2012 - 06:13 pm: Edit

Ted wrote:
>>Peter, right - but even in vanilla F&E2K you still have to be concerned about avoiding operating fighters on CVs of different empires (but for Klingon/Lyran) and of course the exceptions for pin counts and squadron size for a few ships in the basic game (which you already pointed out).>>

Well, yes. There are specific, clear rules about swapping empire fighters (i.e. the Lyrans and Klingons specifically *can*; the Feds and Gorns specifically *can't*; no one else can at all as a blanket rule). And the weird squadrons make figuring out pincount complicated sometimes. But the issue that actually needed clarifying got sufficiently clarified (i.e. the 8 fighters from a Fed CVB can be replaced by any 8 fighter factors you have handy), which is good :-)