Archive through March 19, 2013
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Federation & Empire: F&E QUESTIONS:
F&E Q&A Discussions:
Archive through March 19, 2013
Option 5 only allows you to use it in combat as a crippled but captured enemy ship, but doing so invites a recapture attempt. It cannot be repaired until it is converted. There are no provisions for conversions to occur during combat.
305.25 - Option 5: "It can be included in the battleforce at its current (crippled) factors and be treated as any other unit of the capturing player with one exception: The original owner could recapture it by expending damage equal to triple the crippled defense factor"
That's separate from Option 3, where it is taken back to a starbase for repair and conversion - thus it's clear that Option 5 means you can use it crippled without converting it first. Also, I think it's impossible to convert something without repairing it first, so that further proves that the ship can be used in combat without conversion (just at the crippled rate only).
Thus to Eric, I would say, no, you can't repair it by RCR at the time you capture it, as to use it *at full value*, you must convert it first. But you can use it in combat at the crippled value.
Note: I am citing F&E2K rules. Has Option 5 been deleted from from F&E2010?
Edit: Sorry, cross posting with Chuck. He already answered it.
Kevin, Option 5 remained the same in the 2010 edition of the rules. You may use it as described under (302.25) Option 5.
The options are completely separate, there is nothing within them linking the options together.
So, Option 5 says it can be used in battle with its current factors.
Option 3 goes into conversions.
There is no rule anywhere I can find, stating that captured ships cannot use RCR, and I can't see a logical reason for it either (fly to SB, get repaired, fly out).
In fact, at the top of 305.2, it states you only pick ONE option. So, if I choose option 5 and use it in combat, I can't pick option 3 later in the battle and thus no conversion rule applies (yet).
305.3 states pretty clearly if it survives option 5, or was never used, it can only use option 2-4.
So, sure, if it lives, its gotta be converted to be used.
But, if captured during the battle, and survives option 5 or isn't used, why can't it use RCR to repair and get back into the battle or at least fix it to avoid pursuit? Obviously, after the battle is over it has to use option 3 to return to a base for conversion.
It's because the rules for capturing ships were complete before RCR was added to the game (IMO).
I imagine that they're going to rule that you cannot repair a captured ship until it has been converted to the new owner's technology.
Richard, it's already been ruled that way up the Q&A thread by FEDS.
Not really Thomas, the ruling goes over option 3 and NOT option 5, which directly contradicts the whole "can't use in combat" thing.
The options aren't related, each is its own and rules in one don't matter to rules in another.
However I too expect that it isn't allowed, but right now, under the rules, nothing states that it can't be.
No, you can use the crippled ship in combat under Option 5. You just can't use Rapid Combat Repair on it to make a full value ship.
Weighing in..
Use of option 5 allows future use of options 2-4.
Technically option 6 should also be allowed, as it is simply passing the buck to an ally.
None of options 2-4 involve rapid combat repair.
Therefore one should not be able to use rapid combat repair on a captured enemy unit. To repair a captured enemy unit one must use option 3, unless you can find a ruling that says differently.
FEDS clarification on captured ships and the use of rapid combat repair issued in Q&A topic.
I am probably being mad - but have never noticed this before.
How many different Supply Grids are there?
413.4 confirms that a section without access to the Capital or Off Map area is a Partial Grd - but it then goes on to any planet or base not conneceted to the 'capital Supply Grid' is by definition a Partial Supply Grid.
If a force is in supply from the off Map area - which is seperated from the Capital (which has never been captured) - would forces either on a base - or in supply, but not on a base but only supplied from the Off Map area get replacement fighters for free?
My best guess is that Ships don't need to be on a Base to count as in supply - but due to the 'capital' referece in 413.4, only get free replacement fighters from the Capital Main supply grid?
But may be wrong - and just can't beleive I have never noticed it before!
Paul, I think (413.41) answers your question. A max of 12 replacement fighters.
No, to be more clear, what 413.41 says is that in a partial supply grid, 1 EP will supply 5 ships and provide 12 replacement fighter factors.
If that's the case then the first and second sentences of (413.40) contradict each other. I assume the use of "capital" in the second sentence is not intended to be that strict (note it is not capitalized) and its use here is a bit sloppy. In some cases it is correct, some empires only have capital main grids and no off map main grid like the Klingons and so the statement is correct, but for say the Federation it is not strictly true. I have always played that the off map grid is the same as the capital main grid for fighter replacements.
Yes, you are right. The rule first says one thing, then something else.
In regards to Eric's question about declined approach and being able to retreat immediately. I believe the question is answered by 302.221, and specifically the "or" clause: "... or if the attacking player challenges and the defending player declines, proceed to sub-step 2B." Sub step 2B is the base battle. So, regardless of the issues of the SoP that Eric raises, the rules themselves say that you proceed straight to the "base" battle, which will require at least one round of combat before one side or the other can retreat.
Thing is, nowhere does it say what to do if the *defender* retreats after a declined approach. I don't think proceeding to the base battle skips the fact that a previous declined approach battle was "fought" according to other rules.
If it does skip it, yet another notch of faith will be lost for me with rule inconsistencies.
I'm pretty sure the defenders are screwed in this case, but this is contradictory to our fiasco with 2 adjacent Lyran bases, where the Attacker couldn't retreat to either before the defender beat him there.
Your argument does have some merit. I don't think it's the way the rules were intended, but that's what FEAR is for.
It doesn't contradict the Lyran situation at all. In that case it was a *non-fighting retreat*. That case was dictated by the *order* of retreats - defender retreating first. That affected the attacker's retreat situation. When you retreated onto the Lyran BATS, it was non-fighting (I think), whereupon you could have done the same thing. But you didn't - I declined approach and you chose not to fight. When both sides decide not to fight, then no fight takes place. If you had pressed to the base I would have had to fight at least one round - just like the situation in your question.
No one doubts your contempt for the rules, or your lack of faith in rule inconsistencies or rules that don't make sense except for game balance. If you don't like the game as a result, then don't play it. If you like the game anyway, then play it and don't sweat it so much.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." -Ralph Waldo Emerson.
Edit: I can't recall the details of our Lyran situation. If you were unable to retreat to the BATS at all because priority 2 prevented it - then it's still a totally different situation. There retreat priorities dictated where you retreat, which has nothing to do with approach battles. In any case, there is no inconsistency.
The key point is that there was no battle for the defender to retreat from but we'll check the rule later...
I'll take a stab at this since I just finished my first turn of my first real game and I'm waiting for my opponent to do his economics.
Sequence of Play is rule (105) but the rules for how and when to conduct most of it is in (302).
The defender's first option to retreat is in (302.11). If he declines that, you move to (302.22), the approach battle.
Per (302.221) if the defender declines the approach, you move to the base battle. You don't get to the defender's next option to retreat until (302.7)
And that makes sense Troy.
What throws a wrench into it is the whole "a declined approach battle is a round of combat" thing.
If its truly a *round* of combat, a retreat could take place (and if the defender had cripples, just a pursuit battle!).
Perhaps I was thinking of this whole thing incorrectly though, and maybe this is why I couldn't find an answer.
Maybe after the first "round" of combat, the declined approach, the defender accepts the 1st or 2nd retreat chance to leave the hex. Since the RDU must be destroyed, and the hex isn't resolved until it is (302.721), it protects the defenders and allows them to retreat unmolested. If the defenders had any cripples though, it would not block the pursuit of them.
Heck, I dunno, which is why I asked the question 
Troy,
That is how I have seen it too... the argument though is I think... "was the intention to considered a declined approach as a full regular round of combat" if so I see how folks are maybe wanting some clarification. For the longest time with RCR I was assuming that one couldn't do this after a declined approach but it was ruled you could do so... which is a good thing and wise ruling. But it makes the questions about what else might be allowed after a declined approach.
I know in several situations I have caught myself in the situation of BATS + FF facing a force that is going to grind me to dust.. an had to think through the issue to not try and retreat the FF after a declined approach. Even though I know the rule pretty explicitely (to me at least) says nope ya cannot do such a thing.
Also for my 2 cents... there is already in my thought way too many opportunities to get ships out of harms way.. if we allowed retreat after declined approach this would be just another way to save a ship. On the other hand logically it seems if the enemies are coming to blast a base, it seems the FF could just head for greener pastures before things heated up at the base.
Dont you just love it my committment
Well, if you dont want the FF to die Michael, can you not declare it an unchosen flagship candidate and not put it in the battleforce?
Uhmmm errrrr Richard... stop using your blasted Vulcan logic on me!
Egads I think that works! Now I need to write the families of all those FF crews!
Although I think the issue still exists over a planet as PDU's cannot be a flagship at all, but over a base you are sure correct!
What is the command rating of a PDU?.......