PDU/PGB: CR=0

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, March 19, 2013 - 09:07 pm: Edit

Please note that a CR of zero is different from a CR of "NA". This has already been ruled upon.

CR=0 means the unit can lead zero units if selected as a flagship.

By Michael Parker (Protagoras) on Wednesday, March 20, 2013 - 08:14 am: Edit

Chuck,

Here is the problem with that for example. The current latest FED sits has a BUNCH of stuff with CR=0 and nothing with N/A listed on it. Things like mega fighter markers are CR=0 so then am I to assume a IFF with a megafighter marker could be the command ship of a battleforce (albeit a silly battleforce).

A colony has a CR=0 but a planet is not shown at all so assuming a planet had no bases at all it could not be the flagship but a colony could?

Perhaps this is an issue with the SITS themselves, but things seem pretty mixed up in some frustrating ways with this CR=0/CR=NA metric.

Looking through the Fed Kling and Rom latest SITS I do not find a single thing with N/A CR the only things that do not have a number are certain things like pods that instead of being 0 are +1 +2 etc.

By Terry O'Carroll (Terryoc) on Wednesday, March 20, 2013 - 09:27 am: Edit

Every legal battle force must have a flagship. If fighters had a "N/A" rating, then (for example) an independent fighter squadron, unaccompanied by any other units, which reacted into a hex and pinned a frigate could not form a legal battle force for the ensuing combat. Same logic for any other unit with an N/A rating - N/A implies that this unit can NEVER form a legal battle force all by itself. As for pods, in F&E you never see pods appearing in a battle force independently of a tug (IIUC), so the +1/+2 applies to the CR of the tug which is towing them.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Wednesday, March 20, 2013 - 01:33 pm: Edit

Planets, support equipment (SWACS/Decoys/Mega markers/pods/shipyards) and support personnel (ADM/MMG/DIP/etc.) cannot serve as flagships.

Note:

(303.7) ATTRITION ONLY
If the only friendly units in the hex are fighters and/or PFs, the Battle Force is assumed to have a Command Rating of three and there is no flagship.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, March 20, 2013 - 06:32 pm: Edit

FEDS ruling on FR at a base is good and well-worded as an effective change. Chuck, do you want me to make a note in the warbook topic that this rule needs to be updated to make the ruling clear, or is that done automatically with rulings?

By Paul Edwards (Pablomatic) on Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 02:10 pm: Edit

Thank you Chuck and Thomas for the rulings and direction.

Not a complaint, ruling is fine, just comments about the ruling on Klingon diplomatic cruisers.
I had overlooked that they can be escorted. Nevertheless, the best solution to the problem of vulnerability of DIPs on diplomatic cruisers is to un-convert said cruisers and send the DIP on a regular ship to do the trade with allies mission. Two ships is a lot to commit when other races commit zero ships with their diplomats. Using a Prime Team to guard the ship takes it away from more valuable uses, etc. By removing the DIP from the ship, the Klingons can deploy them on allied homeworlds like everyone else, where they are only vulnerable to a (-2) E&S assassination attempt. Granted it might be worth keeping the D7N (for it's special abilities) at Lyrantan if you can ensure the Alliance cannot drone raid there, but any diplomat at Romulus is likely to be exposed to attack at some point and keeping him on a diplomatic cruiser is just asking for the cruiser to be crippled by E&S and then killed with a special raid. This is potentially a 27 ep damage raid (20 for DIP, 7 for D7N), not to mention future EP costs due to loss of allied trade for both Empires during one or more turns. Any competent Alliance player should attempt it until he succeeds in my opinion.

I do recognize that any eventual special raids fix may solve this problem for the Klingon player.

I won't un-convert in my current game Charlie Mike as the game could end any turn and the risk acceptable at this stage. Un-converting at least the D5N will be my policy in any new games I play as the Klingon however.

By Michael Parker (Protagoras) on Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 04:06 pm: Edit

Ted,

On the RCR it has been ruled on previously that RCR can take place between a declined approach and the base battle.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 04:24 pm: Edit

Ted, I think the reference in the SOP of immediately going to Phase 5 Step 2B is correct in the sense that you first skip Steps 3, 4, and 5, then conduct Steps 6 and 7 as appropriate because you can retreat behind the base after a declined approach battle as well.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 04:37 pm: Edit

Mike - the ruling that I posted was the only one I could find. Hence the request for clarification.

Thomas has an interesting point.

By Michael Parker (Protagoras) on Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 04:39 pm: Edit

I am almost positive a ruling exists, as I am the one that asked it. I could be wrong though it would not be the first nor last.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 06:21 pm: Edit

Mike, I searched the BBS and that's the only ruling on the subject I found. However, I'm terrible at searching the BBS, so maybe you can find it where I failed. Might also be in a Captain's Log? Dunno.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 09:03 pm: Edit

Reference to my post on Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 04:24 pm is (302.721).

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, March 23, 2013 - 07:40 am: Edit

Posted by me in the Q&A Topic already:

---

Quote:

Q522.33 Can a single ship of any type carrying more than one Prime Team in the Op movement phase or strategic movement phase? (522.33) states that a single ship may operate only 1 Prime Team at a time. However this conflicts with (539.131) and (539.231) below.

Rules for consideration: (539.131) and (539.231) each state that the unit in question may carry two passengers including Prime Teams and they may function normally.

---

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 08:17 am: Edit

In reference to Peter Bakija's question in the Q&A, even if you have over 14 offensive compot, you can still use SSC if you want to. (310.115).

By Michael Parker (Protagoras) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 09:13 am: Edit

Peter,

I think the thrust of Chuck's response was that you do not have to use escorts in SSC. So suppose your force was.

CVL FF SF

You just look at those three ships and you need not ever appeal to if the FF is escorting or not. For one escorts are not needed in SSC as there is no directing so there is no imperative to make it hard to kill the CV. Second there is no formation of a battleline, nor is there any appeal to if a flagship can control the line as there is no line, no CR calculation at all. There is no minimum battleforce as there is no battleforce.

In SSC you just see if your 3 units or less qualify for SSC. If they do not you can still have them qualify by voluntarily limiting them to 14-19 factors.

So I at least think Chuck was asking... can you find a situation where you even need to have escorts assigned to a CV in SSC.

The answer MIGHT be... when a CV previously assigned escorts in a standard battle retreats into a hex where SSC combat is possible. It still has escorts from the previous round. But even in this case I wonder if it even matters.

From your response you seem to be concerned about leaving ships out of SSC. That is never a concern.

If you have 3 or less ships and your opponent has 3 or less then you MAY be eligible for SSC. If either have 4 or more you have to use regular resolution.

If both sides have 3 or less, then you look at combat factors. If BOTH sides have equal to or less than 14-19 Off-Def compot then SSC MUST be used. Either side finding itself at 15 or more Off compot of 20 or more def compot may choose to limit itself to 14-19 in order to choose to use SSC.

So in practice both sides look at their compot totals and if they exceed 14-19 then decide if they wish to use SSC. If they BOTh decide to use SSC then SSC is used, if either decides not to use SSC then regular combat is used.

So in your CVE CLE FF example it is three ships. if you use the FF as an ad-hoc or not is irrelevant, since even if you do not use it, you can choose to voluntarity restrict yourself to a total of 14 off compot and be eligible for SSC. Say instead you have CVE BC EFF. you can choose to restrict this to 14-19 to be eligible.. or if you think your better off in regular combat you can choose to not restrict yourself and force BIR choices (which you can now choose to use the BC as an ad-hoc or not as you wish).

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 10:41 am: Edit

Er, I think a CV still is required to have escorts in SSC, or at least counts as three ships in any case. I certainly don't see anything that says that carriers have an exemption from their normal requirements.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 10:52 am: Edit

Ah, see, I think I was missing out being able to voluntarily reduce compot to fit into SSC (which is something I may have noticed once and then forgot, or maybe never have noticed). In which case, the variable AF of an ad-hoc escort is irrelevant, as if you wanted to, you could make a SSC force out of pretty much any 3 ships that have a total of 19 DF by just not firing some guns and being at 14 AF. Which seems weird, but ok.

By Michael Parker (Protagoras) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 12:31 pm: Edit

Richard,

There are no CR requirements in SSC that I can see. CV's are not required to have escorts it is just that if they do not have escorts then those missing escorts count towards the command rating of the flagship.

So a Kzinti CVS BC and CLD... if you put them in a battleforce would be {CVS blank blank} BC CLD. taking 5 command slots. If you put the same force into SSC it is just CVS BC CLD. even if behind the scenes your thinking of it as a CVS group with no escorts your still fine as CVS itself ha CR=9. BUT while I have not looked at it while writting this... I do not THINK SSC says anything at all about satisfying Command requirements (I could be very wrong there though). But with CV's and SSC I cannot imagine it would ever matter as even the dinkiest CV's have enough CR to command missing escorts + 2. Well maybe not the tiny Hydran CV the GNV or whatever.

By Michael Parker (Protagoras) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 12:33 pm: Edit

Peter,

You can also lower defpot also.. you can say "Even through these 3xD5's have 22-21 compot I will voluntarily limit them to 14-19.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 12:39 pm: Edit

For reals? You can have, like, 3xDN and make a SSC force out of them at 14-19?

That is a weird rule. But ok.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 12:55 pm: Edit

I'd be more than happy to have my 3xDW face your 3xB11 in SSC...

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 01:21 pm: Edit

Well, yeah, there is that.

By Michael Parker (Protagoras) on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - 01:25 pm: Edit

Yeah you can put 3xDN into SSC if you want... prolly better off rolling 36 compot though

By Timothy Mervyn Linden (Timlinden) on Thursday, March 28, 2013 - 03:56 pm: Edit

RE: Mr. Fay's question on refusing a capture roll:

I'd hope that you would still have the option to scuttle the captured ship to avoid pursuit. The rules may be written to imply that you cannot by the limits of what you can do with a crippled ship being more specific than the scuttle rules - but you should be able to. (I could see not getting salvage though, if you need to bring it back to a base to normally salvage the ship)