I think the answer to the first of my recent Q&A gave the information that supply cannot pass through a neutral hex, so that WOULD put a ship starting in the WYN cluster out of supply, so far as I understand. I could be wrong, which is why I asked the second question.

By Patrick Sledge (Decius) on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - 08:03 am: Edit

By Mike Parker (Protagoras) on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - 05:19 pm: Edit

Deleted by Mike P

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, September 06, 2013 - 12:47 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

(537.12) Infiltration: Once per turn, one resistance movement on the planet can attempt to infiltrate one of the ships (not bases) at the planet's location. Designate the target (which must be one of the 3 ships with the lowest defense factors).

Can this kill an FCR? That seems way powerful. It seems that the intent of the rule is to kill a small ship, not an expensive unit like an FCR.

---

By Rob Padilla (Zargan) on Friday, September 06, 2013 - 06:16 pm: Edit

Ohhh forgot they can't target auxes. Pretty sure Ted hates these because I had a game where I got lucky early and nailed a few expensive units.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, September 06, 2013 - 06:16 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

Well a FCR is a small unit. IMO this just gives the attacker a reason to never keep FCRs over captured planets. Same goes for most auxes.

---

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, September 06, 2013 - 06:37 pm: Edit

Yes, my personal opinion is that the infiltration rule is silly and I don't like it. It makes no sense that even a prime team could destroy a B10 by itself - even theoretically - though "infiltrators" have the same chance of doing it as killing an E4 (assuming the B10 doesn't have 3 or more escorts of lower defense rating). In fract, prime teams generally can only cripple a ship at best. Why the difference? Besides, why should it matter *at all* how many lower defense rating ships are present? Why not pick any ship as a target. Makes more sense just to eliminate the rule.

But this is my personal opinion and has no bearing on the question or on the operation of the rule.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, September 07, 2013 - 08:57 am: Edit

In response to Pete's question on infiltration, if my opinion, if the FCR was part of a carrier group that has not been broken up, then it should be excluded from being selected as a valid target. The FCR or other inside escorts or a carrier itself may only be chosen if they are exactly 3 ships in the hex in question.

Reasoning:

(308.1): Carrier Groups may only be attacked in one of 2 ways, the outer escort may be attacked or the entire group may be attacked.

(320.48) Special Raids states that Carrier Groups which have remained intact allow only the outer most escort to be attacked.

(537.11) Sabatoge and (537.12) Infilitration are limited to one per empire per turn.

(540.21) Diplomatic Teams modify Sabatoge and Rebellion roles by -2.

By Rob Padilla (Zargan) on Saturday, September 07, 2013 - 11:58 am: Edit

Thomas, the problem is that *only* works IF the FCR used it's emergency escort ability to become an inner escort. Otherwise they are *always* considered the smallest escort. See 526.351 and 526.353.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Saturday, September 07, 2013 - 12:09 pm: Edit

I agree with Ted on this one (at least partially). I wouldn't remove the rule but rather further develop it.

The concept of Resistance Movements (RM) is palatable but the operation of the Infiltration rule is a bit out of sync with the Sabotage rules (the other RM) certain Espionage mission rules (designed sabotage attacks).

Infiltration of ships at a planet seems to be a much more difficult operation that the Sabotage RM. The ships themselves are mobile units vs a PDU/PGB. It would take a very specific and concentrated plan to get people and equipment into the precise location in space and through the security measures of the occupying forces. Especially from a devastated world. Where are the modifiers for this rule? The rules in place make it SO much easier to pull off than a Sabotage RM.

Sabotage is stated as success on 10, 11 or 12 (537.11). An can only attack a Planetary Ground Base (PDU or PGB)(537.111). The first modifier (if there are no others) really make it only successful on an 11 or 12 (537.112). The successful attack really is ineffective as an IGCE can be given up instead of the intended PDU(PGB) target.

Infiltration (which ideally should be considered an Advanced Resistance Movement as it is harder to pull off) has none of these modifiers. I cannot think of modifiers to place other than maybe size class or command ratings. I would recommend that when the PO revision is done (eventually) that a cost be applied (supporting and organizing a specific RDU into an Infiltration force) to performing this venture. In lieu, of paying the economic cost that a die roll modifier be applied. Reflective of the difference between an organized resistance and a loose plan to attack the oppressors. I like the cost vs no cost option as it doesn't prevent players from giving it a go but rather make it less effective.

In relation to the question at hand...IMO Any ships/units stationed at a planet should be potential targets (especially Auxes, even though the rule currently disallows this, as they need to stay close to supply areas where the supplies and defensive patrols are). FCR is really just another specialty ship that should be able to be targeted (possibly under a general modifier). Carrier group formation should not matter one bit as an infiltration would not be done with ship attacks but rather be done with (shuttles (maybe), transporters and other subsumed equipment & planning).

Once ground troops came into being I really wanted occupation of planets to be a designated concentration of ships, troops, and supplies. The game could easily absorb the potential for troops being stationed (we already have some troop counters) at captured worlds as an occupying force separate and in replacement of the IGCEs. As of now this has not been fully developed. (A portion of this vision was the espionage missions which did not turn out exactly as I had first proposed.) Maybe in the future it can be developed further.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, September 07, 2013 - 05:59 pm: Edit

Rob you didn't read what I said at the beginning, which was if the FCR is a part of the carrier group.

If it is not part of a carrier group it is fair game.

This goes along with another rule that is out of whack in regards to GEDS, and that is stealing a crippled ship under E&S missions. Again the same thing has happened where a Carrier was crippled in combat but the escorts aren't. However the group remained together.

The whole purpose of being in a group is protect the group. The most vulernable unit is not the FCR or carrier, it is the outermost escort.

By Rob Padilla (Zargan) on Sunday, September 08, 2013 - 05:28 am: Edit

Thomas I understood your point. What I'm saying is that the FCR is only guaranteed to be an *inner* escort if it uses it's ability. Otherwise you'd have had to have assigned it as a CV escort in the combat step in an overstuffed group to put another light escort in front of it, thus rendering it's emergency escort ability useless.

By Daniel Glenn Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Monday, September 09, 2013 - 07:20 pm: Edit

And since most FCRs are smaller than other escorts they wind up being the outside escort if assigned in the regular escort assignment step, so they're still vulnerable when part of a group unless assigned as an emergency escort.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, September 09, 2013 - 07:55 pm: Edit

This is easily dealt with by having a hull of the same type as the FCR for use in such cases, whether it is a standard warship, a variant that can be used as an adhoc, or an actual escort.

By Rob Padilla (Zargan) on Monday, September 09, 2013 - 08:14 pm: Edit

Richard, that still forces the player to actually *use* the FCR as a normal escort and hense loose it's emergency escort ability.

Far easier just to not base FCRs at enemy planets and take no risk with them.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, September 09, 2013 - 08:24 pm: Edit

Irrelevant. I was addressing Daniel's point that FCRs wind up being an outside escort, not the point that an FCR loses it's emergency escort ability if used as a standard escort.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, September 09, 2013 - 10:07 pm: Edit

FCRs do not automatically become the smallest escort. The rare exceptions are the Klingon E4R when paired with the F5E, and Kzinti FCR when paired with a FKE. Even then as both the Klingon E4A and Kzinti EFF are have the same defense factor as their FCR counterparts. (515.31) makes no distinction beyond the defense factor and if 2 ships are of equal size, it is the owning player's choice which is the outermost escort.

This gives value to those little escorts everyone complains about.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, September 09, 2013 - 11:01 pm: Edit

Or you can use adhocs instead, and not have to pay for those little escorts.

By Mike Parker (Protagoras) on Tuesday, September 10, 2013 - 09:14 am: Edit

back to the original point.

The danger is the Klingon E4R since there are no other small ships to put with it at a planet that will screen it. This is one of the primary reasons I like the F5 version. Oh other empires have this issue also the Kzinti come to mind. But they are not often garrisoning planets.

What is really needed is a way to say "these three ships are at the planet and this whole big fleet is in the hex but not at the planet" for purposes of infiltration. But maybe the idea of the rule is that during the 6 month turn any ship in the hex would routinely visit a captured planet for r&r.

In any case the rule is abundantly clear on this point, if an FCR is amongst the ships with the 3 lowest defensive factors it is eligible. So don't base E4R's at a planet and if you base the F5 FCR make sure you have three E4's of some variety there!

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, September 10, 2013 - 11:55 am: Edit

I think the E4R would be protected if inside of a carrier group but not the outer escort. I could be wrong though.

By Mike Parker (Protagoras) on Tuesday, September 10, 2013 - 01:46 pm: Edit

Well infiltration does not care about being an escort or a CV or anything like that. It isn't directed damage it represents other methods of puting the smack down on a unit.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, September 10, 2013 - 02:01 pm: Edit

I'm not really sure it overrides carrier group protection. I'd have to check the Q&A archives at the least before I was even remotely confident I could get an FCR in a carrier group - and even then I'd anticipate a Q&A session resulting, unless there's already a ruling on it.

By Alan De Salvio (Alandwork) on Tuesday, September 10, 2013 - 05:11 pm: Edit

This is GOD's way of telling you not to build E4Rs for garrison duty

By Rob Padilla (Zargan) on Tuesday, September 10, 2013 - 08:37 pm: Edit

The infiltration rules only have a targeting restriction that it *must* target one of the three smallest defense factors. That's it. So as written right now, this is a case of the more specific rule trumping the more general rule of CV groups.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, September 10, 2013 - 08:41 pm: Edit

I wouldn't care to bet on which way a ruling about that would go.