My understanding is that this is all moot; Neutral zone planets do not accumulate EP at peacetime. They don't join the war until both empires that they are adjacent to are at war with each other, and until that time, they don't accumulate EPs.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, December 20, 2013 - 06:16 pm: Edit

I'm inclined to rule this way unless someone can provide a compelling argument otherwise.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, December 20, 2013 - 07:06 pm: Edit

For what it's worth, Richard, I agree that a *neutral* planet doesn't gather EPs, so probably a planet that converts, unconverts, and then converts the other way probably doesn't start accumulating EPs until it re-converts. However, neutrals that convert *do* accumulate EPs. It's black letter. 540.243

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, December 20, 2013 - 07:08 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

I'm inclined to rule this way unless someone can provide a compelling argument otherwise.

---

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, December 20, 2013 - 07:12 pm: Edit

540.253 Only says such a planet produces income, not that it can accumulate it in peacetime.

Empires produce income too, during peacetime, but cannot accumulate it. I don't see why a NZ planet would have an exception to this without seeing an explicit rule (or ruling) say so.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar2) on Friday, December 20, 2013 - 07:37 pm: Edit

Considering that a PGB costs 4 EP (411.12) and a PDU costs 7 EP (or 8 EP if this is considered self-generated [433.421]), a neutral planet has to accumulate EPs....

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, December 20, 2013 - 08:00 pm: Edit

I think the reference to PDUs added may be PDUs paid for by the allied empire, in the same manner that an empire can add PDUs to an unallied neutral zone planet.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, December 20, 2013 - 11:19 pm: Edit

Producing income and not accumulating it makes no sense to me. Why would you have a rule that says a converted neutral planet produces income - and then say that it is not part of the new owner's grid until the turn after entry? Saying it doesn't accumulate during peacetime, to me, makes the entire first phrase pointless.

In fact, I *think* there is a ruling already out there that says that the former neutral produces income and holds it - with the new owner not able to access the money until the planet officially joins under the 540.253 limits.

Maybe the whole thing needs to be revisited.

By Mike Parker (Protagoras) on Monday, December 23, 2013 - 08:23 am: Edit

There is a ruling to that effect. And in addition one can use Orion smuggling to ADD EP to a neutrals treasury but you cannot smuggle it out. I was the initiator of that ruling.

If we ruled that neutral planets do not accumulate ep then we might as well in my opinion remove the rule allowing dips to sway NZ planets at all. You can use a dip to make 2ep for your side (1ep if you go to the LDR). However swaying a planet is of almost no value to you if it does not accumulate ep. There is too great an opportunity for the opponent to re-neutralize it, add to it the lost revenue and I think very few folks will even try. Maybe the klingons buying an extra dip to try and get sherman's planet as a forward base for the invasion of the Feds might be a good play... but even with full Lyran EP concessions to them I find the Klingons have plemty of other uses for their EP beyond a dip that becomes almost useless once they DOW the feds.

I don't really care if the whole swaying of NZ Planets is removed, but I think we should be aware if we prohibit these swayed planets from accumulating EP we are almost doing exactly that!

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, December 23, 2013 - 08:44 am: Edit

Swaying planets is totally worth it - you get full income and 2 PDU as soon as the war swings their way, for +2 EP a turn over the period that the planet would be waiting for annexation and recovery.

Getting multiple turns of EP on top of this could be a ridiculous amount of income when the NZ planet goes to war along with it's ally, possibly as much as 15 EP in the case of Midketh.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, December 23, 2013 - 08:50 am: Edit

From the Q&A archives:

Chuck Strong:
Ref (540.2) Missions for Diplomats

Q1.4: Under (540.253) NEUTRAL PLANETS: "If a Neutral Planet joins an empire, it produces income..."

A1.4: Peacetime can be spent but not saved. Limited war can be spent and saved. Exhaustion affects this fully.

By Mike Parker (Protagoras) on Monday, December 23, 2013 - 10:21 am: Edit

I disagree. You are loosing out on 2ep every turn you use a diplomat to try and sway a NZ planet. This is money in your cofferes in a real sense that is lost. Two things can also happen that are bad. You can end up putting the planet in an enemy camp instead of yours. And once you do sway the planet you often invite your opponent to try and put it back to neutral. To 'protect' your investment in a swayed planet you will often leave a dip there so that the enemy cannot easily push it back to neutral, so you lose 2ep a turn there for the 3ep you gain assuming the planet doesn't end up neutral again. I stick to my point except the very real benefit of getting a defended base close to the enemy for use by the Coalition invading the Federation I see this as a net loser economically. If you get to gain the 3ep a turn to eventually buy defenses then it seems to break about even maybe be slightly for your favour.

I wasn't aware FEDS had previously ruled on this issue. It conteracts earlier rulings by FEAR however, and it makes a whole bunch of the language in the rule rather moot unless I am missing something.

If this is and/or becomes the rule I will just ignore this option for the most part. Its not a game changer in either respect in my opinion.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, December 26, 2013 - 10:30 pm: Edit

I found this ruling in the 2010 archive. Apparently you can buy PDUs while at peace at the neutral planet. This would imply the EPs could be saved, too.

---

Quote:

Ted Fay:
Q1: Can the Federation add PDUs to a formerly neutral planet (went to Federation side as a result of diplomacy) when the Federation is at limited war after turn 7?

A1: (602.49B) specifically disallows deployment of PDUs in unreleased fleet areas. (540.253) allows a neutral planet that joins your empire to have PDUs added to it up to the normal limit. It does not say you are limited by the war status of that PDU. It goes on to further say that the neutral planet is not part of the supply or strategic movement grid of until the turn after the race is at war with or allied to the other adjoining race. So, the neutral planet is a partial supply grid until war is declared or an alliance is signed. The neutral planet can save up its eps and buy PDUs from that supply of eps but, cannot have eps brought in for PDU or other base upgrades. (540.251) also attaches the planet to the adjacent neutral zone and activates the planet when the fleet goes active.

---

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, December 26, 2013 - 10:45 pm: Edit

I think this ruling is incorrect, it ignored the peace time restriction of no accumulation of EPs.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, December 26, 2013 - 11:28 pm: Edit

Well, perhaps this aspect of 540.25 needs to be re-addressed then. You should do another Q&A.

By Terry O'Carroll (Terryoc) on Friday, December 27, 2013 - 12:53 am: Edit

I think that the accumulation of EPs is allowed for neutral worlds because they are not part of your empire and not under the same restrictions. Can't check exact wording of rule however.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, December 27, 2013 - 07:21 am: Edit

Diplomatic EP questions have been addressed in the Q&A.

By Rob Padilla (Zargan) on Friday, December 27, 2013 - 05:06 pm: Edit

So I read the ruling.

Is it saying what I think it is? It seems to say that the EPs the neutral generates gets sent to the general treasury.

Is that correct?

FEDS: Yes -- under the conditions of the rules and stipulations cited in the ruling.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, December 27, 2013 - 05:50 pm: Edit

Yup, that's my understanding too. Well, you should say "sort-of" neutral as the planet did get swayed.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, December 27, 2013 - 08:42 pm: Edit

Rob:

Be careful with your semantics...

A neutral planet does NOT generate any income for any player empire.

A formally neutral planet, converted by diplomatic efforts, generates income in peacetime for the controlling empire as long as there is a valid strategic movement path to the joined empire's supply grid. During wartime, the converted planet is officially grafted into the joined empire's supply grid and strategic movement system under (540.253).

If a neutral zone planet joins an empire through diplomatic efforts then it is no longer a "neutral" planet unless, through counter-diplomatic efforts of (540.254), it reverts to back to a neutral status.

By Rob Padilla (Zargan) on Saturday, December 28, 2013 - 02:38 pm: Edit

Chuck,

Yes that was what I meant. A planet that was swayed over generates income for the joining empire.

So what if the empire it joins is not at war yet? Like the Feds turns 1 through 6. I would think said swayed planets income would get absorbed into the rest of the peacetime spending and NOT be accumulated.

Is that correct?

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, December 28, 2013 - 02:53 pm: Edit

No, it is considered under diplomatic income.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, December 28, 2013 - 04:25 pm: Edit

Rob stated: I would think said swayed planets income would get absorbed into the rest of the peacetime spending and NOT be accumulated.

FEDS: Your thinking is NOT in line with the stated rules; please read my ruling as I posted with the supporting rules.

---

Quote:

(540.2) [Last line]...Any EPs generated by diplomatic teams may be spent by the owning race even if at peace.

---

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, December 29, 2013 - 11:39 am: Edit

(503.622) NZ capture ruling.

There is some strangeness here. Consider this example:

There are Klingon ships in 1013. During the Hydran turn, they react and move into the neutral zone. They are still there at the beginning of the Klingon turn.

According to the new ruling, they would not have captured the nz hex, because it can only be captured by operational movement.

I suggest that 'occupy' means that if a ship is occupying an NZ hex at the start of the ship's owning empire's turn, that it capture that NZ hex (regardless of whether enemy ships are adjacent or not).

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, December 29, 2013 - 12:31 pm: Edit

Richard, the NZ hex is only captured during the op movement phase. It has been that way since the beginning. See (503.62). Even if an enemy unit reacted in and won the hex it would not count for capture until the Op Movement phase of the reacting player.