| By Keith Plymale (Zaarin7) on Monday, November 18, 2013 - 05:02 pm: Edit |
Then somebody needs to port this to the WarBook thread under the appropriate section.
| By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, November 18, 2013 - 07:32 pm: Edit |
Keith, Q&A items, even those in the archives do not need to be ported to the warbook thread. SVC already has a procedure in place for dealing with the Q&A for these items when we get to that product. This procedure is much more efficient than that used for the 2010 Rulebook update. Trust me.
| By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, November 22, 2013 - 12:40 pm: Edit |
Q520.41 Can a crippled SAF, which was crippled *before* the current combat phase conduct a SAF attack? To be clear, the SAF was crippled on the opponent's prior turn and then moved, crippled, into the current combat hex during the phasing player's operational movement.
| By Tim Losberg (Krager) on Monday, November 25, 2013 - 04:28 pm: Edit |
How are Operational bases treated in a Capital Assault defense.
Do they have to be "set up" at a planet for the duration of the battle?
Treated as Defense Limited assigned to a system?
Treated as an Auxiliary and split between the static/mobile?
| By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, November 26, 2013 - 05:29 am: Edit |
Q316.213 Makes reference to a 'maximum force'. What is the definition of 'maximum force' in this rule? It is unclear.
| By trent j telenko (Trent_Telenko) on Wednesday, November 27, 2013 - 12:51 pm: Edit |
Exactly how many Federation carrier battle groups are allowed in a battle force in Plain F&E2010?
Please note that the 3rd Way CVBG rule 315.6 in Advanced Operations (A.O.) prohibits use of more than 1 CVBG in a battle force.
Plain F&E2010 _does_not_ include the one CVBG per battle force restriction of A.O.
IOW, the Feds can deploy two or more CVBG using the F&E2010 rules set.
This is an extreme example of a legal CVBG battle force in F&E2010:
[CVL + CVE + DE + FFE] (Four ships counting as three command slots one fighter squadron of six factors)
[CVL + CVE + DE + FFE] (Ditto Above)
[BTV + CVS + DE + DE + FFE] (Five ships counting as four command slots BTV W/O escorts and the CVS with three escorts and two fighter squadrons of 12 factors total)
DN+ Command ship.
FFS Battle force scout
This difference rule gap was spotted by players down in the "First Blood" _Reports From The Front_ topic --
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board:
Federation & Empire:
F&E Reports from the Front:
Active Scenarios:
First Blood
| By Michael Tisdel (Jtisdel) on Sunday, December 01, 2013 - 06:37 pm: Edit |
This afternoon I played a face-to-face game of (698.0) The War that Almost Was from Captain's Log #21 and we uncovered the following questions:
Question 1: In section "(698.2) Time Tables for the Scenario", in "Gorn Units Available" it states:
1st (Home) Fleet is released if Federation units enter Gorn territory. (It is not released when Federations Forces enter the Neutral Zone). 6th Fleet is release if Federation units enter a province where those units are based.
Federation forces may enter neutral zone hexes only.
| By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Saturday, December 07, 2013 - 04:52 pm: Edit |
Q600.321. What does the last sentence mean with respect to setting up an allied MB in the unreleased fleet area of a friendly empire? The last clause is confusing. "An ally could set up a mobile base in the area of an unreleased fleet, but could not upgrade it and could not build it in the hex of an existing base to include a mobile base, of any other empire." I think that this means the answer to my question is 'the MB can't setup in the unreleased fleet area.' For example, on Coalition turn 2 the Lyrans attempt to set up a MB in the Klingon capital (hex 1411). This hex is part of an unreleased fleet province (Home fleet is not released until the Hydrans invade or Coalition turn 4, whichever comes first). Opponent asserts the Lyran can't setup a MB in hex 1411 on Coalition turn 2 due to 600.321, but must wait until Coalition turn 4. Is opponent correct?
FEDS: An empire cannot set up a MB/OPB in any hex of an unreleased fleet that contains a base (MB/OPB/BS/BTS/STB/SB) of an allied empire.
| By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - 11:11 am: Edit |
Q305.231 Can a captured war cruiser (any empire) be converted into a new heavy cruiser (same empire)? Also are variants except for survey cruiser variants available?
| By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - 06:07 pm: Edit |
(305.231) [excerpted] A captured ship refitted and put into use is considered a ship of the new owning player for all purposes (except that a ship of one empire cannot be converted into a variant of the capturing empire’s equivalent ship, but only into a variant of the original owner).
Quote:
A DW is not a variant of a FF; nor is an NCA a variant of a CW. A true variant installs/replaces weapons and other systems compatible within a given base hull but does not change the base hull. The capturing empire simply does not have the luxury of researching and developing base hull conversion for one-off conversions of captured ships.
RULING: Unless overruled by ADB, conversions of captured ships that change one base hull to another base hull are not permitted.
FEDS SENDS.
| By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, December 20, 2013 - 02:48 pm: Edit |
Q540.253. What happens to economic points that accumulate when a neutral planet turns to one side, but then later is made neutral again and then subsequently turned to the other side?
Detail: A Klingon diplomat operates unopposed at the neutral planet Bezwell Index in hex 2214. On Coalition Turn 3 the Klingons bungle negotiations at Bezwell Index (rolling a 6) and the planet joins the Federation. Per 540.253, 3 economic points accumulate at Bezwell Index on Alliance turn 3. The Federation player does not spend these points on a PGB. On Coalition Turn 4 the Klingon diplomat redeems himself (rolling a 1) and so Bezwell index becomes neutral again. On Coalition Turn 5 the Klingon diplomat succeeds yet again (rolling a 2) and Bezwell index turns Klingon and stays Klingon for the rest of the game.
What happened to the 3 economic points accumulated on turn 3? Do they disappear when Bezwell Index became neutral again? Are they saved and become Klingon property under the restrictions of 540.253? Is the Federation somehow allowed to get access to those 3 EPs? If economic points were not accumulated on Alliance turn 3 for whatever reason, just change the facts so that 3 EPs were saved while Bezwell Index was a Federation planet but before it reverted to neutral and subsequently to Klingon. Thanks.
| By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Saturday, December 21, 2013 - 10:27 am: Edit |
So we just discovered that apparently, Base Stations are better at EW than Battle Stations.
Somehow, a Kzinti, Fed, or Klingon Base Station gets to use 2EW points while maintaining a full 10 point attack factor. On the other hand, a Kzinti, Fed, or Klingon BATS has to drop to a 9 point attack factor from a 12 to use 2EW points. This makes no sense.
Is this intentional? A typo? An error?
I fully realize that the intention is that the Kzinti/Fed/Klingons get an EW advantage on a BS just like on a BATS, but there should clearly be *some* sort of reduction of attack factors to use more EW, given that the BATS has some sort of reduction of attack factors to use more EW.
| By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, December 21, 2013 - 11:30 am: Edit |
It's just a weird thing. BATS can go to 4 EW, which BS cannot, so BS aren't REALLY better.
| By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Saturday, December 21, 2013 - 01:51 pm: Edit |
I mean, it isn't like it is destroying anything or whatever, but it seems like it is an error. Dropping the BS to 8 attack for the 2EW (i.e. half way between 10 and 5, round up) seems like it would make sense.
| By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Saturday, December 21, 2013 - 01:53 pm: Edit |
Ooh--another question:
(521.35) i.e. the G attack modifier chart. You get +1 if you destroy 1 (or more) defense battalions on the planet you are attacking. Do you get this same +1 if you destroy one (or more) SIDS on a base you are attacking?
| By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Saturday, December 21, 2013 - 10:54 pm: Edit |
Peter, the BS thing needs to be in the SIT section, not here. Nothing here will change it.
| By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, December 26, 2013 - 10:43 pm: Edit |
Q540.254. This rule says that on a roll of 6, a diplomat (trying to turn an neutral planet that has joined an empire) is sent home to it's own capital.
My opponent says that it can then (on the same turn) go back to that planet (via strategic movement) or elsewhere.
I suggest that if this is the case, the die roll is meaningless, and it is probably meant to penalize the diplomat by putting it out of action for a turn.
Am I correct, or is my opponent? Or are we both wrong?
The only way an expelled diplomatic team can be sent home is via operational or [free] strategic movement -- both of which can only be performed during their respective movement phases. Once the expelled diplomatic team arrives in its capital, it ends movement for the remaining turn. Expelled diplomatic teams that returned to their capital on one turn may then move normally during their next turn.
FEDS SENDS
F&E Staff: Please note this step as an addition to the next update of the SoP.
| By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, December 26, 2013 - 11:36 pm: Edit |
Q540.253 Do neutral planets which are allied with an empire (for example, Sherman's Planet 1910) accumulate economic points when not at war? (540.15) PEACETIME: Diplomatic teams function for races at peace, so the Federation and Gorns could each use one of their teams to negotiate trade deals with each other and raise some money that could be spent during the pre-war period or saved for later.
There are conflicting rulings on this. My opinion is that they don't, but my opponent says that they do.
Quote:
(540.2) [Last line]...Any EPs generated by diplomatic teams may be spent by the owning race even if at peace.
(540.251) [Extracted] ...Note that if the planet joins your empire it is treated as a part of the adjoining fleet and if that fleet is inactive the new planet is in an inactive fleet area, but defenses can still be added to the planet and it produces income for the gaining race...
Economic Points generated by a converted neutral planet under (540.25) can be sent to the joining empire as long as there is a valid strategic movement path from the converted neutral planet to the joined empire. This transfer is no different than trade income generated with neutral empires under (540.23) which can be sent home to the trading empires 's capital as long as there is a valid strategic movement path from the hex the diplomatic team is in to the team's capital. This is the intent of the rule under (540.15) and (540.2) [above].
Note that the supply and strategic movement restrictions of the joining neutral planet under (540.253) refers to USING the converted neutral planet as a supply point/strategic movement node or to extend a supply grid/strategic movement grid prior to war with the adjoining empire.
Unless overruled by ADB or any prior ADB rulings, this ruling supersedes any prior rulings by FEAR or FEDS.
FEDS SENDS
| By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, December 27, 2013 - 08:07 am: Edit |
Note on prior FEDS ruling of the last subject:
FEDS notes that he failed to notice rules (540.15) and (540.2) in his ruling of 2008 and regrets the error.
| By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, December 27, 2013 - 09:11 am: Edit |
I think in your ruling above, reference to rule 540.523 should be 540.253.
FEDS: Fixed -- thank you.
| By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Sunday, December 29, 2013 - 12:59 am: Edit |
Q(503.622) What does the word "occupied" mean in this rule? The rule states: "A neutral zone hex is "captured" if it is occupied, or if the capturing player was the last to move a unit through it and no enemy ships are in or adjacent to the neutral zone hex." Some of my opponents have said that if, for example, a fleet retreats into a neutral zone after combat then at the point the NZ hex is "occupied" and thus captured under 503.622. Others of my opponents have said that the NZ hex is occupied only during operational movement, such as for example if a ship is moved to the NZ hex and then left there (thereby "occupying" it). The thought in this case is that retreat movement is too transient to exert control over the NZ hex and thus it is not "occupied" under the rule.
Please clarify.
| By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Sunday, December 29, 2013 - 07:50 am: Edit |
(503.622) A neutral zone hex is “captured” if it is occupied, or if the capturing player was the last to move a unit through it and no enemy ships are in or adjacent to the neutral zone hex. Players should keep a record on their Player Folio of which neutral zone hexes they have captured. (503.621) For every neutral zone hex held, the empire gets credit for 0.2 EPs of “provincial” income. Neutral zones between allies can be “captured” to increase the economic base in any mutually agreeable proportion.
Quote:
What does “occupied” mean in the context presented in (506.622)? It means that if a unit ENDS its operational movement in a neutral zone hex AND no enemy SHIPS are adjacent to or within that specific hex after completion of reaction movement, then that hex is also deemed as captured.
The only other way to CAPTURE a neutral zone hex under (503.622) is to:
A. Move a unit through a neutral zone hex using ONLY operational movement (503.623)
–AND–
B. Not have any enemy SHIPS in or adjacent to the specific neutral zone hex in question at the completion of each movement PULSE for that specific hex.
This allows for reaction movement to occur prior to the capture action for that movement pulse. Enemy ships that later move adjacent to other neutral zone hexes captured during the same player turn have NO EFFECT on those other neutral zone hexes captured during prior pulses.
Bottomline: The only way to capture neutral zone hexes is move through or end movement (occupy) in the neutral zone hex during operational movement while meeting the neutral zone capture restrictions.
Additionally, during research on this question, FEDS could not find any supporting rule that specifies that COLLECTION of income from a previously captured neutral zone hex is nullified by the adjacency of an enemy ship to that hex. Collection of income from neutral zone hexes is ONLY dependent upon “held” (captured) status at the moment of income collection under rule (503.621) below.
Quote:
Therefore, unless overruled by ADB, FEDS overturns previous rulings that nullified income collection of captured neutral zone hexes if an enemy ships is adjacent to the previously captured hex. By rule, enemy adjacency only effects initial neutral zone hex CAPTURE and not neutral zone income COLLECTION.
FEDS SENDS
| By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, December 29, 2013 - 01:19 pm: Edit |
I wish to appeal a portion of this ruling. It is my opinion that 'occupy' means that if a ship is occupying a NZ hex at the beginning of that ship's empire's turn, that the NZ hex is captured.
| By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Sunday, December 29, 2013 - 01:19 pm: Edit |
(503.622) A neutral zone hex is “captured” if it is occupied, or if the capturing player was the last to move a unit through it and no enemy ships are in or adjacent to the neutral zone hex. Players should keep a record on their Player Folio of which neutral zone hexes they have captured. (503.621) For every neutral zone hex held, the empire gets credit for 0.2 EPs of “provincial” income. Neutral zones between allies can be “captured” to increase the economic base in any mutually agreeable proportion.
Quote:
What does “occupied” mean in the context presented in (506.622)? It means that if a unit BEGINS or ENDS its operational movement phase in a neutral zone hex AND no enemy SHIPS are adjacent to or within that specific hex after completion of reaction movement, then that hex is also deemed as captured.
The only other way to CAPTURE a neutral zone hex under (503.622) is to:
A. Move a unit through a neutral zone hex using ONLY operational movement (503.623)
–AND–
B. Not have any enemy SHIPS in or adjacent to the specific neutral zone hex in question at the completion of each movement PULSE for that specific hex.
This allows for reaction movement to occur prior to the capture action for that movement pulse. Enemy ships that later move adjacent to other neutral zone hexes captured during the same player turn have NO EFFECT on those other neutral zone hexes captured during prior pulses.
Bottomline: The only way to capture neutral zone hexes is move through or end movement (occupy) in the neutral zone hex during operational movement while meeting the neutral zone capture restrictions.
Additionally, during research on this question, FEDS could not find any supporting rule that specifies that COLLECTION of income from a previously captured neutral zone hex is nullified by the adjacency of an enemy ship to that hex. Collection of income from neutral zone hexes is ONLY dependent upon “held” (captured) status at the moment of income collection under rule (503.621) below.
Quote:
Therefore, unless overruled by ADB, FEDS overturns previous rulings that nullified income collection of captured neutral zone hexes if an enemy ships is adjacent to the previously captured hex. By rule, enemy adjacency only effects initial neutral zone hex CAPTURE and not neutral zone income COLLECTION.
FEDS SENDS
| By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, December 29, 2013 - 02:50 pm: Edit |
Request for appeal withdrawn.
| Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |