(624.0) reference to Driving Winds scenario (625) be (625.0). Corrected cross reference. Thomas Mathews 27 Jun 2012

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, July 01, 2012 - 12:50 pm: Edit

Updates to Earlier Rules, Pg2, (540.1) The ISC has three diplomats should read (540.1) The ISC have three diplomats. has is singular, while have is plural and in this case the number is what the subject is referring to. Thomas Mathews 1 July 2012

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, August 12, 2012 - 09:04 am: Edit

(624.72)add reference: See (654.0). Adds improved cross reference to the limited war rules. Thomas Matehws 12 Aug 2012

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Friday, September 07, 2012 - 10:40 am: Edit

(706.0) Fifth Fleet should read Second Fleet. The provinces the Fifth Fleet is assigned to are on the Federation Border and in F&E 2010 this fleet is designated as the Second Fleet. Change for consistency. Thomas Mathews 7 Sep 2012

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Friday, September 07, 2012 - 12:20 pm: Edit

(706.0) Seventh Fleet in provinces 4901, 4903, 5101, 5104 should be the Fourth Fleet. The Fourth Fleet currently listed below the Seventh Fleet should be the Seventh Fleet. Reasoning: The Seventh Fleet is the Gorn Off Map fleet in F&E 2010. Thomas Mathews 7 Sep 2012

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, September 07, 2012 - 05:03 pm: Edit

Turtle:

Those fleet designations were later changed historically by the Gorns later in the war. I cannot offhand cite the source document but Ryan might be able to assist.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, January 20, 2013 - 11:37 am: Edit

(105.IW) 5-3B: Change "must be used in Phase 5 - Step 3B" to read "must be used in Phase 5 - Step 3K". Small Scale Combat is actually resolved in 5-3K not 5-3B. Thomas Mathews 20 Jan 2013.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, January 30, 2013 - 06:58 am: Edit

(545.21) Add CSF to list of ships taking 2 PPD mounts. The CSF improved strike carrier has 2 PPDs on the SSD. Thomas Mathews 30 Jan 2013
STRONG: Concurs.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, April 21, 2013 - 11:30 pm: Edit

(624.43) Seventh Fleet: (Seven ships, no auxiliaries) should read: (Seven ships, one auxiliary). The SAS is the small auxiliary scout. Thomas Mathews 21 Apr 2013 STRONG: Concurs.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, July 28, 2013 - 08:58 am: Edit

(105.IW) 3A-4H and/or should read or. A ruling on WYN trade states that only 1 pick up or delivery of EPs is allowed per transport. Thomas Mathews 28 July 2013

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Monday, January 20, 2014 - 05:21 pm: Edit

(545.21) PPD Points: My copy of the print version of the ISC War rulebook lists the BBL as using 3 PPD mount points during production. However, if going by the data on this ship class in Captain's Log #41 Supplemental File, this should be split between 4 (to cover the 4 PPD/2 Pl-S edition shown on the SSD) and 2 (for the 2 PPD/4 Pl-S variant described in the R-section). Gary Carney 20 January 2014.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 07:49 pm: Edit

I was trying to go over the historical ISC scenario in light of this potential startup, and found a few points I wanted to clarify.

(624.27): The Inter-Stellar Concordium is at a peacetime economy for the duration of the Gathering Winds scenario. According to (431.21) in F&E 2010, an empire can build a mobile base in addition to its scheduled production "if at war". However, in this case, the Y168 ISC OOB in (624.43) has only six pre-constructed MBs available, yet has twelve on-map BATS locations to attempt to place bases into. Should there be an exception made for the ISC allowing them to build MBs while at a peacetime economy, or is there a pre-existing detail which I may have overlooked? Gary Carney 22 January 2014.

(624.43): The set-up areas for the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Fleets include the outer ring of provinces (6003, 5903, 5604, 5306, 5209, 5211, 5413, 5716, and 6016) which under (624.22) have yet to be integrated into the ISC. If the deployment areas are left as-is, the ISC player would be able to get a "head-start" on capturing these provinces by simply placing his ships from the relevant fleets there at setup. Is this intentional, or should the ISC start from within its pre-Y168 territory instead? If the latter, I may suggest the Second Fleet setting up in provinces 6005 and 5905 only, the Third in 5606 only, the Fourth in 5409 only, the Fifth in 5713 and 6013 only, and the Sixth in 5411 only. Gary Carney 22 January 2014.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 09:11 pm: Edit

One other question (for now) on the above scenario:

(624.3): Over in (625.3), it's noted that the Pacification scenario begins with the ISC Player Turn on Turn #1, and ends on the Non-Aligned Player(s) Turn on Turn #10. But in this earlier scenario, whose Player Turn goes first: the Gorn/Romulan side, or the ISC? The notes in (624.26) only refer to the order in which the Gorns and Romulans alternate their movement in their shared Player Turn. But there is a line in (624.261) which states that the Romulans and Gorns "are for the purposes of convenience considered the Alliance". If that means the Gorns and Romulans move in the Alliance Player Turn, does the ISC then go first alongside the Coalition? (This would also be worth noting were this scenario to be played alongside The Wind.) Gary Carney 22 January 2014.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 09:16 pm: Edit

I think you should ask this last one in Q&A, as I couldn't figure it out either.

By John Wyszynski (Starsabre) on Thursday, February 27, 2014 - 07:38 am: Edit

In the OOB of the Federation First Fleet, there is a MEGA-A10 counter. But there is no ship in that fleet which uses A10s. There only ship that does is the CVA in the Fifth Fleet.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, April 28, 2014 - 04:12 am: Edit

Please discuss issues with the scenario "Gathering Winds" in this topic.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, April 28, 2014 - 07:53 pm: Edit

John, to what scenario are you referring to?

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Tuesday, April 29, 2014 - 02:14 am: Edit

I think he is looking at the scenario in CB. Turtle remember when I didnt have enough counters/markers to represent the SB fighter and planetary fighter (F14/F15) upgrade given to the Feds by rule (502.95)? I think that could be the issue.

This was fixed in the new CB GBX for most GW based scenarios involving the Federation that take place after Y171. If you find one put a note in the CB thread.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, April 30, 2014 - 01:44 pm: Edit

(624.0) Romulan Home Fleet proposed construction schedule.

Home Fleet:
Turn 1 Y168F: SP, SPF, SK, WE/KE.
Turn 2 Y169S: 3xK4*, 2xSK.
Turn 3 Y169F: No production.
Turn 4 Y170S: SUP, WE/KE.
Turn 5 Y170F: CON, [SPB,2xSKE].
Turn 6 Y171S: 3xSP, SKF, [SKB, SKE].
Turn 7 Y171F: No production.
Turn 8 Y172S: KC9†, FFH.
Turn 9 Y172F: SP, [3xSP>SPC]

The above schedule is proposed and subject to change. It is not the full Romulan Turn 1 thru 9 construction schedule.
WE/KE is a War Eagle conversion to King Eagle. A War Eagle must be at an eligible starbase for this conversion to be conducted.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, May 04, 2014 - 10:13 am: Edit

(624.3) Romulan Forces: All Units in the Home Fleet under (704.0) not listed as PWC. The PWC schedule is as follows:
Home Fleet:
Turn 1 Y168F: SP, SPF, SK, WE/KE.
Turn 2 Y169S: 3xK4*, 2xSK.
Turn 3 Y169F: No production.
Turn 4 Y170S: SUP, WE/KE.
Turn 5 Y170F: CON, [SPB,2xSKE].
Turn 6 Y171S: 3xSP, SKF, [SKB, SKE].
Turn 7 Y171F: No production.
Turn 8 Y172S: KC9†, FFH.
Turn 9 Y172F: SP, [3xSP>SPC]*

WE/KE is a War Eagle conversion to King Eagle. A War Eagle must be at an eligible starbase for this conversion to be conducted.

* The the SP to SPC conversions refer to the Romulan Survey Ships for turn 10 when the Romulans go to war with the Federation. If playing with SO these units are those listed under SO.

NOTE: The above schedule is proposed and subject to change. It is /b{not} the full Romulan Turn 1 thru 9 construction schedule.

This supersedes the April 30, 2014 post on this subject.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Sunday, May 04, 2014 - 04:41 pm: Edit

It seems odd that there are gaps in the production schedule. Can some things be rearranged so that every turn something is being built?

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, May 04, 2014 - 04:46 pm: Edit

At this point in time, it is unlikely. Note that the Gorns also have gaps in their production schedule for their home fleet.

Keep in mind this may change at some point in the future.

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Sunday, May 04, 2014 - 05:24 pm: Edit

The gaps are because it only lists the Home Fleet. Their is construction every turn.

All the pre-war construction (Hydran, Fed, Gorn, Tholian, Romulan) have production gaps when looked at on a Fleet basis.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Sunday, May 04, 2014 - 08:39 pm: Edit

Turtle and Sheepdog make good and valid points; I don't see a reasonable case to rearrange the the Romulan production schedule unless ADB directs otherwise.

By Pete DiMitri (Petercool) on Tuesday, May 06, 2014 - 04:57 am: Edit

I think that maybe the FFH built on turn 9 is a typo from the OB.

The Romulan OB shows an FH being built in each of the 3 fleets for PWC. But the turn by turn schedule has an FH being built on turn 7 and 9, and an FFH on turn 8.

So either the turn by turn schedule which lists the FFH is wrong or the total PWC listed in the fleets is wrong.

I guess this stuff really belongs in OB reports rather than ISC War though.