Gentlemen,

I worried about which neutral zone hexes would be included for the same reasons that bother you. It seems that clarity on the range of the non-expeditionary Tholian forces in 503.33 could be cleared up by the rule saying either that those forces may go no further than two hexes outside Tholian space or that they may go no further than three hexes outside Tholian space. The phrase concerning "including neutral zone hexes" is very confusing.

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 03:15 pm: Edit

(503.33) RANGE LIMIT: Tholian ships may not move more than two hexes outside of Tholian territory (including neutral zone hexes), and then only if at War.

This seems pretty clear that the 2 hex range includes NZ hexes.

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 03:47 pm: Edit

I don't know, Ryan. I'm not even sure which side of the discussion you are supporting.

Are you saying it's clear that the 2 hex range is of the original borders only, which means passing through the neutral zone hexes is included in the 2-hex limit? Or are you saying the two hex limit is of the original borders plus the neutral zone hexes?

(I never questioned it as being the original borders, but now that it's been brought up, I agree it's unclear what was actually intended.)

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 03:53 pm: Edit

I think the key is that neutral zone hexes aren't Tholian territory (or anyone's). Otherwise they wouldn't be NEUTRAL zones.

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 03:53 pm: Edit

Captured NZ are not Tholian territory, they are captured neutral zones.

2719 (tholian)>2619 (NZ) > 2519 (Klingon) two hexes from original border.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 04:11 pm: Edit

My point is that NZ hexes are not territory so do not count as Tholian territory when counting two hexes.

This means (for example) that the only Klingon territory which is two hexes away from Tholian territory are hexes 2518 and 2519.

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 04:15 pm: Edit

Correct Richard.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 04:18 pm: Edit

I completely agree with this assessment. Except that the rules say:

503.33 Tholians may not move more than two hexes outside their territory "including neutral zone hexes."

Why does it say "including neutral zone hexes"? What does that mean in this context?

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 04:20 pm: Edit

Peter,

Read the rule as I wrote it. That is a straight copy from F&E2K10.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 04:22 pm: Edit

Yes. I just wrote the exact same thing.

The rules seem to say that captured neutral zone hexes extend the range of the Tholian fleet. I can't imagine that was intentional. But then, if it wasn't, why does it say "including neutral zone hexes"?

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 04:25 pm: Edit

If the intention of the Tholian range limit rule is that Tholians (except for the detached fleet) can't move further than 2 hexes from *original* Tholian space (which is what I suspect is supposed to be the rule), why include the note "including neutral zone hexes" at all? It just confuses things.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 04:27 pm: Edit

Including neutral zone hexes means they are part of the two hex limit, not that they are part of Tholian territory, imo.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 04:30 pm: Edit

I suspect that you are correct (i.e. I am standing on the side of "Tholians can't move further than 2 hexes from their *original* territory"). But adding the note of "including neutral zone hexes" just muddles things. As the rule *could* have said:

(503.33) RANGE LIMIT: Tholian ships may not move more than two hexes outside of Tholian territory, and then only if at War.

With no reference at all to NZ hexes, and done exactly what it needed to do. There is no *need* to refer to NZ hexes in this instance. Unless they are being referred to for some purpose.

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 04:38 pm: Edit

It was probably added, at least as far back as 2K, because some players figured the NZs didn't count.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 05:14 pm: Edit

By by doing so, it makes the rule seem like it is specifically saying that NZ hexes count as somewhere you can count 2 hexes from. Which I don't think is the intention. But kind of how the rule reads.

By Keith Plymale (Zaarin7) on Monday, July 21, 2014 - 07:18 pm: Edit

Given the shape of the Holdfast it could be written something like this:

"Tholian ships may not move outside the boundaries formed by hex 2519, 2518 to 2916 to 3318,3319 inclusive. This does not effect ships on a Raid (314.19) mission."

I took the hex numbers from the Vassal map so if the printed map is different use those. Also the pattern goes from board edge to board edge that's why I wrote it that way.

If the staff/FEDS/FEAR/SVC/G.O.D. like this take it too the WarBook and maybe add it to the next clarifications in Captains Log. If not just ignore it but IMHO it is clearer than the RAW. I do bring almost 25 years of play testing and development to the table. Thank you for you consideration of my humble sublition.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Friday, July 25, 2014 - 10:49 am: Edit

Keith wrote:
>>I found this in reading this folder:
"Official ruling by SVC: All light escorts now cost 0.5 EPs to produce or convert as determined by staff and SVC. SIT’s to be adjusted at a later time to reflect this change. FCRs are not normal light escorts and do not count in this ruling." >>

Yeah. This is important. Light escorts cost .5 to make instead of 1.

>>Would a better way to represent this be to say:
"...All size class 4 escorts now cost 0.5 EP's less than currently stated to convert as determined by staff and SVC. SIT's to be adjusted at a later time to reflect this change. FCR's are not normal light escorts and do not count in this ruling." >>

No? I'm not sure how that would be an improvement over the current wording. Because:

A) As noted elsewhere, not all Size Class 4 escorts are "Light" escorts--Hydran DE (SC4 but "Heavy") and Kzinti DDE (SC4 but "Heavy") are two examples.

B) The wording of "0.5 EP less" is not more helpful than "they cost .5 EP to produce or convert". And is weird and unwieldy.

>>Just trying to seek clarity in my understanding. Is the mention of "...produce..." not meant to mean what it literally says? And is light escort defined by doctrine or by hull size? >>

"Light" escort is defined by the SIT (i.e. ships are noted as a "Light" or "Heavy" escort on the SIT). I mean, yeah, *most* of the time, "Light" escorts are SC4. And I don't think there are any SC3 "Light" escorts. But there are enough exceptions that one shouldn't simply assume that if an escort is SC4, it is a "Light" escort (although most of the time, you'd be right).

In terms of "Produce", I'm not sure what you are finding confusing there. In F+E, building or converting escorts are interchangeable--there is no limit on substituting or converting them. So you can build them for a .5EP surcharge over the base hull, or convert them for a .5EP at a conversion facility.

By Keith Plymale (Zaarin7) on Friday, July 25, 2014 - 12:31 pm: Edit

Okay then just for example the Fed DDE. In the listed by SIT CVA group it's the light escort, in the listed by SIT CVS/CVB it's the inner escort. On it's individual line it is indeed defined as a light escort. So the individual line rules. Clarity achieved and I will remember this process in posting in the future.

Sorry for my legal trained mind. To me the word "produce" in the original post is different from "conversion". I do apologize.

By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Friday, July 25, 2014 - 12:37 pm: Edit

No problem, Keith. Just trying to make sure stuff gets in the right place so it is recorded properly. They are good questions and will help others as they read the appropriate topics for them.

Keep asking. If you have a rules question, then post in the Q&A. If it is a why was this rule done this way, it doesn't make sense, post in the why section. And, if you just have a general question about something for clarification, feel free to post here for all three, as you might find it has been answered before and someone will enlighten you on the subject. It is a friendly place and we like to keep it that way.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Friday, July 25, 2014 - 12:41 pm: Edit

The DE is a "Light" escort by virtue of the notation on the SIT that says it is a "Light" escort (I'm not trying to be snarky here--just making sure things are clear). Any information about whether it is an "inner" escort of a particular group or not is mostly irrelevant--pre the 2K10 rules, the basic set didn't have separate escort counters, just group counters (and also no concept of "Light" or "Heavy" escorts; those were invented in an expansion set). So if you had a Fed CVS group counter (i.e. 3CVS, which I think still shows up in the online SIT), there had to be a definition of what was in it (which, IIRC, was a CVS, DE, FFE). Those notations (i.e. all the "here is what should be in this group" notes on the online SIT) is really just an artifact of the previous edition of the game (and that a lot of people still have those CV group counters around, and it is important to be able to know what that represents if you end up with some or have some left over).

In 2K10, they completely removed the unbreakable carrier group rules, and replaced them with the flexible carrier group rules and scads of escort counters. As a result, there is no need at all to pay attention to what is "supposed" to be in what CV group (i.e. those notations on the online SIT for, like, "3CVS" or "4CVN" or whatever). As you can build your carrier groups however you'd like, as long as it follows the rules for escort groups (i.e. correct number, must have at least 1 light escort on the outside or it counts as having it anyway, etc). And what escorts are "Light" or "Heavy" are simply notations on the SIT under that particular ship.

In terms of "produce", that rule specifically means "produce" as in "build new", as opposed to "convert". Again, as escorts are completely unrestricted in terms of production, you could "produce" (i.e. build) 10x Fed FFEs in one turn, and then convert another 10 at various starbases if you really wanted to.

By Keith Plymale (Zaarin7) on Friday, July 25, 2014 - 12:55 pm: Edit

No problem Peter. I go back to the 1986 version so I'm familiar with the evolution of the groups. And I asked about the inclusion of the groups on the SIT and SVC said they stayed in because some folks still use them.

"In terms of "produce", that rule specifically means "produce" as in "build new", as opposed to "convert". Again, as escorts are completely unrestricted in terms of production, you could "produce" (i.e. build) 10x Fed FFEs in one turn, and then convert another 10 at various starbases if you really wanted to."

Understand all that.

"So you can build them for a .5EP surcharge over the base hull, or convert them for a .5EP at a conversion facility."

This was the clarity I was asking for. Thanks.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Friday, July 25, 2014 - 02:36 pm: Edit

>>No problem Peter. I go back to the 1986 version so I'm familiar with the evolution of the groups. And I asked about the inclusion of the groups on the SIT and SVC said they stayed in because some folks still use them. >>

Yah--like, there is no actually reason you *can't* use the CV group counters, and so I suspect that some folks still do. And they often show up if you are picking up cheap lots of counters off e-bay or something. So it is important that somewhere there is a record of what all those counters represent. So I guess having them in the online SIT makes perfect sense. But I can imagine it also occasionally confuses folks :-)

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, July 25, 2014 - 08:14 pm: Edit

Copied from Q&A:

By Bill Steele:
My question is about retrograde movement. Can Hydran ships supplied by the FCP use retrograde movement to move to a Kzinti retrograde point?

Example: 12 Hydran ships with the TUG+FCP and the diplomat come out of the center of Lyran space and meet up with a Kzinti fleet at Klingon Batt 0906. After flashing the appropriate gang signs and vaporizing the BATT together can the Hydrans follow their new friends back to a Kzinti base?

206.31 says units supplied by a tug can use retrograde movement; does that apply to the special Hydran expeditionary tug?

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, July 25, 2014 - 08:24 pm: Edit

A couple of things.

First, the FCP does not provide supply. It is the special supply tug that does this.

Second is that it has been established in discussion on these forums (in the past) that the special supply tug itself does not enable retrograde movement. So you would have to be in supply by some other method to be eligible for retrograde movement.

From FEAR (Q&A) archive:

By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Friday, August 19, 2011 - 01:38 pm:

...

A: A valid retrograde path would have to be determined to get a Hydran into Federation space. This would require a Hydran ship to be adjacent to a BATS blocking the path and they would have to have a valid supply point to draw from. The Hydran supply Tug is not a valid retrograde supply point. It is essentially an underway replenishment ship like in the current navy.

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Friday, July 25, 2014 - 09:03 pm: Edit

But does it *enable* retrograde? It itself is not a retrograde point, but if it's supplying you, would you not then be able to retrograde to another location?

Then again, is there an example of having a valid retrograde point and it *NOT* supplying you for retrograde? If not, then the question is moot - the Supply Tug would not be needed anyway.