(435.11) includes Limited War for transfering funds
(435.221) Any friendly or allied ship can be used...
(207.292) covers off-map movement for fund transfers (three turns from one capital to another)

So it can be done, just at a slower pace...

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, April 18, 2015 - 06:54 am: Edit

Stewart, (207.291) states that both empires must be at war. It doesn't say anything about limited war.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, April 18, 2015 - 09:55 am: Edit

The limited war rules say that if a rule does not say it is allowed in limited war, then it is not.

By Ken Rotar (Sir_Krotar) on Saturday, April 18, 2015 - 02:44 pm: Edit

The Kzinti are definitely not allowed to do raids into Federation territory. I guess the question is, are blockade runs considered to be raids all the time? Logically, I do not see why the Federation would not be totally fine with a Kzinti blockade run. However, what makes sense is not necessarily what the rules allow.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, April 18, 2015 - 02:59 pm: Edit

I don't see a problem with a blockade run.

I'm not sure about disallowing a raid into Klingon-held Fed territory. I'd actually want to go read a rulebook before answering that one.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar2) on Saturday, April 18, 2015 - 06:58 pm: Edit

Hmmm, then there's a small conflict between

(207.291) [Ships cannot move between off-map areas unless both empires are at War and allied.]

and (435.11) [Any empire can trasfer up to 20 EPs per turn to each allied empire provided that both are a War (including Limited War) and have become allies or cobelligierents.]

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, April 18, 2015 - 07:03 pm: Edit

Oh, are you talking about before the Feds are in the war? Then no to both.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Saturday, April 18, 2015 - 09:13 pm: Edit

SVC: The precise situation is the Feds are at limited war to support the Kzinti. It is now Alliance turn 8, where the Klingons have NOT attacked the Federation yet. There was no attempt at the Hydran expedition.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, April 18, 2015 - 11:00 pm: Edit

Then no raid and probably no run.

By Ken Rotar (Sir_Krotar) on Sunday, April 19, 2015 - 10:01 am: Edit

SVC: The rules do allow the Federation to do blockade runs into Kzinti space. However, it is not clear whether the Kzinti can do likewise. It seems if the Federation can do so, so too should the Kzinti. The problem is that, for obvious reasons, the Kzinti cannot raid Federation space (it would not be very friendly); however, a blockade run is not an aggressive act. The confusion lies in the fact that blockade runs are handled by the rules on raiding.

By Ken Rotar (Sir_Krotar) on Sunday, April 19, 2015 - 10:10 am: Edit

(435.11) says [Any empire can trasfer up to 20 EPs per turn to each allied empire provided that both are a War (including Limited War) and have become allies or cobelligierents.]

However, because (207.291) says [Ships cannot move between off-map areas unless both empires are at War and allied.], the safest way of sending EP (and I suspect the way many people have been playing) is not allowed.

If the Kzinti in the given situation cannot do a blockade run, there are only two choices remaining that I can think of: somehow, the Federation must do a blockade run into the Kzinti capital, which is usually quite difficult given the number of enemy ships in Kzinti space; or, stockpiles must be set up, requiring the Kzinti to make pickups through enemy held areas (not really too safe).

Am I missing anything?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, April 19, 2015 - 12:16 pm: Edit

Mike C can handle this.

By Jeffrey Tiel (Platoaquinas) on Monday, April 20, 2015 - 11:39 am: Edit

I'm not understanding rule (308.87) which states that this rule cannot be used if using (521.3) or (521.8). (521.82) states that the Gorns get a bonus for independent GCE's but refers that bonus back to rule (308.87). Nor am I seeing anything in (521.3) which references any sort of Gorn bonus. So, I must be missing something. Can anyone tell me what it is? What is the Gorn ground bonus?

By Michael Alan Calhoon (Mcalhoon2) on Monday, April 20, 2015 - 06:28 pm: Edit

Excerpted from (308.87) NOT A RULING

A force with 6 (or more) Gorn ships with at least 50 ComPot (3 of which must survive damage allocation) who are attacking a planet or base, and who do not use normal ground combat, may execute a special attack (after damage allocation.) They roll an unmodified 2d6, and if they roll a 9 through 12, score a SIDS on the base, or destroy one PDU.

That is the referred to Gorn bonus.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, April 20, 2015 - 07:55 pm: Edit

Essentially 6 or more Gorn ships with a minimum total of 50 offensive combat potential includes a "G" unit that may make a ground attack using (308.87) instead of (521.0).

This "G" unit cannot be used to replace the standard "G" units lost as a result of (521.0). At the same time should this Gorn special attack fail, there is no need to provide a replacement other than to have a minimum of 6 healthy Gorn ships totaling 50 to use it in the next round of combat.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, April 20, 2015 - 08:15 pm: Edit

Rule 308.87 does not refer to any sort of 'G' unit. 'Unit' has a specific meaning in F&E and probably should not be used in an explanation of this.

The main thing is that if you use 308.87, you cannot in the same round use a normal G attack or a purchased G factor for a G attack. 308.87 completely bypasses the marine assault rules.

It is also useful in that variable battle intensity does not modify the die roll, so in some cases it can be more effective than a normal G attack.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, April 20, 2015 - 08:39 pm: Edit

No, but that is the effect of the rule.

By Ken Rotar (Sir_Krotar) on Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - 01:28 am: Edit

Perhaps this rule would make the blockade run legal:

(320.511) The ship uses all of the raid rules, except that the target hex of the raid is a friendly or neutral hex within raiding range. The objective hex might be an off-map area.

Furthermore, the following rules seems to validate the rest of the process questioned above:

(413.452) EPs delivered to another empire via (435.0) could be delivered to a satellite stockpile in that empire’s original territory. This could include a satellite stockpile established for that specific purpose by the arriving EPs.

(413.453) EPs in a satellite stockpile cannot be moved [except by (435.0) by a tug (or other suitable cargo-carrying unit) of the same or an allied empire]; they cannot be transferred to the capital by (413.44). Such EPs could be used by any ship drawing on the Partial Supply Grid to pay for supplies or other costs without needing a tug to move them around inside the Partial Supply Grid.

By Jeffrey Tiel (Platoaquinas) on Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - 08:37 am: Edit

Thanks for the help on the Gorn bonus!
Jeff

By Jeffrey Tiel (Platoaquinas) on Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - 09:33 am: Edit

Gentlemen,

I am always torn between whether to add PF modules or Power Augmentation modules to starbases once the choice becomes available for PF-races. I'm curious what others have done on this question and why those choices are made.

Jeff

By Jeffrey Tiel (Platoaquinas) on Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - 10:39 am: Edit

Does anyone know what the EW levels are on a stellar fortress?

Jeff

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, April 22, 2015 - 09:43 am: Edit

JT, No, because stellar fortresses are not defined in F&E yet even in a playtest format. Even then they will vary between the drone using empires and other empires.

By Jeffrey Tiel (Platoaquinas) on Wednesday, April 22, 2015 - 09:01 pm: Edit

Thomas,

I'm pretty sure I saw a stellar fortress in the new Lyran SIT. That's just preliminary then?

Jeff

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Wednesday, April 22, 2015 - 09:23 pm: Edit

JT,

The factors are on the new SITs since it's part of the consolidated base project. I don't know what the EW factors are.

Ryan

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, April 23, 2015 - 09:10 am: Edit

I have a tidbit to add to the whole issue of a bare uncaptured planet blocking capture of a province because 422 refers to "units".

Aside from Rob Padilla's point that PDUs cannot block capture, so how can a bare planet, see also 438.2:

"A province is considered to have remained captured if no
ships of the original owner are in that province at the end of
either player-turn. A raid (314.27) that successfully disrupts
the province re-starts the four-turn clock."

This rule says that a province "remains" captured if no *ships* of the original player are in that province at the end of either player turn. Ships are distinguished from units. This rule stands in direct opposition to the notion that an uncaptured planet, by itself, blocks capture of the province it is in. This long term capture rule would make no sense if a bare planet could block capture of a province, as then the capture clock couldn't begin in the first place.

My opinion: rule 430.22 referring to a province being captured if no friendly "units" are in the province is a mistake or misprint. It should say "ships." Also, arguing that a planet is a "unit" and thus blocks capture of a province contradicts 430.25 (PDUs do not affect the province), 430.21 (requiring a friendly SHIP or BASE to create a disrupted province, as opposed to a captured province, when an enemy ship is present), and 438.2 (a province is captured if no originally owning SHIPS are present).

I don't recall if this has turned into an official question yet, but to me the solution to the ambiguity in 430.22 is to correct "unit" to "ship".