(525.23H) Establishes the HDW HOG as costing 14 EPs and giving a HDW operating it a (8H) factor in place of the normal (1) factor, with the Federation as the only exception.

The Hydran HDW has three fighter factors instead of the normal one, but the HDW countersheet PDF (http://www.starfleetgames.com/sfb/sfin/HDW.pdf) just shows it with (8H); effectively missing two paid for fighter factors (as opposed to the V-mode, which does have two extra fighter factors).

Should the Hydran HOG be cheaper (10 EPs), as it only needs five extra fighter factors, or should the HDW-H really be a 5-7(8H2)? (Which implies updating the PDF....)

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, March 17, 2015 - 04:07 am: Edit

F&E Staff: Can someone on staff please research this issue and post the references here.

FEDS

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar2) on Tuesday, March 17, 2015 - 08:48 pm: Edit

525.21 notes HDW's have 'one fighter factor (more for Hydrans)'
525.23V adds +5 factors (+3 crippled) [shown in FO SIT]
AO SIT shows Hydran HDW with 3 factors
FO (530) notes HDWs are in AO
525.23H is a flat 14 EP for 8H (except Feds) not noting the extra factors on the Hydran HDW but does note that HDW 'does not have its one factor of hybrid fighters'

Alternatives - follow the Lyran JGP-V (525.243) and give Hydran HDWH 2 spare factors.

By James Lowry (Rindis) on Wednesday, March 18, 2015 - 12:06 am: Edit

I'll note that I just found the KNH on the SIT (unpublished/TO) with 6-7(1) factors. So keeping Hydran HOGs at full size will allow it to be a 6-7(8H) HDW-H, like everyone else's.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Wednesday, March 18, 2015 - 02:19 am: Edit

Per (525.23H), the Hydran HDW would lose ONE of its hybrid factors to help make room for the HOG. So unless overruled by ADB, the Hydrans must still pay for the HOG like all other empires, but would retain the other two factors as hybrids fighters. The Hydran HDW with HOG factors would be: 5-7(8H2)/3-4(4H1).

---

Quote:

(525.23H) ...When using a HOG, the HDW does not have its one factor of hybrid fighters; their deck space was taken up by the heavy fighters.

---

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, March 22, 2015 - 10:58 am: Edit

(603.3) states that bases built in neutral territory do not count for victory points. But with the addition of Diplomacy (540.25), neutral planets can join a given empire. Over the course of the war, a neutral planet was flipped to one side then later captured by the other side. The side that captured the flipped neutral planet builds a base there. Does that base count for the purposes of victory points?

E.G. The Klingons flipped the planet in 1506. Later the Kzintis capture the planet and then build a Sector Base there.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, March 22, 2015 - 09:16 pm: Edit

I would add to the question the same thing about annexed neutral zone hexes.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, March 25, 2015 - 11:16 am: Edit

Q542: What is the Federation limit on survey ships performing survey off-map under the Special Operations Rules? Is it 10, 11, or 14? Relevant rules: 542, 503, OOB under 2nd Exploration Fleet. In particular, see 542.26, 505.30, and 505.31. See also Q&A discussions for different players' analyses.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Wednesday, March 25, 2015 - 07:10 pm: Edit

Unless overruled by ADB the following clarification of the rules are as follows (see above rule references from 3:10pm today):

A. If using just the F&E2KX rules the Federation starts with seven ships assigned to off-map survey duty and can increase this number up to ten total ship by using 1-3 of the CVLs to augment the original seven survey already there.

B. If using CO rules the maximum number of ships allowed to conduct off-map survey is increase to eleven but only the use of the 3xCVL --AND-- the COV to reach that number.

C. If using SO the Federation starts with eleven paid survey slots and may, by rule, purchase three additional slot for a maximum number of 14 off-map survey slots. Additional survey units may be produced to fill these slots as desired by the Federation player and as allowed by the rules.

D. Federation survey ships available at start (turn #7) are: 5xGSC, 2xCLS, 3xCVL, and COV (this assumes all F&E modules in use).

FEDS SENDS

By Jason Langdon (Jaspar) on Thursday, March 26, 2015 - 02:18 am: Edit

Question on retreating during combat on a planet and avoiding pursuit.

(302.721) says:

"…Devastated planets without PDUs (even those with RDUs) do not block pursuit."

Question: If a planet is undevastated but has lost all of its PDUs, will it block pursuit?

Thanks.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, March 26, 2015 - 02:16 pm: Edit

JL:

What you are describing is an UNdevastated planet with an RDF. Rule (508.162) specifically states that RDFs do not block pursuit. The important point to remember here is that BASES (including PDU/PGBs) left behind block pursuit; planets alone do not block pursuit. So unless overruled by ADB any planetary hex (regardless of the associated planets devastated status therein) without a base (not RDF) cannot block pursuit.

FEDS SENDS

References:

---

Quote:

(302.741) BASES: If the unit left behind is a base station‡, battle
station, mobile base, PDU, or starbase (or other bases and colonies
in future products), a retreating force is not able to take these
units with them. Such a unit, left behind after ships retreat from a
Battle Hex, remains functional and forces the players to return to
Step 2 of the Combat Procedure (302.2) above. Ships leaving
these units behind cannot be pursued...

(508.16) RESIDUAL DEFENSE FACTOR: If a planet’s defenses
have been destroyed but it is left in or returned to the control of
the original owner, it has a residual defense factor (RDF) of three
defense factors (no fighters, no crippled rating) representing the
residual defense capability.
(508.161) This residual factor is destroyed automatically if the
planet is devastated (508.21) and returns automatically if the
planet returns to (or remains in) friendly ownership. If the Attacker
devastates the planet and captures it, the RDF never comes into
play (and the Attacker did not have to destroy it). If the Attacker
devastates the planet on one turn, but returns to capture the still devastated
planet on a future turn, he would have to destroy the
resurgent RDF to capture the planet.
(508.162) This residual defense factor is not a “unit” in any sense.
It has no attack factor and cannot cause damage. It does not
block pursuit or retreat. You cannot re-devastate the RDF over
and over on the same turn to rack up points.

---

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, March 27, 2015 - 12:37 am: Edit

Further clarification for the above ruling...

The enabling rule is (302.741) where "Bases" are the ONLY units that are specified as being able to block pursuit.

ONLY hexes containing a base still controlled by the retreating player therein can block pursuit; these bases include PGB, PDU, MB, OPB, BS, BTS, PS (and upgrades), STB, SB, SFB, Colony Bases, and variants thereof. A planet is NOT a base.

FEDS SENDS

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, April 12, 2015 - 10:31 am: Edit

Q438.2 Is a garrison ship (430.22) required to remain in a province and at a planet, if the province contained a planet, once all conditions of annexation are met under (438.2)? Note: A PDU of any type could replace the garrison ship required for the planet, but not the province under (430.25) and (508.23).

By Ken Rotar (Sir_Krotar) on Monday, April 20, 2015 - 02:31 pm: Edit

Can the Kzinti do a blockade run to pick up EP from the Federation from a stockpile set up for the Kzinti even if the Federation is at Limited War?

(435.11) says, "Any empire can transfer up to 20 EPs per turn to each allied empire provided that both are at 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.

That leaves blockade running as probably the safest way of facilitating the transfer. However, though the Federation is allowed to do a blockade run into Kzinti space, it appears that the Kzinti cannot do likewise with the Federation because (654.4F) says, "An empire being supported by a Limited War campaign cannot conduct raids‡ into, through, or from the space of the supporting power."

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 Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - 01:27 am: Edit

FEDS regrettably cannot assist FEAR or do proper research on Q&A for a least a month due to "F&E Week" with ADB and other personal priorities.

By Ken Rotar (Sir_Krotar) on Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - 02:22 pm: 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.

I am requesting a ruling on this.

By Joseph Piegols (Krubd) on Thursday, April 23, 2015 - 11:57 am: Edit

This has probably been overly covered, but a two day debate has occurred, and the same arguments have occurred with other players. A battle in hex 1004 has ended with 6 Kzinti ships retreating. There is a Lyran FF in each of hexes 1005, 0905, 0904, 1003, and 1104, also an 8 ship Lyran force in the battle hex, 1004. The Kzinti wants to retreat to hex 1104. Does this require a fighting retreat to opt out of priority 4, or does priority 2 allow any of the surrounding hexes because the Kzinti outnumbers the single FFs? Further if the Lyran opts to retreat as well, would it be a fighting retreat into hex 1105?

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Friday, April 24, 2015 - 07:31 am: Edit

Joseph

Not an answer - but FEAR will need more info.

What are the Supply Points for the Kzinti and Lyrans - and who owns 1105?

i.e. - Both sides need to retreat closer to supply - if they can.

If (and both are connected to a Full Supply Grid) 1202 is Kzinti held and 1105 is Lyran owned (and doesn't have more Kzinti ships than are retreating+all ready there) - both sides can retreat to 1104 and 1105 normally.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, April 24, 2015 - 11:03 am: Edit

.

By Rob Padilla (Zargan) on Wednesday, May 06, 2015 - 03:51 pm: Edit

Q321.42:

If in a battle hex there is a planet with PDUs and a defending Monitor, can the MMG add a ship to the battleforce? I do not believe it should, as the PDUs are not "available" for a Marine attack.

---

Quote:

(321.42) Target: A Marine Major General can only be used in a combat round in which at least one PDU or "base" (on either side) is available for a Marine attack.

---

---

Quote:

(521.323) Ground combat ships cannot attack forces on a planet if there is a Monitor in the enemy Battle Force (even in the formation bonus slot). This applies for any round in which a monitor is in the defending battle force, even if it is destroyed in that round. Bases do not benefit from this rule.

---

By Matthew Smith (Mgsmith67) on Sunday, May 10, 2015 - 09:23 am: Edit

I have a question about 203.51 and 205.32.

FEDS ruled on 12/29/12 that a pinned ship immediately stops all movement. The phasing player's only choice is to decide which ship that is.

So, here's the question:

It is the Alliance turn.

A large Lyran force is in 1001 with a scout. One Lyran FF is in 1202, and a large Klingon force is in 1403, but lacks a scout. The Lyrans are attempting to upgrade a MB->BATS at 1105.

The Kzinti wish to stop the base upgrade, and have sufficient ships available in the capital to do so, but not if pinned by either the large force in 1001 or the large force in 1403.

They plan to enter the 2-hex reaction range of 1001 only briefly, at 1202, and then turn South to continue on to 1105.

As they enter 1202, the Lyran player announces "you must leave one ship behind, and it immediately ceases all movement. Since you have a ship that has ceased movement, then by 205.32, I can react two hexes, and I do so, pinning your entire force."

The Kzinti player says "No, I get to chose when that ship stops, and the remainder of my ships surely get an opportunity to leave before your second pulse of reaction."


Which player is correct?

By Sebastian Palozzi (Sebastian) on Tuesday, May 19, 2015 - 11:34 am: Edit

In reference to SIDS, rule 308.86 states "A battle station can be damaged by this system."
Is the rule referring to the voluntary SIDS (308.84) or is it referring to the Attacker's use of SIDS?

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, May 19, 2015 - 01:08 pm: Edit

It takes three SIDS to cripple a battle station either by the attacker or voluntary by the defender or a combination of the two. If the defender chooses to resolve a SIDS then each SIDS on the BTS only resolves four damage points.

FEDS SENDS

By Matthew Smith (Mgsmith67) on Tuesday, May 19, 2015 - 02:26 pm: Edit

I have three follow-on questions about the reaction ruling that says the pinned ships must immediately stop.

I'll stick to the same general area, 1202, but slightly change the situation each time.

In the first follow-up, the Kzinti hold 1202 with no PDU remaining, but with two FF and a SF.
The Lyrans also have two FF and a SF next door in 1102, with a larger force in 1101.
None of these FF and SF for either side has moved yet.

The Kzinti move into 1302, at which point the Lyrans react into 1202.
Since the Lyrans reacted into 1202 and pinned the Kzinti force before anybody else got there, do the ships already in 1202 lose all movement for the turn because they're pinned, even if another force unpins them later?

-----------------
Second follow-on question:
Like the original question the Kzinti are trying to get to 1105. They need to go through 1202, and already have three FF in the hex which have not yet moved this turn. The Lyrans have three FF in 1102 and a large force in 1001.
As the Kzinti enter 1202, the Lyrans react from 1102. The Kzinti claim that the three FF already in the hex are the "pinned force."
Do those ships lose all movement for the turn, even if they're unpinned later?


-----------------

Third follow-on question:

In this case, the Kzinti are trying to move into 1001, which has a large Lyran force with a scout.
They send three ships into 1102 where they're pinned by three ships from 1001. The Kzinti now send another force into 1202 (on their second pulse) headed towards 1001. Can the Lyran react three ships into 1102 from 1001, thereby unpinning the three ships there, and allowing those unpinned ships to react into 1202, both on the second pulse?

-----------------

I'm trying to find the underlying principle here so that the rules are predictable. To me, there's zero difference between my first two follow-on questions, and hence the answer should be the same for both.

But (again to me) there's also no difference between either follow-on question and the situation from my 5/10/15 question where the Kzinti player can say "I left a ship behind, as the rules require, but I haven't told you it stopped yet, so clearly all I'm doing is splitting stacks, which doesn't afford a reaction opportunity above the first one where I moved into the hex. Later on, after moving the rest of this stack, I'll return to the lone FF in 1202 and tell you it stopped. Or maybe not. Heck, for all you know, I plan to move the remainder of the stack out of the hex and then immediately turn them around and move them back into the hex, thereby unpinning that lone FF I originally left there, which then goes on to leave the hex."

That hypothetical move (splitting a stack, leaving one FF behind, moving out then back in, stopping the large stack, and then moving the FF out) would clearly be legal in the absence of the Lyran FF. In the presense of the Lyran FF, at no time does the Kzinti player leave the hex with insufficient forces left behind according to the written pinning rules, but it's in violation of the ruling of 12/29/2012.

Hence the question, and the follow-ups. If the Kzinti player loses the movement of the ships which had not yet moved in the first and second follow-up questions, then at least the rules are consistant.

But if they're allowed to move (as I suspect they will be) then I really don't understand the rationale that allows unmoved ships to be unpinned at a later time but does not allow a portion of a moving stack to be unpinned later by other ships within that same stack. And if this is the case, then consider this my formal appeal to the 12/29/2012 ruling.

By Byron Sinor (Bsinor) on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 - 01:22 am: Edit

I tried to find if this question has been addressed previously, but its a bit complicated and I keep getting thousands of hits that are not relevant.

The rule for transporting mobile bases is that the ship or ships transporting the base cannot enter a hex with enemy units in it. Suppose that a group of Freight Eagles enters Denobula, capturing the neutral zone hex, but not attacking the planet. So, far no rules violations, it can setup the base in that hex, no issues.

But on the same turn another group of Romulan ships enters the hex afterwards and attacks Denebola. Okay, maybe an issue with the rules, but not violating the rules, as written. The battle is simple with the Romulans offering an approach battles, etc...

But lets add a final twist, the Federation, at war with the Romulans, send a reserve fleet to defend Denebola.

Okay... what happens now?

-Byron

P.S. The Tug mission rule is 509.1-C