CL51 Q&A downloaded to here - FEAR

Mike,

Every empire gets one free engineer on their first turn at war (not wartime economy).

The Feds get a second one for free when they are at war with any two of the following: Klingon, Romulan, Kzinti, Gorn. (Historically turn 10.)

The Klingons get a second engineer with the release of second Imperial War Reserve Squadron.

The ISC receive a second engineer regiment on the the second turn of full war.

Any units beyond these must be paid for.

This is all in (541.11)

By Mike Oliver (Mholiver) on Sunday, April 03, 2016 - 07:50 am: Edit

Thanks Ryan and sorry Strong

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Sunday, April 24, 2016 - 10:13 am: Edit

I'm (hopefully) looking for a bit of clarification (in my own mind) of Strategic Movement.

According to (204.31), only "Newly built, repaired, or activated units can be moved by Strategic Movement on the turn in which they were placed on the map or repaired" for free, (i.e: not counting against limits).

In (204.312), it states, "If a group (e.g., a carrier group) includes some newly built ships and some other ships, the newly built ships can move strategically for free only if the converted ships move with them (or are detached from the group); the other ships count against the Strategic Movement limits if they move that way."

This last quite raises questions (to me) if ships that were converted also get free strategic movement from the conversion facility, or if that only applies if the ships were subject to conversion during repair.

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Sunday, April 24, 2016 - 11:18 am: Edit

Conversions only do not get free strategic movement. Only if they were converted during repair would they qualify.

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Sunday, April 24, 2016 - 11:35 am: Edit

Thx... Just wanted to be certain.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, April 30, 2016 - 08:21 am: Edit

Q308.97 Can a command point be purchased at any time during the course of a turn? Also can deficit spending be used to purchase a command point if not required to be purchased only during the economic phase of the turn under (105.IW) Phase 2B and any substeps there of?

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, May 15, 2016 - 12:27 pm: Edit

Q525.12 If the direct buy of battleships is not allowed in a game under (436.26) but all empires may produce battleships under (436.21). What happens should the completion of a fast battleship be on the fall turn of a given year when the player built a fast DN on the turn before? Typically the OOB only allows the construction of one SC2 ship per turn with Battleships falling under (436.0) and not subject to the SC2 limit. Fast ships (525.0) are limited to one per turn with one SC2 ship per year under (525.12). (525.12) still limits the Lyrans to the above restrictions on fast ships even if the ship in question was converted rather than substituted in the normal production schedule. Note that most empires produce their allotted DN in the Spring of a given year according to the Order of Battle. The Feds and ISC being the major exception as they build one a turn.

By Blake Ball (Gamergeek) on Sunday, May 29, 2016 - 12:00 pm: Edit

Q442.323 How do you rectify this rule with 435.222? 442.323 says that EP are loaded at the start of Operational or Strategic movement and unloaded at the end, suggesting it takes 2 turns for a 'round trip' drop off of EP's from one Empire to another, pick up T X, drop off at end of T X Opp or Strat movement, return X+1. While 442.322 says that a round trip could be done in one turn?

Am sure this has been asked, would appreciate someone pointing me to the right answer.

BB

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, May 31, 2016 - 08:08 am: Edit

It is Alliance Turn 3. The Hydrans have attacked the Lyran border battle stations. The Klingons have a reserve fleet in hex 1013. The Klingon reserve fleet wants to use reserve movement to go to Lyran the battle station in hex 0413. Can the Klingon reserve fleet travel through the Klingon/Hydran neutral zone hexes to get there, even though the Hydrans have not attacked the Klingons yet?

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Tuesday, May 31, 2016 - 10:22 am: Edit

No, they can't enter the NZ without declaring war, which they can't do on T3.

(503.61) Units are not allowed to enter neutral zone hexes which are adjacent to future belligerents until War or an alliance exists with that empire.

Ryan

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Wednesday, June 01, 2016 - 05:12 pm: Edit

Peter

I believe if the Hydrans attack the Lyrans - that automatically moves the Klingons to at War with the Hydrans- so 503.61 does not apply - due to the Hydran attack being on the Coalition and not just the Lyrans.

Can't for the life of me find the definition of the Coalition (in that an attack on one is an attack on all current members of it) and I don't believe the Hydrans can only be at war with just the Lyrans (or Klingons) on Alliance turn 3 - it's war with the Coalition or peace.

Edit - Oops - thought this was Q&A Discussion.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, June 05, 2016 - 12:22 pm: Edit

Q701 When the NCAs and NCCs become available can a NCC be freely substituted for a NCA? The OOB does not address NCCs for NCAs but it does address CCs for CAs both in 701.0 and in the various empires' OOBs.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, June 19, 2016 - 11:38 am: Edit

(307.31) Pursuit Battle Pursued Force

When a pursued force has, say, a crippled 4 point FF (with a defense of 2 due to being crippled) in it that is in excess of the pursued main battle force that is being used in combat (i.e. "extra crippled ships"), if the pursuing force has an extra point of damage left over to resolve and there are no ships in the main pursued battle force that have a defense value of less than 3, is the pursued force required to resolve that point of damage (either by killing the crippled FF or some other unit, or crippling an uncrippled ship in the main battle force)?

Can crippled carriers that have fighters on them that are in the pursued force, but not the main pursued battle force (i.e. also "extra crippled ships") use those fighters to absorb damage in the pursuit battle?

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, June 19, 2016 - 03:32 pm: Edit

Question answered in discussion forum.

By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Sunday, June 19, 2016 - 07:13 pm: Edit

Q: (307.31) Pursuit Battle Pursued Force

When a pursued force has, say, a crippled 4 point FF (with a defense of 2 due to being crippled) in it that is in excess of the pursued main battle force that is being used in combat (i.e. "extra crippled ships"), if the pursuing force has an extra point of damage left over to resolve and there are no ships in the main pursued battle force that have a defense value of less than 3, is the pursued force required to resolve that point of damage (either by killing the crippled FF or some other unit, or crippling an uncrippled ship in the main battle force)?

Can crippled carriers that have fighters on them that are in the pursued force, but not the main pursued battle force (i.e. also "extra crippled ships") use those fighters to absorb damage in the pursuit battle?

For clarification, as it is what is likely an easy question that is difficult to quickly describe:

Ok. I am being pursued. My force that is caught in pursuit is:

C8, D6M, D6D, 8xd5 (where "d5" is a crippled D5).

and then over and above that, I have 4xd5, 4xf5, 4xe4, d6v, 2xe4a (i.e. all crippled ships that are not in the main battle force).

The pursuing force does 13 damage. It uses that 13 damage to direct kill a d5 for 8, and then an e4a (not on the main battle force) for 4. There is 1 point of damage left over. 1 point of damage is enough to force a crippled e4 to blow up if it were on the main battle line, so is am I forced to resolve the 1 point of damage (either by killing an e4, or some other ship, or crippling one of the uncrippled ships on the line)? And if so, can the crippled d6v give up a fighter (that is also not in the main battle force) to resolve that 1 point?

A:==================
(307.31) CREATION: The retreating player must form his Battle Force as follows: First include all crippled ships, then add up to three uncrippled ships. From this force, designate a flagship. If the Battle Force exceeds the Command Rating, the force is used as is although excess ships (selected by the owner) do not count in the combat potential but can be damaged. If the Battle Force does not exceed the Command Rating of the flagship, additional uncrippled ships may be added up to the maximum rating.
=================

So Yes, such a crippled frigate is "in the battleforce" even though it is not contributing combat potential. So it would be part of that retreating battle force for all the normal damage rules. It would force you to resolve that last damage point, and I believe you could use the fighter factor to resolve it, as that unit is still "in the battle force" even if it is "in excess" and not contributing combat potential.

There is no "main battle force" or "pursued battle force", (these terms are not used in the rule anywhere) there is just the "battle force", some of which is perhaps not counting its combat potential, but all of which are potential damage/targets. The only other entity besides the "battle force" is the "reserves" which are all ships not in the battle force, and in the case of a pursued force can only consist of uncrippled ships. Reserve ships can never be used to resolve damage.

FEDS Concurs with FEAR.

Unless overruled by ADB, the following ruling addendum applies:

While crippled carriers or crippled PFTs may be counted as excess crippled units but NOT contributing their compot to a pursued force may be damaged during the pursuit round, any of their assigned attrition units may ***NOT** be used to resolve any pursuit round damage unless they are used as an AUTHORIZED independent squadron or flotilla to the pursuit battle force. However, once all pursuit damage is resolved, any attrition units that are now find themselves homeless could use the normal rules to find another home (if one is to be found) or they are destroyed.

Not that (307.31) specifically authorizes excess crippled SHIPS to be damaged by pursuit damage but NOT attrition units ASSIGNED to those excess crippled SHIPS.

FEDS SENDS

By Dale Lloyd Fields (Dylkha) on Tuesday, June 21, 2016 - 12:25 am: Edit

How many pods could an allied tug pull if an allied tug could pull pods?

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Tuesday, June 21, 2016 - 12:25 am: Edit

Does the transfer of ownership between allied empires affect the long term capture (438.1) and annexation (448.2) of an enemy province?

By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Tuesday, June 21, 2016 - 06:39 pm: Edit

RE: How many pods...

It depends on how much wood a woodchuck could chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Wednesday, June 22, 2016 - 02:09 pm: Edit

Q 315.7
Battle Groups and Pursuit
++++++++++
A battle group included in a pursued battle
force (307.21) could not increase it in size but, if there is a
command rating deficit, could allow an additional ship to
participate in the battle.
++++++++++
We are having a discussion about how to interpret this.

Illustrative hypothetical example:
Pursued force includes DN, 2xCA as the uncrippled ships and 4xCW, 4xDW, 4xFF as the crippled ships.

Proponent 1 claims that one of the 4 FFs contribute compot, since the 14 ships in the battle force exceed the command limit of the DN, creating a "command rating deficit" which allows a BG to be formed from crippled CWs and DWs.

Proponent 2 claims that none of the FFs contribute compot because that would involve an "increase in the size" of the force, which is forbidden.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, June 25, 2016 - 08:00 am: Edit

Q301.915 Support Personnel are disbanded or relieved under (301.915) except incompetent admirals under (316.221). What happens to incompetent MMGs under (321.34)? (321.34) provides for effectiveness of MMGs in the same way that (316.22) does for admirals.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Tuesday, June 28, 2016 - 07:17 pm: Edit

I had a few questions concerning the (5TX.0) TESTBED X-SHIPS rule provisionally offered in Captain's Log #51:


*If more than on ship type is marked on a given empire's SIT as a "test-bed" ship, does only one of these options have to be built as the "test-bed" ship before formal X-ship production can begin; or does one of each of them have to be built before that can happen?

For example, the CL51 SIT for F&E marks both the Hydran Hunter-X and Cuirassier-X as "test-bed" ships. Under this rule, do the Hydrans only have to build one or the other as the "test-bed" ship; or do they have to build one of each (on the same turn, or on successive turns) before they can move on to formal X-ship construction?

For what it's worth, the respective R-section entries confirm that the first Cuirassier-X was a new build, but are unclear on whether the first Hunter-H was a new build or a conversion of a non-X frigate. But it doesn't quite specify which one was done first.


*The CL51 MSC for F&E lists the Romulan Snipe-X as a "test-bed" ship. However, the R-section of this ship implies that it may not have been the very first X-ship built in Romulan space, or (by my reading, at least) that there may have been concurrent efforts to field other prototype X-ships elsewhere in the Empire at that time. Should the "test-bed" note for the SNX be deleted; or, depending on the answer to the previous question, would it rather be the case that a Romulan player would have the option off choosing to build either a SNX or one or more alternate X-ship types as their own "test-bed" ship in a player campaign?

Indeed, could it be that the Romulans might have to build one "test-bed" for each series of hull (Eagle, Kestrel, and Hawk), before they can start producing (or converting) more X-ships of that series?


*The CL51 MSC for F&E lists the Vudar FFX as a "test-bed" ship. However, the R-section for this ship notes that the historical Vudar "test-bed" X-ship was a DWX. Should the "test-bed" note for the FFX be deleted; or, depending on the answer to the first question, would it rather be the case that a Vudar player would have the option of choosing to build either a DWX or an FFX as their own "test-bed" ship in a player campaign?


*It's noted that the Federation used the CB NCC-1749 USS Vincennes as their "test-bed" ship, in contrast to several of the X-frigates featured in CL51. Is it known which class of Kzinti, Tholian, Orion, ISC, or LDR X-ship would count as those empires' respective "test-bed" X-ships under these rules?

For future reference, (R12.207) in Module X1R notes that the first WYN X-ships were an OCRX, two OLXs, and an FFX. Depending on the answer to the first question, one of those might be worth designating as the WYN "test-bed" X-ship - or each of them could, if a WYN player were to be given the option of choosing one for this purpose.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - 12:34 am: Edit

Gary: These continuity questions need to be addressed and answered by Petrick within the SFB section. Once he decides which are or are not testbed X-ships then we will work from that point.

Until then, this is simply a playtest rule, so just play with the ships and rules as written in CL51.

FEDS SENDS

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 05:04 pm: Edit

Q302.7. Retreat into off map area or staying on the map. Example: The Hydrans are on the map fighing in the 01xx row adjacent to their off map area. They have an adjacent hex also in 01xx row with no enemy forces in it. Do they have to retreat to the off map area since this is their supply source or could they retreat to the open hex on map thus staying on the map and still being 0 hexes from supply?

If a unit is on a point of origin of supply, then the range to that supply point is by definition "ZERO".

If a unit is in an empty hex but adjacent to a supply point, then the range to that supply point is one hex.

---

Quote:

(302.733D): Of the remaining available retreat hexes in which his force would be in supply, the player must select the one with the shortest supply path to a supply point.

(413.1) DEFINITION
The Supply Grid is a network of bases and planets. It consists of a friendly capital hex (or off-map area), any friendly (i.e., same empire) bases or planets that have a valid Supply Route (six hexes or less) to that hex, any friendly bases or planets that have a valid Supply Route (six hexes or less) to any of those hexes, etc. As long as a base or planet has a supply path (any length, as long as there is a base or planet every six or fewer hexes along that path) to a capital hex (or off map area), it is part of the Supply Grid.

---

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 05:09 pm: Edit

Q453.24. The Operational Base can retreat as a slow unit, But it can withdraw when towed by a tug. Since the only point you can withdraw from the battle is in Phase 5-1 they only way to tow a OPB out of combat is to withdraw before combat. Is this correct?

---

Quote:

(537.232) A rescue tug can, instead of rescuing a crippled ship in the pursuit battle, rescue one slow unit (avoiding pursuit entirely). This can only be a "single ship" so it could rescue an auxiliary or monitor but not a convoy (or LTF or SAF). FRDs cannot be rescued in this way as they have their own overriding movement rules. The rescued ship may be from an allied race. This is done during the formation of battle lines for the pursuit battle.

---

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 05:24 pm: Edit

Q453.0 Can an operational base act as it's own beginning Strategic Movement Node for either moving by StratMove on it's own or being towed by a tug?

Answered in 2011.
By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, June 25, 2011 - 09:56 am: Edit

Discussed at Origins and needs a final review:

Q: Can an OPB with a tug be the starting point of a strategic movement node for the Tug to move the OPB strategically with in the limits of (453.22) and (453.23).

A: Yes, the OPB base is considered to be a valid starting strategic movement node, but cannot, itself, be the ending node.

PER FEAR: NO FURTHER DISCUSSION NEEDED PRIOR TO REVIEW