ALL DONE 4 APRIL 2017

BB cost for fighters not listed - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

BB- entry missing - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

BBV YIS should reference "(436.0)" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

SDS YIS should reference "(436.0)" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

Z-Symbols Used Footer doesn't have glyph for PFs in all cases - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

WSCS Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

SCS Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

BCS Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

DCS(P) Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

NDC Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

NPF Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

MPF Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

Multiple "+PFS" used in several places instead of glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

PFT Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

HAA factors are shown as "3-8-1-4" instead of "3-8/1-4" suspect this has propagated through several other (all?) SITS. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

ASC Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

HAP Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

LAP Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

SAP Build & conversion costs for PFs missing- add glyph - Howard Bampton 2017-04-03

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Sunday, April 09, 2017 - 10:19 pm: Edit

DONE 24 APRIL 2017

BB-/BB Other SITs show BB before BB- Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

BBV Build cost should have +24 for FTR, not +16 - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

BCV Build Cost lists "For BC/DN/CVA/SCS" Since one can sub for a sub, the CVA/SCS entries are no longer needed. Replace with "For BC/DN: 12+12" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

BCS Build Cost lists "For BC/DN/CVA/SCS" Since one can sub for a sub, the CVA/SCS entries are no longer needed. Replace with "For BC/DN: 15+6+(PF glyph)" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Sunday, April 09, 2017 - 10:20 pm: Edit

DONE JUST FOR CONSISTENCY, 24 APRIL 2017

CV Should one be able to down sub from DN to build CV? Most other BCH hulls list this as legal. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

CVH Should one be able to down sub from DN to build CV? Most other BCH hulls list this as legal. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Sunday, April 09, 2017 - 10:21 pm: Edit

DONE 24 APRIL 2017

CVA/DND/CVA (4CVA) Suggest moving DND above CVA so CVA/CVA/CVN listings are in a row (most CV groups done this way). - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

CVL/CVL (3CVL) Suggest moving these together as most CV/CV groups are together. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

SR/SRV Suggest moving these together as most SR versions are together. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

NOTE THAT ROWS ARE IN ORDER BY DATE. IF THE TWO ITEMS HAVE DIFFERENT DATES IT IS VERY OFTEN IMPOSSIBLE TO PUT THEM TOGETHER.

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Sunday, April 09, 2017 - 10:22 pm: Edit

SENT TO FEAST (Ryan)

CVH YIS is listed as Y178, G3 shows Y176. G3 shows heavy FTR YIS of Y175 which suggests Y176 date is more likely. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Sunday, April 09, 2017 - 10:22 pm: Edit

DONE

NCD "From MDC:4(triangle)" should have a space between the ":" and "4". - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Sunday, April 09, 2017 - 10:24 pm: Edit

CANNOT FIND ANY A/B DATES IN THE FILE.

General (applies both within this SIT and across SITs I suspect): Some places in the SIT use YxxxS/YxxxF for spring/fall turns, while others use Yxxx(A) and Yxxx(B). Suggest picking one standard and switching all references to it. If the A/B style is used, consider adding a footer defining it akin to "Y-Date Avail Yxxx(A) is the spring turn of Yxxx, while (B) is the corresponding fall turn.". New players should quickly figure out S/F construct but may not get the A/B one- Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Sunday, April 09, 2017 - 10:27 pm: Edit

SENT TO FEAST

LAH/HAH Fighters for HAH cost 1/FTR when built and when converted from HAV, while LAH costs are higher for the same fighter groups. Shouldn't they be the same? (presumably "From: LAV: 2+2" (replaced 6 factors of normal FTR with 8 factors of heavy FTR) and "(513.112): 4+14") - Howard Bampton 2017-04-09

Note- I chopped things up so that items that staff may wish to validate/reject were in separate posts from cosmetic bits.

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 - 07:22 pm: Edit

LAD Note needs scout reference. Use: "Auxiliary Drone Bombardment Ship; Scout; EW=2" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24

LAP Unit has PFs. Build cost doesn't reflect this. Try: "(526.4): 6+Pfglyph" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24

ASC conversion from LAP (which has PFs) to ASC shouldn't require buying PFs. "From: LAP: 2+6" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
FEDS: NON-CONCURS. The LAP could be empty at the time of the conversion; the symbol is a reminder that the PFs are not included in the conversion.

=========

FEDS note on auxiliary ship build costs: Recommend simply citing for each auxiliary build as follows:

(549.121): #
(where '#' is the cost of production)

Rationale:

---

Quote:

(549.121) Each empire may produce one auxiliary (of any type) per turn (the Federation, Klingons, Romulans, and the ISC may produce two per turn), but only one per year may be a large, jumbo, or heavy auxiliary. One large or two small auxiliary troop ships can be built each turn in addition to that number. Some auxiliaries have an “in service” limit (762.0). Some smaller empires have lower limits in their order of battle.

---

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 - 07:23 pm: Edit

OBSOLETE REPORT SINCE THE AUX REVISION
LAC Conversion lists "From LAux: 1". LAux is not defined. Unclear on proper fix (could do ME style Aux, book keeping line, others). Staff?- Howard Bampton 2017-04-24

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 - 07:24 pm: Edit

OBSOLETE REPORT
DATA WAS UPDATED IN THE AUX REVISION.

HAP YIS of PF4 should be fixed to a Yxxx date. Staff? - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24

HSC YIS of PF5 should be fixed to a Yxxx date. Staff? - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 - 07:25 pm: Edit

Kzinti HPC Designation doesn't need "Kzinti" as this is the Kzinti SIT. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE

ITEMS BELOW WERE MADE OBSOLETE IN THE AUX UPDATE

HAP Note needs scout. Try: "Auxiliary PFT, Scout, EW=2" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24

HSC Note needs scout. Try: "Auxiliary SCS, Scout, EW=2" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - 08:13 pm: Edit

Jason, the CA has the 2 extra disrupters of the C14 refit. This is enough to justify the increase of offensive compot from 7 to 8.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, May 14, 2020 - 08:17 am: Edit

Jason, also see (607.587) in the Four Powers War where a CS may be converted to a BC. In actuality this conversion as CS to a CA which is just the 2 disrupters mentioned above.

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Thursday, May 14, 2020 - 12:39 pm: Edit

Turtle:

That works from the standpoint of (reasonably) using the BC as a stand-in for the the CA in a 4PW scenario, where compot is scaled to allow maximum use of already existing counters. If an unrefitted D7 is 8-8, then it makes sense for a Kzin CA (represented by a BC counter) to be 8-8 as well. In the decade-later context of the GW, where a D7B is an 8-8 and a true Kzin BC is also an 8-8, the Kzin CA is most assuredly not an 8-8. Of course, a 4PW (unrefitted) D7 can't reasonably be claimed to be an 8-8 in the GW period either; it's probably an 8-7, or maybe even a 7-7. An actual Kzinti BC in the 4PW era would probably rate somewhere in the neighborhood of a 9-9; it would certainly be expected to blow the airlocks off an unrefitted D7.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, May 14, 2020 - 12:58 pm: Edit

The CS is 7-8 ship. The CA used in both the 2nd Fed-Kzinti War and 4 Powers War adds the 2 Disruptors. Bringing more in line with a D7 than a D6. Look at the Difference between the D6 and D7 from an armament standpoint. The only difference is the 2 PH-II with the RF,R,LR and LF,L, RR arcs on the forward part of the rear hull. All other weapons are the same. Everything not mentioned above is the same.

The big difference between the Kzinti CA and BC is the 3 extra power. The drone racks themselves don't get refitted until Y175, so both ships have 4 Type A racks.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Thursday, May 14, 2020 - 01:18 pm: Edit

Thanks for truckin' along Steve. And thanks to the staff for keeping up

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Thursday, May 14, 2020 - 02:18 pm: Edit

Quote
==========
The big difference between the Kzinti CA and BC is the 3 extra power.
==========
That is one significant difference. The other big difference is the change in firing arcs of the disruptors and forward phasers from L+LF / R+RF to FA+L / FA+R, allowing an alpha strike in the entire FA arc as opposed to only on the center spline. An extra 6 boxes on each of the 3 forward shields is not to be sneezed at either. As pointed out earlier, the CA to BC upgrade is at least as "good" as the D6 to D7 upgrade.

By Alan De Salvio (Alandwork) on Wednesday, March 04, 2020 - 07:51 pm: Edit

No HDWQ
SVC: YES, THERE IS.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - 03:15 pm: Edit

NEVER MIND
I CORRECTED THE DATES MANUALLY FROM THE LAST BACKUP
I updated the Kzinti large auxiliaries by importing the Klingon data, which might mean that the PF and HF dates need fixing.

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Saturday, January 25, 2020 - 01:27 pm: Edit

Kzinti: Battlecruisers: BC: YIS should be 160, not 137: The SFB Master Ship Chart lists a YIS of 160, with a "Y1" notation indicating no early prototyping is possible.
Jason E. Schaff 25 Jan 2020

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, May 07, 2020 - 07:37 am: Edit

---

Quote:

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Saturday, January 25, 2020 - 01:27 pm: Edit

Kzinti: Battlecruisers: BC: YIS should be 160, not 137: The SFB Master Ship Chart lists a YIS of 160, with a "Y1" notation indicating no early prototyping is possible.
Jason E. Schaff 25 Jan 2020

---

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - 05:29 pm: Edit

Quote:
==========
The Kzinti CA (not listed in F&E) has the same factors as the BC
==========

What is the rational for asserting that they have the same factors? The CA is arguably at least as deficient relative to the BC (inferior weapons arcs, inferior forward shields, and 3 less power) as the D6 is to the D7 (2 fewer phasers and 2 less power).

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - 05:43 pm: Edit

Where are you going to squeeze in the CA between the CS 7-8/3-4 and the BC 8/4?

The BPV difference is 2 from CA to BC but 12 from CS to BC.

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Wednesday, May 13, 2020 - 06:10 pm: Edit

The CS in a 7-8 in the 4PW timeframe, where referenced against the contemporaneous (unrefitted) D7 being an 8. It would presumably rate significantly less than that in the GW timeframe. I suppose it would make sense to claim that the 8 factor BC is a stand-in for the CA in the 4PW timeframe.

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 - 07:25 pm: Edit

NCD should have "scout" in notes. "Drone variant of NCA, Scout, EW=2" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
MINOR NON-ERROR FORMAT FIX MADE 14 MAY 2020

NPF conversion from MPF- the MPF already has PFs, so the conversion should just be "From MPF: 3" with no PF cost. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE 14 MAY 2020
THE SIT IS NOT THE PLACE TO NOTE THAT MISSING PFS HAVE TO BE PAID FOR.

PFP (2PFP) Build cost should be "(431.22): 6+pf glyph". Unit has PFs. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE 14 MAY 2020

SCP+ Build cost should be "(431.22): 8+12+pf glyph". Unit has PFs. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE 14 MAY 2020

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 - 07:26 pm: Edit

BCS - factors for crippled side should have the half fighter factor trangle: "10P(3)/5P(1t)" (t==triangle) - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE 14 MAY 2020

CVL (3CVL) Should this have a triagnle half fighter factor on the uncrippled side or is this a counter issue? SFB unit has 9 ftr which in F&E is 4t. - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE SOMETIME IN 2017

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 - 09:45 pm: Edit

FLG Nonstandard EW notation. Alternative: "Police Flagship, Scout, EW=1, Commando Ship (one battalion)." - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE SOMETIME IN 2017

LAS Nonstandard EW notation. Alternative: "Large Auxiliary Scout; EW=3" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE SOMETIME IN 2017

LAP Nonstandard EW notation. Alternative: "Large Auxiliary PFT (526.4), Scout, EW=2" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE SOMETIME IN 2017

SAS Nonstandard EW notation. Alternative: "Small Auxiliary Scout, EW=2" - Howard Bampton 2017-04-24
CORRECTION MADE SOMETIME IN 2017

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Tuesday, May 02, 2017 - 09:56 pm: Edit

STAFF ENDORSEMENTS NEEDED
=====
BBV: Conversion from BB and BB- should be 4+fighters, not 2+fighters (heavy carrier). Construction cost should be 38+24 (not 38+14) as this ship has 12 fighters at 2 EP each. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
SEEMS LOGICAL AND WAS DONE ON 15 MAY 2020 BUT I WOULD PREFER TO H AVE THE STAFF TELL ME THAT WAS CORRECT.

SDS: Conversion from BBV, BB and BB- should be 5+fighters+PFs, not 7+fighters+PFs (SCS). (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
SEEMS LOGICAL AND WAS DONE ON 15 MAY 2020 BUT I WOULD PREFER TO H AVE THE STAFF TELL ME THAT WAS CORRECT.

DN: Needs conversion from DNE. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
CONVERSION CREATED as 3 PONTS FOR STAFF TO CONFIRM.

CD: Needs conversion from CS for early
scenarios (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
ENTERED IT AS 4‡ TWO-STEP CONVERSION. NEED STAFF CONFIRMATION.

CC: Needs conversion from CS for early scenarios. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
ENTERED IT AS 3‡ TWO STEP BUT NEED STAFF CONFIRMATION.

CVH: YIS should be Y178 (heavy fighter date), not Y176.(Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
SEEMS LOGICAL AND WAS DONE ON 15 MAY 2020 BUT I WOULD PREFER TO H AVE THE STAFF TELL ME THAT WAS CORRECT.

NCD: Drone factor should be , not [4]. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
DONE 15 MAY 2020

CLX: Missing entry, captain's log forget which number. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
SOMEBODY FIGURE THAT OUT AND I'LL GO GET IT FROM THE CHART FOR THAT ISSUE.

TGT: Conversion from CAM possible? (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
IN THEORY YES, BUT I'M WAITING FOR THE STAFF TO TELL ME WHAT THEY THINK.

TGC: Conversion from CAM possible? Add "combat" to tug in notes? (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
IN THEORY YES, BUT I'M WAITING FOR THE STAFF TO TELL ME WHAT THEY THINK.

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Tuesday, May 02, 2017 - 09:59 pm: Edit

DDE: Conversion from CM and DD. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
CONVERSION FROM DD HAS BEEN THERE FOR YEARS. NO LONGER ALLOWED TO CONVERT FROOM CM BUT YOU CAN BUILD IT FOR A CM SLOT.

DDS: Conversion from CM, not DD (no longer in production officially). (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
NO, CANNOT CONVERT FROM CM, CAN SUBSTITUTE FOR CM.

FDX: Belongs with FFK frigates. Conversion from FF needs 2-step symbol. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
NOT REALLY CONVINCED IT NEEDS TO MOVE; I MARKED IT TWO-STEP BUT I'M NOT SURE THE STAFF WILL AGREE. CERTAINLY NO DISCOUNT.

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Tuesday, May 02, 2017 - 10:05 pm: Edit

SB(FH): Should read SB(FH) With Fighters AND Heavy Fighters. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
CORRECTION MADE 15 MAY 2020

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Tuesday, May 02, 2017 - 10:10 pm: Edit

SFX(FP): Modules should read as: 4xFTM+2xPFM/HPM/HFM. There is a 2x2x in there. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
CORRECTED 15 MAY 2020

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, May 05, 2017 - 01:33 pm: Edit

Fix EW spacing
ONLY TWO NON-STANDARD FOUND, BOTH FIXED.

Fix Scout capitalization
DONE 15 MAY 2020

update HDW entries.
DONE SOMETIME IN 2017

Check auto-date on header.
DONE 14 MAY 2020

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Saturday, May 06, 2017 - 02:31 am: Edit

FLG: Build cost lacks "Call up" entry. Add "Call up: 2" Cost per 531.3 - Howard Bampton 2017-05-06
CORRECTED EARLIER

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Saturday, May 06, 2017 - 02:32 am: Edit

Search for double dagger position is needed on this SIT- multiple fixes needed.
IMPOSSIBLE TO PROCESS, NO IDEA WHAT IS WANTED.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, May 06, 2017 - 11:18 am: Edit

Standardize HDW variants as HDWZ and HDWX variants as HWXZ.

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Sunday, May 07, 2017 - 09:32 pm: Edit

POL Call up cost for generic POL is 0. Fixing. Backporting Paravian style POL call up frequency: Build "Call up: 0 (1/Turn) (531.12)" - Howard Bampton 2017-05-07
THIS WAS DONE SOMETIME IN 2017

PV Backporting Paravian style PV call up frequency: Build "Call up: 3 (1/Fall)" - Howard Bampton 2017-05-07
THIS WAS DONE SOMETIME IN 2017

PV Backporting Paravian PV Note "Police Carrier; See (531.4)" - Howard Bampton 2017-05-07
THIS WAS DONE SOMETIME EARLIER.

FLG Backporting Paravian style FLG call up frequency: Build "Call up: 2 (1/Spng)" - Howard Bampton 2017-05-07
THIS WAS DONE SOMETIME IN 2017

FLG Backporting Paravian style FLG Note "Police Flagship, Commando Ship, Scout, EW=1. See (531.3)." - Howard Bampton 2017-05-07
THIS WAS DONE SOMETIME IN 2017

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, May 16, 2020 - 07:29 am: Edit

BBV: Conversion from BB and BB- should be 4+fighters, not 2+fighters (heavy carrier). Construction cost should be 38+24 (not 38+14) as this ship has 12 fighters at 2 EP each. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
SEEMS LOGICAL AND WAS DONE ON 15 MAY 2020 BUT I WOULD PREFER TO H AVE THE STAFF TELL ME THAT WAS CORRECT.

Confirm Conversion costs of BB and BB- to BBV is 4+fighters. All heavy carrier conversions are 4+fighters. Standard across all empires. Thomas Mathews 16 May 2020

SDS: Conversion from BBV, BB and BB- should be 5+fighters+PFs, not 7+fighters+PFs (SCS). (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
SEEMS LOGICAL AND WAS DONE ON 15 MAY 2020 BUT I WOULD PREFER TO H AVE THE STAFF TELL ME THAT WAS CORRECT.

Confirm Conversion costs of BB, BB- and BBV to SDS is 5+fighters+PFs. All SDS conversions are 5+fighters+PFs. Standard across all empires the same as DN hulls to SCS conversions are except for the weird Federation. Thomas Mathews 16 May 2020

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, May 16, 2020 - 07:18 am: Edit

CLX: Missing entry, captain's log forget which number. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
SOMEBODY FIGURE THAT OUT AND I'LL GO GET IT FROM THE CHART FOR THAT ISSUE.

CLX is in Captain's Log #37. Thomas Mathews 16 May 2020

ADDED 16 MAY 2020, THANKS TM--SVC SENDS

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, May 16, 2020 - 07:11 am: Edit

REVIEWED 16 MAY 2020; NOT DONE, AS THE CHART DOES NOT ALLOW A BC TO BE CONVERTED TO A TUG (THE HULLS ARE TOO DIFFERENT). SIMILARLY, A KLINGON D7 CANNOT BE CONVERTED INTO A TUG. I WENT WITH 4 WHICH IS THE COST OF A SIMILAR HULL CONVERSION FOUND IN OTHER EMPIRES.

TGT: Conversion from CAM possible? (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
IN THEORY YES, BUT I'M WAITING FOR THE STAFF TO TELL ME WHAT THEY THINK.

Confirm Conversion to TGT from CAM is possible. See (R5.A20) which states that production of CAMs was switched to early transport tugs. Recommend conversion cost be the same as a conversion from a BC of 6 EPs. Thomas Mathews 16 May 2020

TGC: Conversion from CAM possible? Add "combat" to tug in notes? (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
IN THEORY YES, BUT I'M WAITING FOR THE STAFF TO TELL ME WHAT THEY THINK.

Confirm Conversion to TGC from CAM is possible. See (R5.A20) which states that production of CAMs was switched to early transport tugs. Recommend conversion cost be the same as a conversion from a BC of 8 EPs. Thomas Mathews 16 May 2020

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, May 16, 2020 - 07:04 am: Edit

CC: Needs conversion from CS for early scenarios. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
ENTERED IT AS 3‡ TWO STEP BUT NEED STAFF CONFIRMATION.

Not a 2 step conversion (437.0). This ship does not meet the criteria for a 2 step conversion under (437.1). Recommend conversion cost from CS be 3 EPs. Reasoning. The CC gains 2 points of offensive compot and 1 point of defensive compot on the uncrippled side plus 1 point each on the crippled side and +1 to the command rating. Thomas Mathews 16 May 2020

DONE 16 MAY 2020

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, May 16, 2020 - 07:00 am: Edit

CVH: YIS should be Y178 (heavy fighter date), not Y176.(Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
SEEMS LOGICAL AND WAS DONE ON 15 MAY 2020 BUT I WOULD PREFER TO H AVE THE STAFF TELL ME THAT WAS CORRECT.


CVH: YIS is Y176 as currently listed. Reasoning: SFB G3 states that the YIS of the CVH is Y176. The Kzintis began experimenting with and deploying heavy fighters sooner than other empires. See (R5.A29) and (R5.F8) with the LAS having a YIS date of Y175 in G3. Thomas Mathews 16 May 2020

SO NOTED IN THE FILE, SVC 16 MAY 2020. I ADDED A"CORRECT" NOTE TO THE CELL TO FORESTALL FURTHER FALSE REPORTS.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Friday, May 15, 2020 - 03:55 pm: Edit

NCD: Drone factor should be , not [4]. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
DONE 15 MAY 2020

NCD Factors should be: 8 Sc Symbol/4 not 8[4] Sc Symbol/4 Drone Bombardment Factors are denoted using "< >" not []. Thomas Mathews 15 May 2020

NOTE: "quote" symbols used to make the appropriate characters appear properly in the post.

DONE 14 MAY 2020 BY SVC

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Friday, May 15, 2020 - 03:33 pm: Edit

CD: Needs conversion from CS for early
scenarios (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
ENTERED IT AS 4‡ TWO-STEP CONVERSION. NEED STAFF CONFIRMATION.

Not a two-step conversion (437.0). This ship does not meet the criteria for a two step conversion under (437.1). Given the YIS of both the CS and CD recommend the conversion cost be kept to 3 EPs, the same as the conversion cost from the BC. The CS and CD are available during the Second Fed-Kzinti War (682.0) while the BC isn't except in the limited form of the CA. Thomas Mathews 15 May 2020

DONE 16 MAY 2020 BY SVC

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, May 15, 2020 - 02:55 pm: Edit

STAFF ENDORSEMENTS NEEDED
=====
DN: Needs conversion from DNE. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
CONVERSION CREATED as 3 PONTS FOR STAFF TO CONFIRM.
FEDS: 3 points is fine.
SVC THEN SO BE IT.

CD: Needs conversion from CS for early
scenarios (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
ENTERED IT AS 4‡ TWO-STEP CONVERSION. NEED STAFF CONFIRMATION.
FEDS: Not qualified for two-step under 437.0; This is only possible when the first conversion is to a larger ship class and the second is to a variant of that larger; CS, BC, and CCs are cruisers under MSC. Recommend: From CS: 3; same cost as the BC.
SVC THEN SO BE IT.

CC: Needs conversion from CS for early scenarios. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
ENTERED IT AS 3‡ TWO STEP BUT NEED STAFF CONFIRMATION.
FEDS: Not qualified for two-step under 437.0; This is only possible when the first conversion is to a larger ship class and the second is to a variant of that larger; CS, BC, and CCs are cruisers under MSC. Recommend: From CS: 2.5
SVC CANNOT CONCUR. CONVERTING CS TO BC IS 2, BC TO CC IS 2, I CAN SEE 3 (GIVING IT THE BENEFIT OF THE TWO-STEP DISCOUNT IF NOT THE NAME) BUT 2.5 IS TOO CHEAP.

CVH: YIS should be Y178 (heavy fighter date), not Y176.(Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
SEEMS LOGICAL AND WAS DONE ON 15 MAY 2020 BUT I WOULD PREFER TO H AVE THE STAFF TELL ME THAT WAS CORRECT.
FEDS: The MSC says Y176.
SVC EARLIER SAID HE HAD ENTERED IT AS Y176 WITH A "CORRECT" NOTATION SO NO ONE ASKS AGAIN.

NCD: Drone factor should be , not [4]. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
DONE 15 MAY 2020

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Monday, May 08, 2017 - 01:21 pm: Edit

HPC 5HP.1 states call up replaces POL call up. Adding to note : "Heavy Police Ship (5HP.0), call up replaces POL" - Howard Bampton 2017-05-08
FEDS: Okay.

HPC Call up missing from build cost: "Call up: 0 (1/Year)" - Howard Bampton 2017-05-08
FEDS: Please ADD.

SVC DID BOTH ON 19 MAY 2020

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Thursday, May 11, 2017 - 02:14 pm: Edit

HDW COG/FOP/POG etc- entries need to be added to SIT as a part of HDW cleanup. - Howard Bampton 2017-05-11
FEDS: REPORT SEND.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, May 15, 2020 - 03:05 pm: Edit

SVC DID ALL OF THESE 19 MAY 2020

M-PAL (PF): YIS should be Y181 (PF date), not Y180F. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
NEED STAFF ENDORSEMENT
FEDS: CONCURS.

M-PAL (SCS): YIS should be Y181 (date), not Y181F. (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
NEED STAFF ENDORSEMENT
FEDS: CONCURS.

BS(FH): Modules in notes should be 2xFTM & FHM, (not 2xFHM). (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
NEED STAFF ENDORSEMENT
FEDS: CONCURS.

BTS(FH): Correct designation is BTS(FH), NOT BTS(F).
DONE 15 MAY 2020


BTX(FH): Correct designation is BTX(FH), not BTX(F). DONE 15 MAY 2020
NEEDS STAFF ENDORSEMENT
FEDS: CONCURS.

By Frank Brooks (Alskdjf) on Friday, May 19, 2017 - 09:15 pm: Edit

SDS: Should there be a reference to (436.0) in the Build Cost column? All of the other units in this section have one. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Yes.
DONE 19 MAY 2020 BY SVC

CM MEDIUM CRUISERS: The Salvage column should have three decimal places. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
CORRECTED 15 MAY 2020

By Frank Brooks (Alskdjf) on Friday, May 19, 2017 - 09:16 pm: Edit

DONE 21 MAY 2020 BY SVC

CLD: The SFB Ref # should be R5.946. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Yes, but reference correct format would be 946.

Cargo Pod: The SFB Ref # should be R5.13. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Yes, but reference correct format would be 13.

HDW Variants: As none of the other rules references refer to a specific product, the words "in AO" can be removed from the Conversion Cost and Build Cost columns. F Brooks, 19 May 2017
FEDS: Ahh - ok...

FKE: The word "CL24" can be removed from the SFB Ref # column. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Yes, but reference is 118

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Friday, July 26, 2019 - 08:57 am: Edit

DONE BY SVC 21 MAY 2020

Kzinti: War Destroyers: SDW: Cost: 6 should be 7. The standard drone ship surcharge for a non-x drone ship with scout functions is 3. Thomas Mathews 26 Jul 2019

Kzinti: War Destroyers: SDW: From: DW: 4 should be 3. The standard conversion cost for a non-x drone ship with scout functions is 3. Thomas Mathews 26 Jul 2019

FEDS: CONCURS with ALL line items above.

By Frank Brooks (Alskdjf) on Friday, May 19, 2017 - 09:16 pm: Edit

CORRECTIONS MADE 21 MAY 2020 BY SVC

BTS(F) first listing: The text "& PFM" in the Notes column should be removed, as this unit does not have any PFs. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: CONCURS.

STX(F) first listing: The "=" in "2xFTM=" in the Notes column should be removed. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: CONCURS.

STX(F) second listing: The "+6" at the end of the various lines in the Conversion Cost column should be "+(8)". F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: CONCURS.

STX(F) second listing: The Build Cost column should be "Upgrade Only". F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: CONCURS.

SB(FP): The text "4xPFM/HPM/HFM" in the Notes column should be "4xFTM". F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: CONCURS.

By Frank Brooks (Alskdjf) on Friday, May 19, 2017 - 09:16 pm: Edit

SVC DID ALL OF THIS ON 21 MAY 2020

FLG: The Salvage column should have three decimals. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FIXED 15 MAY 2020

PV: The SFB Ref # should be R5.A12. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Ref is A12.

HEAVY AUXILIARIES: The word "Heavy" should be added to the beginning of the Notes column for those units that don't already have it. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Okay.

JAC: The SFB Ref # should be R1.A23. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Ref is A23.

JAC: The word "Jumbo" should be added to the beginning of the Notes column. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Okay.

By Frank Brooks (Alskdjf) on Friday, May 19, 2017 - 09:16 pm: Edit

SVC DID OR CONFIRMED ALL OF THIS ON 21 MAY 2020

LARGE AUXILIARIES: The word "Large" should be added to the beginning of the Notes column for those units that don't already have it. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
ALL HAVE IT

FHL: The words "Large Hospital Auxiliary" in the Notes section should probably be "Large Auxiliary Hospital Ship" to be consistent with the other units in this section and the FHS. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FIXED DURING THE MASS UPGRADE

REPR: The words "Large Auxiliary" should be added to the beginning of the Notes column. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
DONE DURING THE MASS UPGRADE

FHS: This unit should be moved to the Small Auxiliaries section. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
MOVED DURING THE MASS UPGRADE

FHS: The word "Aux" in the Notes column should be "Auxiliary" to be consistent with the other auxiliary units. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: CONCURS with all above.
ALL DONE

By Frank Brooks (Alskdjf) on Friday, May 19, 2017 - 09:16 pm: Edit

SVC DID ALL OF THIS ON 21 MAY 2020

LAD: The word "CL22" can be removed from the SFB Ref # column. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Ref is 951A per MSSB.

SMALL AUXILIARIES: The word "Small" should be added to the beginning of the Notes column for those units that don't already have it. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Okay.

BASES section header: The word "TRANSPORTABLE" should probably be added to the beginning of this header to be consistent with other empires using the new base format. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: Okay.

BS(FH): The word "2xFHM" in the Notes column should be "HFM" (spelling, and there's only one). F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: CONCUR.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, October 20, 2019 - 07:28 am: Edit

SVC NOTES THAT THE HDWQ WAS ON THE CHART WHEN HE STARTED WORKING ON IT IN EARLY MAY 2020

Kzinti: HDW Heavy War Destroyers: HDWQ, 69, 6-7 (1) Survey Symbol/3-4 (0.5), AO, 5, Y181, See (525.2) in AO, 1.25, Survey mode of HDW, add complete missing entry. Thomas Mathews 20 Oct 2019

FEDS: CONCURS that HDWQ listing need to be added.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Saturday, February 29, 2020 - 03:09 pm: Edit

PROCESSED BY SVC 21 MAY 2020

Page 4 CDX (CMDX) lists "1EW" and not the current convention of "EW=1"
Page 6 "Kzinti HPC" should be "HPC"
Page 6 FDX lists "1EW" and not the current convention of "EW=1"

Page 7 FTH "(521.23): 6 (1/yr)" should be "(521.23): 6 (1/year)"
ENTRY IN CHART DOES NOT SAY THAT SO NO CHANGE MADE.

Page 9 BS(FH) (With fighters and heavy fighters) "From: BS(F): 2+(8)" should be "From BS(F): 2+(8)"
COLON EXCISED

Page 9 BS(FP) [With fighters and gunboats] " From: BS(F): 2+¶" should be " From BS(F): 2+¶"
COLON EXCISED

FEDS: While FEDS is agreeable to ALL line items above, these fixes are of the lowest priority with respect to ADB time dedicated to F&E issues.

By Frank Brooks (Alskdjf) on Friday, May 19, 2017 - 09:17 pm: Edit

SVC MADE ALL THREE CORRECTIONS 22 MAY 2020

SBX(F) second listing: The "HFM" in the Notes column should be "2xHFM". F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: CONCURS.

SBX(F) second listing: Should the "From BTS(N)" in the Notes column be "From BTX(N)"? F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: YES.

SBX(FP) Should the "From BTS(N)" in the Notes column be "From BTX(N)"? F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
FEDS: YES.

By Stefano Predieri (Preda) on Wednesday, June 27, 2018 - 06:30 am: Edit

SVC MADE THIS CORRECTION 22 MAY 2020
NDC has an availability date of 179;
NPF has an availability date of 180;

but this are both PFT and kzinti hit PF2 in S181, how is that possible?

FEDS: These earlier dates appear to support INT intro; use PF2 date of Y181 for both.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - 02:57 am: Edit

SVC MADE THESE CORRECTIONS 22 MAY 2020
KZINTI PINK LINE REPORT

Kzinti HAP: YIS Y181 based on Kzinti PF2 (PFT) date
Kzinti HSC: YIS Y181 based on Kzinti PF2 (PFT) date
Kzinti FSD: YIS Y172 based upon (445.3) intro date
Kzinti PFM: YIS Y180F based on Kzinti PF1 date
Kzinti HFM: YIS Y178 based upon (530.212) HF intro date
Kzinti HPM: YIS Y178 based upon (441.5) intro date

FEDS - 18 MAY 2020

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - 04:25 am: Edit

SVC MADE THESE CORRECTIONS 22 MAY 2020
Kzinti ALL HDWs: YIS is Y182 per MSC.
Kzinti ALL HWXs: YIS is Y185 per MSC.
FEDS - 19 MAY 2020

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Saturday, February 29, 2020 - 08:31 pm: Edit

SVC MADE ALL OF THESE CORRECTIONS ON 22 MAY 2020

Page 10 BTX(N) [No fighters/ gunboats] "From: BSX(N): 3" should be "From BSX(N): 3"

Page 10 BTX(F) [with fighters] "From: BSX(F): 3 From: BTX(N): 2+6" should be "From BSX(F): 3 From BTX(N): 2+6"

Page 10 BTX(F) [with fighters & heavy fighters] "From: BSX(F): 5+(8)" should be "From BSX(F): 5+(8)"

Page 10 BTX(FP) [with fighters and gunboats] "From: BSX(F): 5+¶ From: BSX(FP): 3 From: BTX(N): 4+6+¶ From: BTX(F): 2+¶" should be "From BSX(F): 5+¶ From BSX(FP): 3 From BTX(N): 4+6+¶ From BTX(F): 2+¶"

Page 10 STX(F) [With Fighters & Heavy Fighters], should not the build cost be "Upgrade Only"?

Page 17 PDU "From PGB (441.3)" should be "From PGB: (441.3)"

FEDS: While FEDS is agreeable to ALL line items above, these fixes are of the lowest priority with respect to ADB time dedicated to F&E issues.

By Frank Brooks (Alskdjf) on Friday, May 19, 2017 - 09:18 pm: Edit

SVC PROCESSED THIS 22 MAY 2020

SFB(F) second listing: The "HFM" in the Notes column should be "2xHFM". F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
I CANNOT FIND AN SFB(F) IN THE SIT AND HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS MEANT.
FEDS: I think "SFB" refers to a Stellar Fortress base.
THIS WAS DONE

SFB(F) second listing: Since the STB(FH) already has some heavy fighters, the conversion cost listed in the Notes column should probably be "50+6+(8)". F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
COMPLETELY UNABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THIS WAS SO NOTHING WAS DONE. NO FURTHER ACTION. RESUBMIT WITH CORRECT DATA AND I WILL PROCESS IT.

SFX(N): On occurrence of "2x" in "2x2xPFM" in the Notes column should be removed. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
SVC DID THIS 19 MAY 2020

SFX(F) second listing: The Designation should be SFX(FH). F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
SVC DID THIS 19 MAY 2020

SFX(F) second listing: The Factors column is missing the heavy fighter information. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
I PRESUME THAT MEANS CHANGE 12 TO 6H8 AND DID THAT. LET ME KNOW IF IT IS WRONG.
ACTUALY IT SHOULD BE 8H6 NOT 6H8, THANKS STAFF!

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Saturday, March 28, 2020 - 11:44 pm: Edit

Kzinti SAS Should not "Small Auxiliary Scout; (2EW)" be "Small Auxiliary Scout; (EW=2)"
DONE SOMETIME BEFORE 2020

Kzinti SAH "Small Auxuliary Carrier with heavy fighters." should be "Small Auxiliary Carrier with heavy fighters."
CORRECTION MADE 23 MAY 2020

Kzinti LAS "Large Auxiliary Scout; (3EW)" should be "Large Auxiliary Scout; (EW=3)"
CORRECTION MADE SOMETIME BEFORE 2020

Kzinti LAP "Large Auxiliary PFT (526.4); scout (2EW)." should be "Large Auxiliary PFT (526.4); scout (EW=2)."
CORRECTION MADE SOMETIME BEFORE 2020

Kzinti BTX(F)
"X-Battle Station. Includes: 2xFTM+HFM. SIDS=4.5; Cripple 4xSIDS; Destroy 2xSIDS; 50% of upgrade cost must be XTPs. From: BSX(FH): 3 From: BTX(N): 4+6+(8) From: BTX(F): 2+(8)" should be
"X-Battle Station. Includes: 2xFTM+HFM. SIDS=4.5; Cripple 4xSIDS; Destroy 2xSIDS; 50% of upgrade cost must be XTPs. Additional Conversions: From BSX(FH): 3 From BTX(N): 4+6+(8) From BTX(F): 2+(8)"
AWKWARD WAY TO SAY DELETE THREE COLONS.
CORRECTION MADE 23 MAY 2020

FOR ALL OF MY BITCHING THIS TOOK A TOTAL OF THREE MINUTES.

By Frank Brooks (Alskdjf) on Friday, May 19, 2017 - 09:18 pm: Edit

CORRECTION MADE 23 MAY 2020

SFX(F) second listing: The "SB(FP)" in the Conversion Cost column should be "SB(FH)". F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
DONE 19 MAY 2020

SFX(FH) : The "+16" at the end of the various lines in the Conversion Cost and Notes columns should be "+(16)". F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
SOMEBODY NEEDS TO EXPLAIN THAT ONE TO SVC.
FEDS:The +(16) is for the heavy fighter cost.
SVC: what somebody needed to remind me was that heavy fighter costs go in parens for some reason i cannot remember or imagine.
CORRECTION MADE 23 MAY 2020

SFX(FH) : The last "+6" in the "From STX(F): 72+6+6" in the Notes column should be "+(16)". F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
CORRECTION MADE 23 MAY 2020

SFX(FH) : The line "From STX(FH): 70+6" in the Notes column should have "+(8)" added to the end. F Brooks, 19 May 2017.
CORRECTION MADE 23 MAY 2020

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - 05:45 pm: Edit

CORRECTION MADE 23 MAY 2020

STF(FH): Modules should be 2xFTM & HFM (not 4 FTM). (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
CORRECTION MADE 23 MAY 2020

SBX(F): Modules should be listed as 4xFTM + 2xHFM (not 1 HFM). (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
CORRECTION MADE 23 MAY 2020

STX(FH): Designation should be STX(FH), not STX(F).
DONE 19 MAY 2020
Conversion from BSX(F) should be 17+8, (not 17+6).
DONE 19 MAY 2020
From BTX(F) should be 14+8 (not 14+6). From STX(N) should be 4+6+8 (not 4+6+6).
DONE 19 MAY 2020
From STX(F) should be 2+8 (not 2+6). (Nick Samaras, May 2, 2017)
DONE 19 MAY 2020

SFX(F): Conversion from "SB(FP)" should be "SB(FH)".
CANNOT FIND THIS
NO CHANGE MADE
RESUBMIT CORRECTED DATA

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, April 13, 2020 - 07:19 am: Edit

SVC DID THIS 22 MAY 2020

Kzinti: STX(F)[With Fighters & Heavy Fighters]: From: STX(N): 4+6+6 should be 4+6+(8). The cost of the heavy fighters is 8 EPs for a base not 6 EPs. Thomas Mathews 13 Apr 2020

FEDS: CONCURS.