Can an uncrippled co-located base repair the SIDS steps of another co-located base (either crippled or not crippled) (either with or without a tug)?

By Jeffrey Tiel (Platoaquinas) on Wednesday, July 19, 2017 - 10:24 am: Edit

Does the Romulan SP to FHM conversion that costs four EP on the SIT count as a major or a minor conversion? And, if the answer is major, the SIT does not allow the FHM to be converted from the SP as a two step SP to SPM to FHM minor conversion?

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, July 19, 2017 - 05:46 pm: Edit

Q717.22 In non-historical scenarios involving the Vudar can the Vudar build their Minor Shipyards in the Hole as an exception to (450.13)? The Major Conversion facility activated in the Hole in Y172 would appear to give an exception to (450.13).

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar2) on Wednesday, July 19, 2017 - 07:33 pm: Edit

Jeffrey, to count as a two-step, it's SP>FH>FHM (ship class then variant) and it should be minor as both costs are less than three per...

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, July 20, 2017 - 05:02 pm: Edit

Q447.21: Do fractional turns of economic exhaustion under 447.21 round up or down?

Example: On Coalition turn #6, the Klingons accrue 0.5 turns of economic exhaustion under rule 447.21. The Klingons, on later turns, pay back sufficient debt (or increase their revenue) so that they do not again incur additional turns of economic exhaustion. They maintain a full wartime economy for the entire game. Ordinarily, the Klingons begin level 1 of economic exhaustion (75%) on Coalition turn #16. However, on Coalition turn #15, the Klingons have 15.5 turns of exhaustion due to rule 447.21. Does this mean that level 1 economic exhaustion (75%) begins on turn 15 (effectively rounding the 0.5 turns of exhaustion up) or does this mean that level 1 economic exhaustion begins on turn 16 (effectively rounding the 0.5 turns of exhaustion down).

I searched the BBS and could not find an answer, and the rules do not say. F&E generally retains fractions, so I would initially think the answer is "no effective additional exhaustion," or "round down" because the total turns of exhaustion is still "15.5" and thus has not reached "effectively 16" by actual turn 16. However, I thought I would confirm.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar2) on Thursday, July 20, 2017 - 08:21 pm: Edit

Ted, it's above 15 so 15.5 would place things at level 1 (75%) on Turn 15 (just one of the drawbacks of ADS)... [this matches the excel versions of Economic Forms]

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, July 21, 2017 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Q447.21: Do fractional turns of economic exhaustion under 447.21 round up or down?

---

Quote:

(652.31) BASIC RULE: An empire begins suffering from economic exhaustion after fifteen turns of a Wartime economy (twenty turns for the Federation, which has a “fatter” economy able to withstand more strain). Once economic exhaustion is reached, an empire can no longer control its economy. For the next ten turns they will receive 75 percent of their income; thereafter, they will receive only 50 percent until the campaign ends.

---

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, July 27, 2017 - 12:45 am: Edit

Q-CL#46. Are the Lyran CL variants considered "historical units" that can be purchased during an "official" F&E general war game?

Honorable opponent says they were never officially added to the game since they were not published in an F&E specific product.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, July 27, 2017 - 02:02 am: Edit

For the moment, I can tell you that the Lyran CLG and CLS were published in FO-2016 so they can be purchased.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, July 27, 2017 - 02:08 am: Edit

I do not find them in FO2016 that I have.

On the SIT on this forum, those units are listed as from CL#46, not FO16.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, July 27, 2017 - 04:54 am: Edit

See FO-2016 page 63.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, July 27, 2017 - 11:15 am: Edit

Follow up question to Lyran CLV question, above.

Q-general: Generally speaking, for Federation and Empire "official" games, if a unit is published in a Captain's Log and also listed in the F&E SITs without a specific restriction, and otherwise not limited by a scenario, is such a unit added to the game? Or, must the unit be published in an official F&E product before it is considered added to the game?

It is assumed that general restrictions always apply. For example, if the Captain's Log published unit is a CV, then the empire's general CV limits would apply when purchasing that unit.

The question is whether non-conjectural units published in a Captain's Log and also listed in the F&E SITs, without a "conjectural" or other restrictive note, are considered officially added to the game.

Thank you.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, July 27, 2017 - 01:31 pm: Edit

As to allowing ships from Captains' Log: In general, if a unit has a historical presence in SFU history, then I see no reason why it cannot be added to games that for the most part are using a great majority of the F&E rulesets. However, if one is playing with basic F&E only, then only units from basic F&E can be used unless the players agree to allow for their use.

FEDS RULING:

Unless overruled by ADB, historical units presented in Captains' Log along with their published F&E SIT factors may be used in F&E scenarios set in established SFU history.

Restrictions: Units that were deemed "impossible", "campaign only", and "conjectural only" are not permitted in historical games or games using the basic set of rules (F&E2K10) only. This includes unit types that do not yet have supporting or established rulesets; examples include but are not limited to minesweepers/minelayers, minor/civilian units, freighters, leader units (CWL/DWL), interceptors (and their tenders); stellar fortresses, and unpublished empires.

Limits: Established limits must also be adhered to such as service limits "only one to may be in service" or units that are deemed obsolete for a given historical scenario. Unit type production limits must also be followed, such as carrier, scout, drone, mauler, PFT, commando, transport, penal, diplomatic, FCR, etc.

General Practice: It is best for players to establish beforehand what Captains' Log units and rules that will be permitted into their games.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, July 27, 2017 - 01:33 pm: Edit

Nolo contendre

By James Lowry (Rindis) on Friday, July 28, 2017 - 10:40 pm: Edit

Q: (439.16) & (314.25) Does a raiding ship affect supply during the raid at all? i.e., if a defending ship is destroyed during a raid with no other survivors, does the raider prevent supply in that hex (preventing salvage), or does the raider spend too little time in the hex to prevent salvage collection?

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, July 30, 2017 - 08:09 am: Edit

Q542.26 Can an empire pay the required three EPs for more than one survey slot in a given turn? While (542.11) specifically states that any empire can only produce one survey ship per year by any means it is silent on matter of survey slots for the support when surveying off map under (505.2) and (542.27). Also a survey ship produced in a given year can be used to survey on map under (542.34) and does not require the survey slot under (542.26).

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 07:07 pm: Edit

Q503.63 Can an empire move ships through the hex of a neutral planet containing an enemy Diplomat with a theater transport (537.1),
(537.2) or (537.3) without having to "engage" the theater transport carrying the diplomat or the planet's defenses? APTs, PTRs, and Federation Express Transports cannot pin ships under (537.122), (537.222) and (537.322) respectively.

By Byron Sinor (Bsinor) on Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 10:00 pm: Edit

So, its time for more questions on Retreat, Priority 2 (302.732). Looks like its a popular this week.

The player cannot select a hex containing a number of enemy units greater than the number of ships in his retreating force (plus friendly units already in that hex)...

...This step counts the actual number of units. Cripples count at the full value.

Definition of units: Fleet elements including ships, and others such as bases, PDUs, convoys, repair ships, fleet repair docks, etc. See Annex (756.0) for a list of non-ship units.

in 765.0 Non-ship Units

The following units are not "ships" in the game definition of the term: admirals, auxiliaries, base stations, battle stations, cloaked decoys, colonies, colony bases, commercial convoys, convoys, diplomatic teams, forward defense units, engineer regiments, fleet repair docks, logistical task forces, military convoys, Marine Major generals, mobile bases, operational bases, planetary repair docks, planets, planetary defense units, Prime Teams, repair ships, special attack forces, starbases, stellar fortresses, SWACS, X-versions of any of these units.

Residual Defense Factors (508.16) are not units.

So.... the question is, really SWACs effect retreat? Admirals, Marine Major generals, Prime teams? There priority 2 rule states all Planetary Defense Units on a planet count as 1 unit, and the fighters and PFs on those PDU are organized into ship equivalents, but the rule is silent on fighters or PFs on ships, do they count as units in ship equivalents or each individuals, because they are defined as Attrition Units under 756.3 Specific Category Definitions and in the terms definitions. The word unit is in their name, so Attrition Units are Units, right? In any case, there are cases where NSUs under 756 make no sense to control retreats and its unclear how to count other units in other circumstances. One thing that IS clear is that cripples count as 1 unit each, which is fine and dandy. Can we get some clarity on the rest of these cases, because I'm just not sure how to count units.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, August 09, 2017 - 02:50 pm: Edit

Q(443.51). Must a commercial convoy that starts a turn on a newly upgraded starbase that is otherwise a valid destination for a commercial convoy spend the whole turn there to complete delivery and reverse direction on the following turn, or can the convoy reverse direction the same turn the starbase is upgraded? The sequence of play and rule 443.51 do not say.

Prior relevant ruling:
ANSWER: Rule (443.51) says you get the EPs immediately after the convoy's arrival, but you couldn't carry them over to the next turn since you can't acumulate EPs before entering the war.

Situation:

It is Coalition turn #6. The Klingons begin upgrading BATS 1009 to a starbase on this turn (satisfying all requirements and paying the required EPs). During operational movement of Coalition turn #6 a commercial convoy inbound from Lyran starbase 608 arrives at what is still Klingon BATS 1009. No EPs are delivered because the base at 1009 is not a starbase yet.

On phase 1A1 (base upgrade completion phase) of Coalition turn #7 the commercial convoy starts on what is now officially a Klingon starbase in hex 1009.

Research of rule 443.51 found a ruling that states that commercial convoy is derived *immediately* upon arrival. However, the commercial convoy starts "arrived", and thus it seems the commercial convoy delivers its 10 EP cargo "immediately" at step 1A1 of the sequence of play when the base upgrade is completed and the BATS is now a starbase that is a valid destination for a commercial convoy.

Nevertheless, rule 443.51 also says the convoy "stops" and reverses direction the following turn. This rule makes sense when the convoy is ordinarily delivering convoy after it arrives during operational movement. However, in THIS case, the convoy is already THERE and has already delivered its cargo.

Therefore, it seems to me that the convoy may also begin moving back towards Lyran starbase 608 on Coalition turn #7 without having to wait during Coalition turn #7 at newly upgraded SB 1009.

However, because of the wording of the rule, I would like confirmation that this is indeed the case; namely, that in this situation the commercial convoy can begin moving back towards Lyran starbase 608 on the same turn that the Klingon starbase on which the commercial convoy is sitting (and delivers its EPs to "immediately" in the economic phase) comes into existence.

Thank you for considering and ruling.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Wednesday, August 09, 2017 - 04:10 pm: Edit

Unless overruled by ADB, a commercial convoy can only DELIVER its EP cargo during the operational movement phase of the player turn it arrives at a valid starbase regardless if the commercial convoy moved operationally two, one, or zero hexes during the current operational movement phase. The final two acts of receiving supplies from commercial convoy are arrival and delivery. This is only possible during the operationally movement phase as validated by (443.21).

FEDS SENDS

---

Quote:

(443.21) SPEED: Each Commercial Convoy is a counter which moves on the map at the speed of a convoy (two hexes per operational movement phase). Commercial Convoys cannot use Strategic Movement. Commercial Convoys retreat as per the "slow unit" rules (302.742) but only two hexes and they cannot deliver their supplies during Retreat movement. If a Commercial convoy retreated to a valid destination starbase, it would have to remain there without moving on its next Operational Movement Phase in order to "arrive" and "deliver" its supplies.

---

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, August 09, 2017 - 04:12 pm: Edit

Confirmed, that's what the rule says.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, August 10, 2017 - 07:27 pm: Edit

Q542.27 Is the total number of colonies in the off map area limited to the combination of (446.15) and (542.27) #2 or is each rule looked at separately for calculating colonies?

Rules in question quoted below:

(446.15) Off-map: A race could develop one colony in the off map area for every five new provinces surveyed there (not including pre-game "at start" provinces).

(542.27) 2 = Create an off-map colony without going through the colony set up rules. If more than one colony already exists per off-map province, no effect. This colony is created in zero time and at zero cost.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, August 11, 2017 - 12:59 am: Edit

Turtle:

Unless overruled by ADB, colonies developed under (446.15) are specifically limited to one new colony per each set of five NEW provinces developed beyond any of an empire's off-map, at-start provinces.

Colonies created under high risk survey rules (542.27) are specifically limited to the number of ALL available provinces in the off-map area less any colonies already in the off-map area.

FEDS SENDS

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, August 12, 2017 - 01:50 am: Edit

Q515.34

This rule seems to say that theatre transports are not excluded from being ad-hoc escorts. Is this intended?

I note that LTTs and Tugs ARE excluded and possibly FFTs and such were forgotten when this rule was written.

---

Quote:

By Michael Alan Calhoon (Mcalhoon2) on Sunday, January 12, 2014 - 07:04 pm: Edit

(515.33) Are theater transports restricted from ad-hoc escort eligibility as LTTs and Tugs are?

It can be interpreted that the intent of (515.33) is to prohibit the use of transport ships from performing duties as an ad hoc escort. Unless overruled by ADB, theater transports are too be govern by (515.33) and may not serve as ad hoc escorts.

FEDS SENDS

---

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, August 16, 2017 - 03:33 pm: Edit

Q515.332: Do the listed ad-hoc escorts lose *all* abilities? I could find no related ruling on this question.

Sub Question A:
For example, the opponent concedes that a commando ship in an ad hoc role cannot conduct a G attack; however, opponent argues that nevertheless the G is still "on board" and can be transferred to other G units present in the battle hex to replace losses between rounds. I say the ability to transfer a G to another G unit is a "special ability" which does not function under 515.332. Which is correct? Does the ad hoc G ship keep the ability to transfer it's G to another G unit between battle rounds?

Sub Question B:
In another example, opponent concedes that a scout used as an ad hoc escort cannot contribute electronic warfare points to a battle force in which it participates. However, opponent says that the scout is still a scout and thus it receives the "self protection" point that scouts ordinarily receive when attacked with directed damage. I say the "self protection point" is a "special ability" within the meaning of 515.332 and thus cannot be used. Which is correct? Does the scout retain its self protection point when used as an ad hoc escort?