| By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Saturday, July 20, 2019 - 02:16 am: Edit |
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, January 10, 2011 - 10:29 pm: Edit
________________________________________
Quote:
Q531.212
Police ship rules originally came out with Combined Ops, and then a year later the Expanded rule came out in Planetary Operations. My question is regarding 531.212.
The rule in CO reads: "Police ships cannot enter a hex containing more than 1 enemy ship."
The PO rule reads: "Police ships cannot use Operational Movement to enter a hex containing more than 1 enemy ship."
I've found rulings from 7 or 8 years ago that clarified it a bit, saying Police ships can retreat into a hex containing more than 1 enemy ship, and that's even in the errata. But with the more recent PO ruling, why was that errata necessary, as that rule specifically states Operational Movement only. Does the PO rule supercede the CO rule, or was the change to 531.212 unintentional? Which way does it work? I ask because I have played many opponents who play police ships like the older CO rule, but that may be incorrect.
________________________________________
A531.212
FEDS Confirmation: The PO rule clarifies the CO rule.
Further FEDS clarification:
Police ships cannot use Operational or Reaction or Reserve Movement to enter a hex containing more than one enemy ship. A police ship can enter space containing enemy units during the retreat process.
Just as a reminder also that units using Strategic Movement can never enter enemy held hexes.
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, January 11, 2011 - 03:26 am: Edit
________________________________________
Quote:
Q 442.8 Romulan KR Maintenance
Some players believe the intent of the rule is to allow the Romulans to gather as many KR spare parts as they can, and that there is no limit to this other than what can be obtained via Orion Smuggling (442.84). Other players believe that the wording of the rule is singular in nature, and that the Romulans can only collect one set of spare parts per turn (442.82).
My question is, which side is correct?
________________________________________
Note: This issue has been ruled on by previous FEAR on 19 June 2005:
Question: Can 2-3 tugs travel back and forth in the same turn thus picking up several turn’s worth of spare parts?
FEAR ANSWER: Don't see why not.
FEDS Further Clarifications:
1. Multiple deliveries of KR parts can be made per turn but a given transport vessel may only make one strategic movement delivery cycle (K-R-K or R-K-R) per turn. Obviously this is limited by the availability of delivery ships, strategic movement capacity, and strategic connectivity grid between the capitals.
2. Operational Movement can be used for KR parts deliveries but would be much slower. Operational, strategic, and blockade movement can be combined but NOT on the same turn nor can there be Operational-Operational movement daisy-chain relay transfers in the same turn.
(A situation might be that the Rom Capital is cut-off from the strategic grid where the delivery tug moves on the grid one turn and is moved operationally the next turn and delivered to the Capital via blockade movement on the next turn.)
3. KR parts can stockpiled beyond the original six turns of parts listed under (442.82).
4. KR parts can be stockpiled at any Romulan supply point after delivery to the Romulan capital. This might be done in order to supply KR ships via blockade runners with parts from the Romulan capital that are cut-off in a separate supply grid. However, the separate grid and the main grid EACH must use a turn of supplies per turn if not connected.
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, January 15, 2011 - 02:36 pm: Edit
FEDS Clarification
(322.0) Tholian Pinwheels
(322.22) Pinwheels cannot be counted as part of a Battle Group since they are immobile; see text in (315.0).
(322.32) The owner may cripple an entire pinwheel using the 50% defense factor bonus but only if all ships of the pinwheel are uncrippled. The owner may destroy an entire pinwheel using the 50% defense factor bonus but if one or two ship element are crippled the other remaining ships must be crippled first without using the 50% defense bonus.
Directed damage to cripple a pinwheel containing one or two previously crippled element ships still gains the 50% defense factor bonus of only the uncrippled elements.
(322.56) Salvage: Destroyed ships of a pinwheel can be salvaged and roll for depot level repair under the provisions of those rules.
===============================
Pinwheel Damage Examples (Given 3xPC pinwheel)
Voluntary Damage:
Owner cripples 1xPC of pinwheel; resolves 4 damage points
Owner cripples 2xPC of pinwheel; resolves 8 damage points
Owner cripples pinwheel; resolves 18 damage points (50% bonus kicks-in)
Owner destroys pinwheel with no previous damage; resolves 27 damage points
Owner destroys pinwheel with 1xPC previously crippled; resolves 17 damage points
Owner destroys pinwheel with 2xPC previously crippled; resolves 13 damage points
Owner destroys pinwheel with 3xPC previously crippled; resolves 9 damage points
Directed damage to cripple or destroy pinwheel:
Pinwheel with no previously crippled PCs: requires 36 directed damage points to cripple; 54 total points to destroy
Pinwheel with 1xPC previously crippled; requires 24 directed damage points to cripple; 42 total points to destroy
Pinwheel with 2xPC previously crippled; requires 12 directed damage points to cripple; 30 total points to destroy
Pinwheel with 3xPC previously crippled; requires 18 directed damage points to destroy
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, January 17, 2011 - 08:20 pm: Edit
REVISED RULING ON THOLIAN NEUTRAL ZONE HEXES
Okay – after spending a good part of the afternoon reading the rules I found the ‘missing’ rule that restricts the Klingons from occupying the neutral zone hexes adjacent to the Tholians. The ruling was incorporated in the last line of a scenario note in (601.11):
“The Klingons cannot occupy Neutral Zone hexes adjacent to the Tholians until they are at war with the Federation.”
So here is my revised ruling:
FEDS RULING
Rule (503.64) is a general rule. Rule (601.11) is a specific rule that only applies to a historical General War scenario such as “The Wind” (601.0). As always, a specific rule overrides a general rule.
Please accept my apologies for my mistake and for not catching this earlier – I was wrong.
===============
FEAR: Please remove my previous erroneous comments in this topic to avoid confusion.
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Monday, January 24, 2011 - 03:32 pm: Edit
Q601.2 When *exactly* do the Hydrans setup in the General War scenario? Obviously, in view of 601.162, they setup on Turn #3. However, do they setup during the Coalition phase at the top of turn 3, or just before the Alliance turn at the bottom of turn 3. The reason why this question is important is because of the expedition. At least with the expanded rules, stopping the expedition is difficult in the latter case because the Hydran player may observe Coalition deployments and then setup his fleets to maximize the chances of success of the expedition. As a result, the Coalition player must deploy an extraordinary number of ships in order to block every single possible path the Hydrans could take. As an aside, I have always played this way, but it seems to me that perhaps I have been playing wrongly as the rule is not clear. If the Hydrans have to setup at the *beginning* of turn 3, then it is easier for the Coalition to match the Hydran deployment during CT3.
R601.2 The Hydrans, per (601.162) are not required to have their forces on map for both turns 1 and 2. So, they setup before their turn 3. Yes, this does allow them to take advantage of any weakness in the Coalition forces deployed. The Coalition players need to be careful of what the possibilities are for the Hydrans.
Appeal 601.2 This ruling was appealed requesting that the Hydrans be required to set up before Turn 3 for the Coalition begins. Historically, the Hydrans were able to pull off strategic surprise on the Klingons with their expedition and allowing them to setup after the Coalition player turn 3 allows for this strategic surprise without any other special rules. Ruling stands at FEAR appeal level.
Q320.511 A legal unit performing a blockade run must have a friendly or neutral hex as its target when performing this type of raid. Does the presence of friendly ships in enemy territory meet the requirement of making the hex a valid target?
Reasoning this would be the case. Any tug using missions U or V or transferring personnel i.e. an Admiral (316.0) or Diplomat (540.0). U and V would have to make such a hex valid target under (509.0) Fleet Transports.
A320.511 In the raid phase, a hex occupied solely by one side is considered a friendly hex.
Q430.22 If a colony is being established in a captured province, does the tug performing the mission count as the province Garrison?
R430.22 If the Tug is performing any mission other than A,B,G,L,M,N,P,Q,R, or S it cannot be counted towards either planetary or provincial garrison.
R302.742 Slow units with standard speed ships has been ruled upon in the past. Just as a reminder however -- slow units assigned standard speed escorts are treated slow GROUPS and therefore are included in slow unit retreats as a slow group. As always, escorts can be dropped (but not added) per rule (see SoP) prior to retreat battle.
Q703.0 Request for clarification of many multi part rulings.
The issue is unlimited Klingon CVT production. Vastly simplified, Klingon carrier production limit is two true CV’s plus one CVE per turn. There is a cap on the number of CV2 and/or CV3 pods (6 total) that can exist at any one time.
Previous rulings say that: - CVT production is not counted against a turn's carrier limits and pods on a CVT do not count against the carrier pod limit.
Logical, but ridiculous, conclusion is that CVT production on any one single turn is limited by two factors only; the number of TGA hulls available and the number of EPs available to spend.
On the first turn every TGA could become a CVT. Not much else would be built but that is a tactical issue not a rules one.
This tactical issue could arise if no Romulan carriers along with no k+l mauler options are picked in conjunction with each other or a non-historical campaign is being played.
A703.0 The only direct references to the Klingon CVT in the rules are in (431.731), (509.43), and (703.4). None of these give any direction. The limiting factor is that the Klingons can build only one TGA a year by any means (701.0) Regular Ships. This limits the Klingons to the three initial CVTs (East, West, and Northern Reserve Fleets) with five TGAs (Home, East, North, West, TBS Fleets) with one per year to build for a total of four more by turn 7. So, they could build a total of 12 CVTs by turn 7 with no TGAs for anything else such as Battle Tugs (Great absorbers of damage vs. repair cost), Commando Tugs (With a MMG gives you another 8 point ship in your battle line in a fixed defense battle with multiple G’s), Etc. Yes, the TGBs can be used for the scout tug and drone tug missions, but you only have two of them and lots of other Tug duties to do. Yes, the D5Gs and Theatre Transports can also do some of this, but you have to build them and have more of them.
This is a game of choices and this is one of them players have to make. The potential for unlimited CVT production is there for that reason. For that reason it stays.
Q302.75 When is a fighting retreat resolved? Is the retreat resolved immediately after the player’s retreat or at any other time, phasing players choice, during the Combat Phase (Phase 5 of the SOP)?
A302.75 Fighting Retreat battle hexes are NOT required to be fought immediately once the parent battle hex is resolved. Fighting Retreat battle hexes are simply added to the list of battle hexes that must be resolved during the phasing player's turn in the order chosen by the phasing player. In the case of Fighting Retreat, simply note that the battle hex is to be resolved using the fighting retreat battle rules -- also note any conditions that apply.
Q600.0 Why does it state in several places in the rules and scenarios that you can place one item in the main effort sector. What does this mean?
A600.0 If one is playing an existing sectorized scenario (Winds of Fire, Maelstrom, Gale Force, etc.) then certain capabilities and rules are only assigned and/or used in the main effort.
For example, a player cannot use production overrides (450.334) in a sector scenario that does not include the main effort. So if you are just playing Winds of Fire, sector C only then you cannot use production overrides in this scenario.
Q519.0 Do Monitors count as a ship for pinning?
Good question. Under (203.53) non-ships cannot be used to pin. The Annex (756.0) doesn't list monitors as non-ship units but (756.1) does list it as a slow unit (along with overload tugs which can pin units). The monitor rule section (519.0) is silent on the issue.
Due to a monitor's mission and their limited engine capability I'd say that they do not 'leave' the local area of their planet looking for trouble. If the Monitor has a pallet then it can "project" some force outside it's planet only position and can still count as a one or more ship equalivients for pinning just like an Aux CV.
A(519.0) Unless overruled by ADB, add rule (519.37): "Monitors cannot pin other units under (203.5). Note that if they have a pallet the attrition units do count in the pin count."
Q524.111. What are the actual limits for the CPF? Is the "counters provided" limit the intended limit for each race?
A524.111 The rule (524.111) lists a limit based in its discussion of counters provided. It says, each race is provided four counters except the Lyrans which have seven, the Tholians who have two and Orions who have none. There is a production limit of 1 per turn in (524.112). It also states that Players may mutually agree to change these limits, but are warned that the effect on game balance may be unpredictable.
Q524.14 Does the limit of one CPX in rule add to the total limit of CPFs? In other words, if the limit is say 4 CPF (as mentioned loosely in rule 524.111 for most races), is it 4 CPF plus one CPX? Or is it 4 total including the CPX?
R524.14 No, the total number of CPFs include the CPX. So, if you have a limit of four CPF you may have one CPX and three CPF for a total of four.
Q524.14. Why does this rule say "This is the second casual flotilla built"? Does a regular CPF have to be built first?
A524.14 Yes, a regular CPF needs to be built first. You need a prototype before you add all the cool X toys!
Q524.14 Does the reading of this rule where it says that the CPX can be carried by X-ships or raiding (pool) ships mean that a CPF cannot be carried by an X-ship? Is this where my answer to Q2 (above) lies? Or is a CPX just a marker to be exchanged with a CPF when X-ships carry them? The rule seems to indicate not and that a CPX is built with the intent of being used on X-ships (or normal ships in the raiding pool). Why would the CPX work on normal ships and the CPF not work on X-ships? Are the CPF/CPX counters representative of the mech-link technology? If so this seems a bit backward.
A524.14 It is a technology thing. The CPF works on regular ships while the CPX works on X technology ships.
Q523.4 Does an X conversion of a base from the standard base to the X base, i.e. BATS to BTX require a tug or can a single LTT perform such a X-conversion?
R523.4 Since this requires some major refits and changes to the base, a Tug is required for anything larger than a Base Station.
Q453.13 Can a planet upgrade an Op Base in the same way it can upgrade a Mobile Base?
R444.22 Since an Op Base is just a moveable MB and (453.13) says they can be upgraded for the same cost as a mobile base, they can also be upgraded the same way as a MB.
Q444.2 Can a planet upgrading a MB or Op Base (if allowed) upgrade the base in question to a BSX (444.33) if X Tech is available at the time of conversion?
A444.2 Since a planet can do the upgrade from either MB or OPB then a BSX could be made from planet side resources, including XTP’s. [NOTE: EDITED ON 1/25/2011]
Q537.131 In the case of G actions that suppress the rebellion is supply returned immediately upon suppression or is there a delay like in a re-conquest?
A537.131 Supply is returned upon the next supply check in the SOP.
Q537.13 In the case of liberation of a rebellious planet by the original empire and/or its allies does supply return immediately or is it delayed as any other liberation?
A537.13 Supply is returned like any other liberation as the rebels are not worried about the infrastructure to run an planet-wide economy, but only worried about if they are going to make life miserable for the conquerors.
=====================================================
F&E Ruling Appeal
Q424.35: When using Depot Level Repair to repair crippled ships is it one ship total per turn or up to one ship per depot track per turn?
R424.35: One crippled ship per turn is allowed to be placed in one of the holding boxes for the Depot Level Repair. Not one ship per holding box in the depot.
I believe that this ruling is in error. The Depot Level Repair charts are setup with multiple tracks. If it was originally intended to be one ship per turn regardless of type then One sheet with one track per empire would have sufficed for the DLR rules. With Multiple tracks per empire on the tracking chart I believe the intent is to allow one or more ships to begin the journey through the DLR track(s).
Rule (424.35) refers to unused DLR capacity. Each repair track can repair at no cost the ‘worst damaged’ ships [see text (424.0)] of the fleet at no cost (abstracted) so logic would assume that a crippled ship would be easier to repair than a ‘worst damaged’ ship. The repair capacity for EACH track exist whether it is used or not.
The appeal is SUSTAINED by FEDS: Empires with multiple depot repair tracks may send one eligible crippled ship per turn PER HOLDING POOL TRACK to avoid wasting capacity of multiple tracks.
Additional FEDS ruling: Once a crippled ship is placed in a DLR holding box, it cannot be removed from DLR and repaired using any other repair method. (The DLR teams begins a irreversible cannibalization process once a ship enters DLR that is abstracted into the game system; the salvage option in (424.34) still applies).
=========================================================
Q508.21 If a planet has less than the full 10 points of devastation damage applied to it, does that damage remain so that it is easier to devastate on later turns or is that damage lost when the attacker decides to retreat?
A508.21 Planetary damage is cleared at the end of the combat PHASE of the current player turn. If you there is not enough damage to devastate the planet then the planet is not devastated. There is no enabling rule that says partial planetary damage is carried over and accounted for over player turn breaks.
Q310.42 After the successful freezing of a target with an SFG (312.222), are the die roll modifiers in (310.12) recalculated before resolving ESSC?
Note for consideration: Compot is required to be recalculated for the force of ships frozen under (312.211).
A310.42 Just like in a normal battle, force levels and modifiers are recalculated after SFG interactions are complete. This includes any ESSC calculations.
Q503.14 Once Orion secedes from the Federation, can Diplomats be sent to Orion as an Armed Neutral?
A503.14 Yes, just like the LDR, the Orion Enclave is considered a “Permanent Neutral” with special rules in (503.5). The diplomat may be delivered per (540.14).
Q503.1 Can a Diplomat be sent to the WYN cluster?
A503.1 No, see (540.23).
Q534.232 Can a player use E&S missions to assassinate enemy diplomats in neutral space?
A534.232 Yes, this is what Prime Teams do.
Q540.25 We've been doing the rolls for negotiating with neutral planets during economics. Is this correct? I don't see it defined anywhere.
A540.25 Yes, per (540.251) the rolls are done in the Economic Phase of the SOP in 1C3 before income is determined.
| By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Saturday, July 20, 2019 - 02:17 am: Edit |
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 01:54 pm: Edit
Q517.41 Does the VHP overload Kzinti, Klingon and Lyran LTTs under (517.41) because it uses the same rule (517.36)? Or is this not a weight issue? Rule 530.225 seems to indicate single weight but this implication of 517.36 (last sentence) and 517.41 (last sentence) seem to conflict with that concept.
A517.41 Looking at the SSDs for the VHP vs. the VAP shows that it is mostly cargo boxes and of the number that is similar to the VP pod instead of the VAP pod. The reference in (517.36) is for the ability of a LTT to carry the single VHP, not the weight restrictions of the VAP on a LTT in (517.41).
Q517.36 Does (or should) rule (517.36) apply to the Lyran KVP (and KVH) for purposes of mixing with other Lyran K-type pods? If so I would suggest an add to say "Lyran TGs using the K-pods are under the same restrictions for the KVP (VAP) and KVH (VHP)."
A517.36 Yes, all the restrictions on the Klingon pods with weight restrictions carry over to when they are being used by the Lyrans.
Q517.13 What if the Lyran tug borrows a Klingon VAP (or VHP) pod under rule (517.13), would rule (517.36) apply? Also, what if a Klingon tug borrows the Lyran KVP or KVH pods does (517.36) still apply?
A517.13 Yes, in both situations.
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Wednesday, February 16, 2011 - 11:23 am: Edit
A few follow up Qs because my originals were not as well prepared as I thought...
Q517.36 Implied in the responses "By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 01:54 pm" it seems that the Lyran VHP cannot be mixed with other pods. Is this true?
A517.36 The VHP is, based on (517.36), a pod that cannot be mixed with other pods.
Q530.23 The Lyran VHP pod (rule (530.23) give Lyran limit = 1) can be mounted with a borrowed Klingon VHP pod. This would be Mission R+R and would not overload the tug if I am reading you right. Am I following you now?
A530.23 Yes, the ability for the Klingons and Lyrans to share pods allows for this.
Q517.36 The last line states,"The VHP pods in Advanced Operations use the same rule." Is this statement general to ALL nationalities of VHP pods from AO or specific only to the Klingon, Kzinti, and the implied Lyran pods (now clarified by you above)? Please note rule 530.225 (which has been re-numerated as 530.23 since CL36) does not mention carriage restrictions for any race nor does it reference rule 517.36.
A517.36 This rule is specifically for just Klingon and Kzinti pods. That includes any Klingon pods that the Lyrans use or build.
Q530.23 This rule gives the Lyrans a max limit of 1 VHP. The online OOB charts (711.3) PRODUCTION NOTES gives a max limit of 2 Lyran VHP. The online 2008 SITs show a limit of 1. Which is correct?
A530.23 This rule is correct, only one (1) VHP for the Lyrans.
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Wednesday, February 16, 2011 - 02:12 pm: Edit
Q449.0 May a player with ships already in the WYN Cluster use blockade running to move an unlimited number of cargo, EP-carrying ships out of the WYN cluster?
A449.0 A couple of issues with this question.
One: Raid pools are limited by (314.10), (320.14), (320.51), and (320.511), so, no, you can’t use unlimited number of ships. As a non Federation/Klingon empire you could have a maximum of three ships doing blockade runs until the raid pool is expanded in the Spring of Y176 (Turn #16) which increases this number by two. Federation/Klingon raid pools are one ship larger. (314.10)
Two: Blockade running into the WYN Cluster consists of two steps, one, entrance into the cluster, drop cargo or pick up cargo per (320.512), and return. So, for example, on Turn # 1 the Kzinti use a TGT to deliver 6 EPs to the WYN resulting in a WYNCOVIA balance of 9 EPs (1.5 times 6) per (449.131). This rule (449.131) does not allow the balance to be withdrawn until Turn #2 or later.
The TGT then returns back to the Kzinti raid pool, leaving the Cluster by rule (449.13). Note: the TGT could end its blockade run by staying in the Cluster and not be interned per rule (449.13) and (320.514). But, the TGT will no longer be part of the raid pool (320.11).
To continue the example: On Turn #2 the TGT stays in the raid pool and does another blockade run starting with no cargo and this time picking up the 9 EPs in the WYNCOVIA account and returning to the Kzinti capital.
Bottom Line: A ship cannot take cargo to and from the Cluster in the same turn based on (320.512) “The ship moves to the hex, picks up or drops off suitable cargo, and then returns to where it began. And a limited number of ships can be used for blockade running in one turn (314.10), (320.14), (320.51), and (320.511).
This answer required no ruling as this information was all in the rules. True, it was in four different locations, but remember that rules must be taken as a whole, and not piecemeal.
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, February 25, 2011 - 03:33 am: Edit
(436.26) refers to BB build costs and carrier PRODUCTION limits NOT battleforce limits. BBVs and SDSs count against carrier BUILD limits. A BB with fighters doesn't count against any carrier production limits under (436.26).
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, February 25, 2011 - 12:08 pm: Edit
Fact: The F&E2K10 Rev 1 SIT for the Klingons states that the B10 is a single ship carrier. This is the most current ADB published position (2010) on the issue so unless overruled by ADB, it is a single ship carrier and not classed a heavy carrier.
Unless overruled by ADB, notional Battleship Carriers (typically those with 12 fighter factors -- B10V, BBVs, etc.) are classified as HEAVY CARRIERS.
Unless overruled by ADB or specifically stated otherwise in the SITs, generic battleships with four or less fighter factors will also be classified a single ship carrier. The known exception is the Hydran battleship where the SIT specifically says it is a hybrid carrier.
FEAR -- If I am anywhere off-base with these positions please speak-up as I cannot find anything in writing that says otherwise.
Since SVC has already commented my comments are anti-climatic, but, players should always be aware of the latest release of anything they refer to. It is the players responsibility to find and use the latest copy which is readily available.
In this case, the most current SIT, if read, would have answered the question even before it was asked. I have found that most questions can be answered this way without posting in this topic.
--FEAR
By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, February 25, 2011 - 12:59 pm: Edit
Looks good to me.
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Wednesday, March 09, 2011 - 12:30 pm: Edit
Q524.0 Are E&S missions allowed against future belligerents (in neutral? or enemy? territory) then? What about the Feds while they're neutral or limited war? We disallowed all but the Feds at limited war, but the rules don't specify one way or another...
A524.0 No, that would be declaring war on the future belligerent and the definition of a future belligerent requires you to leave them alone up to a certain point. E&S missions are beyond that point.
Q430.0 A question on economics and province ownership. What is at issue is when exactly is a province considered captured? I will use an example during the game. Province 701 on turn 2 had a Kzinti BATS in 701 and nothing else. A Lyran force came in and destroyed the BATS in combat. The coalition player then retrograded out leaving none of his units in the province and likewise no alliance units.
During alliance turn 2 the question arises. Does province 701 (which can be connected to the Kzinti grid) provide 2ep to the Kzinti or only 1 ep under 430.24 (Abandoned) rule.
A430.0 Guidance to this issue can be found in Fighter Operations in rule (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.” Note that the use of ships and not units in this requirement. This also provides a time when the province is considered “captured” for both long term effects such as those listed in (438.0) but also short term like those in (430.0).
Q540.25 When are the rolls for negotiating with neutral planets done?
A540.25 During the economics phase of your player turn. (540.251)
Q424.35 Is it legal to place an un-crippled variant hull into depot for the purpose of returning it to the base hull configuration at no cost? (other than two years out of service, of course!)
A424.35 No, (424.35) specifically states that only crippled ships can be placed in the depot tracks.
Q502.921 Is this a legal Carrier Battle Group (CVBG)? CVA, DVL NAE, NAC, DWA, DWA
A502.921 This rule specifically states that a CVBG consists of two carriers each with the normal number of escorts and a single ship carrier with or without escorts may be allowed to be in the group. So, yes, this is a valid group: (CVA+NAE+NAC+DWA) + (DVL+DWA) = CVA+DVL+NAE+NAC+2xDWE.
Q515.141 Are carrier groups formed once per battle hex - or are they fixed until the retrograde phase?
A515.141 See (515.144) which limits formation of carrier groups to once per Battle Hex, but if they retreat into another Battle Hex they have to stay in the original formation.
Q449.2 Are vessels that are intending to be sold to the WYN Cluster eligible to be reacted upon while they move to the hex adjacent to the cluster?
A449.2 Extensive comments have been made on this subject in Q&A in March of 2008 and in Captain’s Log number 37 in November of 2008. The intent of the rule is to allow any of the three Empires adjacent to the WYN cluster (Klingon, Lyran, & Kzinti) to sell up to four ships over a 20 turn period to the WYN cluster. This must be done by operational or special raid (blockade running) movement. Obviously, with the target hex being the WYN cluster there will not be any interception possibilities for the blockade running.
With operational movement the owner of the ship once the intent to sell is specified is the WYN, a permanent neutral (Civil Wars may change this status) and as such is not able to react to as the enemy empire does not want to upset the owners of the very lucrative WYNCOVIA banking system, among other intangible benefits.
Also, since the ship is a WYN ship before it leaves the seller’s territory any limits on ships leaving the seller’s territory no longer apply.
Q511.532 During the procedure for a capital assault, the defender of the capital hex must split his/her ships into static, mobile and crippled ships pools. So what happens if a carrier group is damaged (one ship crippled) during combat in the capital hex?
A511.532 Any crippled ship that is part of a group has to stay with that group until the next battle hex or the end of the current battle hex in the pursuit sub-phase. As such, any group it is assigned to also becomes “crippled” per (511.532) and the group must be placed with the crippled ships for that system.
Q511.52 What happens if a previous battle hex in which carrier groups were present retreats into a capital assault battle hex, and some of those carrier groups are damaged (contain one or more crippled ships)? How are those groups treated?
A511.52 Any groups that ended up with crippled escorts would have to be placed in the crippled area of a system per (511.532).
Q503.512 When an interned ship becomes captured because a future belligerent entered the war (or in the case causing the question Orion Enclave rejoined the Federation) is the ship just considered an un-crippled captured ship?
A503.512 If the Orion Enclave rejoins the Federation the interned Coalition ship is captured immediately, undamaged, and is available to be used in any of the six options in (305.2) by the Federation.
Q305.23. Question regarding captured ships. Say you capture a ship. Is it possible to repair that captured ship at a BATS (or field repair) on turn 1 and then perform the native conversion on turn 2? The rule seems unclear.
A305.23 The rules are not specific that they have to be done at the same time. But, a player would have to keep records of the status of the ship.
Q509.1-C When using theatre transports to setup a MB if one or more is destroyed you only get partial credit in groups of 1/3. If say one of the TT's is killed meaning your 2/3rds complete.. can you next turn assign another 3 TT's to the task even though you only really need 1? This would be of course so that it takes 3 rounds of directing to stop the MB setting up.
A509.1-C There is nothing saying you can’t assign more ships to the job than would be the minimum to perform the mission. An example of this is two LTTs setting up a MB would be one and two-thirds what would be needed to setup the MB. It is more than necessary, but gets the job done.
Q705.0 In getting ready to setup a game, I just noticed that the Marquis' fleet has carriers with CLs for escorts. Should those actually be CLEs or are the indeed pressing CLs into service as escorts?
A705.0 No, they are CLs and ad-hoc escorts.
Q411.1 How is supply defined for a hex itself? This question is important for determining whether a province generates income, whether a POL can be placed in the hex, and possibly other issues.
A411.1 You trace a path for the hex in question based on the requirements listed in (411.1). It must be no longer than six hexes and not blocked by enemy units for most units. Some units have a range longer than six hexes such as fast ships or the Federation Express transport. If you can meet these requirements, then the hex in question is in supply at the moment you check.
Q411.31 Can an enemy ship in hex A block supply for empty adjacent hex B? If a friendly ship is in hex C, also adjacent hex A, is that empty hex now in supply?
Q411.31 This rule is clear that an adjacent friendly ship to the hex in question here would open supply for it.
Q420.61 Does the use of an Engineer Regiment (541.34) repairing SIDS on a base reduce the cost by 5 pts per Eng Unit under (541.31)?
A420.61 Yes, (541.31) and (541.34) allow an Engineer Regiment to repair up to two SIDS like a tug for eight EPs minus the five for the Engineer Regiment for a net cost of three EPs.
Q541.33-D Is a repair of SIDS considered a construction project for the Engineer Regiment in much the same way it reduces the cost of a base upgrade (541.33-D)?
A541.33-D No, you use 541.34-A instead for this task.
Q542.26 Can the 3 EPs for the Survey Infrastructure slot be paid over multiple turns?
A542.26 They could be, but the three EPs need to be paid before a ship is dispatched to the off-map area. This needs to be accounted for in writing.
Q542.12 Does a Federation CVL still count as a survey ship?
A542.12 Yes, see (542.12)
Q537.131. May a commando raid during the raid phase suppress a rebellion?
A537.131 No, it needs to be done in the combat phase per (537.131).
Q437.21. Is the conversion from Romulan FH->SUB a minor conversion?
A437.21 This is not a rule question but a SIT question and needs to be addressed there.
Q412.23 Can a tug acting as a supply point (presumably with other ships in the hex) use withdrawal before combat if attacked? Can it use cloaked evasion? Note that per (412.22) if the tug forced to retreat it loses its status as a supply point.
A412.22 Withdrawal before combat is not necessary. It just forces an approach battle then retreats. If it is the only unit there then it can’t withdraw anyways, but could attempt to use cloaked evasion if so equipped.
Q603.16 602.11 When can the coalition attack the Tholians?
R603.16 602.11 There is some potential conflict here, but (603.16) is general where (602.11) is specific. So, only the Klingons can attack the Tholians on turn 7 or later. The other members of the Coalition must wait for turn 10.
This has been confirmed by SVC and no further discussion is warranted.
Q312.45 says an SFG unit in "single combat" is hampered by this rule.
I assume that if an SFG unit is in small scale combat, but has two consorts, then these penalties don't apply and the SFG can freeze targets normally.
The question is, how do you resolve damage in SSC then? Does each frozen ship take only "1 casualty" to destroy?
How does this work please?
A312.45 Remember SSC has two die rolls:
A. One by the attacker's offensive compot on the defender's defensive compot; and
B. One by the defender's offensive compot on the attacker defensive compot.
If the SFG ship freezes a unit, the frozen unit cannot use its offensive compot. There is no provision for "directed" or double casualties; the frozen unit simple has zero offensive compot to offer which affect his die roll under (310.2).
Rule (312.45) applied under the OLD Single Combat rules (and before the addition of Advance Small-Scale Combat rules (318.7) in AO). This rule (312.45) will need to be updated when Combined Operations is updated.
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Friday, April 01, 2011 - 10:57 am: Edit
Q453.12 in SO says that OPBs can have a repair module in one of the positions. I can't find a cost for a repair module.
A453.12 Repair modules are not in the game, yet.
Q501.5 All fighters on all surviving carriers (in supply) are restored for no economic cost every turn. (501.5) The "free fighter factors" only apply to the cost of building new carriers, right? (431.74) Before I actually read the rules, I thought each empire only got a certain number of killed fighters back each turn for free, and had to pay for the rest.
A501.5 In step 2B4 of the SOP, fighters are replaced per (501.5) which allows for an unlimited number of replacements up to the capacity of existing carriers. The free fighter factors mentioned in (431.74) are for construction of new carriers.
Q539.81 The initial exchange of D5s for SPs and conversion for free to KDR and KDL is clear. Are the "subsequent exchanges" agreed to by both empires (me) also free conversions?
R539.81 No, only one exchange is free, the rest will have to pay for the conversions per the SIT.
Q540.22 I am looking at the rules for Diplomats, specifically trade between allies (540.22). It specifies that a valid strategic movement path between the capitals is required.
How then do the Romulans trade with the Klingons and Lyrans, since the shortest path between a Klingon base and a Romulan base is 8 hexes?
A540.22 The Federation is a future belligerent (503.4) and as such, the trade delegation is allowed to communicate until it is no longer a future belligerent. This allows for the diplomatic action using a Federation Strategic Movement Node (SMN).
Q453.24 If an Operational Base retreats with a tug does it use slow movement or since the tug is towing it does it use normal retreat rules? If the Operational Base is in slow unit pursuit combat is it considered set-up?
A453.24 The term “withdraw” in this rule refers to withdraw before combat (302.11) not retreat (302.7) and the subsequent pursuit (307.0) even though a unit that withdrew during (302.11) can still be part of (302.7) and (307.0).
A Operational Base that retreats with a Tug would be considered a slow unit, but, per (453.22) it would be considered “set-up” for the subsequent combat.
Q316.14 (restrictions on admiral transfers). Request for clarification. Context: It is C1, and the Lyrans have two admirals in a single forward deployed fleet. During the retrograde phase the Lyran player attempts to use a FF to transfer one of those admirals to a BC in a rear deployed reserve fleet. Non-phasing player has objected to this maneuver on the basis of the admiral transfer restrictions under 316.14. Phasing player argues the rule does not apply. Question is, who is right? Issues below.
Phasing player argues that 316.14 does not apply unless 316.22 (admiral effectiveness) is in play. The reason is the "NOTE" under 316.14, which states "Most of rule 316.14 is not needed if 316.22 is not used. It would be sufficient to require admirals to be on ships with CR8 or more and not allow them to function on the ships listed in 316.146)."
The problem is that this language is not clear. What does "not needed," mean? Does that language mean that the rule *is* in force, but *can optionally* be ignored if 316.22 (which *is* optional) is not being used? Optional rules imply that both players must consent to use of the optional rule, and hence under this interpretation 316.14 must be used unless both players agree otherwise.
However, does this phrase mean that one player can simply say that it's "not needed" and thus argue that the 316.22 unilaterally doesn't apply - i.e., "because 316.14 is 'not needed' I don't have to pay attention to that rule"? In this case, unless both players agree to play WITH the rule, it does not apply (but for the restriction in the NOTE).
So, there's a question as to whether "most" of 316.14 is an optional rule that goes along with 316.22. Clearly, you do use 316.14 if 316.22 is used, but if 316.22 is not used then it can be argued that 316.14 simply doesn't apply.
Follow up issue: As for the CR8 restriction in the Note in 316.14 - THAT part seems NOT optional even if 316.22 is not in play. Admirals must be on CR8+ ships under the note. The phasing player could say that he would have to retrograde a CR8+ ship to move the admiral back (for the context example above). However, phasing player would argue that he was simply transferring the ADM during retro between CR8+ ships (which is what he did do), and thus the ADM was always on a CR8+ ship within the same movement phase.
This argument is analogous to the issue of garrisoning planets and provinces, where a garrison ship doesn't have to be continuously present, only that some garrison ship is present at the end of the current phase. So, if I can move a garrison ship off a planet and later move another garrison ship onto that planet in the same phase, and the planet doesn't change hands, then so to is an admiral "on" a CR8+ ship so long as he is on one by the end of the turn.
To recap, the questions are:
1) What does "not needed" mean in 316.14?
2) Can a FF be used to move an ADM within a phase, or does a CR8+ ship have be used to move an ADM - assuming 316.22 is NOT being used?
A316.14 (Taking non-phasing player hat off and putting FEAR hat on.) What does “not needed” mean? Reading the note at the end of (316.14) it is clear that the rules in (316.14) are not needed except the minimum Command Rating of 8 requirement and not on the ships listed in (316.146).
As for “Can a FF be used to move an ADM with a phase, or does a CR8+ ship have to be used to move an ADM is NOT being used?” we need to look towards (316.144C) for guidance even though it is part of the “non needed” section of the rules for variable admiral effectiveness. This rule allows for an admiral to move via the Strategic Movement network to anywhere within the network during the Strategic Movement phase. During this phase the Admiral is not on a CR8+ ship.
Therefore it is FEARs opinion (not the non-phasing player ) based on arguments presented that this is similar enough to the issue of planet garrisons that a non qualifying ship could move an Admiral from one qualifying ship to another within the same phase.
This is an automatic appeal to FEDS since FEAR is also the non-phasing player in this question even though FEAR agreed with the phasing player’s argument.
| By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Saturday, July 20, 2019 - 02:17 am: Edit |
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 - 01:37 pm: Edit
Q205.141. This rule states that crippled units may not use reaction movement. Fair enough. However, can a crippled carrier react its fighters? Example: A crippled Lyran CVD is sitting on a supply point and has its full 6 fighter factors. The crippled CVD obviously may not react; however, may its 6 fighters react under the normal conditions for reacting groups of fighter factors under 205.142?
A205.141. (205.71) allows for six fighter factors to react one hex per (205.70) and (205.72). So, if you have a crippled carrier that has six or more fighters’ factors on the crippled side it can react its fighters independent of the carrier in groups of six factors.
Q442.8 There has been some recent discussion about rule 442.8, Romulan KR Maintenance. Some players believe the intent of the rule is to allow the Romulans to gather as many KR spare parts as they can, and that there is no limit to this other than what can be obtained via Orion Smuggling (442.84). Other players believe that the wording of the rule is singular in nature, and that the Romulans can only collect one set of spare parts per turn (442.82).
My question is, which side is correct? To further my case, I present the following:
The wording of the rule in question, 442.82 is:
"The Romulans may obtain additional spare parts from the Klingons. Each turn that an SPH, KRT, or 3FE (or a Klingon or Lyran Tug) can complete a trip from the Klingon capital to the Romulan capital, one turn of "KR spare parts" is credited to the Romulans."
If we correct the second sentence to read properly, and to include the implied "or", we get:
"Each turn that a SPH or KRT or 3FE (or a Klingon or Lyran Tug) can complete a trip from the Klingon capital to the Romulan capital, one turn of "KR spare parts" is credited to the Romulans."
That sentence reads very singular in nature and in this player's opinion in no way allows more than a single turns worth of extra spare parts to be credited to the Romulan player. Otherwise the sentence would have read:
"Each turn that one or more of the following..."
I would also note that the option to buy extra parts via the Orions has no merit if the Romulans, in the early part of the war, can gather up an extra 10 or 15 turns of KR supplies, as in that case the Romulans should never run out of spare parts.
And it can't even be argued that this ties up ships that could be used on the offensive, as APTs/PTRs are legal to carry spare parts, and it would not be unreasonable to have 20 or 30 of them ferrying spare parts every turn from T11 onwards.
FEDS Further Clarifications:
1. Multiple deliveries of KR parts can be made per turn but a given transport vessel may only make one strategic movement delivery cycle (K-R-K or R-K-R) per turn. Obviously this is limited by the availability of delivery ships, strategic movement capacity, and strategic connectivity grid between the capitals.
2. Operational Movement can be used for KR parts deliveries but would be much slower. Operational, strategic, and blockade movement can be combined but NOT on the same turn nor can there be Operational-Operational movement daisy-chain relay transfers in the same turn.
(A situation might be that the Rom Capital is cut-off from the strategic grid where the delivery tug moves on the grid one turn and is moved operationally the next turn and delivered to the Capital via blockade movement on the next turn.)
3. KR parts can stockpiled beyond the original six turns of parts listed under (442.82).
4. KR parts can be stockpiled at any Romulan supply point after delivery to the Romulan capital. This might be done in order to supply KR ships via blockade runners with parts from the Romulan capital that are cut-off in a separate supply grid. However, the separate grid and the main grid EACH must use a turn of supplies per turn if not connected.
Q531.212 Police ship rules originally came out with Combined Ops, and then a year later the Expanded rule came out in Planetary Operations. My question is regarding 531.212.
The rule in CO reads: "Police ships cannot enter a hex containing more than 1 enemy ship."
The PO rule reads: "Police ships cannot use Operational Movement to enter a hex containing more than 1 enemy ship."
I've found rulings from 7 or 8 years ago that clarified it a bit, saying Police ships can retreat into a hex containing more than 1 enemy ship, and that's even in the errata. But with the more recent PO ruling, why was that errata necessary, as that rule specifically states Operational Movement only. Does the PO rule supersede the CO rule, or was the change to 531.212 unintentional? Which way does it work? I ask because I have played many opponents who play police ships like the older CO rule, but that may be incorrect.
A531.212 FEDS Confirmation: The PO rule clarifies the CO rule.
Further FEDS clarification:
Police ships cannot use Operational or Reaction or Reserve Movement to enter a hex containing more than one enemy ship. A police ship can enter space containing enemy units during the retreat process.
Q450.13 Does the restriction on Minor Shipyards preventing them from being built in The Capital include all the hexes of a multi-hex capital, or only the hex with the Capital Shipyard?
A450.13 We must first look for the definition of a “Capital Hex” to find the answer. (511.0) provides this and defines multiple hex capitals to have multiple capital hexes. So, the answer is that the restriction applies to all the hexes of a multi-hex-capital.
Q534.212 Can this mission target a size class 2 ship? I ask because part of the rule has the mark which is referenced under the mission table, and that note makes mention of what to do if you target a SC4 or SC2 ship instead of the assumed SC3 ship.
A534.212 No, it specifically states that only SC3 or SC4 ships can be targeted.
FEDS Clarification
(322.0) Tholian Pinwheels
(322.22) Pinwheels cannot be counted as part of a Battle Group since they are immobile; see text in (315.0).
(322.32) The owner may cripple an entire pinwheel using the 50% defense factor bonus but only if all ships of the pinwheel are uncrippled. The owner may destroy an entire pinwheel using the 50% defense factor bonus but if one or two ship element are crippled the other remaining ships must be crippled first without using the 50% defense bonus.
Directed damage to cripple a pinwheel containing one or two previously crippled element ships still gains the 50% defense factor bonus of only the uncrippled elements.
(322.56) Salvage: Destroyed ships of a pinwheel can be salvaged and roll for depot level repair under the provisions of those rules.
===============================
Pinwheel Damage Examples (Given 3xPC pinwheel)
Voluntary Damage:
Owner cripples 1xPC of pinwheel; resolves 4 damage points
Owner cripples 2xPC of pinwheel; resolves 8 damage points
Owner cripples pinwheel; resolves 18 damage points (50% bonus kicks-in)
Owner destroys pinwheel with no previous damage; resolves 27 damage points
Owner destroys pinwheel with 1xPC previously crippled; resolves 17 damage points
Owner destroys pinwheel with 2xPC previously crippled; resolves 13 damage points
Owner destroys pinwheel with 3xPC previously crippled; resolves 9 damage points
Directed damage to cripple or destroy pinwheel:
Pinwheel with no previously crippled PCs: requires 36 directed damage points to cripple; 54 total points to destroy
Pinwheel with 1xPC previously crippled; requires 24 directed damage points to cripple; 42 total points to destroy
Pinwheel with 2xPC previously crippled; requires 12 directed damage points to cripple; 30 total points to destroy
Pinwheel with 3xPC previously crippled; requires 18 directed damage points to destroy
PINWHEEL COMBAT EXAMPLE:
Consider this scenario: 3xPC (Pinwheeled) vs D6 & 3xF5
Round 1: The Klingon cause 7 points of damage and choose to let the damage fall.
Q1. Does this cripple the pinwheel?
A1. No, because it is a base that requires 18 points (12 DF + 50% Bonus = 18 DF) to cripple but the Klingons now have 7 plus points for the next round.
Round 2: The Klingon now inflicts 3 points of damage and chooses to let the damage fall.
Q2. Does this cripple the pinwheel?
A2. Maybe, though the pinwheel requires 18 points to cripple it has now taken 10 points which is by rule now enough to invoke the 50% damage to cripple rule. The Tholian now has a choice, he can:
A. Cripple the pinwheel and give the Klingon 6 minus points the next round; -OR-
B. Exercise the OPTION in (322.32) to cripple one and destroy another effectively dissolving to pinwheel. (This would allow the Tholian to sacrifice the crippled PC and hold out the uncrippled PC the next round effectively saving the uncrippled PC.)
Round 3: The Tholian pinwheel is crippled. The Klingons inflict 6 damage points but are absorbed by the minus points. The Pinwheel remains intact with no minus points.
Round 5. The Klingons inflict 3 damage points and chooses to let the damage fall.
Q5. Does this destroy the pinwheel?
A5. No, because it is a base that requires 9 points (6 DF + 50% Bonus = 9 DF) to destroy but the Klingons now have 3 plus points for the next round.
Round 6: The Klingon now inflicts 1 point of damage and chooses to let the damage fall.
Q6. Does this cripple the pinwheel?
A6. No, though the pinwheel requires 9 points to cripple it has now taken 4 points which is by rule NOT enough to invoke the 50% damage to cripple rule, but the Tholian now has a tough choice, he can:
A. Destroy two PCs without the bonus and leave one PC uncrippled with a slim hope that the Klingon will not generate enough damage to kill it the next next round; -OR-
B. Stick it out another round.
Q308.84. When taking voluntary SIDS, how much damage does the defender of a SB take if he takes 1*SIDS on battle round 1, 2 SIDS on battle round 2, and 1*SIDS on battle round 3? The example clearly explains what happens on rounds 1 and 2. The rule says to round down. Thus, the defender would resolve 4 damage on round for 1*SIDS and then 9 damage on round 2, for a total of 9+4=13 damage resolved. However, on round 3 the rule seems to imply that if you take merely 1*SIDS that you resolve only 4 damage. In this case you seem to loose a point of damage, because the 0.5 damage from round 1 and the 0.5 damage from round 3 were both rounded down (SIDS being nominally 4.5 damage apiece).
A308.84 This rule states “When calculating the damage resolved, round any fractions down.” So, with this example (with a starbase) round one with one SIDS scored voluntarily would be four points of damage, round two with two SIDS scored voluntarily would be nine points of damage, and round three with three SIDS scored voluntarily would be another four points of damage for a total of 17 points of damage over the three rounds. If all four SIDS were taken at once the total damage resolved would be 18 points, so one point of damage potential was lost in scoring SIDS in odd numbers.
REVISED RULING ON THOLIAN NEUTRAL ZONE HEXES
Okay – after spending a good part of the afternoon reading the rules I found the ‘missing’ rule that restricts the Klingons from occupying the neutral zone hexes adjacent to the Tholians. The ruling was incorporated in the last line of a scenario note in (601.11):
“The Klingons cannot occupy Neutral Zone hexes adjacent to the Tholians until they are at war with the Federation.”
So here is my revised ruling:
FEDS RULING
Rule (503.64) is a general rule. Rule (601.11) is a specific rule that only applies to a historical General War scenario such as “The Wind” (601.0). As always, a specific rule overrides a general rule.
Please accept my apologies for my mistake and for not catching this earlier – I was wrong.
Q453.24 If moved by a tug, set up, and later using "...withdrawal" from 453.24 carried by that tug, does the OPB withdraw normally, or is it subject to slow unit pursuit?
If a withdrawing OPB can be pursued, will it be considered "set up" when in combat?
A453.24 The OPB can retreat using slow retreat rules. It can only use (302.1) with a tug.
Q509.1-C In my current game we have assumed that a tug can carry an OPB to withdraw before combat. My opponent now wants to cripple my tug with an E&S mission, so it can't carry the OPB in withdrawal since 509.1-C says a tug declares carrying a base at the start of operational or strategic movement or in final activities phase.
If I put a second tug in the hex, and he does cripple the first one with an E&S mission, and I can't declare the second tug to carry the OPB, can the second tug perform a rescue mission on the OPB and withdraw it without slow unit pursuit?
Or, are we playing the OPB rules all wrong? Perhaps OPBs can't be set up, then pack on a tug and withdraw before combat?
A509.1-C The OPB is never “packed” (453.21), and as such, does not need to be “set-up”. A Tug can be designated during the Operational Movement phase to tow one to be able to withdraw the OPB in the opposing player’s combat phase. If you wish to have two tugs at that location to prevent the E&S mission from preventing this, which is one of many choices set forth for a player to consider. The E&S mission will not stop a Tug which was not previously declared towing a base from becoming one during the operational movement phase if the Tug is not crippled.
Q539.81 When exchanging the initial required 3xSP for 3xD5, if variants are exchanged, are all conversion costs free for the 6 ships? And if further ships are exchanged, do they have to then pay conversion costs.
A539.81 Since the SPs always have combat modules for the SPs. SPs always go to the Klingons as vanilla SPs. Any D5s would have to be unconverted from their variants before converted to Romulan technology, this would be a two-step conversion and as such won’t cost anything more for the Romulans (D5(x)=>D5=>KDR) which is (1+2-1=2). If the D5 is not vanilla then the Romulans cannot do any conversions to Romulan variants in the current turn.
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, May 14, 2011 - 03:01 pm: Edit
Ref Hurricane - Sector "E" for what to do with the Romulans in Sector "F" prior to the Gorn invasion.
________________________________________
Quote:
(603.UE31) ROMULANS: ...NOTE: The Romulans in this sector receive their full income and can use their full production schedule from Sector F and all benefits of the main effort until the Gorn invasion.
These points can be spent for repairs, conversions, base upgrades, new production, and anything else allowed by the rules...
________________________________________
Bottomline: The Romulans in Sector "F" lose all production and generated cash to the Romulans fighting in Sector "E" for turns 10-12.
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Monday, May 16, 2011 - 04:06 pm: Edit
Some of this was answered previously, but incorporated into one report.
Q430.24 Rehashing previous QnA on this issue: Trying to understand rule (430.24), which I will quote for convenience:
(430.24) "If the enemy occupies (sole possession) a province and voluntarily withdraws from it during his player turn (no friendly units are in the province), the originally owning player, provided he controls a province adjacent to the abandoned province, receives one Economic Point from it on his following Player Turn and can re-occupy it to gain the full production on later turns. If the original owner does not have an adjacent province, no one receives the EPs for that province on the current turn."
My question is: what does it mean to "occupy" a province? Is it the same as conquering? Here are some examples. In each case, has the province been "occupied" or not?
1) Enemy forces enter the province during their op move and destroy the only friendly base there during combat. They then retrograde out of the province. The province contains no friendly fleets.
2) As above, but the enemy forces retreat out of the province after destroying the base. At the end of combat, no forces are in the province.
3) There is a combat in the otherwise empty province, which both sides retreat from. However, the friendly forces retreat first.
4) Enemy forces pass through the empty province during movement.
William
By Nick G. Blank (Nickgb) on Friday, December 27, 2002 - 12:28 am: Edit
William Jockusch: For those purposes it is assumed that you actually captured an enemy province, and then later moved out.
A430.24 I am taking this as a review of a FEAR ruling and will address it here. If this does not satisfy you, then an appeal to FEDS will be in order.
You must leave a ship in the province to occupy it at the end of the combat phase. Otherwise, you were just passing through and not interested in setting up patrols to actually control what is being done in said province. The “locals” just stayed away from your ship(s) and then moved back in as you left, barely disrupting any of the local economy.
Q537.222 What modifier from section 537.222 should apply to a tug trying to keep an operational base out of slow unit pursuit?
A537.222 Per (453.0) an Operational Base is a special form of Mobile Base and not a ship, a rescue Tug mission is not allowed as they are for only ship units.
Q515.26 Is there a rule or ruling stating that a tug with a battle pod and a carrier pod cannot be escorted? (ie a Kzinti TGC with 10(3) combat/fighter factors).
A515.26 A Tug that can carry two equal weight pods can carry a CV pod and another pod and still be escorted. In this example a Kzinti TGC with a BP and a VP would be a 10(3) and be classified as a CVL and eligible to be escorted by 1 or 2 escorts per (515.23)
Q537.13 At what point in the turn is the roll made for planetary rebellion?
A537.13 This is done in 3A-3K of the SOP. This is in the Planetary Operations version of the SOP.
Q534.223 May an inner escort be attacked by a sabotage mission?
A534.223 The only thing prohibiting a sabotage mission by a Prime Team on a ship in a group is that the escorted ship itself cannot be attacked. This rule specifically allows the escorts to be attacked. So, yes, you can attack the inner escort of an escorted group by the sabotage mission.
Q312.22 What table would a STB or STX equipped with a single SFG roll on? Note for consideration Sector Bases and X-Sector Bases can have a single SFG installed. See (452.11)
A312.22 A STB or STX with a single allowed SFG unit would use the SBA-1, SBA-2, and/or SBA-3 tables depending on the number of targets. It would not be able to use the SBA-4+ tables since there is only one SFG unit on it.
Q515.2 As an example, per (515.22) this Kzinti carrier group is legal: CVL, CLE, CLE, FFE
Can you form the following group, assuming that it takes four slots (by deleting the frigate)? CVL, CLE, CLE, (empty)?
A515.2 No, you cannot form such a group, per (515.35). The usual configuration of this group is Carrier + Heavy Escort + Light Escort, and as such it cannot add an additional heavy escort and then give up the light escort. If you did not have a light escort you could form up, in this case, a CVL+CLE or put in the light escort spot a FF or similar ship as an ad-hoc escort. The rules are clear that this type of escort manipulation is not allowed.
Q307.0 Can a retreating force capture a pursuing ship during a pursuit battle?
A307.0 No, see (305.12)
Q449.0 May a player with ships already in the WYN Cluster use blockade running to move an unlimited number of cargo, EP-carrying ships out of the WYN cluster?
A449.0 A couple of issues with this question.
One: Raid pools are limited by (314.10), (320.14), (320.51), and (320.511), so, no, you can’t use unlimited number of ships. As a non Federation/Klingon empire you could have a maximum of three ships doing blockade runs until the raid pool is expanded in the Spring of Y176 (Turn #16) which increases this number by two. Federation/Klingon raid pools are one ship larger. (314.10)
Two: Blockade running into the WYN Cluster consists of two steps, one, entrance into the cluster, drop cargo or pick up cargo per (320.512), and return. So, for example, on Turn # 1 the Kzinti use a TGT to deliver 6 EPs to the WYN resulting in a WYNCOVIA balance of 9 EPs (1.5 times 6) per (449.131). This rule (449.131) does not allow the balance to be withdrawn until Turn #2 or later.
The TGT then returns back to the Kzinti raid pool, leaving the Cluster by rule (449.13). Note: the TGT could end its blockade run by staying in the Cluster and not be interned per rule (449.13) and (320.514). But, the TGT will no longer be part of the raid pool (320.11).
To continue the example: On Turn #2 the TGT stays in the raid pool and does another blockade run starting with no cargo and this time picking up the 9 EPs in the WYNCOVIA account and returning to the Kzinti capital.
Bottom Line: A ship cannot take cargo to and from the Cluster in the same turn based on (320.512) “The ship moves to the hex, picks up or drops off suitable cargo, and then returns to where it began. And a limited number of ships can be used for blockade running in one turn (314.10), (320.14), (320.51), and (320.511).
A ship moves in and moves out in the same phase by blockade movement. It, by definition of what raid ship is, cannot start the phase out side of the capital and in the raid pool, hence it cannot blockade move staring in the WYN cluster. It can only move out as part of the blockade movement into the cluster.
This answer required no ruling as this information was all in the rules. True, it was in four different locations, but remember that rules must be taken as a whole, and not piecemeal.
Q449.22 Can the 2 sides at war send captured ships to the WYN to be exchanged? The WYN are the only "neutral" bordering the Kzintis, and Klingons once the Federation enters the war.
A449.22 Although 305.24 allows for ships to be exchanged in Neutral territory, neither side would want the WYN (who are just a group of dissidents to all three Empires surrounding it) to get a hold of a ship larger than 6 on the uncrippled side. So, only ships of less than 6 on the uncrippled side could be exchanged by (449.22) and (305.24).
Q442.21 Can a half fighter factor be exchanged for 2 PFs under (442.21)?
A442.21 If players have a methodology to keep track of fractional fighter factors, then, sure.
Q442.21 Can an empire exchange leftover free fighter factors for PFs during the fall turn production phase?
A442.21 No, it must happen in the Spring turn.
Q517.41 Does the VHP overload Kzinti, Klingon and Lyran LTTs under (517.41) because it uses the same rule (517.36)? Or is this not a weight issue? Rule 530.225 seems to indicate single weight but this implication of 517.36 (last sentence) and 517.41 (last sentence) seem to conflict with that concept.
A517.41 Looking at the SSDs for the VHP vs. the VAP shows that it is mostly cargo boxes and of the number that is similar to the VP pod instead of the VAP pod. The reference in (517.36) is for the ability of a LTT to carry the single VHP, not the weight restrictions of the VAP on a LTT in (517.41).
Q517.36 Does (or should) rule (517.36) apply to the Lyran KVP (and KVH) for purposes of mixing with other Lyran K-type pods? If so I would suggest an add to say "Lyran TGs using the K-pods are under the same restrictions for the KVP (VAP) and KVH (VHP)."
A517.36 Yes, all the restrictions on the Klingon pods with weight restrictions carry over to when they are being used by the Lyrans.
Q517.13 What if the Lyran tug borrows a Klingon VAP (or VHP) pod under rule (517.13), would rule (517.36) apply? Also, what if a Klingon tug borrows the Lyran KVP or KVH pods does (517.36) still apply?
A517.13 Yes, in both situations.
Q517.36 Implied in the responses "By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - 01:54 pm" it seems that the Lyran VHP cannot be mixed with other pods. Is this true?
A517.36 The VHP is, based on (517.36), a pod that cannot be mixed with other pods.
Q530.23 The Lyran VHP pod (rule (530.23) give Lyran limit = 1) can be mounted with a borrowed Klingon VHP pod. This would be Mission R+R and would not overload the tug if I am reading you right. Am I following you now?
A530.23 Yes, the ability for the Klingons and Lyrans to share pods allows for this.
Q517.36 The last line states,"The VHP pods in Advanced Operations use the same rule." Is this statement general to ALL nationalities of VHP pods from AO or specific only to the Klingon, Kzinti, and the implied Lyran pods (now clarified by you above)? Please note rule 530.225 (which has been re-numerated as 530.23 since CL36) does not mention carriage restrictions for any race nor does it reference rule 517.36.
A517.36 This rule is specifically for just Klingon and Kzinti pods. That includes any Klingon pods that the Lyrans use or build.
Q530.23 This rule gives the Lyrans a max limit of 1 VHP. The online OOB charts (711.3) PRODUCTION NOTES gives a max limit of 2 Lyran VHP. The online 2008 SITs show a limit of 1. Which is correct?
A530.23 This rule is correct, only one (1) VHP for the Lyrans.
| By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Saturday, July 20, 2019 - 02:18 am: Edit |
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, May 21, 2011 - 10:21 am: Edit
For Hydran conversions:
"FF" means HN, CU, and CR (all are FF base hulls);
"DD" means KN and LN (all are DD base hulls);
"DW" means DWF and DWH (all are DW base hulls);
"CW" means HR and TR (all are CW base hulls);
"NCA" means MHK, IRQ, CHY, IRC, and MKI (all are NCA base hulls);
"CA" means RN, DG, RGR, LC, LB and LM (all are CA base hulls).
Note to Ryan Opel: Please add this to the Hydran OOB notes on conversions section.
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Tuesday, August 23, 2011 - 11:18 am: Edit
Residual Defense Factor Questions:
Q508.16 Does an RDU exist on an un-devastated planet that has never been captured? (Does it also matter if the PDU/PGB's were destroyed on a previous turn - in the game in question, the PDU/PGB's were killed on a previous player turn).
A508.16 Yes, the RDF comes into existence as soon as the attackers leave the hex and the combat phase is over.
Q508.16 Can a planet which has never been devastated, have a RDF?
A508.16 Yes, per (508.16) the defenses of a planet are the PDUs and other units on the planet. The 10 points to devastate represents civilian and economic targets.
Q508.161 If planet is devastated and recovers - does it 'lose' it's RDF?
A508.161 No, the RDF is ever present until the original owner of the planet returns some kind of unit with defensive capability to the planet, i.e. a PDU.
Q508.16 If planet is devastated, captured, liberated/un-garrisoned and recovers - does it 'lose' it's RDF?
A508.16 No, until some other kind of defense is placed on the planet the RDF will exist.
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Tuesday, August 23, 2011 - 12:23 pm: Edit
Q425.2 Does CDR reduce the cost of converting a CA or CC to a CX by 1 XTP? The CX is showing that the base hull is a CA(3) on the SITs.
A425.2 A Federation CX has a base hull of CA(3), so does the CA or CC. As such either could be used with Conversion During Repair (CDR) at a major conversion facility with a SBX to make a CX with a CA for (6-1=5) or with a CC (5-1=4) with xtp to make a CX.
Q501.91 A Kzinti battle force had the following carriers (plus escorts):
CVL (4.5 fighters)
CVE (3 fighters)
2CV (6 fighters each )
For these ships, how many ship equivalents of fighters are there?
A501.91 You can do this two different ways. One is to count each carrier separate: CVL = 4.5 fighters = 0.77 ship equivalents (SE), CVE = 3 fighters = 0.5 SE, 2x(CV = 6 fighters = 1.0 SE. You then add them together (0.77+0.5+2x(1.0)) to come up with 3.27 SE. You need to consider each group separate before adding them together. Anything less than 0.5 is dropped.
You can also, with fighter types of all the same kind, just add up all the factors and divide by the standard squadron size for that type, 6 in this case. So, in this example, we would have (4.5+3+2x6) = 19.5 and divide that by 6 for 3.25 SE. Anything less than 0.5 is dropped.
Note that the parenthetical (6-8) refers to the squadron size for the unit in question. A Federation CVB with a F-15 squadron would have a standard squadron size of 8 and would only count as one SE instead of 1.33 SE when counting for SE calculations.
Q436.0 Are the B10 fighters considered a squadron, or hybrid? I say hybrid since the SITs don't call it a carrier.
A436.0 The SIT for the B10 does classify it as a single ship carrier, so the fighters are their own squadron for that single ship carrier and have the appropriate cost.
Q440.6 Are ACS ships considered CVAs for build limit purposes?
A440.6 ACS ships count against heavy fighter carrier and scout limits only.
Q709.0 Do both the UH and CV have oversized squadrons?
A709.0 Yes.
Q203.85 What are the cloaked movement stack and ship quantity limitations for Orions with Cloak?
A203.85 The Orions are limited to 1 stack of 12 ships per 673.1-O4 in CL#28
Q537.12 Can a neutral planet conquered by the enemy be used as the source of an infiltration attack against an enemy unit occupying the neutral planet?
A537.12 No, there is not enough infrastructure in place for you to pull this off. (Read, this opens a whole can of worms that we would rather not open).
Q308.71 Can an OPB, using slow retreat towed by a tug, use the formation bonus? It's a base, which is disallowed (308.74), and it is "treated like a set up mobile base in combat" (453.32), so no. However, it is a slow unit which can be in the formation slot, and so can towed FRDs.
A308.71 The fact that it is a base is specific while the fact that it is a slow unit is general. The specific overrules the general, so, no, it cannot use the Formation Bonus box in combat.
Q312.271 If I want to direct on a carrier group, how does that interact with SFG's freezing some of the group?
A312.271 Only the smallest escort can be frozen. And, if it is placed in stasis, it is not considered part of the group anymore. The rest of the group could then be targeted by your one directed damage attack if you choose to not direct on the frozen ships.
Q312.271 You are only allowed to directly choose to try to stasis the outermost escort, and generally are hoping for random choices to get the rest? Even with multiple SFG ships as they all choose targets first then roll to see what happens afterwards, correct?
A312.271 Only the ships selected for the random roll can be frozen. Only the smallest ship in the group can be selected by the attacker, and then the defender chooses his ships by selecting any unselected ships including but not limited to the next smallest ships in the group that is not selected. So, theoretically a battle line with a Hydran TG+VP, DE, AH, DG, HN with random selections would have the attacker selecting the AH, DG, and HN with the defender selecting in this order, the DE, and the TG+VP. If there was TG+VP, DE, AH, DG, DG, RN, CU, CU, CU available, there would be the attacker selecting the AH, DG, RN with the defender selecting the three CUs.
Q SIT [NCA ">3 point(minor) conversions on SITs] ... Do these mean all these NCAs get the allowed conversion done at starbases in 1 turn?
A SIT Yes, and some of the conversions to variants qualify for a two step conversion and still are a 3 point minor conversion capable at a starbase outside a major conversion facility location per (437.21).
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Saturday, October 22, 2011 - 01:54 pm: Edit
The last part of the Q&A in CL43 is incorrect. Sorry guys, we missed something. What is in later modules such as Advanced Operations is correct. The production of Drone ships by the Kzinti is limited to "Can produce (by any means) no more than two drone ships of all types combined per turn. MDC, DND, CLD, count against this limit. Replacement of battle pods counts against drone limits; two battle pods built on the same turn count as one drone ship (one pod counts as one ship)."
By Mike Curtis (Fear) on Friday, October 28, 2011 - 03:11 pm: Edit
Q305.4 Can a captured survey ship be used for survey by the capturing empire?
A305.4 This section of the rules is a list of exceptions to what you can and cannot do with captured ships. It is very specific about other specialty ships, but there is no mention of existing survey ships here or in (542.0) when captured. (305.47) was modified to include the prohibition of conversion into survey ships and we believe the intent of the designer was to not allowed any other survey ships than the players empire to perform survey duty. So, no, a captured survey ship cannot be used for survey.
Q517.13 Q517.34 When operating a carrier pod on an allied Coalition tug under 517.13 which empire is required to provide escorts for the carrier tug? I presume that 517.13 would require the carrier tug to be escorted by ships of its own empire; "For purposes of supply, command, etc., a pod is ignored and the nationality of the tug determines how the combination is treated."
A517.13 A517.34 The escorts must be of the empire that owns the transport. Example: A Klingon LTT is operating with the Lyran KVP. The escorts would be a Klingon AD5 and F5E.
Q310.11 Is it possible for a non-phasing player to arrange his ships so that ESSC can be selected when he started with 12 ships in the hex?
Situation: Opponent says yes under these circumstances: 1) Withraw 6 ships before combat. Advance only 3 ships to the line under the minimum command rules and elect ESSC combat (assume the other side has no choice but to use ESSC combat). Opponent says that 310.11 says that the this (ESSC) system is used at the beginning at Sequence of Play Sub-step 5-3J. That means, he has advanced 3 ships at that stage and so can elect ESSC.
However, this result doesn't seem right to me as he started with 12 ships in the hex and still has 6 in the hex at the moment of combat. Opponent says "so what" and simply says that by electing ESSC he will always be forced to put no more than 3 ships on the line and I'll have no choice but to use ESSC. I say that he might be able to put up 6 ships on a subsequent round and invalidate ESSC.
A310.11 Reminder: The SoP (105.0) is also a rule in itself.
SoP 5-3B applies. One will note that before any battle force deployments occur in 5-3E one must determine if the SSC restriction apply in step 5-3B.
Thus, I agree with this clarification:
"If both players have no more than three units (or equivalents) with a combined total of no more than fourteen offensive and no more than nineteen defense factors in the battle hex,...."
In 5-3B, before any battle forces are formed players must consider ALL units in the ENTIRE battle hex to determine if SSC rules apply.
Also note that once it is determined that the SSC rules apply to the hex that the SoP continues from 5-3B.
5-3C still applies to SSC even though carriers groups have no meaning in SSC. Why do this then? Because if a carrier group from a SSC retreats into another battle hex with other carriers, one cannot change existing carrier groups that retreat into the battle hex.
5-3D still applies to SSC. If a battle hex contained only 3xFTS, each with a CR of Zero then only one FTS could be in the battle force since one FTS would be a flagship with ZERO command capacity (it can lead a force of ZERO ships). In theory, a command point cold be (foolishly) used to allow one other FTS to join the battle force.
5-3E applies to SSC. Consider a Tholian BS (10) plus three fighters under attack by D6 (7-8), D5S (3-7) & E4 (4). The D6 & E4 embed themselves in the web, the D5S does not so its offensive compot is lost under (512.311). If the E-4 was crippled then the D5S could pull it out of the web. One, in theory, could choose to leave out a unit under minimum force rules but that only increases the chance of more casualties to the group.
5-3F applies to SSC if 3xPC form a pinwheel (12-18).
5-3G applies to SCC if one has ships designated to tow ships from webs.
5-3H applies if a honor duel is needed within SSC.
Q320.341 Are plus or minus points generated by a drone raid pursuit battle incorporated into the plus or minus points generated by the drone raid itself?
Situation: A 12 point drone raid (doubled to 24) attacks a MB. The raiders roll a natural "1" which, when adjusted by EW, generates 4 damage. 4 damage forces the MB to be crippled but generates 4 minus points during the subsequent combat phase under 320.341. During the pursuit battle, the pursuers catch. Ignoring their combat roll for the moment, the pursued drone raiders manage to score 2 points of damage. Assume the pursers are all cruisers and could ignore 2 damage if nothing else were considered.
Opponent offers strict reading of (320.341), which says +/- points are only applied to the COMBAT PHASE (emphasis) - but since the raid occurs during the raid phase the +2 points generated during pursuit may be ignored and are NOT combined with the raid minus points. Thus, the +2 damage effectively "goes away" and the original -4 does not become -2. Again, the reason is because the minus points apply to the combat phase, but the damage don during pursuit is applied immediately during the raid phase (under the strict interpretation).
I say that this doesn't make sense. Why would damage done by the raiders simply go away when +/- points are in the system? I think the intent of the rule is to track +/- points generated during the entirety of the raid (from attack to pursuit) and apply them during the subsequent combat phase.
A320.341 per this rule, any +/- minus points carry over to the next combat phase. Since the raids occur earlier in the turn, a record of these +/- points needs to be kept for resolution. It should be noted that any portion of the raid phase has the +/- points applied also, including, but not limited to any Interception (320.35).
Q316.0 If you allow an ADM to be moved about within a phase by a non-qualifying ship some secondary questions and issues come up.
Q1 Does the movement require that you are assured of being able to reach a qualifying ship?
Example for clarity: If you try and move an ADM during operational movement with a FF, and your opponent can react to pin this ship(s) therefore precluding you reaching your destination are you still allowed to attempt the move of the ADM?
A1 The potential to be able to reach the qualifying ship must be there. Enemy action does not have to be considered, although the phasing player may want to be aware of this.
Q2: And if you are allowed to move the ADM what happens if your opponent decides to pin you with a reaction move and you end up being stuck on a non-qualifying ship at the end of the phase?
A2: The ADM is then on that ship for the upcoming battle phase and will move to a larger qualifying ship when/if the transport ship survives and subsequently moves to another location later in that turn or another turn per (316.14). If using variable ADMs (316.22) your opponent may have an opportunity to pin the ship, but decline as he wants the ADM to get where it is going to keep the incompetent ADM in service or to give him an advantage in an upcoming battle.
Q302.742 My opponent has a fleet consisting of some crippled units and 5 LAVs, 4 SAVs, 4 SAFs, 4FHL, 3FTL, 5FTS. He then retreats. I choose not to pursue his non-slow units and attack these auxiliary units conducting slow unit retreat. He has more units than can fit in a battle force. How is this battle conducted?
A302.742 He forms a legal battle force as do you and you resolve your damage on the units in the battle force. Since this is a non-pursuit battle (scouts, drone ships, etc are allowed) only the units in the battle force are subject to damage.
Q448.28 Q508.25 Regarding hospital ships and captured/annexed planets,(448.28) says that a planet is annexed when the province its in is annexed. At that point, the recovery clock of 4 turns starts (508.25) and the hospital ship (451.31) can cut the time down to 2 turns.
If I understand this correctly, it means that a hospital ship can't help a captured planet until its annexed?
A448.28 A508.25 The now annexed planet cannot start its recovery clock until it is part of your empire. Until the annexation is complete it is still your opponent’s planet.
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, December 17, 2011 - 09:55 pm: Edit
Ref: KC9 and a successful Hydran Expedition
The Romulans will have to wait until the Klingons can deliver the KC9 using standard movement methods. Once the KC9 arrives at the Romulan Shipyard the Romulans may deposit the initial 13 EPs at any time during or after the point of arrival. The Romulan may then pay the remaining final 5 EPs two turns after the initial payment.
During this special Klingon delivery period the KC9 has a temporary self-defense COMPOT of 4-14/2-7 and a command rating of zero. No salvage is possible if the KC9 is destroyed before the final payment is made.
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, December 19, 2011 - 03:35 am: Edit
FEDS Statement of Fact: The intent of these rules is to prevent a Lyran player from circumventing tug production limitations.
Example:
Y171S: No TG are produced this turn.
Y171F: Lyrans choose not to build a TG but instead chooses to bring an SR on map; this counts against the tug production limit for Y171. The Lyrans paid a price to bring the SR on-map.
Y172S: Lyrans return the SR to the off-map duties.
Y172F: Lyrans build their only permitted TG this turn.
Y173S: Lyrans build their only permitted TG this turn.
Y173F: Lyrans again choose to bring the SR back on to the map. The Lyrans are permitted to do this since they ALREADY suffered the production limitation for this unit in Y171F.
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, December 23, 2011 - 08:46 pm: Edit
Unless FEAR can show me some compelling rationale otherwise, here is how I would call these:
1. If the DMH replaces both of its modular sections, does it cost 2 points to do so?
FEDS: Yes
2. In a related question, does the DMH replacing both of its sections cost it 2 movement points?
FEDS: No – one movement point if performed at the same time and at the same base.
3. If you upgrade a carrier (say changing a CW carrier into a NCA carrier or converting a Gorn CV into a CVS), does it count against the carrier limits if you are adding no fighters to the carrier in question?
FEDS: No; see (515.526).
4. The Patrol Detachment sets up in hex 3319. Since that fleet area has no SB, can one ship be placed on the SB at 3518 in order for it to be converted?
FEDS: Yes; using (600.322) said ship can move to that SB on previous turn.
5. Does the SKE really cost 1.5EP to convert from a SK(?)? It would be the only escort in existence with that cost. That directly contradicts (432.12) and (308.132)B and the SITS in F&E2K and AO.
FEDS: Escort conversion cost is 1.0 EP not 1.5 EP.
6. Does activating a VUL take up SB conversion capacity?
FEDS: Yes – it is a four point minor conversion; see (525.55).
7. Does activating a VLV count against heavy carrier production?
FEDS: Yes
8. Does making a modular conversion count as operational movement? Would a ship that had its modules changed but didn't otherwise move be capable of being added to a reserve fleet?
FEDS: No; modular conversion uses time that would be used to move operationally.
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, December 24, 2011 - 05:12 pm: Edit
FEDS Q&A Policy
Just FYI to those that have F&E rule questions. Those that cite the rule number or the section related to the question at hand will be given a higher priority in answering their issue by FEAR/FEDS over those that do not. If we get well documented and researched questions it really makes it easier and faster for the Q&A team to get you the answer you need.
Thanks.
| Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |