In other words, whether or not you are the attacker, SAFs will not show up in an approach battle.

When you are the attacker, you do not deploy them at all in an approach battle. They have no targets (yet). Once you reach the PDUs and/or base, you can then use one per combat round.

When you are the defender, YOU are the one who can accept an approach battle. If you do, then the SAFs are treated like "bases" or "convoys" - meaning they do not show up in the approach battle (if you accepted it). However, they WILL be forced onto the combat line if the attacker is able to press the battle to the "base" (i.e., the SAFs).

Hope that helps.

By Bill Powell (Bleedingbill) on Thursday, August 29, 2019 - 03:53 pm: Edit

Thank you Chuck, I appreciate the quick response. There will be much wailing and gnashing of teethe on our next gaming session.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, September 01, 2019 - 09:34 am: Edit

Re: Bases and Victory Points.

Thanks for the quick answer, Chuck!

So if the Lyrans and Klingons each build a SB in the same captured hex of Kzinti space, if they are both alive at the end of the game, that counts for +20VP for the Coaltiion, as only one of the SBs count for VPs (but specifically, *at least one* does count).

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, September 01, 2019 - 05:07 pm: Edit

Re: Bases and Victory Points.

Chuck wrote (in Q+A):
"Unless overruled by ADB, a player can only count one base per hex for VP calculations."

And then SVC wrote "Confirmed".

Just making sure that we are all on the same page here, now that I'm thinking about it.

The main crux of my question was that the way the rule (603.3) is written, it could be construed that *no* newly built bases in a hex with multiple newly built bases can count for VPs. Which, I'm fairly certain, is not remotely the intention of the rule in question. But I just want to make sure that when you say:

"Unless overruled by ADB, a player can only count one base per hex for VP calculations."

You specifically mean "Unless overruled by ADB, a player can only count one [newly built] base *in a hex with multiple bases* per hex for VP calculations."

And also, this does not preclude one from counting multiple originally built bases in the same hex (i.e. as 603.3 reads, the Feds will get 60VPs for the total of 3 original SBs in their Capital, assuming they are all alive at the end of the game; if the Feds put up a new SB over Earth, it does *not* count for an extra 20VP, as it is a newly built base in a hex with friendly base).

Just endeavoring to make sure the VP rules are clear; I don't think they actually come up much, so here is to figuring them out when we get there :-)

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, September 01, 2019 - 07:09 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

By Jason Langdon (Jaspar) on Sunday, September 01, 2019 - 06:46 pm: Edit

Followup to Peter's questions.

A lost BATS has to be replaced by a BATS. SB by an SB?

So a new SB near where a BATS was lost doesnt count?

A new BATS near where an SB was lost doesnt count ?

---

---

Quote:

but newly built bases do not count unless they replace lost bases (and must be within three hexes of the specific base they replaced) or unless they were built in captured
enemy territory (not neutral territory)

---

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Sunday, September 22, 2019 - 04:27 pm: Edit

I'll post this in discussions as well (as it's not a rules question).

Coalition Turn 10.... what happens if the Romulans decide NOT to attack the Federation?

i.e.
1) What level of economy are they at?
2) Can they explore the on map provinces?
3) What fleets are released?

I might decide to attack,...but need to plan for peace too

By Bill Powell (Bleedingbill) on Monday, September 23, 2019 - 01:42 pm: Edit

Hello there. I have a question concerning being in supply for retrograde movement. section 410.22 states that supply status for purpose of combat is evaluated for both players at the start of each player turn and at the instant of combat. section 410.24 at the last sentence states that a ship which is in supply at the start of the turn is treated as being in supply for purposes of combat, but it must actually be in supply at the instant of combat to be in supply for retrograde movement. My opponent(the Federation) entered Klingon space and attacked a Major planet at hex 1714, my line of Battle stations behind him are intact. This makes him out of supply during the instant of combat. The rules says that he is unable to retrograde. He is treated as in supply for combat. We fight our round of combat and he retreats to the battle station directly behind him. which places him on one of my battle stations and also puts him back in supply, he believes that he can fight my battle station and be able to retrograde on the retrograde phase because of the fact that he was in supply for the second battle with his same fleet with my battle station. Is this the case? Thank you for your time.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Monday, September 23, 2019 - 01:54 pm: Edit

Bill

Correct. The Fed forces can Retrograde.

As long as you had 1 battle hex 'in supply', you can retrograde.

Supply is probably the most difficult part of the game to fully understand - the movement of ships can put forces into, out of and back into supply during a turn - and the other battles are done in will affect that too!

By Bill Powell (Bleedingbill) on Monday, September 23, 2019 - 02:02 pm: Edit

So a fleet can start a combat out of supply, retreat into another combat and then be considered in supply for purposes of retrograde? I'm not arguing the point, I just want to be certain about this, because if this is the case we will see it again.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Monday, September 23, 2019 - 02:23 pm: Edit

Correct - the rules don't distinguish how much a ship has been in or out of supply during the turn.

Check at combat (which could be over several battle hexes) and at start of Retro - if any are 'in supply' you can retrograde.

By Bill Powell (Bleedingbill) on Monday, September 23, 2019 - 06:25 pm: Edit

Coll, Thanks for the quick response.This will make the Feds happy.

By Bill Powell (Bleedingbill) on Monday, September 23, 2019 - 07:44 pm: Edit

Oops, I meant to say cool.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, September 23, 2019 - 10:19 pm: Edit

I suspect that the LAST battle hex you are in determines if you can retrograde. I'd ask Q&A before relying on Paul's answer.

By Stefano Predieri (Preda) on Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - 05:23 am: Edit

Also, specifically about your situation, being in supply at the moment of combat is an exception that let you retrograde even if you're not in supply at the start of the retrograde movement phase, when the supply status for retrograding is normally checked. Unless for some improbable situation that federation fleet retreated forward without killing the BAT it fought or other really weird placement happened, after that second fight/relative retreat the fleet would have been in supply for sure, and so it could have retrograded regularly.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - 07:03 pm: Edit

The supply check for all units wishing to retrograde that participated in combat is conducted under (105.M17) Phase 6A.

If a battle force that was out of supply for the purposes of combat under (105.M17) Phase 5-3A and is out of supply for Retrograde (105.M17) Phase 6A then those ships cannot use retrograde movement.

If the ships are in supply for both (105.M17) Phase 5-3A and (105.M17) Phase 6A then they are free to retrograde under (206.0).

If the ships in question are in supply under (105.M17) Phase 5-3A, but not for the Retrograde supply check under (105.M17) Phase 6A, then they may still use retrograde movement under (206.31) and (410.24).

It took me a while to figure this out.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - 09:23 pm: Edit

I think the question is if a unit is in supply for one supply check during the combat phase, but not in supply for a SUBSEQUENT supply check after another battle, can it still retrograde?

I suspect not.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - 09:59 pm: Edit

Richard, the way I read the rules in question, the answer is yes, if it was in supply at the last supply check for combat.

The unit(s) in question must be in combat, and in supply at the time of the last supply check in the combat phase (Phase 5-3A) they are a part of. If those conditions are met, then the unit(s) in question are eligible to retrograde even if they are not in supply at the time of the supply check under Phase 6A.

NOTE: I did a search for "supply status" on the SOP (105.M17) and between Phase 5-3A and 6A, "supply status" does not appear anywhere between those two.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Wednesday, September 25, 2019 - 03:38 am: Edit

FYI:

---

Quote:

(410.24) RETROGRADE: Supply status for Retrograde Movement is determined at the start of that phase. Exception: if the ship were in supply at the time of combat, it is considered to be in supply for purposes of Retrograde Movement. This can become confusing. A ship which is in supply at the start of the turn is treated as being in supply for purposes of combat, but it must actually be in supply (not just be treated as in supply) at the instant of combat to be in supply for Retrograde Movement (206.31).

---

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, September 25, 2019 - 12:25 pm: Edit

What if the ship is in two combats, and is in supply the first time, but not the second time? Are you saying it would be able to retrograde?

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, September 28, 2019 - 12:21 pm: Edit

Two key questions on the Feds attacking the Klingons and the Romulans not attacking on turn 10.... I would suggest we keep the discussions here?

603.54 - I think Chucks informal ruling sounds ideal - if the Coalition don't want the Gorns in the War, the Romulans can stay out of the war.

603.2 - I don't like the idea the Romulans could stay out of the war until turn 11 - and build SB's in Western Fleet's area, which can't be stopped. Moving though and surveying the one map areas seems reasonable (perhaps the NZ hexes would require them to attack though).

All just my thoughts though!

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Saturday, September 28, 2019 - 01:28 pm: Edit

Paul wrote:
>>It would seem the economy is at 100% and the normal build schedule and conversions are available (which seems reasonable).>>

All of this seems correct, as the rules are written, yes.

>>Can Romulan Ships though 'leave' Romulan space

1) Capture legal NZ hexes (the 3 by Tholains space)
2) Survey the On Map Romulan provinces and planets>>

They can survey, as they are at a full war economy at the start of T10, and are a fully operational empire. It is immaterial if they enter Fed space or not. At the start of T10, they are enabled to send their survey ships to start surveying. Which they can do as they are released to do that by the scenario. Once they start surveying provinces during operational movement, they aren't going to suddenly be un-surveyed at the end of operational movement when it turns out they didn't cross the Fed border.

The Tholian NZ hexes are probably fair game, although hex 3217 is counted as adjacent to Fed territory. So if the Romulans, on T10, as their first move, capture NZ hexes 3118, 3218, and 3219, and then never cross the Fed border, nothing special is going to happen.

>>Also - within Romulan space, can the named fleets (Western, Tholian Patrol and Home) move and are the Fleet areas considered to be released?>>

Why would they be unable to move? The scenario says:
(603.2) "Set up the Romulans before Turn #10 begins. The Romulans may attack the Federation. If they do, they become part of the Coalition. The Romulan Home Fleet, West Fleet, and Patrol Detachment are available."

The Romulan Home Fleet is released at the start of T10. It can't enter Fed Space anyway, as it can't reach it. You can move the Home Fleet to a location that is near the Fed border, not enter the NZ, and then have moved the Home Fleet. And then, at the end of the operational movement phase, if the Romulans have not crossed the border, are you suggesting that the fleet needs to be retroactively moved back to the Capital? As while it was released at the start of the turn, if you don't cross the border, it becomes unreleased?

>>3) Moving within Romulan space seems reasonable (it allows the Romulans to bring up the Romulan Home Fleet)>>

It doesn't just seem reasonable. It is just the rules as established.

>>4) What concerns me though (for the game), is that if the Fleet areas are considered 'released', it would allow the Romulans to upgrade Bases which can not be stopped by the Alliance (as they are not at war and the game mechanics restrict the turns the Alliance can attack the Romulans).>>

They can do that, yes. Unless the rules get changed to say that they can't. At the start of T10, the Romulans can pay to upgrade a BATS into a SB that some FEs are sitting on, or whatever. And then, if the Romulans don't cross the border, are they then going to have to retroactively *not* be upgrading that BATS?

Is this really particularly any different than what happens when the Romulans attack the Feds anyway? When the Romulans attack the Feds on T10, there are so many Romulans rolling across the border that unless the Coalition is doing monumentally terribly, the Romulans can upgrade bases inside Romulan territory with impunity anyway.

>>To aid, the rules for the Hydran are similar, but the Coalition can attack the Hydrans on turn 4 and so can stop base upgrades (so point 4 would be different).>>

What bases are you envisioning getting upgraded that couldn't realistically be upgraded on T10 anyway?

By William Jockusch (Verybadcat2) on Saturday, September 28, 2019 - 01:43 pm: Edit

Reading the rule, it's actually not clear the fleets are released. Here is what it says:

(603.2) . . . .Set up the Romulans before Turn #10 begins. The Romulans may attack the Federation. If they do, they become part of the Coalition. The Romulan Home Fleet, West Fleet, and Patrol Detachment are available.
So the question is, does the "available" part depend on the "if they do" part. It's not clear either way.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, September 28, 2019 - 01:56 pm: Edit

I agree with William - It's not clear,.

If they do....are they are available or if they don't are they still available (noting it doesn't say released).

Peter - the issue on Base Upgrades is that theoretically, if side A upgrades a Based, side B can get to kill it (accepting the map and distances might say you can't actually stop the upgrade) - but the Alliance Attack restrictions would stop the Romulans staying at peace and upgrading a BATS to a SB - it doesn't sound 'logical', as the Vulcans would say.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Saturday, September 28, 2019 - 02:00 pm: Edit

I think this is a case of excessive overthinking a sentence.

If "The Romulan Home Fleet, West Fleet, and Patrol Detachment are available." was in the paragraph *before* the "If they do, they become part of the Coalition.", would things seem clearer?

Like, the big issue here is that there is nothing in the rules that requires a "declaration of war" or anything. The Romulans don't have to commit to attacking the Federation or anything to get their fleets released and to be allowed to survey, and whatever.

At the start of T10, their fleets are released, they can explore, and then can move. And if they cross the Fed border, they are fighting the Feds (and all that means is the the Fed fleets in question are released and the Feds can enter Romulan territory). If they don't cross the Fed border, they aren't, and things aren't going to retroactively undo because they didn't cross the border. And there are plenty of rules in the scenario that detail what happens if the Romulans don't attack the Feds, so clearly, it is taken into account.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Saturday, September 28, 2019 - 02:04 pm: Edit

Paul wrote:
>>Peter - the issue on Base Upgrades is that theoretically, if side A upgrades a Based, side B can get to kill it (accepting the map and distances might say you can't actually stop the upgrade) - but the Alliance Attack restrictions would stop the Romulans staying at peace and upgrading a BATS to a SB - it doesn't sound 'logical', as the Vulcans would say.>>

I understand this. But in a practical sense, it is completely a non issue. If the Romulans attack the Feds on T10, and also upgrade BATS 4012 into a SB at the same time, what is the actual likelihood that the Feds can in any way, shape, or form, do anything about that, assuming a moderately competent level of play? And how is this actually different than the Feds just not being able to attack a Romulan base upgrade, 'cause the Romulans haven't attacked them?

The rules. They are pretty clear on all of this. Still.