I have a few questions about Klingon-Lyran pod sharing. There was a Q&A in CL#39 clarifying that a pod "pool" corresponds to the race's main supply grid, and that for a Klingon/Lyran tug to use an allied pod, it must be on an allied supply point when it switches.
Does that mean that an adopted Klingon/Lyran tug use shareable pods just like a tug of the host race, since their supply is drawn from the ally? Or does the above rule still apply?
Somewhat related, can shared pods be "delivered" to an allied pool, just like pods of the same race can be delivered to a partial grid?

By William Jockusch (Verybadcat) on Tuesday, September 08, 2020 - 05:54 pm: Edit

Rule (435.23) says "Note that since a ship carrying
EPs cannot enter a hex containing enemy ships, this must have
happened as a result of reaction movement."

This causes all sorts of problems when interacting with retreat movement. Suppose a force that includes an EP-carrying tug is retreating.

1) What if the retreat priority rules dictate hex A, but hex A contains enemy units? Does the force retreat to hex A anyway? Or does one throw out hex A, then apply the retreat priority rules to the remaining hexes?

2) What if all available retreat hexes contain enemy units?

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Tuesday, September 08, 2020 - 07:06 pm: Edit

Note that (435.23) is talking about operational movement (when reaction can occur), retreat movement is part of combat the ship carrying EPs is like every other ship involved in combat.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Wednesday, September 09, 2020 - 04:37 am: Edit

Question on PF and Replacements - 502.43

What does 'Special Free Strategic Movement' mean?

502.432 states it can only be done if the tender is in supply (so in effect similar to replacement fighters) - but 502.433 then adds that new productions are moved to the tenders 'baes, whatever' they are deployed on by special free Strategic Movement (starting at the place they were built and ending at the tender or other bases).

So what does 'Special' infer?

1) There has to be a normal 'free' of enemy Unit/not adjacent (unless more friendly in the hex) path of valid Strategic Movement Nodes (SMN) from the place they was built to the end hex and the end hex has to have a valid SMN in it.

2) There has to be a normal 'free' of enemy Unit/not adjacent (unless more friendly in the hex) path from the place they was built to the end hex and the end hex.

(Note, 502.433 seems to state the Tender is a temporary SMN for PF replacement - so 'special in effect adds a Tender to be a valid SMN node for this rule).

3) There has to be a SMN route from the build hex to the end hex, but enemy units can be adjacent to the route which has to have a valid Strategic Movement Node in it.

4) There has to be a SMN route from the build hex to the end hex, but enemy units can be adjacent to the route.

(Note, 502.433 seems to state the Tender is a temporary SMN for PF replacement - so 'special in effect adds a Tender to be a valid SMN node for this rule).

Option 1 uses normal Strategic Movement rules and so disregards the 'special' aspect of the rule, options 2 to 4 all can be interpreted slightly differently.

The closest equivalent to replacement fighters is 'Option 4' (but are less flexible than replacement fighters still - for example - a forces supplied by a Convoy and more than 6 hexes from SMN would receive replacement fighters, but would not receive replacement PF's).

So the question is - which interpretation of 'special' is correct?

Thank you


P.S. I'll post this and the EP question in Discussions to keep the topic clean.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Thursday, September 10, 2020 - 03:16 pm: Edit

Sorry, another formal Q&A.

There has been various questions related to this, but there has been no explicit answer (to my knowledge) to this question.

413.41 - Can Partial Supply Grid Supply pay for Allied Ships and Allied Replacement Fighters?

As an example, can a Lyran Partial Grid provide supply via 413.41 to Klingon Ships, which are within that Partial Grid.

I believe the answer is 'No' for two reasons

1) 413.1 - and 413.4 - Refers to the 'empire' and not Allied forces.

i.e. 413.41 can only be used by the Empire who owns the Partial Grid.

2) Partial Grid and (Main) Supply Grid Terminology are not interchangeable - as per this ruling : -

(Whole question/Answer copied)

(413.41) implies that Economic Points can be produced in a Partial Grid (note that this existed before the salvage rules); (430.12) says that "only those planets linked to a Supply Grid and provences that have one or more of their hexes linked to a Supply Grid produce Economic Points"; (413.1) indicates that a Supply Grid must include one or both of the Capital or Off-Map Area; (413.4) says that a Partial Grid contains neither the Capital nor the Off-Map Area.
Q: So, Partial Grids are both permitted and absolutely prohibited from producing EP. Which is correct?
A: Both, a Partial Supply Grid is not a Supply Grid and a Supply Grid is not a Partial Supply Grid. Each has their own definition and are treated separately

It was also previously ruled that Expeditionary Fleets can not use Partial Supply Grids.

Q: On a related note, is the intent of (413.43) to prohibit expeditionary fleets (411.7) from drawing supplies from their main supply grid, through the allied supply grid(s), then through their partial supply grid?
A: That is one of the effects.

So the follow on question, it would seem logical (and because of the above distinction between Main Supply Grids and Partial Supply Grids), that equally Homeless Ship Supply can not be set up or used through a Partial Supply Grid?

Lastly, to support this, within the 413.4 Partial Supply Grid rules is '413.43 - No Allied Help'

Although this is a title, it would seem to confirm that Partial Supply Grids can only help the Empire which owns it?

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Friday, September 11, 2020 - 02:36 am: Edit

To aid answering the two recent questions - I have simplified them.

502.43 Replacement PF's - What does 'Special Free Strategic Movement' mean?

1) End Hex can be a Tender and not a Strategic Movement Node? YES/No

2) Path from the Hex the PF's are built in to the Tenders hex, do enemy units in adjacent hexes to the path and the final hex block the resupply of PF's (204.222)? Yes/NO


413.41 - Can a Partial Supply Grid Supply pay for Allied Ships and Allied Replacement Fighters?

1) Can Allied Forces benefit from 413.41? Yes/NO

2) Can Homeless supply be used in a Partial Grid? Yes/NO (and if Yes, if an existing supply line was set up from an Allied Empire Main Grid - can it be transferred to the Partial Grid - or would it need to be cancelled and repaid for?)

To aid the court - Answers words in capitals I believe are the answers.

By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Friday, September 18, 2020 - 09:52 pm: Edit

I'm trying to properly understand (512.32).

1. Is the defense factor of the towing ship/ships compared to the crippled ship's crippled defense factor? My reading of the rule implies so.

2. How does the plural "ships" referring to towing ships fit in if "each [ship must have] a defense factor no more than two points lower than the trapped ship"? I understand the possibility of having two or more ships available to pull ships out of web on a one to one basis, I just don't get the implied teamwork of "unless an uncrippled ship or ships (each with a defense factor no more than two points lower than the trapped ship) outside of the web (but in the Battle Force) is assigned (at the end of the battle round) to pull them out of the web. The towing ship (or ships) is (are) designated before damage is resolved, and if destroyed, that ship cannot pull the cripple out of the web". It states trapped ship, not trapped ship or ships, but does use "them" once. Nothing states or implies the sum of the defense factors of the towing ships may be compared to the defense factor of a cripple to be towed. In short, could a D5 pull a crippled C8 out of a web? How about two F5s?

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, September 19, 2020 - 02:42 am: Edit

Sorry to chase, but can a formal ruling to these two questions be given, as it is now delaying a game.

1)502.43 Replacement PF's - What does 'Special Free Strategic Movement' mean?

No previous ruling and no definition given to 'Special Free Strategic Movement'.

2) 413.41 - Partial Grids and interaction with allied forces - Can Homeless Supply (410.5) and/or Partial Grid Ability (413.41) be used on Allied ships contained within a Partial Supply Grid (Example Klingon Ships in a Lyran Partial Supply Grid)?

Previous rulings said 'no' for the related Expedition Supply rule and stated "Partial Grids are are not Main Grids and Main Grids are not Partial Grids", but didn't expand on when the difference was relevant or not relevant.

413.43 "No Allied Help " was perhaps intended as the definition difference between Main and Partial Grids - but it only states it can't be connected to an allied Supply Grid, rather than 'It is not possible for Allied Ships to receive any supply (other than temporary Base supply - the CL32 ruling) benefits while contained within an Allies Partial Supply Grid' - as that would cover 410.5, 411.7 and 413.41.



Thank you

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, September 19, 2020 - 05:46 pm: Edit

REF: Special Free Strategic Movement

---

Quote:

(502.43) REPLACEMENTS: At the end of every Retrograde Phase (once per Player Turn), all PF-owning players (whether it was their Retrograde Phase or not) must examine their PF flotillas. Each player also does this in his own Production Phase.

(502.431) Those tenders which are under strength can be (but do not have to be) brought up to full strength immediately by using any available Economic Points in the Treasury to produce new PFs (even though this is outside the normal Production Phase). Deficit spending can be used in the Retrograde Phase but not the Production Phase.

(502.432) This can only be done if the tender is in supply, and the PFs must come from the same grid the tender is in.

(502.433) New production PFs are moved to the tenders (bases, whatever) they are deployed on by special free Strategic Movement (starting at the place they were built and ending at the tender or other base).

---

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, September 19, 2020 - 05:53 pm: Edit

Paul Howard stated:

---

Quote:

Previous rulings said 'no' for the related Expedition Supply rule and stated "Partial Grids are are not Main Grids and Main Grids are not Partial Grids", but didn't expand on when the difference was relevant or not relevant.

---

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Saturday, September 19, 2020 - 06:21 pm: Edit

Chuck, there were a few more rulings needed in the Archive through September 06, 2020 of this thread.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, September 19, 2020 - 06:47 pm: Edit

Ted:

Are the rulings preventing the progression of a current game?

By William Jockusch (Verybadcat) on Saturday, September 19, 2020 - 06:56 pm: Edit

Rule (413.1) seems entirely clear on whether or not a Partial Supply Grid is a Supply Grid. Here is the key excerpt:

(413.1) There are two kinds of Supply Grids: Main (or regular) Grids are connected to the capital or off-map area; Partial Supply Grids are not and are covered by (413.4) below.

Whether or not there are rulings that contradict this I have no idea.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Saturday, September 19, 2020 - 11:44 pm: Edit

Chuck, no. They can continue to wait.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Sunday, September 20, 2020 - 04:04 am: Edit

Chuck

Was first answered in 2008 and reconfirmed in 2012 (CL38)

Pages : -
Federation & Empire: F&E QUESTIONS: F&E Q&A: Archive 2008 and republished Federation & Empire: F&E QUESTIONS: F&E Q&A Archive File: Archive through August 09, 2012



(Whole question/Answer copied)

(413.41) implies that Economic Points can be produced in a Partial Grid (note that this existed before the salvage rules); (430.12) says that "only those planets linked to a Supply Grid and provences that have one or more of their hexes linked to a Supply Grid produce Economic Points"; (413.1) indicates that a Supply Grid must include one or both of the Capital or Off-Map Area; (413.4) says that a Partial Grid contains neither the Capital nor the Off-Map Area.
Q: So, Partial Grids are both permitted and absolutely prohibited from producing EP. Which is correct?
A: Both, a Partial Supply Grid is not a Supply Grid and a Supply Grid is not a Partial Supply Grid. Each has their own definition and are treated separately


Thanks

Paul

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Sunday, September 20, 2020 - 06:44 pm: Edit

Just remember that any supply grid requires a base/planet(s) to collect the EPs (important for partial grids) ...

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Friday, October 02, 2020 - 06:16 am: Edit

Q302.617 Does killing a penal ship under (528.411) count as a directed damage attack for the purposes of the auto kill rule (302.617)?

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Sunday, October 04, 2020 - 10:55 am: Edit

Chuck

Sorry to chase - any news on 413.41/413.43 answer?

(Partial Supply Grid and Allied forces within that Grid)

Thanks

Paul

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Thursday, October 08, 2020 - 02:07 pm: Edit

Hi Chuck

Any news on 413.41/413.43 answer?

Any chance of an answer before Sunday.??...otherwise I have suggested we toss a coin

Thanks

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Sunday, November 08, 2020 - 05:19 am: Edit

Hi Chuck and FEAR.

Sorry to chase again - any luck on 413/41/413.43.

What Allied supply rules apply in a Partial Grid?

Thanks

Paul

By Trent J. Telenko (Trent_Telenko) on Sunday, November 08, 2020 - 05:06 pm: Edit

I have several questions regards rules (530.222) Changeover and (549.123) Production of auxiliaries in Fighter Operations 2016 (included below questions)


1. What is the cost of converting a small or large Aux-CV standard fighter squadron to a 8-COMPOT heavy fighter squadron?

Is it one EP per heavy fighter factor or two EP?

If I recall correctly, Federation F-111's cost 2 ep per factor per SVC. This was to recognize F-111 were PF equivalents.

2. When you use rule (530.222) to convert Federation SAV/LAV to F-101 carrying SAHY/LAHY on turns #21 - #25...is rule (549.123) the more specific so I can convert SAHY/LAHY on those turns without affecting my A-20 or F-111 production for warships on those turns?




(530.222) Changeover: Changing an existing carrier to use heavy fighters requires payment of the EPs (or free fighter factors) for
the difference in cost. This changeover has no other cost and does not require the use of any conversion capacity by a base.

Only carriers in supply can be changed in this way. Changeovers of existing carriers to heavy fighters are limited only by the rules herein; conversion of non-carriers into carriers for heavy fighters or building new heavy fighter carriers is under the normal limits on carrier production. Limit one free HF changeover per turn.

After the PF introduction date, the construction of a heavy fighter carrier or conversion of a non-carrier to heavy fighters may be counted against that empire’s PFT limit (530.223) or against its carrier limit; additional HF changeovers beyond the one free one per turn may counted against these limits. Note that Federation carriers for A-20 heavy assault fighters have their own specific
(lower) limits (532.0).


(549.123) Production of auxiliaries does not count against the mission specialty, e.g., auxiliary carriers don’t count against the
carrier limit, auxiliary scouts don’t count against the scout limit, and auxiliary PFTs don’t count against the PFT limit.

By Trent J. Telenko (Trent_Telenko) on Sunday, November 08, 2020 - 05:27 pm: Edit

I have several questions regards (532.0) FEDERATION A-20 HEAVY FIGHTERS (Rule below questions)

1. What is the cost of converting standard fighter factors to A-20 factors on SAHV and LAHV auxiliary carriers? Is it one EP or two EP's?

2. How does (532.222) actually work for A-20's on SAHV and LAHV auxiliary carriers?

Every Federation warship SIT converting a F-18 carrier to an A-20 (See: CVS to CAV) there is a one EP shipyard conversion to add the necessary photon freezers.

3. Could I use (530.222) to convert a F-101 SAHY or LAHY on the same turn I build a SAHV and LAHV given (549.123) Production of auxiliaries?


(532.222) Changing an existing carrier to use A-20s is done as a conversion as per (530.222).

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Thursday, November 12, 2020 - 04:40 pm: Edit

Hi. I have a question about the base game. Rule 704.1 says that WE/KE means convert one WE to KE at no cost. It also limits the conversions to one per turn and says that starting turn 7 this conversion costs three EPs. Two related questions:

One, is the one per turn limit for the free conversions or total WE/KE conversions? I.e., could I pay for a second WE/KE conversion the same turn I used a free one?

Two, the rule says you must pay for this conversion starting turn 7. However, the pre-war construction has a "WE/KE" entry for turn 8, which is obviously after turn 7. How do I interpret the turn 8 entry?

I did a keyword search on "WE/KE" and did not see an answer. I have the 2010 Revision 1 rules (with the star on each page).

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Thursday, November 12, 2020 - 05:42 pm: Edit

John,

The WE/KE conversions is limited to a total of one conversion per turn.

Prewar consstruction (to include listed conversions) are at no cost. The turn 8 listing is if the Romulans have to repairs from any pre-wwar raids and need money. They could skip the WE/KE and have 3ep available for repairs.

Ryan
F&E OB Specialist.

By K Maxson (Krm) on Monday, November 16, 2020 - 07:32 am: Edit

I've got a question about battle hexes with three or more mutual antagonists (301.71). Let's say in the Free Campaign we end up with a Lyran DD, a Kzinti DD, and a massive Klingon fleet of 40 units in the same hex. Each antagonist is required to form two battle forces but in this case that is not possible. Could the Lyran and Kzinti field their only possible battle forces against each other, decline to roll a die as (301.71) permits, and then retreat without pursuit, leaving the massive Klingon Fleet impotent in the hex?

(301.74) further muddies the water with its "defeated first" terminology, since (301.71) clearly states that there are distinct simultaneous battles between the various antagonists. There can never be a "defeated first" antagonist as that rule is stated.

Have 3+ player game rules been further explicated somewhere?