@Jeff Wile,

In SFB the designation is CVT. However, it's easy to forget that F&E really is it's own game, even though it's set in the SFU and has many close ties to SFB.

In F&E, the Kzinti CVT is not a designation as such. (Note, however, for the F&E Klingons, there *is* a CVT designation).

In F&E, the nomenclatures for various ships are given in the SITS (ship information tables). These are available for free download from the BBS in the F&E section.

For the Kzinti, the SIT lists two tugs (the TGC and the TGT). The SIT then lists a number of different kinds of pods useable with *either* tug.

Thus, in F&E the designation becomes, for example, TGT+2*VP (a TGT transport tug with 2 carrier pods) or TGC+BP+VP (a TGC combat tug with one combat pod and one carrier pod).

Hope that helps.

@Mike and @Jeff:
As for the escort requirement for tugs, Mike is correct - and I had forgotten that requirement. Thus, Jeff, your original tac note is illegal in Federation and Empire (not necessarily in SFB) because TGC+2*VP plus 3*CVL groups would require 10 command slots, not 9.

For your reference, I've copied the F&E rule, below, that applies to this situation.

That being said, Jeff, your tac note is still viable if you use a TGC+BP+VP, giving 16 fighter factors in the battle force. The TGC+BP+VP will have a 10 command rating, and thus can absorb the "ghost command slot" required by the unescorted tug.

Here's the F&E rule in question:

---

Quote:

(515.26) TUGS withcarrier pOdS [mission (509.1 B)] or SCS
pods:j: [mission (509.1 Q)] do not require escorts, but can
be escorted.
(515.261) Unescorted carrier tugs count as two ships for
command rating purposes.
(515.262) Carrier tugs with four or fewer fighter factors are
treated as CVLs (515.23).
(515.263) Carrier tugs with five-to-ten fighter factors are
treated as CVs (515.22).
(515.264) Carrier tugs with eleven or more fighter factors
or with SCS pods are treated as CVAs (515.21).
(515.265) Tugs which have their own fighters but no carrier
pods are not considered carriers for this rule.

---

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 - 08:37 am: Edit

Jeff - Sorry to point out a further error, but the FF plus 3 Squadrons of Fighters is an Illegal Battle Force.

Point 1 - Unless the forces only comprises fighters/PF's - you can only have 1 equivalent of fighters per ship being used.

So FF+1 Squadron would be permitted.

Point 2 - which is more relevant.

Prior to any ships withdrawing, one of the ships which has the third or higher Command Rating has to be designated as the Flagship - so with a Carrier Tug and 3 CVL's - the Carrier Tug or one of the 2 CVL's has to be the Flagship.

The only 'exception' to this rule is Cloaks, in that the normal Flagship designation is done (so a 3rd or higher CR rated Cloaked Ship has to be designated) - Withdrawals are then done - and only if the designated Flagship successfully cloaked, can another Flagship be designated.

So, unless you wanted to therefore risk the CVL or Carrier Tug 'on it's own'* - you would almost certainly put up the full line, noting the Carrier Tug and 3 3 CVL groups does take 11 command slots (so it would need to be a Carrier Battle Tug).**

* - There may be times when the loss of a CVL is better than using a full line (Well there has to be a first time to face 11 B10's....).

** - Or in theory a command point is used (why though for a 1 round battle.....) - Rules not with me, so unsure if an Admiral could be on a CVL and count?

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 - 09:57 am: Edit

@Paul and @Jeff,

Paul has some more points, but I want to encourage Jeff. This is an interesting tac note after it has been cleaned up for the F&E rules issues. Personally, I'll start using it as Alliance, especially when defending SBs with token forces. It's resilient for a few rounds (all you need for a token SB force) and leaves the heavies for capital defense.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 - 10:16 am: Edit

Paul, I'm confused. What do you mean by FF plus 3 squadrons of fighters is illegal?

I'm assuming the FF is a Frigate with a command rating of 3. If so then the FF is the flagship and can command 3 squadrons of fighters. See (302.33) and the subsequent sub rules as well the Kzinti SIT.

Jeff's idea is in part an expansion of my Tac Note entitled The Kzinti CVL Revisited published in CL#40 as well as new ideas with regards to the Kzinti CVL and use in combat itself.

I would note that Jeff's idea is great when defending a base or a planet with atleast 1 PDU. If an overwhelming enemy force shows up, the Kzintis can always retreat behind the base or planet without having to risk the fleet.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 - 11:14 am: Edit

Thomas

You got me worried for a moment then - Minimum Force 302.36 : -

"Independent Fighter/PF ship equivalent can't account for more than half of the battle force unless there are not enough ships present to make up the required portion."

So - if the potential force was say 3 x FF and 3 x 6 IFF (reacted in), you can't use 1 x FF and 3 x 6 IFF, as that breaches 302.36.

Your force would be 1 x FF and 1 x 6 IFF (or 2 x FF and 2 x 6 IFF, or 3 x FF and 1 x 6 IFF).

A potential force of just 1 x FF and 3 x 6 IFF could use everything though (as the 302.36 requirement is met - and the Command rating of the FF is sufficient to control the IFF's).

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 - 11:32 am: Edit

Paul, no it doesn't. Because they reacted in, doesn't mean that they can't then withdraw before combat. What you say would only apply after withdrawal from combat and the resulting 3xFF and 3xFighter Squadrons were left. Even then 2xFF would be excused under the Flag Ship exclusion rule.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 - 01:19 pm: Edit

Thomas - it doesn't stop stuff withdrawing before combat - but as 302.36 refers to Battle Force, it does require you to construct the line without exceeding the 50% IFF requirement and 50% of the forces in the hex?


So a force of 5 x FF's and 3 x IFF's is in a hex.

1 of the FF's is required to be the Flagship.

2 x FF's elect to withdraw before combat.

So 3 x FF are left.

I can then use the Flagship rejection rule to reduce the 3 x FF to 1 x FF (for the 50% ship requirement - 302.32).

But, those rejected Flagships are still present in the hex - just that they aren't required to be in the Battle Force - i.e. I can't see an enabling rule to disregard them from both the battle force AND 'in the hex', to allow additional IFF's to be included.

(They clearly are still in the hex, as if crippled, would be effected by pursuit)

In other words, they are there - but don't have to be used - but if you don't use them, you can't include IFF's to break the 50% Battle Force rule.


Tried to find a formal Q&A answer - not found one yet (and need to cook tea) - but I did come across this post (who has used the same thinking I have) : -

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, August\ 25, 2017 - 11:39 pm: Edit


You'd ha\ve to send a flag ship if their was an eligible ship in the hex.

Also, if you only send one or two ships, you can only send one or two squadrons of attrition units (in such a case). This is in 302.36 which also has a confusing sentence that makes no sense whatsover ('unless there are not enough ships present to make up their required portion (if any) *what required portion I ask* and see (303.7) *independant squadrons with no ships/bases*.


Unless I have got it totally wrong?

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 - 02:08 pm: Edit

>> Prior to any ships withdrawing, one of the ships which has the third or higher Command Rating has to be designated as the Flagship - so with a Carrier Tug and 3 CVL's - the Carrier Tug or one of the 2 CVL's has to be the Flagship.


The Kzinti CVLs, MECs, and CLEs are all command rating 6. With the carrier tug being either a 9 or 10 (depending on which way Jeff decides to take his tactical note), you have a large pool of “top 3” command ships to choose from. One could just as easily select one of the MECs or CLEs to be the flagship. So if our defending fleet in the hex is:

1 x Kzinti CVT Battle/Carrier tug (Command rating 10)
1x [required phantom CVT escort]
3x CVL (command rating 6)
3x CLE (command rating 6)
3x EFF (command rating 3)

And we choose to withdraw before combat, we must identify our top 3 candidates, and select one to leave behind as flagship. We pick:

1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
1x CLE (chosen candidate)

We have selected a CLE as flagship. We can then withdraw 5 other ships of the 10. We choose to withdraw:

1x CVT (not flagship candidates)
1x CVL (not flagship candidates)
2x CLE (not flagship candidates)
1x EFF (not flagship candidates)

Leaving behind a 5 ship force of:

1x CLE (flagship)
1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
2x EFF (not flagship candidates)

The 2x CVLs don’t have to be in the battle force, as excluded candidates. So the battle force becomes:

1x CLE (flagship)
2x EFF (not flagship candidates)

The 2x CVL in the hex that were excluded candidates could contribute their fighters as IFFs, but this would open them up to possible 3x directed damage in the support echelon. It would depend on the strength and composition of the attacking force to see if this is a risk.

I believe (302.133) prevents leaving fighters behind unless the carrier is also left behind?

Does that all sound right?

--Mike

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 - 04:58 pm: Edit

Mike

The Kzinti CVL has a CR of 8 (it's built on a BC hull).

Also, the 3rd Highest (or higher) Command Rated Ship has to fight in the first round - you don't re-select eligible flagships after ships have withdrawn (302.133 - one of the more buried rules).

So with a TGC+VP and 3 x CVL's (and escorts)….. the TGC or a CVL has to be the Flagship.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Friday, April 23, 2021 - 02:08 pm: Edit

Paul,

You are absolutely right, the Kz CVL is a CR 8. I read the line in the chart across, and read the CR for the CVE in the line above it. One hazard of having old eyes. Thanks for the correction.

I think in my example (which used the wrong CR), I think the same CLE was selected as flag at the very beginning of the steps and run through all the way to the round 1 battle force?

One other potential option for this tacnote could be to use a force of:

1 x Kzinti CVT VP/BP (Command rating 10)
1x [required phantom CVT escort]

1x CVL (command rating 8)
1x CLE (command rating 6)
1x EFF (command rating 3)

3x CVE (command rating 6)
3x EFF (command rating 3)

That gives a force with 16.5 fighters, and for withdrawal before combat would need to leave 1xCLE and 2xEFF behind? I'll leave it to Jeff to take his tacnote from here.

--Mike

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Friday, April 23, 2021 - 03:22 pm: Edit

Mike

That's correct.

If the force got 'mugged' - it could put up a CLE (or a CVE) to die (assuming you never had to form any groups).

I would say though that's a totally different 'tactic' note - using CVE's on mass.

I would also say the problem with trying to fine tune forces to this disagree, can cause issues if the plan goes wrong.

For example - William is the expert in creating battles and doing them in a set order, to allow him to normally retreat through other forces.

So if the above force was used - and fought as a line, and then retreated but then got retreated over (by a nice force with a Mauler and several Lyran BC's/DN's etc) - because the CVL+CLE+EFF carrier group was already formed, it can't then put up the CLE to die - so you would probably lose a CVE+EFF (or worse) to a Mauler.

Discussions should probably be moved to the Discussion topic though.....

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, April 28, 2021 - 06:08 pm: Edit

I haven’t abandoned this, just having real life interfere with my game time allotment.

I will resubmit the Kzinti CVL thing, including the comments and suggestions people have kindly offered. Just need to find a block of time with few or no interruptions.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, June 09, 2021 - 05:11 pm: Edit

a kzinti CVL battle Fleet.
Jeff Wile,
USS Minnesota.

the venerable Kzinti CVL has long been the odd duck of the Hegemonic Navy. with only 9 fighters (three short of a full 12 fighter squadron, or to convert to F&E fighter factors 4.5.) to assemble a battle fleet with 36 fighters/18 fighter factors or 3 nominal fighter squadrons), required some fiddling with the ship force pools to find a combination that totaled the "sweet spot" of 36 fighters (etc...)

While 4 CVL groups do total 36 fighters (18 fighter factors.) 12 ships (3 per CVL group) exceeds the command limits of a Dreadnought,much less, that of a CVL.

the solution is to use an unescorted TGC+BP+VP, giving 16 fighter factors in the battle force. The TGC+BP+VP will have a 10 command rating, and thus can absorb the "ghost command slot" required by the unescorted tug.

Prior to any ships withdrawing, one of the ships which has the third or higher Command Rating has to be designated as the Flagship - so with a Carrier Tug and 3 CVL's - the Carrier Tug or one of the 2 CVL's has to be the Flagship.


The Kzinti CVLs, MECs, and CLEs are all command rating 6. With the carrier tug being either a 9 or 10, you have a large pool of “top 3” command ships to choose from. One could just as easily select one of the MECs or CLEs to be the flagship. So if our defending fleet in the hex is:

1 x Kzinti CVT Battle/Carrier tug (Command rating 10)
1x [required phantom CVT escort]
3x CVL (command rating 6)
3x CLE (command rating 6)
3x EFF (command rating 3)

And we choose to withdraw before combat, we must identify our top 3 candidates, and select one to leave behind as flagship. We pick:

1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
1x CLE (chosen candidate)

We have selected a CLE as flagship. We can then withdraw 5 other ships of the 10. We choose to withdraw:

1x CVT (not flagship candidates)
1x CVL (not flagship candidates)
2x CLE (not flagship candidates)
1x EFF (not flagship candidates)

Leaving behind a 5 ship force of:

1x CLE (flagship)
1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
2x EFF (not flagship candidates)

The 2x CVLs don’t have to be in the battle force, as excluded candidates. So the battle force becomes:

1x CLE (flagship)
2x EFF (not flagship candidates)

The 2x CVL in the hex that were excluded candidates could contribute their fighters as IFFs, but this would open them up to possible 3x directed damage in the support echelon. It would depend on the strength and composition of the attacking force to see if this is a risk.

At the very least, this tac note puts the CVL class back in combat where it belongs, instead of spending the General War acting as a fighter transport lending its fighters to better carriers that actually participate in the battle.

many thanks to Ted Fay, Mike Erickson and others who made comments and suggestions to improve this tac note.

Foot note#1. the resulting battle force has 33 fighters. this translates to 16 fighter factors, per F&E rules.
footnote#2. players may elect to add a scout frigate to the force. as every tactical situation is unique, judgment must be used. the presence of an additional ship may change the order of retreat and put one or more ships at risk. if the mission requires additional electronic warfare support. then it might be justified. the basic point was to use the CVL in a classic pin force.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, June 09, 2021 - 05:23 pm: Edit

Apologies for the delay.

my family has a history of eye disease, (macular degeneration, glaucoma, astigmatism, short sightedness, cataracts etc.)

what was once a simple task, now has become quite difficult.

I am now legally blind in my left eye, and my right eye is affected as well. surgery and other treatments will help, but the ultimate prognosis is not good. the scary part is, according the state of Minnesota, I can still drive! (makes me wonder about my fellow drivers out on Minnesota highways...)

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, June 09, 2021 - 05:23 pm: Edit

Jeff, CVLs have a command rating of 8 not 6. The CVL is based on the BC Hull.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, June 10, 2021 - 12:09 am: Edit

Thomas, I cut and pasted Mike Ericksons comments, without remembering that Paul Howard had already pointed out the error.

Too late tonight to fix it, will repost with the correction tomorrow.

Thank you for pointing it out.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, June 10, 2021 - 01:19 pm: Edit

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, June 09, 2021 - 05:11 pm: Edit

a kzinti CVL battle Fleet. (Version 1.01)
Jeff Wile,
USS Minnesota.

the venerable Kzinti CVL has long been the odd duck of the Hegemonic Navy. with only 9 fighters (three short of a full 12 fighter squadron, or to convert to F&E fighter factors 4.5.) to assemble a battle fleet with 36 fighters/18 fighter factors or 3 nominal fighter squadrons), required some fiddling with the ship force pools to find a combination that totaled the "sweet spot" of 36 fighters (etc...)

While 4 CVL groups do total 36 fighters (18 fighter factors.) 12 ships (3 per CVL group) exceeds the command limits of a Dreadnought,much less, that of a CVL.

the solution is to use an unescorted TGC+BP+VP, giving 16 fighter factors in the battle force. The TGC+BP+VP will have a 10 command rating, and thus can absorb the "ghost command slot" required by the unescorted tug.

Prior to any ships withdrawing, one of the ships which has the third or higher Command Rating has to be designated as the Flagship - so with a Carrier Tug and 3 CVL's - the Carrier Tug or one of the 2 CVL's has to be the Flagship.


The Kzinti CVLs, MECs, and CLEs are all command rating 6. With the carrier tug being either a 9 or 10, you have a large pool of “top 3” command ships to choose from. One could just as easily select one of the MECs or CLEs to be the flagship. So if our defending fleet in the hex is:

1 x Kzinti CVT Battle/Carrier tug (Command rating 10)
1x [required phantom CVT escort]
3x CVL (command rating 8)
3x CLE (command rating 6)
3x EFF (command rating 3)

And we choose to withdraw before combat, we must identify our top 3 candidates, and select one to leave behind as flagship. We pick:

1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
1x CLE (chosen candidate)

We have selected a CLE as flagship. We can then withdraw 5 other ships of the 10. We choose to withdraw:

1x CVT (not flagship candidates)
1x CVL (not flagship candidates)
2x CLE (not flagship candidates)
1x EFF (not flagship candidates)

Leaving behind a 5 ship force of:

1x CLE (flagship)
1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
1x CVL (non chosen candidate)
2x EFF (not flagship candidates)

The 2x CVLs don’t have to be in the battle force, as excluded candidates. So the battle force becomes:

1x CLE (flagship)
2x EFF (not flagship candidates)

The 2x CVL in the hex that were excluded candidates could contribute their fighters as IFFs, but this would open them up to possible 3x directed damage in the support echelon. It would depend on the strength and composition of the attacking force to see if this is a risk.

At the very least, this tac note puts the CVL class back in combat where it belongs, instead of spending the General War acting as a fighter transport lending its fighters to better carriers that actually participate in the battle.

many thanks to Ted Fay, Mike Erickson and others who made comments and suggestions to improve this tac note.

Foot note#1. the resulting battle force has 33 fighters. this translates to 16.5 fighter factors, per F&E rules.
footnote#2. players may elect to add a scout frigate to the force. as every tactical situation is unique, judgment must be used. the presence of an additional ship may change the order of retreat and put one or more ships at risk. if the mission requires additional electronic warfare support. then it might be justified. the basic point was to use the CVL in a classic pin force.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Thursday, June 10, 2021 - 06:31 pm: Edit

When looking at flagship candidates, what happened to the CR 10 BTV (battle/carrier tug)??

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Thursday, June 10, 2021 - 06:36 pm: Edit

The CVL has a command rating of 8, so the three flagship candidates would be the TGC+BP+VP, and two of the CVL's. So if you withdraw most of your fleet to avoid combat, you lose a CVL.

However, I'd think that if you're getting pounced, just keep all your ships on the line and duke it out. One round and withdraw, you'll prolly only lose fighters and some escorts, the same escorts you were trying to sacrifice with the withdrawal option.

If you have a spare Admiral, you could then escort the TGC for a line of BTV(CLE,EFF), 3 CVL(each CLE,EFF), plus scout for good protection and cheap damage absorbtion. Vulnerable to maulers, though? But that was always part of the risk in a pin fleet mission, yes? Or is that unacceptable?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, June 10, 2021 - 08:05 pm: Edit

Kevin, in theory, risk assessment tracks with mission priority.

If the mission is classic pin force, then the need for an admiral or a additional command point is less.

If the mission is an approach battle in defense of the Capital world, then maximum attrition on the enemy forces becomes a priority... which justifies the use of an admiral. Plus, trading an escort or two and fighter factors to bleed the enemy might make sense.

It all depends on what strategy you’ve chosen for the Kzinti Hegemony.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, June 10, 2021 - 11:56 pm: Edit

Stewart, good catch.

Too late to edit it, so I will repost a corrected version.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, June 11, 2021 - 09:23 am: Edit

Stewart:

I think you might have missed a paragraph. I will copy it below:

"...We have selected a CLE as flagship. We can then withdraw 5 other ships of the 10. We choose to withdraw:

1x CVT (not flagship candidates)
1x CVL (not flagship candidates)
2x CLE (not flagship candidates)
1x EFF (not flagship candidates)..."

in this version, the CVT is the CR 10 BTV (battle/carrier tug)??

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Friday, June 11, 2021 - 06:38 pm: Edit

Jeff, how did the BTV get out of being a flagship candidate when it has the highest command rating, the choice would be between 2 of the CVLs (CR8) and the BTV (CR10) ...

By Kosta Michalopoulos (Kosmic) on Friday, June 11, 2021 - 07:02 pm: Edit

Jeff, I think you are confusing when the flagship selection process occurs. As I understand it, candidate flagships are selected prior to withdrawal before combat. So one of the CVT or CVLs has to remain behind and act as the flagship.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, June 11, 2021 - 10:30 pm: Edit

Stewart and Kota:

I suspect you are both confused.

In the posted example, three ships are selected as flagship candidates, two CVL and one CLE (the chosen flagship), along with two EFF escorts (also not chosen flagships.). And Kosta, note the section above, in the example, that all three selected flagships (two CVL type carriers, and a CLE) were designated prior to withdrawal before combat.