Archive through February 19, 2022
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Federation & Empire: F&E QUESTIONS:
F&E Q&A Discussions:
Archive through February 19, 2022
While I admit I asked the question, my understanding is that Tim's reasoning is good. I believe a mauler can hit 10 ATUs (attrition unit factors). I suppose the counter argument is that you can only hit one unit or group of units as permitted by the rules; i.e., the best counter argument is that there is no enabling rule that - say - 10 fighters is considered a "single unit".
Of course, under such an argument, I would say that 1 squad of fighter factors must be considered a single unit (as it is 1 ship equivalent unit (SEQ)), but I still don't think that's the best interpretation in view of the enabling rule allowing any number of ATUs to be attacked in a single battle round.
/me shrugs. I've got my opinion, opponent has his (though he has, for the sake of continuing play, adopted my interpretation).
"By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Friday, February 11, 2022 - 01:30 pm: Edit
Am I correct in interpreting the rules to believe that the Lyrans can get BBs by conversion in 1 turn even if (436.26) is not used?"
Firstly, it requires the optional rule that anyone can build the BB!
436.4 does seem to contradict the SIT tables though - as it says Entry rate us 175 (which I suppose is the expected turn of entry if the rolling method is used).
In theory though, yes, if 436.4 was used, I believe the answer is yes.
However, as the Alliance I think I would think most players would say 'no conversions from a DN or CA', as the Lyrans would be able to build 1 BB a year...which would seem to be a fairly busted rule if everyone else (including the Klingons) takes at least 2 years to build 1!
Having 5 Lyran BB's available when the Kzinti (and Klingons) can have 1 - I think would break the game.
When the Hydrans arrive - it's 7 Lyran BB's+ 1 Kliingon BB's v 2 Alliance BB's - assuming they can afford them!
Turn 11 (assuming Feds are attacked on turn 7) it's 11 Lyran BB's+ 2 Klingon BB's v 5 Alliance BB's (assuming the Kzinti and Hydrans can afford them) - and so it will only go one way.
i.e. Capital Assaults are now a walk in the park.
Unless the conversion cost had to be paid over several turns - i.e. a limit of say 5 points per turn could be spent on it - I don't think that is the intent of the rule, even if the rule does say it's experimental.
I found this question asked and answered on the BBS, but it was long enough ago that I wanted to be sure that the answer didn't change as newer editions of the game were published.
Rule 204.31 says that "newly built, repaired or activated units..." receive free strategic movement. What does "activated" mean in this context? Is it limited to mothball activations under Rule 434 or does it also include newly released fleets?
The confusion arises in that the word activated is sometimes used synonymously with released. For example, the second paragraph of 600.30 says: "If the fleet is released (activated, made available)...." Similarly, unreleased fleets are frequently referred to as inactive fleets.
In the old post, the answer was that only ships activated under Rule 434 received free strategic movement; newly released fleets did not. Please confirm whether this is still the case.
Ships activated from mothballs receive free strategic movement. Ships that are a part of a released fleet do not receive free strategic movement, unless they are moved as part of the original 10 (15) free strategic movement points provided under (204.30).
John
To add to Thomas's answer - the Lyran Far Stars and Kzinti Barony Fleets get 'special off map arrival strategic movement' but it only allows them to enter 1 hex onto the map (usually 109 and 1401) - further Strategic Movement is allowed, but if they continue moving, it does count towards their allowance.
Easier to think about 'Released and Unreleased' with fleets rather than activated.
In a capital assault, it is clear that crips have to be assigned to a system and stay in the system. Did we ever settle whether or not they have to be assigned to only one planet within the system, and whether or not they are eligible to be on the battle line at other planets within the system?
In the rule, it looks to me like the system:
The Defending Player deploys any “defense-limited” units (see below) and all crippled ships in the system boxes (the first or left column). The crippled ships can be used in combat and given up as casualties, but if they leave that system, they must retreat out of the capital hex and won’t be able to be repaired (420.421) in that hex on the next Player Turn.
However, when I look around on this board, I see references to the crippled ships pool being at the "planet with the most PDUs". I'm not sure which to believe.
Hi William,
The assignment of cripples to the planet with the most PDUs comes from Rule 511.573.
So my interpretation is that 511.52 covers their assignment to a system, then 511.573 covers their assignment within that system.
Might I suggest discussions on questions continue here... before the powers that be notice 
?
By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, February 13, 2022 - 08:48 pm: Edit
Q1: You would have to go to 0718 because it is part of a main grid at the time of retreat. Any argument to the contrary pretty much means you are throwing away the retreat priority rules and are in undefined territory.
Comment - Don't you need to take into account the hex you end in though for supply, so if the Hydrans are in 718 - 617 is Coalition controlled and so 718 would be a partial supply grid AFTER the 'full' retreat.
Partial Retreats would need to go to 718 though - as at the time of the retreat - 617 although not a Supply Source (due to the retreat rule), it is still part of the supply grid.
Quite often in the game with William - we have had a force out of supply - but if it retreats to Hex X, it reopens supply to that hex - and so you need to note what the position will be post retreat - not pre-retreat. (Although it's possible we might be playing it totally wrong)
By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Monday, February 14, 2022 - 12:40 am: Edit
John C - where did you read that? (436.26) is for 'buying directly' which would include construction or by converasion.
The rule is that it's 25% of the cost shown in the SIT per turn, that covers both by construction or conversion.
Comment - I better read up 436.26 (and any associated rules in the expansions) as conversions are 100% and instant - I don't believe this is a part conversion rule (unlike the part repair rule!)
Paul: I agree with Richard, it makes sense that 0718 is the only allowed hex for the partial retreat. Q1 wasn't really "I'm not sure how to rule this" so much as, "I'm not missing something here, am I?"
Q2 is where I'd like an answer. It's also relevant in the Kzinti theatre where it's possible that the Kzinti would partial retreat cripples offmap and then do a regular retreat to 1502. It's vanishingly unlikely that it'll come into play in my current game (I'd have to win two very disadvantaged SSCs) but it's unclear whether I can retreat to two different hexes with a partial retreat in general.
Sam
I think your right - but it's only because of the requirement that everything goes to the same hex, with Partial and full capital retreats - as 718 would normally be optional (i.e. Exclude or not Partial Grids).
If the Hydrans DIDN'T want to retreat to 718 'after the battle' (so to speak), they would need to avoid doing withdrawals or partial retreats during the battle - and so they could then exclude Partial Grids and allow them to retreat to the 5xx column (or possibly 616/618 depending on the supply chain lengths etc!).
Stewart wrote:
"All ships in this game are direct purchase, even the conversions as they all take one turn. Battleships take four turns under direct purchase by (436.26) or more when using (436.2) as the fewest turns would be seven.
"Also, since (436.26) is optional how would the Lyran CA to BB conversion be handled if (436.26) were not used?
"The Lyrans would get some many points to start with (say 8 as the CA parts are already present), or the Lyrans would get 2 addition die rolls on their initial purchase (again for the pre-existing CA parts)..."
OK, but all of that is either opinion or speculation. Please site the rule, and please quote the pertinent part. Nothing in the rules supports what you're saying.
JohnC - you asked an open question and got two options that fit within the rule structure, the Lyrans need the mechanics on how they convert their BBs from their CAs or DNs. Unless one wants to say that they get NO benefit by converting ...
After playing F and E off and on for 30 years . . . I have my first slow pursuit!
Does it require a die roll?
Is it limited to one round?
You don't need to roll to catch a slow pursuit.
You build a full battle line, send up to 6 of those ships to the regular pursuit (which needs die rolls to catch, etc.). The rest (or all of them, if you don't want to regular pursuit, or there isn't a regular pursuit) attack the slow ships. The attacker gets to pick both BIR numbers. It only lasts one round. You can shoot things not on the line in slow pursuit like in regular pursuit (i.e. if there are 3 escorted AUXes on the slow pursuit line, and then some other AUXes not on the line, you can shoot them anyway as if they were on the line; this is a recent update and not in the rulebook).
In the base game, slow pursuits don't happen much (IIRC, the only thing in the base game that you can slow pursuit is an FRD, and if you are in a fight with an FRD, it's probably dead before the retreat phase). In the expanded game, slow retreats can happen reasonably regularly, with AUX ships being around a lot.
Hi Peter
Thanks -
It was a SSC combat Tug+FRD v RN - which got auto caught for the slow round.
The only thing I noticed different between regular combat and SSC combat was the defender gets a minus for having 'slow forces' (-1) - which we did apply, which replaced the 'chaser' picking both BIR's.
So, I think we got it right.
Good to hear though that the ability to target Aux's not on the line will make it more likely you could lose them.
(The LAV+3 escorts and SAV+2 Escorts made a pretty impressive slow retreat force.... which protected the unescorted stuff!)
(In my game with William - the only slow forces are towed FRD's and Convoys - so they don't often see combat!)
Note that you can only use SSC in the slow pursuit if you did not use normal combat previously in that battle.
Stewart, we're not disagreeing. I believe such a conversion should take 4 turns minimum and should only be done at the primary shipyard. Even a major conversion facility (450.12) I think is too small.
I'm undecided in my opinion of how soon after the most recent conversion began another may begin. I believe CDR (425.2) should only reduce the cost by one point and not one point per turn of the conversion or any other method someone may come up with to save EPs. I'm not sure if a crippled DN being converted should have the full repairs paid for since it's losing its center module, or if an intact center module should be convertible to a DND.
Conversions to BBs are unique to the Lyrans and LDR. My questions show they are underdefined as I've put rule numbers to prove a point I don't agree with. I agree with your judgment on how they should be handled. What I'm asking you is to prove it with the rules. The one rule you cited is a good template on how it should be handled for consistency, but it was only about construction and not conversion.
JohnC - Since FEDS has just added the beginning of the Lyran conversion rules (for direct buying at least), maybe the machanics for the 'normal' conversion will appear.
Now for your question about a crippled DN to BB, I'd apply the discount on the DND and not the BB since the center is being removed anyway, it's return (as the DND) should warrant the discount ... but that's above my paygrade for an answer (but not an opinion).
Stewart/John:
I don't see the DND as a 'modular' piece that can be removed from the DN where the converting player gets some sort of discount. I would see the DN center section as a foundation of conversion for the BB center section...but that's my non-binding opinion and if asked by ADB, I would not support the concept of giving a discount for the DN section.
As to CDR, unless overruled by ADB, the CDR discount per rule is one point TOTAL and NOT one point per turn.
Richard
Correct - all the battle used SSC
Sterart, again we agree.
Chuck, "center module" was a bad choice of words on my part, but that happens when I have a small tablet computer on the fender of a semi-truck while typing during a delivery.
My thought was that if the cost of a BB conversion is the same whether the converted ship began as a DN or CA the center section of the DN could be retained and converted into a DND or for another DN conversion. I'm also thinking that if the DN were crippled, and its center section is simply lost during the conversion, the repair cost could be limited to the retained outer sections IOW the CA part of the DN, and the center section salvaged for 1 EP, the same as a DND. This isn't exactly a discount for the BB conversion, but it is a savings of 2 EPs, and I think reasonable and plausible.
I agree that CDR should be for only 1 EP saved total.
I would ask if in the BB conversion ruling that conversions of battleships cannot be completed before the Year-in-Service date, if "completed" shouldn't be "commenced" as before the YIS date, the multi-turn conversion is to a ship type which doesn't yet exist.
John
There isn't the mechanism to 'save' parts of a conversion.... as it is - I don't think CA or DN to BB conversions should be allowed anyway
If it is ruled a part turn conversion to a BB can be done - it should cost more to start with a CA than a DN.... seems a tad unusual to basically gain 8 Ep's of ship for free in a conversion?
As I said at the start of his discussion - if non Klingon builds of BB's was allowed - I wouldn't allow the Lyrans the conversion option as part of the agreement- it's just far too powerful.
The YIS also make it very weird to understand.
Paul, all opinions are valid for discussion, but only some get approval for inclusion in the game.
My observation began with a look at the Lyran and LDR MSITs where the conversions are listed.
Please look in the Q&A on February 13, 2022 - 06:23.
The CA/DN to BB conversion is already in the rules. I noticed that the rules "as published" allowed for one turn conversions from CA/DN to BB, which I thought was too dangerous as you said. I questioned what was published to bring attention so it might be confirmed or adjusted. Adjustments are happening. Every so often I have a new question which possibly should be addressed, like if a conversion to a BB can happen concurrently with a construction of a BB.
This conversion was a can of worms waiting to be opened. I opened it and am trying to help put it back before somebody else spills it. All I am able to do is ask questions, and suggest a solution which is reasonable and plausible.
Gentlemen:
Please see my recommended BB production rules clarification for the update of the basic set rules.
FEDS
>> it should cost more to start with a CA than a DN.... seems a tad unusual to basically gain 8 Ep's of ship for free in a conversion?
This is an SFBism. The design for the Lyran BB uses the two halves of a CA/CC catamaran and inserts a large center section to make a BB trimaran. This is conceptually similar to the way a CA/CC catamaran is made into a DN trimaran. However, the center section of a BB is different than the center section of a DN. So when converting a DN to a BB the central DN section is removed and is effectively a leftover. So there is no real advantage to going DN->BB vs going CA->BB. That's why the costs are the same.
The leftover central DN section could be used to make another DN, or could be used as a weird standalone ship the DND which is roughly the strength of a light cruiser.
--Mike