Archive through April 25, 2022
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Federation & Empire: F&E INPUT:
F&E Reports from the Front:
Active Scenarios:
Where Terrible Things Happen:
Archive through April 25, 2022
On CT3, the Alliance mildly outrolled the Coalition (4.06 to 3.71) but the major engagements were mostly equal in the capital, on an aggregate basis (The Alliance was ahead 3 pips in Hex 1202 and 3 more in the uncontested Vronkett devastation when they had all of 9 COMPOT and rolled a '6'). The big round over the shipyard went 5, 5.
It looks like this game is "probably" a Hydran-First, but the Coalition is doing enough to suggest that, maybe, they are doing a Two-Capital or Kzinti-First if the Kzinti don't spend to defend the capital shipyard.
Not sure if I have missed something...
Example
1 (Keevarsh) Coalition 6 102 4 0 5 1 22.50% 22.95 Maul 3xPDU(20) 3 PDU Fighters (-15) (D6M No Shock)
Alliance 5 92 1 3 27.50% 25.3 Direct D7 (24) Cripple F5 (-4)
2 (Keevarsh) Coalition 6 102 4 1 6 6 37.50% 38.25 Maul PDU (5) 10 Planet, 4 Fighters, Autokill FF (-2) (Mauler shocks out)
Alliance 2 41 -1 1 4 30.00% 12.3 N Cripple D5, F5
Why did the Coalition Maul the final PDU - letting the damage drop would have forced the FF to die (as if you direct, Autokill doesn't apply) and I would guess the PDU would have still died rather than crippling what ever else was there?
Would have avoided a Shock Roll on a non-relevant mauling attack!
More importantly - the owed points don't appear to have been applied to the Coalition during the battle or for the pursuit battle?
In effect - that 20 damage done might only be 10*(limit of -3 per system applies, so 3 x -3 and 1 x -1).
What did the Coalition put in form for the persuit battle (as I am guessing it was a C8 or DN and so a mauler will still die)?
On a rules point - the second Keelsalm battle would have also left no owed points to the Alliance, as the Auto kill rule would in effect apply first and so either 2 points would be left on the planet or 2 less fighters die (i.e. killing a crippled 2 compot unit can't generate 2 owed points).
All good points.
We are resolving this by assuming that there was 2 left on the planet, and the Coalition came back and devastated the empty planet later (I would not have defended it without PDUs.) That way nothing has to be retconned.
We just missed that the auto kill doesn't apply after the mauler operates, obviously, and no one has a lot of interest in re-working later rounds of combat. No doubt the Coalition gained a trick here, but that's okay, there have been Alliance-favoring goofs too.
[The owed points were applied, the Coalition just had a lot of damage.]
>> No doubt the Coalition gained a trick here, but that's okay, there have been Alliance-favoring goofs too.
It's your second big F&E game. The rules are complicated. Mistakes happen. Press on!
--Mike
Graham
308.25 and 302.63 are alas fairly complex and one question from 2019 wasn't answered.
The only time owned points are 'cancelled' it seems is when an undefended devastated planet is attacked *(308.252) - but it seems a undefended non-devastated planet doesn't remove owed points.
(There has been various comments that once the defender has taken all the damage they can do, the rest are ignored - but owed points from a previous round would still be claimable by the attacker it seems - as they still have to deal damage on the planet to complete the devastation).
* I did ask this explicit question in 2019, but it wasn't answered - I was given the answer covering undefended devastated planets and didn't query it then.
I would be shocked if the response was that the attacker can effectively deter pursuit by arranging to devastate an undefended planet or two. In many games the outer minors aren't even defended in the first place...
[That's assuming you mean that the Coalition would "stock" a bunch of plus points by devastating Keevarsh with 2 points left against no opposition and then carry those into the pursuit. That seems like an absurd interpretation.]
If you mean some other owed plus points, I don't think there are any.
When I said owed points, I meant the -15 from the previous round:
38 - 15 (involuntary minus points from R1 in this system) - 10 (Planet) - 6 (self kill FF) - 4 fighters - 5 (Mauler) = 40 (-2)
And it appears I am not to be shocked:
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, April 22, 2013 - 01:07 pm: Edit
I'll restate this:
The intent of plus points is to carry over damage points that COULD have been given up (but was not) to resolve damage but did not meet the REQUIREMENT where the remaining number of unresolved damage points is less than half of the smallest defense factor of the remaining units in the Current Battle Force.
The damage absorbing player must have a remaining unit in the current battle force in order to carry-over any plus points into a following round battle (or pursuit).
Absurd example for illustrative purposes:
Three crippled ships (B10-, B10-, and E4) remain to enter the first round of battle verses a Hydran fleet of PGF and 11xHN.
The Klingon selects the E4 to face the Hydrans and exclude the 2xB10s as unchosen flagships; the crippled B10s have no part of this battle round.
The Hydrans manage to score 15 points of damage; the crippled E4 does no damage.
The E4 is destroys leaving 13 points unresolved.
The Hydran player cannot claim there are 13 plus points available to take into a following standard battle round OR even three points into a pursuit battle round BECAUSE there are NO remaining units from the current round that could have taken the excess damage but did not meet the minimum damage requirements.
FEDS SENDS
Hi Graham
I think there are three issues here
1) Does 'over damage' (classic definition of the battle force line was annihilated) carry over
2) Does excess damage taken carry over
3) Rule 302.55 AND 302.63 (specifically 302.632).
From Chucks post he is saying point 1 doesn't apply (and unless SVC disagrees, that is the rule).
He doesn't cover off point 2 though - and from 308.252 only covers devastated and non-defended planets - so as an example.
Attacker v 2 PDU's+ Defenders in a hex
Round 1 - 100 v 40 = both sides do 25% damage
So 25 v 10 and both sides let fall.
Defender self kills 2 x PDU's and the 12F and takes 7 of the 10 damage on the planet - no owed.
Attacker crippled a D5 and F5 and is owed 2.
Round 2 - Defender doesn't defend the planet and it's 100 v 0 (noting planet is NOT devasteted).
Attacker does 50% and 50 damage and defender does no damage.
The planet is devastated and the balance of 47 damage is cancelled - as there is no defenders to take it on (as per Chucks ruling).
The attacker took no damage and so the 2 damage from round 1 is still available to be carried over to the pursuit battle.
OK?
Point 3 (and hands up, I have NEVER noticed this).
Who has in either their printed 2010 rules or the F&E 2010 PDF rules - a rule (302.55) Annihilation
and (302.63) Annihilation?
302.63 has 3 points to it - and 302.632 does state owed points after a battle line has been destroyed DOES carry over if thee are other forces in the hex (so in Chucks example, the 13 points would carry over to round 2 or 3 points to the pursuit).
Best guess - 302.63 should have been deleted?
There is also a forth 'weird' possibility for Capital Assaults - what happens if the defences of a planet which through 511.573 originally received the crippled ships have all been destroyed - but other planets still have defences and the attacker attack the planet with cripples?
The cripples can be targeted via 511.573 - but other than the planet (which could be devastated as 511.551 can be applied), the defender might have no line to defend with?
I'll ask about points 1 to 4 in Q&A 
I think 308.252 applies whenever there are "no defending units" whether or not the planet is devastated at the beginning of the combat round. An RDF is not a unit, I believe.
I think this resolves it.
I mean, should the rule on plus and minus points just -say- that you don't get plus points unless there is an existing unit in the battle force or static defense that could have been given up, but wasn't? Maybe, although I haven't thought of all of the permutations yet.
But here it's pretty simple. When Keevarsh is again attacked in a Phantom Round 4, the Kzinti leave it be and the Klingons drop rocks down the gravity well with tractor beams because that's less energy than frying the atmosphere with disruptor blasts. Boom! But no plus points because there were no defending units, only helpless scared kittens.
Sad, but true.
Correct on the RDF.
The rule 308.272 doesn't support that interpretation though IMHO.
Also, what happens if the planet was defended with PDU's and they all die and the planet becomes devastated at the end of that combat round?
Also, the idea of taking 'owed points' by over crippling could become nullified (which probably isn't a bad idea, but as + and - points are hard wired into the game, that might have other issues being created).
But what you are proposing is the defender gets a benefit if they don't defend a planet and can wipe owed point - i.e in effect do damage without risking their own units - which probably isn't good for the game?
I guess maybe I just don't understand.
308.252 prescribes that nothing is "wiped". Owed points (positive or negative) simply are not affected by a round of combat that doesn't involve actual fighting. It isn't that they are reset to zero (which I think you are implying?) but that they remain in the state they were in before the "no-combat-round-of-combat".
Thus, if the Coalition had -2 in its favor, and went back into the system and devastated an undamaged but undefended planet, it would still have -2 if it then moved on to the next planet in the system; the defender doesn't get a free pass.
Likewise, if the Coalition left 15 fighters swinging, they cannot eliminate those minus points over an undefended planet before fighting the "real" battles.
I will read 308.272 tonight, AFB at the moment.
Okay, so reading extends my confusion over what is being discussed rather than resolving it. Reading 308.272 didn't take long, because at least in my version of the rules from last year, there is no such rule.
308.252, I think, is simple. It should be read without the parenthetical. The parenthetical is a special case, but has no effect on the rule, which is as I stated. Unless there is a defending "unit", the total plus or minus points simply doesn't change as a result of that combat resolution.
Sorry - looks like 308.272 was typed instead of 308.252
The key point is that Planets are considered Units (non-Ship Units to be precise) and so the 308.252 normal rule of damage carrying forward is modified if the planet is devastated and there are no other defending units present (and RDF's are not units!)?
Two things
1) In Hydran space, full PDU product, at the costs of having to skip a couple of HN's and the pure carrier build. Instead, the Hydrans will rely on TGV's for a couple of turns, and make DE's to protect them with.
Both factions produce their FCR, because we do not skip FCR builds. Ever.
Fully agree the Kzinti need more FCR's - but the Hydrans start with a couple (so emergency Escort duty is covered).... but it's nearly impossible to burn up all their fighters any way - so do they need another FCR?
That FCR is 3 HN's AND a couple of Eps left!
2) The TR can't become a DE - the 2 unbuilt HR's can though (so you can sub the HR for the DE).
Something to mention, which is crucial if you are playing the Hydrans.
The Galaxy hates them!
They have some of the best ships - and the worst economy. which only goes one way.
And if the other Allies can ever help them - the game is probably already won for the Alliance.
Building cheap hulls is perhaps crucial though - as every HN built is a FF or E4 the Coalition has to send to keep them under control (i.e. pinning)
There are no HR's on AT3 (Y169F). (709.211) Wartime Schedule: Y169F: [UH+DE+2AH], DG, TR, 3xHN, 3xCU.
The TR can indeed become a DE. Per the online SIT, the DE can be substituted for either (lists DD 5+3) destroyer, and the TR can be down-substituted to a destroyer (the Hellbore destroyer, sure). The DE looks like an LN, by its factors, but it is in fact a generic destroyer escort that can be substituted for any (Hydran, obviously) destroyer build (or converted from any destroyer, as both conversions are listed with appropriate hybrid fighter costs).
I may skip FCR later, but the goal in this game is precisely to burn fighters at all costs; so having more is part of the overall plan as well as just being efficient. It's true I lose 2 SEQ, but HN's are pretty much the emptiest pincount in the game.
Ahh - I looked at turn 5 not turn 3 on the new OOB and it showed 2 x HR.... 
!!
It does also mention CW's can be subbed for LN's - which is weird as the rest of the Subs seem to do the TR>KN and HR>LN!
Hydran subs are just....weird!
Totally agree in burning fighters is good - and burning more fighters is even better...
...but the Coalition don't play that game!
(i.e. Direct the best hull and run!)
Outside defending a SB or 617.... you can't really burn 30+ fighters in a battle.
I think you could sub an HR for the TR or DG.
Weirdly you can sub HR for TR but not TR for HR. In this case it doesn't much matter because you can sub DE for any DD, and downgrade TR to any DD (but, again, not HR...)
So you can sub anything for a hellbore ship but not hellbore ships for fusion ships. This would make sense as a balance thing in SFB... but the fusion ships are mostly better (if more expensive) in F&E.
"In closing my defence case your honour, may I refer you to the CW v Hellbore/Fusion ruling', which although confusing, allows my defendant to swop their Pet Elephant for the required Pet Lion on the basis both of have four paws...."
"In closing for the prosecution, although the defence presents a good case, if I remember correctly, your can't swop a Pet Lion for a Pet Elephant......"
As I said - it's just Weird!
Me again
Hex 0111: Coalition rolls 4 (+ 4 = 8, dead POL) Alliance 11 (- 4 = 7, THR retreats to resolve)
Hex 1819: Coalition rolls 5 (+ 4 = 9, dead POL) Alliance 10 (- 4 = 6, THR retreats to resolve)
Hex 1105: (BF v. D6) Coalition rolls 8 (+ 0 = 8, Crippled retreating D6 resolves) Alliance 8 (- 2 = 6, BF Retreats)
Hex 0904: (BF v. F5,FF) Coalition 8 (- 1 = 7, Coalition retreats) Alliance 4 (-1 = 3 no casualties)7
I assume the 'rolls' are actually reversed - i.e. the THR's rolled the 4 and the 5 (as unless there was other ships in the hex, +/-'s look wrong )?
Paul: Yes, I wrote it down wrong, apparently I'm still thinking I'm the Coalition. The Alliance was outrolled badly in SSC this turn.
So after AT3, the situation optically looks good for the Alliance; there aren't too many ships occupying Alliance space and the two Lyran BATS on the Hydran border are gone, denying supply on the capital (although retreat into supply is still possible). In addition, the Coalition does not have a lot of Maulers available for capital assaults on CT4 (in particular in the north, where the Kzinti have been trying hard to kill and cripple them).
I know Peter said once that trying to keep up with Mauler production is not possible, but I learned in the last game that trying to keep up with scout production isn't easy, either.
Some of this is just optical, though; the Coalition has a LOT of ships waiting to cross into Hydran territory (The TBS and Far Stars both went south, along with a lot of CT3 construction) so it maybe a bad season for methane-breathers.
So in terms of commentary, the Coalition seems pretty committed to Hydran-first at this point; there just aren't enough ships in Kzinti space to win fights, while in Hydran space there are plenty of ships and it appears that the capital is a priority for the Klingons. The big remaining strategic questions in Hydran space are: (1) Can the Lyrans get to 0617 without losing 0411 given that they don't have supply anywhere in between; and (2) How many PDUs can the Hydrans get up before they do, given that the Hydrans want to be making ships rather than PDUs.
Combat is over in Hydran space, with the Kzinti front to follow. The Lyrans killed three BATS, fought a round at 0215, killed a cruiser, and retreated from the Starbase, taking some cripples and losing two cruisers in return (including an STT).
The Klingons killed all remaining BATS and Starbase 1017 basically for free, and waltzed into 0617 and killed 4 PDU over the capital (crippling a line in the process) and 2 PDU were stripped from Hydramax, but then the Klingons retreated, losing a D6S in pursuit.
So the Hydrans are on the menu, and will have no more than 12 PDU for the real assault which begins next turn.
So CT4 happened.
And there are (pending econ on AT4) a total of 12 PDU over capital planets in the Hydran and Kzinti capitals combined. If the Alliance isn't "serious" the game could be effectively over on turn 5 with a double-capital capture and the Feds enjoying Federation reaction in peacetime, somehow. I mean sure, I'm going to do literally everything I can to make that utterly not happen, but it could if the Alliance were shrimpy about defense.
But yeah, virtually every Coalition DN on the Kzinti front died in a fire last turn, and it will be - get this - up to three turns before they are all back with friends.
So - speaking of things burning in fires - I chucked all plans for AT4 econ and started with "build max PDU on every shipyard" and moved on from there. It looks like each faction might get a whole non-FF ship. And that's leaving -repairs- out, which I don't think I've ever done before by choice (and I may yet chuck some FF production in the bin to make them happen).
Anyway, my son is apparently channeling Admiral Halsey.