Be careful what you wish for...

Revised 433 point 43.pdf revised_433_point_43.pdf (432 k)

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Monday, July 25, 2022 - 08:23 pm: Edit

433.431 states that ANY SK variant can be converted to a base SK hull. 433.434 contradicts that.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Monday, July 25, 2022 - 08:48 pm: Edit

The Romulan MSSB R4.25 (page 14) suggests SKE is a modular conversion not a permanent one.

Nexus 10, page 13, column 1, 2nd paragraph "Report by Tiercellus" suggests SKE are convertible back to a destroyer configuration.

--Mike

FEDS: Pertrick confirmed that today at ADB HQ...SKEs are modular but pulling out the escort modules from a SPM DESTROYS the 'M' modules.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, July 26, 2022 - 07:01 am: Edit

Escorts get a bunch of stuff that isn't part of the module.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, July 26, 2022 - 07:02 am: Edit

434 is right, I'll fix 431.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Tuesday, July 26, 2022 - 08:18 am: Edit

(433.43): According to the R-section data in Star Fleet Battles Module R12, the GryphonHawk heavy war cruiser (R4.135) is able to swap out its modules, or at least to the same extent as seen for the SparrowHawk itself.

The GryphonHawk-C/-S and GryphonHawk-J variants are offered as SSDs in Captain's Log #52.

(433.43) Recommend adding GryphonHawk (GH) to this list as it is a modular ship able to swap-out modules like a SparrowHawk. CHANGE TO READ: "The Romulan SparrowHawk (SP), GryphonHawk (GH) and SkyHawk (SK) ships are built with modular construction." FEDS - 2 June 2024

(433.43) Recommend CHANGING GryphonHawk (GH) from the note in the second paragraph. MODIFY TO READ: "Note: Various other “hawk-series” ships exist including for example FireHawk, NovaHawk, SuperHawk, FarHawk, ThunderHawk, KillerHawk, RoyalHawk, Saberhawk, SeaHawk, and JayHawk. None of these can use (433.43). Only the SP, GH, and SK can do so." Rationale: GryphonHawks are able to swap-out modules like a SparrowHawk." FEDS - 2 June 2024

(433.432) RECOMMEND CHANGES:
"While other ships must begin the turn in an authorized friendly base hex to be converted, these modular ship types can also be converted during Operational Movement."

ALSO later in the rule:
"The SP, GH and SK ships can also use normal conversions." FEDS - 2 June 2024

(433.433) RECOMMEND CHANGES: "All SPs, GHs, and SKs are produced..." FEDS - 2 June 2024

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Tuesday, July 26, 2022 - 04:40 pm: Edit

Clarification request, RE: Revised 433.43

The revised rule reads: "The ship simply moves into the starbase (or stellar fortress) hex, gives up one Movement Point, pays the required repair points (433.433), is converted, and continues moving."

Is there any economic cost to this (i.e. does it still cost EP, but at the repair cost of 0.5 EP per repair point as per repairing ships), or is it considered to be free from an EP standpoint?

-Mike Dowd [26 July 2022]

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, July 26, 2022 - 05:17 pm: Edit

It says what it says. EP was marked out in red, repair added in blue.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, July 26, 2022 - 10:42 pm: Edit

Repair CAPACITY is used with no EPs.

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Friday, July 29, 2022 - 02:00 pm: Edit

Thanks Chuck -- That's what I was looking for.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Friday, July 29, 2022 - 05:57 pm: Edit

I may have missed it in the proposed suggestion but I would humbly request we also make a reference of the Capital Slipway abilities in relation to the new rules added by TacOPs. Specifically (455.1) CONVERSIONS IN LIEU OF CONSTRUCTION

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

THE RELEVANT RULES:

(455.11) GENERAL CONCEPT: A player can replace a construction slot with a conversion of a ship of that type into a variant of the same base hull type. The cost of the original production is not paid; instead, the cost of the conversion is paid. Substitutions cannot be used to change the base hull type of the slipway (pro duction slot) except as provided herein.
Example: A player wants to convert a heavy battlecruiser into a battle control ship and is willing to give up production of a new heavy battlecruiser to convert the existing ship.

(455.111) This can be a major or minor conversion, so long as it is within the overall limits of a specific type of conversion, such as the limit on carriers or drone ships produced in one turn and the overall limits for that empire.

(455.112) Any slipway can convert any variant of that base hull (within other rules) but cannot convert/repair/construct a different base hull except for allowed substitutions and components of the base hull (e.g., a CW in an NCA slot).

(455.12) REQUIREMENTS: The ship to be converted must be in the hex of the shipyard at the start of the Production Phase for this to be done. Funds must be available to pay the cost. The cost of the original production is not paid, but the cost of the conversion is paid.

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Tuesday, April 11, 2023 - 10:26 am: Edit

Would a starbase that had already conducted 16 points of repairs during the repair phase still be eligible to conduct a modular conversion during operational movement or would it have to leave some repair capacity unused in anticipation of the modular conversion? If the latter, it might be worth adding a sentence to that effect.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Sunday, June 02, 2024 - 09:24 pm: Edit

With a number of Romulan modular configurations being considered for the various countersheet revisions currently (at this time of typing) being undertaken elsewhere on the BBS, I was minded of the ways by which this proposed rule would change how said modules can be swapped in and out - and, perhaps, by what (if any) other means this could be done, as and when the next revision to the Basic Set rulebook is formally underway.

Specifically, while the current proposed rules allows for the use of repair points at a starbase or a stellar fortress to change modules, I was wondering: might it be made possible for a fleet repair dock to use some or all of its repair capacity to do this also?

-----

It might be worth clarifying if, in Star Fleet Battles terms, the FRD (and/or any cargo augmentation modules attached to it) is (or are) able to store such modules inside their respective cargo holds - or, for that matter, if their repair crews are able to transfer these modules to and from a ship docked internally or not.

But if this is indeed to be made so, that might permit Romulan fleets operating "openly" (i.e. not under cloak) in occupied Federation and/or Gorn space to be able to respond, in a limited manner at least, to losses of particular mission variant hulls without sending ships across the pre-war Neutral Zones to the nearest Romulan starbase and back again - but at the increased risk of losing any forward-deployed modules, if the FRD they are being held at is intercepted and destroyed.

Alternatively, since Romulan FRDs are equipped with cloaking devices, it would also be possible for the Romulans to park an FRD under cloak in a relatively secure location. Then, a cloaked modular ship could approach the dock, uncloaking only once inside (so as to maintain operational security). Once uncloaked, the repair crews aboard the dock could swap out the modules as ordered, as well as patch up any damage the base hull might have accrued to this point. Once all of this is completed, the ship could reactivate its cloak, exit the dock, and then go about its business in its new configuration - again taking care not to uncloak until at a safe distance from the dock itself.

For the purpose of disclosure, that second example is lifted directly from a non-Alpha playtest empire over in SFB; which, in a case of form following function, developed its own FRD-esque hidden bases, from which to operate a variety of modular "pirate" warships. Still, it seemed like a not entirely illogical use case on this side of the Void, also...

-----

Of course, even if the Romulans could do this in technological and/or logistical terms, that still leaves the question as to whether or not they should do this from a doctrinal perspective.

At which point, I defer to the expert Romulan F&E players who might be reading this thread someday, and who could best determine whether such a use case might be worth considering or not...