Jason:

---

Quote:

(502.51) PFs can be deployed on PDUs, bases, or PFTs. The
deployments below are in addition to the fighters assigned.
Base stations‡, battle stations, PFTs: six PFs (one flotilla).
Sector bases‡: six PFs (one flotilla).
Starbases, stellar fortresses‡: twelve PFs (two flotillas).
PDUs: three PFs (1/2 flotilla).
Using PF modules‡ (441.412), one flotilla of PFs may be
based on mobile bases and operational bases‡.

(446.51) BASE: A player could build a “colonial base” (CB) in a
hex where a colony was established by (446.1). This would function
as a mobile base except that it could not be upgraded (to an
MB or any other base), has no crippled side, and could not be
dismantled and moved. A colony base can be given up to two
fighter modules and up to one PF module.

---

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Saturday, July 02, 2022 - 07:53 am: Edit

Chuck; Thanks for the reference; I missed that. Unfortunately, 441.4 is ambiguous.
441.41 states, in part (emphasis added):
"...and (502.6) provides a number of PF
modules equal to the number of free PF flotillas (which must be used immediately for ANY base of that race, whether in supply or not; they cannot be stored)."
Which means that the free PFs can be deployed to MBs. However, 441.412 states, in part:
"SBs, BATs, and PDUs get PF modules free at the same time as the free PFs."
That would seem to prevent free PF deployment to MBs. However, I suspect 441.412 is archaic language since, read literally, it would also prevent free PF deployment at STBs and BSs.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Tuesday, July 05, 2022 - 12:34 pm: Edit

@FEDS: You asked me to give you a "bump" on my Qs that still need rulings. These are:

---

Quote:

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, March 25, 2022 - 05:33 pm: Edit

Q537.11 (New PO 2021 rules). May one select one of the 3 options twice, or does the rule require selecting two separate items from the list of 3 options?

This rule says, "Any occupied planet without two of the following [IGCE on planet, PDU on planet (not PGB), commando ship in orbit] automatically rebels (537.15)."

Is it possible to pick two G ship in orbit in order to prevent an automatic rebellion - or must you have two *different* units on the list (i.e., a PDU and a G ship, an IGCE and a PDU, or an IGCE and a G ship)?

Note the answer has profound implications on game play.

-It is not possible to lay down a PDU on the turn a planet is captured, due to the sequence of play. It is not possible to buy an IGCE for a planet unless a PDU is present. Therefore, if the answer is you must have two *different* units from the list to prevent automatic rebellion - then this means every single planet captured on a Coalition turn will always automatically rebell on the subsequent Alliance turn, and vice versa. It is unavoidable.

This result, in turn, has important consequences on game play. For one, a rebelling planet is not a supply point for the conquering player. For another, under the new PO rules (537.15) the rebelling planet may be the target of a reserve fleet.

However, if all it takes is two G ships in orbit to prevent auto-rebellion, then a little simple planning by having the attacking force come in with two G ships will prevent the auto rebellion.

Official ruling respectfully requested.

Thank you.

---

---

Quote:

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, March 25, 2022 - 05:37 pm: Edit

Q537.1 Are steps 1-4 performed *per empire* or once *per side*?

All of the 537.1 rules are silent on this issue. Therefore, arguably, the resistance movement is evaluated per *side* (i.e., the Hydrans, Federation, Kzinti, and Gorn are all lumped together, roll a die to see if any one of their captured planets has an "event" under step 2, and then figure out which of the many planets among them has the vent occur).

However, it could have been intended that the procedure is to be performed *per empire*. Thus, for example, the Hydrans will go through 1-4, the Kzinti will go through 1-4, etc - meaning resistance movements are more likely to happen *somewhere* from turn to turn.

Clarification respectfully requested.

Thank you.

---

---

Quote:

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, March 25, 2022 - 05:40 pm: Edit

Q537.11 Are captured formerly neutral planets treated under steps 2-4, or ignored altogether?

Rule 537.11 says that "planets that were neutral before they were captured do not rebel."

Does this mean that they never check for an event at step 2, are not included in possible locations at step 3, and will never sabotage, infiltrate, sabotage, or go into rebellion?

Or, does this mean that a neutral planet is simply except from auto rebellion?

If so, then are all neutrals combined together as one? Or (from the above question) all combined with all possible Alliance planets?

Clarification respectfully requested.

Thank you.

---

---

Quote:

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, March 31, 2022 - 05:11 pm: Edit

Q537.11 what happens to a rebelling planet if the planet is abandoned by the attacker? Does the planet remain in rebellion?

For example, the Klingons occupy minor Hydran planet 519. Unable to garrison the planet properly, the planet goes into automatic rebellion under 537.11. The Klingon player, noting that a planet in rebellion can be the target of a reserve fleet, and further having other ambitions in the Hydran theater, elects to completely abandon planet 519.

As a result, the planet immediately reverts to a devastated planet under the Hydran player's control (no ship garrisoning the planet).

However, what happens to the rebellion? Is the planet still a valid target of a reserve fleet because the planet is still in rebellion, even though no ships are present at 519?

Note the Hydran player may want to send a reserve fleet to 519, even though there will be no fight, simply to reposition forces for a subsequent Alliance turn.

Ruling respectfully requested, thank you.

---

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, July 06, 2022 - 03:54 pm: Edit

FEAR: immediately rulings requested for StratCon WOF setup.

Q502.6 As PF are deployed under PF1, PF2 and PF3 does this deployment take place at the beginning of the turn regardless of who is the phasing player or only when they are the phasing player? Note (530.212) and (502.6) are not clear on this.

Q530.212 As the Kzintis deploy heavy fighters on the equivalent but slight different HF1, HF2, and HF3 pattern are they deployed at the beginning of the turn regardless of who is the phasing player or only when they are the phasing player? Note (530.212) and (502.6) are not clear on this.

Supporting Rule for PF and Heavy Deployment being at the start of the turn regardless of phasing or non-phasing player:

---

Quote:

(502.92) CVBGs: By the use of new command technology, the Federation was uniquely able (starting in Y181) to deploy Carrier Battle Groups. They can begin using CVBG systems during the Coalition part of Turn #26.

---

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Wednesday, July 06, 2022 - 06:19 pm: Edit

Unless specifically noted by rule or ADB, all initial non-ship capabilities like Battlegroups, ADMs, CVBGs, CVEGs, late war formations, introductory fighter, MEGA, PF, CPF, and HF deployment is conducted at the top of turn prior to any player turn. Free units that require production like free SAP/LAP/ASC are available durning the player’s turn.

By William Jockusch (Verybadcat) on Monday, July 11, 2022 - 08:45 am: Edit

If a capital hex has no PDUs, can partial retreat be pursued?

Relevant portion of rule:

(302.741) BASES: If the unit left behind is a base station, battle
station, mobile base, PDU, or starbase (or other bases and colo-
nies in future products), a retreating force is not able to take these
units with them. Such a unit, left behind after ships retreat from a
Battle Hex, remains functional and forces the players to return to
Step 2 of the Combat Procedure (302.2) above. Ships leaving
these units behind cannot be pursued . . . .

It seems to me this does not envision the possibility that ships might be left behind. So it's unclear to me one way or the other whether or not pursuit is allowed in that case.

If it matters, the hex does have an undevastated planet, without PDUs. But it would be interesting to know in either case.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Tuesday, July 12, 2022 - 02:58 am: Edit

To add to Williams question and to appeal a ruling in 2015.

"(302.721) If there are units in the hex which cannot retreat (bases,
PDUs), the Battle Hex is not resolved and will require additional
Combat Rounds, but the non-retreating player cannot pursue the
retreating ships. Devastated planets without PDUs (even those
with Residual Defense Factors) do not block pursuit. See
(302.742) when “slow” units are involved."


The original rule therefore differentiates between Undevastated Planets without defences (which do block persuit) and Devastated Planets without defences (which does not block persuit), but this appears to have been changed in a ruling in 2015 : -

"By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, March 26, 2015 - 02:16 pm: Edit

JL:

What you are describing is an UNdevastated planet with an RDF. Rule (508.162) specifically states that RDFs do not block pursuit. The important point to remember here is that BASES (including PDU/PGBs) left behind block pursuit; planets alone do not block pursuit. So unless overruled by ADB any planetary hex (regardless of the associated planets devastated status therein) without a base (not RDF) cannot block pursuit.

FEDS SENDS

References:


Quote:
(302.741) BASES: If the unit left behind is a base station‡, battle
station, mobile base, PDU, or starbase (or other bases and colonies
in future products), a retreating force is not able to take these
units with them. Such a unit, left behind after ships retreat from a
Battle Hex, remains functional and forces the players to return to
Step 2 of the Combat Procedure (302.2) above. Ships leaving
these units behind cannot be pursued...

(508.16) RESIDUAL DEFENSE FACTOR: If a planet’s defenses
have been destroyed but it is left in or returned to the control of
the original owner, it has a residual defense factor (RDF) of three
defense factors (no fighters, no crippled rating) representing the
residual defense capability.
(508.161) This residual factor is destroyed automatically if the
planet is devastated (508.21) and returns automatically if the
planet returns to (or remains in) friendly ownership. If the Attacker
devastates the planet and captures it, the RDF never comes into
play (and the Attacker did not have to destroy it). If the Attacker
devastates the planet on one turn, but returns to capture the still devastated
planet on a future turn, he would have to destroy the
resurgent RDF to capture the planet.
(508.162) This residual defense factor is not a “unit” in any sense.
It has no attack factor and cannot cause damage. It does not
block pursuit or retreat. You cannot re-devastate the RDF over
and over on the same turn to rack up points."

(To aid, Chucks full post is between " and ")

Two things (point 1 being the game mechanic which means the ruling changes the rules) : -

1) Chucks ruling does not seem to take into account rule 302.721 (i.e. there is two things which independently will block persuits - Bases via rule 302.741 or Undevastated Planets via rule 302.721).

2) Within the game, should there be an advantage for the Defender to have avoided the Planet being Devastated, prior to them retreating and a Benefit for the Attacker if they are able to Devastate the Planet before the defender retreats, i.e if Undevastated Planets do not block persuit, it will make defending planets harder to avoid persuit - which may or may not want to be an outcome of the ruling.

The key aspect for the Appeal request is point 1) though.

Thank you

(I am guessing either no one noted the Ruling or overlooked 302.721, hence it was not appealed in 2015).

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Tuesday, July 12, 2022 - 10:37 am: Edit

Sorry - 2 additional related questions to the Retreat question.


302.723.

Easy question.

Assuming ALL bases have been destroyed and all planets are devastated (or Status does not matter), can the Attacker pursue forces which do a Partial Retreat?


(302.723 states "This is known as a “partial retreat” and is separate from the more general retreats covered by (302.7)."

Key word being 'seperate'.

The rules do not say persuit can or can not happen though - but the world seperate (to me) implies it is not a normal retreat and so persuit can not happen.


Which does lead to a related question : -

307 - How many pursuit battles can be fought in an hex?

Normally, there is a maximum of 1 Pursuit Battle - but could you have 2 if the Defender withdraws crippled forces prior to a battle?

Is the Pursuit Force v withdrawn ships (which includes 1 or more cripples) fought immediately?


After the normal combat - is there another pursuit?

(which could weirdly be for both sides if the attacker then retreats and the defender has something which could pursue - unlikely, but a large dice imbalance or ships being captured could allow the defender to 'win' and the attacker has to retreat).

I am therefore guessing (but it's not in the rules) the answer is C and D?

A) There can be as many pursuits in a hex as the defender declares either a Withdrawal before combat or Partial Retreat, plus 1 for the normal pursuit at the end.

B) There is only ever a maximum of 1 pursuit battle in any hex - which is done either as a Withdrawal before Combat pursuit or a normal pursuit.

C) There is no pursuit allowed when the defender uses the Partial Retreat rule

D) With Withdrawal before combat, the single pursuit battle takes place at the end of the battle - and crippled ships which Withdrew, are included in it. (To be fair, I am not sure I like this answer, but it is better than A or B.. - so could be 1 per side be the answer and the attacker decides to do it immediately or at the end?)


So to clarify questions on 302.723 and 307.

302.723 - As this is not a normal retreat, the Attacker does not have a Pursuit Option

307 - There is a maximum of 1 pursuit battle in a hex and if the Defender used Withdrawal before combat, it is done at the end of the battle.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, July 12, 2022 - 04:02 pm: Edit

A hex can have one normal pursuit battle and a slow unit retreat and that's it. You cannot have two 'normal' pursuit battles.

By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Tuesday, July 19, 2022 - 10:58 am: Edit

I have some questions about Depot Level Repair, and specifically how crippled ships, which could use the repair rules, are treated.

(424.35) allows one crippled ship to be placed in the holding box per turn. Is there a limit on the number of cripples which can be in the holding box? Is there a limit on the number of cripples which can be in the repair track? Can a cripple be added to the holding box if it is not empty?

Since cripples are not destroyed, can cripples be removed from the holding box for any reason? Can cripples be removed from the repair track, forfeiting the work and leaving the track box empty, for any reason? These seem to violate (424.33) ".... Since only "destroyed" ships are sent to the depot, none of them can be removed from the depot for normal repairs" but cripples weren't destroyed. If a cripple can exit the repair track or the holding box, when in the SoP can it be done?

Thanks in advance.

By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Tuesday, July 19, 2022 - 04:33 pm: Edit

John,

Previously answered in the Q&A and will be updated in the rulebook when we do that one.

You can place an unlimted number of cripples in the holding box per turn, with no limits on the numbers in the holding box. You can only move one ship per track from the holding box into each repair track per turn. Only one ship can be in each repair box in each repair track.

Cripples cannot be removed from depot level repair after they have been assigned there.

F&E Staff Volunteer

By Roger S. Ritchie (Rogerrit) on Monday, August 29, 2022 - 12:53 pm: Edit

In terms of the Strategic Operations 2022 rulerbook, how do diplomatic teams of neutral empires on turn 1, e.g., Federation and Romulan, move outside of their empire? The diplomatic teams are released, but they are transported by ships that do not seem to be released.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, August 29, 2022 - 01:04 pm: Edit

Roger,

They may move on APTs, PTRs, FX, or other small ships with a Defense Factor of 4 or less, excluding Police Ships.

I know it is in a Q&A. Probably for basic rulebook update in the 600 section. I just don't remember when and where.

By Roger S. Ritchie (Rogerrit) on Monday, August 29, 2022 - 02:15 pm: Edit

Thanks Thomas. Looks like FEDERATION & EMPIRE 2010 EDITION rulebook, rule 600.35, covers the release of these small ships to carry the diplomats.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, August 31, 2022 - 11:07 am: Edit

@FEDS: You asked me to give you a "bump" on my Qs regarding 537.1 that still need rulings. My last bump was on 7/5. Some questions now roughly 5 months old.

---

Quote:

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, March 25, 2022 - 05:33 pm: Edit

Q537.11 (New PO 2021 rules). May one select one of the 3 options twice, or does the rule require selecting two separate items from the list of 3 options?

This rule says, "Any occupied planet without two of the following [IGCE on planet, PDU on planet (not PGB), commando ship in orbit] automatically rebels (537.15)."

Is it possible to pick two G ship in orbit in order to prevent an automatic rebellion - or must you have two *different* units on the list (i.e., a PDU and a G ship, an IGCE and a PDU, or an IGCE and a G ship)?

Note the answer has profound implications on game play.

-It is not possible to lay down a PDU on the turn a planet is captured, due to the sequence of play. It is not possible to buy an IGCE for a planet unless a PDU is present. Therefore, if the answer is you must have two *different* units from the list to prevent automatic rebellion - then this means every single planet captured on a Coalition turn will always automatically rebell on the subsequent Alliance turn, and vice versa. It is unavoidable.

This result, in turn, has important consequences on game play. For one, a rebelling planet is not a supply point for the conquering player. For another, under the new PO rules (537.15) the rebelling planet may be the target of a reserve fleet.

However, if all it takes is two G ships in orbit to prevent auto-rebellion, then a little simple planning by having the attacking force come in with two G ships will prevent the auto rebellion.

Official ruling respectfully requested.

Thank you.

---

---

Quote:

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, March 25, 2022 - 05:37 pm: Edit

Q537.1 Are steps 1-4 performed *per empire* or once *per side*?

All of the 537.1 rules are silent on this issue. Therefore, arguably, the resistance movement is evaluated per *side* (i.e., the Hydrans, Federation, Kzinti, and Gorn are all lumped together, roll a die to see if any one of their captured planets has an "event" under step 2, and then figure out which of the many planets among them has the vent occur).

However, it could have been intended that the procedure is to be performed *per empire*. Thus, for example, the Hydrans will go through 1-4, the Kzinti will go through 1-4, etc - meaning resistance movements are more likely to happen *somewhere* from turn to turn.

Clarification respectfully requested.

Thank you.

---

---

Quote:

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, March 25, 2022 - 05:40 pm: Edit

Q537.11 Are captured formerly neutral planets treated under steps 2-4, or ignored altogether?

Rule 537.11 says that "planets that were neutral before they were captured do not rebel."

Does this mean that they never check for an event at step 2, are not included in possible locations at step 3, and will never sabotage, infiltrate, sabotage, or go into rebellion?

Or, does this mean that a neutral planet is simply except from auto rebellion?

If so, then are all neutrals combined together as one? Or (from the above question) all combined with all possible Alliance planets?

Clarification respectfully requested.

Thank you.

---

---

Quote:

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, March 31, 2022 - 05:11 pm: Edit

Q537.11 what happens to a rebelling planet if the planet is abandoned by the attacker? Does the planet remain in rebellion?

For example, the Klingons occupy minor Hydran planet 519. Unable to garrison the planet properly, the planet goes into automatic rebellion under 537.11. The Klingon player, noting that a planet in rebellion can be the target of a reserve fleet, and further having other ambitions in the Hydran theater, elects to completely abandon planet 519.

As a result, the planet immediately reverts to a devastated planet under the Hydran player's control (no ship garrisoning the planet).

However, what happens to the rebellion? Is the planet still a valid target of a reserve fleet because the planet is still in rebellion, even though no ships are present at 519?

Note the Hydran player may want to send a reserve fleet to 519, even though there will be no fight, simply to reposition forces for a subsequent Alliance turn.

Ruling respectfully requested, thank you.

---

By Stefano Predieri (Preda) on Thursday, September 08, 2022 - 01:11 pm: Edit

Question about federation early activation.
In the new game we started this may, the klingons decided to treacherously attack Kzinti marquis Area during turn 6, substantially killing SB and BATS for free (We saved the planet with reserves) activating the Federation for limited war one turn early.

We don't agree on how to read rule 702.214 on federation early production (Italians here, so maybe it's a translation issue...)
During turn 6 we all agree federation should use first spring early war turn production (Only difference from prewar construction is a CA instead of a FFS, and obviously a ton of money to use for other things).
But than our enemies assume that turn 7 should use first fall early war production (identical to turn 7 production) and than turn 8 production should be used regularly thereafter.
Net cost of the early attack: 1 better ship and 80sh extra money for federation (that from the actual ship deployment I assume will be attacked on turn 10 anyway). Not that much in exchange for a freely killed starbase...

I'm myself not sure on how the rule should be interpreted.
Should the note on the federation being attacked in x turn should be used (the federation hasn't been actually attacked),
- than turn 6 count as turn 8 and than we proceed with turn 7 as 9 for production than full production rates
(net gain for the federation 35 extra ships by turn 10)
-or should it be totally ignored, and turn 6 is first early spring, turn 7 is first early fall and than we should proceed with y173 schedule (net gain for the federation 29 extra ships)?

As it makes a SUBSTANTIAL difference a ruling would be appreciated...

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, September 08, 2022 - 01:43 pm: Edit

Surprised you didn't have a Fed reserve help at the Marquise SB. Or did you?

Note that the Feds can borrow extra EPs, do overbuilds, get survey rolls and so on. They will be at 100% eco on turn seven (and 75% on turn 6).

By fabio poli (Fabioz) on Friday, September 09, 2022 - 01:35 pm: Edit

Note that the Feds CAN'T borrow extra EPs, CAN'T do overbuilds, CAN'T get survey rolls and so on. They will be at 75% eco on turn seven AND FORTH, UNTIL ATTACKED (654.0).

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, September 09, 2022 - 03:15 pm: Edit

No. 654 describes the limitations of limited war which do not apply if the Marquise area is invaded.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Friday, September 09, 2022 - 04:04 pm: Edit

Doesn't 601.12 (page 111, F&E2010*) indicate that Coalition invasion of the Marquis area during scenario 601 (turns #1 - #6) creates Limited War status for the Federation?

And once Limited War status has been created for the Federation, doesn't 654.0 (page 130) contain the list of allowed (654.1) and not allowed (654.2) actions for that status?

--Mike

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, September 09, 2022 - 04:12 pm: Edit

You are correct; I was mistaken.

By Stefano Predieri (Preda) on Wednesday, September 14, 2022 - 01:53 pm: Edit

Regarding downgrade substitutions.

On the rule in the new planetary operations (450.4), a lot more conversion are marked with the cross symbol (numerically unlimited) than the same rule on the OOB (70x.222).
Wich one is correct?
I assume planetary operation, since it is far more recent than the OOBs, but it's worth controlling...

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Wednesday, September 14, 2022 - 06:37 pm: Edit

SO is the ruling, actually the SITs ate the ruling document. The OOBs don't and will probably never list them all.

FEAST
aka the guy that maintains the Master OOBs

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Wednesday, September 14, 2022 - 07:10 pm: Edit

(Moving to F&E QA Discussion)

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Wednesday, October 05, 2022 - 04:16 pm: Edit

Q537.22. This rule states, inter alia, that "This rescued ship cannot be used in a battle force for the remainder of the turn, but might be forced into a pursuit battle.} What is the effect of this rule on carrier groups when a carrier escort is validly self-killed and rescued by a rescue tug?

An argument can be made that if the carrier group returns to the line, the killed-and-rescued (crippled) escort is no longer in the carrier group because the escort can no longer "be used". In effect, the group has been "reformed" to exclude the killed and rescued unit.

An argument can be made that if the carrier group is never returned to the line during the combat procedure, then during a subsequent pursuit the carrier group can appear WITH the killed-and rescued escort still part of the group, as the exception does indicate that a killed-and-rescued can be forced onto a pursuit line.

Is it both? In other words, are both facts true - if you return the group to the line the crippled escort is dropped, but if not then it will remain with the group during pursuit?

Is it something else? For example, the killed-and-rescued escort remains in the group (and counts against command limits) but contributes zero compot so that it does not "used" in the combat? However, there is no support in the rule for this eventuality, and the crippled escort is still "used" in the sense that it could potentially absorb damage.

Or, does self-killing and rescuing an escort in a carrier group simply remove the escort from the group altogether, regardless of whether there is pursuit. In this case, the killed-and-rescued escort could appear a a single crippled ship during pursuit.

Specific clarification is requested on how to treat carrier groups when self-killing and rescuing an escort within the carrier group.

Thank you!

=============

FEDS RULING

Unless overruled by ADB, validly self-killed escorts (having been assigned to an escort group) and rescued by a rescue tug under (527.22) cannot be used in a battle force for the remainder of the turn and are no longer treated as part of its assigned escorting group; nothing under (537.22) restricts the escorted group from further participation in following battle rounds. The rescued escort's assigned group is treated as if the rescued escort was 'destroyed' for all intents and purposes from that point forward which MIGHT mean that a command slot could be open or that a FCR could be assigned to the now vacant escort slot.