---

Quote:

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.

---

By Stefano Predieri (Preda) on Thursday, October 06, 2022 - 01:37 pm: Edit

Regarding my question on Federation production rates in early war scenarios, there is an actual rule in F&E2010 that covers it, 656, that I overlooked the first time (I Actually get 6 extra ships before turn 10 that way...). But again there is no corrispondence between that rule and any possible reading of the early production rates in the OOB, so the inconsistence should be fixed someway...

By Soeren Klein (Ogdrklein) on Friday, October 21, 2022 - 07:52 am: Edit

Hi, there!

A quick question for the Higher Powers over here, that came up in the Battleforce 55 thread.

What ist the YIS for the Klingon F5W?

SFBs Modules G3 and R6 say it is Y176.

Yet the F&E SIT on the Warbook Annex Page says Y175.
The OOB by Ryan Opel says, Klingons can build F5Ws beginning in Spring Y175.
Is that an error or was the YIS changed when the SITs/OOBs were updated?
I tried a key word search in the F&E section of the BBS but found not answer.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Soeren Klein

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, October 21, 2022 - 12:36 pm: Edit

Both data points are correct. As it says in SFB, the date given on the MSC is the "squadron service" date with a few ships available a year or two earlier. F&E works with individual ships and (as it says in F&E) you get the first one on the first date.

The point is that if you build a BPV fleet in SFB you cannot always just say "I have the very first one of every ship type in my fleet" because that just doesn't happen.

By Soeren Klein (Ogdrklein) on Friday, October 21, 2022 - 01:50 pm: Edit

Steve,

thanks for the answer.

I see, it is one of the finer points where SFB and F&E are different from one another.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Soeren Klein

By fabio poli (Fabioz) on Wednesday, October 26, 2022 - 12:22 pm: Edit

C5A and small combat.

In the small scale combat the combined defence of the ships involved is accounted for.
But if the C5A freeze some of them does the defense of frozen ship count?

I mean, the small scale combat table take in account defensive weapons alongside the "hull" of the ships but in that table the frozen ships can't add their defensive weapons (and manouvres) and should not be accounted for. IMHO.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Wednesday, October 26, 2022 - 07:16 pm: Edit

(312.45) - an SFG ship w/ 2 consorts uses its SFG normally (frozen ships are ignored), w/o consorts, an SFG cannot be used in SSC though a C5A can use its SFG during a raid via (314.135).
[Modifiers for SFGs are under (318.74).]

By fabio poli (Fabioz) on Thursday, October 27, 2022 - 07:59 am: Edit

There is a particular exceptions for C5A in raid (by stasis fields rules). It can use stasis without consorts. In any case you answered my question. TY

By fabio poli (Fabioz) on Friday, October 28, 2022 - 08:33 am: Edit

(603.2) Romulans can attack the Federation from T10+ and Gorns from T13+. The Federation can attack the Romulan from T20+ (barring other events).

Is it correct?

By Stefano Predieri (Preda) on Friday, October 28, 2022 - 01:17 pm: Edit

As feared, in our game, turn 10 is arrived and coalition hasn't attacked the federation.
Now federation has been at limited war from turn 6, and in turn 10 it has to either go to full war economy or revert to peace economy due to the 4 turn limit on limited war stance.

-Can the federation go to full war economy without actually declaring war on anyone?
If they can, how that change the operational limitations (overproduction, off map survey, minor shipyard building, possibility to place/upgrade bases)?
Does that releases any fleet?

As rules stands, if i declare war on Klingons, the Gorn will never join the alliance unless attacked, even if the Romulans than attack me (the federation) later. And they will.

And from this PIN and economy disparity there is no comeback...

Also, if the Romulans don't attack on turn 10, do the turn 10 released fleets become released anyway? Can they start the on Map exploration?

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, October 28, 2022 - 03:36 pm: Edit

The Hydrans, Klingons and Romulans go to full war production without being at war with anybody. Presumably the Feds can do this (on A10) as well, in this case.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, October 29, 2022 - 05:53 am: Edit

Stefano, you do not have to declare war until your half of Turn 10.

By Stefano Predieri (Preda) on Monday, October 31, 2022 - 12:48 pm: Edit

I have to play my half of turn 10 Thursday, Thomas, but I don't particularly want to declare war, since that will keep the Gorn out of the alliance forever, unless the coalition attacks them directly (and I wouldn't...). But if my only alternative is to abandon Kzinti territory and revert to peace economy, I'm forced to consider the option.

Richard, I agree with you, it should be possible, but while Hydrans, Klingon and Romulans have specific scenario rules letting them do that, Federation don't.
And my opponents insist that since specific scenario rules trump general rules, and the scenario doesn't let the federation do that, than I couldn't.

That's why an official ruling would be appreciated...

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Monday, October 31, 2022 - 02:31 pm: Edit

Stefano not a FEAR answer but 652.211 appears to be the answer you are after.

(652.211) The actual combat conditions are not related to the economic level. An empire can be on a Wartime economy (431.4) without attacking another empire or being attacked. Limited War
is considered Wartime for purposes of production restrictions,mobile bases, defense battalions, etc., but not for base upgrades.


Continued in Q&A Discussions to avoid clutter here.

By Andrew White (Nom) on Saturday, November 12, 2022 - 06:56 am: Edit

Can I get a clarification on "units" vs "ships" for 302.732?

On 25 July 2012, Chuck strong posted:

---

Quote:

FEDS CLARIFICATION ON (302.732) TERMS

...

Within (302.732) ONLY the terms "enemy units" and "friendly units" does not include APTs, PTRs, FXPs, supply convoys (414.0), FRD/PRDs, minor shipyards, hospital units, fighter storage depots, nor any support personnel or equipment defined under (756.3). All fighters or PFs are formed into ship equivalents and counted as either "enemy units" and "friendly units" for their respective side.

Within (302.732) ONLY the term "ship" in the phase "the number of ships in his retreating force" means the actual number of SHIPS (not ship equivalents of fighters or PFs; each Fast ship and X-ship is counted one as one "ship"); crippled ships still count as ships due to the last line of this rule.

---

• It could not enter a hex containing 2 F5s (2 units vs 1 ship)
• It could not enter a hex containing a D5V with full fighters (2 units vs 1 ship)
• It could enter a hex containing a D6V with full fighters (1 units vs 1 ship) - 5 fighters rounds to zero by 501.91

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, November 12, 2022 - 04:05 pm: Edit

503.5 - Orion Enclave

503.412 - If the only Coalition Supply Grid is a Supply Tug (or Convoy), it would appear the Orions remain neutral?

Just checking as William thought it has to be a 'full' base or Planet being the connection point, but we couldn't find anything on it.

On a related question (which was asked, but not answered by someone else), if the only connection to a Coalition Supply Grid was a Partial Supply Grid - would that still count as rules do not say yes or no.

By William Jockusch (Verybadcat) on Saturday, November 12, 2022 - 04:43 pm: Edit

Re the Orion question -- the answer I thought I once saw, but sure as heck can't find now, was based on the use of the word "connect" in the first sentence of 503.512:

(503.512) The Orions will re-join the Federation if no hex of the
Orion Enclave is able to connect to the Coalition Supply Grid at
the start of any Federation Player Turn.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, November 12, 2022 - 07:54 pm: Edit

Andrew White: Your analysis seems mostly correct. Note that fighter SEQs are not always counted as ships, as you have noted in one exception.

One of your statements is incorrect:
"It could enter a hex containing a D6V with full fighters (1 units vs 1 ship) - 5 fighters rounds to zero by 501.91"
By 501.91, 5 fighter factors is generally 1/2 ship equivalent, not zero. This rule does not refer to any rounding to zero in such a case.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, November 12, 2022 - 07:57 pm: Edit

For the Orion question, the key is whether Orion remains connected to a Coalition supply grid, and what defines the supply grid. While a supply tug can extend a grid, it is not part of one. A supply grid would require at least one supply point controlled by the Coalition to possibly qualify as a supply grid for this purpose.

By Andrew White (Nom) on Thursday, November 17, 2022 - 09:06 pm: Edit

613.42 Combined Operations "Reptilicon" Romulan Builds, Rev 31 Aug 2021

The conversions and substitutions make reference to SKB and SPB, as if they are pre-2010 groups.

E.g. Convert SP? + 2xSK? to SPB for 3 points. According to the F&E 2010 SIT, an SPB is a single medium carrier. Thus I assume this is actually permitting SP? -> SPB and 2xSK? -> 2xSKE.

Is this correct?

According to the SIT, converting an SP -> SPB or SK -> SKB is 1 EP (+ fighters), while converting a SK -> SKE is 1.5 EP. As such, the conversions in 613.4 are under-costed by 0.5 EP per SKE.

Possible errata:
* Conversions:
** SP? to SPB: 1 point + 16 points for fighters
** SK? to SKB: 1 point + 8 points for fighters
** SK? to SKE: 1.5 points
* Substitutions
** SP w/ SPB - (1/turn, Y168 only)
** SK w/ SKB - (1/turn, Y168 only)
** SK w/ SKE

Further questions:
* Should SKE conversions be priced at 1.5 EP or discounted to 1 EP?
* Do the Romulans get 6 free fighter factors in Spring Y168?

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Thursday, November 17, 2022 - 10:20 pm: Edit

I have a question regarding Reptilicon Revenged as well, though I only have the original Combined Operations, and not the more recent revisions.

613.42 lists both the allowable substitutions and conversions, but then notes "Y168 only". It does not show an indication as to what items on the list are restricted to Y168, which would only be the final turn of the game.

Therefore, no conversions are possible for the first two turns of the game at all.

That also means for the first two turns:

Few additional scouts can be made by any means, as the SE cannot be done by substitution nor conversion, though it could be overbuilt.

FAL maulers could be made by substitution (only one per turn, unless you can do additional substitutions via overbuilding?).

Technically, you start with only one CE troopship and have absolutely no capability to build or convert any more during the entire scenario!


So my question, was that intended, or was that a misprint? Has it been revised in the updated Combined Operations?

By Andrew White (Nom) on Thursday, November 17, 2022 - 11:39 pm: Edit

Kevin's question prompted me to look again, and there's another issue with the Romulan carrier group conversions. The last two conversions are:
* 4x BH to 4x WH: 4 points
* 2x BH + 2x SN to 4x WH: 5 points

I assume the first is 4x BH to 2x WH (plus 5 fighters) + 2x BHE, which would be 4x1 EP + 10 EP for fighters under the basic rules.

The second option is odd. This is implicitly converting 2x SN to 2x BHE, which is not covered by F&E2010 pg 161, either as a conversion or substitution.

Also, the substitutions lists a "WH group" (for 2xBH + 2xSN). It seems a reasonable assumption that this results is [2xWH + 2xBHE], but strictly a "WH group" as a distinct purchasable entity doesn't exist in F&E2010.


Side observation: many of the other conversion costs differ to F&E2010 pg 161/163.

Gorn:
* DD to SC: 2 vs 1
* CL to BC: 4 vs 3

Romulan:
* K5 to K5S: 2 vs 1
* WE to SE: 3 vs 2

All except the CL to BC are a +1 surcharge for scouts, so this might be by design rather than just an inconsistency. But the SPC conversion is at the standard 3 points.

Conversion to K5L from K5 is missing (intentional?).

Typo:
* "KR or K7R or KRM": should say "to KRM".

Suggestion: Unless non-standard pricing is critical to the scenario, rewrite the substitution & conversion rules in the format of 704.3/4 and 706.2/3 and let the F&E2010 SITs handle the costing and details.

By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Wednesday, November 23, 2022 - 11:44 am: Edit

Hopefully this a stupid question. If "(523.121) XTPs can only be accumulated at the shipyard, and
cannot be transferred, placed in satellite stockpiles, transported, or sold; exception (523.128). They can be accumulated at a re-placement shipyard under construction." prevents XTPs from being relocated, how do they get to bases and repair facilities outside the capital for use in repairs and upgrades?

By Nick Blank (Nickgb) on Wednesday, November 23, 2022 - 01:01 pm: Edit

I think in the same way your regular EPs from your main economy get to bases and FRDs for repairs. If you have a supply path to the base/FRD in question, you are good to spend EPs and XTPs there.

The restriction is just that your XTPs are tied to your main supply grid. They cannot be moved to or accumulated in a partial grid, or placed in a satellite stockpile, given to an ally, etc...

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Wednesday, November 23, 2022 - 11:47 pm: Edit

Reviewing the SIT files, 5 of the 9 original empires do not have repair ships (REPR) on their SIT. Only Gorn, Hydran, Lyran, and Tholian have them listed.

Are they missing from the Federation, Klingon, Kzinti, and Romulan and Orion SITs?