Yes, they can.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, February 18, 2023 - 10:49 am: Edit

John

To expand on Richard's correct answer - yes, it is due to the Kzinti having to create a sub stacks in 1201 (the ships pinned) and the moving stack.

The moving stack moving to 1101 can only be reacted to by stuff within range of 1101.

Once that Sub Stack (or further sub stacks) of that force completes its move, the pinned sub stack in 1201 will need to declare 'end' and can then be reacted into.

If the pinned stuff declares 'end' first, this may or may not be a good idea (you may not want the Klingons to react in for example and they may not want to react if they can't fully pin your force and you could then head towards 1402 say).

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Saturday, February 18, 2023 - 11:17 am: Edit

Thank you!

Assuming the Lyrans still hold the planet in 1202, am I correct that retreat sub-priority 3D will require the Kzinti force to retreat to the off map area from the battle in hex 1201?

Basically, I am confirming that even though 1301 will not have any Coalition ships in it, it cannot be used as a retreat hex.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, February 18, 2023 - 12:41 pm: Edit

John

Yes - Unless they can get another supply point in range 1 of 1201 (Convoy for example).

It's the one disadvantage the Kzinti have - if they have to retreat, they have to retreat off map and can't retro back onto the map.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, February 18, 2023 - 01:29 pm: Edit

Paul's explanation is incorrect; pinned units do not and cannot declare they end movement - that happened at the moment they were pinned.

In this example, the first hex of extended reaction occurred when units entered 1201. The second hex of extended reaction will occur if the currently moving stack moves a second hex (and the extended reaction must go to 1201) or if that stack declares that it stops. If no units remained in 1201 then the second hex of this extended reaction could not occur.

If the second hex of reaction movement is declined at this point, it cannot occur later. Reaction could still occur later if further movement of untis provoked an opportunity.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, February 18, 2023 - 03:28 pm: Edit

Sorry Richard - I believe you are incorrect - as otherwise your previous answer that they could react would also be incorrect. The rules refer to sub stacks 203.44 and there is nothing which stops you changing what gets pinned and pinning can change during the turn.

Example

The Kzinti moving force into 1301 is

CVS, MEC, 6 x FF and SF.

A Lyran CC and 4 x FF's reacts into 1301.

Sub Stack 1 is 5 x FF and Sub Stack 2 is the CVS, MEC, FF and SF .

Sub Stack 1 continues to move and 2 x FF's break off to do something else. The remaining 3 x FF move back into 1301 and then declare end.

No further reactions into 1301 occur.

Sub Stack 2 can leave 1 x FF and the SF in 1301 and the CVS and MEC could then continue to move somewhere else - as that Sub Stack has not declared an end and is no longer pinned.

(You can't start moving a brand new stack which wasn't in the original move, as a stack has to end it's move before you move onto a new stack).

The way the phasing player resolves their Sub Stacks is down to them and can be in any order they like (except once a sub stack starts it's movement, other than creating sub stacks from that, the original sub stack has to complete it's movement before you move onto something else.

Simple Example
Stack A becomes Sub stack 1A and 2A.
Sub Stack 2A continues to move and becomes 2A, 2B and 2C - you can't start moving again Sub Stack 1A unless 2A, 2B and 2C have all completed their move, but once they have 1A can move again.

Unless we have been playing the rule wrong....

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, February 20, 2023 - 11:15 am: Edit

Paul, from 203.51, it says that pinned ships cannot resume op moves.

" However, once a
given stack (including the ships left behind in various pinning
situations) has completed its movement, those ships cannot re-
sume moving if they become unpinned later in that Movement
Phase. In the above example, the player could not move three
more ships into hex 1010 later during the Movement Phase to
allow the three units detached from the fleet to rejoin it, but the
three new units might be able to continue moving and join the
original stack."

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Monday, February 20, 2023 - 04:43 pm: Edit

I would argue the ships that was initially detached have not 'ended their move' - hence why they have to declare an end to their move, at some point, allowing other ships to react in.

For example - using the original example from John, if some ships gets pinned in 1201 and the rest continue to move to 1101 (outside reaction from 1402>1302) - if the 1101 pinned ships 'ended' their move at the point they was pinned it would allow the Coalition to immediately react from 1302 into 1201 (and therefore pin other Kzinti forces)?


So until the 1201 (potentially) temporarily pinned force declare end (allowing further reactions) - a sub stack from the original stack they all started in, could unpin them - but a new moving stack would require the 1201 forces to end their move and couldn't then be unpinned.

By Jamey Johnston (Totino) on Monday, February 20, 2023 - 07:38 pm: Edit

How my local group has always played this, based on our reading of 203.51 and other relevant rules, is that the partial stack that was pinned has now stopped moving, but the rest of the stack can (and must, if they're not stopping) continue to move. Other forces able to react to the movement may continue to do so. When that whole stack (pinned and continued on) has completed moving (active player declares the stack's movement is done), the non active player may then perform the following actions: Any able to react units may move one (or two if scout supported) hexes into any hex where any ships in the original stack stopped moving. This includes the ability to react only the second reaction hex (delayed) from a one hex reaction from two hexes away towards the pinned force.

However, I don't think it's permitted to react two hexes to the pinned force on the pulse of movement where they get pinned, but rather only after the entire stack's movement is complete. This allows the acting player the option of using his next pulse to move the unpinned ships into the hex that was reacted into. If you treat the pin as "declared end of movement" that becomes impossible, and allows a two hex reaction between pulses of movement, thereby pinning more ships, which doesn't seem right.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, February 20, 2023 - 09:51 pm: Edit

The rule gives an example where ten ships move into the hex of three ships and three are pinned.

It then says later on that the ten ships could have moved through if FIRSt you sent three other ships to pin the opposing ships. The rule states that otherwise the pinned ships may not move.

It is my understanding that pinned ships are stopped automatically and cannot declare they are stopping as they have no operational movement capability from that point on.

It really does simplify things and I think that's the intent; that way you don't have to declare 'stop' for all those pinned ships that can't move anyway.

The rule could certainly be better worded, but it doesn't ever explicitly say that pinned ships can become unpinned and operationally move and it does indicate to the contrary.

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Saturday, February 25, 2023 - 12:03 pm: Edit

A few questions:

1) The Lyrans don't start carrier production until Y171. If they happen to capture a Kzinti carrier before Y171, can they still convert it to their own use? If they capture one (or convert a previously captured one) after Y171, does that conversion count against the two carriers per year limit?

2) In addition to carriers, the Lyrans can also produce carrier pods in Y171. Are there any limits related to the pods (other than the allowed total of two)? For example, could the Lyrans produce two carrier pods and two CVLs in spring Y171?

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, February 25, 2023 - 02:21 pm: Edit

John

1) I can't see any reason why the Lyrans couldn't convert it to Lyran Tech - as there is no 'disabling rule', to stop it.

2) Pods are limited to the the CV or CVA production limits - so Lyrans could build a CV pod and a CVL in 171.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, February 25, 2023 - 06:18 pm: Edit

Note that the Lyrans could not produce two CVLs on the same turn - they are limited when it comes to carrier production.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Saturday, February 25, 2023 - 06:27 pm: Edit

From F&E2010, page 138:

(711.3) Can produce two carriers per year (plus one DWV‡ per turn: Advanced Operations). This can include a maximum of one CV and one CVL [or two CVLs] by any means each year. Maximum of one carrier substitution and one carrier conversion per year. If a CVA‡ (513.41) or SCS is built, it counts against the CV limit. Conversions count as carrier production.

I think this may allow 2xCVL in one turn, if one is a subst and one is a conversion? Then the rest of that year the Lyrans would produce 0 carriers?

--Mike

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Saturday, February 25, 2023 - 08:04 pm: Edit

I also interpreted that sentence to mean that the Lyrans could produce two carriers in the same turn (one substitution, one conversion) if they produced none in the year's other turn.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Sunday, February 26, 2023 - 02:18 am: Edit

Two per year means just that:
Two in a Spring and zero in a Fall turn;
Two in a Fall and zero in a Spring turn;
Or one in the Spring and one in the Fall.

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Monday, February 27, 2023 - 09:35 am: Edit

Hi Paul,

I think your answer to my second question from Saturday's post is incorrect. After I posted, I came across Rule 509.314, which says that carrier pods do not count against carrier production limits.

Thus, combining that rule and the other discussion, I believe the Lyrans could produce two carrier pods and two CVLs in spring Y171. Of course, whether they would actually want to is a separate question.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Monday, February 27, 2023 - 11:09 am: Edit

(509.134) is a great find. Also note:

(431.22) TUG PODS: One set (509.4) of tug pods can be produced each turn for replacements and authorized additions only. This can only be done in the shipyard.

The Lyran VP+ is a single 6FF pallette, which I believe counts as a "set of tug pods". Under 431.22 only one "set of tugs pods" can be produced each turn.

So I believe in Spring Y171 the Lyrans can:

• Produce one CVL via substitution
• Produce one CVL via conversion
• Produce one VP+ pallette

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Monday, February 27, 2023 - 12:45 pm: Edit

Thanks, Mike.

After reviewing 431.22 (with 509.41) and 509.314, I believe that you are correct: one pod and two carriers could be produced in Spring Y171. And since pods do not count against the carrier limits, they could then produce the second carrier pod in Fall Y171.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Monday, February 27, 2023 - 03:12 pm: Edit

I am sure Fighter Pods used to count as the equivalent Carrier Hull on build limits... but I can't find the rule.

Did it get changed, or we missing the rule I remembered or is my memory wrong?

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Monday, February 27, 2023 - 09:42 pm: Edit

I was always assuming they did not count against the limits. That was always one of the benefits of tugs, the variants can be built in addition to the limits.

By Nick Blank (Nickgb) on Tuesday, February 28, 2023 - 01:25 pm: Edit

Tug pod construction is rule (431.22) which says you can build one pod (or set of pods) per turn. There are no other restrictions beyond the total numbers of each type of pod, and they do not count against other ship construction limits like scout/drone/carrier.

Also see the individual master orders of battle, e.g. the Federation order of battle says under special production, build one pod per turn up to maximum limits by pod type.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Thursday, March 02, 2023 - 01:50 am: Edit

Per the Klingon SIT
Build Cost or Substitution of the CVT is putting carrier pods on a tug.
Notes: says it counts as a Med Carrier build.

CVT+ says the same

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, March 02, 2023 - 05:15 am: Edit

Correct. The CVT and CVT+ are considered carriers because the addition of the pods is a permanent installation of the pods making it a true carrier unlike adding pods that could be swapped out in a later turn.

FEDS CONCURS.

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Thursday, March 02, 2023 - 10:44 am: Edit

A few questions about escorts.

1) In the Hydran Order of Battle, the UH carrier group is listed as [UH + DE + 2xAH]. However, the SIT says it is a medium true carrier, and it is not listed in 515.21 as one of the medium carriers that requires three escorts. Can the UH be operated as [UH + DE + AH] or is the third escort required? If a third escort is required, could the third escort be a DE giving [UH + DE + DE + AH]?

2) Rule 515.263 says that carrier tugs with five to ten fighter factors are treated as CVs. In the case of the Lyrans, they operated their CVs as if they were CVAs and used three escorts. Does this mean that a Lyran tug with a carrier pod that is escorted must have three escorts?