Problem addressed: Successful Hydran Expedition is often game-ending for the coalition.

A number of rules have been introduced recently which have the effect of making the Hydran expedition much easier to achieve than in the pre-F&E2k days: Fighting retreat, the supply tug and Fast Ships are the prime examples. Legendary Commodores (if they are added) will also make the expedition easier.

A sucessful expedition makes any coalition attack on the Federation much more difficult, as the element of surprise is lost. It also makes progress against the Kziti and Hydrans more difficult, as the coalition is forces to fight a three front war it was not prepared for.

I propose that this sitution be addressed by allowing the Romulans to enter the war earlier if the Federation is activated early by the expedition.

-----

Romulan Reaction:

If the Federation enters the war early due to the Hydran expedition, the Romulans can (at the option of the Romulan player) invoke the Romulan reaction.

The Romulans may declare war on the Federation Four turns after the Federation is activated by the Hydrans, just as they normally would on turn 10. The Gorns join the war 2 turns after the Romulans, just as they normally would on turn 12.

Using the Romulan reaction subtracts 20 VP from the Romulan total.

By Eric Stork (Merchant) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 12:36 am: Edit

Why bonus VP? The Coalition doesn't get any if the Federation is activated early.

By John Smedley (Ukar) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 12:36 am: Edit

If this idea is found to have merit, we'll need to work out the build lists for the Roms for turn 8&9, and for the Gorn turn 10&11.

By John Smedley (Ukar) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 12:38 am: Edit

The bonus VP occur for the same reason that the Federation Reaction in AO gives VP to the Coalition. (Actually, it takes VP away from the Feds, but the effect is the same)

Basically, the rule is introduced to allow the Coalition to remain competitive in a game that they otherwise would lose. Invoking such a rule should (IMO) incur a VP penality.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 12:55 am: Edit

Without great care, this could result in the Klingons not keeping any ships back to block the expedition; the Hydran capital falling faster; and so many more Romulan ships that the Fed advantage dissipates.

By Edward Reece (Edfactor) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 04:11 am: Edit

Actually the Gorn and Romulan would just start using their usual wartime build schedual. So there really isn't anything to work on there.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 04:34 am: Edit

I seem to recall that this concept was rejected by SVC a few years ago...

By David Lang (Dlang) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 06:47 am: Edit

I also think that the real problem here is that it´s just to easy to get an expedition through kzinti space useing these rules.

I don´t think the new rules and ships have made it much easier to get through klingon space (a little easier possibly, but the klingons just have to pay attention to the possibility)

the problem is the ability for fast ships from both the kzinti and hydran empires to link up, allowing the hydan ship to move all the way up into kzinti space in one turn (and far enough into kzinti space that it can be protected by the kzinti fleet so it can´t be killed after that)

the answer may be as simple as the lyrans and klingons deploying a few ships to their mutual border, (cutting off the retrograde and then pinning the ships so they can´t go where they want to)

this is something that needs to have a term paper written for it. Pete, Joe, do you have thoughts on this?

By David Lang (Dlang) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 07:17 am: Edit

also when considering early romulan entry to the war, consider that the romulans were not only building up their fleet (as shown by the PWC but they are also still exploring their space (remember they still haven´t finished it by turn 10) so their income will be less then you would expect.

IIRC from the R section of the SPC there were 6 built (3 subbing for normal cruisers), with each one needing 1 turn to activate a province it´s pretty close to the romulans having no income outside the capitol when the shipyard is completed on turn 1

lets see 25 provinces to explore (not counting the capitol), assume the first 6 SP are built as SPC

turn	#SPC	#provinces explored
1	1	1
2	2	3
3	4	7
4	6	13
5	6	19
6	6	25

now it´s not very reasonable to say that ALL of the cruiser production was dedicated to survvey ships (especially given their deperate lack of cruisers) so if they instead built 1 on turn 4, 1 on turn 5, 2 on turn 6, 2 on turn 7 that would put their survey schedule exactly on track to match the existing info

also remember the discussion that just happened about early fed entry to the war, the feds are pretty limited early on.

the romulans may not WANT to start much earlier (activating the fed 6th fleet and the Gorn navy)

By David Lang (Dlang) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 07:52 am: Edit

oops I just realized that in F&E the roms only get 3xSPC in their starting fleet.

redoing the timetable

turn	#SPC	#provinces
1	1	1
2	2	3
3	3	6
4	3	9
5	3	12
6	3	15
7	3	18
8	3	21
9	3	24

so they would have had to survey at least one other province besides the capitol before turn 1 to make this possible.this would make their economy be

turn	EP	PWC cost	K series activations
1	55	19.5
2	57	23	6xK4 (6EP??)
3	61	31.5	6xK4 (6EP??)
4	67	39.5
5	73	42.5
6	79	39.5	KC9 (13EP)
7	85	49.5
8	91	52.5	KC9 pt 2 (5EP)
9	97	59.5
10	103
11	109
12	113

this includes 1xSPC each on turns 1-3
especially if you consider that they also needed to retrofit all their existing ships with warp, build monitors, aux ships etc they are spending quite a bit of cash besides what comes out as ships.

if they get activated early they should ahve to pay a good chunk of this to finish the job

now one ´problem´ with this reasoning is that the PWC chart shows the SPC conversions happening on turn 9. however I think that was to answer the questions ´why didn´t they survey their space before turn 10´ and this shows that they may not have been able to finish the job

it looks as if they really didn´t intend for the war to start for another year or so, but decided to jump in early. Hitler did the same thing in WWII when he started the war 2-3 years before it was planned

By John Smedley (Ukar) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 12:03 pm: Edit

David,

I've spent quite a bit of time thinking about possible expedition routes, and I've come to the conclusion that it is very difficult for the Klingons and Lyrans to stop the expedition, if the alliance player makes it his objective from turn 1.

I don't think this is a bad thing. The expedition (against a prepared opponent) always involves some cost for the alliance. I think that going for the expedition should be a real choice on the part of the alliance, I would just like rules to make the effects of the expedition less drastic for the coalition.

You are correct that the new Fed entry rules make the expedition somewhat less attractive. The Fed economy still remains, however, and can prop up Kzinti ship production significantly. Also, the destruction of SB 2211 is made much more costly, as the Fed Home fleet can reinforce it. I would argue that this SB is one that the coalition must destroy, and making it significantly more expensive dramatically changes the dynamic of the war.

By Joe Stevenson (Ikv_Sabre) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 02:35 pm: Edit

David L.

"this is something that needs to have a term paper written for it. Pete, Joe, do you have thoughts on this?
"

I don't see anyone getting through to Kzinti space easily, not if I can help it. My new approach has that corridor pretty well blocked. It isn't impossible, but it won't be easy.


John S.,

"Successful Hydran Expedition is often game-ending for the coalition. "

How many times have we seen this occur? I think it might be a bit premature to say "often".
Mind you, I'm not against the concept of Romulan reaction, just as I was in favor of early Fed reaction. The goal of keeping the game alive is a good one. I just don't think that the frequency should be overstated.

Joe

By David Lang (Dlang) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 04:23 pm: Edit

Joe, I´m curious how many ships it takes to block that route.

it´s hard to block it from the hydran side since the hydrans can use all of the first two turns of construction to open a path for the DNL

from the kzinti side the alliance not only needs to get the DNL to the meeting place, but also needs to be able to retreat/retrograde back to kzinti space. here I think there´s a bette chance of stopping them (especially since they need to be in supply at the time of combat to be able to retrograde), but if the kzinti allocate a number of ships to the task they can make it hard to stop.

I guess I´m wondering how many coalition ships the threat of this route will tie up for turns 2-4 (turn 2 to get into position, 3 to be in place, 4 to get back where they can be useful) if the alliance doesn´t try it

By Tony Barnes (Tonyb) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 04:51 pm: Edit

The key to stopping it (IMHO) is clogging up the north end.

The key to that would be:
- make sure 1004, 1105, 1205 fall on T2. The Kzinti will need at least 1 of: 703, 803, 902, 1001, 1004, 1105, 1202, 1205, 1304 to survive to Alliance turn 3 to have any chance. However, without 1004-1205, the supply situation becomes much more "interesting".
- don't have all your forces on 1307 (or wherever the FRD park is). from 1307, they can't react out to the 9xx hex row to stop a Kzinti drive. Alternatively, don't have a FRD park at all
- keep 906/1107 alive to help block the path back out (assuming the Z-DNL can make it through).
- threaten the Kzinti capital on turn 3 sufficiently so they can NOT afford to send their DNL reserve to a position to try this (I assume that the setup for this is DNL reserve on T3C to someplace close to the border, then dive across).

Doing all these things doesn't really tie up any ships to a large degree. The Northern offensive is basically trying to do them anyway. The only change required would be to not stack all ships in the FRD park on Turn 3 (a dozen ships on 1107 should be more than enough).

By MikeMascitti (Lokiwormtongue) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 04:58 pm: Edit

Being a Rom at heart I of course absolutely LOVE the idea of some kind of Rom Reaction. A successful Expedition is yet another reason for a premature end to an F&E game. Yes of course someone will argue that I’m a “quitter’ and the Expedition isn't the end-all for the Coaltiion but I disagree…the game is won or lost vs the FEDS and an early entry severly skews the game.

can we please at least consider a Rom reaction rule as an optional thing for those players who want to continue their games after an Exp? I’m sure SVC could whip something up for a Caps Log.

assume an Exp works…I just can’t see the “we are destined to rule the galaxy” Roms sitting back, watching half the galaxy at war, seeing the Coalition at a disadvatage, and doing nothing about it. Let them enter 3 turns after the Feds-Klinks go to war…as was historical…better yet also give them the option to attack the Gorns using that Rom-Gorn only war option in the Hurricane

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 06:42 pm: Edit

WEll, when they are building their fleet and trying to explore their space, conquest against a fairly even opponent would probably not be the first thing on their minds.

By Eric Stork (Merchant) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 07:27 pm: Edit

John S.,
1 - I don't see a need for new build lists, you just advance them like the Feds do.
2 - You will need to consider that there may be more Romulan provinces to count as unexplored. And if entering before SPC builds, how do they explore them?

John S. & David L.,
You guys (and anyone else who thinks the Expedition is easy) really need to get the Coalition setup on the Hydran border from Gotterdamerung. Should have been a tac-note called, "Pluggin up the Hydran Leak."

By David Lang (Dlang) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 07:35 pm: Edit

Eric,

1. the Feds don´t just advance their builds anymore, the builds they get aren´t quite as good.

Eric re: the expedition, note that we are talking about the expedition as done in return of the cruiser (feds activated on turn 4) where blocking it at the hydran side means that you have to have large enough fleets on the hydran border to prevent a single CR9 ship (CR10 if they include an admiral) from being able to get through your line. given that the coalition doesn´t know where the first two turns of hydran production will appear it will take a LOT of ships to do it this way.

By John Smedley (Ukar) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 08:38 pm: Edit

Tony

You are correct - the expedition to Kzinti space is much simplier if the Kzinti have one of the bases you mention. That is why I say that the alliance must make the expedition it's objective from turn 1. Having 1105 in Kzinti hands on turn 3 is not impossible (it will certianly be devistated, but that doesn't matter).

With that said, it can be acomplished without any of these. In RotC, I had lost all of the BATS you mentioned. I retook 1105 on alliance turn 3 - it was not a valid retro point. I had sent a reserve to a small fight in 1004. The reserve had a kzinti DNL and a tug. The Hydrans pinned 0411 and sent a fleet toward 0509. It was mostly pinned by a lyran reserve in 0510 (IIRC), but a THR continued to 0608 to link up with the kzinti DNL. The majority of the Kzinti force hit 0607. The Kzinti & Hydran DNLs retreated toward kzinti supply, onto 0607. The force then fighting retreated to 0707 then to 0806, then retrograded to 1202 (I was prepared to move an FRD to 1103 to make retrograde easier, but after the Lyran reserve reacted I determined it would not be necessary).

By John Smedley (Ukar) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 08:42 pm: Edit

Tony is correct that the way to stop the expedition to Kzinti space is on the Kzinti side. Since the entire Hydran fleet is not deployed until alliance turn 3, stopping all of the Hydran options on the Hydran side is very difficult (the coalition does not have enough ships to do this and moutn a credible turn 3 offensive).

I should note that my origional plan for the expedition was to go up the Klingon-Lyran NZ. My opponent blocked this path, so instead I went entirely through Lyran space.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, June 02, 2003 - 03:13 am: Edit

Against a properly played coalition, I think it would be close to impossible for the Zin to hold ANY of their western/border bases out to alliance turn 3 bar maybe the BATS next to the Marquis. 0902 will normally fall turn 2, almost certainly turn 3. Holding any of the required BATS/planets will require used of Zin reserves, probably losing the Duke's SB turn 3 as a result. And it will be very difficult even then. At the very best, I think the Zin will hold one out-of-supply BATS or planet come turn 3, and either their fleets will have taken serious damage, or their defences will have taken extra strain.

By John Smedley (Ukar) on Monday, June 02, 2003 - 08:39 am: Edit

BATS and planets cannot be out of supply, and are still valid retrograde points.

You are correct that the diversion of the Kzinti reserve to ensure the expedition may result in the loss of the Duke's SB turn 3 - it did for me.

The point is that a sucessful expedition is worth the loss of the SB (since it's going to fall anyway).

By Joe Stevenson (Ikv_Sabre) on Monday, June 02, 2003 - 03:58 pm: Edit

"The point is that a sucessful expedition is worth the loss of the SB (since it's going to fall anyway). "

It depends. If the Kzinti still made the Coalition pay for taking the base, then that is fine.

If they took it in a walk, I'm not entirely sure.

By John Smedley (Ukar) on Monday, June 02, 2003 - 04:13 pm: Edit

1304 combat results, from RofC
Kz dest: CLD, SB
Kz crip: CVL, 3BC, CLE, EFF, CL, FFK
Kl dest: D6M, D6J, 3E4A
Kl crip: D7C, D6M, 9D5, 6F5L, 5F5, E4
L crip: 5DW, DWS
Kz drone exp: 4.8 ep
Kl drone exp: 7.2 ep

So the Kzinti lost 1 ship, and crippled 8
The coalition lost 5 ships, and crippled 29

Certianly the Kzinti lost out ep wise if you include the base, but I don't think I call this a "walk".

By Joe Stevenson (Ikv_Sabre) on Monday, June 02, 2003 - 04:17 pm: Edit

"The coalition lost 5 ships, and crippled 29 "

Good.


No, I would not call that a walk. I had not read the battle report (nor did I have the inclination to try and find it); I was expressing a concern. Thanks for filling in the info.

Joe