All items corrected. Topic remains open.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Sunday, June 21, 2020 - 01:50 pm: Edit

Noticed a small problem with the historical PWC, only 2 SK hulls on turn five and 4 on turn 6

Home fleet has two SKEs on Turn 5 but no other SK hull for turn 5, turn 6 has 4 SK hulls (3 Home, 1 North).

Propose one of the Turn 6 SKFs be shifted to the Turn 5.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Monday, June 22, 2020 - 12:25 pm: Edit

Hmmmm, 2nd ENG on the third spring turn comes out to 5 or 6 turns after entering the war but (542.12) is spring turn with three war turns which is 3-5 turns (depending on whether the third war turn being spring counts).

The 3rd ENG is worse, as it is the sixth spring turn (11-12) vs spring with 6 war turns (6-8, depending on if the sixth war turn in spring counts).

By Jeffrey Coutu (Jtc) on Thursday, April 08, 2021 - 05:17 am: Edit

(704.212) I suggest adding one “SP” to the Home Fleet on Turn 5 in their PWC. My Reasoning: Only 24 SP hulls are being built in the PWC while previous OOBs listed that 25 were built (I suspect that the “[SP>SPS]” conversion for Home Fleet Turn 9 was mistakenly counted as a build). The number of SP hulls built for Turns 1-9 are (respectively): 2, 2, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, so one SP should be added to Turn 5 production (increasing the total SP hulls on that turn to 3). The number of SP hulls shown on the OOB being built per fleet are Home: 7, North: 8, West: 7, Patrol Detachment: 2; so I suspect the hull should be added to the Home Fleet. Previous OOBs for the Home Fleet PWC listed for SP hulls: SPB, 6xSP, SPF, (and the 3xSPC which we will ignore); while this OOB lists: SPB, 5xSP, SPF; therefore probably it should be a SP hull that should be added. - Jeff Coutu, 8 April 2021

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Thursday, April 08, 2021 - 01:27 pm: Edit

(704.221) SUP can be substituted or NH for CON should read: SUP can be substituted for NH or CON. The SUP is a single ship carrier command cruiser. Thomas Mathews 8 Apr 2021

By Joe Stevenson (Ikv_Sabre) on Tuesday, May 16, 2023 - 02:29 am: Edit

The old Romulan carrier production has somehow made it back onto the Order of Battle.

Way back, we simplified this to two medium carriers, plus on SKB, one CVA per year, and I think one NH either per year or per turn.

I think the problem is that some old products were updated but didn't get the carrier production updated.

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Tuesday, May 16, 2023 - 09:49 am: Edit

Joe, I asked about that awhile back, and was told that Romulan carrier production is weird, it was intended to be weird, and it's going to remain weird. So no, it's not a mistake, it was intended that way.

By Joe Stevenson (Ikv_Sabre) on Sunday, May 21, 2023 - 12:58 am: Edit

Kevin,

The thing is, it was changed from being weird. Twice. And the 2nd time it was only because of a glitch.


The original carrire build schedule existed before a lot of new carriers were added to the game. The change was made after a lot of negotiations. And after the originally one was added back in by accident, it was corrected.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Sunday, May 21, 2023 - 01:49 pm: Edit

Current:

Carriers:
Maximum carrier production by any means is:
One SPB and one SKB per turn.
One CNV or one SUB per year.
One SUP per turn (Spring: sub for or convert from NH;
Fall: sub for CON or convert from NH).
One WH per turn by any means.
KR to KRV in Y170+, counting against the SPB limit.
See (525.6) for Modular Dreadnaughts limits.

Six free fighter factors per turn; see (431.74) (Basic).
Twelve free factors per year; see (431.74), (431.744) and (442.6) (Advanced).


Joe I am looking for the archived oob…
Are you saying the WH group at some point (was decided by ADB/Staff) in the timeline the Romulans shifted schedules to a 2nd Medium Carrier?
And just to be clear: The actual production schedule is straight up ships, these are all carrier substitutions, right?

By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Sunday, May 21, 2023 - 02:44 pm: Edit

Joe,

Is this the one your looking for?

Maximum carrier production by any means is:
Two medium carriers per turn;
One light carrier per turn;
One Heavy Carrier per year replacing medium carrier;
One SUP per turn (Spring: sub for or convert from NH; Fall: sub for CON or convert from NH).
KR to KRV in Y170+, counting against the medium limit.
See (525.6) for Modular Dreadnaughts limits.

Six free fighter factors per turn; see (431.74) (Basic).
Twelve free factors per year; see (431.74), (431.744) and (442.6) (Advanced).

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Sunday, May 21, 2023 - 03:41 pm: Edit

Ryan,

Yes, that's the one. I was one of the guys debating the whole issue back when Joe first proposed it. That was basically what we came up with.

Though I do want to point out, one of the issues we had discussed back and forth was that the SUP could be built *in addition* to the two medium carriers per turn, which I thought was too much. (The exact debate basically went "Two medium carries plus the SUP makes it three good carriers per turn", vs. "The SUP is not a medium carrier, it's not that great".) The agreement we hammered out was that the SUP *counted against* the two medium carrier builds. If you like the SUP, build it alongside a NHB. If you don't think the SUP is a good carrier, build two NHB's as your medium carriers.

But after it disappeared a second time, I inquired about it, and was told (I thought by Steve himself) that "No, Romulan carrier production is weird, that's just the way it is." I took that as a ruling from GOD, and well, I don't mind either way.

By Joe Stevenson (Ikv_Sabre) on Thursday, May 25, 2023 - 09:13 pm: Edit

Ryan,

that's the one

I don't remember this "One Heavy Carrier per year *replacing medium carrier*"

But otherwise, it looks correct

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 02:22 am: Edit

It's typical for all major carrier empires to do so -- they're just worded differently. Essentially these empires can normally produce a maximum of 3 medium and one heavy carrier per year.


FED: Maximum of two carriers and one FV/DWV per turn by any means, including no more than one CVA/SCS and one BCS/BCV per year.

KLIN: Maximum of two carriers and one escort carrier per turn by any means, including no more than one C8V or C8S and one C7V/C7S per year.

KZIN: Maximum of two carriers plus one escort carrier per turn by any means, no more than one CVA or SCS per year.

HYD: Can produce no more than one CVA (CV, ID) per year by any means.
Can produce no more than two heavy or medium “true carriers” per turn by any means.
Can produce one CVE/DWV per turn.

ISC: Maximum of two carriers and one light/escort per turn by any means, including no more than one CVA/SCS per year and one BCS/BCV per turn.

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 09:28 am: Edit

So why do the Romulans get more than all the others?

They can build two carriers and one SKB/SeaB per turn, including nor more than one CNV/PHX and one SUN/TH per year... plus one SUP per turn on top of all that.

My opinion: The SUP should count against the two carriers per turn limit.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 12:27 pm: Edit

Because that is what ADB decided what was needed for game balance.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 12:48 pm: Edit

So under the OOB listed on the board at this moment we have the Romulans getting

One Heavy Carrier each year (CNV, SUB, and I assume later the FAB)
2.5 Medium Carriers per turn (SUP, SPB, WH) *subs are tricky in this medium group, see below
One Escort Carrier per turn (SKB or SEB)

*Trying to understand why the published list would NOT be generalized for mediums like the others...
-- the SUP is a CC class and could typically be subbed across to the NHB/SUN (not a SUB) or downgraded into lesser cruiser classes (FH, SP, WE, etc)
-- the SPB is a CW hull and while you are allowed to sub a Kestral (technically up in class) KRV you cannot sub up to the FH classes as they are heavy cruisers, you could sub across (WE) or downward (to a WH or SEB for instance).
-- the WH says WH, not WH 'group' (does this mean one ship IOW 1/2 of a medium carrier per turn?), this ship is a Battle Hawk DD and that means you cannot sub up to WE/QE Cruisers classes or higher.

This is likely why the comment was they are weird. Also why it was avoided (corrected away from) the 'two medium carriers' format.

In this way and because they are indeed odd prob leave the SUP the way it is and the format as it is now as 'correct'. Unless the WH allows for a full group of two ships (meaning they would get 3 full Med Carriers) then personally I would only slightly lean toward a SUP restriction (slightly only because the WH group is not an awesome group).

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 01:18 pm: Edit

Note the D7 based K7V is not addressed but would assume (maybe incorrectly) that this particular Kestral would fall into the 'Sub for SUP' and not 'Sub for SPB' portion of the substitution rule. Basically because the KRV is based on lesser D6 hull (with 5 fighters) and an exception to allow it in the war cruiser substitution.

The KDV based upon the D5 hull I assume would fall into the substitution for the SPB.

No opinion on the KWV (NCA/D5W class).

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 03:10 pm: Edit

Lawrence,

Based on what the OOB on the board at this moment says, I agree with everything that you just posted. But you make it sound as if we should not change anything to the way the Romulan carrier production *as has been currently ruled*, which is listed as two medium carriers per turn, plus the SUP.

That means, the Romulans can build (by conversion) a NHB in place of a SPB, and then build another NHB (again, by conversion, probably from a FH) in place of the scheduled WH group, and then also build a SUP (by schedule or conversion), plus a SKB with that, and replace a NHB with a CNV or SUB once per year.

Do you see two NHB carriers plus a SUP per turn (3 full medium, very good carriers) as acceptable and reasonable?

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 03:35 pm: Edit

Since the K7, KR, KDR are not 'built' by the Romulans, there cannot be "substitutions" for K7V, KRV, or KDV -- only conversions from these hulls.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 03:58 pm: Edit

As to the WH, that was a legacy of the OLD medium carrier group counter system where 4WH was one counter. Since we updated the system years ago that all ships got individual counters, we might have forgotten to update the production restrictions on this unit since the only way back in the day was to produce the WH group counter.


===========

Pending ADB approval, I would propose that producing two WHs by any means during a turn be counted as one medium carrier under (515.24); if only one WH [2-5(2.5)/1-3(1)] is produced in a turn, then allow it to counted against the light carrier (SKB/SEB) production.

We just did did this with the Chickhawk PFT (2CH) which WAS an unbreakable group. So now if you build two CHs today, they still count one PFT, but if you build one, then it only counts as a light PFT.

FEDS RECOMMENDS

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 04:49 pm: Edit

Chuck yep I meant conversion of those Kestrals against those limits and stand corrected.

Kevin: I think I see the gap in the conversation and for this OOB thread. A limit to the total number of medium carriers seems needed to be spelled out IN ADDITION to the specified rules.

To answer your question. No, It would not seem fair or balanced to change what is already there to increase the numbers. I will point out part of your example is not actually allowed. What I mean is, nowhere do the rules allow a swap of a WH for any other medium carriers larger than a WH. Opening the door to a general medium carrier limit could unless a further specified restriction is placed.

By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 04:59 pm: Edit

The WH is the single ship not the 4WH.

The WH can be subbed for a WE or SK or converted from the BH.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 06:46 pm: Edit

Yes I could have said that better, to be more clear on my statement, nowhere in the rules does it allow a larger carrier (read as ship) to be subbed for a (BH based) WH.

Chuck I'd be wary opening the door on "well I only produced one WH on Turn X (light carrier) and another on Turn X+1 (as a light carrier) while using the Medium carrier slot for something better...oh and then I combined them over here into a Med carrier."

I think the point is that the 4WH group is a bad carrier and what players want to try is to take the medium carrier allowance and use it for a great carrier like a NHB or as Kevin points out an extra SUP.

(This should probably not happen except in some very non-historical games. The Roms are historically a hot mess with regards to politics/science and its reflected in their mixy fleet compositions from a history of scientific failures and poor decision making. Based upon some of the fun SFU reading materials.)

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 07:31 pm: Edit

Lawrence,

"To answer your question. No, It would not seem fair or balanced to change what is already there to increase the numbers. I will point out part of your example is not actually allowed. What I mean is, nowhere do the rules allow a swap of a WH for any other medium carriers larger than a WH. Opening the door to a general medium carrier limit could unless a further specified restriction is placed."

Yes, but that's my point. The new OOB (unposted online as yet) would simply be "two medium carriers", so it is totally legal to build two NHB per turn, plus the SUP.

Per Ryan Opel, May 21, 2:24 pm:

Maximum carrier production by any means is:
Two medium carriers per turn;
One light carrier per turn;
One Heavy Carrier per year replacing medium carrier;
One SUP per turn (Spring: sub for or convert from NH; Fall: sub for CON or convert from NH).
KR to KRV in Y170+, counting against the medium limit.
See (525.6) for Modular Dreadnaughts limits.

Six free fighter factors per turn; see (431.74) (Basic).
Twelve free factors per year; see (431.74), (431.744) and (442.6) (Advanced).

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, May 26, 2023 - 09:50 pm: Edit

Lar:

I'm not going to have any heartburn over two WHs produced in a year. This awkward group has limited effectiveness already as it eats up four command slots giving a low compot density. I can't even recall anyone building them after Y171.