I would say the JGP is not a base hull.

By Douglas Lampert (Dlampert) on Wednesday, June 29, 2022 - 10:52 pm: Edit

In the F&E SIT the JGP is listed as its own base hull. The fact that it can be converted from the CL doesn't necessarily mean it isn't a base hull, especially not for the Lyrans.

The SIT could be wrong, but I would expect it to govern till told otherwise.

By Daniel Glenn Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Thursday, June 30, 2022 - 10:57 pm: Edit

Ryan,

Base hull determines salvage. That's why even though command cruisers (and other leader variants) are variants of a specific class, they are also a base hull. The JGP gets more salvage than a CL, so it is listed as a base hull.

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Friday, July 01, 2022 - 07:43 am: Edit

Based on the current SITS, CCs are _not_ their own base hull type, even though they (mostly) have a different salvage value that the base hull type.

Fed CC - base hull = CA
Klingon D7C - base hull = D7
Kzinti CC - base hull = BC
Gorn CC - base hull = BC
Hydran LC, LM, LB - base hull = CA
Lyran CC - base hull = CA

However, the JGP is , according to the SITS, has its own base hull type, distinct from the CL.

By Daniel Glenn Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Friday, July 01, 2022 - 09:34 am: Edit

Hrmmmm

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Friday, July 01, 2022 - 10:18 am: Edit

For what it's worth, R11.61 in the Lyran MSSB indicates:

This ship is a variant of the Panther light cruiser (R11.5) but the changes were sufficiently extreme that it is considered a new class.

--Mike

By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Friday, July 01, 2022 - 09:59 pm: Edit

(553.0) TESTBED X-SHIPS

See (533.1) "Test-bed ships will be designated as such on an empire's SIT."

The Lyran X test-bed is FFX according the the TACOPS SIT.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, December 05, 2022 - 02:11 pm: Edit

I NEED THE STAFF ANSWER

In Tactical Operations the Klingon Battleships are shown with the symbol * for PPD, used by the ISC only. Should those actually be A, for SFG? Same issue with bases.

no more than one D5L per turn by any means. I assume that this is above and beyond the free D5L for every 5 D5s? Otherwise you could never get one D5L for every two D5s (and might still not be enough unless some D5s are converted - 9 D5s a turn means say 2 free and one paid for giving 6 D5 and 3 D5L, but 9 is not 10 so you don't quite get 2 free). Should it say by any means except the free conversions.

By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Monday, December 05, 2022 - 11:22 pm: Edit

In Tactical Operations the Klingon Battleships are shown with the symbol * for PPD, used by the ISC only. Should those actually be A, for SFG? Same issue with bases.

The counters are actually "blank circles" since the BB's and Bases can 0, 1, or 2 SFGs.

"(551.222) The F&E staff included white dots on Klingon battleship counters to reflect the SFGs (312.0). If you build a Klingon battleship without SFGs (or with only one), you could color in the unneeded dots (or dot) with a black marker."

Ryan

[SVC: I told you guys that was a BAD idea.]

By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Monday, December 05, 2022 - 11:28 pm: Edit

"no more than one D5L per turn by any means. I assume that this is above and beyond the free D5L for every 5 D5s? Otherwise you could never get one D5L for every two D5s (and might still not be enough unless some D5s are converted - 9 D5s a turn means say 2 free and one paid for giving 6 D5 and 3 D5L, but 9 is not 10 so you don't quite get 2 free). Should it say by any means except the free conversions."

I can't find this refenced in the rules.

FEAST

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, December 06, 2022 - 01:40 am: Edit

Ryan, I think that is on the TO SIT. The question was about it's contradiction with the rules.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, December 06, 2022 - 03:01 am: Edit

SVC:

Your assumption is correct; an empire may pay for the conversion or pay for the substitution of only one additional leader variant once per turn beyond the free substitutions under rule (551.12).

FEDS SENDS

=========

Rule for Reference:

---

Quote:

(551.12) FREE LEADER UPGRADES: Rule (303.5) effectively provides CWLs and DWLs at no cost. As these “invisible” leaders are no longer used, actually buying them (i.e., paying to upgrade a standard warship into a warship leader) would cost money and reduce the efficacy of the rule.

(551.121) To account for this, each empire keeps a running total of the war cruiser hulls built (including all variants except X-ships and NCAs), and every fifth war cruiser hull built could be taken as a CWL at no additional cost. You still have to pay for the CW, but not to upgrade it. An unused CWL slot could be used on the next turn, but if not, the free upgrade is lost.

(551.122) A similar running total is kept for war destroyers, and every fifth DW hull built (not including X-ships or HDWs) can be a DW upgraded to a DWL at no additional cost. You still have to pay for the DW, but not to upgrade it.

(551.123) There are some special cases.
The Kzintis keep four running totals (CL, DD, DW, CM).
The Gorns keep three running totals (DD, BD, HD).
The Hydrans keep three running totals (DD, DW, CW), and when they reach five DDs, they can pick any of the three leader types for the free upgrade.
The ISC does not have a CW but does count DDs and FFs as separate running totals with free upgrades.
The Vudar keep three running totals (CW, DW, FW)."

---

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Tuesday, December 06, 2022 - 09:59 pm: Edit

OK, the math says that the Klingons would get one free D5L on their first turn (of 9 production) and 2 free on turns 2-5 (45 D5s, 9 free D5Ls), once the D5W enters production, they get one D5L on turns 1 and 3 and 2 on turns 2, 4, & 5.

The Federation, producing 12 NCLs gains 2 CLCs on turns 1, 2 and 4 and 3 on turns 3 and 5 (60 NCLs, 12 CLCs) and once the NCA is in production, they gain 2 CLC on the first four turn and 3 on the fifth.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Monday, December 12, 2022 - 06:26 pm: Edit

Question regarding light PF tenders (551.4): these are available for construction prior to the (502.6) initial PF deployment for a given empire. For example, the Klingon FWY has a Year Available of Y177 while the Klingon’s PF deployment starts Y178F and they cannot start buying PFs for PFTs until Y179S.

As the light PF tender concept was to be the testbed for developing gunboat operations, having them available for building prior to F&E PF deployment makes sense - but that leaves them not able to have PFs purchased for them until the empire’s second turn of PF deployment.

Is the intention that they operate without PFs until that turn (basically allowing an empire to “pre-build” a DWY or two, with the assumption that the PFs themselves aren’t yet being deployed into combat situations even if the ship is available)? Or should (551.4) include a rule enabling the purchasing of PFs to the max of a half flotilla per DFY prior to the second turn of PF deployment?

Thanks!

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, December 13, 2022 - 02:23 pm: Edit

The earlier date is because they originally operated interceptors and the dates in the SITs will be corrected to reflect their PF service dates since F&E does not use interceptors. Sorry about the confusion.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, December 13, 2022 - 03:03 pm: Edit

Gotcha and no worries! Someone noted the discrepancy on the FB group and I figured I'd run it by here.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, February 24, 2023 - 01:03 pm: Edit

(634.12) CORRECTION: The rule states that there is a STARBASE over the WYN capital planet of Vanonia. SFB rule (R1.1C) states that the WYN do not have starbases; (R1.47) also says that sector bases were not used by the WYN. Rule (R1.2A) specifies that the WYN DO use battle stations. Unless overruled by ADB, the base over Vanonia is a BTS and in scenarios after the introduction of X-technology, the WYN BTS at Freeholm (the shipyard planet) is upgraded to a BTX per (523.413).

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Thursday, June 01, 2023 - 12:39 pm: Edit

The TacOPs scenario Eye which has been proposed for StratCon has some gaps to clear up before we play it at StratCon. SVC wrote he long wanted to create this scenario and I believe the players have wanted something like this.
Plus buying more counters cannot be bad, right? Scenario rules are usually play-tested (SVC has noted no reports were sent in). Most scenarios (due to the playtest/design) have details within them that are more specific than the general rules of the game.

While much of the set up will be reflective of the general war scenario, there are some nuances not mentioned in 632.0:

Lets get to it...

(632.4) FORCES AVAILABLE

REFERENCE RULE:
(632.42) FEDERATION: Every Federation ship is quintupled; that is, every Federation ship is joined by four identical ships. This does not include bases or ships on off-map survey but does include repair ships, FRDs, and prime teams. The Federation receives eight extra Reserve markers and can add one to any or all numbered fleets; any others go to the Home Fleet. Ships are released from the mothball reserve (which was quintupled) at triple the normal rate. Pods limits are quintupled.

There are a few questions (many are YES/NO or short answers) so if you please..

SHIPS: Normal Ships of the line x5. Done.

Aux Ships: Are these Normal Ships? x5 for these? What restrictions if any should exist?

Monitors: Are these Normal Ships? x5 for these?

The Second Fleet: Specifics of the OOB have ships listed as SURVEY DUTY (so by rule not x5). So to be clear those that are shown in 2901 (on map) not listed for SURVEY DUTY are x5, right?

Mobile Bases: The rule says bases. It seems to indicate those shown on the map are not x5 (rightly so). MB however are not spelled out. What about MBs listed on the OOB (stored)?

Repair Ships: Clearly addressed x5. Done.

FRDS: Clearly addressed x5. Done.

Prime Teams: PT are spelled out as x5. Since the Feds start with none is this referring to the PT Limit? Is the PT rule for activation modified to receive x5 or the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)?

RESERVES: +8 (limited to plus one to each numbered fleet, rest in Home). Clearly addressed. Done.

Mothballs: Clearly addressed x5. Also addresses release schedule (which is actually 632.53) but Done.

PODS: Pods are x5, right? It is spelled out that LIMITS are clearly x5.

OTHER PERSONNEL & UNITS:
Prime Team LIMITS and PRODUCTION: The maximum number of Prime Teams (x5 would be 75) and their production rate (x3 or x4 per turn) are assumed but not mentioned. Assuming the inclusion of the LDR and Vudar then the coalition could have a maximum of 89 Prime Teams vs the current Federation 15 (x5 = 75). Is this correct?

ADM: Scenario is silent. Assume these are x5 for those found listed on the OOB? Is the ADM rule for activation modified to receive x5 or at the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)? Limits also increased x5?

MMG: Scenario is silent. Assume these are x5 for those found listed on the OOB? Is the MMG rule for activation modified to receive x5 or at the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)? Limits also increased x5?

DIP: Scenario is silent. Assume these are x5 for those found listed on the OOB? Is the DIP rule for activation modified to receive x5 or at the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)? Activation Costs, would these change? (Note there is really no place to send the DIPLOMATS as there are no allies in this game so x5 prob unnecessary, right??)

ENG: Scenario is silent. Assume these are x5 for those found listed on the OOB? Is the ENG rule for activation modified to receive x5 or at the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)? Limits also increased x5?

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Thursday, June 01, 2023 - 12:48 pm: Edit

One for (632.53)

FED FORCES THAT WILL BECOME AVAILABLE DURING THE SCENARIO
F14 & F15 Scenario is silent. Note: The CVA is slightly early in this scenario (see that note below) should these become available with the CVA (same time?). When they are available do we follow the rule for activation or is it modified to receive x5 or the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)?

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Thursday, June 01, 2023 - 12:51 pm: Edit

(632.52) COALITION SCHEDULE:

Lyrans: Far Stars Fleet normally is released and arrives Strat Movement of T2. Given this scenario is an "all in" on attacking the Federation, should it be released earlier?

Kzinti: Barony Fleet normally is released and arrives Strat Movement of T2. Given this scenario is an "all in" on attacking the Federation, should it be released earlier?

Tholians: Can only move two hexes away from their territory with exception of an Expeditionary fleet. Should all their ships be allowed unlimited range for this scenario?

ISC: For the ISC order of battle/production (713) dated 8 March 2021, available via the Warbook Annex, contains “(713.211) Wartime Schedule: Y168S: CL, DD, 2xFF” which in effect is turn zero (T0) production.
Does the ISC get this production at no cost as part of setting up the game for turn 1 (Y168F)?
Does the ISC get to assign this T0 production to the fleet of its choice?

Hydrans: Old Colonies Squadron normally is released when Hydran capital is attacked or starbase is destroyed. Given this scenario is an "all in" on attacking the Federation, should it be released on Turn 2 like the Klingon IWR?

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Thursday, June 01, 2023 - 12:55 pm: Edit

(632.53) FEDERATION SCHEDULE: (These could be simple decisions but might need a bit more.)

RAID POOL: The rules are silent on the size of the federation raid pool, and whether or not that is increased in size.
My recommendation would be at a minimum give them the expanded re-pool from the beginning, but a case could be made for it to be x2, x3, x4, or even x5 the size of it. Thoughts?

DEPOT: The rules are silent on the number of the Fed Depot Level Repair Tracks, and whether or not those are also increased in number.
No recommendation here, but a case could be made for it to be x2, x3, x4, or even x5 the size of it. Thoughts?

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Thursday, June 01, 2023 - 01:02 pm: Edit

Addresses Qs for BOTH (632.52 and 632.53)

ACTIVATION of DN: Typically for federation early war, the early DN is an activation, not a production cost. This should probably be confirmed and spelled out in the rule for production. NOTE: The coalition in this scenario also have activation costs for the early DNs, specifically the Hydran PAL under (442.51) in the scenario is addressed to use activation early cost, same for all? Feds get x5 of their DN (10 AF model) at the discounted rate, right?

BATTLESHIPS: Battleships are part of the normal general war rules as well as the federation reaction rule mentioned in the scenario.

After reading both Federation Reaction (318.3) and Battleship production rules again, The Federation may start production of Battleships on Turn 5 (Fall of Y170). The first Federation battleship(s) is/are produced via direct build 36+ fighters over 4 turns, subsequent battleships are produced via die roll method from my understand of the wording of (318.31). The Klingons could start battleship production on Turn 2 (Spring of Y169) via die roll based on the assumptions above. Ruling for other empires would be needed as (436.4) would create a conflict with (318.3) and conceivably put the Federation at a disadvantage. The Fed BB production is at the increased rate x3 (or x4), right?

MINOR SHIPYARDS: Would minor shipyards, or minor conversion facilities have a modified earlier availability date being this is an "all-in" scenario?
Would the Fed total limit of MSY be increased, if so would it match the level pf production x3 (or x4 w/ISC)?

By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Thursday, June 01, 2023 - 08:35 pm: Edit

There are a few questions (many are YES/NO or short answers) so if you please..

Aux Ships: Are these Normal Ships? x5 for these? What restrictions if any should exist?

> These are ships so x5 and production per turn also boosted. FEAST

Monitors: Are these Normal Ships? x5 for these?

> Normal ships, x5, same deployment restrictions as listed. FEAST

The Second Fleet: Specifics of the OOB have ships listed as SURVEY DUTY (so by rule not x5). So to be clear those that are shown in 2901 (on map) not listed for SURVEY DUTY are x5, right?

> I would would say no for CVL/COV. They were/are survey ships and have survey slots available. They are pulled off survey duty at the start of the game. FEAST

Mobile Bases: The rule says bases. It seems to indicate those shown on the map are not x5 (rightly so). MB however are not spelled out. What about MBs listed on the OOB (stored)?

> I would say not increased. Production limits would be increased. FEAST

Prime Teams: PT are spelled out as x5. Since the Feds start with none is this referring to the PT Limit? Is the PT rule for activation modified to receive x5 or the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)?

> I would say limit increased and production rate increased. FEAST

PODS: Pods are x5, right? It is spelled out that LIMITS are clearly x5.

> Correct. FEAST

OTHER PERSONNEL & UNITS:
Prime Team LIMITS and PRODUCTION: The maximum number of Prime Teams (x5 would be 75) and their production rate (x3 or x4 per turn) are assumed but not mentioned. Assuming the inclusion of the LDR and Vudar then the coalition could have a maximum of 89 Prime Teams vs the current Federation 15 (x5 = 75). Is this correct?

> I think this is correct. FEAST

DIP: Scenario is silent. Assume these are x5 for those found listed on the OOB? Is the DIP rule for activation modified to receive x5 or at the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)? Activation Costs, would these change? (Note there is really no place to send the DIPLOMATS as there are no allies in this game so x5 prob unnecessary, right??)

> They'd be useful in annexation and recovery of planets. FEAST

ENG: Scenario is silent. Assume these are x5 for those found listed on the OOB? Is the ENG rule for activation modified to receive x5 or at the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)? Limits also increased x5?

> That's a good question. 10 Eng to start is a LOT of engineers. Ask FEAR's opinion.

By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Thursday, June 01, 2023 - 08:39 pm: Edit

F14 & F15 Scenario is silent. Note: The CVA is slightly early in this scenario (see that note below) should these become available with the CVA (same time?). When they are available do we follow the rule for activation or is it modified to receive x5 or the production rate of x3 (x4 with the ISC involved)?

> Are you asking about the independent F-14/F15s? I would deploy them at the normal YIS. FEAST

By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Thursday, June 01, 2023 - 08:58 pm: Edit

Lyrans: Far Stars Fleet normally is released and arrives Strat Movement of T2. Given this scenario is an "all in" on attacking the Federation, should it be released earlier?

> I would say no. Takes time to get everyone together. FEAST

Kzinti: Barony Fleet normally is released and arrives Strat Movement of T2. Given this scenario is an "all in" on attacking the Federation, should it be released earlier?

> I would say no. Takes time to get everyone together. FEAST

Tholians: Can only move two hexes away from their territory with exception of an Expeditionary fleet. Should all their ships be allowed unlimited range for this scenario?

> I would say no. Tholians are still rather standoffish. FEAST

ISC: For the ISC order of battle/production (713) dated 8 March 2021, available via the Warbook Annex, contains “(713.211) Wartime Schedule: Y168S: CL, DD, 2xFF” which in effect is turn zero (T0) production.
Does the ISC get this production at no cost as part of setting up the game for turn 1 (Y168F)?
Does the ISC get to assign this T0 production to the fleet of its choice?

> Good question. I would say yes. FEAST

Hydrans: Old Colonies Squadron normally is released when Hydran capital is attacked or starbase is destroyed. Given this scenario is an "all in" on attacking the Federation, should it be released on Turn 2 like the Klingon IWR?

> Allow release on T2. FEAST