Turtle,

---

Quote:

No. Many different Federation carriers may be placed in the CVBG box but are considered to be "mainline" carriers and do not have a CVBG designation. Examples include but are not limited to the Federation CVL, NVA, NVH, and FFV.

---

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Saturday, April 08, 2023 - 02:38 pm: Edit

Next question - How do people keep track of which slot a unit came out of for the formation bonus slot? As an example, if I put my flagship into the formation bonus slot, how do you know it came out of the flagship slot or a different slot? Do people put a upside down counter on the slot where the unit came out of?

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, April 08, 2023 - 03:50 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

(502.921) These included two carriers, each with the normal number of escorts. (This could include single-ship carriers with newly assigned escorts. All ships in a CVBG must be Federation.) No more than one of these carriers could be a CVA or SCS. Once a CVBG is formed, it cannot be disbanded until the end of the Combat Phase.

---

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, April 08, 2023 - 03:55 pm: Edit

Second Question depends on the platform you are using. The Cyberboard Battle Force Charts have a specific box marked CVBG for the ship that doesn't count against the command rating.

VASL also has a spot on the battle force chart marked CVBG for the ship that doesn't count against the command rating.

I'm not sure where my DF&E93 battle force charts are to look at them. So for a FTF game that may be problematic at the moment.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Saturday, April 08, 2023 - 06:30 pm: Edit

The Advanced Ops Battle Force chart does have a spot for the CVBG ship.

Here is the link

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Sunday, April 09, 2023 - 03:24 pm: Edit

Thanks Turtle, so there is not a listing or note in the SIT for a CVGB, but this is a "created unit" for the purposes of the CVGB slot on the battle force chart.

I like the Advanced Ops Battle Force chart as it shows the rule numbers that apply to a slot. I have been using this to help set a flag for each unit as to which slot it can go into.

From your example: SCS+ACS+NAC+NAC+DWA+DWA+FFE,
how many ships can be placed on the battle line ship slots? Is it 10 or is it 10 - 6 = 4?

In "(502.923) A CVBG counts as one ship less than the number of ships it contains for purposes of Battle Force command and for Reserve Movement." I am not sure what is meant by "for purposes of Battle Force command" is this for the command rating of this unit or when determining the flag ship.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, April 10, 2023 - 06:37 am: Edit

For SCS+ACS+NAC+NAC+DWA+DWA+FFE, it can be 2 different results.

1. SCS is the Flagship with a command rating of 10, the ACS+NAC+NAC+DWA+DWA+FFE take a total of 5 of the 10 slots available to the SCS to command, leaving you 5 slots available. NOTE an Admiral will add 1 more ship to the battle force as will the Free Scout.

2 If a ship other than the SCS(CR10) or ACS (CR9) ship is chosen as the flagship then the SCS+ACS+NAC+NAC+DWA+DWA+FFE count as 6 ships against the Command Rating of that flagship leaving CR-6 slots available for it to command. NOTE an Admiral will add 1 more ship to battle force as well as the Free Scout.

By Alan De Salvio (Alandwork) on Monday, April 10, 2023 - 05:35 pm: Edit

The last IDS on any side of a base should be explicitly addressed. As the word 'must' is currently in 302.615, both decision paths are supported. I vote for clarifying that the full amount to score the voluntary IDS amount must be scored, or plus points are carried over. This is a common situation in the first 12 or so years of the General War since so much BTS busting happens, and typically the busting player has to use minimum force for each BTS. I would further argue (and reiterate in the rule) that these little gem F&E battles are always accompanied by "we should play this out in SFB." Nah - base battles are man-makers in SFB. Respect the Phaser-IV.

By Jamey Johnston (Totino) on Monday, April 10, 2023 - 10:51 pm: Edit

Thomas has the right of it, Ken. TL;DR: You build your battle force just like you would otherwise, but if you are Fed in Y181 and later (Turn 26?) and you have two carriers with all their escorts present you get an extra ship.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Monday, April 10, 2023 - 11:57 pm: Edit

For option 2 "2 If a ship other than the SCS(CR10) or ACS (CR9) ship is chosen as the flagship then the SCS+ACS+NAC+NAC+DWA+DWA+FFE count as 6 ships against the Command Rating of that flagship leaving CR-6 slots available for it to command. NOTE an Admiral will add 1 more ship to battle force as well as the Free Scout."

If the other ship has a command rating of 10, and the carrier group counts as 6, wouldn't this leave 4 ships for the battle line? Just making sure I understand because the 6 carrier group ships plus "leaving CR-6" would be 12 ships.

By Kosta Michalopoulos (Kosmic) on Tuesday, April 11, 2023 - 12:36 am: Edit

Ken, I think that "CR-6" is meant to be read as "command rating of flagship, minus six." So, with a CR10 flagship, you would have room for four additional ships. With an admiral or command point, you could add another one above that.

By Jamey Johnston (Totino) on Tuesday, April 11, 2023 - 12:40 am: Edit

Ken,

Right, if the command ship is CR 10, "CR-6" becomes 4. In that case (as with option 1), you end up with 12 ships total, before Admiral/Free Scout. As I mentioned in my TL;DR, no matter which method you use to form it, you are getting 1 additional ship on the battle line with a CVBG, in addition to the extra DD protection for the carriers.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Tuesday, April 11, 2023 - 05:16 am: Edit

Ken CR-6 is Command Rating of said flagship -6 for the CVBG. Plus the possibility of ships being added via an Admiral and/or Free Scout.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, April 11, 2023 - 06:23 am: Edit

It's not correct to say the command rating of the flagship is reduced. it is fixed. Phrasing it that way is potentially confusing.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Friday, April 14, 2023 - 09:54 pm: Edit

Q. Does this mean only the F5W choice of MSY for the Klingons will be able to produce a FF OR can the F5L choice (not a DW) also make this downward substitution?

I'd interpret this as meaning any MSY from the DW column (which may be a genuine DW or something close to it depending on the empire) can step down and make something from the FF column instead.

So to address your example then, a Klingon MSY building either F5W or F5L could step down and build either E4 or F5 instead.

--Mike

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Saturday, April 15, 2023 - 01:00 pm: Edit

Yeah but thats the thing...it doesnt say column. Therefore the question, which would lead to a slight change in the rule clarifying intent.

If so it would say smeting like Any MSY in the DW SY column can produce a FF (or similar)

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Saturday, April 15, 2023 - 06:13 pm: Edit

If it can build an F5L, doesn't that automatically mean the F5L can downsub to an F5 or E4?

(Sorry, don't have the rules in front of me.)

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Saturday, April 15, 2023 - 08:45 pm: Edit

(450.121) Larger ships, NCAs, auxiliaries, and special units (FRDs, SAFs), non-“war” ships (other than frigates, police ships, Lyran DDs in CW yards, Gorn DDs in BDD yards, and the Romulan BH) cannot be produced in minor shipyards. See (450.19). For example, it is specifically prohibited to build DDs that are not DWs in a DW shipyard. (Very few DDs are actually DWs. The Tholian DD is one example. DWs have a reduced cost, usually paying four EPs for a ship with six combat factors.)

Doesn't this suggest that everything in the DW column either is or is considered to be a DW?

--Mike

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Thursday, May 18, 2023 - 02:36 am: Edit

"
By Daniel Glenn Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Wednesday, May 17, 2023 - 05:41 pm: Edit

Q540.23 Can diplomatic income received under (540.23) be transferred to another empire while you are still at peace? Both (540.22) and (540.23) allow a currently neutral empire to spend their diplomatic income under these rules at the owner's discretion, but we have a question about whether that would include transferring the funds, or possibly using those points to trade with the WYN cluster. Neither are specifically spending, but are certainly options an empire (or its diplomatic corps) might consider."

To add to what Richard said - the answer is no.

There is no enabling rule to allow transfer of Ep's prior to be allied, outside of specific rules (the Romulan KC9 payment for example).

On a practical basis - outside of a ship (or the N Klingon ships) to carry Diplomats, no ships are released - and ships are interned if they enter another empire.

So there is no way to get the Ep's to a future Allie.

By Patrick Sledge (Decius) on Thursday, May 18, 2023 - 08:13 am: Edit

---

Quote:

On a practical basis - outside of a ship (or the N Klingon ships) to carry Diplomats, no ships are released - and ships are interned if they enter another empire.

So there is no way to get the Ep's to a future Allie.

---

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, May 18, 2023 - 02:59 pm: Edit

FEDS answered this in Q&A.

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Wednesday, June 07, 2023 - 09:47 pm: Edit

My word search found this question asked back in 2010 but could not find an answer.

For Lyran option 653.11L (Early CVs), does this include early productions of escorts as well? Or are only the carriers available early, and ad-hoc escorts have to be used until Y171?

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Thursday, June 29, 2023 - 03:06 pm: Edit

Hi. Just following up on the question above. For our game in progress, we went ahead and included early production of escorts, but would like confirmation that this was correct.

In addition, I have been conducting a review of my rulebook and have some clarifying questions in addition to the Lyran escort question.

1) Small scale combat. Rule 310.11 says that fighters are considered to be 1-1, and PFs are 2-2. Rule 310.141 says that a "unit" consists of 1-6 fighter or PF factors. For the purposes of the "unit" defense factor comparison in 310.14, is a "unit" of six fighters considered a defense factor of 1 or 6?

2) Escort substitution under 431.52 as applied in the base game without any expansions. I found a Q&A on the BBS saying that an F5E is an allowable substitution under this rule. Is this true in the base game? The rule describes this as a "frigate escort" exception, and technically the F5 base hull is a DD. However, the F5 base hull only costs three points so it would meet the three points or less requirement, even if not technically a frigate. The context of the Q&A raised the possibility that the answer would be different in the base game vs. an expansion.

Thanks in advance!

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Thursday, June 29, 2023 - 09:05 pm: Edit

My reading of question 1?

A Unit of fighters can have any defense factor between 1 and 6, inclusive, dependant on the number of factors present. It is not fixed, but so long as there are no more than 6 fighter factors, it only counts as a single unit. If you had 7 fighter factors, you would have 2 units, with defense factors of 6 and 1.

By Warren Mathews (Turtle) on Friday, June 30, 2023 - 06:06 am: Edit

1) A unit of fighters consists of 1 to 6 fighter factors inclusive or 1 to 8 heavy fighter factors inclusive under (530.11). Don't forget the Federation exception under (302.352) which also includes F-111s (527.0) and A-20s (532.0).

2) F5s may be built at Klingon starbases so F5Es may be substituted at Klingon starbases for F5s there as (431.501) allows the F5 to be built at a starbase because the base F5 hull is exactly 3 EPs. Until Y178 when 4 EP base hull war destroyers may be built at starbases in lieu of 3 point or less frigates under (442.53). Allowing DWEs to be substituted for DWs at that point in time.