(3R.0) RAIDS INTO OFF-MAP AREAS
Within the limits of the following rules, it is possible to send ships into enemy off-map areas to attack various targets there. These rules form an exception to many other rules, not least (207.21) prohibiting ships from entering an enemy off-map area.

(3R.1) STEP 1: ASSEMBLING A RAIDING FORCE
The attacking player must designate a single stack of ships (all within the same hex) as the Raiding Force. (This could be done at a point within Operational Movement when the force has been assembled, but using up movement points before launching the raid reduces the chances of its success.) The Raiding Force can include any number of ships, but cannot include “slow” units (e.g., monitors, SAFs, convoys, etc.). Each raid costs 3EP.
(3R.11) No more than one Raiding Force per “alliance” can be sent into any given off-map area. (Note that two forces could conduct such raids only in a non-historical free campaign.)
(3R.12) The Raiding Force is limited in size. It can include the flagship, whatever the flagship can control, plus a free scout, three drone bombardment ships, and (if used) a command point ship. It can also include three more ships above the command limits.

(3R.2) STEP 2: DECLARING AN OBJECTIVE
The attacking player then declares the objective of the raid. This must be one of the following:
1. Any enemy ship in the off-map area, including FRDs, convoys, bases, etc; SRs cannot be picked. [Note, if you are just trying to destroy a bunch of ships, pick any ship as the objective.]
2. Any enemy planet or base in the off-map area including the enemy “off-map capital”. See special rule on this below.
3. The accumulated total of enemy “survey points”.

(3R.3) STEP 3: LAUNCH THE RAID
The Raiding Force moves off of the map into the enemy off-map area by Operational Movement. Note how many movement points the Raiding Force has left after entering the off-map area; this will be the lowest number for any of the units in the Raiding Force. (The Raiding Force must also be in supply, so if the nearest supply node is farther from the map edge than the point the Raiding Foce began moving from, the Raiding Force must count its expending movement points from that Node.)
On-Map forces of the Defending player may react into the Off-Map area if they are adjacent to it, or can reach it by Reserve Movement. Such forces are then added to the Off-Map force pool, one-third of which (3R.5) could immediately oppose the raid.
Enemy units in the Off-Map area do not block retreats there. Units can retrograde out of the Off-Map area.

(3R.4) STEP 4: DETERMINE IF OBJECTIVE WAS REACHED
The Raiding player rolls one die. If the result is a 6 (or more) the objective was reached; if it was 1-5, the objective was not reached. This die-roll is subject to numerous modifiers:
Each remaining movement point in the Raiding Force = +1
Objective is a planet or base = –2
Objective is off-map capital planet = –3
Objective is survey points total = –4
Objective is an uncrippled warship = –3
Objective is a convoy or FRD or crippled ship = –1
Each previous raid on that specific target = +1
If the objective was reached, it must be included in the defending battle force (subject to approach battles). If the objective was not reached, it cannot be included in the Defending Battle Force.

(3R.5) STEP 5: DEFENDER REACTION
The Defending player divides all of his warships (other than the objective or SRs) into three equal groups. This division must be made by class (e.g., three DWs, one goes to each force). Remaining ships are then divided by combat power (e.g., largest ship to Group 1, second largest to Group 2, third largest to Group 3, then start over). Carrier Groups are temporarily broken down into their constituent ships, but as each class is divided between the groups, the owning/defending player must make every effort to send all ships of the original carrier group to the same group. The Defending player then rolls a die to determine which of the three groups are included in the initial forces pool. A die roll of 1-2 indicates the first force, 3-4 the second, and 5-6 the third. The Defending player then designates one of the other groups as “the near group” and the other as “the far group” (including all SRs).

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 02:13 pm: Edit

What happens after you assign groups and roll to see which one is the initial force?

By Clell Flint (Clell) on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 04:25 pm: Edit

Suggested correction
(3R.1) ... The Raiding Force can include any number of ships, but cannot ...
Should be changed to:
... The Raiding Force can include as many ships as allowed by (3R.12), but cannot ...

{edited for spelling}

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 04:18 am: Edit

The problem with this is that the raiding player could "pin" 30+ ships off-map by leaving a fleet next to an off-map area in open space. Leaving fewer ships off-map left the defender to some nasty consequences due to the 3-way split enforced on the defender.
Having pinned 30 ships off-map with his 12 or so fleet, the attacker can then eliminate on-map assets of the defender much easier. (imagine trying to defend the hydran capital with 30 fewer ships while the coalition is attacking you with only 10 fewer ships).

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 05:32 am: Edit

The chances of successfully finding the target that to leave 30+ ships to defend aganst it is silly.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 05:32 am: Edit

The chances of successfully finding the target are so small that to leave 30+ ships to defend aganst it is silly.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 08:22 am: Edit

C fant

You call 66% a small chance?

Suppose you leave 15 ships behind. And the coalition has a crack 14 ship fleet adjacent to to your off map (they can easily spare ships ona 1:1 basis). They go for your off map SB or major planet (before it becomes your capital).

modifiers +5 (unused MPs) -2 base/planet.

= 66% chance of find (rises on subsequent attempts)

That planet/base is devastated/destroyed, as you only had 5 ships defending it. Worse, the Coalition got it cheap. Still worse, the Coalition can target for redevastation easily later as it has no defences.

By the way, I note that one can use no less than 19 ships on an off-map raid (20 if using a command point). That can be an ugly bunch.

By Tony Barnes (Tonyb) on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 12:36 pm: Edit

DAS,
If the Coalition leaves 14 crack ships adjacent to the Hydran offmap, the Hydrans gladly jump them with 8000 fighters.

They can also make sure to have ships in hexes those 14 ships are likely to retreat to and generate more battle hexes.

By MikeMascitti (Lokiwormtongue) on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 09:39 pm: Edit

first of all let’s realize one thing, this rule is immensely pro-Coalition, it will only be used against the Hydrans and Kzinti…these off-map areas are no longer safe…I don’t have a problem with this as long as its balanced with something else

second I don’t understand why the defender has to split up his forces into three groups… I’m sorry, I really don’t grasp this whole concept about the defender being caught unawares on HIS home turf, shouldnt he have the advntage of early warning stations/sensors etc? I would think that the defender would have ample warning and time to prepare his defenses…it’s the attacker thats venturing into unknown areas and could get blasted

why doesn’t the defender get a chance to intercept the raid before it reaches a target…better yet why can’t the defender simply choose where (planet or base) he places his fleet instead of splitting it into 3 parts? he gets to place his ships wherever he want on-map

third perhaps off-map areas shouldve been better prepared knowing that they now can be attacked, how about addding a monitor or two off-map, maybe some aux-scouts or carriers that are restricted to off map? why are there no BATS off-map?

finally why wouldn’t FRDs or crippled ships be allowed to hide with a base-planet just like with standard raids?

By David Lang (Dlang) on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 01:40 am: Edit

it's just a little harder as the supply point would need to be moved adjacent to the offmap area.

however with repeated raids it gets easier. after a couple attacks it gets dangerously likly to be able to hit the offmap shipyard.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 03:49 am: Edit

Tony

You forget. The Coalition have fighters as well - and if they have 18 in a fleet, are happy to trade dirdammed frigates and fighters for a round or two - attritting the hydran fleet. And the major problem is not when the Hydrans have been forced off-map, it's when they are *also* trying to defend thier capital.

Mike

I don't understand the three groups thing either. I guess it was a trade off - there is no logical reason why the coalition could not throw 100-ships into the off-map area. So, in return for the coalition not doing this, the alliance get a nasty little disadvantage.

Assuming the ship numbers and reaction rules stay the same..
My inclination here would be to make it almost impossible to get to a (base) target for several turns (e.g. increase the modifiers to about -7 to -10) and not charge so much for off-map raids (? reduce to 1 or no EPs). That way, it will be a number of turns (5-6) before the alliance really has to worry about off-map defence. If the coalition still has not captured the capital by then, the alliance may have enough ships to defend both capital and off-map. Also, the coalition is spending a major effort to keep the alliance bottled up that long.
Another thing is that the +1 modifier will only accumulate for one target. So, the alliance should be allowed a choice - either allocate ships to a specific target, or play the three-way split. If they allocate any ships to a specific target, those ships cannot be included in the 3-way.

If the Alliance has lost the capital in that time while the +1 modifier builds up, the fleet will retreat off-map, whereupon there should be a strong enough defence there (unless the Alliance has been stupid and let their fleet get blown up, in which case they deserve to lose the off-map area).

By Ahmad Abdel-Hameed (Madarab) on Friday, September 24, 2004 - 03:26 pm: Edit

Should this rule include a section allowing the defending player to "excuse" any ships in reserve groups at his choice? Should it allow reserve groups to "move" to the battles formed by this procedure?

By Thanasis Kinias (Tkinias) on Saturday, September 25, 2004 - 04:26 pm: Edit

IIRC this rule was written before there was such a thing as on-map raids in F&E. Might it be appropriate simply to use a variant of the normal raiding rule (or `special' raids) instead? The target hex would be the off-map area, reached by operational movement as for any other raid.

We just need a way to determine what of the defending ships are considered in the target hex for defending purposes. Province disruption, police ships, etc., should work as normal (although maybe there's only a 50/50 chance of a police ship showing up, since they're much more dispersed out there).

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 01:54 pm: Edit

Off map areas are to be divided into two regions, "near" and "far".

things in the "near" region (including all printed-on-map bases and off map planets) can be raided and can be (assuming they can move at all) be moved back onto the map.

Things is the "far" region (including all working survey ships) cannot be raided and cannot move onto the map.

Units can be moved from near to far or far to near during operational movement, taking their entire movement allowance.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 02:07 pm: Edit

At the risk of being granted booth time...

So are the Lyran Far Stars in the near or far regions?

I go get my booth jammies.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 02:10 pm: Edit

Both.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 03:27 pm: Edit

Man, one "O" from trouble!

By Ahmad Abdel-Hameed (Madarab) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 07:24 pm: Edit

Save anti-matter, agonize with a friend!

Can ships (and FRDs) other than survey ships voluntarily go into the far zone?

I think that I like the concept, but if the off-map areas aren't "dangerous and uncharted", why aren't we seeing more large-scale incursions into them?

I think that I'd like to propose that off-map raids have a certain chance of disaster to them, including complete annihilation. To counter that, when they pursue fixed targets they get not only a cumulatively greater chance of success (both avoiding disaster and locating their target) but can start including more ships towards that mission.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 07:38 pm: Edit

You can put your FRDs in the far zone but crippled ships will lose two turns reaching them and coming back.

They are dangerous and uncharted (by the enemy) which is why you don't see more incursions than the rule allows.

By Craig Tenhoff (Cktenhoff) on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 12:00 am: Edit

SVC, should we get Chuck to break the current Off-Map Areas into Near and Far Zones on the Large Map?

Could we look into overlays or something to break up the Zones on the Existing Maps?

By Craig Tenhoff (Cktenhoff) on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 12:09 am: Edit

(3R.12) Should this be modified to include the extra ships allowed by Admirals and MMG? C. Tenhoff 9-27-04

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 12:18 am: Edit

I wouldn't do anything to the map based on a draft of a rule that might never be printed.

The whole rule needs a major rewrite based on everything that has happened since CL19, but it won't be done today.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 02:41 pm: Edit

We gotta call this something other than "raid" as we have the 314/320 raids now which are totally different.

By Thanasis Kinias (Tkinias) on Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 02:45 pm: Edit

SVC: Incursion?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 02:51 pm: Edit

A bit of philosophy. The off map area is defined as being....

1. sparse of infrastructure, meaning that the owner can't park everything in one place and create a huge defense.

2. Virtually unknown to the enemy, who has to bumble around to find things like planets, FRD parks, crippled CVAs, and the like.

Based on this, I would propose as follows.

Each off map area has seven sub-areas.

One of these is the "survey zone" which is where the SRs hang out. This is safe from off map attacks but harder to reach (takes a turn of movement).

The other six are areas of what I called the "near off map zone" a few days ago.

All pre-game planets and bases (the ones published on the map) are assigned to one of these six areas, one per area. (See point 1, the lack of infrastructure means you have to spread out the assets). Any colonies or for that matter FDUs you build in the off map have to be in one of the six areas and have to be in the area with the least stuff. If the Hydrans put their three planets in areas 1, 2, 3 and their starbase in 4, they have to put their first colony in 5.

The enemy "off map attack" rolls a die to see which one of the six areas it finds. Once it finds that one, it knows of all immovable things in it and can raid it again. So let's say I raid the Hydrans and roll a die and get a 4. I now know that 4 has the starbase. If I want to attack the starbase I can pick 4. If I don't want to fight the starbase I can re-roll anything that comes up 4.

Off map ships not in the survey zone can be assigned to any of the six areas (when a raid comes). So you could park your whole fleet with the starbase so that if I dumb luck into it the battle is going to hurt, or you could park it all in sector 6 and spring a trap. Or spread it out.