Federation Commander Forum Index Federation Commander
A NEW fast paced board game of starship combat!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Question on Capturing Ships

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Rules Questions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1947
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 10:18 am    Post subject: Question on Capturing Ships Reply with quote

I understand the mechanism for capturing ships with Marines. What I don't understand is how you keep the ship captured.

Rule (5F2c) says, "To actually capture an enemy ship, you eliminate all defending Marines and then score an additional number of casualty points equal to the number of control systems (5A) on the ship (3E2). You can then withdraw any Boarding Parties which exceed the original number of control boxes. (italics mine)

I assume the boarding parties which you need to leave behind equal to the number of control boxes are a sort of 'skeleton crew' - but of course it could be that I have only one surviving boarding party if it has been a particularly stiff fight. Now, if I withdraw Boarding Parties (or there are insufficient survivors from my boarding parties) so that the ship does not now contain a number of my boarding parties equal to the number of control boxes, what happens? Does the ship remain captured by me, does it revert to its original owner, or does it become uncontrolled?

The reason I am asking this is because I am designing a convoy raid scenario in which the players may need to 're-use' some of the Marines that they have already beamed over to capture ships. However I guess this could also apply in any scenario.

I hope the question is clear from all this. I suppose it's three questions really: how many Marines do we need to leave aboard, what happens if we don't, and what about when there are only few survivors?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Bolo_MK_XL
Commander


Joined: 16 Jan 2007
Posts: 785
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I suppose it's three questions really: how many Marines do we need to leave aboard, what happens if we don't, and what about when there are only few survivors?


How many depends on ship class: (quick glance at ssds)
DD/FF: 4
CL/NCL: 5
CA: 6
CC/DN: 8

Considering the Combat Table for Marines, if you don't have a large force, it's gonna take many turns to capture the ship, probably going past end of scenario/battle (only matter if your force withdrawals)

Would worry more about your opponent sending boarding parties over to recapture it, since the only thing you can do with the ship is withdraw,
like regular crew as long as you have one control box (boarding party), you would have control of movement (including turning)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3471
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am asking. After thinking about it, I think I have a good answer, but I want to get it confirmed first, so as to keep confusion down.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1947
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 6:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike, just wondering if you've been given an answer yet, please? Smile
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3471
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, I haven't. Mongoose has been monopolizing Steve's time, and he just can't get to it right now.

The base problem is that there is a requirement in the rule, but there is no penalty. There are just so many ways to go with the "missing" penalty, that, really, I don't know which works best.

What I recommended is that if an otherwise captured ship does not have sufficient numbers of marine units present at the start of a (1E3c) Marine Phase, then the ship reverts to its original owner. That means if you capture a ship, but have insufficient boarding parties present, you have a full turn to increase the number or get the survivors off the ship. This seemed the best compromise I could see and seemed to best convey the intent of the rule. (Namely, there is a large, 'invisible' crew still present on a captured ship. You need sufficient marines present to keep them under control. Have too few, and they reassert control.)
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1947
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for that, Mike. I'll run with that for now Smile
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Klingon of Gor
Lieutenant SG


Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 130

PostPosted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 2:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

By coincidence this answer was helpful to me as well, since I happen to be playing around with some ideas for a commerce raiding campaign. It is useful to know exactly what the requirements are for a prize crew if you're trying to get the prize home. Thanks
_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away" - Philip K Dick
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1947
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ping, please Wink
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3471
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My answer above is correct. I received confirmation today.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1947
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Mike, that's cool.

Can I post a follow-on from this, then: say I capture a Small Freighter (which has two control boxes at the start of the scenario) and leave my occupying force of two Marine units aboard. The ship is controlled by me. Later in the game, my opponent transports Marines aboard the freighter and in the ensuing firefight one of my Marines is destroyed, and all his Marines are destroyed too. I now have one Marine left aboard, so the ship reverts to its original owner. Is that right?

It seems that what we are saying here is that so long as a captured ship remains on the map, it is more vulnerable to re-capture than it was vulnerable to being captured in the first place, because of the remaining 'indigenous' crew.

I'm not trying to complicate things here, it's just that in the scenario I am designing, the ships raiding the convoy have a limited number of Marines with which to capture the freighters.

While on the topic, is there any other way that players of this game generally use to capture ships?

For example, say there are three freighters (any type) with the engines damaged and the escort has been destroyed or driven off; the raiding pirate (or whatever) has a relatively intact ship, but not enough Marines remaining to use to keep them tame.

Do players assume that some sort of surrender is arranged so that all remaining freighters are captured but without the use of Marines? Since the alternative is that the ships could be destroyed or tractored away at will, this seems quite a viable idea. What usually happens in these cases?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1947
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mjwest wrote:
No, I haven't. Mongoose has been monopolizing Steve's time, and he just can't get to it right now.

The base problem is that there is a requirement in the rule, but there is no penalty. There are just so many ways to go with the "missing" penalty, that, really, I don't know which works best.

What I recommended is that if an otherwise captured ship does not have sufficient numbers of marine units present at the start of a (1E3c) Marine Phase, then the ship reverts to its original owner. That means if you capture a ship, but have insufficient boarding parties present, you have a full turn to increase the number or get the survivors off the ship. This seemed the best compromise I could see and seemed to best convey the intent of the rule. (Namely, there is a large, 'invisible' crew still present on a captured ship. You need sufficient marines present to keep them under control. Have too few, and they reassert control.)


Sorry but I need to ask another one on this. If the captured ship is 'reverted' to its original owner, what happens to the (insufficient) enemy Marines still aboard?

If they are still active, then they would be able to reattempt capture by scoring casualty points against the control spaces again - which would eventually be automatic in the absence of defending Marines.

If not, then one assumes they surrender. I think if we say that enemy Marines surrender upon the ship reverting control to its original owner, this would avoid a lot of messing about.

Because, if you think about it, the situation of an uncaptured ship with enemy marines aboard, who then subsequently capture the ship, is exactly the same situation as the ship with insufficient Marines to control it. I hope you can see the semi-circular (is there such a thing?) nature of the argument here; I think that simply saying that the Marines surrender if a ship reverts would solve it. Whaddaya think?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Bolo_MK_XL
Commander


Joined: 16 Jan 2007
Posts: 785
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Personally would say as long as enemy marines are onboard, the ship is uncontrolled --

Until the point the marines are destroyed/captured, then no one has ownership of the vessel ---
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3471
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The ruling is a confirmed ruling. If a Marine Phase starts and a captured ship does not have sufficient marine units present, control reverts to the original owner. It does not sit uncontrolled.

However, if the ship does revert to its original owner, the marine units do not go away and do not surrender. This does mean they can again capture the ship. If no marine units from either side are added to the equation, control of the ship will endlessly swing between the two sides. To end the situation, one side needs to add marine units, or the invading marine units need to be retrieved.

I will add an extra ruling I need to send to Steve that says if a ship disengages in this condition (with no marine units of its own and with insufficient enemy marine units preset to maintain control) the ship is considered to be under the control of the original owner. (I.e. it does not count as "captured", and in a campaign the original owner keeps the ship.)
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3051

PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yepppppp, that's it.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1947
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well that's all completely fair enough. Thanks once again, gentlemen Smile
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Rules Questions All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group