View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Kang Fleet Captain
Joined: 23 Sep 2007 Posts: 1976 Location: Devon, UK
|
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 3:55 pm Post subject: Displacing Andromedan ships |
|
|
"(5U5b) Friendly Displacement: If used on a different Andromedan ship, the procedure is the same as in (5U5a) but the ship can only be moved six hexes.
A die roll (5U5a1) is still required for success. This could result in the other Andromedan ship being displaced beyond the range limit of the device."
Please could this be clarified, in that is the hex that a displaced Andro ship goes to known in advance (not self-displacement, and assuming a successful die-roll)? The reason I ask is that the second part of this Rule seems to infer that displacing 'other' Andromedan ships is subject to similar 'scatter' as the displacement of hostile ships. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
mjwest Commodore
Joined: 08 Oct 2006 Posts: 4075 Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 4:06 pm Post subject: Re: Displacing Andromedan ships |
|
|
Kang wrote: | "(5U5b) Friendly Displacement: If used on a different Andromedan ship, the procedure is the same as in (5U5a) but the ship can only be moved six hexes.
A die roll (5U5a1) is still required for success. This could result in the other Andromedan ship being displaced beyond the range limit of the device."
Please could this be clarified, in that is the hex that a displaced Andro ship goes to known in advance (not self-displacement, and assuming a successful die-roll)? The reason I ask is that the second part of this Rule seems to infer that displacing 'other' Andromedan ships is subject to similar 'scatter' as the displacement of hostile ships. |
I am pretty sure it is a hold-over from an older version of the rule. Originally, friendly displacement was subject to random scatter on failure, but that was eliminated. Just 'delete' that last sentence. _________________
Federation Commander Answer Guy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kang Fleet Captain
Joined: 23 Sep 2007 Posts: 1976 Location: Devon, UK
|
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow, what a fast reply Thanks Mike, that makes sense. It's in the latest RRB too, which is why I was puzzled. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|