ISC pre-arming

Dan Ibekwe · Post by **Dan Ibekwe** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 12:07 am

As I understand it, in FC multi-turn arming weapons may start a scenario with pre-loading energy if the player chooses, but at the penalty of the ship's batteries being empty on turn one.

Does this apply to ISC ships with both Plasma Torps and PPDs? By draining the batteries, can an ISC Star Cruiser start with *both* her PPD *and* her Plasma -Ss armed?

Seems a bit generous.

DNordeen · Post by **DNordeen** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 1:55 am

I'd say yes, because photon loading has never specifically related it to the amount of energy stored in batteries.

For example the CA has 4 batteries, but pre-loading requires 8 points of power (4 phot x 2 power). So therefore it's impossible for the CA to use it's batteries (4 pts) to preload all the photons.

Basically, you used your energy to pre-load weapons and didn't have anything to charge the batteries. With that in mind, the ISC should be able to pre-load all their weapons too.

Bolo_MK_XL · Post by **Bolo_MK_XL** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 3:41 am

Would have to say, no you can't start with Plasma-S' loaded -- since they are 3 turn arming ---
Though during the turn you could launch it as a quick load F ----

Dan Ibekwe · Post by **Dan Ibekwe** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:41 am

....since you only get *one* turn of pre-loading; the torps cannot be fired (except a fast loads Fs) before turn two.

As the man said, D'oh.

Which would have utterly changed the outcome of last nights' game (a blockade-running FT was crippled and captured after being hit by a pair of bolted Pl-S on turn one, just too soon for her allies to intervene).

Thanks!

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:04 pm

First off, plasmas (regardless of any other weapons present) do not get full loading. They only get the first turn of loading. (Except Pl-Fs, of course, which always start fully loaded.) Also note that this first turn of arming does NOT require the sacrifice of battery energy. It is "free".

Second, PPDs are explicitly granted the analogous capability of (4C2c), so they may sacrifice their battery power to be fully armed (with normal loads) on turn one.

So, yes, a (for example) ISC CA will can start the turn with its PPD fully loaded and its Pl-S torpedoes on their second turn of arming.

DNordeen · Post by **DNordeen** » Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:20 am

Just to make sure I understand,

Prior to Turn 1: Torps are pre-loaded (no loss of batteries) and PPD is pre-loaded (lose the batteries)

Energy Allocation of Turn 1: You pay for turn 2 arming of the Torps and pay to fully load the PPDs.

Is that right?

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:29 am

Savedfromwhat · Post by **Savedfromwhat** » Mon Jul 14, 2008 3:28 am

But you can blow your batteries to complete the second arming turn for plasma G/S/R and thus start turn 1 as the third turn of arming, or did I missread that?

Scoutdad · Post by **Scoutdad** » Mon Jul 14, 2008 3:47 am

Savedfromwhat wrote:But you can blow your batteries to complete the second arming turn for plasma G/S/R and thus start turn 1 as the third turn of arming, or did I missread that?

(4J2e) START OF TURN: Plasma armed ships begin scenarios (unless the scenario rules state otherwise) with type-F launchers fully armed and with type G/S/R launchers holding the first turn of arming energy, and with full batteries.

I see nothing about being able to blow the batteries and have two turns of arming. (4C2c) applies to Photon Torpedoes, but is further modified by (4K2a) and (4M2a) to include Hellbore Cannons and Plasmatic Pulsar Devices (PPDs).

Now, remember that you can fast-load a Type F torpedo in a larger launcher (Type G/S/R) and fire it after two turns of arming - including the hypothetical turn 0 and turn 1... (4J2d) Option 1.

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Mon Jul 14, 2008 5:49 am

Savedfromwhat wrote:But you can blow your batteries to complete the second arming turn for plasma G/S/R and thus start turn 1 as the third turn of arming, or did I missread that?

No, you cannot do that. There is no rule that permits that.

On hellbores and PPDs, note that (4K2a) and (4M2a) were only part of the playtest rules. In the published rules in DK, there is no reference to (4C2c) in (4K2a). Instead there is an explicit analog at (4K2c). When the PPD rule gets published "for real" it will also have such an explicit rule (most likely at (4M2c)).

Active Ingredient · Post by **Active Ingredient** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:00 am

"But you can blow your batteries to complete the second arming turn for plasma G/S/R and thus start turn 1 as the third turn of arming, or did I missread that?"

I thought the same thing and have always played that way. But now that I looked for the rule, it seems to have mysteriously disappeared from my rulebook.

P.S. Sorry JPAT ... my bad!

Scoutdad · Post by **Scoutdad** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 3:59 am

Active Ingredient wrote:I thought the same thing and have always played that way. But now that I looked for the rule, it seems to have mysteriously disappeared from my rulebook.

AI: Has your rulebook been RetConned? (as seems to frequently happen in the Star Trek Universe)

Active Ingredient · Post by **Active Ingredient** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:02 am

So ... have ya ever been in the situation where all the cool kids are using a word and you have no idea what it means and you pretend to know what it means just to fit in ....?

Uh ... yeah ... heh heh ... my rulebook's been "RetConned" ... heh heh ... um .... Good one! (now where's that 'thumbs up with a dorky look on my face emoticon...? )

djdood · Post by **djdood** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:40 am

RetCon = Retro-active Continuity.
This is where the creators of something put out something that conflicts with with things they did before and expect the fans to not notice (or just grit their teeth and ignore it...).

The SFU has been amazingly free of this. Paramount's treatment of Star Trek (especially in the Berman & Bragha years) is pretty riddled with it.

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:24 am

'dood,

In my experience "retcon" is a deliberate act. It isn't that the fans aren't expected to notice, but rather that they are expected to just accept it. It is usually done because things have spun out of control and the new editors are trying to create consistency even at the cost of what has happened before.

This is most common in comic books, where their "histories" are completely redesigned, or at least tweeked, every few years. I believe comic books are where the term first originated.

What you are describing is either "sloppiness", "carelessness", "cluelessness", "idiocy", or "stupidity". In such cases there is no deliberate attempt to make changes, but rather no attempt is being made to be consistent. These type of changes are not "retcons", but just pedestrian inconsistency.

For an example of "retcon" in the SFU, we have the 2X era presented in the old Supplement 2. It didn't work out, so it has been removed from the SFU and will eventually be replaced with something else.