Displacement device

[storeylf]

5U6a - "No more than one displacement device can be used on (ie fired) a single object in a single impulse, or on consectutive impulses, whether it was succesful or not. [...] a second attempt can be made on the next impulse.

Seems to be a bit of a contradiction, can someone clarify that. Nothing can be the subject of a displacement (succesful or not) in 2 consectutive impulse, but you can try again the next impulse if the target was andro? Is the first bit meant to say non-andro, or is another attempt the next impulse wrong for andros.

[mjwest]

The last sentence is giving an exception when attempting to displace an Andromedan unit and the displacement fails utterly. (It didn't "miss"; it just failed to operate.)

[Kang]

More on Displacemnt devices, I'm afraid.

Rule (5U3a) mentions declaring a direction in which to displace an enemy ship, but later rules say that both direction and distance are random. Is the earlier mention a misprint, or perhaps a holdover from a previous ruleset?
--
Can a mothership displace a satellite ship out of its hangar (i.e. launch it by displacement device) and then displace itself in the same Direct Fire phase? Discussions in the thread here: http://tinyurl.com/3akb6tb said that sat ships launched by displacement device use the friendly displacement rules. This leads, then, to expanding the above question to asking: Can a DD-equipped ship displace another Andro ship and then itself in the same phase? (obviously the converse order could never happen because if the mothership displaces first then it will be disrupted)
--
I realise that using the DD on an enemy ship is subject to normal firing modifiers. What happens when I want to displace an Andro ship; do I still suffer the fire modifiers if it's, say, manoeuvring evasively?
--
Can a displacement device be used (for any purpose) by a mothership under EM, or does it count as a direct-fire weapon in this case? (i.e. No!)
--
If two attempt at displacing an Andro ship fail, can a third be made on a subsequent impulse?
--
If a ship is displaced into the same hex as an enemy ship, how do we determine relative positions and shield facings? [Edit: Answer found in (5U6g)]
--
Not a DD question, but related in terms of Sat Ships: (2D4b) says that a ship under EM cannot '...be boarded by transporter'. Do we 'logically' extend this to saying also that a Sat Ship which is under EM cannot be recovered by transporter?

[terryoc]

You can bias the random direction roll, declaring a particular direction which will be treated as a different direction. I interpret the rule as meaning that must be declared when the DisDev is declared.

[Kang]

You can bias the random direction roll, declaring a particular direction which will be treated as a different direction. I interpret the rule as meaning that must be declared when the DisDev is declared.

Thanks Terry - but I have scoured the rules on the Displacement Device and can't find any reference to this. I know the facility exists in SFB (you can specify that if you make a direction roll of a certain number, it is treated as a different number) but I can't find it in Fed Commander.

It would be a simple enough system - I just can't find it! Anyone know where it is, plz?

[storeylf]

You can bias the random direction roll, declaring a particular direction which will be treated as a different direction. I interpret the rule as meaning that must be declared when the DisDev is declared.

Thanks Terry - but I have scoured the rules on the Displacement Device and can't find any reference to this. I know the facility exists in SFB (you can specify that if you make a direction roll of a certain number, it is treated as a different number) but I can't find it in Fed Commander.

It would be a simple enough system - I just can't find it! Anyone know where it is, plz?

I was wondering what terry was on about, so its an SFBism.

Haven't seen in it in FedCom. Can't personally see any reason to add another rule to disdevs for it either. I thought the ability to even fire disdevs at enemy ships was potent enough, my distant memories of andros didn't recall that they could do that when andros first came out, but my SFB memories are very vague.

[Kang]

I was wondering what terry was on about, so its an SFBism.

Yeah, it gave the Andros some limited control over the direction of enemy displacement. What you did was to declare one direction (X), and an alternative direction (Y). Then you roll your direction die. If you rolled the first number X, then the ship would be moved in direction Y instead. Rolling any other number, including Y, means that the target goes in the rolled direction without modification.

Haven't seen in it in FedCom. Can't personally see any reason to add another rule to disdevs for it either. I thought the ability to even fire disdevs at enemy ships was potent enough, my distant memories of andros didn't recall that they could do that when andros first came out, but my SFB memories are very vague.

You would want to do it, for example, if displacing an enemy ship directly toweards your ship would bring it into what would be a better firing range bracket for him. Conversely, you might be deterred from displacing an enemy ship if you thought there was a reasonable risk that he'd be displaced into such a better range bracket. Of course, he'd be disrupted, but still....

I'd therefore like to see that rule introduced, or if it is already 'in', I'd like it pinpointed. I can already think of a set of rather useful little tricks for it.....

[storeylf]

You would want to do it, for example, if displacing an enemy ship directly toweards your ship would bring it into what would be a better firing range bracket for him. Conversely, you might be deterred from displacing an enemy ship if you thought there was a reasonable risk that he'd be displaced into such a better range bracket. Of course, he'd be disrupted, but still....

I'd therefore like to see that rule introduced, or if it is already 'in', I'd like it pinpointed. I can already think of a set of rather useful little tricks for it.....

Oh - I'm not saying i can't think of uses for it. Its just a debate I have with my regular opponent, almost any specific rule is simple and easy to put in, but the cumulative effect is the issue, you end up with an ever growing rule book. Thats what I meant, I see no real call for an extra rule and extra dice rolls.

[DirkSJ]

You would want to do it, for example, if displacing an enemy ship directly toweards your ship would bring it into what would be a better firing range bracket for him. Conversely, you might be deterred from displacing an enemy ship if you thought there was a reasonable risk that he'd be displaced into such a better range bracket. Of course, he'd be disrupted, but still....

I'd therefore like to see that rule introduced, or if it is already 'in', I'd like it pinpointed. I can already think of a set of rather useful little tricks for it.....

Oh - I'm not saying i can't think of uses for it. Its just a debate I have with my regular opponent, almost any specific rule is simple and easy to put in, but the cumulative effect is the issue, you end up with an ever growing rule book. Thats what I meant, I see no real call for an extra rule and extra dice rolls.

The ever growing rulebook is what killed SFB for me. No thanks to adding any more things to FC unless they are to fix a serious balance issue. Thus, no thanks to extra DisDev rules; the system is fine as is.

[Kang]

Can I ping this please for an official answer to my original question list?

[mjwest]

Rule (5U3a) mentions declaring a direction in which to displace an enemy ship, but later rules say that both direction and distance are random. Is the earlier mention a misprint, or perhaps a holdover from a previous ruleset?

The parenthetical comment should be deleted. It is left over from something that was apparently dropped from the final rules.

Can a mothership displace a satellite ship out of its hangar (i.e. launch it by displacement device) and then displace itself in the same Direct Fire phase? Discussions in the thread here: http://tinyurl.com/3akb6tb said that sat ships launched by displacement device use the friendly displacement rules. This leads, then, to expanding the above question to asking: Can a DD-equipped ship displace another Andro ship and then itself in the same phase? (obviously the converse order could never happen because if the mothership displaces first then it will be disrupted)

I see nothing in the rules that would prevent it, so sure. Just be aware that the DD use was already declared, so if the first fails to work, you cannot cancel the second. They both must be attempted.

I realise that using the DD on an enemy ship is subject to normal firing modifiers. What happens when I want to displace an Andro ship; do I still suffer the fire modifiers if it's, say, manoeuvring evasively?

(4A4) modifiers only affect displacement of non-Andromedan rules. Ergo, you can displace another EMing Andromedan unit with no decrease in the chances for success. (The roll for use on Andromedan units is not a "to-hit" roll.)

I will ask if this needs to be changed, however.

Can a displacement device be used (for any purpose) by a mothership under EM, or does it count as a direct-fire weapon in this case? (i.e. No!)

A Displacement Device is functionally a weapon (5U3a). As such, EM prevents its use, even for self-displacement.

If two attempt at displacing an Andro ship fail, can a third be made on a subsequent impulse?

If the attempt to displace and Andromedan ship fails, another attempt may be made on the following impulse. Nothing puts a limit on the number of attempts that can be made in succeeding impulses.

Not a DD question, but related in terms of Sat Ships: (2D4b) says that a ship under EM cannot '...be boarded by transporter'. Do we 'logically' extend this to saying also that a Sat Ship which is under EM cannot be recovered by transporter?

Sure. There is no way to recover a satellite ship that is under EM.