Dramatic SFB: Age of PFs Orders

[Majead Farsi]

More like 300 more than yours! I will be fighting this one! As I'm well up
here in fire power! Encounter #2116 I'm not fighting that one as I'm well
outgunned!! #2115 I'm still debating if there is a way of saving the
freighters. will let you know on that one!

Majead

On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 08:38, Don Lavanty <emeketos at gmail.com> wrote:

> Trust me I find fighting Carnivon's very dangerous those disruptor cannons
> are nasty. His force does include a CV group but I have 6 interceptors
> included
>
> Carnivon have
> CWL, 2xCW, CWB, DWS,  2xDWA, CVS 12 fighters(JK-4 & HY-3), ISC CC w// int's
> vs my Paravian
> CWL, 3xCW, RMS w/ 2p-b&p-sd w/ ints, BCH w/ Ints, DWL w/ int's
>
>
>
> his force is at least 100bp more than mine.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 2:52 AM Wayne Power via SFBdrama <
> sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> You would need to battle in a fleet, with some heavy ships, to take that
>> Paravian force on.
>> On Monday, 7 September 2020, 09:38:20 am AEST, Gregory Flusche via
>> SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Yes looks legal to me as well
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 6, 2020 at 6:09 PM Matt via SFBdrama <
>> sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > He has a total of 7 ships with 4 command type/ Leader equivalent ships
>> > ( they have Flag bridges etc!). Is this Fleet legal or has he got too
>> > many leaders/ Command ships. His ships are :
>> > CWL, CW, CW, CW, RMS (with 3 pods), BCH, DWL.
>> > To be honest it's the DWL that looks as if it should not be there by
>> > itself as there are no SC 4 ships to lead!
>>
>>
>> Flag bridge does not necessarily make it a leader variant. For example,
>> starbases (S8.27) and some Lyran ships (R11.5). Even leader variants
>> don't always have flag bridge - see most DWLs and FLGs. As near as I
>> figure, leader variants are marked as such only on the SSD (though
>> looking at higher-than-normal Command Ratings for the class can be an
>> indicator. Unfortunately, that also captures some PFTs and carriers.)
>> See (S8.36); it begins with the most complete definition of a leader
>> variant that is off the top of my head.
>>
>>
>> The RMS (regardless of the number of pods) counts as a Size-Class 2
>> ship. As such, it counts under (S8.331). One would think that (S8.363)
>> applies to keep it from being considered as a leader, but the RMS is
>> actually a dreadnaught-sized tug variant - which is still not a leader
>> variant. (note that the tug pods are never applied against a flagship's
>> command rating.)
>>
>>
>> The BCH very much is under (S8.333). This also excludes it from being
>> considered a leader variant. This also allows the BCH to be included,
>> specifically regardless of the inclusion of a Size-Class 2 unit.
>>
>>
>> So per (S8.36), the consideration of leader variants falls to the CWL
>> and the DWL. The CWL is leading a full squadron of CWs, allowing the DWL
>> to be included under (S8.361).
>>
>>
>> The above fleet appears legal to me.
>>
>> --Matt
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
>> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
>> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
>> http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
>> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
>> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
>> http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
>> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
>> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
>> http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mattnet.org/pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet.org/attachments/20200907/13ce4b0b/attachment-0002.html>