Dramatic SFB: Jindarian Bomber dates

[Gregory Flusche]

When I did a battle force for captains log a few years ago. Using the
Jundos.I ran into just that problem. The ruling was to use G3. I was very
happy that Matt was using the earlier time frame for the Bombers in the
campaign. Historically the Jindariians only added new Tech when the Empires
around them used it. Was this done so as to not draw attention to the fact
that they actually are more advanced than the other Empires?

That does sound right.

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 7:49 AM Wayne Power via SFBdrama <
sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:

>
> That note is from the BBS in,  Star Fleet Battles: Rules Questions: SFB
> Rules Q&A.
> On Sunday, 20 December 2020, 06:08:34 pm AEST, Wayne Power via SFBdrama <
> sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> from BBS,
>
> By *Steve Petrick (Petrick)
> <http://www.starfleetgames.com/cgi-bin/discus/board-profile.cgi?action=display_profile&profile=petrick-MODERATOR>*
>  on Monday, January 27, 2020 - 03:23 pm: Edit
> <http://www.starfleetgames.com/cgi-bin/discus/board-profile.cgi?action=editpost&postid=817545&page=12031/40622>
>
> Profile Editor
>
>
> <http://www.starfleetgames.com/cgi-bin/discus/board-profile.cgi?action=editpost&postid=817545&page=12031/40622>
>
>
> "John L. Stiff:
>
> My memory is not what it was, so someone may correct me, but to the best
> of my memory the only reasons the Jindarians are denied the use of bombers
> is a case where they are using the original bomber dates that were in
> Module F1 and superseded by Module G3 (Jindarian bombers begin appearing in
> the Alpha Octant in Y172, not Y88). Or other special scenario rules denied
> the use of bombers for the given scenario, or the player tried to put
> bombers on a non-asteroid ship, or the player tried to put bombers and fast
> patrol ships on one ship (even the Jindarians are not allowed to put heavy
> fighters, a class that for this purpose includes bombers, on a space
> control ship/stellar domination ship, or any ship that is otherwise a true
> PF tender"
>
>
> and some other notes on same BBS page about using G3
>
>
> On Sunday, 20 December 2020, 05:43:07 pm AEST, Wayne Power via SFBdrama <
> sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Matt,
>
> The last time I asked the BBS it was the new G3 is the Jindarian bomber
> list, they still get bombers as early as other empires when bombers first
> appear. (it was done for historical reasons, the jindarians kept technology
> developments at the same pace as the other surrounding empire in their area
> of operation).
> On Sunday, 20 December 2020, 04:31:55 pm AEST, Matt via SFBdrama <
> sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>
>
> Hey guys. I'm still working on the campaign database project.
>
> First: it looks like I'm still on track for finishing up by new-years.
> Good news all around.
>
> However, I've run into a teensy little snag that bugs the heck outta me.
> The Year-In-Service dates for the jindarian bombers in module G3 has
> nearly doubled. This flies in the face of the bomber descriptions in a
> couple of particulars and is so wildly different than the original
> source (module F1) that it's got to be wrong. Buuut... G3 is supposed to
> be the most-current-update. All of my other data assumes it is
> authoritative (except for those few modules I have that were published
> later.)
>
> So I'd like to see if you guys can find me some commentary that solves
> this issue one way or another (Errata? BBS comment? Email from
> ADB's-PR-nightmare?) If not, then I will (very reluctantly) have to go
> with the G3 dates as published and the Jindarians will lose their place
> as the first people with bombers by half a dozen spots.
>
>
> --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
> ____________________________________________________
> 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/20201220/1d570ff4/attachment-0002.html>