Dramatic SFB: Flexible Escorts

Wed Feb 24 03:39:22 PST 2021

GWO, is the scenario battle 141 colony assault, Seltorian v Hydran  happening? I believe it is the only battle that has not been decided for this turn.    On Wednesday, 24 February 2021, 08:50:47 pm AEST, Majead Farsi <majeadfarsi at googlemail.com> wrote:  

 R9.31A states that the Hydran SRV is not a true carrier BUT has assigned escorts as in the chart. I can not see anywhere on the chart a notation for no escorts. So to me the Hydran SRV must have Escorts even though it's not considered a true carrier! In G3A, other than the small pol carrieres and BB etc, every Hydran ship listed has escorts assigned to it despite saying its not a true carrier. For the Romulans, the SUP and FAK/FAB do not have any escorts assigned to them which is very strange as they become silly powerful, but I assume you can not have the FAK and FAB as they are UNV (Unbuilt variant!). Speaking for the Feds as we do not get our unbuilt variant of DHD and HDD then no other empire should as well.
But despite all the above, this is Matt's campaign and in it he is God the creator! What he decides supersedes everything else! So if he says a ship does not need escorts it does not! If he says a ship needs escorts then it does and if you don't like it, TOUGH!!!This is the way it is and play with what you have and get on with the campaign, stop wasting time arguing like a bunch of old men! (speaking for myself 😀)

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 at 08:42, Wayne Power via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:

Jindarians are empire specific like the Hydrans.    On Wednesday, 24 February 2021, 02:53:21 pm AEST, Marcel Trahan via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:  

 Hi Matt,
I have a question on the following sentence that you wrote earlier:
Romulan Heavy Hawks: Go by the above carrier definitions. The Superhawk (SUP) is a true carrier because it has more fighters than are allowed as a hybrid carrier. If you want a Hawk hybrid carrier, make Farhawks instead.

Why would the SUP be considered a true carrier (it carries 8 fighters) when the Farhawk is a hybrid carrier (it carries 12 fighters). Both ships should be considered hybrid carriers since they both have their carrier version which are the SUB and the FAB. SUP and FAK both dont require escorts while the SUB and FAB do need escorts.
On G3 MSS, all ships that do carry fighters be it Casual, Hybrid or True carriers have the V mention. Only the ship description specifies which ones do require escort. This is further expanded in G3A and even more in the MSSB's.

With the exception of the Hydrans, very few ships have the ability to carry fighters without having escorts. Some never had escorts (SUP, FHK, a few Feds) and can have escorts but they are not mandantory (mainly SRV's, fast carriers (Only when alone on raid), a few scout carriers). What about Jindarian rock ships when they can have from 4 to 12 fighters in addition to up to 6 bombers. Those are considered hybrid carriers (THey dont require escorts)
In addition S8.315 does not invalidate S8.311 in my own opinion. If S8.315 invalidates S8.311, every ship that has a V in the MSS would need to have escorts (including all hydans hybrid carriers and Jindarian hybrid rockships) because S8.315 would invalidate the R section, where it is listed if the ships requires escort. This would also include all BB's since they carry 6+ fighters.
I will make a list of all ships that carry fighters (excluding hydran hybrid carriers) and if they can have escorts and of the ones that can have escorts but are not required to do so as per their ships description. (there is not that manhy of them)
If you rule that the SUP-A/K needs escorts, i will have to either change my initial build order or convert it to a SUB. FAK are not available since they are UNV. The only reason i build a SUP is that it did not need escorts as per R4.34 (same as the FAK as per R4.128)
Marcel

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 11:12 PM Matt via SFBdrama <sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:

> I fail to see the distinction between the Gorn and Hydran SRV both at 
> 8 fighters.  It seems to me that once the Hydran SR takes on the extra 
> fight and SRV designation that it cross the same line as every other 
> races Survey Cruiser.  S8.321 does nothing to define what a hybrid. I 
> do not see how a Hydran SRV fits under this.  It being a SRV make you 
> a true carrier which should be universal.
>
> (S8.321) Hydran hybrid-ships (non-true-carriers) are exempt from this 
> restriction. True carriers (those requiring escorts) must count their 
> fighters against the overall limit. Hydran carrier escorts are treated 
> as hybrids.
>
> ...
>
> Gorn SRV: 8 fighters. A true carrier per (S8.322).
>
> Fed GSCv: 2 fighters. A casual carrier per (J4.62).
>
> Fed CVL: (A GSC with 8 fighters). A true carrier per (S8.322).
>
> Hydran SRV: 8 fighters. Hybrid carrier per (S8.321).
>
> Kzinti SRV: 4 fighters. Hybrid carrier per (S8.322).
>

I agree that the Hydran SRV should be a true carrier, but I don't see 
any of the earmarks that distinguish it from the other Hydran hybrids - 
particularly since it does not have an escort table or an "N1" note in 
the MSC. Thus, it is treated by the same rule that treats other Hydran 
hybrids. To wit, (S8.321).

As you reprinted from the rule above, (S8.321) states that Hydran 
hybrids are Hydran ships that are not true carriers (e.g. not defined in 
R9.R4). This is why the Ranger (9 fighters), Ragnar (12 fighters), and 
Paladin (12 fighters) are hybrid carriers.

You'll also note that other empires have SRVs that are not true 
carriers. The Kzinti SRV would be pretty sad if it were a True Carrier. 
Fortunately for the Kzinti, (S8.322) saves it from being considered such.

--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/20210224/ab12ccc6/attachment-0002.html>