January 2010

F&E Q&A [Continued]

Question: Rule (431.37) lets me take a ship from the next production cycle and it counts against the current turn's limits. Does this let me move the limits on carrier production from next turn to this turn? Maulers? Scouts?

Answer: It allows you to move the hull, but not the various limits. So you could borrow a CW from next turn, but could only build it as a CWV under the current turn's carrier limits, or as a CWS under the current turn's scout limits, or a CW-mauler under the current turn's mauler limits.

Question: Are "chained substitutions" allowed? For example, the Hydrans allow the following substitutions:
* Can substitute LN for HR. (DD for CW)
* Can substitute UH for LN. (CV for DD)
Does this mean that I can substitute a UH for an HR in the production schedule?

Answer: Yes, this is called a substitution for a substitution or in slang "subbing for a sub". You can do this with other empires, i.e., substituting 2xFF for a CL and then substituting one of them into a EFF and the other into a SF.

Question: Rule (431.8) specifically states "You cannot substitute a ship, then convert it during construction into the originally scheduled type." This is presumably to prevent odd "discounts" such as the Lyrans substituting a CA for a DN and then converting the CA into a DN (which saves two EPs). However, I noted that the spirit of this rule is broken by the Hydrans, who can substitute an LN for an HR, and then either convert that to a UH or substitute a UH for it, the two paths to the same ship having slightly different costs. Should that be legal?

Answer: This cost differential is from Hydrans just being plain weird. The LN base hull (4 EPs) is discounted like a war destroyer to keep its cost in line with the KN when you add the fighters. This is just part of what the LN is. Rule (431.8) does not apply since you started with an HR and subbed a LN then did a LN>UH conversion. So, yes you can do a HR substitution into a LN then convert that LN into a UH for 22 EP.

Question: Is converting a Romulan modular DN to carry SPB modules illegal during the same year that you produce any other CVA, or does that violate the rule on producing more than one heavy carrier per year?

Answer: It all depends.
Placing existing modules on an existing DN would not count against the heavy carrier limit.
Placing existing modules on a modular DN built that year would count against the heavy carrier limit.
Placing new modules on a modular DN built in that year or any previous year would count against the heavy carrier limit.

Question: Can a variant (e.g., a MEC) be converted into a different variant (e.g., an MDC) at the cost of the conversion of a regular production ship (i.e. CM) or is the ship required to be converted twice, once back to the original configuration, then a second time to the new configuration subject to availability, conversion limits and racial limits? I refer to rule (433.0).

Answer: According to rule (433.24) "Any variant (except a mauler) can be converted into any other variant that the base hull can be converted into. Pay a 1-point surcharge to 'unconvert' the original variant and then the normal conversion cost for the desired variant. If the original conversion was three points, the extra surcharge point (total cost 4) does not make this a major conversion using the one allowed major conversion. The 1EP cost is paid per ship, so a Romulan FE group would cost three points to convert into three WEs." There you have it.

Question: In the Kzinti OOB under carrier build limits it is stated, in part, that "BCV and BCS limited to one per year (total) and count against carrier limit; BCS also counts against PFT limits."

In CL #26 it was ruled that converting one carrier into another does not count against carrier build limits if there is no change in the number of fighter factors.

Does the one-per-year combined BCV and BCS limit include CV to BCV conversions? One argument is that CV to BCV doesn't count against the BCV limit since it doesn't count against the carrier limit. Another argument is that the BC is a separate ship type with its own rules.

Answer: A specific limit, in this case in (705.0), always overrules a general limit. The BCV and BCS are specific ship types that can only be produced (by any means) under their own one-per-year limit. They also count against the carrier limit which also points out the more limited production limits.

So, the conversion of a CV to a BCV would not count against the carrier limits, but would count against the BC limits. So you could convert a CV to a BCV and then build another CV, if you want, but not two BCVs.

Question: Is the one-per-year BCV/BCS group substitution added in Advanced Operations instead of, or in addition to, the one-BCH-per-year substitution for either a DN or CC in an empire's F&E2K ship build limits?

Answer: It is an either/or situation. You can substitute one BCH hull per year for a DN or CC. This includes the BCV and BCS.

Q: In the Hydran rules for Y170, there is a PAL which is "activated" but I can't find where any cost of this is, or what it means.

Answer: This is in the rulebook, but perhaps difficult to find. Rule (442.51) states the activations are conversions of Templar early DNs. The cost is 5 EP and the fighters are free.

Question: I'm converting a B10 into a B10V. During the same turn I'm installing two SFG modules to get a B10VAA. Is there an EP discount as a two-step conversion?

Answer: Actually, you aren't going to do this. Rule (312.321) allows the B10 to receive two SFG kits in one single minor conversion, but a conversion to a carrier is a separate conversion that would take place on another turn. You cannot do them at the same time, and even if you could, there is no discount. Also, be aware that the B10VAA cannot use carrier escorts when using the SFG. This is a ruling by a previous FEAR in 2007 at Origins when the current FEAR tried to use one.