OOC Thread

[Daemonknight]

Dave, the way the rule is worded, it states that the 'defender' retains a minimum of 10% of his forces...i believe the rule is protecting the person being forced to retreat. That would be the only way the rule makes sense. It doesnt protect the person forcing the retreat.

So if the damage goes through, then my Falcons are more or less wiped out. But i don't understand the raid table or salvage part of what Cannonshop said? Dont see what the raid table has to do with anything, but whatever the salvage generated is, its going to the Falcons.


And from the three criticals i rolled, instead of the 15% that Cannon allowed to live it'll go upto 25% because of the twin 5% less damage.

[JediBear]

Dave, the way the rule is worded, it states that the 'defender' retains a minimum of 10% of his forces...i believe the rule is protecting the person being forced to retreat.

That's not how either Dave or I read it. I'll grant you that the language is ambiguous, but the obvious way to read it is that 'player who rolled the critical event' and 'this player' are the same player while the 'defender' is the player the crit was rolled against. This rule could stand to be reworded, because it is ambiguous and potentially confusing, but I'm convinced this was the original intent.

That would be the only way the rule makes sense.

Rules don't necessarily make sense, though in this case it does -- the surviving force would need something to hold the field with. It's unlikely their opponents retreated from their imaginations.

So if the damage goes through, then my Falcons are more or less wiped out.

Except the minimum 10%mandated by the rules (which also mandate that the damage goes through.)

But i don't understand the raid table or salvage part of what Cannonshop said? Dont see what the raid table has to do with anything, but whatever the salvage generated is, its going to the Falcons.

I'll admit that I didn't quite catch it either. He seemed to be suggesting that if your force was wiped out, you could re-build it based on salvage from the raid-salvage table, but I'm not sure where the rules would allow that. Cool idea though.

And from the three criticals i rolled, instead of the 15% that Cannon allowed to live it'll go upto 25% because of the twin 5% less damage.

The rules are pretty clear that it's an OR. Cannonshop might be totally cool with you also rolling three crits, but I'm not sure I am. The rules are actually fairly clear here, and we should be as consistent as possible in their application.

[Daemonknight]

I'm not really sure how what you said contradicts what i said about the 10% Jedi...the minimum 10% rule, i would think it applys to the retreating force: after all, if you kill everything, theres nobody to retreat. You dont seem to be disagreeing with your explaination, although you implied it with your first comment.

I wasn't planning on rolling the crits, I know its an OR situation. So does Cannon. But he said to do it anyway for what i assume is dramatic effect for the RP, as he is hooking the retrat from Baker 3 into what ammounts to a total recall order for the battlegroup because of Tharkad. He is going to have to be careful with his route however: he is totally boxed in by Clan worlds, and there are definetly some big Clan fleet elements floating around out there.

[Dave Baughman]

Dave, the way the rule is worded, it states that the 'defender' retains a minimum of 10% of his forces...i believe the rule is protecting the person being forced to retreat.

That's not how either Dave or I read it. I'll grant you that the language is ambiguous, but the obvious way to read it is that 'player who rolled the critical event' and 'this player' are the same player while the 'defender' is the player the crit was rolled against. This rule could stand to be reworded, because it is ambiguous and potentially confusing, but I'm convinced this was the original intent.

The language probably needs to be clarified. "This player" is the individual referred to earlier in the sentence; i.e. "the player who rolled the event." The "defender" referenced earlier (before the asterisk) is the player on the 'receiving end' of the critical event, whereas the "attacker" would bet he palyer who rolled the event. The forced withdrawal rule's damage ceiling is intended to protect the winner, not the victim.

That would be the only way the rule makes sense.

Rules don't necessarily make sense, though in this case it does -- the surviving force would need something to hold the field with. It's unlikely their opponents retreated from their imaginations.

JediBear is 100% correct on the intention of the rule. When the 10% clause is not applied, we get clusters of fun like the CSA vs. WIE fight on New Kerensky a few turns ago.

So if the damage goes through, then my Falcons are more or less wiped out.

Except the minimum 10%mandated by the rules (which also mandate that the damage goes through.)

JediBear is correct in this statement.

But i don't understand the raid table or salvage part of what Cannonshop said? Dont see what the raid table has to do with anything, but whatever the salvage generated is, its going to the Falcons.

I'll admit that I didn't quite catch it either. He seemed to be suggesting that if your force was wiped out, you could re-build it based on salvage from the raid-salvage table, but I'm not sure where the rules would allow that. Cool idea though.

Without digging back through the thread (which, being at work I can't do before my break runs out) I can't say for sure... CS can probably elaborate though.

And from the three criticals i rolled, instead of the 15% that Cannon allowed to live it'll go upto 25% because of the twin 5% less damage.

The rules are pretty clear that it's an OR. Cannonshop might be totally cool with you also rolling three crits, but I'm not sure I am. The rules are actually fairly clear here, and we should be as consistent as possible in their application.

I'm not really sure how what you said contradicts what i said about the 10% Jedi...the minimum 10% rule, i would think it applys to the retreating force: after all, if you kill everything, theres nobody to retreat. You dont seem to be disagreeing with your explaination, although you implied it with your first comment.

Just to reiterate what I wrote in response to Jedibear, the retreating force does not benefit from damage protection. The damage protection is for "the player who rolled the critical event."

I wasn't planning on rolling the crits, I know its an OR situation. So does Cannon. But he said to do it anyway for what i assume is dramatic effect for the RP, as he is hooking the retrat from Baker 3 into what ammounts to a total recall order for the battlegroup because of Tharkad. He is going to have to be careful with his route however: he is totally boxed in by Clan worlds, and there are definetly some big Clan fleet elements floating around out there.

[Daemonknight]

Ok. atleast now i'm sure. shows me to go off trying to interpert the rules myself

[GreyJaeger]

((I just wanted to add, that i love the double 'for enemy' crits...atleast the right side got the good crit check ))

Yeah...I liked that one as well.

[Parmenion]

Question for the masses...

There is apparently 1x SY and 1x MF at Alpheratz in the Horse Alliance (nee Outworlds Alliance) region and which are Guest Facilities.  Does anyone know who they actually belong to?

I'm thinking nationalisation if no-one claims them (with the appropriate proof), however would sooner find out who owns them.

cheers

[LittleH13]

I believe that the Marians are the ones running those facilities.

Question for the masses...

There is apparently 1x SY and 1x MF at Alpheratz in the Horse Alliance (nee Outworlds Alliance) region and which are Guest Facilities.  Does anyone know who they actually belong to?

I'm thinking nationalisation if no-one claims them (with the appropriate proof), however would sooner find out who owns them.

cheers

[GI Journalist]

Question for the masses...

There is apparently 1x SY and 1x MF at Alpheratz in the Horse Alliance (nee Outworlds Alliance) region and which are Guest Facilities.  Does anyone know who they actually belong to?

I'm thinking nationalisation if no-one claims them (with the appropriate proof), however would sooner find out who owns them.

I'll double check GreyWolfActual's backorders, but I'm fairly certain the SY is Marian. I'll get back to you.

I see what happened here. Those were in exchange for the two guest facilities on Pompey. We'll work it out.

[JediBear]

Exactly what is a Horse Alliance and when did that happen? I've been looking for relevant RP and I can't find any. You'd think such a counterintuitive move should have been heralded by something. When did this happen? Genuinely interested as a former Outworlds player who was looking into joining up again.

[Marlin]

Yarp. And when will the other Clans find out?

[Fatebringer]

Well, the RP leading up to this has been going on for a long time I've heard about angst over the Alliance possibly working with the Horses for some time. As a Clanner I shall continue of course call this the "Hell's Alliance" but just because, it's just such a better name, <<snickers>> I'm sure the Omniss will love it.

[Iron Mongoose]

You can see some hints of it in the old RP thread, with Horse envoys comming and going, and some off hand comments here and there, but I think the bulk of negotiations were likely done by PMs and IMs (in accordance with the rules for these things at the time, of course).  I know it was pretty much in the works during my time there, and it was an action that my cherictors were reacting to IC in their actions (trying to demonstrate that the OA can grow a strong, domestic ground force).

Welshman at one time was going to start posting old PMs of secret deals he'd done, so that there was a bit of transperancy.  Say what you will about his tenure in general, but I do think that was a promacing idea, and its something for many factions to consider, once the need for secracy is gone.  Naturaly, no one would expect a faction to be public about "Hey, let's nuke Tharkad!" "Yeah, that sounds like a great idea.  I'll provide the nukes, and you handle the spec ops work."  "Deal!"  Of course not.  But a year or two later, it would be lovely to see.

[Daemonknight]

declassifying past ops or communication happens all the time irl. No reason why it shouldn't happen here.

[NVA]

Actually, this goes WAAAAAY back.  The Horses arrived in the OA early on and then were run out by the Dracs and Feddies, either through force or threat.