Rules Discussion

[Dave Baughman]

I'm not sure about the rule, but it would seen that the "Free PF" that comes with a spacestation that has 3 elements should A.) Not be allowed to move from the Spacestation, and B.) be removed if the number dips below 3 Elements.

Does anyone know why Spacestations get this bonus? If it were just a matter of getting a certain number of facilities, there would be places that shouldn't have it, and places that should.

I'm not sure about the rule, but it would seen that the "Free PF" that comes with a spacestation that has 3 elements should A.) Not be allowed to move from the Spacestation, and B.) be removed if the number dips below 3 Elements.

Does anyone know why Spacestations get this bonus? If it were just a matter of getting a certain number of facilities, there would be places that shouldn't have it, and places that should.

If I recall, it was to provide a way to get PFs outside of the very rare roll.

Yeah, but what we need to prevent from happing is have someone create a Spacestation, gain a free PF, move that PF, get a new free PF, move....

The idea with the "free PF" was to create an incentive for factions to build space stations and put hex elements on them (since space stations are so time consuming to build). The original rule was not very clear on it, but the criteria for the PF would be:

• PF is gained when three hex improvements are built - free hex elements do not count towards this achievement.
• The free PF only happens once per station. Stations cannot be turned into "PF factories" by exploiting the infrastructure movement rules.

[Dave Baughman]

Regarding WarShip saving throws:

The WarShip survival check is supposed to be dangerous; the reason it drops all the available damage on threatened ships first is to ensure that ships still die in large fleet actions. Under the original "Turn 20" rules, a large enough fleet will spread out the damage to the point where it is actually quite hard to kill anything - for example, a 10 ship formation that goes into battle will mean that even the weakest of ships - a 1.5 FP Vincent for example - requires 10x its FP in damage to sink.

Both in the canon literature and in MegaMek, BattleTech is not a friendly environment to WarShips. Weaponry - even that on fighters - outstrips the capabilities of defensive systems and WarShips are essentially always priority targets. The purpose of the WarShip survival roll is to simulate this in simple res without introducing an exploitable mechanism such as letting the attacker designate "priority targets."

This rule probably won't change unless something like force size limits and/or a more regulated method of tracking the composition of flotillas is implemented. Something like that is slated for the future, but is still several turns off (to coincide with the overhaul of the R&D system).


Regarding the fate of orphaned WarShip escorts:

There's no point in mincing words here: WarShip flotillas are an artifact of the 1st edition (pre-turn 20) rules and are broken. Every aspect of WarShip construction, record keeping, and in-out damage behavior is broken.

Until WarShips are fixed - which is among other things entail them losing most/all of their "built in" escorts - there are going to be issues with how survivor FP works mechanically vs. how it should work logically.

I would love to roll in and immediately fix this rule, but as with the issues surounding WarShip survival checks and the R&D system in general this ties into so many other aspects of the rules that I need to go over it carefully to avoid breaking the naval part of the game even more.

In short, please bear with me - things will get better, but to ensure the overall flow of the game isn't disrupted we need to work carefully with regard to fixing some of these issues.

[Fatebringer]

For all the damage that happened in my last played out game, and the focusing fire on ships, the first thing to drop in these games were the Dropships and thruout the game, the fighters. If it takes 10 times the damage to sink the 1.5 FP Vincent, that also makes sense to me, because it would mean, the other side either didn't hit that much or was outnumbered pretty heavily. In my battle, I put my heavily armored ships up front, my more valuable ships in the middle, and my light stuff way in the back so it didn't get taken out in one turn. While some of my valuable ships didn't make it, the Soyuz did because I wasn't stupid enough to put it up front. During the simple rez, I left 3 warships out of it because they were too weak to even hold up againt 1 capitol hit.

[Marlin]

http://intelser.org/forums/index.php?topic=267.0

Here. Holt takes on the rule. However, there is much to clarify. Do Blockades block even friendly economy?

Also, if a System is blockaded and subsequently invaded and eventually taken, do the invaders get the blocked (this time according to rules AND common sense) and banked RP income?

If so, some factions would likely get a boost in RP. Foster comes to mind as do all the blockaded worlds of last turn. Granted they were not really rich, but add .25 RP together.

We really need clarification about these points. Thanks.

However,

[Dave Baughman]

http://intelser.org/forums/index.php?topic=267.0

Here. Holt takes on the rule. However, there is much to clarify. Do Blockades block even friendly economy?

Also, if a System is blockaded and subsequently invaded and eventually taken, do the invaders get the blocked (this time according to rules AND common sense) and banked RP income?

If so, some factions would likely get a boost in RP. Foster comes to mind as do all the blockaded worlds of last turn. Granted they were not really rich, but add .25 RP together.

We really need clarification about these points. Thanks.

However,

Hi guys,

First off let me apologize for not catching how unclearly this rule was written when I carried it over from the old set. Many other rules were rewritten for clarity, but it looks like this one went through almost entirely unchanged. Josh's ruling is a correct interpretation of the rules as written and will stand for the duration of this turn.

Effective turn 40, the following errata will be introduced:

• Delete the text in red and add the underlined text

Blockade
Type: Invasion Movement
Effect: No military forces or supplies can move in, out or through of the Hex any faction save the blockader's
faction. Due to stringent inspection of incoming and outgoing civilian traffic, the economy of the hex is disrupted. The Blockade remains in effect until the blockading faction chooses to cease the blockade or the blockade force is destroyed.

Blockade may be bypassed with Blockade Running orders or with Pirate Transit*

During a Blockade no RP from the target hex may be used even if the blockade force is from the faction that owns the hex. and It may only be banked a maximum of one cycle, but any subsequent income is lost. in addition No troop or Flotilla movements will be is allowed in, out or through the hex unless Blockade Running, Pirate Transit*, or Allied Movement is used.

*The presence of a Blockade imposes a -2 penalty on pirate transit attempts. A failed transit into or out of a blockade hex allows the blockade force the option of immediately attacking the interlopers.

Please let me know if this resolves the questions about the intended process flow for blockade behavior or if I can further clear things up.

[Daemonknight]

so basiclly, trying to defend a hex with a blockade means you trade your planet's entire RP income, to impose a -2 on pirate transit rolls...

for a single turn, because otherwise you lose all income. Could i sugest something?

Instead of being able to only bank a single turn's RP, and then loose everything, allow the RPs from the planet to be used for projects on that planet(hex improvments on the planet, building units with SY or MFs), or be allowed to bank it indefinetly. You wouldn't lose the raw materials that would be getting shipped off planet, they'd just sit in a warehouse.


I just think that it doesnt make sense that in attempting to defend your planet, you are forced to embargo it. You might aswell just let someone raid it. Either that, or change Defensive Interdiction to grant the -2 against Pirate Transits, and make Defensive Blockade a more powerful version. Because it's negetives far outweigh a -2 to pirates imo.

[Fatebringer]

So there is no such thing as a "Defensive" Blockade, to try to only hurts you.
Interdictions only apply to stopping forces during battles where Pirate Points were not used.
And no amount of preparing for raids can help defend against them?

[Fatebringer]

I understand that it would really hurt raiders if a -2 penalty was applied to Raid Insertion rolls making it a lot harder for raids to be initiated thereby reducing the amount of play we get.

I do not have nearly as much issue with there being no defensive action you can take to improve your raid defense, be it with engaging the raiders before landfall or after, as I do with the current way the Resource Raids are handled.

Even with the new wording being put into play for raids, the wording would allowing ground assets to take space assets and assets on other planets in a system so that in essense, a raid unit attacking a three planet system such as Alphard can raid Stafford, a non-control world that probably has militia only with 10 FP and walk away from the system with tons of goods from planets that had defenders such as Alphard and Suetonius, and sometimes, even assets from a faction you didn't even declare you were attacking against.

[Jeyar]

Quick question that is probably in the rules but I missed... What do the Dark count as for dealing with posting attacks - IS or Clan?

I'd prefer IS, but I'm flexible.

[Dave Baughman]

so basiclly, trying to defend a hex with a blockade means you trade your planet's entire RP income, to impose a -2 on pirate transit rolls...

The was blockade was written, it isn't even legal as a defensive measure - which is not/not what was intended. The errata changes blockade from an invasion order to a movement order, which means it can be used in friendly hexes, or against empty hexes or hexes that only contain member worlds.

The tradeoff for "defensive" blockade, however, is that it prevents normal mercanitle activity from taking place. Thus, "defensively" blockading a capital isn't a good long-term solution because it will eventually shut down your RP gain from that hex - but a long-term blockade on a border region is more viable because the .25 RP/turn or whatever the control world there is giving you is a viable trade-off for the major defensive bonus granted by the blockade.


for a single turn, because otherwise you lose all income. Could i sugest something?

Instead of being able to only bank a single turn's RP, and then loose everything, allow the RPs from the planet to be used for projects on that planet(hex improvments on the planet, building units with SY or MFs), or be allowed to bank it indefinetly. You wouldn't lose the raw materials that would be getting shipped off planet, they'd just sit in a warehouse.

Currently, I'm not planning on removing the RP dropoff from blockades, but it is worth noting that this only affects RP. Military production, R&D, and all other functions of the hex are not impeded by the rule as written, so you can still "funnel" RP into the hex from other locations to run its MFs, SYs, and otherproduction facilities.

I just think that it doesnt make sense that in attempting to defend your planet, you are forced to embargo it. You might aswell just let someone raid it. Either that, or change Defensive Interdiction to grant the -2 against Pirate Transits, and make Defensive Blockade a more powerful version. Because it's negetives far outweigh a -2 to pirates imo.

There are two options for system defense; interdiction doesn't cause economic issues and doesn't tie down mobile units, but also doesn't grant as large a defensive bonus. The added benefits of blockade - the extreme difficulty of bypassing the blockade and the -2 penalty on pirate rolls - are offset by the economic degredation it causes when used in highly developed hexes. Basically, its a "risk vs. reward" type equation. If you know you are going to get hit in turn X, youcan blockade it for one turn, bank the RP, and get the benefits. If on the other hand you want to use blockade as a long-term defensive strategy, its going to start to cost your faction.

So there is no such thing as a "Defensive" Blockade, to try to only hurts you.
Interdictions only apply to stopping forces during battles where Pirate Points were not used.
And no amount of preparing for raids can help defend against them?

the eratta should restore the defensive benefits of the blockade order.

Quick question that is probably in the rules but I missed... What do the Dark count as for dealing with posting attacks - IS or Clan?

I'd prefer IS, but I'm flexible.

Well, not to be contrary, but I'd prefer if you treat the Dark as a Clan faction so we can keep it all in one place. They are Smoke Jaguars, after all...

[Fatebringer]

In my opinion, Blockades are still not defensive measure even with the new errata. It's not worth blockading systems that only produce the .25 RP in your example, and the systems that could actually benefit from it would break some factions bank, even going to a point past the 50% limit that raiding could inter.

[Jeyar]

Can there be something in between? Sort of a: "we know a pirate point will open up so we are already looking at that point, but we're not going to stop traffic that is acting properly orderly" type thing.

[Marlin]

So I am right in my assumption that attacking forces gain something out of it? Means foster and some other tiny RP. But I am not picky.

[DisGruntled]

The current / old incarnation of the blockade rule has allowed for defensive blockades in the past.  I know the Adders lost a good bit of a cluster to the NA while raiding Niops. 

[Fatebringer]

Just a question that has been nagging at the back of my mind since I joined and said, why don't the Ravens have any Recharge Stations. Are there any actual benefits for having One?

+5 MP and 1 RP generation seem pathetically insignificant compared to the investment.

No significant MP Generation, no movement bonuses.

The possibility to gain more MP per cycle, or increase maximum jump distance by 1 for KF or 2 for LF drives seems logical.

My stops at Recharge Stations in the past are little more then RP opportunities to stage a trial for charges that do no actual In-Game benefits.