[Tattersail_]

Imperial Historian, on 12 February 2019 - 09:32 AM, said:

I thought anything that could be carried also moved as per usual movement rules. So if he moved a carrier anything in it would move but unless infantry is already loaded into a carrier they can't move.

I doubt that is the case. It specifically says two ships. Imagine I had 2 carriers in my home system with 16 fighters I could move that army into Blend's homeworld in one action. Has there been an instance in any game so far that we can do that?

When ships are built in the spacedocks they are not loaded into carriers either, so in theory you could take 4 fighters and 4 infantry by using warfare secondary in one carrier.

Either case it will affect my next move so I will need clarification from Khell.

If you cannot take infantry in this step then I'll not need to plonk 6 infantry down on top of Mallice. 3 would suffice I think.

[Galactic Council]

You can take as many fighters as you can hold with the Warfare secondary. But you cannot pick up infantry off planets and carry them. You could only carry them if they were already on board - e.g. if your carrier was floating around in an empty space hex with 4 infantry on board.

[Tattersail_]

Galactic Council, on 12 February 2019 - 10:00 AM, said:

You can take as many fighters as you can hold with the Warfare secondary. But you cannot pick up infantry off planets and carry them. You could only carry them if they were already on board - e.g. if your carrier was floating around in an empty space hex with 4 infantry on board.

So Tapper can take a carrier 6 fighters from his HS to Lodor? Asking for a friend.

[Imperial Historian]

He can only do that if the system is empty of all ships except his own AND if that is a legal move for his carrier. Since tappers carrier can only move 1 space, HS to lodor would be an illegal move.

[Tattersail_]

Imperial Historian, on 12 February 2019 - 10:17 AM, said:

He can only do that if the system is empty of all ships except his own AND if that is a legal move for his carrier. Since tappers carrier can only move 1 space, HS to lodor would be an illegal move.

Can he move that one ship twice though, move 1 space then move same ship again?

[Galactic Council]

Tattersail_, on 12 February 2019 - 10:20 AM, said:

Imperial Historian, on 12 February 2019 - 10:17 AM, said:

He can only do that if the system is empty of all ships except his own AND if that is a legal move for his carrier. Since tappers carrier can only move 1 space, HS to lodor would be an illegal move.

Can he move that one ship twice though, move 1 space then move same ship again?

I believe all the movement is meant to be simultaneous, so no. As the first movement would have to happen before the second movement could be initiated.

[Tapper]

Imperial Historian, on 12 February 2019 - 09:20 AM, said:

Tapper, on 12 February 2019 - 08:55 AM, said:

Imperial Historian, on 12 February 2019 - 08:36 AM, said:

Tapper, on 12 February 2019 - 07:33 AM, said:

Yeah. Sorry. Was sick, baby is sick, wife is sick, work doesn't wait and I need to read through chat. My move is simple enough (play AC) but I need to look at the map to pick a planet for it.

I would be very interested in your Political Secrets PN - what would you like in return?

Ouch, hope you feel better!

If you just need a list of planets you can play it on, say what it is and someone will probably have time to get you a list together.

I do feel better! Given Plague's notorious reputation for wiping out entire 10-man garrisons, I felt I needed to make the decision myself.

Searching for Mellon on the map.

Bet you never thought you would be stalling so long for warfare

Well, this action was somewhat useful. Best case scenario Blend has to stall a turn to buy more infantry, worst case scenario he'll have 3 instead of 4 infantry to march on with.
But in general, yes, it has been a slog and I am less likely to control Mallice as a result. Then again, if I really, really wanted it, I'd have researched Grav Drive.
While the CT it gives will certainly be missed, it makes the decisions where to place PDS's a whole lot easier and it will go a much longer way towards protecting my core territory once I have PDS II.

[Galactic Council]

The Embers on Mellon have been extinguished by the Jol-Nar created, Hacan-funded Moistening Syndrome.

[Gnaw]

Galactic Council, on 12 February 2019 - 10:00 AM, said:

You can take as many fighters as you can hold with the Warfare secondary. But you cannot pick up infantry off planets and carry them. You could only carry them if they were already on board - e.g. if your carrier was floating around in an empty space hex with 4 infantry on board.

I think thee is wrong. It is a movement and anything that is legal in a movement is allowed, i.e. picking up infantry off a planet. I remember asking this same question of D’rek in the first game and that was her answer.

[Galactic Council]

Gnaw, on 12 February 2019 - 12:14 PM, said:

Galactic Council, on 12 February 2019 - 10:00 AM, said:

You can take as many fighters as you can hold with the Warfare secondary. But you cannot pick up infantry off planets and carry them. You could only carry them if they were already on board - e.g. if your carrier was floating around in an empty space hex with 4 infantry on board.

I think thee is wrong. It is a movement and anything that is legal in a movement is allowed, i.e. picking up infantry off a planet. I remember asking this same question of D’rek in the first game and that was her answer.

No. It refers specifically to ships. You also cannot land infantry. I've looked it up

[D'rek]

Galactic Council, on 12 February 2019 - 12:18 PM, said:

Gnaw, on 12 February 2019 - 12:14 PM, said:

Galactic Council, on 12 February 2019 - 10:00 AM, said:

You can take as many fighters as you can hold with the Warfare secondary. But you cannot pick up infantry off planets and carry them. You could only carry them if they were already on board - e.g. if your carrier was floating around in an empty space hex with 4 infantry on board.

I think thee is wrong. It is a movement and anything that is legal in a movement is allowed, i.e. picking up infantry off a planet. I remember asking this same question of D’rek in the first game and that was her answer.

No. It refers specifically to ships. You also cannot land infantry. I've looked it up

It's a made-up strategy card (based on a 3rd edition one, but still made up for 4th ed), so there's no official ruling.

Ways that it would be consistent with other 4th ed rules would be:

{a} ships moved by the Warfare secondary cannot transport other units at all

{b} ships moved by the Warfare secondary can only transport units which are already in the same space area as where they start the movement (no picking up from planets, no transporting units from other systems that are partway along the move even if in space)

{c} ships moved by the Warfare secondary can transport units like a normal TA (can pick up from planets, can even pick up partway through the move)


A is more in keeping with the effect from 3rd edition and my original intent - more about plopping a destroyer into an empty hex between you and an incoming enemy fleet to slow them down, and *not* meant to be a replacement for a tactical action. C, IMHO, is over-powered for a secondary.

Either way we should change the wording to be more specific. Or just come up with a whole new effect.

[Tapper]

Galactic Council, on 12 February 2019 - 10:44 AM, said:

The Embers on Mellon have been extinguished by the Jol-Nar created, Hacan-funded Moistening Syndrome.

All we needed to do was make a sufficiently enticing shampoo commercial, really.

[Galactic Council]

I know it’s made up, but I took it from the third edition rules for Warfare secondary, which is closest, and they stated that it can move fighters inside other ships but not infantry (unless they were already in the ship).

But of course it is your card! I definitely don’t think it should be C.

This post has been edited by Galactic Council: 12 February 2019 - 01:42 PM

[Tattersail_]

Nom has passed Gnaw, and I don't think there have been any secondaries.

[Tapper]

My 2 cents: we need a working solution now and a clearer wording or a whole a new power that still feels like something warfare-like, next game.


I'd personally say that if the ships move as is, with anything they had on board but not dropping or taking anything else on board, whether at the start, at the end or midway through the move, feels about right.

And no matter how we define it, the shit starts slowly hitting the fan when looking at additional effects.

First, we encounter a split between technology that applies to tactical actions (Gravity Drive, Lazax Gate Folding) and those that do not but still apply to moves (Light/Wave Deflector, Anti-Mass Deflectors, Magmus Reactor).
It seems logical that technology that applies to tactical actions does not apply. After all, this is not a tactical action.
Other tech that does not mention tactical action but affects pathing and possibilities seems okay to apply to Warfare's Secondary: language wise those three all define what can be travelled through on a move, without mentioning anything about Tactical Actions.

Secondly, and much worse: the question begs itself what to do with effects (including but perhaps not limited to Neuroglaive, Nullification Field, Spacial Conduit Cylinder and E-res Siphons) that touch on activation of the system the ship travels to.
Practically speaking, the ship moves but the system it moves to is not activated, so it should not count.

However, such a definition would also preclude Warfare's secondary from activating PDS fire. Space Cannon is, per the glossary, exclusively activated as part of a Tactical Action per rule 66.2 ("during a tactical action, after the Move Ships substep of the Movement step,....". And by that reading, this Secondary would in one fell swoop become the king of all late game Secondaries.

[Imperial Historian]

Tapper, on 12 February 2019 - 02:04 PM, said:

My 2 cents: we need a working solution now and a clearer wording or a whole a new power that still feels like something warfare-like, next game.


I'd personally say that if the ships move as is, with anything they had on board but not dropping or taking anything else on board, whether at the start, at the end or midway through the move, feels about right.

And no matter how we define it, the shit starts slowly hitting the fan when looking at additional effects.

First, we encounter a split between technology that applies to tactical actions (Gravity Drive, Lazax Gate Folding) and those that do not but still apply to moves (Light/Wave Deflector, Anti-Mass Deflectors, Magmus Reactor).
It seems logical that technology that applies to tactical actions does not apply. After all, this is not a tactical action.
Other tech that does not mention tactical action but affects pathing and possibilities seems okay to apply to Warfare's Secondary: language wise those three all define what can be travelled through on a move, without mentioning anything about Tactical Actions.

Secondly, and much worse: the question begs itself what to do with effects (including but perhaps not limited to Neuroglaive, Nullification Field, Spacial Conduit Cylinder and E-res Siphons) that touch on activation of the system the ship travels to.
Practically speaking, the ship moves but the system it moves to is not activated, so it should not count.

However, such a definition would also preclude Warfare's secondary from activating PDS fire. Space Cannon is, per the glossary, exclusively activated as part of a Tactical Action per rule 66.2 ("during a tactical action, after the Move Ships substep of the Movement step,....". And by that reading, this Secondary would in one fell swoop become the king of all late game Secondaries.

I think the key is that warfare only targets empty systems, so not triggering PDS would be fine, most of your other options would not trigger as a result.

I think your other points feel about right for me, but we need it defining (and preferably this definition added to the starting post)

[Galactic Council]

I believe that we've always played it as Warfare sec NOT initiating PDS fire, as the systems the ships travel to are not activated.

[Galactic Council]

I personally like Warfare sec to include moving whatever is 'on board' at the time the ship is moved, but they cannot pick up or drop off. As IH mentioned, those techs you raise talk about activating systems, and Warfare does not do that, so they wouldn't apply. Other 'passive' effects, such as being able to go into supernovas if you have Magmus Reactor, would apply.

[Galactic Council]

The question I have is about a specific unit - the Saar Floating Factory. It counts as a ship for movement, so would one be able to move it with Warfare secondary?

[Tattersail_]

Galactic Council, on 12 February 2019 - 02:19 PM, said:

The question I have is about a specific unit - the Saar Floating Factory. It counts as a ship for movement, so would one be able to move it with Warfare secondary?

Well if you are allowing a carrier to carry fighters, then you'd have to let the factory take it's giant fleet.

I think 2 ships total as per the wording would be best or change the wording.

The ships would need to follow normal movement rules without effects.