ACTA - Carrier Clash

[tschuma]

For the scenario Carrier Clash, it does not specify what Priority Level it is played at. If one side has a Battle Level ship and the other side can only field a War level ship, then what Priority Level is the games played at?

Thanks

Tom

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

you decide whatever PL and point value you want to play at. You're not limited to just a carrier for the battle, but a full fleet that has to include a carrier.

 

[Burger]

Yeah, you roll the PL and FAPs as normal. Then from those FAPs, you must choose the carrier, and can spend the remaining points on other ships.

 

[Iain McGhee]

Just mind that any ship that carries a certain number of fighters (2 I think, not sure) can serve as the carrier, which includes Omegas and the like. Nasty surprise for someone who brings along an Avenger or Balvarin !

 

[Burger]

Yeah, the rules don't say it needs to have the "carrier" trait.

 

[dmcgee1]

Yeah, the rules don't say it needs to have the "carrier" trait.

Smacks of Rules Lawyering to me - the scenario is "Carrier Clash" - not "Any Ship that can Carry Auxiliary Craft Clash."

I would say that one vessel would have to have the Carrier trait in order to considered a Carrier. Otherwise, my FAP's will be spent on lots of Hermes-class Transports.

 

[Harry Lonsdale]

Yeah, the rules don't say it needs to have the "carrier" trait.

Smacks of Rules Lawyering to me - the scenario is "Carrier Clash" - not "Any Ship that can Carry Auxiliary Craft Clash."

Not at all. The Vree don't have any ships with the Carrier trait; others have ships that are called "carriers" even though they don't have the trait (Amar Fast Carrier, Milani Carrier, etc).

 

[Sulfurdown]

The "Carrier" trait you could think of as an "Advance Carrier Docking Bays" It's only included when the ship can launch/recover ships faster then standard and doesn't really define a ship as a carrier. It's some later rules from armageddon that emphasized the "Carrier" trait as something very special over ships that just carry aux craft (from which I'd say that a Carrier 1 trait should be used so that all ships defined as carrier are so delineated but that's just my personal view).

:!: Also to consider, only your carrier can exceed the Engagement Priority Level. So if you manage to roll a 10 point skirmish, you can field that Battle level carrier but all your other ships must be Patrol or Skirmish level. :!:

 

[Da Boss]

What happens if you don't have a ship that carries aux craft - Vorlons for instance?

 

[Greg Smith]

What happens if you don't have a ship that carries aux craft - Vorlons for instance?

You re-roll the scenario.

 

[Silvereye]

For the carrier clash, you roll to determine the scenario level as normal (Patrol/Skirmish/War etc.). This provies the upper limit of non-carrier ship you can take in your fleet, but the "carrier"vessel is exempt from this (the "carrier" must, however, be a ship carrying at least 2 flights of auxillary craft).

For example; playing as the Minbari, you roll the dice and end up with a Raid level Carrier Clash. You are entitled to take a Morshin Carrier (Battle) or Sharlin War-cruiser (War) as part of your fleet. Due to the fact that both these ships carry two or more flights of auxillary craft. All the rest of the ships you select for your fleet MUST be of Raid level or below, you may not field a Tinashi War-frigate or Troligan armoured cruiser in this instance (as they are Battle level ships), but could choose from Tigara, Teshlan Ashinta, Leshath, Torotha, etc.

See Sky Full of Stars, Page 166.

 

[Iain McGhee]

Yeah, the rules don't say it needs to have the "carrier" trait.

Smacks of Rules Lawyering to me - the scenario is "Carrier Clash" - not "Any Ship that can Carry Auxiliary Craft Clash."

I would say that one vessel would have to have the Carrier trait in order to considered a Carrier. Otherwise, my FAP's will be spent on lots of Hermes-class Transports.

It's not Rules Lawyering at all - it's quite plainly there in the rulebook that for this scenario the "carrier" can be any ship that carries a certain number of auxiliary flights. If you want to house rule it that the "carrier" in this case must actually have the Carrier trait then fine, but not all races have them.

 

[Burger]

Even if your race has them, your campaign fleet might not have any.

 

[dmcgee1]

Yeah, the rules don't say it needs to have the "carrier" trait.

Smacks of Rules Lawyering to me - the scenario is "Carrier Clash" - not "Any Ship that can Carry Auxiliary Craft Clash."

I would say that one vessel would have to have the Carrier trait in order to considered a Carrier. Otherwise, my FAP's will be spent on lots of Hermes-class Transports.

It's not Rules Lawyering at all - it's quite plainly there in the rulebook that for this scenario the "carrier" can be any ship that carries a certain number of auxiliary flights. If you want to house rule it that the "carrier" in this case must actually have the Carrier trait then fine, but not all races have them.

I rescind my earlier statement, and apologize for my insinuation. After, actually, reading the rules, I agree with the definition of "carrier" stated in the rules for the scenario.