Critical Damage question

[Democratus]

If you suffer multiple critical hits with the "-1 Damage Control" result, do they stack like AD or are they considered redundant like Speed damage?

Really trying to master the rules for the upcoming campaign!

 

[Greg Smith]

Critical hits are not cumulative. Except AD loss, which is specifically stated otherwise.

So multiples of -1 damage control do not stack, but must be repaired (or damage control teams given first aid) multiple times.

 

[Democratus]

Okay. New question.

A flight of fighters can be put on Escort duty for a ship.

When another fighter attempts to fire on the ship, the escoring flight can race out to dogfight the attacker.

What's the limit to how far out an escorting fighter can move to intercept like this? Should you take into effect how far the fighter has already moved in the turn?

 

[Greg Smith]

There is no limit. There is no need to track how far the fighter has moved.

It is one of those abstract rules that keep ACTA simple.

 

[AdrianH]

The way I think of it is that the fighter which is in support sees the attacking fighter coming in and, instead of staying next to the ship it's protecting, changes course slightly to intercept the enemy. So instead of an Aurora moving 12" along with a Hermes and then 4" out to jump on the Sky Serpent which is about to shoot, it moves sqrt(12^2+4^2) = 12.65". Granted it won't work exactly like that, especially if the Sky Serpent is approaching the Hermes from head on, but it does provide an explanation as to how the Aurora might keep pace with the ship, intercept the fighter, and still be within its own speed limit.

 

[Democratus]

This situation is coming up with Thorun torpedofighters.

Since they have a range of 6", its conceivable that a fighter could fly FAR beyond its speed to intercept a torpedofighter that is attacking. In some cases more than 150% of its listed speed (tiger starfury escorting 8" and then moving a further 6").

This doesn't seem quite right.

Don't want to seem like a stickler on this one, but is there consensus on this or is it a house rule some of us use?

 

[Burger]

The rules say the interceptor just moves automatically. So rules as written, there is no limit and no need to keep track of the movement used/remaining. Just keep track of which ones have reacted, as they can only do it once each. As Greg says it's an abstraction to keep it simple.

A lot of things don't "seem right", such as why do you need a special action to not move. It's just to keep it simple.

 

[AdrianH]

This situation is coming up with Thorun torpedofighters.

Since they have a range of 6", its conceivable that a fighter could fly FAR beyond its speed to intercept a torpedofighter that is attacking. In some cases more than 150% of its listed speed (tiger starfury escorting 8" and then moving a further 6").

This doesn't seem quite right.

Don't want to seem like a stickler on this one, but is there consensus on this or is it a house rule some of us use?

It is certainly not a house rule. The rules as written make no mention of keeping track of how far the fighter has moved along with the ship before then moving to intercept an attacker. If an enemy fighter attacks the ship, the supporting fighter can dogfight it, then return to its support position, regardless of what happened in the movement phase. By contrast, the rules do specifically say that if the fighter can't keep up with the ship then it drops behind and is no longer in support.

So let's have a really silly example. A Riva (speed 7) is supporting an Ikorta (speed 8 ). If the Ikorta moves its full 8", the Riva is left behind and can not support it. On the other hand, the Ikorta moves 7" and the Riva stays with it. Then a Porfatis attacks from range 8", the Riva dogfights it, then returns to the Ikorta if it wins the dogfight.