David Anla Shok'
Mongoose
Lord David the Denied said:
Oh. I can agree with you rule wise for one on one games. In a campaign, I'd make allowances.
Fleet Carrier trait question
- Thread starter Everyman
- Start date
Oh. I can agree with you rule wise for one on one games. In a campaign, I'd make allowances.
I'd have argued against the rutarian, as it can't 'normally' carry them. It's a paid for upgrade.
I do tend to agree that fleet list is fleet list, I just disagree with idea that no matter how daft the rule should stand as the rule. It's the type of thing I prefer to house rule sometimes. The Black Omegas and in particular get me a bit as it really is a starfury... no spare parts to argue, unless you stock spare pilots but as far as I knew carriers usually had extra planes rather than extra pilots. At least you could argue that the shial might need something special to keeps it's better stealth.
I guess I still see fleet carrier as more command and control telling fighters who to pair up with to get back into the fight, rather than really landing and repairing or re-arming. Just don't see them as having the time for that.
Ripple
I do tend to agree that fleet list is fleet list, I just disagree with idea that no matter how daft the rule should stand as the rule. It's the type of thing I prefer to house rule sometimes. The Black Omegas and in particular get me a bit as it really is a starfury... no spare parts to argue, unless you stock spare pilots but as far as I knew carriers usually had extra planes rather than extra pilots. At least you could argue that the shial might need something special to keeps it's better stealth.
I guess I still see fleet carrier as more command and control telling fighters who to pair up with to get back into the fight, rather than really landing and repairing or re-arming. Just don't see them as having the time for that.
Ripple
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Ripple said:
The upgrade is for the fighters themselves, I can't see any difference in launch/recovery methods between Sentris and Rutarians, they're much the same size and shape, and a pilot is a pilot, as long as he's checked out on the Rutarian he's fine. It's just a limited-deployment fighter.
Ripple said:
it doesnt say anything about paid for upgrades. it says any aux craft it can normally carry. and the balvarin can carry rutarians, same as the posiedon can carry firebolts.
same applys if the balvarin comes carrying sentris but can recover raziks. any flight it can normally carry can be recovered.
It can't normally carry them unless you pay for the upgrades.katadder said:
But its not just about that. Its about spare parts and replacement fighters, to get the flight back up to usability. If 3 of the 6 in the flight are destroyed, 2 have their stealth systems damaged and the other has its Ion Bolt destroyed... how is a Balvarin going to get the flight back to fighting status, unless it has spare Rutarians and Rutarian parts on board (as paid for by the upgrade)?Lord David the Denied said:
Lord David the Denied said:
Should be same for Shials then I would think? the Rutarian has massive stealth upgrade.
I had always played that Rutarian didn't come back but after several people confirmed they could (at tournis etc) I used em - I thought it seemed a bit odd unless you had paid for them as upgrades.........
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
The Shial isn't an upgrade option for a Morshin, though is it? It's an ISA unit, so it's the same situation as the EA/Psi Corp discussion. Different fleet list, can't be recovered.
Burger said:
so you buy 2 flights and can recover as many as you want? you also saying it cant recover raziks unless you swap some sentris for them? as the razik has differant requirements too. thing is perhaps it was carrying rutarians on its last assignment? or perhaps its prepared to carry them on its next assignment, either way it could have spares left over or ready as it can carry rutarians.
a fleet carrier can recover any flights it can normally carry, this is mainly to stop brakiri fleet carriers recovering that huge fighter that it cannot carry. the balvarin can carry rutarians, the posiedon can carry firebolts. just because they are not currently carrying any doesnt mean they cannot recover them. otherwise the posiedon would have to have a mix of every single fighter type available and it doesnt say this. as they can both carry the relevant fighters they can recover them even if they are not loaded with them at the start of the game.
nekomata fuyu
Mongoose
If you're going with approach that you can't recover fighters that you need to pay extra for, then you can't recover those fighters even when you pay for the upgrade. Why? Because by that logic, you still can't normally carry the fighters.
By the letter of the rules, you can either have it one way or the other. You can't change the meaning of normally depending on if you've paid the upgrade cost.
Personally, I think you can recover the upgraded fighters regardless. You can normally carry the upgraded fighters - you just have to pay extra to do so for game balance reasons. You can normally pay the cost if you so wish though.
By the letter of the rules, you can either have it one way or the other. You can't change the meaning of normally depending on if you've paid the upgrade cost.
Personally, I think you can recover the upgraded fighters regardless. You can normally carry the upgraded fighters - you just have to pay extra to do so for game balance reasons. You can normally pay the cost if you so wish though.
I think it depends on how you see upgrades. I see an Olympus with Flash Missiles as a different bird than an Olympus with long range missiles, and that's an unpaid for upgrade.
Basically the Balavarin in this case comes in two flavors... rutarain ready and not rutarian ready. Back in AoG T-bolts caused a similar issue. The different shape and length of the fighter ment the same bays could not service both, you had to upgrade. I expect that the facilities for a rutarian are not the same as for a sentry or a razik.
It all depends on where you are putting you emphasis and meaning as far as normally goes. For me it means the what the ship 'as bought' can normally carry. I could even argue for that it couldn't carry more than it has upgraded spaces for... and still be techincally right if I wanted to go that way, as normally for that ship would be the ability to carry a set number.
Anyway, my point was that language is slippery, and both sides can be perfectly correct based on the wording. We need an out side voice... someone who can speak as if with the voice of god (note the small 'g', no heresy here)... we need Matt!
Ripple
Basically the Balavarin in this case comes in two flavors... rutarain ready and not rutarian ready. Back in AoG T-bolts caused a similar issue. The different shape and length of the fighter ment the same bays could not service both, you had to upgrade. I expect that the facilities for a rutarian are not the same as for a sentry or a razik.
It all depends on where you are putting you emphasis and meaning as far as normally goes. For me it means the what the ship 'as bought' can normally carry. I could even argue for that it couldn't carry more than it has upgraded spaces for... and still be techincally right if I wanted to go that way, as normally for that ship would be the ability to carry a set number.
Anyway, my point was that language is slippery, and both sides can be perfectly correct based on the wording. We need an out side voice... someone who can speak as if with the voice of god (note the small 'g', no heresy here)... we need Matt!
Ripple
I believe someone did jump over to do one, but it got answered by someone before Matt, and that usually means he won't look at it (or is at least much less likely). He prefers to look at unanswered posts first to maximize the number of queries that get good answers, counting on other mongoose/playtest folks to give good rulings on other threads.
This one has a couple of folks from the play test community involved so you need to step up one more level to get a definative voice of authority.
Ripple
This one has a couple of folks from the play test community involved so you need to step up one more level to get a definative voice of authority.
Ripple
Iain McGhee
Mongoose
I'd side with those who said that upgraded fighters that need to be paid for cannot use the Fleet Carrier trait. Don't think they qualify as "normally carried". Only exception being that I would allow a Fleet Carrier that had paid for a particular upgraded fighter type to recover it.