Each ADFC allows you to defend a separate friendly ship. If you have 3 ADFC,
you can spread your PDS across 3 other ships than the one that is equipped
with them. Generally speaking, if a ship has more than 2 ADFC it is either
overspecialised or you have been hit by a hideous amount of munitions
(Fighters/SML/Plasmabolts).
Brendan 'Neath Southern Skies
[quoted original message omitted]
It shouldn't matter the number of ADFCs that a ship has greater than the
first. IMO,ALL SHIPS in the covering distance of the ship with the ADFC are
covered ie. a AAA cruiser with one AFDC and Six PDS can cover an infinite
number of ships within the pds umbrella, but is limted to six PDS bursts
because the cruiser only has six PDSs. We played this before and beign there
is no clear rule in the "rulebook", that is what we use.
> "Robertson, Brendan" <Brendan.Robertson@dva.gov.au> wrote:
Each ADFC allows you to defend a separate friendly ship. If you have 3 ADFC,
you can spread your PDS across 3 other ships than the one that is equipped
with them. Generally speaking, if a ship has more than 2 ADFC it is either
overspecialised or you have been hit by a hideous amount of munitions
(Fighters/SML/Plasmabolts).
Brendan 'Neath Southern Skies
[quoted original message omitted]
> Thomas Westbrook wrote:
> It shouldn't matter the number of ADFCs that a ship has greater than
If your group prefers that as a house rule, that's fine - but you should
be aware that it *is* a house rule, and that the published rules explicitly
say something else.
> but is limted to six PDS bursts because the cruiser only has six
Unclear? The rule (FB1 p.7) says:
"One ADFC allows the ship's PDS (any number of them) to fire at any
combination of threats (Fighters, SMBs etc.) that are directly attacking
one other ship that is within 6" of the ADFC-carrying ship."
Exactly which part of "one other ship" is it you find so unclear that you
interpret it as "an infinite number of other ships"?
Regards,
> --- Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:
The 'one other ship' may not be the problem.
> From the limited statements provided, I think
I.E. the six PDS fire at 7 attacking targets with 6 PDS on each different
target. (3 torp fighters, 2 standard fighters, and 2 missiles.) A second ADFC
would allow the same for a second ship.
Thomas will correct me if I am wrong, I hope.
Bye for now,
That's how we have interpreted it. Each ADFC would cover a friendly ship and
therefore any target(s) attacking that ship. You don't need an ADFC to do
point defense fire for you own ship.
Also, I've played where other players have used the "I'm not attacking/
not a threat, so you can't shoot at me with you PDS" scenario i.e. the enemy
fighters are within the 6 mu range and are cruising past. The ADFC would also
allow the ship to shoot any anything it doesn't like, maybe to include
"friendly allied craft", regardless of intent.
Though others have pushed the envelope and used the "any ship.. any
combination of threats . . ." to say/argue that the single ADFC covers
all ships in the 6 mu range, but is limited to the number of PDS, others have
done the latter with "infinite" PDS shots in a turn [which went over like a
lead balloon].
It generally comes down to the English language, and the definition of
what IS is. A co-worker told me that law is nothing more than arguing
over the interpretation of the English language [his words].
> John Leary <john_t_leary@yahoo.com> wrote:
The 'one other ship' may not be the problem.
> From the limited statements provided, I think
I.E. the six PDS fire at 7 attacking targets with 6 PDS on each different
target. (3 torp fighters, 2 standard fighters, and 2 missiles.) A second ADFC
would allow the same for a second ship.
Thomas Westbrook:
> Though others have pushed the envelope and used the "any ship . .
any combination of threats . . ." to say/argue that the single ADFC
covers all ships in the 6 mu range <snip>
> It generally comes down to the English language, and the definition
FT may have some ambiguous areas, but this is not one of them. In this case,
it comes down to what the definition of "one" is, and while
a group can certainly house-rule that "one" means "some" or "many" or
"all", it would definitely be a house rule. (Whether it's *better* or not is a
different question, of course).
> Thomas Westbrook wrote:
> The 'one other ship' may not be the problem.
Quoting the rules (FB1 p.7), capitalizing one word for emphasis:
"Each Point Defence System (PDS) on a ship may fire ONCE per turn,..."
For a PDS to fire at *two* different targets (fighter groups/MT
missiles/missile salvoes/plasma bolts/AMTs/ships) in the same turn, it
would have to fire *twice* that turn. It can only fire *once* per turn, thus
it can only fire at *one* target per turn
> Also, I've played where other players have used the "I'm not attacking/
> not a threat, so you can't shoot at me with you PDS" scenario i.e. the
It would be *logical* for it to do so, and it works fine as a house rule, but
the official rules as currently written don't allow it to do so.
Regards,