Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Star Trek: Fleet Captains» Forums » Rules

Subject: Self-destruct and mission fulfillment rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Carl Bussema
United States
Lansing
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If a Klingon uses Self-Destruct to blow up his red-alert-status ship, the card is clear that the VP for destroying the ship is not awarded.

Can the Federation player claim this destroyed ship as spoils for the purposes of things like "Destroy a ship in combat" or "Destroy enemy ships with total size equal to half the VP total for the game..."?

It seems like a really ridiculously powerful card if it not only prevents the VP for destruction but also robs the fed player of claiming those other objectives.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Gormley
United States
Northborough
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
I'm a lover of all things heavyweight strategy!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
InfoCynic wrote:
If a Klingon uses Self-Destruct to blow up his red-alert-status ship, the card is clear that the VP for destroying the ship is not awarded.

Can the Federation player claim this destroyed ship as spoils for the purposes of things like "Destroy a ship in combat" or "Destroy enemy ships with total size equal to half the VP total for the game..."?

It seems like a really ridiculously powerful card if it not only prevents the VP for destruction but also robs the fed player of claiming those other objectives.


It doesn't prevent the ship from being destroyed, so it couldn't preventsmeone for getting points for claiming a mission tat requires the destroying a ship
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe L.
United States
Winchester
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
InfoCynic wrote:
If a Klingon uses Self-Destruct to blow up his red-alert-status ship, the card is clear that the VP for destroying the ship is not awarded.

Can the Federation player claim this destroyed ship as spoils for the purposes of things like "Destroy a ship in combat" or "Destroy enemy ships with total size equal to half the VP total for the game..."?

It seems like a really ridiculously powerful card if it not only prevents the VP for destruction but also robs the fed player of claiming those other objectives.


I would say no, and I am basing that strictly on the wording example of "Destroy a ship in combat." The Feds didn't "destroy" the ship, the Klingons did. I will admit, the example of "Destroy enemy ships with total size equal to half the VP total for the game..." does make me pause, but isn't that a hidden mission? And therefore the Klingon player would not know you were trying to accomplish that. I could be wrong about it being hidden, but regardless, there are sometimes missions you draw that you just have no way of every accomplishing, such as some of the very difficult science missions when you are the Klingons. That's just part of the game to have to cope with, and thankfully they built in the mission cycling system.

In my last game, I self-desturcted two small Klingon ships as the attacker in two different combats. While the VP denial was a secondary goal, I was really going for the automatic damage so my other ships could finish off some bigger Fed ships. It felt like much more of a sacrifice, and didn't feel overpowering. I only won that game by 1 VP.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Dunford
Canada
Kemptville
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The Federation player didn't destroy an enemy ship, so I think it's clear that he/she does not fulfill the mission. Consider if it was a 3 player game with 3 factions (Romulans?). Who can claim to have destroyed the Klingon ship? The Klingon player destroyed it, so I can't see how either of the other factions could make a claim.

Meanwhile, missions always state that VPs are earned for destroying an enemy ship, so the Klingon player cannot complete a mission for self-destructing his/her own ship (but might if a Federation ship is destroyed in the process, of course).

In short, I think self-destructing a ship robs an opponent from being able to destroy it (and uses it to do damage to boot), which makes sense both from a strategy and flavour perspective. As for being "ridiculously powerful", it's certainly less powerful than The Picard Maneuver...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Bussema
United States
Lansing
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, in my game, it denied me 4 VP (it was the last ship I needed to get the size mission; 5 VP if you count the 1 for destruction) and got the Klingons 3 VPs (destroy a ship that has destroyed one of your ships), so a 7 VP swing seems pretty powerful to me, especially since it doesn't even require an action if you can do it on your turn during movement.

But if it does happen during combat, I still think the ship was destroyed during combat, and counts for that mission. The "destroy ships with size..." is a secret mission and does not state the destruction must happen during combat.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Dunford
Canada
Kemptville
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wow, that's a pretty exceptional set of circumstances. To be certain, Self Destruct can be very powerful under the right conditions.

I still think that the use of active (vs passive) voice is important in the mission statements. It doesn't say "watch an enemy ship be destroyed" but rather "destroy an enemy ship". If you didn't destroy the ship, how can you take credit for it and complete a mission that requires destroying an enemy ship?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe L.
United States
Winchester
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
iNano78 wrote:
Wow, that's a pretty exceptional set of circumstances. To be certain, Self Destruct can be very powerful under the right conditions.

I still think that the use of active (vs passive) voice is important in the mission statements. It doesn't say "watch an enemy ship be destroyed" but rather "destroy an enemy ship". If you didn't destroy the ship, how can you take credit for it and complete a mission that requires destroying an enemy ship?


Good points. I know a 7 or 8 point swing does sound like quite a bit when you describe it that way, but like Jeff said, it sounds like the exact combination of cards you both had right at that moment made it feel more painful. That can happen in this game for sure. The next time Self Destructs are played, it might not seem to matter as much.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric B.
United States
East Lansing
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with the above interpretations: Feds can't claim Combat Missions from a Self-Destruct.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Self Destruct say something like "...the Combat immediately ends and blah blah blah"? If I'm remembering that correctly, it seems especially clear than that the ship is not destroyed in combat at all, per se.

If this is the case, though, it would be important to double-check the wording in the rulebook about when a player gets the +1VP for destroying an enemy ship. If that's only during a combat/attack, then a Self Destruct wouldn't grant that +1VP bonus to the Klingons either (assuming they destroy a ship with it).

Again though, I'm basically just raising some questions as I don't have the rules/cards handy and am going off of a very fuzzy memory.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.