Marksmanship reads the following: "Action: When attacking this round, you may change 1 of your (focus) results to a (critical hit) result and all your other (focus) results into (hit) results." By dissecting the phrase in question, we see the following; "Action: When attacking this round" (The phrase "this round" is an adverb phrase subject to the verb "to attack") When discerning technical language, it's common practice to remove modifiers from a sentence to distill the nature of the statement, and find the basic meaning. Without the modifier in question, the sentence reads as follows; "Action: When attacking, you may change 1 of your (focus) results to a (critical hit) result and all of your other (focus) results into (hit) results." This statement sets no time limit, and would make the ability usable for the remainder of the game without requiring an action each turn. An example of a card affecting another like this for the remainder of the game would be Damaged Cockpit, which reads "After the round in which you recieve this card, treat your pilot skill value as "0." The game uses these adverb phrases plentifully to indicate criteria that must be met for a special ability to apply, such as the following examples; Backstabber: When attacking from outside the defender's firing arc Maulter Mithel: When attacking at range 1- specifies the range must be 1 Winged Gundark: When attacking at range 1- specifies the range must be 1 Horton Salm: When attacking at range 2-3- specifies the attack must be at range 2-3 In all these instances the adverb phrase is subject to the verb "to attack" and set specifications for when the ability applies. Meanwhile when a card modifies the rules for a set time frame, that specific quality is mentioned. Examples include; R2-F2: Action: Increase your agility value by 1 until the end of this game round. Swarm Tactics: Until the end of this phase, treat the chosen ship as if its pilot skill were equal to your pilot skill. Card text which applies without exceptions does not state it always applies, it just omits the exceptions. Examples include Wedge Antilles, Luke Skywalker, Darth Vader and Dark Curse. It would be a very difficult sell to claim the ability of Dark Curse only comes into play for one attack in a given combat phase but not another. By combining basic rules of grammar and the linguistic conceits of the game, the most logical conclusion states when using Marksmanship to fire Cluster Missiles, both attacks can use the focus to critical hit dice modification. If it was the other way around and only one of the two attacks could be modified, it would more likely read as such; "Action: Once this round when attacking, you may change 1 of your (focus) results into a (critical hit result) and all your other (focus) results into (hit) results." Because it does not specify this happens once this round the ability applies for the entire round. I understand picking apart language in this manner is a very tedious process and this particular wording can be problematic. The mistake is an easy one to make, similar to omitting serial commas. We'll need an FAQ document to be clear on the designer's intent, but the card text as stated allows the full ability to be used on every attack made during the round in which the action is taken. Resource for how adverb phrases modify speech, and what verb they are subject to: javascript:void(0);/*1348457600503*/

Warboss Krag said: For actual sizes, I turn to the initial size-comparison sketches in the Star Wars Sketchbook. The X-wing is 22mm long; the TiE fighter is 9mm long. However, the TiE fighter has a front view as well, and it comes out to 12mm wide by 20mm tall, which is a much larger volume overall. So, yes, the TiE fighter would actually look quite large compared to an X-Wing or Y-Wing. If the models were made in scale, the TiE fighter would be lying on its back in the package in order to fit into a package the same size as those used for the X-and-Y-wings. Which sketchbook would that be? Is it something contemporary that has been published, or concept art for the movie? Either way, hardly a credible source to be cited, the closest thing we have to official is what appeared in the movies. I can't think of anything more "official" to something in a movie than the movie itself. And as said before, that's right about the size of the figures anyway, with the vertical measurement of the TIE solar panels being slightly shorter than the overall length of the X-Wing.

In addition, you never get the range bonus due to it being a secondary weapon.

We had four people playing over at Paladin this last Sunday, looks like there will be a tournament over at Sci-Fi City in a few weeks.

R2D2 said: erm… theres no point in talking about canon if you are referring to facts! doesnt mean something cant be internally cohesive… The movies are internally consistent, the problem comes the moment you add the expanded universe into the mix. Considering at no point in the movies did they cite specific measurements or specs for the ships, I'm willing to believe that the studio masters used in the films are accurate.

Mansions of Madness, Space Hulk: Death Angel and WFRP already do small POD expansions. I'd love to see X-Wing do similar things.

Backstabber, because he has his very own theme song. He's funky!

I've maintained for a very long time that there's really no such thing as "canon" for Star Wars. If you cite different sources you get different numbers, sometimes ranging wildly. For example, I've heard things about A-Wings having newer and more sophisticated shield generators, but at no point in the movies is that mentioned. Hell, I'm not even sure A-Wings are referred to by name. I'm pretty sure the lack of canon is intentional in some regards. The trench run in New Hope isn't about ship specs or how many laser blasts it takes to drop the shields on a Y-Wing, it's about a hail Mary pass by the rebels that almost fails until the shady scoundrel grows a conscience and buys the protagonist the opportunity to use his magic and make an impossible shot. Continuity is great and all, but when you wind up getting multiple authors together who don't collaborate at all, like in the expanded universe, it really goes to pot. Besides, numbers just get in the way of storytelling, and I'll take a good tale over accurate technical specs any day of the week.

I use this. javascript:void(0);/*1347941442732*/ Cheap, easy and it fits the ships perfectly.

Hrathen said: Another stratagy to use against Luke with r2 would be to leave him for last. This speaks to another general strategy: target priority. As a general rule, if a model winds up with a lot of offensive power or disruption capability with no major increases to defense, I'll go after that one first. Wedge is a perfect example, he hits hard and isn't any more durable than a standard X-Wing. Luke is really difficult to take out, but doesn't hit any harder than other X-Wings. Wedge is the primary target between these two.

Hrathen said: Do you always have to keep the lower skilled pilots in front? TIEs seem to be all about working together and fighting in formation, but I haven't got the nack yet. I find myself colliding with my self too often. Unfortunately yes, the Academy Pilots usually wind up in front. I've found avoiding the collisions is one of the most important things you can do as an Imperial player. If you can get the evade action, it's really hard to shoot a TIE down. Otherwise your hull is made of paper mache. That's why I'm practicing formation movement, it keeps my figures organized and avoids collisions with friendly models. I'll probably post a few pics of how I do it tomorrow.

After playing a few games, I think the Imperials are much better served by a combination of harassment and mob tactics to take on the rebels. Focus fire is extremely important if R2-D2 is on the table, but only for that model. An X-Wing can take a grand total of five damage, only two more than a TIE and with a lower Agility. Considering you can very easily outnumber your opponent by a 2:1 ratio, it's not difficult to ping the slower X-Wings to death over the course of several turns. The biggest thing I've learned is the importance of evasion, and knowing when to evade and when to focus. I think that's the biggest way around the shields of the rebels. Of course, if your positioning winds up well enough and you run into this situation it's pretty much game. Three academy pilots in a row, all evading. Backstabber where he belongs, in the Y-Wing's side arc. I had tagged a point of damage on both Rebel ships earlier in the game, but this turn saw both of them out of action. Use that 1-distance attack bonus whenever you can, and don't be afraid to sacrifice a TIE to down a rebel. They can't trade ship-to-ship with you and come out on top.

Parakitor said: Nice. So did you keep your TIEs that close together in formation the whole game? The final positioning was more providence than design, but still interesting. I've been playing around with formation movement, and it seems surprisingly effective.

Today we were at Paladin Tech and Games over in Avalon Park. There's a few other stores in town, once we get more people we'll figure out a regular meeting place.

Prathin said: Davenport, but my schedule is all wonky so my gaming availability is limited at best. No worries, I just got a game in at my FLGS and it looks like we'll have a pretty good crowd playing. I'll publish the times when we meet regularly, show up if you can.

Resized picture, because apparently I can't edit.

Another Imperial victory over the rebels, as a squadron of Academy Pilots maintains formation against the traitorous Duch Vandar. Poor Dutch…

Hello everyone, I'd like to get a regular league together in sunny Orlando, post if you're in this area.

Prathin said: Davenport, FL here Well, good to know other people in central Florida are looking forward to the game. If I can get enough people together, I'm thinking about running a regular league.

Lovely Orlando, Florida here.

FarkonGnome said: Oooooo I like! I'm curious as to how you have to print the segments out, as a printer can't print to the full edges of a piece of paper. To you have to cut out the sides removing the margins where the printer couldn't print at? Can you cut and paste an example of their instructions to determine if I want to buy that and tell my friend we don't want to use that Monday Knight product (after seeing the picture of the item someone posted I could do a better paint job than that). If that PDF has the option to print the entire layout, I might be tempted to buy it and take it up to a local drafting supply place and have them print it out on a E size piece of paper and then attach it to the the piece of metal we'll use for the magnet idea I mentioned earlier. The PDF is just a bunch of 7.5 x 10 inch tiles, a quick run with an x-acto knife will trim it to a 36x36 surface. I hopped into a graphics program and just set it up as a huge file, I'll be printing it out in the next week or so. Worldworks is awesome, if you've never seen them before. I'm a huge fan, cheap terrain is awesome.

I'm in the process of printing a 3x3 patch of this on vinyl. http://www.worldworksgames.com/store/index.php?view=product&product=91 I'll post pics when it's done.

Man, we're milking this for all it's worth.

He should feel sheepish.

felkor said: FFG has stated before that as far as Dust is concerned, they do not want "rare" miniatures, that they want the entire line to always be easily accessible. When asked awhile back about Joe and Sigrid, they said that the issue would be addressed. There should certainly be no surprises to see these 2 figures available again. My money is on Joe and Sigrid being included in the next wave of hero packs, whenever they're released. And hopefully another Axis hero in power armor.