The rules, as written, don't support the concept of "side" or "rear" shots as a positional matter (there are concepts of "in arc" and "out of arc", such as for Backstabber, but that's different). That's because firing range is measured closest corner to closest corner. Also, for the aforementioned reasons. The game is meant to be simple and quick. Such requirements demand a larger degree of abstraction.

You're getting LoL on your X-Wing Wurf.

Though I made it to the final round at Portage, my would-be opponent wasn't feeling well and needed to leave, so we ended up not playing the final round. This is what my plan was for Imperials: Delta Squadron Pilot + Ion Cannon (33) Whisper + VI + ACD + Navigator + Adv. Sensors (43) 2x Academy Pilot (24)

Whoops, posted in the wrong topic. EDIT: So, I just read the topic, and I want to weigh in. There seems to be this weird distinction between "Fly Casual" and "play by the rules." These things are not mutually exclusive, and insisting that someone play by the rules is not contrary to the Fly Casual ideal. As for your specific situation, the best advice I can give you is to never, ever, ever base a ruling on a player's judgment. Always call over a TO, and insist that the TO base their ruling on a relevant entry in the FAQ and/or tournament rules. Only when no such entry in the FAQ/rules exists should the TO be making a judgment call. Print and bring a copy of the FAQ and tournament rules yourself. Know where to find things in them. Because there are players out there who will use social pressure to gain an unfair advantage over you, especially if they know that the TO isn't 100% familiar with the tournament rules for X-wing. Also, because not all TOs have the FAQ/tournament rules memorized, knowing where to find rulings can be a huge time saver for the TO when he's got knowledgeable players on hand to point to the right sections.

An Ionized ship does perform a 1 white maneuver, but no dial is placed. It matters for things like Advanced Sensors. That's the part that's in question. It's tough to tell if the "receive stress" clause is contingent on them having a "chosen maneuver" (does an Ionized ship even "choose" a maneuver?) to look at. If the wording were more like Advanced Sensors, this wouldn't even be a question.

Ionized ships don't choose or place a maneuver dial. Precedent has shown that any effects based on the "revealing of a chosen maneuver" actually requires that a maneuver dial be placed, which doesn't happen with Ionized ships. For example, an Ionized ship cannot use Advanced Sensors. However, Raymus Antilles doesn't say anything about "revealing" a maneuver, just "looking at a chosen maneuver". I suppose that's open to interpretation, but I get the impression that in the case of Ionization, no maneuver is chosen, so you can't "look at the chosen maneuver" to trigger the follow-up clause of "if it's white, get stress." Did you come up with this scenario on your own, or did you have some precedent for it? If there's an official FFG ruling on Raymus vs. Ionization, I'd like to read it.

Pre-tourney prep: 1) Force yourself to go to bed early the night before. Sometimes that means forcing yourself to wake up early the day before, as well. Either way, get a full night's sleep. 2) If you've got opponents available and willing, do a marathon of X-wing a couple days before the tourney. Prep yourself mentally. 3) Spend the day before the tournament doing everything EXCEPT playing X-wing. Get anything and everything done that you don't want to be thinking/worrying about during the tourney. Clean your place, pay your bills, get stuff in the mail, pay your taxes, etc. 4) After #3, spend some time relaxing. At the tourney: 1) Bring several bottles of water and plenty of snacks (I routinely forget to do this). Keep drinking that water regularly throughout the day; you'll shed it pretty quickly. 2) When you arrive, quickly identify where the bathroom is, what restaurants are nearby, and whether there's a water fountain available for refills. 3) Sit down between rounds, or whenever you can spare a few minutes. Most rounds are played standing up after the first turn. 4) Lots of tourney halls get hot with all those people. When you can, duck outside for a few minutes, or (once the summer really hits), go somewhere else where there's AC. 5) Talk to people. Be social. It helps you stay sane. Really.

While I agree that you've got much better potential with a Rebel squad, let me offer an Imperial perspective on your collection. No TIE Expansion means no Howlrunner, which hurts a bit. After tinkering with your available ships a bit, I came up with two possibilities: Darth Vader - 29Adrenaline Rush - 1 Engine Upgrade - 4 Soontir Fel - 27Push the Limit - 3 Academy Pilot - 12 Academy Pilot - 12 Academy Pilot - 12 Darth Vader - 29Squad Leader - 2 Engine Upgrade - 4 Scimitar Squadron Pilot - 16Assault Missiles - 5 Homing Missiles - 5 Seismic Charges - 2 Academy Pilot - 12 Academy Pilot - 12 Academy Pilot - 12 The first squad relies more on outmaneuvering your opponent in the initial skirmish, whereas the second squad relies on a heavy alpha strike to soften up priority targets for the TIEs to eat. Filling 100 points was a bit tricky, and mostly required Vader to accomplish. He's a solid pick, though, and how the squads played out really depended on how you would want to play Vader in each. In the first, Adrenaline Rush makes Vader a strong initial jouster with huge flanking potential immediately following the first pass. Fel forces a tough decision on your opponent on who to try and chase down first: Fel, Vader, or the mini swarm of TIEs. In the second, Vader plays escort to the Bomber, helping him quickly and efficiently fire his payload, then breaking off to act as a harrier while the (probably wounded) Bomber and TIE/lns attempt to swarm down the (hopefully) softened enemy. I wouldn't be embarrassed to field either of these squads at a tournament. Of course, I'd like to have more Imperial options, but if this is what I had to work with, I could do worse.

...I feel bad for ya, son. I got 99 problems, but hittin' ain't one.

A co-worker saw me wearing mine at work today and wanted one, but they're not available for order anymore. Anyone got any extras lying around they wouldn't mind parting with?

I was planning to do pretty much exactly that with my Phantoms. Though the Stygian cloaking devices were more purple-ish than blue, as I recall.

Python. Ick. Better, but not by much. C++, now there's a language I can get behind. Back in my day, we used parantheses for everything! Now get off my lawn, you dirty hippies! *cane shake*

Nothing good ever came from a program written in VB.

Rebel vs. Rebel and Imp vs. Imp are considered to be training exercises. In the EU, there's plenty of description of using low-power cannons and dud ordnance for "live fire" dogfight training. Their onboard computers simulate the damage any given hit would have caused by disabling systems and whatnot. That should tickle your storyboard fancy and still allow mirror matches.

I think you're missing the mark a bit. Higher skill pilots do have the potential to have better agility and attack values, if you consider them over the course of an entire game; because a skilled player can utilize the pilot's high PS to set up more/better shots and avoid being in firing arcs. But ultimately, the ship is the ship. You can't make it shoot harder or dodge faster than its machinery is capable, no matter how good the pilot is. The point here is that the burden of maximizing the usefulness of the stats of any given pilot falls on the player, not the pilot.

In general, not having initiative is a good thing during combat. It only matters for ships of equal PS. Even if one of your ships is destroyed by an enemy of equal PS, it will get the shoot back before it's destroyed. Having more information about the state of the field is always better; so shooting second is, in general, better. There are only a couple of scenarios where having initiative during combat gives you an advantage. Turr Phennir is one of them, since he can boost/barrel roll out of the arcs. Now, the Activation phase is a whole other story. Having initiative gives you tactical advantages (such as denying action economy), whereas not having initiative gives you positional advantages. Some squads value one over the other, so being able to choose whether you have initiative or not is a great option to have.

Finally, a printed ruling on the interaction between FCS and Gunner. No more uncertainty from the naysayers. It works.

I saw some posts in here making a comparison between "looking at facedown cards" and "pre-measuring actions." This is slightly off-topic, but I wanted to clarify something here. The basic game rules allow for pre-measuring of actions such as Target Lock, Barrel Roll, and Boost to determine if they're legal before committing to the action. However, in an officially sanctioned FFG X-wing event, there are special rules regarding these kinds of actions. You must commit to taking the action before measuring to see if that action is legal. If it is legal, you must continue with that action. If not, you may select a different action. Further clarification, if the action requires you to choose a direction (such as Boost or Barrel Roll), you commit to the action and direction before measuring. If the action cannot be performed in the direction specified, you may select another action entirely; you are not obligated to perform the same action in a different direction.

Sorry, I wasn't entirely clear. I'm not suggesting a scenario involving Ten Nunb WITH an Autoblaster. I'm drawing a comparison between Ten Nunb's "uncancellable crit" ability and Autoblaster's "uncancellable hits" ability.

Let me elaborate on my Autoblaster comparison a bit. Let's quantify two different scenarios: Scenario A: Ten Nunb rolls HHCC against a 3 Agility ship that rolls EEE for evasion. Scenario B: A generic ship with an Autoblaster rolls HHC against a 1 Agility ship that rolls E for evasion. 1) The people claiming that Scenario A results in 1 crit would say that Scenario B results in the crit being canceled. 2) The people claiming that Scenario A results in 2 crits would say that the crit in Scenario B cannot be canceled unless you roll enough Evades to completely cover all the normal "uncancelable" hits first. Does #2 sound reasonable to anyone else? Didn't think so. EDIT: Updated for clarity; I'm not suggesting a "Ten Nunb with an Autoblaster" scenario. I'm comparing the "uncancellable" qualtity of Ten Nunb to that of an Autoblaster.

Let me put it this way: the first joker that comes at me with an Autoblaster telling me that I can't Evade the crits rolled on that attack because the regular hits "ate" my Evade results is going to get a stern look.

I agree with Khyros. To satisfy the wording of Ten Nunb, there should be at least 1 uncancelled crit once all modifications and rolling have been completed. There's no more complexity to it than that. If the intent was that the first crit attempted to be cancelled cannot be cancelled, the card would have been worded that way.

This is hyperbole. Even against a ship with 0 Agility, you will roll 0 hits 12.5% of the time at Ranges 2-3. It's true that Gunner is less likely to trigger against lower Agility defenders, but it's by no means "wasted points". And FCS is useful all on its own, regardless of defender stats. All that being said, I've tested Buzzsaw vs. AS/HLC extensively, and I think the AS/HLC shuttle comes out slightly ahead.

In my experience, Recon Spec. is subpar on a BH. Gunner is vastly superior in terms of action economy. Even against low Agility defenders, you will still roll no hits 12.5% of the time at Ranges 2-3. And against higher Agility defenders, it emerges as the superior option. It also mitigates the Blinded Pilot crit quite nicely, though that's a fringe benefit. With Recon, if the intent is to, in general, use one Focus for offense and one for defense, then you're falling short on both offensive and defense capability, as Gunner + Evade yields better averages on both. Yes, double Focus means you could get better returns if they're both used for defense, but what good is a Firespray that lives an extra round or two if it's doing no damage in the interim? tl;dr: I recommend the 2nd list, dropping the APL on the BH and going with Gunner over Recon.

Wingman doesn't really work with Opportunist all that well. Wingman's stress removal happens before Opportunist triggers during the Combat phase. That stress will still be around for the following turn's Activation phase.