Forensicus
-
Content Count
1,281 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Forensicus
-
-
I think there is a grey area though on if Jan is adding a die to an attack, or if she is effectivly raiseing the number on card.
There's actually a good precedent for knowing which of these Jan does, and that is Wedge. Wedge doesn't reduce the number of dice rolled, he actively reduces the stat. I don't think it would actually change the outcome here, since Jan would (hypothetically) increase the stat for the duration of one attack, and then the ability would end before the next attack began... but for this specific question, we do have another example of an ability that actually does change a stat, so we know what it would look like.
The rest of this discussion is becoming downright Twilight Zone. Since the actual rules issue seems to be settled for those who actually care about the rules, I'm going to bow out.
Please don't bow out. I am not asking you to read the rules another way than you do; you have continously excelled in reading rules as written with an added ability of disregarding anyone or anything that indicate that there is such a thing as "rules as intended". The last thing is a thing that FFG does quite a lot. This doesn't seem to be a way/form that you care for in any way, but correct me if I am wrong.
And I'm not sure that's a grey area at ALL.
Jan says "allow that ship to roll one extra attack die."
Wedge says "reduce the defender's agility value by 1."
Those are pretty clearly not the same thing. She adds a die, he affects the stat itself.
If that's a grey area to you, as far as which she's doing, it's no wonder there's a failure to communicate.
My "friend, you're right, those are not "the same thing". If they had worded Jan's ability similar to Wedge's then her ability would only be able to affect the attacking ships Primary Weapon. And thereby we wouldn't need to debate CM and Jan EVER but then what would we have used all this time for instead ??
-
To CW and Buhallin: Kindly abstain from telling me what my grounds for debating this is. I will just assure you that it isn't "that I want her to!!"
Ohh, I don't think I have ANY, not even the remotest of hopes that I will make you change your mind, Buhallin, on this matter (or any other now that we are at it. I know that I am dealing with a man writing a blog where you go through the points where you describe an explain in great depths how, why and where FFG are wrong in their rules and FAQ's. Apparently am "splitting hairs" when I try to represent what I believe (not want) to be Play As Intended while I do see you as a Class A example of a Play As Written kind of guy.
Allow me to quote from your blog:
Proximity Mine: When a ship executes a maneuver, if its base or maneuver template overlaps this token, the token detonates.
Q: If a ship barrel rolls or boosts onto a proximity mine token, does the token detonate?
A: Yes
I think the problem with the ruling here is pretty obvious. Boost and Barrel Roll are not maneuvers; they do not trigger effects which depend on maneuvers. But in this case, they do. The ruling pretty directly contradicts the rules and card text as printed.
How To Play It
Let’s get the important thing out of the way first: this is the right way to play it. Whether we like it or not, whether it follows the rules or not, the FAQ tells us how to play this particular interaction. It is a binding rules document, and I expect that no TO in the world would find you very persuasive if you tried to argue that it should be played otherwise. If you want to argue it, it’s always your prerogative – but don’t credit me when you do
- See more at: http://teamcovenant.com/buhallin/2013/07/29/when-devs-break-their-own-rules/#sthash.gkgJMucI.dpuf
My view on that matter (Prox Mine) was always that a mine (IRL) wouldn't care HOW you got close to it, but only THAT you got close to it. And yes, they wrote it bad on the mine card, but it goes to show that even the best are mistaken.
Too tired for further comments ATM.
-
I'm flattered that you'd quote me, but you're rather dramatically taking me out of context. There is no real rules question here - it's as clear as just about anything can be in the game these days. You can't actually articulate any rules-based reasons for it to work the way you want it to - you're using a combination of fluff, power, and "I want" arguments, none of which actually have any bearing on the rules.
Don't go all victim-card because everyone's being mean to you. If you can actually argue the rules, do it. If you can't, fine - but you're well outside the lines here, and nobody's breaking Wheaton's Law by calling you on it.
Ohh my "dearest" Buhallin, I am just fine and find it almost cute that you think I am feeling victimized. Let me put your mind at ease and let you know that I am not (just as I'm sure you're not either) loosing any slep over this. I have repeatedly, and will do so again, written that I am fine especially if it will be FAQ'ed. The fact that someone (other than me) have felt the need to make this hread in the first place does indicate (at some level) that not everyone posses the same superior intellect and understanding of the rules as you and a couple of other people have.
And stating that I wish it "to work the I want to" is your choice/opinion. I participate in these discussions to
- Put in my points/view (just like you)
- To see and learn what other people think
- To hopefully become wizer or at least more clear on the issues
I do believe that is also your mission with your blog, and if not then please let me know, okay?
-
Someone once wrote:
"Accept that your views are subjective, other people will look at it differently, and the only objective basis for playing the game is the rules as they are printed. If something in the rules really does present a serious problem, try and work out the differences without resorting to namecalling and insults to get your way. Take it from someone who took that approach for far too long: that sort of behavior does absolutely nothing to improve the game for anyone."
And the same game wrote:
"Finally, I’ll quote Wil Wheaton: Don’t be a ****. If you really hit these situations, nobody is right or wrong. Give up the ruling and let your opponent have it, or go to dice. If you’re in a tournament or other competitive environment don’t waste game time arguing it, even if you’re sure the TO got it wrong. I’m (obviously) as intense as anyone when it comes to being right about rules, but it’s important to recognize that the problem in these situations lies with FFG and their rules team, not your opponent or the TO. Taking it out on them is just bad form."
-
I will, as long as you promise to play it as you please to do :-)
-
Also look at Team Covenant's channel for a lot of good reviews, unboxing and interviews with key people in the know.
TC actually quite often have live streams from their games so subscribe to their feed or Facebook and you should be good to go. Anoother tip worth considering: download and install the vassal program
You will find a series of very useful tutorials on the installing proceure
When you play a game on vassal you have the option to start a log file that "records" alle the moves, rolls, chat etc. for the entire game for later analysis. It is also brilliant to test out your setup, moves and strategy playing solo or if you want to make a clean looking reconstruction of an IRL in-game situation/battle.
Check it out and see what you make of it.
Take care
-
Unfortunately I can't press "✓ Like This" more than once, but if you ever post a video of the wings opening and closing too, then at least that will get another for sure
-
Jan is different from Howlrunner because... wait for it... Jan is different.
"If you have no stress tokens..."
That's the key difference. Jan's ability is actually available for each attack, but you can't use it if you're stressed. That means if you use it on the first, you can't use it on the second. Unless we're still debating whether or not the Clusters count as two attacks, which I was hoping we'd resolved.
I disagree with CW on the timing, though - "When attacking..." applies to the entire attack process. This is the same as Dark Curse, whose "When defending" ability applies to the entire time he's the defender. We know that wording doesn't apply to a specific step, because DC stops focus spending both in Step 2 (by blocking secondary weapons) and Step 3 (by stopping the attacker from using a focus token to modify their results).
It is very frightening to once again be opening the apocalyptic "can of worms" that the CM "...to perform this attack twice.." has become. I guess no one would ever have imagined that this would become such a huge issue. I will dare taking just a sneak peak under the lid of said can by uttering the following:
In my humble world there is still a difference between "perform this attack twice" and "perform 2 attacks". Mind you, I am not, repeat NOT, saying that CM's attacks aren't distinct but it is still part of the (how can I say it without being assaulted/accused for coming up with a totally new and far fetched concept?? Ahh, I think this might work out) overall singular attack made when you launch/fire the CM. My reasoning being that if the 2 CM distinct attacks very truly as distinct as, let's say Kath followed by Gunner, then how are you at all able to roll the second attack for the CM?? You just spent the TL foron the first attack?? And just before you come down upon me and "strike down upon me with great vengeance and furious anger" I will provide you with the answer; it is because, as we all know, the CM card says: "Spend your target lock and discard this card to perform (.....wait for it.....) this attack twice" FFG have even been so kind as to put "twice" in bold.
And just before I sneak off to bed let me stress that I am not claiming "superior knowledge" or to be "a keeper of the one and only truth" and actually find these disussions quite a learning experience as long as we can keep the tone at least semi friendly. I respect (though not necessarily agrre with) your opinions, but respect the FAQ even more :-)
Take care.
-
Ohh, this is going to be a good/interesting one:
I think Buh nailed it. It's what I was trying to explain, but as usual, better.
It lasts the entire duration of the attack - in fact the entire combat round, if you want to get technical, but if it's used she gets stressed and it can't get used again until that stress is cleared. As Buhalin said - if you could do some cross faction craziness where you had her with Captain Yorr (as an off the wall example), where he could take that stress token FOR her, she could in that example use her ability on both attacks of the cluster missile.
She adds the die. Takes a stress token. Yorr intercepts and takes the stress token for her. She now has no stress and is free to use her ability a second time.
I think a relevant part of the FAQ is on page 6, regarding cluster missiles triggering Gunner or Luke.
"Each attack granted by Cluster Missiles is distinct, so either attack can trigger Gunner/Luke Skywalker."
Also important to note that if you fire CM, miss, decide to trigger gunner - you are not allowed to resolve the second cluster missile attack. It is overwritten by the "You may make no further attacks this round" text on Gunner/Luke.
I think that's a pretty important precedent for how Cluster Missiles would interact with Jan, as well.
Which I now see Ken just very clearly explained RIGHT above this. I have literally no idea how I missed that post, so all due props to Ken for
that answer first. I wish I could claim he snuck it in while I was typing this, but he posted that an hour ago. 
So I guess we are now allowed to play cross fraction squads?? Last time I checked Jan Orr was a devoted Rebel while Yorr was more inclined towards the Dark Side?? Of course, seeing that we are dealing with a female and a male they COULD have become quite a bit too "friendly"
Edit: Just read your post more closely and realized that you had pointed out that you were aware of the cross fraction issue. Please accept my apology.
-
The difference being, Howlrunner's ability doesn't STRESS her, so there's nothing preventing her from affecting subsequent attacks. Also she says primary weapon only, and thus doesn't affect cluster missiles at all. But otherwise yes, totally identical.
- First of all I was not advocating that Howlrunners ability could ever be used on a secondary weapon attack, so that's beside my point
- Secondly, there are NUMEROUS Pilot Abilities that are completely distinct (detattched??) from whether or not the pilot is stressed (Han Solo, Backstabber, Krassis, Wedge etc etc) so that is not a valid point IMO
What is your response to this?
-
Two attacks. Attacks the same target twice. A Mensa member can probably spell imbecile. Nobody said this was too powerful, just that it's not how it works. The ship isn't still attacking, it's attacking again. Because Kath says "when attacking," all inclusive, full stop. Blue was a terrible, illegible choice.
LOL, fortunately I am not claiming fluency in English as it is not my first language, and I was too lazy to run spellcheck on my posting. Luckily it seems like your far superior mind was able to grasp my point nonetheless, which only serves to speak vloumes of your intellects supremacy
And the same goes to your abilty and goodwill to let my unfortunate choice of color pass uncommented
Take care
KineticOperator reacted to this -
I apologise for my poor or inacurate wording (a huge point in these discussions) but English isn't my primary language and thus I sometimes can't word it exactly as intended. The following replies should be seen as an attempt to clarify some of my point and not as an attempt to retreat, okay?
Quoting the latest FAQ on CM issue I find this to be an argument for my side that it IS one continous attack:
This might be a good circumstantial argument, except the FAQ says directly that it is NOT one continuous attack.
Q: If a ship using Cluster Missiles hits with the first attack, but then misses with the second attack, can he still use Gunner/Luke Skywalker even though the first attack hit?
A: Yes. Each attack granted by Cluster Missiles is distinct, so either attack can trigger Gunner/Luke Skywalker.If it were one attack, there would only be one chance for Gunner to trigger. If it were one attack and you hit with the first "half" of that one attack, you would not have failed to hit, so you would not be able to trigger Gunner.
And if we want to dive into the incidentals, note the verbiage there: "first attack" and "second attack" and "Each attack granted by Cluster Missiles is distinct". You really can't read that to be one single attack.
Ahh, I am fully aware of the FAQ clarification that CM is carried out as two seperate attacks. However I still believe (a dangerous wording I know) that CM attacks are rolled seperate to illustrate how a cluster of missiles are being hurdled towards the target ship. And since the Jan-buffed ship was buffed when it started the attack (i.e. when it spent the TL) then I really can't logically understand why it should loose the extra dice on the second attack. And yes, I now that Marksmanship was clarified in the same FAQ to modify both CM attacks, and that the wording of Jan isn't worded the same way, but it still says (just like Kath's ability) that the buff works "...when attacking.."
And I am steering clear of the in-depth semantics of "triggers" etc. since I am not fluent enough to go into that area, certainly not in this thread.
Yep. Cluster Missiles are two distinct attacks according to the FAQ and Jan only affects a single attack with her ability. Therefore, she can't help with both attacks.
Huh?!? Please explain it to this simpleton why that is so? Allow me to bring in Howlrunner into this in order to examplify:
Howlrunner: "When another friendly ship at Range 1 is attacking with its primary weapon, it may reroll 1 attack die"
Shouldn't her ability only be able to modify the FIRST attack if Kath (with Gunner) misses and then uses the Gunner, or would you not also let Howlrunner re-roll 1 of the Gunner's attack dice? This is truly a case of 2 seperate and distinct attacks and this is further distinguished from the 2 CM "perform this attack twice" by the fact that when you use Gunner you are in fact allowed to switch to another target than the one Kath rolled for.
In my little world (which obviously seems very simple to some of you guys) the wording for Howlrunners ability and Jan's are EXACTLY the same, and Jan even takes a stress in order to grant her buff to the attacking ship.
I will, as always, obey and abide to a FAQ ruling
-
“Of all the threads in all the forums in all of the internet, I walk into yours...."
About as delightful as being followed from thread to thread by a select group of detractors, I imagine. Some people just don't know how to move on.
Aaaaaand reading WW's comment is not so delightfulI'd be careful throwing around the word "triggered" here. Other people may lash out at you in their ignorance.
-
I'd be careful throwing around the word "triggered" here. Other people may lash out at you in their ignorance.
Aaaaaand reading WW's comment is not so delightful
Syleh Forge and Jfitz1431 reacted to this -
Welcome.
The two pieces are completely separate. It is actually easier to consider the second part first.
"Action: Flip this card facedown."
This is just what it says. As your action, instead of taking a Target Lock or Focus etc. for your action you may choose instead to take this action, and turn the card facedown. At that point, it would be just another facedown damage card like any other non-crit damage your ship takes, and has no further "special" effect.
"At the start of each combat phase, roll 1 attack die. On a "hit" result, suffer 1 damage."
After the action phase (when you performed your maneuvers and actions), if you have not used an action to flip this card facedown yet then this effect would take place. You would roll 1 die, and if you got a *hit* then your ship takes 1 damage exactly as it would if that damage had come from shooting/obstacles/whatever.
Basically, the console fire is relatively easy to extinguish but your pilot has to spend an action doing so. If the fire is not out, then there is a chance it will damage the ship. Until you spend the action to extinguish the fire, it will continue to burn.
KO, you've done it again: a swift, concise and polite answer. Always a delight to follow/read your posts.
-
I would say that it should/would work on both attacks based on the following "reasoning":1) The Cluster Missile card says "...to perform THIS attack twice" so even though you roll twice it is denoted as 1 attack (IMO). I believe that this is done the way it is (rolling 2 times) to illustrate the way the missiles "work"2) MM works on BOTH attacks (including the [Focus] to [Crit] on the first [Focus] each time)3) Krassis's reroll would work on both rollsHaving said that, then it is still true that neither you nor the defending ship can use any kind of token ([Focus] or [Evade]) twice but this is slightly beside the point. But either way: any ship carrying missiles/thorps WILL be an expensive vessel and thus become an interesting target. With Maarek Stele you are getting 2 Shields & a higher PS than the average TIE-jockey
I think you hit on one of the strongest arguments AGAINST it here, to be honest. If its the same attack, and Jan's ability affects it both times, why *wouldn't* a single focus or evade spent stay in play and affect both rolls? By that logic it's still the same attack, right?
Nope, now you're just putting new stuff/meaning into my argumentation: First of all the CM card says this "...attack twice.." and I have NEVER agued that you can/should/may use ANY token twice, so you're not taking me down that road. It is not, never have and never will be even similar, and (as I am not a complete imbecil (actually a Mensa member) I am completely aware that the point you are trying to force into my argument, have already (redundantly) been covered in the latest FAQ:
Q: If a ship spends a focus token when
attacking with Cluster Missiles, does the
focus effect modify both attacks?
A: No. The focus effect modifies a single attack.
Can't we agree that CM is not just a watered down Homing Missile? The reason WHY CM attack is performed in 2 rolls is (IMO) a way of illustating/simulating how a cluster of missiles would work in contrast a single missile (like Assault or Concussion Missiles).
On a sort of side note I haven't seen anyone complain that Jon's buff makes Proton Torps "too powerful" so why this fuss over that it makes CM a bit more robust??
Where I think people get confused is the 'this attack twice' but. It's classic goofy FFG wording. The FAQ defines the steps of an attack pretty clearly - I'll clarify when I have them in front of me. But the way it seems its meant to be read is you're making the same type of attack (the missile), twice. Not that they're literally both the same attack.
Ahh, but isn't the ship that Jon cast the buff on still attacking?? IMO it is still in the proces of attacking when it makes it's second roll of the "..perform this attack twice..", or am I WAY off?? On that note allow me to bring in the wording of Kath Scarlett's ability: "When attacking, the defender receives 1 stress token if he cancels at least 1
result" So if Kath have a Gunner on board, why should we take her ability in consideration on the Gunners attack? Put another way, again clearer when I grab my rules, you're walking through the steps two distinct times: roll attack dice, modify attack dice, roll defense dice, modify defense dice, compare results. Two attacks on the same target using the same weapon. If something affects you the whole round, it does both. If it affects one roll, it doesn't carry into the next attack.
Quoting the latest FAQ on CM issue I find this to be an argument for my side that it IS one continous attack:
Q: When a ship attacks with Cluster Missiles,
can it perform the two attacks against
different targets?
A: No, it must attack the same target twice.
If Jan uses her ability, she takes a stress token right then. You resolve attack #1, begin attack 2. After you roll the dice you get to the modify dice step. You want to use Jan. She now has a stress token, which prevents her ability from taking effect, There's no way she wouldn't take a stress token immediately on attack one, and thus have it when checking to see if she qualifies for dice modification during that step of attack two.
IMO Jon takes the stress in order to grant the chosen ship an extra Attack Dice for it's attack and if luck (or strategy) has it that the chosen ship just happens to be attacking with CM then that's just brilliant if it's you are the one who are doing the attacking.
And just allow to make this point as the final addition: How many ships on the Rebel Side are actually able/allowed to carry CM's?? I can only make that list to be: Han Solo (50 points incl.CM), Lando (48 incl. CM), Chewbacca (46 incl. CM) and the A-Wings (ranging from 21 to 30 points incl. CM). Adding Jon to this squad will bring you up to 46 to 55 for the A-Wings and a whooping 71 to 75 points for the YT-1330's without any further upgrades fo either ship.
Is that really THAT terrible??
And finally: as always I will respect and abide by any ruling in an upcoming FAQ on this issue.
Take care out there, it's just for laugh and giggles
-
I would say that it should/would work on both attacks based on the following "reasoning":
1) The Cluster Missile card says "...to perform THIS attack twice" so even though you roll twice it is denoted as 1 attack (IMO). I believe that this is done the way it is (rolling 2 times) to illustrate the way the missiles "work"
2) MM works on BOTH attacks (including the [Focus] to [Crit] on the first [Focus] each time)
3) Krassis's reroll would work on both rolls
Having said that, then it is still true that neither you nor the defending ship can use any kind of token ([Focus] or [Evade]) twice but this is slightly beside the point.
But either way: any ship carrying missiles/thorps WILL be an expensive vessel and thus become an interesting target. With Maarek Stele you are getting 2 Shields & a higher PS than the average TIE-jockey
-
Cluster Missiles make two separate attacks. Effects which modify one don't automatically modify the other. I usually think about Stealth Device for this - if you target a ship with Stealth and hit it with the first attack, is the +1 Agility still in effect for the second attack just because it was for the first?
Each attack is independent, with independent effects and modifiers.
This is why cluster missiles suck. A TL+Focus has less damage potential than with a TL+Focus on a concussion missile IIRC. if the card read something along the lines of "if you spend a focus token on one attack, it modifies the second attack as well" then they would be very worth their points cost. Right now, they are just 'meh'
That's also why I prefer running CM along with Marksmanship on Maarek Stele og even Kath Scarlet. Can really hurt Agility 1 ships
-
I love X-wing on Vassal!
Yes, there is a bit of a learning curve, but it's a very accurate representation of the physical game. There are a couple of people currently working to get Wave 3 uploaded, but it may take some time. There are also a few glitches (like the infamous Target Lock glitch), but there are ways to work around it. And sometimes the server loses connection in the middle of your game. But it's WAY better than not getting to play at all.
I'm trying to figure out a good way to schedule games so that you don't log on crossing your fingers that somebody else will happen to be available at the same time. I suppose we could start a thread in Organized Play if people want to check there, but there's got to be a more efficient way to schedule games than this forum format.
I agree. Check out the brilliant tutorials on YouTube made by some of the Team Covenant guys and then find/follow the tread on TeamCovenant, there have been 2-3 larger tournaments (to my knowledge) with participation of several of the best players out there including the current World Champion Hothie. And they are currently running a pirate league/campaign too. So install, practice and look out for games on the server, make sure that you are running 4.2 (version) mad the corresponding expansion/files then you should meet someone soon. Or post in here for games.
Good luck and enjoy
-
That's a good point, and another point in favor of Marksmanship versus plain old Focus. I haven't had my coffee this morning so if I am completely wrong here I apologize, but Han + Gunner lets you potentially roll four times that round. Shoot, potential reroll with Han. If that misses, Gunner shoots, potential reroll with Han. I think.
If you have a focus token, you can turn all eyeball results to hits on any ONE of those four rolls, which is nice. But if you have Marksmanship, as pointed out, it lasts the entire round, which means in addition to turning one eyeball to a CRIT, before turning the rest to hits, you also have four potential chances to make use of it.
Of course you're only going to *actually* use it once, because once you hit something you can't use Gunner, and if you were able to change eyeball results using Marksmanship you're unlikely to randomly use Han to reroll them. But it does give you four potential chances to land one or more eyeball results among your attack roll, and hopefully get some use out of Marksmanship.
It's true that MM only has a real Damage/Crit Damage effect once but I prefer to look at this way:
The Han/Gunner/MM combo will VERY likely strip your target of [Focus] and/or [Evade] tokens during the attack(s)/roll(s) and thereby makes any subsequent attacks by other ships more likely to cause damage.
But it IS a very expensive solution, no doubt about that, and unless you have Biggs nearby it will make Han a very important target that your opponent must/should focus their fire on, but that's just keeping it true to the movies; after all Jaba the Hutt have put quite a bounty on Han's head, right??
-
So my understanding of the Han Solo and Gunner/Luke Skywalker interaction is that the Gunner allows a second attack if the first misses, and Han can choose to reroll all dice in either (or both) of these attacks (except for those dice which have already been rolled).
Firstly is this right?
And following on from that, is there a whole lot of point putting a Gunner on Han? I've been sold on the usefulness of the gunner (ie in clearing away the defender's evades and focus tokens with th first attack), but isn't it better 'value' on one of the other Falcon pilots as Han already gives you a second chance of a better roll?
And finally, does Marksmanship then tip the balance back in the favour of Han with the gunner, in order to maximise those focuses and crits?
You should look at it this way:
- Han (with Marksmanship) shoots first on Range 2 (as always ) and he rolls 2 x [blank] and just 1 [Hit] so he chooses to reroll all. He then rolls [Hit] , [blank] and [Focus] and uses Marksmanship to change the [Focus] to a [Crit]. Final result [Hit], [blank] and [Crit]
- The Defender Rolls 1 [Evade] and has 1 [Evade] token which he spends, so the attack misses
- Now you can/may (should) use the Gunner to perform a second Primary weapon attack.
- The Gunner rolls 3 [blanks], and thus Han chooses to re-roll all dices and rolls [Focus], [Focus] and [Crit], and then uses Marksmanship to the final result is now 2 x [Crit] and 1 [Hit]
-
The defender (having spent the [Evade] token has to rely on the dices and rolls 2 [blanks] so the net result is 2 x [Crit] and 1 [Hit]
I don't know if this is the BEST example out there, but you can see or get the idea that having to re roll ALL dices doesn't necesarily mean that you will hit anything (I know you didn't think so
) so having a Gunner or Luke ready isn't a totally bad idea. Even with a Target Lock that allows you to re roll the number of dices of your choosing it still feels GOOOOOOD having a backup in the Gunner, sort of like having Howlrunner nearby Hope you found it useful?
May The Force be with you.....
- Han (with Marksmanship) shoots first on Range 2 (as always
-
I get all that, but I still have to disagree. Further targets are going to be A) smaller, and B) require much more lead time.Actually, WAAAAGH, it probably would be. You'd have to get an engineer or someone to explain the math behind it, but it requires much smaller adjustments to track something at long range, versus short range. Just imagine trying to draw a bead on a deer or something if it was running 100 yards out, verus 5 feet in front of you. In the first case you can draw a nice steady bead, get a little lead on it, and you're good. In close, it's going to be in and out of your field of vision before you can ever even look down the barrel. I'm sure there's a sciencey term for that effect, but yeah I think something like a turbolaser absolutely would have an easier time tracking and swiveling to fire at a fighter a ways out, rather than right in close.
Note, that's for a small, fast moving thing - obviously that's less true with other capital ships, hence the whole "we won't last long in close with those Star Destroyers" thing.
Here, let me give you an analogy, based on my own experiences: I've spent more time than I'd care to admit in the turret of an up-armored Humvee. The hand crank is slow and unwieldy, this is true, but I guarantee you I would still have an easier time hitting targets at close range with an M249 or M240 than I would leading targets several hundred meters away.
If you still can't empathize, hopefully some of you out there have played MechWarrior Online. Is it difficult to track a light mech at close range with an Atlas? Absolutely. Is it harder than hitting a light mech at distance with a pulse laser? Absolutely not.
WonderWAAAGH, nobody is trying to take away your experience and you are, as always, entitled to your own opinion. Granted, some f your points are quite valid and true, but you must admit that there are many other things that actually do make it much harder/impractical or even impossible to hit with large guns/turrets or similar in VERY close range??
Nobody is saying that calculating lead time/distance is easy, but if I was tanding (or flying) right in front of your slow moving turret (IRL or in the game) it would be very easy/fast for me to move around the barrel, let's just say a few meters and then it would take a looong time to turn it around AND acquire a new Lock", wouldn't it??
That's kinda also why some missiles/torps aren't suited for close combat, they simply can't turn/adjust fast enough on that close of a range.
So it seems okay to me, and remember, it's just for fun :-)
-
Here is a nice interview with Hovarth, amongst soooo much other stuff they discuss scale at around 49 minutes
-
I think you will find many scenarios in here, plus each of the larger ships (YT-1300 (Millenium Falcon), the Firespray (Slave-1) and also the Lambda Shuttle comes with scenarios or missions. And next year there will be even larger ships and 2 new game formats called Epic and Cinematic. Check out YouTube and the forums for more information.
And best of luck on your adventures in/with this game, I think you will love it either way you want to play it.
May The Force be with you
that answer first. I wish I could claim he snuck it in while I was typing this, but he posted that an hour ago. 
Jan Ors Buffing Cluster Missile Attack Dice
in X-Wing Rules Questions
Posted
I didn't say that. If it is not too much to ask for, I would kindly ask you to read what I wrote, you seem to be able to do so in general but apparently not grasping the meaning of it, so allow me to explain:
IF Jan Ors ability stated that "...increase the attacking ships Primary Wepon value by 1..." THEN it would be (more) analogue to Wedge's ability (both could be said to influence the stats (Attack and Defense respectively)), and THEREBY it would prevent in confusion (even on my part) whether or not Ors ability could ever influence CM or any Secondary Weapon for that matter.
Are we clear now on that point?? We were actually agreeing on something (WOOP WOOP), that there is a difference, and it (almost) saddens me that this point of agreement was wasted on you.
Alas, as previously stated I do not retain any hope (or desire/need) to reach agreement with you or Buhallin; it is obvious that we do not think alike: when I read some rules that seems confusing or right out conflicting I use these discussions to air my views, see what comes back in response, test if I agree or find it still unsettled and then repeat the process several times. I find some of the ways a couple of you guys see it is sooooo different (I am NOT saying wrong) than the way I see it, but when you encounter an opposing view/thought you (IMO)