I've got an HCD mat that I bought days before the FFG announcement and have played on one of the FFG mats. Either FFG got HCD to make the mats for them, or bypassed the middle man and found HCD's supplier. The mats are pretty much exactly the same. They even both have a minor problem where the mats bubble slightly (no so much to make them unplayable) in a distinctive diamond pattern.

Didn't know about the Y-wing, that does make me happier. I'm assuming it also comes with enough base inserts to use it.

So one of the big supposed draws of S&V was the ability to re-purpose some existing ships to scum. Am I right in assuming that right now that means buying another copy of S&V per refit? Hell, that means my existing z-95 and y-wing models are useless with S&V. Would be nice to be able to obtain refit kits of some kind. I don't need 8-10 z95's

Engine upgrade doesn't help you run into anything. You can't boost to overlap. If someone is playing a maneuverable build and they are letting you steamroll over them with just engine upgrade, it just means you outmaneuvered them.

It's really not this cut and dry, and I imagine this is also why you may get simple textbook responses from FFG for e-mails about legality, but you won't get a wide breadth public response on the issue. There is a reason FFG gives discretion to TO's in these situations. Consider that we know thanks to youtube videos that the product is available to consumers in limited form. It is within the realm of possibility to show up at a Store Championship with the product in hand. That doesn't mean the store, or even the region actually has retail venues selling the product yet. Right now, that probably means someone spent a ridiculous amount of money to have the product air lifted from another continent. Does this really sound like a situation where it is beneficial to the store owner/tournament organizer to allow for that product to play in their Store Championship? To allow someone who isn't even spending money at the store to use product that their loyal in store customers can't access? It's already hard for these local brick and mortar shops where we all go play to compete with online vendors. I'm going to a store championship this weekend. If product hasn't arrived, and the TO decides it's legal because some bloke from Aus/NZ flew in with it, I'm probably driving home. I don't much care to participate in competitive games where the players aren't playing with the same balls (deflategate anyone?). If the product arrives on the shelves Friday, then I'm 100% ok with it being legal or restricted based on the TOs whims. If I was the TO, I would make it legal if it was on my store shelves in decent enough quantity for my players to have access, and leave it restricted if my distributor didn't send me much.

Store championship level and above is when I personally stop giving much missed opportunity leeway, and I expect none in return. The leeway I do give is for immediate errors, like saying "Go ahead" followed immediately by "oh wait, action" within about half a second and before I've made any game state changing reveals. Denying immediate correction would put the denying party firmly in the jerk category. I think people white knight for the forgetful far too often for premier level events. Really, it should be the other way around. It is just plain rude to ask for missed opportunity leeway at this level. It puts the opponent in a very awkward position. It is incredibly unsportsmanlike to get huffy and call someone a ****** when they tell you no. Store level before championships is a whole different beast. I see store players as members of my team. Those games are practice games for the championships and beyond. In those games I am much more likely to remind about missed opportunities when I see them being missed. This is a health of the game thing as much as anything else. You don't want to be scaring players off from your local store if you want to keep having a healthy community to play with. I used to judge for WoWTCG for UDE. They had an interesting rule about game state for mandatory events. Both players were responsible for maintaining the game state and missing any mandatory event was a punishable offence. That means you could get warnings or game losses for forgetting that Rebel Captive you just shot at. In practice this rarely came up, but judges were expected to punish both players equally for such missed effects at premier level events. I rather liked that rule and it has affected how I play all games since. Mandatory game state is everyone's responsibility. Optional triggers are the responsibility of the deciding party.

Just an update that we are playing x-wing at Atomic Goblin in Longmont, CO now every Monday starting around 6. Can the OP be edited to reflect this?