This isn't really a question, it's just odd, so it makes me second guess how it works. If I have a front arc that has black dice, but side arcs that don't, and I put the focus on the front arc, I can't add blacks to my red range. But if my side arcs did have black dice, I can.. seems odd.

I think this is very valid.

I don't see what the empire is missing that would allow them to do this. I feel if this would work, the empire could do it now, and I don't really see it.

I said it like that because I know people will think that way, I just can't express well why they think that way. I'm on your side that clarification is fine. But I think it helps to know what it is exactly being asked. In this case the question is not "Does Greivsious affect squads that never had tokens" but instead "Did FFG intend for them to be affected". The card is clear that they do get affected. If they are not supposed to, then FFG would need to reword it. People here get frustrated with people misinterpreting the rules by reading into them. It's draining to them to debate what seems clear. It would be different if for some reason it didn't makes sense that he could attack them, yet the card somehow implied he could now. But all the mechanics work fine with the wording as is. So why read more than is stated? That's where some people here are coming from. But I also understand that that doesn't matter, it's fine to ask FFG for clarification.

It's true. I had this problem with the interaction with Yavaris, flight commander and Flight Coordination Team. Seemed clear to me that I could nudge a bomber in range and Yarvaris them to attack twice, but it wasn't clear to everyone. It was ruled I couldn't at a tournament and then cleared up that it was possible by FAQ. It is often a problem of people reading into something though. Not with the wording itself. But sometimes it does take an official statement to settle it. If a squad card said "When this squad attacks, if the defender does not have any shields, add one damage", does it apply to attacks on other squads? RAW says yes. RAI.. maybe? I can see someone questioning it.

Sorry. I was slow to edit my statement. I agree that I think this has a clear effect. Though someone might guess that FFG meant to say something else? I guess?

The issue some people have is if a squad that never had defense tokens counts as having no readied tokens. Not about the Vader stuff. In this case, I don't think it's ambiguous. But I do see a case for someone guessing that FFG made a mistake and intended it to be something else.

Maybe snap things to a grid of cm? So squads would move to points on that grid.. ships would deploy their front right corner on the grid ( or something ).. maybe a protractor for transferring deployed angle? Then you'd just need to relay some coordinates once in a while to keep the board up to date. Ship movements are probably pretty good with the ruler. The obstacle placement might be tricky to unify over two boards.

I hear ya. I've run more Scurgg than I have B-wings.

These all look really great Green Knight. Thanks for posting!

That is sort of the intent, that things we see all the time become too expensive. If that means you think MC30s are no longer viable, then so be it. But someone might decide that they can make an Ordnance Expertless MC30 work in the meta taking into account all the other now expensive cards.

5 dice (6 with FC) with reroll Intercepters are possible from Wave 1. So 2 blue 2 black doesn't see soo crazy.

Just a random idea.. a league that runs frequent tournaments where use of cards is tracked from tourney to tourney.. and after each tourney, the points of the cards are changed. Cards that get used frequently go up in points, cards that are not used go down in points. I don't have an exact formula of how that would work yet, but does that sound like something people would find fun?