Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About missedtrashday

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

398 profile views
  1. Just to make sure that I have this correct, So as long as the ability trigger is perform the maneuver instead of reveal the dial the effect will work. Fly casual.
  2. If my understanding is correct, docked ships are not affected and can not affect ships that are in play except as specifically stated on their ship and upgrade cards. While the Phantom is docked the Ghost can make rear attacks while the Phantom can make an additional turret attack at the end of the combat phase. The Phantom 2 also allows the Ghost to fire in the rear arc and allows the Ghost a free coordinate action. A Howlrunner docked to a Gozanti does not allow any rerolls. Hope that helps. Fly casual.
  3. This is a theoretical house rule that my playgroup wants to kick around. What would be the effect of allowing a rebel of imperial squad pay a small point cost to fly one scum ship in the squad (mercenary contract)? Would it be game breaking? How many squad points would it be worth? Would the rule be the equivalent of adding a modification card granting the faction affiliation to the scum pilot? If so, what would the effect of discarding that card be (Boba Fett or other discard mechanic)? Would the rule allow the scum ship to equip rebel only or imperial only upgrades, depending on the faction of the rest of the squad? It was just a concept that we were kicking around and I wanted to get some input from a bigger community. It might be a game breaker, which would be why there isn't anything like it in the real game. Thanks in advance for your thoughts. Fly casual.
  4. I was also thinking defender. As a pure guess though, I see a 1 straight instead of a 5 straight. This feels like a ship that wants to advance slowly (if any of this guesswork pans out). And on topic, without any further clarification, and with SB being the only precedent that's even close to the same situation, I have to agree. I still say it feels a little funny to make that kind of leap when it affects my opponent instead of just my squad, but there are times when this game just works that way. Fly casual.
  5. Very true, and with the enforcer title you might not shoot at it even if it is the proverbial sitting duck because that also makes the tokens unavailable. I think I really want to see the dial now to evaluate how hard getting someone in bullseye is really going to be. The ship has 8 total hit points, but with if someone gets in behind and you can't shake them, even 8 pts won't last long. I might have to dust off the old tortoise and hare formation techniques if the dial is as bad as I'm predicting. That too is a guess based on Scum's something good, something bad design. I don't know anything but I'm expecting a dial somewhere between a Lamda and a Y-wing. I think the only parts of the dials that have been revealed are that the 1 and 2 turns are red in the promo description and the 4 K is red in the picture (judge promo information accordingly). That's a lot of red already, and I would guess that there aren't going to be more than 4 greens at best to clear it. Could be brutal in a fun and challenging sort of way. Fly casual.
  6. Brick and mortar all the way. Never had an issue, always got my stuff as soon as any opponent had it (unless the lucky devils went to a con and got a pre-release..grrr). Fly casual.
  7. Wow, I suggested limited retirement (cards only) a couple of years ago on a different thread and I'm still smoking for getting flamed so bad. IMHO rotation of certain cards wouldn't be the end of the world, though sometimes your favorite gets hit and that smarts. What I would really like to see is a web-store where I could purchase the new (FAQ, reprint, etc.) version of cards I already own but are outdated. As long as they were reasonably priced and I didn't get hammered on shipping. They could even require return of my old cards so that they could claim product support if anyone had heartburn with them selling cards without plastic. Love to see it, probably never happen. Fly casual
  8. Sorry about that, You are correct about game rules being unique, and that other rulesets aren't always applicable. And to clarify, in math zero is a number (it can be plotted on a graph or number line), but it is not classified as a real number because it is actually the concept of the absence of anything. Semantics, I know, and now I realize that it isn't applicable here. I do math for a living and sometimes it bleeds into real life accidentally. Again, sorry for the confusion. Fly casual.
  9. If anything I posted misled you to believe I thought that was how it worked, I am sorry. I am pretty sure that most of us agree that the ability's wording means that it doesn't matter if you have focus tokens, evade tokens, or any combination of them, all tokens you hold are affected (as well as possibly no tokens). @AlexW post of Sunny Bounder is certainly compelling. Thanks for the redirect. I am intrigued by the interaction of the HLC, Sunny's ability, and the use of the TL to do nothing more than re-label the dice from rolled to rerolled. I'm assuming this is humor and you don't really think I'm that stupid. I think that this is going down the wrong rabbit hole. There are plenty of places that you could trigger effects where they would have no real outcome. Your post with the rule from focus was a perfect example. You can spend a focus token even though there are no focus results showing on the dice. My response was intended to point out that triggering an effect or spending a token when its original intended effect will not be applicable in order to activate a secondary effect is not the same thing as "all being zero". So far as I can tell, the closest thing we have is the FAQ clarification for Sunny Bounder (Thanks again @AlexW). Fly Casual.
  10. No, because the card says may which means that it is not required to happen every time. Fly casual.
  11. And, If you are "Removing" a zero token to mitigate damage, are you not "spending" it for a game effect?
  12. Hence the need for Frankmail or something, because if it is a choice that the defender has to make, and they do not have the token to choose B, then by default they must choose A.
  13. No, What I said was that having to divide my already narrow attention span between playing the game and looking for specific conditions to line up was a dealbreaker. There are a lot of things in this game that are really cool and work really well, but if you don't catch the opportunity when it pops up, it doesn't work for you. I tend to miss those types of things, so I don't put variable things in my lists. I know that I am missing out on some great combos, but I switch my list nearly every time I sit down to play (outside of organized events). That means that even if something is a constant, I still miss it sometimes because I don't have every comma and period of every card on my list committed to memory. I would probably win more if I settled on just a few lists and then really tricked those out, but that just seems like such a waste. There are tons of lists I've flown just because I wanted to (5 hawks, not effective, funny as heck). I also mentioned that I would fly the second tier pilot because his ability was constant. It's just the way I play, because that's the way I want to play. As for the rest of it, from what I can see it is definitely not clear from the RAW and FAQ because this exact same conversation is happening on two different forums. On the X-Wing wiki forum the debate is swinging the other way, with most people agreeing that Torani's ability will do automatic damage to ships in the new arc who don't have any tokens to discard. While it might be OP, it is my interpretation of the card and rules as they currently stand. I freely admit that my interpretation could be incorrect, and if it is, great! That being said, I feel like the opposite point of view is based on the ability to ignore the lack of tokens due to an inference of intent. It's just that when I read the card, I don't infer the same intent. As far as the examples given of Sunny, Keyan, and focus, from my point of view that is an apples and oranges comparison. In those cases, I spend a token (focus, stress, target lock, etc.) that I hold because it benefits my squad in some way. The key to those rulings and all the debates that led up to them was that I have the token to spend to trigger my ability, can I spend it even when I don't need it for its original intended purpose. The answer is yes. In this debate, you are telling me that I can spend a magic token that I don't have to mitigate damage that I should be taking from my opponent. That doesn't seem fair to my opponent. Again, that point of view comes from what I infer to be the intent of the ability. There is one thing I can think of that could change my mind, and that would be to see the dial. If it is like a TIE Interceptor on crack and can zip everywhere carefree, then to also give it automatic damage at only 27 points would be ridiculous. Conversely, If it moves like a bread truck on square wheels stuck in mud, maybe the automatic damage is there because you are only going to get people in the bullseye once or twice in a game, and lining up 3-4 opponents? Only in the promo. Of course there is another conversation going on about should automatic damage even be a thing, but that's waaay off topic for this thread. I hope that no one is taking this the wrong way. I am really enjoying the debate and it's great of you all to take the time to debate it with me. Fly casual
  14. I may be missing something here but I fail to see how either of the "ALL"s in this part are being used in the same way. This is an entirely different situation in which the player is spending a token THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE and then deciding not to do anything with it. It is the spending of the token that triggers the effect. While you might be correct about that, the word "all" in these examples does not support your position. In the first section, "all" is used twice. The first says that a single focus token affects every die that is showing a focus result. If the player wants to spend that token with no results showing to trigger an effect is not in question. You are correct in saying THAT is well established. The "all" here is used as a blanket inclusion for the entire group of dice. But this is secondary to the fact that a token has to be present to be spent. The second "all" references the entire group of "unspent tokens" that the player might hold. If the player doesn't have any "unspent" tokens then this does not apply. So again, this is only talking about tokens the actually exist. The second quote is much the same. The player opts to spend a real token that they actually have in order to trigger an effect. That the player can spend that token with no focus results showing on the dice doesn't matter, because what the player wants is the secondary effect of shedding stress, and again you are correct that the player can opt to spend the token at a time when its intended purpose would not be the result. In both of those cases, the rulings do not create something from nothing. The dice are there, and the player is spending the token despite the fact that the dice will not be affected. I agree with almost this entire paragraph. I think that the wording on the card will have to be addressed in some way by the PTB to end the debate. And I agree that if it is purely a token stripping ability, that may well fizzle in some situations. If that is the case I won't play it for the same reason that I don't play e-wings. They're lots of fun, but you just don't get what you pay for most of the time. By the time I kit this thing out to really do well, I'm down one large base ship or even two small base ships for something that only gets to use its ability sometimes. It would be much better to play Oberos, whose ability will work every time. I just don't do well when I try to build those kinds of 'the moon must be in the second house of Ares when the fish jumps' lists. I spend too much of my attention trying to make the situation happen and not enough time playing the game. Good debate! We're passionate because we care. Fly casual.
  15. Or maybe it is. The text, as written, is inconclusive. After you perform an attack, each enemy ship inside your bullseye firing arc at Range 1-3 must choose to suffer 1 damage or remove all of its focus and evade tokens. I think that there would be no question if it was worded: After you perform an attack, each enemy ship inside your bullseye firing arc with focus and/or evade tokens at Range 1-3 must remove those tokens or suffer 1 damage. That way the card would specifically only the ships with tokens and limit the ability to a token stripping ability. If the ability is meant to be only a token stripping ability, for my play style, this will be just another card in my box of stuff I never fly because it's just too expensive to make that much of an impact in my lists. Hopefully it will benefit someone. Flu casual.
  • Create New...