Jump to content

Smitty

Members
  • Content Count

    98
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Smitty

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

391 profile views
  1. Ignore everything I wrote. Had a dumb moment and responded as though Jostero's trigger were himself taking damage. Whoops
  2. The rules for how to handle misplaced ships are, the opponent (you) gets final say on location, you put it were you fairly think it was. You don't get a free kill.
  3. Ok a bit of a reach there man. 1, you are anonymously posting, its automatically not libel in that ground no matter what he said. 2, insults are not libel. I can say you are wrong then follow it up with you are an idiot or accuse you of ignoring facts and blah blah other rude stuff calling into question you intellect or even your mental stability if i like... not libel, just rude (examples only, I'm not trying say those things and be rude) 3, in order to be libel he has to say something that can be absolutely prove false. You are the one burdened to prove it false. Also you are the one burdened to prove that he knew that it was false and deliberately said it in order to cause injury to your reputation. Accusing you of being a sex offender is libel, insulting your intelligence or telling you that you're wrong is not.
  4. Funny part in his assertion of he can't be wrong is the origin of the phrase: A person selected to act as a sort of prosecutor against the cause of canonization of a saint. The job literally demands the likely possibility of being wrong or there would be no saints. SkullNBones: Think Riker forced to argue in court that Data isn't sentient. If you're familiar with tng.
  5. From your initial post stating your arguement. Ya, you did. A devil's advocate arguement means you are taking a stance that is not your own, in order to facilitate a debate. But fine I'll drop the semantics, you misused the term, its your position not the devil's fine ok then... except... Your very next sentence you acknowledge your awareness of the FAQ ruling and that its against your arguement. That sounds like you know you're wrong in advance of talking. " I know how it has been currently ruled"
  6. The point is, you acknowledge you are incorrect, then continue to attempt to support a knowingly faulty premise in another persons thread, in a forum for stating how it is, not how it should be. Your entire line of reasoning could be misunderstood as being a basis for believing your faulty premise is a fact, by a new player. I don't know how to make this more clear, HLC says do the swap after rolling, it doesn't stay in effect, there isn't a rule on hlc that says no crits allowed. It only says after rolling flip the crits. That's it you satiate the card text. After a reroll you didn't "After rolling" when you spend a focus you didn't trigger "after rolling" it isn't a no crits allowed sign hovering over your dice it is a specifically timed event of after rolling. There is no such restriction on abt it is effectively a big sign over the entire attack saying no evades canceling hits. It has no specific time during the attack, its for the duration. You point to an evade result at any time, i point at the card and say not so fast there pal, no can do. There is nothing ambiguous here. And if this is a devils arguement case there requires the potential for the arguement to be valid, just not something you agree with. You acknowledge its false, you continue to attempt known faulty arguments based on extremely loose similarities in cards. Nothing from the rules or FAQ stated to support it, and you seem to acknowledge hlc has a specific instance It occurs, then later refer to it as a rule, implying you disregarded even your own Statement. That's not a devils arguement, that's trolling a forum.
  7. It says they can't be canceled by evade results, not they can't be canceled at all. The point is hlc says do stuff after rolling, it is specific in when it occurs. It doesn't say crits are banned for the duration of the attack just after the initial roll do the alteration. Abt however has very different wording it is an effect in play during the entire attack sequence that forbids any attempt to use evade results to cancel hits. It doesn't care how you produce hits, it doesn't mind canceling from sources other than evade results. You're not making a devils argument here, that would imply it is potentially a valid interpretation which is contrary to common opinion and needs discussing (devils arguement also implies you disagree with it yourself and only make the case in order to provoke discussion of the issue, it wouldn't be the devils arguement if you agree, then its just your argument). You are stating how you want it to work, acknowledging it doesn't work that way, then getting offended when told this isn't productive to the thread. This sub forum isn't for debating how rules should work, its for explaining how rules do work to people asking a question. Making a knowingly faulty case here could confuse a new player.
  8. Not entirely correct. The ship is removed after it gets to attack not at the end of that ps level. If there are additional ships at that ps it could matter for some things with other ships at range blah blah from you, and such.
  9. If by setting it aside you mean what would happen if bullseye did nothing? Then in that world full of lines on bases that do nothing, he would be right and could spend them, the natural effect of bullseye is the only thing preventing that particular shenanigan.
  10. I place them in a row left to right in the order they activate. If two ships activate sequentially, then an enemy, then my third i cluster 1 and 2 then a gap to indicate enemy movement, then 3rd like this. OO---O I find this far less likely to produce an accidental mistake in sequence.
  11. Rules say that you can't so you can't... unless your name is Tycho. Below is the golden rule that all of this hinges upon. Cards can override the rule book including the word cannot. The specific cannot wins versus can/ may is when there is a conflict between two cards, or a card and a mission rule in that scenario cannot wins vs can. If cannot in the rules was absolute as well a ton of cards do nothing. "Card abilities can override the rules listed in this guide. Mission rules can override both card abilities and rules from this guide. If a card ability or mission effect uses the word “cannot,” that effect is absolute and cannot be overridden by other effects."
  12. If you have a ship with 3 friggin harpoons sticking out of it itching to pop, then keep that ship in formation, you kinda deserve what you get lol.
  13. You are not destroyed at step 10, you are removed at step 10 not the same thing. You are destroyed the moment your hull is exceeded that is during step 7. Regardless of when you apply the condition, you cannot trigger a harpoon by itself.
×
×
  • Create New...