Jump to content

haukurv

Members
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Thank you very much for this fantastic program. Sure, there are some missing bits and the odd bug around, but it is awesome to get some feel for the handling of ships and to plan out the first couple of rounds for a new list. Very much appreciated!!
  2. Good good. This makes the most sense and is easiest to keep track of. Suspected that this would be the ruling.
  3. I agree @Lyianx that this should be the way to rule this, but unfortunately the term "revealed maneuver" is not clearly defined in the rules and the cards should probably have used "selected maneuver" instead. And I disagree that "actual meaning" is irrelevant, when we have something not clearly defined by the rules we only have "actual meaning" to go by until things are clearly ruled. Just clarifying again, I agree with you on the way the rules "should" handle this, but IMO they don't quite do so, leading to ambiguity which should ideally be officially resolved. with clear rulings.
  4. As I see it, based on language used in the rules it is: a) Reveal dial > this is your revealed maneuver. b) Change dial from revealed to something else > this is not the revealed maneuver anymore as it is no longer the same as you revealed. it was never revealed again but changed. revealed != changed. The actual meaning of "reveal" is to make something secret/unknown/hidden be known/visible. c) Use ability that lets you use a maneuver different from the one on the dial. This is your executed maneuver, not revealed maneuver or currently selected maneuver. So executed maneuver can be any of a, b or c. The only one of these that is visible is b, which would be by far the most convenient one to use when deciding on whether you can use an ability or not. This is however not what the wording of the rules say and could have been worded as "selected maneuver" if that was the intention or "executed maneuver" (which would make most sense when you think about the ability: if I go faster Based purely on the logic and meaning of words this is the logical way to interpret this. It is however rather inconvenient to have to keep track of what happened in a previous phase (you are explicitly prohibited from taking notes during tournament, so you cant even write it down to keep track) in the turn to know whether you can use an ability or not, though this is not the only case (Corrans disarm token comes in the beginning of next round, Sarco Planc needs to know executed maneuver.... to name a couple). So, even if the logical way to read the rules is that revealed maneuver is the one selected on the dial when you revealed it, it would be more convenient to use the selected maneuver for abilities as it is actually visible but would kinda make most sense thematically to use the maneuver that got executed. All 3 cases can be argued for and thus we do need a ruling to make it absolutely clear what "revealed maneuver" means. Until that is the case, the only way IMHO is to use the meaning of the words used to write the rules, which is the maneuver on the dial when it was revealed because when we have nothing better to use, we have to use the rules as written.
  5. Well that is certainly an indicator of how they intend this to work. A ruling stating that the revealed maneuver is the maneuver selected on the dial, after any modifications, would clear that up nicely. But until that is done, we will be having debates on how to handle it.
  6. BTW, just found that you should place the dials next to the pilot card afterwards, which indicates you should not tamper with them afterwards. But yea, there is indeed no record of what maneuver the ship actually performed. These new abilities call for record keeping previously unnecessary. The easiest way would be to use the maneuver set on the revealed dial, as "revealed maneuver" is not defined in the rules and logically that should be the maneuver on the dial when it was revealed but that is inconvenient and calls for information not visible anywhere but relies on history (which can't be recorded according to the tournament rules, as taking notes is expressively forbidden).
  7. Yup, dial is revealed and you execute the maneuver on the revealed dial. You should also place the dial next to the ship being activated. I think this is the first case of that actually being relevant. This is unfortunately very much open for debate as logically the revealed maneuver is the one on the dial when revealed and if it is then changed afterwards it is no longer the maneuver that was revealed. For the game mechanic it would though be a lot move convenient to use the maneuver currently set on the ships dial (after any modifications), as this makes the game state clear. For example in the case of a dispute where one player claims that the other player revealed one maneuver and then changed it to one higher or lower and that player then claims not to have done that, there is no way for a judge to verify this information if the dial has been changed from the "revealed" maneuver. But as currently "revealed maneuver" is not defined anywhere in the rules so TO has to make the call as is. Hopefully we get a rules clarification on this soon.
  8. I agree. A fellow player also pointed out that this could potentially cause very tricky situations for judges, if one player denies having executed a maneuver at certain speed, he could have changed his dial afterwards for example (nothing in the rules disallow that after performing the maneuver) and then the judge can not make a decision based on the board state. On top of that you can't note down the maneuvers according to the tournament rules, so that won't work as a fallback as is. Not that I expect this to happen often, but the possibility is there.
  9. Damnit!! I am so going to have this singing in my head every time I witness Palpatine/Sidious coordinating: "Wipe them out.... ALL OF THEM!"
  10. Aye we know, as seen in the discussion above. Check some posts in this thread where we discuss how easily it can be misinterpreted 😉
  11. No worries (this discussion is btw way more civil than some threads here...)🙂 The reload section is worded very similarly as the boost section but not identically: Boost: "When a ship performs a [boost] action, it boosts. A ship boosts by following these steps:" (coordinate and jam are worded in the same way fyi) vs. Reload: "When a ship performs the [reload] action, it reloads by performing the following steps:" There is subtle difference and if you read the reload it lacks the "... [reload] action it reloads. A ship reloads by..." part. If you only read the reload section and not the other similar ones, it is quite possible to get it wrong. Subtle difference, but makes it more prone to misunderstandings.
  12. It basically boils down to possible misinterpretation of how to resolve the reload action (I misunderstood it myself when I first read through it and explained why in an earlier post). If you misunderstand "reload" (as in the non-action) as "recharge the card" (again, see above) it makes sense not to get a disarm token. It was due to discussion and debate that I saw that I got it wrong the first time. I am pretty sure that I am not going to be the only one to misunderstand it this way and I am also pretty sure that not everyone admits being wrong in the face of evidence either 😉. So IMHO some clarification is warranted to prevent people from playing it wrong.
  13. Interestingly though, you can equip the energy-shells and some bomb, then (provided you can get 2 actions) reload both in the same round, get 2 disarm tokens, that then both pop at the end of the round!
  14. Aye, that is a strong indication that the intent is that "reload" should follow the steps described in the RR.
  15. Indeed. You could however equip the Energy-Shell charges and (IF it had given the ship a reload action) use it to reload bombs 😉
×
×
  • Create New...