My suspicion is they're planning something like the chaff countermeasure that's in Squadrons and also the old X-Wing / TIE Fighter PC games. The way it functions in those games is essentially that it ejects a cloud of stuff behind your ship which lasts for a few seconds and destroys missiles that hit it. In tabletop X-Wing it would make sense for it to be an obstacle which is deployed like Rigged Cargo or Spare Parts and disappears after a round or two.

My local store uses the F.A.T. Mats and they seem fairly good? I'm not exactly a mat connoisseur but they've survived years of use, so if nothing else they seem reasonably durable. I've not really noticed any issues with them sliding about or getting caught on the models or such either.

As far as I can tell, the tournament rules are agnostic on how you actually build your list. They don't mention the app or the PDFs at all. They do, however, state that the Head Judge of an event has the final say on rulings. So it would be up to whoever is the Head Judge at the tournament. The (admittedly small number of) tournaments I have been to have generally required either a written list, or a list submitted to something like Tabletop TO. I've never seen use of the official app be required. Personally I think attaching initiative-scaled upgrades to the Pup is technically impossible, though I don't think it would be problematic to rule that it is treated as either initiative 0 or as the initiative of the Hound's Tooth.

Yes, I agree. Also worth noting: Even if you roll all blanks the game state can still change because the roll occurred, e.g. a player might spend Force from Dooku crew to ensure one dice is blank.

Yes, this. Assuming Atomic Mass don't go in a wildly different direction I assume we'll see more upgrades like the A-Wing, X-Wing and TIE exclusive ones. There are actually some existing upgrades which in retrospect could have had a keyword restriction, though I doubt they'll get errata now unless some broken combo emerges (e.g. It would make sense for Rigged Cargo Chute to have "Freighter only"). If AMG do more narrative / alternative event modes we may also see scenarios with restrictions like "One side can only have freighters" or "Separatists, but no droid pilots" or something.

They've also said in the organised play announcement that they want to feature alternate game modes and narrative events, which might signal that they want to focus a bit more on campaign / narrative-type stuff in general. Solo / coop would obviously be a much better fit for that than if they were focused on standard tournament play.

Narrative events and alternative game modes sounds good, I've wanted to try some more scenario-based stuff but the local scene is quite heavy on standard format tournament players.

I have sometimes wondered whether they might be better off making the bases completely generic by removing the pilot names and ship icons, and then having little name plates that go in the bit that currently holds the numbers instead. It'd save a lot of cardboard, though it might be a little fiddly. Anyhoo, on the actual move, I'm a little concerned because shifting stuff between companies is always a bit of a risk - it might not work out, or might go in a different direction that I don't like. However, from what I've heard people generally like Crisis Protocol, and FFG's distribution in Australia has been rather erratic of late (even pre-covid!), so maybe having all their miniatures under the same company will make it easier for them to manage.

Yes, I agree. Contrast it with the wording on something like Paige Tico: