New to X-wing Question(s)

[Forgottenlore 9,838]

This is causing me flashbacks to arguments on Warseer about using figs painted as one space marine chapter as a different space marine chapter.

[Parravon 5,217]

This is causing me flashbacks to arguments on Warseer about using figs painted as one space marine chapter as a different space marine chapter.

Didn't mean to cause flashbacks!  Although my Space Wolves and Dark Angels include a couple of camouflaged companies, they still have their own chapter decals on them, just subdued.

[StevenO 2,996]

If matching a pilot to the wrong color ship is confusing I'd HATE to think how confused that person would be when facing a TIE swarm.  Ok, all the ships look the same so you need to look more closely.  Now some may have different names but then there are a bunch of generic that may have the same name but may have different upgrades.  Those ships are supposed to be distinguished by number but am I being "unsportsmanlike" if I put 12 on one and 21 on another or use other numbers which may appear similar with a cursory glance?  Being able to distinguish the BSP w/ Predator that is #21 from BSP w/ Outmaneuver #12 is no harder than telling Jax and Fel apart even if they they are flying the "wrong" color Interceptor.

[Buhallin 4,563]

Being able to distinguish the BSP w/ Predator that is #21 from BSP w/ Outmaneuver #12 is no harder than telling Jax and Fel apart even if they they are flying the "wrong" color Interceptor.

This isn't the same thing, and only intentional willful ignorance can continue to pretend that it is.

 

Fel and Jax do not "appear similar at a cursory glance".  They're obviously distinguishable from halfway across the room, thanks to the coloring.  Or at least they should be.

 

So let's try this another way.  Can anyone give a compelling reason to reverse the colors unless you're trying to confuse your opponent?  There seem to be plenty of people who don't really care about anyone who might get confused by it.  Anyone care to offer a good reason for actually doing it?

Edited July 22, 2014 by Buhallin

[Forgottenlore 9,838]

You really like a particular pilot and want him/her to stand out on the table and be special so you use the red royal guard interceptor model to make him special.

This was my exclusive reason for using the red model the first couple times I played Lorrir.

[TezzasGames 1,014]

So let's try this another way.  Can anyone give a compelling reason to reverse the colors unless you're trying to confuse your opponent? 

 

The compelling reason is that the Tournament Rules allow people to play with whatever colour ships they prefer.

 

Interpreting the rules your way won't cut it this time, although it might make a good topic for one of your blog entries.

[Buhallin 4,563]

 

So let's try this another way.  Can anyone give a compelling reason to reverse the colors unless you're trying to confuse your opponent? 

 

The compelling reason is that the Tournament Rules allow people to play with whatever colour ships they prefer.

 

Interpreting the rules your way won't cut it this time, although it might make a good topic for one of your blog entries.

 

I'm not doing anything to interpret the rules.  The rules rather clearly allow it, and I've never suggested otherwise.  Sportsmanship is (pretty much by definition) all about things the rules allow, but are bad form.  "Because the rules say I can" is a rather stereotypical defense for an act of bad sportsmanship.

[TezzasGames 1,014]

 

The rules rather clearly allow it, and I've never suggested otherwise.  Sportsmanship is (pretty much by definition) all about things the rules allow, but are bad form.  "Because the rules say I can" is a rather stereotypical defense for an act of bad sportsmanship.

 

On the contrary, complaining about someone acting within the rules is a sign of poor sportsmanship.

You know that players are permitted to use whatever colour Interceptors they like.

They are not being poor sports.

That's it.  End of story.

[Bilisknir 443]

If matching a pilot to the wrong color ship is confusing I'd HATE to think how confused that person would be when facing a TIE swarm.  Ok, all the ships look the same so you need to look more closely.  Now some may have different names but then there are a bunch of generic that may have the same name but may have different upgrades.  Those ships are supposed to be distinguished by number but am I being "unsportsmanlike" if I put 12 on one and 21 on another or use other numbers which may appear similar with a cursory glance?  Being able to distinguish the BSP w/ Predator that is #21 from BSP w/ Outmaneuver #12 is no harder than telling Jax and Fel apart even if they they are flying the "wrong" color Interceptor.

 

If you do that knowing your opponent is dyslexic then I would call that unsportsmanlike.

If you decide only to use target lock tokens that could be misread (so D, O, Q, G) because you know your opponent has bad eyesight and finds it hard to read the tokens. That's unsportsmanlike.

I personally like if the two players use opposite end of the alphabet for target locks (so one uses A-H and the other S-Z), makes working out who has locked who easier if token get moved and also means at the end you can separate easily.

 

I also prefer that models should match the pilot - not because it is easier to identify the pilot but because it just makes me happy.

Now if you are playing someone who uses the colour as shorthand for the pilot and they ask you to switch them and you refuse without cause then I would consider that unsportsmanlike too.

 

At the end it comes down to whether you are doing what you are doing to gain an advantage or not.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Bilisknir

[Smirrors 7]

Not one of your most compelling arguments Buhallin.

Try again.

[Parravon 5,217]

Such a heated argument over something as daft as a coat of paint, and whether it's bad sportsmanship. 

I think we're rapidly heading for another locked thread.

[DailyRich 3,346]

Suppose someone bought two copies of Imperial Aces, and I bought two Transports.  And we got together and traded our extra unique cards, just to help each other out.  I now have a Jax card, but no special Interceptor.  Am I forever barred from using him because I might confuse someone by flying him on a standard Interceptor?

 

By your logic, I should never be able to use a named TIE Fighter pilot, because their ships look exactly the same as the generics and I'm deliberately trying to confuse my opponent by doing so.

[Bilisknir 443]

Suppose someone bought two copies of Imperial Aces, and I bought two Transports.  And we got together and traded our extra unique cards, just to help each other out.  I now have a Jax card, but no special Interceptor.  Am I forever barred from using him because I might confuse someone by flying him on a standard Interceptor?

 

By your logic, I should never be able to use a named TIE Fighter pilot, because their ships look exactly the same as the generics and I'm deliberately trying to confuse my opponent by doing so.

 

Don't jump to conclusions. He is saying if you have 1 each of Normal, Bloodstripes, Royal TIE Ints then if you have a squad with 3 Ints in it. Say Jax, Fel, and a Black Sqn. It would be a weird choice to put the Black in the blood stripes, Jax in the Standard and Fel in the Royal. If you did that just to confuse your opponent then I'd say that was bad sportsmanship.

 

Note I have in the past broken my own semi-rule on matching ships. Had a squadron of 3 RGI and Jax. Put Jax in Bloodstripe so I could tell him apart!

[StevenO 2,996]

A funny thing about the complaint of Fel in a red Interceptor:  the first time I saw it was when someone was using Fel with the Royal Guard title.  Now obviously he is flying the "Royal Guard" ship because that's what the title says and if those are red then that is what he SHOULD be in.

[Bilisknir 443]

True that.

[VanorDM 11,599]

The whole issue of Fel in a red interceptor is a fairly fringe case.

The larger issue here, the one that Buhallin is actually trying to make, is that if you are doing something with the intent of confusing your opponent, regardless of what it is. Then yes you are guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct.

Regardless of what the rules say, intent trumps just about everything when you're looking at sportsmanship.

[Forgottenlore 9,838]

Beat me to it vanor.

Yeah, there have been a couple arguments recently that have become heated because one side was arguing about the intent of the action and the other was talking about the actual act being taken.

If someone used...non-canonical colors because of some personal preference, like I suggested last page, that's not unsportsmanlike.

If someone used non-canonical colors with the intent of confusing their super lore opponent, that is.

If someone uses the numbers 12 and 21 because those are the numbers they randomly grabbed and it ended up accidentally confusing their opponent, well that is unfortunate but they didn't do anything "wrong", but if they selected those numbers to deliberately TRY and confuse their opponent, that is very bad form.

The problem is, it can be almost impossible to judge someone's intent, which is why accusations of cheating or bad sportsmanship are always judgement calls.

Edited July 26, 2014 by Forgottenlore

[VanorDM 11,599]

which is why accusations of cheating or bad sportsmanship are always judgement calls.

Yeah I wouldn't as a TO kick someone out or even issue a warning to someone who used the red Int for Fel and the normal one for Jax. Or if someone numbered their ships 21 and 12.

Unless I heard them mention that they were doing it with the intent of causing confusion... Because as you point out it's rather hard to prove intent, even as a TO.

But in the case that Buhallin mentioned, which I was part of, or at least read... the OP or at least someone did say they were doing it with the intent of confusing the other person. If someone admits they're trying to pull something like that, again as a TO I'd be inclined to remove them from the event. Maybe not for just that, but it would be 2 of the 3 strikes I'd allow.

[Forgottenlore 9,838]

And also like Buhallin mentioned earlier, if someone (politely) asks you to swap them out, you should really do so unless you have a good reason not to, even though there is nothing compelling you to do so.

[VanorDM 11,599]

you should really do so unless you have a good reason not to, even though there is nothing compelling you to do so.

The fact that people might even balk swapping them, considering that on this very message board I was told that I'd be unsportsmanlike in the following situation.

Player A is down to a single YT on the board, and makes a 3 Left Bank, which drives him off the edge of the table. They most likely meant to make a 3 Right bank but picked left by mistake.

I was told that if I didn't let the person take the Right instead of Left I was being unsportsmanlike, yet there seems to be people here who think a fairly reasonable request like swapping the two interceptors is asking too much.

[Bilisknir 443]

So I think after all that everyone agrees! This thread is now complete. The internet can shut down. We can all leave. I'm off to the pub! Yah!

 

And ninja'd to be incorrect

Edited July 22, 2014 by Bilisknir

[Forgottenlore 9,838]

So I think after all that everyone agrees! This thread is now complete. The internet can shut down. We can all leave. I'm off to the pub! Yah!

 

And ninja'd to be incorrect

What an awesome post.

[Buhallin 4,563]

Vanor, Bilisknir and Forgottenlore hit the main point I was trying to get at.  Telling which ship is which is not part of the game state, and simple courtesy would suggest you do what you can to make sure they can be distinguished as easily as possible.  Isn't this a big part of why we put ships on bases?

 

FWIW, back in the original BGG thread someone did ask FFG.  This was the response:

 

Hello Chris,

In response to your question:
> Rule Question:
> Is a player in a tournament required to use the color scheme of the ship that corresponds to the color scheme on the image on the pilot card IF THEY HAVE THE APPROPRIATE MODEL IN THEIR POSSESSION? 

Players are allowed to paint their ships as they wish (so long as they are not offensive or adversely affect the other player’s experience) and can use “not matching” TIE interceptors.

That said, in the example you provided where a player has Kir Kanos and an Alpha Squadron Pilot and brings the TIE interceptor from the TIE Interceptor Expansion and the red TIE interceptor from the Imperial Aces, although that player is not required to match ships, an opponent can request that the player use the “appropriate" matching ships since having them mixed could be interpreted as being deliberately confusing. If a player refuses to meet this request, it is up to the TO’s discretion about how to treat the situation.

Alternatively, a situation could arise where "not matching” could be beneficial. For example, if a player has 2 Royal Guard TIE and 1 Alpha Squadron Pilot, and owns 1 copy of Imperial Aces and 2 copies of the TIE Interceptor Expansion, it may be more helpful if the player uses the red interceptor for the Alpha Squadron and the 2 grey interceptors to represent the Royal Guard TIEs.

This will be addressed in future updates.

Thanks for playing!

Frank Brooks
Associate Creative Content Developer
Fantasy Flight Games
fbrooks@fantasyflightgames.com

 

 

And if you look at what I said (rather than inventing what I said) it pretty much matches this.  Fly what you can to avoid confusing your opponent.  That's really the simple basis of it, and I'll say again I'm both surprised and disappointed at the number of people who seem to think that's objectionable.

[Buhallin 4,563]

 

 

The rules rather clearly allow it, and I've never suggested otherwise.  Sportsmanship is (pretty much by definition) all about things the rules allow, but are bad form.  "Because the rules say I can" is a rather stereotypical defense for an act of bad sportsmanship.

 

On the contrary, complaining about someone acting within the rules is a sign of poor sportsmanship.

You know that players are permitted to use whatever colour Interceptors they like.

They are not being poor sports.

That's it.  End of story.

 

No, really not.

 

Running up the score is a classic, perfect example of poor sportsmanship.  It's perfectly within the rules.  Taunting another player is poor sportsmanship, nothing in the rules about it at all.

 

I'm sure the delaying A-wings will come up here, so why don't we consider the difference?  In the case of giving someone a hard time about running away, it's trying to harass an opponent into making a bad move.  That's poor sportsmanship.  In the case of the ship paint scheme, you're trying to confuse your opponent by intentionally muddling the game state and their expectations based on the ships.  Also, IMHO, poor sportsmanship.

 

Sportsmanship comes into play only within the boundaries of the rules.  It's pretty much impossible for going outside the rules to be poor sportsmanship - it's cheating.  Which I suppose is technically poor sportsmanship, but we pretty much just default to the greater offense and call it cheating at that point.  So if we're discussing the sportsmanship (or lack thereof) it's pretty much by definition perfectly legal actions.

 

The game should be about making decisions within the game state, not trying to occlude that game state.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Buhallin

[StevenO 2,996]

 

Running up the score is a classic, perfect example of poor sportsmanship.  It's perfectly within the rules.  Taunting another player is poor sportsmanship, nothing in the rules about it at all.

 

I'm sure the delaying A-wings will come up here, so why don't we consider the difference?  In the case of giving someone a hard time about running away, it's trying to harass an opponent into making a bad move.  That's poor sportsmanship.  In the case of the ship paint scheme, you're trying to confuse your opponent by intentionally muddling the game state and their expectations based on the ships.  Also, IMHO, poor sportsmanship.

 

Sportsmanship comes into play only within the boundaries of the rules.  It's pretty much impossible for going outside the rules to be poor sportsmanship - it's cheating.  Which I suppose is technically poor sportsmanship, but we pretty much just default to the greater offense and call it cheating at that point.  So if we're discussing the sportsmanship (or lack thereof) it's pretty much by definition perfectly legal actions.

 

The game should be about making decisions within the game state, not trying to occlude that game state.

 

 

So you had to bring the bolded part  in to demonstrate "poor sportsmanship"  when it is CLEARLY a valid strategy to try to win the game.  For anyone unfamiliar with this tactics here's how it goes:

 

Step 1:  A-Wing alpha strike deals sufficient casualties to give it's player "the lead."

Step 2:  A-Wing player spends the rest of the game flying around trying to avoid any "bad" situations where it could give up the lead.

Step 3:  Ships start running out of fuel and everyone goes home (time called).  A-Wings "win" by preventing enemy from winning.

 

Now I guess the statement that it is "poor sportsmanship" on the part of the guy who is behind to goad the A-Wing player into an unfavorable position and I may actually agree with that.  There is also a contingent that maintain the A-Wing player is being "unsportsmanlike" by refusing to engage; some even say it is cheating (via stalling) and while that may be possible it isn't necessarily true.

 

Looking at the previous post with the FFG quote I see it stating that there is really nothing 'wrong' with using mismatched ships even if it freaks you out.  Your opponent may request that you do something to make it easier for them to follow what you are doing but there is no requirement that they comply; if they don't you may call a TO but that puts the ball back in the court of opinion.