Rakky Wistol 2,903 Posted May 22, 2015 as with all things... it is already "a thing"... will it be a worthwhile THING in this game? maybe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WonderWAAAGH 7,153 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) So is there anything that leads you to believe the former is more likely than the latter? What I believe is that we won't know anything for certain until the reference card is in our hands. I don't think one option is more likely than the other so much as I think that you're giving the idea of new rules to accompany the 180 degree arc short shrift. Is it a new primary weapon? I don't know. Have we had a 180 degree arc before? No. Please bear in mind that the FAQ is always subject to change, especially as the game continues to evolve and interactions become increasingly complex. The designers may have had the foresight to bar this exact sort of interaction that everyone is assuming will be possible. Given that we know as little about their intent and balance philosophy as we do the actual rules text that will accompany the Tooth, why is it so hard to accept that Tactician might not work? While we don't *know* anything, with a bit of critical thinking and pattern recognition, we really know quite a bit. An educated guess still boils down to assumption. You're all welcome to assume as much as you like, and you might very well prove correct. I wouldn't be surprised if you are, and I wouldn't be surprised if you aren't. I don't think "uses existing rules" is that much of a leap. Are there existing rules for a 180 degree arc? Edited May 22, 2015 by WonderWAAAGH Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Forensicus 883 Posted May 22, 2015 So is there anything that leads you to believe the former is more likely than the latter? What I believe is that we won't know anything for certain until the reference card is in our hands. I don't think one option is more likely than the other so much as I think that you're giving the idea of new rules to accompany the 180 degree arc short shrift. Is it a new primary weapon? I don't know. Have we had a 180 degree arc before? No. Please bear in mind that the FAQ is always subject to change, especially as the game continues to evolve and interactions become increasingly complex. The designers may have had the foresight to bar this exact sort of interaction that everyone is assuming will be possible. Given that we know as little about their intent and balance philosophy as we do the actual rules text that will accompany the Tooth, why is it so hard to accept that Tactician might not work? While we don't *know* anything, with a bit of critical thinking and pattern recognition, we really know quite a bit. An educated guess still boils down to assumption. You're all welcome to assume as much as you like, and you might very well prove correct. I wouldn't be surprised if you are, and I wouldn't be surprised if you aren't. I don't think "uses existing rules" is that much of a leap. Are there existing rules for a 180 degree arc? LOL on your "argument" that the other posts are more likely to be invalid, purely based on your (granted, correct) observation that we currently do not have 180 degree arcs in the game currently. As already quoted from the (once again correctly observed "ever subject to change") FAQ: Some ships (such as the Slave I) have an auxiliary firing arc identified by dotted lines printed on its ship token. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sithborg 11,662 Posted May 22, 2015 I wouldn't be surprised if 3 YVHs work. You can set up a very nasty cross fire with the 180 arc. Better than the Firespray's. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WonderWAAAGH 7,153 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) LOL on your "argument" that the other posts are more likely to be invalid, purely based on your (granted, correct) observation that we currently do not have 180 degree arcs in the game currently. As already quoted from the (once again correctly observed "ever subject to change") FAQ: Some ships (such as the Slave I) have an auxiliary firing arc identified by dotted lines printed on its ship token. I'm not sure I see your point, unless you're merely reiterating what was already said. Talking in circles won't do either of us any good, especially if you're inclined to misread my posts. At what point did I infer that another post was "more likely to be invalid"? Edited May 22, 2015 by WonderWAAAGH Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainJaguarShark 2,061 Posted May 22, 2015 LOL on your "argument" that the other posts are more likely to be invalid, purely based on your (granted, correct) observation that we currently do not have 180 degree arcs in the game currently. As already quoted from the (once again correctly observed "ever subject to change") FAQ: Some ships (such as the Slave I) have an auxiliary firing arc identified by dotted lines printed on its ship token. I'm not sure I see your point, unless you're merely reiterating what was already said. Talking in circles won't do either of us any good, especially if you're inclined to misread my posts. At what point did I infer that another post was "more likely to be invalid"? You guys should try talking in squares instead. 1 Forensicus reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GlobeTrotting 205 Posted May 22, 2015 I'll wager $100 that it will be treated as an auxiliary arc akin to the Firespray and that tactician will work on the full 180 degrees. WonderWAAAGH - wanna take the opposite position? Or are you not that convinced? we can exchange PayPal addresses once it is confirmed Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WonderWAAAGH 7,153 Posted May 22, 2015 My position is that we don't know anything for certain, so why would I bet money on something I'm not sure of? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Forensicus 883 Posted May 22, 2015 LOL on your "argument" that the other posts are more likely to be invalid, purely based on your (granted, correct) observation that we currently do not have 180 degree arcs in the game currently. As already quoted from the (once again correctly observed "ever subject to change") FAQ: Some ships (such as the Slave I) have an auxiliary firing arc identified by dotted lines printed on its ship token. I'm not sure I see your point, unless you're merely reiterating what was already said. Talking in circles won't do either of us any good, especially if you're inclined to misread my posts. At what point did I infer that another post was "more likely to be invalid"? I usually take it as a healthy sign when we "disagree" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WonderWAAAGH 7,153 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) That's not an answer to the question I asked, but I suppose it doesn't really matter. If we've ever had a genuine disagreement, it's been trivial enough to escape my notice. Edited May 22, 2015 by WonderWAAAGH Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GlobeTrotting 205 Posted May 22, 2015 My position is that we don't know anything for certain, so why would I bet money on something I'm not sure of? Why? Because you said above that you don't think that one option is more likely than the other--aka, you believe it is a 50/50 coin toss. I'll wager you $100 at 5:1 odds, your favor. A rational actor would accept that bet any day of the week, unless they're lying and don't really think it's fifty-fifty. 1 Forensicus reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WonderWAAAGH 7,153 Posted May 22, 2015 Why? Because you said above that you don't think that one option is more likely than the other--aka, you believe it is a 50/50 coin toss. I'll wager you $100 at 5:1 odds, your favor. A rational actor would accept that bet any day of the week, unless they're lying and don't really think it's fifty-fifty. A rational person wouldn't be concerned with trying to turn a series of observations on a message board into a bet. Personally, I don't need to wager money to feel confident in my own opinions. Whatever else you choose to believe is entirely up to you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ficklegreendice 34,363 Posted May 22, 2015 My position is that we don't know anything for certain, so why would I bet money on something I'm not sure of? isn't that the textbook definition of gambling ? 2 Rodafowa and darthlurker reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainJaguarShark 2,061 Posted May 22, 2015 The K-Wing has a turret icon. It's going to act just like any other primary turret does. The YV-666 has an auxiliary arc shown. It's going to act just like any other auxiliary arc does. What reason does any of us have to dispute that, as things currently stand? Should I also question of the Khirasz's primary arc will function like other primary arcs or whether the Punisher can take autothrusters? 3 quasistellar, Forensicus and darthlurker reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WonderWAAAGH 7,153 Posted May 22, 2015 If I was going to bet money on anything, it'd be that FGD will end his next sentence with an emoji. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Forensicus 883 Posted May 22, 2015 If I was going to bet money on anything, it'd be that FGD will end his next sentence with an emoji. I am putting you on the top of my "People I want on my debate team". Your logic and arguments are as always impeccable and mature Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JFunk 257 Posted May 22, 2015 If I was going to bet money on anything, it'd be that FGD will end his next sentence with an emoji. I am putting you on the top of my "People I want on my debate team". Your logic and arguments are as always impeccable and mature Don't forget witty and acerbic. I win Friday! I got to use acerbic in a sentence today! 1 Forensicus reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ficklegreendice 34,363 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) not exactly derailed, but definitely the most amusing I could find Edited May 22, 2015 by ficklegreendice 2 MortalPlague and Forensicus reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gather 259 Posted May 22, 2015 Does that count as an emoji, or did WonderWAAAGH almost lose a bet? 1 Forensicus reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainJaguarShark 2,061 Posted May 22, 2015 Does that count as an emoji, or did WonderWAAAGH almost lose a bet? In a universe where he gambles, maybe. 1 Forensicus reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ficklegreendice 34,363 Posted May 22, 2015 if it isn't an emoji, FFG should definitely incorporate it asap Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigeltastic 3,808 Posted May 22, 2015 not exactly derailed, but definitely the most amusing I could find It does depict a train wreck well though, which is an apt descriptor at this point I think. 2 ficklegreendice and Forensicus reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hobojebus 11,341 Posted May 22, 2015 If I was going to bet money on anything, it'd be that FGD will end his next sentence with an emoji. Or that there;s never going to be a third faction right Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainJaguarShark 2,061 Posted May 22, 2015 not exactly derailed, but definitely the most amusing I could find It does depict a train wreck well though, which is an apt descriptor at this point I think. It would be more apt if the trains were travelling in a circle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WonderWAAAGH 7,153 Posted May 22, 2015 If I was going to bet money on anything, it'd be that FGD will end his next sentence with an emoji. I am putting you on the top of my "People I want on my debate team". Your logic and arguments are as always impeccable and mature You still haven't answered my question. Here's another one for you: do people on your debate team know what 'ad hominem' means? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites