Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
xanderf

New FAQ (dated 2016-04-25)...

Recommended Posts

Am I completely misunderstanding Boba crew?. The chewbaca bit seems to be implying that Boba triggers on being dealt a face up, not whether that face up didn't stick for whatever reason. Does this mean sheilds don't stop Boba doing his sneaky work?

I assume I am misreading things. Lol.

No.

If a point of damage removes a shield, no cards are dealt at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shields don't keep crits out in the case of Advanced Homing Missiles and Proton Bombs. Boba crew on a ship that hits with AHM will trigger, even if Chewie does his thing, because that face up card was dealt.

Too bad boba crew is scum only, Imperial firesprays would love him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I completely misunderstanding Boba crew?. The chewbaca bit seems to be implying that Boba triggers on being dealt a face up, not whether that face up didn't stick for whatever reason. Does this mean sheilds don't stop Boba doing his sneaky work?

I assume I am misreading things. Lol.

No.

If a point of damage removes a shield, no cards are dealt at all.

Doh.

That's what you get for skimming the faq when you should be working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Anyone else catch the bit about Autothrusters not working against the Inquisitor (primary attack anyway)?

 

I kinda like it. 

 

it's always been that way.    His attack is range 1.   Do Autothrusters work at range 1?   Nope

 

Nah there was a huge argument about this in the rules forum before the previous FAQ made it clear.

I don't know why they needed to add another line to it in this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the inquisitor vs autothrusters ruling is a misreading of their own cards by FFG.

 

Autothrusters - "When defending, if you are beyond Range 2 or outside the attacker's firing arc..."

 

Inquisitor - "...treat the range as range of the attack as Range 1"

 

I can see how they got to the conclusion but autothrusters to me looks as though it refers to the physical resting place of the ship that is being attacked. The little bit of "if you are" I feel qualifies a physical location as opposed to "range of the attack." It is difficult to explain exactly the difference and you can all tell me I'm wrong following this (that's fine most of you think the gunboat should be a thing so we can all be wrong together) but I think the wording of autothrusters should maybe get a slight tweak for clarity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the inquisitor vs autothrusters ruling is a misreading of their own cards by FFG.

 

Autothrusters - "When defending, if you are beyond Range 2 or outside the attacker's firing arc..."

 

Inquisitor - "...treat the range as range of the attack as Range 1"

 

I can see how they got to the conclusion but autothrusters to me looks as though it refers to the physical resting place of the ship that is being attacked. The little bit of "if you are" I feel qualifies a physical location as opposed to "range of the attack." It is difficult to explain exactly the difference and you can all tell me I'm wrong following this (that's fine most of you think the gunboat should be a thing so we can all be wrong together) but I think the wording of autothrusters should maybe get a slight tweak for clarity.

Yes, that was the argument.

They they errated and FAQed the card to make the interaction clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read this whole thread but I have a question about the new faq: how does things like TLT interact with the BLinded Pilot crit from the old deck?

Old deck blinded pilot says 'the next time you roll attack dice you roll 0 dice'.  So one shot of TLT will clear it.

 

New deck says 'next opportunity to attack, you don't attack', which means you skip the whole activation, so for a BTL Y wing, you lost all three shots for instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else catch the bit about Autothrusters not working against the Inquisitor (primary attack anyway)?

 

I kinda like it.

 

it's always been that way.    His attack is range 1.   Do Autothrusters work at range 1?   Nope

Nah there was a huge argument about this in the rules forum before the previous FAQ made it clear.

I don't know why they needed to add another line to it in this one.

They added a new line because the previous version of the FAQ said,

"Autothrusters now reference the specific range of the attack, and therefore never trigger against The Inquisitor’s primary weapon."

But this was not true, because what was errata'd on Autothrusters was,

"When defending, if you are inside the attacker’s firing arc beyond range 2".

No mention of the specific range of the attack.

They did not reference the specific range of the attack, but rather the new section about being inside arc at Range X. And, were it not for the line about "Autothrusters... therefore never trigger" vs the Inquisitor, you would apply exactly the same logic as before (that is, you still measure ship-to-ship distance, within the firing arc, and find that they're sitting beyond Range 2 and therefore trigger).

So this version was them taking out the false statement and just saying that Autothrusters don't work vs the Inquisitor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Anyone else catch the bit about Autothrusters not working against the Inquisitor (primary attack anyway)?

 

I kinda like it.

 

it's always been that way.    His attack is range 1.   Do Autothrusters work at range 1?   Nope

 

Nah there was a huge argument about this in the rules forum before the previous FAQ made it clear.

I don't know why they needed to add another line to it in this one.

 

They added a new line because the previous version of the FAQ said,

"Autothrusters now reference the specific range of the attack, and therefore never trigger against The Inquisitor’s primary weapon."

But this was not true, because what was errata'd on Autothrusters was,

"When defending, if you are inside the attacker’s firing arc beyond range 2".

No mention of the specific range of the attack.

They did not reference the specific range of the attack, but rather the new section about being inside arc at Range X. And, were it not for the line about "Autothrusters... therefore never trigger" vs the Inquisitor, you would apply exactly the same logic as before (that is, you still measure ship-to-ship distance, within the firing arc, and find that they're sitting beyond Range 2 and therefore trigger).

So this version was them taking out the false statement and just saying that Autothrusters don't work vs the Inquisitor.

 

That was my thought at the time TBH.  But I felt like whether or not they had actually managed to clarify the language, they'd managed to be clear about their intent, so I gave it a pass.

They've been annoyingly wooly with their language and bitty with their FAQing in the past couple of FAQ releases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a bunch of wooly worded bitty FAQ'ers!

 

Lol, sorry I just can't help myself sometimes...

It's even funnier if you don't say "F-A-Q", but pronounce it "fack". 

 

It made me laugh, anyway.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So FFG needs to hire the following positions:

English Major

Math major

Rules lawyer

Artist who can redraw the Gold Squadron card as well as half of the crew upgrades on the Ghost

Douchie McNitpick

And give the Imperial Veterans team a huge raise.

I believe MJ and I can cover the first two slots. Give us a chance!

Can I be Douchie McNitpick please?

 

I can write some indignant nonsense on the internet about how my ideas for fixing the game are much better and more elegant than the st00pid people who only spend their time designing the game.

 

Cheers

Baaa

Well... Not to be nitpicky but your sheep wool may have nits, but hooves have not the manual dexterity to pick. As I do not know you on a personal level, I cannot comment on your level of ******-ness. Or is it Douchee-ness? Or Douchiness? If you can answer that conundrum with the proper amount of snark, you might earn that title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So FFG needs to hire the following positions:

English Major

Math major

Rules lawyer

Artist who can redraw the Gold Squadron card as well as half of the crew upgrades on the Ghost

Douchie McNitpick

And give the Imperial Veterans team a huge raise.

I believe MJ and I can cover the first two slots. Give us a chance!

Can I be Douchie McNitpick please?

 

I can write some indignant nonsense on the internet about how my ideas for fixing the game are much better and more elegant than the st00pid people who only spend their time designing the game.

 

Cheers

Baaa

Well... Not to be nitpicky but your sheep wool may have nits, but hooves have not the manual dexterity to pick. As I do not know you on a personal level, I cannot comment on your level of ******-ness. Or is it Douchee-ness? Or Douchiness? If you can answer that conundrum with the proper amount of snark, you might earn that title.

Well, baaallocks to your exacting standards. I'm off to count my lice.

Cheers

Baaa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So for the ruling between the interaction between Rudor and TLT, it says that it depends on initiative.  So does pilot skill have no affect on it at all and its solely initiative?  So if the TLT ship is PS2, initiative still determines the order?  Sometimes i get confused when dealing with things like this.  I always thought that Pilot skill always determined order and initiative only came in when there is a tie in PS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So for the ruling between the interaction between Rudor and TLT, it says that it depends on initiative.  So does pilot skill have no affect on it at all and its solely initiative?  So if the TLT ship is PS2, initiative still determines the order?  Sometimes i get confused when dealing with things like this.  I always thought that Pilot skill always determined order and initiative only came in when there is a tie in PS.

No.

 

Pilot skill never determines order when it comes to timing conflicts, it has only ever been initiative. (PS still determines what order people move and shoot in, but this isn't about that).

 

What's confusing people here is that this has only recently become a timing conflict.  Until this FAQ it was assumed that the second attack of a TLT or cluster missile was not happening with the 'after attacking/defending' timing trigger, rather, that that timing trigger had occurred and resolved before the second TLT shot fired.

 

Of course, it's only really been relevant for one card up until now - Vader crew.  And he still has a different tiing specified in his FAQ.

It all get sconfused because the 'after defending' timing is new this wave and interacts with a LOT of game elements in new and unpredictable ways which haven't been clarified adequately to actually make rulings on them.

It's one reason I won't be running anything with an 'after attacking' or 'after defending' trigger at Regionals this weekend, much as I might have liked to run a Phantom or Dengar.

Edited by thespaceinvader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...