Snap Wexley, Pattern Analyzer, and Substep B!

[lazycomet 294]

Followup... This craziness is legal for the time being:

 

1. PTL/PA/VT SNAP performs GREEN 2-MANEUVER
2. SNAP free boosts

3. SNAP regens with R2-D2!

4. SNAP VT-rolls

5. SNAP PTL-FOCUS (receives stress)
6. SNAP checks stress, removes it.

 

Edited November 1, 2016 by lazycomet

[DeathstarII 1,164]

Followup... This craziness is legal for the time being:

 

1. PTL/PA/VT SNAP performs GREEN 2-MANEUVER

2. SNAP free boosts

3. SNAP regens with R2-D2!

4. SNAP VT-rolls

5. SNAP PTL-FOCUS (receives stress)

6. SNAP checks stress, removes it.

Yes

[VanorDM 11,599]

This craziness is legal for the time being:

 

Yes, because that is the whole point of the Pattern Analyzer card, to allow ships with the Tech slot to check for stress after it's performed an action, meaning it can remove stress after the fact.

[lazycomet 294]

 

This craziness is legal for the time being:

 

Yes, because that is the whole point of the Pattern Analyzer card, to allow ships with the Tech slot to check for stress after it's performed an action, meaning it can remove stress after the fact.

 

 

I never questioned PA... I was convinced SNAP's ability couldn't cheese before checking stress, and FFG might still rule this the other way.

Edited November 1, 2016 by lazycomet

[lazycomet 294]

Here is where it gets cheesy:

 

1. SNAP performs RED 4 K-TURN
2. SNAP free boosts
3. PA gives actions as normal. PTL (BB-8 style)

4. Gets 2 Stress.

 

It's 3 actions on RED w/ PA versus 2 (no free boost if FFG rules that all maneuvers MUST check stress before triggering "Free Action" abilities)

Edited November 1, 2016 by lazycomet

[Vineheart01 6,403]

Technically anyone can do that off a red, but like you said its 2 stress to do it so nobody would.

With either tech, Snap can boost after a 4k. Without it, since the Check Pilot Stress is included in the Execute Maneuver group, he'd be stressed after completing his maneuver.

[lazycomet 294]

Technically anyone can do that off a red, but like you said its 2 stress to do it so nobody would.

With either tech, Snap can boost after a 4k. Without it, since the Check Pilot Stress is included in the Execute Maneuver group, he'd be stressed after completing his maneuver.

 

You bring up a good point. Primed Thrusters clearly made for Triggered Free Boost (Snap) after a K-Turn, but now Pattern Analyzer (again) pushes Primed Thrusters further off the table in value. Yikes.

Edited November 1, 2016 by lazycomet

[Vineheart01 6,403]

Eh, not quite.

 

Primed Thrustors is still great if you are 1pt shy of a list, using BB8, or have excess stress/cant do a green due to the board positions.

In general, its weaker yes. But thats why PA costs 2pts.

[lazycomet 294]

Eh, not quite.

 

Primed Thrustors is still great if you are 1pt shy of a list, using BB8, or have excess stress/cant do a green due to the board positions.

In general, its weaker yes. But thats why PA costs 2pts.

 

 

Agreed. I just meant specifically versus the timing on Triggered "Maneuver Completion" Abilities (Snap). IF checking stress must happen even with PA, then PT would be the only way to get SNAP's freebie on K-Turns.

[lazycomet 294]

Eh, not quite.

 

Primed Thrustors is still great if you are 1pt shy of a list, using BB8, or have excess stress/cant do a green due to the board positions.

In general, its weaker yes. But thats why PA costs 2pts.

 

This is the list that got me dreading the "Check Stress / Execute Maneuver / Snap-FreeCheese" lawyer arguments locally:

https://geordanr.github.io/xwing/?f=Rebel%20Alliance&d=v4!s!198:18,-1,3,204:-1:26:;199:-1,206,187:-1:15:;6:135,-1,-1,78:-1:-1:&sn=Unnamed%20Squadron

 

Edited November 1, 2016 by lazycomet

[WWHSD 9,273]

Eh, not quite.

Primed Thrustors is still great if you are 1pt shy of a list, using BB8, or have excess stress/cant do a green due to the board positions.

In general, its weaker yes. But thats why PA costs 2pts.

This is the list that got me dreading the "Check Stress / Execute Maneuver / Snap-FreeCheese" lawyer arguments locally:

https://geordanr.github.io/xwing/?f=Rebel%20Alliance&d=v4!s!198:18,-1,3,204:-1:26:;199:-1,206,187:-1:15:;6:135,-1,-1,78:-1:-1:&sn=Unnamed%20Squadron

I'm not sure why you're making as big a deal out of if as you are. Sure, it can be a lot of actions but there's plenty of pilots that can get the equivalent of 3 action a round, every round. At the end of the day you are still spending 40ish points on a PS6 ship with 2 agility and 6 or 7 hit points.

Shenanigans with T-70s boosting after K-Turns and T-Rolls seems like its why FFG included Primed Thrusters and Pattern Analyzer in this expansion. It's something that sets them apart from the other ships with similar stat lines and costs.

Edited November 1, 2016 by WWHSD

[Klutz 1,590]

In This Thread: How one person can drag out a question answered in post #2 for over 60 posts. 

[itsthewoo 4]

In This Thread: How one person can drag out a question answered in post #2 for over 60 posts. 

That's not entirely fair. The card is ambiguous as to whether it inserts Perform Action into the Execute Maneuver step, or if it moves Check Pilot Stress out of the Execute Maneuver step. Based on the wording, it's more likely the latter is true, but it was sloppy for FFG to use the trigger language "when executing a maneuver," which could imply that you are in the executing a maneuver for the duration of the card effect.

 

Cleaner:

"During the Activation Phase, you may Check Pilot Stress after the Perform Action step (instead of during the Execute Maneuver step)."

[Slugrage 5,011]

I'm actually dumber now for reading all of this thread to this point.

[Klutz 1,590]

 

In This Thread: How one person can drag out a question answered in post #2 for over 60 posts. 

 

That's not entirely fair. The card is ambiguous as to whether it inserts Perform Action into the Execute Maneuver step, or if it moves Check Pilot Stress out of the Execute Maneuver step. Based on the wording, it's more likely the latter is true, but it was sloppy for FFG to use the trigger language "when executing a maneuver," which could imply that you are in the executing a maneuver for the duration of the card effect.

 

Cleaner:

"During the Activation Phase, you may Check Pilot Stress after the Perform Action step (instead of during the Execute Maneuver step)."

 

 

The funny thing is, over 60 posts, you are the only person who thinks the card is ambiguous. So maybe it isn't so ambiguous after all?

 

 

 

 

I'm actually dumber now for reading all of this thread to this point.

 

I'm never getting those 15 minutes back

Edited November 2, 2016 by Klutz

[lazycomet 294]

 

 

Eh, not quite.

Primed Thrustors is still great if you are 1pt shy of a list, using BB8, or have excess stress/cant do a green due to the board positions.

In general, its weaker yes. But thats why PA costs 2pts.

This is the list that got me dreading the "Check Stress / Execute Maneuver / Snap-FreeCheese" lawyer arguments locally:

https://geordanr.github.io/xwing/?f=Rebel%20Alliance&d=v4!s!198:18,-1,3,204:-1:26:;199:-1,206,187:-1:15:;6:135,-1,-1,78:-1:-1:&sn=Unnamed%20Squadron

 

I'm not sure why you're making as big a deal out of if as you are. Sure, it can be a lot of actions but there's plenty of pilots that can get the equivalent of 3 action a round, every round. At the end of the day you are still spending 40ish points on a PS6 ship with 2 agility and 6 or 7 hit points.

Shenanigans with T-70s boosting after K-Turns and T-Rolls seems like its why FFG included Primed Thrusters and Pattern Analyzer in this expansion. It's something that sets them apart from the other ships with similar stat lines and costs.

 

 

Wait, LOL. You dont see why this is a big deal? Criteria for "Having had Executed a Maneuver" wasn't directly changed via PA's card text. Far from it. So in a future Tournament using SNAP+PA, as written, you cannot FREE BOOST until Stress is Checked since nothing about PA's text instructs us to disregard the Check Pilot Stress substep, in fact it only says Resolve Later, "resolve" being a huge part of establishing Maneuver==1.

 

Argue with me. Call me names... Dont condescend.

[WWHSD 9,273]

Eh, not quite.

Primed Thrustors is still great if you are 1pt shy of a list, using BB8, or have excess stress/cant do a green due to the board positions.

In general, its weaker yes. But thats why PA costs 2pts.

This is the list that got me dreading the "Check Stress / Execute Maneuver / Snap-FreeCheese" lawyer arguments locally:https://geordanr.github.io/xwing/?f=Rebel%20Alliance&d=v4!s!198:18,-1,3,204:-1:26:;199:-1,206,187:-1:15:;6:135,-1,-1,78:-1:-1:&sn=Unnamed%20Squadron

I'm not sure why you're making as big a deal out of if as you are. Sure, it can be a lot of actions but there's plenty of pilots that can get the equivalent of 3 action a round, every round. At the end of the day you are still spending 40ish points on a PS6 ship with 2 agility and 6 or 7 hit points.

Shenanigans with T-70s boosting after K-Turns and T-Rolls seems like its why FFG included Primed Thrusters and Pattern Analyzer in this expansion. It's something that sets them apart from the other ships with similar stat lines and costs.

 

Wait, LOL. You dont see why this is a big deal? Criteria for "Having had Executed a Maneuver" wasn't directly changed via PA's card text. Far from it. So in a future Tournament using SNAP+PA, as written, you cannot FREE BOOST until Stress is Checked since nothing about PA's text instructs us to disregard the Check Pilot Stress substep, in fact it only says Resolve Later, "resolve" being a huge part of establishing Maneuver==1.

 

Argue with me. Call me names... Dont condescend.

I had the impression that you were concerned that Snap with PA working as most people in this thread are arguing that it does was a problem and that the "rules lawyering" that you were dreading was people insisting that Snap with PA gets his boost. That's what I don't understand being overly concerned about.

Pattern Analyzer could probably stand to have a FAQ entry that states that Check Pilot Stress is being moved outside of the executing a maneuver. Since it is moving Check Pilot Stress instead of moving Perform Action, Pattern Analyzer seems clear enough as to what the intent is that it should receive consistent rulings. Either interpretation of this card is going to require that something is done that card doesn't precisely say to do so it doesn't seem to me to be a case of intent conflicting with the rules.

[lazycomet 294]

 

 

 

 

Eh, not quite.

Primed Thrustors is still great if you are 1pt shy of a list, using BB8, or have excess stress/cant do a green due to the board positions.

In general, its weaker yes. But thats why PA costs 2pts.

This is the list that got me dreading the "Check Stress / Execute Maneuver / Snap-FreeCheese" lawyer arguments locally:https://geordanr.github.io/xwing/?f=Rebel%20Alliance&d=v4!s!198:18,-1,3,204:-1:26:;199:-1,206,187:-1:15:;6:135,-1,-1,78:-1:-1:&sn=Unnamed%20Squadron

I'm not sure why you're making as big a deal out of if as you are. Sure, it can be a lot of actions but there's plenty of pilots that can get the equivalent of 3 action a round, every round. At the end of the day you are still spending 40ish points on a PS6 ship with 2 agility and 6 or 7 hit points.

Shenanigans with T-70s boosting after K-Turns and T-Rolls seems like its why FFG included Primed Thrusters and Pattern Analyzer in this expansion. It's something that sets them apart from the other ships with similar stat lines and costs.

 

Wait, LOL. You dont see why this is a big deal? Criteria for "Having had Executed a Maneuver" wasn't directly changed via PA's card text. Far from it. So in a future Tournament using SNAP+PA, as written, you cannot FREE BOOST until Stress is Checked since nothing about PA's text instructs us to disregard the Check Pilot Stress substep, in fact it only says Resolve Later, "resolve" being a huge part of establishing Maneuver==1.

 

Argue with me. Call me names... Dont condescend.

I had the impression that you were concerned that Snap with PA working as most people in this thread are arguing that it does was a problem and that the "rules lawyering" that you were dreading was people insisting that Snap with PA gets his boost. That's what I don't understand being overly concerned about.

Pattern Analyzer could probably stand to have a FAQ entry that states that Check Pilot Stress is being moved outside of the executing a maneuver. Since it is moving Check Pilot Stress instead of moving Perform Action, Pattern Analyzer seems clear enough as to what the intent is that it should receive consistent rulings. Either interpretation of this card is going to require that something is done that card doesn't precisely say to do so it doesn't seem to me to be a case of intent conflicting with the rules.

 

 

Agreed. PA was not confusing me, until we were trying to determine if MANEUVERS are finalized if CHECK STRESS hasn't occurred yet. That's the real meat of this thread and MANY MANY people have missed the boat here.

[Slugrage 5,011]

YOU know whats FUN? When you capitalize WORDS in a paragraph to make it SOUND like YOU know what YOU'RE doing. RIGHT?

[thespaceinvader 17,568]

Nah it just MAKES you sound like a Marvel COMIC BOOK letterer!!

[Slugrage 5,011]

BAM! POW! KABLAMMO!

 

Hey, you're right.

[Zefirus 435]

 

 

In This Thread: How one person can drag out a question answered in post #2 for over 60 posts. 

 

That's not entirely fair. The card is ambiguous as to whether it inserts Perform Action into the Execute Maneuver step, or if it moves Check Pilot Stress out of the Execute Maneuver step. Based on the wording, it's more likely the latter is true, but it was sloppy for FFG to use the trigger language "when executing a maneuver," which could imply that you are in the executing a maneuver for the duration of the card effect.

 

Cleaner:

"During the Activation Phase, you may Check Pilot Stress after the Perform Action step (instead of during the Execute Maneuver step)."

 

 

The funny thing is, over 60 posts, you are the only person who thinks the card is ambiguous. So maybe it isn't so ambiguous after all?

 

 

 

 

I'm actually dumber now for reading all of this thread to this point.

 

I'm never getting those 15 minutes back

 

 

The card is definitely ambiguous.  Now there's two.  Three if we include OP.

 

Nothing on the card says that an integral part of "Executing a maneuver" is no longer part of "Executing a maneuver" which is what is causing the confusion.  Does simply moving a step cause it to no longer be part of the maneuver?  That is the crux of the argument here.  It can just as easily be taken as "Executing a maneuver is completed after you have completed all substeps of executing a maneuver," in effect delaying the maneuver itself.

Edited November 3, 2016 by Zefirus

[VanorDM 11,599]

Nothing on the card says that an integral part of "Executing a maneuver" is no longer part of "Executing a maneuver" which is what is causing the confusion.

Yet it actually does if you read the card and take it at face value. It clearly says to move substep b to a point after step 3. That means substep b is no longer part of the perform a maneuver step.

It can just as easily be taken as "Executing a maneuver is completed after you have completed all substeps of executing a maneuver," in effect delaying the maneuver itself.

No it really can't, unless you are intentionally reading things into the rules and the card that aren't actually there.

[Zefirus 435]

It says to move the Check Pilot Stress step.  Nowhere in that does it say that that step magically becomes no longer part of the maneuver.

 

What if instead of the check pilot stress step, it was actually moving the ship.  Would you say that moving the ship isn't part of the maneuver?  Or would you say that moving a ship is intrinsically part of the maneuver and the maneuver cannot be completed without it?

 

The fact that we're even having this conversation means that it's ambiguous.  

Edited November 3, 2016 by Zefirus

[VanorDM 11,599]

It says to move the Check Pilot Stress step.

If that step is moved, it can no longer be part of the same substep. If someone tells you to move something from the living room to the kitchen, is it still in the living room?

 

Or would you say that moving a ship is intrinsically part of the maneuver and the maneuver cannot be completed without it?

 

No actually moving the ship is not intrinsically part of that rules process. For one, in some cases you don't actually move the ship for various reasons. For another rules are simply a processes, and while there are descriptive names for things that doesn't mean anything is intrinsically part of that process.

 

The fact that we're even having this conversation means that it's ambiguous.

No it really doesn't, it simply means some people are reading things into it that aren't there. Just because one or even a few people are confused by something doesn't mean it's actually confusing.

 

Lots of people ask questions here about what a Hit actually is, or if they can spend a focus token when stressed.  Does that mean that the rules are unclear or ambiguous?  No it doesn't, it means people are either not reading the rules, not reading them carefully enough, or are inserting things that aren't there into the rules.

 

Just like what's happening here.

 

The plain text on the card is quite clear, unless you try to add things that aren't there into it.

Edited November 3, 2016 by VanorDM