Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SylinRhyas

TIE Striker and bumping

Recommended Posts

I ran into what I thought was a non issue but I was given a very convincing argument. If the Striker bumps during its Adaptive Aileron's move does it lose its action. The rule does state,

”A ship must skip its perform action step if it overlapped another ship while executing a maneuver."

The title does call it a maneuver. What's your guys thoughts on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't want to watch the interview, FFG has responded to an email about bumping on a maneuvers outside of the Execute Maneuver step during a ship's activation.

 

The question asked uses an example of Tycho with Daredevil getting an action from Lando so that FFG would answer it as they do not answer questions about unreleased content.

 

 

The response was:

'A ship only skips its “Perform Action” step when it overlaps another ship during the “Execute Maneuver” step of the Activation phase. So Tyco would not skip his “Perform Action” step in your example.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens when the ship hits an asteroid with ailerons but is clear with its regular manoeuver?  We ruled that the ship would roll for damage but would keep his action but we werent sure.  And what about if it was some debris? Would the ship get the stress if it overlaps only with the ailerons?

Edited by Thormind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens when the ship hits an asteroid with ailerons but is clear with is regular manoeuver?  We ruled that the ship would roll for damage but would keep his action but werent sure.  And what about if it was some debris? Would the ship get the stress if it overlap only with the ailerons?

 

I think the current ruling is that obstacle effects happen at any time regardless of whether a ship is completing a maneuver or not.  Debris field would apply stress and ship would roll for damage.  As to an action after aileronning over an asteroid?  I'm not sure... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the obvious follow-up:  what happens if you've dialed up a red maneuver but have a stress after the aileron movement across debris?  Straight 2 or complete the red and have a pair of stress?  If you've dialed up a green the debris stress goes away and all is right again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the obvious follow-up:  what happens if you've dialed up a red maneuver but have a stress after the aileron movement across debris?  Straight 2 or complete the red and have a pair of stress?  If you've dialed up a green the debris stress goes away and all is right again.

 

Aileron happens before revealing your dial. You would treat the stress gained from hitting debris during that maneuver the same way that you would treat stress from any other source. If you reveal a red maneuver while stressed, you preform a white 2 straight. If that causes you to hit the debris a second time you'd get a second stress and roll for damage again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What happens when the ship hits an asteroid with ailerons but is clear with is regular manoeuver?  We ruled that the ship would roll for damage but would keep his action but werent sure.  And what about if it was some debris? Would the ship get the stress if it overlap only with the ailerons?

 

I think the current ruling is that obstacle effects happen at any time regardless of whether a ship is completing a maneuver or not.  Debris field would apply stress and ship would roll for damage.  As to an action after aileronning over an asteroid?  I'm not sure... 

 

 

Per the rules on obstacles, you'd lose your perform action step for hitting an asteroid with the Ailerons maneuver. FFG hasn't mentioned any sort of exception to the rules for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you explain as I don't agree. I believe we've argued this back and forth multiple times, but:

You do your aileron, hit a debris, get a stress, roll a Dice for damage, reveal dial (green maneuver), move, then the perform action step occurs. Well past the aileron debris bump (as long as your template didn't overlap the debris when moving off it obvs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Debris specifically would not deny your action, as debris doesnt deny actions to begin with. The stress it gives you denies actions, which if you did a green move and didnt hit it twice to get a 2nd stress you would get your actions.

 

Rocks deny action steps, and overlapping. Both in email and that interview they said it doesnt, so were just waiting for the wave10 FAQ to drop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you explain as I don't agree. I believe we've argued this back and forth multiple times, but:

You do your aileron, hit a debris, get a stress, roll a Dice for damage, reveal dial (green maneuver), move, then the perform action step occurs. Well past the aileron debris bump (as long as your template didn't overlap the debris when moving off it obvs)

 

There are three steps (with sub-steps) that each ship performs during its activation:

 

1. Reveal Dial

2. Execute Maneuver

3. Perform Action

 

The rules for overlapping asteroids require that you skip your Perform Action step when a maneuver causes the overlap. It doesn't matter what step you are in when the overlap occurs. Hitting an asteroid with the Aileron maneuver isn't that much different than Advanced Sensors. Both of them occur at essentially the same time (before revealing your dial) and both require that you skip your Perform Action step.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rocks deny action steps, and overlapping. Both in email and that interview they said it doesnt, so were just waiting for the wave10 FAQ to drop.

 

I haven't seen/heard a statement from FFG regard Ailerons and asteroids. It was just bumping ships that I recall that they were making an exception for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why on earth would it not deny your action for one situation but permit the other?

 

Thats some 40k level of inconsistency right there.

 

It's two different blocks of rules. It's entirely possible that they will change both but there is no reason to assume that they will. The big difference is that (in most cases) you will be able to account for obstacles when setting your dial and your opponent is not able to use obstacles to ensure that you are constantly losing actions. If you hit an obstacle with your Aileron move, it's your own fault.

 

It all depends on what rule change FFG is actually planning on making to support their ruling. FFG has basically came out and said "ignore what the rules say in this case of overlapping another ship, do this instead". 

Edited by WWHSD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of the strongest thing about the Striker, with the awesome pattern of maneuvers. Who cares about Koyogram when you can move bank, move hard and barrel roll back? Or with EU, bank, hard, boost?

That's near to be an unblockable ship. You can block his title maneuver, but it's hard to block it AND his maneuver.

This ship is amazing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why on earth would it not deny your action for one situation but permit the other?

 

Thats some 40k level of inconsistency right there.

 

It's two different blocks of rules. It's entirely possible that they will change both but there is no reason to assume that they will. The big difference is that (in most cases) you will be able to account for obstacles when setting your dial and your opponent is not able to use obstacles to ensure that you are constantly losing actions. If you hit an obstacle with your Aileron move, it's your own fault.

 

It all depends on what rule change FFG is actually planning on making to support their ruling. FFG has basically came out and said "ignore what the rules say in this case of overlapping another ship, do this instead". 

 

They may be different paragraphs but theyre the same idea: your ship hit something -> bad thing happens. Quite frankly im surprised bumping doesnt cause damage and hitting a ship was just included in the obstacles rules.

Like i said, thats some 40k level of inconsistency. Paragraph-specific ruling, not idea ruling. Its one of the reasons 40k is such a pain to play with anyone that tries to be uber strict to the rules because it causes a ton of "that makes 0 sense" comments. It got bad enough where down to the specific instance of a rule clash it would go one way instead of the other, despite it not directly saying it does. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Why on earth would it not deny your action for one situation but permit the other?

 

Thats some 40k level of inconsistency right there.

 

It's two different blocks of rules. It's entirely possible that they will change both but there is no reason to assume that they will. The big difference is that (in most cases) you will be able to account for obstacles when setting your dial and your opponent is not able to use obstacles to ensure that you are constantly losing actions. If you hit an obstacle with your Aileron move, it's your own fault.

 

It all depends on what rule change FFG is actually planning on making to support their ruling. FFG has basically came out and said "ignore what the rules say in this case of overlapping another ship, do this instead". 

 

They may be different paragraphs but theyre the same idea: your ship hit something -> bad thing happens. Quite frankly im surprised bumping doesnt cause damage and hitting a ship was just included in the obstacles rules.

Like i said, thats some 40k level of inconsistency. Paragraph-specific ruling, not idea ruling. Its one of the reasons 40k is such a pain to play with anyone that tries to be uber strict to the rules because it causes a ton of "that makes 0 sense" comments. It got bad enough where down to the specific instance of a rule clash it would go one way instead of the other, despite it not directly saying it does. 

 

 

But they are two different blocks of rules that explicitly contradict the ruling from FFG. It's not a gray area in the rules that can be interpreted one way or the other. I expect to see the rules for bumping to receive errata in the forthcoming FAQ to make them consistent with this ruling.

 

Which part of hitting an obstacle would you skip if you hit it with your Aileron maneuver? FFG finally issued errata for what happens when you overlap an asteroid doing anything that is not a maneuver. I suppose that they could further extend that to "performing a maneuver during the Execute Maneuver step of the Activation phase".  

 

I've submitted a rules question to FFG to see if they intended that ruling to also cover asteroids.  

 

 

Here's the question that I submitted:

If a ship's base or its template overlaps an obstacle during a maneuver performed outside of its Execute Maneuver step while it is the active ship in the Activation phase does it apply the effects for hitting the obstacle with a maneuver?

 
Example: Countdown uses Adaptive Ailerons to perform a 1 bank maneuver before revealing his dial that causes his base to overlap an asteroid. Does he:
 
a) Roll to see if he takes damage and skip his perform action step.
b) Roll to see if he takes damage. He does not lose his perform action step.
c) Something else entirely.

Edited by WWHSD

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...