New Relay

[ScottGilbert25 92]

So could you activate a shuttle and move it out of range and then relay?

[Drasnighta 26,832]

No, as each squadron activation is resolved completely before the next.

Youd move the shuttle, then be out of range when you checked the next one.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Drasnighta

[Ginkapo 9,321]

Can you chain lambdas? 

[xanderf 6,788]

The question I had on this was whether you could chain relays.

IE., one shuttle at range 3 of a ship, another shuttle at range 3 of that shuttle, and then the squadrons.  As worded, the second shuttle can relay if it is in range to be activated...and it would be in range to be activated via relay from the first shuttle, correct?

[Drasnighta 26,832]

Potentially, I have not read it in specifics yet 

[PT106 2,316]

45 minutes ago, xanderf said:

The question I had on this was whether you could chain relays.

IE., one shuttle at range 3 of a ship, another shuttle at range 3 of that shuttle, and then the squadrons.  As worded, the second shuttle can relay if it is in range to be activated...and it would be in range to be activated via relay from the first shuttle, correct?

My read on this is that Relay only allows for activation of squads that may be out of range of the activating ship, it doesn't affect the determination that the squad is in range or out of range of the activating ship, therefore daisy-chaining Relays wouldn't work. But it may need a FAQ entry.

[reegsk 742]

Yeah, I think you could make a RAW argument that daisy chaining them would work. As @xanderf said, the second Relay ship is "in range to be activated." But I would think the fact that they just made a point of nerfing Relay would put this outside of RAI.

[Green Knight 9,746]

The answer is no.

[reegsk 742]

4 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

The answer is no.

I would agree that it should be, but can you cite rules that prove it isn't?

[Green Knight 9,746]

12 minutes ago, reegsk said:

I would agree that it should be, but can you cite rules that prove it isn't?

Not beyond this, no:

O Squadron: Resolve after revealing the ship’s command dial.
◊◊ Dial: Activate a number of friendly squadrons up to the ship’s squadron value that are at close–medium range of the ship. Each squadron activated in this way can attack and move in either order. The squadrons are chosen and activated one at a time.
◊◊ Token: Activate one squadron as described above.

Except oc:

And Nulay:

The ship resolves a command. 

Range restriction apply.

Relay alters this restriction.

Nothing about chaining.

Sure, one can get all pedantic, but I find nothing concrete to support chaining.

Which leaves me with: no.

[Drasnighta 26,832]

This is Rules, not your blog... GET PEDANTIC. ??

you are checking activation range - Why is that agnostic if Relay?  You indeed check it FOR Relay to be used, so why not but check it while chaining?

 

 

...

 

i mean, even when pedantic, it’s hard to stretch “in range to be activated” with “can be activated” so I am also a no.

 

but come on, GK ... I shouldn’t have to ENNCOURAGE people to be pedantic here... you let me down, man ?

Edited April 6, 2018 by Drasnighta

[Green Knight 9,746]

1 minute ago, Drasnighta said:

This is Rules, not your blog... GET PEDANTIC. ??

you are checking activation range - Why is that agnostic if Relay?  You indeed check it FOR Relay to be used, so shy but check it while chaining?

Ah, but I have you for pedantic and technically correct (which I agree is the best correct).

I'm more into reasonable interpretations and working solutions

[Green Knight 9,746]

New relay = Nulay?

[Drasnighta 26,832]

... i need to be paid for what I do...

 

Cash, Credit and Whiskey accepted.

[Rikash 132]

From RRG 3 under Commands -> Squadron:

Quote

◊ Dial: Activate a number of friendly squadrons up to the ship’s squadron value that are at close–medium range of the ship. Each squadron activated in this way can attack and move in either order. The squadrons are chosen and activated one at a time.

From FAQ'd cards:

Quote

Relay X. (When a friendly ship resolves a [Squadron] command, if you [Relay squadron] are in range to be activated, up to X of the squadrons it [the ship] activates can be at distance 1–3 of you.)

 

I think I disagree with you, GK. My additions are in italics. My hypothetical scenario involves an ISD2 with a squadron dial, 2 lambdas, and 2 interceptors. One lambda is within medium range of an ISD. A different lambda and one interceptor are beyond medium range of the ISD, but within distance 3 of the first lambda. Finally our errant interceptor who is beyond distance 3 of the first lambda (and medium of the ISD), but within distance 3 of the 2nd lambda. From Relay rules, you first check to see if the Relay squadron is in range to be activated. We check the first lambda, and see it's in medium of the ISD. No one argues I can now activate the 2nd lambda and interceptor via Relay and have them move/attack. I now go to the 2nd lambda and check if it satisfies the condition ( ... if you [Relay squadron] are in range to be activated ... ) which we just established was met (I can activate the first lambda). The 2nd interceptor is at range 3 of the 2nd lambda and eligible to be Relayed.

I don't see any language that allows us to draw a distinction between being activated at medium range and being activated by relay. Either you CAN be activated or you CAN'T.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Rikash

[Rikash 132]

I am rethinking it now that Dras highlighted "in range to be activated" vs "can be activated'... Misread it the first time. I'm now firmly in the no camp as well, that's what I get for not thoroughly reading the thread before responding.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Rikash
Nothing to see here.

[Ardaedhel 10,844]

4 minutes ago, Rikash said:

( ... if you [Relay squadron] are in range to be activated ... ) which we just established was met (I can activate the first lambda).

"Can activate" is not the same thing as "in range to be activated", though.  That's the crux of the issue.

[Rikash 132]

Just now, Ardaedhel said:

"Can activate" is not the same thing as "in range to be activated", though.  That's the crux of the issue.

Yea, I missed that wording before. I think I agree with GK/Dras/you now. It's slightly ambiguous wording, but "in range" implies in range of the ship resolving the command.

[Rikash 132]

@Green Knight laugh_it_up_fuzzball.gif (If only I could insert GIFs from work...)

Edited April 6, 2018 by Rikash

[Ardaedhel 10,844]

1 minute ago, Rikash said:

@Green Knight laugh_it_up_fuzzball.gif (If only I could insert GIFs from work...)

 

Got u fam

[xanderf 6,788]

4 minutes ago, Rikash said:

Yea, I missed that wording before. I think I agree with GK/Dras/you now. It's slightly ambiguous wording, but "in range" implies in range of the ship resolving the command.

Of course, Centicore does have the missing '...can be...' wording.

So if you replaced the first Lambda with Centicore, anywhere on the map, it should be able to chain through a second Lambda to more distant squadrons.

[reegsk 742]

Yes, read and quote the rules so I don’t have to. BWUAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Ginkapo 9,321]

"Activation range" is not defined as a concept anywhere.

[Ginkapo 9,321]

[Green Knight 9,746]

6 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Does this even start to stack with relay?

No.