Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Grathew

Heavy Fire Zone

Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, Grathew said:

Wasn't it released in Germany with the Onager?

That was more "oops" than actual release.

FFG only makes rulings based off US release which isn't until the 31st.

And then you will need to submit a question via their rules clarification link and see when they actually will answer it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, just maybe, the version we get of the card is written more clear than the one we've seen in the article.

I remember before Sato came out that there was a great discussion over his effect for how the card seen in the article was written, and then the version released was written differently and completely clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my interpretations. Doesn't mean I am right, but from what I've discussed with other judges, this feels like the "intent" behind the card. Its on the top of my list to get answered when I can.

When a ship equipped with Heavy Fire Zone declares an enemy squadron the target of an attack. If that squadron is not engaged with a friendly squadron, before moving on to the “Roll Attack Dice” step, you may replace all blue dice in that ships anti squadron armament with red dice.

 

There is much confusion over this card, however the intent is clear.
Here is an example of why this card works. Using the Attack sequence.

For this example, it will be a ship with an anti squadron armament of 1 blue die and an enemy squadron that is within long range of the attacking hull zones firing arc.

 

Step 1.  Declare a Target. In this case, a ship attacking a squadron.

Step 2. As you are checking range, declare you are using Heavy Fire Zone and since you are in the “Declare Target” step, which is before the “Roll Attack Dice” step, this allows you to replace the blue die with a red die. Now when the range is checked, the squadron is in “attack range”. 

 

Step3. And now move on to the “Roll Attack Dice” step gathering the red die needed to conduct the attack at long range.

 

What is the interaction with the Counter keyword, if a ship also has Quad Laser Turrets equipped?

Counter is an anti-squadron armament of 1 blue die and would be able to be replaced with a red die.

 

Edited by Karneck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Karneck said:

Here is my interpretations. Doesn't mean I am right, but from what I've discussed with other judges, this feels like the "intent" behind the card. Its on the top of my list to get answered when I can.

When a ship equipped with Heavy Fire Zone declares an enemy squadron the target of an attack. If that squadron is not engaged with a friendly squadron, before moving on to the “Roll Attack Dice” step, you may replace any blue dice in that ships anti squadron armament with red dice.

 

There is much confusion over this card, however the intent is clear.
Here is an example of why this card works. Using the Attack sequence.

For this example, it will be a ship with an anti squadron armament of 1 blue die and an enemy squadron that is within long range of the attacking hull zones firing arc.

 

Step 1.  Declare a Target. In this case, a ship attacking a squadron.

Step 2. As you are checking range, declare you are using Heavy Fire Zone and since you are in the “Declare Target” step, which is before the “Roll Attack Dice” step, this allows you to replace the blue die with a red die. Now when the range is checked, the squadron is in “attack range”. 

 

Step3. And now move on to the “Roll Attack Dice” step gathering the red die needed to conduct the attack at long range.

 

What is the interaction with the Counter keyword, if a ship also has Quad Laser Turrets equipped?

Counter is an anti-squadron armament of 1 blue die and would be able to be replaced with a red die.

 

I 100% agree that what you say is the intention of the card, but the problem whit the rules we have is that this is mentioned in step 1 of the attack (before the "Roll Attack Dice" step):

"If the attacker is a ship, the defending squadron or hull zone must be inside the attacking hull zone’s firing arc and at attack range of the attacking hull zone."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You say the word, but do you know how it is defined?

From RRG
"Attack range is the range at which a squadron or a ship’s hull zone can perform an attack as determined by the armament it is using.
• A hull zone’s maximum attack range is close range if it has only black dice in its armament, medium range if it has at least one blue die, or long range if it has at least one red die."

You are changing the armament during the range check.

Edited by Karneck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lemmiwinks86 said:

I 100% agree that what you say is the intention of the card, but the problem whit the rules we have is that this is mentioned in step 1 of the attack (before the "Roll Attack Dice" step):

"If the attacker is a ship, the defending squadron or hull zone must be inside the attacking hull zone’s firing arc and at attack range of the attacking hull zone."

Diamond bullet points are not necessarily specific events, but reminders/clarifiers.

At least, that's the continuation of the best argument I've heard that HFZ is written as intended and currently functional at long range.

Personally, I think that's a tenuous claim that needs confirmation.  But it's pretty clear how the card is intended to work.

Thanks to the autonomy given to the TO for competitive events, it should be pretty simple so long as things get clarified beforehand.  And for casual games we can use common sense until this gets resolved.

5 hours ago, Karneck said:

You are changing the armament during the range check.

You are changing the dice in your armament "before gathering dice."  This is a distinct step after declaring the target.  Are you saying the range check does not take place until this point?

The bullet point stating the attacker must be at attack range is placed with the declare target step.  Even if it isn't limited to that point of the attack, at that point you have failed the range check, and we're left with the question of whether passing that range check later would matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The card says "While Attacking"...."before you gather dice"

To me this means that anytime during your attack as long as its before you gather your dice, you can change your blues to red.  (although the "before" keyword does say immediately before the specified event")

Plus the book also says ◊◊ If the attacker cannot gather any dice appropriate for the range of the attack, the attack is cancelled.

So you can actually declare and attack even if you do not start out with the dice that can reach the target.  Unless there is something in the FAQ, which I have not checked, yet. 

So I interpret this as you can change the range to long.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So from the FAQ..

If a ship’s attack would not include any dice, but the ship
can add dice through a card effect, can it perform the
attack?
A: No. If a ship does not gather any dice during the “Roll Attack
Dice” step of an attack, the attack is canceled.

So, I still think you can change the range since gather dice is the first thing you do in the Roll Attack Dice step.  Changing your dice to red happens before that, and your attack is cancelled if you have no dice in range during the Roll attack dice step. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, let's go through this properly.

Quote

While attacking a squadron, before you gather dice, if the defender is not engaged with a friendly squadron you may replace all of the blue dice in your anti-squadron armament with red dice.

Rules Reference, p5, Effect Use and Timing:

Quote

A “before” effect occurs immediately before the specified event and cannot occur again for that instance of the event.

Rules Reference, p2, Attack:

Quote

1. Declare Target: The attacker declares the defender and the attacking hull zone, if any. If the defender is a ship, the attacker declares the defending hull zone. Measure line of sight to the defender to ensure the attack is
possible and to determine if it is obstructed.

  • If the attacker is a ship, the defending squadron or hull zone must be inside the attacking hull zone’s firing arc and at attack range of the attacking hull zone.
  • If the attacker is a squadron, the defending squadron or hull zone must be at distance 1.

[Heavy Fire Zone does stuff here]

2. Roll Attack Dice: Gather attack dice to form the attack pool and roll those dice. Gather only the dice that are appropriate for the range of the attack as indicated by the icons on the range ruler.

  • If the defender is a ship, gather the attack dice indicated in the attacking hull zone’s or squadron’s battery armament.
  • If the defender is a squadron, gather the attack dice indicated in the attacker’s anti-squadron armament.
  • If the attacker cannot gather any dice appropriate for the range of the attack, the attack is canceled.

So, Heavy Fire Zone replaces the dice before you gather dice, so that is before the Roll Attack Dice step, so after the Declare Target step.

Which means that when we gather attack dice, we gather red ones instead of blue ones.

The confusion is that the range check for an attack doesn't happen during Step 2, Roll Attack Dice. It happens during Step 1, Declare Target, as part of declaring the defender (note that we're never explicitly told to measure range, it is implied by the bullet point):

Quote
  • If the attacker is a ship, the defending squadron... must be ... at attack range of the attacking hull zone

So, now we need Rules Reference, p2, Attack Range:

Quote

Attack range is the range at which a squadron or a ship’s hull zone can perform an attack as determined by the armament it is using.

  • A hull zone’s maximum attack range is close range if it has only black dice in its armament, medium range if it has at least one blue die, or long range if it has at least one red die.

So, during Step 1 of the Attack, before Heavy Fire Zone has any effect, we need to check the defending hull zone is at attack range. And attack range is defined by the armament it is using for the attack. But we don't work out the armament we are using until Step 2, Roll Attack Dice (where we are told which dice to gather).

One last definition from the Rules Reference, p2, Armament:

Quote

The attacker’s armament indicates the color and number of dice that can be used during an attack. Anti-squadron armament is used when attacking a squadron...

There are two interpretations here:

  1. The armament we use to determine Attack Range in Step 1 is the armament we would gather in Step 2, so includes the Heavy Fire Zone swap,
  2. The armament we use to determine Attack Range in Step 1 is the battery armament or anti-squadron armament, depending on what we are attacking, so doesn't include the Heavy Fire Zone swap.

If 1 is true, a ship with blue-but-no-red dice in its anti-squadron armament can shoot at long range with Heavy Fire Zone. If 2, it can't (because the squadron is not a valid target as it isn't at attack range).

I'm pretty sure 1 is the intent of the card. But as written, that involves breaking causality (something has to have effect before it is caused). 2 is more consistent - you check maximum attack range, which means checking armament, armament is defined (outside the Attack Steps) as being the anti-squadron armament if you are attacking a squadron. And that doesn't get changed (blue to red) until after you do the range check.

So it isn't that the attack is cancelled because there are no dice in the attack pool (the Step 2 test), but never happens because the defender isn't a valid target (the Step 1 test). And this is consistent with the Ignition rules (which say that an Ignition attacks can be declared against ships beyond long range).

Note that if the anti-squadron armament was a red and a blue, and the attack was obstructed, HFZ would make a difference, as the obstruction check happens after you gather dice (before you roll), so after HFZ has switched things.

I think this could do with a FAQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I'm not sure I see how this is vague.

Attacking.

Step 1. Declare Target

-1st bullet: "If the attacker is a ship, the defending squadron or hull zone must be inside the attacking hull zone's firing arc and at range of the attacking hull zone"

(what is the range?  the range is determined by the anti-squadron dice of the attacking ship...usually blue or black).

Step 2. Roll Attack Dice.

-Gather attack dice.  Immediately before* this is then when HFZ card would trigger.  But you have no dice to gather because Step 1 was not fulfilled (assuming the squadron is at red range).

 

*As Grumbleduke posted above, "before" is defined as an effect that occurs immediately before the specified event.

Simply put, you can't replace dice that you don't have for an attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Oh, I absolutely *love* paying points for Downgrades, don't you?

I don't think anyone wants it to work this way.  But if it does, it's better to make that clear than to have players walking around ignorant or sweep it under the rug.

Because if there is a problem, acknowledging it is the first step towards *fixing* it and/or making a choice about how to play it.

Edited by The Jabbawookie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can think is that this is intended to work with point defense reroute to basically increase your chances of getting a hit or double hit with red dice?

Dras what's your interpretation of how it's supposed to work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:

I don't think anyone wants it to work this way.  But if it does, it's better to make that clear than to have players walking around ignorant or sweep it under the rug.

Because if there is a problem, acknowledging it is the first step towards *fixing* it and/or making a choice about how to play it.

Really?

 

Brecause over 3 different topics I’ve got a list of people who are telling me it works that way despite any explanation, evidence, or interpretation.  Even considering potential backgrounds of interpretation and potential intent.

They MUST want it to be so, or they wouldn’t keep fighting for it.

Edited by Drasnighta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rocmistro said:

All I can think is that this is intended to work with point defense reroute to basically increase your chances of getting a hit or double hit with red dice?

Dras what's your interpretation of how it's supposed to work?

 

4 hours ago, beefcake4000 said:

I read it that way too, seemed bad but I figured it was basically just an opportunity to roll a double on the red 

Still quite literally a downgrade,

If nothing else, even if you consider the parity of danage average, and the extra misses worth the 1/8 double: it’s a straight downgrade in Accuracy.

 

Red dice are pointed more than blue dice *for one reason only*
 

Deny it that reason and you’re literally advocating paying points for a downgrade.

 

RAW is an ideal to look towards, for sure.  But there are RAW situations which are plainly incorrect. (Cue @BiggsIRL and his explanation on how Thrawn Dials break the game when you adhere RAW).

 

Sure, it’s be wonderful to get feedback and changes and FAQs with any amount of regularity. It would.  It would be wonderful if people like me were irrelevant because everything was always perfectly worded all of the time.

But it gotten to this for me:


I don’t care anymore.

Assuming RAW which makes something demonstratively worse, pointless and/or irrelevant is stupid.

Assuming RAW interpretations that break the game is the way things are intended is Stupid.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Really?

 

Brecause over 3 different topics I’ve got a list of people who are telling me it works that way despite any explanation, evidence, or interpretation.

They MUST want it to be so, or they wouldn’t keep fighting for it.

There are a fair few detailed arguments in those topics as well.  I've seen a lot of analysis of the quoted attack sequence, which is nothing if not interpretation.

Which is interesting, because I have yet to hear a good argument backed by RAW as to why it facilitates long range shots.

Some arguments that might work, that ideally would be true, yes.  But nothing that uses only explicitly verified RAW.  And if we don't know, we need the FAQ.

And I will admit: claims that the card is fine, made by those who have a good understanding of the rules... feel like an attempt to bend over backwards for RAI.  Which is irritating to me, and is something I will push back on when the card is barely worth using regardless.

 

If the response had been "let's see" or "we should still play it the non-dumb way" these threads would have been shorter.  But even when we don't like RAW, being open about where to deviate from it matters.  That's how you have an honest discussion instead of everyone shooting past each other because some people's reasoning doesn't match their arguments.  I should have said as much way earlier, and to your credit you were pretty forthcoming about that.

Edited by The Jabbawookie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

....

Assuming RAW which makes something demonstratively worse, pointless and/or irrelevant is stupid.

Assuming RAW interpretations that break the game is the way things are intended is Stupid.

Dras I am sympathetic to your frustration, but this also underlies the very real possibility that FFG just made a mistake with this card. It wouldn't be the first time.  I don't think it's our place to fix their mistake, at least not in tournament settings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rocmistro said:

Dras I am sympathetic to your frustration, but this also underlies the very real possibility that FFG just made a mistake with this card. It wouldn't be the first time.  I don't think it's our place to fix their mistake, at least not in tournament settings.

You sure?

As a TO, the Tournament Regulations SPECIFICALLY STATE it is, in the case of a mistake being made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I meant more to assert it as a global fix.

I think it's fine to say "I'm the TO for this event, and as such, given the card's ambiguity, we will be playing Heavy Fire Zone as a long-range red-die interpretation", without necessarily asserting that as the objectively settled way that the card will be FAQ'd by FFG.

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...