Jump to content
Synel

Discrepancy about Damaging Remotes

Recommended Posts

From the rules reference doc:

”If a remote suffers one or more hit/critical damage, deal 1 facedown damage card to it.”

From the Xi Shuttle rules insert:

”If a remote suffers 1 or more damage, it is deal that many damage cards.”
 

The way I’m reading this, it looks like RR means that remotes can receive one damage MAX per attack that hits. The insert means that each uncanceled damage is dealt individually. Translates to either needing at least two attacks to destroy a sensor buoy or at least one attack can destroy a sensor buoy. (First remote with two hull)

 

Which way should I play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/27/2020 at 2:00 AM, meffo said:

the rules insert from the xi shuttle is correct. it should be viewed as the most recent update to the rules on damaging remotes and used as such.

Yeah, you'd think so, but im curious if the inserts are on the same level of priority as the core rule book, in that it gets overridden by the rules reference?

Still, i feel it makes more sense that it gets a number of damage cards, rather than just 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a purely technical standpoint...

  • The Rules Reference does state that, in the case of a discrepancy between the rulebook and itself, the Rules Reference takes priority.
  • I don't recall any clear, printed definition of the legality/enforceability of rule inserts that come with ships.
    • One argument is that Rules Inserts are informational only, and do not have any enforceability whatsoever.  In this case, the Rules Reference takes precedence.
    • Rules Inserts are an additional form of game rules, and as such, are collectively part of the Rulebook.  In this case, the Rules Reference takes precedence.
    • Another argument is Rules Inserts carry greater weight than the Rulebook, as they generally deal with special circumstances unique to the ship they come with.  This puts them outside the jurisdiction of the Rules Reference.

Clearly, the best case scenario is to put both sets of rules into the gladiator pit, and let them fight to the death to determine superiority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also,

The rules inserts cannot be updated to reflect changes. So we don't know how long ago those inserts were put in as final and sent to print.

Finally @meffo something i thought about, (and i know that section wasn't specifically updated) The rules reference, if you think about it, was updated after the inserts were printed so it would *technically* be the most up to date. But that portion of the reference wasnt marked as being changed so.. yeah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All good points, thank you! It’s clear that it isn’t that clear, haha. And I’m glad to know I’m not the only one hesitant about it. I agree about the timing of the inserts being printed -> RRG being updated -> Xi shuttle being released and that is the only thing that makes sense to me that it should be played as “1 attack can yield 2 damage.” Otherwise, I would strongly lean toward RRG being the highest authority here, because there are still Guardians of the Republic and Servants of Strife inserts that don’t say gas clouds can produce strain tokens. Though the timing of release and rules update are clearly in a different order in that case, it’s still a case where we clearly follow the RRG over the inserts. And I assume the cluster mine inserts have a similar discrepancy: inserts have old text, newest RRG version has different rules than those printed.

Edit: It could be as simple as the remote section being overlooked, which is disappointing. But they will catch it and update it at some point.

Edited by Synel

Share this post


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

Also,

The rules inserts cannot be updated to reflect changes. So we don't know how long ago those inserts were put in as final and sent to print.

Finally @meffo something i thought about, (and i know that section wasn't specifically updated) The rules reference, if you think about it, was updated after the inserts were printed so it would *technically* be the most up to date. But that portion of the reference wasnt marked as being changed so.. yeah.

yeah, i'm just sticking with that. the rules insert was updated after that part of the rules reference. that's why it's the most recent rules text regarding this.

also, i just want it to work properly and fairly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2020 at 10:40 AM, Lyianx said:

Also,

The rules inserts cannot be updated to reflect changes. So we don't know how long ago those inserts were put in as final and sent to print.

Finally @meffo something i thought about, (and i know that section wasn't specifically updated) The rules reference, if you think about it, was updated after the inserts were printed so it would *technically* be the most up to date. But that portion of the reference wasnt marked as being changed so.. yeah.

But the Sensor Bouys WERE updated in the RR, and do NOT state any additional rules. 

Screenshot_20201003-143708_Acrobat for Samsung.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TychoCelchu505, agreed. there are no additional rules for this remote, but for all remotes. the rules for all remotes was not updated in the latest version of the rules reference - and that's why the rules insert from the Xi shuttle should be viewed as the latest and thus the most valid publication regarding damaging remotes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My local group has decided to follow the RR in this matter. When we begin to have tournaments again, the TO will make a ruling in advance, if FFG hadn't resolved this by then. The reasons were:  inserts were printed months ago for packaging deadlines, while the revised RR was just released;  the  aforementioned gas cloud/cluster mine, etc. revisions in the RR, showing that inserts are not the end all. Hopefully, this is clarified sooner than later by FFG. Until then we're going with the RR.  

Share this post


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

I do think there's enough flexibility in the language to wonder if the language in the RR is unintentional.

However, given the RR's supremacy clause, I do not see any reasonable alternative to ruling in favor of the RR.

I’ve wondered myself if the only intention there in the RR was just to stop some silly Crit chain on a 1 Hull remote.... thus the 1 card cap.

But yeah it’s a bit odd....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't the fact that damage is suffered one-at-a-time kind of solve this?

Eh, maybe not looking at Iden Versio.

Card_Pilot_83.png

I guess I find it more convincing that, given the RR text, Sensors Buoys would take two attacks--not just two hits from one attack--to kill.  Seems silly and probably unintentional, and one of the few times it actually seems worth asking FFG what they meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/5/2020 at 9:00 AM, JBFancourt said:

Has anyone notified FFG about this yet?

Yes, sent using the Rules Submission Form. 

My thought is that it might be intentional to force 2 attacks to give it some longevity. At 4 pts, being blown up before you could use them makes them kind of unplayable. Not saying that FFG haven't made things unplayable before, but maybe they're trying to get it right this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

Seems silly and probably unintentional, and one of the few times it actually seems worth asking FFG what they meant.

I think it might actually be intentional. Otherwise, these remotes would likely be shot down before they ever got to be used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:

I think it might actually be intentional. Otherwise, these remotes would likely be shot down before they ever got to be used.

This is my thought as well. Given how small remotes are, it makes a kind of sense.

 

12 hours ago, JBFancourt said:

I’ve wondered myself if the only intention there in the RR was just to stop some silly Crit chain on a 1 Hull remote.... thus the 1 card cap.

But yeah it’s a bit odd....

Or, more simply put, stop people using remotes as damage a card sponge to mill their own damage deck down to either help take Direct hits out of play, or in the case of Kylo, remove pilot crits.

That is just a theory though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s no way they actually meant that an attack containing 2+ hit/crit results wasn’t supposed to kill one of these. That’s unintuitive to the point ridiculousness. I understand that there’s a big question about the legitimacy of various rules documents and “AAAAAHHH, gotta fix this,” but when the ruling comes back, if it isn’t one damage card per point of damage dealt, just like every other attack in the game, I’ll eat my flight helmet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Innese said:

Dee reported that the Judge Illuminati has been informed that the rules insert is correct; remotes take damage just like everything else does.

I'm good with that.  I know some folks in 1e weren't satisfied when FFG sources gave hints like this about TrajSim and Genius, but seems sufficient to me.

Share this post


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

There’s no way they actually meant...

There is always that possibility with FFG. They have made some rather controversial rulings in the past that went against what most of the community *thought* they were intending.

If its been confirmed by FFG that the insert is correct, then we should see that reflected in the next RR update. Frankly, im fine with it working either way, just thought it was an interesting topic to discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played this list last night.

First Order Courier (38)    
    Targeting Synchronizer (4)    
    Sensor Buoy Suite (4)    
    Agent Terex (6)     
Ship total: 52  Half Points: 26  Threshold: 4    
    
Zeta Squadron Survivor (32)    x2
    Concussion Missiles (6)   
Ship total: 38  Half Points: 19  Threshold: 3    
    
Zeta Squadron Survivor (32)    x2
    Cluster Missiles (4)    
Ship total: 36  Half Points: 18  Threshold: 3    

Total: 200    

Went 3 and 1. We played it according to the Rules Reference, but I don't think it will matter greatly, if they do change it. The Sensor Bouys are extremely difficult to hit.  In each game my opponent wasted four to five shots and only came up with one damage on one of them (Either rule set would have yielded the same result) . But, they were very effective in getting ordinance off, and Focus firing on targets.  My loss (1st time playing the list) was mostly due to poor setup and bad planning on my part. 

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.


×
×
  • Create New...