Too bad that's a modification, now we cant have a cloaked pilot with stealth device.

Oh and I noticed this, look at the bottom right modification. You can see it says some version of cloaking device, but more important it doesn't say tie phantom only. SO this could go on other ships. Tie interceptor anybody?

ACD has been spoiled as a Phantom-only mod. The top line for ACD seen above even reads "TIE Phantom only: M__"

So thankfully, no silly Rebel-cloaked B-Wings.

But that's not the bottom right mod .

It also looks like ACD is the mod that allows you to take a free cloak action after attacking. The Phantom has the innate ability to cloak after all.

Too bad that's a modification, now we cant have a cloaked pilot with stealth device.

Oh and I noticed this, look at the bottom right modification. You can see it says some version of cloaking device, but more important it doesn't say tie phantom only. SO this could go on other ships. Tie interceptor anybody?

ACD has been spoiled as a Phantom-only mod. The top line for ACD seen above even reads "TIE Phantom only: M__"

So thankfully, no silly Rebel-cloaked B-Wings.

But that's not the bottom right mod .

It also looks like ACD is the mod that allows you to take a free cloak action after attacking. The Phantom has the innate ability to cloak after all.

A fair point!

It does indeed, there is a picture of the ACD in this thread (for anyone who somehow missed this announcement! )

I imagine that the Stygium Particle Accelerator will just cleverly bolt on to the cloaking action only, so that this upgrade card might see use with other ships that feature cloaking actions in the future. Wave 5 may tell... ;D

I'm going to spray paint my phantom black whenever it cloaks and dark grey when it uncloaks.

I'm going to spray paint my phantom black whenever it cloaks and dark grey when it uncloaks.

Okay, action... *shookashookashooka psssssssssst "

I'm going to spray paint my phantom black whenever it cloaks and dark grey when it uncloaks.

Would that be considered stalling during a tournament? =P

It would be stalling if I was like "one spray for you....shhhht...one sniff for me...snarrfff"

Ship X is hit by the attack, but takes no damage.

Or if you use Chewie (crew) to discard the damage card.

Point is, according the rules, a hit doesn't actually require that you do damage to your target, only that you have un-canceled [hit] or [crit] dice left. Damage doesn't actually factor into it at all.

Blount's wording is bad IMO. It works as a shortcut and gets the concept across, but it's still poorly written, unless this means FFG is going to change the rules.

The Advanced Cloak is pretty nice, lets you effectively get free shots in, with anything below a PS7 not able to get a good shot in on Whisper.

Too bad that's a modification, now we cant have a cloaked pilot with stealth device.

Oh and I noticed this, look at the bottom right modification. You can see it says some version of cloaking device, but more important it doesn't say tie phantom only. SO this could go on other ships. Tie interceptor anybody?

Looks like Stygium Plating Augmentation. Maybe it'll allow use of a stealth device, but can't be sure. Could be neat either way. Wish it was easier to read...

Too bad that's a modification, now we cant have a cloaked pilot with stealth device.

Oh and I noticed this, look at the bottom right modification. You can see it says some version of cloaking device, but more important it doesn't say tie phantom only. SO this could go on other ships. Tie interceptor anybody?

Looks like Stygium Plating Augmentation. Maybe it'll allow use of a stealth device, but can't be sure. Could be neat either way. Wish it was easier to read...

If my reading is corrent, it's a Stygium Particle Accelerator and the bottom line contains the words "Free Evade Action"

So looks like whisper will be a pain in the *** against swarm squads with no high PS pilots. Since he'll always be cloaked against their attacks. Perhaps there will be stress rules to counter this? i.e. When cloaked you cannot perform green manoeuvers?

I note that if the spoiler is correct even blocking Whisper would not stop him decloaking and shooting you and the using Adv Cloak to hide again.

And now we know!

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=4715

Too bad that's a modification, now we cant have a cloaked pilot with stealth device.

Oh and I noticed this, look at the bottom right modification. You can see it says some version of cloaking device, but more important it doesn't say tie phantom only. SO this could go on other ships. Tie interceptor anybody?

Looks like Stygium Plating Augmentation. Maybe it'll allow use of a stealth device, but can't be sure. Could be neat either way. Wish it was easier to read...

Stygium Particle Accelerator

Modification.

When you (????) decloak or perform a cloak action, you may perform 1 free evade action. (2 points)

Ship X is hit by the attack, but takes no damage.

Or if you use Chewie (crew) to discard the damage card.

Point is, according the rules, a hit doesn't actually require that you do damage to your target, only that you have un-canceled [hit] or [crit] dice left. Damage doesn't actually factor into it at all.

Blount's wording is bad IMO. It works as a shortcut and gets the concept across, but it's still poorly written, unless this means FFG is going to change the rules.

The Advanced Cloak is pretty nice, lets you effectively get free shots in, with anything below a PS7 not able to get a good shot in on Whisper.

I disagree, I think Blount's wording is fine - the fact that a few specific instances exist in the rules where other effects can cause an attack to count as a hit even when it lands no damage is fairly irrelevant, to be honest.

Stealth - If you are hit by an attack...

Assault Missiles - If this attack hits...

Ion Missiles - If this attack hits...

Blount - ...the defender is hit by your attack, even if he does not suffer any damage.

How is that bad wording? The defender is HIT by his attack, and every ability he seems designed to interact with says "if this attack HITS" or some variation thereof. Seems pretty clear and concise to me. Even if he doesn't do any damage he will trigger any effect dependent on an attack that has to "hit."

Blount's wording is bad IMO. It works as a shortcut and gets the concept across, but it's still poorly written, unless this means FFG is going to change the rules.

The Advanced Cloak is pretty nice, lets you effectively get free shots in, with anything below a PS7 not able to get a good shot in on Whisper.

I disagree, I think Blount's wording is fine - the fact that a few specific instances exist in the rules where other effects can cause an attack to count as a hit even when it lands no damage is fairly irrelevant, to be honest.

Stealth - If you are hit by an attack...

Assault Missiles - If this attack hits...

Ion Missiles - If this attack hits...

Blount - ...the defender is hit by your attack, even if he does not suffer any damage.

How is that bad wording? The defender is HIT by his attack, and every ability he seems designed to interact with says "if this attack HITS" or some variation thereof. Seems pretty clear and concise to me. Even if he doesn't do any damage he will trigger any effect dependent on an attack that has to "hit."

Yeah, I don't understand what problem you see with Blount's language. His ability makes clear that all of his attacks are considered to have hit, and makes a pre-emptive strike on player confusion by telling you that it doesn't mean you automatically do damage.

Yeah, I don't understand what problem you see with Blount's language.

My issue is that it's a sloppy way to word it. Because by the rules you're not required to actually do damage for it to be considered a hit.

I've lost track of the number of times this came up on the rules form with people asking what causes you to lose SD. The reinforces the idea that hit = damage which isn't true.

Been better if they worded it like...

When attacking, the dfender is hit by your attack even if he cancels all [hit] and [crit] dice.

No more text really so it would fit, and also a more correct way to word it based on the current rules.

Yeah, I don't understand what problem you see with Blount's language.

My issue is that it's a sloppy way to word it. Because by the rules you're not required to actually do damage for it to be considered a hit.

I've lost track of the number of times this came up on the rules form with people asking what causes you to lose SD. The reinforces the idea that hit = damage which isn't true.

I see your point, but I think everything after the comma is really more explanatory text than rules text anyway. Like I said, a pre-emptive strike on player confusion, because I can imagine a lot of people assuming that "the defender is hit by your attack" means something like "all red dice turn into [hit]".

I really dislike these sort of skills that guarantee something regarding damage without rolling a dice; -even if it's just a one guy? Ion Pulse Missiles + Blount = 1 damage & 2 Ions, right?

I already disliked B-Wing (or any living or forthcoming 1AG rebel ship with crew) + C-3PO = 1 evade, if you bet against your luck. I just like that there should be still a probability when it comes to dealing/receiving damage, even if expensive combo.

For these who think I'm imp-whiner, like criticism seem to be regarded on QQ-thread, I must add I dislike those skills regardless of faction. And that's why luckily, I could not find same sort of combo from imperial side. At least not yet and hopefully I'll never find.

...luckily, I could not find same sort of combo from imperial side.

I see your point, but I think everything after the comma is really more explanatory text than rules text anyway.

It's not a huge deal... just a sloppy way of wording it. Because it further enforces the idea that hit=damage. If there wasn't room to be more precise that would be one thing, but there really is room, so it's IMO sloppy to use a shortcut that to a point undermines the rules, or at least helps reinforce wrong interpretations.

Don't forget Proton Bombs. No dice just autodamage.

I see your point, but I think everything after the comma is really more explanatory text than rules text anyway.

It's not a huge deal... just a sloppy way of wording it. Because it further enforces the idea that hit=damage. If there wasn't room to be more precise that would be one thing, but there really is room, so it's IMO sloppy to use a shortcut that to a point undermines the rules, or at least helps reinforce wrong interpretations.

I honestly don't think it's that sloppy. Not sure how you would rather have seen it worded - the fact is, that no, an attack does not technically have to do damage in order to have counted as a hit, but only because of a handful of exceptions to that rule, now to include Blount. Things like DTF taking the crit but still counting as a hit for the purposes of something like Stealth are very much the exception to how that normally works. Blount's ability simply means that he's always an exception, and I don't think they could or needed to make that much clearer.

Don't forget Proton Bombs. No dice just autodamage.

You still have to hit with the template. But Vorpal Sword is right about the Vader crew, even if it backfires you it its still damage without rolling a dice. Hmm, actually it is 3 damage

Not sure how you would rather have seen it worded

I actually posted that up a few, but here it is again.

When attacking, the dfender is hit by your attack even if he cancels all [hit] and [crit] results.

I see your point, but I think everything after the comma is really more explanatory text than rules text anyway.

It's not a huge deal... just a sloppy way of wording it. Because it further enforces the idea that hit=damage. If there wasn't room to be more precise that would be one thing, but there really is room, so it's IMO sloppy to use a shortcut that to a point undermines the rules, or at least helps reinforce wrong interpretations.

I honestly don't think it's that sloppy. Not sure how you would rather have seen it worded - the fact is, that no, an attack does not technically have to do damage in order to have counted as a hit, but only because of a handful of exceptions to that rule, now to include Blount. Things like DTF taking the crit but still counting as a hit for the purposes of something like Stealth are very much the exception to how that normally works. Blount's ability simply means that he's always an exception, and I don't think they could or needed to make that much clearer.

I'm not sure why you unsure of how he'd prefer it worded. He posted the exact wording he'd have used.

You still have to hit with the template.

Yes but you mentioned dice, which the bombs don't require, neither do seismic charges for that matter.

So that's 3 sources which are all Imp side only, that allow you to do damage without rolling dice.