Hell, if someone makes a 3 right turn off the board, and it's clear that they CLEARLY meant to the a 3 left turn towards the rear of a ship with 1 hull left that they have a TL on, let them fix the move, it's just better that way.

Wanted to address this because it says a lot.The assumption here is that if I don't let them fix their mistake, I'm somehow being a poor sport, and that it should be expected that I'll let them fix it. That it's better that way.The rules are quite clear, you do the maneuver you set. The fact that you made a mistake, even if it's a clear mistake is still your fault not mine.Why should I not capitalize on the mistake you made? How in the world does doing that make me a bad person or a poor sport? It's a big part of competitive events to take advantage of someone's mistake. In Chess for example that's really the only way you win, by capitalizing on the other persons mistake.Letting someone fix something that is clearly a mistake may be a nice thing to do, but that doesn't mean I owe it to them, or that I'm playing unfairly if I don't. In fact expecting me to let them fix the mistake is the true form of poor sportsmanship and playing unfairly.

You forgot the "mwha, ha, ha, ha" after your statement.

Hell, if someone makes a 3 right turn off the board, and it's clear that they CLEARLY meant to the a 3 left turn towards the rear of a ship with 1 hull left that they have a TL on, let them fix the move, it's just better that way.

Wanted to address this because it says a lot.

The assumption here is that if I don't let them fix their mistake, I'm somehow being a poor sport, and that it should be expected that I'll let them fix it. That it's better that way.

The rules are quite clear, you do the maneuver you set. The fact that you made a mistake, even if it's a clear mistake is still your fault not mine.

Why should I not capitalize on the mistake you made? How in the world does doing that make me a bad person or a poor sport? It's a big part of competitive events to take advantage of someone's mistake. In Chess for example that's really the only way you win, by capitalizing on the other persons mistake.

Letting someone fix something that is clearly a mistake may be a nice thing to do, but that doesn't mean I owe it to them, or that I'm playing unfairly if I don't. In fact expecting me to let them fix the mistake is the true form of poor sportsmanship and playing unfairly.

I wouldn't expect anyone to let me fix a mistake like that. I wouldn't think anyone should expect to be able to correct a mistake like that. It's a mistake and the opponent has to live with it. If we were playing each other, and you wouldn't let me correct a mistake like that, I wouldn't feel any ill will towards you, nor would I think you were an ass.

I also understand the desire to stick to the rules. I get it. I really do. I don't disagree. I guess I just want to play against the full opponent. I want him to have his actions, all of them. If he flips directions around in his head and it's completely clear that he did, I want him to keep his ship on the board and in play. I want to face him at his best. I want the complete challenge, no matter the stakes. If I were to beat him because he flew a ship off the board by a clear mistake, and I won because of it, I'd hate that win. To me that's not a win, it's something else. I know it still counts as a win, and a win is a win and all, but it feels hollow. I wouldn't want to win because a player moved all his PSx ships and then went back and tried to do actions on them, but wasn't allowed because he took an insignificant short cut out of convenience.

I do understand the desire to stick to the rules. It's fair, it's valid, and it's totally correct. Using the rules to one's own advantage is a fine decent strategy, that I take advantage of too. But this all started because someone wasn't going to allow someone to take actions on ships that were moved at the same PS level. The way that situation was described, it sounded like he was almost proud that he caught him and wouldn't let him take his actions. That's probably what started all this.

I understand the letter of the law perspective, but it can be viewed as over zealous at times.

Me and my brother have houseruled this. Whenever you forget to take an action an move on to the next ship, that ship gets a focus token. Maybe I wanted to evade, or barrel roll, maybe he wanted to target lock or boost... If you forgot to do it, it counts as taking a focus, since that's action that every ship can do and it will never make a difference in ships blocking other ships. And it's just less jerky than not allowing an action at all

I don't know how often that comes up but if it becomes too "easy" I could see it being a problem.

You and your brother finish the activation phase and you notice a could ships didn't Act so now you drop the Focus tokens on them because of your house rule and you think you're good to go. If you try that during a tournament of some kind you should NOT be surprised when some when calls BS and you lose those possible actions. Who are you going to blame? Is it his fault for saying you can't dump tokens for actions you didn't take when you should have or is it your fault for not following the RAW?

I see you didn't take a Focus after you moved a ship. I move my ship and the BR and/or Boost to get a shot at that ship. Now you remember, "Oh! Here is the Focus that the ship automatically takes if I didn't do anything else with it." Some of the posts in this thread seem to think this kind of behavior would be fine because "when you take a focus it doesn't change anything."

If you come to a game you should expect to play by ALL of the rules to the best of your ability. If you want to take shortcuts and your opponent approves then you could for that game but don't expect it. If you screw something up and turn the wrong way be prepared to suck it up because that fault is ALL yours and if your opponent expects you to keep the suicide maneuver that shouldn't reflect poorly on them at all.

Someone has mentioned driving one MPH over the speed limit and saying that it is equivalent to "poor sportsmanship" if a cop happens to pull you over for doing that. SORRY, that's the cop doing his job even if you don't like it. Maybe your speedometer is off and he actually has you going 6 over but "generously" writes the ticket for just 1 over which you knew was wrong anyway. Now lets just throw out the cop and instead of him lets look at racing officials enforcing speed limits down pit road; are they being jerks when they penalize a car for driving 1 MPH over the limit? If yes then why are there speed limits at all if they are flexible? The speed limits are there for safety and rigorously enforcing them is meant to keep everything as fair as possible.

I actually had an opponent make that mistake in a tournament not long ago. His bomber took a left turn right off the board. I would have been more than willing to let him fix it, but it was obvious the game was over anyway, it was his last ship and I still had 2 bombers and a (severely wounded) suicide shuttle on the table, and I think he was kinda discouraged because my alpha strike had been so devastating.

There seems to be this assumption that those of us who are asking for the rules to be adhered to are doing so by leaping upon a chair, pointing an accusatory finger at our opponent, and shouting down our demands like Zeus from Olympus. You can want the rules followed and still be a nice person, you know.

No one should feel ashamed for following the rules.

If you don't feel you really "won" because you followed the rules I may tell you that you've gone too soft. Opponents make mistakes and it can even cost them certain victory so don't feel bad about following the rule. My favorite example of the "rules" robbing someone of a win actually come from a game of chess. One player doesn't want to accept the concession of another, who is reduced to his King and can not win, instead electing to "humiliate" that player by Queening all of the remaining pawns. In the end that player got part of his wish when he placed the 7th Queen on the board but the humiliation was also his as his opponent Kind sat in a perfectly safe spot but with no where to go leading to a draw according to the rules of the game.

There seems to be this assumption that those of us who are asking for the rules to be adhered to are doing so by leaping upon a chair, pointing an accusatory finger at our opponent, and shouting down our demands like Zeus from Olympus. You can want the rules followed and still be a nice person, you know.

Very true, and I expect that is the case in reality more often than not. However, on the internet, in threads like these, statements like "why is it bad to play correctly" come across like an accusation that anyone who interprets the rules in a looser fashion is cheating or being dishonest.

Like I said in an earlier post, one side comes across like they are accusing people of cheating, the other side comes across like they are throwing insults and temper tantrums.

There seems to be this assumption that those of us who are asking for the rules to be adhered to are doing so by leaping upon a chair, pointing an accusatory finger at our opponent, and shouting down our demands like Zeus from Olympus. You can want the rules followed and still be a nice person, you know.

I'm guessing that 99% or more of people advocating for following the RAW would try to do it nicely. Perhaps it's just me but it seems that those who are taking the rule violating shortcut are the ones who are offended and then lash out causing an escalation in tensions.

Hell, if someone makes a 3 right turn off the board, and it's clear that they CLEARLY meant to the a 3 left turn towards the rear of a ship with 1 hull left that they have a TL on, let them fix the move, it's just better that way.

Wanted to address this because it says a lot.

The assumption here is that if I don't let them fix their mistake, I'm somehow being a poor sport, and that it should be expected that I'll let them fix it. That it's better that way.

The rules are quite clear, you do the maneuver you set. The fact that you made a mistake, even if it's a clear mistake is still your fault not mine.

Why should I not capitalize on the mistake you made? How in the world does doing that make me a bad person or a poor sport? It's a big part of competitive events to take advantage of someone's mistake. In Chess for example that's really the only way you win, by capitalizing on the other persons mistake.

Letting someone fix something that is clearly a mistake may be a nice thing to do, but that doesn't mean I owe it to them, or that I'm playing unfairly if I don't. In fact expecting me to let them fix the mistake is the true form of poor sportsmanship and playing unfairly.

I wouldn't expect anyone to let me fix a mistake like that. I wouldn't think anyone should expect to be able to correct a mistake like that. It's a mistake and the opponent has to live with it. If we were playing each other, and you wouldn't let me correct a mistake like that, I wouldn't feel any ill will towards you, nor would I think you were an ass.

I also understand the desire to stick to the rules. I get it. I really do. I don't disagree. I guess I just want to play against the full opponent. I want him to have his actions, all of them. If he flips directions around in his head and it's completely clear that he did, I want him to keep his ship on the board and in play. I want to face him at his best. I want the complete challenge, no matter the stakes. If I were to beat him because he flew a ship off the board by a clear mistake, and I won because of it, I'd hate that win. To me that's not a win, it's something else. I know it still counts as a win, and a win is a win and all, but it feels hollow. I wouldn't want to win because a player moved all his PSx ships and then went back and tried to do actions on them, but wasn't allowed because he took an insignificant short cut out of convenience.

I do understand the desire to stick to the rules. It's fair, it's valid, and it's totally correct. Using the rules to one's own advantage is a fine decent strategy, that I take advantage of too. But this all started because someone wasn't going to allow someone to take actions on ships that were moved at the same PS level. The way that situation was described, it sounded like he was almost proud that he caught him and wouldn't let him take his actions. That's probably what started all this.

I understand the letter of the law perspective, but it can be viewed as over zealous at times.

Let's be fair. I did let the guy use his missed action on that situation. My approach was bad, I'll correct that. I only wanted him to follow the correct procedure the rest of the game. I'm with ya in wanting to get the best out of my opponents. However if the best they have to offer is flying off the board, so be it. I will help after the match is over by suggesting holding the dial in a similar orientation as the ship they plan to assign the dial to. This will help those accidental fleeing ships to stick around more then forgiving mistakes. How far do we go to correct mistakes of other players? If I barrel roll to one side and that leaves me at range one of your ship but the other way leaves me out of you firing ark and I still have a shot at you. Would you correct me?

I want to face him at his best. I want the complete challenge, no matter the stakes.

But you're not, you're actually facing him at better then his best. Now I've had this same thing com up when playing, and I offered to let the guy take back his move, because he went left off the board, rather then right towards my ship.

He refused. Because he made a mistake, and he felt he should have to suffer the consequences of that mistake. When you let someone get away with mistakes you're letting them play better then they would otherwise. Now if it's friendly game, or with a new person, or just someone not that good. That's fine it may make for a more enjoyable game. But you are no longer really playing fair, because you're actually helping the other guy out.

But if it's a tournament, then I'm not really there to just have a few good games, I'm there to play my best and win.

To me that's not a win, it's something else.

I disagree, because it was his mistake and he should own up to it. I won a completely fair game there.

I know it still counts as a win, and a win is a win and all, but it feels hollow. I wouldn't want to win because a player moved all his PSx ships and then went back and tried to do actions on them, but wasn't allowed because he took an insignificant short cut out of convenience.

But this all started because someone wasn't going to allow someone to take actions on ships that were moved at the same PS level.

No that's not actually what happened. What happened was someone pointed out that they should move a ship and then take actions for that ship. They gave them a friendly reminder of how the rules work and no one actually lost an action.

But after that, yes the person should lose their actions because they are quite simply not playing by the rules.

I don't know how often that comes up but if it becomes too "easy" I could see it being a problem.

I agree, letting someone do that every time leads them to sloppy playing, it allows people to keep playing with bad habits. I mean we're not talking about complex math here. You're not trying to do do physics problems in your head.

How hard is it really to take your action after each time you move your ship? Is this really some sort of massive burden that is unfair to expect people to remember?

Like I said in an earlier post, one side comes across like they are accusing people of cheating, the other side comes across like they are throwing insults and temper tantrums.

I think it's that kneejerk reaction I mentioned earlier to the "gotcha" types in other games. We're so sensitive to it that we tend to overreact to anything that even has a hint of that type of play.

I guess my issue is that I see people taking the "Fly Casual" concept and seem to want to use is a bludgeon to beat other people into letting them get away with what ever they want. Forgot to take to take your action, I have to let you in the name of Fly Casual.

The whole idea was never intended to be used as way to let someone get away with sloppy playing and fixing their mistakes.

I really love this discussion. Some my come and read this, shack their head and walk away. I feel we are making strides into the root of the whole situation. As long as we keep name calling and accusation out of it. We can build a good social contract on how we play each other in this game.

Playing for fun vs. Playing to win.

I'd rather a good game enjoyed by all than winning at all costs...

+1 and where this convo ends for me Can't be said any better.

Playing for fun vs. Playing to win.

I'd rather a good game enjoyed by all than winning at all costs...

+1 and where this convo ends for me Can't be said any better.

The counter question is what does "winning at all costs" mean? I'll take the "all costs" to include abusing rules to your advantage which usually means not following them in some way. Playing to the letter of the rules is not a cost.

The counter question is what does "winning at all costs" mean?

That and the above statement seems to imply that there's no such thing as a fair yet competitive way to play. That anyone who is playing to win, will do so at all costs, which as you point out includes out and out cheating.

I am not seing the issue here.
I bring a swarm to a tournament, I will ask the other guy whether its ok to move them all together (presuming that the manouvers i want to employ are unproblematic) - Reasons are ease and that such a solution is actually more accurate (less chance of motor-skill induced errors) than template movement I would make **** sure that the manouvers I tried to short cut where all legal (as in I would practice them at home carefully) I would also ask for consent in placing tokens before the match.

I would inform my opponent that my intention is to save time, promote accuracy in the game and that I will be happy to template measure any movement that my opponent think could result in a crash.

I would expect my oppoennt to accept this as it logical, reasonable and civilised. I would recognize, however, his right to stick to the rules as written if my procedurial suggestion makes him the least bit uncomfortable.

If i was the guy across from me playing, I would accept such a course of action as logical and time saving. I would however reserve the right to change my opinion during the match and/or demand measuring of critical movements.
If my opponent did not suggest short cutting tie swarm movement, I might suggest it to him.
My main suggestion (whether player a tie swarm or against it) Discuss it before the game. I would expect a tie swarm player to recognize that what he does (while perfectly sensible) is against the rules as they are written and that he should seek consent and accept that gray areas means we return to rules as written.

The counter question is what does "winning at all costs" mean?

That and the above statement seems to imply that there's no such thing as a fair yet competitive way to play. That anyone who is playing to win, will do so at all costs, which as you point out includes out and out cheating.

I'm afraid when people fail to recognize that the "fair yet competitive way to play," is basically playing with all the rules as they are written.

Carny, when someone asks about taking shortcuts "before" they take them in not at issue. The issue seems to be when someone says "no" to those shortcuts and the person wanting to make them takes issue with it. The related issue is when you just do the "shortcuts" before asking about them and then get upset when the other player stops you from completing it; this does assume you've been following a correct game order before that time.

At this point the "issue" may be hurt feeling and other emotional stuff more than any real game issues.

I guess my issue is that I see people taking the "Fly Casual" concept and seem to want to use is a bludgeon to beat other people into letting them get away with what ever they want. Forgot to take to take your action, I have to let you in the name of Fly Casual.

And, again, that's not what it's about. Let's look at three different situations:

1) I move a model, move another model, think about the second model's actions and decide to barrel roll, then spend some time fine-tuning the exact move. Then I realize I forgot to do the first ship's action, and ask to go back and fix my mistake.

2) I move a model straight ahead in open space, move the model next to it with an identical move, and drop a focus token next to each of them without pausing between the steps.

3) I have a block of ships in open space, flip all of their maneuver dials and say "everyone is 5 straight and focus".

See the difference here? The first situation is a mistake . I forgot to do something, and I'd be guilty of poor sportsmanship if I tried to harass you into letting me go back and correct it. The second and third situations are shortcuts , the only thing I'm doing is being a bit informal about how I announce the actions. In those cases you are guilty of poor sportsmanship if you try to insist that I don't get my actions because I "forgot" them, since you're refusing to allow a common shortcut in a situation where being strictly formal about how everything announced adds nothing to the game. You're the equivalent of the cop pulling someone over for driving 1mph over the speed limit: yes, you're technically correct, but don't expect anyone to respect you.

And no, it's not about abusing "fly casual" or anything. I keep saying it, but I'll say it again: even in hardcore competitive MTG tournaments with $50,000 in cash prizes you're explicitly allowed to use that kind of shortcut and the strictest rules for how you announce your plays are only enforced in situations where the exact order matters.

It is interesting to me that many board members seem to have polarized into "Playing for fun vs. Playing to win." I don't see how these two are mutually exclusive.

I am a big fan of the "fly casual" mantra, but I have never interpreted that to mean that you get sloppy about game execution. I game with a group of people who are much better at remembering the rules than I am. They keep me honest. They have also shown me that two people can interpret a fairly simple rule set quite differently. However, even though we are not casual about keeping the rules or about our execution of game steps, we always have fun. It just seems like a good habit to be in if you err on the side of caution rather than become so relaxed that some of basic game mechanics get ignored.

On a completely unrelated note, the TIE swarm in question should absolutely maneuver one at a time and with a template. If you can't fly your formation, then you should be flying a swarm.

I am a big fan of the "fly casual" mantra, but I have never interpreted that to mean that you get sloppy about game execution

Why not? Shortcuts are just recognition of the fact that, like many games, X-Wing has times when nothing interesting is happening and all you need to do is get everything into the proper position as quickly as possible so you can move on to the next turn. If you have two ships in open space making straight moves and taking focus actions there is no difference between moving two models then placing two focus tokens, declaring "both 3-straight and focus", and moving one then placing a token then repeating it for the second. The end result is two ships in the same relative position, moved directly ahead of where they used to be, with focus tokens. There's no potential for action loss, no debating over which action you're going to take in response to a ship moving, etc. So insisting on explicitly following every step of the activation sequence for each ship is just mindless rule worship.

Which is another reason why adhering to the rules of the game should just be everyone's default as opposed to the short cuts being talked about here. That way everyone can and should know the expectations going into the match.

That someone would just start taking rules shortcuts with a stranger they've never played with before is really presumptuous and a bit silly.

In my mind, not being understanding of these situations and taking a hard line on rules obeyance is bad for the community - even if things are on the line in a tournament. I hate to imagine a person who learned to play amongst friends taking the plunge into their first tournament and then having their opponent forbid them actions as described. That will be a lost player for the game for sure.

The only proper way I think to handle this situation is when you see an opponent begin to move his second ship without taking an action with the first, you stop him and say "did you mean to skip your action?" If you wait until be is done moving several ships and then say "no no no, only an action on the last one" it definitely gives the appearance of unsportsmanlike play. People want to take their actions...why would you wait until they moved all of their ships before saying something? People are going to believe it is because you intended to spring this on them - whether that was your intent or not. I think that waiting until the opponent was done is was really caused the big division on this.

Which is another reason why adhering to the rules of the game should just be everyone's default as opposed to the short cuts being talked about here. That way everyone can and should know the expectations going into the match.

That someone would just start taking rules shortcuts with a stranger they've never played with before is really presumptuous and a bit silly.

Great suggestion, but it just doesn't jive with reality. People are going to play casually and adapt to their local standard of play. I don't think most people go in thinking "I'm want to break the rules today and I'd better ask permission". They develop habits based upon play with their friends and local groups that they aren't giving thought to and are likely perceived amongst those groups as within the framework of the rules. They most often aren't even going to initially be thinking "I'm taking a shortcut here, I should ask permission" This is why it is sportsmanlike to give a warning (or two) if someone goes to do something out of order, but allow it initially. They likely aren't even cognizant of the issue.

In my mind, not being understanding of these situations and taking a hard line on rules obeyance is bad for the community - even if things are on the line in a tournament. I hate to imagine a person who learned to play amongst friends taking the plunge into their first tournament and then having their opponent forbid them actions as described. That will be a lost player for the game for sure.

The only proper way I think to handle this situation is when you see an opponent begin to move his second ship without taking an action with the first, you stop him and say "did you mean to skip your action?" If you wait until be is done moving several ships and then say "no no no, only an action on the last one" it definitely gives the appearance of unsportsmanlike play. People want to take their actions...why would you wait until they moved all of their ships before saying something? People are going to believe it is because you intended to spring this on them - whether that was your intent or not. I think that waiting until the opponent was done is was really caused the big division on this.

He said it way better than I did.

I am a big fan of the "fly casual" mantra, but I have never interpreted that to mean that you get sloppy about game execution

Why not? Shortcuts are just recognition of the fact that, like many games, X-Wing has times when nothing interesting is happening and all you need to do is get everything into the proper position as quickly as possible so you can move on to the next turn. If you have two ships in open space making straight moves and taking focus actions there is no difference between moving two models then placing two focus tokens, declaring "both 3-straight and focus", and moving one then placing a token then repeating it for the second. The end result is two ships in the same relative position, moved directly ahead of where they used to be, with focus tokens. There's no potential for action loss, no debating over which action you're going to take in response to a ship moving, etc. So insisting on explicitly following every step of the activation sequence for each ship is just mindless rule worship.

Probably we are going to have to shake hands and agree to disagree. I can totally see from your example how you can save time as described. However, I find it helpful to execute the steps of the game in the order delineated by the rules so that when a more complicated situation arises, I have saved the manner in which the steps will be executed, almost as muscle memory. It works for us, and seems to prevent disagreements.

Which is another reason why adhering to the rules of the game should just be everyone's default as opposed to the short cuts being talked about here. That way everyone can and should know the expectations going into the match.

That someone would just start taking rules shortcuts with a stranger they've never played with before is really presumptuous and a bit silly.

Great suggestion, but it just doesn't jive with reality. People are going to play casually and adapt to their local standard of play. I don't think most people go in thinking "I'm want to break the rules today and I'd better ask permission". They develop habits based upon play with their friends and local groups that they aren't giving thought to and are likely perceived amongst those groups as within the framework of the rules. They most often aren't even going to initially be thinking "I'm taking a shortcut here, I should ask permission" This is why it is sportsmanlike to give a warning (or two) if someone goes to do something out of order, but allow it initially. They likely aren't even cognizant of the issue.

In my mind, not being understanding of these situations and taking a hard line on rules obeyance is bad for the community - even if things are on the line in a tournament. I hate to imagine a person who learned to play amongst friends taking the plunge into their first tournament and then having their opponent forbid them actions as described. That will be a lost player for the game for sure.

The only proper way I think to handle this situation is when you see an opponent begin to move his second ship without taking an action with the first, you stop him and say "did you mean to skip your action?" If you wait until be is done moving several ships and then say "no no no, only an action on the last one" it definitely gives the appearance of unsportsmanlike play. People want to take their actions...why would you wait until they moved all of their ships before saying something? People are going to believe it is because you intended to spring this on them - whether that was your intent or not. I think that waiting until the opponent was done is was really caused the big division on this.

GiraffeandZebra, great suggestion. I will now interrupt the rules violation before it happens and remind them of proper play. I will say that the way I handled the situation was wrong in the Store Championship. I will now give a once grace reminder of the proper procedure of the action phase before they make the mistake. After that it's Evil Sith Lord Time! Mwha, ha, ha ha.

iPeregrine, I believe we have found a rare breed of gamer in you. It's called the Hardcore Casual Gamer. You are so Casual you are hardcore about it. You've made no attempt at talking with me over this issue other that some nonsense about unsportsmanlike and a cop handing out tickets. You must think your so clever with this cop analogy as you've given it 5 or 6 times now. You insist on ramming your casual style down my throat, hence Hardcore Causal Gamer. While all I've asked that you follow the rules. I've given examples in another game "magic the gathering" of a similar situation. You would enforce the rule there as I would but not here in X-Wing. Instead you bark on about acceptable short cuts. I agree with you there are short cuts taken in magic, i have an empty hand and field, I draw a land play and pass turn. Skipping all the steps in between in the interest of saving time. All the short cuts in Magic move forward! And since you seem to have a hard time with this I'll repeat myself. All the short cuts used in magic progress forward through the turn order. The short cut you seem to want me to allow does not go forward through the progression of steps. Each ship has 6 steps in the activation phase. The last being choose an action. By moving two ships you skip, the rest of the steps of that ship you moved first and have begun the next ships 6 steps. So like in magic if you draw a card you missed your upkeep. No going backwards, Period.

So now by my new approach. When you place that template in front of that second ship. I will remind you that you are skipping your action selection phase for the first ship you moved. At that point if you decide you are too Hardcore Casual to follow the rules and move the ship anyway, I will invoke my right as an "Evil Sith Lord" to deny you that action.

You are so Casual you are hardcore about it.

No, I'm not casual about anything. You just don't seem to understand the difference between "competitive" and "rule worship". As I've pointed out plenty of times already even in MTG tournaments with a $50,000 cash prize you're allowed to use the kind of shortcuts that you consider "too casual" for a local store tournament.

I've given examples in another game "magic the gathering" of a similar situation.

No you haven't, because your MTG example was completely missing the point. You gave an example of a mistake , not a shortcut. The correct MTG analogy would be if I had two of the token producers in play and just put my tokens into play, followed by you insisting that I go step by step through putting each token ability on the stack in the correct order, passing priority, and then resolving them one at a time. And then did absolutely nothing during that whole sequence that would make any of those details relevant.

I agree with you there are short cuts taken in magic, i have an empty hand and field, I draw a land play and pass turn. Skipping all the steps in between in the interest of saving time.

Exactly, and that's what moving adjacent ships in open space and then dropping tokens next to them is. You're just skipping over making explicit declarations of the whole formal activation process since none of those details are relevant.

No going backwards, Period.

Blatantly false. If you say "done" that means "I end my turn and we skip through all the remaining steps of the turn". But then I can say "nope, I want to play X" and then we skip back to the appropriate point and resolve X.

Also, you aren't actually performing any steps out of sequence, you're just silently doing them in sequence and then dropping the physical token once you've moved the ships. This isn't a case of trying to, say, move a ship so that you clear space for the previous ship's barrel roll action. The game state at the end of the whole sequence is identical to the one produced by explicitly announcing and following every step of the activation process.

At that point if you decide you are too Hardcore Casual to follow the rules and move the ship anyway, I will invoke my right as an "Evil Sith Lord" to deny you that action.

And then I'll invoke my right as "not a mindless rule worshiper" to put the token there anyway and tell you to shut up and deal with it.