ST says that you choose a friendly ship at start of combat phase. Can you choose the bearer's ship? There are several cards saying " another (friendly) ship", and ST doesn't have that phrase, and of course oneself has to be considered friendly to oneself...

It's important since you can't avoid the ST effect, you have to choose (no "may"), and sometimes you might not want to...

You HAVE to choose 1 friendly ship IF it's in range 1.

I think what he's getting at is:

when picking a "Friendly" ship with Range-1 does the ship with Swarm Tactics considered to be within Range-1 of itself.

as he pointed out the card itself doesn't specify "another" or "a different" ship. just that it must be within Range-1

It has to be a different ship. Read the next paragraph. It makes it pretty clear 2 ships are implied.

Edit: I've also read that you cannot be range 1 to yourself. Your entire base is you and your range ruler comes off of all points of your base to form a range 1 buffer area that doesn't include your base.

Sorry, I don't know why you would try to interpret the card differently in order to make a loop hole? The card says friendly ship, and "friendly ship" means a ship other than your own that is not an enemy.

Next thing you know, someone's gonna say "it's not an enemy ship unless I target it"...

If it's documented that a ship cannot be within Range-1 of itself then the interpretation presented is an impossible possibility.

as to why look for a loophole is the occasions when you have a High PS pilot near a mini-swarm daisy-chaining PS. If that higher PS pilot is trapped within Range-1 it would be shooting at a lower PS if Swarm Tactics has no other available friendlies within Range; which is very detrimental if there's an enemy ship of equal PS to your high PS pilot.

----

personally I've seen very little use of Swarm Tactics on my end or my opponents end for the above situation to arise. Also the times where I've seen Swarm Tactics used the pilots are generally killed in order of Highest to Lowest PS making the above situation even rarer.

but like it was mentioned IF a ships base is not within range 1 of itself then there's no argument to be made.

Since you HAVE to pick a ship, what happens when you have only the ST ship left? Does the game not continue because you dont have a ship to target? Idk how I feel about HAVING to pick a higher pilot skill ship in those situations. It sounds like a counterintuitive oversight. Is there a FAQ ruling on it that I don't know about?

Since you HAVE to pick a ship, what happens when you have only the ST ship left? Does the game not continue because you dont have a ship to target? Idk how I feel about HAVING to pick a higher pilot skill ship in those situations. It sounds like a counterintuitive oversight. Is there a FAQ ruling on it that I don't know about?

If there is no ship in range, you don't pick a ship. If there is only one ship, you have to select it. Don't make this more complicated than it is.

well, not being in R-1 to oneself clears that, thank you all (and sorry for not posting in the rules forum where it belonged to).

This is a great question! I think he's asking must a high PS pilot be dragged down by swarm tactics?

Let's say at the end game you have Soontir Fel (PS9) and a Black Squadron pilot with Swarm (PS4). When combat starts, Fel is within range 1 of the Black Squadron Pilot. In that situation, is Fel compelled to shoot at PS4 and not PS9?

It's an odd situation, but it could happen. It seems to me that the purpose of the card is to bring up PS skill not to bring it down. But, the wording on the card does infer that Fel must shoot at PS4.

I don't know of any FAQ ruling regarding this. It probably deserves one. And I doubt it would ever occur to most people in game to notice this. But, I'd like to know what the rule is, and how it is applied. Any opportunity to force a High PS pilot into a lower PS is worth knowing about, avoiding, and taking advantage of.

This is a great question! I think he's asking must a high PS pilot be dragged down by swarm tactics?

Let's say at the end game you have Soontir Fel (PS9) and a Black Squadron pilot with Swarm (PS4). When combat starts, Fel is within range 1 of the Black Squadron Pilot. In that situation, is Fel compelled to shoot at PS4 and not PS9?

It's an odd situation, but it could happen. It seems to me that the purpose of the card is to bring up PS skill not to bring it down. But, the wording on the card does infer that Fel must shoot at PS4.

I don't know of any FAQ ruling regarding this. It probably deserves one. And I doubt it would ever occur to most people in game to notice this. But, I'd like to know what the rule is, and how it is applied. Any opportunity to force a High PS pilot into a lower PS is worth knowing about, avoiding, and taking advantage of.

The answer is YES. The card has no "may" in the wording, therefore, Soontir would be at PS4.

There doesn't need to be a FAQ ruling because the rules state that if there is no "may" on the card the ability must be used as it's written.

This is a great question! I think he's asking must a high PS pilot be dragged down by swarm tactics?

Let's say at the end game you have Soontir Fel (PS9) and a Black Squadron pilot with Swarm (PS4). When combat starts, Fel is within range 1 of the Black Squadron Pilot. In that situation, is Fel compelled to shoot at PS4 and not PS9?

It's an odd situation, but it could happen. It seems to me that the purpose of the card is to bring up PS skill not to bring it down. But, the wording on the card does infer that Fel must shoot at PS4.

I don't know of any FAQ ruling regarding this. It probably deserves one. And I doubt it would ever occur to most people in game to notice this. But, I'd like to know what the rule is, and how it is applied. Any opportunity to force a High PS pilot into a lower PS is worth knowing about, avoiding, and taking advantage of.

The answer is YES. The card has no "may" in the wording, therefore, Soontir would be at PS4.

There doesn't need to be a FAQ ruling because the rules state that if there is no "may" on the card the ability must be used as it's written.

Pretty much this. In point of fact, over in the Rules section there is there is a lengthy discussion that has thankfully dropped down to page 3:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/100382-is-swarm-tactics-mandatory/

If you can stomach reading through the whole thing (which drags Damaged Cockpit into the mix and then devolves into a pissing match/rant about how bad FFG rulings are) there is posted a reply from an FFG rules inquiry which reinforces that it works as described above.

Both ships have to take the pilot skill of the ship bearing the upgrade card, but you CAN swarm tactics a ship to a lower Pilot skill.

For instance, if Wedge is range 1 to a Green Squadron Pilot with Swarm Tactics, his pilot skill is 3.

So swarm tactics wedge down below other ships so he can use opportunist? Granted that is a pretty dumb way to use it, but it was the first thing to come to mind.

So swarm tactics wedge down below other ships so he can use opportunist? Granted that is a pretty dumb way to use it, but it was the first thing to come to mind.

I didn't say it was a good idea, I just said it was legal

for sure, was just trying to think of ways to use it for a good cause... that was all I came up with lol.

So swarm tactics wedge down below other ships so he can use opportunist? Granted that is a pretty dumb way to use it, but it was the first thing to come to mind.

It has never occurred to me to use swarm tactics to lower a pilots skill but I quite like this idea. You could put it on a mid level fighter and raise or lower the squads skill depending on the situation. Stick it on Lt Blunt (forgot the real name) and he can either boost lower skill pilots or pull Wedge down to his level to shoot after he's taken the Stealth off someone (because that's all he's going to be used for apparently )

Idk. It just hinges on whether they intended the "may" or not. Or whether we can assume a "may". It's just a counterintuitive thought to me. A FAQ ruling in either direction is probably needed. I know I wouldn't hold it over my opponent's head.

I mean, when both players forget to pull the PS down, is the gravity of the situation the same as when both players don't notice that one of the lists is over 100pts? The rules clearly do not state you "may" have under 100pts. But when a player does miscount, and the opponent doesn't notice until the game is over, some would say that is grounds for an automatic loss, an unfair advantage. If both players forget to Swarm Tactics a ship down to a low PS, and it makes a difference in the end result of the game, are you allowed to call shenanigans and get a win out of the deal. Obviously, take my example with a grain of salt, that was the first I thought of.

Maybe, both players forget that your ship lost 2 HP earlier, and it wasn't marked. But then remembere after the game is over, so you gentlemanly concede. Would you do the same if you forgot to Swarm Tactics and pull Soontir down to PS 4?

I think I'm getting argumentative. I must not have slept well. My wife is gonna hate me when I get home!

I DO like the idea of a purposeful lowering of PS. Could make for some silly situations.

Idk. It just hinges on whether they intended the "may" or not. Or whether we can assume a "may". It's just a counterintuitive thought to me. A FAQ ruling in either direction is probably needed. I know I wouldn't hold it over my opponent's head.

I mean, when both players forget to pull the PS down, is the gravity of the situation the same as when both players don't notice that one of the lists is over 100pts? The rules clearly do not state you "may" have under 100pts. But when a player does miscount, and the opponent doesn't notice until the game is over, some would say that is grounds for an automatic loss, an unfair advantage. If both players forget to Swarm Tactics a ship down to a low PS, and it makes a difference in the end result of the game, are you allowed to call shenanigans and get a win out of the deal. Obviously, take my example with a grain of salt, that was the first I thought of.

Maybe, both players forget that your ship lost 2 HP earlier, and it wasn't marked. But then remembere after the game is over, so you gentlemanly concede. Would you do the same if you forgot to Swarm Tactics and pull Soontir down to PS 4?

I think I'm getting argumentative. I must not have slept well. My wife is gonna hate me when I get home!

Well, its a Wave 1 card that's never been FAQ'ed, so its not likely to be. Rules as INTENDED, you're likely SUPPOSED to force it to happen. Not sure how it would be ruled, otherwise. I have seen an opposing player complain that it was not declared at the start of the combat phase, but according to the card rules, a ship at Range 1 MUST be declared. Therefore, if there is only 1 ship there, its pilot skill is the same as the ship bearing the card. As intended, at least.

Huh, I haven't always used my swarm tactics, though I forgot about a ps0 crit, used it, and an opponent kindly pointed out that I now had two ps0 pilots. Good learning experience, since I'll never do that again! So I suppose it's non-optional, but even with really good players I've never seen it used as anything other than an option to use.

Idk. It just hinges on whether they intended the "may" or not. Or whether we can assume a "may". It's just a counterintuitive thought to me. A FAQ ruling in either direction is probably needed. I know I wouldn't hold it over my opponent's head.

I mean, when both players forget to pull the PS down, is the gravity of the situation the same as when both players don't notice that one of the lists is over 100pts? The rules clearly do not state you "may" have under 100pts. But when a player does miscount, and the opponent doesn't notice until the game is over, some would say that is grounds for an automatic loss, an unfair advantage. If both players forget to Swarm Tactics a ship down to a low PS, and it makes a difference in the end result of the game, are you allowed to call shenanigans and get a win out of the deal. Obviously, take my example with a grain of salt, that was the first I thought of.

Maybe, both players forget that your ship lost 2 HP earlier, and it wasn't marked. But then remembere after the game is over, so you gentlemanly concede. Would you do the same if you forgot to Swarm Tactics uand pull Soontir down to PS 4?

I think I'm getting argumentative. I must not have slept well. My wife is gonna hate me when I get home!

Well, its a Wave 1 card that's never been FAQ'ed, so its not likely to be. Rules as INTENDED, you're likely SUPPOSED to force it to happen. Not sure how it would be ruled, otherwise. I have seen an opposing player complain that it was not declared at the start of the combat phase, but according to the card rules, a ship at Range 1 MUST be declared. Therefore, if there is only 1 ship there, its pilot skill is the same as the ship bearing the card. As intended, at least.

What happens when your opponent forgets to ST his Rookie with Wedge, and you notice, but don't tell him because it is beneficial to you? When your opponent remembers, do you then go back and shoot, even if it changes the outcome of the game? I am getting this discussion a bit off topic, but I'm just curious now what to do when players forget something that MUST happen. Like rolling for asteroids. Idk.

Did anyone see the new system upgrade in Rebel Aces? Similar thing here:

No "May," therefore not optional. You MUST move at PS0.

Good point!

Though I daresay the intention is quite clear.

I just don't believe it with Swarm Tactics I probably have no choice, though! Gotta follow the rule of the card!

I think if your opponent forgets to do something, it's on you to remind him. Generally, people play within the rules, but if you let them do something they shouldn't be doing, that's on you. When the game ends, it should end, no matter how it played out. If your opponent had 102 points, you should have checked before it started. If he broke a rule during play, shame on you for not knowing the rules during the game. If you allow vacating a win based on a squad point total error, it just allows people to try to win, and then if they don't call out the rule violation for a free win. Bad policy.

I do think this Swarm Tactic outcome should be FAQ'd somewhere though. It's not an expected result of the card's text to most people. I can see in some tournament somewhere a big argument happening because someone doesn't want to swarm in a detrimental way. If there was a FAQ, it would end the argument quickly.