Also I am now quite interested in seeing the Phantom's dial. I think we will see that it is quite a slow ship a bit like the HWK. i.e. Max forward of a 3. Mostly to prevent it being abusively fast around the board - a Phantom with a forward 4 and engine upgrade could move the equivalent of a 9 forward on decloaking.

Except we already know it has a koigran turn of 4. So it probably has a 4 straight, too. The only ship that doesn't have a straight that's the same speed as its koigran turn(s) is the TIE Bomber (koigran 5, but no 5 straight).

In one turn, it would be able to:

• Move 4 straight (10 cm, if you include the base)
• Decloak for a 2 straight (6 cm)
• Boost forward 1 (4 cm)
• Push the Limit to Barrel Roll as far as possible forward (1 cm)

For a total of 21 cm! A TIE Interceptor with its 5 forward and Push the Limit can only move 17 cm forward in one turn.

Um, you're thinking of the Defender.

Well... maybe they are checking the forums often...

But they are cloaked

I so wish it was true.. lol

They do come around every so often and clear out the posts trying to sell us all fake passports.

Just realized, you can essentially do a 7 K-turn. A bit of a nasty surprise.

Well, the reason I mention it that way is a statement I heard a while back, sorry I dont think I could find a link for it, but there was something about the employees not being able to read the forums, due bias in game design.. any idea they used could be contested and such.. which makes some sense, bit I admit that there is some possibility they may check from time to time.. just to see whats.... trending.

Well... maybe they are checking the forums often...

But they are cloaked

I so wish it was true.. lol

They do come around every so often and clear out the posts trying to sell us all fake passports.

true, moreso due to reports about it though.. I would think.. as only issues that get reported seem to get removed.. so.. someone is watching.. Big Brother.....?

Sorry if this has been said before, but:

Edit: my source was the X-Wing FB page

Apologies for double-post, but!

I am still not happy that these rules look almost the same as Star Treks cloaking rules, but at least it is starting to look like it has unique attributes.

I am still not happy that these rules look almost the same as Star Treks cloaking rules, but at least it is starting to look like it has unique attributes.

There are really only so many ways you can implement cloaking. I support we could have gone with the old FASA Trek Simulator approach of actually removing the ship from the board, but that might have gotten a bit contentious.

Wait a sec... are you RAI not RAW?..... I think the world may explode!

I've always acknowledged some minimal amount of RAI as being acceptable. For instance, I find that "The card can function without the need for a TARDIS or tearing a hole in the space-time continuum" is usually a safe assumption of intent.

Your experience may differ, of course.

due bias in game design.. any idea they used could be contested and such..

That's a pretty big stretch...

In order for that to actually happen, I'd have to prove that they got the idea from the post I made on their message board. I'd also likely have to prove some sort of harm in them taking the idea.

I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to prove that they took an idea someone else had and posted here, plus, who's going to pay the legal fee's to take such a thing to court?

So no, I don't believe that FFG people are bared from visiting the forms that they own out of fear of someone suing them because they copied someone's idea.

Worth point out that while EXCEPTIONALLY rare, FFG peoples have posted here on occasion. And have even been known to be seen following threads.

Well, the reason I mention it that way is a statement I heard a while back, sorry I dont think I could find a link for it, but there was something about the employees not being able to read the forums, due bias in game design.. any idea they used could be contested and such.. which makes some sense, bit I admit that there is some possibility they may check from time to time.. just to see whats.... trending.

That was me who made that comment. It is taken from things the lead designer of magic has said in his column about how they can't accept unsolicited card ideas. The context was someone wishing that the FFG guys would post on here so that we could pitch them ideas for new ships and expansions and such, I'm sure they can read forums if they want, but they probably aren't allowed to comment, at least not identify themselves.

. . . at least not identify themselves.

Yup. For all we know everyone on the forum is a member of the FFG staff, we all just can't say who we are, so no one ever knows.

Anyways, I like the cloaking/decloaking but would have preferred that it shred Target Locks or let you reroll blank green results, but I will take a super barrel roll/ boost as well.

There are really only so many ways you can implement cloaking. I support we could have gone with the old FASA Trek Simulator approach of actually removing the ship from the board, but that might have gotten a bit contentious.

One of the ways infinity represents camouflage is, after deploying regular forces, your opponent turns his back, you place the figure where it is hidden, take a picure with your phone and then remove the fig. Said figure can't move then without revealing itself.

I know I have read a game where cloaked ships are left stationary as a marker but you secretly record the moves the ship makes each turn, when you decloak you execute each move in order to see where you end up. That wouldn't work with a system that had collisions though.

due bias in game design.. any idea they used could be contested and such..

That's a pretty big stretch...In order for that to actually happen, I'd have to prove that they got the idea from the post I made on their message board. I'd also likely have to prove some sort of harm in them taking the idea.I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to prove that they took an idea someone else had and posted here, plus, who's going to pay the legal fee's to take such a thing to court?So no, I don't believe that FFG people are bared from visiting the forms that they own out of fear of someone suing them because they copied someone's idea.

Might not hurt them, true.. just was meaning that to save themselves the hassle of possibly parroting an idea mentioned here. Ifnthey have no presence they can claim independant rules suggestions.. that they did it with no influence of the community.. that's all

I've know people that would cry foul... heck.. a friend and I came up with the rules for the Gerwalk stuff in battletec back in the 80s.. we wrote them at gencon one year, and then after, my friend drove down to fasa and talked with Loren and Butch Leper and hammered it all out.. my friend got his name in the rule book.. and I was happy to be part of the process.. no fuss no muss.. not everyone is like that..

...I find that "The card can function without the need for a TARDIS or tearing a hole in the space-time continuum" is usually a safe assumption of intent.

But what if they wrote a set of rules for declaring a target and selecting a weapon that required time-travel loops to function? You know, hypothetically.

due bias in game design.. any idea they used could be contested and such..

That's a pretty big stretch...In order for that to actually happen, I'd have to prove that they got the idea from the post I made on their message board. I'd also likely have to prove some sort of harm in them taking the idea.I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to prove that they took an idea someone else had and posted here, plus, who's going to pay the legal fee's to take such a thing to court?So no, I don't believe that FFG people are bared from visiting the forms that they own out of fear of someone suing them because they copied someone's idea.

Might not hurt them, true.. just was meaning that to save themselves the hassle of possibly parroting an idea mentioned here. Ifnthey have no presence they can claim independant rules suggestions.. that they did it with no influence of the community.. that's all

I've know people that would cry foul... heck.. a friend and I came up with the rules for the Gerwalk stuff in battletec back in the 80s.. we wrote them at gencon one year, and then after, my friend drove down to fasa and talked with Loren and Butch Leper and hammered it all out.. my friend got his name in the rule book.. and I was happy to be part of the process.. no fuss no muss.. not everyone is like that..

So your partly responsible for my gateway drug into wargaming? You owe me a LOT of money lol

I lime the way they are doing the cloak action, I like that your true position is just a representation of where you could be, and I feel it has that.. I'm not there, I'm over here .. feel to it..

I am also a fan of hidden tracking for a cloaked ship. Remove it from the board and then track it on paper.. but this board has no alpha-numeric reference so that is out of the question... and the photo solution interesting as well , but not practical here either..

I am looking forward to flying a couple of these in a game... I think they will be very fun ships to fly.

due bias in game design.. any idea they used could be contested and such..

That's a pretty big stretch...In order for that to actually happen, I'd have to prove that they got the idea from the post I made on their message board. I'd also likely have to prove some sort of harm in them taking the idea.I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to prove that they took an idea someone else had and posted here, plus, who's going to pay the legal fee's to take such a thing to court?So no, I don't believe that FFG people are bared from visiting the forms that they own out of fear of someone suing them because they copied someone's idea.

Might not hurt them, true.. just was meaning that to save themselves the hassle of possibly parroting an idea mentioned here. Ifnthey have no presence they can claim independant rules suggestions.. that they did it with no influence of the community.. that's all

I've know people that would cry foul... heck.. a friend and I came up with the rules for the Gerwalk stuff in battletec back in the 80s.. we wrote them at gencon one year, and then after, my friend drove down to fasa and talked with Loren and Butch Leper and hammered it all out.. my friend got his name in the rule book.. and I was happy to be part of the process.. no fuss no muss.. not everyone is like that..

So your partly responsible for my gateway drug into wargaming? You owe me a LOT of money lol

Also, I didn't create Battletec... but I did play it when it was still called battledroids.. hahaha

This talk of tardis is making me want to put a blue box on my board next game.

But what if they wrote a set of rules for declaring a target and selecting a weapon that required time-travel loops to function? You know, hypothetically.

They will in a couple years. Great game, I've played it a bunch. It was very popular in Ancient Rome but it lost popularity during the Middle Ages because of some contradictions between the 1972 printing of the 3rd edition and the Atlantis regional tournament FAQ dated 327 B.C.

...I find that "The card can function without the need for a TARDIS or tearing a hole in the space-time continuum" is usually a safe assumption of intent.

But what if they wrote a set of rules for declaring a target and selecting a weapon that required time-travel loops to function? You know, hypothetically.

They'd probably have several people nag them at Gencon, and they'd basically say "We know it's broken but it's so broken it would take too much errata to fix, fo just play it as intended"

You know, hypothetically

In one turn, it would be able to:

• Move 4 straight (10 cm, if you include the base)
• Decloak for a 2 straight (6 cm)
• Boost forward 1 (4 cm)
• Push the Limit to Barrel Roll as far as possible forward (1 cm)

For a total of 21 cm! A TIE Interceptor with its 5 forward and Push the Limit can only move 17 cm forward in one turn.

Doesn't look correct.

A 4 straight is a move of 16cm, total 20cm when base included (which you have to for the following moves)

2 straight is 8 cm, 12 with the base

Boost straight forward is another 8cm (including base)

and finally the barrel roll, +1cm

Gives a total of 41cm!!!

The pushed Interceptor can move 33cm (24 + 8 + 1)

Gives a total of 41cm!!!

And the range ruler is 30cm, right? 100mm per range band. So conceivably go from out of range in front of to BEHIND a stationary shuttle (another 80mm, so 38 cm needed) in a single turn.

Check this out! Good ole tie fighter below is standing in for the phantom. does a 2 forward, cloak and then next turn de-cloaks and barrelrolls with advanced sensors and PTL... These are only the possible positions BEFORE 2nd movement... go ahead and guess which move I'm going to take and from where...if it's anything at all like a tie dial this is going to be nearly impossible.

Good luck keeping this in arc... and keeping out of it's arc.