ST is now optional! No more swarming ps0!
Swarm tactics has always been optional
Not true. The card text is very clear that it is mandatory use. The FAQ now makes it optional, which is nice.
Edited by hothieNew FAQ and Tournament rules are up.
Not true. The card text is very clear that it is mandatory use. The FAQ now makes it optional, which is nice.ST is now optional! No more swarming ps0!
Swarm tactics has always been optional
We also had an email ruling in a recent thread confirming that it was mandatory (at the time). But now it isn't, which makes much more sense.
Well, it was mandatory, but you could target yourself with it.
I like that they make it clear that when "thinking" about doing a target lock, you have to declare a specific intended target first, and if it is in range you MUST do the lock. It stops all that cheating about range and shots during manouver where people pretend they were checking for target locks when really they were seeing what shots were "on".
Is this "must do the lock" rule new, or did I just not know about it earlier?
I like that they make it clear that when "thinking" about doing a target lock, you have to declare a specific intended target first, and if it is in range you MUST do the lock. It stops all that cheating about range and shots during manouver where people pretend they were checking for target locks when really they were seeing what shots were "on".
Is this "must do the lock" rule new, or did I just not know about it earlier?
It's been there, but they but a bit of extra emphasis on it. Or so it feels.
Edited by kerokoI like that they make it clear that when "thinking" about doing a target lock, you have to declare a specific intended target first, and if it is in range you MUST do the lock. It stops all that cheating about range and shots during manouver where people pretend they were checking for target locks when really they were seeing what shots were "on".
Is this "must do the lock" rule new, or did I just not know about it earlier?
It's been there, but they but a bit of extra emphasis on it. Or so it feels.
It used to be part of the "Competitive Rules Addendum", and it was never clear under what circumstances you should follow that addendum. Now it's the norm for "competitive and premier events", which is nice from the perspective of clarity.
So is the clarification of rulings on Colonel Jendon just to specify that he can pass a Blue Target Lock token to a ship without the Target Lock action?
Cuz it seems that way to me. Makes his Pilot ability more desirable. A Target Lock passed to Mauler Mithel or Backstabber in the right circumstances would be amazing.
So is the clarification of rulings on Colonel Jendon just to specify that he can pass a Blue Target Lock token to a ship without the Target Lock action?
Yeah,which he could always do but which wasn't entirely obvious to some.
Of course, the "clarification" seems to be confusing some people who seem to think it says ONLY those ships, when it doesn't actually say that.
Edited by Forgottenlore
So is the clarification of rulings on Colonel Jendon just to specify that he can pass a Blue Target Lock token to a ship without the Target Lock action?
Yeah,which he could always do but which wasn't entirely obvious to some.
Of course, the "clarification" seems to be confusing some people who seem to think it says ONLY those ships, when it doesn't actually say that.
Thank you very much for clarifying the clarification.
*Disclaimer: Not sarcasm. seriously. Thank you.*
Two things...
If Kath Scarlet attacks with an Ion Cannon,
[critical] results that are canceled by the Ion
Cannon’s game effect do not cause the
defender to receive 1 stress token.
Sad... it only happened once to me, but it was fun saying, "You blocked one critical from the ion cannon, so you're stressed AND ionized.
A ship equipped with Stealth Device only discards
Stealth Device if it defends against an attack and is
hit. Damage suffered from other game effects (such
as Seismic Charge, asteroids, or damage received
for being at Range 1 of a ship hit by Assault Missiles)
does not cause a ship to discard Stealth Device.
What does this mean for Blount?
This might be a dumb question, but does this change anything?
No, doesn't change anything. SD is discarded when an attack hits, Blount's attacks always hit regardless of damage.
They are just clarifying that other sources of damage don't negate it.
Two things...
If Kath Scarlet attacks with an Ion Cannon,
[critical] results that are canceled by the Ion
Cannon’s game effect do not cause the
defender to receive 1 stress token.
Sad... it only happened once to me, but it was fun saying, "You blocked one critical from the ion cannon, so you're stressed AND ionized.
It's still possible for Kath to make someone ionized and stressed with a single attack; suppose she rolls [crit] [crit] [blank] for the attack, and you roll [evade] [blank] for your defense. Your [evade] result cancels a [crit] result, so you get a stress token, and the attack hits, so you suffer 1 damage and get an ion token.
This ruling addresses the idea that was going around for a while that the Ion Cannon itself can cause you to get a stress token. That is, Kath rolls [crit] [blank] [blank], and you roll [blank] [blank]. The Ion Cannons says "…then cancel all dice results", which might mean you take a stress even though you didn't cancel the [crit].
Basically, the ruling says that you get a stress if and only if you cancel the [crit] with one of your [evade] results.
A ship equipped with Stealth Device only discards
Stealth Device if it defends against an attack and is
hit. Damage suffered from other game effects (such
as Seismic Charge, asteroids, or damage received
for being at Range 1 of a ship hit by Assault Missiles)
does not cause a ship to discard Stealth Device.
What does this mean for Blount?
This might be a dumb question, but does this change anything?
Nope. Blount's attack still count as hits even if he doesn't deal damage, so he still causes Stealth Devices to go away when he attacks.
Well, it was mandatory, but you could target yourself with it.
I'm almost certain you cannot target yourself with effects that refer to friendlies at range 1 etc, simply for the fact that you cannot be within range one of yourself. Also Pretty sure the term 'Friendly' means another ship that is in your squadron.
Well, it was mandatory, but you could target yourself with it.
I'm almost certain you cannot target yourself with effects that refer to friendlies at range 1 etc, simply for the fact that you cannot be within range one of yourself. Also Pretty sure the term 'Friendly' means another ship that is in your squadron.
Let's not get into it again, especially since it is now irrelevant. If anyone really wants to review/rehash the subject, here is the thread where it was discussed extensively
This new FAQ gives me hope that they realize the previous FAQ's were poor, and that they clearly read some of these forums...whether they let us on to believe it or not.
I enjoy running Bomber squads, so being able to choose whether or not i want Initiative is huge!
R 2 Astro m ech
If ship is ionized, R2 Astromech’s ability
does make the white [ 1] maneuver green.
Am I the only one that did not know this? I always assumed Ion Cannon / Turret had to be a white manuever. That's nice for removing stress when you've been ionized.
I oughta read these FAQs more often.
Oh, they finally provided the big ship expansion rules! That's a win.
And am I missing something, or did the list of legal expansions vanish?
They stated that in north america all things are legal upon release
Even though swarm tactics is changed, the idea if a ship being friendly to itself is not irrelevant, Etahn's pilot ability is worded friendly ships, (unlike howl runner). So don't add the meaning if other friendly ships if it's not stated in the card text.
Even though swarm tactics is changed, the idea if a ship being friendly to itself is not irrelevant, Etahn's pilot ability is worded friendly ships, (unlike howl runner). So don't add the meaning if other friendly ships if it's not stated in the card text.
Etahn doesn't actually reference enemy ships--instead he buffs anyone attacking enemy ships.
Even though swarm tactics is changed, the idea if a ship being friendly to itself is not irrelevant, Etahn's pilot ability is worded friendly ships, (unlike howl runner). So don't add the meaning if other friendly ships if it's not stated in the card text.
Etahn doesn't actually reference enemy ships--instead he buffs anyone attacking enemy ships.
Ok, my question deals with tie-breakers. Players Al, Bob, and Charlie all are 3-1 (15 points) at the end of the day. Al has beaten Bob in the first round, but neither player played Charlie. Their strength of schedule:
Al played Bob (won, ended up 3-1), Doug (lost, ended up 1-3), Ed (won, ended up 1-3), Frank (won, ended up 2-2)
Bob played Al (lost, ended up 3-1), Frank (won, ended up 2-2), George (won, ended up 2-2), and Harry (won, ended up 2-2)
Charlie played Ivan (won, ended up 0-4), George (won, ended up 2-2), Harry (won, ended up 2-2), and Juan (lost, ended up 4-0)
So Charlie's opponents have 40 points, Al's have 35, and Bob's have 45. Al needs to be higher than Bob because of tiebreaker 1. Is the order Al, Bob, Charlie (Al is higher than Bob, Bob is higher than Charlie), or Charlie, Al, Bob (Charlie is higher than Al, Al is higher than Bob)? Basically, you either have to ignore Charlie having a higher SoS vs Al, or Bob having a higher SoS vs Charlie.
Next question, Al beat Bob first round. Charlie beat Al second round. Bob gets paired up in the third round and beats Charlie. They win all their other matches. Now what's the finishing order?
Finally, "sort the players in each score group by player number." What is player number? I'm assuming it's the current ranking of the players? So the TOs have to figure out the ranks each round? Is there software that follows all of the pairing rules out there? Usually, I see TOs randomly pairing people within score groups (which works for round two, since none of the 5 pointers have played one another, and they all beat someone who has 0 points, but after that...).
Paul
Ok, my question deals with tie-breakers. Players Al, Bob, and Charlie all are 3-1 (15 points) at the end of the day. Al has beaten Bob in the first round, but neither player played Charlie. Their strength of schedule:
Al played Bob (won, ended up 3-1), Doug (lost, ended up 1-3), Ed (won, ended up 1-3), Frank (won, ended up 2-2)
Bob played Al (lost, ended up 3-1), Frank (won, ended up 2-2), George (won, ended up 2-2), and Harry (won, ended up 2-2)
Charlie played Ivan (won, ended up 0-4), George (won, ended up 2-2), Harry (won, ended up 2-2), and Juan (lost, ended up 4-0)
So Charlie's opponents have 40 points, Al's have 35, and Bob's have 45. Al needs to be higher than Bob because of tiebreaker 1. Is the order Al, Bob, Charlie (Al is higher than Bob, Bob is higher than Charlie), or Charlie, Al, Bob (Charlie is higher than Al, Al is higher than Bob)? Basically, you either have to ignore Charlie having a higher SoS vs Al, or Bob having a higher SoS vs Charlie.
Next question, Al beat Bob first round. Charlie beat Al second round. Bob gets paired up in the third round and beats Charlie. They win all their other matches. Now what's the finishing order?
Finally, "sort the players in each score group by player number." What is player number? I'm assuming it's the current ranking of the players? So the TOs have to figure out the ranks each round? Is there software that follows all of the pairing rules out there? Usually, I see TOs randomly pairing people within score groups (which works for round two, since none of the 5 pointers have played one another, and they all beat someone who has 0 points, but after that...).
Paul
Great questions Paul. As to the first one, it's a question I've been asking for months. There is no true confirmation on how to handle tie breakers if there are multiple people at the same level, and only some of them have played each other. On the "casual" level tourneys that I TO, I treat them the same way as the NFL treats 3 way ties - unless they've all played each other, you ignore it and go on to the next tiebreaker. And then at any point a tie is broken and either 1 emerges the winner or 1 emerges as the loser, you start over at the first tiebreaker with the remaining persons.
As for player number, you're officially supposed to get a player number when you register. It's really only used for the first few rounds for pairing. For example, after round 1, everyone who had full wins have the same total points (5), and the same SoS (0)... so you still have to pair them randomly, this is where the player number (based on when you registered) comes into play. I believe the logic is that you can't argue that the TO set you up against an experienced player while setting his friend up against the noob.
I am a bit disappointed that FFG didn't address the tiebreaker scenarios in more detail.
He may now only pass locks to TIE FIghters, Interceptors and Phantoms.
Uhm, no - it doesn't say he can ONLY assign it to ships without the target lock icon, just that he can. That's not exclusive.
@ Greedy merchant - is this what you are getting tripped up by?
After re-reading...... dohhhhhh!!!! It hasn't changed at all
now I look silly.
So the original FAQ posted today had:
The second version has:
Seems like a pretty major difference...
I actually don't like the change. If for whatever reason I wanted to pass a lock to a bomber or a firespray or anything else in order to get focus/target lock I can't do it now.....ah well I wasn't doing it much anyway but IF I wanted to, well now I couldn't do it...
The version at the top from FAQ 2.0 was only valid for about one day. Now it is the same as it was before. And yes, Jendon can give TL to someone who already has a focus token. And he can give TL to someone with the TL action in the action bar.
Edited by dvorOh and I also noticed that they answered another question that came up here.
If you forget to properly set a dial, the other person gets to decide the maneuver for that ship, same as if you did a red while stressed.