I would be of the mind that the *only* use of the range ruler would be to check the distance to meet the Distance 2 from the edge and the Distance 1 from any other asteriod. To do anything else is really bordering on cheating, or at least an *extremely* open interpretation of the rules to me.

So I guess you don't plan out your overall strategy, and just randomly place your asteroids?

No. That isn't what he said at all. He is simply saying you cannot use the measuring device to know 100% without a doubt that you are placing that asteroid exactly where it is most strategically beneficial to you.

Do you not try to approximate in your mind where your maneuvers are going to put your various ships? You cannot put maneuvers on the board during the planning phase, but that doesn't mean you just randomly select maneuvers, does it?

Moving on...

If people stop swinging their **** opinion around and EFFIN read the rules:

I am however a bit dumbfounded that you find these rather innocuous examples to be cases of cheating.

For gamers coming from other wargames, any form of unapproved measuring is outright cheating. For example, if you have too much measuring tape out, or you're using a ruler, it's expected that you leave the extra behind your model. If I'm moving 4" but my ruler measures 12", and I happen to put the full 12" ahead of my model, that's cheating.

So X-wing's more lackadaisical approach to measuring feels off to a lot of experienced minis gamers. To that background, statements like "Not our fault that the ruler reaches out to R3." are flat-out cheating. You can indeed control your ruler so that you don't "accidentally" measure more than you should.

And again, it probably wouldn't be nearly as bad if they were consistent. We still don't have tight rules that cover the timing on measuring, action declaration, and takebacks (for example, we all know you can undo a TL if the target isn't in range, but what if I declare Squad Leader and the recipient has no TL targets in range, and has already Focused?). The fact that actions that would be absolutely incontrovertibly cheating once the first planning phase begins are perfectly fine a few seconds before that is also strange.

So agree or not, there's plenty of reason for the "why".

perspective is key. As x-wing is my first tabletop miniatures game, I do not have the experience with the strict measuring limitations many other tabletop games have and therefore was unaware how this type of debate can appear to others. Thanks for sharing.

For gamers coming from other wargames, any form of unapproved measuring is outright cheating. For example, if you have too much measuring tape out, or you're using a ruler, it's expected that you leave the extra behind your model. If I'm moving 4" but my ruler measures 12", and I happen to put the full 12" ahead of my model, that's cheating.

Not in any war game I've ever played or seen played. About 10 years of 40k.

So am I in the minority on this? I didn't ever really give it much thought to be honest. As it stands I've only done it a couple times that I can recall.

I would argue that the player who invests too much time measuring distances between and to asteroids during set up is wasting a lot of their game time. This puts them at a disadvantage. I say measure away and waste time, I've already done my astroid pre-measurement in the privacy of my own home. Non-issue until FF officially rules, in my opinion.

Also, keep in mind that 5 range is MUCH longer than the 5 forward movement template. The 5 forward template is about as long as range 2.5.

The 5 forward template is exactly as long as range 2 .

all this measuring beforehand to get a slight edge, especially measuring with a ship base plus 5 forward stick makes me think...

Is it legal to use a playmat where certain color stars are strategically placed to make 'eyeball measuring' easier? Like a small bluish star at 1 inch intervals, and then a bunch of other stars splattered on so the pattern is hard for the opponent to notice?

Then you keep a little 4 inch by 4 inch grid right next to your cards and tokens, plus a spare base. You can look at your ship and then place base and move template on your little grid to get an exact read on where your ship will end up.

I hope not, but that almost seems the direction people are going.

Akodo1, that's probably the reasoning behind FFG making the ruling that players should not be using their own play mats at tournament settings. Randomize those suckers up!

all this measuring beforehand to get a slight edge, especially measuring with a ship base plus 5 forward stick makes me think...

Is it legal to use a playmat where certain color stars are strategically placed to make 'eyeball measuring' easier? Like a small bluish star at 1 inch intervals, and then a bunch of other stars splattered on so the pattern is hard for the opponent to notice?

Then you keep a little 4 inch by 4 inch grid right next to your cards and tokens, plus a spare base. You can look at your ship and then place base and move template on your little grid to get an exact read on where your ship will end up.

I hope not, but that almost seems the direction people are going.

Capital ideal! Time to start diagramming my deathstar play mat, it's almost a grid to begin with!

I think it's fine for asteroids. If you see your opponent placing them in a certain pattern (for instance, just beyond a 5 straight as previously mentioned) use it to your advantage and place an asteroid at the 2.5/3 straight and make him fly over it.

I prefer to randomize as best I can, but I don't see anyone getting such a distinct advantage by allowing it.

all this measuring beforehand to get a slight edge, especially measuring with a ship base plus 5 forward stick makes me think...

Is it legal to use a playmat where certain color stars are strategically placed to make 'eyeball measuring' easier? Like a small bluish star at 1 inch intervals, and then a bunch of other stars splattered on so the pattern is hard for the opponent to notice?

Then you keep a little 4 inch by 4 inch grid right next to your cards and tokens, plus a spare base. You can look at your ship and then place base and move template on your little grid to get an exact read on where your ship will end up.

I hope not, but that almost seems the direction people are going.

Something akin to marking cards in poker? It's probably already been done! I would further iterate this idea to make the shades of the stars in hues of red and green so as to deny any colorblind opponent the same advantage! Now that would be seriously sinister!!!

all this measuring beforehand to get a slight edge, especially measuring with a ship base plus 5 forward stick makes me think...

Is it legal to use a playmat where certain color stars are strategically placed to make 'eyeball measuring' easier? Like a small bluish star at 1 inch intervals, and then a bunch of other stars splattered on so the pattern is hard for the opponent to notice?

Then you keep a little 4 inch by 4 inch grid right next to your cards and tokens, plus a spare base. You can look at your ship and then place base and move template on your little grid to get an exact read on where your ship will end up.

I hope not, but that almost seems the direction people are going.

Something akin to marking cards in poker? It's probably already been done! I would further iterate this idea to make the shades of the stars in hues of red and green so as to deny any colorblind opponent the same advantage! Now that would be seriously sinister!!!

Yes, it's all about taking extra advantage of the colorblind!

Here is a FFG article written by X-Wing champion Paul Heaver discussing systematic asteroid placement:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=4709

In this article there are diagrams that show asteroid placement strategies that go beyond determining range 1 to another asteroid. It also references placing asteroids at range 3-4 of an edge. While none of these examples discuss using the range ruler, isn't it implied?

If you use your range finder to measure asteroids, then you are cheating.

Basically, you are supposed to just place them by hand... then I can go back and measure and if you were accidentally too close to another asteroid, then you forfeit the game and I win. I've won so many games this way!

Unless/until FFG clarifies it, it seems that up until the first planning phase pretty much anything goes.

Wasn't there something in the tournament rules saying that templates were not allowed for setup?

all this measuring beforehand to get a slight edge, especially measuring with a ship base plus 5 forward stick makes me think...

Is it legal to use a playmat where certain color stars are strategically placed to make 'eyeball measuring' easier? Like a small bluish star at 1 inch intervals, and then a bunch of other stars splattered on so the pattern is hard for the opponent to notice?

Then you keep a little 4 inch by 4 inch grid right next to your cards and tokens, plus a spare base. You can look at your ship and then place base and move template on your little grid to get an exact read on where your ship will end up.

I hope not, but that almost seems the direction people are going.

For Tourneys, TO supplies the mats, possibly borrow from players if need.

Yes --> Earlier Post <--

But then, say you place an asteroid and measure its distance from a nearby asteroid to determine Range 1 only to find you are too close, are you then stuck with that placement, but only shifted perpendicular away from the other roid? Or can you still say, well, I wanted it there when it was too close, but now I want it farther away. Why shouldn't I be able to move it farther?

I don't have a problem with using the range ruler to measure asteroid placement. It SHOULDN'T be something that is hounded on, imo. You already have to use the range ruler instead of the movement templates, and yes, if you do math they DO transfer between eachother, but it won't be exact since your ships arent going to be perfectly placed anyways, and you WILL move out of alignment just a bit.

If everyone does it, then it would be accepted. But it appears some people don't, so they might consider it cheating when seen for the first time.

Just give it a try before you knock it down. It adds another fun level of complexity and skill for this game. Another way to separate player skill from the randomness of dice. When we see another World Champ, I want to KNOW that he deserved it. Who can argue with that?

Unless/until FFG clarifies it, it seems that up until the first planning phase pretty much anything goes.

Wasn't there something in the tournament rules saying that templates were not allowed for setup?

Depends on your definition of "template". Custom templates are prohibited. Use of all standard game components, including the range ruler and maneuver templates, are explicitly allowed.

For gamers coming from other wargames, any form of unapproved measuring is outright cheating. For example, if you have too much measuring tape out, or you're using a ruler, it's expected that you leave the extra behind your model. If I'm moving 4" but my ruler measures 12", and I happen to put the full 12" ahead of my model, that's cheating.

Not in any war game I've ever played or seen played. About 10 years of 40k.

Really? That's odd. I learned that particular rule in Warhammer Fantasy, and you should have seen the flame wars over on the Warmachine forums when PP decided to allow unlimited measuring from your warcaster. GW games were always the most restrictive on measuring, and some of the last to convert to allow premeasuring.

I won't guarantee that your experience is necessarily the minority, but here's at least one nice big citation for "It's cheating":

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2011/05/goatboys-40k-thoughts-how-people-cheat.html

Major GW-oriented blog, one of the better known bloggers, several years old, first thing on the "How People Cheat" list. So it's probably not a fringe corner case that nobody's ever heard of

Asteroids are placed before ships, correct?

Also, keep in mind that 5 range is MUCH longer than the 5 forward movement template. The 5 forward template is about as long as range 2.5.

5 Template is exactly range 2. Just for reference.

Oh great, another thread that is going to go down the "good sportsmanship" rabbit hole.

And so it has. Perhaps this actually is something that FFG would address in the future but if you can use the range ruler and templates as you wish to set up ships allowing the same to set up asteroids certainly makes sense.

I've mentioned the idea of custom star maps with "pre measuring" already done when it comes to measuring die-hards. It may be my imagination but I can easily see those people who venomously oppose any measuring, except in a very specific incident with no possibility of measuring anything else accidentally, as being the very same people who would have no trouble allowing someone to use a printed playfield that may just happen to have strategically placed reminders on it. The possibility of this is why you aren't supposed to use them in official play.

Now since we are on the topic of asteroid placement do I dare point out the difference between the "rule" and the "tournament rules" where the basic rules allow one player to pick his side AFTER asteroids have been placed? If sides are picked after asteroid placement that would certainly promote a more neutral placement instead of making asteroid placement an important skill to develop if you want to play at the highest levels.

It may be my imagination but I can easily see those people who VENOMOUSLY oppose any measuring, except is a VERY SPECIFIC incident with no possibility of measuring anything else accidentally, as being the very same people who would have no trouble allowing someone to use a printed playfield that may just happen to have strategically placed reminders on it. The possibility of this is why you aren't supposed to use them in offical play.

So just to make sure here, you're bringing up an issue nobody's discussed here, putting it out there, and declaring the opinions of anyone who disagrees with you without anyone else actually weighing in at all? I'm sure there's a term for that, but I'm not sure it wouldn't set off language filters.

For gamers coming from other wargames, any form of unapproved measuring is outright cheating. For example, if you have too much measuring tape out, or you're using a ruler, it's expected that you leave the extra behind your model. If I'm moving 4" but my ruler measures 12", and I happen to put the full 12" ahead of my model, that's cheating.

Not in any war game I've ever played or seen played. About 10 years of 40k.

Really? That's odd. I learned that particular rule in Warhammer Fantasy, and you should have seen the flame wars over on the Warmachine forums when PP decided to allow unlimited measuring from your warcaster. GW games were always the most restrictive on measuring, and some of the last to convert to allow premeasuring.

I won't guarantee that your experience is necessarily the minority, but here's at least one nice big citation for "It's cheating":

I won't guarantee that it's in the majority either, but it does seem ridiculously retentive to me. It should be noted that the BoLS article generated, shall we say, a lot of discussion on the topic. I suspect it is more how exactly you are using it. If you have an extra 3-4 inches of measurement and are clearly moving things quickly and not looking past your move distance it would be fine, if you have 24" of tape measure out and are spending 2 minutes moving each guy, which just happens to be directly in line with a likely target, then yeah problem. Basically, yeah, premeasuring improves most war games (but not, I think, x-wing).

It may be my imagination but I can easily see those people who VENOMOUSLY oppose any measuring, except is a VERY SPECIFIC incident with no possibility of measuring anything else accidentally, as being the very same people who would have no trouble allowing someone to use a printed playfield that may just happen to have strategically placed reminders on it. The possibility of this is why you aren't supposed to use them in offical play.

So just to make sure here, you're bringing up an issue nobody's discussed here, putting it out there, and declaring the opinions of anyone who disagrees with you without anyone else actually weighing in at all? I'm sure there's a term for that, but I'm not sure it wouldn't set off language filters.

Perhaps I shouldn't use all caps but I'm not the one who first brought up the custom star maps. I see Akodo1 had done that back on post #33 and it was commented on after that. As this thread seems to be talking about "measuring" and how much is allowed I don't see how bringing up people who oppose anything except for very specific measures is new material. Perhaps it is overstepping to think that many of the people who hold "measuring" to the strictest uses may also be the kind of people who get all kinds of "extras" for the game including custom star maps to play on.

Maybe I left something out there but my thought are:

1. Custom star maps allow for chance of "pre measuring" and because of that they are not officially approved for tournament play.

2. At least some of the people with an overwhelming passion for measuring rules are likely to have so much passion for the game they would be the ones getting those custom star maps.

To me this thread certainly seems like a place where there will be much arguing about just what and how asteroid placement gets measured.