I'm sure this has been brought up before. I tried my best to do a thorough search before posting. I heard from a friend that someone used Yorr and another OGP to "camp" the corner of the map.

Basically, the OGP performs a 0 maneuver and takes a stress. Yorr absorbs this stress. Yorr executes a 1 forward maneuver and cannot pass by the OGP, so he stays where he is.

Here is what I'm talking about:

Is there an FFG ruling about this sort of thing? I mean, if it is legal I kinda want to try it in my next tournament.

Perfectly legal. Opinions on the cheesiness/sportsmanship of the tactic vary, but it is certainly legal.

It's not all that effective, really. I've participated in two separate tournaments with some variant of the parking lot (one that just bumped a lot, one that used wingman/yorr).

It can throw people for a loop, but players quickly learn how to deal with it. In both tournaments I participated in, they crushed their first round opponent, had a much more difficult time the second round, and lost from there.

I would think the 'infinite combo rule' would apply here. Though I and fellow players avoid this kind of situation so I've never come across it.

Thoughts on applicability of the ICR?

This is not dissimilar to the Falcon Fortress tactic, that has been proven to look great from the outside, but can be defeated. If someone throws a couple of Ion shots at the Omicron, things will start moving whether you like it or not.

Every list can be beaten. There is no perfect list.

I am not a fan of the Lambda Parking lot, but in the end it is a personal choice to fly it or not. Pun intended.

And I am pretty sure a thread here at some point explained why this does not fall under the ICR.

Was it this one?

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/104325-what-is-an-infinite-combo/

I would think the 'infinite combo rule' would apply here. Though I and fellow players avoid this kind of situation so I've never come across it.

Thoughts on applicability of the ICR?

An "infinite combo" is one which can be repeated without end, with no other ability able to take place. For instance, if you had an ability that gave you a focus token when you gained an evade token, and an evade token when you gained a focus token, and managed to combine them, that would be infinite - those two abilities would react to each other with no ability for anything else to act, and they could do it forever. You could freeze at that point of the game until time ran out.

There's nothing infinite about a Fortress. Each takes maneuvers, and the game continues as normal. Ships can attack and kill any of the elements of the fortress, and do so just fine. So however annoying the tactic might seem, the infinite combo rule doesn't apply.

Given the rule that you can usually use something only once per opportunity or trigger, the game mechanics manages to sidestep the ICR quite deftly. Thankfully.

And yes, I spelled "Lambda" wrong in the title.

Atleast he got the name right, just spelled it worng.

I don't know how many times I've cringed at a tournament as my opponant proudly announced they were moving their Lambada.

If I'm winning, I feel like dancing. pun intended.

Perfectly legal. Maybe not always so effective.

You may want to consider equipping them with Ion Cannons. If your opponent is going to attack you they'll be pointed toward an edge so maybe you can get them to fly off.

Given the rule that you can usually use something only once per opportunity or trigger, the game mechanics manages to sidestep the ICR quite deftly. Thankfully.

Not really. So long as a new event is occurring, it's a new opportunity. Pretty much every instance/example of infinite loops generate a new event with each step, since pretty much every game system has a once-per-opportunity rule.

Given the rule that you can usually use something only once per opportunity or trigger, the game mechanics manages to sidestep the ICR quite deftly. Thankfully.

Not really. So long as a new event is occurring, it's a new opportunity. Pretty much every instance/example of infinite loops generate a new event with each step, since pretty much every game system has a once-per-opportunity rule.

I agree with your interpretation and explanation. However, I'm not so sure how sporting the OPs example would be. Like I said, the group I play with actively avoids this kind of set-up and 'traffic jams.' Perhaps this may be clarified by FFG at some point as to being/not being an example of an ICR at some later date?

Legal? Appears so. Douchey? Extremely. What's the point of playing xwing if you don't want to move ever??

Legal? Appears so. Douchey? Extremely. What's the point of playing xwing if you don't want to move ever??

Exactly!

I don't see what the problem is. It's not even a strong tactic. It's very easy to outmanoeuvre and pull apart. Movement is such a huge part of the game, I don't know why you'd want to skip it.

I agree with your interpretation and explanation. However, I'm not so sure how sporting the OPs example would be. Like I said, the group I play with actively avoids this kind of set-up and 'traffic jams.' Perhaps this may be clarified by FFG at some point as to being/not being an example of an ICR at some later date?

If we agree that it's not an example of an infinite combo, why would we need them to clarify it?

Whatever your view on the sportsmanship issue (and I'm very much not diving into another one of those right now) why don't we just leave it at that? I've always been uncomfortable when you start with the solution you want and go hunting for rules to justify it, and that's very much what this feels like.

This tactic has been around for a while. It's a tactic with its own strengths and weaknesses. It's not really exploiting any rules, because you still pay the penalties associated with the moves. People just don't like it. But we've been through at least two separate FAQ updates without FFG choosing to errata it. They will or they won't, but if they felt it was somehow that wrong, they've had ample opportunity to do something about it.

It's a legal, valid tactic that's permissible by the rules.

Regarding 'sportsmanship':

If someone did this in a friendly, casual game, I probably wouldn't bother playing them.

If someone did this in a tournament, no problem at all.

Well, you're free to give it a go. But it can be defeated and it's not all that popular. Just giving you a heads up.

This tactic is called fortressing. I did up a thread detailing what it was and how to beat the YT version. The OP is describing the Lambda version.

The Lamba version doesn't have the advantage of firing arcs like the YT does but it is one of those tactics that if you are not aware of it you may put yourself into a bad position when you first encounter it.

First identify that 2 or more Lambda's are in play and that one of them is Yorr.

Check how they are placed for initial placement (they have bad maneuverability so it is difficult to get into position so initial placement is key).

If you see it being deployed, fly to the far edge and full turn towards and go as slow as you can. Target Yorr in behind and bump the OGP in front to stall you so you can put shots into Yorr continuously until he is destroyed. Then keep bumping the OGP until it takes that forward move and follow behind it.

And there you go - defeated. Thanks for the solution there, Sergovan.

I saw a YT mobile version with Chewie and Lando at the Gatineau regionals. The person placed top 8 but didn't make it top 4.

Also, FFG did in fact address this some time ago. They said it was legal but they'd keep an eye out on it at tournaments and maybe change the ruling if they felt it was necessary.

Well, after reading how to defeat it, I think I'll try running:

Yorr+Ion Cannon+Tactician+Rebel Captive+FCS+APL

OGP+Ion Cannon+Tactician+Rebel Captive+FCS+APL

Soontir Fel+PTL

That would be rough to fly into, I'll give you that.

Well, after reading how to defeat it, I think I'll try running:Yorr+Ion Cannon+Tactician+Rebel Captive+FCS+APLOGP+Ion Cannon+Tactician+Rebel Captive+FCS+APLSoontir Fel+PTL

Rebel Captive is Unique so only one of those allowed.

Jim