Gah. I hate to bring up a potential cluster missile cluster f#%^ but something mentioned in the farlander stress thread made me think of it.

With munitions failsafe we now have the precedent that for cluster missiles to count as "missing", both attacks have to miss. Shouldn't that same logic apply to whether or not you can use gunner off of a CM attack?

In some ways it already does. The PROBLEM is with the Gunner card which shuts down all the attacks after it is used. For the Failsafe to trigger both attacks must miss as either one connecting means it doesn't work. With Gunner the situation is kind of reversed in that either attack missing will trigger Gunner but if Gunner happens before the second attack then that second attack can not happen because of the Gunner.

Now I guess an interesting case can be made for Cluster + Gunner + Failsafe. If the first Cluster attack misses it will trigger Gunner. If you use Gunner then there is no second Cluster attack to hit which means the Failsafe can go off and you can keep the missile because the attack missed.

It should yes.

I seem to remember the ruling that said you could use Gunner if either shot from CM missed. The FAQ says you can or at least that seems the best way to read the gunner entry.

But clearly that doesn't jive with the Munitions Failsafe ruling.

In some ways it already does.

I don't know that I agree.

Either an attack is a hit or it's a miss. With CM this of course gets confusing because it's two attacks, but Munitions Failsafe FAQ entry clearly states that both attacks have to miss to count. So Gunner which also depends on a miss should only go off if both attacks from the CM miss.

Otherwise you have two contradictory statements. The fact that you forfeit your second attack with CM if you use Gunner doesn't change if an attack is a hit or miss.

Of course this could be a 'working as intended' type thing and we just have to live with it.

Munitions failsafe says nothing about missing. So it seems resonable to me that CM only need to hit with one attack to have "hit" and be discarded.

Gunner is the oposite, it says nothing about hitting, only missing, so any attack that misses gives you an opportunity to trigger him. How many attacks that come befor or would otherwise be possible after is irrelevant.

So I don't see any conflict here.

Munitions failsafe says nothing about missing. So it seems resonable to me that CM only need to hit with one attack to have "hit" and be discarded.

Gunner is the oposite, it says nothing about hitting, only missing, so any attack that misses gives you an opportunity to trigger him. How many attacks that come befor or would otherwise be possible after is irrelevant.

This.

While the concept is pretty straightforward, the actual function of Munitions Failsafe is weird. It stops the initial discard, and sets up a condition that if you hit with an attack, THEN you discard the missile.

So while there is some conceptual conflict between Failsafe and Gunner, as far as the game effects go it's perfectly fine. And I honestly don't see any other way to make the Failsafe work.

I suppose I can see that.

For Failsafe if any attack hits, then that triggers Failsafe, but for Gunner if any attack doesn't hit then that triggers gunner.

Seeing how CM is the only attack that could both hit and miss... It's a corner case.

Seeing how CM is the only attack that could both hit and miss... It's a corner case.

As always

As always

Yeah if nothing else this once again goes to show just how messed up CM really is.

Here's how I read the FAQs. The Gunner FAQ says "When Gunner is used to perform a primary weapon attack, any additional attacks (such as from Cluster Missiles) are forfeited." so you are choosing to give up your second attack with CM.

The CM FAQ says "If a ship is equipped with Cluster Missiles and Munitions Failsafe, both attacks must miss for Munitions Failsafe to activate." with "both" highlighted in the FAQ.

So if you forfeit the second attack with CM, it no longer meets the requirements to activate Munitions Failsafe as both attacks did not miss and thus you discard your CM. Does that make sense or am I pulling this too far out of my ass?

Here's how I read the FAQs. The Gunner FAQ says "When Gunner is used to perform a primary weapon attack, any additional attacks (such as from Cluster Missiles) are forfeited." so you are choosing to give up your second attack with CM.

The CM FAQ says "If a ship is equipped with Cluster Missiles and Munitions Failsafe, both attacks must miss for Munitions Failsafe to activate." with "both" highlighted in the FAQ.

So if you forfeit the second attack with CM, it no longer meets the requirements to activate Munitions Failsafe as both attacks did not miss and thus you discard your CM. Does that make sense or am I pulling this too far out of my ass?

I think you're reading too much into it, but it's not an unrealistic way to read the entry.

Munitions Failsafe reacts to a hit with the weapon. The entry basically reverses that from "any hit" to "all misses", and then shorthands "all" to "both" for the two Cluster Missile attacks. That wording is certainly poor, but if it were trying to set up a strange interaction with Gunner I think it would be more specific.

So...

That means if you had a ship with Gunner, CM and Failsafe, if you miss with your first attack from CM, use gunner, then you get to keep the CM.

Since you didn't score a hit with the CM on the first attack and didn't make the second attack.

Here's how I read the FAQs. The Gunner FAQ says "When Gunner is used to perform a primary weapon attack, any additional attacks (such as from Cluster Missiles) are forfeited." so you are choosing to give up your second attack with CM.

The CM FAQ says "If a ship is equipped with Cluster Missiles and Munitions Failsafe, both attacks must miss for Munitions Failsafe to activate." with "both" highlighted in the FAQ.

So if you forfeit the second attack with CM, it no longer meets the requirements to activate Munitions Failsafe as both attacks did not miss and thus you discard your CM. Does that make sense or am I pulling this too far out of my ass?

I think you're reading too much into it, but it's not an unrealistic way to read the entry.

Munitions Failsafe reacts to a hit with the weapon. The entry basically reverses that from "any hit" to "all misses", and then shorthands "all" to "both" for the two Cluster Missile attacks. That wording is certainly poor, but if it were trying to set up a strange interaction with Gunner I think it would be more specific.

I think it was worded this way to cover possible future inclusions and to avoid a Munitions FAQ of "if you run Gunner, CM, and MF then...". I've never seen anyone build a list with all three on a ship so I guess it's mostly an academic discussion for now. We'll have to see if it becomes viable or they put out another clarification entry for it.

So...

That means if you had a ship with Gunner, CM and Failsafe, if you miss with your first attack from CM, use gunner, then you get to keep the CM.

Since you didn't score a hit with the CM on the first attack and didn't make the second attack.

That is how I see it working.

As for the FAQ wording requiring "both" CM attacks to miss to allow MF to save it they clearly do when you don't even make the second attack. Considering how far in advanced Munitions Failure was spoiled FFG should have been well aware of the Cluster/Gunner/Failsafe combo long before they put out the FAQ.

I understand how the interactions work but thematically it doesn't make sense.

Flechette torpedoes are even worse with failsafe.

Thematically, neither Gunner nor Munitions Failsafe really make any sense. I mean consider:

Gunner: You've got this guy sitting around in a ship yet the only time he'll do anything is if you shoot at something and miss. I know I'd be kicking this guy out and replacing him when I really see the Gunners job is to really be attacking every turn even if the "pilot" is shooting at other things regardless of hits or misses.

Failsafe: So you fire your ordnance off and it doesn't hit anything so we'll just say "DO OVER" and reset the missile like nothing has ever happened. Oh, I guess I could apply a little sense to this and say "your targeting computer has calculated the odds of you missing your attack and at the moment you think you want to release it the failsafe determines it will not be a good strike and just shuts it down." Failsafe and a Flechette both triggering is just crazy.

You know, instead of a "failsafe" maybe they should have an "advanced targeting computer" that does something like Jonus to help make sure ordnance HITS when it is fired instead of just saying "Sorry but try again."

Job Description: Gunner

Duties

Must be prepared to sit at the gun station and fire the weapons system every once in a while during the heat of battle.

Must be prepared to override the Munitions Failsafe system when that system is most required.

Chain of Command

Reports directly to the pilot with any failure in performance, so the pilot can attempt to rectify the situation himself.

Vacation Days, Sick Days and Health Plan

None

Salary

Being in the service of the Empire/Rebel Alliance is payment enough (delete non-applicable faction).

Just think about Airen, if you could put a gunner on a Z-95... "Actions! Actions for everyone!"

Maybe that's why he was on the Falcon at the battle of Endor.