Well, that's the question at hand. If startPos = [21, 12] and endPos = [21, 12], does the ship actually move? It may, it may not. Stationary may be a different case, it may not.

You're declaring that it does, but don't seem to have anything to actually base that on as far as rules/rulings/evidence goes. And that's kind of the problem I'm having here - you're making a lot of declarations for what is, and why stationary has the FAQ entry it does, and what does and doesn't count as movement... but you're providing absolutely no evidence, and every time you try and explain it you show, yet again, that you don't actually understand how movement works in X-wing.

But what you are trying to suggest is that since the ship ended back where it started, it didn't move at all and the 'previous touchings' were not break. That's what is wrong... And precisely there lies the paradox... if the ship didn't move at all, how it overlapped what it had in front?

The ship did overlap to initiate the "touching" state. That state lasts until one ship or the other moves so that they're no longer physically touching. I pointed that out several posts back.

We know that for stationary maneuvers, if you overlap (and therefore are touching) that touching state can last multiple turns. You don't have to overlap this turn in order for it to be maintained. If two shuttles hit each other, and then have Yorr pulling their stress as they do stationary moves, they could stay touching for the rest of the game based on that one overlap.

So the question is whether overlapping and ending back at your same position counts as moving. Logically, I don't believe it does - if there is no change in the game state, you didn't actually move anywhere, there is no time - not even an instant - when your ship is in any position that is not touching the one in front of it. The condition to reset the "touching" state is never met.

I believe this is why there's a difference in the "start touching, same maneuver, still touching" case. The lead ship executes first, completes its maneuver, and there is now a time when they're not touching. They've moved away. In a case of stationary move - selected or otherwise - there is no such point in time when they're not physically touching. So, they're still touching.

So the question is whether overlapping and ending back at your same position counts as moving. Logically, I don't believe it does - if there is no change in the game state, you didn't actually move anywhere, there is no time - not even an instant - when your ship is in any position that is not touching the one in front of it. The condition to reset the "touching" state is never met.

Oh, but there is a change in the state of the game. A ship that simply maintains a 'touch' by using [·0] maneuvers doesn't suffer from anti-pursuit lasers, while one that "maintains" a touch by 'bouncing back' eats lasers every round. And it does so because it 'resets' the touching state every round.

Oh, but there is a change in the state of the game. A ship that simply maintains a 'touch' by using [·0] maneuvers doesn't suffer from anti-pursuit lasers, while one that "maintains" a touch by 'bouncing back' eats lasers every round. And it does so because it 'resets' the touching state every round.

Anti-Pursuit Lasers don't trigger due to touching - they trigger due to overlapping. If a ship remains touching without overlapping, then they don't trigger. It has nothing to do with maintaining a touch or bouncing back. It simply has to do with whether an overlap occurred or not.

A ship which executes a stationary does not overlap, but remains touching.

A ship which executes a 1 ahead, overlaps, and ends up back in the same position, both overlaps and touches.

So it is very possible for a ship to overlap without actually moving (assuming we use "changed position" as our definition for "moving").

Nevermind, I see the distinction now.

Oh, but there is a change in the state of the game. A ship that simply maintains a 'touch' by using [·0] maneuvers doesn't suffer from anti-pursuit lasers, while one that "maintains" a touch by 'bouncing back' eats lasers every round. And it does so because it 'resets' the touching state every round.

Anti-Pursuit Lasers don't trigger due to touching - they trigger due to overlapping. If a ship remains touching without overlapping, then they don't trigger. It has nothing to do with maintaining a touch or bouncing back. It simply has to do with whether an overlap occurred or not.

Indeed, APL triggers by the overlap, but the later 'touching' state is a direct consequence of an overlap. So, the 'bouncing' ship triggers a new overlap each round, which in turn, generates a new 'touch state'.

Unless you are implying that every round a new overlap is generated, but the 'original touch' is kept the same from the 1st round... which sounds plainly wrong.

You are forgetting that if an overlap occurs, the player must follow a given serie of steps, which include moving (that specific word is used) the ship backwards as centered on the template as possible, and placing it so the bases of both ships are touching. This process has to be repeated everytime an overlap occurs. And does imply that every overlap is new, along with its also new corresponding 'touch' state.

Again, for conveniency, we simply let the ship as is on the table, and quickly declare an overlap->touch. Much like we never use the critical hit tokens, even when according to the rules, they should be used.

The [·0] maneuver is unique precisely because it is the only maneuver that can't produce overlaps, which is what allows the original touch to 'last' from round to round.

A ship which executes a stationary does not overlap, but remains touching.

A ship which executes a 1 ahead, overlaps, and ends up back in the same position, both overlaps and touches.

So it is very possible for a ship to overlap without actually moving (assuming we use "changed position" as our definition for "moving").

At this point, it is well stablished what the core of the question is.

No, it's not possible for a ship to produce overlap without "moving". And that's precisely why the [·0] maneuver has the properties it has. Your assumed definition is purposefully misleading. Moving in this game is synonimous of 'executing a maneuver'... not 'changing positions'. And you can't trigger an overlap without executing a maneuver.

This certainly looks like a topic that can go around and around and around with no indisputably clear answer. This isn't really even a case of "it should work" because both sides have justifications for their positions.

FFG needs to answer this question in the FAQ if you will want to see the official rule. Until that time you'll either need to dice off or call a TO to figure out how it will be 'officially' ruled for that tournament.

You are forgetting that if an overlap occurs, the player must follow a given serie of steps, which include moving (that specific word is used) the ship backwards as centered on the template as possible, and placing it so the bases of both ships are touching. This process has to be repeated everytime an overlap occurs. And does imply that every overlap is new, along with its also new corresponding 'touch' state.

And what makes you think I'm forgetting this?

You might want to look a bit deeper at the terminology used there before you hold it up as all that meaningful. It also uses "overlap" a lot, but it's referring to the physical state of the ships overlapping, not the game state of overlapping (this argument was deployed for the "Hit all the APL ships" debate, but proved wrong). Same thing applies to "move" here - there is no "move" in X-wing which involves the ship going backwards along its template. You're physically moving the model, but you're not causing a game "move".

Moving in this game is synonimous of 'executing a maneuver'... not 'changing positions'.

"Moving" is not a defined game term in X-wing. It's used for executing a maneuver, yes, but it's also used for boost or barrel roll, and "moving through" is used to mean "the maneuver template crosses" and "moves" means "has a final position which is". Your own definition of it two paragraphs up used the term for something other than "executing a maneuver", so it's obviously not all that synonymous.

"Move" may or may not mean "changing positions", but it certainly is not synonymous with "executing a maneuver".

As entertaining as it is debunking these things over and over, I'm going to leave this one to wait for an FFG response, because this is obviously going nowhere.

I can agree in the entertaining part.

And my sleep needs also will thank leaving the solution into FFG hands as well.

Guys I think we are missing the point here. We keep talking about overlapping but the text for oicunn reads as follows

After executing a maneuver, each enemy ship you are touching suffers 1 damage.

Since we know that (from the faq)

Guys I think we are missing the point here. We keep talking about overlapping but the text for oicunn reads as follows

After executing a maneuver, each enemy ship you are touching suffers 1 damage.

Since we know that (from the faq)

Touching and Stationary Maneuvers

If a model begins its activation touching another ship and executes a

[ 0] maneuver, the ships are considered touching.

Touching Multiple Ships

A ship can end its maneuver touching multiple ships. If a ship overlaps

two ships, and its own base ends its maneuver touching both ships it has

overlapped after moving backwards along the template, the overlapping ship

is considered to be touching both overlapped ships, and both overlapped ships

are touching it.

So I think the faq answers this pretty easily.

Since I move my ship back to where it started all ships touching oicunn stay considered touching. which then Triggers Oicunns effect

Your own quoted text does NOT support that.

IF Oicunn performed a "Stationary Maneuver" then all would be good but the Decimator dial does not have that maneuver. Instead Oincunn must rely on overlapping to lead to 'touching' and that is not the case here.

Oicunn is not "touching" anything because of the "Stationary Maneuver" text cited. He also does not overlap more than one ship to lead to the second cited text.

To say that a ship which ends up not moving is equivalent to it performing a Stationary Maneuver is effectively the same as a ship that has it's k-turn block is instead performing a straight maneuver. That may be the net result but it is not the process. Just because multiple things can leave a ship in the same final position that does not mean all of the things that get the ship there are the same.

Guys I think we are missing the point here. We keep talking about overlapping but the text for oicunn reads as follows

After executing a maneuver, each enemy ship you are touching suffers 1 damage.

Since we know that (from the faq)

Touching and Stationary Maneuvers

If a model begins its activation touching another ship and executes a

[ 0] maneuver, the ships are considered touching.

Touching Multiple Ships

A ship can end its maneuver touching multiple ships. If a ship overlaps

two ships, and its own base ends its maneuver touching both ships it has

overlapped after moving backwards along the template, the overlapping ship

is considered to be touching both overlapped ships, and both overlapped ships

are touching it.

So I think the faq answers this pretty easily.

Since I move my ship back to where it started all ships touching oicunn stay considered touching. which then Triggers Oicunns effect

Your own quoted text does NOT support that.

IF Oicunn performed a "Stationary Maneuver" then all would be good but the Decimator dial does not have that maneuver. Instead Oincunn must rely on overlapping to lead to 'touching' and that is not the case here.

Oicunn is not "touching" anything because of the "Stationary Maneuver" text cited. He also does not overlap more than one ship to lead to the second cited text.

To say that a ship which ends up not moving is equivalent to it performing a Stationary Maneuver is effectively the same as a ship that has it's k-turn block is instead performing a straight maneuver. That may be the net result but it is not the process. Just because multiple things can leave a ship in the same final position that does not mean all of the things that get the ship there are the same.

That's correct, the other 2 ships could then attack as well. The 0 move FAQ entry clarified that by doing that move, you would still be considered touching for the purposes of the combat phase.

Yeah no that doesn't sound right at all

To say that a ship which ends up not moving is equivalent to it performing a Stationary Maneuver is effectively the same as a ship that has it's k-turn block is instead performing a straight maneuver. That may be the net result but it is not the process.

Not that it necessarily demolishes your point here, but you might want to check your examples because that's actually exactly what does happen, and it is the process.

As soon as either of these ships moves away...

This is a very meaningful phrasing, IMHO (at least as meaningful as Core Rulebook parsing gets around here). If a ship ends up in exactly the same spot due to collision, I don't think it's moved away from anything.

We don't know if there's a parity between the known rules for a Stationary maneuver and a ship which goes nowhere due to blocking, but it's not hard to view the Stationary ruling as a clarification of this point, which would make the blocked situation identical. That would be easier to do if FFG made FAQ entries just clarifications, rather than rules rewrites, but it's what we've got.

Just RoShamBo for it. There's no clear ruling on this

Once again the Touching =/= Touching debate comes up again.

There is “Touching” which is a rules keyword from FFG that is a shortened form of “this ship overlapped that ship this turn”

Then there is the real world Touching which obviously means to be in physical contact.

The massive issue here is that FFG uses BOTH of these words in the core rule book.

Example of FFG “Touching”:

Ship A tries to move past ship B and fails, Ship A backs up and stops at ship B placed in Physical contact with ship B, both ships cannot fire at each other.

Example of real world touching:

Ship A completes manoeuvre, then barrel rolls in such a way that the ships are physically in contact (real world touching) but because your not allowed to overlap during a barrel roll the ships are not “FFG Touching”. This is an instance of Touching where both ships can still shoot at each other while still being in physical contact.

Now the main question is, Does Oicunns rules text refer to “FFG Touching or “Real world touching”

If it's “FFG Touching” only the front ship is hit with damage, if it's “Real world Touching” then all 3 opponent ships are hit.

Until FFG determine which “Touching” is relevant, both arguments are just as valid and as void as each other.

To say that a ship which ends up not moving is equivalent to it performing a Stationary Maneuver is effectively the same as a ship that has it's k-turn block is instead performing a straight maneuver. That may be the net result but it is not the process.

Not that it necessarily demolishes your point here, but you might want to check your examples because that's actually exactly what does happen, and it is the process.

It is but it's not.

If a ship has a green 4S and a red 4K but gets blocked the final position of the ship is the same that 4K doesn't actually morph into a straight which would have prevented gaining the Stress. If something triggered off of either maneuver type the blocked straight is still doing a straight and will do whatever; if something other than the turn was triggered by the K-turn it will still happen but if something would have happened if a straight was performed it would NOT trigger despite the final position being the same as a straight.

That is how I see things which I believe makes my example correct. If the blocked K-turn ACTUALLY becomes a blocked straight, and would count exactly like the ship performing a straight at that same speed, then I would need to re-evaluate.

It is but it's not.

If a ship has a green 4S and a red 4K but gets blocked the final position of the ship is the same that 4K doesn't actually morph into a straight which would have prevented gaining the Stress. If something triggered off of either maneuver type the blocked straight is still doing a straight and will do whatever; if something other than the turn was triggered by the K-turn it will still happen but if something would have happened if a straight was performed it would NOT trigger despite the final position being the same as a straight.

That is how I see things which I believe makes my example correct. If the blocked K-turn ACTUALLY becomes a blocked straight, and would count exactly like the ship performing a straight at that same speed, then I would need to re-evaluate.

Page 17:

If the active ship is executing a {K-turn} maneuver that causes it to overlap another ship, instead treat its maneuver as a {Straight} maneuver with the same speed and color revealed on the dial.

The "treat as" terminology here is the same as all other game effects which change a maneuver, and in all cases and all ways the maneuver is only based on the resultant maneuver. So if you do a Red 4K and overlap, it becomes a Red 4 Straight.

And yes, this should trigger anything that would trigger off the straight maneuver. The Nien Nunb ruling throws a wrench into this, presumably because they didn't want a failed K-turn to go green, but I doubt anyone would question that Minor Hull Breach (which potentially causes damage on red maneuvers) would trigger following Damaged Engine (which turns maneuvers red).

It is but it's not.

If a ship has a green 4S and a red 4K but gets blocked the final position of the ship is the same that 4K doesn't actually morph into a straight which would have prevented gaining the Stress. If something triggered off of either maneuver type the blocked straight is still doing a straight and will do whatever; if something other than the turn was triggered by the K-turn it will still happen but if something would have happened if a straight was performed it would NOT trigger despite the final position being the same as a straight.

That is how I see things which I believe makes my example correct. If the blocked K-turn ACTUALLY becomes a blocked straight, and would count exactly like the ship performing a straight at that same speed, then I would need to re-evaluate.

Page 17:

If the active ship is executing a {K-turn} maneuver that causes it to overlap another ship, instead treat its maneuver as a {Straight} maneuver with the same speed and color revealed on the dial.

The "treat as" terminology here is the same as all other game effects which change a maneuver, and in all cases and all ways the maneuver is only based on the resultant maneuver. So if you do a Red 4K and overlap, it becomes a Red 4 Straight.

And yes, this should trigger anything that would trigger off the straight maneuver. The Nien Nunb ruling throws a wrench into this, presumably because they didn't want a failed K-turn to go green, but I doubt anyone would question that Minor Hull Breach (which potentially causes damage on red maneuvers) would trigger following Damaged Engine (which turns maneuvers red).

****, I see now that I was mistaken on that front and I'm embarrassed about that.

In the context of this general discussion there is nothing in that rule which would change a blocked maneuver into a Stationary maneuver as the speed and color would remain unchanged. Perhaps such a ruling may come down but we aren't there yet.

****, I see now that I was mistaken on that front and I'm embarrassed about that.

In the context of this general discussion there is nothing in that rule which would change a blocked maneuver into a Stationary maneuver as the speed and color would remain unchanged. Perhaps such a ruling may come down but we aren't there yet.

I don't think anyone was suggesting a blocked became a stationary. The question is what the actual requirement for "untouching" is. We know what it takes to get into a touching state. We know that a stationary maneuver will maintain that from turn to turn. What we don't know is why - is it a property of the stationary maneuver itself, or just because there's no actual movement?

****, I see now that I was mistaken on that front and I'm embarrassed about that.

In the context of this general discussion there is nothing in that rule which would change a blocked maneuver into a Stationary maneuver as the speed and color would remain unchanged. Perhaps such a ruling may come down but we aren't there yet.

I don't think anyone was suggesting a blocked became a stationary. The question is what the actual requirement for "untouching" is. We know what it takes to get into a touching state. We know that a stationary maneuver will maintain that from turn to turn. What we don't know is why - is it a property of the stationary maneuver itself, or just because there's no actual movement?

Some of the posts I've read would suggest that being blocked back to your starting position would become a Stationary maneuver. The post that prompted my poor example mentioned "Touching and Stationary Maneuvers" and then goes on to list the ruling where it describes says a touching ship remains touching when the [0] maneuver is performed. It should be obvious that a [0] is not the same as a 1S even when it moves back to the beginning.

After you pointed it out it seems that a 5k could get blocked into a Straight but even if it doesn't move close to 5 it is still going to count as a speed 5 red maneuver.

I know this thread is old, but I was recently linked to it from another thread.

I'm curious to know how you guys think it should be played if the front Z-95 was a fraction of an inch away from Oicunn, and Oicunn performs a 1 straight. There would be movement, the bases of the 2 side-Zs would still be in physical contact, but would they be considered touching? (The front Z-95 would obviously suffer 1 damage from Oicunn and not be able to attack Oicunn)

The same question comes up if you bump into the side of a huge ship that then performs a straight maneuver.

In my understanding, the only 2 ships considered as touching would be Oicunn and the front Z-95.

See discussion in the other thread

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/133863-pre-rammed-oicunn/