The "each additional hit" part seems to be the biggest point of confusion. "Each" implies there is potentially more than one additional hit, however with dual-wielding that isn't the case. Narratively, dual-wielding allows for two weapons to strike, but it's still one hit, mechanically. I feel that's an important distinction in the discussion of "hits", making it even murkier.

If we assume "hit" means "success", then the word "additional" becomes problematic, as in an attack all successes count. Perhaps it should be worded, "each success"? Even so, I'm not sure causing "free damage" based on successes alone is worth all that much. You'd need to roll 6 successes to even harm a stormtrooper, which is a rather substantial amount of successes to be rolled.

.

It's one roll, but potentially two hits. You spend two advantage to hit with the secondary weapon.

I mentioned this. The confusion isn't about dual-wielding, it's about dual-wielding with Spitfire.

I think what Spitfire means is that if you are using a weapon capable of producing multiple hits, like an autofire or linked weapon, you can allocate additional hits to multiple targets. It is basically allowing someone with an autofire pistol to not have to use the autofire rule on top of two weapon combat, or a linked weapon being restricted to one target. I don't think it transforms a weapon not capable of multiple hits into one that is.

I don't know why anyone would bother with an autofire pistol, but a pair of HH-50s becomes a hella set up with the talent.

The "each additional hit" part seems to be the biggest point of confusion. "Each" implies there is potentially more than one additional hit, however with dual-wielding that isn't the case. Narratively, dual-wielding allows for two weapons to strike, but it's still one hit, mechanically. I feel that's an important distinction in the discussion of "hits", making it even murkier.

If we assume "hit" means "success", then the word "additional" becomes problematic, as in an attack all successes count. Perhaps it should be worded, "each success"? Even so, I'm not sure causing "free damage" based on successes alone is worth all that much. You'd need to roll 6 successes to even harm a stormtrooper, which is a rather substantial amount of successes to be rolled.

.

The text seems pretty clear to me.

Per EotE pg 210, "To make the attack, he performs a combined check ."

The procedure for assembling the dice pool continues to refer to this as a check. All attacks are some form of skill check. The result of of the skill check determines how many hits. Furthermore, since the attack is a skill check, that means there is only one target .

The end of the second paragraph says, "Finally, he determines his target." This is completely unambiguous.

The final paragraph in the Two-Weapon Combat section begins, "If he succeeds, he hits with his primary weapon as normal. He may also spend AD AD or TR to hit with his secondary weapon as well."

There's no assuming about what the terminology means. You make a single check as described. Success means you hit with the weapon you declared is primary. Then you can spend advantage/triumph to cause your secondary weapon to hit. Net successes increase damage for both hits.

Two-weapon combat, with no fanciness added, is against one single target . There is literally no reason to think otherwise. And that is where Spitfire's functionality comes in. You follow the same procedure I said above, but with the following added to it: "You may allocate the hit from your secondary weapon to any target within range."

So if you succeed your combat check, and have enough advantage and triumph to activate a second hit, you can deal damage to two targets. If you modified the initial check to activate autofire, and/or you have linked, then each additional hit can therefore be applied to an additional target.

I understand perfectly well how dual-wielding works. The discussion is, again, Spitfire, which is oddly written and why people are confused.

The "each additional hit" part seems to be the biggest point of confusion. "Each" implies there is potentially more than one additional hit, however with dual-wielding that isn't the case. Narratively, dual-wielding allows for two weapons to strike, but it's still one hit, mechanically. I feel that's an important distinction in the discussion of "hits", making it even murkier.

If we assume "hit" means "success", then the word "additional" becomes problematic, as in an attack all successes count. Perhaps it should be worded, "each success"? Even so, I'm not sure causing "free damage" based on successes alone is worth all that much. You'd need to roll 6 successes to even harm a stormtrooper, which is a rather substantial amount of successes to be rolled.

.

The text seems pretty clear to me.

Per EotE pg 210, "To make the attack, he performs a combined check ."

The procedure for assembling the dice pool continues to refer to this as a check. All attacks are some form of skill check. The result of of the skill check determines how many hits. Furthermore, since the attack is a skill check, that means there is only one target .

The end of the second paragraph says, "Finally, he determines his target." This is completely unambiguous.

The final paragraph in the Two-Weapon Combat section begins, "If he succeeds, he hits with his primary weapon as normal. He may also spend AD AD or TR to hit with his secondary weapon as well."

There's no assuming about what the terminology means. You make a single check as described. Success means you hit with the weapon you declared is primary. Then you can spend advantage/triumph to cause your secondary weapon to hit. Net successes increase damage for both hits.

Two-weapon combat, with no fanciness added, is against one single target . There is literally no reason to think otherwise. And that is where Spitfire's functionality comes in. You follow the same procedure I said above, but with the following added to it: "You may allocate the hit from your secondary weapon to any target within range."

So if you succeed your combat check, and have enough advantage and triumph to activate a second hit, you can deal damage to two targets. If you modified the initial check to activate autofire, and/or you have linked, then each additional hit can therefore be applied to an additional target.

I understand perfectly well how dual-wielding works. The discussion is, again, Spitfire, which is oddly written and why people are confused.

Except it's not as long as one consistently uses the language and terms the books use. Like how it's two-weapon combat, not dual-wielding. "Additional hits" does not mean "this talent gives you extra hits". Confusions arise when folks start inconsistently using language from other game systems.

Maybe the rulebooks should come with a dictionary?

The "each additional hit" part seems to be the biggest point of confusion. "Each" implies there is potentially more than one additional hit, however with dual-wielding that isn't the case. Narratively, dual-wielding allows for two weapons to strike, but it's still one hit, mechanically. I feel that's an important distinction in the discussion of "hits", making it even murkier.

If we assume "hit" means "success", then the word "additional" becomes problematic, as in an attack all successes count. Perhaps it should be worded, "each success"? Even so, I'm not sure causing "free damage" based on successes alone is worth all that much. You'd need to roll 6 successes to even harm a stormtrooper, which is a rather substantial amount of successes to be rolled.

.

The text seems pretty clear to me.

Per EotE pg 210, "To make the attack, he performs a combined check ."

The procedure for assembling the dice pool continues to refer to this as a check. All attacks are some form of skill check. The result of of the skill check determines how many hits. Furthermore, since the attack is a skill check, that means there is only one target .

The end of the second paragraph says, "Finally, he determines his target." This is completely unambiguous.

The final paragraph in the Two-Weapon Combat section begins, "If he succeeds, he hits with his primary weapon as normal. He may also spend AD AD or TR to hit with his secondary weapon as well."

There's no assuming about what the terminology means. You make a single check as described. Success means you hit with the weapon you declared is primary. Then you can spend advantage/triumph to cause your secondary weapon to hit. Net successes increase damage for both hits.

Two-weapon combat, with no fanciness added, is against one single target . There is literally no reason to think otherwise. And that is where Spitfire's functionality comes in. You follow the same procedure I said above, but with the following added to it: "You may allocate the hit from your secondary weapon to any target within range."

So if you succeed your combat check, and have enough advantage and triumph to activate a second hit, you can deal damage to two targets. If you modified the initial check to activate autofire, and/or you have linked, then each additional hit can therefore be applied to an additional target.

I understand perfectly well how dual-wielding works. The discussion is, again, Spitfire, which is oddly written and why people are confused.

Except it's not as long as one consistently uses the language and terms the books use. Like how it's two-weapon combat, not dual-wielding. "Additional hits" does not mean "this talent gives you extra hits". Confusions arise when folks start inconsistently using language from other game systems.

Maybe the rulebooks should come with a dictionary?

The very fact the Spitfire talent has a thread consisting of multiple, often-contradictory opinions makes it clear there's an issue. To split hairs between "two-weapon combat" and dual-wielding" is asinine, and isn't "using language from other game system"; it's simply language. It's that same use of language that has some people confused as to how Spitfire works, and they'd like it to be cleared up. While many have had good ideas as to how Spitfire might work, I haven't seen a concrete explanation that doesn't lead at least one other person to more questions.

Frankly, there are a number of elements within the rules that aren't as clear as one might hope. The Spit Fire talent is an example (my personal take is that it grants what amounts to autofire, allowing the shooter to go beyond two hits from attacking with two pistols, but they still need to spend 2A per additional hit, which in turn can be assigned to multiple targets; that may not be RAI, but that's my current interpretation of the talent), but there's also what does and doesn't stack for defense, which has apparently gotten bad enough that the designers are in the midst of rethinking the whole process.

Frankly, there are a number of elements within the rules that aren't as clear as one might hope. The Spit Fire talent is an example (my personal take is that it grants what amounts to autofire, allowing the shooter to go beyond two hits from attacking with two pistols, but they still need to spend 2A per additional hit, which in turn can be assigned to multiple targets; that may not be RAI, but that's my current interpretation of the talent), but there's also what does and doesn't stack for defense, which has apparently gotten bad enough that the designers are in the midst of rethinking the whole process.

I like your interpretation of Spitfire and after a discussion with a player, we've agreed to try it that way. I appreciate that the system's not so tightly-woven that pulling a loose thread unravels it. Apart from a few head-scratchers, I'm extremely happy with it.

See the thread at https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/108101-ffg-developer-answered-questions/page-7#entry1738858

That's a might long thread, and I'm not seeing Spit Fire mentioned on the page you linked. I even did a search for the word Spit. Can you pin the location down a bit more for me. (Note: I'm visually impaired so fully capable of missing something right in front of me.)

The post I linked to tells you how to send questions to the developers, and therefore isn’t specific to the issue of a particular talent.

Ah, in that case I should probably point out the multiple people in this thread who've already said they've submitted the question and not received an answer.

Frankly, there are a number of elements within the rules that aren't as clear as one might hope. The Spit Fire talent is an example (my personal take is that it grants what amounts to autofire, allowing the shooter to go beyond two hits from attacking with two pistols, but they still need to spend 2A per additional hit, which in turn can be assigned to multiple targets; that may not be RAI, but that's my current interpretation of the talent), but there's also what does and doesn't stack for defense, which has apparently gotten bad enough that the designers are in the midst of rethinking the whole process.

This is what I wanted it to be before it came out, and how I hope to run it when my character picks it up.

The only other "reasonable" way to run it that I've read so far allows you to target a minion, and then have your off hand hit the BBEG with Adversary 9 for just 2 Advantage.

I'm also hoping Donovan's theory is the correct one. If it's only the ability to hit a different target it actually calls into question the worth of the entire talent tree.

Really? Guns Blazing, Call em, Improved Quickdraw, Sorry About the Mess. The whole tree not having worth is a little melodramatic don't you think?

There are two ways to play gunfighter, getting a bunch of hits, or getting extremely precise hits with a high lethality critical hit potential.

I still say there is nothing in that Talent that grants weapon any additional effects, it just expands the effects themselves.

A pair of HH-50s are Linked 1, so with Spitfire you could potentially get 4 total hits, and spread that out over 4 separate targets, hardly worthless.

Really? Guns Blazing, Call em, Improved Quickdraw, Sorry About the Mess. The whole tree not having worth is a little melodramatic don't you think?

There are two ways to play gunfighter, getting a bunch of hits, or getting extremely precise hits with a high lethality critical hit potential.

I still say there is nothing in that Talent that grants weapon any additional effects, it just expands the effects themselves.

A pair of HH-50s are Linked 1, so with Spitfire you could potentially get 4 total hits, and spread that out over 4 separate targets, hardly worthless.

I agree the tree is nice.

As for Spitfire, the question is "What does it allow to do?" I say that because Linked specifically says "The Same Target". But so does Two Weapon Combat. And Autofire requires the Target to be the one with the highest Difficulty.

We should probably let Spitfire modify Two Weapon Combat ONLY! Linked and Autofire should be left intact. So, Spitfire will really only allow for a second hit to target a different target, without having to worry about that target's difficulty as long as they are within range.

Then, add Linked and/or Autofire to that.

It makes the most sense (until we get an official answer), allows each individual rule to shine, and allows Spitfire to do something different and special, but not a clear copy of a different rule.

But Spitfire definitely needs at least a word from the Devs.

The HH50 is the naval artillery of blaster pistols. They are encumbrance 3 and therefore only interesting (When using two of them) if they are jury rigged to encumbrance 1 - in my opinion a waste of jury rigging - or as a kind of dueling weapon that is only used when every point of damage counts. In nearly all other situations you will need your encumbrance treshold to bring along more useful items like tools, security equipment, healing equipment, explosives...

From my game experiences the gunslinger is top for duel situations (one on one) or to make the maximum of use from "legal weapons". A gunslinger can be devastating when equipped with one (like mine in the moment) or two disruptor pistols, which is the "illegal but effective way" or he can make the most use from non-restricted and small weapons. A gunslinger even with two holdout-blasters is a force to be reckoned with and armed with two heavyer models (Like Dragoons) he has enormous firepower without drawing too much attention. I plan to go for two lancer pistols in the future of our game. One optimized for long range shooting (Paired, Telescopic Optical Sight, Banthas Eye Laser Sight or Blaster Suppressor) and the other one to make use as a first weapon when getting close (Paired, Banthas Eye Laser Sight, Electronic Sighting System). A Heavy or a Gadgeteer with big, restrictet, automatic or explosive weaponry may outgun a Gunslinger at ease but he will in most cases be the second to shoot or he wont even reach the shootout as he has problems with the authorities on the way.

I think the most use you can get from "spitfire" is in combination with "Call' Em". You can use your first gun to disarm your opponent and hit him directly with your second gun. The other, more obvious use would be a situation when you have to fight two rival characters at once. You could buy your group time and disarm them both or when you are armed with pistols with high damage output (Disruptors) you can go for the kill and shoot both of them directly.

So took another look at the full text of Spitire (which is a 25 XP talent in Gunslinger).

Personal opinion, but I'd say that things liked Linked and Autofire wouldn't be allowed to break their specific rules with this talent.

So for instance, if using an HH-50 (Linked 1) in one hand and a heavy blaster pistol in the other, I wouldn't allow the shooter to split the extra hit generated from Linked 1 to hit a different target; whichever target catches the first hit from the HH-50 would catch the second hit from the Linked quality. The heavy blaster pistol shot could via Spitfire either hit the same target as the HH-50 or a different target. But there's now way the PC would be able to hit three different targets with that particular weapon set-up.

Now if there's a PC using an IR-5 (Dangerous Covenants) in one hand and a heavy blaster pistol in other, the PC would have to take the penalties for using Autofire as well as two-weapon combat (so increasing the difficulty twice) if they wanted to use both Autofire and Spitfire on the same attack roll, with Spitfire again allowing the off-hand weapon to hit a target of the shooter's choose.

If a PC is using twin HH-50 pistols, then the off-hand attack could still hit a different target than the primary, but again they couldn't split the Linked quality to potentially hit up to four separate targets even though both weapons have Linked. Any hits triggered from Linked would have to be assigned to whatever target caught the initial shot from that weapon.

Now admittedly I've not read through this entire thread in exacting detail, so apologies if this has been discussed in detail on an earlier page, but the one potential issue would be if the PC with Spitfire chooses to target a minion group, and then use the Spitfire talent to have the off-hand attack peg a Nemesis that has ranks in Adversary. Personally, I don't see this as too major of a problem simply because Spitfire is a 25XP talent and is pretty much a capstone ability of the Gunslinger spec.

As stated earlier, I'd allow a PC to use Spitfire to be able to score more than just one additional hit when using the talent, provided they generate enough advantages to do so, and that those extra hits could be assigned however. So a PC with twin H-7 Equalizer blaster pistols (Suns of Fortune) using Spitfire that has a net result of 2 successes and 4 advantage would (in my view) be able to score 3 hits (one for the primary weapon for succeeded, one for the off-hand for 2 advantage, and a third with the off-hand for those last two advantage due to Spitfire). Yes, this could be gamed a bit simply by way of the Paired attachment (which drops the advantage cost of hitting with an off-hand weapon by one), but given that Spitfire only works with Ranged (Light) weapons and most of those pale damage-wise when compared to Ranged (Heavy) weapons, I don't view this "exploit" as being nearly as bad as the officially endorsed (at least by Andy Fischer) exploit of using the Jury-Rigged talent on an Autofire weapon to reduce the advantage cost of that quality to only one advantage. Yeah, there are distruptor pistols that are freaking brutal, but those carry a whole host of other problems, the top of which is they are illegal for civilians to own and tend to mark the user as the worst of criminal scum.

Narrative restrictions don't address mechanical issues, whenever things like "disruptors are restricted, or HBRs are restricted' are used in these discussion over mechanics it's mixing apples and oranges. Narrative descriptions of items don't, and shouldn't be, used to address mechanical game imbalance issues.

Who gets to decide which gun the extra hits from the autofire interpretation of this talent come from?

If you aren't using the exact same kind of pistol you have to be able to know which causes each hit with this interpretation. Even if you don't game it with some kind of peter cheater combo like a X-30 as the primary and a disruptor rifle with the pistol grip mod in the other, there still has to be a method to decide which is precisely providing the additional hits. Which one's crit rating do you use, since the rules already state each hit can cause an independent critical hit, you have to have a method for splitting up hits some how, which this Talent certainly makes no mention of. Should it be 50/50? Should it favor the primary weapon? If it does then I immediately switch to the disruptor pistol in the main hand with a holdout blaster in my off to give the staggered autofire interpretation advantage to my disruptor pistol.

This aspect is already addressed in two weapon combat and how it functions, and to me isn't an issue if this Talent simply adds to what a weapon can already do and modifies how Linked works potentially, as opposed to adding a weapon effect to the use of two weapons together. Saying Linked doesn't allow for hitting multiple targets makes little sense, two weapon combat says you can't hit multiple targets. Clearly Talents are meant to modify existing base rules.

Even autofire doesn't create this issue, as the weapon with autofire is the source of extra hits. Dual wielding autofire weapons makes little sense even without the added Difficulty, as you can already hit multiple targets with autofire. Where you immediately create an issue, as well as confusion, with this interpretation of the Talent. To say nothing of a multitude of balance issues with simply adding autofire to the likes of disruptor pistols.

Maybe the devs haven't answered because they're arguing over how it works also....

The idea of splitting the shots from a weapon with linked quality seems completely out of the rules for me. But two linked pistols with the paired upgrade is in my opinion - apart from the drawbacks i outlined in my previous post - not even an exploit. So if a player uses 2 of these over-heavy blaster pistols and scores 4 advantages (with paired upgrade) it is legit for me to score 2 hits on 2 targets. But the idea of splitting the hits gained from paired seems a little too absurd for me. Using 2 automatic weapons this way is perhaps a style over use approach but in my oppinion useless as you gain no advantage from doing so, except some rare circumstances as using a droid disabler to roast some piece of technology and mowing down some minions with the other (automatic) gun.

Although this is a diskussion over game mechanics and not over narrative details, the narrative factor is also to be considered as it works as a balance for the game. I think that some aspects of the gunslinger-talents are meant to adress those narrative reasons, so they are to be considered as well if you want to interprete the rules. Spitfire is weak compared to auto-fire, but bringing a automatic weapon in a secured place is not the best idea seen from the narrative point of view. So there is the spitfire talent to compensate these narrative restriction.

The damage output from light weapons in comparison with their heavy counterpart is low - but you have the advantage that they tend to have a very low encumbrance (i think that FFG made a mistake giving the heavy blaster pistol two points of encumbrance - considering that there are now a lot of 1P-enc. Blaster pistols mit the same or even more damage output than those), which makes room for other equipment. Apart from that they are either legal to carry or small enough to be concealed which is impossible to do for the real heavy hitters. 2 holdout-blasters with model 58 concealment holsters and the weapon signature reduction upgrade can be taken at almost every place while a gadgeteer with his upgraded heavy blaster rifle would have to fight his way in - if this is an option at all. While two blaster pistols may be seen as a sign of excentricity (if they are not concealed after all) a blaster carbine or rifle in a civilized place might rise lots of suspicion from the resident criminal organizations or even law enforcement. So the real strength of a gunslinger is in my opinion that this spezialisation allows a character to make exceptional use from easy to obtain and easy to bring in weaponry. So the only reason to choose a gunslinger over a gadgeteer or heavyy is indeed narrative.

So the only reason to choose a gunslinger over a gadgeteer or heavyy is indeed narrative.

Your'e kidding me, right? Gadgeteer and Heavy do not get any Lethal Blows. They get no Rapid Reaction. Neither gets Natural Marksman. Add in Call em, Quickdraw and Improved Quickdraw, and there are plenty of mechanical reasons to take Gunslinger over both Heavy and Gadgeteer.

It is a little late in our time zone - GMT+1 - so i am a little tired and have to apologize. Of course you are right with rapid reaction, natural marksman, quickdraw and so forth. But when it comes down to dealing massive damage it is the combination of gadgeteer/gunslinger who is top of the line. What i was trying to say was, that it is senseless to compare auto-fire and spitfire without their respective context. The Gunslinger will shoot first, he can bring his equipment to places a heavy or gunslinger can't but he will not inflict as much damage than those two.

The core of this diskussion is weighting the advantages granted by auto-fire and linked against the advantages granted by spitfire. And that is pointless from my point of view. As i mentioned earlier the strength of spitfire is not laying down a hail of light on multiple opponents but to maximise the use of rapid reaction, call em and so forth. It is for example possible to disarm two opponents using call em (two aim maneuvers on their weapons or arms using stress) without accumulating lots of setback-dices befor they even can react which is a trick no other specialisation can do. Those who want to compete with pure fighter spezialisations and therefor want to maximize targets affected by spitfire don't know what the gunslinger is for.

if the PC with Spitfire chooses to target a minion group, and then use the Spitfire talent to have the off-hand attack peg a Nemesis that has ranks in Adversary. Personally, I don't see this as too major of a problem simply because Spitfire is a 25XP talent and is pretty much a capstone ability of the Gunslinger spec.

This is exactly what i had always believed the purpose of Spitfire was. Your taking easy shots at the mooks, but then at the last moment you turn and blast the BBEG in the face when they are least expecting it.

So the only reason to choose a gunslinger over a gadgeteer or heavyy is indeed narrative.

Your'e kidding me, right? Gadgeteer and Heavy do not get any Lethal Blows. They get no Rapid Reaction. Neither gets Natural Marksman. Add in Call em, Quickdraw and Improved Quickdraw, and there are plenty of mechanical reasons to take Gunslinger over both Heavy and Gadgeteer.

Im with you, a Gunslinger is all about shooting first and ending the fight in that 1 action, be that through Wounds, a bad Crit, or disarming the opponent through "Call Em". The fact they can do that basically anywhere since pistols are so commonplace is the icing on the cake.

when it comes down to dealing massive damage it is the combination of gadgeteer/gunslinger who is top of the line.

Have to disagree there also. Gunslinger/Gambler is way better no doubt. Second Chances and Double or Nothing pretty much the most lethal combo imo.

The Gambler is a case on its own. The double-or-nothing ability is a real game changer but could be used in any context. A Gadgeteet with a repeating blaster (jury rigged) could bring down small starships in one round using double or nothing and second chances. The Gambler and these two talents (+ the additional double or nothing-talents) are without any comparison in the game. As i consider taking gambler as second spezialisation for my gunslinger these two talents are at the moment a constant source for diskussions on our table.

I would hope that if Spitfire mimicked a quality such as Autofire, the text would say so. All the discussions about Linked and Autofire, while interesting, haven't addressed the core question about what this talent is supposed to do. I agree that bringing in narrative examples clouds the issue more.

Anyway, I'm hoping to see the talent in action and better understand the potential strengths and weaknesses of various interpretations.

My first thought also was that the funktion of this talent is, that additional successes rolled will generate additional hits. Like shooting with 2 Blaster pistols with damage 6, rolling 5 successes generates 5 allocateable hits with 11 points damage. The Name "Spitfire" also indicates this. But i would really like to see a clarification on this topic by the developers. Since we have autofire and jury rigging and spitfire is a 25 XP talent this interpretation is not so absurd. I watched some Clint Eastwood-Movies in the last days and the interpretation that the purpose of this talent is to allow fanning with the colt is as good as the other interpretation i came up with earlyer that post.

When the developers have wanted something to use autofire, they say so unequivocally, as in the case of where it is mentioned in the Force power Move. In my experience asking questions they are very deliberate and literal in their use of language.

Here's how I'd answer this question in our "Messages from the Edge" thread for the show. Look at specifically what is stated, and nothing more.

Spitfire states in it's full talent description (page 33, Fly Casual ):

After the character makes a successful combined check with two Ranged (Light) weapons, each additional hit generated as part of the attack can be allocated to any other target within range of the weapon.

So now we look at the rules for Two Weapon Combat and Combined Checks in Edge of the Empire page 210-211. The only verbiage in there that refers to the number of hits generated are as follows:

If he succeeds, he hits with his primary weapon as normal. He may also spend 2 Advantage or 1 Triumph to hit with his secondary weapon as well. If both weapons hit, he may spend additional Advantage and Triumph to activate qualities from either weapon.

That's it. There's nothing between those two referenced quotes that suggest any additional hits beyond the single second hit for the Combined Check are generated when using Spitfire. The verbiage in Fly Casual referencing "each additional hit" is if you are using any left over Advantage and Triumphs to generate additional hits via Weapon Qualities; Auto Fire and Linked.

Based on basic text, language, and RAW I'm not seeing where the question is, or where some of you are pointing at to evidence that any extra hits are generated (outside of those from Autofire or Linked). I see folks citing "name" and "inference" as to why Spitfire should "make two-guns work like and autofire attack", but the RAW doesn't support that at all. Any other talent or ability in the game that allows you to generate additional hits states it explicitly (Force Power Move and the Saber Swarm talent for Ataru Strikers).

At it's core; Spitfire allows you to make a two-weapon attack at one target and if you succeed you can hit anyone else in range with your second shot; be they a minion Stormtrooper or Darth Vader. That's the big advantage of Spitfire; applying minion defenses to BBEGs for 2 Advantage.