On page 20 in the core rule it states

"When a ship executes a maneuver in which either the maneuver template or ship's base physically overlaps an obstacle token, follow these step:"

Then on page 18 in the FAQ

" Q. When a ship executes a maneuver, is the entire width of the ship considered to be moving along the maneuver template and possibly hitting obstacles?

A. NO. Only the maneuver template itself and the final position of the ship are considered when determining if a ship hit an obstacle."

OK so first off I have to say I hate this change. It gives large ships a big advantage. I mean so now big ship can move just like small ship as long as your maneuver template or final position of the ship are considered when determining if a ship hit an obstacle an not the ships base. This is just wrong. I mean a big ships base is 4 times the size of a small ships base. So it runs a bigger chance to hit something. But not now with this new ruling in the FAQ.it's like no don't worry it doesn't matter that almost half your ship goes over something your fine. You don't have roll. I am sorry why was this changed? What is wrong with the original ruling?

Now before someone posts an states "Well in 3D space the ship can be going over/under or around the obstacle so if the template doesn't go though it you should not have to roll to see if you get hit." To this I say yes that is true but you forgot one thing. in a 3D space the obstacle would be moving not sitting still an that is why you should roll if your base crossing over an obstacle. Cuz there is a chance it hits you. Did you see Empire Strikes Back?

So what are your opinions on this?

I don't see a contradiction or change, just a clarification. To the best of my knowledge, the rule for movement has always been that ship movement does not "track along" the template (unless you're moving back after a base overlap). Other then that, isn't it true that the only time the actual base of the ship is considered is when the ship is actually placed on the table between moves?

If they wanted to increase the possibility of damage for skirting obstacles in large ships, it would make the game just that little bit more complex. One thing FFG have striven for is simplicity in order to keep gameplay moving at a good pace. The more "realism" that could be incorporated, the more it would slow things down. There's numerous unrealistic game mechanics within X-wing when compared to other similar games, but while other games may be more realistic, they are definitely slower to play.

This is a change? Hasn't it always worked that way? As far as the game is concerned, the ship basically teleports from its starting position to the end of the template. What it might have hit had it moved along the template is and always has been irrelevant.

Yeah, that's not a change. It has always been that way.

This was not changed at all. That is exactly how it has worked since day one.

To add to the chorus above, here are the instructions for executing a maneuver:

Holding the template firmly in place, grip the side walls of the base and lift the ship off the play surface. Then place the ship at the opposite end of the template, sliding the rear guides of the ship into the opposite end of the template.

The ship never touches anything in between. That's why the collision check rule says that if the ship or template overlap, you collide - if the ship "flew" the path, as you seem to have been playing, a check on the template would be redundant.

So, as many have said by this point, no change at all.

As the OP mentioned, a Large ship base is four times the size of a small ship

The most common asteroid placement is within Range 1 (2 ship bases) of another.

So you'd be extremely limited on the board when flying Large Ships, if the base also counted (and you didn't remove the ship, to place it in front of the template) while performing the maneuver - as you would overlap obstacles all the time.

Just to add agreement, the rules have always worked the way the FAQ says.

That being said, its a common misunderstanding, hence why it is in the FAQ. I believe it has been in the FAQ for several years now since Wave 1.

what all of them said. ^

Of course, the other side of the argument is have you ever tried to plot the path of movement when doing a 1-turn? There's simply too much margin of error when doing it. Did the corner possibly overlap the asteroid, because when it was side one, it didn't? When does it count as an overlap if one tip overlaps, but after moving 5mm further, it no longer does? The arguments could literally go back and forth for ages.

By utilising the template and end position only, all that drama is avoided.

There is a change. the rule book states if a ship base overlaps an the faq removed that.

If this is not a change then why would the rules talk about ship base at all when moving through ship and obstacles. Why not just say if you end on something roll to see if you get hit.

Yes the rule book states Holding the template firmly in place, grip the side walls of the base and lift the ship off the play surface. Then place the ship at the opposite end of the template, sliding the rear guides of the ship into the opposite end of the template. But on the same page it states if a ship executes a maneuver that causes either its base or maneuver template in use to physically overlap with another ship base see move through a ship. Where it states Ships can move through space occupied by other ship without penalty

So why have a section about move though ships and a section about move though obstacles. This is because they state two different things. Ships state no penalty an obstacles states there is a penalty an that penalty happens when either the maneuver template or ship's base physically overlaps an obstacle

Then you can even add in the section overlapping other ships as well.

Yes a big ship would be harder to fly as it should be its bigger. They cant zip around like a small ship. But asteroids are range 1 spaced so there is room for large to move around an not be blocked out on asteroid placement. An just like moving to begin with. You have to make the call if your base is going to hit that asteroid or not this does not make it harder it just makes you change how you fly a little.

Now the rule is what it is do to the faq. an that is fine. But I still think it give big ship a big advantage.

It means when a ship base overlaps.... When it is placed at the end of the template. There has never been overlapping as it moved down the template. It's the same rule since wave 0. No change, the faq is a clarification.

There is a change. the rule book states if a ship base overlaps an the faq removed that.

I don't mean to sound rude, but there is no diplomatic way of saying this: there is no change. You have been doing it incorrectly.

But on the same page it states if a ship executes a maneuver that causes either its base or maneuver template in use to physically overlap with another ship base.

Yes, it does say that. It means that if the template or the final position of the base overlaps. Because as far as the game rules are concerned, the base has no other position. In essence, it vanishes from its starting location and reappears at the end of the template. If it can't fit at the end of the template, you follow the overlapping rules to figure out where you should place it. Even then, the template is used as a visual guide to estimate the correct position. The ship is not considered to be moving along the template at any point in time.

Where it states Ships can move through space occupied by other ship without penalty

Which only means that the template can cross another ship. Nothing more.

Even if it is a change (which, as everyone points out, it's not) that particular entry has been in the FAQ since about the second version of it. To the extent that it's a shocking change to the rules, it's a shocking change which happened around two years ago.

So if you really want to decide that the rest of the community is completely wrong in their interpretation, that's up to you, even if you are kinda looking like a jerk for it. But the change happened two years ago. It's long since done and really not going to change (again?).

There is a change. the rule book states if a ship base overlaps an the faq removed that.

If this is not a change then why would the rules talk about ship base at all when moving through ship and obstacles. Why not just say if you end on something roll to see if you get hit.

Yes the rule book states Holding the template firmly in place, grip the side walls of the base and lift the ship off the play surface. Then place the ship at the opposite end of the template, sliding the rear guides of the ship into the opposite end of the template. But on the same page it states if a ship executes a maneuver that causes either its base or maneuver template in use to physically overlap with another ship base see move through a ship. Where it states Ships can move through space occupied by other ship without penalty

So why have a section about move though ships and a section about move though obstacles. This is because they state two different things. Ships state no penalty an obstacles states there is a penalty an that penalty happens when either the maneuver template or ship's base physically overlaps an obstacle

Then you can even add in the section overlapping other ships as well.

Yes a big ship would be harder to fly as it should be its bigger. They cant zip around like a small ship. But asteroids are range 1 spaced so there is room for large to move around an not be blocked out on asteroid placement. An just like moving to begin with. You have to make the call if your base is going to hit that asteroid or not this does not make it harder it just makes you change how you fly a little.

Now the rule is what it is do to the faq. an that is fine. But I still think it give big ship a big advantage.

But it does, because that's how movement works. Executing a maneuver is, emphasis mine, "...lift the ship off the play surface. Then place the ship at the opposite end of the template..." The FAQ entry is merely clarifying what the rules already say, that the ship doesn't move along the template when executing a maneuver, only the template and the end position matter. And that is consistent with how both the Obstacle and Ship overlap rules are written already, there's zero conflict between the two as Obstacles and Ships are different entities anyway.

If you follow the rules as they are written for movement, place your template, pick up the ship then place it at the opposite end, then check:

1) does the maneuver template overlap a ship? either way, nothing happens.

2) does my ship's base overlap a ship? If so, place my ship centered on the template, touching the other ship

3) does my template, or ship base now overlap an obstacle? Suffer the consequences of the Obstacle type

4) did I end my maneuver overlapping an asteroid? I can't attack in addition to the other consequences.

For half a minute there I thought the rules suddenly changed.

Glad to see it is just someone making a poorly informed, by highly alarmist, statement.

I don't think anyone is being rude. We are having a debate over something. You can say I am wrong an that is fine. As long as no one start name calling or hurt full.

We are just going over the different interpretation of what is in the rules that all. So it all good

Now you saying that any time it states overlap or overlapping that that means only in the final position. But if that is the case. Then way are there time the rule state final position an other time it does not?

Also the section on page 20 is called "Moving into and through obstacles" not stopping on obstacles now if my ship does not follow my template an just blinks from one end to the other then there is no reason to have the part about the ships base in this line.

"When a ship executes a maneuver in which either the maneuver template or ship's base physically overlaps an obstacle token, follow these step:"

Since there is another part at the end of the section that talks about if you land on an obstacle.

Glad to see it is just someone making a poorly informed, by highly alarmist, statement.

How are you not used to this by now?

I don't think anyone is being rude. We are having a debate over something. You can say I am wrong an that is fine. As long as no one start name calling or hurt full.

We are just going over the different interpretation of what is in the rules that all. So it all good

Now you saying that any time it states overlap or overlapping that that means only in the final position. But if that is the case. Then way are there time the rule state final position an other time it does not?

Also the section on page 20 is called "Moving into and through obstacles" not stopping on obstacles now if my ship does not follow my template an just blinks from one end to the other then there is no reason to have the part about the ships base in this line.

"When a ship executes a maneuver in which either the maneuver template or ship's base physically overlaps an obstacle token, follow these step:"

Since there is another part at the end of the section that talks about if you land on an obstacle.

Because the final position is not always at the end of the template. Refer to the process Otacon posted for how moving a ship plays out. At no point do you stop to measure if you would have hit something along the way.

Just from a logistical point of view, do you have any idea how long we'd spend arguing with our opponents if we needed to do that? It would dramatically increase the length of a game for no gain. FFG avoid such things like the plague.

I am sorry if I sound like a jerk I am not trying to be I am still a new player an I am trying to understand. I am putting out how i see the rules and looking for answers to why i see them differently then the rest of you that's all.

I can tell you that from the designer demo's at Gencon when the game was announced that ships have never traced thier trajectory along the template.

You'd routinely just have games where nobody took an action.

You can look up some Gencon or Worlds Finals videos. These would be quite litterally occuring with FFG Officials watching a game. You will never see players tracking thier ships flight along the template.

Glad to see it is just someone making a poorly informed, by highly alarmist, statement.

How are you not used to this by now?

Because most of the time these are actually coming from something relatively new and perhaps even have some justification.

Here we have someone crying "wolf!" based on ancient information that isn't even a change. Now when the way Autoblasters was altered/clarified THAT merited such a topic heading as it actually was a change from the way most of us had been using and understanding the rule for some time. More recently there was the dial debate where the great change is really just the official ruling coming in a way that some did not expect.

On page 20 in the core rule it states

"When a ship executes a maneuver in which either the maneuver template or ship's base physically overlaps an obstacle token, follow these step:"

Then on page 18 in the FAQ

" Q. When a ship executes a maneuver, is the entire width of the ship considered to be moving along the maneuver template and possibly hitting obstacles?

A. NO. Only the maneuver template itself and the final position of the ship are considered when determining if a ship hit an obstacle."

OK so first off I have to say I hate this change. It gives large ships a big advantage. I mean so now big ship can move just like small ship as long as your maneuver template or final position of the ship are considered when determining if a ship hit an obstacle an not the ships base. This is just wrong. I mean a big ships base is 4 times the size of a small ships base. So it runs a bigger chance to hit something. But not now with this new ruling in the FAQ.it's like no don't worry it doesn't matter that almost half your ship goes over something your fine. You don't have roll. I am sorry why was this changed? What is wrong with the original ruling?

Now before someone posts an states "Well in 3D space the ship can be going over/under or around the obstacle so if the template doesn't go though it you should not have to roll to see if you get hit." To this I say yes that is true but you forgot one thing. in a 3D space the obstacle would be moving not sitting still an that is why you should roll if your base crossing over an obstacle. Cuz there is a chance it hits you. Did you see Empire Strikes Back?

So what are your opinions on this?

Page 7 of said Rulebook tells you that you place the movement template and lift the ship off the board and then place it back at the end of the template. You don't move the ship along the template. The FAQ just clarified the rules in the Rulebook.

Yes a big ship would be harder to fly as it should be its bigger. They cant zip around like a small ship.

Have you seen Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back? Do you recall a flight on an asteroid's surface that a YT-1300 survived and two TIEs did not?

The miniatures themselves, while in scale of one another... somewhat, are no where near the scale of the board. If they were, then blaster range would be pretty much snowball range. It's late and I don't want to do the math. It's also a 3d space sim game represented on a 2d board. There must be simplifications made.

The alternative would be to have the ships 'follow' the templates to see if they clip an asteroid. Sure that's easy on a straight, but it would be extremely problematic on a turn or bank. Any small adjustment in angle would prevent clipping. Therefore, only the template is used when making this determination. It's just the only way that it can be done to be fair.

Thematically, bumping ships aren't really crashing into each other. They occupy the same Z-axis space in 3d. As they are not on the same height plane, they cannot shoot each other. When a ship's template flies 'through' another ship, it is simply going either above or below it.

Asteroids represent a mini field more than they do a single rock. This mini asteroid field extends to fill the entire z-axis column. Thus when a ship flies his template through, the ship loses his action because they had to focus on not blowing up. They roll to see if they accidentally hit something. I imagine you don't roll on ship to ship collisions because then no one would fly anything but AP's. Losing your action is penalty enough.