Still waiting for a rule citation.

FAQ, page 9, Measuring Range:

Players may only measure range and/or use the range ruler to determine whether a ship is inside or outside of a firing arc at the following times:

...

• After declaring the intended target of a target lock action, the active player may measure range to the intended target, and only to the intended target.

If you're using the target lock action to measure range to another target, then you're breaking the rules. There is a certain amount of unavoidable incidental information; taking actions which are specifically aimed at creating "incidental" information is intentionally measuring to a ship other than the intended target.

And? I can still measure to a ship that's way out of range for the target lock. So thanks for telling us we have to point the ruler to the ship we declared, which we knew.

The whole point of using this "thing" is to measure for stuff in between anyway.

It really comes down to the question of what constitutes a measurement. One side wants to pretend that the absolute and only way to take a measurement is to use the range ruler to mark directly from one ship to another. Honestly, I think that's both ludicrous and dishonest. When you finish a process, do you have knowledge about range which you did not have at the beginning of that process? Then you've taken a measurement , and I don't think it matters where you happen to be pointing the range ruler at the time.

And that, per the rules, is illegal.

This means that you think that people are simply not allowed to take a target lock (or, technically, measure for a target lock) if another ship is in between the targeter and the targetee, since you would then "have knowledge about range which you did not have at the beginning of that process." I'm glad that smarter people than either of us made (and continue to refine) the rules to this game.

My thoughts on the initial problems of the 'target lock abuse' are here , earlier on in the thread, but the short version is, I think the Target Lock rule as it currently stands is poorly designed.

At the time. I offered no alternative, because I hadn't really thought about it, and because I don't think it's such a big deal, even with the obvious abuse aspect of it.

When this thread resurfaced, I went back and read my posts, and thought a bit more about the 'problem', considering my recent games over the last 6 months. Some observations;

1) Certain pilots, like Kagi and Carnor Jax, require you to measure range to those pilots in the activation phase if you take certain actions due to their pilot abilities.

2) Because of the above point, it is impossible to limit the acquisition of incidental information, so we can't expect to have or create a rule that would force Target Lock acquisition to avoid that information we can still get in other ways.

3) What we *CAN* do is limit the amount of incidental information that Target Locks can get, and make it part of the core mechanic, and create a trade off, so this information comes at some sort of cost.

Suggested new Target Lock action

ACQUIRE A TARGET LOCK

Ships with the [Target Lock] action may acquire a target lock.

To acquire a target lock, perform these steps.

1. Determine range by taking the range ruler and measuring the distance from any point on the active ship’s base in all directions.

2. You may pick any ship in range as the target of the target lock. If you choose to target lock a ship in range.

2a. Place a red target lock token next to the enemy ship

2b. Place a blue target lock token next to the active ship

3. If there are no enemy ships in range, you may choose a different action.

All we have done is change the timing on when the target it chosen. Normally, we do target -> measure range -> determine validity. Now we do measure range -> determine validity -> pick one ship in range to lock on to.

So;

• You get information to all ships in range.
• You get limited information about ships just out of range.
• You only get to change your action if there are no ships in range, so there's none of this declaring targets on the other side of the board to measure range of your 'intended' target.
• Does not force you to actually lose your current locked target, so ships can act as 'spotters' for other ships.
• Is essentially trading an action to gain information
• Makes a certain amount of thematic sense (to me). A ship's targeting computer should be able to show all the ships it can lock on to, and avoid offering ships it can not lock on to as possible choices.