Page 16 of the core rule book

deStroying ShipS

When the number of Damage cards dealt to a ship is equal to or greater than its hull value, the ship is immediately destroyed (faceup and facedown cards count toward this total). Immediately remove the destroyed ship from the play area, discard all of its Damage cards to a faceup discard pile next to the Damage deck, and return all of its tokens to their respective supplies.

This doesn't say that you have to reveal your crits. If I had a decimator that just died without ever taking a crit, I would have 12 face down damage cards on it. Now if I pushed them all into a little pile and then flipped that pile over into the discard pile, wouldn't I be in compliance with this rule? At the same time I've only revealed the crit that was on the bottom of the pile.

Zlashie: it's a bit like poker - the better you are at using the information you have the better your chance of making the best decision. That's why some people are better at poker than others. No, they aren't more lucky

That's why this rule matters. It gives high-level player better information. Rexlar Brath deciding to go for a flipped crit or instead spending Focus on flipping eyes. Or, what's my risk of getting a Blinded Pilot if I save my Focus and eat a crit in the last firing round of a game so that I instead may spend it to boost my game saving attack (I've lost a game due to a Blinded Pilot crit that I could have avoided by using a Focus for defense - thus I didn't get that final shot on a 1 Hull Shuttle).

I strongly disagree.

In poker, the essence of the game is to judge probability and act upon it. Is my hand strong enough to warrant a 32% chance of getting the straight on the fifth card?

"It gives high-level player better information": Except for lists containing Rexlar Brath, it does not grant any "better information", because you cannot use that information in any way. Rexlar Brath is one out of many pilots and I would argue that the rule is more of a annoyance than it is for making Rexlar Brath stronger (and stronger I mean slightly better when you count the probability in your head and spend 4min pondering whether or not it is a good idea to spend your focus token when there is x% chance of drawing a [insert Damage Card you are looking for here]). Is the Rexlar Brath combo with this irrelevant rule necessary for the flow of the game? No it is not, and I would argue that a 0point Defender title could be added which says "Action: You may look at the top 5 cards of the damage deck", which would grant a much better flow of the game than having to draw and discard a whole lot of cards for no particular reason other than "it says so in the rules".

Sorry, but I am still not convinced that this rule should be a rule.

@Zlashie - Its the internet m8, you will always get those who want to try and put some mystical spin on things like this.

Its a complete load of codswallop.

If you had to show every damage card you drew whether face up or face down then there would be some tactical advantages to drawing all the cards.

The fact that you do not does not make 1 blind bit of difference whether or not you draw cards.

You could even just assign damage counters to "Hits" instead of drawing a card and it still would not make any difference to the game.

That deck is nothing more than Schrodingers Cat for all intents and purposes.

Yes its the rules but "Wise men guidelines, Fools follow"

@Zlashie - Its the internet m8, you will always get those who want to try and put some mystical spin on things like this.

Its a complete load of codswallop.

If you had to show every damage card you drew whether face up or face down then there would be some tactical advantages to drawing all the cards.

The fact that you do not does not make 1 blind bit of difference whether or not you draw cards.

You could even just assign damage counters to "Hits" instead of drawing a card and it still would not make any difference to the game.

That deck is nothing more than Schrodingers Cat for all intents and purposes.

Yes its the rules but "Wise men guidelines, Fools follow"

You do realize that when a ship is destroyed all the damage cards on it go into the face up discard pile? So you do end up seeing even the face-down damage cards when a ship is destroyed.

Page 16 of the core rule book

deStroying ShipS

When the number of Damage cards dealt to a ship is equal to or greater than its hull value, the ship is immediately destroyed (faceup and facedown cards count toward this total). Immediately remove the destroyed ship from the play area, discard all of its Damage cards to a faceup discard pile next to the Damage deck, and return all of its tokens to their respective supplies.

This doesn't say that you have to reveal your crits. If I had a decimator that just died without ever taking a crit, I would have 12 face down damage cards on it. Now if I pushed them all into a little pile and then flipped that pile over into the discard pile, wouldn't I be in compliance with this rule? At the same time I've only revealed the crit that was on the bottom of the pile.

Are you actually suggesting that what is in your face-up discard pile is not information available to your opponent?

Page 16 of the core rule book

deStroying ShipS

When the number of Damage cards dealt to a ship is equal to or greater than its hull value, the ship is immediately destroyed (faceup and facedown cards count toward this total). Immediately remove the destroyed ship from the play area, discard all of its Damage cards to a faceup discard pile next to the Damage deck, and return all of its tokens to their respective supplies.

This doesn't say that you have to reveal your crits. If I had a decimator that just died without ever taking a crit, I would have 12 face down damage cards on it. Now if I pushed them all into a little pile and then flipped that pile over into the discard pile, wouldn't I be in compliance with this rule? At the same time I've only revealed the crit that was on the bottom of the pile.

Are you actually suggesting that what is in your face-up discard pile is not information available to your opponent?

Where do the rules say that my opponent gets to rifle through my discard pile?

Page 16 of the core rule book

deStroying ShipS

When the number of Damage cards dealt to a ship is equal to or greater than its hull value, the ship is immediately destroyed (faceup and facedown cards count toward this total). Immediately remove the destroyed ship from the play area, discard all of its Damage cards to a faceup discard pile next to the Damage deck, and return all of its tokens to their respective supplies.

This doesn't say that you have to reveal your crits. If I had a decimator that just died without ever taking a crit, I would have 12 face down damage cards on it. Now if I pushed them all into a little pile and then flipped that pile over into the discard pile, wouldn't I be in compliance with this rule? At the same time I've only revealed the crit that was on the bottom of the pile.

Are you actually suggesting that what is in your face-up discard pile is not information available to your opponent?

Where do the rules say that my opponent gets to rifle through my discard pile?

Discard piles are always public information and can be reviewed in their entirety by all players. This is how it works in every game that uses cards. It's practically a social more.

I don't really see how doing basic division makes you "Rain Man".

Look, just because you don't understand the math behind the rule, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are plenty of cited reasons why you should follow the rules.

Dude, I have had my share of high level statistics and game theory. I understand the math. The Rain Man comment is not about math, it's about rapid and comprehensive attention to detail with a mind towards application, in the midst of all the other things that one could spend one's brainpower on.

I don't see why everyone has a hard time following the rules in this case but they follow other rules without issue. It doesn't matter if you like the rule, you can't pick and choose which ones you want to follow.

Where is the rules does it address how to deal when the damage deck runs out.

This is how it works in every game that uses cards.

How it works in other games doesn't matter in the least.

I looked and while it does say you need to discard to face up discard pile, it does not say anywhere that I can find that the other player can look through the discard pile. So unless someone can find text in the rules or FAQ that says the opponent can go through the discard pile, then that is just something people have assumed you can do based on other games. But is not something the rules of X-Wing actually allow.

Where is the rules does it address how to deal when the damage deck runs out.

Sidebar on page 21 of the core rules.

I must say, I still find this rule an oddball and hope that FFG will change the wording to yield more smooth games

Why? What do you actually gain by changing how it works? You'd save at most a few moments of game time, and nothing else. Hardly justification for changing how it currently works.

@Zlashie - Its the internet m8, you will always get those who want to try and put some mystical spin on things like this.

Its a complete load of codswallop.

If you had to show every damage card you drew whether face up or face down then there would be some tactical advantages to drawing all the cards.

The fact that you do not does not make 1 blind bit of difference whether or not you draw cards.

You could even just assign damage counters to "Hits" instead of drawing a card and it still would not make any difference to the game.

That deck is nothing more than Schrodingers Cat for all intents and purposes.

Yes its the rules but "Wise men guidelines, Fools follow"

You do realize that when a ship is destroyed all the damage cards on it go into the face up discard pile? So you do end up seeing even the face-down damage cards when a ship is destroyed.

It is irrelevant how many cards you see. As I said, you either have a build where you crit-hunt or you dont.

IF your build focuses on critting, there is never a scenario where you would not want it to crit, and thus any number of shown damage cards warrant no further information you need.

IF your build does not focus on critting, crits are merely a luck on rolls, and thus any number of shown damage cards warrant no further information you need.

The only situation, thus far, which can use this obscure rule, is Rexlar, and in most cases, whether you want to use the focus token to crit is not a question of "I have 33% chance of getting the crit card I want", but rather a question of "do you deal more damage/harder damage or do I buckle up defences?": Yes, you can name games were "knowing that I had 77% chance of drawing a Direct Hit won me the game", but when speaking of Probabilities, despite how improbable they are, just remember Murphy's Law: All probable events that can happen, will happen over time.

With this rule only affecting Rexlar, and in most cases not even being relevant to Rexlar, I must say, I still find this rule an oddball and hope that FFG will change the wording to yield more smooth games; I strongly disagree that needing to count cards or track the damage discard pile yields a better gaming experience just so you can calculate probabilities of hitting for double damage on Rexlar!

I think when one person has Determination it could be useful to know how many pilot cards remain, though overall I am interested in the intent of the rule (whether it is probabilities, checking the deck, etc...)

Edit: This can affect a choice to flip over the crit on a Mangler cannon or use Vader, for example.

@Zlashie - Its the internet m8, you will always get those who want to try and put some mystical spin on things like this.

Its a complete load of codswallop.

If you had to show every damage card you drew whether face up or face down then there would be some tactical advantages to drawing all the cards.

The fact that you do not does not make 1 blind bit of difference whether or not you draw cards.

You could even just assign damage counters to "Hits" instead of drawing a card and it still would not make any difference to the game.

That deck is nothing more than Schrodingers Cat for all intents and purposes.

Yes its the rules but "Wise men guidelines, Fools follow"

You do realize that when a ship is destroyed all the damage cards on it go into the face up discard pile? So you do end up seeing even the face-down damage cards when a ship is destroyed.

It is irrelevant how many cards you see. As I said, you either have a build where you crit-hunt or you dont.

IF your build focuses on critting, there is never a scenario where you would not want it to crit, and thus any number of shown damage cards warrant no further information you need.

IF your build does not focus on critting, crits are merely a luck on rolls, and thus any number of shown damage cards warrant no further information you need.

The only situation, thus far, which can use this obscure rule, is Rexlar, and in most cases, whether you want to use the focus token to crit is not a question of "I have 33% chance of getting the crit card I want", but rather a question of "do you deal more damage/harder damage or do I buckle up defences?": Yes, you can name games were "knowing that I had 77% chance of drawing a Direct Hit won me the game", but when speaking of Probabilities, despite how improbable they are, just remember Murphy's Law: All probable events that can happen, will happen over time.

With this rule only affecting Rexlar, and in most cases not even being relevant to Rexlar, I must say, I still find this rule an oddball and hope that FFG will change the wording to yield more smooth games; I strongly disagree that needing to count cards or track the damage discard pile yields a better gaming experience just so you can calculate probabilities of hitting for double damage on Rexlar!

It can sort of be useful to Maarek Stele players, too.

I'm casual games I play all the criticals.

If my ship has 1 hull left and he gets dealt 5 hits and a crit I deal only the crit. Counting out five hits that you won't reveal makes no predictable difference to the likelihood of pulling a given card.

Except it totally does. You can't draw something as a crit that's already been dealt facedown.

I'm casual games I play all the criticals.

If my ship has 1 hull left and he gets dealt 5 hits and a crit I deal only the crit. Counting out five hits that you won't reveal makes no predictable difference to the likelihood of pulling a given card.

Except it totally does. You can't draw something as a crit that's already been dealt facedown.

... If you do not reveal those cards, it makes no difference.

If I were to ask you to draw a card from a standard, well shuffled deck of cards.

Are you more likely to draw a King if you drop the top card, or if I first discard the top 10 cards?

We can argue about this all we want. Until the rules are changed, you'll be required to deal damage cards properly in any match where there's a TO doing their job.

I just went back on watched the worlds 2014 final match. It looks to me that they do deal out all the damage cards but don't even bother with a discard pile. If showing and discarding crits ins't important to the players and judge of that match I'm not going to worry about doing it.

I'm casual games I play all the criticals.

If my ship has 1 hull left and he gets dealt 5 hits and a crit I deal only the crit. Counting out five hits that you won't reveal makes no predictable difference to the likelihood of pulling a given card.

Except it totally does. You can't draw something as a crit that's already been dealt facedown.

... If you do not reveal those cards, it makes no difference.

If I were to ask you to draw a card from a standard, well shuffled deck of cards.

Are you more likely to draw a King if you drop the top card, or if I first discard the top 10 cards?

If those 10 cards didn't include a King, then yes, and I'm less likely to draw a King if one or more were discarded in those top 10 cards, and clearly can't at all if all four went that way. Granted yes, you don't know one way or the other aside from faceup crits along the way, and it doesn't matter outside of a couple cards, but it's still tweaking the odds that that crit you draw is or isn't something.

If those 10 cards didn't include a King, then yes, and I'm less likely to draw a King if one or more were discarded in those top 10 cards, and clearly can't at all if all four went that way. Granted yes, you don't know one way or the other aside from faceup crits along the way, and it doesn't matter outside of a couple cards, but it's still tweaking the odds that that crit you draw is or isn't something.

As long as none of the cards are revealed, it make absolutely, mathematically, objectively, no difference at all.

Of course, if any of the cards are revealed, it gives you more information and therefore changes the probabilities.

If those 10 cards didn't include a King, then yes, and I'm less likely to draw a King if one or more were discarded in those top 10 cards, and clearly can't at all if all four went that way. Granted yes, you don't know one way or the other aside from faceup crits along the way, and it doesn't matter outside of a couple cards, but it's still tweaking the odds that that crit you draw is or isn't something.

As long as none of the cards are revealed, it make absolutely, mathematically, objectively, no difference at all.

Of course, if any of the cards are revealed, it gives you more information and therefore changes the probabilities.

I don't think you understand the basic mathematics behind your argument.

It does not matter if YOU know what the distribution is at any given moment. What matters is what the distribution is, whether part of it is hidden or not. Given that you draw cards and do not replace them, this is called a stocastic distribution; that is the set of random variables (cards drawn) changes over time.

If you choose not to draw those cards, whether you see them or not, you have altered the stocastic distribution. The chance of any one card is altered, whether you perceive that distribution or only part of it.

This is why card counting on small deck shoes is so effective and many casinos switched to large deck shoes and robo-dealers.

As long as none of the cards are revealed, it make absolutely, mathematically, objectively, no difference at all.

Of course, if any of the cards are revealed, it gives you more information and therefore changes the probabilities.

I don't think you understand the basic mathematics behind your argument.

It does not matter if YOU know what the distribution is at any given moment. What matters is what the distribution is, whether part of it is hidden or not. Given that you draw cards and do not replace them, this is called a stocastic distribution; that is the set of random variables (cards drawn) changes over time.

If you choose not to draw those cards, whether you see them or not, you have altered the stocastic distribution. The chance of any one card is altered, whether you perceive that distribution or only part of it.

This is why card counting on small deck shoes is so effective and many casinos switched to large deck shoes and robo-dealers.

I'm pretty confident in my understanding of the statistics and probabilities at play here.

As long as none of the cards are revealed: The chance of any one card is not altered.

I invite you to compare the results of the 2 following experiments:

• The "no discard"/control experiment
  1. Shuffle your complete damage deck
  2. Draw the top card
  3. Repeat a couple thousand times
  4. Note the distribution of cards you drew

• The "discard 10" experiment
  1. Shuffle your complete damage deck
  2. Discard the top 10 cards
  3. Draw the card that is now on top
  4. Repeat a couple thousand times
  5. Note the distribution of cards you drew

The distribution in both cases will be identical: ~21% Direct Hits and ~6% of all each crit.

Card counting is a horrible example. You can't count cards that you never see face up...

"The dealer just discarded 10 cards face down that I never saw. I am now much more likely to get a blackjack - time to bet big!!!"

Dealing facedown damage cards that will never get flipped faceup is equivalent to "burning" cards in Poker.

In Texas hold 'em (as well as in Omaha hold 'em), a card is burned (ie: discarded, dealt facedown) before the flop, before the turn, and before the river.

If you do a Google search to know if this affects the odds at all, the response is overwhelmingly clear. Here's a sampling:

• No. So long as the burn cards are unknown and the shuffle is truly random they have no effect what-so-ever.
• No. The probabilities do not change in any card gave by burning cards.
• No, those cards have no significance to odds calculation.
• No effect whatsoever.
• The number of cards burned and/or dealt have zero affect on your odds.

I invite your to Google it and read through the results until you find an explanation that you find appropriate.

We can argue about this all we want. Until the rules are changed, you'll be required to deal damage cards properly in any match where there's a TO doing their job.

No question, it's in the rules. While I agree with Zlashie's overall premise, I don't think it's necessary to go back and change the rule. I just think that the rule irrelevant and unobserved.

I hope TOs have better things to do with their time than make sure people are laying down the proper amount of cards. But, you're a TO - do you enforce this? Not to my recollection anyway.