I would agree with this, but what makes me disagree is the lack of the word "immediately" on IG-88A. If it said "immediately after you perform an attack, if that attack destroyed the defender, then you may recover 1 shield", then I agree with you 100% that IG-88A's ability would not trigger. The timing condition would have passed.

This doesn't hold for any other ability, though. Every ability activates and is resolved immediately, whether it says "immediately" or not.

R2-D2 Astromech: "After executing a green maneuver, you may recover 1 shield (up to your shield value)."

FAQ on R2-D2 Astromech and overlaps: A ship equipped with R2-D2 rolls for damage before recovering a shield. However, it recovers a shield before rolling for APL or asteroid damage. (APL triggers on "after [execution of the maneuver]", as well.) The "when a ship executes a maneuver" wording of Proximity Mines is what allows it to insert before the "after" wording of R2-D2, and you resolve the R2-D2 step after the Proximity Mine so rudely interrupted it.

In the core rules, the wording is actually just as clear. (I'm le shocked) It says, "Although ships perform their attacks one at a time, ships with a pilot skill value equal to the active ship's pilot skill value have the opportunity to attack before being destroyed."

The "before" word used here is what's important, imo.

So therefore, the simultaneous attack happens in between the damage assignment and the being destroyed events. Which makes sense. The simultaneous attack interrupts the resolution of IG-88A, but after the simultaneous attack is over (barring destruction of IG-88A), the regen of a shield should still happen.

That said, I'm not so sure about Fel's Wrath anymore.

R2-D2 Astromech: "After executing a green maneuver, you may recover 1 shield (up to your shield value)."

FAQ on R2-D2 Astromech and overlaps: A ship equipped with R2-D2 rolls for damage before recovering a shield. However, it recovers a shield before rolling for APL or asteroid damage. (APL triggers on "after [execution of the maneuver]", as well.) The "when a ship executes a maneuver" wording of Proximity Mines is what allows it to insert before the "after" wording of R2-D2, and you resolve the R2-D2 step after the Proximity Mine so rudely interrupted it.

That isn't why the R2-D2 ruling is what it is. The obstacle rules tell you to complete the maneuver, then roll for damage. So on an obstacle, the order goes Overlap, Execute Maneuver, After Execute Maneuver, Roll for Damage. Proximity Mine is a "When", which comes before "After" effects. I hadn't noticed when they added APL to the ruling, but I actually believe that's wrong (per the rules, anyway). APL and R2-D2 are both "After executing a maneuver", which means the order should be determined by initiative.

In the core rules, the wording is actually just as clear. (I'm le shocked) It says, "Although ships perform their attacks one at a time, ships with a pilot skill value equal to the active ship's pilot skill value have the opportunity to attack before being destroyed."

The "before" word used here is what's important, imo.

So therefore, the simultaneous attack happens in between the damage assignment and the being destroyed events. Which makes sense. The simultaneous attack interrupts the resolution of IG-88A, but after the simultaneous attack is over (barring destruction of IG-88A), the regen of a shield should still happen.

This can't be correct. If it were, then the simultaneous fire rule would interrupt ALL "After attacking..." abilities. But it doesn't. And it really doesn't say that it does. It says you get an opportunity to attack before being destroyed, but it does so by changing when you're destroyed - not what other abilities can come in the mean time.

Back on IG-88: I think what they wanted the rule to say was "After a ship is destroyed by your attack", rather than "After your attack which destroys a ship." That would still have left us with the undefined "destroyed by" problem, but it at least would have avoided the timing conflict.

I think if we treat it as such, then the timing issues really do fall into place. Fel's Wrath is removed end of combat, so that's when the ability triggers. If IG-88A is destroyed before Wrath, then there's no ability in play to trigger at that point.

That still leaves us with questions about just how you determine who destroys a ship, but hey, take what we can get.

While I generally hate resurrecting every thread that gets answered in an FAQ, I'm going to break the rule on this one, because IG-88A is giving Cluster Missiles a run for their money for most messed-up card.

With the ruling on IG-88A vs. Dead Man's Switch, it seems obvious the ability should be "After a ship is destroyed by your attack", because both rulings have it triggered by the destruction, rather than the attack. But even that doesn't quite cover it, because even if IG-88A worked like that, it should have the same trigger as Dead Man's Switch, making it an initiative-order resolution.

Bleh.