I tend towards the least powerful interpretation of abilities and stuff; I'd be willing to side that the prototype can't use the X1 title, because inquisitor, with the x1 title, would be throwing 3 dice and adding a critical all the time with only a premium of 1 point paid.

That seems too much to me, especially when the V1 title says what's on the maneuver dial, and vice versa the advanced's x1 title.

Wow, these are some of the dumbest discussions I've seen outside MMO forums...

Indeed. No one knows for sure. FFG ruling plox.

If the TIE/x1 and Adv. Targeting Computer end up being usable on the Prototype, I'll let the forum vote on whether:

(1) I eat an actual hat, on camera, or

(2) I buy Crabbok a Raider.

If(when) it isn't usable you should eat a nacho hat.

There's no point to making the FAQ longer if we all know how they will rule.

Obviously, as this thread proves, we don't ALL know how they would rule.

banjobenito - keep in mind that scootypuffjunior does not argue that his conclusion is merely probable (that would by my position) but that it is logically necessary.

All members of X have been Y -> A is X -> A is also Y

The conclusion does not follow from the premises. As has been explained, that all title cards have heretofore referred to one model cannot establish that all title cards must always refer to one model. What's more, the premises assume the conclusion: if A is a member of X (your second premise) then your first premise and conclusion are the same.

So let's review the two positions:

- RAW state that title cards can only refer to one model

- RAW do not state that title cards can only refer to one model

Until someone can find a rule printed by FFG to the effect of the former, the latter must be assumed. This is a separate matter from whether one thinks that the TIE/x1 card should be apply to the TIE Adv. Prototype. Although I think it should not, I also think it is worthwhile explaining why this can be a question in the first place.

No, the rules say their restricted to one type (if applicable) which is listed on the card. In the case of titles, the type listed on every single title in the game (and soon to be in the game) is one ship. The TIE/x1 and TIE/v1 are no different than any other title in the game. That is not a matter of opinion; it's a fact.

Dance around it all you want, if you say otherwise you're wrong. If you want to rules lawyer and say it's ambiguous, you're wrong. If you want to agree with me, but tell me I'm wrong, then you're just trolling at this point.

The open-ended term "TIE" qualifies as a "type" under the rules; "TIE Advanced" could also be an open-ended type. This is why you have to make the additional argument that title cards can only refer to one model. The problem is, the evidence necessary to prove that argument (a rule to that effect) does not exist.

"I'm right, you're wrong and trolling, nah nah nah" just isn't a meaningful argument, scooty.

Guys, the Prototype Veteran card says it can go on a wing, which wing should I put it on? Left right or 71st fighter wing?

This wording argument is pointless because you can see what it's meant to do with simple common sense. The TIE/x1 is a fix, it's in effect an at least 4 point cost reduction, likely even more considering the potency of Advanced Targeting Computer and of Accuracy Corrector. If the TIE/v1 can equip it, it's either going to be overpowered by five points and completely game breaking or it comes deliberately five points overcosted, making the Raider a compulsory purchase to make it competitive.

One assumes FFG are idiots and the other assumes they're gouging to a level that'd make Games Workshop blush.

It's fairly obvious that the TIE advanced x1 can equip TIE/x1 and the TIE advanced v1 can equip TIE/v1, and not vice versa.

However, seeing as this crazy notion seems to be spreading and could end up circling the forum until next February I'm going to send a question to Support. Let's end this once and for all.

...gouging to a level that'd make Games Workshop blush.

Objection, your honor! Assumes facts not in evidence, namely that there's any pricing scheme that would make GW blush.

I hope the FAQ for this is

"The TIE/x1 title card may not be applied to TIE Adv. Prototype pilots."

rather than

"Title cards only apply to one model of ship"

because it would be cool to see a title card that could apply to multiple models. But for reasons described ITT, TIE/x1 is not a good candidate.

The open-ended term "TIE" qualifies as a "type" under the rules; "TIE Advanced" could also be an open-ended type. This is why you have to make the additional argument that title cards can only refer to one model. The problem is, the evidence necessary to prove that argument (a rule to that effect) does not exist.

"I'm right, you're wrong and trolling, nah nah nah" just isn't a meaningful argument, scooty.

In regard to title cards, Scooty is clearly referring to in-game precedent, not a rule. The complete data set already exists in the form of all released title cards in the game. That is sufficient evidence for him to prove his point.

Wow, these are some of the dumbest discussions I've seen outside MMO forums...

Indeed. No one knows for sure. FFG ruling plox.

If the TIE/x1 and Adv. Targeting Computer end up being usable on the Prototype, I'll let the forum vote on whether:

(1) I eat an actual hat, on camera, or

(2) I buy Crabbok a Raider.

GDI.

Now I want the X1 to be usable on the TAP. Both of those are fun options.

We have already explained multiple times why the idea of them getting access to a a title that was created for the sole purpose of buffing an extremely underpowered ship back in to usability is beyond stupid. Not only would it completely break the new ship but it would completely undo all that they /JUST/ did do make the Advanced relevant again. On top of this /every/ /single/ /title/ in the whole goddamn game is limited to one specific /model/ .

Twin Ion Engine Mk II would like to have a word with you about this statement.

We have already explained multiple times why the idea of them getting access to a a title that was created for the sole purpose of buffing an extremely underpowered ship back in to usability is beyond stupid. Not only would it completely break the new ship but it would completely undo all that they /JUST/ did do make the Advanced relevant again. On top of this /every/ /single/ /title/ in the whole goddamn game is limited to one specific /model/ .

Twin Ion Engine Mk II would like to have a word with you about this statement.

Not a title.

We have already explained multiple times why the idea of them getting access to a a title that was created for the sole purpose of buffing an extremely underpowered ship back in to usability is beyond stupid. Not only would it completely break the new ship but it would completely undo all that they /JUST/ did do make the Advanced relevant again. On top of this /every/ /single/ /title/ in the whole goddamn game is limited to one specific /model/ .

Twin Ion Engine Mk II would like to have a word with you about this statement.

Not a title.

Yeah, I totally screwed up here... I need to get some sleep. *jetpack away*

"TIE Advanced" could also be an open-ended type.

No it can't.

It doesn't take a Herculean feat of reasoning to realize that the name "TIE Advanced" on the card is the ship called the "TIE Advanced."

The open-ended term "TIE" qualifies as a "type" under the rules; "TIE Advanced" could also be an open-ended type. This is why you have to make the additional argument that title cards can only refer to one model. The problem is, the evidence necessary to prove that argument (a rule to that effect) does not exist.

"I'm right, you're wrong and trolling, nah nah nah" just isn't a meaningful argument, scooty.

C'mon, Manchu. TIE Advanced cannot be a type, because it is a specific, existing ship.

In regard to title cards, Scooty is clearly referring to in-game precedent, not a rule. The complete data set already exists in the form of all released title cards in the game. That is sufficient evidence for him to prove his point.

It's even more ridiculous that he agrees with my conclusion and has said as much multiple times, both on this forum and another.

Serissu with an HLC and a Sheild Upgrade is 33 points. That is about as close a ship mechinaclly to a 26 point x1 ATC Inquisitor that you can currently build but even for 7 points more it isn't as powerful.

It is ludicrous to believe that FFG will permit the x1 title and ATC to be used on this new ship.

Whatever I'm putting it on there anyways. Try and take it off my card. I double dare you! =P

Seriously though, they really need to do something about the way this is worded before it goes to the printers. I don't have a perfect suggestion at the moment, but if it arrives on store shelves exactly as we see it now, then I would expect a ton of future arguments about the exact same thing. If the Inquisitor's TIE were simply called "Super Secret TIE" then we'd have no problem. Well, less of a problem.

Whatever I'm putting it on there anyways. Try and take it off my card. I double dare you!

So I didn't read the whole thread so I am pretty sure some of my points have been covered. I am 90% sure FFG with rule that the adv prototype is the adv prototype and not the the advanced. I believe the base cost on the prototype with be 17 or 18 points because ffg generally costs the elite pilots at 1 point more per point of ps though sometimes they will add another point for a good ability. I do see the prototype and the x1 as different ships filling different roles but we will need the full spoiler for confirmation and not just speculation.

Edited is underlined

Wow, these are some of the dumbest discussions I've seen outside MMO forums...

Indeed. No one knows for sure. FFG ruling plox.

If the TIE/x1 and Adv. Targeting Computer end up being usable on the Prototype, I'll let the forum vote on whether:

(1) I eat an actual hat, on camera, or

(2) I buy Crabbok a Raider.

Eating a hat would have to be an edible hat. Perhaps made out of fondent. I wouldn't want you to develop some type of felt-based reaction that makes you sick, on my account. And for a Raider, since I'll already have one the day it comes out, I'd forgo that for an Armada Raider - since I'll likely want multiples of those.

Not like you are going to be wrong though. I just want them to change the name if indeed the X1 isn't allowed for the prototype. Think about some guy showing up to your FLGS with X1 titles on his Prototypes and Twin Ion modifications on them as well... and when he Speaks to you he isn't going to say "I'm flying the Tie Adv Prototype". What would "Adv" sound like anyway... Advuhh?

So I didn't read the whole thread so I am pretty sure some of my points have been covered. I am 90% sure FFG with rule that the adv prototype is the the advanced. I believe the base cost on the prototype with be 17 or 18 points because ffg generally costs the elite pilots at 1 point more per point of ps though sometimes they will add another point for a good ability. I do see the prototype and the x1 as different ships filling different roles but we will need the full spoiler for confirmation and not just speculation.

A STRONG BET AGAINST!

So I didn't read the whole thread so I am pretty sure some of my points have been covered. I am 90% sure FFG with rule that the adv prototype is the the advanced. I believe the base cost on the prototype with be 17 or 18 points because ffg generally costs the elite pilots at 1 point more per point of ps though sometimes they will add another point for a good ability. I do see the prototype and the x1 as different ships filling different roles but we will need the full spoiler for confirmation and not just speculation.

A STRONG BET AGAINST!

So I typed it wrong I'll edit

Still bet against.