That it is unlikely to happen because the ship's that you are typically utilizing happen to be on smaller bases isn't relevant, because if it is legal for those small ships that can get out of the way of each other it is just as legal for those large ships that can't. Creating a situation in which you can not resolve the maneuver.

As per the overlap rules a ship that overlaps another can not finish it's maneuver. You reduce speed, even to 0, in order to find a maneuver that would no result in an overlap. In this situation you can never do so, thus you can never complete the maneuver.

Just on that basis, nevermind the introduction of measurements on an axis this game never tries to include, there is no grounds to conjecture that this type of deployment is remotely legal.

But if you need FFG to tell you as much I am beyond sure that they will. If they don't also think that you are pranking them with the question.

You are ignoring the meaning and context behind ". . . unable to finish it's maneuver normally." because right after that they talk about modifying how the maneuver is then done. It is not all inclusive it is a statement that preps you how an overlap maneuver differs from a normal maneuver.

I reference bullet point 2 of the Overlap rule.

• Even if a ship does not change its position as a result of being at speed “0,” it has still executed a maneuver and resolves any effects of overlapping obstacles and/or another ship.

The problem is not whether or not speed zero counts as executing a maneuver. It clearly does as of the part you quoted.

The problem is this part (bold added by me):

If a ship executes a maneuver and its final position would overlap another ship, it cannot finish its maneuver normally. Instead, temporarily reduce its speed by one (without changing the speed dial) and move the ship at the new speed. This process continues until the ship can finish its maneuver.

So as long as the maneuver ends with an overlapp you have to continue the proces of reducing speed. There is no allowence to stop that process just becouse you have reached speed 0. But you can't reduce it more either. So you end up with a paradox where you can not follow the rules no mater what you do.

Thankfully the bullet I posted resolves that to the best of my understanding. While there is a paradox it starting position being where it was ends the situation.

I know thin ice there but as I keep stating I am in the group of people who think that they are going to say no to this.

I argue and debate this because while am with everyone else on this, this type of situation does need a valid rule as to why not.

The example of the speed 1 maneuver is the closest thing to get to a rule but it would depend on how FFG uses the bullet I pasted. Which the speed 0 part was not the point of it, it was the end part which states that you still resolve the Overlap damage effect even of you went 0.

I argue and debate this because while am with everyone else on this, this type of situation does need a valid rule as to why not.

I think we all know why it shouldn't be allowed. It appears that you're forcing the issue to make the rule writers make an addendum to the rules so that it's explicitly not allowed.

By the way, is there a rule in the book that says you have to put all the ships on their bases and not on their sides? Maybe we should force them to write that in there too.

I daresay that the next time I TO I'm just not going to allow it, and I really should have disallowed it last Saturday.

Thankfully the bullet I posted resolves that to the best of my understanding. While there is a paradox it starting position being where it was ends the situation.

I know thin ice there but as I keep stating I am in the group of people who think that they are going to say no to this.

I argue and debate this because while am with everyone else on this, this type of situation does need a valid rule as to why not.

The example of the speed 1 maneuver is the closest thing to get to a rule but it would depend on how FFG uses the bullet I pasted. Which the speed 0 part was not the point of it, it was the end part which states that you still resolve the Overlap damage effect even of you went 0.

I think your misunderstanding the rules say that a maneuver that overlaps is not legal to complete so the rules force you to slow down untill your maneuver doesn't overlap, the point you quoted just says that even if the ship ends up not moving it counts as "moving" but if it is still overlapping then the rules specifically state that it is impossible to complete

True but it also shows that speed 0 allows the ship to not change its position. Move or not.

Now the real point you should be making is the end of the second paragraph. Specifically the second to last sentence of that paragraph.

This process continues until the ship can finish its maneuver, even if that maneuver is to remain in place at speed “0.”

The two sides of that statement is that a ship can still remain in place for one but it has to finish it's maneuver. So that can lead to an awkward situation.

Was waiting for moderation, so I am reposting below.

This is just...lame.

Does anyone think FFG intended for people to pile all their ships on top of one another during deplyment?

I think I'll have some coffee now.

Have fun.

This is just...lame.

Does anyone think FFG intended for people to pile all their ships on top of one another during deplyment?

I think I'll have some coffee now.

Have fun.

You say pile up but you can't really do that. Since you have to have the models attached, those pesky flight pegs get in the way ^_~

First, let me say that this is utterly the most ridiculous thing I've ever read. The post originator is being intentionally obtuse and acting as if the rest of us are insane because it's clearly obvious that this MUST WORK UNTIL FFG SAYS OTHERWISE! Also, you have no right to not be mocked for saying insane things on the Internet, that's just how the world is. And this is insane.

THAT BEING SAID, it's also brilliant. I did a little digging in the rulebook and the dictionary and I think we can really make this work in our favor, folks.

Squadrons must be placed within distance 1 - 2 of a friendly ship and may be placed outside the deployment zones.

My analysis leads me to believe that the intent of this is to allow you to deploy squadrons on top of the bases of your ships, and have the ships carry them to the zone that they will then move out of! It's not written anywhere that you can't, and clearly if you are lifting the ship to move to it's new position and can deftly balance the squadrons on top, you get to take them with you! It's brilliant. The squadrons get to ride inside of the ship, and because all shots would be obstructed, only two die anti-squadron ships would be able to fire on them! And if they are B-Wings, they could actually fire OUT with their black die, sacrificing the blue die to the obstruction.

I have literally solved the (not even really a) problem of how to make squadrons viable.

Did I mention that this entire conversation was the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard?

Actually, there is a rule stating that Squadrons can't overlap ships or other squadrons. Though ships don't have that rule since Overlapping only occurs after a maneuver

No I am not being obtuse, I am asking for a legitimate rule that disproves this because like everyone else I am in agreement that it is stupid. However I will play Devils advocate until a rule or FFG response to my email.

Remind me again:

You are saying that since there is no rule that says this is not allowed, you are going with it (even if in the devil's advocate excuse). Why is the reasoning that "there is no rule that says you ARE allowed to do this" not valid?

In other words, since there is nothing in the rules that says you CAN'T but there's nothing in the rules that says you CAN, why not use common sense instead?

He's also read into the point that, yes, there is nothing in the rules saying you can't... But it is *conspicuous* to him that - as far as he can see - all OTHER possibilities have been rendered as "CAN'T"s, ergo, the fact it has been omitted is *DELIBERATE*.

He's also read into the point that, yes, there is nothing in the rules saying you can't... But it is *conspicuous* to him that - as far as he can see - all OTHER possibilities have been rendered as "CAN'T"s, ergo, the fact it has been omitted is *DELIBERATE*.

Bingo! They purposefully included that squadrons cant overlap, they know that the overlapping rule occurs after executing a maneuver but not before a maneuver, etc.

FFG has been great on these little nuisances and getting them covered.

P. 9-Play area The play area is the shared space occupied by ships, squadrons, obstacle tokens and objective tokens. The recommended play area is 3' x 3' for the core set and 3' x 6' for a 300 fleet point game.

• If any portion of a ship's or squadron's base is outside the play area, that ship or squadron is destroyed.

The play area by definition is two dimensional (3' x 6'), not three. The only vertical component of the game is the base of the ship. Therefore, any portion of the base (ship or squadron) above the height of a ship's base is "outside" the play area and "is destroyed."

The movement and overlapping rules specifically do not allow "stacking" of ships or squadrons and details how to resolve issues that may arise to prevent this from occurring.

P11-Ship movement: • A ship can move through ships, squadrons, and obstacles without issue.

P. 8-Overlapping: If a ship executes a maneuver and its final position overlaps one or more squadrons, move any overlapped squadrons out of the way

P.8-Overlapping: If a ship executes a maneuver and its final position would overlap another ship, it cannot finish its maneuver normally

It is clearly apparent this a two dimensional game (through the rules) and absolutely needs no FAQ.

Well here is the issue I am finding. Even though the game is a 2d game (which I agree with) the overlapping rule does not start until after a move.

P. 9-Play area The play area is the shared space occupied by ships , squadrons, obstacle tokens and objective tokens.

Shared space includes the Overlap.

Well here is the issue I am finding. Even though the game is a 2d game (which I agree with) the overlapping rule does not start until after a move.

P. 9-Play area The play area is the shared space occupied by ships , squadrons, obstacle tokens and objective tokens.

Shared space includes the Overlap.

And if you feel Uncomfortable with the fact someone else might use this, don't worry because they can't in a tournament Thanks to a TO. There has been lots of evidence presented in this thread to prove this lack of a "rule" wrong and if you continue to be Ultra rules Lawyer it becomes ridicules...

For rules I sight the unspoken rules of Common sense and sportsmanship, if that is not enough for you then I don't know why you still "Disagree" with everyone even though in every post you say you "agree"

/sigh none of those things mean anything. First off I have addressed all of these things, RAI and RAW are pointless here.

Second, what evidence do you have? Movement concerning overlap in the chance that a ship can't get clear in its initial move from setup? That is covered and is on page 4 or so. What other rule do you have?

Third, common sense is not so common so that is a useless statement.

Fourth, a TO needs at least a rule to say no to something. Considering that they go through lengths to show that squadrons can't be placed to overlap at any time but there is no rule for ships other than the Overlap rule which never comes into play until a maneuver is executed.

Please read the thread, this has all been covered.

Please, Let this topic die until Lyraeus gets a response from FFG.

Or we all die of old age.

Either way.

So, here is an interesting idea/question.

Overlapping ships in the setup stage of the game. Is it allowed?

What I mean is, can I stack ships so that portions are in another ship?

May I suggest you determine for yourself if this game has a "permissive" set of rules or a "restrictive" set of rules. Virtually every game uses a "permissive" set of rules that state what can be done. There are very few games that use a "restrictive" set of rules where if there isn't a restriction in the rule set, it is permitted. "Restrictive" rules present so many problems that it is rare to find a set of these rules. A "permissive" set of rules may have some restrictions but the over arching rules state what is permissible.

If you conclude this game uses a "permissive " set of rules, the answers to both your questions is no, because there are no rules permitting you to do so. If you conclude this game uses a "restrictive" set of rules, the answer to both your questions is yes, because the rules don't specifically prohibit it.

The cartoon is an excellent example of a "restrictive" set of rules.

Just sayin'.

Just sayin'.

You may have just convinced me this rule is totally awesome to have :') o it's AMAZING!

Just sayin'.

I like that second formation.

But yes, this is the type of stuff that people will do if "overlapping" during setup is allowed....

Also I thought we all agreed that this thread needs to die?

I doubt that would actually happen in a game. No advantage at it and limits your overall deployment.