I came for the humor, but...this just needs to stop

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

Or we all die of old age.

Either way.

Yes please!

Each time someone makes a new post, others are forced to read the posts within this thread! No one here has the ability to restrain themselves from either reading or posting here!

It is true. . . I can't help myself. . .

I for one think it's entirely fair to mercilessy mock Lyraeus now...

...but only if we're willing to eat crow in the (ridiculously unlikely) event that FFG agree with him

I would argue that the Play Area is defined only as a two dimensional space, and during deployment any attempt to place a ship in a three dimensional manner (i.e. overlapping through the placement of the ship during deployment) is in violation of the rule that the ship must be placed within the Play Area.

While it may be a "loose" definition, its already abundantly clear that the rules as intended are not meant to support the idea of stacking models at the start of play. The rules are written such that the physical balancing of the models should not be a factor during the course of the game.

What RAI? They cover squadrons being placed in the overlap and the Overlap rule only takes place after you execute a maneuver. So we what RAI are you talking about?

Where in the rules defines the play space as 2d? You are required to have models on your bases which are also raised.

What RAI? They cover squadrons being placed in the overlap and the Overlap rule only takes place after you execute a maneuver. So we what RAI are you talking about?

Where in the rules defines the play space as 2d? You are required to have models on your bases which are also raised.

I'm claiming RAI by fact that by what Overlapping as a block of rules covers, the actual placement of a ship base on top of another ship base never occurs.

It is clear that during all parts of the game, the rules are intentionally written to -prevent- requiring players to balance models on top of each other. Its not explicitly stated during deployment because of an oversight, sure, but to claim that its an intended part of the rules is downright laughable. Now sure, they should clarify this and cover this in the FAQ, but if for even a second you think that what you are suggesting falls within the spirit of the rules... well, no need for me to make rude remarks.

The Play Area is listed as having two dimensions, not three. The models are placed on top of said surface, and it should be assumed that a model that is in play must be fully in contact with that surface (e.g. if a ship is placed partly outside the play area, it is removed from play).

Wait...I found a way for this debate to end...

In the RRG the play area is defined as a 3' x 6' area, this is a flat area, it specifically only provides an x and y axis, there is no z axis. Then there is the rule that if any part of the ship bas is outside of the play area, that ship is destroyed.

So therefore, you CAN set your ships up as you posted, BUT as soon as the turn starts, those ships are outside of the play area, thus those ships will be destroyed giving those points to your opponent.

Imagine it like this:

The Play Area is a 2d plane. Ships and squadrons exist as smaller planes that are encompassed by the Play Area. Ships and Squadrons that are not in the play area are counted as lost and removed from play.

During the course of play, a Ship or Squadron follows certain rules that result in it being temporarily removed from where it exists on the table, and placed somewhere else. It can never, while following the rules during play, be placed in a way that overlaps another ship or squadrons plane. This is the entire point of the Overlapping section of rules - its not that an actual physical overlap of the model actually ever occurs, its just that the Overlap rules are used to account for when an overlap might occur, and handles the situation to a point where an overlap doesn't happen.

Wait...I found a way for this debate to end...

In the RRG the play area is defined as a 3' x 6' area, this is a flat area, it specifically only provides an x and y axis, there is no z axis. Then there is the rule that if any part of the ship bas is outside of the play area, that ship is destroyed.

So therefore, you CAN set your ships up as you posted, BUT as soon as the turn starts, those ships are outside of the play area, thus those ships will be destroyed giving those points to your opponent.

Also consider that you can overlap an obstacle. That is what a 1/4 of an inch or so above the "2d plane" that means when you overlap those by your definition of the play area you are now out of it.

Wait...I found a way for this debate to end...

In the RRG the play area is defined as a 3' x 6' area, this is a flat area, it specifically only provides an x and y axis, there is no z axis. Then there is the rule that if any part of the ship bas is outside of the play area, that ship is destroyed.

So therefore, you CAN set your ships up as you posted, BUT as soon as the turn starts, those ships are outside of the play area, thus those ships will be destroyed giving those points to your opponent.

All areas include where your models are as well. Since you are required to have models attacked to bases those would be outside the play area as you describe it.

Also consider that you can overlap an obstacle. That is what a 1/4 of an inch or so above the "2d plane" that means when you overlap those by your definition of the play area you are now out of it.

As far as determining what is in the play area, only the bases themselves (excluding the shield dials) are taken into account. If ANY part of the base (all 4 pegs MUST be fully within the 3' x 6' area) is outside of the play area (again defined as a flat 3' x 6' area) the ship is destroyed.

Obstacles are specified in the rules. They specifically state that a specific event occur depending on the type of obsticle (faceup damage card, 2 damage to a hull zone, or remove damage card/point of damage) instead of the ship being destroyed.

You realize that in such events like Minefields that you can start the game overlapping an obstacle and nothing happens to it. It is no longer on the "flat portion of the play area" though by your rules. You see obstacles don't do anything until after a maneuver is executed. Hmmmm. . . Just like overlapping. . . Odd that.

Well there is a rule for it:

Squadrons cannot be placed so that they overlap

You took the overlapping rule out of context it seems. Where in the rules did you find the overlap rule?

"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, even if that maneuver is to remain in place at speed “0.” Then deal one facedown damage card to the ship that moved and the closest ship that it overlapped"

There is a rule on Overlaps though. Overlaps for ships occur after a maneuver is executed. Until then they have not overlapped by the games terms.

Taken from that Parody thread:

Because the play area is the 3x3 or 3x6 mat every piece on the game has to touch. There's only 4 categories of things that are in the play area. (Well, technically 5 if you count the setup area markers). Ships, squadrons, obstacles, and objective markers.
Ships and squadrons are explicitly prevented from overlapping each other during gameplay after deployment, and are explicitly ALLOWED to overlap obstacles and objective markers.

Your problem lies in that the deployment SPECIFICALLY states you have to place the ship on the play area. The play area is defined SPECIFICALLY as the 3x3 or 3x6 mat. If you don't place the ship/squadron/obstacle/objective on the play area, you didn't place it properly according to the rules.

Oh and: "If any portion of a ship’s or squadron’s base is outside the play area, that ship or squadron is destroyed." If you don't place the ship ENTIRELY in the play area you have to destroy it immediately.

There is a rule on Overlaps though. Overlaps for ships occur after a maneuver is executed. Until then they have not overlapped by the games terms.

Please show me where it says you can deploy on top of obstacles placed in you deployment area due to Minefields. Remember, overlapping only occurs after a maneuver.

Because Fleet Ambush specifically states you can not deploy on top of the obstacles but minefields has no such clause in it. . . Interesting that eh? The fact that there is a rule in place in one area but not in effect all the time. Very interesting.

People need to stop feeding the trolls. Trolls should stop trolling because it just drives sane and normal people away from the forum and the hobby.

People need to stop feeding the trolls. Trolls should stop trolling because it just drives sane and normal people away from the forum and the hobby.

Silly argument, imo; however, i've been in your shoes, in Warhammer, Lyraeus (much easier to do since GW can't write rules 1/10 as well as FFG can). So i'm going to try to show you what you would like: actual rules that show this isn't doable. Of course, you're correct in that there isn't a rule that says you can't in deployment...as far as I can tell. Which, imo, is just an oversight in the realm of: "No one would ever think to deploy their ships on their ships." I feel we should give FFG the benefit of the doubt, since they rarely do this, compared to GW who do this about 30-times a rulebook.

I can't address the issue of if a ship can't move off another ship. It could possibly happen. But unlikely since the ships most used in this method are small bases.

Yup I did, my opponent was ok with it and we had no issues because it gave NE no advantage other than being able to fully utilize the corner of the deployment area.

Now let's say a VSD tried this with Half of its base in the air (that changes the dimensions but not 3 pegs, I will explain in a bit), that VSD moves even speed 1 and it will be off the base. (though why it would occur that way I don't know but meh people deploy for wierd reasons)

Now here is why 3 pegs don't effect the X axis of a ship, 3 pegs on the table means that it has a flat section, that means that 2 arcs are flat, there will be 1 arc of the X axis and 1 arc of the Y axis. So dimensions don't change. Also if I am doing that then it likely means I can't reach a target if there was one.

ScottieATF, I am being nice I suggest you tone it down and watch your context.

This admission, combined with ARR Page 8 under Overlapping, paragraph 2: " 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 it's maneuver , even if that maneuver is to remain in place at speed "0"..."

As people have pointed out, this ultimately means you are in a recursive loop without end...OR you proceed from speed "0" to "-1".

You claim that bullet 2 allows you to count as completing a maneuver at speed "0" if you don't move. Please tell me how you make it to that bullet? You can never get out of Paragraph 2's rule-loop if you're deployed already overlapping. It really is that simple. If you don't agree; please explain what process of rules allows you to escape the loop and get to bullet 2 in order to invoke the "non-standard maneuver" rule.

However, I will agree that it's kinda silly that we have to find the rules for this in a later portion of the game.

As for the idea of Minefields and obstacles: there is a huge difference here than with ships...you're allowed to be on an obstacle.

Honestly, the obstacles should be utterly 2d, and a board with holographic versions would be ideal. That they have some form of Z-axis dimension is merely a hurdle of technology for the game and the best compromise to a digital play space.

The bullet system is different than their number system. The bullet system is the things that I are included in this rule are to specify on while the number system (see setup and attack) goes down each item and you continue down that list one number at a time. Bullets are all inclusive.

Well the argument they were making was that all pegs are on the table at one time and that bases, obstacles and squadrons were a part of the setup.

Hello, Damion,

In response to your question:

Rules Question:

Alright so in Star Wars Armada I have noticed that you have rules on not letting squadrons overlap at any time but nothing on Ships. You have the Overlap rule but that only takes effect after a maneuver is executed. So here is the question, in the setup can you overlap a ship base with another ship base. The use of it is to make the most of your deployment corners and to be able to effectively place ships so that they can maneuver into tighter positions and formations. The added forum link is to a post where I pose this in a picture. https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/183819-overlapping-in-the-setup/?p=1716411 I 100% expect you to say no to this but bring this up simply because it is not covered while all other eventualities are. Thank you for your time. ~Lyraeus

Your suspicion is spot-on; a ship cannot be placed during setup so that it is overlapping another ship.

Thanks for playing!

James Kniffen

Game Designer

Fantasy Flight Games

[email protected]

Email in its entirety.

well, that settles this debate

You gonna ask them now to provide you a rules reason, or can we let this go now?

You gonna ask them now to provide you a rules reason, or can we let this go now?

You going to continue to be an ass about this?