There's a big problem with your logic, Blue Five.

The mention of the "Corresponding section's base" applies pretty specifically and overtly to the PWT of the CR-90 which, again, has its own set of rules as to where it can fire from.

Even if it DID apply to the Raider, I could easly interpret that as "Range from rear arc is measured from rear section, range from fore arc is measured from fore section" STILL firing the primary and NEVER contradicting that rule.

Your argument seems to be that the secondary arc restriction is poorly explored, and you're absolutely correct. However, it is not at all unfair to extrapolate a rule from the example given, since it's clearly intended to say that secondaries are limited to the equipped section.

There is no similar argument to be made for the primary being restricted, however. The primary weapon value is a ship stat, both fore and aft are the same ship, and nowhere, not ONE PLACE is anything stated about the primary being unable to fire from any of the arcs.

The rules don't say anything like that. Not in the CR90 rules, nor in the Raider rules, nor in the Huge ship rules.

I quoted the exact rule. Corresponding section.

Reference please? Book, page and section.

The Huge Ship rules haven't been updated for the Raider, and are copied from the rulebooks for the GR-75 and CR90. Prior to the Raider, the only huge ship weapon was a turret. Having a section on non-turret primaries in the CR90 rulebook would be just confusing.

Irrelevant. We must operate with the rules we have, not with "possible future rules".

The current rules specifically limit secondary weapons to their corresponding section.

The current rules specifically limit Primary Weapon Turrets to a specific section.

However, there's no limitation for ordinary primary weapons, other than those in the ordinary rules (Printed firing arc(s) in the ship's token).

In this game, if something doesn't sound right, it probably isn't.

Should I remind you how many times this has been proved wrong? Across all these years?

You are experienced in this forum, and you better than many people here should already know that.

In this game, if something doesn't sound right, it probably isn't.

Okay, but there's the problem... it sounds to me and many others PERFECTLY RIGHT for the Raider to get to use its primary from multiple arcs. It makes perfect sense. I can't see a single physical design feature on the ship, rule in the book, or even common sense scenario that should prevent it.

It does not make the ship overpowered in the slightest. If anything it takes it from a very niche forward-firing-only role to a much more reasonable brawler with a totally exposed rear. For a 100 pt ship, it should **** well be able to at LEAST defend itself from the side.

It's not like it's an unstoppable juggernaut. The Raider goes down VERY quickly, and limiting primary shots to the front arc just sees it go down even faster.

At this point I'm just arguing for the sake of interpretation. I can say with absolute certainty that I have no intention of playing with one again. If I want big ships I'll play Armada, where the rules are well thought out and don't slow down a game about dogfighting.

It's not like it's an unstoppable juggernaut. The Raider goes down VERY quickly, and limiting primary shots to the front arc just sees it go down even faster.

Don't blame the rules for poor play on your part.

Reference please? Book, page and section.

The Huge Ship Rules you were quoting.

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/2d/47/2d47a35a-6ec7-4d4b-a262-efacde97dfa3/huge_ship_rules.pdf

Huge Ship Rules, last updated 24th April 2015.

Irrelevant. We must operate with the rules we have, not with "possible future rules".

The current rules specifically limit secondary weapons to their corresponding section.

The current rules specifically limit Primary Weapon Turrets to a specific section.

However, there's no limitation for ordinary primary weapons, other than those in the ordinary rules (Printed firing arc(s) in the ship's token).

Go back and read those rules again. As Written, they limit the CR90's secondary weapons to their corresponding section¹, turret primaries to their corresponding section² (it does not specify which section that is) and the Raider's aft secondary weapons to either aft arc.³

Which means by your logic, As Written, I can fire Raider Fore hardpoints from the aft arc.

1: Huge Ship Rules (linked above), Page 2, Turret Primary Weapon

2: Huge Ship Rules (linked above), Page 3, Additional Firing Arcs

3: Raider rulebook, Page 5, Raider Firing Arcs

Reference please? Book, page and section.

The Huge Ship Rules you were quoting.

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/2d/47/2d47a35a-6ec7-4d4b-a262-efacde97dfa3/huge_ship_rules.pdf

Huge Ship Rules, last updated 24th April 2015.

Irrelevant. We must operate with the rules we have, not with "possible future rules".

The current rules specifically limit secondary weapons to their corresponding section.

The current rules specifically limit Primary Weapon Turrets to a specific section.

However, there's no limitation for ordinary primary weapons, other than those in the ordinary rules (Printed firing arc(s) in the ship's token).

Go back and read those rules again. As Written, they limit the CR90's secondary weapons to their corresponding section¹, turret primaries to their corresponding section² (it does not specify which section that is) and the Raider's aft secondary weapons to either aft arc.³

Which means by your logic, As Written, I can fire Raider Fore hardpoints from the aft arc.

1: Huge Ship Rules (linked above), Page 2, Turret Primary Weapon

2: Huge Ship Rules (linked above), Page 3, Additional Firing Arcs

3: Raider rulebook, Page 5, Raider Firing Arcs

Are you trying to prove that the rules are poorly written?

No argument here, that's kinda the whole point.

No, I'm replying to a Rules as Written Argument with a Rules as Written Argument. It's true that the Raider rulebook has a few glaring omissions in it though.

Anyway, a response to your post, which I missed previously.

There's a big problem with your logic, Blue Five.

The mention of the "Corresponding section's base" applies pretty specifically and overtly to the PWT of the CR-90 which, again, has its own set of rules as to where it can fire from.

All it says to define which section the CR90 fires from is "Corresponding Section's Base" (page reference in the previous post). It's established that the CR90 can only fire from the fore, therefore the primary weapon corresponds to the fore base. Therefore it is no more a universal stat than the other three values on each card.

Even if it DID apply to the Raider, I could easly interpret that as "Range from rear arc is measured from rear section, range from fore arc is measured from fore section" STILL firing the primary and NEVER contradicting that rule.

I've no idea what you mean by this.

Your argument seems to be that the secondary arc restriction is poorly explored, and you're absolutely correct. However, it is not at all unfair to extrapolate a rule from the example given, since it's clearly intended to say that secondaries are limited to the equipped section.

It's a poor adaptation of the CR90's rules. The CR90's firing arcs only affect the secondary weapons because the primary weapon is a turret, consequently all rules relating to firing arcs in the CR90 booklet refer to its secondaries: to talk about firing arc limitations for the primary weapons would be misleading. Yes, it's clear that secondaries are limited to the equipped section, but it doesn't say this. If we assume this is what it means, then we're moving out of Rules as Written and into Rules as Intepreted. And if we do that, assuming precedent from the CR90, then the fore weapon of the Raider also corresponds to the ship card it's on and therefore the section it's on. There is no Huge Ship weapon for which the rules are clear that can fire from anywhere other than its corresponding section, and the CR90 primary fires from its corresponding section. There's no reason to assume that the Raider's primary does not also fire from its corresponding section.

There is no similar argument to be made for the primary being restricted, however. The primary weapon value is a ship stat, both fore and aft are the same ship, and nowhere, not ONE PLACE is anything stated about the primary being unable to fire from any of the arcs.

It also does not state that the Raider's fore hardpoint cannot fire from any of the arcs. Furthermore, if the primary weapon corresponds to both sections then nowhere does it state the CR90 cannot fire from the rear base.

Are the other stats on that card universal to the ship? (Shield, Hull, Agility)? Or are they section stats?

No, I'm replying to a Rules as Written Argument with a Rules as Written Argument. It's true that the Raider rulebook has a few glaring omissions in it though.

Anyway, a response to your post, which I missed previously.

There's a big problem with your logic, Blue Five.

The mention of the "Corresponding section's base" applies pretty specifically and overtly to the PWT of the CR-90 which, again, has its own set of rules as to where it can fire from.

All it says to define which section the CR90 fires from is "Corresponding Section's Base" (page reference in the previous post). It's established that the CR90 can only fire from the fore, therefore the primary weapon corresponds to the fore base. Therefore it is no more a universal stat than the other three values on each card.

Even if it DID apply to the Raider, I could easly interpret that as "Range from rear arc is measured from rear section, range from fore arc is measured from fore section" STILL firing the primary and NEVER contradicting that rule.

I've no idea what you mean by this.

Your argument seems to be that the secondary arc restriction is poorly explored, and you're absolutely correct. However, it is not at all unfair to extrapolate a rule from the example given, since it's clearly intended to say that secondaries are limited to the equipped section.

It's a poor adaptation of the CR90's rules. The CR90's firing arcs only affect the secondary weapons because the primary weapon is a turret, consequently all rules relating to firing arcs in the CR90 booklet refer to its secondaries: to talk about firing arc limitations for the primary weapons would be misleading. Yes, it's clear that secondaries are limited to the equipped section, but it doesn't say this. If we assume this is what it means, then we're moving out of Rules as Written and into Rules as Intepreted. And if we do that, assuming precedent from the CR90, then the fore weapon of the Raider also corresponds to the ship card it's on and therefore the section it's on. There is no Huge Ship weapon for which the rules are clear that can fire from anywhere other than its corresponding section, and the CR90 primary fires from its corresponding section. There's no reason to assume that the Raider's primary does not also fire from its corresponding section.

There is no similar argument to be made for the primary being restricted, however. The primary weapon value is a ship stat, both fore and aft are the same ship, and nowhere, not ONE PLACE is anything stated about the primary being unable to fire from any of the arcs.

It also does not state that the Raider's fore hardpoint cannot fire from any of the arcs. Furthermore, if the primary weapon corresponds to both sections then nowhere does it state the CR90 cannot fire from the rear base.

Are the other stats on that card universal to the ship? (Shield, Hull, Agility)? Or are they section stats?

The rules for shield, hull, and agility are all well explained or at least delineated, and not in question. That would be a false equivalency.

The rules for the huge ship's primary weapons are NOT well explained.

Were they, this question would never have come up.

As for the CR-90 not being able to fire a turreted weapon outside of it's only 360 firing arc, when it's clearly stated in the rulebook that the CR 90 can only fire it's turreted weapon from the 360 firing arc printed on the fore section... AND the fact that a turreted weapon has never been able to fire from anything BUT a 360 arc...

I'm not going to argue this with you any more. These questions have been explored thoroughly over the last several pages.

This is not simply a question of rules as written. There are MANY questions where the RAI is obvious when the RAW is obtuse. In this case, neither is clear.

Of course it's not a question of Rules as Written. That the fore hardpoint can fire from the back is obviously wrong. I believe it's fairly clear I pointed out that Rules As Written state this in order to debunk the Rules as Written approach both you and Jehan were taking, not because I somehow think that fore hardpoints can fire from the aft. Yes, nowhere does it say that the primary can't fire from the back. But also, nowhere does it say the Raider's fore can't fire from the back.

Likewise, notice the bolded if in my point about the CR90. If primary weapons aren't section specific, then the CR90, by the rules of the game, can turret off the back. It obviously can't, we all know this. Therefore it's a simple deduction that primaries are section specific, just like every other stat on a ship card. The fact that the CR90's turret rules refer to corresponding section should be proof enough, but it evidentally wasn't.

And if the Raider's primary weapon is specific to the fore section, or to use the lingo of the rulebook, it corresponds to the fore section, why would it be able to fire out the back?

As for the CR-90 not being able to fire a turreted weapon outside of it's only 360 firing arc, when it's clearly stated in the rulebook that the CR 90 can only fire it's turreted weapon from the 360 firing arc printed on the fore section well...

That's not what it says.

This is what it says:

I don't see the word "fore" anywhere.

And again, if your argument is that the rules are poorly written, you'll have to pick another subject, because you're preaching to the choir.

I'm glad that the answer is so obvious to you, but you'll have to trust me when I say that it is not as obvious to others.

I may even agree with you IF the CR-90 had two 360 arcs printed. It doesn't.

Reference please? Book, page and section.

The Huge Ship Rules you were quoting.

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/2d/47/2d47a35a-6ec7-4d4b-a262-efacde97dfa3/huge_ship_rules.pdf

Huge Ship Rules, last updated 24th April 2015.

I read those rules wholly and nowhere they say that ordinary primary weapons are 'attached' to a specific section of the ship, as you stated.

However, we have rules that specifically say that a ship can fire its primary weapon within the firing arc printed on their ship's token, and another rule that specifically state that huge ships may have different 'additional' firing arc's on their ship's token.

Are the rules incomplete, obsolete or poor explained? Maybe... But we have to work with what we have.

I don't see the word "fore" anywhere.

You can find it on the CR90's booklet, which explicity limits its PWT to the fore section.

Are the rules incomplete, obsolete or por explained? Maybe... But we have to work with what we have.

There is no rule stating that the Raider cannot fire its fore secondary weapon from its aft firing arc. The huge ship rules specifically refer to the CR90, and the Raider's rules only refer to the aft firing arc.

Am I saying you should? Of course not. I say this to illustrate the problem with saying that because the rules don't say you can't fire from the back, you can fire from the back.

And again, if your argument is that the rules are poorly written, you'll have to pick another subject, because you're preaching to the choir.

I'm glad that the answer is so obvious to you, but you'll have to trust me when I say that it is not as obvious to others.

I may even agree with you IF the CR-90 had two 360 arcs printed. It doesn't.

My argument is as it has been from the start, that the Raider's primary weapon is part of the fore section and that it can only fire its primary weapon from that section's firing arc.

As for the CR90. It has no 360 arcs printed. It has a reminder arrow on the fore section. It can only fire from the fore section because the primary weapon corresponds to the fore section. If it did not, then it would be able to fire from either. My point here is that the CR90's weapon corresponds to the fore rather than the whole ship, not that it can fire from the aft.

I read those rules wholly and nowhere they say that ordinary primary weapons are 'attached' to a specific section of the ship, as you stated.

Then evidentally you did not read them throughly. Here is the screencap again.

Nowhere does it say the CR90 is limited to the fore. Nowhere does it say the word "fore." All it says is that the primary weapon has a corresponding section. It doesn't say which section that is.

There is nothing in the Huge Ship rules specifically denoting which section a primary weapon corresponds to. The red arrow? That's, as stated here, a reminder to shoot 360, not rules text. The only thing that can possibly denote which section the primary weapon is attached to is which ship card the primary weapon is printed on. The CR90's primary corresponds to the fore section because it is printed on the fore card. Therefore, the Raider's primary corresponds to the fore section because it is printed on the fore card.

If being printed on the fore card does not denote that the primary weapon corresponds to the fore section, then there is no rule stating the CR90's weapon corresponds to the fore section. If the primary somehow corresponds to both sections, then both the Raider and CR90 can make primary attacks from their aft sections.

In brief, the Raider's primary corresponds to the fore section, and the precedent for every other huge ship weapon on a two card huge ship is that they fire from their corresponding section.

EDIT:

You can find it on the CR90's booklet, which explicity limits its PWT to the fore section.

It says "Thus, the fore ship card shows the turret primary weapon icon, and the ship token shows a circular red arrows as a reminder."

It then clarifies that the primary fires from the fore section, after stating that it's on the card. The Huge Ship rules, which are generalised but only up to date to the CR90, say "corresponding section," not "section specified by that ship's rulebook." It's theoretically possible to have a huge ship with an aft primary weapon.

Section corresponding to what? Section corresponding to the weapon. The CR90's primary corresponds to the fore section, and can only fire from it.

And again, those rules refer exclusively to a TURRET Primary weapon, which the Raider doesn't have.

It is inherently dangerous applying specific TURRET rules for huge ships to otherwise 'normal' primary weapons, especially when there are no such limitations to them in the rest of the game's rules.

The turret rules are that it can fire 360 degrees. Furthermore, they state is that the turret primary weapon has a corresponding base.

That base is the ship card it is printed on. The Raider's primary is also printed on the fore card. It is crippled when the Fore is crippled. Its corresponding section is the fore section. Every other Huge Ship weapon in the game has a corresponding section. Every. Single. One. Why would the Raider be suddenly different?

If you try to use small ship rules for it, they say firing arc. Not arcs. This is why the clarification that the CR90's guns shoot from either of their section's arcs and the clarification Raider's aft guns (which have a double arc) shoot from either arc.

Personally, I find it odd that they were so precise with something so intuitive, but forgot to specify section specific firing for the entire front half of the ship.

There is no rule saying that Raider fore hardpoints cannot fire from the back. Section specific firing is assumed by the rulebook. It's also all but assumed by the CR90's, only clarified in its explanations of double arcs and turret weapons.

The fore section has a firing arc. The aft section has two firing arcs. Fore equipped weapons fire from the fore (including the primary, which is on the fore card), aft equipped weapons fire from the aft.

Blue, come on man.

I can't speak for anyone else, but since you're basically posting the same information repeatedly, seeming to expect a different answer, let me assure you that I UNDERSTAND your argument. I grasp it. I comprehend it. I grok it.

I do not, however, agree with it.

Writing it again won't change that.

I understand that you've turned the argument on its head, trying to address the secondary firing rules, but the issue is that the INTENT of the secondary firing rules are clear. The INTENT of the primary firing rules is not. The SPECIFICS are ambiguous, leaving all interpretation in the realm of being, at best, likely but not certain.

This is the problem we face, and neither one of us are going to bridge this gulf without official word which may or may not be forthcoming, since FFG continues to remain silent for me at least.

Threads like these ones must give FFG the belief that, at the core, most of us are complete idiots.

Threads like these ones must give FFG the belief that, at the core, most of us are complete idiots.

Guilty as charged.

Threads like these ones must give FFG the belief that, at the core, most of us are complete idiots.

Guilty as charged.

A little bit of extra work won't hurt them. AFAIK, no developer has ever died for clarifying an extra rule or two.

Besides, it is highly probable that they will clarify that 'normal' primary weapons are attached to a especific section of the ship... It is just that the current RAW are vague enough to lead (or mislead) into arguing the contrary.

Blue, come on man.

I can't speak for anyone else, but since you're basically posting the same information repeatedly, seeming to expect a different answer, let me assure you that I UNDERSTAND your argument. I grasp it. I comprehend it. I grok it.

I do not, however, agree with it.

Writing it again won't change that.

I understand that you've turned the argument on its head, trying to address the secondary firing rules, but the issue is that the INTENT of the secondary firing rules are clear. The INTENT of the primary firing rules is not. The SPECIFICS are ambiguous, leaving all interpretation in the realm of being, at best, likely but not certain.

This is the problem we face, and neither one of us are going to bridge this gulf without official word which may or may not be forthcoming, since FFG continues to remain silent for me at least.

The intent of the secondary firing rules is clear, and the intent on the primary rules is equally clear: primaries fire from their section. Once you start saying "oh the CR90's primary rules only talk about turrets" then you've moved out of clear intent and towards Rules as Written. The CR90 rules don't address non-turret primaries because the CR90 doesn't have one, but the turret part is measuring at any point inside or outside of arc from the weapon's corresponding section. Again, corresponding section. An explicit statement that the primary weapon of the CR90 is part of the fore, and the Raider's main gun is set up in exactly the same way, just missing the red ring around the attack value that lets it fire outside of its firing arc.

That the CR90's primary would be section restricted and the Raider's would not is nonsensical, and if it were a universal weapon defying the CR90's precedent they'd not have neglected to mention it entirely.

That base is the ship card it is printed on. The Raider's primary is also printed on the fore card. It is crippled when the Fore is crippled. Its corresponding section is the fore section. Every other Huge Ship weapon in the game has a corresponding section. Every. Single. One. Why would the Raider be suddenly different?

First off, i want to say that i am in the camp if thinkinf that rhe primary weapons is only firing from the fore.

The above quote however is a very poor and comes of as unnecessarily condescending. There is only one other epic ship with a primary weapon. Hard to set a precedent when, half of the epic ships with primary weapons have a primary weapon turret. If there were several epic ships with similar weapons to the raider you could set your benchmark.

It looks to me, by the shear length of this thread, that the "intent" is far from clear. And we all seem to agrea that the RAW are not clear at all.

Let's hope FFG comes out with an answere soon so we can stop this endless repeat of the same arguments from both sides.

The above quote however is a very poor and comes of as unnecessarily condescending. There is only one other epic ship with a primary weapon. Hard to set a precedent when, half of the epic ships with primary weapons have a primary weapon turret. If there were several epic ships with similar weapons to the raider you could set your benchmark.

Read it again. You've assumed a word is there that isn't, specifically the word primary. There are a grand total of five huge ship weapons, three hardpoint secondaries and two primaries. The CR90's primary and all secondaries have a corresponding section from which they fire. Why would the Raider's weapon, set up in exactly the same way to the CR90 sans the ring that allows it to fire outside of its arc, somehow correspond to both?

All that indicates that the CR90's primary weapon corresponds to the fore is that it's printed on the fore card. What indicates it has a turret? The ring around its primary weapon value. If we were to take that ring off of it, would it suddenly be able to fire from a section it does not correspond to? Of course not.

One look at the CR90 makes the intent for primary weapons clear, they too are part of a section, just like every other stat on a Huge Ship's card.

There are now multiple pages of people arguing that the rules don't say the Raider's primary weapon can't fire from the aft arcs, and therefore it can. I would like to further suppose that Captain Jonus is flying within Range 1 of the aft section, and invite anyone to prove the Raider can't attack using his firing arc. After all, the rules don't say I can't!

Everyone seems to agree the Raider's rulebook isn't doing a very good job. Everyone seems to agree it needs to be FAQed or updated as soon as it's feasible for FFG to do so. That's all fine, but it's not a reason to completely ignore the nearest equivalent we have--and while I wouldn't usually point to a turret, I do think Blue Five is making a lot of sense in referring to the only other Huge primary weapon. That weapon can only fire from its corresponding base.

In the absence of a cut and dry ruling, I'm going off of how firing arcs have traditionally been used in the game. There is no example that I can find in any other ship where a firing arc is present that the primary weapon cannot pass through. Either it fires through it directly, or a turret can pass through the area as part of its 360 degree coverage. Arcs that extend past the range of secondary weapons are colored differently (Firespray and Hound's Tooth). There's a visual representation of areas that can be fired at via primary but not with secondary.

The exception to this seems to be the CR90. However, the CR90 has a specific section in the Huge rules area relating to Huge Ship turrets that specifically says that it measures from the corresponding base that the turret is located at. The only other language pertaining to firing arcs are that the secondary weapons are limited to the corresponding section (the implied rule being whichever card the secondary weapon was put on).

The Raider's primary weapon doesn't apply to the corresponding section rules as it is not a turret nor is it a secondary weapon. There's no specific language in the Raider book to state that these arcs are off limits to primary weapons. It seems that if it isn't expressly forbidden, it should be allowed.

Additionally, it just makes sense from a game design purpose. As mentioned in an earlier post, one play style must include having a naked Raider. Limiting the firing area to the front would make this play style impossible as the ship is not maneuverable enough to make the default build viable.

To illustrate this, let's take a battle between a vanilla CR90 and an Imperial Raider. Given the sluggish maneuverability of both ships, the CR90 merely needs to work its way past the front firing arc of the Raider and it is free to pepper the ship at will while the Raider vainly tries to turn turn 180 degrees to get back in the fight. Unless the CR90 is blocked in by obstacles or the edge of the play area, kiting should be a matter of pure simplicity and you can orbit each other until the Raider is a burning husk.

No other ship is so handicapped by the lack of upgrades. All other models can be expected to at least make a showing in their default state.

Given that there's no clear cut rules against the rear firing arcs being off limits to the primary weapon, I'm going to continue using those firing arcs in the same manner as every other firing arc in the game and fire primary weapons through it until FFG says otherwise. The Raider is specifically billed as an anti-fighter corvette. The fluff was made by FFG itself with this in mind. No anti-fighter platform is going to have a configuration that expects it to dogfight ships much more nimble than it is in order to attack.

Also of interesting note, the only critical damage cards that affect energy gain come from the fore section. This card is called Reactor Leak and implies that the power production capability of the ship is in the front and not the back. Considering this, I figure that both the attack value and the energy capacity are shared between the two sides of the ship. An ion strike to the front will take off energy just as easily to the back. FFG merely altered the standard stat template in order to shoehorn the energy value onto one side.

There are now multiple pages of people arguing that the rules don't say the Raider's primary weapon can't fire from the aft arcs, and therefore it can. I would like to further suppose that Captain Jonus is flying within Range 1 of the aft section, and invite anyone to prove the Raider can't attack using his firing arc. After all, the rules don't say I can't!

That's not fair either. To be precise, people is not arguing that "rules don't say, therefore I can", because in fact, there are rules that say that we can, which are the very own game's basic firing rules.

Any ship can fire its primary whithin the printed firing arc on its token, and furthermore, the rules for huge ships explicity indicate that they can have more than one, additional, firing arcs on its token. And it happens that those rules aren't contradicted in any especific way in the Raider's booklet, nor any of the other huge ship booklets. The only existing restrictions EXPLICITLY exist for secondary (hardpoint) and turret weapons.

If anything, the closer rule to find an analogy to the Raider Situation would be "Auxiliary firing arcs", not "Turret firing arcs".

So it's not a case of "the rules don't say"... It's a case of "The rules say that I can, even if it sounds crazy".

RAW, there's nothing that prevents the Raider from firing its primary on any of its firing arcs...

RAI, probably it should do so only from its front section.

The exception to this seems to be the CR90. However, the CR90 has a specific section in the Huge rules area relating to Huge Ship turrets that specifically says that it measures from the corresponding base that the turret is located at. The only other language pertaining to firing arcs are that the secondary weapons are limited to the corresponding section (the implied rule being whichever card the secondary weapon was put on).

The huge ship rules, quoted extensively on previous pages, say "corresponding base." The CR90's primary corresponds to a base. The only indication as to which base that is is the card on which the primary is printed.

Additionally, it just makes sense from a game design purpose. As mentioned in an earlier post, one play style must include having a naked Raider. Limiting the firing area to the front would make this play style impossible as the ship is not maneuverable enough to make the default build viable.

Along with the naked generic HWK?

You're essentially saying that every build must be viable. That's an impossible design goal.

One style of play involves running four unupgraded Storm Squadron TIE advanced x1s.

No other ship is so handicapped by the lack of upgrades. All other models can be expected to at least make a showing in their default state.

HWK. TIE advanced.

In fact, I'd say both of those are far worse off than a naked Raider.

Given that there's no clear cut rules against the rear firing arcs being off limits to the primary weapon, I'm going to continue using those firing arcs in the same manner as every other firing arc in the game and fire primary weapons through it until FFG says otherwise. The Raider is specifically billed as an anti-fighter corvette. The fluff was made by FFG itself with this in mind. No anti-fighter platform is going to have a configuration that expects it to dogfight ships much more nimble than it is in order to attack.

Unless you build it terribly by putting no upgrades on it.

Also of interesting note, the only critical damage cards that affect energy gain come from the fore section. This card is called Reactor Leak and implies that the power production capability of the ship is in the front and not the back. Considering this, I figure that both the attack value and the energy capacity are shared between the two sides of the ship. An ion strike to the front will take off energy just as easily to the back. FFG merely altered the standard stat template in order to shoehorn the energy value onto one side.

Critical effects are global to the ship. Besides, someone's not reading all the cards. Look at the CR90. Grid Overload. Makes you lose all energy on the aft card.

Only the aft section can gain energy. That's even in the rulebooks. The ship's fore card and upgrade cards can spend that energy, but only the aft can accumulate it.

The Raider's primary weapon doesn't apply to the corresponding section rules as it is not a turret nor is it a secondary weapon. There's no specific language in the Raider book to state that these arcs are off limits to primary weapons. It seems that if it isn't expressly forbidden, it should be allowed.

It's also not expressly forbidden to fire the fore hardpoints from the aft. Furthermore, all your points can be used to support firing fore hardpoints from the back.

RAW, there's nothing that prevents the Raider from firing its primary on any of its firing arcs...

RAI, probably it should do so only from its front section.

And nothing to stop the fore hardpoints firing from the back too.

It's fairly clearly meant to only fire the primary from the fore.

If anything, the closer rule to find an analogy to the Raider Situation would be "Auxiliary firing arcs", not "Turret firing arcs".

No auxilary arcs on the Raider. Auxilary arcs are arcs from which the primary but not secondaries can fire.

Each section of a huge ship has its own firing arc/s, from which all weapons can fire as per normal firing arc rules. Turrets can fire outside of the firing arcs from their section and are clarified to measure range from their corresponding base.

The only argument that would support firing the Raider's primary from the back but not the fore hardpoints would be to claim it does not correspond to a section. However, the Huge Ship Rules pdf state that the CR90's primary does, yet gives no indication as to which section that is. Were we to have a ship with a turret on the aft section, how would we know which section it corresponded to? The answer is simple: the card it's printed on. There's nothing on the CR90's ship card restricting its weapon to the fore save its weapon being printed on the fore card. The Raider's weapon is also printed on the fore card.

The setup of the Raider's primary weapon is identical to the CR90's, save it lacks the 360 turret symbol that allows it to fire outside of its firing arc. If, as some people are suggesting, we follow precedent from the large and and small ship game, then the disappearance of this symbol means it can't fire outside its firing arc and nothing else. To turn a primary turret into a primary non-turret, you take away its 360 firing.

Assume for the moment the Raider has a turret. Could it fire from both bases? No. It fires from the weapon's corresponding base, the fore.

Remove the turret symbol. That symbol means "can fire primary outside firing arc" on every ship it appears on. The Raider can now only fire from inside its firing arc. There's nothing to suggest it can now fire from the aft.