Question - what does the Raider's dial call it?

Raider-class Corvette.

Actually I had only read the first few posts then made that. I hadn't even caught up to the fact that this same argument was taking place already.

But that is certainly my take.

Adv. is an abbreviation for Advanced. Therefore, TIE ADV. Prototype DOES contain "advanced". I know some of you would disagree, but it is my stance that ADV does include prototype, as evidenced by the article which clearly states that it is a "TIE Advanced prototype", and evidenced further by the fact that the Raider has CORV., but that includes "Corvette". We now know intent for what ADV means, and we have precedent that an abbreviation CAN and DOES include the full word.

I think somebody is very close to having to eat a hat or something....

But if you then leave RAW land for a moment and apply common sense it falls apart.

• TIE/x1 is a four point fix card. If the TAP can take it, it's either broken powerful (something FFG avoids intensely, hence E-wing generics) or cripplingly overpriced out of the blister.
• The TAP comes with its own title, TIE/v1, which costs 1 point. The Accuracy Corrector + TIE/x1 combo makes it redundant right out of the box.
• The TAP isn't a TIE advanced x1. It's a TIE advanced v1. Thematically it's like an A-wing equipping B-wing/E2. TIE/x1 is the abbreviated designation for the model of Darth Vader's TIE.
• If the TAP can take TIE/x1, then not only is the Raider an obligatory purchase to make it viable, but intentionally so. It would mean FFG deliberately overpriced a ship to sell more Raiders. Anyone who believes that must have a very low opinion of FFG.

There is more than enough reason to deny the TAP the TIE/X1 title. No need to refer to such pickwickian arguments as "adv. =/= advanced", especially when that logic leads to absurdities as in the Raider's case.

Gosh I sure wish Disney had called it a TIE Experimental or something, those were ugly anyways and are luckily now dead. Would have spared us a lot of nonsense.

There is more than enough reason to deny the TAP the TIE/X1 title.

What are those reasons?

If you say that adv. is the same as advanced rules wise then it can take that title.

Question - what does the Raider's dial call it?

Raider-class Corvette.

Actually I had only read the first few posts then made that. I hadn't even caught up to the fact that this same argument was taking place already.

But that is certainly my take.

Adv. is an abbreviation for Advanced. Therefore, TIE ADV. Prototype DOES contain "advanced". I know some of you would disagree, but it is my stance that ADV does include prototype, as evidenced by the article which clearly states that it is a "TIE Advanced prototype", and evidenced further by the fact that the Raider has CORV., but that includes "Corvette". We now know intent for what ADV means, and we have precedent that an abbreviation CAN and DOES include the full word.

I think somebody is very close to having to eat a hat or something....

But if you then leave RAW land for a moment and apply common sense it falls apart.

• TIE/x1 is a four point fix card. If the TAP can take it, it's either broken powerful (something FFG avoids intensely, hence E-wing generics) or cripplingly overpriced out of the blister.
• The TAP comes with its own title, TIE/v1, which costs 1 point. The Accuracy Corrector + TIE/x1 combo makes it redundant right out of the box.
• The TAP isn't a TIE advanced x1. It's a TIE advanced v1. Thematically it's like an A-wing equipping B-wing/E2. TIE/x1 is the abbreviated designation for the model of Darth Vader's TIE.
• If the TAP can take TIE/x1, then not only is the Raider an obligatory purchase to make it viable, but intentionally so. It would mean FFG deliberately overpriced a ship to sell more Raiders. Anyone who believes that must have a very low opinion of FFG.

To your first point, I think the Inquisitor's TIE is significantly overpriced right out of the box, considering that I'd rather take an 18 point interceptor over any of the new versions of this ship. It stinks right out of the box IMO.

2nd point - It's own title does not disprove the availability of another optional title. Many considered the Slave 1 Title to be redundant, especially when teh Andrasta title came out.

3rd point - The TAP isn't an x1 or a v1. it is titles that make it either way. Maybe you mean the version we saw in Rebels? I'd be willing to concede that THAT was a V1, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of there being other variants in the universe.

4th point - Wouldn't be the first time we've seen a "Mandatory upgrade in a huge ship box". C-3PO ring any bells? At least we get 4 titles with the raider as opposed to just one.

So none of what you said is really "Common sense", it's just bias and speculation. Your BEST point is that it woudl seem odd for the Inquisitor's TIE to be overcosted right out of the box - and I will agree to a point, that it seems odd for them to do that. But I think it's certainly a distinct possibility for them to have done that. Perhaps the original plan was for the inquisitor to cost 21, and his cost was inflated when they realized he'd be able to get a free X1 title.

Yeah that's why I think it'll be the 'prototype' part of the TAP that stops you, not that Adv/Advanced thing.

That's clearly just an abbreviation.

incorrect

the new rulebook specifies that the ship-type must contain the entirety of the specified ship

Tie Advance Prototype would be eligible for Tie/x1

Tie Adv. prototype is not

there is a reason why FFG made it ADV. and it wasn't to keep their big-ass font size

What if...

The previous poster was right and Advance = Adv. and the "entirety" is meant so as not include the 'Prototype' portion. Then FFG would only need to FAQ Darth Vader and say that because X1 is already in his title you can apply that upgrade if desired?

Then the Corvette still equals the Corv. and Advance equals Adv. but the name is the name is the name except for a quick fix for Vader.

Simple, makes sense and keeps RAW all at the same time.

There is more than enough reason to deny the TAP the TIE/X1 title.

What are those reasons?

<p>But if you then leave RAW land for a moment and apply common sense it falls apart.

• TIE/x1 is a four point fix card. If the TAP can take it, it's either broken powerful (something FFG avoids intensely, hence E-wing generics) or cripplingly overpriced out of the blister.
• The TAP comes with its own title, TIE/v1, which costs 1 point. The Accuracy Corrector + TIE/x1 combo makes it redundant right out of the box.
• The TAP isn't a TIE advanced x1. It's a TIE advanced v1. Thematically it's like an A-wing equipping B-wing/E2. TIE/x1 is the abbreviated designation for the model of Darth Vader's TIE.
• If the TAP can take TIE/x1, then not only is the Raider an obligatory purchase to make it viable, but intentionally so. It would mean FFG deliberately overpriced a ship to sell more Raiders. Anyone who believes that must have a very low opinion of FFG.

Yeah that's why I think it'll be the 'prototype' part of the TAP that stops you, not that Adv/Advanced thing.

That's clearly just an abbreviation.

incorrect

the new rulebook specifies that the ship-type must contain the entirety of the specified ship

Tie Advance Prototype would be eligible for Tie/x1

Tie Adv. prototype is not

there is a reason why FFG made it ADV. and it wasn't to keep their big-ass font size

What if...

The previous poster was right and Advance = Adv. and the "entirety" is meant so as not include the 'Prototype' portion. Then FFG would only need to FAQ Darth Vader and say that because X1 is already in his title you can apply that upgrade if desired?

Then the Corvette still equals the Corv. and Advance equals Adv. but the name is the name is the name except for a quick fix for Vader.

Simple, makes sense and keeps RAW all at the same time.

Ah, but then we can no longer use the Twin Ion Engine Mk. II upgrade, because there is no ship that, in its entirety, is called "TIE".

Furthermore, that would let the TIE advanced equip TIE/v1.

This whole X1 title argument boils down to

We all know that in the case of the Inquisitor's TIE, that ADV. is an abbreviation for the word "Advanced". FFG calls it that in the debut article. This is not in dispute. Some would argue that since the exact representation of the word differs from the card to the X1 title, that the title can not go on the card.

The Raider's titles are for a Corvette, but the Raider card has a similar abbreviation "Corv." Some would argue that the Raider titles can OBVIOUSLY go on the raider, since it comes with that ship. I agree with this argument.

So the crux of the question is : Where do you stand on Abbreviations? Suppose there is a Blister expansion for teh new T70 X-Wing and it has a title on it that says "X Wng. Only", based on that abbreviation would you say:

A) "X Wng." means X-Wing and it can go on ALL X-Wings, old and new.

B) It Can not go on ANY ships, since both the old X-Wing and New X-Wing both spell out WING on their cards.

or

C) It can ONLY EVER go on the ship it comes with.

Yeah that's why I think it'll be the 'prototype' part of the TAP that stops you, not that Adv/Advanced thing.

That's clearly just an abbreviation.

incorrect

the new rulebook specifies that the ship-type must contain the entirety of the specified ship

Tie Advance Prototype would be eligible for Tie/x1

Tie Adv. prototype is not

there is a reason why FFG made it ADV. and it wasn't to keep their big-ass font size

What if...

The previous poster was right and Advance = Adv. and the "entirety" is meant so as not include the 'Prototype' portion. Then FFG would only need to FAQ Darth Vader and say that because X1 is already in his title you can apply that upgrade if desired?

Then the Corvette still equals the Corv. and Advance equals Adv. but the name is the name is the name except for a quick fix for Vader.

Simple, makes sense and keeps RAW all at the same time.

What if...

FFG actually meant what they wrote and no FAQ is needed?

they'd have to have ****** up big time to have an explicit entry in the update rulebook not say what they meant

if the prototype portion was the restrict the /x1, they'd have written that the ship-type must explicitly match the type specified by the title (so no tie advance prototype because "prototype")

instead, the only condition is that the ship type contain the entirety of the restricted type, hence "Tie Advance x1" being eligible for the Tie/x1

this also implies that any "X-wing only" title will be shared by the T-70, and any "Tie fighter only" titles will be shared by the FO

In my head it's like this,

"Tie Advanced".equals("Tie Advanced") - true

"Tie Advanced".contains("Tie Advanced") - true

"Tie Advanced X1".equals("Tie Advanced") - false

"Tie Advanced X1".contains("Tie Advanced") - true

"Tie Adv. prototype".equals("Tie Advanced") - false

"Tie Adv. prototype".contains("Tie Advanced") - false

"Tie Adv. prototype".replace("Adv.","Advanced").equals("Tie Advanced") - false

"Tie Adv. prototype".replace("Adv.","Advanced").contains("Tie Advanced") - true

just to give you an insight in to why i'm a massive pain in the arse.

Yeah that's why I think it'll be the 'prototype' part of the TAP that stops you, not that Adv/Advanced thing.

That's clearly just an abbreviation.

incorrect

the new rulebook specifies that the ship-type must contain the entirety of the specified ship

Tie Advance Prototype would be eligible for Tie/x1

Tie Adv. prototype is not

there is a reason why FFG made it ADV. and it wasn't to keep their big-ass font size

What if...

The previous poster was right and Advance = Adv. and the "entirety" is meant so as not include the 'Prototype' portion. Then FFG would only need to FAQ Darth Vader and say that because X1 is already in his title you can apply that upgrade if desired?

Then the Corvette still equals the Corv. and Advance equals Adv. but the name is the name is the name except for a quick fix for Vader.

Simple, makes sense and keeps RAW all at the same time.

What if...

FFG actually meant what they wrote and no FAQ is needed?

An argument that hasn't been brought up yet I believe is that the only multi ship name restricted upgrade so far says "TIEs only". Should the TAP be able to use the Advanced title that would have to say "TIE Advanceds only". Likewise a new title/mod that fixes the X-Wing but is usable by the T-70 X-Wing would have to be labeled "X-Wings only". Might have been discarded by the nonconvincable yet, but I think it holds some ground.

Few other things:

You must use the new damage deck if you have it. I assume this will be take affect next month in official tournies when people have access to the new core set at the end of the month rather than just lucky people that hit Target today.

The Asteroids got new shapes. Was there another set from something else so this makes 3 sets or am I thinking of debris clouds? 2 district sets of Asteroids now anyway.

Did everyone only get 1 upgrade in their box or did I get a dud box? I got 1 of each of:

BB-8 & R5-X3. Unique Astromechs.

Wired, EPT.

Weapon Guidance, Tech.

Proton Torpedoes.

Weapon Guidance is not unique and every pilot card in the box can use it. Why wasn't there at least 3(1 for each actual model in the box)?

To your first point, I think the Inquisitor's TIE is significantly overpriced right out of the box, considering that I'd rather take an 18 point interceptor over any of the new versions of this ship. It stinks right out of the box IMO.

It's hard to say for sure without seeing the dial but the Inquisitor may very well be the best Ace Imperials can field for under 30 points.

Few other things:

You must use the new damage deck if you have it. I assume this will be take affect next month in official tournies when people have access to the new core set at the end of the month rather than just lucky people that hit Target today.

The Asteroids got new shapes. Was there another set from something else so this makes 3 sets or am I thinking of debris clouds? 2 district sets of Asteroids now anyway.

Did everyone only get 1 upgrade in their box or did I get a dud box? I got 1 of each of:

BB-8 & R5-X3. Unique Astromechs.

Wired, EPT.

Weapon Guidance, Tech.

Proton Torpedoes.

Weapon Guidance is not unique and every pilot card in the box can use it. Why wasn't there at least 3(1 for each actual model in the box)?

The back of the box tells you how many upgrade cards are in the box.

Furthermore, that would let the TIE advanced equip TIE/v1.

And you just had to use logic against me

What if...

FFG actually meant what they wrote and no FAQ is needed?

Then why aren't you agreeing with those who say the Raider can't use their own titles because Corvette and Corv. are not the same by this interpretation.

I'm not trying to be rude or argumentative; I'm merely pointing out the obvious that with this interpretation or the opposing one there has to be a FAQ to fix one or the other.

To your first point, I think the Inquisitor's TIE is significantly overpriced right out of the box, considering that I'd rather take an 18 point interceptor over any of the new versions of this ship. It stinks right out of the box IMO.

25 points for a PS8 with a good statline with a 3 dice cannon? His ability is so good it's probably more than 1 point. And you think that'd be balanced with TIE/x1 and ATC on top of it? Range 1-3 autocritting Phantom cannon for 26 points?

Furthermore, your judgements of a ship you've seen pretty much nothing of don't change the fact that if the TIE/v1 can equip TIE/x1 then either Inquistor's TIE + Raider is broken or the Inquisitor's TIE is deliberately overpriced.

2nd point - It's own title does not disprove the availability of another optional title. Many considered the Slave 1 Title to be redundant, especially when teh Andrasta title came out.

Then they fail to understand the definition of redundant (maybe confusing it with obsolete). Slave 1 and Andrasta have completely different effects. tIE/x1 and Accuracy Corrector for 0 points gives you a strictly better effect than TIE/v1 for 1 point. Free Evade with your Target Lock, or free choice of action and autohitting whenever you shoot?

3rd point - The TAP isn't an x1 or a v1. it is titles that make it either way. Maybe you mean the version we saw in Rebels? I'd be willing to concede that THAT was a V1, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of there being other variants in the universe.

The ship is a TIE advanced v1. The TIE fighter with funny armoured folding wings? TIE/v1. The Inquisitor flies a TIE advanced v1, aka a TIE/v1. A TIE advanced x1 or TIE/x1 is the ship Vader flies at Yavin. The Inquistor's TIE can no more be a TIE/x1 than an X-wing can.

4th point - Wouldn't be the first time we've seen a "Mandatory upgrade in a huge ship box". C-3PO ring any bells? At least we get 4 titles with the raider as opposed to just one.

C-3PO isn't a mandatory upgrade for anything. Maybe he's a bit cheap for what he does, but he's not a deliberately undercosted fix card like TIE/x1.

So none of what you said is really "Common sense", it's just bias and speculation. Your BEST point is that it woudl seem odd for the Inquisitor's TIE to be overcosted right out of the box - and I will agree to a point, that it seems odd for them to do that. But I think it's certainly a distinct possibility for them to have done that. Perhaps the original plan was for the inquisitor to cost 21, and his cost was inflated when they realized he'd be able to get a free X1 title.

You actually think they'd inflate the price of a ship when they found an unintentional rules loophole rather than close the loophole?

Furthermore, that would let the TIE advanced equip TIE/v1.

And you just had to use logic against me

What if...

FFG actually meant what they wrote and no FAQ is needed?

Then why aren't you agreeing with those who say the Raider can't use their own titles because Corvette and Corv. are not the same by this interpretation.

I'm not trying to be rude or argumentative; I'm merely pointing out the obvious that with this interpretation or the opposing one there has to be a FAQ to fix one or the other.

sure?

considering epic isn't the main focus of the game (hence HUGE ships being the only restricted type of ship), it's going to be taking the short end of the stick in all matters X-wing

if there is an faq, it'll be for the Raider. The Advance titles are perfectly planned out

Tie Advance and Tie Advance x1 --> Tie/x1 NOT Tie/v1

Tie Adv. Prototype --? Tie/v1 NOT Tie/x1

This is a TIE/x1.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TIE_Advanced_x1/Canon

This is a TIE/v1.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TIE_Advanced_v1

god **** the v1 looks incredibly silly, like it's just a premature x1 with growing pains

hopefully ffg will work its modeling wizardry like it did with the K and punisher

god **** the v1 looks incredibly silly, like it's just a premature x1 with growing pains

hopefully ffg will work its modeling wizardry like it did with the K and punisher

How does it look silly?

The FFG sculpt image looks better but I'd have to crop that and that's a pain without a mouse.

god **** the v1 looks incredibly silly, like it's just a premature x1 with growing pains

hopefully ffg will work its modeling wizardry like it did with the K and punisher

How does it look silly?

GIANT head

itty-bitty panels

like a reverse crobat