What happens in a situation when you lose an icon from your upgrade bar and you had a card with that icon equipped?

For example if a critical hit forces you to drop the Tantive IV title and you had a extra Crew card equipped?

Another one I can think is if you lose your R2-D6 because of Integrated Astromech and had a Elite Pilot Talent card equipped?

From the Huge Ship Rules, Crippled Sections for Ships with Multiple Ship Cards:

"When a Ship card's crippled side is revealed, the controlling player must choose and discard any upgrade cards in excess of the upgrade icons depicted." Emphasis mine.

That's the only reference to discarding upgrade cards because of the loss of upgrade icons. There's nothing that says it happens under any other circumstance; and I would note that there are no crits that could remove a title anyway, one discards Teams and the others only prevent upgrade cards from being used. Integrated Astromech and R2-D6 is the first possibility of that, and as of right now there's nothing that suggests upgrade icons are relevant outside of Squad-Building during the Gather Forces phase or when a Ship card's crippled side is revealed.

They may change that at some point, but for right now; nothing happens.

Actually I was talking about Deck Breach. What happens if you put the Tantive IV title "Upgrade card" under it?

"Place 1 of the Upgrade cards equipped to this section under this card. You cannot use that Upgrade card while this card is faceup."

I would guess you have to discard upgrades in excess of your allowance.

I actually got deck breach on my tantive last week. I opted to place han solo under the card rather that the title as I would loose him either way but it would save a team.

EDIT: stupid phone autocorrect mistakes removed

I would gudsdyrkelse you have to discard upgrades in excess of your allowance.

I actually got decideret breach on my tantive last week. I opted to place han alligevel under the card rather that the title as I would loose him either way but it would save a team.

I was faced with a similar situation before. I put the Tantive title under the Deck Breach and with it the Weapons Engineer.

I didn't need the WE card at that point in the game anyway since there was only 1 opponent ship left in the game.

Still, it would be great to have an official clarification for this, since it can now happen with the Integrated Astromech too.

Not sure how you mean it can happen with IA. IA instructs you to discard the Astromech, not the IA card itself.

I am talking about placing under the Deck Breach crit the Tantive IV title card. Which in terms means that your upgrade bar in the fore section does not have an extra Crew and Team icon any more. What happens to the extra crew and team cards then, you discard them?

Now, discard R2-D6 with the Integrated Astromech, which means your upgrade bar does not have the Elite Pilot Talent icon any more. What happens to the EPT card, you discard that too?

Joker Two suggests that you should keep the cards, in both cases I assume.

Not sure how you mean it can happen with IA. IA instructs you to discard the Astromech, not the IA card itself.

Edit: ninjas are fast tonight.

I'd say, based on the epic ship situation, that you would lose the EPT.

You no longer have an EPT slot, as the card that gave you one has been discarded.

I'd say the same if there was a way to discard titles. If your Advanced lost it's title, I'd say you'd lose the sensor upgrade too, as you no longer have the slot.

Do what the rules say, not what they do not. Outside of huge ships, the rules do not say anything - so do nothing.

Do what the rules say, not what they do not. Outside of huge ships, the rules do not say anything - so do nothing.

Except there is now a way to do this in the main-game.

Integrated Astromech, sacrificing R2-D6, the one that gives you an Elite Talent slot.

Do what the rules say, not what they do not. Outside of huge ships, the rules do not say anything - so do nothing.

Except there is now a way to do this in the main-game.

Integrated Astromech, sacrificing R2-D6, the one that gives you an Elite Talent slot.

Which has nothing to do with the question. The question is not whether the situation can arise, but what to do when it does. The answer is that the players simply follow the rules by doing nothing and carrying on as normal.

Do what the rules say, not what they do not. Outside of huge ships, the rules do not say anything - so do nothing.

Except there is now a way to do this in the main-game.

Integrated Astromech, sacrificing R2-D6, the one that gives you an Elite Talent slot.

Which has nothing to do with the question. The question is not whether the situation can arise, but what to do when it does. The answer is that the players simply follow the rules by doing nothing and carrying on as normal.

Unless the rules saying that you can't have upgrades without having the slots for them get involved.

BUT

I can see that an FAQ is needed.

Do what the rules say, not what they do not. Outside of huge ships, the rules do not say anything - so do nothing.

Except there is now a way to do this in the main-game.

Integrated Astromech, sacrificing R2-D6, the one that gives you an Elite Talent slot.

Which has nothing to do with the question. The question is not whether the situation can arise, but what to do when it does. The answer is that the players simply follow the rules by doing nothing and carrying on as normal.

Unless the rules saying that you can't have upgrades without having the slots for them get involved.

BUT

I can see that an FAQ is needed.

A FAQ is not needed. Doing noting is what the rules call for. There is no issue with the purchased upgrade continuing to function once its slot is removed.

Players may want a FAQ to change the rules, but that doesn't mean that one is required when, like here, the rules are clear and produce a reasonable result.

An FAQ is required when there are multiple interpretations of the rules, mate.
I'm not asking for an errata, I am merely saying that both sides of the argument have logical backing, and as they result in two different gameplay elements, clarification is required by folks farther up the ladder than us.

Look at it this way: With my interpretation, R2-D6 is going to be sacrificed to save one's life. With your interpretation, there is literally no downside to sacrificing it, so you should treat it as an extra Shield token.

One one-point upgrade goes from having a heavy downside to being completely overpowered over differing rules citations. Thus, FAQ.

You are asking for an Eratta. There are not multiple interpretations because rules that do not exist cannot be interpreted. Unless you have some rules that even suggest that removal of a purchased upgrade should occur if the slot that it occupies is somehow removed, then you are talking about introducing new rules to resolve something that you find to be overpowered.

No FAQ - the rule could not be more clear. A lot of people love to toss out unreasonable interpretations or their own ideas and say that a FAQ is required. Games with tomes of FAQs are offputting.

@Rapture: I 100% agree with your interpretation of the scenario. However, I disagree with your stance about no FAQ needed.

DraconPyrothayan isn't asking for an Errata, he's not asking for a rule change, nothing like that, he's simply asking for an FAQ to clarify a situation that has never arisen in the game until now- a situation where your upgrade bar could potentially change mid-game. There's nothing wrong with wanting official clarification of that.

So take a breather, and sit back and wait for the FAQ to come out and prove you right.

Do what the rules say, not what they do not. Outside of huge ships, the rules do not say anything - so do nothing.

Except there is now a way to do this in the main-game.

Integrated Astromech, sacrificing R2-D6, the one that gives you an Elite Talent slot.

There already was a way, kind of. A ship with R2-D6 (or Virago, A-Wing Test Pilot, Royal Guard TIE) could take a Damaged Cockpit crit, or get Decoy'ed or Mux'ed down to low PS, and as a result have an upgrade that their ship wasn't allowed to equip due to its minimum PS restriction. As far as I know, there isn't an official ruling on this situation, but I suspect that most people that ran into it wouldn't have discarded the "illegal" upgrade.

I really don't think a quick FAQ entry would hurt, but without one, I think it's probably best to treat the huge ship crippled section rules as an explicit special case. In other cases, if it's legal to equip at the beginning of the match, then game effects shouldn't change that.

So take a breather, and sit back and wait for the FAQ to come out and prove you right.

The request isn't aggrivating, only unnecessary. People can think that the rules should work a certain way, but demanding a FAQ to prove that the rules do not work that way when there is no rules basis for that individual's desired outcome is a waste of time and space that could be devoted to legitimate questions.

So take a breather, and sit back and wait for the FAQ to come out and prove you right.

The request isn't aggrivating, only unnecessary. People can think that the rules should work a certain way, but demanding a FAQ to prove that the rules do not work that way when there is no rules basis for that individual's desired outcome is a waste of time and space that could be devoted to legitimate questions.

I strongly disagree with you. When a situation can arrise and is not explicitly written in the rules how to deal with it means the rules that cover that field are poorly written. Because nothing is written doesnt automaticaly means you ignore it and do nothing. So in that case a request for an FAQ is a totally legitimate question.

Because nothing is written doesnt automaticaly means you ignore it and do nothing.

The rules are allowed to be silent when it come to specific items. Players are expected to apply the general rules to resolve the specific interaction.

What 'situation' is arising? How is the game compromised? Is somethimg unfair or undesirable occurring that is causing people to question the rules not clarifying this one specific occurrence relating to one specific card?

The rules do cover this situation. They tell you how list building works and give you permission to fill your pilot's upgrade slots. The rules do not give you permission to later remove purchased upgrades due to the loss of an upgrade slot. It is really that simple. Why people are having such a hard time admitting this is because they are pursuing a different result than the rules actually call for. If they want to be up front about it and ask for an errata, then that is fine. But pretending that a FAQ is required while failing to present any rules to support or suggest their desired outcome is disengenous.

Because nothing is written doesnt automaticaly means you ignore it and do nothing.

The rules do not give you permission to later remove purchased upgrades due to the loss of an upgrade slot. It is really that simple.

Really? Could you please quote the page and line in the rule book where this is clearly stated?

Because you mention the rules awfully lot but fail to present any quote to them.

Plus, none of us are asking for the rule to BE one way or the other, we're asking for the FAQ to CLARIFY it. Whichever way it's supposed to be, we now have a card that calls into question what happens in this situation.

So as a community that plays a lot of events and tournaments, these things need to be crystal clear for us so when we take in a build, there won't be a 1/5/10 minute discussion with a TO during a game as to how to handle it.

It comes up, you present the FAQ ruling on it, and the game carries on. That's all we want.

Plus, none of us are asking for the rule to BE one way or the other, we're asking for the FAQ to CLARIFY it. Whichever way it's supposed to be, we now have a card that calls into question what happens in this situation.

So as a community that plays a lot of events and tournaments, these things need to be crystal clear for us so when we take in a build, there won't be a 1/5/10 minute discussion with a TO during a game as to how to handle it.

It comes up, you present the FAQ ruling on it, and the game carries on. That's all we want.

Until the FAQ comes out all we can do is carry on playing and have fun - not think up new mechanics (removing upgrades mid-game due to losing slots is an entirely new mechanic outside of Epic-play, and as the rules are separate there is no precedent to do so). So for now the solution is to leave cards in play if a slot is lost and then adjust our gaming if/when it is FAQ'd.

True, but also it's a mechanic that is only available to us via proxy-ing the cards

The cards that have brought this up are not released yet, and so hopefully get clarified before they are usable at events, which is what most of us want the clarification for.