I don't know, I think "additional" is pretty clear.

From Dictionary definition:

"added, extra, or supplementary to what is already present or available"

in other words, if you understand English and trust the dictionary, it is unambiguously saying you need something THERE in the first place to add anything to it. Seems like plain English to me.

The game's definitions do not always, or often, strictly adhere to the dictionary definition. In fact they are defined within game context.

Besides, if you start with 0 and add 1 that is additional. It's added, extra, or supplementary.

Seems like plain English to me. (So maybe you should verify that your argument doesn't work as well against you as it does for you before being condescending.)

I don't know, I think "additional" is pretty clear.

From Dictionary definition:

"added, extra, or supplementary to what is already present or available"

in other words, if you understand English and trust the dictionary, it is unambiguously saying you need something THERE in the first place to add anything to it. Seems like plain English to me.

The game's definitions do not always, or often, strictly adhere to the dictionary definition. In fact they are defined within game context.

Besides, if you start with 0 and add 1 that is additional. It's added, extra, or supplementary.

Seems like plain English to me. (So maybe you should verify that your argument doesn't work as well against you as it does for you before being condescending.)

yeah nice try except we already determined that the OR in the upgrade card precludes the "zero plus" argument. The only question left was the "additional" and I think the definition of additional is nowhere alluded to or contextualized in the rules like "spend" "exhaust" etc. are therefore it is absolutely not condescending to determine that the dictionary definition is valid and as intended. Therefore taking the additional to mean "already present or available" we can determine using pretty linear logic that a speed change is neither present nor available . "Not One" is not logically zero it is logically "Null" otherwise you can infer that the nave token allows you to reroll zero dice and would therefore trigger the statement "when rerolling dice" (for example) which is logically poop. Sorry, but I think this case is closed.

Come on, guys. No need to get so adversarial.

The fact is that you can interpret this either way. There are arguments for both.

I believe one is stronger, but this seems like a perfect excuse to toss FFG an email and put this to bed (eventually).

Come on, guys. No need to get so adversarial.

The fact is that you can interpret this either way. There are arguments for both.

I believe one is stronger, but this seems like a perfect excuse to toss FFG an email and put this to bed (eventually).

This.

Sorry, but I think this case is closed.

Nah.

That for example is not comparable as Ozzel text doesn't say "When changing speed" but instead "When executing a Nav Command".

If it actually said "when changing your speed (during a Nav Command)" we wouldn't have this thread. People are inferring that's what the upgrade means, and possibly could end up being correct as that could be what's intended, but the text doesn't contain that strict of a contingency.

Here I'll give am actual example. "Admiral Pozzel" "When a friendly ship executes a Con Fire Command, it may reroll an additional dice". Is that reroll contigent on actually having rerolled any dice? Or just on executing a Con Fire command irregardless of what you actually gain from it?

I don't even remember Admiral Pozzel. :/

No, jk, yeah that's what I'm saying.

I'm not even saying it is one way or the other anymore - I think both are plausible enough to be seriously considered, especially within the framework of how we've seen FFG make rulings in the past.

imo theyre both plausible right now. we need that email reply.

Just checked my spam folder, Gmail didn't use a redirect token to move it to that arc. Hopefully FFG doesn't Evade, to cancel the answer.

I'm sorry.

Is ok. Thanks for sending. =)

Im happy to have found an interaction that cannot be completely validated upon consensus without official ruling. =)

FFG We still need a ruling on this one!!

You're only issuing a single command even though you're using both dial and token. I dont see how Ozzel could grant an additional speed on both the dial and token when his card specifies "resolves a navigate command". Or was that not the issue here?

What's being discussed is:

If I use Nav team to get a click from a token, can I also change speed by 1?

Ie.. different interpretations of "additional".

Ah yes the direction of the argument changed somewhat into the thread it seems.

So is there an order of playing upgrade cards? Assuming you played 1 nav token: What makes you resolve Nav team before Ozzel to reach 0+1 speed and 1 yaw? Resolving them simultaneously you'll end up with 1+1 speed OR 1 yaw.

Ah yes the direction of the argument changed somewhat into the thread it seems.

So is there an order of playing upgrade cards? Assuming you played 1 nav token: What makes you resolve Nav team before Ozzel to reach 0+1 speed and 1 yaw? Resolving them simultaneously you'll end up with 1+1 speed OR 1 yaw.

Because there is no "simultaneous" timing in Armada, at least, not defined as such...

a) If two cards for the same player have the same Timing, then the player chooses the order in which they resolve.

b) If two cards for both players have the same Timing, then the first player resolves theirs first.

This is a B issue. I don't believe you can get the best of both worlds with just a token ... But you certainly get your choice of which one it is...

anyone get a response on this?

This really could be ruled either way. So we just need an official FAQ'ed at this point.

I'm sure the email-ee will update when they get an email. I think I sent one in, on this, actually.

Finally got an answer from the dev team. This should surprise almost everyone (including myself, who argued for this perspective, lol.)

"Hello, Brent.

In response to your question:

Hey, I had a question concerning the possible interaction between Nav Team, and Admiral Ozzel. So if my ship spends a Nav token and also has Nav teams I can either change my speed or yaw. If I'm running under Ozzel's banner, can I also increase my speed by an "additional" one, per Ozzel, or not because Nav Team is a replacement effect? (So with this setup could I change my speed, and increase my yaw by one with just a Nav token?) Thanks!

Yes, you can in fact use Nav command using the token, resolve the Nav Team effect to increase your yaw by 1, and also resolve Admiral Ozzel’s effect to change your speed by 1.

Thanks for your question!

Michael Gernes

Game Producer"

I think the most interesting part of that response is that it was from Michael Gernes, not James Kniffen... Which is interesting, but not entirely unwelcome

I think the most interesting part of that response is that it was from Michael Gernes, not James Kniffen... Which is interesting, but not entirely unwelcome

An oddity that I did notice. Maybe JDawg is on vacation.

Well. This makes Ozzy a bit more interesting, then...

Well. This makes Ozzy a bit more interesting, then...

You Imps with your lack of Support Team ships. Seriously, get with the program.

You Imps with your lack of Support Team ships. Seriously, get with the program.