I personally like the version TIE/D + Ruthlessness, as it forces the opponent to break formation.

But does the tractor beam make a damage to a ship in range 1 after hitting the target. Rule would say yes, game logic would deny it, because how can you make damage with a tractor beam to an adjacent ship.

TIE/D:
Once per round, after you perform an attack with a secondary weapon that costs 3 or fewer squad points, you may perform a primary weapon attack.

Ruthlessness:
After you perform an attack that hits, you must choose 1 other ship at Range 1 of the defender (other than yourself). That ship suffers 1 damage.

Tractor beam:
If this attack hits, the defender receives 1 tractor beam token. Then cancel all dice results.

I personally like the version TIE/D + Ruthlessness, as it forces the opponent to break formation.

But does the tractor beam make a damage to a ship in range 1 after hitting the target. Rule would say yes, game logic would deny it, because how can you make damage to an adjancent ship with a tractor beam.

use the targeted ship like a ball-n-chain and slam it into the other ship

Ruthlessness:
After you perform an attack that hits,

Tractor beam:
If this attack hits

I would imagine it would...

Man, I was just gonna slap predator on but ruthless sounds FUN.

I was wondering now, if my ball-n-chain theory has any merit, why the Ruthless defender would smash his buddies with a t-beamed ship

this is what I came up with:

don't get too near Vess when he's got his toy

My guess would be this is going to be FAQ'd, but it looks totally legit right now.

My guess would be this is going to be FAQ'd, but it looks totally legit right now.

Why would it be?

My guess would be this is going to be FAQ'd, but it looks totally legit right now.

Why would it be?

because as it stand tractor does no damage, but with ruthlessness it does one damage... and not even to the ship that rolls the defense dice... would it be fair that Soontir Fel takes damage, just because old man palpmobile cant maneuver for his life? the answer to that question is obviously yes, so i just took it away to make it easier... It just needs a little clarification is all.

I can imagine that careless or ruthless use of a tractor beam might tear a chunk from a nearby ship as the beam sweeps across it. 25 years playing GW games has taught me to not be too literal when translating in-game effects to narrative.

If both attacks hit ruthlessness triggers twice.

I personally like the version TIE/D + Ruthlessness, as it forces the opponent to break formation.

But does the tractor beam make a damage to a ship in range 1 after hitting the target. Rule would say yes, game logic would deny it, because how can you make damage to an adjancent ship with a tractor beam.

use the targeted ship like a ball-n-chain and slam it into the other ship

This explanation makes the combo even cooler.

A

My guess would be this is going to be FAQ'd, but it looks totally legit right now.

Why would it be?

because as it stand tractor does no damage, but with ruthlessness it does one damage... and not even to the ship that rolls the defense dice... would it be fair that Soontir Fel takes damage, just because old man palpmobile cant maneuver for his life? the answer to that question is obviously yes, so i just took it away to make it easier... It just needs a little clarification is all.

The trigger for Ruthlessness is that your attack hits, which is the same trigger for the tractor beam itself to work. So it is legal, but doesn't make sense in any other way, as far as I'm concerned.

If your attack doesn't do damage to its target, I see no good reason for a different ship to also be damaged.... in terms of what the rules are supposed to represent in the star wars x wing universe. Ruthlessness is supposed to represent a disregard for making a clean shot at your target and hitting other nearby ships in collateral damage. This doesn't make much sense with a tractor beam if you ask me.

A

My guess would be this is going to be FAQ'd, but it looks totally legit right now.

Why would it be?

because as it stand tractor does no damage, but with ruthlessness it does one damage... and not even to the ship that rolls the defense dice... would it be fair that Soontir Fel takes damage, just because old man palpmobile cant maneuver for his life? the answer to that question is obviously yes, so i just took it away to make it easier... It just needs a little clarification is all.

The trigger for Ruthlessness is that your attack hits, which is the same trigger for the tractor beam itself to work. So it is legal, but doesn't make sense in any other way, as far as I'm concerned.

If your attack doesn't do damage to its target, I see no good reason for a different ship to also be damaged.... in terms of what the rules are supposed to represent in the star wars x wing universe. Ruthlessness is supposed to represent a disregard for making a clean shot at your target and hitting other nearby ships in collateral damage. This doesn't make much sense with a tractor beam if you ask me.

unless you think of it in the sense that it might magnetically charge the ship causing a nearby ship (regardless of friendliness) to bump it and cause damage (oicunn style)

One day people will just read the cards and follow the rules...

There is nothing to debate, question, or FAQ. When an attack hits (says NOTHING about damage) another ship, besides yourself, at R1 of the defender suffers 1 damage.

Might not make sense... but I'm totally going to run it until they FAQ it.

Although... I suspect I'll just cause my own ships to get hurt more often than not.

Oh well, worth it.

My guess would be this is going to be FAQ'd, but it looks totally legit right now.

OMG why? The last thing we need is an FAQ about a totally underused EPT like Ruthlessness...

Or do you really think that it would be OP to do 1 damage on top of your Tractor beam with a 3 point talent? Even if in Tie/D's case it would potentially be 2 damage per turn.

From a rules perspective: As long as you HIT with the tractor beam you fulfill the condition of Ruthlessness and do a damage on the neighbour. Nothing speaks against it.

There is nothing to debate, question, or FAQ.

I disagree that it doesn't need a FAQ.

FAQs are not just clarifying grey areas of the rules, they are also used to highlight obscure rules that may be totally clear how they work but either don't come up often (so people forget about the interaction) or are weird corner cases that make perfect sense mechanically but result in counter intuitive results flavor-wise. this is an example of that last instance. A basic understanding of the rules leaves no question whatsoever how it works, but leaves you going "huh, that doesn't make a lot of sense". such a situation warrants a FAQ just so nobody wonders if they are missing something because the answer they get is so countrary to what they would have expected from the flavor.

My guess would be this is going to be FAQ'd, but it looks totally legit right now.

OMG why? The last thing we need is an FAQ about a totally underused EPT like Ruthlessness...

Or do you really think that it would be OP to do 1 damage on top of your Tractor beam with a 3 point talent? Even if in Tie/D's case it would potentially be 2 damage per turn.

From a rules perspective: As long as you HIT with the tractor beam you fulfill the condition of Ruthlessness and do a damage on the neighbour. Nothing speaks against it.

Ruthlessness has a place on the defender now regardless of whether or not this interaction with Tractor beam is FAQ’d. I think that as it stands now, it makes no sense in-universe that this interaction works, and there is a possibility that the interaction is too strong. The Tractor beam is aggressively priced at 1 point, because it doesn’t do any direct damage; it’s dependent on later attacks to have an effect. Stacking another damage on it is a serious upgrade, especially when you duplicate the same bonus with your next attack.

I think it would be better with Ion cannon.

I'd hate to say this but with tractor beam I don't find it that effective as it does 0 damage. The only thing it does it makes it easier for other ships to hit. So the only way I could see tractor beam work is with a pathfinder & pack list. The Pathfinder is the tractor beem Defender/shuttle or Myst Hunter/IG-88 B and the pack is 5 Tie Fighters or Z-95 Headhunters. The pathfinder marks a target fairly easy and then all of a sudden 2 firepower is just brutal on what would normally be safe from 2 firepower.

Still the problem is you have to hit with the tractor beam. So the pathfinder is going to be a high pilot skill with exceptional build or abilities that allows for easy dice modification.

Ruthlessness on the Defender makes total sense. These ships have languished for too long. Zapping one target for -1 agility and pinging another ship for a damage before firing the primaries and pinging again for extra damage is exactly what the Defender should be doing. It's a monster and it costs way too much not to be pounding this hard.

I think it would be better with Ion cannon.

I'd hate to say this but with tractor beam I don't find it that effective as it does 0 damage. The only thing it does it makes it easier for other ships to hit. So the only way I could see tractor beam work is with a pathfinder & pack list. The Pathfinder is the tractor beem Defender/shuttle or Myst Hunter/IG-88 B and the pack is 5 Tie Fighters or Z-95 Headhunters. The pathfinder marks a target fairly easy and then all of a sudden 2 firepower is just brutal on what would normally be safe from 2 firepower.

Still the problem is you have to hit with the tractor beam. So the pathfinder is going to be a high pilot skill with exceptional build or abilities that allows for easy dice modification.

so... Vess with Tractor and Tie/D and an epsilon swarm

The ship receiving the Tractor Beam token loses control momentarily and the other ship flies into it and takes a damage.

Maybe the Tractor Beam does more than just reduce the target's agility.

Ruthless tractor beams might cause shrapnel to fly at other ships or piece of the ship that was ensnared. Or we just accept that it works and accept that the Defender is just awesome.

My guess would be this is going to be FAQ'd, but it looks totally legit right now.

OMG why? The last thing we need is an FAQ about a totally underused EPT like Ruthlessness...

Or do you really think that it would be OP to do 1 damage on top of your Tractor beam with a 3 point talent? Even if in Tie/D's case it would potentially be 2 damage per turn.

From a rules perspective: As long as you HIT with the tractor beam you fulfill the condition of Ruthlessness and do a damage on the neighbour. Nothing speaks against it.

Ruthlessness has a place on the defender now regardless of whether or not this interaction with Tractor beam is FAQ’d. I think that as it stands now, it makes no sense in-universe that this interaction works, and there is a possibility that the interaction is too strong. The Tractor beam is aggressively priced at 1 point, because it doesn’t do any direct damage; it’s dependent on later attacks to have an effect. Stacking another damage on it is a serious upgrade, especially when you duplicate the same bonus with your next attack.

This interaction? Too strong? XD

It.s potentially 2 bonus damage per turn. UNLESS your opponent doesn't fly formation and Ruthlessness is totally wasted! Which makes Ruthlessness a very risky pick. And what if you screw up and get one of your ships as only Range 1 (and that can happen even if you dont mess up too by smart enemy maneuvering). What then? Forfeit 2 shots?

WIth Ion cannon/Flechette this could stack up real quick actually with 2 attacks from Tie/D and both being able to deal damage. And you control your adversary even more... So i don't think this is a problem of Tractor Beam especially if it's going to be a problem at all.

Which i don't think as we are still not back to a swarm meta. Most lists are still 2-4 ships and don't need any formation flying. And they also won't do it if they see that phoned in combo.

There are better EPTs on Vessery!

My guess would be this is going to be FAQ'd, but it looks totally legit right now.

OMG why? The last thing we need is an FAQ about a totally underused EPT like Ruthlessness...

Or do you really think that it would be OP to do 1 damage on top of your Tractor beam with a 3 point talent? Even if in Tie/D's case it would potentially be 2 damage per turn.

From a rules perspective: As long as you HIT with the tractor beam you fulfill the condition of Ruthlessness and do a damage on the neighbour. Nothing speaks against it.

Ruthlessness has a place on the defender now regardless of whether or not this interaction with Tractor beam is FAQ’d. I think that as it stands now, it makes no sense in-universe that this interaction works, and there is a possibility that the interaction is too strong. The Tractor beam is aggressively priced at 1 point, because it doesn’t do any direct damage; it’s dependent on later attacks to have an effect. Stacking another damage on it is a serious upgrade, especially when you duplicate the same bonus with your next attack.

This interaction? Too strong? XD

It.s potentially 2 bonus damage per turn. UNLESS your opponent doesn't fly formation and Ruthlessness is totally wasted! Which makes Ruthlessness a very risky pick. And what if you screw up and get one of your ships as only Range 1 (and that can happen even if you dont mess up too by smart enemy maneuvering). What then? Forfeit 2 shots?

WIth Ion cannon/Flechette this could stack up real quick actually with 2 attacks from Tie/D and both being able to deal damage. And you control your adversary even more... So i don't think this is a problem of Tractor Beam especially if it's going to be a problem at all.

Which i don't think as we are still not back to a swarm meta. Most lists are still 2-4 ships and don't need any formation flying. And they also won't do it if they see that phoned in combo.

There are better EPTs on Vessery!

Not too strong, but the combo is very versatile.

But in general when I look at your postings in this thread here (and your way of writing) it is obvious that you are looking for a conflict or rub up the wrong way. I don´t understand why you desperately want to "enlighten" us. Just leave it as it is and find your peace in another topic.