So wait a sec... people need an FAQ (or want) for this combination but where able to understand Lieutenant Blount + Assault Missiles?

So wait a sec... people need an FAQ (or want) for this combination but where able to understand Lieutenant Blount + Assault Missiles?

At least assault missiles do damage. I can see that effect making sense much easier than I can this one.

Sure, it makes little sense.

Does hitting Turr with an ion at PS 10 make sense? It completely shuts down the engines, but he is still able to attack, barrel roll and engine boost, while ioned. Or a Phantom with ACD, for that matter, initiating the power hungry cloaking systems while ioned.

Does it make sense that a cannon is more accurate at long range than the primary lasers? They are both mounted on the same ship after all.

Some things make no real sense, so what.

So wait a sec... people need an FAQ (or want) for this combination but where able to understand Lieutenant Blount + Assault Missiles?

At least assault missiles do damage. I can see that effect making sense much easier than I can this one.

No he does not need to do damage.. thats the whole point.

Blount:

"When attacking, the defender is hit by your attack, even if he does not suffer any damage."

Assault Missles:

"If this attack hits, each other ship at Range 1 of the defender suffers 1 damage"

So its the exact same situation.. he shoots AM at enemy but roles 0 hits.. still everybody gets hit.

So there is no difference in the ruling.

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.

"and there is a possibility that the interaction is too strong" citing Babaganoosh. Which i have no quarrel with actually.

But sorry, i must be allowed to say if i don't see any need to clarify this 2 card interaction further because it's pretty obvious what the rules say, and also to disagree if someone states that something is possibly "too strong" and potentially needs further ruling by FFG.

I made 2 posts exactly here and both of them were completely inoffensive to anyone, including Babaganoosh. If i disagree, i will go on and say so, that's nothing said against anyone! And fyi, i will go on posting wherever and whenever i feel like it!

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

Why would it be?

Because someone has missed how it is possible for an attack to "hit" but deal absolutely no damage.

If Ruthless hadn't been Imperial Only you'd see this concern a lot more and a while ago as Blount could run around shooting at stuff and causing damage to things near his target.

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.

Well, if tractor beam hits and you run the 2 attacks Defender, then that defender becomes better than Wedge - not only -1 agi against his own following attack but his friends may also use that effect! Wedge-effect for everyone! Kinda removes the glory from outmaneuver though (cheaper, no valuable EPT slot necessary)

Also, I don't get that "the tractor beam ships needs to be high PS to enable other ships in list to use its effect". Actually, it just doesn't need to be the lowest; best option would be to have everybody at the same PS, and then choose which one goes first (probably the tractor beam equipped, but you never know). I run a Scum list with all being PS 5, and it gives great options to choose each turn in which order to move and shoot.

"and there is a possibility that the interaction is too strong" citing Babaganoosh. Which i have no quarrel with actually.

But sorry, i must be allowed to say if i don't see any need to clarify this 2 card interaction further because it's pretty obvious what the rules say, and also to disagree if someone states that something is possibly "too strong" and potentially needs further ruling by FFG.

I made 2 posts exactly here and both of them were completely inoffensive to anyone, including Babaganoosh. If i disagree, i will go on and say so, that's nothing said against anyone! And fyi, i will go on posting wherever and whenever i feel like it!

It's easy to misinterpret a post's tone as dismissive. My feelings aren't hurt, for the record.

The main reason I guessed this interaction may see an FAQ is because it doesn't make sense (to me) in the context of a starfighter dogfight, which is what the game is supposed to simulate. The interaction being too powerful is, again, just a possibility.

"and there is a possibility that the interaction is too strong" citing Babaganoosh. Which i have no quarrel with actually.

But sorry, i must be allowed to say if i don't see any need to clarify this 2 card interaction further because it's pretty obvious what the rules say, and also to disagree if someone states that something is possibly "too strong" and potentially needs further ruling by FFG.

I made 2 posts exactly here and both of them were completely inoffensive to anyone, including Babaganoosh. If i disagree, i will go on and say so, that's nothing said against anyone! And fyi, i will go on posting wherever and whenever i feel like it!

It's easy to misinterpret a post's tone as dismissive. My feelings aren't hurt, for the record.

The main reason I guessed this interaction may see an FAQ is because it doesn't make sense (to me) in the context of a starfighter dogfight, which is what the game is supposed to simulate. The interaction being too powerful is, again, just a possibility.

It was in no way intended to go against you, be assured! I just don't like when someone tries to forbid me to state my opinion. But it wasn't you trying to do that anyway!

Well, just see it as a tractor beam causing a collision between 2 friendly ships flying formation maybe, or if it's a really strong beam it could just toss the fighter around against his squadmate...

are we completely sure we know all the rules to tractor beam? for instance, is it super easy for a small ship to tractor a large ship??

Syck tractors falcon: hits.

4 khiransljdnfdl pour fire into it.

hmm.

I could get addicted to that.

are we completely sure we know all the rules to tractor beam? for instance, is it super easy for a small ship to tractor a large ship??

Syck tractors falcon: hits.

4 khiransljdnfdl pour fire into it.

hmm.

I could get addicted to that.

We're still missing the lower half of the reference card, BUT:

• we know when the tokens are applied (immediately after a hit)
• we know what they do during the combat phase (reduce AGI by 1 to minimum of 0)
• we know what happens to them during the end phase (they are removed)

The second half /could/ have specific rules for whether ship size makes a difference, but that seems like a wierd order to list the effects in.

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.

I'm gonna put my beam on full power and just swing it onto the target - who cares if I rip a piece off of a different ship or pull some debris onto something while I do this....

That ruthlessness interaction could be a pretty **** big deal. I like 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.

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.

"and there is a possibility that the interaction is too strong" citing Babaganoosh. Which i have no quarrel with actually.

But sorry, i must be allowed to say if i don't see any need to clarify this 2 card interaction further because it's pretty obvious what the rules say, and also to disagree if someone states that something is possibly "too strong" and potentially needs further ruling by FFG.

I made 2 posts exactly here and both of them were completely inoffensive to anyone, including Babaganoosh. If i disagree, i will go on and say so, that's nothing said against anyone! And fyi, i will go on posting wherever and whenever i feel like it!

I am sorry I didn´t want to insult you. I would never force anybody to stop posting anything, it was just a suggestion. If you felt like I forced you than I am sorry for that misunderstanding, I just had the impression (because of your use of callsigns) that you want to disagree at all costs with emphasis and the reason I didn´t understand. So of course feel free to post what and whenever you want.

To topic:

I think the use of ruthlessness is in general a good EPT for TIE/D, even without tractor beam. It is versatile against lists with Biggs (which I assume will have his comeback soon) and other formations. It forces the opponent to split ships, which can be annoying in case of TIEs for example (even without howlrunner). Other example would be Palpshuttle, where you stay in range of the shuttle (which is not difficult) and shoot at it. Ships coming close to you are often in range 1 of the shuttle (even easier when large base ships). Soontir has to take care too not to get such riochet shots (and loose stealth device).

To topic:

I think the use of ruthlessness is in general a good EPT for TIE/D, even without tractor beam. It is versatile against lists with Biggs (which I assume will have his comeback soon) and other formations. It forces the opponent to split ships, which can be annoying in case of TIEs for example (even without howlrunner). Other example would be Palpshuttle, where you stay in range of the shuttle (which is not difficult) and shoot at it. Ships coming close to you are often in range 1 of the shuttle (even easier when large base ships). Soontir has to take care too not to get such riochet shots (and loose stealth device).

Having Ruthless cause damage to Soontir after hitting a ship near him would NOT cause him to lose a Stealth Device if so equipped. A ship needs to be specifically targeted by an attack to lose a Stealth Device.

Perhaps the intent is to say that Fel needs to avoid taking damage when he isn't the one being hit and that losing a Stealth Device would also be very bad although a completely separate event. The way the quoted post is worded it makes it seem that taking a "ricochet shot" will also cause a ship to lose a Stealth Device when that is not the case.

.....

Thread tracers

..... /leaves thread.

My question is how does Rexlar then work with ruthlessness, doesn't seem like it would work but would be amazing if it does

My question is how does Rexlar then work with ruthlessness, doesn't seem like it would work but would be amazing if it does

His effect doesn't interact with ruthless. Due to the wording, the extra damage from ruthless is not an attack, it's an effect.

To topic:

I think the use of ruthlessness is in general a good EPT for TIE/D, even without tractor beam. It is versatile against lists with Biggs (which I assume will have his comeback soon) and other formations. It forces the opponent to split ships, which can be annoying in case of TIEs for example (even without howlrunner). Other example would be Palpshuttle, where you stay in range of the shuttle (which is not difficult) and shoot at it. Ships coming close to you are often in range 1 of the shuttle (even easier when large base ships). Soontir has to take care too not to get such riochet shots (and loose stealth device).

Having Ruthless cause damage to Soontir after hitting a ship near him would NOT cause him to lose a Stealth Device if so equipped. A ship needs to be specifically targeted by an attack to lose a Stealth Device.

Perhaps the intent is to say that Fel needs to avoid taking damage when he isn't the one being hit and that losing a Stealth Device would also be very bad although a completely separate event. The way the quoted post is worded it makes it seem that taking a "ricochet shot" will also cause a ship to lose a Stealth Device when that is not the case.

Oh, yes you are right, taking a damage is not the same as getting hit. Thanks for the clearing

Take it to the limit:

Colonel Vessery (40)

TIE Defender (35), Tractor beam (1), Ruthlessness (3), TIE/D (0), Twin Ion Engine Mk. II (1)

Omega Squadron Pilot (20) x 3
TIE/fo Fighter (17), Ruthlessness (3)

---

Omega's set up TL's for Vessery then take advantage of the TB token. #formationflyingisdead

Take it to the limit:

Colonel Vessery (40)

TIE Defender (35), Tractor beam (1), Ruthlessness (3), TIE/D (0), Twin Ion Engine Mk. II (1)

Omega Squadron Pilot (20) x 3

TIE/fo Fighter (17), Ruthlessness (3)

---

Omega's set up TL's for Vessery then take advantage of the TB token. #formationflyingisdead

King of friendly and unfriendly fire, godfather of ricoshet shots, atomic bomb mode

I like that, it´s so suicide and effective at once, fun to play

Take it to the limit:

Colonel Vessery (40)

TIE Defender (35), Tractor beam (1), Ruthlessness (3), TIE/D (0), Twin Ion Engine Mk. II (1)

Omega Squadron Pilot (20) x 3

TIE/fo Fighter (17), Ruthlessness (3)

---

Omega's set up TL's for Vessery then take advantage of the TB token. #formationflyingisdead

King of friendly and unfriendly fire, godfather of ricoshet shots, atomic bomb mode

I like that, it´s so suicide and effective at once, fun to play

just dont fly at range 1... fly slow or fly fast, dont match your opponents maneuvers.

This is truly the counter to Biggs we deserve.

There is nothing to debate, question, or FAQ.

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.

This line of thought is exactly what gets people into trouble in this game. To quote Yoda, you must first unlearn what you have learned. Other games have rules about actions that are similar to the ones found in X-wing. Those other games do not apply to X-wing. Luke Skywalker always had R2-D2 in his X-wing during the movies. This has no barring on the rules of X-wing the game.

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!

Ruthlessness on a Tie/D is going to be one of those things that looks great on paper and in the right match-up is awesome but is far too situational to run for anything but ***** and grins, especially as part of a list that has a decently high ship count and is filled with high agility, low hit point ships.