Likely because we actually agree on something.

It's so unlikely that this situation should ever arrive that morbid fascination keeps me here.

A game effect forcing you to attack something that is Heavy instead of a ship doesn't mean that the Heavy is the one directly preventing an attack on the ship.

This has nothing to do with what I said, and there is absolutely no point in bringing up another argument to be abused.

Actually, it does. Because that assumption is what allows you to attack the ship.

Nope, but ok.

Nope, but ok.

Heavy squadrons engage. Hopefully we can agree on this. Ok, so my squadron goes to target an attack. He's engaged (by only one Heavy squadron). Ok, well let's examine his targets, only a Heavy squadron is an eligible target, but Heavy says I don't need to target him/I can target a ship instead if I'd like.

Add Instigator's Engagement to the mix, and here's where the assumption is made. If Instigator's Engagement forces you to attack a Squadron, and then you then decide to take advantage of Heavy's text to attack a ship. However, in this case it doesn't apply, because Heavy is worded: "You do not prevent engaged squadrons from attacking ships or moving" and:

A game effect forcing you to attack something that is Heavy instead of a ship doesn't mean that the Heavy is the one directly preventing an attack on the ship.

Just to show I understand your side - engagement is a binary state, either you are or you are not. If you are Engaged then you must check for legal squadron targets to shoot before attempting to shoot a ship. If a your only legal target is Heavy then you may forego that target in favor of shooting a ship.

Whereas I think Engagement is a layered state. I hold this position not only because Instigator says to treat as engaged by an additional 2 squadrons, but because Grit also checks for multiple engagement targets. Also because in the Rules Reference, "While a squadron is at distance 1 of one or more enemy squadrons, it is engaged with all of those enemy squadrons" suggests that engagement with multiple entities would bely several instances of Engagement.

I guess I wasn't very clear. Obviously it can make a difference in some circumstances (at the moment only Grit) how many squadrons you're engaged with, but my point is that the Engagement rule doesn't care. That rule doesn't say "you must attack one of the squadrons you are engaged with", just like Heavy doesn't say "a squadron engaged with Heavy squadrons only is not prevented from moving or attacking ships". It's not that engagement is a binary state, but that the rule governing targetting triggers based on a binary condition: IF (engaged = true) THEN ...

As for the "precedent" set by Grit, two points:

First, like I mentioned before, Grit vs Heavy are both card effects and therefore equally ranked. If they contradict, an interpretation by FFG can be necessary. This is not the case with Heavy vs Engagement.

Second, Grit says "you are not prevented from moving while engaged with only 1 squadron". If you're engaged with a TIE Fighter, you can move because of Grit. If you're engaged with a TIE Bomber, you can move because of both Grit and Heavy. If you're engaged with a TIE Fighter and a TIE Bomber, Grit immediately switches off and, although Heavy still works, the TIE Fighter is now enough to prevent you from moving.

I gotta say, I was on the other side of the coin on this and assumed the FAQ would rule heavy targets could be ignored all together. Now that the FAQ has been placed I feel a little more clear. I think with the Grit and Instigators FAQ combined I can break it down a little more. Sorry if this hurts, fellas.

Engagement occurs when any squad is within distance 1 of an enemy squad and no obstruction occurs. When there is an engagement with a squad that carries the "heavy" keyword the squad with heavy prevents no attacks on ships, or movement with the squad(s) engaged with it. However, should a squad be engaged with a squad that does not carry this heavy key word, the non-heavy engagement takes precedence (precedence is a bad word, but you get it) and the squad that is under engagement must then proceed with actions as if normally engaged regardless of whether the squad is engaged with a heavy squad or not.

Grit. In theory the grit keyword would deactivate when engaged with multiple heavy squadrons. Read that last sentence again. Since there is a squadron with that keyword, there could be 1, or 2, or 50. It would be the same if there was a squadron without grit engaged with many heavies. However, when engaged with a squad without heavy and one with. Grit cannot be applied as there are two active engagements and one carries no keyword, the squad with grit would not be able to target ships or move. Both scenarios deactivate grit, one actually holds him down.

Instigator- this tricky little beast. "Enemy squadrons at distance 1 are treated as if they are engaged by 2 additional squadrons, even if they are not currently engaged." Word for word. So if a squadron is within distance one of this ship it is treated as engaged by two additional squadrons. Treated as if engaged. There are not two phantom squadrons. As if. You treat that squad as if it is engaged by two more squadrons. Two more engagements. I hate to be so demonstrative but that's where the whole thing opens up to me. The squad can freely attack the ship if there is no other engagement as no valid target exists, those squads don't exist. It is engaged in every sense of the word, but hey, he's not going to aim at empty space. When no legal squadron targets exist you can open up on ships. When this squadron is engaged by another squadron & instigator it may only shoot the squadron. This is because there are truly three engagements. Two do not carry the keyword heavy and one does. Those non-keyword engagements force the squad to aim for any applicable targets that are not ships. Therefore, should any valid targets present itself the squadron must engage that target first.

I miss something? Go ahead then, tear my interpretation apart.

Nope, you have it right in my view.

I feel like Instigator's "treated as if they are engaged by 2 additional squadrons" is what blows the lid off of it. If multiple engagements were meaningless in any and all cases except for Grit it wouldn't make sense to me.

Instigator's ability is to engage squadrons, including those with Grit.

In what other case does multiple engagement do anything?

This thread is nothing short of hilarious.

I feel like Instigator's "treated as if they are engaged by 2 additional squadrons" is what blows the lid off of it. If multiple engagements were meaningless in any and all cases except for Grit it wouldn't make sense to me.

Daveddo, I think it is "two additional squadrons" specifically so grit is affected as well. It's simply to prevent movement of any squad regardless of what it is, except tycho.

Have we really not gotten an actual answer back on this yet? Seriously?

Have we really not gotten an actual answer back on this yet? Seriously?

Unfortunately, no. I submitted it and I know at least one other member has submitted it as well.

I submitted a question about... Something or other before this thread popped up and I'm still waiting on that one, too.

My guess is that Store Championships are occupying most of the available brainpower.

I submitted a question about... Something or other before this thread popped up and I'm still waiting on that one, too.

My guess is that Store Championships are occupying most of the available brainpower.

Maybe there isn't enough brainpower to find a diplomatic way of saying that Instigator does not negate the Heavy keyword.

I submitted a question about... Something or other before this thread popped up and I'm still waiting on that one, too.

My guess is that Store Championships are occupying most of the available brainpower.

Maybe there isn't enough brainpower to find a diplomatic way of saying that Instigator does not negate the Heavy keyword.

Or that it does? We'll let sleeping giants lie for now.

Maybe there isn't enough brainpower to find a diplomatic way of saying that Instigator does not negate the Heavy keyword.

By the glory of Occam's Razor, I assume this must be the case!

It doesn't interact with the heavy keyword in any way.

It doesn't interact with the heavy keyword in any way.

Damnit FFG! Can't you see what this is doing to us?

Damnit FFG! Can't you see what this is doing to us?

I think we do it to ourselves plenty, even without this.

Another week gone by, anyone received a ruling yet?

I'm sure the moment we get one, it'll be here, with bold flashing typeface.

I'm sure the moment we get one, it'll be here, with bold flashing typeface.

Only if the asker was right.

Otherwise it'll be in the smallest font that the forum supports.