https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/d4/ee/d4eef29c-0edb-4e7c-bddb-cba5f3e80eb1/armada_faq_v2.pdf

Nothing really surprising.

Edit:

They also updated the tournament rules to reflect Wave 2!
https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/e3/82/e3827f2b-9389-440b-b4d4-71a6b3f2e8bc/armada_tournament_rules_v2_high_res.pdf

I like that Jan rule. I wouldn't have ever thought about that scenario until I played her.

I like that Jan rule. I wouldn't have ever thought about that scenario until I played her.

Oh man, I was right about the Phylon Q7 Tractor beams. You MUST lose a Navigate token. If you cannot, then you lose 1 speed.

Yeah thats a big ruling on those tractors.

Amazingly the FAQ answered exactly zero of the questions I really had about the rules.

Thanks FFG.

Tournament rule fail. Still says 300 points and 100 points of squads.

Tournament rule fail. Still says 300 points and 100 points of squads.

"Unless Jan Ors herself is defending, her defense tokens cannot be targeted by an accuracy icon’s effect"

But I though only Hit icon's have any effect on squadrons??? and accuracy and Critical have no effect.

common misconception. Accuracies do affect defense tokens of unique squadrons.

Also still need Nav Team + Ozzel interaction!

--

Tractor beam should have been written: "...that ship must spend a nav token if it has one. If it does not, it reduces its speed by 1 to a minimum of 1."

Oh man, I was right about the Phylon Q7 Tractor beams. You MUST lose a Navigate token. If you cannot, then you lose 1 speed.

Now I am extremely happy over this. . . Yes. . . Very happy

Is there anything that would prevent someone with admonition from using a redirect and then discarding the exhausted redirect to get the title's benefit? I didn't see it mentioned in the FAQ

Is there anything that would prevent someone with admonition from using a redirect and then discarding the exhausted redirect to get the title's benefit? I didn't see it mentioned in the FAQ

You are activating a card ability not spending the token a second time.

Did this FAQ make Quad Laser Turrets even worse?

Did this FAQ make Quad Laser Turrets even worse?

I had no idea there was any confusion with quad lasers. It's simply one blue dice every time you're attacked by a squadron at distance one.

Did this FAQ make Quad Laser Turrets even worse?

I had no idea there was any confusion with quad lasers. It's simply one blue dice every time you're attacked by a squadron at distance one.

Yeah, that one confused me too. What else could it be?

Also still need Nav Team + Ozzel interaction!

--

Tractor beam should have been written: "...that ship must spend a nav token if it has one. If it does not, it reduces its speed by 1 to a minimum of 1."

This. The way this card is written is directly contrary to the ruling. There is nothing on the card that says option B (reducing speed) is dependent on the ability to do option A. If that was indeed the intent, then it is very poorly written. As least there is a ruling to work from now, but I am surprised that they made this big of a mistake in the text of the card as FFG is usually good about that sort of thing.

Did this FAQ make Quad Laser Turrets even worse?

I had no idea there was any confusion with quad lasers. It's simply one blue dice every time you're attacked by a squadron at distance one.

Yeah, that one confused me too. What else could it be?

People thought the counter was based on the color of their Anti-squadron Value

A major victory for common sense

People think some strange stuff.

Also still need Nav Team + Ozzel interaction!

--

Tractor beam should have been written: "...that ship must spend a nav token if it has one. If it does not, it reduces its speed by 1 to a minimum of 1."

This. The way this card is written is directly contrary to the ruling. There is nothing on the card that says option B (reducing speed) is dependent on the ability to do option A. If that was indeed the intent, then it is very poorly written. As least there is a ruling to work from now, but I am surprised that they made this big of a mistake in the text of the card as FFG is usually good about that sort of thing.

I think you're talking about Tractor beam wording, in which I completely agree. Its extremely poor writing. And honestly, I don't see why they HAD to rule it that way.

Oh man, I was right about the Phylon Q7 Tractor beams. You MUST lose a Navigate token. If you cannot, then you lose 1 speed.

Muhahahaha I was right!

Now I am extremely happy over this. . . Yes. . . Very happy

Been thinking about this - is it such an advantage?

I guess it is better to be able to reliably negate the NAV token.

But say we have a speed three demolisher with engine techs coming at us. Unless he is crazy he is going to have a nav command banked.

So we hit him with the Q7s. He loses his nav token. (I guess that makes wulff sad if he is relying on him). He is still at speed 3 with a nav command when he activates so he can still manuvre and engine tech.

I don't think it gets much better if you hit him with a second Q7.

So really, we cost him a nav token, or the opportunity cost of not being able to use say, concentrate fire or engineering.

Been thinking about this - is it such an advantage?

I actually just recently started a thread about whether it was better to save the nav token when being tractored. Except for a few corner cases it was basically always the defenders interest to accept the speed reduction and save the token until he moved, so I would say, yes, being forced to spend the nav token is definitely an advantage for the tractoring ship. Though possibly not a really BIG advantage.

Here is the thread

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/195458-tractor-beams/#entry1927209

Oh man, I was right about the Phylon Q7 Tractor beams. You MUST lose a Navigate token. If you cannot, then you lose 1 speed.

Muhahahaha I was right!

Now I am extremely happy over this. . . Yes. . . Very happy

I just read that and thought you'd be happy to hear... obviously you already saw it Well done Lyr