where is this rule?

The rules state that crit icons don't effect fighters. Other than that, all the normal rules for attack dice apply. So why WOULDN'T accuracy results work vs fighters?

It is a VERY common mistake. The rules say crits don't effect fighters, and generics don't have tokens so accuracies don't effect them, so people start thinking "only hit icons effect fighters", when that isn't what the rules actually say.

Exactly this.

You get the same kind of confusion from new players with black anti-squadron dice on ships. Some people assumed they worked out to medium range simply because all the anti-squadron dice up through wave 1 did. This is because they were blue dice (which by default go to medium range), not due to any specified "flak goes out to medium range" rule.

People think some strange stuff.

One of my local players seems sore that Assault Proton Torpedoes wasn't FAQ'ed to be less potent then they are. Um...

The ruling on Jan Ors is interesting enough I'll need to slip her into my rebel squadron lists for now on. Unblockable bankable brace tokens that escorts can use on top of their own!

People think some strange stuff.

One of my local players seems hurt that Assault Proton Torpedoes wasn't FAQ'ed to be less potent then they are. Um...

The ruling on Jan Ors is interesting enough I'll need to slip her into my rebel squadron lists for now on. Unblockable bankable brace tokens that escorts can use on top of their own!

Indeed, but intel officer on raider becomes more interesting.

pretty sure they write the cards that could be broken vague so they can faq their "intention" based on feedback

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.

Correct. I was saying that if their intent was for it to work the way the FAQ is written, then they did a poor job wording the card the way they did.

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.

Honestly, I think that, wording aside, the ruling actually strengthens the card. Not allowing the defender to have a choice about how something affects them is always a good thing. You never want to allow your opponent choices in games like this, because it allows them to make the least painful choice for them.

I think tractor beams is one of those cards that you do t use every turn.

Sorry - do or don't use every turn? I can't work out what you are saying here.

I think you would be doing your best to use it just about every turn wouldn't you?

I think tractor beams is one of those cards that you do t use every turn.

Sorry - do or don't use every turn? I can't work out what you are saying here.

Don't know that I agree with him, but I am certain that is what hapened with the "do t"

I think tractor beams is one of those cards that you do t use every turn.

Sorry - do or don't use every turn? I can't work out what you are saying here.

He typed "don't" on a tablet that is very easy to accidentally miss the "n" key and hit the space bar instead. I do it all the time.

Don't know that I agree with him, but I am certain that is what hapened with the "do t"

Ok fair enough!

I think to use tractor beams as "intended" you are almost going to need three of them - the first to kill the Nav token, the second to drop one speed band, and a third to drop a second speed band to negate the nav command speed increase he is very likely to have banked if he is relying on maintaining speed.

On the other hand, it does open up the use for a single tractor beam ship to snipe nav tokens (which has tactical uses in and of itself), and as a threat in being.

On the other hand, it does open up the use for a single tractor beam ship to snipe nav tokens (which has tactical uses in and of itself), and as a threat in being.

I think this is a very valid point and it's kind of how I have been thinking about using Tractor Beams since the FAQ hit. Using it to snipe Nav Tokens can limit people's ability to rely on speed and maneuverability as part of their plan. It can potentially screw with Ozzel builds, not to mention having an impact on Tarkin and Garm abilities. It's no smoking gun, but as I said before any time you can take choice out of your opponent's hands, that's a good thing.

I think tractor beams is one of those cards that you do t use every turn.

Sorry - do or don't use every turn? I can't work out what you are saying here.

He typed "don't" on a tablet that is very easy to accidentally miss the "n" key and hit the space bar instead. I do it all the time.

Don't know that I agree with him, but I am certain that is what hapened with the "do t"

There are definitely times when you don't want to use it even though you could. If I have an ISD with tractor beams and I'm closing head-on with Ackbar's Home One, I want that closing speed as high as I can get it. If Ackbar is obligingly tooling along toward me at speed 2 at the outer edge of long range, I'm probably not going to slow him down even though I could.

On the other hand, it does open up the use for a single tractor beam ship to snipe nav tokens (which has tactical uses in and of itself), and as a threat in being.

I think this is a very valid point and it's kind of how I have been thinking about using Tractor Beams since the FAQ hit. Using it to snipe Nav Tokens can limit people's ability to rely on speed and maneuverability as part of their plan. It can potentially screw with Ozzel builds, not to mention having an impact on Tarkin and Garm abilities. It's no smoking gun, but as I said before any time you can take choice out of your opponent's hands, that's a good thing.

I can say from running Ozzel several times now that I would have zero fear of Tractor Beams. Navigate commands are happening constantly to just jerk the speed around to wherever works best that turn, so all the Tractor Beams are really doing is temporarily lowering my speed by 1 before it gets changed by 2 anyways.

I think they have a lot more utility against Rebels in general (to either disrupt the snoozefest conga lines or selectively slow down sneaky little SOBs like CR90s and MC30s) than Imperials, but I can see their utility against Gladiators run by someone who might not be Navigating as much, like Vader or Screed.

And in fact, FFG writes a LOT of their cards poorly.

They should hire a lawyer to review their verbiage. It is often inconsistent and tends to rely on "common sense" which is a terrible thing to rely on when people in a competitive environment start rules lawyering to make something align to their advantage.

Someone has never played Attack Wing.

IMO, FFG writes their cards exceptionaly well. They aren't perfect, but there is far less argument about ****, or at least the argument is far more nuanced then I've seen in other games.

And in fact, FFG writes a LOT of their cards poorly.

They should hire a lawyer to review their verbiage. It is often inconsistent and tends to rely on "common sense" which is a terrible thing to rely on when people in a competitive environment start rules lawyering to make something align to their advantage.

Someone has never played Attack Wing.

IMO, FFG writes their cards exceptionaly well. They aren't perfect, but there is far less argument about ****, or at least the argument is far more nuanced then I've seen in other games.

They have not played the games by the company that shall not be named, or the V1 Firestorm Armada. . .

lets not even talk about Heroclix.....

Thanks guys I need to point that over sight to the guy that showed all the people around here how to play and fit it.

Ah crap, as a rebel player, I now loath tractor beams.

Thank god they are a modification and prevent you from using other modification cards, those seem to be primarily the dice adders to the game.

Expanded Launchers AND tractor beams on a VSD1? I think not!

But this could suck, will have to integrate Leia into more lists because I know my friend already loves tractor beams as they were.

They have not played the games by the company that shall not be named, or the V1 Firestorm Armada. . .

I was into Mechwarrior: Dark age in a big way back in the day. I even went to the UK championships.

I got burned in a big way by the collapse of that game, I still have about 100 mechs sitting in a box in the attic in my parents' house. They have mostly been used as conversion fodder for a 40k guard army, so it's not all bad. My ogryns are cool.

After MW:DA went belly up I resolved to only ever play GW games as they were the most popular, but over 10 years the sheer accumulation of stuff that is required from GW (especially since 4th edition) as well as the tables and terrain makes it too unwieldy, and so I like that I can play armada on a yoga mat, collect both of the only 2 sides and it all packs down into a single plastic box

what plastic box!?!? I must know!

They have not played the games by the company that shall not be named, or the V1 Firestorm Armada. . .

I was into Mechwarrior: Dark age in a big way back in the day. I even went to the UK championships.

I got burned in a big way by the collapse of that game, I still have about 100 mechs sitting in a box in the attic in my parents' house. They have mostly been used as conversion fodder for a 40k guard army, so it's not all bad. My ogryns are cool.

After MW:DA went belly up I resolved to only ever play GW games as they were the most popular, but over 10 years the sheer accumulation of stuff that is required from GW (especially since 4th edition) as well as the tables and terrain makes it too unwieldy, and so I like that I can play armada on a yoga mat, collect both of the only 2 sides and it all packs down into a single plastic box

40k became a glut of exaggerated prices and intentionally unbalanced army books all to drive sales forward for new models and books.

I gave it up when GW's intentions and methods became too obvious to ignore. Which is a shame, because I've have loved the 40k setting since the earliest days of GW's existence.

Still love me some necrons and space marines, but I can't bring myself to stay engaged with their greed.

They have not played the games by the company that shall not be named, or the V1 Firestorm Armada. . .

I was into Mechwarrior: Dark age in a big way back in the day. I even went to the UK championships.

I got burned in a big way by the collapse of that game, I still have about 100 mechs sitting in a box in the attic in my parents' house. They have mostly been used as conversion fodder for a 40k guard army, so it's not all bad. My ogryns are cool.

After MW:DA went belly up I resolved to only ever play GW games as they were the most popular, but over 10 years the sheer accumulation of stuff that is required from GW (especially since 4th edition) as well as the tables and terrain makes it too unwieldy, and so I like that I can play armada on a yoga mat, collect both of the only 2 sides and it all packs down into a single plastic box

40k became a glut of exaggerated prices and intentionally unbalanced army books all to drive sales forward for new models and books.

I gave it up when GW's intentions and methods became too obvious to ignore. Which is a shame, because I've have loved the 40k setting since the earliest days of GW's existence.

Still love me some necrons and space marines, but I can't bring myself to stay engaged with their greed.