Hey guys. If I have two squadrons, one with escort and the other without, under the effects of intel, do enemy squadrons within range 1 of both squads still have to attack the escort if they do choose to attack since they are still technically engaged?

I'd say yes, you have to attack the escort if you choose to attack squadrons.

Heavy. (You do not prevent engaged squadrons from attacking ships or moving.)

Escort: (Squadrons you are engaged with cannot attack squadrons without escort unless performing a counter attack.)

I don't see anything in the heavy definition that overrides escort. Now if you wanted to attack a ship or move away, then you could do that.

I'd say yes, you have to attack the escort if you choose to attack squadrons.

Heavy. (You do not prevent engaged squadrons from attacking ships or moving.)

Escort: (Squadrons you are engaged with cannot attack squadrons without escort unless performing a counter attack.)

I don't see anything in the heavy definition that overrides escort. Now if you wanted to attack a ship or move away, then you could do that.

I just wanted to chime in and say that I agree with this interpretation 100%. You are not obligated to attack squadrons when they are Heavy but if you choose to, you MUST preferentially attack Escort squadrons.

Ok, just wanted to make sure people were on the same track of thinking I was. Thanks guys.

Ok, just wanted to make sure people were on the same track of thinking I was. Thanks guys.

No problem!

There's been a fair amount of confusion regarding the interaction of Heavy and Escort and such type of effects lately. This, thankfully, is one of the more straightforward questions. Don't look at the Instigator rules thread until FFG issues an official errata/FAQ/response, I'm warning you. .

You are still engaged with the Escort so you have to attack it.

Remember that Heavy does not prevent engagements. It is just a modification of the engaged rule when it is applied to that squadron.

Ok, just wanted to make sure people were on the same track of thinking I was. Thanks guys.

No problem!

There's been a fair amount of confusion regarding the interaction of Heavy and Escort and such type of effects lately. This, thankfully, is one of the more straightforward questions. Don't look at the Instigator rules thread until FFG issues an official errata/FAQ/response, I'm warning you. .

Ok, just wanted to make sure people were on the same track of thinking I was. Thanks guys.

No problem!

There's been a fair amount of confusion regarding the interaction of Heavy and Escort and such type of effects lately. This, thankfully, is one of the more straightforward questions. Don't look at the Instigator rules thread until FFG issues an official errata/FAQ/response, I'm warning you. .

They did update the FAQ.

Unless it snuck by somewhere, did they specifically update the FAQ regarding the interaction between Instigator + heavy squadrons engaging enemy squadrons and whether or not those enemies are obligated to attack the Heavies or not? Because all that question really provided an answer to was "how many pages of nerd rage can one question produce without any resolution?"

Unless it snuck by somewhere, did they specifically update the FAQ regarding the interaction between Instigator + heavy squadrons engaging enemy squadrons and whether or not those enemies are obligated to attack the Heavies or not? Because all that question really provided an answer to was "how many pages of nerd rage can one question produce without any resolution?"

IIRC, the answer to that is 6. 6 pages.

It mentioned the interaction between Instigator and squadrons - but it didn't mention Heavy (so there is still debate over whether or not the lack of exception is meaningful, or an oversight, lol.)

Unless it snuck by somewhere, did they specifically update the FAQ regarding the interaction between Instigator + heavy squadrons engaging enemy squadrons and whether or not those enemies are obligated to attack the Heavies or not? Because all that question really provided an answer to was "how many pages of nerd rage can one question produce without any resolution?"

IIRC, the answer to that is 6. 6 pages.

It mentioned the interaction between Instigator and squadrons - but it didn't mention Heavy (so there is still debate over whether or not the lack of exception is meaningful, or an oversight, lol.)

From the FAQ

Instigator

"Squadrons can attack this ship if they are not engaged by an actual enemy squadron in the play area.

The Intel keyword does not affect this ship’s ability."

Seems pretty clear to me. If this comes up in one of my tournaments I am going to rule that the squadrons will have to attack the Heavy squadron. Anyone needing an explanation of why will be told that the squadron is engaged by 2 phantom squadrons and a heavy, does not know the difference and is attacking the one squadron it can see.

On a side note. . . I think I still have the page count beaten. . . Not to mention a few snide threads about the topic as well.

Unless it snuck by somewhere, did they specifically update the FAQ regarding the interaction between Instigator + heavy squadrons engaging enemy squadrons and whether or not those enemies are obligated to attack the Heavies or not? Because all that question really provided an answer to was "how many pages of nerd rage can one question produce without any resolution?"

IIRC, the answer to that is 6. 6 pages.

It mentioned the interaction between Instigator and squadrons - but it didn't mention Heavy (so there is still debate over whether or not the lack of exception is meaningful, or an oversight, lol.)

What exception though?

From the FAQ

Instigator

"Squadrons can attack this ship if they are not engaged by an actual enemy squadron in the play area.

The Intel keyword does not affect this ship’s ability."

Seems pretty clear to me. If this comes up in one of my tournaments I am going to rule that the squadrons will have to attack the Heavy squadron. Anyone needing an explanation of why will be told that the squadron is engaged by 2 phantom squadrons and a heavy, does not know the difference and is attacking the one squadron it can see.

On a side note. . . I think I still have the page count beaten. . . Not to mention a few snide threads about the topic as well.

What exception? The lack of an exception about the Heavy keyword.

It's fine that you feel it's clear. Other do as well, but not everyone.

Some view the lack of an exception as a possible oversight, rather than a deliberate intention - that's all I was saying. Feel free to TO as you wish.

Unless it snuck by somewhere, did they specifically update the FAQ regarding the interaction between Instigator + heavy squadrons engaging enemy squadrons and whether or not those enemies are obligated to attack the Heavies or not? Because all that question really provided an answer to was "how many pages of nerd rage can one question produce without any resolution?"

IIRC, the answer to that is 6. 6 pages.

It mentioned the interaction between Instigator and squadrons - but it didn't mention Heavy (so there is still debate over whether or not the lack of exception is meaningful, or an oversight, lol.)

What exception though?

From the FAQ

Instigator

"Squadrons can attack this ship if they are not engaged by an actual enemy squadron in the play area.

The Intel keyword does not affect this ship’s ability."

Seems pretty clear to me. If this comes up in one of my tournaments I am going to rule that the squadrons will have to attack the Heavy squadron. Anyone needing an explanation of why will be told that the squadron is engaged by 2 phantom squadrons and a heavy, does not know the difference and is attacking the one squadron it can see.

On a side note. . . I think I still have the page count beaten. . . Not to mention a few snide threads about the topic as well.

What exception? The lack of an exception about the Heavy keyword.

It's fine that you feel it's clear. Other do as well, but not everyone.

Some view the lack of an exception as a possible oversight, rather than a deliberate intention - that's all I was saying. Feel free to TO as you wish.

In some situations the lack of an exception is a bad thing and in others it is blatantly obvious.

Think on it. The rules thread I am most infamous for was on an exception and people railed on me relentlessly about it. Now the same thing is happening again and yet people are switching their concepts about it.

The FAQ is pretty cut and dry about what it includes. Of course FFG can change their minds or add in a further clarification but the FAQ has a yes or no answer regardless of the type of rules involved.

I like how that concept is pick and place.

In some situations the lack of an exception is a bad thing and in others it is blatantly obvious.

Think on it. The rules thread I am most infamous for was on an exception and people railed on me relentlessly about it. Now the same thing is happening again and yet people are switching their concepts about it.

The FAQ is pretty cut and dry about what it includes. Of course FFG can change their minds or add in a further clarification but the FAQ has a yes or no answer regardless of the type of rules involved.

The situations seem pretty different to me, but no bother, I'm not really looking for a fight.

Thank you for your opinion.

Heavy: You do not prevent engaged squadrons from attacking ships or moving.

Escort: Squadrons you are engaged with cannot attack squadrons without escort unless performing a counter attack.



There is no room for ambiguity here, Lyraeus.

Escort has no impact on ship attacks whatsoever. You will only have to attack the escort if you CHOOSE to attack squadrons rather than the Instigator.

If the squadrons engaging you in addition to Instigator are heavy, according to the golden rule, they DO NOT PREVENT you from attacking the ship.

Yes, you are treated "as if" engaged by two additional squadrons (Preventing movement), but since they aren't valid targets, they cannot take targeting priority, and nothing in the FAQ for Instigator indicates otherwise.

The point of the FAQ ruling is that Instigator cannot be made "Heavy" and thus can prevent squadrons from moving even if Intel is present on the opposing side.

Heavy: You do not prevent engaged squadrons from attacking ships or moving.

Escort: Squadrons you are engaged with cannot attack squadrons without escort unless performing a counter attack.

There is no room for ambiguity here, Lyraeus.

Escort has no impact on ship attacks whatsoever. You will only have to attack the escort if you CHOOSE to attack squadrons rather than the Instigator.

Wait. . . your not serious right?

You DO understand that if you are engaged with a NON-Heavy squadron that you are REQUIRED to attack it and can not attack the ship right? That IS how Escort works and squadrons in general.

Now I am not sure where Escort came into play here but lets go with it. The FAQ on Instigator specifies that if you are engaged with a squadron that you must target it first with other squadrons BEFORE you can attack instigator. That is how the FAQ reads and is pretty clear on that. Now if there is a TIE Bomber and a TIE Advanced engaged with what ever squadron you have, you have to attack them if you are in Instigator's range. It wont matter if they are heavy or not, once again how the FAQ is written and reads.

Now when they change it or release more information (Der, or someone else likely sent an email on this already) then we will have a better picture.

Heavy: You do not prevent engaged squadrons from attacking ships or moving.

Escort: Squadrons you are engaged with cannot attack squadrons without escort unless performing a counter attack.

There is no room for ambiguity here, Lyraeus.

Escort has no impact on ship attacks whatsoever. You will only have to attack the escort if you CHOOSE to attack squadrons rather than the Instigator.

Wait. . . your not serious right?

You DO understand that if you are engaged with a NON-Heavy squadron that you are REQUIRED to attack it and can not attack the ship right? That IS how Escort works and squadrons in general.

I never said anything of the sort.

Now I am not sure where Escort came into play here but lets go with it. The FAQ on Instigator specifies that if you are engaged with a squadron that you must target it first with other squadrons BEFORE you can attack instigator. That is how the FAQ reads and is pretty clear on that. Now if there is a TIE Bomber and a TIE Advanced engaged with what ever squadron you have, you have to attack them if you are in Instigator's range. It wont matter if they are heavy or not, once again how the FAQ is written and reads.

Escort came into play because it's... sort of the subject of the thread. It's right there in the first post, and then you brought up Instigator.

The FAQ on Instigator is irrelevant to the wording for Heavy. It doesn't even address it, it simply addresses that Instigator's ability doesn't prevent you from attacking it unless you are genuinely engaged by another physical squadron base. This is overriden by Heavy, just like every other engagement.

Several people on the forums claimed that you couldn't attack Instigator with a squadron period. It happened. The claim was that you were treated "as if engaged" and so couldn't target ships no matter what. The errata clarified that.

Now, I understand what you're saying. After all, a squadron treated "as if" it were engaged would have to attack squadrons, right? So let's play this out.

I am engaged by Instigator and by a heavy squadron. I check my available targets. I'm engaged, so I prioritize squadrons. My only attack option is a heavy squadron which, according to the golden rule (Heavy overrules RRG on targeting), CANNOT prevent me from targeting a ship. The only other target is a ship that I can't be prevented from attacking, so I target Instigator.

Cut and dry.

If they want to change this they need to errata Heavy, not Instigator.

I'm engaged, so I prioritize squadrons.

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean.

You are engaged by the Instigator.

Therefore you are engaged. You must attack a squadron if possible. If there are no squadrons you can legally attack, you may target a ship. If there are squadrons you can legally attack, you can only attack those squadrons. Heavy isn't going to matter unless ALL squadrons you are engaged with have it, and the 2 Instigator squadrons don't.

I'm engaged, so I prioritize squadrons.

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean.

You are engaged by the Instigator.

Therefore you are engaged. You must attack a squadron if possible. If there are no squadrons you can legally attack, you may target a ship. If there are squadrons you can legally attack, you can only attack those squadrons. Heavy isn't going to matter unless ALL squadrons you are engaged with have it, and the 2 Instigator squadrons don't.

The only squadrons I can target cannot prevent me from attacking a ship, therefore I attack the ship.

Instigator doesn't magically generate invisible squadrons to act as targets, and there's no way I would accept that argument without a very specifically directed errata stating that Instigator's invisible engagements override Heavy, which we do not have.

EDIT: So we're clear, I understand the argument completely I just disagree with it.

You're saying that I'm engaged (with imaginary squadrons who CANNOT be Heavy), therefor I MUST target squadrons (even heavy ones). This matches with the RRG. However, Heavy has ALWAYS overridden the RRG, specifically and explicitly. That is the whole point of Heavy in the first place.

I feel like we've been here before.

If you are engaged by 400 squadrons and 399 of them have heavy you still have to target a squadron, but not necessarily the one without heavy.

If you are engaged by 3 squadrons and 1 of them has heavy you still have to target a squadron, but not necessarily one of the ones without heavy. In fact, if the 2 squadrons without heavy are themselves not legal targets for any reason, you still have to target a squadron. It just so happens that the only remaining target has heavy. Being engaged by the heavy squadron is not preventing you from targeting ships, but being engaged by 2 other (non heavy) squadrons does.

Whether or not a particular squadron is a legal target is a separate determination from whether or not you are engaged and have to target squadrons at all.

I feel like we've been here before.

Indeed

If you are engaged by 400 squadrons and 399 of them have heavy you still have to target a squadron, but not necessarily the one without heavy.

If you are engaged by 3 squadrons and 1 of them has heavy you still have to target a squadron, but not necessarily one of the ones without heavy. In fact, if the 2 squadrons without heavy are themselves not legal targets for any reason, you still have to target a squadron. It just so happens that the only remaining target has heavy. Being engaged by the heavy squadron is not preventing you from targeting ships, but being engaged by 2 other (non heavy) squadrons does.

Again, I understand the argument. I do not agree with it, and there is no clear ruling on the matter.

They've already errata'd Instigator once to confirm that his imaginary squadrons don't prevent you from targeting him, I don't see why it'd be any different when Heavy is applied to the available targets. It doesn't matter how many squadrons I'm engaged by if all the available targets are heavy. The ONLY ability affected by the number of engaged squadrons is Grit, which Instigator is pretty clearly intended as a hard counter for.

I know, I know... "But it's Instigator that's making you attack them, so Heavy doesn't matter!"

I'm not even saying that this isn't necessarily the *intent* of the card, but I will say that the argument supporting it is flimsy, and not strictly supported by any current ruling, not to mention throwing the Title's list of abilities WAY beyond the identically costed Impetuous.

That alone should be a red flag.

There's a problem with this, though, isn't there?

Heavy doesn't prevent engagement, it OVERRIDES it for purposes of movement and targeting priority.

At no point does my engagement with a heavy squadron make me "not engaged" it just means I don't have to target it over a ship, and if I don't have to target any available targets over a ship, I can target a ship.

If FFG comes out and says otherwise, that's fine. Until then, Heavy takes precedence over the standard Engagement rules, and invisible squadrons do not prevent firing on a ship in the absence of other (non heavy, because the golden rule) squadrons, in accordance with the errata.

EDIT: And I've also fired off an email to FFG on this issue, since it's pretty obvious they're the ones who need to clarify one way or the other.

Hey I just want to apologize for bringing this rolling firefight into this thread. My comment was flippant and intended to be humorous but instead we just have the same BS packaged up, moved over, and reheated in a new place. Sorry, guys .

For the record, Lyr, you're misquoting the new FAQ.

What it says is:

Squadrons can attack this ship if they are not engaged by an actual enemy squadron in the play area.

What it does not say is:

Squadrons cannot attack this ship if they are engaged by an actual enemy squadron in the play area.

EDIT: And I've also fired off an email to FFG on this issue, since it's pretty obvious they're the ones who need to clarify one way or the other.

I think someone did from the other thread, too - but maybe they will answer it sooner if they get more emails, lol.

I'm not sure that the forums can handle not having an answer much longer!

For the record, Lyr, you're misquoting the new FAQ.

What it says is:

Squadrons can attack this ship if they are not engaged by an actual enemy squadron in the play area.

What it does not say is:

Squadrons cannot attack this ship if they are engaged by an actual enemy squadron in the play area.

And it certainly doesn't say:

Squadrons cannot attack this ship if they are engaged by an actual enemy squadron in the play area, even if that squadron would not normally prevent attacks against a ship .

What's the difference between the actual wording get you used and the middle one? They mean the same thing to me.

You can [/url] not choose to attack the ship if engaged with an actual squadron.

That is what it is saying.