i'm Waiting the official clarification from FFG's "Rules question service" for my community, but I would like to know your opinion

A lot of Imperial players were impressed by the Inquisitor's Tie and a great debate with speculations has started

Here the question:

Can the Tie X/1 title ("Tie Advanced only" ) be used on the Tie adv.Prototype?

The Tie X/1 title is "Tie Advanced only" and a lot of people believe that this means that they can use it on every ship that have the word TIE ADVANCED in the name. They use as premise , the fact that the Ion Engine MK II and the Integrated astromech modifications can be used respectively on each TIE and X-WING but, modifications are very different from titles.

The titles are exlusuve for the ships with which they're released, then....

NO the title can't be used on Adv prototype just because it's a different ship ( and of course have its own title )

This post:

suggests that all the words of the name need to be included.

So, because "Adv." is not "Advanced", the Prototype shouldn't qualify.

This post:

I'd say yes too, based on extrapolating from this bit in the Squad Building topics in the RRG on page 20. If it can apply for squad building for upgrade cards, to me it would be logical that it'd apply for other abilities in reverse. Some disagree. YMMV.

Ship-type only: This upgrade can only be

equipped to a ship of the specified type. If the

ship’s type includes the entirety of the restricted

type, it can equip that upgrade. For example,

a TIE/fo fighter can equip an Upgrade card

restricted to “TIE Fighter only.”

suggests that all the words of the name need to be included.

So, because "Adv." is not "Advanced", the Prototype shouldn't qualify.

Which is now requiring a ruling on abbreviations. So, still we wait...

Out of the rule book, i think that in this case is easy to resolve the question:

Different ships ( stats, and model, AND NAME )
Different title for each one, with the reference to the ships type

Then, if i can use the Tie X/1 title on the prototype, ( Cost 0 Vs Cost 1 ) i can't use the prototype's title on the Advanced just because it's TIe adv. prototype only. That makes no sense in terms of logic and game design

You could argue on rules technicalities for hours because there's room for intepretation and precedent in multiple directions.

You could also apply common sense, which would give a clear no. TIE/x1 is a fix card to the tune of 4 points, which means the prototype would have to be designed four points overpriced for it to work. Even if TIE/x1 was equippable by the rules the FAQ would soon correct it.

It's also worth noting that TIE/x1 is the class abbreviation for the Episode IV model of TIE advanced. The Inquistor model of TIE advanced is known as a TIE/v1 and comes with its own title. Lorewise, it'd be like sticking TIE/D on it.

Here is one, of the maybe dozen, recent threads arguing the subject.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/194519-quick-psa-ship-type-naming-rules-why-fos-are-fighters-and-taps-are-basic/?hl=%20advanced%20%20title

This post:

I'd say yes too, based on extrapolating from this bit in the Squad Building topics in the RRG on page 20. If it can apply for squad building for upgrade cards, to me it would be logical that it'd apply for other abilities in reverse. Some disagree. YMMV.

Ship-type only: This upgrade can only be

equipped to a ship of the specified type. If the

ship’s type includes the entirety of the restricted

type, it can equip that upgrade. For example,

a TIE/fo fighter can equip an Upgrade card

restricted to “TIE Fighter only.”

suggests that all the words of the name need to be included.

So, because "Adv." is not "Advanced", the Prototype shouldn't qualify.

That quote above was from a different discussion. Please don't misquote me to try to prove your point that I wasn't attempting to make. That thread had nothing to do with the TIE/Ad and TAP, but was a discussion if TIE/fo could use Youngster's pilot ability.

I think we can all agree this is still a massive grey area.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaay more than fifty shades of grey.

And to the OP, it's probably a fruitless question at the present time, as FFG has a long and glorious history of not typically answering rules questions for unreleased product. That point may very well be in the rules included with the ship, or in the inevitable FAQ that usually follows shortly after the product release. YMMV

It certainly needs clarified.

Either the TAP can take the x1 title and be massively overpowered, or

The imperial raider corvette huge ship can't take its own titles because of abbreviations.

TAP's with X1's for everyone YAY.

It certainly needs clarified.

Either the TAP can take the x1 title and be massively overpowered, or

The imperial raider corvette huge ship can't take its own titles because of abbreviations.

More likely FFG will simply rule against the established rules once again with an entry that says something along the lines of "TIE Advanced Prototypes cannot equip the TIE/X1 title card."

Because otherwise they would indeed be massively overpowered, and thus they are absolutely not getting access to that card. Rules be damned.

That thread had nothing to do with the TIE/Ad and TAP, but was a discussion if TIE/fo could use Youngster's pilot ability.

True - but the FAQ comment may still be relevant to this - if the TIE/fo had had part of its name abbreviated, then it wouldn't have qualified for TIE Fighter only things (like being attached to a Gozanti).

http://xwing-miniatures.wikia.com/wiki/Docking_Clamps

Using the aforesaid FAQ quote, it would logically follow that the TIE f/o Fighter, because its name includes "TIE Fighter" is dockable, but the TIE Adv. Prototype is not (because the abbreviation, in this case, is not the full word).

Using the aforesaid FAQ quote

The FAQ quote (actually rules reference) is about applying upgrade cards to ships, not ships referenced by abilities, so doesn't necessarily apply.

There is no technicality here, the language is explicit.

Two entirely different ship names.

"Tie Advanced"

"Tie Adv. Prototype"

Both of the titles explicitly state which ship they are used for so absolutely not.

I agree if you outright ignore the word prototype in the ships name it creates all sorts of confusion about the abbreviation but luckily the word prototype is in fact printed on the card so this is not a point of contention.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaay more than fifty shades of grey.

My son showed me something he saw somewhere, that said that the only reason that is romantic is because he's rich. If the guy lived in a trailer park it would be a episode of Criminal Minds.

Regarding the question...

This is a case where RAI is actually clearer than RAW. RAW is a hot mess, that at best breaks existing things.

It seems we are to treat this like a exact text match, in which adv. is not the same thing as advanced, but if we do that the the Raider titles don't work. They could FAQ/Errata the Raider titles so they are the exception. But even that only partly fixes the real issue, that being they have titles they want to work on more than one ship, like the TIE mk2, but then have titles they only want to work on one ship like the x1.

Which is complicated by the fact that they can't actually control what the ships are called in the first place.

Or one uses common sense, and figure it out logically. But I think it's safe to assume that common sense isn't terribly common, and asking for logic is well... a bit of a fool's errand

RAI is perfectly clear, and yes RAW isn't as much. But sometimes, in topics like these that come up from time to time, I seriously wonder if the FFG team thinks we're all just really dense.

However it doesn't help when we get responses like...

Automated Protocols is a noted exception to the rule that huge ships cannot perform free actions. A huge ship equipped with Leebo cannot perform a free boost action. Huge ships cannot perform free actions granted from Squad Leader, Lando Calrissian (ship), or another huge ship performing a coordinate action.

Thanks for playing,

Frank Brooks

Associate Creative Content Developer

Fantasy Flight Games

[email protected]

I mean where exactly in the rules does it state that Automated Protocols is the sole exception? The rules say...

"Huge ships cannot perform free actions UNLESS they are equipped with an Upgrade card that allows them to, such as the "Automated Protocols" Upgrade card."

Which given the plain text means AP is an example of an exception, not the only one.

Can you imagine how annoying an (16 base) 18 point ship would be with 3 green dice, Auto Thrusters and a free sensor jammer would be to kill? now put 5 of them in a list, and throw some missiles on there for some punch.

thanks to all , and I'm sorry if the thread is similar to others already been done.

Here in Italy many casual players ( and often, competitive players ) do not have a deep knowledge and understanding of the rules.

This is a limit case and is quite particular, and as community manager i can't read anymore any kind of speculations about Tie X/1

Anyway a official clarification is necessary to clear each doubt, even if the role book and the Vader's Faq lead me to think that we have a clear reference to resolve this issue .

I can understand the frustration of the imperial players, after the nerf of Phantom , and releases really not decisive ( Defender, Bomber, Punisher ) , but all the recent announcements make sense a great return of the empire and they don't need a rule manipolation to make the TAP really OP .

Even the return of the Tie Advanced and Vader was a lot of fun in game terms .

However it doesn't help when we get responses like...

Automated Protocols is a noted exception to the rule that huge ships cannot perform free actions. A huge ship equipped with Leebo cannot perform a free boost action. Huge ships cannot perform free actions granted from Squad Leader, Lando Calrissian (ship), or another huge ship performing a coordinate action.

Thanks for playing,

Frank Brooks

Associate Creative Content Developer

Fantasy Flight Games

[email protected]

I mean where exactly in the rules does it state that Automated Protocols is the sole exception? The rules say...

"Huge ships cannot perform free actions UNLESS they are equipped with an Upgrade card that allows them to, such as the "Automated Protocols" Upgrade card."

Which given the plain text means AP is an example of an exception, not the only one.

That first quoted email from Frank Brooks doesn't say what you think it does. "[AP] is a noted exception..." (emphasis mine) implies that it's not the only exception, in agreement with the second quote.

That first quoted email from Frank Brooks doesn't say what you think it does. "[AP] is a noted exception..." (emphasis mine) implies that it's not the only exception, in agreement with the second quote.

It seems to me that the "noted" exception is the only exception. It looks like someone came up with a good idea for an upgrade, but completely forgot about the rules. Gee, hasn't that happened before somewhere...?