How about someone mails a dev to exactly know what they wanted to do?

And while you are at it, ask them about the X1 title on the TIE Advanced Prototype!!!!

This.

But they won't gives answer for both of these because the ship is not released yet and they do not answer questions until the ships are released (in case they change their mind before the release).

...based on the range of the attack.

Autothrusters cannot be used on this Range 3 attack because the ships are at Range 2 from each other.

The card stipulates "if you are beyond Range 2", not "if the range of the attack is beyond Range 2". Whether this is a case of RAI or not doesn't matter (until it gets errata'd, if ever); RAW, the Inquisitor absolutely triggers Autothrusters if the defending ship is at Range 3.

...based on the range of the attack.

This is not true.

Autothrusters cannot be used on this Range 3 attack because the ships are at Range 2 from each other.

The card stipulates "if you are beyond Range 2", not "if the range of the attack is beyond Range 2". Whether this is a case of RAI or not doesn't matter (until it gets errata'd, if ever); RAW, the Inquisitor absolutely triggers Autothrusters if the defending ship is at Range 3.

You cut an important part of Autothruster:

When defending, if you are beyond Range 2[...].

You can only defend from an attack, which set the range at 1 here. So Autothruster doesn't work here.

EDIT: Autothruster use the same wording than the extra green dice from range 3 (but say beyond range 2 instead of at Range 3):

• If defending at Range 3 against a primary weapon attack, the defender rolls one additional defense die.

So if Autotruster works, it makes the extra green dice works, which make The Inquisitor ability completly useless.

You cut an important part of Autothruster:

When defending, if you are beyond Range 2[...].

You can only defend from an attack, which set the range at 1 here. So Autothruster doesn't work here.

The ships themselves remain at Range 3 (which is why Carnor and Strom can't work against The Inquisitor).

When defending is merely the trigger for Autothrusters. There is no reason to assume that the Range of the attack overrides the range of the ships; in fact, it's quite the opposite. I'm not sure where you got your rules quote from, but the Rules Reference, in the "Range Combat Bonus" section, is quite clear to indicate that the range of the attack is what's used to determine the additional dice.

When resolving a primary weapon attack, the

attacker or defender may roll additional dice

depending on the range of the attack. At Range 1,

the attacker rolls one additional attack die during the

“Roll Attack Dice” step. At Range 3, the defender

rolls one additional defense die during the “Roll

Defense Dice” step.

• Range combat bonuses are not applied during a

secondary weapon attack

The ships themselves remain at Range 3 (which is why Carnor and Strom can't work against The Inquisitor).

Carnor and Strom don't work because their abilities are measured from them and have nothing to do with the range of the attack. Those ship don't even need to be involved in the attack for their abilities to come into play.

When defending is merely the trigger for Autothrusters. There is no reason to assume that the Range of the attack overrides the range of the ships; in fact, it's quite the opposite.

That's a good point. I was pretty sure we went through all of this when the Inquistor was previewed and the consensus seemed to be that he did indeed cancel Autothrusters. Now, I'm not so sure. I'll see if I can dig up that older thread.

You cut an important part of Autothruster:

When defending, if you are beyond Range 2[...].

You can only defend from an attack, which set the range at 1 here. So Autothruster doesn't work here.

The Inquisitor only sets the range of the attack at 1.

The ships themselves remain at Range 3 (which is why Carnor and Strom can't work against The Inquisitor).

When defending is merely the trigger for Autothrusters. There is no reason to assume that the Range of the attack overrides the range of the ships; in fact, it's quite the opposite. I'm not sure where you got your rules quote from, but the Rules Reference, in the "Range Combat Bonus" section, is quite clear to indicate that the range of the attack is what's used to determine the additional dice.

When resolving a primary weapon attack, the

attacker or defender may roll additional dice

depending on the range of the attack. At Range 1,

the attacker rolls one additional attack die during the

“Roll Attack Dice” step. At Range 3, the defender

rolls one additional defense die during the “Roll

Defense Dice” step.

• Range combat bonuses are not applied during a

secondary weapon attack

I got my quote from the Roll Defense Dice step of the Attack section of the Rules Reference.

...based on the range of the attack.

This is not true.Autothrusters cannot be used on this Range 3 attack because the ships are at Range 2 from each other.The card stipulates "if you are beyond Range 2", not "if the range of the attack is beyond Range 2". Whether this is a case of RAI or not doesn't matter (until it gets errata'd, if ever); RAW, the Inquisitor absolutely triggers Autothrusters if the defending ship is at Range 3.

I'm pretty sure you're definitely wrong in your own example. That triggers autothrusters.

Back to the original point of the thread. How bout something like this for PS overkill:

...based on the range of the attack.

This is not true.Autothrusters cannot be used on this Range 3 attack because the ships are at Range 2 from each other.The card stipulates "if you are beyond Range 2", not "if the range of the attack is beyond Range 2". Whether this is a case of RAI or not doesn't matter (until it gets errata'd, if ever); RAW, the Inquisitor absolutely triggers Autothrusters if the defending ship is at Range 3.

I'm pretty sure you're definitely wrong in your own example. That triggers autothrusters.

I am pretty sure you are saying the same thing...

The Autothrusters derail has a thread over in the rules section where it probably belongs.

You cut an important part of Autothruster:

When defending, if you are beyond Range 2[...].

You can only defend from an attack, which set the range at 1 here. So Autothruster doesn't work here.

The Inquisitor only sets the range of the attack at 1.

The ships themselves remain at Range 3 (which is why Carnor and Strom can't work against The Inquisitor).

When defending is merely the trigger for Autothrusters. There is no reason to assume that the Range of the attack overrides the range of the ships; in fact, it's quite the opposite.

Also, if you read Autothruster text:

When defending, if you are beyond Range 2 or outside the attacker's firing arc,

It doesn't say beyond Range 2 of the attacker. The only information we have is that "When defending" which can only happens if you defend against an attack, so we should assume it is beyond Range 2 of the attack.

Not sure I have seen discussion of how the Tracer missile works with the V1 Title. If you are considering running a few TAPs together, the XX-23 Tracer can make for one heck of an alpha strike.

Would want the Tracers on a high PS ship. Tag your target and every TAP gets a free TL and a free evade.

The problem with using the Tracers is that you won't get the free Evade until the Tracer hits...if it hits. If you are using it on a low PS pilot, you miss out. Also, lots of high PS ships are hard to hit. If you don't hit that ship, then no one gets the TL and the alpha strike is ruined.

I see Tracer as being used on low agility targets and fired by a high PS ship. Otherwise you are too much a sitting duck. Personally, I don't rate Tracers as all that good, unless you are using Blount. I'd rather just grab a TL off an easier target for the free Evade. Even taking out support ships helps in the long run.

My take on the AT thing is that it does not work with the inquisitor. Why? Because it is the same wording as the range 3 attach. Have a look at the article by FFG:

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2015/12/31/hunted-by-the-inquisitor/

I guess that this will get an point in the next FAQ for the better or for the worse. I agree that it is not clear enough.

...based on the range of the attack.

This is not true.Autothrusters cannot be used on this Range 3 attack because the ships are at Range 2 from each other.The card stipulates "if you are beyond Range 2", not "if the range of the attack is beyond Range 2". Whether this is a case of RAI or not doesn't matter (until it gets errata'd, if ever); RAW, the Inquisitor absolutely triggers Autothrusters if the defending ship is at Range 3.

I'm pretty sure you're definitely wrong in your own example. That triggers autothrusters.

I am pretty sure you are saying the same thing...

No I'm saying that autothrusters is turned on in the example image because regardless of ship distance the attack is range 3.

Either way, I think V1 is the best title for the Inquisitor because of his ability to hop back and forth over range bands with Push the Limit.

Klutz posted this image awhile back in this thread. Using the HLC side of the diagram would seem to be the most applicable to the Inquisitor. Autothrusters is using the range of the attack, and not separate "closest point to closest points" range measurement in each example.

Either way, I think V1 is the best title for the Inquisitor because of his ability to hop back and forth over range bands with Push the Limit.

it's the only title for the Inquisitor

and no, V1 would not be superior to X1 ATC's better-than-HLC-that-also-ignores-thrusters (of doom). There's a very good reason we got the TAPs rather than the Tie Advance v1

On the other 3 pilots, it would be more like Mangler Cannon.

Also, you guys are assuming TIE Advanced Prototype will be abbreviated in all languages. You're gonna be upset when someone shows up with tournament-legal chinese language cards with no abbreviations.