Yeah no.

Punishing One will have dual cards.

When that preview drops they will tell us the rest of the story about dual cards. ?Rage? is probably a dual card.

Yeah, it's worth noting that the card fan we've seen so far for Punishing One includes no rules cards at all, at the very least it would normally include title and modification rules etc. So I wouldn't be surprised to see dual cards in there.

It's possible - looking at the Punishing One's fan, the two upgrade cards in the bottom left are both Elite Talents - and duplicates, at that.

I for one welcome our card overlords.

Seriously the card says you must equip a tractor and pay for it so that's what you do there's no hidden trick involved.

This is a problem.

How is it a problem? Just do what the card says.

The problem is that the title doesn't actually say that you can equip a Tractor Beam in spite of the ship not having the correct upgrade slot.

It's obvious what the intent is but the card has what appears to to be an impossible to meet prerequisite.

The title Mist Hunter says you are to add a (barrel roll) to the action track, and MUST add Tractor Beam to the ship... it does not say add a secondary (cannon) weapon to the upgrade track. It doesn't need to have the (cannon) symbol.

But nothing on the card actually says that you are able to equip a Tractor Beam.

It's a poorly written card. It should have granted a cannon slot and a 0 cost Tractor Beam that was mandatory to take. The title would cost 1 point.

I know what the intent is. I know how it will play. The card is still bad.

Probably mentioned already, but... The G1-A has no cannon upgrade slot... how do you equip the tractor beam? When the person said you "just equip it" does that mean it ignores the fact there is no upgrade for it? So other than the "Mist Hunter" there can no no other G1-A fighters that use the tractor beam?

Just wanting to make sure I fully understand this...

it is the only G1-A that can equip it.

it doesnt matter that it doesnt have a cannon slot, if you equip the title, you get the cannon regardless.

Some of the squad builders out there will have to work this into their codes then. trying to use the http://xwing-builder.co.uk/build#to theory craft and I can't figure out how to make the tractor beam equip haha

Well, (YA)XW Squad Builder already does it; when you equip the title, it automatically equips the tractor beam and you can't take it off without removing the title.

But nothing on the card actually says that you are able to equip a Tractor Beam.

It's a poorly written card. It should have granted a cannon slot and a 0 cost Tractor Beam that was mandatory to take. The title would cost 1 point.

I know what the intent is. I know how it will play. The card is still bad.

If you know exactly how to use the title once you've read the card, I'd say the card is written just fine.

(Edit: fixed the quote BBC formating)

Hey fellas! Seems like the forum gang is havin' trouble with the Mist Hunter Title! Let's break it down for 'em!

So the only way

A G1-A

Can get Tractor Beams

Is the title it seems

All that Poe Dameron

Ain't foolin' no one

It's the Mist Hunter fools

Equip the title for free

Yeah, take a Tractor Beam

Pay the squad cost appropriately

...

There I think that's settled nicely. Anyone still fuzzy?

If you know exactly how to use the title once you've read the card, I'd say the card is written just fine.

Then why issue errata for cards like Lone Wolf or Genius? No one honestly believed that Lone Wolf was meant to never trigger or that Genius was just waiting for a new type of bomb to be released. It was obvious how those cards were meant to be played but they still needed to be fixed.

You take the title you must also take a tractor beam cannon and pay for it, it's 100% clear .

The ship can not normally mount a cannon but the mist hunter can, in fact it must.

There's nothing confusing about how it's worded or the intent behind it.

You take the title you must also take a tractor beam cannon and pay for it, it's 100% clear .

The ship can not normally mount a cannon but the mist hunter can, in fact it must.

There's nothing confusing about how it's worded or the intent behind it.

The wording isn't confusing. It's sloppy. It creates needless inconsistencies that may end up needing to be FAQed around in the future.

Probably mentioned already, but... The G1-A has no cannon upgrade slot... how do you equip the tractor beam? When the person said you "just equip it" does that mean it ignores the fact there is no upgrade for it? So other than the "Mist Hunter" there can no no other G1-A fighters that use the tractor beam?

Just wanting to make sure I fully understand this...

it is the only G1-A that can equip it.

it doesnt matter that it doesnt have a cannon slot, if you equip the title, you get the cannon regardless.

Some of the squad builders out there will have to work this into their codes then. trying to use the http://xwing-builder.co.uk/build#to theory craft and I can't figure out how to make the tractor beam equip haha

Those squad builders are probably best off just including the tractor beam and its cost when they template out the title. It may still be a secondary weapon but when it is an essential part of the title just put in on with the title.

The only real reason to have the tractor beam stay separate is because it could get knocked off by something like Munitions Failure from the original damage deck while the rest of the title stays active.

If that is all there is to it then the card should have been worded

"You gain a 'cannon' icon and must equip a tractor beam upgrade in it, paying normal costs."

In order to conform to the templating that the game uses.

That's how you write a clear, concise ruleset. To be writing your rules with this level of sloppiness leads to a muddled, confusing mess of rules that no one can keep straight.

The confusing mess seemed pretty harmless to me.

You wanna talk confusing mess? Try 40k on for size buddy! Ha! That will make your head spin if you think the Mist Hunter title is a muddled mess!

The confusing mess seemed pretty harmless to me.

You wanna talk confusing mess? Try 40k on for size buddy! Ha! That will make your head spin if you think the Mist Hunter title is a muddled mess!

Repeated issues like this are HOW 40K became the confused mess it is. That's why we're arguing about it, we don't want x-wing to go down that path, and this card is.

Why is it that whenever cards are released/previewed it turns into a race into who can find the loophole?

I thought the Mist Hunter title is quite straightforward but the calls for FAQ's continue.

I don't see the problem, no where does it say that a G-1A can equip a (cannon) or a Tractor Beam, only the Mist Hunter can equip a Tractor beam. It is the same as saying only the Outrider can equip a (cannon) that can fire outside of its primary firing arc at the cost of having no primary weapon. No other YT-2400 can fire a (cannon) outside it's primary firing arc.

Why is it that whenever cards are released/previewed it turns into a race into who can find the loophole?

I thought the Mist Hunter title is quite straightforward but the calls for FAQ's continue.

happens with just about everythin, sadly

even explicit stuff like TAPs != Tie Advance

I understand the need for clarification on stuff from the notoriously incorrect articles (viva la SLAM), but not from card text

Why is it that whenever cards are released/previewed it turns into a race into who can find the loophole?

I thought the Mist Hunter title is quite straightforward but the calls for FAQ's continue.

It doesn't need a FAQ. It needs an errata.

The confusing mess seemed pretty harmless to me.

You wanna talk confusing mess? Try 40k on for size buddy! Ha! That will make your head spin if you think the Mist Hunter title is a muddled mess!

Repeated issues like this are HOW 40K became the confused mess it is. That's why we're arguing about it, we don't want x-wing to go down that path, and this card is.

Precisely. Its not so much an issue of what it does, but how cards will interact with it. Say, in the future, there is a card with text that reads "if you have a cannon equipped"... Now does the Misthunter give you a cannon, or no? Things get mucky quick.

I know many are all read as written but I think this is pretty clear, okay to me it is. The only confussion will be of our own making.

The confusing mess seemed pretty harmless to me.

You wanna talk confusing mess? Try 40k on for size buddy! Ha! That will make your head spin if you think the Mist Hunter title is a muddled mess!

Repeated issues like this are HOW 40K became the confused mess it is. That's why we're arguing about it, we don't want x-wing to go down that path, and this card is.

Precisely. Its not so much an issue of what it does, but how cards will interact with it. Say, in the future, there is a card with text that reads "if you have a cannon equipped"... Now does the Misthunter give you a cannon, or no? Things get mucky quick.

no they dont

it has a cannon equipped (t-beams); just no cannon slot

if a card comes around that replaces a cannon slot, it wont work on Misty because it has none

there is no room for doubt here; it aint r2-d6 + IA

The confusing mess seemed pretty harmless to me.

You wanna talk confusing mess? Try 40k on for size buddy! Ha! That will make your head spin if you think the Mist Hunter title is a muddled mess!

Repeated issues like this are HOW 40K became the confused mess it is. That's why we're arguing about it, we don't want x-wing to go down that path, and this card is.

Precisely. Its not so much an issue of what it does, but how cards will interact with it. Say, in the future, there is a card with text that reads "if you have a cannon equipped"... Now does the Misthunter give you a cannon, or no? Things get mucky quick.

no they dont

it has a cannon equipped (t-beams); just no cannon slot

if a card comes around that replaces a cannon slot, it wont work on Misty because it has none

there is no room for doubt here; it aint r2-d6 + IA

The R2-D6 ruling going the way that it did actually cleared up some of the mess around the Mist Hunter title.

The confusing mess seemed pretty harmless to me.

You wanna talk confusing mess? Try 40k on for size buddy! Ha! That will make your head spin if you think the Mist Hunter title is a muddled mess!

Repeated issues like this are HOW 40K became the confused mess it is. That's why we're arguing about it, we don't want x-wing to go down that path, and this card is.

Precisely. Its not so much an issue of what it does, but how cards will interact with it. Say, in the future, there is a card with text that reads "if you have a cannon equipped"... Now does the Misthunter give you a cannon, or no? Things get mucky quick.

no they dont

it has a cannon equipped (t-beams); just no cannon slot

if a card comes around that replaces a cannon slot, it wont work on Misty because it has none

there is no room for doubt here; it aint r2-d6 + IA

Ok perhaps a poor example because it explicitly says in the card that you equip it. The better discussion would be if a cards text said "If you have a cannon slot", how it would interact with a ship with the title. Yes, it may be clear to you that it does not have a cannon slot, but that is hardly clear when you are equipping a cannon. I'm not saying it's difficult to understand or creating any issues right now, but I can see it being needlessly confusing (to some) in the future.

There is one other point to make.

Any upgrade card or pilot ability that affects a ship (friendly or otherwise) that has a secondary weapon(cannon) upgrade WILL NOT affect the Mist Hunter.

Since it wasn't equipped with a secondary weapon(cannon/missile/torpedeo) upgrade.

scum Jonus would affect the hunter because you still have the cannon (2ndary weapon); just no cannon slot

If Misty could double title with Tie/D; it could use Tie/D with T-beams because it has the cannon; just no cannon slot on its bar

no cannon slot on bar = no cannon slot

clearest of cuts

The confusing mess seemed pretty harmless to me.

You wanna talk confusing mess? Try 40k on for size buddy! Ha! That will make your head spin if you think the Mist Hunter title is a muddled mess!

Repeated issues like this are HOW 40K became the confused mess it is. That's why we're arguing about it, we don't want x-wing to go down that path, and this card is.

Precisely. Its not so much an issue of what it does, but how cards will interact with it. Say, in the future, there is a card with text that reads "if you have a cannon equipped"... Now does the Misthunter give you a cannon, or no? Things get mucky quick.

no they dont

it has a cannon equipped (t-beams); just no cannon slot

if a card comes around that replaces a cannon slot, it wont work on Misty because it has none

there is no room for doubt here; it aint r2-d6 + IA

Ok perhaps a poor example because it explicitly says in the card that you equip it. The better discussion would be if a cards text said "If you have a cannon slot", how it would interact with a ship with the title. Yes, it may be clear to you that it does not have a cannon slot, but that is hardly clear when you are equipping a cannon. I'm not saying it's difficult to understand or creating any issues right now, but I can see it being needlessly confusing (to some) in the future.

nope; still clear

no cannon slot on bar = no cannon slot

clearest of cuts

The confusing mess seemed pretty harmless to me.

You wanna talk confusing mess? Try 40k on for size buddy! Ha! That will make your head spin if you think the Mist Hunter title is a muddled mess!

Repeated issues like this are HOW 40K became the confused mess it is. That's why we're arguing about it, we don't want x-wing to go down that path, and this card is.

Precisely. Its not so much an issue of what it does, but how cards will interact with it. Say, in the future, there is a card with text that reads "if you have a cannon equipped"... Now does the Misthunter give you a cannon, or no? Things get mucky quick.

no they dont

it has a cannon equipped (t-beams); just no cannon slot

if a card comes around that replaces a cannon slot, it wont work on Misty because it has none

there is no room for doubt here; it aint r2-d6 + IA

Ok perhaps a poor example because it explicitly says in the card that you equip it. The better discussion would be if a cards text said "If you have a cannon slot", how it would interact with a ship with the title. Yes, it may be clear to you that it does not have a cannon slot, but that is hardly clear when you are equipping a cannon. I'm not saying it's difficult to understand or creating any issues right now, but I can see it being needlessly confusing (to some) in the future.

You are not everyone, Fickle. The example Sentinal brings up is the exact type of scenario that brings confusion. I guarantee 90% of casual players who ran a list which had a combo in a list which was similar to what he mentioned, would not realize the Misthunter did not grant them that bonus (if there was an upgrade which was dependent on another ship having the cannon slot).

There is one other point to make.

Any upgrade card or pilot ability that affects a ship (friends or otherwise) that has a secondary weapon(cannon) upgrade WILL NOT affect the Mist Hunter.

Since it wasn't equipped with a secondary weapon(cannon/missile/torpedeo) upgrade.