This question occurred to me based on another thread on this forum, but is in no way meant to imply anything about the situations described in that other thread.

I hold the view that each player is responsible for his own judgement calls.

If he says 'i can't boost left because I will bump' for example, I don't see it as required to correct him, even if I'm positive he won't bump. He'll, I've even played with people that took offense at such corrections.

How would you best handle the following situation: Activation ends with two ships facing each other, some distance away. Opponent has the higher PS and says something like 'can't shoot, out of range' without measuring. I don't share his ceranty that it's indeed out of range but, as I can't measure on his ship's turn I just give him a neutral 'sure/whatever/your call'. Then my turn comes, I measure range, turns out the ships were in range, I want to shoot but the opponent argues that since I agreed(even tacitly) with his decision that the ships are not in range, this decision should stand for my ship as well.

In short: if your opponent makes a legal action (choosing not to shoot/boost/barrel roll/take a free target lock from K4 Droid/etc.) based on incorrect information (misjudgment of range/obstacles/arc/etc.) do you feel compelled to correct them, even if your opinion has not been asked?

You've given a couple examples and I'm going to try to adress them. For the boost you have no obligation, especially since your opponent can check and gets a different action. Ditto for something like target lock.

On the shooting phase though unless you strongly suspect your opponent was trying to cheat you with that declaration (he declares his VI howlrunner out of your wedge antilles range) then holy cow dude, don't be an ass. You should have checked to clarify rather than deliberately attempted to cheat your opponent. Fly casual man

During a game? Depends on how new the player is. Afterward it depends on the setting, when its just a casual game for fun we'll probably skip a recap in favour of more games, but if its potential tournament lists we often give each other feedback on what could have been done better.

Depends on play. For casual play, I always suggest for opponent, what's better. I want to play against best play, not mistakes.

In tournament depends on player. I know players, that would never remind you, I will not remind them. But in general, i always remind that opponent can shot and such. Just like mentioned, I will not remind for players, that I know don't do the same

In your case, it was his choice not to shot and why should you not shot?

I would prefer to rewind several steps if necessary and reasonable in order to make sure that the game doesn't hinge on a simple procedural error. I will happily take advantage of a piloting error that lands you on an asteroid, but I'm not going to be a stickler if you forget to take a focus action or use Advanced Cloaking Device.

In casual play, I tend to be helpful with things like boosts, checking for range and arcs, and looking for alternate targets if my opponent doesn't realize so-and-so is also in range.

In tournament play, I'm a little less generous, but I tend to be pretty forgiving unless my opponent is a stickler, in which case I'll meet their level of rigorous play without complaint. Some players like a stricter game and I respect that.

It all depends on the circumstances. If you are teaching someone, or they are new and don't have a lot of experience, then I say helping others get better goes along way to improve game. IE if you have a bunch of people that you consistently beat, they may not have fun and drop off or out. By creating a larger pool, these players will then improve and maybe throw a few surprises your way.

If you need to win due to a players lack of knowledge then that says more about your character than the opponents skill. But rules are rules and everyone has the right to measure or not measure. in your example if they choose not to measure, pretty basic stuff, then you do and you are in range, then thats tough for them. But in the case of the K4, I would ask them if they want to Target Lock, good sportsmanship and all that.

I would rather be challenged and beat a person fair and square than beat them due to their lack of knowledge.

Tournaments are a complete different kettle of fish.

This has been asked before and the answer seemed to be:

a) NO! It's a tournament, kill or be killed, be ruthless, murder, death, kill, etc.

b) Be a good fella. At the end of the day, it's just a game.

In this situation, if it's close I would have measured from the start. Especially considering that you would be firing back at the ship. The measurement affects you both.

In all cases, I will remind the opponent that they should at least measure. However, I'll also remind them that if they put the template down for the Boost or Barrel Roll, they will have to commit to it.

We. always. check/measure.

Always.

And if we cannot agree? we call the TO.

You should have checked to clarify rather than deliberately attempted to cheat your opponent. Fly casual man

How is deliberately attempting to cheat allowing an opponent to make his own decision on whether something is in range or not?

I would have said"If that's what you think, we'll see." And then took my shot if they didn't change their mind.

I pretty much always point out something that my opponent may have forgotten to do, even if it's advantageous to them. I've had opponents forget they had gunner or predator, assume out of range or arc. I've even had an opponent start one of his ships facing the wrong way, which would have resulted in a Jax leaving the table in turn 1.

In some of the cases, it's been the cause of a loss of a ship. In a few, it's been the cause of a loss of a game. In most, it's made little overall difference. In all cases, however, I remained happy I did so.

In casual games, I'll mention it outright; "hey, you know you have a reroll there, right?" or "are you sure that's range 2? I think you might have range 1 on me, it's worth a check".

In a tournament, I'll be more subtle, mainly because people tend to be more focused, but I'll still say it. Although, lately I've been keeping it to two incidents per game; I think that's enough of a chance.

We should all strive to be like Jack:

With $1,000,000 on the line this guy gave his opponent a second chance.

If we can't do that when all we're playing for is bragging rights, or some plastic and cardboard at an official Tournament, then we should be ashamed of ourselves.

I would prefer to rewind several steps if necessary and reasonable in order to make sure that the game doesn't hinge on a simple procedural error. I will happily take advantage of a piloting error that lands you on an asteroid, but I'm not going to be a stickler if you forget to take a focus action or use Advanced Cloaking Device.

In casual play, I tend to be helpful with things like boosts, checking for range and arcs, and looking for alternate targets if my opponent doesn't realize so-and-so is also in range.

In tournament play, I'm a little less generous, but I tend to be pretty forgiving unless my opponent is a stickler, in which case I'll meet their level of rigorous play without complaint. Some players like a stricter game and I respect that.

This is the best answer so far. We should all strive to be like this guy.

If a guy's got a few games under his belt, then I'm just going to leave him to it. I'll remind him of the mandatory stuff, but anything he's responsible for is entirely up to him. I'm not going to be held accountable for him not over-estimating the range during his turn. If an opponent puts more faith in the Mark 1 Eyeball as his preferred measuring device, then more fool him. I'm pretty accurate when estimating ranges, but if it looks like a "maybe", then I'm going to get the range ruler and check. Every time. I'm sure not going to trust an estimate and then complain to the opponent because he agreed with me and we found out I was wrong. It's not a matter of poor sportsmanship, or poor gaming etiquette. It's simply using the right tools for the job. And the eyeball is not as accurate as a ruler.

Your not responsible for playing the other guys list knowing if you'll bump or not is part of the skill of playing.

And if he didn't measure that's his fault he didn't get a shot you have every right to measure and shoot.

You didn't say he was out of range at the end of the day.

If he flat out asks me, I'd offer my opinion on the range. But if he's just talking out loud to himself? It's his turn and his decision.

Yeah, I usually leave them too it. Every now and then I've let out some kind of audible with things like 'I can't boost there'. But that can be a bit tricky - if they measure it they have to do the action and that might not be what they want anyway, and by saying something they might commit too quickly without thinking.

I might feel better about mentioning something when it comes to presuming arcs and ranges though, as they're free to measure what they want in that situation anyway.

Is this the other guy from the post about the TO rolling a die to settle the dispute?

Is this the other guy from the post about the TO rolling a die to settle the dispute?

Nope. That thread merely got me wondering. Last night I had a similar situation on Vassal. My opponent eyeballs he's out of range says he doesn't have a shot. I turn on range circle and it turns out he did have a shot. In a tournament I wouldn't have interfered.

Imo while shooting is technically optional there are almost no situations where someone will want to not shoot. Plus if you agree to no shot one direction it's unsurprising that it will be assumed no shot in the other direction. Boosting I wouldn't give any opinion on in a tournament but the shooting is basically not optional and affects you too so I'd urge a check of that one.

I'm also surprised someone would just pass on shots without checking for the long bomb shot that seems silly.

In a casual game I would go out of my way to make sure, and even offer my opponents tips. I don't want to sweep in a casual game just because my opponent forgot I had Proton Bombs.

But in a tournament game? If you declare that your Epsilon Pilot doesn't have an arc on my Vader even though he clearly does, go ahead. I'll go to dials without saying anything.

If your opponent does not measure and just declares that his ship is out of range, and then it comes to your time to shoot and it turns out you're actually in range, your opponent has missed an opportunity and you have to consent to allow him to perform his missed trigger.

I think responsible is a strong word. Sure, you shouldn't be cheating and so.

I always like to discuss strategy and banter mid game.

So whenever someone says: "I don't think it's in range/arc", I reply: "Check it out, maybe it is."

I think is more fun and satisfiyng playing like that, you know, about flying right and rolling dice.

Wouldn't you like to play agains someone like that?

But sure

rules as is, in OP example, he missed an opportunity to fire. His loss.

It happens, he will learn to always check.

I would prefer to rewind several steps if necessary and reasonable in order to make sure that the game doesn't hinge on a simple procedural error. I will happily take advantage of a piloting error that lands you on an asteroid, but I'm not going to be a stickler if you forget to take a focus action or use Advanced Cloaking Device.

In casual play, I tend to be helpful with things like boosts, checking for range and arcs, and looking for alternate targets if my opponent doesn't realize so-and-so is also in range.

In tournament play, I'm a little less generous, but I tend to be pretty forgiving unless my opponent is a stickler, in which case I'll meet their level of rigorous play without complaint. Some players like a stricter game and I respect that.

This is how I roll. I hate winning on technicalities and it IS just a game. Lets enjoy the match, even in tournament play, and both walk away with some good stories.

In the most technical sense, an opponent who incorrectly assumes a ship is out of range and waves off the attack as a result has to fall under "missed opportunities". When I measure and it turns out the ships were in range after all, it is solely up to me ("...without the consent of his or her opponent") whether we retroactively allow the attack.

As for what I'm morally responsible for, I tend to the scrupulously-honest-even-when-it's-bad-for-me side of tournament play. I usually regret it afterward: the recent example that sticks in my head is when I stopped an opposing player from removing his ship by reminding him of the Simultaneous Attack Rule, and lost a fairly healthy Omicron + Palpatine as a result.

But that often feels like watching my opponent dig a grave and climb down into it, but refusing to throw the first shovel's worth of dirt in the hole. I'm trying to get better (or "better", maybe) about letting mistakes go by--especially if they're obvious, basic mistakes made by relatively experienced players. So in this case... honestly I'd probably still say "are you sure?" before priority passes to the next ship. But if my opponent affirmatively passes on his or her chance to attack after a mild prompt, in a tournament setting I don't think I'd allow the game to be rewound.

Especially finding out this was on Vassal makes this even more baffling. It is easier to check range than it is to say "I think I'm out of range"... it's just a habit... you check it for everything cause it is so easy to do and use. Too many people flicker it on and off so fast it can be hard to tell sometimes, but for a quick check it is easy and dead simple.