I believe that the bottom line is that everyone is entitled to make their own decision about what they do in any given situation. I think the problems arise when we start applying our views on what is right in a gaming situation to others. If someone feels that remembering to do your own stuff is an important part of the game and wants to play strictly rules as written, that's a matter of personal preference and noone should label them a jerk or yell at them for it.

To put it another way, if you forget a trigger and your opponent offers to let you go back and take it, (or doesn't), then accept it or decline, but don't feel bad about it. If your opponent misses a trigger, then remind them and let them go take it (or don't) but don't feel bad about it.

To me, that's what "Fly casual" means. If you want to play strict, fine if you wasn't to play loose, fine. I might not like it, but meh, whatever. either way, you're not a jerk.. f you think your opponent is a jerk, you probably need to look in the mirror.

Of course, if they expect second chances but won't give you any, then yeah, they're a jerk. Sorry. Put up with them or don't play them.

Yeah, but is it considered 'cheating'...?

For a definition of cheating, please visit this topic: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/203056-how-to-check-loaded-dice/page-1

If someone feels that remembering to do your own stuff is an important part of the game and wants to play strictly rules as written, that's a matter of personal preference and noone should label them a jerk or yell at them for it.

Exactly yet far too many people here will do exactly that. If you don't play by what they feel is the 'spirit of the game' you're a WAAC jerk.

To me, that's what "Fly casual" means. If you think your opponent is a jerk, you probably need to look in the mirror.

Honestly the term Fly Casual has become so corrupted by the militant casuals that it no longer means anything really. I was here when Hothie started it and he never intended it to be used as hammer to beat someone else up, which is exactly what some people use it for now... Which ironically is about as un-casual as you can get.

Of course, if they expect second chances but won't give you any, then yeah, they're a jerk.

The golden rule applies. Do unto others as you'd have done unto you. If I offer help then I think it's fair to expect some in return. Likewise if someone offers me help and I take it then I should offer them help.

If on the other hand I refuse to help someone I shouldn't expect help, and if they offer me help I should refuse it. Which is what I do most times, I'd rather lose playing my best then win because the other person had to help me.

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.

Pretty much sums this up for me.

You, obviously, don't know what being a good sport is. Flying into a rock is a mistake, just as forgetting to take a Focus Action is. However, one has a simple remedy. Do you really want to be the "I won because he forgot to take his free Cloak Action" guy? I don't.

I also don't want to be the "I lost because I kept letting my opponent Focus when he forgot to take his action every. Single. Turn." guy either.

Completely new player here and it is a bit disappointing to see there are a few people saying that they'd keep quiet on this one. I'm about to take part in my first tournament next week and thus far the only other person I've played is my brother, so I'm fully expecting to make mistakes myself, but would hope that someone else would see this as ultimately a bit of fun and would at least prompt me to check things. I know I'll be the first to pipe up if someone forgets to do a really obvious action or doesn't pick up enough dice. I'd much rather lose and feel I'd played as courteously as possible than win because the pressure of a tournament setting made someone forget something obvious.

That's obviously going to work against me at times, but this is an X-Wing tournament, not the World Series of Poker.

There's a huge difference between playing against a new player and playing against someone with substantial experience.

For the kind of mistake that's under discussion here, it's really easy to avoid: never simply assume you just know what's in and out of range or arc. Always use the ruler to check, even if you're sure.

Here, I think being fair means being explicit about the fact that your opponent is declining to measure for the attack before the next ship is activated. With a reasonably experienced opponent, that probably means just saying "Are you sure?" If I know I'm playing someone new, I'd probably be more explicit: "The first step of the combat phase is measurement. Are you sure you want to skip that opportunity?"

But if you say yes, it's not my responsibility to argue with my opponent or measure for him or her. If you pass... you pass.

From the FFG tournament rules:

"Players are expected to play optimally..."

So in a tournament setting, no suggestions should be offered or expected.

While flying with friends for fun, anything goes in terms of advice, tips, hints, etc.

Personally; I like to win in an even game. If I notice someone missing something repeatedly I will give them a few reminders but don't have the capacity to remember every opponents list and how to fly it at a tourney. It feels wrong to smash a load of damage on someone then realise they have sensor jammer they forgot. Whilst it's not my fault; it just feels wrong as that's not how the game SHOULD have gone. It is only a game and a stilted game seems just not as fun to me. Don't get me wrong; I love tournies but I love proper games of X-Wing, not just jumping on someones balls when they make a mistake. We're all human and everyone makes mistakes at times.

This, however, is a double edged sword. Often I'll remind my opponents and end up playing someone who won't do the same and will jump on every mistake I make. I had one league game where my opponent forgot his FCS (which reads "may" not "must") so it's a missed opportunity. I said that's fine mate, have your TL. No reason you wouldn't have taken it. I then forgot a shot with Poe and we hadn't progressed past the combat phase but he refused to let me take the shot. I didn't kick up a fuss, just made it my mission in life to crush him. Which I did. Frustrating as it is; I actually find wins like this really satisfying as it feels like the metaphorical boulder up a hill. Odds are against you but you still persevere.

I don't think anyone is obliged to remind opponents or allow them missed opportunities but I do believe in consistency. If you're playing someone who will allow you your missed opportunities then you should do the same.

All that said; the example in the OP is unusual. If it involves return fire I would always tell them to check as it COULD be perceived as deliberate attempt to coerce your opponent by simply agreeing then shooting them. If they refuse to check, well, that's up to them...

EDIT: For clarity; our league runs on Friday nights and I'm usually going there straight from work having worked a long week and am tired. I expect the other players to be tired as well so generally play very casually despite the semi-competitive setting. We're there for fun at the end of the day

So in a tournament setting, no corrections or suggestions should be offered or expected.

I'd dare say that most X-Wing players would offer a 'are you sure?' type thing at least a couple times per game. We won't stop someone from dropping focus tokens on 2+ ships with the same PS at the same time. We will let someone with a ACD recloak even if they forgot...

However anyone who expects that kind of help and gets upset if it's not offered and starts in on the name calling is the true poor sport here.

I know myself I'll offer a 'are you sure?' 2 or 3 times a game but don't expect it, but after that 2nd or 3rd time I going to let you fly your list to the best of your ability, which means since you're not perfect that means making mistakes.

In a casual game I like to allow my opponent to use their abilities, to openly discuss the best possible target, to work together to learn the game in a fuller way and leave the game feeling like both involved had a good time. I would hate to feel I strung my opponent along the whole game and won because they didn't know a new list.

I played casually on Vassal, had a close game, but my opponent won and seemed very proud about it. I argeed, it was a close game and I felt I had tried my hardest but just couldn't win. Then my opponent reminded me I had Punishing One on my Jumpmaster, I forgot the whole game and he knew, but never told me. It really soured me.

This is interesting.

Rolling the amount of dice that match your Attack Power or Agility + range modifiers is one of those "mandatory" rules. There is no "may" or "up to". You cant purposely roll less, for example, to purposely trigger Gunner + FCS combo. In the same light, if you have a ship with Gunner and roll 1 hit only, your opponent cannot choose to roll 0 Green dice to just take 1 hit and avoid the possible Gunner attack when he evades that 1 hit. He HAS to roll the correct number of dice. Jumpmaster title doesnt have a "may" in it, it just adds to your attack power, which makes attacking with 3 dice mandatory.

Your opponent not reminding you, in full knowledge, is basically cheating. You can file it under missed opportunity so long as your opponent ALSO forgets. If he admits to being fully aware, it basically invalidates the entire match, and shows that your opponent was deliberately ignoring a mandatory game rule to gain an advantage.

I think that sounds harsher than I intended, haha!

All that said; the example in the OP is unusual. If it involves return fire I would always tell them to check as it COULD be perceived as deliberate attempt to coerce your opponent by simply agreeing then shooting them. If they refuse to check, well, that's up to them...

It could be and you're right it is an interesting example.

But it's pretty thin to call it unfair. I mean if the other guy says 'Wedge is out of range of your Howlrunner' and I verbally agree, then IMO I'm bound by that, and I shouldn't check for range when it's Howl's turn.

But if I don't say anything either way or even ask if he's sure. It's not like I can be accused of anything. Just because he feels it is out of range doesn't mean he gets to decide that for both of us. Legally I can't check for range at that point and if he won't there's nothing I can do.

Because if we do go that way with it, then someone could say 'X is out of range of Y' and prevent you from shooting X when the exchange would be highly unfavorable for X. Say a stressed B-Wing shooting at a Phantom with TL and Focus on the B-wing.

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.

Exactly this is how people should be in EVERY competition. That is good sportsmanship

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.

It is exactly this kind of attitude that is the real problem with these threads. Notice how one group are a bunch of vile evil people and the others are the good guys.

There are a group of people here who honestly seem to think that playing by the RAW, fairly and competitively makes you an evil and reprehensible person. Does anyone actually think painting someone else with that kind of broad strokes is in anyway fair or helps contribute to a honest and reasonable discussion?

Can anyone honestly say that someone who would treat someone else that way is honestly a good sport?

Or can people reasonably make the claim that a difference of opinion about how to play a game makes one group evil and other morally superior?

In this situation, if it's close I would have measured from the start.

Then you would be guilty of cheating, period. You can not check for range until it is your ships turn to attack. The rules are quite clear on that fact, but apparently for some people cheating is fine when done in the name of 'fly casual'.

Edit: "We should all strive to be like Jack"

You're right we should all strive to play by the rules, whether it gives us an advantage or not. Jack saw that it was in and said so. He wanted to make sure that the game was played fairly.

That however has nothing to do with the question at hand. It wasn't that any rule was broken, or a bad call was made. Someone decided to not attack when they maybe could of, that is a choice not a rule being broken or even played incorrectly.

But if I don't say anything either way or even ask if he's sure. It's not like I can be accused of anything. Just because he feels it is out of range doesn't mean he gets to decide that for both of us. Legally I can't check for range at that point and if he won't there's nothing I can do.

That's pretty much what I mean. Offer a gentle reminder then you can't be accused of anything even though RAW would state you haven't done anything wrong. My opponent can't decide who is and isn't in range with his eyes; that's what my measuring stick is for and I'll decide what I'm shooting in my turn. It's just lazy to not even check but I wouldn't want to be seen as encouraging them not to check

Rolling the amount of dice that match your Attack Power or Agility + range modifiers is one of those "mandatory" rules. There is no "may" or "up to".

In fact, this is true even if your opponent rolls four blanks on their attack roll and has no way to modify or re-roll. You're still supposed to roll your agility for defense, no matter that it might have no bearing on the outcome whatsoever. Same as if you have a 1 Agility ship with one hull left and your opponent rolled two damage. Even though you're dead, you're still supposed to roll. Reason being there may be effects that trigger off your die roll that won't happen if you don't.

In a casual game I like to allow my opponent to use their abilities, to openly discuss the best possible target, to work together to learn the game in a fuller way and leave the game feeling like both involved had a good time. I would hate to feel I strung my opponent along the whole game and won because they didn't know a new list.

I played casually on Vassal, had a close game, but my opponent won and seemed very proud about it. I argeed, it was a close game and I felt I had tried my hardest but just couldn't win. Then my opponent reminded me I had Punishing One on my Jumpmaster, I forgot the whole game and he knew, but never told me. It really soured me.

This is interesting.

Rolling the amount of dice that match your Attack Power or Agility + range modifiers is one of those "mandatory" rules. There is no "may" or "up to". You cant purposely roll less, for example, to purposely trigger Gunner + FCS combo. In the same light, if you have a ship with Gunner and roll 1 hit only, your opponent cannot choose to roll 0 Green dice to just take 1 hit and avoid the possible Gunner attack when he evades that 1 hit. He HAS to roll the correct number of dice. Jumpmaster title doesnt have a "may" in it, it just adds to your attack power, which makes attacking with 3 dice mandatory.

Your opponent not reminding you, in full knowledge, is basically cheating. You can file it under missed opportunity so long as your opponent ALSO forgets. If he admits to being fully aware, it basically invalidates the entire match, and shows that your opponent was deliberately ignoring a mandatory game rule to gain an advantage.

I think that sounds harsher than I intended, haha!

Let me state that I do try my best to remind my opponents of their forgotten Rebel Captives and Tacticians.

But doing it round after round it gets irritating that I have to play YOUR busted power card for you, that I have to be the one to sink the dagger into my own stomach, and the temptation to just stop saying something and 'forget' starts arising.

My opponent can't decide who is and isn't in range with his eyes; that's what my measuring stick is for and I'll decide what I'm shooting in my turn.

Yeah exactly. If someone asks me my opinion I'll give it. If they just assume and I think they're wrong I'll mention it. But if they don't bother checking that's on them.

It in no way means I can't check myself when it's my turn. Which is after their ability to shoot has passed, and at that point it may not be fair to let them shoot now since other things may of happened differently if they had shot then.

Most people here have a three strikes rule. We'll likely remind someone of a opportunity or a mistake they're making 3 times, and after that they're on their own.

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?

A few things:

One, if this was an official match somewhere, then you have TOs. If something is debatable, then you just call a TO for a ruling. If it's a casual game, then the other person shouldn't mind you just going "now hold on, let's just check".

On the second aspect, the case of the person saying "no you can't do that we agreed" that's just plain against the rules. If I were the TO for that event, then I'd call that intentional harrying. And that is expressly forbidden. To me it seems to fall into the same category as rushing your opponent and/or trying to force a missed opportunity. If it comes time for his pilot to fire and he refuses to check, then that's his business. But he doesn't get to tell you that you also don't get to fire, because yeah it's entirely possible the opponent figured the risk of trading fire was unfavorable. This isn't a nebulous concept, it's not debatable. It's solid, measurable facts. If the ship is in range, the ship is in range. Insisting it's not doesn't change anything. Contrary to everyone's favorite Mythbusters meme, one does not get to reject reality and substitute their opinion. And on another note, it sounds like your opponent is used to being a bully and getting their way all the time, which is unsporting on top of the other ways they're just flat out wrong. But again, if you're not sure about measuring on "their turn" then you just say "hey TO, we need a ruling. Is this in range?" It's perfectly valid for you to do that, especially if you're trying to avoid situations like the one that would end up happening to you a few moments later.

Now, if the range had been so close it was difficult to tell, or if in the process of measuring one of you bumped something slightly and both of you decided to say "yeah whatever they're out of range" that would be different. But I see no reason you should pay for your opponent being a resolutely ignorant bully.

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?

For the boost part, I don't think you are obligated to say anything.

For the out of range question, I would be very careful what I said, and would probably encourage my opponent to check.

I'm of the opinion that it's a game and I would rather help my opponent out a little than screw them over. This would change if my opponent is being a jerk.

TL;DR. The most important thing is that you hold yourself to the same standard as your opponent.

The only things I've been guilty of are teaching a newbie how to "cheat" by declaring a target lock at a ship beyond 3 range so that he can measure a ship nearby to see if it's within Range 2 or not before boosting.

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.

This .. OMG this.

I'm so sick of people doing things today because they CAN do them, with no thought to whether they SHOULD do them.

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.

This .. OMG this.

I'm so sick of people doing things today because they CAN do them, with no thought to whether they SHOULD do them.

I can't like this enough.

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.

This .. OMG this.

I'm so sick of people doing things today because they CAN do them, with no thought to whether they SHOULD do them.

Can someone explain to me exactly what happened here? Not familiar enough with tennis to know exactly what happened.

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.

This .. OMG this.

I'm so sick of people doing things today because they CAN do them, with no thought to whether they SHOULD do them.

Can someone explain to me exactly what happened here? Not familiar enough with tennis to know exactly what happened.

The first guy serves the ball, and it lands in the legal zone (barely) and the second player misses it. But the ref calls it in favor of the guy who missed. Then that player tells his opponent that it was in and that he should challenge the ref's call. He willingly hands a ruling into his opponent's favor because he knew that was the right thing to do.

This has been the only game I've played competitively where a significant portion of people vilify others by playing by the rules. I mean, what does "Fly Casual" even mean any more? It should mean both players are playing by the rules at all times and they're cool about it (measure your range, check arcs, declare when appropriate, etc.). However, as others have mentioned, it has become an excuse for sloppy play. I don't mind reminding people of rules in a casual game but playing in a tournament expectations should be higher.

In summation,

Play by the rules and by cool about it.

Call a TO over if you need to.

"Fly Casual" is dumb and doesn't mean anything anymore.