If you have "Zeb" crew equiped on Ghost and the Phantom is not docked or you do not have an attack shuttle at all, does a ship that bumped your rear arc can shoot you?

If you have "Zeb" crew equiped on Ghost and the Phantom is not docked or you do not have an attack shuttle at all, does a ship that bumped your rear arc can shoot you?

Yes, in that case the enemy ship would be able to attack the Ghost. The enemy ship is in your firing arc (regardless of whether or not you can currently use that arc to make attacks), so when it activates it is not considered touching you.

Well, it is a special arc rather than an auxiliary one. Shouldn't we wait for the ship and its rules to actually be released first?

Well, it is a special arc rather than an auxiliary one. Shouldn't we wait for the ship and its rules to actually be released first?

Yeah that's my thought too. There is even a icon printed on the arc on the tile.

Well, it is a special arc rather than an auxiliary one. Shouldn't we wait for the ship and its rules to actually be released first?

You're welcome to wait. But if someone needs a rule to use to resolve a game in Vassal or with proxies at home, my post above is the logical extension of everything we currently know about firing arcs.

If you have "Zeb" crew equiped on Ghost and the Phantom is not docked or you do not have an attack shuttle at all, does a ship that bumped your rear arc can shoot you?

Yes, in that case the enemy ship would be able to attack the Ghost. The enemy ship is in your firing arc (regardless of whether or not you can currently use that arc to make attacks), so when it activates it is not considered touching you.

I would argue the opposite. It's not a primary or auxiliary arc (which are the 2 we know count for things like "in arc" or "not in arc"), it's a special arc. I would say while you don't have a phantom docked, that arc essentially doesn't exist and they'd get no shot from zeb crew, but while the phantom is docked and you can use said arc, then it would count for you to shoot each other (in thi8s case, special arc basically meaning it's an arc if you have a phantom, it's not an arc otherwise)

We don't know. That is the only valid answer, the fact that it is identified differently than auxiliary arcs shows that it will gave different rules, and we simply do not know what those might be yet.

If someone is allowing unreleased content in their games then they and their opponent should know the existing rules and be willing to create their own interpretations when unknown rules create questions.

I would argue the opposite. It's not a primary or auxiliary arc (which are the 2 we know count for things like "in arc" or "not in arc"), it's a special arc. I would say while you don't have a phantom docked, that arc essentially doesn't exist and they'd get no shot from zeb crew, but while the phantom is docked and you can use said arc, then it would count for you to shoot each other (in thi8s case, special arc basically meaning it's an arc if you have a phantom, it's not an arc otherwise)

Here's the preview article:

Although the VCX-100 features a special firing arc from which it can fire any torpedoes it equips...

And if you look at the card fan, there's a big torpedo printed on the base. So yes, it's certainly possible the special arc will have special rules that make it somehow not a firing arc, even though it's a firing arc that's primed on the base and can be used for some kinds of attacks regardless of whether it has an Attack Shuttle docked. But that seems a bit farfetched and kludgy to me.

Although the VCX-100 features a special firing arc from which it can fire any torpedoes it equips...

And if you look at the card fan, there's a big torpedo printed on the base. So yes, it's certainly possible the special arc will have special rules that make it somehow not a firing arc, even though it's a firing arc that's primed on the base and can be used for some kinds of attacks regardless of whether it has an Attack Shuttle docked. But that seems a bit farfetched and kludgy to me.

It could also be argued that if the game consisted of just the VCX-100 with no Attack Shuttle attached and no torpedoes equipped then there is no rear arc on the VCX-100. Wait for the ship to appear in stores, previews have been known to be wrong before.

Okay, look at the current FAQ rulings for things like Backstabber or the statement on page 15 that "A ship's firing arcs are always the printed, shaded arcs on the ship's token."

Again, yes: it's perfectly possible that FFG will rule that the special firing arc on the VCX-100 isn't really a firing arc except that sometimes it is. But until you see that appear somewhere official, it seems like a reasonable extension of the current rules to say that something that looks like a firing arc and is referred to as a firing arc is, in fact, a firing arc.

Soooo....

Do we have a definitive answer for this yet?

Soooo....

Do we have a definitive answer for this yet?

A "primary firing arc" (AKA "standard firing arc"), an "auxiliary firing arc", and a "special firing arc" are all firing arcs, any ability that simply references "firing arc" treats them all the same. While the "primary" and "auxiliary" definitions can be found the the Rules Reference (pg. 11), the "special" definition is currently only in the Ghost expansion rules insert (because "special" firing arcs didn't exist before) and there's is nothing in there says that you should ever treat it as not being a firing arc.

Soooo....

Do we have a definitive answer for this yet?

A "primary firing arc" (AKA "standard firing arc"), an "auxiliary firing arc", and a "special firing arc" are all firing arcs, any ability that simply references "firing arc" treats them all the same. While the "primary" and "auxiliary" definitions can be found the the Rules Reference (pg. 11), the "special" definition is currently only in the Ghost expansion rules insert (because "special" firing arcs didn't exist before) and there's is nothing in there says that you should ever treat it as not being a firing arc.

Also some Huge ships just have plain firing arcs. These also count.

Soooo....

Do we have a definitive answer for this yet?

In the absence of an explicit ruling from FFG that the special firing arc is not actually a firing arc, I plan to rely on the most straightforward interpretation, which also happens to match the plain-language interpretation.

That is, all firing arcs are considered to be firing arcs, all the time.

I asked the Judges and FFG Officials at the Hoth open series and was told that the special firing arc is only active if the Ghost has a torp or the phantom. If not, the Ghost does not have a back arc. I asked because I had Zeb in a ghost in my list.

I asked the Judges and FFG Officials at the Hoth open series and was told that the special firing arc is only active if the Ghost has a torp or the phantom. If not, the Ghost does not have a back arc. I asked because I had Zeb in a ghost in my list.

So is this now the way how to handle this?

If the ghost isn't the Ghost and has no shuttle and if there is no torps on board of the Phantom/non-Phantom,

then Backstabber gets his additional die even if he is inside of the special firing arc.

I guess then when the Phantom docked off the Ghost and all Torps are fired this would also appeal.

I asked the Judges and FFG Officials at the Hoth open series and was told that the special firing arc is only active if the Ghost has a torp or the phantom. If not, the Ghost does not have a back arc. I asked because I had Zeb in a ghost in my list.

So is this now the way how to handle this?

If the ghost isn't the Ghost and has no shuttle and if there is no torps on board of the Phantom/non-Phantom,

then Backstabber gets his additional die even if he is inside of the special firing arc.

I guess then when the Phantom docked off the Ghost and all Torps are fired this would also appeal.

Until there's an FAQ, one judge ruling one way doesn't change the rules as written, especially as I'm sure that some other anecdote could suggest the other way.