Yeah at Gen con my e wing was hugely modified. Took off the top gun, added 2 more guns under the wings and 2 guns on the nose. Alex Davy was watching my play and said he really digged my corran. Never once did any of the judges there tell me I can't use it.

The best example I have of this is all the people that did TIE/fo repaints of original TIE Fighters last summer after the movie trailers came out. If someone tried to fly one of those as a TIE Fighter in a tournament I was running, I would DQ the ship because it has been modified and not only looks different from the original, but looks like a completely different ship in the game.

But if it's just a repaint it's legal.

Call me funny, but if I'm playing a Fantasy Flight game at a Fantasy Flight sanctioned tournament with the chance of winning Fantasy Flight promos and a bye in another Fantasy Flight tournament, I think it's only proper that i use Fantasy Flight materials. Casual play? Local store tournament? Do whatever you want. But sanctioned events? I feel like you should support the company who's supporting your fun.

I'm actually with this... Having actual materials at a tournament I think is correct.If someone can use a photocopy then you'd have to let everyone prkxy in everything. Then it's like...why bother buying anything.

But, to the specific example above...other players were ready to lend him the correct card. That should have been good enough for anyone.

Dont get me wrong, like i said lets keep some standards: if TO says no prox, its no prox no matter what.

But i just dont like "i payed" attitude. You payed for fun at the event.

In short, when you decide to deviate from the rules for whatever reason, you also must also accept the consequences of that decision.

In the case of modding ships, I choose to deviate because modding and painting is fun, rewarding, and other players seem to enjoy it too. I understand the intent of the rule is not to trample the creativity of players, so I'm willing to risk the enforcement. If I take a loss or a DQ for it, I'd be bummed but I'd still have no regrets.

But in the case of proxying cards, there really isn't a good defense for it. You just didn't feel like supporting FFG with another purchase, and didn't take the time to ask anyone to borrow it. You broke the rules for no defensible reason.

The best example I have of this is all the people that did TIE/fo repaints of original TIE Fighters last summer after the movie trailers came out. If someone tried to fly one of those as a TIE Fighter in a tournament I was running, I would DQ the ship because it has been modified and not only looks different from the original, but looks like a completely different ship in the game.

While the TO is given a ton of authority, the rules EXPLICITLY allow player to paint their ships however they want. You DQing someone because you don't like their ships paint job is no different that you DQing someone because that they colored the rims of their maneuver dials.

It's not about liking or not liking the paint, it's about flying a ship that has been painted to look specifically like a different ship in the game. This makes it so that if someone just looks at the ship quickly, they will be inclined to think it's the wrong kind.

Imagine flying a list of mixed TIEs and TIE/fo ships where all the original TIEs have been painted to look like TIE/fo ships. I guarantee you that's going to cause confusion.

It would be like using a YT-2400 model with a YT-1300 pilot card, dial, and base. Just looking at the ship on the table leads you to believe it's a totally different ship class.

The best example I have of this is all the people that did TIE/fo repaints of original TIE Fighters last summer after the movie trailers came out. If someone tried to fly one of those as a TIE Fighter in a tournament I was running, I would DQ the ship because it has been modified and not only looks different from the original, but looks like a completely different ship in the game.

But if it's just a repaint it's legal.

Not a repaint that makes the ship look like another playable ship in the game. The whole point of the "no mods" rule is to prevent confusion as to what ship is being flown. A ship from class A that has been painted to look exactly like ship class B will automatically cause confusion.

The best example I have of this is all the people that did TIE/fo repaints of original TIE Fighters last summer after the movie trailers came out. If someone tried to fly one of those as a TIE Fighter in a tournament I was running, I would DQ the ship because it has been modified and not only looks different from the original, but looks like a completely different ship in the game.

While the TO is given a ton of authority, the rules EXPLICITLY allow player to paint their ships however they want. You DQing someone because you don't like their ships paint job is no different that you DQing someone because that they colored the rims of their maneuver dials.

It's not about liking or not liking the paint, it's about flying a ship that has been painted to look specifically like a different ship in the game. This makes it so that if someone just looks at the ship quickly, they will be inclined to think it's the wrong kind.

Imagine flying a list of mixed TIEs and TIE/fo ships where all the original TIEs have been painted to look like TIE/fo ships. I guarantee you that's going to cause confusion.

It would be like using a YT-2400 model with a YT-1300 pilot card, dial, and base. Just looking at the ship on the table leads you to believe it's a totally different ship class.

What if someone's only using one type of TIE and just prefers the aesthetics of the originals or f/os?

Because that's the intention of my current repaint project - to unify all my TIEs under one scheme, f/os included; but I don't own any original TIEs and probably don't intend to.

One time I almost called someone on the no Modding rule. His Y-wing had so much warhammer kibble on it it genuinley took me 3 looks to figure out what ship it actually was. This rule exists for a reason, it can cause genuine confusion. Other things that would concern me are "closed foil" X-wings looking like Z-95s and wingless TIEs (I saw this one once, There was no way to know what kind of TIE it was. I lent him my own TIE and he used it for the tournament). A TO should use discretion to be sure, but the rule needs to be there.

I have seen a few paintschemes I would have prefered to be banned.

Mostly because they where so far out of theme.

The worst one I remember eas someone with a Tie Swarm. Howlrunner was painted with Bob Marley smoking a joint on the wings. The rest of the Ties where painted in rastafari colours.

It looked horribel imo and had nothing to do with Star Wars

but isn't that good motivation for your pilots to blow them up?

Not really.

I am a huge fan or repaints that fit the style and theme of Star Wars, but playing agasint people who paint their Fighters to look like Rastafarian Squadron, My littel Pony ships and other out of Star Wars sillyness is detrimental to the game immersion, at least it is for me.

The best example I have of this is all the people that did TIE/fo repaints of original TIE Fighters last summer after the movie trailers came out. If someone tried to fly one of those as a TIE Fighter in a tournament I was running, I would DQ the ship because it has been modified and not only looks different from the original, but looks like a completely different ship in the game.

While the TO is given a ton of authority, the rules EXPLICITLY allow player to paint their ships however they want. You DQing someone because you don't like their ships paint job is no different that you DQing someone because that they colored the rims of their maneuver dials.

It's not about liking or not liking the paint, it's about flying a ship that has been painted to look specifically like a different ship in the game. This makes it so that if someone just looks at the ship quickly, they will be inclined to think it's the wrong kind.

Imagine flying a list of mixed TIEs and TIE/fo ships where all the original TIEs have been painted to look like TIE/fo ships. I guarantee you that's going to cause confusion.

This conversation has been had many times. How is playing a TIE/FO and a TIE painted like a TIE/FO any more confusing that flying Tetran with Mk II engine next to Fel with a shield upgrade? It is not. You just are not thinking - which is perfect if you really are a TO.

In both cases, the two sets of ships have different maneuvers, different shields, and are similar or identical models. Would you DQ that player flying Tetran and Fel?

Remember, the rules require that every ships have a tile on its base. That tile is how ships are distinguished. If a player mistakes a *** Fighter for a TIE/FO, it is no different than mistaking Tetran for Fel - both happen because that player is a moron.

The best example I have of this is all the people that did TIE/fo repaints of original TIE Fighters last summer after the movie trailers came out. If someone tried to fly one of those as a TIE Fighter in a tournament I was running, I would DQ the ship because it has been modified and not only looks different from the original, but looks like a completely different ship in the game.

While the TO is given a ton of authority, the rules EXPLICITLY allow player to paint their ships however they want. You DQing someone because you don't like their ships paint job is no different that you DQing someone because that they colored the rims of their maneuver dials.

It's not about liking or not liking the paint, it's about flying a ship that has been painted to look specifically like a different ship in the game. This makes it so that if someone just looks at the ship quickly, they will be inclined to think it's the wrong kind.

Imagine flying a list of mixed TIEs and TIE/fo ships where all the original TIEs have been painted to look like TIE/fo ships. I guarantee you that's going to cause confusion.

It would be like using a YT-2400 model with a YT-1300 pilot card, dial, and base. Just looking at the ship on the table leads you to believe it's a totally different ship class.

What if someone's only using one type of TIE and just prefers the aesthetics of the originals or f/os?

Because that's the intention of my current repaint project - to unify all my TIEs under one scheme, f/os included; but I don't own any original TIEs and probably don't intend to.

So you are painting all your TIE/fo to look like original TIEs? I guess I can understand it from an aesthetics perspective, but in a game setting, that starts to look like purposeful deception. People are going to look at your squad and think "TIE swarm," not "TIE/fo swarm."

This conversation has been had many times. How is playing a TIE/FO and a TIE painted like a TIE/FO any more confusing that flying Tetran with Mk II engine next to Fel with a shield upgrade? It is not.

It's different because what you are describing is entirely within the game as purchased. It is normal for two ships of the same type to have slightly different configurations based on upgrades. Yes, it can get confusing and requires both players to keep an eye on which ship is which, but it's a necessary evil. The TIE vs. TIE/fo situation is different because you are disguising one ship that exists in the game as a completely different ship in the game. The two ships behave similarly enough that it would be very easy for someone to lose track of which one is which. It could also be interpreted as purposeful deception - the player might be hoping for exactly that to happen so that they can sneak a sloop on someone who isn't expecting it (for example).

You are suggesting that the models don't serve any purpose and that players should look exclusively at the base tiles, ID numbers, and upgrade cards to tell ships apart. If that's the case, then why not just play without the ships at all? If I can't look at your ship and *at least* know what brand of ship it is, then that's not a legal model in my opinion.

In both cases, the two sets of ships have different maneuvers, different shields, and are similar or identical models. Would you DQ that player flying Tetran and Fel?

Remember, the rules require that every ships have a tile on its base. That tile is how ships are distinguished.

As long as they made a reasonable effort to make it clear which ship is which, no I would not. If they tried to fly the two without ID numbers, I would require them to do so - players shouldn't have to read the pilot name on a base tile every time they need to check which ship it is.

You just are not thinking - which is perfect if you really are a TO.

If a player mistakes a *** Fighter for a TIE/FO, it is no different than mistaking Tetran for Fel - both happen because that player is a moron.

You sound like just a barrel full of laughs. I'm sure you're a blast to play against.

You're supposed to have ID numbers for each of your ships during a tournament anyway (For mirror matches), so that's normal.

Another vote for Store Championships, Regionals, Nationals, Worlds - Re-paints only and NO proxy cards. Borrow or buy if need.

As for Tournaments. Up to TO and players. I actually forgot my cards once and allowed to proxy one round. Thanks. Would never even ask during a Store Championship. Hence my new nightmares.

I like seeing repaints on the table but not modifications. Those can be show before and after or even in a display.

Ah, the topic that clogged up the uk/irk group. As was said there, the player asked the TO who was fine with it, and was bringing the originals in case any players minded. This is absolutely the right way to play it.

Really? That kind of guy? How on earth a photocopied in color and size upgrade card would kill your game? Ok miniatures im up here, lets keep some standards but paper components of the game? Especially upgrade cards that sometimes are in the ships you'll never use (epics....)?

And argument about "Spending money for tournament"...holy come on how much you pay for those tournament? 50bucks or what? And even so how does this little piece of paper beeing different quality, or even not beeing there at all, will lessen your fun from event?

Fly casual....

Feeling like you've got the right to break the rules of the game is the opposite of fly casual. Even at casual FLGS nights I always ask my opponent if it's alright when I want to proxy something. It's just good manners.

When there's a tournament kit involved, the default rules are that you need all legit components to your list. TO has the final say, but for Store Championships and up, I'd expect those rules to stand firm.

As for modifications, the rule seems like it has a pretty simple goal - if you show someone just the ship, they should be able to name the chassis without any confusion. Adding fins to your royal guards won't make people think they're not TIE Interceptors. Painting your TIE Fighters in /fo colors (or vice versa) is probably going to confuse people, and that's not cool at a tournament.

It's different because what you are describing is entirely within the game as purchased. It is normal for two ships of the same type to have slightly different configurations based on upgrades. Yes, it can get confusing and requires both players to keep an eye on which ship is which, but it's a necessary evil. The TIE vs. TIE/fo situation is different because you are disguising one ship that exists in the game as a completely different ship in the game.

You are suggesting that the models don't serve any purpose and that players should look exclusively at the base tiles, ID numbers, and upgrade cards to tell ships apart.

In both cases, the two sets of ships have different maneuvers, different shields, and are similar or identical models. Would you DQ that player flying Tetran and Fel?

Remember, the rules require that every ships have a tile on its base. That tile is how ships are distinguished.

As long as they made a reasonable effort to make it clear which ship is which, no I would not. If they tried to fly the two without ID numbers, I would require them to do so - players shouldn't have to read the pilot name on a base tile every time they need to check which ship it is.

You just are not thinking - which is perfect if you really are a TO.

If a player mistakes a *** Fighter for a TIE/FO, it is no different than mistaking Tetran for Fel - both happen because that player is a moron.

You sound like just a barrel full of laughs. I'm sure you're a blast to play against.

Anyways. That's the question. What does the community think of mildly modded models.

Sincerely,

The guy who looks at the IG-2000 and cries out to fold those wing/legs.because....****....that ship is hard to look at as is.

MAGNETY GOODNESS is what IG desires

and yeah, tournament where you can't take a good looking E-wing is a bad tournament :C

Proxy with your buddies or casual tournaments. But when its tournament time store championship on up pony up and buy, beg, borrow (don't steal) the official merch. Otherwise fly what you have and be creative within your limitations. There's no magic upgrade card or pilot I the entire game you must have to win (exept TLTs?). Be that awesome guy that wins with a Wave I list. It is possible. Fly casual but fly well.

I'm actually with this... Having actual materials at a tournament I think is correct.

If someone can use a photocopy then you'd have to let everyone prkxy in everything. Then it's like...why bother buying anything.

But, to the specific example above...other players were ready to lend him the correct card. That should have been good enough for anyone.

Dont get me wrong, like i said lets keep some standards: if TO says no prox, its no prox no matter what.

But i just dont like "i payed" attitude. You payed for fun at the event.

If a person has a problem with it, then they should raise it at the start of the match, during the game they could be being beaten and use it as an out.

If you're doing a tournament I believe that if proxied cards are allowed then you should be allowed to proxy anything else. If I see an opponent using proxy cards at the start of the first round of a tournament I'd call them on it but if someone will loan him the genuine cards then continuing would be fine. If the proxies are discovered later I would be most upset and would expect him to get a game loss at best and at that time I no longer care if someone will loan him the actual cards; he has been playing illegally and should have to suffer something because of it. What does "discovered later" mean? It means that if he is sneaking proxies without disclosing their use and I discover them after play has begun or perhaps even worse if I encounter a player using proxies in later rounds.

When it comes to modified models I believe you should be ok when it is immediately clear what the ship is. Right now the TIE Fighter and TIE/fo are close enough that either could expect extra scrutiny so I'd really say stay away from bringing either of those with physical modifications. On the Rebel side some confusion could show up with the Z-95, X-Wing, and T-70 so I'd exercise caution there as well.

What is the difference in terms of gameplay? In both cases the opponent simply looks at the base tile to distinguish which ship is which. Painting ships does not create any potential for confusion that the designers did not already account for.

Would you fly a TIE Advanced model with a TIE Interceptor base tile and pilot card? No, because they would be confusing at least and deceitful at worst. Using a model that looks like a TIE/fo with TIE Fighter base and pilot is the same thing. You are using a model that makes the ship you are flying look like a completely different class of ship. I'm not sure how many different ways I can explain that concept.

It's also worthwhile to note that every time FFG has re-released a ship, it's been with some different paint scheme. This is to make it easier for players to tell their similar ships apart without having to use ID numbers or repainting ships themselves. However, they've never released a paint scheme of a ship that made it look like a totally different ship class because, get this, it would be confusing.

You will have to show me the quote where I said that. I am not seeing it. Regardless, that has nothing to do with this discussion.

Must you jump straight to insults at every turn? I have TOd numerous times and never encountered a player who didn't recognize the importance of clearly identifying their ships. Even if the rules as written don't explicitly require you to in every case, there is clearly that intent. Play with the spirit of the rules in mind, not just their exact lettering.

Also from that same section in the tournament rules:

"the head judge is the final authority on any component’s eligibility in the tournament. if a component is ruled ineligible and the player cannot locate a replacement for it, that player is disqualified from the tournament. "

So if I, as a TO, think that a ship is going to cause confusion during gameplay, then it's up to me to make that call. Here's another great example of following the spirit of the rules and not just the words; the explicit rules would allow the head judge to eject any ship at any time for "illegal components" and no one else can dispute it. That would be a dickish thing to do, though, since the spirit of the rules is to only reject ships that are clearly going to cause a problem.

This conversation has been had many times. How is playing a TIE/FO and a TIE painted like a TIE/FO any more confusing that flying Tetran with Mk II engine next to Fel with a shield upgrade? It is not. You just are not thinking - which is perfect if you really are a TO.

It's different because Tetran and Fel are still both interceptors. Sure, Fel m ight have an extra shield (in your example), and tetran might have a couple extra green banks, but they both have the same interceptor dial and are going to fly mostly the same. The TIE Fighter and TIE/FO don't have the same dial, and the addition of green hard turns and sloops can make a far more significant difference to how the two different ships will fly than extra green banks will for an interceptor.

It's also worthwhile to note that every time FFG has re-released a ship, it's been with some different paint scheme. This is to make it easier for players to tell their similar ships apart without having to use ID numbers or repainting ships themselves. However, they've never released a paint scheme of a ship that made it look like a totally different ship class because, get this, it would be confusing.

It actually is not worthwhile to mention that. Players can purchase two TIE Interceptor expansions and fly Fel and Phennir together and FFG thought that the potential for confusion in that scenario did not justify DQing players or requiring them to put ID tokens on the bases. This is because FFG thought about it and realized that it is impossible to confuse ships with different base tokens because those ships have different base tokens.

What is worth mentioning is that you are set on players using ID tokens, pieces of cardboard that sit at a ships base and provide a way to differentiate between pilots, and consider that sufficient to differentiate ships, but you think that players having to look at base tokens, pieces of cardboard that sit at a ships base and provide a way to differentiate between different ships and pilots, is too onerous. Why?

The only issue I can see is when you turn up to an event, first game and your opponent deploys an entire fleet of Scum Uglies. Now I would admire the guy for putting the effort in to making them but if you can't tell what ship the Y/TIE/Khirazx actually is without having to specifically look at the name on the card insert then you have a problem.

Also, I agree with the TIE / TIE F/O debate, even if my opponent explained it to me that they numbers 10 and 20 are black sqd with crackshot and the unmarked is actually Omega Leader but they all looked like F/O, later on, I may forget, go for the sloop block and kick myself when reminded that they can't do a sloop due to being normal TIES. Its the same when I see Carnor Jax in a blood stripe Interceptor and Soontir Fel in the Red one, at some point, I AM going to get the two confused.

Not wanting to bring the dreaded 40k but that sort of thing is kinda like modelling/modding for advantage.