Now I know you can't use un-official SW Armada ships, with stats that is not from FFG in a Turnament.

But If one wanted to use a Assault Frigate Mk1 model as a Proxy, instead of the IMHO ungainly looking AF Mk2, still using the FFG stat and baseplate...

Or if one decided that Fighter squadrons should have a pair of fighters instead of a trio fighters on one squadron stand.

Would it be okay to play with these proxy models in a "Official" turnament???

Or must the models have to be the official ones from FFG, with Squadrons stands of three fighters???

How far can one go with modifing/repainting ones stable of Starships and Starfighters, without risking being banned from a turnament???

Obviously painting ones ships with Nazi symbols, is in very very bad taste and people should have their head examined for doing such a thing. But what are the limits for what you can bring to a turnament???

Turnaments for some WW2 games has some restrictictions on what you can bring of models, must be painted etc.

But I couldn't find any for SW Armada, or I haven't looking persistantly long enough after it.

Another Ewok Snowball from the Kiwi Rat

The rule is that you can not use proxy models in events.

If I were running an event that had cost out of pocket on MY end and NOT FFGs end, I would allow it.

If the event is an FFG sponsored event coming out of FFGs pocket, I would say you better have the original stuff on table.

I would allow it for tournaments under premiere level (so store championship and below), however if I was TO, I would require you to have the models close by incase your opponent has an issue

i agree, Store championship and below. I would say OK to proxy upgrade cards, but ships can be a bit tricking getting the exact arcs down and all for a base.

I would allow it for tournaments under premiere level (so store championship and below), however if I was TO, I would require you to have the models close by incase your opponent has an issue

My club did this with 40k/WHFB. Proxy and custom built models were okay by opponent's permission, but you had to have the official models available. And I feel that's a great middle ground. If your opponent is new to the game and worries they'll be confused by a non-official model, they can ask that you use the regular one. If they're a stickler for rules, well, they're technically in the right, as the rules state FFG models only.

Even if you weren't using an FFG-provided tourney kit, you should still honor the rules on account of player confusion. Alternate models can throw off someone new to the game, which gives their opponent an unfair advantage (not that someone would do it on purpose).

And there are no soft scores in this game, so you can't argue that you're using alternate models for visual appeal to enhance your scores. You're using them because you like them. And if you're able to drop that money on Shapeways, you should also be able to afford the original FFG model.

As for repaints, I think non-offensive is fairly straightforward, and would fall under the sportsmanship rules for the tournament. If someone showed up with something offensive painted all over their ships, they should get das boot. I don't see how else you could make things confusing through paint jobs, though. The ships all have fairly distinguished designs.

But how much confusion would there be having 2x A-wings on a squadron stand, than the usual three???

I mean would a "New player" be so confused over that there is one tiny model less on a squadron stand, that he/she is unable to comprehend that it still function the same way?

Wether or not you would "Allow" it or not notwithstanding, the tournament rules from FFG state:

Only Original FFG Components can be used :

If it is an "FFG Organized Play" Tournament, which includes the use of an FFG Tournament Kit, then players are to expect these rules to be followed...

If, however, it is NOT using a Tournament kit, then ALL BETS ARE OFF...

However, FFG's TOURNAMENT rules are as follows (in quotes)

L E GA L P RO DUC T S

Only official Star Wars: Armada components are legal for use in tournament play.

Proxies of cards and ship models cannot be used. Third-party tokens and range rulers may be allowed at the head judge’s discretion.

COMPONENT MODIFICATIONS

During tournament play, each player is required to use the components included in official Star Wars: Armada products (see “Legal Products” on page 6).

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.

It is possible for a player to have multiple identical ship cards in his or her fleet. To avoid confusion, it is required that each ship be identified to its player and ship card with ID tokens.

Players are welcome and encouraged to personalize their fleets according to the following rules:

• Players may paint their Star Wars: Armada ships and squadrons.

• Players cannot modify ship bases to alter their size or shape. Weight may be added to a ship base if it does not alter the size or shape of the base.

• Cards must remain unaltered, though they may be sleeved for protection. Sleeves for Damage cards must be identical and unaltered.

• Players may mark their tokens, command dials, and speed dials to indicate ownership as long as the function of the component is not compromised.

However, players should be careful not to mark the cardboard in their command dials in any way that may indicate to their opponents what commands they have selected!

• Players may mark asteroid fields, debris fields, and other obstacles to indicate ownership, but cannot otherwise alter them in any way.

Ergo. No AFMK-Is instead of IIs, as those are Illegal components. No 2, 4 or 5 Model Fighter Stands, as those are Illegal components.

But a standard FFG 3x model squadron stand with a A-wing Missing in the middle would be legal, as all components is FFG's

Even snipping of one arm of the 3x model peg, making it a 2x Model peg, would still keep it as a FFG product, and since the peg is not a base component, then technically speaking no alteration has been made to the Base components size or shape.

And If a TO or FFG representative would exclude one from a turnament for such a minor "surgery", then I would suspect they must have begun their day very badly, like being waken up by angry Wookies or worse Jar Jar Binks

Mee saw A-wing missing on muy model peg :D

But a standard FFG 3x model squadron stand with a A-wing Missing in the middle would be legal, as all components is FFG's

Even snipping of one arm of the 3x model peg, making it a 2x Model peg, would still keep it as a FFG product, and since the peg is not a base component, then technically speaking no alteration has been made to the Base components size or shape.

And If a TO or FFG representative would exclude one from a turnament for such a minor "surgery", then I would suspect they must have begun their day very badly, like being waken up by angry Wookies or worse Jar Jar Binks

Mee saw A-wing missing on muy model peg :D

Be as technically correct as you want.

I'm just quoting what FFG has written as "Rules".

yeah if you missing a fighter, or like my VSD the stupid antenna broke of BOTH of mine, that should not matter. now if you were taking a fighter squadron that had proper amount of HP/Hull and was proxy it for another squadron type, that is totally different.

There's something of a divergence when it comes to this, but I did ask officially some time ago (because of my Mk. II conversions). On the pure technical side, Dras is right: no modification of any components beyond paint scheme, no changing base sizes is spelled out in particular.

When I asked about store championships, Sullust, standard tournaments, the response for conversions was “Yeah, that should be fine as it's left up to the TO's discretion. Just clear it before the start.” I'm paraphrasing, but I can always dig up the actual reply. Still it falls perfectly in line with:

“ 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 this

is as illegal as this

is as illegal as this

in the case of a premiere event. As is taking the tail of an MK II and flipping it around.

But the 1-2 fighter thing isn't as cut and dried so long as they are FFG made things. So the 1-2 fighters -say, as named squadrons for easy identification- is as interesting as question as if you may include 1 TIE advanced and 2 TIE Ln to represent Vader. All of which consist of the base components with no additional third party proxy.

Common Sense shall never reign supreme so long as people are around to rule-lawyer it into the ground with clauses to benefit themselves Still, It is an issue that can come up. Just clear it ahead of time and you're golden.

NOOOOOO! NOT MY MK2 TAIL!

But how much confusion would there be having 2x A-wings on a squadron stand, than the usual three???

I mean would a "New player" be so confused over that there is one tiny model less on a squadron stand, that he/she is unable to comprehend that it still function the same way?

I think you know that I wasn't referring to having one fewer fighter on the stand, and was speaking more to things like the Shapeways ships being used as legal ships. The last tournament saw a player with two GR-75s proxied in as HWKs. No one there minded, so it was perfectly fine. My point is that, should someone bring something like that to a tournament, they should also have the legal FFG model in case there is someone, like a "new player" or a rules lawyer, who argues that it's not allowed.

I think you know that I wasn't referring to having one fewer fighter on the stand, and was speaking more to things like the Shapeways ships being used as legal ships. The last tournament saw a player with two GR-75s proxied in as HWKs. No one there minded, so it was perfectly fine. My point is that, should someone bring something like that to a tournament, they should also have the legal FFG model in case there is someone, like a "new player" or a rules lawyer, who argues that it's not allowed.

Following the Rules makes you a Rules Lawyer?

I think you know that I wasn't referring to having one fewer fighter on the stand, and was speaking more to things like the Shapeways ships being used as legal ships. The last tournament saw a player with two GR-75s proxied in as HWKs. No one there minded, so it was perfectly fine. My point is that, should someone bring something like that to a tournament, they should also have the legal FFG model in case there is someone, like a "new player" or a rules lawyer, who argues that it's not allowed.

Following the Rules makes you a Rules Lawyer?

Following the Rules makes you a Rules Lawyer?

That's a lawyer's question if I ever heard one, right up there with 'have you stopped beating your spouse?'

The question usually becomes who is raising the issue, and for what reason? Is the game on a live stream that represents FFG? Is it going to be used for promotional material? Is it just for aesthetics and all the other components (bases, tokens, cards, upgrade cards) all there? Is an opponent combing for infractions to try to get an unfair advantage over the competition under the guise of 'following the rules'? Etc etc, endless et cetera.

So there is certainly a place for the rule (at least in my mind) but absolutes on either side make for interesting anecdotes and unpleasant memories.

That's why the TO is there: the burden is off both parties: issues raised in advance, aspects addressed by a responsible and empowered impartial 3 ^rd party before the rule has to be enforced. Ta-dah!

Following the Rules makes you a Rules Lawyer?

The question usually becomes who is raising the issue, and for what reason? Is the game on a live stream that represents FFG? Is it going to be used for promotional material? Is it just for aesthetics and all the other components (bases, tokens, cards, upgrade cards) all there? Is an opponent combing for infractions to try to get an unfair advantage over the competition under the guise of 'following the rules'? Etc etc, endless et cetera.

Every tournament is used for promotional purpouces. It might not be used to promot it to people outside the event it self, but it certenly is a promotional event for thouse involved. How willing I am to purchase future products for a game will most defenitley be influenced by my experiece at a tournamnet for that game.

"Semantics and anecdotes do not concern me, Admiral. I want that ship."

All four of those were sample question rather than supportive statements. I'm not pretending to have a universal answer to the issue (you are right, strictly speaking. It is a sort of internal promotional venue, but different tournaments are subject to different rules in a very literal way as outlined by the Tournament Rules), I'm just saying that enforcement of rules can be done for a variety of reasons both noble and ignoble.

If you want me to rephrase, then "Used as the subject of a photo opportunity and marked for inclusion in multimedia material as used by Fantasy Flight Games or their corporate partners for marketing and display purposes." But that's longer, less fun, more snide, makes me come off as a jerk, and doesn't really change anything.

In the end, "Players should not be punished for their lack of understanding in the finer points of Star Wars: Armada rules." (Competitive Events, Tournament rules , P.1). That statement isn't true of higher level events, so it doesn't seem to be a black and white issue.

I think you know that I wasn't referring to having one fewer fighter on the stand, and was speaking more to things like the Shapeways ships being used as legal ships. The last tournament saw a player with two GR-75s proxied in as HWKs. No one there minded, so it was perfectly fine. My point is that, should someone bring something like that to a tournament, they should also have the legal FFG model in case there is someone, like a "new player" or a rules lawyer, who argues that it's not allowed.

Following the Rules makes you a Rules Lawyer?

When I talk about rules lawyers, I generally talk about those people that butt in if it doesn't concern them or try to apply an oppressively literal translation of the rules to get an advantage. As an example - let's say I'm playing the person with the Rebel Transports. He asks me if I can use them. I say it's fine. Then the guy from the next table comes over and tells my opponent that he can't use them (this guy is not the TO, in the example). In reference to this issue of proxy models, I would consider that rules lawyering. It has no effect on that person, so he should stay out of it. Now, if he were to play that person later, he would be well within his rights to call the TO over and have the models removed. But there's a good chance he wouldn't, so why ruin someone else's day?

I had someone tell me the mat I brought to the last tournament was "way too big" (as a side note, he was using my 3' x 3' FFG official mat). It was about two inches too long. My opponent didn't care, and that guy wasn't the TO, so we just ignored him. My mat had a space theme on it, and the ones provided by the venue were plain black felt. Technically, I should not have been able to use my mat because it was not FFG official and not provided by the venue. So technically (i.e. rules lawyer-ishly) he was correct. But we ignored him because ignoring the rule provided for a more interesting background to our game, which I think brings more fun.

The only problem with that attitude is you ignore and ergo, belittle someone who has gone to the effort to know and understand the rules.

The situation is not fair on anyone when it is presented that way.

You know. . . 2" changes a lot of things. . .

You know. . . 2" changes a lot of things. . .

Well that's a different discussion that's probably not appropriate for these forums. . .

The only problem with that attitude is you ignore and ergo, belittle someone who has gone to the effort to know and understand the rules.

The situation is not fair on anyone when it is presented that way.

That's not how I mean it, though, so I might be misrepresenting myself. I'm talking about something everyone involved knows the rules on, but have chosen to allow. If my opponent really wants to use his non-standard models because he thinks they're cool and he spent extra money on them, it's not going to effect me at all, so I would say yes. If someone else who is not playing my opponent butts in to say no, that's what I'm calling BS on. My opponent and I both know what the rules are. My opponent was up front and asked if it was okay. I said yes. The person injecting himself into the situation is technically correct (the best kind of correct, amirite?), but there was no call for it.

Now a different situation would be if you look at the table next to you and see that one player is confused about non-FFG ships, as an example. I would still assert that the proper course wouldn't be to jump in and say, "Those aren't legal so you can't use them!", but rather to let the player know what the rules are and that they do not have to allow them at all. That's not what the mat guy did, though. He either assumed our own ignorance or wanted to be TO but also wanted to play, and told us to remove the mat. Had he come over and just mentioned the rule to check for our awareness, I would've been fine. But he didn't. He felt he had the nonexistent authority to come over and tell us what to do. He assumed that he knew more than we did and was going to boss us around, and that, in my mind, is one definition of a rules lawyer.

EDIT - And going with the above example of the confused player not knowing about the FFG official model rules, I would also say that said person interjecting should be comfortable advocating for the confused player. I could see a situation where the person, now knowing the rule, seems hesitant to allow it and/or the player with the non-standard models tries to pressure them into saying they're okay (possibly because they don't have the proper models). In that situation, I would say get the TO involved. But if you see something like that, you ask, and both players say they're fine with it, then don't worry about it. Maybe remind them that they can be disqualified (although I, as a TO, would probably just have the models in question removed), but it's not your call.

Just had a quick read of the rules with respect to "Component Modifications" and "Legal Products"

In the main it's focused on keeping the size of the bases or proper ship cards etc... to be only those that are produced by FFG - which makes sense as then all should be fair and square.

Also, you must only use the "components included" in Armada products

Oddly though, there does not seem to be any rule that you must use *all* the components. In nearly every case though you will have to for game reasons - such as command tokens or the ID for a ship etc... But the exception to this is the actual ship model itself as it's the only part that component that has no actual impact on the game. You could argue that they are there to indicate the type of ship, but the ship card(s) contain the specific information for a ship e.g. a Type A and B CR90 both use the same model, you have to look at the base or the card to know what type it is.

So then, in theory, could you legally play a game using just the bases of ships/squadrons and no models?

I would agree that the bases are perhaps the biggest consideration, but the ship models themselves play a key part because it's not easy to quickly identify a ship by its base from across the table. A large base is going to be obvious based on which faction, because there is only one large ship on each side. But if I slap down three medium bases for my Rebel fleet, it can be a lot of different things. Or a Glad-I base next to a Glad-II base. Yes, it does say "Gladiator II-class Star Destroyer", but in smaller letters on the side that faces away from your opponent. And yes, I know you are jesting with a hypothetical, but wanted to address it before I see someone actually try it. . .

During my last game of the tourney, my opponent pulled his ISD off and we played with just the base. The ISD kept blocking our ability to check sight arcs and kept bumping my ship models. I wouldn't just say that you can play the game without the ship models, but at times you almost must take the models out. Now, I wouldn't advocate just putting the bases down at the beginning of the game and rolling along that way. But the ship models themselves have no real effect on the game, so if they're interfering with game play (with the LoS/bumping other models example above being the only example I can think of), then I would say it's fine to pop them off. Although insisting you can play the entire game without the models is just being asinine, and an example of rules lawyering.

Actually, I think that's what I've been trying to say about how I define a rules lawyer - someone who uses their knowledge of the rules for no other reason than to display their knowledge of the rules. Not to settle a disagreement. Not to make sure someone isn't getting an unfair advantage. Just to demonstrate how well they know the rules, even if you know the same rules. Well, that and someone who goes and does something like playing an entire game without ship models because it's "technically" legal.