the rules preventing the TAPs from taking Tie/x1 deal specifically with ship-type restricted upgrade cards (must contain the entirety of the specified ship-type)

Docking Clamps is Gonzati Only, but the text portion that allows docking of Tie Fighters/Advance/Bombers/Interceptors etc. is not technically governed by the same rules

it probably will be, for consistency's sake and to allow FOs, in which case the TAPs is not a Tie Advance for game purposes

Great break down of that ruling.

FFG does not respond to rules questions concerning unreleased products. For this reason, we're all in a wait and see fashion. I personally never cared about intricate Epic rules, because my group doesn't feel the need to follow them. Epic is a more laid back version of play for us. I will be surprised if FFG does not rule in favor of the TAP being able to dock on the Gonzati, seeing how they are both ships taken from Rebels.

agreed

if someone wants to TAPs in their gonzati because of the show, I'm not about to rules lawyer them out of it

Advanced Targeting Computer on the Inquisitor, though...

yeah, that's just a game breaker

I doubt it. They knew wave 8 was coming when they printed the Gozanti, so they would have accounted for it ahead of time instead of retroactively changing how it was worded.

Cards and upgrades can only reference existing content

But the arrival of Wave 8 was severely delayed, at the time of the Gozanti's release, wasn't wave 8 supposed to have been here already?

Actually no. At GenCon, Christian Peterson was confident that the Gozanti would drop before the holidays, but what he said about Wave 8 was that they would try to get it out before but most likely would be Q1.

But at the time of the announcement of the Carrier, Wave 8 was already announced, with a tentative due date of Q4. Development of both must have gone in tandem.

Is Gozanti really that difficult to spell?

#askingforafriend

I doubt it. They knew wave 8 was coming when they printed the Gozanti, so they would have accounted for it ahead of time instead of retroactively changing how it was worded.

Cards and upgrades can only reference existing content

But the arrival of Wave 8 was severely delayed, at the time of the Gozanti's release, wasn't wave 8 supposed to have been here already?

Actually no. At GenCon, Christian Peterson was confident that the Gozanti would drop before the holidays, but what he said about Wave 8 was that they would try to get it out before but most likely would be Q1.

But at the time of the announcement of the Carrier, Wave 8 was already announced, with a tentative due date of Q4. Development of both must have gone in tandem.

Until the product hits the shelf, FFG does not include it in rules or other materials. The PAT isn't real until you can buy one. At that point, FFG will then adjust rules and answer questions.

Why would the TAP V1 want to ride on the Gozanti? I thought the whole point of the Gozanti was to be able to have a smaller transport vehicle for Tie Fighters that don't have jump drives? The V1 does have jump drives, so doesn't need to dock with the Gozanti. Of course, I bet it could if it wanted to dock, though.

It doesn't.

The reason the TAP can't dock with the Gozanti is to prevent it from taking the TIE/x1 title. The Gozanti is probably phrased such as to allow the TAP to dock with it, but the merry TIE/x1 problem means until they get some FAQ/errata to stop the TAP getting a free system or 1 point ATC those clamps will be closed to it.

The TIE Advanced Prototype doesn't have hyperdrive capability? In the episode where they were taking the children I thought they did. Otherwise why did the leave the children in their fighters rather then their support craft.

it does have hyperdrive capability. Just watch the show.

it does have hyperdrive capability. Just watch the show.

I did, that is why I commented. Why don't they have a smiley sticking out my tongue?

The "it has hyperdrive" argument really should note that the TIE/x1 also has a hyperdrive and the Punisher (probably?) does not. So the x1 doesn't "need" to be transported to battle either, but the Punisher does.

On a similar train of thought some also say that by the same argument the Raider cannot take it's own titles because the card has Raider Corvette abbreviated as "Raider-class Corv" on its ship card.

I think rules as intended is fairly obvious in both cases but conflicts with the strictest interpretation of the rules as written, so here we are arguing about a problem that shouldn't exist...

Until the product hits the shelf, FFG does not include it in rules or other materials. The PAT isn't real until you can buy one. At that point, FFG will then adjust rules and answer questions.

Yes. Yes indeed.

*looks at todays FAQ

So, about that.

Sorr, couldn't resist. .

New FAQ was released today. Included was:

Darth Vader can be equipped with the TIE/x1 Upgrade card.

TIE Adv. Prototype ships cannot be equipped with the TIE/x1 Upgrade card.

More relevent FAQ: youngster works on FOs

Logic dictates the gonzati does to

By these standards, taps is technically not eligible

Is Gozanti really that difficult to spell?

#askingforafriend

It must be!!! There are still mispellings after your post! And I was wondering the same thing as I was trying to read the replies before your post! LOL!