Firstly, the Valen Rudor ruling went the opposite way of what many people thought (being that he can range himself away from the 2nd shot of TLT or Cluster Missiles).

Similarly, Bossk + VI/Adaptability gets to transfer the modified PS onto the Nashtah Pup.

What else in the FAQ surprised you?

Rudor ruling surprises me. Really expected that one to go the other way. It's such a rare case (one ship can do it) it's not a big deal, though.

+/-PS following to the Pup is a nice thematic ruling that similarly won't happen too often (likely less, in fact).

TBing the enemy onto obstacles causing them to suffer all ill effects kinda surprised me, that's going to irk alot of people once vets arrives.

Yeah, I've played against Tractor Beans once so far, and they were annoying but fun. I think this combined with the below is too much. The below removes some tactical decision-making (which actually weakens the game by adding a crutch), and the above just wasn't necessary. It's already easy to line someone up on an asteroid/debris next turn because of the adjustment available with a Barrel Roll, having it happen twice is a little overkill. Tractor Beans are ONE point: they shouldn't be doing much.

Tractor beam movement is optional now, that's a welcome surprise. There's a couple situations where I could see you having the opponent "right where you want him" and then having to execute the tractor beam movement would screw that up.

Much better to have the "may" clause in there.

Tractor beams DONT do much. They deal no damage. You have to give up your entire attack to maybe move a ship, and then, to maybe cause damage.

There are so many variables to it that it would be ridiculously over costed at any other price.

TBing the enemy onto obstacles causing them to suffer all ill effects kinda surprised me, that's going to irk alot of people once vets arrives.

It's bull that's what it is, lowering agility and doing 1 dmg would have been a fine choice. Therefore making any more attacks agaisnt that ship easier to hit. But moving onto fkn asteroids is bull?

Also they didn't mention large ships, so you can't move large ships? Just lower their agility? Or neither?

You can just lower their agility. They don't get moved.

Also, have you met Paragoombaslayer by any chance? I have a feeling you two would get along really well. Or, perhaps absolutely hate each other. Hard to say.

I'm fine with Tractor Beams being OP. They won't be, but even if they are I'm fine with it. Should make some Acewing ships taste it, particularly non-Soontir.

Defenders may dominate the game once Imp Vets drops with the D title, but that would be a good thing, a return to flying generics that have to get enemy ships in arc. Wave 8 is already going to do that with the plethora of ordnance based lists it makes viable.

Also, that glorious quad OGP, quad Baffles, Quad Tractor Beam, quad Tactician list.

TBing the enemy onto obstacles causing them to suffer all ill effects kinda surprised me, that's going to irk alot of people once vets arrives.

Yeah, I've played against Tractor Beans once so far, and they were annoying but fun. I think this combined with the below is too much. The below removes some tactical decision-making (which actually weakens the game by adding a crutch), and the above just wasn't necessary. It's already easy to line someone up on an asteroid/debris next turn because of the adjustment available with a Barrel Roll, having it happen twice is a little overkill. Tractor Beans are ONE point: they shouldn't be doing much.

Tractor beam movement is optional now, that's a welcome surprise. There's a couple situations where I could see you having the opponent "right where you want him" and then having to execute the tractor beam movement would screw that up.

Much better to have the "may" clause in there.

I mean, they deal 0 damage, in the HLC's slot. They need the help

The amount of effort put into The Inquisitor, Autothrusters and Tactician. Even 6 months ago I'm sure they would have just said "Inquisitor turns off Autothrusters" and left it at that; it's a very pleasant surprise to see them try to make the rules actually work instead. I don't think they got it quite right, but an A for effort.

It's annoying that it took such a careful rewrite of the AT card to do it, though.

The number of "the cards says this, but actually it meant to say THAT" upgrades and pilots in the game is...really starting to bug me. I mean, we're up to *pages* of errata'd cards, now, which, just...blergh.

I'd really be quite happy to be able to just buy the reprinted cards from FFG in a pack and be done with having to memorize/tote around the entire FAQ...

Yeah, I'm not convinced Tractor Beams are going to be OP in themselves. Rather, on titled Defenders, I think the prospect of losing an agility and potentially being lined up to go over an obstacle is going to scare the piss out of players, forcing them to waste tokens on a damage-less attack only to be battered by a primary weapon. Then again, they could also just not fly near asteroids. We'll see what happens.

The turret / Tactician ruling makes sense rules-as-written and further incentivizes being mindful of firing arcs while flying a PWT, which is fantastic.

The Inquisitor is going to be a homewrecker and I'm so excited for it.

Yeah, I'm not convinced Tractor Beams are going to be OP in themselves. Rather, on titled Defenders, I think the prospect of losing an agility and potentially being lined up to go over an obstacle is going to scare the piss out of players, forcing them to waste tokens on a damage-less attack only to be battered by a primary weapon. Then again, they could also just not fly near asteroids. We'll see what happens.

To be fair, the Defender needs the help.

The size of an asteroid increased by a base size all around. That will influence the setup of the game if even one player is bringing a single TB. For that reason alone you should bring one.

If you could use them to BR and Boost someone off the table, they wouldn't have changed the rules concerning those, a while back.

Except it didn't, because you have to give up a shot of damage and hit with it to get them on there. And it only increased by a base if you're next to or behind the 'roid anyway.

From experience trying them out after the Mist Hunter article, getting people onto obstacles was probably the least important of the TB's effects; the agility penalty and the range and arc control were vastly more useful IME.

I mean, they deal 0 damage, in the HLC's slot. They need the help

Where are you getting the 6-point discount on your HLC's?

the fix for SLAM action really surprised me..

TBing the enemy onto obstacles causing them to suffer all ill effects kinda surprised me, that's going to irk alot of people once vets arrives.

Yeah, I've played against Tractor Beans once so far, and they were annoying but fun. I think this combined with the below is too much. The below removes some tactical decision-making (which actually weakens the game by adding a crutch), and the above just wasn't necessary. It's already easy to line someone up on an asteroid/debris next turn because of the adjustment available with a Barrel Roll, having it happen twice is a little overkill. Tractor Beans are ONE point: they shouldn't be doing much.

Tractor beam movement is optional now, that's a welcome surprise. There's a couple situations where I could see you having the opponent "right where you want him" and then having to execute the tractor beam movement would screw that up.

Much better to have the "may" clause in there.

I mean, they deal 0 damage, in the HLC's slot. They need the help

As someone who's been using it since we got the full rules on /D I can guarantee people will hate tractor beams once vets is out.

The fact it's now clear TB happens before ruthlessness kicks in makes it even worse.

Good time to be imperial.

ok how many folks went back and looked for the slam fix..lol feeling ornery today... lol

The section about the proper way to roll dice is the best part of the new FAQ entries.

Lame that we need clear directions on how to handle dice **** ups, but welcome for the times we need it against bad sports in tournaments.

yeah i have done (Rolled extra dice) on many occasions I always just asked my opponent what he wants me to do. re-roll all none or some.. since it was my screw up.

Yeah it's common sense but sadly any game attracts a small percentage of players that are TFG.

Stopping dice shenanigans saves TO's alot of hassle.

Love the dice rules. It's the most intuitively fair, but I'm glad it's now clear - bonus dice are way too easy to mess up in the heat of a tourney when your brain is turned to cheese.

Pretty happy with the whole thing, really; my biggest surprise is that they didn't add the TAP to the Gozanti's fighter list.

I'm still going to have to reread the Autothruster and Tactician updates again. Seems like they measure separately to attacks. The first read through kinda broke my brain trying to make sense of it.

Im shocked they only mention 2 out of the 3 (possible) exceptions to "Tractor Beam" re-positioning. How hard would it have been to list all three: Obstacles, Other Ships (Bases), and Mat's Edge!

Sloppy, FFG, sloppy.

^ Also shocked about "Cannot Tractor Beam onto an overlapping Ship" *** auto-nerf *** (Ion Projector; Anti-Pursuit Lasers).

^ Also shocked about "Cannot Tractor Beam onto an overlapping Ship" *** auto-nerf *** (Ion Projector; Anti-Pursuit Lasers).

1) You could never overlap ships, that's in the original print of the tractor beam rules reference.

2) You can't boost, barrel roll, or decloak off the board regardless of what causes the boost or barrel roll, it doesn't specify only stopping boost and barrel roll actions.

^ Also shocked about "Cannot Tractor Beam onto an overlapping Ship" *** auto-nerf *** (Ion Projector; Anti-Pursuit Lasers).

1) You could never overlap ships, that's in the original print of the tractor beam rules reference.

2) You can't boost, barrel roll, or decloak off the board regardless of what causes the boost or barrel roll, it doesn't specify only stopping boost and barrel roll actions.

Does the errata clarify whether the movement is mandatory or not? Like, say one position is blocked (boost), but the BR to the left is not. Does the ship HAVE to be barrel rolled, or can the player say, "I boost, but can't boost, so he stays there".

So if I read it right ( which I probably didn't lol). If I have a ship with tactician and the ship I am shooting is in arc at range 1, but is also in arc of range 2 since it lies in between, I can shoot with range 1 bonus (like normal) but also trigger tactician?

Not quite. If the target is range 1 outside of arc, but range 2 in arc, and you have a turret primary weapon, you can get the range 1 attack bonus, but still trigger Tactician.

If it says firing arc, then you check the distance in arc. Otherwise, don't check the arc. They reworded autothrusters to make that more clear.

TBing the enemy onto obstacles causing them to suffer all ill effects kinda surprised me, that's going to irk alot of people once vets arrives.

Wait when people try to tractor beam them off the map

^ Also shocked about "Cannot Tractor Beam onto an overlapping Ship" *** auto-nerf *** (Ion Projector; Anti-Pursuit Lasers).

1) You could never overlap ships, that's in the original print of the tractor beam rules reference.

2) You can't boost, barrel roll, or decloak off the board regardless of what causes the boost or barrel roll, it doesn't specify only stopping boost and barrel roll actions.

Does the errata clarify whether the movement is mandatory or not? Like, say one position is blocked (boost), but the BR to the left is not. Does the ship HAVE to be barrel rolled, or can the player say, "I boost, but can't boost, so he stays there".

Errata makes it a may. Don't even have to fail a boost if you don't want.