Regionals season has officially begin, with the conclusion of the Fantasy Flight Games Center 2016 IA Skirmish taking place today. Here are my scatterbrained observations from my playtime today. 15 players with a top 8 cut after 4 rounds.

• Intentional Draw rule lead to lots of chatter and confusion after round 3. Four people took an ID to make the top 8 cut.
• Twins everywhere, mostly combined with Sabs.
• No dual Banthas, but Scum lists were effective (Bantha, HK, Hired Guns)
• On Warzone on the Fallout mission you CAN destroy the non-command room doors. All doors have 10 health/1 def--not just those for the command room.
• 6 store championship byes were used
• It was an all-troopers finals: Rebel Troopers vs. Stormtroopers. Rebel Troopers took the win.

I'm really excited for the next Regionals, especially those in the upper midwest area.

Regionals season has officially begin, with the conclusion of the Fantasy Flight Games Center 2016 IA Skirmish taking place today. Here are my scatterbrained observations from my playtime today. 15 players with a top 8 cut after 4 rounds.

• Intentional Draw rule lead to lots of chatter and confusion after round 3. Four people took an ID to make the top 8 cut.
• On Warzone on the Fallout mission you CAN destroy the non-command room doors. All doors have 10 health/1 def--not just those for the command room.
• 6 store championship byes were used

The Intentional Draw was one of the worst things I have seen in my 20+ years at miniatures tournaments. I cannot believe that rule is in the book. it's basically running the numbers and win-trading. The fact that the standings were posted and people could do the math and Intentionally Draw to guarantee each player would make the cut, in my opinion, is wrong. (All 4 players who took an intentional draw made the cut, had they actually played each other, two of those players would have scored 6 and two scored 9, affecting everyone's SOS for tiebreakers in the 6-point bracket). If that rule is still in the book by the end of this weekend, I'm done with FFG sanctioned tournaments. It's just another thing that promotes not actually playing games. (Along with winning round one byes, (which I am guilty of using, never again), SOS for tie-breakers instead of MOV, and voluntary drop outs).

For Fallout, the non-command room doors are "unlocked" (and can be opened with an interact), and the other two you breakdown, who made you break all four doors?!?

Number of store byes used fixed in above quote. There were 6 store champion byes, and a seventh "odd man" bye.

I think he's saying you can attack the non-command room doors, regardless of the fact they are unlocked. Very convenient for certain figures with focus abilities.

Also, this means you can "remotely" open the opponent's door.

Regionals season has officially begin, with the conclusion of the Fantasy Flight Games Center 2016 IA Skirmish taking place today. Here are my scatterbrained observations from my playtime today. 15 players with a top 8 cut after 4 rounds.

• Intentional Draw rule lead to lots of chatter and confusion after round 3. Four people took an ID to make the top 8 cut.
• On Warzone on the Fallout mission you CAN destroy the non-command room doors. All doors have 10 health/1 def--not just those for the command room.
• 6 store championship byes were used

The Intentional Draw was one of the worst things I have seen in my 20+ years at miniatures tournaments. I cannot believe that rule is in the book. it's basically running the numbers and win-trading. The fact that the standings were posted and people could do the math and Intentionally Draw to guarantee each player would make the cut, in my opinion, is wrong

I'd LIKE to keep this as a discussion about Regionals and not about the ID controversy, but I can't help but get sucked in. Prior to the new "rule", draws existed. You could just as much intentionally draw now as you could before--it was just less convenient. And while the ID rule "legitimizes" it, it is meant more as a recognition that IDs do happen. The only real solution is to upheave the scoring system, preferably with a 3-2-1-0 score (3 total win/40 points, 2 partial win/less than 40 points, yet win, 1 competitive loss/greater than or equal to 20 points, and 0/total loss), followed by MOV.

I'm not going to talk about ID any more, I let it slide on my skirmish summary post (with a neat picture!), but as you said, I got sucked in and had to voice my opinion.

As for the doors, I was not aware you could attack an object with no listed health value. That doesn't make any sense.

It makes sense insofar as the rules state "a figure can attack a door (Health: 10, Defense: none)", ergo all doors have 10 health and can be destroyed after delivering as much damage.

Right, but the mission specifically states that only two of the doors are locked and can be attacked, not all four.

The Arizona Regional also happened today. There were 14 Players with 4 that had Bye cards at the start. There were a good variety of lists, although it leaned towards trooper and twins lists for the majority. Mostly it was Empire troopers, but there was one Rebel trooper/Smuggler spam list that made it to the top 4. There were several Bantha Lists, but only one of which was a dual Bantha list. There was one ID match going to the two undefeated players at the end of swiss.

The top list was:

2 Elite Stormtroopers

1 Elite Snowtrooper

1 Heavy Stormtrooper

-Targeting Computer

2 Officers

Rule by Fear.

Right, but the mission specifically states that only two of the doors are locked and can be attacked, not all four.

Locked != can be attacked. You're just adding that in randomly. The rules state doors have 10 health. If doors have health, they can be attacked. Locked only means you can't interact to open it. You can't attack the doors on Kuat A just because they're locked.

The ruling also comes directly from the mouths of the developers, so you'll get no argument from me.

Right, but the mission specifically states that only two of the doors are locked and can be attacked, not all four.

Locked != can be attacked. You're just adding that in randomly. The rules state doors have 10 health. If doors have health, they can be attacked. Locked only means you can't interact to open it. You can't attack the doors on Kuat A just because they're locked.

@DT: I'm not adding that randomly, you're taking what I wrote out of context. While you are technically correct in the fact that just because a door is locked doesn't mean it can be attacked in ALL cases, I was referencing specifically "Fallout" from the NWZ map, not ALL cases.

EXACT TEXT FROM FALLOUT:

The doors to the Command Room are locked. A figure can attack a door (Health 10, Defense: None).

"Objects", RRG, Page 20:

Mission rules can allow objects to be attacked by specified figures (see “Attacking Objects” on page 6).

"Doors", RRG, Page 11:

Some missions specify that certain doors are locked. Locked doors cannot be opened except as specified in the mission rules.

"Attacking Objects", RRG, Page 6:

Mission rules specify how much Health the object has. (truncated)

The "Command Room" isn't the entire center of the board, it is only tile 21A. Tile 21A has 2 doors, not all 4. Constant Motion (the other NWZ mission) mentions nothing of doors, therefore, they are treated normally (interact to open). Deception Game and Reprogrammed both state the door is locked and then list a health and defense value. However, neither of these missions EXPLICITLY STATE doors can be attacked. The exact text reads: "The door is locked (Health: 10, Defense: 1 ▼)." Does this mean doors just have health but cannot be attacked in these cases? No. It is implied that to save space on the card. On the old KSS map, both missions had special rules for dealing with doors, none of those doors could be attacked, and none had health listed on them.

Can you state a precedent where a door was not stated as locked, and yet was stated as attackable with a health/defense value?

I think in the case of Fallout, we have a poorly written rule set for the intention of what doors are supposed to be doing in this mission. We all agree on the fact that 2 of the doors are locked. What we don't agree on is, can the other 2 doors be attacked.

Perhaps some official clarification is an order?

@tropoFarmer, Did you get the ruling directly from Paul Winchester (who was there), or from one of the Tournament Organizers?

I think you're making this way harder than it needs to be.

Pretend the sentence "The doors to the Command Room are locked." wasn't there. I believe we can all agree the rest of the card means all doors have 10 health and can be attacked.

Why do you think adding this phrase back in alters the 2 doors this sentence has nothing to do with?

And this actually makes sense as a strategic element on the map. You can blow open your opponent's door.

I am not making this harder, it's very simple. I'm just reading the mission rules and following them.

1) If I have to "pretend a sentence isn't there" for your argument to make any sense, then my logic is not flawed. Your logic, however, is flawed.

2) Operating under your "lets just ignore text" logic, then why bother wording it that way at all? Consider the following statements assuming each line exists in a vacuum:

• " All doors are locked. A door may be attacked (Health: 10, Defense: None) ." <-- This right here makes perfect sense, right?
• "All doors may be attacked (Health: 10, Defense: None)." <---Doesn't say the doors are locked, so you could attack them or walk up and open them.
• "A door may be attacked (Health: 10, Defense: None)." <--- Same as above, but begs the question, why word it this way when there are multiple doors? Stlll allows you to walk up and open the doors, they aren't locked.
• "Doors to X are locked. A door may be attacked (Health: 10, Defense: None)." <-- This here closely mirrors what the rules say, where the mission rules state which doors are locked and how to open them.
• "Doors to X are locked. All doors may be attacked (Health: 10, Defense: None)." <-- This is what you are proposing the rules say, but they don't say that.

3) If the doors are locked, you have to blow open the opponents doors anyway. If they aren't, you can walk up, interact with them and open them. The strategic element is the same. What the argument for attacking unlocked doors really is about is figure that can (Surge): Focus getting unfettered access to Focus without themselves becoming exposed to attack.

As stated above, please provide precedence to support your argument. Show me a single skirmish instance where a door is not locked, can be interacted with and opened normally without the need to attack it, and still be attacked. I have gone through all the skirmish missions and have yet to find a single door that is attackable and unlocked.

I agree with Fizz. As far as I can find there is no (other) door that fits the criteria above.

The ruling was out of Paul Winchester's mouth. Don't complicate it. End of ruling.

Well then someone needs to tell him to officially FAQ it, because it seems to be at odds with how other maps and the campaign work.

If it's supposed to be

The doors to the Command Room are locked. A figure can attack all doors (Health 10, Defense: None)

or

The doors to the Command Room are locked. A figure can attack a locked door (Health 10, Defense: None)

instead of

The doors to the Command Room are locked. A figure can attack a door (Health 10, Defense: None

Then they need to FAQ/errata it.

Current wording is ambiguous

As for the ID issue... I agree that it's stupid. Just play the **** game. IA is almost impossible to intentionally draw in game anyway and there's provisions for dealing with "slow play".
Here's what you need to draw:
"In the rare situation that both players have the same number of victory points at the end of the game, the player with the most victory points from defeating hostile figures wins the game. If the result is still a tie, each player counts the number of damage tokens on his or her remaining figures. Then, each player adds the Health values of any defeated figures corresponding to Deployment cards still in his or her play area. The player with the lowest total damage tokens and Health wins. If players are still tied, the game is a draw. If a game during elimination rounds would end in a draw, the player with initiative receives a win and the opponent receives a loss."
If you can actually achieve an in game draw you deserve a medal

As for byes.... I like the idea but I don't think it works very well with so few players. In 50+ player tournaments (like x-wing) it makes sense and is a nice reward for winning store champs. But in 12 player tournaments it's kind of unnecessary.

I like the bonus but I don't like that it's another rule that prevents playing of the game. That's what all this is about. We should be playing the game as much as possible.

"A figure can attack a door", "A figure can attack all doors", and "A figure can attack any door" are all functionally equivalent in English, as you said so yourself. I don't understand why you think the preceding sentence somehow alters this. That's not the way English works. The only difference is the middle one might suggest you could attack them all at the same time, given certain context, but that's irrelevant here. Really that's just a reason not to use that version.

Strategically, there is a difference between blowing open a door across a room and having to walk across 2 sets of difficult terrain to interact with it. It gives a few more options for attacking the enemy if they won't open the door.

I don't know why you won't consider this without precedent. Thankfully, clarification came from Paul, so we don't have to argue about it anymore.

I was present when Paul and Todd (developers) were discussing it with folks on Saturday. Todd said, "It was unintentional for all of the doors to be able to be attacked, but based upon the wording of the card they are able to be." This occurred during the quarterfinal matches. He also added that he likes the strategic bit that being able to attack the unlocked doors adds to the map.

I was present when Paul and Todd (developers) were discussing it with folks on Saturday. Todd said, "It was unintentional for all of the doors to be able to be attacked, but based upon the wording of the card they are able to be." This occurred during the quarterfinal matches. He also added that he likes the strategic bit that being able to attack the unlocked doors adds to the map.

And they may think about it a bit more after our conversation here, and reverse that decision. They also thought ID was a great idea to implement as well, and now that they are seeing it in play, maybe they arent so sure.

We will see what happens when an official FAQ ruling is issued. Allowing unlocked doors to be attacked sets up an extremely dangerous precedent.

I was present when Paul and Todd (developers) were discussing it with folks on Saturday. Todd said, "It was unintentional for all of the doors to be able to be attacked, but based upon the wording of the card they are able to be." This occurred during the quarterfinal matches. He also added that he likes the strategic bit that being able to attack the unlocked doors adds to the map.

And they may think about it a bit more after our conversation here, and reverse that decision. They also thought ID was a great idea to implement as well, and now that they are seeing it in play, maybe they arent so sure.

We will see what happens when an official FAQ ruling is issued. Allowing unlocked doors to be attacked sets up an extremely dangerous precedent.

While they admitted it was an unintended element within the wording of the rules, it does add another element of depth to the game as Paul pointed out. Sure you may not like it letting Snowtroopers get a focus on the opening turn of the game by shooting at a door, its not at all thematic however the game has plenty of niche areas where game function takes over theme.

Much in the same way in the early days of X-wing where "blocking" was discovered, it was never intended to be a strategy in the game and lots of players decried it as unfair and against the spirit of the game but it quickly became widespread and is now an accepted part of the game.

I think just because there is a strange rules interaction that many had not thought of up till now doesn’t make it illegal or "cheesy" it's just another aspect of the game that players have figured out.

Also would you care to elaborate as to how this is a dangerous precedent?

"A figure can attack a door", "A figure can attack all doors", and "A figure can attack any door" are all functionally equivalent in English, as you said so yourself. I don't understand why you think the preceding sentence somehow alters this. That's not the way English works. The only difference is the middle one might suggest you could attack them all at the same time, given certain context, but that's irrelevant here. Really that's just a reason not to use that version.

Strategically, there is a difference between blowing open a door across a room and having to walk across 2 sets of difficult terrain to interact with it. It gives a few more options for attacking the enemy if they won't open the door.

I don't know why you won't consider this without precedent. Thankfully, clarification came from Paul, so we don't have to argue about it anymore.

It's confusing and ambiguous because it's not consistent.

That's the problem.

Here's a list of maps with locked doors that have health:

1) Shadow war on Geonosis Foundry - "The door is locked. A figure can attack the door (Health 10: Defense: 1 Black Dice) to open it"

2) Training Ground (both missions) - "The door is locked (Health 10: Defense 1Block)

3) Safe and Sound on Echo Base - "The doors are locked. A figure can attack a door (Health 7: Defense: 1Block)"

4) Fallout on Nelvaanian Warzone - "The doors to the Command Room are locked. A figure can attack a door (Health 7: Defense: none)"

5) One Man's Trash on Coruscant Landfill - "The doors to the trash compactor are locked (Health:10 Defense: 2Block)"

The last 2 of these maps both have locked and unlocked doors. There's no conflicts on the first 3 maps as they only have 1 door or ALL the doors are locked.

The question here is, how come each of these have different wording? How come some specifically state that doors can be attacked? How come none of these are consistent? Even 1 and 2 are almost the same (single locked door) have different wording.

Some of that is simply because newer products would have updated wording, but it can be unnecessarily confusing.

Main difference here is that between 4 and 5 .... on map 5, you can't attack the unlocked doors.

And the wording on map 3 and 4 says you can attack it but leaves of the "to open it part". Obviously the RRG says a defeated door is open, but it's poor wording like this that creates confusion.

Now it seems that the designers (regardless of ruling) have said this issue was unintentional... which implies the intent is as worded on map 5 (which is the latest product from the Bantha pack).

It's actually a wider issue. These rules for games like this are all about proper wording, and that wording should match the intent.

In my opinion, the wording on maps 2 and 5 are the clearest. There's no additional pointless information and nothing ambiguous.

I believe the intent of Leia's map is the same as the Bantha one (map 5) but the ruling was made contrary to that which really just makes this whole issue even more interesting. It's a strange precedent for the designers to decided against the intent of the rule instead of just fixing it with an FAQ/errata.

Side note: I think being able to focus off attacking a door is silly to begin with. They should probably just FAQ that out completely and the issue of attacking unlocked doors goes away completely.

Shooting at a bloody door doesn't take effort or focus... it's silly and not thematic. But that's just my opinion

I'm all for more strategic depth... but I don't think "use an action to get a free focus" is a particularly interesting mechanic... it also cheapens certain unit's abilities and some command cards.

I thought this post was about IA Regionals, not rules...

I thought this post was about IA Regionals, not rules...

Yeah! How'd the Austin(?) Regional shake out? Anybody know?

I thought this post was about IA Regionals, not rules...

Yeah! How'd the Austin(?) Regional shake out? Anybody know?

Lots and lots of troopers. @theunsullied won with Bantha, HK, eTusken, nexu,hired gun, gideon, 3p0, devious, beast Tamer, temp Alliance. 2nd was trooper swarm with heavy/TC for spice.

I will try to get this post back on topic lol. Here is my lists I've been playing with much success for awhile now. Centerville Ohio Regionals at Epic Loot Games and Comics

2x eNexu (one with last resort)

eHKs (with exsplosive armaments)

eTusken Raiders

Gideon

C-3po

Temporary Alliance

Devious Scheme

Beast Tamer

Command Deck:

2x Pummel

2x Jundland Terror

1x Negation

1x Take Initiative

1x Opportunistic

1x Price on Their Heads

1x Wild Fury

1x Parting Blow

1x Element of Surprise

1x Urgency

1x Ferocity

1x Planning

1x Focus

We had 24 people with 10 byes used. 5 rounds cut to top 8

I used a bye

We didn't play the finals. I conceded to my opponent so that he could use the bye at Origins, that I had no plan on going to. It was also 11pm at this point.

I'll be back to answer question or add to the report.