Wish they clarified the V1 title and PTL interaction. Can you still get the evade if you used the target lock for your second action with PTL?

Yes, because that is how nested actions work.

I guess it all depends on whether the rules for discarding state that the opposing player can actually discard the other players cards. But then Boba already instructs them to do so, so rule zero applies I guess. Yeah, sounds like the cards themselves get discarded regulardless of EM tokens. It's possible to interpret Boba that he forces the player to discard, maybe, but EM also says may discard, so whatever. Why is Boba blowing up torpedoes when he should be taking out PTL or Palpy.

I guess it all depends on whether the rules for discarding state that the opposing player can actually discard the other players cards. But then Boba already instructs them to do so, so rule zero applies I guess. Yeah, sounds like the cards themselves get discarded regulardless of EM tokens. It's possible to interpret Boba that he forces the player to discard, maybe, but EM also says may discard, so whatever. Why is Boba blowing up torpedoes when he should be taking out PTL or Palpy.

It's actually very relevant on any sort of heavy munitions carrier since extra munitions itself gets an extra munitions token. If you hit redline's extra munitions you halve his effectiveness.

Wish they clarified the V1 title and PTL interaction. Can you still get the evade if you used the target lock for your second action with PTL?

Yes, because that is how nested actions work.

Do you got a link/quote/reference to nested actions? I've been trying to find it but can't.

I'm just curious as to why an FAQ with such significant rulings got posted with zero fanfare. No news item, and nothing on Twitter or Facebook. With the font errors people were getting, I wonder if this was supposed to have seen the light of day yet.

The real problem with the new TLT/Rudor ruling/wording is that Rudor triggers "After Defending." This should happen before any 2nd Attack. And besides, TLT is "spray and pray." There is NO second trigger at all (unlike Gunner), it's a pre-determined chain (attack 1, attack 2).

This is more of a way to BUFF Initiative than it is a way to NERF Rudor.

Either way, it's messy. Unneeded.

I'm just curious as to why an FAQ with such significant rulings got posted with zero fanfare. No news item, and nothing on Twitter or Facebook. With the font errors people were getting, I wonder if this was supposed to have seen the light of day yet.

I am not sure if I count any of the rulings I saw updated as a) significant or b) changes from how most people interpreted things.

The real problem with the new TLT/Rudor ruling/wording is that Rudor triggers "After Defending." This should happen before any 2nd Attack. And besides, TLT is "spray and pray." There is NO second trigger at all (unlike Gunner), it's a pre-determined chain (attack 1, attack 2).

This is more of a way to BUFF Initiative than it is a way to NERF Rudor.

Either way, it's messy. Unneeded.

'After defending' should read 'after an attack where you were targeted'.

I'm just curious as to why an FAQ with such significant rulings got posted with zero fanfare. No news item, and nothing on Twitter or Facebook. With the font errors people were getting, I wonder if this was supposed to have seen the light of day yet.

I am not sure if I count any of the rulings I saw updated as a) significant or b) changes from how most people interpreted things.

I wonder how the new FAQ lines up with all those dubious email rulings...

I'm just curious as to why an FAQ with such significant rulings got posted with zero fanfare. No news item, and nothing on Twitter or Facebook. With the font errors people were getting, I wonder if this was supposed to have seen the light of day yet.

It went up on twitter about an hour ago.

The real problem with the new TLT/Rudor ruling/wording is that Rudor triggers "After Defending." This should happen before any 2nd Attack. And besides, TLT is "spray and pray." There is NO second trigger at all (unlike Gunner), it's a pre-determined chain (attack 1, attack 2).

This is more of a way to BUFF Initiative than it is a way to NERF Rudor.

Either way, it's messy. Unneeded.

'After defending' should read 'after an attack where you were targeted'.

That would be the clarity needed. As it reads, it's after resolving any green dice (even zero), yet before the 2nd TLT / CLUSTER.

The real NERF in all this is to poor GUNNER... now that TLT/CLUSTERS move away from "Spray and Pray" and into "Sorry You Dont Have Initiative" domain.

I'm just curious as to why an FAQ with such significant rulings got posted with zero fanfare. No news item, and nothing on Twitter or Facebook. With the font errors people were getting, I wonder if this was supposed to have seen the light of day yet.

Because everyone here is reading FAR, FAR more into this FAQ than FFG did. There really isn't much new here, just some minor clarifications that everyone already knew, written so poorly that people are using them in ways FFG didn't intend.

So FFG needs to hire the following positions:

English Major

Math major

Rules lawyer

Artist who can redraw the Gold Squadron card as well as half of the crew upgrades on the Ghost

Douchie McNitpick

And give the Imperial Veterans team a huge raise.

I'm just curious as to why an FAQ with such significant rulings got posted with zero fanfare. No news item, and nothing on Twitter or Facebook. With the font errors people were getting, I wonder if this was supposed to have seen the light of day yet.

I am not sure if I count any of the rulings I saw updated as a) significant or b) changes from how most people interpreted things.

Most people -- including the previous FAQ -- we interpreting Rudor quite differently than how this one does. And the whole concept of the second attack being nested at the end of the first attack is new.

I'm just curious as to why an FAQ with such significant rulings got posted with zero fanfare. No news item, and nothing on Twitter or Facebook. With the font errors people were getting, I wonder if this was supposed to have seen the light of day yet.

I am not sure if I count any of the rulings I saw updated as a) significant or b) changes from how most people interpreted things.

Most people -- including the previous FAQ -- we interpreting Rudor quite differently than how this one does. And the whole concept of the second attack being nested at the end of the first attack is new.

This. Why did we get two half-assed FAQs anyway? Now we need a 3rd FAQ. And if it doesn't mention GONK's two unique actions, it will be half-assed as well.

I'm just curious as to why an FAQ with such significant rulings got posted with zero fanfare. No news item, and nothing on Twitter or Facebook. With the font errors people were getting, I wonder if this was supposed to have seen the light of day yet.

Because everyone here is reading FAR, FAR more into this FAQ than FFG did. There really isn't much new here, just some minor clarifications that everyone already knew, written so poorly that people are using them in ways FFG didn't intend.

Did you miss the bit where they gave a new explicit definition of "perform this attack twice", and it was different from how it's been played up until now?

I'm just curious as to why an FAQ with such significant rulings got posted with zero fanfare. No news item, and nothing on Twitter or Facebook. With the font errors people were getting, I wonder if this was supposed to have seen the light of day yet.

Because everyone here is reading FAR, FAR more into this FAQ than FFG did. There really isn't much new here, just some minor clarifications that everyone already knew, written so poorly that people are using them in ways FFG didn't intend.

Did you miss the bit where they gave a new explicit definition of "perform this attack twice", and it was different from how it's been played up until now?

Maybe this latest FAQ is just a bad dream... We'll wake tomorrow with TLT and CLUSTER MISSILES being ordinary "Spray n Pray" again. Read: pre-determined chains that don't have a 2nd Attack trigger (that's Gunner's role).

So FFG needs to hire the following positions:

English Major

Math major

Rules lawyer

Artist who can redraw the Gold Squadron card as well as half of the crew upgrades on the Ghost

Douchie McNitpick

And give the Imperial Veterans team a huge raise.

I believe MJ and I can cover the first two slots. Give us a chance!

So FFG needs to hire the following positions:

English Major

Math major

Rules lawyer

Artist who can redraw the Gold Squadron card as well as half of the crew upgrades on the Ghost

Douchie McNitpick

And give the Imperial Veterans team a huge raise.

I believe MJ and I can cover the first two slots. Give us a chance!

Can I be Douchie McNitpick please?

I can write some indignant nonsense on the internet about how my ideas for fixing the game are much better and more elegant than the st00pid people who only spend their time designing the game.

Cheers

Baaa

Does the rephrasing of the TLT chain have an effect on the Ghost's end-of-combat-attack? If the second attack is nested then does it get included there? As if fire control on 3 attacks wasn't already enough...

Does the rephrasing of the TLT chain have an effect on the Ghost's end-of-combat-attack? If the second attack is nested then does it get included there? As if fire control on 3 attacks wasn't already enough...

The answer may or may not surprise you.

So no one knows how this affects the new damage deck's Blinded Pilot and TLT?

So no one knows how this affects the new damage deck's Blinded Pilot and TLT?

Still get no attack. Blinded pilot says you skip you rnext opportunity to attack, so you don't get to trigger the first TLT shot to get the second one.

So FFG needs to hire the following positions:

English Major

Math major

Rules lawyer

Artist who can redraw the Gold Squadron card as well as half of the crew upgrades on the Ghost

Douchie McNitpick

And give the Imperial Veterans team a huge raise.

(the dash rendar promo with retarded face is in the same pack with the ghost crew)

Am I completely misunderstanding Boba crew?. The chewbaca bit seems to be implying that Boba triggers on being dealt a face up, not whether that face up didn't stick for whatever reason. Does this mean sheilds don't stop Boba doing his sneaky work?

I assume I am misreading things. Lol.