I'm sure this has come up in the past, but I haven't seen it so I wanted to get some weigh in.

I'm a squadron-heavy player and the way I move my squadrons is the way the rulebook says it. I lay the ruler down, I move them distance X, then I pick the ruler up and I'm done. If I misjudged distance 1 after I'm done moving them, that's my fault.

This is how I've seen more and more people doing it and it drives me bonkers.

1. Put ruler next to squadron (half the time it's floating in the air above them, but whaetver).

2. Move squadron distance x.

3. Measure distance 1 from object desired.

4. Shift squadron as needed.

In my opinion, this is a violation of the one-tool rule. You are using the squadron as a placeholder for distance X while you simultaneously measure distance 1. In addition to that, you are not moving your squadron the way that FFG describes in the rules, which is to move the squadron along the ruler and set it down at distance X. Shifting it around after it's been placed should not be allowed.

Bring on the italics, Dras

I myself did it the "improper" way as well for a long time. I have since been corrected and now am a missionary for preaching the correct way.

Makes squadrons WAY more difficult to play well and makes intel WAY more difficult to use/ easy to avoid, etc..

I myself did it the "improper" way as well for a long time. I have since been corrected and now am a missionary for preaching the correct way.

Makes squadrons WAY more difficult to play well and makes intel WAY more difficult to use/ easy to avoid, etc..

That's how I feel. I take pride in being able to barely put my B-wings in distance 1 of a ship or out of distance 1 of an enemy squadron. B-wings are SLOW and it's difficult sometimes. Likewise, when I move Jan, I take pride in being able to Heavy as many enemy fighters as possible.

That's a skill I've personally practiced.

So it's annoying to see someone negate that entire skill by shifting their fighters around on the table after they've already moved them.

Casual play is casual. Depends on the people.

Personally, if it's casual, I wouldn't normally say anything unless I felt the extra shift moved it outside the range of where they'd normally be able to move and it's a pivotal moment or something.

I'm talking about tournament play though, where I've seen this more than a few times. I'm also looking for clarification that my interpretation is correct and moving squadrons this way is against the rules.

Ehhhh. I could figure it out with one tool, and it will take me x amount of time. But i will do it. Or I could do it the "improper way" and arrive at the same location in y amount of time. Y is always, always, always less than x. In this example, we can also substitute the pronoun "I" for the pronoun "you". Which is why in general, its better to not be anal about this, because its not actually harder if your opponent is willing to make you wait. Its just more annoying for everyone involved. Provided of course they are shifting in an area that is clearly with in the range of the fighter, I wholeheartedly endorse this behavior as it speeds things up considerably. Obviously, at the outer edges of a fighters range bands, things get less lax.

Edit: I say one tool, i mean shifting.

I think this depends upon how much grace you have for others and in what kind of context you're playing.

The ruler is usually floating in the air because it would pass through other components on the map and this represents the closest to exactitude that can be achieved in that situation.

You're negating a couple things.

1. Proper is proper for a reason

2. Fighter bases are fairly large in relation to the size of distance 1 and knowing where distance 1 ends and begins before moving a fighter does not guarantee you will be out or in of distance 1 after you've moved. I disagree that it's not more difficult than putting a fighter down and shifting it to desired location.

Also, move most of my squadrons the proper way and it doesn't slow down the game that much at all. It's amazing how measuring distance 1 from what targets I'm concerned about, making a mental note of it's position, then putting a ruler down and moving doesn't take all that long.

Edit: Over time I've also just gotten a good idea of how far distance 1 is, so premeasuring it gets less and less important.

And again, I'm talking less about casual play and more about tournament play. I gave my case for what I feel the rule allows. Are my interpretations of the rules correct?

I think this depends upon how much grace you have for others and in what kind of context you're playing.

The ruler is usually floating in the air because it would pass through other components on the map and this represents the closest to exactitude that can be achieved in that situation.

I know what you mean, but I've seen plenty of times where it is floating much higher than necessary, and their range 3 squadrons suddenly move distance 4. I understand that the squadron game, by its nature, is rather loose, but at least TRY to get the ruler as close as possible. I can mark a ship and move it and keep my finger down on the marker and will happily do so in a tournament setting when it really matters to make sure no one is cheated.

I knew I'd read something about this topic recently.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/143732-unofficial-rules-clarifications-and-faqs/

There's an official response (searchable elsewhere) allowing final measuring and adjustment of the squadron with the tool.

Direct Link to a Copy of said response:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/143732-unofficial-rules-clarifications-and-faqs/page-6#entry2077054

You're negating a couple things.

1. Proper is proper for a reason

2. Fighter bases are fairly large in relation to the size of distance 1 and knowing where distance 1 ends and begins before moving a fighter does not guarantee you will be out or in of distance 1 after you've moved. I disagree that it's not more difficult than putting a fighter down and shifting it to desired location.

Also, move most of my squadrons the proper way and it doesn't slow down the game that much at all. It's amazing how measuring distance 1 from what targets I'm concerned about, making a mental note of it's position, then putting a ruler down and moving doesn't take all that long.

Edit: Over time I've also just gotten a good idea of how far distance 1 is, so premeasuring it gets less and less important.

And again, I'm talking less about casual play and more about tournament play. I gave my case for what I feel the rule allows. Are my interpretations of the rules correct?

Based on Dras' link it seems you are right. Proper is proper for a reason. Probably the ones I wrote.

That's a fair response, though the intent has to be made. I can accept that.

Edit: Thanks for providing a clear ruling, Verg and Dras, not just pompous snark.

I'm absolutely against the idea that skill in this game is about playing the game far more than your opponent and knowing exactly what distance is what.

I'm much more interested in the game that attempts to near perfect play/theory.

I'm more interested in what your thought intent is (to get into range1 of that, be out of range 1 of that), than I am woo'ed by people's anal insistence that you're 1 mm off. Also this game gets kind of bumpy and you have to move stuff a lot. If someone flicks their hp dial and then puts the ship back not exactly in the same place, a distance of 1 mm can easily change the equation a lot.

So... no. I do not agree with your idea at all.

Everyone around here wants to have a good casual time. If you intend to do something, and you make a reasonable and quick effort to do that squadron placement, that's what we want to see. We don't want to argue about this is in or out. Nor do we want to make the game all about playing it more, because that inherently splits the game into people who are fanatical about it, and people who have lives and simply want to play every so often.

A person who insists this, might technically be right, but also someone I would publically say is not fun to play against, and that can make it much harder to get games for practice around here.

I agree, actually. I play 3-4 casual games a week and we have a good time, but we're always practicing for tournament play so we're always trying to perfect our style. I've never called anybody out for any of their actions because I feel like, for the most part, small things don't really affect the game. On the flip side, I like to be as by the book as possible because I think it's a respect thing. I don't want my opponent to feel cheated because I was loose with my heavy hitters (B-wings). Mistakes are made, and that's cool. Even in a tournament if someone forgot to spend their Engi dial, before they fired or something, I'm not going to be a jerk and say, "No bro, the rules say Engineering happens first." Whatever. But I never want my opponent to feel like I'm taking advantage of looseness in rules to get an edge so I often go out of my way to make sure I'm not.

Mostly, I felt like the way my opponents were doing it was against the rules because it wasn't it tune with what the rule book said. It was clarified that I was wrong, and I'm happy with that. I can just do it myself now and not feel obligated to meticulously move my squadrons where I want them.

I'm more interested in what your thought intent is (to get into range1 of that, be out of range 1 of that), than I am woo'ed by people's anal insistence that you're 1 mm off. Also this game gets kind of bumpy and you have to move stuff a lot. If someone flicks their hp dial and then puts the ship back not exactly in the same place, a distance of 1 mm can easily change the equation a lot.

This sort of thing is why, if I care about the outcome of a particular measurement, I like to measure, have my opponent agree something is wherever it is, and then if it gets bumped later oh well we know where it was relative to things that matter.

I often like to measure and make public note if I'm in close, medium, distance 1 etc immediately after I move the piece. Especially if it's a narrow margin. I don't want the table to bump and get knocked out.

This burned me once on an Intel sweep in a tournament. I had ended just inside distance 1 of the token but after several minutes of play and a bit of bumpage I ended up outside of it.

I think FFG has made the right call here, since I too believe the game is much more about overall planning and stratagy as opposed to the fine tune moving of squadrons by eyeballing. Ships are a little different, since the movement is very important, but its also much more defined using a small set of possible maneuvers. Eyeballing squadrons would be a skill in spatial relations that I don't believe fits into the game's spirit, plus would result in more time than necessary for those who really want to reach a desired outcome. This is one of the big differences from X-Wing, where you have no premeasuring, and thus your movement comes down to your skill at guesswork (though it obviously is a high skill cap). Squadrons can already slow the game down, so its nice to be rather loose with them, even in tournament play. Things get bumped/picked up to adjust values, so intent and communication is most important. If we both knew a squadron was in X place, and engaged with A,B, and C it makes it much easier and results in less disputes. Obviously care is still needed when moving squadrons to max range, and I'm all for placing the tool flat on the table, moving it and asking my opponent if it all looks good.

[Large snip] Things get bummed [another large snip]

Something anything something something if you're brave enough.

From long years of table-top wargame experience, a very important part of play is communicating with your opponent.

If your opponent is trying to put his bombers in range 1 of your ship, but you're quietly confident he is out by a millimetre or two, then SAY SO THEN. Don't wait until he starts rolling attack dice to pull out the protractor and start measuring. And likewise, when you are moving your squadrons, tell your opponent where you are trying to put them and get their agreement about where they've been placed.

Things can run like this:

"Ok, so my B Wings can attack your Star Destroyer if I place them here"

"Actually, I think that one needs to move a little closer"

"Oh hey, you're right, thanks"

Or they can devolve into 'spirited debates' about how far each squadron moved, was able to move, whether their final position was adjusted when their activation slider was toggled or their hit point dial was rotated, next thing you know you've got TO's coming over and it's just an entirely unpleasant experience for everyone involved.

It's not coddling someone to point out they haven't actually moved into attack range if that's what they're TRYING to do. It's not shooting yourself in the foot to assist your opponent to place the models where he is trying to place them. And you're not a better player because you can visually judge the distance of the range 1 band down to the millimetre.

I fall very much into the "whatever's quickest" camp along with Madag. I get frustrated enough with people spending ages at a time agonising over the many thousands of possible manoeuvres they could take: I'd much rather them pre-measure with their squadrons and spend less time doing it.

The way I view it, in a real battle, with the sci-fi navigation systems and command officers and map displays, the actual fighters would be able to position themselves incredibly accurately, planning out their course in advance and following it exactly - the same as with the ability to hold the manoeuvre tool just out of locking it into position. For me, it adheres to the themes of the show, the game, and my own desire to have a stress- and frustration-free gaming experience.

From long years of table-top wargame experience, a very important part of play is communicating with your opponent.

If your opponent is trying to put his bombers in range 1 of your ship, but you're quietly confident he is out by a millimetre or two, then SAY SO THEN. Don't wait until he starts rolling attack dice to pull out the protractor and start measuring. And likewise, when you are moving your squadrons, tell your opponent where you are trying to put them and get their agreement about where they've been placed.

Things can run like this:

"Ok, so my B Wings can attack your Star Destroyer if I place them here"

"Actually, I think that one needs to move a little closer"

"Oh hey, you're right, thanks"

Or they can devolve into 'spirited debates' about how far each squadron moved, was able to move, whether their final position was adjusted when their activation slider was toggled or their hit point dial was rotated, next thing you know you've got TO's coming over and it's just an entirely unpleasant experience for everyone involved.

It's not coddling someone to point out they haven't actually moved into attack range if that's what they're TRYING to do. It's not shooting yourself in the foot to assist your opponent to place the models where he is trying to place them. And you're not a better player because you can visually judge the distance of the range 1 band down to the millimetre.

I 100% agree with this. Take your time and measure and whatever you need to do, but primarily you should be communicating. Both stating your intention and asking your opponent for his if it looks iffy. I rarely have problems with this method.

[Large snip] Things get bummed [another large snip]

Something anything something something if you're brave enough.

Slightly confused by this, though I did fix the typo

[Large snip] Things get bummed [another large snip]

Something anything something something if you're brave enough.

Slightly confused by this, though I did fix the typo

The full quote would be something that I probably would get banned for saying

The full quote would be something that I probably would get banned for saying

Good thing one of us isn't wearing hockey pads...I lied, I'm wearing hockey pads too.

The full quote is "Anything's a ***** if you're brave enough." - referring to a "marital aid."

Words to live by.