Silver crane.

When would fire control team have an effect?

Lots of times!

All I'm arguing is that if you trigger ACM's and it deals two damage and you also trigger XX-9s that the two damage from the ACM's are not eligible to be flipped by the XX-9s. You would still flip the first 2 cards dealt by the attack, just not the ACM cards (if any).

Oh and that you can trigger both XX-9's and the standard crit but only 2 cards would be face up.

I am firmly in the three cards camp. Its two seperate effects, taking place one after the other. Default crit effects the first card to go through while under that effect, XX9 effects the first two cards to go through under its effect. I think its pretty clear by their example in the article this is the interpretation they are going to support, so we may as well all get on board now.

Also this conversation got crazy deep into technicality. I don't even get what some of you are arguing at this point. But good on you, you crazy kids.

Two separate effects that both effect the first card dealt by the attack. The first card is the first card in either case.

I'm aware of the RAW argument. I just think its going to be overruled in errata.

Ok. Here we go.

RRG 4:

Damage

Ships and squadrons can suffer damage from attacks, obstacles, and other game effects .

Ok here we establish damage can come from things other than attacks.

Critical Effects

A critical effect, denoted by the “E:” header, can resolve if there is at least one E icon in the attack pool. • The attacker can resolve only one critical effect per attack. • The attacker does not spend a die icon to resolve a critical effect unless the effect says otherwise. • Critical effects resolve at the beginning of the “Resolve Damage” step of an attack.

So here is the definition of the critical effect. We've established it can cause damage as part of it's effect and that it resolve at the beginning of the "Resolve Damage" step of the attack.

RRG 2:

Resolve Damage: The attacker can resolve one of its critical effects . Then the attacker determines the total damage amount. Then the defending squadron or hull zone suffers that total damage, one point at a time. ◊ If the attacker or defender is a squadron, the damage is the sum of all (hit) icons. ◊ If the attacker and defender are ships, the damage is the sum of all (hit) and (crit) icons .

Ok so here it clearly states that if damage is the sum of all the crit and hit icons.

From this we can understand that ACM's resolve fully and that any damage that may or may not have been dealt does not have any bearing on the damage from the attack which is defined as the total of the results shown on the dice.

Thank you for taking the time to cite sources here. While I still disagree that it is clear-cut, you do make a better argument than I'd been able to find.

I don't think that "other game effects" means that crits necessarily don't count as damage dealt by an attack, nor does the description of how to calculate damage from the attack pool exclude critical damage from the attack, because "critical effects resolve at the beginning of the "Resolve Damage" step of an attack " --that is, the critical effect is part of the attack.

I've just submitted the question for clarification, in hopes that it will be included in the FAQ for Wave 4. Until then, I don't think arguing here is going to do much more good.

Thanks for keeping it civil, I appreciate that.

Wouldn't you just resolve one effect and then move on to the next?

Mix n match between two resolutions seems wonky at best, no?

Ok. Here we go.

RRG 4:

Damage

Ships and squadrons can suffer damage from attacks, obstacles, and other game effects .

Ok here we establish damage can come from things other than attacks.

Critical Effects

A critical effect, denoted by the “E:” header, can resolve if there is at least one E icon in the attack pool. • The attacker can resolve only one critical effect per attack. • The attacker does not spend a die icon to resolve a critical effect unless the effect says otherwise. • Critical effects resolve at the beginning of the “Resolve Damage” step of an attack.

So here is the definition of the critical effect. We've established it can cause damage as part of it's effect and that it resolve at the beginning of the "Resolve Damage" step of the attack.

RRG 2:

Resolve Damage: The attacker can resolve one of its critical effects . Then the attacker determines the total damage amount. Then the defending squadron or hull zone suffers that total damage, one point at a time. ◊ If the attacker or defender is a squadron, the damage is the sum of all (hit) icons. ◊ If the attacker and defender are ships, the damage is the sum of all (hit) and (crit) icons .

Ok so here it clearly states that if damage is the sum of all the crit and hit icons.

From this we can understand that ACM's resolve fully and that any damage that may or may not have been dealt does not have any bearing on the damage from the attack which is defined as the total of the results shown on the dice.

Thank you for taking the time to cite sources here. While I still disagree that it is clear-cut, you do make a better argument than I'd been able to find.

I don't think that "other game effects" means that crits necessarily don't count as damage dealt by an attack, nor does the description of how to calculate damage from the attack pool exclude critical damage from the attack, because "critical effects resolve at the beginning of the "Resolve Damage" step of an attack " --that is, the critical effect is part of the attack.

I've just submitted the question for clarification, in hopes that it will be included in the FAQ for Wave 4. Until then, I don't think arguing here is going to do much more good.

Thanks for keeping it civil, I appreciate that.

Wouldn't you just resolve one effect and then move on to the next?

Mix n match between two resolutions seems wonky at best, no?

But there's no mixing and matching going on here. There are several steps that occur in order to resolve an attack, beginning with declaring the target all the way through suffering damage. The critical effect is triggered by a critical icon showing on a die in the attack pool during a specific step of the attack, as part of the attack.

Nevermind, you're suggesting that you thoroughly resolve APT, then trigger XX-9. Good point, I think you might be onto a workable resolution there.

Though the answer to "is critical damage part of the damage referenced on XX-9?" still needs to be determined for the purposes of ACM.

Under GK's paradigm, with APT/XX-9, the optimal resolution order would be resolve APT, then resolve XX-9 such that it would apply to the damage dealt by the attack pool, bypassing any need to identify whether the card dealt by APT was part of the attack damage referenced on XX-9.

With ACM/XX-9 (or ACM/default), on the other hand, the optimal resolution order would under some circumstances be to resolve XX-9 first, and then APT, if one or both hull zones adjacent to the defending zone had no shields--but only if you could apply XX-9 to the damage of ACM. So it still needs to be answered, but only for that case.

As I read it Fire Control Teams gives you two critical effect "slots" in the process of step 5 resolve damage rather than 1.

So, as you cannot resolve the same critical you CANNOT get a default critical effect and combine it with another default critical effect.

So in fact you have to deal a non-standard critical say that of the XX-9 Turbolasers AND the default or XX9 and APT for example.

MC-30 scout with proton torpedoes, TRC and fire control team. More expensive than the regular mc-30 but a lot more hurt potential.

I wonder if order will matter. . . Will the standard critical count a card already dealt from APTs in this attack or is it just going forward from the resolution of that critical. . . Hmmmm

I would say that the APT crit is not damage dealt by the attack, thus you would have the chance for your first card to be face up.

Critical effects are not always damage, and that is why I think they are an addition caused by an attack, you do not reduce your damage pool by one dice to trigger a crit effect, IE you do not spend the dice, you are just permitted to cause a critical effect if you have a crit icon of the correct colour for your critical effect.

Standard crit is : first damage is dealt face up.

XX-9s are an upgrade card that cause 2 cards to be dealt face up, worded first two, meaning you do not get to pick in the sequence when you flip cards, it is always the first two cards dealt.

I do not think that means if you trigger default crit, and then XX-9 crit, you lose a card, this is a new card, dealing with wording from stuff written two years ago. The only time you would ever ask this question is when using standard crit, and XX-9, at any other time you would just fire off both crit effects, which is the written intent of both the upgrade card, and the article, so if no other potential conflict is there, why not until FFG come out and say, "actually that was not intended." treat it as intended.

I was having a similar discussion on facebook yesterday to this morning. As far as I can see there is not distinction between damage cards that are dealt based on summing the damage results during the resolve damage steps.

Both the XX9 and standard crit effect refer to damage cards being dealt by the attack not damage results and so currently should apply to any damage cards dealt throughout the attack steps. APT deals a damage card face up, ACMs potentially deal damage cards depending on the available shields and should therefore both be considered when dealing and counting any damage cards face up.

As Lyr mentioned timing I'm also curious about this, if I trigger ACMs and deal 2 damage to the adjacent zones say with no shields resulting in 2 damage cards and then trigger the standard effect or XX9. At this point 2 cards have already been dealt and the crit effect says the 1st card/2 cards are dealt by this attack are dealt face up. Technically at this point they have already been dealt so am I allowed to then flip them or have I missed the opportunity? An easy solution would be to trigger the standard/XX9 effect prior to ACM.

An odd corner case situation occurred to me earlier when I was thinking about this, if this is the correct interpretation and any cards dealt as a result of attack should be considered. In a precision strike mission, I spend a die with a hit symbol to flip a damage card face up, this reveals a structural damage card which then deals a face down damage card to the ship. That damage card has also been dealt during the attack steps and so should it be counted when considering damage cards dealt by the attack for the standard and XX9 effect?

An easy solution for FFG to implement for most of these questions would be to FAQ that the standard crit effect and XX9 refer to any damage cards dealt subsequently to the crit being triggered. This would mean that my corner case could be ignored, the APT could be ignored and as long as ACMs are triggered as the second crit effect they have the potential to deal face up damage cards. Of course that assumes that FFG wants us to ignore them.

Very interested to see what the actual intent and FAQ from FFG is on this as this combo throws up quite a few interesting interactions.

That's the crux of the argument. I would say you can't flip them as they are dealt as part of the resolution of the critical effect, not the attack. The rules state the damage dealt by the attack is the total of all the hit and crit results showing on the dice. It's the same as if you trigger XX-9s and the first crit is Structural Damage. You don't flip the card you deal as a result of Structural Damage, you flip the next card that is dealt as a result of the attack not as part of another effect.

That's the crux of the argument. I would say you can't flip them as they are dealt as part of the resolution of the critical effect, not the attack. The rules state the damage dealt by the attack is the total of all the hit and crit results showing on the dice. It's the same as if you trigger XX-9s and the first crit is Structural Damage. You don't flip the card you deal as a result of Structural Damage, you flip the next card that is dealt as a result of the attack not as part of another effect.

I was having a similar discussion on facebook yesterday to this morning. As far as I can see there is not distinction between damage cards that are dealt based on summing the damage results during the resolve damage steps.

Both the XX9 and standard crit effect refer to damage cards being dealt by the attack not damage results and so currently should apply to any damage cards dealt throughout the attack steps. APT deals a damage card face up, ACMs potentially deal damage cards depending on the available shields and should therefore both be considered when dealing and counting any damage cards face up.

As Lyr mentioned timing I'm also curious about this, if I trigger ACMs and deal 2 damage to the adjacent zones say with no shields resulting in 2 damage cards and then trigger the standard effect or XX9. At this point 2 cards have already been dealt and the crit effect says the 1st card/2 cards are dealt by this attack are dealt face up. Technically at this point they have already been dealt so am I allowed to then flip them or have I missed the opportunity? An easy solution would be to trigger the standard/XX9 effect prior to ACM.

An odd corner case situation occurred to me earlier when I was thinking about this, if this is the correct interpretation and any cards dealt as a result of attack should be considered. In a precision strike mission, I spend a die with a hit symbol to flip a damage card face up, this reveals a structural damage card which then deals a face down damage card to the ship. That damage card has also been dealt during the attack steps and so should it be counted when considering damage cards dealt by the attack for the standard and XX9 effect?

An easy solution for FFG to implement for most of these questions would be to FAQ that the standard crit effect and XX9 refer to any damage cards dealt subsequently to the crit being triggered. This would mean that my corner case could be ignored, the APT could be ignored and as long as ACMs are triggered as the second crit effect they have the potential to deal face up damage cards. Of course that assumes that FFG wants us to ignore them.

Very interested to see what the actual intent and FAQ from FFG is on this as this combo throws up quite a few interesting interactions.

Seems to me you are over complicating it some what,

Lets say you take 1 damage, dealt face up, it is Structural Damage, according to you, you ignore Structural damage telling you to deal a face down damage, then flip structural damage, because, you only caused 1 point of damage?

Critical effects are additions, to damage already sustained, no need for an FAQ.

No they aren't, they can be damage, that much is clear, and they come about as a result of a crit icon being present in the damage pool, but they are not damage dealt as a result of the attack, but rather damage caused by the critical effect or, in case of structural damage, the effect on the the structural damage card. This would mean you could not flip the card dealt by structural damage or critical effects with XX-9's which I believe I've shown the rules support as damage dealt by the attack is defined as the total of all the crit and hit icons in the case of ships.

That's the crux of the argument. I would say you can't flip them as they are dealt as part of the resolution of the critical effect, not the attack. The rules state the damage dealt by the attack is the total of all the hit and crit results showing on the dice. It's the same as if you trigger XX-9s and the first crit is Structural Damage. You don't flip the card you deal as a result of Structural Damage, you flip the next card that is dealt as a result of the attack not as part of another effect.

Valid point. That is what I think FFG will use.

I agree, this will probably be the ruling.

But it's definitely ambiguous enough to call for an FAQ ruling one way or the other. Particularly if they actually intend for XX-9 and the standard crit to stack under Fire-Control Team, because that, at least, I think is clearly contradictory between RAW and the announcement article.

No they aren't, they can be damage, that much is clear, and they come about as a result of a crit icon being present in the damage pool, but they are not damage dealt as a result of the attack, but rather damage caused by the critical effect or, in case of structural damage, the effect on the the structural damage card. This would mean you could not flip the card dealt by structural damage or critical effects with XX-9's which I believe I've shown the rules support as damage dealt by the attack is defined as the total of all the crit and hit icons in the case of ships.

No they aren't what?

A Crit is an additional effect generated during an attack, and yes it can be damage, but the source of the effect is the crit. Are we arguing the same thing here?

No they aren't, they can be damage, that much is clear, and they come about as a result of a crit icon being present in the damage pool, but they are not damage dealt as a result of the attack, but rather damage caused by the critical effect or, in case of structural damage, the effect on the the structural damage card. This would mean you could not flip the card dealt by structural damage or critical effects with XX-9's which I believe I've shown the rules support as damage dealt by the attack is defined as the total of all the crit and hit icons in the case of ships.

No they aren't what?

A Crit is an additional effect generated during an attack, and yes it can be damage, but the source of the effect is the crit. Are we arguing the same thing here?

so i cant get two crit effects with this?!

MC80 Battle Cruiser (103 points)
- Mon Karren ( 8 points)
- Fire-Control Team ( 2 points)
- XX-9 Turbolasers ( 5 points)
- X17 Turbolasers ( 6 points)
- Leading Shots ( 4 points)

Dodonna is a disappoint!!!

back to the drawing board....

so i cant get two crit effects with this?!

MC80 Battle Cruiser (103 points)

- Mon Karren ( 8 points)

- Fire-Control Team ( 2 points)

- XX-9 Turbolasers ( 5 points)

- X17 Turbolasers ( 6 points)

- Leading Shots ( 4 points)

Dodonna is a disappoint!!!

back to the drawing board....

I do think the intent is that you should be able to get both XX-9 and standard crit effect with that setup... but as written , right now , I do not believe that the rules provide for it.

so i cant get two crit effects with this?!

MC80 Battle Cruiser (103 points)

- Mon Karren ( 8 points)

- Fire-Control Team ( 2 points)

- XX-9 Turbolasers ( 5 points)

- X17 Turbolasers ( 6 points)

- Leading Shots ( 4 points)

Dodonna is a disappoint!!!

back to the drawing board....

I do think the intent is that you should be able to get both XX-9 and standard crit effect with that setup... but as written , right now , I do not believe that the rules provide for it.

What we need to do is get a comprehensive list of possible questions that need to be answered in response to this Upgrade. We need to know the timing, how it interacts with the standard crit and XX-9's, as well as the standard crit/XX-9's and APTs/ACMs.

Any other things we need to know?

so i cant get two crit effects with this?!

MC80 Battle Cruiser (103 points)

- Mon Karren ( 8 points)

- Fire-Control Team ( 2 points)

- XX-9 Turbolasers ( 5 points)

- X17 Turbolasers ( 6 points)

- Leading Shots ( 4 points)

Dodonna is a disappoint!!!

back to the drawing board....

I do think the intent is that you should be able to get both XX-9 and standard crit effect with that setup... but as written , right now , I do not believe that the rules provide for it.

What we need to do is get a comprehensive list of possible questions that need to be answered in response to this Upgrade. We need to know the timing, how it interacts with the standard crit and XX-9's, as well as the standard crit/XX-9's and APTs/ACMs.

Any other things we need to know?

I just (like, seconds ago) copy/pasted the list from the email I sent to FFG over in the Vassal Tourney thread for Doobleg to rule on. I think it's comprehensive, but it was just off the top of my head.

Just reading the cards, here's my interpretation:

The card is designed to allow multiple critical effects. This should be taken into account when it comes to determining what is allowed/not allowed.

XX9/Standard: The intent is to allow 3 face-up cards, but the result is only 2. This is due to the way in which it defines the result: the first two damage cards dealt by "this attack"

XX9/APTs: The result is 3 damage cards, if all would trigger. APT does not deal a damage card "from this attack." Instead the first card is dealt face-up, without preamble. It is not a part of "this attack," it is defined entirely by the APT critical effect. The APT critical effect is to simply deal a face up damage card to the defender, regardless of the attack results. Something could force the attack results to be no damage, but if a crit result occurred APT would cause a face-up card to appear.

XX9s/ACMs: Same as above: If the first 2 results of ACMs would be dealth as damage cards, XX9s would trigger becaue ACMs are not a part of the attack, they are a part of the critical result. This only occurs of the two damage cards are deal after ACMs, the ACM damage is not a part of the XX9 trigger. Those cards are not a part of the attack, they are caused separately by the damage result after the ACM critical effect.

It should be noted that so far, only two ships can potentially cause any of these combos. Those are the VSD-1, and the MC30.

I will say that this is perhaps the most confusing wording for attacks so far. An Errata to the XX-9 card or the Critical Damage rules would be best to define how this is supposed to interact with future upgrade cards.

Just reading the cards, here's my interpretation:

The card is designed to allow multiple critical effects. This should be taken into account when it comes to determining what is allowed/not allowed.

XX9/Standard: The intent is to allow 3 face-up cards, but the result is only 2. This is due to the way in which it defines the result: the first two damage cards dealt by "this attack"

XX9/APTs: The result is 3 damage cards, if all would trigger. APT does not deal a damage card "from this attack." Instead the first card is dealt face-up, without preamble. It is not a part of "this attack," it is defined entirely by the APT critical effect. The APT critical effect is to simply deal a face up damage card to the defender, regardless of the attack results. Something could force the attack results to be no damage, but if a crit result occurred APT would cause a face-up card to appear.

XX9s/ACMs: Same as above: If the first 2 results of ACMs would be dealth as damage cards, XX9s would trigger becaue ACMs are not a part of the attack, they are a part of the critical result. This only occurs of the two damage cards are deal after ACMs, the ACM damage is not a part of the XX9 trigger. Those cards are not a part of the attack, they are caused separately by the damage result after the ACM critical effect.

It should be noted that so far, only two ships can potentially cause any of these combos. Those are the VSD-1, and the MC30.

I will say that this is perhaps the most confusing wording for attacks so far. An Errata to the XX-9 card or the Critical Damage rules would be best to define how this is supposed to interact with future upgrade cards.

Based on what rules? Are you assuming or using the rules?

To me, it seems clear that the intent is for two distinct/separate critical effects.

The example given says that it's possible to give three face up damage cards in an attack, using XX9 and FCT. THAT IS THE INTENT. Clearly there is some ambiguity due to the wording of XX9 being written when only one critical was possible.

Also the rules relating to an attack, were written with only one crit in mind, so they should be modified to account for two critical effects.

So I'm going with 3 face up, until the FAQ says otherwise.