Previously the ruling was that you weren't allowed to perform both actions on one turn, because they were on the same card. Now however:

Both actions on “Gonk” are different actions. A ship

equipped with “Gonk” can perform both actions during a

round if it has the ability to perform multiple actions.

Which enables the Experimental Interface combo after all. General consensus was that the combo was too expensive and restrictive anyways, but could there be a place for it?

GONK!

Not really a re-errata; the first ruling was just an email.

Well this is good news for my Bossk build. Here I was thinking of swapping out EI for EU...pfft!

GONK.

I'm all for everything that adds more Gonk to my games.

I'm so Gonkin' happy about this....gonk.

thats how i always thought it worked. All of us actually not just me at my flgs lol.

Because thats how it SHOULD have worked all along. Was just a bad email ruling

It was never errata'd in the first place. That email made zero sense.

OK...NOW I will start list-building with GONK.

"NEW GONKNESS"

98 points

Dengar JumpMaster 5000

http://xwing-builder.co.uk/view/528162/new-gonkness

I'm so Gonking GONK!

"And after that fateful day, no one trusted an email ruling hence forth."

Previously the ruling was that you weren't allowed to perform both actions on one turn, because they were on the same card. Now however:

Both actions on “Gonk” are different actions. A ship

equipped with “Gonk” can perform both actions during a

round if it has the ability to perform multiple actions.

Which enables the Experimental Interface combo after all. General consensus was that the combo was too expensive and restrictive anyways, but could there be a place for it?

I'm so glad that we cater to regen goober players.

Scum Super Dash with regen, just in time for Scum Soontir Fel.

Previously the ruling was that you weren't allowed to perform both actions on one turn, because they were on the same card. Now however:

Both actions on “Gonk” are different actions. A ship

equipped with “Gonk” can perform both actions during a

round if it has the ability to perform multiple actions.

Which enables the Experimental Interface combo after all. General consensus was that the combo was too expensive and restrictive anyways, but could there be a place for it?

I'm so glad that we cater to regen goober players.

Scum Super Dash with regen, just in time for Scum Soontir Fel.

It was never errata'd in the first place. That email made zero sense.

And it still hasn't received an errata.

Yup. I'm totally nitpicking that FAQ entries aren't the same thing as errata,

It was never errata'd in the first place. That email made zero sense.

And it still hasn't received an errata.

Yup. I'm totally nitpicking that FAQ entries aren't the same thing as errata,

I feel ya on this one. Once played a player who tried to convince me that a ship which has yet to activate receives no ion tokens when hit by a Conner net because the FAQ reference does not mention it receiving ion tokens. I told him the FAQ was just a clarification and that the physical card specifically states the ship receives the ion tokens. He said the FAQ over ruled the card. I had to explain to him the difference between an errata and a FAQ reference...

It was never errata'd in the first place. That email made zero sense.

And it still hasn't received an errata.

Yup. I'm totally nitpicking that FAQ entries aren't the same thing as errata,

I feel ya on this one. Once played a player who tried to convince me that a ship which has yet to activate receives no ion tokens when hit by a Conner net because the FAQ reference does not mention it receiving ion tokens. I told him the FAQ was just a clarification and that the physical card specifically states the ship receives the ion tokens. He said the FAQ over ruled the card. I had to explain to him the difference between an errata and a FAQ reference...

While you're technically correct (and that's the best kind), his ship just loses the ion tokens once it performs the maneuver on its dial anyway, so effectively the result of doing it his way is the same as not putting them (except if you happen to have Dace Bonearm in your list or something).

YOU'RE GODDAMN RIGHT THAT'S HOW "GONK" WORKS!!!!!1

Sorry, I was very passionate about this one.

It was never errata'd in the first place. That email made zero sense.

And it still hasn't received an errata.

Yup. I'm totally nitpicking that FAQ entries aren't the same thing as errata,

I feel ya on this one. Once played a player who tried to convince me that a ship which has yet to activate receives no ion tokens when hit by a Conner net because the FAQ reference does not mention it receiving ion tokens. I told him the FAQ was just a clarification and that the physical card specifically states the ship receives the ion tokens. He said the FAQ over ruled the card. I had to explain to him the difference between an errata and a FAQ reference...

While you're technically correct (and that's the best kind), his ship just loses the ion tokens once it performs the maneuver on its dial anyway, so effectively the result of doing it his way is the same as not putting them (except if you happen to have Dace Bonearm in your list or something).

This is incorrect. He retains the ion tokens until the next round, where he then performs the 1 straight maneuver as if ionized, and then removes them. Ion tokens cannot be cleared without performing an ionized 1 straight maneuver. Period.

The discussion was already had here for anyone interested. ForgottenLore got it right eventually for us.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/222982-conner-net-confusion/

*taps Kdubb on the shoulder* You dropped this:

*taps Kdubb on the shoulder* You dropped this:

*Ahem!*

except when using electronic baffle to get rid of the ion token.

As far as regenerating goes it's very expensive and restrictive AND it lacks the platform to abuse it (no further means of damage reduction ala Poe/cream/miranda)

Fat tel's probably your best bet; even then it'll be more for the pleasure of shouting GONK!

It was never errata'd in the first place. That email made zero sense.

And it still hasn't received an errata.

Yup. I'm totally nitpicking that FAQ entries aren't the same thing as errata,

I feel ya on this one. Once played a player who tried to convince me that a ship which has yet to activate receives no ion tokens when hit by a Conner net because the FAQ reference does not mention it receiving ion tokens. I told him the FAQ was just a clarification and that the physical card specifically states the ship receives the ion tokens. He said the FAQ over ruled the card. I had to explain to him the difference between an errata and a FAQ reference...

While you're technically correct (and that's the best kind), his ship just loses the ion tokens once it performs the maneuver on its dial anyway, so effectively the result of doing it his way is the same as not putting them (except if you happen to have Dace Bonearm in your list or something).

This is incorrect. He retains the ion tokens until the next round, where he then performs the 1 straight maneuver as if ionized, and then removes them. Ion tokens cannot be cleared without performing an ionized 1 straight maneuver. Period.

The discussion was already had here for anyone interested. ForgottenLore got it right eventually for us.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/222982-conner-net-confusion/

Thanks for the clarification, I obviously missed all the threads. Naturally I'll spread the info in my group and we'll follow it, but it looks like it's all based on an email from Frank just like Gonk was before he finally appeared in the FAQ today (edit) and the Zeb-crew/Dengar interaction

It was never errata'd in the first place. That email made zero sense.

And it still hasn't received an errata.

Yup. I'm totally nitpicking that FAQ entries aren't the same thing as errata,

I feel ya on this one. Once played a player who tried to convince me that a ship which has yet to activate receives no ion tokens when hit by a Conner net because the FAQ reference does not mention it receiving ion tokens. I told him the FAQ was just a clarification and that the physical card specifically states the ship receives the ion tokens. He said the FAQ over ruled the card. I had to explain to him the difference between an errata and a FAQ reference...

While you're technically correct (and that's the best kind), his ship just loses the ion tokens once it performs the maneuver on its dial anyway, so effectively the result of doing it his way is the same as not putting them (except if you happen to have Dace Bonearm in your list or something).

This is incorrect. He retains the ion tokens until the next round, where he then performs the 1 straight maneuver as if ionized, and then removes them. Ion tokens cannot be cleared without performing an ionized 1 straight maneuver. Period.

The discussion was already had here for anyone interested. ForgottenLore got it right eventually for us.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/222982-conner-net-confusion/

Thanks for the clarification, I obviously missed all the threads. Naturally I'll spread the info in my group and we'll follow it, but it looks like it's all based on an email from Frank just like Gonk was before he finally appeared in the FAQ today.

Heh ya that's fair. Perhaps we should do as Forgottenlore suggests the rules truly indicate the scenario should play out- the ship is immediately ionized and performs the 1 forward the round in which it is ionized.

Gonking, painbot Dengar was a beast before, twice buffed now.