How is fire control teams ambiguous? Just wondering, since it seems clear to me, however I might have missed something.

Do XX-9s stack with basic crit? Basic crit is to deal first card face up. XX-9s is the first two.

So thats the first, and the first and second.

Does does that mean first, second, and third for three total, or does it mean first and first (obsolete) and second for two total.

Thats just one question.

(Personally, I feel its the first three, but as written its the two.)

Seriously guys, we just had our nationals and there were around all of 3 questions that were at all problematic. They were raised the week before and the TO came up with an interim ruling before the tourney so everyone knew where things stood.

Conflated crisis anyone???

The problems with FCT basically involve any combination of critical effects that flip cards face up and cards that deal damage. Aside from XX-9s there's also both "Assault" ordnance weapons. Do their damage count as the first damage cards dealt? Mind you, before answering, that the RRG very explicitly states what counts as damage, and it never mentions critical effects.

It is one card that effectively cannot be played in a competitive environment because the combinations it enables weren't written to be combined at all.

Seriously guys, we just had our nationals and there were around all of 3 questions that were at all problematic. They were raised the week before and the TO came up with an interim ruling before the tourney so everyone knew where things stood.

Conflated crisis anyone???

How many people brought Fire Control Teams? In a national tournament, I can't imagine it was many. At that point you're basically hoping the judge rules in your favor that you've merely read the card text right.

Seriously guys, we just had our nationals and there were around all of 3 questions that were at all problematic. They were raised the week before and the TO came up with an interim ruling before the tourney so everyone knew where things stood.

Conflated crisis anyone???

I'm not sure everyone has access to the folks running tourney's a week, hell even more than an hour, before an event so I don't think you can always get prior rulings on cards. I have experienced game time decisions by TO's that were not at all what I interpreted the cards interactions as being, even though I could logically defend my interpretation with the RRG. definitive explanations are necessary on some of these new cards. Period.

And I'm with Caldias here (I think he's the one who said it...) that I want them to get it right without a bunch of errata after the fact.

Seriously guys, we just had our nationals and there were around all of 3 questions that were at all problematic. They were raised the week before and the TO came up with an interim ruling before the tourney so everyone knew where things stood.

Conflated crisis anyone???

I'm not sure everyone has access to the folks running tourney's a week, hell even more than an hour, before an event so I don't think you can always get prior rulings on cards. I have experienced game time decisions by TO's that were not at all what I interpreted the cards interactions as being, even though I could logically defend my interpretation with the RRG. definitive explanations are necessary on some of these new cards. Period.

And I'm with Caldias here (I think he's the one who said it...) that I want them to get it right without a bunch of errata after the fact.

I'm definitely with Skycake on this one, and I want to see those tables flipped!

Skycake may be a little bit biased from having to play with this Not-A-Rules-Guru every fortnight..... >.>

He has some... Rules anger issues, I feel.

I... uh... "Wonder" why...

Drasnighta: "If you refer to page 6 of the RRG, it clearly states..."

Skycake: "Aargh!!!" [flips table]

How is fire control teams ambiguous? Just wondering, since it seems clear to me, however I might have missed something.

Do XX-9s stack with basic crit? Basic crit is to deal first card face up. XX-9s is the first two.

So thats the first, and the first and second.

Does does that mean first, second, and third for three total, or does it mean first and first (obsolete) and second for two total.

Thats just one question.

(Personally, I feel its the first three, but as written its the two.)

I take fire control teams as meaning you can cause APT to go off. And then also fire off xx9. So one faceup from apt, then two from xx9

APT and standard crit with FCT is actually pretty clear if you follow the Attack resolution stack because the point where you "resolve critical effect" and the point where you resolve Standard critical effect are two clear and distinct steps with their own "first damage card" look at it this way, if you were to defer using the APT effect for some crazy reason and your damage gets through shields you would then resolve the standard critical effect when in the assign damage step, 2 completely different timings, whereas the XX9 critical effect has the SAME timing as the standard critical effect (which is where the confusion arises).

APT and XX9 WOULD result in 3 crits total if triggered and damage through to hull

I don't understand the delay for FAQ, personally. From the way I look at it, they wrote the card and therefore had a particular *intent* in mind, they spent a good long while playtesting it, released it into the wild and have had more than a month for all the interpretation problems to come up, lots of time to *clarify their intent* they aren't re-inventing the wheel just balancing the tires, right?

Hey, look, man, I've been waiting on a specific question to be asked since November Last Year.

Not only have I re-asked and re-submitted it through the form, I had an email discussion with a member working on such things, and he specifically asked me to Email him that question direct.

I did.

and I am still waiting an Answer.

The big dealio is the shifting of not only priorities, but staff workloads since the Merger with Asmodee. From what I can tell, the FAQ and question response is down to 1 person now, and its on top of their other duties.

Its a sh*tty situation, granted.

But us whining about it isn't getting anywhere.

Hey, look, man, I've been waiting on a specific question to be asked since November Last Year.

Not only have I re-asked and re-submitted it through the form, I had an email discussion with a member working on such things, and he specifically asked me to Email him that question direct.

I did.

and I am still waiting an Answer.

The big dealio is the shifting of not only priorities, but staff workloads since the Merger with Asmodee. From what I can tell, the FAQ and question response is down to 1 person now, and its on top of their other duties.

Its a sh*tty situation, granted.

But us whining about it isn't getting anywhere.

Yeah I guess I can see that. You devote the amount of manpower that is proportional to the expected impact on your business. Esoteric rules questions that ruin a small portion of one games (out of so many) fan bases' day is probably not a super high priority. I mean, percentage wise, how many Armada players out of the set of all Armada players really care about clarifying some of these things (maybe 5%? 10%?) and out of those how many would stop or reduce purchases because of it (0.01%? Like Lord Nelson and his rare ilk maybe?)

Drasnighta: "If you refer to page 6 of the RRG, it clearly states..."

Skycake: "Aargh!!!" [flips table]

Actually it's more like

*Skycake listens attentively in quiet admiration*

It's usually someone flipping tables....

Seriously guys, we just had our nationals and there were around all of 3 questions that were at all problematic. They were raised the week before and the TO came up with an interim ruling before the tourney so everyone knew where things stood.

Conflated crisis anyone???

So imagine yourself in the middle of world's qualifier, having spent literally thousands to get there, and your opponent calls the TO about your 3 bomber commands centers, and the TO rules that they don't stack! That's aneurysm level frustration right there bud... and to think, it would have all been avoided had a company making millions set aside an afternoon to hash out the issues and release a colorful, explicitly written rules pdf...

I hope they can release the FAQ at least 2-3 weeks before world's to give people proper time to adjust.

G-8 being able to reduce engine techs to speed 0 and if you can turn jamming field on/off are going to be huge decisions that people will need to adjust to.

I hope they can release the FAQ at least 2-3 weeks before world's to give people proper time to adjust.

G-8 being able to reduce engine techs to speed 0 and if you can turn jamming field on/off are going to be huge decisions that people will need to adjust to.

You're giving them, what, 10 days, then?

I hope they can release the FAQ at least 2-3 weeks before world's to give people proper time to adjust.

G-8 being able to reduce engine techs to speed 0 and if you can turn jamming field on/off are going to be huge decisions that people will need to adjust to.

You're giving them, what, 10 days, then?

But still about two months from release.

I hope they can release the FAQ at least 2-3 weeks before world's to give people proper time to adjust.

G-8 being able to reduce engine techs to speed 0 and if you can turn jamming field on/off are going to be huge decisions that people will need to adjust to.

You're giving them, what, 10 days, then?

More like hoping and saying pretty please

I understand the concern, but there's still a lot of time between now and then (more than a month). I still say I'd rather they get the FAQ right instead of rush through important decisions.

You say that, but a lot of the current questions are about how a card by itself is supposed to function, before it even interacts with anything else. Which is something that FFG should have known before it released the card.

And they probably do, but there are other things not of this wave they have an opportunity to tweak, if needed, and I would rather they make sure they get that right than rush to get answers for this wave. Don't get me wrong, I want one too, I just think it's a little too early to start complaining.

There's no reason FFG is limited to only releasing a single FAQ. It would even make a lot of sense to release one that explains the *basic functionality* of the most ambiguous cards sooner and then add on the edge cases later.

None of this is going to affect me much personally, since the level of competition in my town is very casual. But when your company and game claim to want to cater to the competitive scene, leaving the basic functionality of a slew of upgrades up to individual TOs for a month and a half (so far) makes you look unprofessional at best

<clip>

The big dealio is the shifting of not only priorities, but staff workloads since the Merger with Asmodee. From what I can tell, the FAQ and question response is down to 1 person now, and its on top of their other duties.

Its a sh*tty situation, granted.

But us whining about it isn't getting anywhere.

Asmodee and FFG both can look at the existing amount of requests from us, which I'm assuming they have since they are a successful business, and assign assets to managing said workload. If they made this just one person, I am VERY concerned about how seriously they, as a business, are taking this need for clarification in existing and future products....

FAQs for Conquest and AGOT 2.0 released today via the FFG OP twitter.

Maybe FAQ soon?

FAQs for Conquest and AGOT 2.0 released today via the FFG OP twitter.

Maybe FAQ soon?

Just as soon as it was last week when the Android: Netrunner FAQ was updated.

...

Well, 10 days ago.

The weird thing for me it that most of these questions are not difficult for the game designers to answer. They know exactly how the cards should work.

We can spend days and days arguing the semantics and grammar of a card, but the guy who made the card can give an answer in literally seconds.

Do bomber command centres stack? Yes.

Post on forum, done. When more time is availiable, republish FAQ document.

I personally don't see the downside of using their forum, one of the main community hubs for ffg, for this sort of purpose.

That is essentially what happens.

Except it doesn't account for "Where is the Question asked?"

Basically:

Question is Submitted Online.

Question goes to Answerer's Email.

Answerer issues Answer to Submitter via Email.

Answer should be put on Forums by Questioner.

When more time is available, FAQ is republished.

It also doesn't account for what I refer to as the AP/XI complex.

Which is basically, "I Designed it to do 'x', but looking at what's been done with it, and what's coming up, should 'y' apply isntead?" And agonising over that.

For example:

Does BCC stack is a simple enough question, but you have to follow the systems of Precedents.

If BCC stacks, then Targeting Scrambler stacks. And one may be intentionally, and the other Unintentionally - how do you remedy that situation within the bounds of the Rules?