TheCallum, much more goes into that than you suggest. Intent is the first motivator but can't be the only thing to consider when making a ruling. More than intent, the way the general rules are written impact how an issue gets a ruling. They can't just release their intent for a rule/card because of several factors:

• They want to avoid changing a core rule or card text. Last thing they want is for printed text to be incorrect. Doing this more than a few times has never worked for other games and never will. It causes player grief when you have text on a card that says one thing but some FAQ says it does something completely different, and is very hard to keep track of. The rulebook can become invalidated and core game is stale and old, undesirable. They have to always adhere to core rules and not have edge case exceptions all over, making the rules extremely difficult to comprehend and memorize.
• One "simple" ruling can have a cascading effect that can cause countless other problems.
• Precedence. Once you set a precedence you have to stick to it. If you say one thing you have to be consistent from there on with similar rulings on the subject.

Writing good game rules is an extremely difficult task, and one FFG does pretty well. I play tons of other boardgames and some rulebooks are so bad I simply give/sell/trade/toss the game because of rules issues. Too many good games not to.

FAQ rulings don't really have to be precedential.

They probably SHOULD be, but they don't have to be.

For example, in the Star Wars LCG, the general rule is that when an 'enhancement' card is blanked by a card effect, it leaves play, because the text of the card says 'enhance X', where X is another game element.

In the FAQ where they clarified this, they said that the enhancement leaves play because it loses the validity it has as an enhancement (e.g. it no longer has any text to make it a valid enhancement).

Then the FAQ differentiated cards that enhance other cards and cards that enhance a different game element, such as the player's playing area. The FAQ said that cards that enhance the game state that are blanked DO NOT leave play, but remain where they are, just with blank text for the length of time they are blanked, whereas cards that enhance other cards must leave play if they no longer have a valid attachment condition.

No other support for this interpretation in the rules or through precedent, and we received this inconsistent determination that still causes debate. Moreover, they've had 2 or 3 opportunities to rectify this, and they have chosen to not do so.

So, you don't necessarily need your rulings to coincide or follow precedent, but you do need them to be clarified and spelled out precisely.

I wonder how much of it is balance related.

Do BCCs stack?

Well FCTs came out a little stronger than anticipated, so lets get some data before we decide.

Other answers are delayed, as they don't want to waste time on a document with a 30 day life span...

Suddenly things seem slow from the outside...

FAQ rulings don't really have to be precedential.

They probably SHOULD be, but they don't have to be.

For example, in the Star Wars LCG, the general rule is that when an 'enhancement' card is blanked by a card effect, it leaves play, because the text of the card says 'enhance X', where X is another game element.

In the FAQ where they clarified this, they said that the enhancement leaves play because it loses the validity it has as an enhancement (e.g. it no longer has any text to make it a valid enhancement).

Then the FAQ differentiated cards that enhance other cards and cards that enhance a different game element, such as the player's playing area. The FAQ said that cards that enhance the game state that are blanked DO NOT leave play, but remain where they are, just with blank text for the length of time they are blanked, whereas cards that enhance other cards must leave play if they no longer have a valid attachment condition.

No other support for this interpretation in the rules or through precedent, and we received this inconsistent determination that still causes debate. Moreover, they've had 2 or 3 opportunities to rectify this, and they have chosen to not do so.

So, you don't necessarily need your rulings to coincide or follow precedent, but you do need them to be clarified and spelled out precisely.

Read it as "Need, if you want the game to be playable."

If we can't understand the rules, it's hardly a game, is it?

FAQ rulings don't really have to be precedential.

They probably SHOULD be, but they don't have to be.

For example, in the Star Wars LCG, the general rule is that when an 'enhancement' card is blanked by a card effect, it leaves play, because the text of the card says 'enhance X', where X is another game element.

In the FAQ where they clarified this, they said that the enhancement leaves play because it loses the validity it has as an enhancement (e.g. it no longer has any text to make it a valid enhancement).

Then the FAQ differentiated cards that enhance other cards and cards that enhance a different game element, such as the player's playing area. The FAQ said that cards that enhance the game state that are blanked DO NOT leave play, but remain where they are, just with blank text for the length of time they are blanked, whereas cards that enhance other cards must leave play if they no longer have a valid attachment condition.

No other support for this interpretation in the rules or through precedent, and we received this inconsistent determination that still causes debate. Moreover, they've had 2 or 3 opportunities to rectify this, and they have chosen to not do so.

So, you don't necessarily need your rulings to coincide or follow precedent, but you do need them to be clarified and spelled out precisely.

Read it as "Need, if you want the game to be playable."

If we can't understand the rules, it's hardly a game, is it?

The game is playable. There is a system in place if there are questions about the rules. What ends up happening is one person reads a card or rule in one context and tries to bend the game to fit their interpretation. I think the only 2 cards no one really understands is G-8 and BCC/Targeting Scrambler. Can G-8 hit Engine Tech? Do I spend my dial/token before you declare G-8? Does BCC stack, and thus Targeting Scrambler Stack?

Everyone needs to stop stressing about this FAQ. FFG will release it, or they will jump on the band wagon and declare Armada is dead. The game is currently playable and chances are you can use problem solving to get around the questions waiting for the FAQ. And if you can't play the game because of that, then don't play until the FAQ hits.

That's not quite accurate, and some people might build around their misunderstanding. Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?

That's not quite accurate, and some people might build around their misunderstanding. Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?

You really think they won't post an FAQ before their major tournament, held at their HQ? And if you are going to Worlds, I find it hard to believe the players don't already know about these issues, and will have an understanding of both ways they will work.

That's not quite accurate, and some people might build around their misunderstanding. Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?

You really think they won't post an FAQ before their major tournament, held at their HQ? And if you are going to Worlds, I find it hard to believe the players don't already know about these issues, and will have an understanding of both ways they will work.

That's what this whole thread is about. Getting an FAQ before Worlds. True story, check the thread title.

I didn't say I don't think they will, I said they really should. Two pretty different things.

I know people who are going who do not spend much time on the forums, and our local TO has made specific rulings on some abilities - yes, we are aware that there are two different interpretations, but not knowing which one will be valid could make a pretty big difference in how you build your list.

That's not quite accurate, and some people might build around their misunderstanding. Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?

You really think they won't post an FAQ before their major tournament, held at their HQ? And if you are going to Worlds, I find it hard to believe the players don't already know about these issues, and will have an understanding of both ways they will work.

The players knowing there is an issue is irrelevant to the discussion. Of course we all know that there are issues.

The point is that some of these different interpretations make DRAMATIC differences in list building. BCC stacking could very easily determine whether I would bring a giant pile of B-wings or not. It could also determine how important it is that I address the possibility of facing someone else's quadruple-rerolling TIE Bomber swarm of doom. Jamming Fields is either awesome or terrible for A-wings, Interceptors, and YT-1300s. Devastator with Tagge is either an amazing combo or it's completely anti-synergistic.

And maybe you're way better than me, but personally, if I'm spending hundreds or thousands to go to Worlds, I would prefer not to bring an untested fleet. So that means these cards or combos that people have bought are effectively unplayable at Worlds unless they are FAQ'd several weeks in advance.

That's why people are upset that it's taking so long for the support to come.

That's not quite accurate, and some people might build around their misunderstanding. Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?

You really think they won't post an FAQ before their major tournament, held at their HQ? And if you are going to Worlds, I find it hard to believe the players don't already know about these issues, and will have an understanding of both ways they will work.

That's what this whole thread is about. Getting an FAQ before Worlds. True story, check the thread title.

I didn't say I don't think they will, I said they really should. Two pretty different things.

I know people who are going who do not spend much time on the forums, and our local TO has made specific rulings on some abilities - yes, we are aware that there are two different interpretations, but not knowing which one will be valid could make a pretty big difference in how you build your list.

Well actually you asked what I believe to be a rhetorical question, "Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?" You are implying FFG should release FAQ because so someone doesn't get screwed with their list build. So I responded with my own rhetorical question "You really think they won't post an FAQ before their major tournament, held at their HQ?"

And to get back to the facts, from my understanding, you submit a list to FFG to go to Worlds, which you can submit up to the last day? I'm not sure because I can't go so I didn't look into it. So again, I don't understand the stress of not having an FAQ.

That's not quite accurate, and some people might build around their misunderstanding. Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?

You really think they won't post an FAQ before their major tournament, held at their HQ? And if you are going to Worlds, I find it hard to believe the players don't already know about these issues, and will have an understanding of both ways they will work.

That's sort of the point of the thread.

And it's fine for me to know that there are two options for how a card will work, but it's not gonna help me build my fleet, unless I simply refuse to use those cards.

So again, I don't understand the stress of not having an FAQ. [/size][/background]

You don't understand why people might be frustrated about not having concrete answers to how things work going into the biggest event in the world?

If you don't understand that, then afraid I don't think I can do anything for you. Sorry man.

That's not quite accurate, and some people might build around their misunderstanding. Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?

You really think they won't post an FAQ before their major tournament, held at their HQ? And if you are going to Worlds, I find it hard to believe the players don't already know about these issues, and will have an understanding of both ways they will work.

That's sort of the point of the thread.

And it's fine for me to know that there are two options for how a card will work, but it's not gonna help me build my fleet, unless I simply refuse to use those cards.

So again, I don't understand the stress of not having an FAQ. [/size][/background]

You don't understand why people might be frustrated about not having concrete answers to how things work going into the biggest event in the world?

If you don't understand that, then afraid I don't think I can do anything for you. Sorry man.

Has anyone asked FFG for an FAQ? Have either of you sent an email to FFG? And I'm talking about directly emailing them, not posting on the forums.

That's not quite accurate, and some people might build around their misunderstanding. Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?

You really think they won't post an FAQ before their major tournament, held at their HQ? And if you are going to Worlds, I find it hard to believe the players don't already know about these issues, and will have an understanding of both ways they will work.

That's sort of the point of the thread.

And it's fine for me to know that there are two options for how a card will work, but it's not gonna help me build my fleet, unless I simply refuse to use those cards.

So again, I don't understand the stress of not having an FAQ. [/size][/background]

You don't understand why people might be frustrated about not having concrete answers to how things work going into the biggest event in the world?

If you don't understand that, then afraid I don't think I can do anything for you. Sorry man.

Has anyone asked FFG for an FAQ? Have either of you sent an email to FFG? And I'm talking about directly emailing them, not posting on the forums.

I've been talking with Michael directly over Email.

That's not quite accurate, and some people might build around their misunderstanding. Wouldn't it be great to show up to Worlds with a list that doesn't work like you intended, because FFG couldn't put out a simple FAQ within 90 days of a products release?

You really think they won't post an FAQ before their major tournament, held at their HQ? And if you are going to Worlds, I find it hard to believe the players don't already know about these issues, and will have an understanding of both ways they will work.

That's sort of the point of the thread.

And it's fine for me to know that there are two options for how a card will work, but it's not gonna help me build my fleet, unless I simply refuse to use those cards.

So again, I don't understand the stress of not having an FAQ. [/size][/background]

You don't understand why people might be frustrated about not having concrete answers to how things work going into the biggest event in the world?

If you don't understand that, then afraid I don't think I can do anything for you. Sorry man.

Has anyone asked FFG for an FAQ? Have either of you sent an email to FFG? And I'm talking about directly emailing them, not posting on the forums.

I've been talking with Michael directly over Email.

Ah yes I've seen those. I was actually going to include you in my previous post and ask you to talk to him because you 2 are best buds now.

#justagame

Ah yes I've seen those. I was actually going to include you in my previous post and ask you to talk to him because you 2 are best buds now.

The assumption is that I have not been.

I have been.

For quite some time.

But, as I oft state. I'm not an anybody. I do what I do on the forums because I enjoy it. I have no rank, or special pull, or even a direct line.

Just my opinions.

Guys, the answer to everything is 42

Yea but now I need the FAQ to know the question.