The first time a ship is assigned a tractor beam token, the opposing player can force the ship to perform a boost or barrel roll using the 1-straight template. Is there a reason why you can't force a ship backwards?

It's not like there's a rule that the involuntary movement must bring the ship closer to the user of the ... in fact, if you hit a ship facing away with you, you can force it to boost away from you.

My theory is that the only reason it's not allowed is because this game doesn't have any backward movement (yet... Quadjumper may change that). It's easier to say "boost" on the rule card for Tractoring than it is to describe rules for moving in all four directions. Does anybody know for sure?

I don't think there's been any official word on this from the game developers.

But I think your theory is likely accurate. Backwards movement may seem obvious in how it would work, but it does technically require a full rules explanation (such as on a reference card) in order to make it part of the game. Tractor Beams were complex enough already without also adding in new rules for a special type of movement that didn't exist in the game before.

Also, adding backwards movement to Tractor Beams would make them more powerful than they already are, because it would create even more situations where you can tractor someone into or out of an arc or onto a rock.

Only the developers know for sure.

Other theory: You cannot move a ship directly against its main engine with TB. Death Star can do that, a small ship cannot.

For the fluff justification: because that's the way the engines are pointing and the TB isn't powerful enough to move the ship against its engines.

(Don't think about it too hard, it's star wars physics)

Not sure anyone can say for sure. Your guess is a good one. As are the guesses above..

While the game is not based on what we call physics, there is an assumption that all ships are constantly moving forward (minus the Shuttle, Inertial Dampeners, etc.) - moving backwards would require some serious power to overcome that ship's inertia.

Maybe we'll see a Heavy Tractor Beam with increased effect?

i imagine if you are trying to push/pull a ship directly against their thrustors you need a BEEFY as hell tractor beam to counter it enough to literally pull them back.

Throwing them to the side or pulling them forward doesnt combat their forward momentum. Though i am surprised you cant use 1bank templates with it.

Guess itdd be too easy to push someone out of a range 3 shot maybe

Probably not but eh, future proofing and call that.

I see the ships as always moving forward, and tractoring them backward would simply represent pushing against their thrust and slowing them down a bit. I also thought it would make sense for larger ships to have more options available when pushing small ships, but I suppose there's only so much room on the Tractor card.

I have wondered why banks are forbidden as well... I figure giving control over ship facing as well as position might be too much, though I wouldn't mind seeing a heavy tractor beam that could do it.

I see the ships as always moving forward, and tractoring them backward would simply represent pushing against their thrust and slowing them down a bit. I also thought it would make sense for larger ships to have more options available when pushing small ships, but I suppose there's only so much room on the Tractor card.

I have wondered why banks are forbidden as well... I figure giving control over ship facing as well as position might be too much, though I wouldn't mind seeing a heavy tractor beam that could do it.

Being able to change facing would be too powerful, in particular, too easily able to make it possible to force people to run off the board.

Precisely... the first time I played against a tractor beam (proxying based off of previews), I was jousting my my opponent along a table edge and he tried to boost me (bank) so that I'd fly off the board the following round. I thought that was fishy and confirmed that it was. I can definitely see why banks aren't allowed.

It's how the tractor beam worked in TIE Fighter, they didn't stop, they kept going but in a straight line. X-wing's tractors are more versatile since it can cause B-rolls too

Backward movement would kind of screw action header bombs.

Barrel Roll can incorporate a small amount of backward movement.

i imagine if you are trying to push/pull a ship directly against their thrustors you need a BEEFY as hell tractor beam to counter it enough to literally pull them back.

Throwing them to the side or pulling them forward doesnt combat their forward momentum. Though i am surprised you cant use 1bank templates with it.

I suspect the quadjumper may change that

What I want to know is why haven't we seen any tractor beam mechanics for Huge ships yet? I mean, come on! That makes way more sense then having a tiny little Scyk jerking around a K-Wing that's 3x it's size.

The first time a ship is assigned a tractor beam token, the opposing player can force the ship to perform a boost or barrel roll using the 1-straight template. Is there a reason why you can't force a ship backwards?

It's not like there's a rule that the involuntary movement must bring the ship closer to the user of the ... in fact, if you hit a ship facing away with you, you can force it to boost away from you.

My theory is that the only reason it's not allowed is because this game doesn't have any backward movement (yet... Quadjumper may change that). It's easier to say "boost" on the rule card for Tractoring than it is to describe rules for moving in all four directions. Does anybody know for sure?

The way I kinda see it, other than making it even more powerful, is kind of a physics issue. Imagine you're a cowboy in a galloping horse and you lasso another galloping horse. That's essentially what a Tractor Beam does. Creates a metaphysical link between the two craft. Now, because of their respective masses and their speeds, that cowboy can easily make the captured horse change direction, but it takes quite a bit to make it stop and/or reverse. They both weigh quite a bit, but are pretty close in terms of mass. Also, they both have quite a bit of inertia moving forward. The attacker would have to have enough mass and apply enough force to apply enough negative acceleration to cause a ship, which weighs several tons and is moving several hundred miles per hour, to stop completely and reverse. Possible, sure, but only with sustained connection.

Think about a full scale dogfight and how long it would actually take. A hundred point game of X wing would be resolved in a matter of seconds if it were to take place in real time. That means that your tractor beam is only connected to the target for a mere fraction of a second, just enough to bump them off course a smidge. Not enough for the sustained effort of stopping or reversing the target.

I kind of relate this to the way that large ships don't get moved when they get TB tokens, also. (Most) ships that take tractor Beams are small bases. Let's increase our cowboy metaphor to a car and truck metaphor. If you (first of all, had a really awesome car with a cable gun) fired a cable gun from the top of a car and attached it to a Tractor Trailer, you could likely affect it's ability to steer to a small degree, but could not likely make a drastic change to its heading. IE, large ships lose agility, but do not get course corrected.

Make sense, or was that just a lot of babble trying to make sense out if the rules?

Tractor beam in Sci-fi has always been use to either to hold a ship in place or pull it toward oneself. I have never seen one that will push a ship backwards.

Perhaps, you are thinking about what is called, "Reverse Tractor Beam". FFG may yet produce a upgrade card with that ability.

The first time a ship is assigned a tractor beam token, the opposing player can force the ship to perform a boost or barrel roll using the 1-straight template. Is there a reason why you can't force a ship backwards?

It's not like there's a rule that the involuntary movement must bring the ship closer to the user of the ... in fact, if you hit a ship facing away with you, you can force it to boost away from you.

My theory is that the only reason it's not allowed is because this game doesn't have any backward movement (yet... Quadjumper may change that). It's easier to say "boost" on the rule card for Tractoring than it is to describe rules for moving in all four directions. Does anybody know for sure?

The way I kinda see it, other than making it even more powerful, is kind of a physics issue. Imagine you're a cowboy in a galloping horse and you lasso another galloping horse. That's essentially what a Tractor Beam does. Creates a metaphysical link between the two craft. Now, because of their respective masses and their speeds, that cowboy can easily make the captured horse change direction, but it takes quite a bit to make it stop and/or reverse. They both weigh quite a bit, but are pretty close in terms of mass. Also, they both have quite a bit of inertia moving forward. The attacker would have to have enough mass and apply enough force to apply enough negative acceleration to cause a ship, which weighs several tons and is moving several hundred miles per hour, to stop completely and reverse. Possible, sure, but only with sustained connection.

Think about a full scale dogfight and how long it would actually take. A hundred point game of X wing would be resolved in a matter of seconds if it were to take place in real time. That means that your tractor beam is only connected to the target for a mere fraction of a second, just enough to bump them off course a smidge. Not enough for the sustained effort of stopping or reversing the target.

I kind of relate this to the way that large ships don't get moved when they get TB tokens, also. (Most) ships that take tractor Beams are small bases. Let's increase our cowboy metaphor to a car and truck metaphor. If you (first of all, had a really awesome car with a cable gun) fired a cable gun from the top of a car and attached it to a Tractor Trailer, you could likely affect it's ability to steer to a small degree, but could not likely make a drastic change to its heading. IE, large ships lose agility, but do not get course corrected.

Make sense, or was that just a lot of babble trying to make sense out if the rules?

I like this, it makes sense. I don't necessarily want TB to be able move a ship backwards, though I suppose if it did, it could be viewed as slowing down a ship by essentially ret-conning its movement that turn. But really that's more or less represented by the TB token and agility loss.

Tractor beam in Sci-fi has always been use to either to hold a ship in place or pull it toward oneself. I have never seen one that will push a ship backwards.

Perhaps, you are thinking about what is called, "Reverse Tractor Beam". FFG may yet produce a upgrade card with that ability.

What you're describing is a repulsor beam. They are much more rare than tractor beams, but they make a few appearances in Star Trek, and apparently Iron Man's hand cannons are repulsor beams. In this game a Tractor acts as a Repulsor if you hit a ship that is facing away from you, and make it boost.

I can accept an explanation about the beam not being strong enough to directly fight against a ship's thrust. I do think it would be fun to see a tractor beam mounted on a Huge ship that could do just that, though. I do still think the designers just didn't want to explain backwards motion though.

Do you have to move the ship that is tractored at all? Can you just leave it where it is with a token?

Do you have to move the ship that is tractored at all? Can you just leave it where it is with a token?

FAQ clarifies that the card text is supposed to have "may" in regards to repositioning a small ship

so you don't have to move em