But everyone is quick to chastise the desperate player for playing within the rules

But provided things happened like the one guy said... (which is always a fairly large caveat) the first player wasn't actually playing by the rules.

The other guy had three ships to fire, when he fired with this second ship the guy telling the story said 'I'm going to shoot with Dengar' at that point the other guy effectively ignores him and shoots with his 3rd ship bypassing the chance to use Dengar, and then the TO decides that it's a missed opportunity.

But in this case it's not, it's that one guy skipped the other guys chance to perform an action. Now were it me, I'd insist that I take the shot with Dengar, but apparently up to that point both sides had been playing fairly casual... Until this point where the one guy threw the whole concept of flly casual out the window.

At that point I think any reasonable person would start to respond in kind, or at least really think about it.

Even if we call what happened a missed opportunity, if you deny someone a take back no matter how big or small the impact, then you better not expect to get any yourself from that point on.

never be a prick about a missed opportunity like that. If it was something we forgot until the end of the round, kinda late at that point, but if it was literally the next event that you remembered, let it slide.

Even experienced players forget something now and then.

But everyone is quick to chastise the desperate player for playing within the rules

But provided things happened like the one guy said... (which is always a fairly large caveat) the first player wasn't actually playing by the rules.[/size]

[/size]

The other guy had three ships to fire, when he fired with this second ship the guy telling the story said 'I'm going to shoot with Dengar' at that point the other guy effectively ignores him and shoots with his 3rd ship bypassing the chance to use Dengar, and then the TO decides that it's a missed opportunity.[/size]

[/size]

But in this case it's not, it's that one guy skipped the other guys chance to perform an action. Now were it me, I'd insist that I take the shot with Dengar, but apparently up to that point both sides had been playing fairly casual... Until this point where the one guy threw the whole concept of flly casual out the window.[/size]

[/size]

At that point I think any reasonable person would start to respond in kind, or at least really think about it. [/size]

[/size]

Even if we call what happened a missed opportunity, if you deny someone a take back no matter how big or small the impact, then you better not expect to get any yourself from that point on.[/size]

This isn't exactly right. He didn't ignore me and move on to the third ship but did lead me to believe I would be taking the shot after he finished with the third ship. Had he not I never would hav3 allowed him to move on.

The truth is I was scammed and it was my fault for allowing it to happen. I still believe the TO made the wrong call but it was his call to make and I respected it even though I didn't agree with it. The thing is that scummy move did end up costing him the game as I stuck exactly to the rules from then on out. The amount of mistakes he made from then on cost him much more than getting shot at once.

Honestly I would have been less peeved off about it had the guy actually had something to gain from winning but he didnt. He was so far out from any prizes that the game result had no bearing for him so to pull a move like that for no gain steamed me. Of course I would stick to the exact rules from then on.

Fortunately he wasn't someone local to me and I will probably never play him again. I did however learn a valuable lesson for the upcoming regionals tournament that I am playing in. I still plan to be a fair and respectful player, but I won't be falling for any tricks.

Wait, I thought Gonk was a once a turn action and you couldn't double dip

That's what I would have thought as well although a later FAQ did clear things up. At the time the "Gonk" issue is probably something that could have some confusion surrounding it. That is a case where you need to call the judge and hope they know what the "right" ruling is.

I mean I can easily see two people discussing how Decloaking worked/works. The worst of these is when a rule or something is actually changed such that an earlier, and sometimes long established, rule could be well known but then changed for seemingly no real reason.

But everyone is quick to chastise the desperate player for playing within the rules

But provided things happened like the one guy said... (which is always a fairly large caveat) the first player wasn't actually playing by the rules.[/size]

[/size]

The other guy had three ships to fire, when he fired with this second ship the guy telling the story said 'I'm going to shoot with Dengar' at that point the other guy effectively ignores him and shoots with his 3rd ship bypassing the chance to use Dengar, and then the TO decides that it's a missed opportunity.[/size]

[/size]

But in this case it's not, it's that one guy skipped the other guys chance to perform an action. Now were it me, I'd insist that I take the shot with Dengar, but apparently up to that point both sides had been playing fairly casual... Until this point where the one guy threw the whole concept of flly casual out the window.[/size]

[/size]

At that point I think any reasonable person would start to respond in kind, or at least really think about it. [/size]

[/size]

Even if we call what happened a missed opportunity, if you deny someone a take back no matter how big or small the impact, then you better not expect to get any yourself from that point on.[/size]

This isn't exactly right. He didn't ignore me and move on to the third ship but did lead me to believe I would be taking the shot after he finished with the third ship. Had he not I never would hav3 allowed him to move on.

The truth is I was scammed and it was my fault for allowing it to happen. I still believe the TO made the wrong call but it was his call to make and I respected it even though I didn't agree with it. The thing is that scummy move did end up costing him the game as I stuck exactly to the rules from then on out. The amount of mistakes he made from then on cost him much more than getting shot at once.

Honestly I would have been less peeved off about it had the guy actually had something to gain from winning but he didnt. He was so far out from any prizes that the game result had no bearing for him so to pull a move like that for no gain steamed me. Of course I would stick to the exact rules from then on.

Fortunately he wasn't someone local to me and I will probably never play him again. I did however learn a valuable lesson for the upcoming regionals tournament that I am playing in. I still plan to be a fair and respectful player, but I won't be falling for any tricks.

From the sounds of it, you technically WERE in the wrong and the judge made the right call (you let him move on to the third ship when he said it hadn't fired yet, thus missing your chance to revenge on the second). Once it's moved on to that ship, even if he chooses not to fire, you've mossed the chance to revenge at #2. On the other hand, he clearly was trying to sucker you by pointing out that #3 hadn't shot yet and hoping to get you to save the revenge shot for him. I can't disagree with the TOs ruling, but i totally don't blame you either for holding him strictly to the rules after that. I probably would have done the same.

From the sounds of it, you technically WERE in the wrong and the judge made the right call (you let him move on to the third ship when he said it hadn't fired yet, thus missing your chance to revenge on the second). Once it's moved on to that ship, even if he chooses not to fire, you've mossed the chance to revenge at #2. On the other hand, he clearly was trying to sucker you by pointing out that #3 hadn't shot yet and hoping to get you to save the revenge shot for him. I can't disagree with the TOs ruling, but i totally don't blame you either for holding him strictly to the rules after that. I probably would have done the same.

I can't disagree with the TOs ruling, but i totally don't blame you either for holding him strictly to the rules after that. I probably would have done the same.

Again going with the caveat that we accept the story being told... I disagree with the TO, and here's my reasoning.

Natedawgusmc declared his(?) intention to take the revent shot on ship #2. At that point everything should stop until that's happened.

But as I understand it, the other guy made it sound like he'd let that revenge shot happen after he took the shot with #3. Then after he shoot with #3 he refused to let Dengar take that revenge shot.

I just don't see how this could happen without it being intentionally trying to bypass the revenge shot. If Natedawgusmc didn't say anything about taking the revenge shot, then yes it would be a missed opportunity, but he did in fact say something.

As a TO, if I was looking at the situation where someone declared the intention to take an action but agreed to allow something to happen first (something that could have no possible impact on that action) for the sake of expediency but the other player was trying to claim it was a missed opportunity, I'd not only allow the action to take place, I'd give the other guy a warning for poor sportsmanship, with a possible loss/DQ depending on other infractions.

Because again, as I understand it, Player A said "I'm going to do this". Player B said "Let me do this first", then after B finished he refused to let A do the declared action. I just don't accept that this is the same thing as a missed opportunity.

I can't disagree with the TOs ruling, but i totally don't blame you either for holding him strictly to the rules after that. I probably would have done the same.

Again going with the caveat that we accept the story being told... I disagree with the TO, and here's my reasoning.

Natedawgusmc declared his(?) intention to take the revent shot on ship #2. At that point everything should stop until that's happened.

But as I understand it, the other guy made it sound like he'd let that revenge shot happen after he took the shot with #3. Then after he shoot with #3 he refused to let Dengar take that revenge shot.

I just don't see how this could happen without it being intentionally trying to bypass the revenge shot. If Natedawgusmc didn't say anything about taking the revenge shot, then yes it would be a missed opportunity, but he did in fact say something.

As a TO, if I was looking at the situation where someone declared the intention to take an action but agreed to allow something to happen first (something that could have no possible impact on that action) for the sake of expediency but the other player was trying to claim it was a missed opportunity, I'd not only allow the action to take place, I'd give the other guy a warning for poor sportsmanship, with a possible loss/DQ depending on other infractions.

Because again, as I understand it, Player A said "I'm going to do this". Player B said "Let me do this first", then after B finished he refused to let A do the declared action. I just don't accept that this is the same thing as a missed opportunity.

We can't know without having been there, but my read on it from:

Well when I announced that I was using Dengar's ability he said that he still had to take his shot with his last ship.

is that basically his opponent was basically saying "I haven't attacked with this third ship yet" trying to get him to save his revenge shot to try to finish him off. By letting him move on to that attack, Natedawgusmc lost his chance to revenge shot. If he wanted to revenge shot at the second ship regardless, you don't let the guy move on and take another attack. You say "No, I declared my ability, I'm going to make my attack, then #3 can shoot". Espeically in the case of dengar. Whether you use his ability or not can have a significant impact on what your opponent does (see people skipping attacks to avoid revenge shots). Having let that pass and letting his opponent make his attack (or pass as the case may be) with the last ship, he lost the chance to revenge against #2.

Like I said, it sounds like his opponent was playing him, and I'm all for holding him strict to missed opportunities after that, but as a TO I agree with the TO in question that he'd missed his chance. The key is that, like you said, everything should have stopped when he declared the revenge shot, but he went ahead and let his opponent move on to the third ship, at which point it's now too late to take the revenge shot. Nowhere in the original account does he say his opponent told him he'd let him do the revenge shot against number 2 after shooting with number 3, just that number 3 hadn't shot yet.

p.5 of the Tournament Rules, under Missed Opportunities, states that, "Players are expected to act with respect and not intentionally distract or rush an opponent with the intent of forcing a missed opportunity."

So yeah, once the guy said he was going to take his Dengar shot, the other player was in the wrong for distracting him from taking his shot.

p.5 of the Tournament Rules, under Missed Opportunities, states that, "Players are expected to act with respect and not intentionally distract or rush an opponent with the intent of forcing a missed opportunity."

So yeah, once the guy said he was going to take his Dengar shot, the other player was in the wrong for distracting him from taking his shot.

That depends whether he was trying to distract him, or just "trick" him into saving the shot to revenge against his third ship.

No where am I arguing that the guy wasn't an ass (going by the side of the story that we've seen), but by letting the guy move on to his next ship, he lost his revenge shot. There's no "finishing shooting" with all of your ships,t hen going back to do the revenge shot against someone else after. That's not how dengar works, you either use him or you don't.

p.5 of the Tournament Rules, under Missed Opportunities, states that, "Players are expected to act with respect and not intentionally distract or rush an opponent with the intent of forcing a missed opportunity."

So yeah, once the guy said he was going to take his Dengar shot, the other player was in the wrong for distracting him from taking his shot.

That depends whether he was trying to distract him, or just "trick" him into saving the shot to revenge against his third ship.

No where am I arguing that the guy wasn't an ass (going by the side of the story that we've seen), but by letting the guy move on to his next ship, he lost his revenge shot. There's no "finishing shooting" with all of your ships,t hen going back to do the revenge shot against someone else after. That's not how dengar works, you either use him or you don't.

That's where the "act with respect" part comes in.

Firstly, he was wrong for distracting him

Secondly, if you move past that, he was not respecting him by ignoring the fact that he had already declared he was taking a shot and forcing a missed opportunity.

Sorry, I respectfully disagree Vander, that player was entirely in the wrong, multiple ways.

PS "distract...an opponent with the intent of forcing a missed opportunity" and ""trick" him into saving the shot to revenge against his third ship" are the same thing.

FAQ:

“Gonk”

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.

That's true now, but at the time, the person who argued that you couldn't use Experimental Interface to Gonk twice could have actually been correct.

FFG's first ruling on the matter was that both actions were the "Gonk Action", and thus, you could not use Gonk more then once per round. After awhile, everyone realized that Gonk is terrible and so FFG reversed this ruling, hoping it might see a hair more play.

The more you know!

Just remember, inside every Gonk, there is a little person screaming to get out because it's lunch time.

p.5 of the Tournament Rules, under Missed Opportunities, states that, "Players are expected to act with respect and not intentionally distract or rush an opponent with the intent of forcing a missed opportunity."

So yeah, once the guy said he was going to take his Dengar shot, the other player was in the wrong for distracting him from taking his shot.

That depends whether he was trying to distract him, or just "trick" him into saving the shot to revenge against his third ship.

No where am I arguing that the guy wasn't an ass (going by the side of the story that we've seen), but by letting the guy move on to his next ship, he lost his revenge shot. There's no "finishing shooting" with all of your ships,t hen going back to do the revenge shot against someone else after. That's not how dengar works, you either use him or you don't.

That's where the "act with respect" part comes in.

Firstly, he was wrong for distracting him

Secondly, if you move past that, he was not respecting him by ignoring the fact that he had already declared he was taking a shot and forcing a missed opportunity.

Sorry, I respectfully disagree Vander, that player was entirely in the wrong, multiple ways.

PS "distract...an opponent with the intent of forcing a missed opportunity" and ""trick" him into saving the shot to revenge against his third ship" are the same thing.

Thats fine, we can respectfully disagree (especially since neither of us were involved or probably have the specific situation matter). I would argue it wasnt so much distracting him (not trying to get him to FORGET the revenge shot, just save it for a different target so he wouldnt get it). Its bad sportsmanship and shouldnt be encouraged, but only works if the other person goes along with it (and if you want your rebvenge shot on #2 why would you ever think its okay to let #3 go ahead and get his shot first).

Ad a TO, all you can know for sure is that whether dengars player called the revenge shot or not, he still let his opponent move on to activate the next ship for combat, at which point its past dengar's opportunity. If it was a player known for pulling crap like that you might make an argument for ruling against him (or not allowing him in events in the first place), but from the info he's got he didnt technically do anything against the rules IMO. The TOs job is to enforce the rules

If someone starts yelling at me, I don't care who you are, your going to get hurt.

I hope that when you end up in jail the charge is "Being an immature idiot."