Snipe + Howlrunner + Flight Controllers (Saber Squadron) Discussion

By Drasnighta, in Star Wars: Armada Rules Questions

Posted at

Okay so if you use FC with snipe 4 and you are obstructed, it's snipe 3.

The rules reference makes it very clear that both FC and Howlrunner's ability affect your attack pool. It also makes very clear that an unmodified anti squadron armament is your attack pool.

Posted at

The Disagreement at the moment is such:

You state that one is the other.

I am saying that one is the direct descendent of the other...

Because if one is the other, than you can modify them both with the same things...

Where you clearly cannot.

Take A. It becomes B.

Its not A anymore. Its B.

But stuff you did to change A, will form part of B.

But stuff you do to B doesn't Change A.

ANd stuff you do that will "Only" Change B, won't change A.

Once A is turned into B. its B.

Sorry, your Grapes are now Wine. No amount of holding them up and saying "its the same stuff" will make someone Believe that Grapes are Wine... Only that Grapes make Wine...

PLEASE Don't shortcut the rules. :D

Doing so has the potential to add errors in the future as more upgrades are added.

(And that's all I have to say on that matter... The Rules are clear in what is called what, and what is what, and what can be done to what... That, as you stated to me in another Thread, is simple reading comprehension ....)

Posted at

Doesn't change the fact that snipe has an anti squadron value and Flight Controllers modifies the anti squadron value you are attacking with.

That's the argument that involves basic reading comprehension imo.

Edited by Warlord Zepnick
Posted at

Doesn't change the fact that snipe has an anti squadron value and Flight Controllers modifies the anti squadron value you are attacking with.

Thas the argument that involves basic reading comprehension imo.

I'm... Not arguing that.

I'm only arguing that "The Squadrons" value, and the "Snipe" value, are different things.

Which I am allowed to.

Posted at

I'm just saying there is more than one way to reach the conclusion that FC affects snipe.

Posted at

And more than one way it doesn't....

So all I have (hopefully) done today, is show you that there is a distinct difference between when you add something for "Increase ... Armament" effects, and "Add .... to attack pool" Effects...

Right>?

Posted at

Yes, Dras :D

<3

Edited by Warlord Zepnick
Posted at

And more than one way it doesn't....

So all I have (hopefully) done today, is show you that there is a distinct difference between when you add something for "Increase ... Armament" effects, and "Add .... to attack pool" Effects...

Right>?

You've covered the difference between adding to armament and adding to the attack pool.

You've not really touched upon why it would be different for snipe. Why one and not the other, when both apply to 'regular' attacks.

Posted at

Because they're very differently worded?

  • Howlrunner's ability affects the attack pool whenever "attacking a squadron", provided the range and swarm conditions are met.
  • FC affects "your anti-squadron armament", which may or may not be used to make an attack.
  • If your Snipe X attack uses an anti-squadron armament that isn't yours (because "your armament" gets ignored and you use "an armament of X" instead), then FC has no effect.

In other words:

  • Howlrunner boosts attacks .
  • FC boosts a squadron's innate ability to attack.
  • Snipe is an alternative attack .
Edited by DiabloAzul
Posted at

I'm still not convinced FC won't boost Snipe.

Just wait for FFG to release the FAQ and flood them with questions.

Posted at

I'm not convinced it won't, either.

It depends on whether FFG intended "with an anti-squadron armament of X" to mean:

  • "use X instead of your squadron's printed anti-squadron armament"; or
  • "treat your squadron as having a printed anti-squadron armament of X". (see e.g. Adm. Chiraneau)

Like with RLB and Strategic, I believe the RAW can be interpreted in at least two ways. I do have a preferred interpretation, which may or may not agree with what I suspect FFG had in mind as RAI. Luckily a FAQ will surely come soon :D

Posted at

Ok, finally making some headway.

Thanks DA for stating the dissension so I could understand it.

Posted at

Otherwise, why wouldn't it be worded like this:

Snipe 4: You can attack squadrons at distance 2 with your/this units/this squadrons/the anti-squadron armament. This attack ignores the Counter keyword.

For the same reason COUNTER has a value. It allows more nuanced building. Can you imagine if COUNTER was equal to your printed anti-squadron value?

Posted at

If we don't consider snipe or counter as an anti-squadron armament for FC bonus does it means we can do the same for obstruction? If I remember obstruction remove a die from the battery not from the pool and I would bet counter (and snipe) could be obstructed. Of course I probably miss something.

Posted at

If we don't consider snipe or counter as an anti-squadron armament for FC bonus does it means we can do the same for obstruction? If I remember obstruction remove a die from the battery not from the pool and I would bet counter (and snipe) could be obstructed. Of course I probably miss something.

Obstruction actually removes a die from the attack pool, not the battery.

This is from the RRG:

"If an attack is obstructed by one or more ships or obstacles, the attacker must choose and remove one die from his attack pool before he rolls dice during the “Roll Attack Dice” step."

Posted at

If we don't consider snipe or counter as an anti-squadron armament for FC bonus does it means we can do the same for obstruction? If I remember obstruction remove a die from the battery not from the pool and I would bet counter (and snipe) could be obstructed. Of course I probably miss something.

Obstruction actually removes a die from the attack pool, not the battery.

This is from the RRG:

"If an attack is obstructed by one or more ships or obstacles, the attacker must choose and remove one die from his attack pool before he rolls dice during the “Roll Attack Dice” step."

Ok. That's right.I miss this.

Posted at

Steps (not rules wording, but what happens:)

1. Look at Battery Armament. Pick up Dice equal to battery Armament. Once dice are picked up, these are your attack pool.

2. Throw the Dice. They must be thrown to become "legit". An unthrown dice has no value and is worth less than squat.

3. Obstruction makes you lose a dice between 1 and 2. If you end up with 0, you have nothing in your pool, and the attack ends. If the attack hasn't ended, go to 4.

4. Mess about with your dice by resolving any other effects that you're allowed to do, by modifying dice.

Posted at

Is interesting that in the Spanish translation of FC the upgrade says "las baterías antiescuadron" using plural XD. I would have the easiest answer if other languages could rule hehe but...

Posted at
I almost read the entire thread!! Now I have an idea about the arguments people are using.


About snipe range I think almost everybody agree about this. But I'll put the rules.


From the RG, range and distance, 9:


At: If any portion of a hull zone, base, or token is inside a specified band, that component is at that band.


Minimum–Maximum: This abbreviation encompassesthe minimum band, maximum band, and all bands in-between, such as “distance 1–4.”


Usually (I think always), the minimum-maximum has an "at" cause "at 1-4 distance" wouldn't be the same than "within 1-4 distance". Anyway, we don't have a "minimum-maximum", just an "at" so if a squadron is within distance 1 isn't at 2 so we can't snipe. Someone (sorry for not quoting) ilustrate it with the evade token. If you are at long range you are not at short range. The first doesn't include the second.


The doubt here came from if a squadron has portions in 1 and 2. About that we have (again from RG, Measuring firing arc and range, 7):


To measure attack range to or from a squadron, measure to or from the closest point of the squadron’s base.


I think that it is very clear but for someones who want to argue that as long as some portion is at 2 they can snipe I sugest an if-game:

If we consider that the attacker or the defender could choose the actual distance just calling the at-rule It would be a chaos. If the attacker choose, uppgrades like targeting scrambler would suck as long as if the defending ship had some portion at medium the attacker would argue that it is at medium so no scrambling. If the defender choose, something similar would happen with evade or just with the attack.

Taking the closest point is the best, most neutral and even the most nifty solution.


About the FC with snipe I will put together all the quotes from FAQ, RG and cards I found about and people put here or at least I'll try.


From RG


Armament, 2

The attacker’s armament indicates the color and number of dice that can be used during an attack. Anti-squadron armament is used when attacking a squadron.


Attack, 2 (·2 Roll Attack Dice)

If the defender is a squadron, gather the attack dice indicated in the attacker’s anti-squadron armament.


Modifying dice, 7

Dice can be modified in the following ways by game effects:

• Reroll: When a die is rerolled, the attacker picks it up and rolls it again. A die can be rerolled multiple times.

• Add: When a die is added, roll an unused die of the

appropriate color into the attack pool.

• Change: When a die is changed, rotate it to display the indicated face.

• Spend: When a die or die icon is spent, remove that die from the attack pool.

• Cancel: When a die or die icon is canceled, remove it from the attack pool.


(I put this one above just to show there is nothin about "increase").


Squadron keywords, 12

A counter attack can be modified by effects that modify a standard attack, such as the swarm keyword.


(Just cause someone suggest we must work with snipe as we do with counter)


From the FAQ


Squadrons, 5

Q: When a squadron with counter performs its counter attack, can it resolve abilities that affect an attack?

A: Yes. A counter attack functions just like a normal attack except that the dice gathered for the attack are indicated by the squadron’s counter value instead of its anti-squadron armament. They can be affected by the swarm keyword, Howlrunner’s ability, etc.


From Saber Squadron


Snipe

Snipe 4: You can attac squadrons at distance 2 with an anti-squadron armament of 4 blue dice. This attack ignores the Counter keyword.


From Flight Controllers

Squadron-icon: The anti-squadron armament of each squadron that you activate is increased by 1 blue die until the end of its activation.


From Enhanced Armament

Modification. The battery armaments for your left and right hull zones are increased by 1 red die.


(I put this last one just for comparing reasons with Flight controllers).


I think it's done.


Well, as long as I understood, someones say that FC works cause snipe is an anti-squadron armament and someones say it doesn't cause FC works on the anti-squadron armament of the box but not the other cause the snipe value replace the default anti-squadron armament.


My thoughts:

The 4 blue dice of snipe 4 are an anti-squadron armament.

FC is not a modifying dice upgrade but it only means that it doesn't work during the resolve attack effects.

To increase the armament doesn't change the card. Enhanced armament doesn't say a thing about it. It only says that the battery armament is increased. The armament just indicates the number and color of dice gathered at the roll attack dice step (RG). I am attacking with ship/squadron to a ship/squadron from here/there so I gather these/those dice.

Maybe it doesn't mean anything for someones who defend that FC doesn't work with snipe but is interesting that armament is not defined in the same way than speed chart for example, where the RG points specifically the printed one. It let me think that the armament is not only the box printed in the card but the number of dice gathered during the roll attack dice step. In this way FC easily increase this number cause, through normal attack or through snipe, you are gathering an anti-squadron armament.


I put here again from the RG, 2, attack.


Roll Attack Dice: Gather attack dice to form the attack pool and roll those dice. Gather only the dice that are appropriate for the range of the attack as indicated by the icons on the range ruler.

· If the defender is a ship, gather the attack dice indicated in the attacking hull zone’s or squadron’s battery armament.

· If the defender is a squadron, gather the attack dice indicated in the attacker’s anti-squadron armament.

· If the attacker cannot gather any dice appropriate for the range of the attack, the attack is canceled.


If we agree about enhanced armament and other "increase armament upgrades" works here I think it would be clear. Of course If we argue that these upgrades works over the card we don't have an specific wording that could point the snipe anti-squadron armament (even when the wording doesn't point to the anti-squadron box either).

At this point I didn't help myself to argue in favor or oppossing. I admit that I always thought FC would work but after reading all these rules I am not sure. Anyway reading again some rules I found this:


From the RG, armament, 2:

The attacker’s armament indicates the color and number of dice that can be used during an attack. Anti-squadron armament is used when attacking a squadron. Battery armament is used when attacking a ship.

• Each hull zone of a ship has its own battery armament that it uses when the ship attacks from that hull zone.

• Each squadron has a single battery armament

• A ship has one anti-squadron armament that is used regardless of which hull zone is attacking.


I already quote part of this one but, as you can see, it specifically says some things.

I obviate the first paragraph and go to the points.

It says that a ship has four baterry armament. Not with these words but it does. Also says that a ship has only one anti-squadron armament and a squadron has only one battery armament.

What RG doesn't say is that a squadron has only one anti-squadron armament. It could be stupid but not less than say that it has just one battery armament. Why the RG points one thing and not the other? The answer is easy. Some squadrons of the wave 1 have counter x (the keyword was in the RG that comes with the core, where any of the squadrons has counter). And counter says that the attack you did with counter is done with an anti-squadron armament of x blue dice. I think that the RG admit the possibility of squadrons that had more than one anti-squadron armament. Which ones? Whichever that said that in the card. Of course we don't have any squadron with two or more anti-squadron boxes printed in the card but there is nothing in the RG or the FAQ where they said that the armament is printed in boxes. We already have anti-squadron armament printed without icons in boxes like the counter one or snipe one.

I thing is clear that snipe and counter are anti-squadron armament, I think is clear that they are anti-squadron armaments of the squadron that had it as long as RG doesn't limit the number of anti-squadron armament a squadron cuold have. The FC increases the anti-squadron armament of the squadrons. Someone (I think was DiabloAzul) put an example to imagine a situation where snipe or counter said something like "you may attack with the anti-squadron armament of a friendly squadron". That was a fallacy (with no dangeorus intentions of course) that obviated thar fact that FC points the squadron's anti-squadron armament. Of course that if the squadron is not using its own anti-squadron armament it cannot increase it with FC!

The thing is:

1) If the armament is just the dice we gather during the roll attack dice step it doesn't matter where they come from as they were "appropriate for the range of the attack" and anti-squadron/battery as appropiate. Here we can talk about a counter anti-squadron armament and snipe anti-squadron armament in the same way we talk about left hull battery armament. Anyway, "increase armament" would work here if we fulfill the requirements (attack from an specific hull when the increase effect point that, for example).

2) If the armament is the thing printed and the "increase armament" upgrades modify these, we need to answer a question for FC that we don't have with enhanced armament: Does FC increase all the anti-squadron armament of the squadron or just one of them?

a. FC increase all anti-squadron armaments. Ok, then, FC works with snipe.

b. FC increase just one anti-squadron armament. Ok, then, what anti-squadron armament FC increase? We can't know.

If we work with answer "b" we would be in the same situation if some upgrade card said something like "your battery armament is increased by 1 red die". Which one? The ship has 4!!

Answer "b" throws us to a cul de sac that we can't resolve. There is no reason to say what anti-squadron armament FC is increasing unless we said that counter or snipe are not squadron's anti-squadron armament.


Of course we still have the faq answer... I really think this is the major problem. The answer doesn't refer counter as an anti-squadron armament and it point that you use the counter value instead the anti-squadron armament of the squadron. The fact that the answer just talk about a "value" doesn't mean that counter wasn't an anti-squadron armament. I think we can easily change the answer as follows:


A: Yes. A counter attack functions just like a normal attack except that the dice gathered for the attack are indicated by the anti-squadron armament specify by the squadron’s counter value instead of its anti-squadron armament. They can be affected by the swarm keyword, Howlrunner’s ability, etc.


I think I am not changing anything at all. Problem: the answer is worded in a way that seems like the anti-squadron armament of counter isn't a squadron's anti-squadron armament even when it says "squadron's counter value". From here I can't continue unless I take the answer as an easy way to clarify a question rather than a rule or an errata (what it isn't). This way I could intend that the answer could want to say "instead of other anti-squadron armament". Of course, maybe a squadron can't have more than one anti-squadron armament but if this is right, why they didn't put in the RG? And if it wasn't necessary, why they put it with the battery armament?


My shaky position about that is that a squadron could have more than one anti-squadron armament (as the RG allows). These other anti-squadron armament are, right now, counter's and snipe's anti-squadron armament. What they want to say in the faq is that when you counter (or snipe) you use the appropiate anti-squadron armament (as roll attack dice already said). And FC increases all anti-squadron armament as if it doesn't we can't know what anti-squadron armament FC increases.

If a squadron only has one anti-squadron armament like the FAQ seems to say, the "Each squadron has a single battery armament" is one of the most stupid sentence in the RG.


And that's all. I am not sure if I have helped or confused. I hope the first and sorry for the second ;)