yeah I don't see how the "instead" is getting ignored here....

That sentence doesn't leave a lot to interpretation does it?

" For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1"

What is unclear about that? If I say "Hey man, instead of that pie you ordered, you can have a set aside piece of cake." are you unclear on what your desert options are?

If I get an RRG and FAQ I'll fully understand what my options are.

yeah I don't see how the "instead" is getting ignored here....

That sentence doesn't leave a lot to interpretation does it?

" For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1"

What is unclear about that? If I say "Hey man, instead of that pie you ordered, you can have a set aside piece of cake." are you unclear on what your desert options are?

True enough, but my argument is you are still getting desert.

If getting desert = activating a squadron

then you can have cake (moving and attacking with a squadron as normal)

or pie (placing a squadron within distance 1 and attacking if you like)

You have the option of doing 1 instead of the other, but you are still falling under the umbrella of getting desert. The instead doesn't cancel the overarching part of the phase in my mind.

"Instead of activating a squadron on the board, activate one of the squadrons set aside by this card."

yeah I don't see how the "instead" is getting ignored here....

That sentence doesn't leave a lot to interpretation does it?

" For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1"

What is unclear about that? If I say "Hey man, instead of that pie you ordered, you can have a set aside piece of cake." are you unclear on what your desert options are?

"Instead of activating a squadron on the board, activate one of the squadrons set aside by this card."

... is not at all what the card says.

IF the card said

For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1 and activate it. It may not move during its activation"

Then it would be 100% crystal clear. But that is not at all what the card says.

It says " For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1"

Which is essentially saying EITHER: Activate a squadron or place 1 set-aside squadron within distance 1.

Now I'm hungry.

IF the card said

For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1 and activate it. It may not move during its activation"

Then it would be 100% crystal clear. But that is not at all what the card says.

It says " For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1"

Which is essentially saying EITHER: Activate a squadron or place 1 set-aside squadron within distance 1.

At which point, our only other rules precedent of placing Squadrons that were "Set aside" should apply as well:

When a squadron that was set aside is deployed, set its activation slider to display the same color as the initiative token.

Which would mean it is not activated, and is ready for activation.

It's worded the way it is to prevent you from immediately activating the squad you place. Otherwise you could just drop 4 bwings on a ship with no way to stop it without killing the ship.

"On upgrade card effects, the term 'you' refers to the ship that the upgrade is equipped to." Rules reference page 13 Upgrade Cards

IF the card said

For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1 and activate it. It may not move during its activation"

Then it would be 100% crystal clear. But that is not at all what the card says.

It says " For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1"

Which is essentially saying EITHER: Activate a squadron or place 1 set-aside squadron within distance 1.

So by this definition what does the lady sentence even do??? That is what is unclear. Because on this definition the last sentence of pointless.

I am a believer now. Steven, Dras, Kristjan and DA are correct.

When you use a squad command/token, you can trigger RBD. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the colon sign : indicates you spend something for an effect. This is why you can Ozzel and Nav Team at the same time.

The same is for RBD. You spend the command to drop a squad at range 1 of you. You are forgoing your usual "activate a squad" ability. Entirely replaced. You drop an unactivated squad next to you. That squad cannot be moved during your activation. RBD is equipped to you, the ship. If you believe my first statement to be true, dropping an unactivated squad, then the card makes sense. If you think the squad is activated, the card is unclear.

This argument is hinging on the squad being activated or not when it is placed from RBD and Occam's Razor says the squad is unactivated when it is dropped from the ship.

Nope, the symbol then a colon is an additional effect you can trigger.

So by this Definition what does the last sentence even do??? That is what is unclear. Because on this definition the last sentence of pointless.

Because for EACH point you have you get to make that decision. You can EITHER place a squadron OR activate a squadron. You can use 2 of your squadron points to do one of each- you can drop a B-Wing, and then use the next squadron point to activate it... but it cannot move this turn,

Another question I have is if you use flight commander does this means you could place squadrons after movement?

Another question I have is if you use flight commander does this means you could place squadrons after movement?

Yes because you do the entire command after movement.

It gives you another timing to do the command basically.

IF the card said

For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1 and activate it. It may not move during its activation"

Then it would be 100% crystal clear. But that is not at all what the card says.

It says " For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1"

Which is essentially saying EITHER: Activate a squadron or place 1 set-aside squadron within distance 1.

At which point, our only other rules precedent of placing Squadrons that were "Set aside" should apply as well:

When a squadron that was set aside is deployed, set its activation slider to display the same color as the initiative token.

Which would mean it is not activated, and is ready for activation.

Fantastic catch, Dras. The FAQ has precise rules about the meaning of "set aside" squadrons, and how in-game deployment of these squadrons works. Even if the expression is only clarified in the context of Hyperspace Assault, it's a pretty solid basis.

EDIT: It's worth noting that the new Fighter Ambush objective card also involves "setting aside" squadrons. Presumably all instances of "setting aside" will be resolved the same way unless otherwise specified.

IF the card said

For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1 and activate it. It may not move during its activation"

Then it would be 100% crystal clear. But that is not at all what the card says.

It says " For each squadron you would activate with this command, you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons within distance 1"

Which is essentially saying EITHER: Activate a squadron or place 1 set-aside squadron within distance 1.

At which point, our only other rules precedent of placing Squadrons that were "Set aside" should apply as well:

When a squadron that was set aside is deployed, set its activation slider to display the same color as the initiative token.

Which would mean it is not activated, and is ready for activation.

Fantastic catch, Dras. The FAQ has precise rules about the meaning of "set aside" squadrons, and how in-game deployment of these squadrons works. Even if the expression is only clarified in the context of Hyperspace Assault, it's a pretty solid basis.

I think that should end the argument. FAQ says set aside squads come in ready to be activated.

Nope, the symbol then a colon is an additional effect you can trigger.

So by this Definition what does the last sentence even do??? That is what is unclear. Because on this definition the last sentence of pointless.

Because for EACH point you have you get to make that decision. You can EITHER place a squadron OR activate a squadron. You can use 2 of your squadron points to do one of each- you can drop a B-Wing, and then use the next squadron point to activate it... but it cannot move this turn,

So your saying the activation in the last sentence of the ships?

Good discussion gents!

Good discussion gents!

I'd like your comment but this error occurred

"You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day"

I must say: the more I read the card, the more sense the drop unactivated interpretation seems. I don't like it, but it makes sense.

Good discussion gents!

I'd like your but this error occurred

"You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day" [/size]

I did it for you.

Good discussion gents!

I'd like your but this error occurred

"You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day"[/size]

I did it for you.

Good discussion gents!

I'd like your but this error occurred

"You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day"[/size]

I did it for you.

do it for me too...I am over liked today as well...

Still kinda hung up on the last sentence with, and based on current rules I agree with, the consensus that they are not activated.

It's worded the way it is to prevent you from immediately activating the squad you place. Otherwise you could just drop 4 bwings on a ship with no way to stop it without killing the ship.

"On upgrade card effects, the term 'you' refers to the ship that the upgrade is equipped to." Rules reference page 13 Upgrade Cards

If the just dropped B-wings don't count as having been activated when placed with RLB, Yavaris just comes up behind or via Relay activates them and kills the ship "worse." Or another ship's activation might spend a squadron command on those ships allowing them to move and shoot having gotten a range boost by both being carried and placed at range 1.

Said endangered enemy ship might get a chance to activate and flee shoot back in that scenario though so I'll concede that you have a point there.

Think about some Interceptors docked on a Gozanti at speed four then deployed by RLB range 1 away from it. They are unactivated. Now another ship is free to order them with its squadron command and they would then be able to move and shoot and still get drug alone by that ships FCT. Add things like Boosted Comms and this new relay in there.

Makes more sense that you've spent an activation to activate the squadron and now its done without Tallon in my opinion. And it still could be drug by FCT on the RLB ship causing a range reduction for this but more investment of points to prevent losing all movement of the squadron.