still IMO the RR is pretty clear that you must attack engaged squadrons first that are within distance 1 of you, so you can't snipe (which is still an attack from the snipe squadron) a squadron at distance 2 , until you move away from or kill the squadron at distance 1

That'd only be true if the squadron you are engaged with has escort.

it's like saying i can use Rogue to move away from an Xwing at distance 1, to go and kill an Xwing at distance 2, i can't i have to deal with the Xwing at distance 1 first as i am "engaged" with it . I must attacked engaged squadrons first

No it's not. Using Rogue to move away from an engaged, non-Heavy squadron is not supported by the rules. Using Snipe to attack a squadron at distance two instead of an engaged squadron (that does not have escort) is legal.

that is my point using snipe the way you mentioned is not legal. the RR states "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron" , if i a snipe squad have an Awing at distance 1 and an Awing at distance 2, i have to attack the Awing at distance 1 because i am engaged with it, again "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron".

that is my point using snipe the way you mentioned is not legal. the RR states "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron" , if i a snipe squad have an Awing at distance 1 and an Awing at distance 2, i have to attack the Awing at distance 1 because i am engaged with it, again "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron".

Except that is not what the RR states. It states "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship." It does not preclude you from attacking a squadron at distance 2 with snipe, only a ship.

it's under the Engagement section, it clearly states when a squadron attacks it must attack an engaged squadron (distance 1) if you have a ship in distance 1 or another squad at distance 2 you have to attack the squadron at distance 1 ENGAGED first. again this was written long before snipe was introduced so the only reference point in the RR was when you had a squad and ship within distance 1 of you. so until FFG FAQs it , you must attack an Awing at distance 1 as opposed to being able to attack another Awing at distance 2. snipe is still an attack, but because you are engaged at distance 1 you can't use your snipe ability.

snipe says

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

keyword "attack" again "when a squadron attacks it must attack an engaged squadron is possible" , i have an Awing at distance 1 and distance 2, i am not engaged with the Awing at distance 2 but i am with the Awing at distance 1, so therefore i MUST attack the engaged Awing at distance 1 first.

it's under the Engagement section, it clearly states when a squadron attacks it must attack an engaged squadron (distance 1) if you have a ship in distance 1 or another squad at distance 2 you have to attack the squadron at distance 1 ENGAGED first. again this was written long before snipe was introduced so the only reference point in the RR was when you had a squad and ship within distance 1 of you. so until FFG FAQs it , you must attack an Awing at distance 1 as opposed to being able to attack another Awing at distance 2. snipe is still an attack, but because you are engaged at distance 1 you can't use your snipe ability.

No. My quote is straight from the RRG,yours is not. You can't make up stuff and claim it's part of the rules, nor can you leave out relevant sections of the rule.

"When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship."

To prove my point. Let me give a concrete example. An X-Wing is within distance one of Ship A, TIE Fighter A, and TIE Fighter B. TIE Fighter B is completely on a an obstacle and thus obstructed. Ship A s not a valid target based on the engagement rules. The X-Wing is engaged only with TIE Fighter A due to TIE Fighter B being obstructed thanks to the obstacle it's parked on. Both TIE Fighter A and B are legal targets for the X-Wing's attack.

The way you are trying to frame the rules would limit the X-Wing (incorrectly) to only attacking TIE Fighter A.

snipe says

"when a squadron attacks it must attack an engaged squadron is possible"

The Key argument that is being used against you, at the moment, mate... Is that is not the end of the Quote. You are doing the equivelant of adding a 'full-stop' to a line where there is none. In doing so, modifying the quote. That is why they say "making up rules".

You're telling the truth , but not the whole Truth.

The quote must go from the start, to the Full stop. On occasion, you can end at a comma, too... But very rarely.

But definitely, you cannot leave off a qualifying statement, when that statement gives context to the initial quote.

I'm adding my own personal caveats to these now: "If I have to write in the World Cup FAQ about it, its probably not cut-and-dry..."

i am not, the RR states "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship" so again makes no difference if i left off the ship part, that still doesn't change FACT that a squadron MUST attack and engaged squadron is possible. so in the example you are not understanding, it is clear that you must attack the engaged squadron which is the Awing at distance 1, you cannot attack (keyword) the Awing at distance 2, forget the word snipe here. just focus on the word attack, because snipe is an attack. again, i must attack an engaged squadron is possible, which in my example it IS POSSIBLE for me to attack the Awing at distance 1 so i must do that .

This thread highlights to me an issue my friends and I had many years ago, on a car trip we started to argue the rules with no rule book in the car. We created a rule for rule discussions that exist with us to this day.

"Never have a rules discussion without the rules right there, read them and read everything in full that pertains to that rule."

With the Rule Book as a PDF you should be able to copy and paste the exact quote or portion of the rules as you need:

ENGAGEMENT p6:
While a squadron is at distance 1 of one or more enemy squadrons, it is engaged with all of those enemy squadrons.
• An engaged squadron cannot move.
• When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship.
• A squadron does not engage ships or friendly squadrons.
• If line of sight between two squadrons is obstructed, those squadrons are not engaged even if at distance 1 of each other, though they can still attack each other.
• A squadron is no longer engaged if the last squadron engaged with it is destroyed.
• Squadrons do not engage other squadrons while moving even if a portion of the range ruler is at distance 1 of an enemy squadron. Only the starting and final positions matter for engagement.

@dras, i hit post around same time as you. yeah i should have quoted the whole line but ppl should understand

i am not, the RR states "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship" so again makes no difference if i left off the ship part, that still doesn't change FACT that a squadron MUST attack and engaged squadron is possible

Aah, but it does.

By keeping the Ship part there, you are potentially making the entire line apply to a context that is irrelevant to the question at hand.

Essentially, the line - the rule - is not there to enforce you to attack Squadrons at distance 1 above all else. Its telling you that you must attack squadrons instead of ships .

But we're not discussing Ships here. At all.

What does that rule say about attacking Squadrons above all else?

NOTHING .

It is an irrelevant part of the argument.

It is only made relevant by cutting off the end.

This thread highlights to me an issue my friends and I had many years ago, on a car trip we started to argue the rules with no rule book in the car. We created a rule for rule discussions that exist with us to this day.

"Never have a rules discussion without the rules right there, read them and read everything in full that pertains to that rule."

With the Rule Book as a PDF you should be able to copy and paste the exact quote or portion of the rules as you need:

ENGAGEMENT p6:

While a squadron is at distance 1 of one or more enemy squadrons, it is engaged with all of those enemy squadrons.

• An engaged squadron cannot move.

• When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship.

• A squadron does not engage ships or friendly squadrons.

• If line of sight between two squadrons is obstructed, those squadrons are not engaged even if at distance 1 of each other, though they can still attack each other.

• A squadron is no longer engaged if the last squadron engaged with it is destroyed.

• Squadrons do not engage other squadrons while moving even if a portion of the range ruler is at distance 1 of an enemy squadron. Only the starting and final positions matter for engagement.

ok thanks, so i still don't see Silver Crane where i am wrong , everything i said is still pretty clear and simple. you can't use snipe in the examples i mentioned, please explain to me how you can?

ok thanks, so i still don't see Silver Crane where i am wrong , everything i said is still pretty clear and simple. you can't use snipe in the examples i mentioned, please explain to me how you can?

"You ask the Impossible."

It doesn't say you Can.

It doesn't say you CAN'T , either.

... Guess where that leaves us?

Essentially, the Rules process goes like thisL:

I am a Squadron

I wish to attack.

I must decide if I want to attack a Squadron or a Ship.

I wish to attack a Squadron.

I pick a Squadron at Distance 1 to attack, as my Range is Distance 1.

...

Snipe allows you to pick a target at Distance 2.

But the Rules are COMPLETELY SILENT on wether you can do that in preference to a target at distance 1 or not.

COMPLETELY SILENT

UTTERLY SILENT.

At which point, I personally feel its best to default ot the "Can't" side of things... Because, I mean... I hate bringing it up again. But if you assume you can do things because you're not told you can't... You get some wonderful Jenga Ship Deployments...

To prove my point. Let me give a concrete example. An X-Wing is within distance one of Ship A, TIE Fighter A, and TIE Fighter B. TIE Fighter B is completely on a an obstacle and thus obstructed. Ship A s not a valid target based on the engagement rules. The X-Wing is engaged only with TIE Fighter A due to TIE Fighter B being obstructed thanks to the obstacle it's parked on. Both TIE Fighter A and B are legal targets for the X-Wing's attack.

The way you are trying to frame the rules would limit the X-Wing (incorrectly) to only attacking TIE Fighter A.

Now lets expand the example to include Snipe. So an E-Wing is within within distance one of Ship A, TIE Fighter A, and TIE Fighter B, and at distance 2 of TIE Fighter C. TIE Fighter B is completely on a an obstacle and thus obstructed. Ship A s not a valid target based on the engagement rules. The X-Wing is engaged only with TIE Fighter A due to TIE Fighter B being obstructed thanks to the obstacle it's parked on. Both TIE Fighter A and B are legal targets for the E-Wing's regular attack and TIE Fighter C is eligible to be attacked using Snipe.

The only rule that would prevent this is if a squadron with Escort is engaged with the squadron using Snipe.

To sum up my point, do what the rules say. RAW supports the examples I have provided.

but snipe is not the same as being obstructed man LOL. also you are treating snipe as not being an "attack" like it is something additional to an attack, when it is still an attack read snipe it says "you can attack..." . again the rules above clearly stated "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron , if possible rather than an enemy ship" ... if we read the entire ENGAGEMENT section in entire to me at least it clearly states that your Ewing would have to attack Tie A first, we are not talking about obstructions here we are talking about engagement. i like Dras comment, they really need to FAQ this, but i don't see i am bending rules. it's pretty clear to me.

to add. to my comment. still doesn't change FACT to me that whether it is ship, obstructed squad, or squad at distance 2, i must attacked an engaged squad if possible. ok good night for me. i'm on holiday so will only be able to reply late at night from hotel until i get back on jan 30th.

but snipe is not the same as being obstructed man LOL. also you are treating snipe as not being an "attack" like it is something additional to an attack, when it is still an attack read snipe it says "you can attack..." . again the rules above clearly stated "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron , if possible rather than an enemy ship" ... if we read the entire ENGAGEMENT section in entire to me at least it clearly states that your Ewing would have to attack Tie A first. i like Dras comment, they really need to FAQ this, but i falsdon't see i am bending rules. it's pretty clear to me.

False.

Based on what you are claiming only TIE A is a legal target. Clearly TIE B is also a legal target. I highlighted the section of the RRG that spells this out for you.

ENGAGEMENT p6:

While a squadron is at distance 1 of one or more enemy squadrons, it is engaged with all of those enemy squadrons.

• An engaged squadron cannot move.

• When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship.

• A squadron does not engage ships or friendly squadrons.

• If line of sight between two squadrons is obstructed, those squadrons are not engaged even if at distance 1 of each other, though they can still attack each other.

• A squadron is no longer engaged if the last squadron engaged with it is destroyed.

• Squadrons do not engage other squadrons while moving even if a portion of the range ruler is at distance 1 of an enemy squadron. Only the starting and final positions matter for engage

So that being said, we can attack non-engaged squadrons. What basis do you have for stating Snipe can't be used? I've provided an example where it would not be able to be used, and that is if a squadron with Escort is engage with the squadron attempting to use Snipe. If the the engaged squadron does not have escort, there is no basis in the rules for stating Snipe cannot be used on a legal target.

I mean, I'm no Expert on the rules.... But the only way its "Clear" to me is if there's serious rule-bending involved.

So that being said, we can attack non-engaged squadrons. What basis do you have for stating Snipe can't be used? I've provided an example where it would not be able to be use

At Distance 1.

Your Example stated Distance 1.

It has context within a Distance 1 Shot.

Snipe is not a Distance 1 Shot.

it is a Distance 2 Shot.

Fair enough, I agree Snipe clearly can't be used at distance 1, that's why I called out TIE C as being at distance 2. So let narrow the example down more.

Tie A is within distance 1 of an E-Wing and TIE B is at distance two. The TIE at distance one is engaged in with the E-wing. What's stopping the E-wing from using Snipe against TIE B?

The absence of a rule that specifically states he can .

Snipe allows the attack. It doesn't mention anything about engagement disallowing you from sniping.

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

An engaged squadron with Escort is a whole other ball of wax on the implications it has on targeting.

Do what the rules state, not what they don't state. I rest my case

Its in the Email requests to see what answer we get, one way or another.

Personally, I'm not entirely sure where I stand on it... I like the idea of Snipe as a benefit, but how much of a benefit should it be, from a game design perspective?

In the end, for the World Cup, I ruled to limit it. Essentially. Some napkin math told me that Snipe was Costed to be a Benefit, but not costed to be Awesome.

I understand your point of view. I think it's allowed, at least RAW, but FFG gets the last say on how it works and they could come up with something off the wall.

The question is does Snipe supersede the engagement rules?

Can you Snipe someone outside engagement range, while you are engaged with another enemy squadron? Answer can as easily be no as it could be yes.

Only FFG can clear this one up, because it can easily be seen as either way.

Snipe is an ability that allows you to shoot things at range 2, so you can move, not have enough move to get into standard attack range (range 1) and still be able to shoot at a target.

It also allows you to strategically position yourself to shoot at things to not suffer Counter attacks.

It also allows you to strategically position yourself to ignore Escort.

It does not say you ignore engagement rules though, and engagement rules state you shoot at a legal engaging squadron at distance one of you.