But the point I made earlier still stands. You don't have to shoot an engaged squadron at distance 1. You are able to attack unengaged squads at distance 1 so long as escort is not involved, so here is some precedent.

From the FAQ

Q: If a squadron is at distance 1 of two enemy squadrons, one

that it is engaged with and one that it is not engaged with

because it is separated by an obstacle, does the original

squadron have to attack the engaged squadron?

A: No. A squadron can attack another squadron at distance 1

regardless of whether it is technically engaged with that

squadron

I mean, I'm no Expert on the rules....

(That's a range 2 snipe)

From the FAQ

Q: If a squadron is at distance 1 of two enemy squadrons, one

that it is engaged with and one that it is not engaged with

because it is separated by an obstacle, does the original

squadron have to attack the engaged squadron?

A: No. A squadron can attack another squadron at distance 1

regardless of whether it is technically engaged with that

squadron

good point, again this is all at distance 1 and being "engaged" and doesn't cover snipe and distance 2. the FAQ statement also still implies having to attack an engaged squadron first and foremost. if we go back to page 6 of the RR it's all about distance 1 and being engaged . this FAQ statement above my writing is about obstruction and engagement and helps re-enforce the statement i made earlier from the line on page 6 about

"WHEN A SQUADRON ATTACKS, IT MUST ATTACK AN ENGAGED SQUADRON IF POSSIBLE rather than an enemy ship"

in the end , a squadron must deal with and attack all squadrons at distance 1 first , before attempting to turn on their snipe ability and try and attack at distance 2.

From the FAQ

Q: If a squadron is at distance 1 of two enemy squadrons, one

that it is engaged with and one that it is not engaged with

because it is separated by an obstacle, does the original

squadron have to attack the engaged squadron?

A: No. A squadron can attack another squadron at distance 1

regardless of whether it is technically engaged with that

squadron

good point, again this is all at distance 1 and being "engaged" and doesn't cover snipe and distance 2. the FAQ statement also still implies having to attack an engaged squadron first and foremost. if we go back to page 6 of the RR it's all about distance 1 and being engaged . this FAQ statement above my writing is about obstruction and engagement and helps re-enforce the statement i made earlier from the line on page 6 about

"WHEN A SQUADRON ATTACKS, IT MUST ATTACK AN ENGAGED SQUADRON IF POSSIBLE rather than an enemy ship"

in the end , a squadron must deal with and attack all squadrons at distance 1 first , before attempting to turn on their snipe ability and try and attack at distance 2.

This FAQ does not imply you must attack an engaged squad.

It literally says " A squadron can attack another squadron at distance 1 regardless of whether it is technically engaged with that squadron"

You can attack whatever was at your attack range. If is engaged or not it doesn't matter.

When a squadron activate it can attack. A snipe squadron can attack at distance 1 with its default anti-squadron armament or at distance 2 with the snipe anti-squadron armament. Snipe is an attack so whatever could modify attack could modify snipe (obstruction, adding dice, escort, etc).

What you say is that as the faq only talk about distance 1 it doesn't apply over snipe?

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...

So, this is a fine guideline. But I don't actually think it should be applied here,at least in so far as deciphering what the current RAW is for Sniping an enemy squadron at distance 2 while engaged by a second non-heavy enemy squadron at distance one.

We have the engagement rules, which by definition are a set of limiting factors. We have the rules for the Snipe Keyword, which has its own limitations clearly printed on the card. And while I concede the Engagement set was written prior to the existence, and probably even the conception of Snipe, as Ard pointed out earlier Snipe was written to interact with the preexisting engagement rules.

So what we have, is a list of things we cannot do, clearly laid out for us. The rules as written allow you to snipe at distance 2, regardless of engagement (sans Escort). The limitation on attacks that is created by engagement is versus ships. Moreover, it is very specifically versus ships. Enforcing any other limitation is at best an RAI argument, which is about as useful for our purposes as "lets wait and see the FAQ." At worst, its creating your own rules.

And a little bit off topic- Dras, I have nothing but respect for what you do in this forum. When you come out on a rule question where I disagree, my immediate thought is "well, ****, what did I miss here?" But the idea that you are ruling in the VWC to limit snipe based on some napkin math that supposes designer intent of cost based on conjecture about how powerful a brand new ability even is strikes me as below your usual standard. I know you have a lot of stuff going on IRL but maybe take another look at that one. There is a valid RAW argument here, and an RAI argument. One should always hold more weight then the other.

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...

Good stuff

Mag hit the nail on the head, Dras: when I saw that you disagreed with me, I did a double take even though I was completely sure of my position.

Sorry, but I'm still completely sure of my position.

The validity of the Air Bud argument entirely aside, it doesn't hold up here anyway. The RAW in this case clearly delineate what you can do, and then set parameters around that action to limit it.

When a squadron is activated by a O command, it can

move and attack in any order.

Okay, how do I attack?

To perform an attack with a squadron or ship, resolve the

following steps:

1. Declare Target: The attacker declares the defender and

the attacking hull zone, if any. If the defender is a ship,

the attacker declares the defending hull zone. Measure

line of sight to the defender to ensure the attack is

possible and to determine if it is obstructed.

◊ If the attacker is a ship, the defending squadron or hull

zone must be inside the attacking hull zone’s firing arc

and at attack range of the attacking hull zone.

◊ If the attacker is a squadron, the defending squadron

or hull zone must be at distance 1.

Uh oh, Dengar is at distance 2, guess I can't shoot him. Except, wait:

You can attack squadrons at distance 2 with an anti-squadron armament of 3 blue dice. This attack ignores the Counter keyword.

Sweet! I have a clear set of rules describing exactly what I can do and who I can target! Fortunately, though, I've read the RRG and know there are some other restrictions in here. Let's see if they apply:

Each squadron’s attack range is distance 1.

Not applicable, explicitly superseded by my upgrade card IAW The Golden Rule.

While a squadron is at distance 1 of one or more

enemy squadrons, it is engaged with all of those enemy

squadrons.

...

When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged

squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship.

Whew, good thing I'm not attacking a ship or this would prevent my attack.

The RAW clearly lay out what I may do, including the limiting parameters surrounding those actions. If a player wants to claim that there are additional limitations on the things that I am explicitly permitted to do, the burden of proof is on them to demonstrate a basis for the limitation.

Look at that quote from Squadron Activation again. The default position here is not "you can't attack," it's "you can attack."

I have no issue whatsoever with being "Wrong".

I mean, I'm no Expert on the rules....

You certainly have been acting like you think you are lately.

(That's a range 2 snipe)

1) Lately?

2) Duh.

3) Do you have something pertinent to add to the discussion?

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...

Good stuff

Mag hit the nail on the head, Dras: when I saw that you disagreed with me, I did a double take even though I was completely sure of my position.

Sorry, but I'm still completely sure of my position.

The validity of the Air Bud argument entirely aside, it doesn't hold up here anyway. The RAW in this case clearly delineate what you can do, and then set parameters around that action to limit it.

When a squadron is activated by a O command, it can

move and attack in any order.

Okay, how do I attack?

To perform an attack with a squadron or ship, resolve the

following steps:

1. Declare Target: The attacker declares the defender and

the attacking hull zone, if any. If the defender is a ship,

the attacker declares the defending hull zone. Measure

line of sight to the defender to ensure the attack is

possible and to determine if it is obstructed.

◊ If the attacker is a ship, the defending squadron or hull

zone must be inside the attacking hull zone’s firing arc

and at attack range of the attacking hull zone.

◊ If the attacker is a squadron, the defending squadron

or hull zone must be at distance 1.

Uh oh, Dengar is at distance 2, guess I can't shoot him. Except, wait:

You can attack squadrons at distance 2 with an anti-squadron armament of 3 blue dice. This attack ignores the Counter keyword.

Sweet! I have a clear set of rules describing exactly what I can do and who I can target! Fortunately, though, I've read the RRG and know there are some other restrictions in here. Let's see if they apply:

Each squadron’s attack range is distance 1.

Not applicable, explicitly superseded by my upgrade card IAW The Golden Rule.

While a squadron is at distance 1 of one or more

enemy squadrons, it is engaged with all of those enemy

squadrons.

...

When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged

squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship.

Whew, good thing I'm not attacking a ship or this would prevent my attack.

The RAW clearly lay out what I may do, including the limiting parameters surrounding those actions. If a player wants to claim that there are additional limitations on the things that I am explicitly permitted to do, the burden of proof is on them to demonstrate a basis for the limitation.

Look at that quote from Squadron Activation again. The default position here is not "you can't attack," it's "you can attack."

but if you have a tie fighter at distance 1 and dengar at distance 2 you must attack the tie fighter OR somehow maybe using jan OR jumpmaster fly out of distance 1 from the tie so you can then shoot dengar from a distance 2 range, based on all the RR statements.

WHEN A SQUADRON ATTACKS, IT MUST ATTACK AN ENGAGED SQUADRON IF POSSIBLE, rather than an enemy ship

and

Thanos, the portion at the end about enemy ships does not go away, nor can we reasonably infer that it would apply to squadrons at distance 2.

i am not saying it goes away you are. i am saying it pretty clear that in the RR guide squads operate at distance 1 when attacking and are engaged at distance 1, and must always attack other squadrons at distance 1. that is clearly the intent on the RR guide for squads attacking. in all honesty i would like nothing more than for snipe to be the OP ability everyone seems to want it to be, i would want to take advantage of that. But i love Armada too much, and it has a great META to the design of the game. after i have read and re-read the Engagement section it is pretty clear to me everything revolves around "engagement" and "distance 1" .

the statement about "rather than an enemy ship" was to curb situations , in armada's beginnings, where someone wanted to be able to target a "ship" instead of a "squadron", that was a NO NO of course..

SO, what we have here is failure to communicate LOL, jk... so , that rule or statement i mention doesn't take away from the fact that even if a ship is not involved you are still engaged and must attack engaged squadrons before you can snipe others at distance 2. Hell they might as well FAQ it as

"WHEN A SQUADRON ATTACKS, IT MUST ATTACK AN ENGAGED SQUADRON IF POSSIBLE, rather than an enemy ship, OR a Squadron at distance 2" or something ...

i honestly think everyone that reads into Snipe so that you can ignore being engaged by 5 other squads all at distance 1 and then still be able to snipe anyone you want at distance 2 is really incorrect based on the RR guide and the HONEST intent by the designers if you really really stop and read what engagement is all about.

for the love of God FFG if you are reading this post please please FAQ snipe, so we can all put it to rest.

I really really think you are making an induction process. You said that as the RRG said "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship." It must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than a non-engaged squadrons even when the FAQ says you don't have to. Yes, the FAQ talk about squadrons at distance 1 but I don't know how the induction that would defend that the FAQ allows to snipe even if you are engaged could be bigger than the induction that would defend that the RRG disallows you to snipe if you are engaged.

The faq says the right way to do some things so takes prevalence over the RRG. In this situation the FAQ overwrite your induction at least when the engaged and non-engaged are at distance 1 but if the FAQ does with distance 1 why it won't do with distance 2?

Sorry for my English. I am writing ato the same time I watch the TV and it is not easy to me XD

I really really think you are making an induction process. You said that as the RRG said "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship." It must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than a non-engaged squadrons even when the FAQ says you don't have to. Yes, the FAQ talk about squadrons at distance 1 but I don't know how the induction that would defend that the FAQ allows to snipe even if you are engaged could be bigger than the induction that would defend that the RRG disallows you to snipe if you are engaged.

The faq says the right way to do some things so takes prevalence over the RRG. In this situation the FAQ overwrite your induction at least when the engaged and non-engaged are at distance 1 but if the FAQ does with distance 1 why it won't do with distance 2?

Sorry for my English. I am writing ato the same time I watch the TV and it is not easy to me XD

I'm totally confused by what you said , if you could re-word and throw in exact quotes from the FAQ that would help. i am not sure how to begin to reply to you.

so if i'm right in understanding you, PLEASE let me know if i'm not, i was referring to the FAQ saying the following:

Q: If a squadron is at distance 1 of two enemy squadrons, one that it is engaged with and one that it is not engaged with because it is separated by an obstacle, does the original squadron have to attack the engaged squadron? A: No. A squadron can attack another squadron at distance 1 regardless of whether it is technically engaged with that squadron

this entire rule/line/quote only refers to squads "engaged" and at "distance 1" (which is the range for engagement) it does not mention or cover the special ability of snipe. with snipe in mind, if my snipe squadron only has squads at distance 2 then there is NOT an "engagement" that is occurring.

the RR covers page 6 covers engagement. so if i have a snipe squadron that is engaged with say 4 Awings, then i have another Awing at distance 2 of ME, i am not able to snipe the Awing at distance 2 due to the other 4 Awings that i am "engaged" with at distance 1. again, take in and read and digest the entire "engagement" section , NOT just single lines. so many people are harping on the statement of "When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship"... if we take the entire "Engagement" section for what it is worth, we must deal with engaged squadrons (those at distance 1) first and fore most , meaning either killing them all or move away from them (via them being heavy or via intel ability) to be able to snipe some other squad at distance 2.

Thano, the rule you keep bringing up is in regards to a squad attacking a ship, not a squad attacking a squad.

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

Cool, we have established that a squad that wants to attack a ship, must attack an engaged squadron instead. But we already have a contradicting FAQ.

Q: If a squadron is at distance 1 of two enemy squadrons, one that it is engaged with and one that it is not engaged with because it is separated by an obstacle, does the original squadron have to attack the engaged squadron?

A: No. A squadron can attack another squadron at distance 1 regardless of whether it is technically engaged with that squadron.

So a squadron that is attacking can choose to attack any squadron within range 1, and they do not need to be engaged.

How do you explain this? You insist a squad must attack an engaged squadron when that is clearly not true. And don't give any of that "well it's obstructed" BS. If a squad is obstructed, they do not engage, and following your logic, cannot attack if they are engaged to another squadron.

Snipe will allow a squad to shoot at range 2 regardless if they are engaged to another squad. The only rule that supports your argument is contradicted by the FAQ and the rule refers to squads attacking ships.

The rule by Thano:

When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship or other squadrons. Those squadrons must be beyond distance 2 because if they are not you can shoot them even if you are not engaged with them. But only if you are not engaged with them due obstruction cause is you are not engaged by other reason you must attack an engaged squadron.

Am I wrong?

As a some what of a new player, my take is no. That's just based on common sense though, and I know common sense isn't always part of the rules. I play Check Your 6 Jet Age, also some Birds of Prey.

If, in the middle of a dog fight (2 squadrons engaged), and you stop maneuvering to line up a target 40 miles away, you are so so very dead.

Just my $0.02

Thano, the rule you keep bringing up is in regards to a squad attacking a ship, not a squad attacking a squad.

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

Cool, we have established that a squad that wants to attack a ship, must attack an engaged squadron instead. But we already have a contradicting FAQ.

Q: If a squadron is at distance 1 of two enemy squadrons, one that it is engaged with and one that it is not engaged with because it is separated by an obstacle, does the original squadron have to attack the engaged squadron?

A: No. A squadron can attack another squadron at distance 1 regardless of whether it is technically engaged with that squadron.

So a squadron that is attacking can choose to attack any squadron within range 1, and they do not need to be engaged.

How do you explain this? You insist a squad must attack an engaged squadron when that is clearly not true. And don't give any of that "well it's obstructed" BS. If a squad is obstructed, they do not engage, and following your logic, cannot attack if they are engaged to another squadron.

Snipe will allow a squad to shoot at range 2 regardless if they are engaged to another squad. The only rule that supports your argument is contradicted by the FAQ and the rule refers to squads attacking ships.

if we read the RR on engagement it is pretty clear, your statement about obstruction doesn't play into effect here. this FAQ statements above is pretty clear that it includes the distance 1 engagement, it doesn't mention snipe and distance 2 at all. so if we read the RR engagement section entirely, we can see that squads are meant to attack engaged squadrons first.

As a some what of a new player, my take is no.......

As I said earlier, if you are going to talk rules have the handy.

If you have snipe and there is a squadron at range 1, it does not prevent you shooting at another squadron even one at range 2. I think Undeadguy has the rules summarised quite nicely.

Tactically you may be right, addressing the target at long range may be a tactical mistake, but the rules shouldn't prevent us from making these mistakes. The rules should just stand back and allow us the choice where the choice is given.

The only thing that prevents you shooting at another squadron is a squadron with escort that is engaged with our squadron.

I think it is imprudent to give a players squadrons a keyword he didn't pay for.

Is this RAI? That I don't know, and I am certainly happy for people to ask the question for the folks that write the FAQ to consider.

Thano, the rule you keep bringing up is in regards to a squad attacking a ship, not a squad attacking a squad.

i read it , again the entire engagement section, as you are engaged at distance 1 and must attack squads at distance 1 first, or find a method to escape being engaged before you can snipe someone at distance 2.

Yeah, I don't see why an E-Wing couldn't ignore an enemy TIE in standard "1" engagement range to Snipe an Interceptor that's further away, as the Interceptors are not a Ship.

As long as that Interceptor's base is entirely outside of range "1", but not entirely ouside of range "3".

If the TIE squadron is Black Squadron, however, the E-Wings are screwed and the Squints are safe as the E-Wings have to fire at Black Squadron because of Escort.

Seems pretty cut and dry.

Thano, the rule you keep bringing up is in regards to a squad attacking a ship, not a squad attacking a squad.

i read it , again the entire engagement section, as you are engaged at distance 1 and must attack squads at distance 1 first, or find a method to escape being engaged before you can snipe someone at distance 2.

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

I am not breaking this rule as I am not attacking a ship. This bullet point only applies if I want to attack a ship and my squadron is engaged with an enemy squadron.

but if you read the entire engagement section as a whole it defines that squadrons are engaged at distance 1 and have to attack engaged squadrons at distance 1. myself and others tend to see it from a different point of view, such that the designers when writing this engagement section (not just the 1 line you mentioned) intended for a squadron that is engaged to attack engaged squadrons at distance 1, the fact that the line mentions rather than an enemy ship was written and developed long before the introduction of snipe. with the introduction of snipe, until there is an FAQ, you still have to attack engaged squadrons. at the time the RR guide was written the only possible conception was engaged squadrons at distance 1 and ships at distance 1 . we should be grouping ships and "squadrons at greater than distance 1 together", the line quoted above about "...rather than an enemy ship" FAILS to mention ANYTHING regarding squadrons beyond distance 2 that you can attack, so i don't see how YOU are drawing your conclusions. hence the reason needed for a FAQ. with my last statement it shows that a squadron must attack an engaged squadron.

I have nothing else to add. I'd advise everyone to wait for the FAQ.

There is no rule that exclusively says a squad must attack an engaged squad, and the FAQ clearly says a squad does not have to attack an engaged squad, end of discussion.

...such that the designers when writing this engagement section (not just the 1 line you mentioned) intended for a squadron that is engaged to attack engaged squadrons at distance 1...

May I suggest you read the rule again? Especially the part where the said designers actually say the exact opposite! "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."

Do you know why people are accusing you of making it all up?