I agree with thanosalzin on this - I read the engagemeant rule as range 1 engagement trumps other targeting, but an FAQ will clear it up. Range 1 obstructed is different, of course, but I digress. I don't read anything in Snipe that indicates you're allowed to ignore engagement.

I agree with thanosalzin on this - I read the engagemeant rule as range 1 engagement trumps other targeting, but an FAQ will clear it up. Range 1 obstructed is different, of course, but I digress. I don't read anything in Snipe that indicates you're allowed to ignore engagement.

Because it doesn't need to be there.

The default state of affairs during a squadron activation is "you may attack." If you want to make the claim that engagement or anything else prevents that attack, it is incumbent upon you to demonstrate why. But I'll save you the time: It's not there. There is zero ambiguity in the RRG suggesting that "engagement trumps all."

The only argument to be made for engagement preventing Snipe is this bizarre claim that the designers weren't familiar with and accounting for core rules of the game when they were writing cards... Which, to me, kind of sounds like trying to justify an untenable position because somebody doesn't want to be wrong...

The only way you can even possibly start to attempt to justify it, is turning the counter-Thano argument (That he's ignoring the end of the sentance) to state that the FAQ justification must also include, and be limited to "Distance 1" as that is what the answer is...

But its untenable.

More than anything, a continuing argument should raise additional points, rather than repeat the same points over and over....

And we're well beyond that.

Let's leave it, until its answered... Any TO needing to make a call, I dare say, would be able to make a call based on their own opinion and the evolved discussion here, if need be.

I read the section. The situation we are talking about is:

We have three squadron. 1 sniper, 1 engaged with the sniper and 1 at distance 2 of the sniper. Can the sniper shoot to the squadron at distance 2 using snipe?

Engagement

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

squadrons. (SO THE SNIPER IS ENGAGED WITH 1 SQUADRON)

• An engaged squadron cannot move. (IT DOESN'T MATTER CAUSE THE SNIPER IS NOT TRYING YO MOVE)

• When a squadron attacks, it must attack an engaged squadron if possible rather than an enemy ship. (WE ARE SHOOTING SO IT COULD BE INTERESTING)

• A squadron does not engage ships or friendly squadrons. (THERE IS NO SHIP IT DOES NO MATTER)

• 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. (WE DON'THAVE OBSTRUCTION HERE SO IT DOESN'T MATTER)

• A squadron is no longer engaged if the last squadron engaged with it is destroyed. (WE DIDN'T DESTROY ANYTHING ALREADY SO IT DOESN'T MATTER)

• 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. (WE ARE NOT MOVING SO IT DOESN'T MATTER)

At the end, for the situation we are discussing about almost the entire section is useless. That is the reason we quote just the only thing we care about:

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

The thing here is that you can't attack ships if you are engaged and you can shoot an engaged squadron. It doesn't say a word about shooting other squadrons. I don't know why you extend this rule to other squadrons. If you do the "rather than an enemy ship" has no sense. The reason to be wrote like is wrote is that the chance to attack other squadrons is not affected by this rule. This rule only came up when you have 2 or more squadron engaged and 1 or more ships at attacking range.

From Snipe

"You can attack squadrons at distance 2 with blah blah"

This modify the attack range of the sniper squadrons under specific condition. Do it modify engagement rules? No. So snipers become engaged at distance 1, you can't snipe ships, you can't snipe at distance 1, you can't snipe with the dice you want, etc. Snipe is affected by the rule above but this rule doesn't say anything about shooting squadrons. It tall about of shooting ship what you can't do IF 1 you are engaged and 2 you can shoot an engaged squadron.

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.

This is interesting and you hold your position as this talk about distance 1, not snipe, and obstruction. Of course it would be awesome if it talked about snipe 2 years before snipe rule exist. The thing here is the answer. The answer doesn't say that the obstruction is the only situation due you can shoot non engaged squadron if you are engaged. It only say that you can shoot squadrons at distance 1 (squadron range) and the engagement doesn't matter.

Why the question talk about obstruction cause at this moment is the only way a squadron have to be at distance 1 and not being engaged. With snipe this have not changed. What changed snipe was the attack range of some squadrons.

I understand some "RAW and only RAW" guys defending that as the FAQ just talk about distance 1 and obstruction it doesn't apply to the situation. Ok. What I can't understand is the same guys could at the same time add words to the RRG that are not there.

funny, but all this talk about "snipe" and "attacking at distance 2" every wording in the RR or the FAQ that was brought up never include or cover ANYTHING at distance 2 . all the wording and rules completely revolve around "engagement" and "distance 1" ONLY, it seems to me all those opposing me (except of Dras and his very nice neutral stances) are interjecting wording to apply to attacking at "distance 2" and ignoring "engagement". so for me until an FAQ we should go by the strict wording of distance 1 and engagement in all those rules and statements, so to use snipe , simple put, we have to move out of engagement.

More than anything, a continuing argument should raise additional points, rather than repeat the same points over and over....

Maybe it could be write:

"A continuing argument must raise additional points rather than repeat the same points over and over."

So we can cut "rather than repeat the same points over and over" and get just "a continuing argument must raise additional points." This way, a continuing argument can't be funny, bothering, long, short, written in bold, etc. It must raise additional points and just that.

I am just joking. Don't take me seriously XD

Interesting debate, i'll add my 0.019€:

An object is "at" distance X if a part of it is within the bar. An object being partly on the distance 1 zone and distance 2 zone is "at" distance 1 AND "at" distance 2. Snipe allow to attack "at" distance 2, regardless of other effects. Imho, the only thing that could prevent a squadron to snipe another, is that a third squadron engages him and answer to the "rather" rules written above. (imho the "rather than a ship" could be written as "rather than anything else") (or "escort": of two squadrons you can attack, you must attack the "escort" one)

Small text, big picture:

Right of the map (ignore the left part and consider only one TIE exist at a time): the Ewing can snipe TIE 2, 3, 4, because at last a part of their is within distance 2. He cannot snipe TIE 1 because he is within distance 1 (100% of it is in the distance 1 zone) (but he can do a normal attack), he cannot attack TIE 5 because he is beyond distance 2, (0% of it is inside distance 2 zone)

About engagement: TIE 2 and Ewing are engaged. So Ewing must attack "an engaged squadron" rather than anything else. TIE 2 is an engaged squadron, AND at snipe range, so Ewing can snipe TIE 2.

If all 5 TIE exist together, engagement rule apply and Ewing can attack TIE 1 or 2 normally, OR snipe TIE 2. Engagement rules prevent Ewing to snipe TIE 3 & 4 because he must attack "an engaged squadron rather".

Harder: ignoring the right part of the map. blue TIE and Ewing are engaged, red TIE and Lancer are engaged. Red TIE is at distance 2 / snipe range of the Ewing.

Ewing is engaged, so must attack an engaged squadron. Red TIE is an engaged squadron at snipe range, so it can be sniped.

If Lancer wasnt here, red TIE wouldnt be engaged, so Ewing could not snipe him.

(what im not sure, is that Ewing must attack rather "a squadron he is engaged with" or "an engaged squadron" as written in RRG. Reading by the book, i understand that the only thing that matters is that the squadron is engaged, regardless how.

So as my ship is "at long range" even when you are shooting me "at medium range" I spend evade to cancel this die.

OR

You can't use targeting scrambler as you are "at medium range" even if you are "at short range".

This would be chaotic. What distance prevail? Who choose? Easiest answer: the short one as when measuring you must do it from and to the nearest points. So if you are at distance 1 you are not at distance 2. Of course the faq will say anything but without the faq I think this way is the only one that don't multiply our problem.

And for the other question I have no answer. You just make me think that if "rather than a ship" could be written as rather than whatever" why is not written that way? or why is not written "...If possible(.)"?

Interesting debate, i'll add my 0.019€:

An object is "at" distance X if a part of it is within the bar. An object being partly on the distance 1 zone and distance 2 zone is "at" distance 1 AND "at" distance 2. Snipe allow to attack "at" distance 2, regardless of other effects. Imho, the only thing that could prevent a squadron to snipe another, is that a third squadron engages him and answer to the "rather" rules written above. (imho the "rather than a ship" could be written as "rather than anything else") (or "escort": of two squadrons you can attack, you must attack the "escort" one)

Small text, big picture:

Right of the map (ignore the left part and consider only one TIE exist at a time): the Ewing can snipe TIE 2, 3, 4, because at last a part of their is within distance 2. He cannot snipe TIE 1 because he is within distance 1 (100% of it is in the distance 1 zone) (but he can do a normal attack), he cannot attack TIE 5 because he is beyond distance 2, (0% of it is inside distance 2 zone)

About engagement: TIE 2 and Ewing are engaged. So Ewing must attack "an engaged squadron" rather than anything else. TIE 2 is an engaged squadron, AND at snipe range, so Ewing can snipe TIE 2.

If all 5 TIE exist together, engagement rule apply and Ewing can attack TIE 1 or 2 normally, OR snipe TIE 2. Engagement rules prevent Ewing to snipe TIE 3 & 4 because he must attack "an engaged squadron rather".

Harder: ignoring the right part of the map. blue TIE and Ewing are engaged, red TIE and Lancer are engaged. Red TIE is at distance 2 / snipe range of the Ewing.

Ewing is engaged, so must attack an engaged squadron. Red TIE is an engaged squadron at snipe range, so it can be sniped.

If Lancer wasnt here, red TIE wouldnt be engaged, so Ewing could not snipe him.

(what im not sure, is that Ewing must attack rather "a squadron he is engaged with" or "an engaged squadron" as written in RRG. Reading by the book, i understand that the only thing that matters is that the squadron is engaged, regardless how.

TIE 2 is NOT at distance 2; it is at distance 1 and cannot be sniped. You measure range from closest point to closest point. The fact that the rest of the base is at distance 2 is immaterial.

ALMOST EVERY EFFECT we've had so far, has said "1-X"... In the fact that it can be used ANYWHERE along that Distance Set...

Just to throw my two cents in the ring here....I'm pretty sure the FAQ is going to come out and say beyond distance one, meaning you cannot Snipe if engaged. Let's put it in real world terms...If a sniper fires at a target, the bullet doesn't appear 100 yards in front of the sniper. Now if there's someone trying to stab at him (ground equivalent to distance 1), he'd reposition rather than take a shot.

So as my ship is "at long range" even when you are shooting me "at medium range" I spend evade to cancel this die.

OR

You can't use targeting scrambler as you are "at medium range" even if you are "at short range".

This would be chaotic. What distance prevail? Who choose? Easiest answer: the short one as when measuring you must do it from and to the nearest points. So if you are at distance 1 you are not at distance 2. Of course the faq will say anything but without the faq I think this way is the only one that don't multiply our problem.

And for the other question I have no answer. You just make me think that if "rather than a ship" could be written as rather than whatever" why is not written that way? or why is not written "...If possible(.)"?

Can't snipe ships, for those you still have to get close.

So as my ship is "at long range" even when you are shooting me "at medium range" I spend evade to cancel this die.

OR

You can't use targeting scrambler as you are "at medium range" even if you are "at short range".

This would be chaotic. What distance prevail? Who choose? Easiest answer: the short one as when measuring you must do it from and to the nearest points. So if you are at distance 1 you are not at distance 2. Of course the faq will say anything but without the faq I think this way is the only one that don't multiply our problem.

And for the other question I have no answer. You just make me think that if "rather than a ship" could be written as rather than whatever" why is not written that way? or why is not written "...If possible(.)"?

Can't snipe ships, for those you still have to get close.

I know you can't snipe ship. I just said that if you can say that a squadron is at distance 2 when it is a distance 1 the you can say a ship is at long range even when it is at medium range and this is not true.

To sum up:

0. Snipe works only against squads (obviously)

1. Snipe works only at distance 2

2. A squadron can't be at both distance 1 and 2 at the same time, since you measure closest to closest (and the dividing line counts as the closer distance)

3. If you're engaged with a squadron you must shoot at engaged squadrons (if possible)

4. From 3 it follows that if you're engaged with a squadron you can't snipe out of that engagement

Interactions:

Counter - Snipe ignores counter.

Escort - Snipe doesn't change how Escort applies.

Howl - Howl's bonus applies to Snipe (universal or near universal consensus)

FC - Flight Controllers may/may not apply to Snipe (I'm firmly in the does apply camp, but agreement isn't universal)

Did I forget anything?

To sum up:

0. Snipe works only against squads (obviously)

1. Snipe works only at distance 2

2. A squadron can't be at both distance 1 and 2 at the same time, since you measure closest to closest (and the dividing line counts as the closer distance)

3. If you're engaged with a squadron you must shoot at engaged squadrons (if possible)

4. From 3 it follows that if you're engaged with a squadron you can't snipe out of that engagement

Interactions:

Counter - Snipe ignores counter.

Escort - Snipe doesn't change how Escort applies.

Howl - Howl's bonus applies to Snipe (universal or near universal consensus)

FC - Flight Controllers may/may not apply to Snipe (I'm firmly in the does apply camp, but agreement isn't universal)

Did I forget anything?

Yep. You forget "...rather than an enemy ship" in 3. Maybe for you is nothing but for some (me included) it means that the part where you can't snipe to a squadron when you are engaged with another squadron is not as clear as you said. If the engaged squadron has escort there is no problem but if it hasn't there is. This is the question about this thread full almost 5 pages.

To sum up:

0. Snipe works only against squads (obviously)

1. Snipe works only at distance 2

2. A squadron can't be at both distance 1 and 2 at the same time, since you measure closest to closest (and the dividing line counts as the closer distance)

3. If you're engaged with a squadron you must shoot at engaged squadrons (if possible)

4. From 3 it follows that if you're engaged with a squadron you can't snipe out of that engagement

Interactions:

Counter - Snipe ignores counter.

Escort - Snipe doesn't change how Escort applies.

Howl - Howl's bonus applies to Snipe (universal or near universal consensus)

FC - Flight Controllers may/may not apply to Snipe (I'm firmly in the does apply camp, but agreement isn't universal)

Did I forget anything?

Your number 3. is not backed up by any rules in my opinion. Engagement does not force you (as a squadron) to shoot at enemy squadrons you are engaged with. You are free to shoot other squadrons with which you are not engaged, the restriction that you have to shoot at squadrons engaging you only applies if you target ships.

Otherwise its fine.

To sum up:

0. Snipe works only against squads (obviously)

1. Snipe works only at distance 2

2. A squadron can't be at both distance 1 and 2 at the same time, since you measure closest to closest (and the dividing line counts as the closer distance)

3. If you're engaged with a squadron you must shoot at engaged squadrons (if possible)

4. From 3 it follows that if you're engaged with a squadron you can't snipe out of that engagement

Interactions:

Counter - Snipe ignores counter.

Escort - Snipe doesn't change how Escort applies.

Howl - Howl's bonus applies to Snipe (universal or near universal consensus)

FC - Flight Controllers may/may not apply to Snipe (I'm firmly in the does apply camp, but agreement isn't universal)

Did I forget anything?

Your number 3. is not backed up by any rules in my opinion. Engagement does not force you (as a squadron) to shoot at enemy squadrons you are engaged with. You are free to shoot other squadrons with which you are not engaged, the restriction that you have to shoot at squadrons engaging you only applies if you target ships.

Yes but at range 1.

To sum up:

0. Snipe works only against squads (obviously)

1. Snipe works only at distance 2

2. A squadron can't be at both distance 1 and 2 at the same time, since you measure closest to closest (and the dividing line counts as the closer distance)

3. If you're engaged with a squadron you must shoot at engaged squadrons (if possible)

4. From 3 it follows that if you're engaged with a squadron you can't snipe out of that engagement

Interactions:

Counter - Snipe ignores counter.

Escort - Snipe doesn't change how Escort applies.

Howl - Howl's bonus applies to Snipe (universal or near universal consensus)

FC - Flight Controllers may/may not apply to Snipe (I'm firmly in the does apply camp, but agreement isn't universal)

Did I forget anything?

Yep. You forget "...rather than an enemy ship" in 3. Maybe for you is nothing but for some (me included) it means that the part where you can't snipe to a squadron when you are engaged with another squadron is not as clear as you said. If the engaged squadron has escort there is no problem but if it hasn't there is. This is the question about this thread full almost 5 pages.

Ah, thanks. Missed that one. Serves me right for relying on memory.

Sounds kind of lame, but RAW is RAW.

To sum up:

0. Snipe works only against squads (obviously)

1. Snipe works only at distance 2

2. A squadron can't be at both distance 1 and 2 at the same time, since you measure closest to closest (and the dividing line counts as the closer distance)

3. If you're engaged with a squadron you must shoot at engaged squadrons (if possible)

4. From 3 it follows that if you're engaged with a squadron you can't snipe out of that engagement

Interactions:

Counter - Snipe ignores counter.

Escort - Snipe doesn't change how Escort applies.

Howl - Howl's bonus applies to Snipe (universal or near universal consensus)

FC - Flight Controllers may/may not apply to Snipe (I'm firmly in the does apply camp, but agreement isn't universal)

Did I forget anything?

Your number 3. is not backed up by any rules in my opinion. Engagement does not force you (as a squadron) to shoot at enemy squadrons you are engaged with. You are free to shoot other squadrons with which you are not engaged, the restriction that you have to shoot at squadrons engaging you only applies if you target ships.

Yes but at range 1.

Please where does it state this limitation? The relevant part is p. 6 engagement , as it was brought up already. Engagement hinders you to shoot ships if you are engaged, it does not hinder you to attack other squadrons with which you are not engaged for any reason. Having an attack with range 2 (snipe) does not alter the engagement wording, snipe itself does not state any limitations, so how do you draw the conclusion that engagement is somehow extended in its meaning for squadrons with snipe?

To sum up:

0. Snipe works only against squads (obviously)

1. Snipe works only at distance 2

2. A squadron can't be at both distance 1 and 2 at the same time, since you measure closest to closest (and the dividing line counts as the closer distance)

3. If you're engaged with a squadron you must shoot at engaged squadrons (if possible)

4. From 3 it follows that if you're engaged with a squadron you can't snipe out of that engagement

Interactions:

Counter - Snipe ignores counter.

Escort - Snipe doesn't change how Escort applies.

Howl - Howl's bonus applies to Snipe (universal or near universal consensus)

FC - Flight Controllers may/may not apply to Snipe (I'm firmly in the does apply camp, but agreement isn't universal)

Did I forget anything?

Your number 3. is not backed up by any rules in my opinion. Engagement does not force you (as a squadron) to shoot at enemy squadrons you are engaged with. You are free to shoot other squadrons with which you are not engaged, the restriction that you have to shoot at squadrons engaging you only applies if you target ships.

Yes but at range 1.

Please where does it state this limitation? The relevant part is p. 6 engagement , as it was brought up already. Engagement hinders you to shoot ships if you are engaged, it does not hinder you to attack other squadrons with which you are not engaged for any reason. Having an attack with range 2 (snipe) does not alter the engagement wording, snipe itself does not state any limitations, so how do you draw the conclusion that engagement is somehow extended in its meaning for squadrons with snipe?

FAQ

My reading of the Tycho Celchu special ability confirms the RR in that the only restrictions for being engaged are you can't move or attack ships.

To sum up:

0. Snipe works only against squads (obviously)

1. Snipe works only at distance 2

2. A squadron can't be at both distance 1 and 2 at the same time, since you measure closest to closest (and the dividing line counts as the closer distance)

3. If you're engaged with a squadron you must shoot at engaged squadrons (if possible)

4. From 3 it follows that if you're engaged with a squadron you can't snipe out of that engagement

Interactions:

Counter - Snipe ignores counter.

Escort - Snipe doesn't change how Escort applies.

Howl - Howl's bonus applies to Snipe (universal or near universal consensus)

FC - Flight Controllers may/may not apply to Snipe (I'm firmly in the does apply camp, but agreement isn't universal)

Did I forget anything?

Your number 3. is not backed up by any rules in my opinion. Engagement does not force you (as a squadron) to shoot at enemy squadrons you are engaged with. You are free to shoot other squadrons with which you are not engaged, the restriction that you have to shoot at squadrons engaging you only applies if you target ships.

Yes but at range 1.

Please where does it state this limitation? The relevant part is p. 6 engagement , as it was brought up already. Engagement hinders you to shoot ships if you are engaged, it does not hinder you to attack other squadrons with which you are not engaged for any reason. Having an attack with range 2 (snipe) does not alter the engagement wording, snipe itself does not state any limitations, so how do you draw the conclusion that engagement is somehow extended in its meaning for squadrons with snipe?

FAQ

Kindly return to the use of phrases and sentences.

In non-functional linguistics, a sentence is a textual unit consisting of words that are grammatically linked. In functional linguistics, a sentence is a unit of written texts delimited by graphological features such as upper case letters and markers such as periods, question marks, and exclamation marks. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence

Thanks.

3. If you're engaged with a squadron you must shoot at engaged squadrons (if possible)

If you rule that a squadron can't Snipe while engaged, you also have to rule that Colonel Jendon cannot use his special ability while engaged. Or any other squadron with an "instead of attacking" ability.

As has been pointed out before, FFG explicitly answered in an email that the purpose of the rule in question was simply to protect ships, and that an engaged squadron is free to attack any valid squadron target.

Ben uses Snipe at range 3 against ships while engaged with X-Wings.

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.

While Snipe didn't exist when this FAQ answer was given - it is still an official answer. Until they change it, the limitation is distance 1 for shooting non-engaged squadrons.