I agree with the limitations of engagement on snipe. It also makes sense thematically. As long as the squad doesn't have anything to deal with it can snipe from range. But when engaged they are caught in a dog fight, they can't line up a shot.

I agree with you about how it should work thematically but it is not supported by the rules or at least I didn't see how yet.

About its balance I don't know. The new wave don't arrive until this Friday here. We have this thread about how snipe should or shouldn't work, we have threads about defender spam and cloak. But I didn't see a thread talking about how awesome or disappointing snipe is.

Played with it a couple times, Snipe is pretty good.

I read the entire section. Many times. In two languages.

Engagement

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.

Please, point us what part we are not quoting and you think we must consider in this situation.

Only quoting ovinomanc3r for the rules part, not for what he wrote.

I really dont understand the whole discussion. The rules (as currently written) are clear. And always were so far. If they were not, hidding in obstacles would be better than escort.

You have to attack an engaged squadron before you can attack a ship. Thats it.

There is no word that you have to attack an engaged squardon over a squadron you are not engaged with.

If you would have to attack engaged squadrons first, it would mean if two squadrons are in range 1 of you, one hidding in an obstacle the second without blocked line of sight (and engaging you), you have have to attack the one with a clear line of sight. And are not allowed to attack the one hidding in the obstacle. It would mean the free squadron get a escort keyword for free. A bit overpowered.

Snipe is the same. There are two Squadrons that you can attack. One in range 1 (engaging you) the second at range 2. You can choose (same as on the obstacle example) who you want to attack.

Escort only work on engaged squadrons. So if the escort squadron is on range 1 you have to attack it. If it is at range 2 you can choose which squadron you want to attack.

Is there anything i missed now?

Theme is very nice, but the rules are basically:

-Engagement prevents attacks on ships

-Escort prevents attacks on (other) squadrons

And while engaged you can -

-attack other squadrons at distance 1.

Theme is very nice, but the rules are basically:

-Engagement prevents attacks on ships

-Escort prevents attacks on (other) squadrons

And while engaged you can -

-attack other squadrons at distance 1.

That is accurate, but not exhaustive.

This is what was actually asked and answered:

Question: "While engaged, can I attack another squadron at distance 1 even if it is not engaging me?."

Answer: "Yes, while engaged, you can attack any squadron at distance 1."

...which is decidedly not the same as:

Q: "While engaged, can I attack another squadron, even if it is not engaging me?"

A: "Yes, but only if it is at distance 1."

Equally, Snipe does not say "While you are not engaged, you may attack other squadrons at distance 2".

There simply is nothing at all in the rules, FAQ or FFG emails to sugges that Snipe may not be used while engaged.

Engagement only prevents:

1. Movement
2. Attacks on ships

I agree with the limitations of engagement on snipe. It also makes sense thematically. As long as the squad doesn't have anything to deal with it can snipe from range. But when engaged they are caught in a dog fight, they can't line up a shot.

I agree with you about how it should work thematically but it is not supported by the rules or at least I didn't see how yet.

About its balance I don't know. The new wave don't arrive until this Friday here. We have this thread about how snipe should or shouldn't work, we have threads about defender spam and cloak. But I didn't see a thread talking about how awesome or disappointing snipe is.

Played with it a couple times, Snipe is pretty good.

Thanks. At least I have it as long as I noticed that the new stuff won't arrive until 20. I am so Vader at the end of the episode III.

There simply is nothing at all in the rules, FAQ or FFG emails to sugges that Snipe may not be used while engaged.

But it doesn't make any sense.

Being engaged basically means you're "dogfighting" i.e. you're jinking and manoeuvring which is why you can't attack ships i.e you're too busy trying not to get hit to line up on the ship.

It is the same reason why you can't attack ships is why you wouldn't be able target anything else other than fighters that are close to you in dogfighting range.

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

There simply is nothing at all in the rules, FAQ or FFG emails to sugges that Snipe may not be used while engaged.

But it doesn't make any sense.

Being engaged basically means you're "dogfighting" i.e. you're jinking and manoeuvring which is why you can't attack ships i.e you're too busy trying not to get hit to line up on the ship.

It is the same reason why you can't attack ships is why you wouldn't be able target anything else other than fighters that are close to you in dogfighting range.

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

That's all fine and dandy, but the current rules do not support what you are arguing.

If FFG comes and says you can't snipe while engaged then we have a rule. But we don't have that and we cannot assume what they intended to happen. They could have easily wrote on the card you can't snipe while engaged, but they didn't. So I could assume that I can snipe while engaged, but I don't need to because the rules allow it.

There simply is nothing at all in the rules, FAQ or FFG emails to sugges that Snipe may not be used while engaged.

But it doesn't make any sense.

Being engaged basically means you're "dogfighting" i.e. you're jinking and manoeuvring which is why you can't attack ships i.e you're too busy trying not to get hit to line up on the ship.

It is the same reason why you can't attack ships is why you wouldn't be able target anything else other than fighters that are close to you in dogfighting range.

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

Ohh, RPG discussion. May i? May i?

But the Pilot is so skilled and experienced that he can attack squadrons at bigger range than normal pilots can. For him the range 2 is the dogfight range, and he can attack any squadrons at these ranges.

On the other hand it does not work on ships, because he is a dogfight pilot that is used to fight against other squadrons.

Fair enough?

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

Option A: FFG knew what they were working on, and intended for the interaction to work the way you claim it does, and yet they did not think of wording Snipe, the FAQ entry or their email answer in such a way to make this clear.

Option B: The interaction does not work the way you claim it does, and instead works the way the rules, the FAQ entry and their emails say it does.

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

Option A: FFG knew what they were working on, and intended for the interaction to work the way you claim it does, and yet they did not think of wording Snipe, the FAQ entry or their email answer in such a way to make this clear.

Being limited to attacking other squads at range 1 while engaged seams pretty clear to me.

The same as Jamming fields always being on.

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

Option A: FFG knew what they were working on, and intended for the interaction to work the way you claim it does, and yet they did not think of wording Snipe, the FAQ entry or their email answer in such a way to make this clear.

Being limited to attacking other squads at range 1 while engaged seams pretty clear to me.

The same as Jamming fields always being on.

Well its true that the rules are pretty clear.

How so many of you came the same conclusion with absolutely nothing to base it on is whats confusing.

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

Option A: FFG knew what they were working on, and intended for the interaction to work the way you claim it does, and yet they did not think of wording Snipe, the FAQ entry or their email answer in such a way to make this clear.

Being limited to attacking other squads at range 1 while engaged seams pretty clear to me.

The same as Jamming fields always being on.

If you take the FAQ with RAW do the same with the RRG. If you start intending things from the RRG (and we already have the RAI of the RRG) we could play with the FAQ with RAI too.

I think it is easy. If you want to snipe while engaged you can do it right now. If you want to disallow it you will need a FAQ.

Has the thematic argument any sense? Of course it does but theme is not a rule. Do your house rule. It could be great but playing officially I thing it is pretty clear. I am not a judge and I probably never ever will be one but if (IF) I was a judge I would say "yes, you can".

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

Option A: FFG knew what they were working on, and intended for the interaction to work the way you claim it does, and yet they did not think of wording Snipe, the FAQ entry or their email answer in such a way to make this clear.

Being limited to attacking other squads at range 1 while engaged seams pretty clear to me.

The same as Jamming fields always being on.

Interesting that you should choose Jamming Fields as your example. A card that had to be errata'd to make it work as intended. Because, yes, JF was quite clearly not always on. Hence the errata to make it so.

It may well be that Snipe is intended to be limited by engagement. But just like Jamming Fields, it's going to take an errata or rules update to do it, because it's not even ambiguous right now. There are just a vocal few who don't like it thematically.

FYI at the Regional held at the FFG Event Center on 1/7 which Michael Gernes judged, the ruling was that so long as you were not engaged by a squadron with escort, you could use Snipe. Take that for what you will.

FYI at the Regional held at the FFG Event Center on 1/7 which Michael Gernes judged, the ruling was that so long as you were not engaged by a squadron with escort, you could use Snipe. Take that for what you will.

Did you attend?

I did, but dropped after the first round as I was feeling ill.

You got the most important thing. An answer to this cursed thread.

Sorry you had to drop. That's never fun.

Yea but it would have been less fun for me and my opponents with the way I was feeling.

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

Option A: FFG knew what they were working on, and intended for the interaction to work the way you claim it does, and yet they did not think of wording Snipe, the FAQ entry or their email answer in such a way to make this clear.

Option B: The interaction does not work the way you claim it does, and instead works the way the rules, the FAQ entry and their emails say it does.

A voice of reason in a desert of personal interpretation, to the extend of completely ignoring entire rule passages to fit the own ideas.

FYI at the Regional held at the FFG Event Center on 1/7 which Michael Gernes judged, the ruling was that so long as you were not engaged by a squadron with escort, you could use Snipe. Take that for what you will.

Silver Crane killed Ben. Bless Silver Crane.

Someone needs to link this thread to the Wikipedia page for "Confirmation Bias".

Being engaged basically means you're "dogfighting" i.e. you're jinking and manoeuvring which is why you can't attack ships i.e you're too busy trying not to get hit to line up on the ship.

It is the same reason why you can't attack ships is why you wouldn't be able target anything else other than fighters that are close to you in dogfighting range.

The FAQ may have predated Snipe but I'm confident the people at FFG knew what they were already working on and that is why the FAQ specifies range 1.

Buy the time a company releases a product be it a car, computer, phone, game expansion they are already working on the next model/expansion or maybe the model/expansion after the next.

Engagement is a game mechanic that allows fighters to protect ships. Escort is a mechanic to allow squadrons to protect other squadrons. You don't need to use the anti-ship engagement rules to protect other squadrons as there is already a mechanic for that. If you want to protect your squadrons from Snipe, you need to get use your Escorts, just like in every other case.

If FFG know about Snipe when they wrote the FAQ, why didn't they also reword Heavy? As I pointed out, Heavy is exactly the same in Wave 5 as it was in Wave 1. It will allow attacks on ships but NOT attacks using Snipe!

The engagement rules are written in such a way as to prepare for a situation (via various special rules) where a squadron might be engaged but still have no legal squadron target. In that case, they can attack ships. It has nothing to do with forcing squadrons to attack at range 1 (which, as I also pointed out, would make special abilities that activate "instead of attacking" not actually work if engaged)

When did they Errata page 6 of the rules?

Under engagement:

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

You have to shoot at an engaged squadron. Since engagement is to range one and snipe is at range two you can't snipe while engaged.

Since the faq clearly states that you do not have to shoot at an engaged squadron?

People are treating engaged like it's escort.

The only time you have to shoot at an engaged squadron is if you want to shoot at a ship. It doesn't say you have to shoot at an engaged squadron if you want to shoot at a squadron. In fact, the faq specifically states that when attacking a squadron, you don't have to choose a squadron engaged with you. You can pick a squadron that for the faq example, isn't engaged with you.

If one can attack a squadron not engaged with you when attacking squadrons, then there is no limitation on snipe doing the same.

Engagement is not escort.

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.

What happens if you add to this question a ship within anti ship range of the squadron? Do you now have to target the engaged squadron if possible due to the engagement rules or can you still choose?

The reason I ask is that as a player, I would say I'm shooting at the ship because I know I can't, I'm engaged. So what triggers the part of engagement where a squadron that wants to target a ship but is engaged must target an engaged squadron if possible? I as the attacking squadron player would never announce an attack on the ship if that limited me to only being able to target the engaged squadron. If the engagement rule of requiring an attack on an engaged squadron if possible is triggered simply by being in range of possibly attacking a ship, then it's not about what I announce as a target.

I'm not sure I'm explaining this correctly, but what are your thoughts when adding the presence of a ship within range of antiship in the above faq example? Does it affect what the target must be and why per the engagement rules? This is something i've rarely encountered and pretty much played as having to target the engaged fighter, but that's due to simplicity than a complete confidence in my understanding of how the rule must be applied.

Gernes ruled (kinda) Reiryc. The battle is over(ish). We can lay down our arms (close by). But unless he FAQ's it differently then he ruled at the regionals, which seems unlikely, then you can snipe from engagment provided escort doesnt enter the picture.