CDAT, you might not be able to tell if it was an intentional design feature.

But don't worry, because I can. And I will use my super powers for you now.

This was not intentional. The designers never had any intention of rendering ships with a command value of 1 practically useless, and they never thought players would be so silly as to try and interpret the rules that way.

So there you go.

I would like a little clarification for the final battle. When you have 6 players on on table, how are the planning stages allowed to decided.

I cant see a conversation in front of the opposing team where you say ok this is what each and everyone of us is going to do, since this would allow the other team to just sit and wait. And once they heard how the other team is going to move and play they make a counter to that play.

second I cant see everyone just going "cowboy" and forget what your other team members are doing. otherwise you are going to have a lot of ships just ramming into each other

and finally third since our upgrades affect each others beside the commanders how can we plan without giving away our strategy to the other team

Generally, the same way you conduct your strategy during the planning phase of the campaign itself.

I can see from your handle that you're a bit paranoid, but unless you're playing in a super competitive campaign, your opponents are either unlikely to care one way or the other if your team decides to hold a little informal 'huddle' before the game or inbetween each round. It's actually likely that the other team would appreciate an opportunity to coordinate as well.

As for the cowboy issue, I can only see that being a problem if you're supremely unlucky with teammates. Remind whomever is the Grand Admiral of your team to try to get players to play with group cohesion. The stakes are especially high during the AOA, so maybe try to help the other members of your team see those points.

Really, I don't think any of these concerns necessarily needs to be solved by rules, but more actually by communication and coordination.

As for the not giving away of strategy, unless your opponents are morons, they're likely to know what sorts of upgrades and combos you'll be bringing / are capable of. Use your little huddle as a way to refine and adapt your strat over the course of the battle.

Have you experienced any of these issues yourself, or are you just paranoid?

Remember, it's supposed to be fun , not rules intensive. Salt to taste.

we are having this conversation now the leader of the opposing team says that all conversations have to be open for everyone to hear. To me a side huddle makes sense. But he wants the whole thing so everyone can hear not passing of notes or such. To me if we played this kind of true to real life we would have secure communications so that we could sort of plan our attack hense coming here to see how others are dealing with this issue

Yeah, I'd definitely bring those concerns to the attention of the group.

No reason for that to happen.

Is the opponent fleet the ones in the lead in the campaign, by chance?

no

59 minutes ago, Paranoidsmurf said:

we are having this conversation now the leader of the opposing team says that all conversations have to be open for everyone to hear. To me a side huddle makes sense. But he wants the whole thing so everyone can hear not passing of notes or such. To me if we played this kind of true to real life we would have secure communications so that we could sort of plan our attack hense coming here to see how others are dealing with this issue

All game information is open information. But your Grand Admiral should realize that there is no reason to expect players to openly advise the opposing side of your plan. Tell him that you won't follow unless he and his team also loudly and openly discuss their plans in public with you there, including any discussion of which bases to build. And that if he doesn't change the rules, that you'll consider any subsequent private conversations between his team to be collusion to cheat per the rules he's established. That should get him reconsidering real quick.

In short, call his bluff. If he doesn't agree, but his teammates do, suggest that he drop out and another player join who is more willing to play in the spirit of the campaign.

So maybe this question has been asked and answered already but here it goes.

When you declare a hyperspace retreat you forfit your command dial but does your ship still attack and move? Or is everyone on your ship stopping to hit the hyperspace buttons symiltaniously?

59 minutes ago, Rune Taq said:

So maybe this question has been asked and answered already but here it goes.

When you declare a hyperspace retreat you forfit your command dial but does your ship still attack and move? Or is everyone on your ship stopping to hit the hyperspace buttons symiltaniously?

You still have an action, you just don't get the dial. You can still use commands from Tokens etc.

Glad to see there's some commitment finally on some of the most asked questions.

So which takes precedence? Book or Map?

Map I believe was the answer.

On 2/1/2017 at 6:02 PM, Paranoidsmurf said:

we are having this conversation now the leader of the opposing team says that all conversations have to be open for everyone to hear. To me a side huddle makes sense. But he wants the whole thing so everyone can hear not passing of notes or such. To me if we played this kind of true to real life we would have secure communications so that we could sort of plan our attack hense coming here to see how others are dealing with this issue

It's called comint and noooopppppeeee.

On 2/1/2017 at 6:02 PM, Paranoidsmurf said:

we are having this conversation now the leader of the opposing team says that all conversations have to be open for everyone to hear. To me a side huddle makes sense. But he wants the whole thing so everyone can hear not passing of notes or such. To me if we played this kind of true to real life we would have secure communications so that we could sort of plan our attack hense coming here to see how others are dealing with this issue

Offer him a compromise, that your team has a pregame strategy (which you developed in secret) but you're not going to make secret plans going forward. That said you're not going to shout and you're not going to whisper. If he still has a problem, either put it to a vote, or submit a detailed PowerPoint entitled "our plan" and refuse to play until he turns one in of his own, and demand any deviations to be submitted and pre-cleared ahead of time.

Another question: if the armed station has no target can it still use it's "attack" to basically pass an activation?

3 hours ago, JJs Juggernaut said:

Another question: if the armed station has no target can it still use it's "attack" to basically pass an activation?

Even without an FAQ, I don't see why not.

The "Attack" rules basically state you Declare your attack before measuring to see if you have your target in range or not... In fact, you don't actually know you have a target in range until you've Declared your attack and then measured the Range....

Its the same rules precedence that let's Jendon have someone Double Tap, even if he himself doesn't have an enemy at Distance 1.

20 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Even without an FAQ, I don't see why not.

The "Attack" rules basically state you Declare your attack before measuring to see if you have your target in range or not... In fact, you don't actually know you have a target in range until you've Declared your attack and then measured the Range....

Its the same rules precedence that let's Jendon have someone Double Tap, even if he himself doesn't have an enemy at Distance 1.

That makes sense for that portion of the question. We had a second question come up as well.

If you are out of ships can you still use the station to attack?

question comes from the wording "instead of activating a ship." It begs the question do you need a ship to activate the "instead", or is it a new option. I don't know if we've had a similar ruling yet.

Well, if you're going to throw secondary questions after the Fact

But, even then. Clear-Cut- ish

A Station is not a ship. A Station consists of a Station Token and a Station Card. This is a definition in the CC Rulebook. Much the same as "Ship" is a definition in the RRG.

Station are treated as ships when resolving effects .

Stations are treated as a ship with one hull zone while it is attacking or defending.

However. Stations are not Ships. They are Stations.

So if you lose all of your ships, but your Station and Squadrons are still alive - you lose the game (still). As it is not a Ship. It is a Station.

So at least in that unasked question, we have an answer. The question after the fact however - Yes, I agree that may need at least a wording clarification.

Instead is one of those words that are not defined in the Rulebook, and thus, we must look towards an English Language Definition. Which can be taken as "in place of a ship activation" (ie, you need to have a ship to activate instead of), or "when you could activate a ship" (ie, you don't need a ship, just a 'slot' of activation) are both legitimate artifacts.

Of course, defining the word Instead would also answer, and cause other problems... The single biggest one that I can think of, off the top of my head, that uses instead in its rules, is Rapid Launch Bays . And we know how fun that thread is now, don't we?

TL'DR version: I don't know , and can only surmise the answer to the followup question. That one could do with an answer. But your first question, (and a secondary unrelated one to boot!) T o tally Answered

Yeah, pretty much the conclusion we came to, can very much be taken either way. We rolled a die to determine how our CC would treat it, haha

Based on FFG's LCGs you would need a ship to trigger the replacement effect, but obviously this is no LCG...

I think it's pretty clear: you lose when you're out of ships, not activations.

36 minutes ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

I think it's pretty clear: you lose when you're out of ships, not activations.

But that was not the question.....

46 minutes ago, JJs Juggernaut said:

But that was not the question.....

The question isn't " If you are out of ships can you still use the station to attack? "
Because if you're out of ships you lose. Game over.

15 minutes ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

The question isn't " If you are out of ships can you still use the station to attack? "
Because if you're out of ships you lose. Game over.

Guess my wording was a little ambiguous. The question is "if you are out of ships to activate can you still use the station to attack." IE, I have less activations then my opponent and I finish all my ships before he moves one of his into range of the station.

Thank you for the attempted, if curt, answer.

2 hours ago, JJs Juggernaut said:

Guess my wording was a little ambiguous. The question is "if you are out of ships to activate can you still use the station to attack." IE, I have less activations then my opponent and I finish all my ships before he moves one of his into range of the station.

Thank you for the attempted, if curt, answer.

My guess on the way it is written is no, if you do not use it before your last ship you do not get to use it that turn. But this is just my best guess as there are other cards that just as clear to me and the mind readers know better than what is printed.

Any word on re-balancing Hyperlane Raid and Show of Force (and station assault)?

The Unarmed Stations are hilariously easy to destroy, while hyperlane raid requires a lot to happen for the Rebels to get some money out of it.