On 2/1/2017 at 9:11 AM, RampancyTW said:

Bolded for emphasis.

FCS is a "may" effect. ACD is a "may" effect. Whisper's ability is a "may" effect. Hence being able to defer any of those. According to the timing chart, all non-attack things have to be resolved before all attack things. Correct.

Once you get to attack things, you have two effects. One says immediately, the other does not. Being able to trigger gunner after a cannon shot that HITS, violates the text of the gunner card, no? You're no longer immediately performing an attack after an attack that misses, you're immediately performing it after an attack that hits.

Can you point me to somewhere in the rules or the FAQ where it specifies that "immediately after" and "after" are the same thing, timing wise? I understand what you're asserting, but can you point me to where we're told to ignore "immediately" timings?

Just tried to find it and can't. This question has come up before, recently and in that original post Frank Brooks had responded to a question asked to him via email. The correct sequence is Primary attack (misses) which triggers both effects simultaneously. The player then resolves the IG-88B effect (cannon shot) followed by the gunner shot (primary) since Gunner states "you cannot perform another attack this round". Whereas IG-B doesn't include that text.

Both cards state "you may" and since neither specify "before/during/after" they may be resolved in any order. If anyone has better search foo skills than mine (rubbish when looking for anything other than bass guitar stuff) if they could like to the original thread that would help people out. Although unrelated, by way of illustration... Consider a different scenario, Wampa firing at Countdown. Wampas ability states "at the start of the compare dice step" while Countdown states "during the compare results step" which are timing triggers, in this case Wampa triggers before Countdown. As for immediately, it's really an erroneous word which shouldn't have been included on the card in the first place. Since immediately after you miss an attack with gunner onboard you pick up the dice...... having said "I trigger gunner" or words to that effect...

While the haters may hat on the combo, consider, it only works on one ship for scum since none of their ships aside from the YV can take 2 crew. People have tried using Dengar crew to reroll hits into misses enabling you to trigger the double tap on a second (priority) target. Me, I like scum but I honestly would fancy trying to set this combo up repeatedly but I won't doubt it's effectiveness against certain lists. The combo has been around since before worlds and no such lists made top 16, which to me suggest while it's potent the top players don't consider it efficient enough.

4 hours ago, DailyRich said:

I see the idea behind this, but I'm somewhat leery about using Dengar to throw away an attack that I know I rolled hits on for two attacks I *might* roll hits on. It's not like the initial attack is going to strip tokens, because your opponent would be crazy to spend any knowing what's coming.

Dengar works on all attacks, it isn't a once per round card. Also with bossk you can turn a crit from mangler into 2 hits and from the primary attack if you roll one.

Also you attack with ig88 first to strip tokens, first attack with a tractor beam. If that hits great for bossk, if it doesn't attack either with the tractor beam again to keep stripping tokens or mangler for damage. Then follow up with bossk

I think it is something that should be correct

about the third sub phase (the "iii" one in the 9 phase) , it should not let both gunner and Ig's abilities to activate in the same time , because the attacker had to choose only 1 of those two , so if he choose Ig , and according to the timing chart , does gunner triggers in the next attack?

Yes. The next attack being the IGB attack. And note, it *resolves* then, but its trigger has already occurred so it doesn't need to trigger again.

On 2/6/2017 at 9:23 AM, Black Bart said:

about the third sub phase (the "iii" one in the 9 phase) , it should not let both gunner and Ig's abilities to activate in the same time , because the attacker had to choose only 1 of those two , so if he choose Ig , and according to the timing chart , does gunner triggers in the next attack?

9i says choose ONE of your abilities. 9iii says that any abilities not chosen may resolve after the next attack. Once you decide to use one ability, you are starting a new attack right away. Then, following the attack sequence, when you come to step 9 again follow the sub steps and choose your other ability. IG and Gunner do not activate at the same time.

19 minutes ago, Whispering Hawk said:

9i says choose ONE of your abilities. 9iii says that any abilities not chosen may resolve after the next attack. Once you decide to use one ability, you are starting a new attack right away. Then, following the attack sequence, when you come to step 9 again follow the sub steps and choose your other ability. IG and Gunner do not activate at the same time.

They are "triggered" at the same time, by, in this case "attack does not hit".

As you rightly say however, they are resolved singly. If (RaW) your opponent resolves the Primary Attack triggered by Gunner's text then you CANNOT resolve IG-88B's cannon attack do to the wording at the end of Gunner "you cannot perform another attack this round". If however the Cannon attack via IG-88B is resolved first, the Gunner primary attack will still be resolved once the Cannon attack has been resolved since they had the same trigger condition.

Just think about the game state when Gunner was released. It was pretty much the first card of its kind, so immediately after seemed appropriate to ensure that players didn't try to fire, miss, fire with all the rest of their ships, then have gunner trigger and fire a final shot (RAW argument being that if it just said after, then the attack would be after, just a lot further after than originally intended). This was long before a timing chart was ever released as well.

As far as the combo goes, for anyone who is on the "this should be FAQ'd to not work" bandwagon, consider this. The setup requires a YV-666 with Gunner and IG-88D as crew and a Mangler Cannon (Tractor technically, but it doesn't cause damage, and the others are only one damage, so who cares), paired with an IG-88B Aggressor flying beside. That combo alone (using a Slaver as cheapest YV) costs at least 75 points. That's 3/4 of a list dedicated to this one combo on a YV, ships that notoriously go down fast. You get two attacks out of them (because they are missing with one to trigger the two) in a turn, and you get one from IG (if one misses, then it misses and gets the extra attack only if he has a cannon). So you are getting 3 attacks that can cause damage per turn maximum out of this list, and in order for the ships to be outfitted to perform well, those are likely to be the only two ships on the list. That means you are dealing with 3 attacks per turn that can cause damage. How is that any different than a 3 ship list?

It's a cool combo, but in order for it to work, you have to have a very specific list. So I wouldn't call this an OP list by any means, and anyone who thinks this is going to be game-defining hasn't seen how quickly YV-666s go down lately.

On 2/4/2017 at 1:32 PM, Stormbringer1986 said:

hi there, this is my first post (sorry if it's a long one) and i have been pointed to this thread because yesterday i played exactly this combo.

TL;DR VERSION: i played this for the first time 2 days ago and my friend doesn't want to believe me this is legit, what should i do if another opponents asks for solid proof i am not screwing him? /TL;DR

i was fielding Boosk with dengar, ig88d crew and gunner + IG88B VS a friend of mine with his own rebels (Biggs, Miranda Doni, Ashoka).

as soon as i missed purposedly my first shot against his Biggs, i patiently and seriously introduced him to the card combo, refreshed to him in multiple cases 2.4.3 FAQs, the attack timing chart, step 8 to 9 through the little box after the 9, showed him our nation's (we're from italy btw) primary xwing facebook group talking about this and asserting it was legit, which started discussing it from this post here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/XWingTMG/comments/5mvtur/tennessee_regional_battle_report_top_8_cut/

which was my very reason for trying out that list.

the part right after squadron list in the link is the mail exchange between the player and allegedly someone from FFG which responded. i get this is a reddit post and anyone could forge up a fake email, that is why someone else in this thread already said people should not rely on interview clarifications on the rules, but that they should put out something official...

my opponent is a very rational person, never had any problems with him and is a very calm dude, he has even some months of experience playing the game more than me and he almost regularly beats my ass with what i call "imba rebel ****" like bb-8 triple action with PTL or other crazy things these cards let us do in this game.

well, this time HE WAS ENRAGED. he spent like 40 minutes hearing me repeating calmly my explaination, objecting and then closing himself in silence looking up infos on his phone.

i told him from the start of the argument, since he seemed to not aggree, that i had no problem - even if that meant thrashing half of my card and list - to play the rest of the game WITHOUT my double trigger, but i insisted that it was legit and that i could get he didn't have to like any of it. anyway after he spent some other 20 minutes looking up rules on his phone, just to get on with our game, i convinced him to go on finish the game without triggering gunner after IG88D(B).

i ended up winning anyway, since luck wanted to reward my understanding and fairplay.

he left still full of WRATH saying FFG must patch this thing, and that if this is legit he will not play again and that he will wait for them to "FAQ THIS **** BECAUSE IT'S NOT RIGHT" to play another game.

i said to him that rebels had much of this same **** somewhere else, and imperials and scum too, in the end i said to him "mate, do you imagine people playing from wave ONE? what could they have been through? which kind of **** they saw happen on the table? let's not think THIS ONE THAT HELPS ME INSTEAD OF YOU is the game breaker..."

it was useless. up until now he is steadfast on this. the argument is over but he still thinks this is wrong.

now tell me, since i want to play this in local tournaments, what should i do to make the opponent accept this as a legit ruling if he gets angry like my friend?

thank you and see you next time

Before an event approach a TO and confirm this just in case. Then if anyone got issues call the TO to tell them to either get lost and give you 100-0 or shut up and play

@Vitalis seems legit ^^' problem about torunament organizer in my store he's a guy who still hasn't even learnt the game, so players are more knowledgable than him in these matters, but anyway thank you for your reccomandation, surely i will rememeber this when i get to a bigger scene with more prepared TOs

@Raven19528 THANK YOU! as you said: the attack and even damage output on this list archetype - that has to be very strictly built as you described - is the same of any other ace-sized dogfight list. anyone who thinks this has to be FAQed is just basically but*hurt

BTW yesterday had a rematch with same guy& same lists, guy accepted to play with the working rule and he won while I ill-piloted Boosk out of the field on my part while he was brutally shooting him down without a single miss. EVEN STILL he had to repeat that this combo has to be "CONCEDED" that it's WRONG and that he or his faction (rebels) have NOTHING even remotely similarly wrong.

I got quite exhausted by that kind of talk and even pointed out he was playing (among others, see: Biggs and Miranda) a tie fighter SPECIFICALLY REFITTED TO WORK BETTER FOR REBELS (ashoka on sabine's tie) with +1 crew slot (which the tie didn't have) while sporting the same flying prowess of an empire tie, with a crew thought exactly for that ship that would get released the following wave, carrying bombs that could land and explode ON ACTIVATION (also released the very wave before the ship), that could do all this while NO-ONE could target her until she shot first because she had the title...WHY SHOULD MY GUNNER+IG BE MORE OF A CHEAP COMBO THAN THAT UNFAIR bulls**t, FOR ONE?

he calmly said it wasn't even comparable.

screw that.

You need to appoint a judge that is NOT that TO because you MUST have someone who you can ask about any rulings, and that person MUST KNOW THE GAME!

16 hours ago, Parravon said:

You need to appoint a judge that is NOT that TO because you MUST have someone who you can ask about any rulings, and that person MUST KNOW THE GAME!

i know, I'd like to. but our store is a small store in a small town in italy, in which even the store owner hasn't gotten much into the game yet, save for selling it (while he is a lot more into MTG).

i read that even FFG hasn't actually done more than speak about a judge program to let people subscribe to a course that makes them officially judges in US, so it's safe to assume that in other countries the situation is even worse: unfortunately most of the time that happens to be the case.

FFG should at least start tracking people and store events with a card and internet IDs, like DCI does. then they could, dunno, make a e-learning judge course that renders one able to be an accounted legit judge for stores... something like that.

2 hours ago, Stormbringer1986 said:

i know, I'd like to. but our store is a small store in a small town in italy, in which even the store owner hasn't gotten much into the game yet, save for selling it (while he is a lot more into MTG).

i read that even FFG hasn't actually done more than speak about a judge program to let people subscribe to a course that makes them officially judges in US, so it's safe to assume that in other countries the situation is even worse: unfortunately most of the time that happens to be the case.

FFG should at least start tracking people and store events with a card and internet IDs, like DCI does. then they could, dunno, make a e-learning judge course that renders one able to be an accounted legit judge for stores... something like that.

Read the rules and edge cases extensively and step forward to become one. Here you fixed the situation

You can be a player and a judge in a small store tournament. It's a much better solution than having a guy that doesn't know the game trying to make rules decisions for the group.

yea you are both right.

problem is... i wanna play xD

usually in these household tournaments, when doubts arise, people ask collectively and the more experienced players give their reasoning.

most of the times players accept the explaination from someone perceived as more experienced, other times... well, **** happens as in the former case. depends on the fairplay and behaviour of the players, as usual...

The judge's ruling is final, and if all players can agree on electing a judge (and assistant judge) from the players present, then they must abide by their own elected judge's ruling. To be a judge, you need to know the game rules very well, so that any questions that arise can be dealt with in a timely and correct manner.

By being a judge also doesn't exclude you from playing in the tournament. You appoint an assistant judge to make any rulings that you might not be able to, like a game you are actually playing in. I've done it before and it's not a hassle in a small tournament. You just need to be well prepared. The last tournament that I judged and played in, I required the players to email me their list and gave them a deadline of 1:00pm the day before and told them they would all be posted on the club facebook page immediately following the deadline. I also said that because I was playing as well, my list would be posted at 12:00pm, so they theoretically had an hour to peruse my list and make any changes before emailing theirs. This meant that I couldn't be accused of entering a list after seeing everyone else's. Most chose to email early anyway, and it gave me a chance to check their lists before game day and thus save time prior to playing.

You actually can have a tournament organiser that does not know the rules, but all he does is arrange the game draws and declares start and finish times for the tournament rounds. The judge is the one who makes any rules decisions. If you take that role away from the TO, you should have a successful tournament.

thanks @Parravon this insight will be very helpful and i will most surely propose it to TO someday (for now we are too small but as soon as we get bigger an official judge will be necessary)

I recently "found" this combo, wasn't sure that it worked, but search an answer and understand it.

But how to make it clear for someone that doesn't think it right.

A lot of people (mostly veterans of the game) think that once you didn't choose gunner, the triggered effect isn't valide, exept if you miss with IG shot.

They don't think/believe that the effects "stacks" and is still valide after the IG shot, even if you show them Frank response to this combo...

I even demonstrate with the exemple on the FAQ with initiative's Dengar Vs IG

IG shot and miss.

Trigger Dengar + IG

Dengar shot first, back to step 9 of Dengar, but IG didn't shoot, so he can't activate his effect.

Dengar counter IG 2nd Shot.... Strange isn't it ?

And they still doesn't get it....

Still works with updated FAQ right

On 2/1/2017 at 3:11 AM, RampancyTW said:

Can you point me to somewhere in the rules or the FAQ where it specifies that "immediately after" and "after" are the same thing, timing wise? I understand what you're asserting, but can you point me to where we're told to ignore "immediately" timings?

I can now:

FAQ, pg 5:

"Immediately"
Immediately is used as emphasis on some cards, it is purely reminder text and has no distinct game effect.

1 hour ago, spacelion said:

Still works with updated FAQ right

Yes

Quote

If a player has simultaneous effects that resolve from the same trigger, that player resolves the entirety of one effect (and any subsequent effects from that trigger) before resolving the others.