14 minutes ago, Reinholt said:

Guessing is not an appropriate mechanic for a grand strategy game occurring in space with advanced sensor gear.

While I'm sympathetic to the "let's just resolve squadrons as quickly as possible, whatever is required" argument, I don't find the "guessing/eyeballing is bad for squadrons" argument carries much water when maneuvering ships well requires a fair amount of experience and guesswork at eyeballing ranges and final arc orientations. Expecting to be able to position squadrons precisely where you want them down to the millimeter with no guesswork and then "well hopefully that works, let's see" is how ship movement is handled seems disjunctive.*

*Please be nice to my $5 word, I saved up all week for it.

^ applause

24 minutes ago, Reinholt said:

Edit: I also meant to quote Thraug but I am on my phone. My bad.

Strongly against.

Armada should not be a game that is primarily a test of eyesight and the ability to guess based on visual impression. One of my good friends who plays is blind as a bat without his glasses, and only okay with them. He shouldn't be penalized.

Guessing is not an appropriate mechanic for a grand strategy game occurring in space with advanced sensor gear.

Ship movement is a guess, you can place the tool and look at variable end positions, but without actually locking it in and moving it, you eyeballed where it was going to end up being placed.

Ending up with arcs where you want them is also a guess, a combination of your eyeball of potential move point, and your opponent moving also.

I think perhaps you have been playing a different game.

I don't have any real issues with the proposed change as I am not seeing how it will be any different than what happens currently. I mean outside getting placed for an alpha strike, usually your squads have more move than they need to reach where you want, for example, I have targets falling inbetween range 3-4 and my squadron is speed 5, I show my opponent the range measurement, so he can verify it is well below my total move allowance, and then measure range 1 of the target and place my squadron accordingly inside that band.

I'm surprised nobody has brought up the "shaky hands" or other motor skills impairment argument yet. If the rule means what some of you seem to think it means (which I don't necessarily agree with), suddenly perfect hand-eye co-ordination is a requirement for good play.

Perfect hand eye co-ordination? really? the hyperbole train never stops around here.

You clearly have not spend much time playing with people with disabilities.

EDIT: ...but fine, OK, my choice of words may have been somewhat dramatic.

9 minutes ago, DiabloAzul said:

I'm surprised nobody has brought up the "shaky hands" or other motor skills impairment argument yet. If the rule means what some of you seem to think it means (which I don't necessarily agree with), suddenly perfect hand-eye co-ordination is a requirement for good play.

What part are you referring to? Removing your hands from the squad or measuring a million different ways before placing (which is illegal per the RRG, but this new tourny reg may overrule that). Or both?

14 hours ago, Mogrok said:

well there is already a tool on the table for the sqn movement as you move it along its length...so you can't use another tool.

that would also be the tool in the one hand.

I think the problem they are trying to address is the moving a fighter its not in range to attack a target its moved back then its moved again later but now its in range thing. We had players do this crap in other games when they were trying to charge and could not reach the first time then move back. Its really lame watching someone pull this and they really don't think the other players don't see it as a crap move.

14 hours ago, tgall said:

Sooooo I guess I can move a squadron, keep my hand on it, flip the tool around to then shuffle to distance 1 of thing I'm going after? Maybe?

*blah*

If ever there was a **** move tourny ruling/clarification gentlemen (and ladies) I think this is it.

I totally respect anyone that communicates as they are moving what they are trying to do and adjusts accordingly presuming space/time/physics allow for it. It just seemed like the gentlemanly/gentlewomanly/gentlebeing thing to do.

After reading this addition, it just feels like they are trying to remove that element.

I mean if we wanna go ripping arms off and all as part of squadron movement, I guess we'll see how it plays.

Like I've said this is actually how I have pretty much played from day one. And how I have seen 90% of people play it. Not seeing an issue. And for those saying well you have to place the tool on the table blah blah blah, c'mon at best 50% of the time is there actually room for the tool on the table. If your so worried about people "possibly cheating" by losing their original position just ask them to mark it first. This is a lot of overreaction to a small improvement. I can't see how this is a problem over how others have been doing it.

56 minutes ago, DiabloAzul said:

I'm surprised nobody has brought up the "shaky hands" or other motor skills impairment argument yet. If the rule means what some of you seem to think it means (which I don't necessarily agree with), suddenly perfect hand-eye co-ordination is a requirement for good play.

No it's not at all. And seriously for some of the "concerns" I'm seeing about this you would have to be a rules Nazi for them to be an issue. "What happens if you bump another squadron? Is it activated now? C'mon FFG!" For real? Seriously guys if you think that will be a thing I can't help you.

After chewing on this a bit more, I can see two possibilities.

1) There's some kind of errata coming that will make the purpose clearer. I think this unlikely, but conceivable, and it would explain this.

2) This is much less of a big deal than we're making it out to be, and it's just there to introduce a very well-defined end of your turn to prevent the kind-of take backsies I've run into before. My opponent moves a squadron to take my bait, I reach for the super sneaky Interceptor that was waiting for him to do that, and then he's suddenly "not done yet." Shady, yes, but without clearly-defined you are finished with your turn criteria, hard to call out.

1 hour ago, DiabloAzul said:

You clearly have not spend much time playing with people with disabilities.

EDIT: ...but fine, OK, my choice of words may have been somewhat dramatic.

I was just teasing man, you know, like good, or acceptable, or even OK, it has to be perfect, and that is all I was jesting about.

If someone has a genuine issue, then they have a genuine issue and you accommodate them as such, I don't think anyone would do anything less, however that is different than someone placing something, picking it up and placing it again.

18 hours ago, Captain Weather said:

Query, with the way it's worded would you not just be able to hold the squadron and measure with the other hand. Like I understand it would be a bit more difficult if you're pushing the limits of your movement, but say I'm well within my movement could you not just establish I can move anywhere in this general area and then just hold the squadron and measure with the one hand till your happy?

Because the rrg says the ruler must be in play for movement, and removing the ruler for movement indicates final position, effectively. So swapping tools implies final position. So premeasure all you like, but once you pick up anything but movement measurement itself is done.

3 minutes ago, Darthain said:

Because the rrg says the ruler must be in play for movement, and removing the ruler for movement indicates final position, effectively.

Citation?

And, if this is the case, why word it like this instead of, you know, "removing the ruler indicates final position"?

2 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

Citation?

And, if this is the case, why word it like this instead of, you know, "removing the ruler indicates final position"?

Squadron movement rrg pg 12 the 1st, 2nd, and the second last bullet all require rulers to be used for movement during the actual movement. This precludes other measuring.

This whole thread has me like

17 hours ago, Reinholt said:

This is just punishing for no reason. I totally get why the hand on squad rule works to prevent fiddling, but the reason for the fiddling was the one tool rule. Now if you can neither fiddle nor use more than one tool, you actually have to do all the precision measurement for every single squadron or leave a token at the starting point to re-measure over and over and over without removing the hand from the squad.

I believe the obvious intent of the rule change is that FFG never meant squadron movement to be ABOUT 'precision measurements'.

Of course, the easiest way to do that would be to just treat the resulting 'squadron blob' that emerges in a match AS a singular 'squadron blob'. IE., if you are at range 1 of a squadron in the melee for purposes of engagement, you are considered at range 1 of every other squadron in the blob, too. So there is no point to endlessly fiddling about with movement towards the edges of the blob, trying to get JUST in range of some things and JUST outside of others. Either you are moving into the melee (and then you are in it), or you are avoiding it (in which case you have no contact with any squadron in it).

If they were really keen on speeding up the "fiddly"-ness around squadron movement and play, you'd need to do it more like that then in trying to be overly-restrictive on when you can move your hand off the piece.

4 minutes ago, xanderf said:

I believe the obvious intent of the rule change is that FFG never meant squadron movement to be ABOUT 'precision measurements'.

Of course, the easiest way to do that would be to just treat the resulting 'squadron blob' that emerges in a match AS a singular 'squadron blob'. IE., if you are at range 1 of a squadron in the melee for purposes of engagement, you are considered at range 1 of every other squadron in the blob, too. So there is no point to endlessly fiddling about with movement towards the edges of the blob, trying to get JUST in range of some things and JUST outside of others. Either you are moving into the melee (and then you are in it), or you are avoiding it (in which case you have no contact with any squadron in it).

That sounds like it would be horrifically boring, extremely exploitable, would unnecessarily nerf the ability of fast squadrons to position optimally in the scrum, and would remove any semblance of tactics from the squadron game.

Plz no.

10 minutes ago, xanderf said:

I believe the obvious intent of the rule change is that FFG never meant squadron movement to be ABOUT 'precision measurements'.

Of course, the easiest way to do that would be to just treat the resulting 'squadron blob' that emerges in a match AS a singular 'squadron blob'. IE., if you are at range 1 of a squadron in the melee for purposes of engagement, you are considered at range 1 of every other squadron in the blob, too. So there is no point to endlessly fiddling about with movement towards the edges of the blob, trying to get JUST in range of some things and JUST outside of others. Either you are moving into the melee (and then you are in it), or you are avoiding it (in which case you have no contact with any squadron in it).

If they were really keen on speeding up the "fiddly"-ness around squadron movement and play, you'd need to do it more like that then in trying to be overly-restrictive on when you can move your hand off the piece.

Sooooooooo I can engage you with my Y-Wing that completes a chain of other Y-Wings all at range 1 of each other, and at the end sits Dutch, Wedge and Yavaris and with your rule, Dutch and Wedge can now shoot down the daisy chain to activate and kill everything else. Move 1 Y-Wing and now you can't shoot back.

48 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

Citation?

And, if this is the case, why word it like this instead of, you know, "removing the ruler indicates final position"?

I posted this on page 2 and it seems like everyone freaking out about this simply ignored it, didn't read it, or doesn't understand the rules.

Squadron Movement To move a squadron, its owner proceeds through the following steps:

1. Determine Course: Place the range ruler flat on the table with the distance side faceup. The center of the distance 1 end of the ruler must be in contact with the squadron’s base.

2. Move Squadron: Pick up the squadron and position it anywhere along the center of the ruler up to the line that marks the end of the distance band matching the squadron’s speed value. The squadron’s base cannot be placed beyond that line. Then remove the range ruler and place the squadron in the final position.

• A squadron cannot be placed with any part of its base overlapping another squadron or ship.

• A squadron can move through ships, squadrons, and obstacles without issue. Only its starting and final positions matter.

• If the range ruler cannot be placed in the play area due to other ships and squadrons being in the way, hold the range ruler above the play area and estimate the squadron’s final position.

• When a squadron moves, it can choose to remain in its current position and is still considered to have moved.

2 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Sooooooooo I can engage you with my Y-Wing that completes a chain of other Y-Wings all at range 1 of each other, and at the end sits Dutch, Wedge and Yavaris and with your rule, Dutch and Wedge can now shoot down the daisy chain to activate and kill everything else. Move 1 Y-Wing and now you can't shoot back.

^ this is what I meant by exploitable.

Don't forget the Biggs/YT-1300 ball back in GH range across the board from your bombers.

Just now, Undeadguy said:

2. Move Squadron: Pick up the squadron and position it anywhere along the center of the ruler up to the line that marks the end of the distance band matching the squadron’s speed value. The squadron’s base cannot be placed beyond that line. Then remove the range ruler and place the squadron in the final position.

This doesn't say that removing the range ruler defines the final position though. It says remove it and place the squadron in its final position. "Place the squadron in the final position" could very easily be interpreted to mean "now that you know the maximum movement distance, do all the little fiddling to get it where you want it."

4 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Sooooooooo I can engage you with my Y-Wing that completes a chain of other Y-Wings all at range 1 of each other, and at the end sits Dutch, Wedge and Yavaris and with your rule, Dutch and Wedge can now shoot down the daisy chain to activate and kill everything else. Move 1 Y-Wing and now you can't shoot back.

I think it should be pretty clear that a two-or-three line suggestion on a forum post about a direction to go in that would address the problem is not intended to be an exhaustive treatise and comprehensive new ruleset.

The issue with your example is the one Y-Wing 'moving out of place' to break the chain. If it hadn't, then the fighters at the other end of it are going to be shooting back at Dutch and Wedge all the same.

It may be as simple as saying that if you are at range 1 of a squadron, you are also at treated as being at range 1 of all the squadrons it is at range 1 of - so not an endless chain, but a wider area of engagement that means the endless fiddling is pointless. Or possibly leave the huge-chain possibility in play, but tweak Intel a bit to prevent that 'one Y-Wing moves out of the chain and breaks it' from happening. There are definitely plenty of options, here.

But as long as each squadron is treated as its own unique thing in the melee blob, no changes to the movement rules are going to impact how 'fiddly' the squadron game is (which most people don't seem to enjoy - including myself, and I'm usually running 120+ pts of squadrons...and from this recent rule change, FFG seems to not want either)

1 minute ago, Ardaedhel said:

This doesn't say that removing the range ruler defines the final position though. It says remove it and place the squadron in its final position. "Place the squadron in the final position" could very easily be interpreted to mean "now that you know the maximum movement distance, do all the little fiddling to get it where you want it."

There is no comma after ruler, thus both portions of the sentence are tied together and must be completed as one action. I know it means breaking out a dictionary and getting incredibly literal with the rules, but this discussion is like pulling teeth. I'm almost to the point of doing a flow chart to demonstrate how to move squads and why you actually can't measure engagement while moving the squad.

7 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

There is no comma after ruler, thus both portions of the sentence are tied together and must be completed as one action. I know it means breaking out a dictionary and getting incredibly literal with the rules, but this discussion is like pulling teeth. I'm almost to the point of doing a flow chart to demonstrate how to move squads and why you actually can't measure engagement while moving the squad.

This is getting into Rules Forum territory, let's take it off the main forum.