32 minutes ago, Jambo75 said:

Please explain?

I've had to say that around 4 times for 4 different things can you tell me which one this was?

On 26/04/2017 at 11:29 PM, Jambo75 said:

Wtf happened to Fire Control Teams?? That was unnecessary and bizarre. What is its purpose, and is it just APTs that can't combine? Fecked if I know...

@Tirion

Don't have specific quotes for you but the standard crits effect is deal the first damage card from this attack gave up.

APTs state deal a face up damage card. Seeing as this is a damage card dealt from the attack the standard crit already triggered when APTs were triggered.

Not a rule change just a Clarification. This is how the rules worked already. Now seeing as FCTs are almost useless I would have preferred an errata to APTs saying

"This card is not counted as a damage card from this attack"

Or something or other just to give FCTs another option.

I also think at 5 points compared to what else takes up that space it should be an exhaust. But that is a whole other bag of beans.

Just my ten cents

On 28/04/2017 at 5:54 PM, Tirion said:

Don't have specific quotes for you but the standard crits effect is deal the first damage card from this attack gave up.

APTs state deal a face up damage card. Seeing as this is a damage card dealt from the attack the standard crit already triggered when APTs were triggered.

Not a rule change just a Clarification. This is how the rules worked already. Now seeing as FCTs are almost useless I would have preferred an errata to APTs saying

"This card is not counted as a damage card from this attack"

Or something or other just to give FCTs another option.

I also think at 5 points compared to what else takes up that space it should be an exhaust. But that is a whole other bag of beans.

Just my ten cents

Ok. So here's the thing. APT has a specific crit. The standard crit also also has a specific effect. There are other cards that also have specific effects. FCTs allows two to trigger.

so, for me me that's any two. APT and standard, concussion missiles and standard, any ion cannon and standard.

so, why just single out APT? I don't understand FCT, and I don't understand the ruling. What made sense to me before, now no longer does.

I'm confused.

On ‎27‎.‎04‎.‎2017 at 10:38 PM, Tirion said:

That's just the rules it wasn't a change

Beside the fact that there was no rule that the crit is part of the attack damage?

Everyone (or nearly) always thought the critical effect from ACM and APT does not count as damage from the attack.

Quote

5. Resolve Damage: The attacker can resolve one of its critical effects. Then the attacker determines the total damage amount. Then the defending squadron or hull zone suffers that total damage, one point at a time.

◊ If the attacker or defender is a squadron, the damage is the sum of all " hit " icons.
◊ If the attacker and defender are ships, the damage is the sum of all " hit " and " crit " icons.
◊ Each ship has the following standard critical effect: “ crit : If the defender is dealt at least one damage card by this attack, deal the first damage card faceup.”

There was no ruling so far how to handle the crit in terms of damage.
Normally you are doing the crit first, and after this dealing the damage. And a lot thought that the faceup damage card (from the standard crit) only count for the damage after resolving the critical.

The FAQ entry clarified this. The critical does count as damage from this attack.

This means:
XX9 + ACP => two possible face up cards if the critical damage from ACP goes on adjacent hulls without shields.
XX9 + standard crit => only two faceup damage cards (not three).
XX9 + APT => one faceup from the APT and max. one more faceup damage card from the XX9.
APT + standard crit => only one faceup damage card from the APT, the standard crit is fulfilled with this APT crit.

31 minutes ago, Tokra said:

There was no ruling so far how to handle the crit in terms of damage.

That's why we asked.

And we were told it did not count.

And I uploaded it into the Email Answers Thread, when I got it.

Hence the confusion of *yet another* reversed statement.

Just now, Drasnighta said:

That's why we asked.

And we were told it did not count.

And I uploaded it into the Email Answers Thread, when I got it.

Ok, let me write it a bit different. There was no rule for this in the FAQ so far.

We all know, that email ruling get flipped with the FAQ from time to time. And this was not the first time it happend.

Just now, Tokra said:

Ok, let me write it a bit different. There was no rule for this in the FAQ so far.

We all know, that email ruling get flipped with the FAQ from time to time. And this was not the first time it happend.

Yep. But again, its one that opens a whole can of worms if you read it forward.

Counting Damage from Critical Hits as "Damage" as part of the "Damage" component, well, people ask questions about Luke Skywalker and Projector Misaligned ...

24 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Yep. But again, its one that opens a whole can of worms if you read it forward.

Counting Damage from Critical Hits as "Damage" as part of the "Damage" component, well, people ask questions about Luke Skywalker and Projector Misaligned ...

Just curious. What would be the question about Luke and Projector Misaligned?