Oh, man, this bickering is pointless?

Custom Card creators, however, need this SOLVED. What else are they supposed to do, print another custom card for the ship?

On April 27, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Lyraeus said:

Ahhh the diehard

Darned Right. Hi, Lyr!

14 minutes ago, Darth Lupine said:

Darned Right. Hi, Lyr!

It's the age. You are about as changing as a mountain Ello my friend.

Actually I would find more interesting imagine about what OTHER thing could do that hiden title. The rebel quasar was the first and the last thing people thought about I think.

2 hours ago, Lyraeus said:

It's the age. You are about as changing as a mountain Ello my friend.

Yep, you get as old as me, crankiness comes naturally. Why, I remember back in my day, squadrons were useless.....

8 hours ago, Darth Lupine said:

Yep, you get as old as me, crankiness comes naturally. Why, I remember back in my day, squadrons were useless.....

In the dark ages, when Armada was dead?

19 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Oh, man, this bickering is pointless?

Moreso than most, yes. Like I've said, the reveal of the title card will settle it. Either it says "Rebels can use this" in which case list building does not use a "check at every step" method or there's no such title and it really makes no difference if list building is procedural or not. As much as I roll my eyes at a lot of the debates about squadrons or which ship is dead this week, at least in those we can learn something that doesn't depend on a preview article. Even if I think the VSD is perfectly usable, seeing why some hyperbolic person thinks it's a useless ship might make me aware of weaknesses I hadn't considered or was dismissive of. The Rebel Quasar debate basically boils down to arguing about whether there will be a title like that, because if there is such a title it immediately resolves the debate about procedural list building. Since we need a preview article to know (because there's no way they'd leave such a title out of the preview article) this is basically just one group shouting "it will happen" and another shouting "no it won't" back.

I mean if you guys were having fun arguing about whether building a list requires checking legality every time you add an upgrade then...okay, how? I genuinely can't see why that would be enjoyable. But you do you, I guess?

I feel like ffg would make more money if they release a rebel quasar in a year or so with a different paint scheme, new upgrade cards and maybe give the rebel version different firing arcs or different upgrade options to differentiate the two. I honestly like that both sides have very different ships and that both sides feel different. Not even sure the rebels have a need or use for a carrier right now.

6 hours ago, Hockeyzombie said:

Since we need a preview article to know (because there's no way they'd leave such a title out of the preview article) this is basically just one group shouting "it will happen" and another shouting "no it won't" back.

Well, you have missed the "point" of the argument, and the point is a rules discussion.

It start off as an "this is happening, because it is awesome."

and then it became me saying , "This can't happen just like that, because these rules stand in the way."

|

Of course, the answer is always "FFG will make it happen if they want to make it happen."

It just can't happen as it is right now.

All I am advocating - and all my position has ever stated............ Is that people read the **** Rules.

You know what people don't do?

Read the **** Rules.

I can quote many, many, many threads which are me kindly saying "read the **** rules", or rather, reading the **** rules for people

So my statement to you, is this conversation is No Less or More Pointless than any conversation found on the FFG Forums. And beyond an "Armada is Dead!" "conversation", I'd feel hard pressed to find one

Besides, this has continued the discussion of "veterans pack", "campaign box" versus "brand new release" for a Rebel variant. Which people were not even considering from day one. The statement that its the sort of thing that would be hyped from first image... Yes. Pointless.

You don't have to involve yourself in discussion - but discussion will happen. And I'm sorry you feel its pointless.

But you know what.

Its all I got.

13 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Well, you have missed the "point" of the argument, and the point is a rules discussion.

It start off as an "this is happening, because it is awesome."

and then it became me saying , "This can't happen just like that, because these rules stand in the way."

My own point was that list building is not explicitly stated to be procedural, which seems to be the focus of the rules argument. Currently it doesn't really matter if it is, since upgrades that add upgrade slots are a pretty minor detail (it's not like anyone's getting disqualified because they took out the card for ECM before the card for Tua). My argument is that if they really do include a title that says "You may take this ship in a Rebel list as long as this title is equipped," then obviously list building only requires a check for legality after you say you're done. Unless there was a rules email I'm unaware of, they've never actually said that list building checks legality with each addition or change the player makes. I mean, if it did would that make some of my lists illegal because there were times when I accidentally added too many squadrons?

Basically, I find the idea of procedural list building strange because it seems more complicated than necessary. Either way my list must be legal when I present it to my opponent so we can determine initiative, so why would we add a bunch of legality checks to the list building process? And like I've said, if the title really does let the Rebels steal the Quasar that would essentially mean that FFG uses this logic as well because the title wouldn't work otherwise.

That said I apologize if I came across as hostile. I do think this discussion is pointless, since it all depends on what an unrevealed upgrade does and at present we don't even know enough bout the Quasar to evaluate if the Rebels even want the stupid thing. If we had more information on it we could discuss it's possible uses in a Rebel list but without a point cost or full knowledge of available upgrades that's hard to do. I do think most speculation on "what if [faction] gets [EU/Legends ship]???" is pointless but I see the fun in throwing out ideas on what the stats of a Venator or Lucrehulk would be. I get that you're the rules guy, but we don't actually have a ruling on this unless the title (indirectly) clarifies it.

I can respect the frustration involved in having to wave the RRG at people all the time. I had a surprising amount of difficulty explaining that Jamming Barrier gives you the "larger half" of your dice pool, because my opponent thought that "remove half, rounded down" meant you keep the rounded down amount.

14 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Besides, this has continued the discussion of "veterans pack", "campaign box" versus "brand new release" for a Rebel variant. Which people were not even considering from day one. The statement that its the sort of thing that would be hyped from first image... Yes. Pointless.

I didn't mean they would hype it in the wave six reveal. I mean that when they do a more detailed preview of the Quasar, there's no way they don't hype it as the first cross-faction ship in Armada. Assuming that the title actually does that, of course. I'm not really certain either way that the title does anything like that and I'm not sure if I want it to. I'd rather see that in a campaign box as a special objective or something. I do like to see that people have apparently remembered that the Aces/Veterans packs in X-Wing could be done in Armada. So many people seem to think the VSD is dead and never coming back, and it just makes me think of the TIE Defender.

On 4/26/2017 at 11:11 AM, Green Knight said:

Maybe this has been asked before...but here goes: is it conceivable that the face-down upgrade card (the only one between the 2 expansions in wave 6) could actually ba a Title that lets the Quasar join the Rebel side?

It would be unprecedented, but FFG likes to add new Stuff with every wave, so that's not a disqualification (also: Sabine's TIE from X-wing). Also, the Quasar is actually used by both sides ON SCREEN, which is different AFAIK from other ships. So if ever there was to be a dual-faction ship, this would be it, no?

One problem with this interesting theory: the BACK of the face down ship card is Imperial gray/black, not Rebel red/white.

1 hour ago, evanger said:

One problem with this interesting theory: the BACK of the face down ship card is Imperial gray/black, not Rebel red/white.

The idea is that the face-down title is something like "You may use this ship in a Rebel list." If that's what it is, then presumably the back of the ship card wouldn't matter as long as you equip the title.

FAQ: Can a Rebel player use the Quasar Fire title, which says 'This ship may be added to a Rebel fleet,' to do the thing that it says on the card?

A: No. This upgrade is actually unplayable, and we couldn't find a loophole in our own airtight procedural list creation rules to let this exception happen. The technically-correct reading of the RRG that says a ship must be of the appropriate faction before it can assign titles takes priority here.

Weeks, months of silence will go by before this clarification comes down. Tournament players will lose sleep wondering how TOs will adjudicate it. The discussion thread will crash the forums server. Brother will be pitted against brother in the great conflict of our time: Team Mauve versus Team Peridot. Ben Skywalker will sell all your collections on eBay. With no other recourse, FFG soon announces Armada Second Edition.

6 hours ago, Nostromoid said:

FAQ: Can a Rebel player use the Quasar Fire title, which says 'This ship may be added to a Rebel fleet,' to do the thing that it says on the card?

A: No. This upgrade is actually unplayable, and we couldn't find a loophole in our own airtight procedural list creation rules to let this exception happen. The technically-correct reading of the RRG that says a ship must be of the appropriate faction before it can assign titles takes priority here.

Weeks, months of silence will go by before this clarification comes down. Tournament players will lose sleep wondering how TOs will adjudicate it. The discussion thread will crash the forums server. Brother will be pitted against brother in the great conflict of our time: Team Mauve versus Team Peridot. Ben Skywalker will sell all your collections on eBay. With no other recourse, FFG soon announces Armada Second Edition.

#TeamMauve

Or am I #TeamPeridot? Either way I hate those other guys.

ARE WE ANNOYING YOU DRAS ARE WE?

Shenanigans and arguing aside we may as well just wait for the preview of the Quasar. The reveal (or lack thereof) of a faction-changing title should settle things. And we have something else for the forum to argue over! Can you spend a command token if it matches the command you used Leia's ability on? I'm leaning no, but I can at least understand the reasoning that the other argument hinges on. I wouldn't mind if it was actually a thing you can do, of course. That would settle the "is Leia worth 38 points" question pretty much instantly.

5 minutes ago, Hockeyzombie said:

ARE WE ANNOYING YOU DRAS ARE WE?

Shenanigans and arguing aside we may as well just wait for the preview of the Quasar. The reveal (or lack thereof) of a faction-changing title should settle things. And we have something else for the forum to argue over! Can you spend a command token if it matches the command you used Leia's ability on? I'm leaning no, but I can at least understand the reasoning that the other argument hinges on. I wouldn't mind if it was actually a thing you can do, of course. That would settle the "is Leia worth 38 points" question pretty much instantly.

Well, We've been arguing it since reveal, after all.

And yes, I am getting annoyed. Mostly because unlike what I aspire to do - utilise logical discussion and rules precedence - I instead get veiled abuse, snickering and hyperbole. Which is intended to do nothing but annoy and belittle.

But I'm allowed to be annoyed.

Just as people are allowed to annoy.

This is the internet, after all.

1 hour ago, Drasnighta said:

utilise logical discussion

Why in the Emperor's name would you ever think you could do this on the internet?

Because I ascribe to the belief that education is one of the greatest gifts humanity has discovered, and retain the hope that fundamentally, people are not bastards to one another.

I don't have that hope. Rebellions are built on hope. Besides some of my favorite people are bastards.

1 minute ago, Megatronrex said:

I don't have that hope. Rebellions are built on hope. Besides some of my favorite people are bastards.

I shall amend to bastards to one another. For that Australian feeling.

5 hours ago, Hockeyzombie said:

#TeamMauve

Or am I #TeamPeridot? Either way I hate those other guys.

I'm not Team Peridot, I'm Team Lapus Lazuli.

1 minute ago, geek19 said:

I'm not Team Peridot, I'm Team Lapus Lazuli.

#ObscureReferenceWin

22 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

#ObscureReferenceWin