SF title states:

Quote

When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc, you may roll 1 additional attack die. If you do not, you may perform an additional attack from your auxiliary firing arc.

Now during my latest turnament someone said that the TIE/SF was able to shoot twice with it's back fire arc.

I kinda understand what that guy meant when reading the title text.

Any thoughts on this?

Reword it a bit and you get the full meaning:

If you do not roll an additional attack die when you attack with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc, you may perform an additional attack from your auxiliary firing arc.

The second attack is contingent on two things:

1) First attack must be from the Primary Firing Arc

2) First attack must not claim the additional attack die.

I'd say no. The way the card is worded implies you must attack from your primary arc, ie the front one, and the added red die determines if you get a butt shot but you still have to fire out your primary first. Firing out the aft makes the choice of adding a red die impossible. I believe your friend is incorrect on his assumption.

The timing for the title card is "When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc,". If you don't meet that timing, the rest of the title might as well not exist. If your first shot is from the rear arc, you don't qualify to trigger the title, so you do NOT get a second shot.

This arrangement of sentences seems to be a recurring theme from FFGs card designers lately. Targeting Synchronizer suffers from similar confusion of whether the second sentence is contingent on the whole first sentence being used or just half of it.

In short, no.

In long, you have many options (die counts are the base amount, add range 1 if applicable):

1: missile out the front. Nothing out the back - you didn't make a primary attack.

2: 3 dice out the front, nothing out the back (or 2 dice out the front if you want to miss for some reason, you can choose not to activate the title at all).

3: 2 dice out the rear, nothing out the front.

4: 2 dice out the front, followed by 2 dice out the rear.

I always read it to mean you may either attack once out your front with an extra red dice, or you may attack once out of both the front and rear. No double attack from the rear.

I really don't understand why the devs can't use more specific wording to avoid this confusion...the proper way to interpret this card is as follows...

When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc, you may roll 1 additional attack die. If you do not, you may perform an attack from your auxiliary firing arc in addition to your primary attack.

Problem solved.

19 hours ago, iamzoner said:

I really don't understand why the devs can't use more specific wording to avoid this confusion...the proper way to interpret this card is as follows...

When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc, you may roll 1 additional attack die. If you do not, you may perform an attack from your auxiliary firing arc in addition to your primary attack.

Problem solved.

Solves nothing, sadly, because an attack with a primary weapon out of an auxiliary firing arc is still a primary attack.

19 hours ago, iamzoner said:

I really don't understand why the devs can't use more specific wording to avoid this confusion...the proper way to interpret this card is as follows...

Job security. If you make a perfect product, you don't need anyone to support the customer issues after...

this pops up now and then. I wish they'd faq it so this stops popping up, even locally once in awhile i'll get someone waiting for the 2nd attack after i fire with backdraft out the aux arc.

TIE/SF title is one solid block of text, indicating they are one effect. The "if you do not" would indicate he can attack twice out the aux arc IF it was a separate paragraph, meaning its a second trigger. Its an "If, Then, Else" clause, which is rather rare in this game.

If: You perform an attack out of your primary firing arc
Then: Roll +1 die
Else: Do not roll +1 die and attack out Aux arc as well

Backdraft would be one of the most broken ships in the game if the title let him fire twice out the aux arc. Even firing once he can really shred people if flown right.

Solves nothing, sadly, because an attack with a primary weapon out of an auxiliary firing arc is still a primary attack.

Yes. It is still a primary attack out of an auxiliary arc. But it is NOT a primary attack out of a PRIMARY arc.

So reworded...

When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc, you may roll 1 additional attack die. If you do not, you may perform a primary attack from your auxiliary firing arc in addition to your attack from you primary arc.

"You may EITHER roll 1 additional die OR after attacking, make an additional attack from your auxiliary arc"

On 6/12/2017 at 10:22 AM, Achowat said:

Solves nothing, sadly, because an attack with a primary weapon out of an auxiliary firing arc is still a primary attack.

Except it HAS to be from the primary firing arc.

Read the card. "When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc...."

Unless the text calls out a specific arc, it works in all arcs. This calls out primary arc, so it only works in the primary arc.

1 hour ago, Vineheart01 said:

Except it HAS to be from the primary firing arc.

Read the card. "When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc...."

Unless the text calls out a specific arc, it works in all arcs. This calls out primary arc, so it only works in the primary arc.

Right, but IAmZoner's solution adds no additional explanation to that effect over the current wording.

Yes it does. It clarifies the difference between an additional attack being separate from the initial attack from the primary weapon rather than leaving room to interpret it as 2 attacks out the aux arc which was the entire question of the post. The current wording can confuse people to think that "you may perform an additional attack from your primary arc" can mean firing both attacks out the aux arc, which is not the way the card is played, but there is still room to twist what the current wording says.

On 12/06/2017 at 5:57 AM, iamzoner said:

I really don't understand why the devs can't use more specific wording to avoid this confusion...

I don't understand where the confusion actually comes from. The wording isn't that confusing. Is it less a problem with the actual wording and an issue to do with actual English comprehension levels vs what FFG things they are?

14 minutes ago, Dr Zoidberg said:

I don't understand where the confusion actually comes from. The wording isn't that confusing. Is it less a problem with the actual wording and an issue to do with actual English comprehension levels vs what FFG things they are?

That I can answer.

Quote

When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc, you may roll 1 additional attack die. If you do not, you may perform an additional attack from your auxiliary firing arc.

Two sentences. Due to the way the constituent parts are split, people are reading it two different ways, with one being that the 'if' refers to adding an extra die and the other being that it refers to the sentence in it's entirety. I shall rephrse the ability to clarify:

Quote

A: When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc, you may roll 1 additional attack die. If you do not [roll 1 additional attack die], you may perform an additional attack from your auxiliary firing arc.

B: When attacking with a primary weapon from your primary firing arc, you may roll 1 additional attack die. If you do not [perform a primary weapon attack from your primary arc], you may perform an additional attack from your auxiliary firing arc.

And if I am going to be blunt, it is a reading comprehension issue. B is not a reasonable interpretation, but it is unfortunately not that uncommon.

Yes it is a reading comprehension issue. Yes it is not uncommon. Are we supposed to just say to our opponents that they have reading comprehension issues then? I don't forsee that working out very well.

So, I'm attacking ship in front of my TIE and at this moment I can roll addidtional die...or don't and attack other ship behind my TIE

And when I do the roll I attack only ship in front of me, right?

24 minutes ago, Bober00 said:

So, I'm attacking ship in front of my TIE and at this moment I can roll addidtional die...or don't and attack other ship behind my TIE

And when I do the roll I attack only ship in front of me, right?

You're right that you trigger the title when attacking a ship in your primary arc, and that that's when you make the decision about which of the title's benefits you want (either an extra die on this attack or an attack out the aux arc after this one).

I'm not sure what you mean by the second thing. You're only attacking one ship at a time, but you might be attacking twice depending on what you chose.

I mean when I have ship in front of me and behind me, I can attack 1 in front with addidtional die (2+1) roll OR both with standard 2 dies on each of them

Just now, Bober00 said:

I mean when I have ship in front of me and behind me, I can attack 1 in front with addidtional die (2+1) roll OR both with standard 2 dies on each of them

Correct, noting that in this instance you *must* roll the front arc attack first THEN the back arc attack if you choose to do both. It rarely matters much, except when it's really important for things like Fire Control System.

2 minutes ago, Bober00 said:

I mean when I have ship in front of me and behind me, I can attack 1 in front with addidtional die (2+1) roll OR both with standard 2 dies on each of them

Yes, that's right.

Ignorable bonus content: You do also have the option of not using the title at all (no extra die, no bonus attack), if you've got money problems and need to throw the match. Although in that case it might be better to just forgo your attack entirely.