GreenDragoon.. figures another programmer would agree with me haha.

And Sharrrp, yeah, I agree that the 2 camps are not going to come to a consensus. Your view makes sense. But I feel mine does too (obviously.) I am really curious how FF rules on this.

I never thought it would be this polarizing, especially for an upgrade card I don't think is all that great other than a fun little "watch this..." for a game. Especially if it turns out you can't make use of the EM and the card itself.. gonna field 3 base Punishers with nothing else just to get 6 cluster mines/connor nets/proximity mines in play before the game starts? Then have those Punishers picked apart by ships that either dodged the mines or soaked them and are now just mildly inconvenienced but have a full armament. Oh, and the Punishers have to dodge the undetonated ordinance too, and they are not so maneuverable. lol

7 hours ago, xbeaker said:

But there is nothing preventing you from using it multiple times with the mapper either.

Except games are permissive based and in order to do something there needs to be a rule that lets you do something.

Quote

We all agree that you can only discard a card once. The very point of EM is to allow you to effectively 'discard' a card and still have that card to use again later. The only thing stopping you currently from using a torpedo, missile, or bomb twice in a round is the hard and fast rule that says you can't. If MM said that you can activate an equipped bomb and place it on the table I'd agree, but the spending of the card is payment for a different ability. And that 1 specific ability, which can be used at that one specific time, allows the breaking of the rule which says you can only deploy 1 bomb per round.

Minefield mapper says nothing about dropping/deploying bombs. Some people may see this as semantics but there are rules that define both of those abilities and that you can only deploy one bomb per round.

Quote

So why is everyone so stuck on this fictitious rule that seems to state that you can't spend the card the token is on in the same round you spend the token.

Because there is nothing that says you CAN spend the same card multiple times.

Quote

This is not a once per opportunity thing, as the opportunity clearly states that you can do it with as you like.

The trigger of MM is "During setup, after the "Place Forces" step,..." The action is "..you may discard any number of your equipped Bomb upgrade cards. " If you only have 2 bomb upgrade cards equipped you can at most drop 2 bombs, It does not say you can keep discarding the same bomb upgrade cards multiple times.

Quote

There is nothing about the MM that says you CAN'T use the token and the card itself to pay a cost. There is no other ability or precedent that shows you can't use both.

There isn't anything that says you can either. This is the big issue here. There is no other ability that shows you can use both, so why assume a card can when it doesn't state it?

Quote

This is the first case of being able to discard a card as a cost that could have a token on it, for an effect. It is NOT the same as activating a card or action twice for it's ability.

Incorrect, discarding missiles/torps/bombs is a cost to use it for an effect. Boba fett also forces the discard of an upgrade card for an effect but as the faq clearly states if it targets an upgrade card with a token on it you can discard the token instead because the EM token is a replacement effect, not another card itself.

Quote

Common sense says you can use both when triggering MM, only people's very specific and unfounded interpretation says that no, you can't use the card if you used the token.

Your opinion does not make it common sense. MM does not state it can discard the same upgrade card multiple times.

Quote

On homing missiles, you need the lock to fire, but you can still spend the lock to re-roll. Same attack, that lock is utilized twice.

No that lock is not utilized twice. The ATTACK:(TARGET LOCK) header does not use the target lock, it only requires the ship making the attack to have one on its target, this is not a cost, it is very different. The re-roll spends and discards the target lock is a cost just like spending a targetlock to make the attack in the first place, you can't spend the target lock twice, or to spend it once for multiple effects unless a rule states you can.

Quote

Advanced targeting computer, if you have a lock you can add a crit, but CAN'T spend the lock to re-roll. FF tells us explicitly when we can't use, or re-use something.

ATC has it in its rules what to do specifically, if you add a <ka-boom> result you can't spend the target lock on that attack, if there was another effect that could let the tie advance spend the target lock for an effect other than re-roll it still couldn't do it. The rules also tell us explicitly what we can use or re-use something. MM does not tell us we can spend the same bomb upgrade card multiple times.

Quote

But if we can't spend or activate at all, it is clearly defined.

Same with what we can spend. MM does not say we can spend the same card multiple times.

Quote

MM has a cost, but no upper limit,

Also incorrect. There is an upper limit, that limit is the number of equipped bomb upgrade cards.

Oberron I'm not going to go through and restate all my points, except to say that when there ARE restrictions they are listed. The rules are not just permissive based, telling you only what you can do, they also define what you can't do. In this case they neither say you can, or can't which is why we are even having this discussion. And the rules on the bomb cards themselves are meaningless, as you aren't using the bomb card to drop the card. And Boba Fett crew doesn't matter because he can only remove 1 card, if he allowed you to discard more than 1 card, you can bet this discussion would have come up sooner. For the at least 3rd time now, understand what you guys are saying. If that is the rule I'm not going to organize a march on Fantasy Flight and demand it changed. But I also understand the intent of MM, and based on the intent without anyone's opinion of how and when you can spend the tokens with the cards, you should be able to drop all available bombs such that you have none for the rest of the game should you choose to.

3 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

First off, "Once per opportunity" does not apply. The rule states that you can't use a card ability twice. In this example you would not be allowed to use MM twice - but you aren't, you're using it once for "any number". So clearly the rule does not apply.

Second, it helped me to think about it like a program. It's a loop, but is it a for- or a while-loop? The former needs to know an upper limit when it starts, the latter keeps going as long as a condition is met. This means for MM: a for loop would require a declared upper limit of bombs (any number = e.g. 2), and you can go up this "any number", but not above. For a while loop it would require a condition, i.e. as long as you have bombs to spend you may. "Any number" is here undefined and only known at the end.

Third, let's look at the card:

"During Setup, after the "Place Forces" step": no question here, it does not care about the number of tokens.
"Place all corresponding bomb tokens in the play area beyond Range 3 of enemy ships.": also no question here. This part does not care about the number of tokens.

So we have to focus on "you may discard any number of your equipped {bomb} Upgrade cards."
You are instructed to discard X equipped cards. This sounds as if they were all discarded at the same time. But we know that X-Wing TMG does not know actually simultaneous steps - so you have to start with one card!

If this is true (no simultaneous effects) then we have our answer:
1. you discard a card - EM proccs and a token may be discarded instead.
2. you discard a card - EM proccs and a token may be discarded instead.
3. you discard a card - no EM left and a card is discarded.
4. you discard a card - no EM left and a card is discarded.

If you disagree please explain this to me: You are allowed to discard the upgrade card immediately, even if you have an ordnance token on it, correct?
So what is the difference between discarding an upgrade card that still has a token and one that has not anymore a token?

To illustrate better what I mean: You have identical bomb upgrades A and B, and both have ordnance tokens (shown by A+ and B+ if they have tokens). You use MM during setup.
0. You have bombs A+ and B+.
1. You want to discard card A+, but EM allows you to discard the token instead. Now you have A and B+ remaining. You continue with MM.
2. You want to discard card B+, and you do not want to discard the token instead. Now you have A remaining.

If this is possible, why can't you discard A in step 2?

If you are in the camp that thinks 4 are not possible, then you surely have to agree that you could discard the first token and the corresponding upgrade card up to the upper limit of equipped {bomb} Upgrade cards!

So is "equipped" the key word here? Does that provide an upper limit to the qualifier "any number"? If not then I don't see how your viewpoint does not violate the "any number".

Card texts:
EM: "When you are instructed to discard an Upgrade card, you may discard 1 ordnance token on that card instead."
MM: "During Setup, after the "Place Forces" step, you may discard any number of your equipped {bomb} Upgrade cards. Place all corresponding bomb tokens in the play area beyond Range 3 of enemy ships."
Once per opportunity: "A card ability cannot be resolved more than once during the timing specified on the card. "

You are only using MM once for any number, why in your example of A+ B+ are you trying to use it on the same upgrade card twice?

"Any number.." also has a part after it your are missing, that part is "..of your equipped Bomb upgrade cards". There is an entire back half of what "any number" is and that is the number of equipped bomb upgrade cards. I do agree that you start with one card at a time but MM does not say we can go back to discard the same upgrade multiple times. You said it yourself "In this example you would not be allowed to use MM twice - but you aren't, you're using it once for "any number" " With any number being up to the number of equipped bomb upgrade cards.

as for

Quote

To illustrate better what I mean: You have identical bomb upgrades A and B, and both have ordnance tokens (shown by A+ and B+ if they have tokens). You use MM during setup.
0. You have bombs A+ and B+.
1. You want to discard card A+, but EM allows you to discard the token instead. Now you have A and B+ remaining. You continue with MM.
2. You want to discard card B+, and you do not want to discard the token instead. Now you have A remaining.

If this is possible, why can't you discard A in step 2?

Because you have already counted A as discarded as payment and there are no instructions to go back and keep discarding the same upgrade card. Programs don't double back and re-check unless told to and x-wing rules are the same way.

17 minutes ago, xbeaker said:

Oberron I'm not going to go through and restate all my points, except to say that when there ARE restrictions they are listed. The rules are not just permissive based, telling you only what you can do, they also define what you can't do.

And the restriction is listed. " you may discard any number of your equipped Bomb upgrade cards" the restriction for any number is of your equipped bomb upgrade cards. Also your points so far have been talking about once per oppertunity which I have not argued at all, as well as talking about timmy, cake, and donuts with people trying to use real life situations to explain game rules. So far the only point I have been able to sift through the post have been loosely "It doesn't say you can't do it". If there are more than that then I have missed them. Could you repost them just once more or point to which page and post they are on?

Quote

In this case they neither say you can, or can't which is why we are even having this discussion.

If the rules don't say you can then why assume that you can?

Quote

And the rules on the bomb cards themselves are meaningless, as you aren't using the bomb card to drop the card.

In what reference to what I state are you replying to? If it is limit of deploying/dropping one bomb a turn that isn't a rule on a bomb card, that is a general rule of x-wing.

Quote

For the at least 3rd time now, understand what you guys are saying. If that is the rule I'm not going to organize a march on Fantasy Flight and demand it changed.

Glad you understand what we are saying. No one is claiming that you are going to march on FFG?

Quote

But I also understand the intent of MM, and based on the intent without anyone's opinion of how and when you can spend the tokens with the cards, you should be able to drop all available bombs such that you have none for the rest of the game should you choose to.

How do you understand the intent of mm is to be able to drop the same upgrade cards multiple times? Have you spoken to the developers about it and gotten a reply? (Not sarcasm, actually serious questions). If you have proof of the intent from the developers that would change a lot of things.

The reason "Once per opportunity" keeps being mentioned, is because if you had 2 opportunities, this would totally work.

Hypothetical new ship with a bomb, torpedo, and 2 system slots. Equipped with a bomb, EM, and 2 minefield mappers.

At the end of deployment, map 1 sees you have a bomb equipped, and lets you discard it for an effect. EM then interrupts the discard part, but the effect still happens. It it cannot "go back" and select that bomb again, because it already selected it's bombs.

But then the second map triggers, sees you still have a bomb equipped, and lets you discard it for an effect. There's no munition token to save it anymore, so the bomb is discarded.

Personally I want to see this done with 3 x Punishers. Just Completely litter the entire field...

3 hours ago, Oberron said:

You are only using MM once for any number, why in your example of A+ B+ are you trying to use it on the same upgrade card twice?

Because why not? I did not end up discarding either card, did I`?

2 hours ago, Oberron said:

Because you have already counted A as discarded as payment and there are no instructions to go back and keep discarding the same upgrade card. Programs don't double back and re-check unless told to and x-wing rules are the same way.

I don't think I did. I tried to use upgrade A and used a token instead !

As for programs: of course they do in a loop, which this clearly is. There is an exception after you try to discard the first one, and then it goes to the next iteration where it doesn't care which one of the X options it already tried. That's not even the discussion. The discussion is whether it's a for- or a while loop.

My position on how many total and why is well established so I won't get into that again.

However, I think there is good reason to think you could do the same bomb twice. Other upgrades that have multiple effects, such as Rage or Inspiring Recruit, it has been established that the things happen (in these cases adding or removing stress) sequentially not simultaneously. Which means that things which trigger off thosr conditions can be triggered twice.

So I think it's reasonable that if you had one proxy mine and one cluster mine on a ship with EM and are using MM to "discard 2 equipped bomb cards" you may choose to discard the cluster first to deploy the first set and discard the EM instead. Then you go to discard the second bomb and the game doesn't "remember" which bomb you did the first time so you can pick the cluster again and deploy a second one.

There's enough ambiguity on this point I'd be hesitant to take a firm stance either way on this point but if I was TO and had to make a ruling this is what I would go with today.

At this point I think everyone concerned is happy to agree that an FAQ is the only real way this can get resolved?

I certainly am.

Maybe we could all drop it until that time, and we could all go off and submit the question to the Rules Questions form instead.

Obviously, this won't get solved until a ruling by FFG comes out, but here is my two cents when I read the cards...

Minefield Mapper reads... "you may discard any number of your equipped (bomb) upgrade cards ." Key word being cards . So in this scenario, if you have one bomb and one Ext ra Munitions card equipped, you still technically only have one bomb upgrade card equipped, not two. Extra Munitions allows you to discard the token en lieu of the card for game affects, NOT that you have two "copies" of the card. So since you only have one bomb card at your disposal at the timing of this scenario, you can use the Extra Munition token in place of the bomb, but not both.

12 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Because why not? I did not end up discarding either card, did I`?

Because you need a rule to do something. There is no rule on mm that allows you to discard the same card multiple times. Em replaces what is discarded but does not replace the fact the card was used for something

"I don't think I did. I tried to use upgrade A and used a token instead!"

You did use upgrade A, you tried to discard upgrade A but had an effect that changes what is discarded. This does change the fact that upgrade A was used. Otherwise em doesn't do anything for deploying bombs or shooting with missiles and torps. If you didn't use the upgrade as part of mm how are you placing a bomb for it?

"As for programs: of course they do in a loop, which this clearly is. "

Burden of proof is on you for this claim. How is mm a loop and where does it state you can use the same upgrade multiple times?

1 hour ago, Oberron said:

Because you need a rule to do something. There is no rule on mm that allows you to discard the same card multiple times. Em replaces what is discarded but does not replace the fact the card was used for something

Not quite. Why do you need a rule that allows you to discard the same card multiple times, when you're not actually discarding the same card multiple times? And how/why does the game "remember" which card was used? Why does it not forget after the first iteration?

1 hour ago, Oberron said:

You did use upgrade A, you tried to discard upgrade A but had an effect that changes what is discarded. This does change the fact that upgrade A was used. Otherwise em doesn't do anything for deploying bombs or shooting with missiles and torps. If you didn't use the upgrade as part of mm how are you placing a bomb for it?

Yes, but the rules do not keep track. They don't care how often a card was targeted, because usually the card would be discarded and the game is free to forget. EM changes the first part, but not the second: the card is not discarded, but the game still forgets.

1 hour ago, Oberron said:

Burden of proof is on you for this claim. How is mm a loop and where does it state you can use the same upgrade multiple times?

I don't understand? Burden of proof for what? That it's like a loop? Are you asking for proof for an analogy ?

7 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:

At this point I think everyone concerned is happy to agree that an FAQ is the only real way this can get resolved?

I certainly am.

Maybe we could all drop it until that time, and we could all go off and submit the question to the Rules Questions form instead.

Just gonna leave this here again...

Found what might be some relevant precedent in determining if this is a while- or for- loop, to continue using the terminology you guys have laid out. In the rules reference, page 5, we are told to use a target lock in an attack in the following way:

Quote

Target Lock: The attacker can spend a target lock he has on the defender to reroll any number of his attack dice

Here is a quick snippet from GreenDragon that seems to summarize the argument:

Quote

So we have to focus on "you may discard any number of your equipped {bomb} Upgrade cards."
You are instructed to discard X equipped cards. This sounds as if they were all discarded at the same time. But we know that X-Wing TMG does not know actually simultaneous steps - so you have to start with one card!

If this is true (no simultaneous effects) then we have our answer:
1. you discard a card - EM proccs and a token may be discarded instead.
2. you discard a card - EM proccs and a token may be discarded instead.
3. you discard a card - no EM left and a card is discarded.
4. you discard a card - no EM left and a card is discarded.

If you disagree please explain this to me: You are allowed to discard the upgrade card immediately, even if you have an ordnance token on it, correct?
So what is the difference between discarding an upgrade card that still has a token and one that has not anymore a token?

I disagree with the assertion that "X-Wing TMG does not know actually simultaneous steps" leads to this conclusion. Taking the target lock as an example, which asks us to "reroll any number of his attack dice" (the same wording as "discard any number of upgrade cards") we do not use a target lock in order to:

Given an attack roll of bang, blank, blank, eye
1. Reroll the first blank, see the result
2. Reroll the second blank, see the result
3. Reroll the eye, see the result
Be done rerolling.

Instead, we select which dice we will reroll and then reroll them all simultaneously.

Extending this to MM, we first select which cards we will discard, and then discard them all simultaneously. Yes, we will be putting the bombs out onto the field one at a time, but we get only one opportunity to select which cards to discard. If you have two cluster mines and extra munitions equipped, then you select ... nevermind, at this point I'm just retreading arguments.

My point is that there is precedent in X-Wing for the phrasing "[verb] any number of [noun]s" to mean that all [noun]s must be selected prior to any of them being [verb]ed.

Exactly. It's not a loop of any kind. It is, like General Hux, Fleet Officer, or spending a Target Lock, a function that expects a distinct set of one kind of thing as its input.

1. Discard any number of Bomb cards.
2. Select 3 Bomb cards (all of which happen to have EM tokens).
3. Discard said cards.
4. Lose EM tokens instead of cards.
5. Drop 3 Bombs, still have 3 Bomb cards (none of which have EM tokens any longer).

The EM discard replacement doesn't happen in the middle of selecting cards to discard. You select them all at once, then EM tokens replace the cards once you actually attempt to discard them.

That said, it's just like FFG to rule the opposite way for no reason at all...

6 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Not quite. Why do you need a rule that allows you to discard the same card multiple times, when you're not actually discarding the same card multiple times?

You need a rule that allows you to do something in a game. That is how games work. If you are saying that you aren't trying to use MM on the same upgrade card why do you think you can get mines for both?

Quote

And how/why does the game "remember" which card was used? Why does it not forget after the first iteration?

Because of the next sentence of MM " Place all corresponding bomb tokens in the play area beyond Range 3 of enemy ships. " bomb tokens from the equipped bomb upgrade cards that were discarded. The game can call for game states when it needs to.

Quote

Yes, but the rules do not keep track.

Except when they do/need to for another rule.

Quote

They don't care how often a card was targeted, because usually the card would be discarded and the game is free to forget.

There needs to be a rule that lets you discard a card or target a card/ship multiple times by the same trigger otherwise you just do it once, redline is an example of a trigger that can target the same ship multiple times from the same trigger (in this case acquiring a target lock).

Quote

EM changes the first part, but not the second: the card is not discarded, but the game still forgets.

EM replaces the discard with something else. MM doesn't "forget" which equipped card was selected for discard, if it did then we wouldn't know which bombs to place.

Quote

I don't understand? Burden of proof for what? That it's like a loop? Are you asking for proof for an analogy ?

Burden of proof that MM is a looping effect that happens multiple times and not just once.

I amazed no one has cited the Boba Fett crew card yet as a precedence for the Extra Munition Token being treated as a card as per the FAQ/Errata

4 minutes ago, Deimos said:

I amazed no one has cited the Boba Fett crew card yet as a precedence for the Extra Munition Token being treated as a card as per the FAQ/Errata

Because it doesn't apply. Boba attempts to make the player discard an appropriate upgrade, the EM token does it's job and says "Hey, discard me instead!" At no point is the EM token treated as an extra copy of the card.

I would like to say two things first: I'm not trying to be difficult or a sophist here, I genuinely don't understand. So thanks @Oberron for his patience. I enjoy these exchanges, and I hope you do too. Personally, my view was definitely changed on how MM works with relevance to the game. That is, I now also think that "equipped cards" is the most relevant part and defines an upper limit, so you can't discard 4 in total.

8 hours ago, Bascaria said:

Extending this to MM [...]

While I really appreciate the input, I don't think it applies to the question whether it is a loop in general. I'd say rolling dice is handled differently than other card effects.

8 hours ago, Bascaria said:

My point is that there is precedent in X-Wing for the phrasing "[verb] any number of [noun]s" to mean that all [noun]s must be selected prior to any of them being [verb]ed.

But I do agree that it helps answer the (only) relevant question of this thread because it provides an upper limit and thus we have a for-loop.

7 hours ago, digitalbusker said:

Exactly. It's not a loop of any kind. It is, like General Hux, Fleet Officer, or spending a Target Lock, a function that expects a distinct set of one kind of thing as its input.

But what happens if you assign a focus to a ship and something happens (e.g. Jake, but als stress by Rage on Soontir, ...)? You will have to assign one token first, and then the next, not both at the same time. The only instance we see simultaneous things is with dice. So the loop looks like this for Hux:

for (i in 1:{number of friendly ships})
assign 1 focus to ship i
if condition card still available
assign condition card? -> assign card to ship i

And you can go to up to three ships. But you will have to do one after the other, technically. Same thing for MM.

3 hours ago, Oberron said:

You need a rule that allows you to do something in a game. That is how games work. If you are saying that you aren't trying to use MM on the same upgrade card why do you think you can get mines for both?

To repeat my argument:
MM instructs me to discard a bomb upgrade. EM intercepts and instructs me to discard something else instead. Then the second bomb I'm allowed to discard kicks in, and I can again choose which bomb I will discard.

While writing this I think I finally understood your position: you think that "equipped card" already kind of marks which upgrade cards can be targeted by MM?
So MM basically determines at the very beginning which cards are legitimate targets, in addition to counting how many there are? And this then means that my only try to select bomb A is already through and I have only bomb B left?

Because I read it differently. To me "equipped card" belongs fix to "any number of equipped card". So in my interpretation, it doesn't care about which card but only how many . I think then it also makes sense what I'm saying, and the for loop would look like this:

for (i in 1:{number of equipped cards}
choose bomb card
discard bomb card
place corresponding token

3 hours ago, Oberron said:

Because of the next sentence of MM " Place all corresponding bomb tokens in the play area beyond Range 3 of enemy ships. " bomb tokens from the equipped bomb upgrade cards that were discarded. The game can call for game states when it needs to.

Except when they do/need to for another rule.

There needs to be a rule that lets you discard a card or target a card/ship multiple times by the same trigger otherwise you just do it once, redline is an example of a trigger that can target the same ship multiple times from the same trigger (in this case acquiring a target lock).

This part of the discussion is also very interesting, because I really do think the game forgets. To start right off with Redline: yes, Redline needs the explicit approval, but only because it would otherwise violate two core rule: you can only maintain one TL, and you replace your TL if you target a ship again. That does not mean you generally can't affect a target twice. But it does mean that you need explicit instructions if you would otherwise violate a core rule.

And for the bolded part: that's why I chose a ship with two identical bombs. I still maintain that the game has no idea which bomb token came from which bomb. And that also means it does not care.

3 hours ago, Oberron said:

EM replaces the discard with something else. MM doesn't "forget" which equipped card was selected for discard, if it did then we wouldn't know which bombs to place.

My fault: it only forgets when it reaches the next iteration, as every loop does. Which is why the idea of a loop really helps along, I believe.

3 hours ago, Oberron said:

Burden of proof that MM is a looping effect that happens multiple times and not just once.

Because every game effect - with the exception of (re)rolling dice - that does several things at once does them sequentially, not simultaneously. Which is a loop.

7 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Because every game effect - with the exception of (re)rolling dice - that does several things at once does them sequentially, not simultaneously. Which is a loop.

Yes, it will drop them sequentially, nothing is simultaneous in this game you are right (Except dice). But we can see with target lock wording that you have to choose all the card first. Then discard them sequentially. So you will not be able to choose two time the same card. Except if FFG rules otherwise. But right now, I think target lock is a really good precedent.

Just now, muribundi said:

But we can see with target lock wording that you have to choose all the card first.

How dumb do I feel for not spotting this parallel earlier. This x10 with double frosting and cashback.

7 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

I would like to say two things first: I'm not trying to be difficult or a sophist here, I genuinely don't understand. So thanks @Oberron for his patience. I enjoy these exchanges, and I hope you do too. Personally, my view was definitely changed on how MM works with relevance to the game. That is, I now also think that "equipped cards" is the most relevant part and defines an upper limit, so you can't discard 4 in total.

This forum is all about discussion after all. I enjoy level headed discussions that don't result in passive aggressive name calling and poor claims of "my logic is superior to yours!" like some people seem to jump to when stuck in a corner.

Quote

To repeat my argument:

MM instructs me to discard a bomb upgrade. EM intercepts and instructs me to discard something else instead. Then the second bomb I'm allowed to discard kicks in, and I can again choose which bomb I will discard.

EM only intercepts when you go to discard, not when you choose how many you want to discard. You pick the amount of upgrades you want to discard first, then discard them, then place bomb tokens. Placing bombs is done last after all the discards.

Quote

While writing this I think I finally understood your position: you think that "equipped card" already kind of marks which upgrade cards can be targeted by MM?

Correct, because that is what the card tells us we can pick for any number.

Quote

So MM basically determines at the very beginning which cards are legitimate targets, in addition to counting how many there are? And this then means that my only try to select bomb A is already through and I have only bomb B left?

With legitimate targets being up to the amount of equipped bomb upgrade cards.

Quote

Because I read it differently. To me "equipped card" belongs fix to "any number of equipped card". So in my interpretation, it doesn't care about which card but only how many .

But you also have stated that MM only works once per card " In this example you would not be allowed to use MM twice - but you aren't, you're using it once for "any number". " with any number being up to the equipped bomb upgrade card. Unless I am misreading something?

Quote

This part of the discussion is also very interesting, because I really do think the game forgets.

I always see it as the game forgets until it needs to remember it. Which with the wording of the final sentence of MM, to me it does remember which cards are discarded.

Quote

To start right off with Redline: yes, Redline needs the explicit approval, but only because it would otherwise violate two core rule: you can only maintain one TL, and you replace your TL if you target a ship again.

You need a rule to do anything. Redline has a rule to effectively ignore the two core rules. But the difference is that redline has a rule to do something.

Quote

That does not mean you generally can't affect a target twice. But it does mean that you need explicit instructions if you would otherwise violate a core rule.

And for the bolded part: that's why I chose a ship with two identical bombs. I still maintain that the game has no idea which bomb token came from which bomb. And that also means it does not care.

My fault: it only forgets when it reaches the next iteration, as every loop does. Which is why the idea of a loop really helps along, I believe.

Because every game effect - with the exception of (re)rolling dice - that does several things at once does them sequentially, not simultaneously. Which is a loop.

It shows that you need a rule in order to do something.

As for identical bombs or not the game has to know which bomb came from which bomb upgrade card that is pretty much the definition of corresponding. Does it matter in the game? No, not really. But to know which bomb is from which upgrade card is still important even if they were the same because it matters if the bombs are different.

34 minutes ago, muribundi said:

But we can see with target lock wording that you have to choose all the card first. Then discard them sequentially. So you will not be able to choose two time the same card. Except if FFG rules otherwise. But right now, I think target lock is a really good precedent.

You pretty much convinced me. I'm still slightly skeptical.

Even though otherwise, my argument is that this only requires me to determine the amount of dice and not specific dice, which would allow me to declare to reroll 3 and then roll one after another has still two points going for it that I made earlier already: 1. there are specific rules that prohibit this (can only reroll a dice once) and 2. the precedent that dice - unlike anything else - are rolled simultaneously.