Q: Do TIE Strikers (and Reapers) skip their perform action step if they overlap an asteroid or another ship with their Aileron’s ability maneuver?

A: No.

Just now, Boom Owl said:

Q: Do TIE Strikers (and Reapers) skip their perform action step if they overlap an asteroid or another ship with their Aileron’s ability maneuver?

A: No.

unknowable.

On 9/28/2018 at 1:16 PM, JasonCole said:

Just so we're clear, no one has actually provided written evidence against what I've been talking about so far, right? It's just been all "I'm a rules architect" and "mah strikers" so far, right? I get that's the schtick here. I typically listen to you guys because you're a) funny and b) reasonably logical and pretty common sensical and c) eager to try and break things. I'm moderately confused by the fingers in ears and foot stomping.

On 9/28/2018 at 1:04 PM, Sunitsa said:

ohhhh I love it

Because it definitely wasn't a dev who had no clues on how Leebo and Kylo interacted...

Q: Do TIE Strikers (and Reapers) skip their perform action step if they overlap an asteroid or another ship with their Aileron’s ability maneuver?

A: No. It is only during the Execute Maneuver step that a ship skips its Perform Action step for overlapping a ship or obstacle.

3 minutes ago, jagsba said:

unknowable.

Unforeseeable.

UNKNOWABLE

Can we take a moment to consider whether a stickied forum post for rules clarifications is better or worse than occasional errata documents? Is the barrier for pushing information out this lower? Will most players even know it exists?

On 9/28/2018 at 10:32 AM, Darth Seridur said:

Brunas, read the rules ref. Using your feelings is not sufficient!

Ffg need to give a specific exemption to strikers like they did in 1.0.

@Tlfj200 i wouldnt be surprised. But they need to do something.

I am so close to rioting about this.

On 9/28/2018 at 10:38 AM, JasonCole said:

Nothing in the description of "maneuver" on p13 references a dial in any way. AA is pre-dial reveal, but it's still a maneuver. So far, it looks like this:
1- AA maneuver
1a- did maneuver clear?
y - continue to activation steps
n - follow rules for overlap (including the very specific "skips it's perform action step") This rule doesn't care WHEN the step is, it merely skips it when it happens.

2- Activation
reveal dial, all the blah blah

On 9/28/2018 at 11:03 AM, Sunitsa said:

I don't understand the Jostero example, what's the problem there?

Well, it won't be the first time they make a rule at an event just to publish a FAQ saying otherwise after it.

I'm not that confident about devs understanding their own game, 1.0 gave us plenty of examples where they had no clues

I wonder what I'll do with my $15.

Unbelievable.

6 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

Q: Do TIE Strikers (and Reapers) skip their perform action step if they overlap an asteroid or another ship with their Aileron’s ability maneuver?

A: No. It is only during the Execute Maneuver step that a ship skips its Perform Action step for overlapping a ship or obstacle.

Boom! Good enough for me. (especially since it's crystal ******* clear)

1 minute ago, PaulRuddSays said:

Can we take a moment to consider whether a stickied forum post for rules clarifications is better or worse than occasional errata documents? Is the barrier for this lower?

As long as these migrate over to a future RR, this is definitely better.

This lets them tackle things more granularly without waiting on the RR update, AND is independently verifiable (but their emails!)

This only works if every answered question then makes it to the next FAQ.

Or they could just, you know, wing it. That sounds more efficient.

3 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

As long as these migrate over to a future RR, this is definitely better.

This lets them tackle things more granularly without waiting on the RR update, AND is independently verifiable (but their emails!)

Bonus, I don’t even have to check the forums to find out. How would you construct the over/under that @Rytackle reads them all on air for me? ?

Quote

Q: When a ship is destroyed by a game effect triggered with "before engaging,” does it still engage?

A: Yes, because the game has already reached that initiative step, it is not removed until after all ships of that initiative have engaged, per simultaneous fire.

So, console fire still lets you shoot even if it destroys you?

Quote

Q: If a ship with Cloaking Device [Illicit] rolls a focus result and then fails while attempting to decloak, what happens?

A: The ship does not remove its cloak token.

So, if you pull this off, a breaking cloaking device only breaks when you want it to. Remember to pick the decloak that doesn't work when it breaks and THEN decloak where you actually wanted to be in the system phase!

Quote

Q: Does the StarViper-class Attack Platform’s Microthrusters ship ability affect the barrel roll that results from becoming tractored?

A: Microthrusters does affect this barrel roll. The player whose effect assigned the tractor token determines the direction and position of the template.

That one is weird with "but muh theme!", but sure, why not.

While I may disagree with how they're getting those responses out, it's great that they are at all and most of them appear to make sense.

7 minutes ago, PaulRuddSays said:

Bonus, I don’t even have to check the forums to find out. How would you construct the over/under that @Rytackle reads them all on air for me? ?

Hammer the over!

7 minutes ago, PaulRuddSays said:

Bonus, I don’t even have to check the forums to find out. How would you construct the over/under that @Rytackle reads them all on air for me? ?

Over/under on how many episodes until @rytackle reads them on air, set at 0.5. Keeping in mind that he's traveling for Coruscant.

6 minutes ago, PaulRuddSays said:

Bonus, I don’t even have to check the forums to find out. How would you construct the over/under that @Rytackle reads them all on air for me? ?

Well 25 posted right now...definitely reading the first one because wording mattered a lot in that...not all of them need to be read completely, just said in passing... @Rytackle might not do it as much because people rag on them about doing so... maybe the over/under on these read on Mynock podcast overall is... 9.5?

Q: If a ship with Han Solo [Rebel, Gunner] engages at initiative 7 (through Roark Garnet, Heightened Reflexes [Force Power], etc.) and performs its primary attack, can it subsequently attack from the same turret arc using Han Solo’s bonus attack at initiative 7?

A: Yes. The ship can resolve the two effects in either order, and so if Han’s bonus attack is resolved second, it can perform both.

prepare to commence glue eating

8 minutes ago, drjkel said:

So, console fire still lets you shoot even if it destroys you?

Yes, and how... Had a quadjumper hit by 2 Console Fire crits that round, with one hull remaining... We spent some time pouring over the rules before determining whether it gets to shoot. Because of the same initiative ruling, where it's not removed until after it's initiative value is totally resolved, it fires.

Edit: As a note... I'm glad they answered that question though, because I could see people complaining on it.

Strikers:

So FFG needed to issue an FAQ. Looks like we were right to raise the issue, rather than stamp our feet and pretend it didnt exist.

Strikers needed a faq entry in 1.0 and still needed the exact same Faq for 2.0.

Unknowable!!!!

And yet, we arrived at the place we all expected to arrive at.

...So, did we?

Doesn't it pretty boil down to "ships are removed after all ships at that initiative have activated"?

I like they are posting FAQ on the forum: hopefully this means they can hand them out faster if needed without having to pass Disney's review.

29 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

Q: Do TIE Strikers (and Reapers) skip their perform action step if they overlap an asteroid or another ship with their Aileron’s ability maneuver?

A: No. It is only during the Execute Maneuver step that a ship skips its Perform Action step for overlapping a ship or obstacle.

So they didn't choose to nerf aa in the end

Yeah - this always felt like a loophole they could have used.

I wonder if they just wanted to be extra, super duper, sure about it didn't break license?

2 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

And yet, we arrived at the place we all expected to arrive at.

...So, did we?

A: Maybe

Just now, Tlfj200 said:

And yet, we arrived at the place we all expected to arrive at.

...So, did we?

Yes, we did. I fly Strikers all the time. I wanted the FAQ to safeguard them.

It is like you thought people would happily never pick up Striker players about this.

You live in the US. The land of lawyers and whiny ****. You ought to believe in the worst of opponents!