44 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

It's felt like you've been pushing back when I've said the same things (no BR, but they need a price cut) through the last few pages. If that wasn't your intention, all good, no harm, no foul.

Looked back over and it seems we didn't bump heads over this one, though we had a good thought experiment involving VT as an upgrade. If RZ-1s get a price cut they get a price cut. A weaker than prockets rocket style missile might help too (heck, might help allot of missile carriers).

30 minutes ago, svelok said:

now for something completely different

how does kalani interact with the ability queue? (namely, FTC/afterburners/etc)

I know what I already think the answer is, I want uncolored opinions

Player order.

1 hour ago, svelok said:

now for something completely different

how does kalani interact with the ability queue? (namely, FTC/afterburners/etc)

I know what I already think the answer is, I want uncolored opinions

I'd also say player order. If Kalani is first player, they get to grab locks first. If Kalani is second player, opponents can FTC or such away.

1 hour ago, Hiemfire said:

Looked back over and it seems we didn't bump heads over this one, though we had a good thought experiment involving VT as an upgrade. If RZ-1s get a price cut they get a price cut. A weaker than prockets rocket style missile might help too (heck, might help allot of missile carriers).

I think I conflated you with the other pushback relating to "If A-Wings get a cut, then Scyks must get one, too." Mostly, I think the 4 points for VT is too much for an A-Wing to pay.

Anyhow, all good.

6 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

I think I conflated you with the other pushback relating to "If A-Wings get a cut, then Scyks must get one, too." Mostly, I think the 4 points for VT is too much for an A-Wing to pay.

Anyhow, all good.

It isn't just VT that that 4 point difference pays for, but /shrug. We'll see what FFG does.

1 hour ago, Hiemfire said:

Player order.

Just now, theBitterFig said:

I'd also say player order

Specifically, the subject of distinction is: does the ship which satisfies the requirements to place Kalani into the queue, have to be ship which satisfies the requirements and is chosen to receive the effect when Kalani resolves, and vice-versa.

1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

Planetary Sentinel 14th on Metawing since Jaunary, ahead of the Blue Escort T-65... Shouldn't read too much into this given the circumstances, but clearly not dumpster tier.

Note the sample size, and in particular the size of events, that's being drawn from - specifically as compared to the other pilots around it. I realize metawing doesn't support filtering data by event size, so:

Using only large events, for 1371 total lists:
Battle for North Texas (Extended, 56/58)
Fly Better Las Vegas Open Grand Championship (Extended, 232/233)
Sith Taker Open 2020 (Extended, 96/96)
Sith Taker Open - Hyperspace Side Event (Hyperspace, 68/69)
Dallas/Fort Worth System Open (Hyperspace, 137/137)
Road to Lima Open Series - Online (TTS) (Hyperspace, 45/45)
GSP Space Jam #1 (Extended, 148/148)
GSP Space Jam #2 - Rome (Extended, 145/146)
GSP Space Jam #3 - Los Angeles (Extended, 148/148)
Space Jam Sydney Championship (Extended, 143/143)
Space Jam Los Angeles (Extended, 148/148)

There are 7 lists with Planetary Sentinels, 0 in cut; 14 lists with Blue Escorts, 2 in cut. Compare 9-0 Pheonix Squadrons, 6-2 Tempests; 131-20 Boba Fetts as a yardstick. Lack of evidence etc but the metawing ranking massively obscures that the pilot has been taken to large events roughly as many times as (checks notes) IG-88D or Fenn Sheath...

8 minutes ago, svelok said:

metawing ranking massively obscures

Everything probably?

Im not entirely sure why anyone still looks at it for stuff besides history since the start of 2.0.

18 minutes ago, svelok said:

Specifically, the subject of distinction is: does the ship which satisfies the requirements to place Kalani into the queue, have to be ship which satisfies the requirements and is chosen to receive the effect when Kalani resolves, and vice-versa.

"If you do, that friendly ship acquires a lock on that enemy ship, and gains 1 stress token."

Yes, the friendly ship that the triggering enemy ship landed in the bullseye arc of is the one effected by the ability if the Kalani carrier's friendly is in range 0-3 of the Kalani carrier and the acquired lock has to be on the enemy ship that triggered the effect. The enemy ship can trigger this multiple times if they land in multiple bullseye arcs simultaneously though. Each bullseye arc it landed in counts as a separate opportunity.

34 minutes ago, svelok said:

Specifically, the subject of distinction is: does the ship which satisfies the requirements to place Kalani into the queue, have to be ship which satisfies the requirements and is chosen to receive the effect when Kalani resolves, and vice-versa.

I'd treat it like Anakin. After an enemy ship moves, if it's in a friendly bullseye, Kalani can trigger. One friendly ship queues up the ability, and if that ship still has the particular enemy in bullseye when the ability resolves, the friendly gets a lock and a stress. If the enemy is first player and used an "after executing" ability to reposition out of bullseye, the friendly ship goes without a Lock or stress.

//

So in addition to the obvious weakness that bullseye effects are hard, there's also the issue that once-per-opportunity only allows one friendly ship to get a lock on a particular enemy. Block Soontir into the bullseye of three Belbullabs? Only one bubblegum gets a lock.

Don't get me wrong: I'm wicked glad Kalani exists. I'm glad there's a non-calculate Tactical Relay. Every single other one was literally unusable for Skakoan Aces, and a few were for even Feethan Ottraw Ottopilots. The HMP also probably doesn't really care about most of the existing calculate ones (the defensive K2-B4 might be OK).

I don't think Kalani is going to be particularly good, but I'm still glad there's a Tactical Relay that's theoretically not-useless for Belbullabs.

38 minutes ago, svelok said:

Lack of evidence etc but the metawing ranking massively obscures that the pilot has been taken to large events roughly as many times as (checks notes) IG-88D or Fenn Sheath...

I guess here's my point: if the Striker was absolute-trash-tier-unplayable-don't-even-bother, it couldn't rank this high on Meta-Wing. Even given the event size differences and the sample size issues, if the Striker was a bottom-third quality ship, it wouldn't be top-ten-percent ship here.

I'm not willing to go much beyond that. Terrible ships probably don't appear in the top 10-15%. Excellent ones probably don't appear in the bottom 10-15%.

//

The other part: I think that if a few folks are making a solid go of it with a ship like a Striker at smaller events, then that's good enough. If every ship is good enough that someone who really loves it can win/cut at small local events, even if it never makes a big splash at large events, then that's low-end balance achieved. That's my definition of playable. There's more top-end balance to do with overperforming ships (probably aces) at large events, but that's kind of a different issue.

13 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

So in addition to the obvious weakness that bullseye effects are hard, there's also the issue that once-per-opportunity only allows one friendly ship to get a lock on a particular enemy. Block Soontir into the bullseye of three Belbullabs? Only one bubblegum gets a lock.

Uses "a" and not "1". If Soontir ends up in the bullseye of 3 Belbullabs simultaneously all 3 instances are processed as separate opportunities.

So, my reading of Kalani:

- Kalani resolves once per opportunity (maneuver). You cannot get 3 locks onto a single ship, even if it lands in 8 bullseyes.

- The enemy ship must be "in a friendly ships bullseye" to enter the queue. The enemy ship must be "in a friendly ships bullseye" to resolve the ability (and that friendly ship gains the tokens). There is no need for these to be the same friendly ship, in the event that the enemy has FTC-ed out of one bullseye and into another; nor to declare which ship will take the tokens until the moment of resolution.

"That friendly ship" in the second sentence is referencing the friendly ship at range 0-3 of the Kalani carrier that the enemy ship landed in the bullseye of during their maneuver. There is no change in reference point between the 2 sentences that would allow a ship other than the original friendly ship who had the enemy land in its bullseye acquire the lock.

Yes, FTC + 1st player is good for getting out of this, regardless if the FTC roll or boost has the ship end up in another bullseye arc (Kalani's does nothing in that case, as the Jedi wasn't executing a maneuver to get there), much as it is at getting out of Snap Shot and Foresight bonus attacks.

13 minutes ago, svelok said:

The enemy ship must be "in a friendly ships bullseye" to enter the queue. The enemy ship must be "in a friendly ships bullseye" to resolve the ability (and that friendly ship gains the tokens). There is no need for these to be the same friendly ship, in the event that the enemy has FTC-ed out of one bullseye and into another; nor to declare which ship will take the tokens until the moment of resolution.

I don't think so.

"That ship" refers to the same friendly ship, but when the ability resolves in the queue you only need to spend the charge to take the lock, wherever the enemy ship is, bullseye or not (if the lock is legal).

3 minutes ago, S4ul0 said:

"That ship" refers to the same friendly ship, but when the ability resolves in the queue you only need to spend the charge to take the lock, wherever the enemy ship is, bullseye or not (if the lock is legal).

This can't be so, as requirements must be met both to enter into the queue as well as to resolve an ability.

Just now, svelok said:

This can't be so, as requirements must be met both to enter into the queue as well as to resolve an ability.

The bullseye is a requirement to resolve the ability?

32 minutes ago, svelok said:

So, my reading of Kalani:

- Kalani resolves once per opportunity (maneuver). You cannot get 3 locks onto a single ship, even if it lands in 8 bullseyes.

- The enemy ship must be "in a friendly ships bullseye" to enter the queue. The enemy ship must be "in a friendly ships bullseye" to resolve the ability (and that friendly ship gains the tokens). There is no need for these to be the same friendly ship, in the event that the enemy has FTC-ed out of one bullseye and into another; nor to declare which ship will take the tokens until the moment of resolution.

Ok. After re-reading the requirements rules in the forum section, I see your point now. I agree.

Does triple up-arrows on the Solitary indicate regenning 3 every round?

If so, it sure sounds like this was meant to trigger multiple times.

15 minutes ago, Bucknife said:

Does triple up-arrows on the Solitary indicate regenning 3 every round?

If so, it sure sounds like this was meant to trigger multiple times.

It does, and it can. The disagreement on multiple triggers is over if a single enemy ship can trigger multiple uses. If 3 separate enemy ships ended up in the bullseye arcs of friendly ships within range 0-3 of the Kalani carrier then it definitely triggers all 3 times.

13 minutes ago, Bucknife said:

Does triple up-arrows on the Solitary indicate regenning 3 every round?

yes

13 minutes ago, Bucknife said:

If so, it sure sounds like this was meant to trigger multiple times.

well, its fairly clear from how its written that it does not - "after blank, if blank, do effect" doesn't really leave any room for the interpretation that it can trigger many times. There's no "for each", "every", "any", or etc verbiage that there easily could have been.

otoh, ignoring the FTC/burners/etc loophole and consider just like, XBAY vs 7 Vultures B22 or some other representative matchup, and it really does not seem hard to trigger kalani on 2 or even 3 ships per turn

picking a totally random, no bias in selection involved, definitely not chosen for any particular reason CIS game from before the dark times and clicking into the middle for a random turn, ignoring repositions that might've happened I see a plausible 3 hypothetical kalani triggers off 4 vultures in a single turn, with just 3 enemy ships on the table

@svelok From the rules reference (page 19, Timing) pertaining to being able to a Jedi that FTCed into a Kalani backed ship's bullseye arc:

"After: The effect resolves immediately following the timing specified."

Being in bullseye arc of the friendly ship is part of the requirement for entering the ability que. "That friendly ship" refers to the ship who's bullseye arc the triggering enemy ship was in immediately after the maneuver was executed. A FTC Jedi that barrel rolls into a bullseye arc using FTC does not trigger Kalani since the Timing for abilities entering the que has passed.

For further reference, from the FAQ in the Rules Reference (page 31) :

"Q: What is meant by a requirement for an ability?
A: A requirement for an ability is a conditional if-statement, such as "if you
are tractored" or "if the defender is in your bullseye arc." A ship being in arc
at range for an attack made as part of a triggered ability, such as Snap
Shot or Foresight, is also a requirement for that ability.
If an ability's requirements are not met at the time the ability would be
added to the queue, it cannot be added to the queue.
If the ability's requirements are not met at the time the ability would be
resolved from the queue, the ability is not resolved and is instead removed
from the queue.
If an ability instructs you to make a choice, such as choosing a ship, that is
not itself a requirement to initiate an ability."

4 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

Being in bullseye arc of the friendly ship is part of the requirement for entering the ability que. "That friendly ship" refers to the ship who's bullseye arc the triggering enemy ship was in immediately after the maneuver was executed. A FTC Jedi that barrel rolls into a bullseye arc using FTC does not trigger Kalani since the Timing for abilities entering the que has passed.

It is not that rolling into an arc triggers Kalani.

It's that after a maneuver into ship A's bullseye, a (first player) ship places FTC into the ability queue, Kalani's requirement is satisfied and enters the ability queue, FTC resolves and rolls out of ship A's bullseye but into ship B's bullseye, Kalani's requirement is satisfied by ship B and resolves, Kalani grants a lock/stress to ship B.

7 minutes ago, svelok said:

well, its fairly clear from how its written that it does not - "after blank, if blank, do effect" doesn't really leave any room for the interpretation that it can trigger many times. There's no "for each", "every", "any", or etc verbiage that there easily could have been.

That "verbiage" is not required. Every time that the timing + trigger condition is met Kalani can enter the que.

Timing: After an enemy ship executes a maneuver,

Condition: if it is in the of a friendly ship at range 0-3,

What you can do: You may spend 1.

There is nothing limiting the number of times Kalani's ability can trigger in a Round other than the number of charges Kalani has.

3 minutes ago, svelok said:

It is not that rolling into an arc triggers Kalani.

It's that after a maneuver into ship A's bullseye, a (first player) ship places FTC into the ability queue, Kalani's requirement is satisfied and enters the ability queue, FTC resolves and rolls out of ship A's bullseye but into ship B's bullseye, Kalani's requirement is satisfied by ship B and resolves, Kalani grants a lock/stress to ship B.

The second ship isn't the ship who's bullseye met the triggering condition for Kalani to enter the que so does not qualify for the second part of the ability (acquire lock for the cost of a stress). "That friendly ship" is referring only to the ship who's bullseye arc triggered Kalani's ability.

58 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

That "verbiage" is not required. Every time that the timing + trigger condition is met Kalani can enter the que.

what? once per opportunity makes no distinction between triggering conditions. at the specified timing, you can trigger kalani exactly one time, the same as you can trigger fine tuned controls or r4-p44 exactly one time.

I'm not prepared to discuss the other aspect, because this conclusion seems foundational.

3 minutes ago, svelok said:

what? once per opportunity makes no distinction between triggering conditions. at the specified timing, you can trigger kalani exactly one time, the same as you can trigger fine tuned controls or r4-p44 exactly one time.

I'm not prepared to discuss the other aspect, because this conclusion seems foundational.

3 separate enemy ships execute their maneuvers during their own activations in the Activation Phase and each of them finishes executing their maneuvers in the bullseye arc of a ship friendly to and range 0-3 of Kalani carrier. That is 3 separate timings where the trigger condition is checked.

Gosh, this is the kind of convoluted ruling that puts me of.

Keep it simple, FFG.