10 minutes ago, Darth Seridur said:

Strikers seem to have 2 nerfs in 2nd edition.

On their Ailerons move, if they bump a ship, or go through/land on an asteroid, they skip their "Perform Action" step.

Fine about the asteroid one. Most Striker players can fly through rock fields, fine.

Super pissed about the bump one. Actively manipulating bumps with your ailerons to your advantage was awesome.

Strikers are so easily the most fun ship to fly.

Did I miss this somewhere in the rr? First time I’ve heard this...

3 minutes ago, PaulRuddSays said:

Did I miss this somewhere in the rr? First time I’ve heard this...

Read p14 Overlap section of the Rules Ref.

For rocks, read obstacles section.

For knowledge purposes:

Ffg issued an FAQ in 1.0 to stop this from happening (see adaptive ailerons upgrade card in 1.0 FAQ. It is still available to download). It exempted them from losing their action via ailerons rocks/ bumping ships.

Legit want them to do that again.

Is it better to OP Vader or Soontir?

New Krennic Aces (193)
Darth Vader — TIE Advanced	70
Supernatural Reflexes	12
Fire-Control System	3
Afterburners	8
Ship Total: 93
 	
Scarif Base Pilot — TIE Reaper	41
Director Krennic	5
Ship Total: 46
 	
Soontir Fel — TIE Interceptor	52
Predator	2
Ship Total: 54

Strikers do not lose actions from hitting ships with AA in 2.0

From hitting rocks with AA it's debatable.

4 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Strikers do not lose actions from hitting ships with AA in 2.0

From hitting rocks with AA it's debatable.

Proof? Evidence? Show your work?

As a Striker player, I must know the correct answer.

7 minutes ago, RStan said:

Proof? Evidence? Show your work?

As a Striker player, I must know the correct answer.

In this case (I haven't cared to check), you'll need to demonstrate why strikers do lose their action from AA bumps, as the aileron is entirely separate from performing an action etc.

By default, they get their action, unless there's some rule that says they don't.

50 minutes ago, impspy said:

Is it better to OP Vader or Soontir?

New Krennic Aces (193)
Darth Vader — TIE Advanced	70
Supernatural Reflexes	12
Fire-Control System	3
Afterburners	8
Ship Total: 93
 	
Scarif Base Pilot — TIE Reaper	41
Director Krennic	5
Ship Total: 46
 	
Soontir Fel — TIE Interceptor	52
Predator	2
Ship Total: 54

I'd OP Fel in a hearbeat. Vader has FCS, meaning he's more likely to have 3+ hits/crits, which are going to go through anyway. Fel, w/o target lock capability, stands a better chance of having single hits/eyeballs, which can be OP'd off for an effect, leaving him tokens for defense.

18 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Strikers do not lose actions from hitting ships with AA in 2.0

From hitting rocks with AA it's debatable.

I'd love this to be true. Is there an errata for it? Rules Reference, p14, #3 under overlapping: "The ship skips it's perform action step". With AA clarified as a maneuver (basically strikers and reapers make 2 maneuvers per turn, with one action step after both), the rules do seem to read that strikers have to successfully execute both maneuvers to get their action step.

10 minutes ago, JasonCole said:

I'd love this to be true. Is there an errata for it? Rules Reference, p14, #3 under overlapping: "The ship skips it's perform action step". With AA clarified as a maneuver (basically strikers and reapers make 2 maneuvers per turn, with one action step after both), the rules do seem to read that strikers have to successfully execute both maneuvers to get their action step.

I imagine it will be FAQ'd to say otherwise, but putting my rules lawyer hat on and I really can't interpret it any other way.

"If a ship executes a maneuver and overlaps a ship, it must PARTIALLY execute that maneuver by performing the following steps:

*blahblahblah*

3. The ship skips its Perform Action step."

Since the AA is the ship executing a maneuver, I don't see right now how it doesn't skip it's perform action step as written.

3 minutes ago, Scott Pilgrim2 said:

I imagine it will be FAQ'd to say otherwise, but putting my rules lawyer hat on and I really can't interpret it any other way.

"If a ship executes a maneuver and overlaps a ship, it must PARTIALLY execute that maneuver by performing the following steps:

*blahblahblah*

3. The ship skips its Perform Action step."

Since the AA is the ship executing a maneuver, I don't see right now how it doesn't skip it's perform action step as written.

I'll bet $5 it's not ruled that way at Coruscant.

4 minutes ago, Scott Pilgrim2 said:

I imagine it will be FAQ'd to say otherwise, but putting my rules lawyer hat on and I really can't interpret it any other way.

"If a ship executes a maneuver and overlaps a ship, it must PARTIALLY execute that maneuver by performing the following steps:

*blahblahblah*

3. The ship skips its Perform Action step."

Since the AA is the ship executing a maneuver, I don't see right now how it doesn't skip it's perform action step as written.

14 minutes ago, JasonCole said:

I'd love this to be true. Is there an errata for it? Rules Reference, p14, #3 under overlapping: "The ship skips it's perform action step". With AA clarified as a maneuver (basically strikers and reapers make 2 maneuvers per turn, with one action step after both), the rules do seem to read that strikers have to successfully execute both maneuvers to get their action step.

Their dial is not faceup during that whole process, so this does not apply.

Then they execute another maneuver afterwards. There is no clause saying you get 1 perform action step per turn, as free actions are no more.

If someone says that crashing a striker into another ship loses the action, it would have to be the (non-present) action that they would get for AA- which implies that a striker would do its first action after AA and then another after the real move.

Which if that's true get ready for massed Focus+Evade strikers holy ****.

26 minutes ago, Brunas said:

In this case (I haven't cared to check), you'll need to demonstrate why strikers do lose their action from AA bumps, as the aileron is entirely separate from performing an action etc.

By default, they get their action, unless there's some rule that says they don't.

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.

1 minute ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Their dial is not faceup during that whole process, so this does not apply.

Then they execute another maneuver afterwards. There is no clause saying you get 1 perform action step per turn, as free actions are no more.

If someone says that crashing a striker into another ship loses the action, it would have to be the (non-present) action that they would get for AA- which implies that a striker would do its first action after AA and then another after the real move.

Which if that's true get ready for massed Focus+Evade strikers holy ****.

This, pretty much.

I'm waiting for "it didn't say skip your action this turn so you skip it for the rest of the game" next.

The text for activation and performing a maneuver is written for ships activating normally.

Just now, 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.

No, they don't. I'm not using my feelings here, I'm using apathy. I don't care, so I haven't checked the rules reference.

I don't know why the new version has brought out the worst rules lawyering I've ever seen, but I'm sick of it.

Yes, there are apparently mistakes in the rules reference. User your brains to pick them out.

3 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Their dial is not faceup during that whole process, so this does not apply.

Then they execute another maneuver afterwards. There is no clause saying you get 1 perform action step per turn, as free actions are no more.

If someone says that crashing a striker into another ship loses the action, it would have to be the (non-present) action that they would get for AA- which implies that a striker would do its first action after AA and then another after the real move.

Which if that's true get ready for massed Focus+Evade strikers holy ****.

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

5 minutes ago, Brunas said:

No, they don't. I'm not using my feelings here, I'm using apathy. I don't care, so I haven't checked the rules reference.

I don't know why the new version has brought out the worst rules lawyering I've ever seen, but I'm sick of it.

Yes, there are apparently mistakes in the rules reference. User your brains to pick them out.

Fair enough. This is from rules reference. I don't think this could be considered "a mistake". Seems pretty straight forward. (emphasis mine)

OVERLAP
While a ship executes a maneuver or otherwise moves, it overlaps an object
if the ship’s final position would physically be on top of an object.

A ship fully executes a maneuver if it does not overlap a ship. If a ship
executes a maneuver and overlaps a ship, it must partially execute that
maneuver by performing the following steps:

1. Move the ship backward along the template until it is no longer on top of
any other ships. While doing so, adjust the position of the ship so that the
hashmarks in the middle of both sets of guides remains centered over the
line down the middle of the template.
2. Once the ship is no longer on top of any other ship, place it so that it is
touching the last ship it backed over. This may result in the ship returning
to its starting position.
3. The ship skips its Perform Action step.
• Even though a ship that partially executes a maneuver must skip its
Perform Action step, it can still perform actions granted from other game
effects.
• Even if a ship partially executes a maneuver, it is still treated as having
executed a maneuver of the indicated speed, bearing, and difficulty.

2 minutes ago, 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

Then this would indicate a striker gets 2 actions a turn, since there are no limits on actions/turn.

While we're on the subject of rules lawyering, I'd like to make known my displeasure with turrets not allowing for front arc attack effects, when it's pointed forward...

Everything (but Boba) has been nerfed in 2.0, why are you assuming it won't be the case for Ailrons too?

12 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I'll bet $5 it's not ruled that way at Coruscant.

That's very likely thought, if Devs are going to be there we should expect to have some weird "not working as written" ruling, as traditionally have been so far.

7 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Their dial is not faceup during that whole process, so this does not apply.

Then they execute another maneuver afterwards. There is no clause saying you get 1 perform action step per turn, as free actions are no more.

If someone says that crashing a striker into another ship loses the action, it would have to be the (non-present) action that they would get for AA- which implies that a striker would do its first action after AA and then another after the real move.

Which if that's true get ready for massed Focus+Evade strikers holy ****.

Why not having the dial faceup should matter?

Move:

"A ship moves when it executes a maneuver or otherwise changes position using a
template (such as barrel rolling or boosting)."
So using ailrons is definitely a move (and not a manouver).

Overlap:

"While a ship executes a maneuver or otherwise moves, it overlaps an object
if the ship’s final position would physically be on top of an object.
[...]

The ship skips its Perform Action step."

Then you activate and you have to skip the perform action step.

Overlap entry is probably the worst written one in the whole reference book (it only speaks about ships overlapping something when they move, then in the Mines entry they refer to ships overlapping mines directly dropped onto them for example) but without a FAQ it's pretty straightforward imo.

2 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Then this would indicate a striker gets 2 actions a turn, since there are no limits on actions/turn.

MUH PERFORM ACTION STEP! I FULLY EXECUTED A MANEUVER.

THIS IS CLEARLY INTENDED!

So... no one is taking my $5 bet (that AA bumps do NOT skip the perform action step, and will be ruled as such at Coruscant)?

1 minute ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Then this would indicate a striker gets 2 actions a turn, since there are no limits on actions/turn.

Except that nothing about executing a maneuver grants you an action. The order of phases grants action.

During activation:
"Each ship activates by resolving the following steps in order:
1. Reveal Dial: The ship’s assigned dial is revealed by flipping it faceup
and then placing it next to its ship card.
2. Execute Maneuver: The ship executes the maneuver selected on the
revealed dial.
3. Perform Action: The ship may perform one action."

AA inserts the extra mandatory maneuver before reveal dial, but doesn't exempt it from the effects of the maneuver (overlapping and skipping the action step being one of them).

U N K N O W A B L E
N
K
N
O
W
A
B
L
E

3 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

So... no one is taking my $5 bet (that AA bumps do NOT skip the perform action step, and will be ruled as such at Coruscant)?

Oh **** no. I'm sure they'll sort this. I'm just pointing out that it's written right now pretty specifically to follow keywords such as maneuver, overlap, and action step. Without clarification, all we have is the rules vs how we want it to work.

5 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

Why not having the dial faceup should matter?

Move:

"A ship moves when it executes a maneuver or otherwise changes position using a
template (such as barrel rolling or boosting)."
So using ailrons is definitely a move (and not a manouver).

You have to look at the AA on the ship card. It specifically lists ailerons as a maneuver, not a move. If it wasn't called a "maneuver", then this wouldn't be a thing.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwia1-vdgt7dAhVKy1MKHRD3BaIQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fxwing-miniatures-second-edition.wikia.com%2Fwiki%2F%22Vizier%22&psig=AOvVaw2CtVuYPa61wOcPUii7hFa1&ust=1538235177097816