Just now, Scott Pilgrim2 said:

I don't feel sad for Calen - not knocking his decision, but he decided to go for the easy win.

It is difficult. You can say he should have let the guy redial his move as toy spaceships, and others will say you have to play HARD mode as competitive event.

Either way, it feels sad for Xwing.

Just now, Scott Pilgrim2 said:

I don't feel sad for Calen - not knocking his decision, but he decided to go for the easy win.

Yeah, let's just guilt trip Calen for not letting Peter take back a game changing error that's entirely Peter's fault.

Not saying you are doing that, but people are doing that on Twitch. The onus is not on Calen to allow Peter to take back that kind of mistake at a Final table of a System Open.

Calen would have basically had to ask the judge to ignore the rules. At a game without a table judge and stream it's a **** of a lot easier on paper. But I can't fault him. Honestly doubt I would be able to turn down not having to worry about the travel expenses for worlds. I am not that good a person.

Am I spelling ASTERISK correctly?

On the other hand...

"1. Maneuver Ship: During this step, the ship moves using the matching template.

a. Take the template that matches the maneuver from the supply.

b. Set the template between the ship’s front guides (so that it is flush against the base).

c. Pick up and place the ship at the opposite end of the template and slide the rear guides of the ship into the template.

d. Return the template to the supply (Maneuver, RR. p.13)"

8 minutes ago, Transmogrifier said:

However, there is also no step for placing the ship at the end of the maneuver template in the nubs prior to the "rotate 90 degrees ..." instructions. The ruling argued at Toronto would require that step in order to make any sense.

I think it's possible to argue from the general Maneuver rule that there is a step when a ship was placed with the rear guides into the template. I don't necessarily think it's iron-clad, but there's not nothing there. There is totally a valid case for interpreting the talon roll as checking the guides-based position; it's not nonsense, but I don't know if it's the most convincing case.

//

So. We've got a general maneuver rule which says to put in the rear guides. A Talon Roll bearing roll which skips/adjusts this, but only conditionally.

But maybe the key word is "would." The overlap rule doesn't require you to actually have your ship where it *IS* physically on top of another one, only that it would be. That is, the hypothetical final position is relevant. You don't need to make a physical overlap actually happen, so long as it would happen.

As I dig and look at this from other angles, I kinda think I'm where I started. The best way to treat a Talon Roll is to check the hypothetical final positions for whether or not they would overlap, in order to determine if it fully executes.

I think that's the most convincing argument I can put forward.

No, I don't know the full details, but here's my decision tree, based on the fact I would just let my opponent fix clearly erred dials:

if Marhsall said no, tell my opponent to ignore the marshall, as it's the final table, and our decision to continue playing doesnt affect other games.

If it's my decision, while im entitled to not let them change their dials that are clearly in error, i can... and people can judge me as a morally suspect person.

1 minute ago, Velvetelvis said:

Am I spelling ASTERISK correctly?

It depends.

Thing is, we really DONT know which it was. And MOST people aren't comfortable enough to tell a marshall "naw, we're good" in that situation. It comes from my other tournament experiences.

So I can't say im surprised by the ending, but it's truly sad.

1 minute ago, MegaSilver said:

Yeah, let's just guilt trip Calen for not letting Peter take back a game changing error that's entirely Peter's fault.

Not saying you are doing that, but people are doing that on Twitch. The onus is not on Calen to allow Peter to take back that kind of mistake at a Final table of a System Open.

My instinct is that he should have, but that is selfish for me as a viewer. Calen absolutely did the right thing, especially with an actual big money prize on the line.

3 minutes ago, Iceburg2 said:

Can someone summarize how the final ended?

#1) I set my dials wrong and two ships will fly off the board. There’s no point playing if this happens.

#2) You made a mistake and lost. Sorry.

cue the reddit meltdown.

Will FFG be doing their customary System Open summary article tomorrow?😆

Wonder if they will be extra careful to make sure they get the Winner's name right. unlike the last one, when they declared Mynock Ryan Farmer the winner.

4 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

I think it's possible to argue from the general Maneuver rule that there is a step when a ship was placed with the rear guides into the template. I don't necessarily think it's iron-clad, but there's not nothing there. There is totally a valid case for interpreting the talon roll as checking the guides-based position; it's not nonsense, but I don't know if it's the most convincing case.

The "advanced maneuvers" part of the Bearing section tells you that advanced maneuvers don't follow the same rules:

"Advanced Maneuvers
The following bearings are for ADVANCED MANEUVERS. These have exceptions to the standard rules for executing a maneuver."

Notably it doesn't say "these follow all the same rules unless stated otherwise" or anything in that vein. So to make the "Toronto Ruling" you have to *really* want it.

5 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

if Marhsall said no, tell my opponent to ignore the marshall, as it's the final table, and our decision to continue playing doesnt affect other games.

While we're in vigilante justice territory here, I'd also like to note that this means you can't collude in a final. Not that you can't agree to prize split etc - quite the opposite. You can't collude against no one.

4 minutes ago, Estarriol said:

#1) I set my dials wrong and two ships will fly off the board. There’s no point playing if this happens.

#2) You made a mistake and lost. Sorry.

cue the reddit meltdown.

But did they tell you how Tallon Rolls really work?

Too soon to joke?

5 minutes ago, Brunas said:

You can't collude against no one.

Arya disagrees!

19 minutes ago, Iceburg2 said:

Can someone summarize how the final ended?

Peter Rose dialed 2 hards towards the table edge for his B-Wings that left one of them flying off the edge the following turn. He conceded the match since he'd have been down too many ships against Calen Wong's Rebel swarm as a result. IIrc (watched the stream) he chose not to request his opponent allow a dial change/walk back.

So why are folks all up in arms about Talon rolls but not any of the Cascade standard rules as written violations?

The end step timing chart is my personal favorite. To **** with telling me QD can't baffle to attack after you cleanup tokens. If I want to do bad, shenanigany things that's my right.

4 minutes ago, Deathrevived91 said:

So why are folks all up in arms about Talon rolls but not any of the Cascade standard rules as written violations?

The end step timing chart is my personal favorite. To **** with telling me QD can't baffle to attack after you cleanup tokens. If I want to do bad, shenanigany things that's my right.

As written that is exactly how it is supposed to function. The issue comes down to how they are defining "during" as not triggering the Ability Que.

If I’m at a system open and my opponent wants to fly off the board and concede I’ll take it. I suck at this game and need wins any way I can get them.

4 minutes ago, Scott Pilgrim2 said:

Arya disagrees!

didn't want the show, reference missed, rekt

3 minutes ago, Deathrevived91 said:

So why are folks all up in arms about Talon rolls but not any of the Cascade standard rules as written violations?

The end step timing chart is my personal favorite. To **** with telling me QD can't baffle to attack after you cleanup tokens. If I want to do bad, shenanigany things that's my right.

I'm not sure I follow - you're saying there's a camp of people upset about the small rules fixes tournaments for undefined behavior we're using, that are also wanting talon rolls to be performed correctly, e.g., it doesn't matter if a 3 turn bumps. Those are logically consistent, unless you're referring to someone else/different set of beliefs?

6 minutes ago, Deathrevived91 said:

So why are folks all up in arms about Talon rolls but not any of the Cascade standard rules as written violations?

The end step timing chart is my personal favorite. To **** with telling me QD can't baffle to attack after you cleanup tokens. If I want to do bad, shenanigany things that's my right.

Probably because weird gimmicky things ruled ineffective in advance is nothing at all like what is expected to be a normal execution of a maneuver suddenly ruled weird to cost someone a game.

5 minutes ago, Transmogrifier said:

The "advanced maneuvers" part of the Bearing section tells you that advanced maneuvers don't follow the same rules:

"Advanced Maneuvers
The following bearings are for ADVANCED MANEUVERS. These have exceptions to the standard rules for executing a maneuver."

Notably it doesn't say "these follow all the same rules unless stated otherwise" or anything in that vein. So to make the "Toronto Ruling" you have to *really* want it.

Maybe this is just me having a pretty multi-disciplinary background. There's totally interpretive space to make a case for checking the guides-position first and not be a giant dumb-dumb. I don't think it's the most convincing, but it's not like someone is just making stuff up with no reference to the text.

They aren't doing something like checking the 1-straight and the 4-bank in the other direction, to borrow from a joke @Brunas made. I think the stronger case (check the wiggles) relies on a bit more nuance, and the reader applying a bit more finesse and leverage on the rules. I don't think it's a bad interpretation to go the other way, I just find it less convincing.

Just now, Biophysical said:

Probably because weird gimmicky things ruled ineffective in advance is nothing at all like what is expected to be a normal execution of a maneuver suddenly ruled weird to cost someone a game.

There is this. Every one knows going in (or has that ruling available before hand) that this is how they're doing it. Even though they did rule it wrong.

Here's what I want to know: why--not in an interpretive sense, but in a gamestate sense--are folks worrying about Talon Rolls? What was the on-table sequence of events that lead to this?

1 minute ago, theBitterFig said:

Here's what I want to know: why--not in an interpretive sense, but in a gamestate sense--are folks worrying about Talon Rolls? What was the on-table sequence of events that lead to this?

TL;DR - Vader dialed in a Talon Roll. An adjustment forward would clear, but the middle hash would not. The judges ruled that since the ship could not do the initial mid hash placement, Vader bumped. So he ended up facing the wrong direction and out of the fight for two turns which was a big momentum shift.