3 hours ago, ImpStarDeuces said:

Maybe. Kind of depends on how much worth it you think 3-4 extra damage from being unable to scatter is.

I'm a glass half full kind of guy so in in a practical sense, at least in my mind, the OP ruling means an Alpha Sloan list takes one extra shot to kill an ace. Then again you could just forgo the Sloan affect and just accuracy the scatter which is super likely if an interceptor is rolling 6 dice with a reroll.

I'm a little worried about how OK everyone is though with a combo that RAW can basically just delete an expensive ace fighter with little or no interplay. Yeah under OP, you might lose a few more Tie Fighters but at no point do I think anyone I know wants a completely one sided exchange to exist in the game by design.

Honestly, I could play it either way and feel fine about it, I just felt like chiming in because of the sky is falling mentality that seems to pervade this thread (this isn't directed at you Ripper). I'm sure that people will still find Sloan effective for her points.

How is it deleting an expensive ace? First you have to roll the ACC. And as you said, whats the difference if you just use the acc instead of sloaning the Defense token with it? To roll 6 dice with an interceptor you need to have howlrunner nearby and active it with a ship using flight controllers. Thats an additional 21 points you have to spend to get those two extra dice. Nevermind the fact you also have GH and Jan to help mitigate the damage that sloan cant touch.

Now imperial aces vs imperial aces is a bloodbath. I have lived through it. It aint pretty.

What if Sloane was errata'd so the accuracy effect only worked vs ships?

1 minute ago, Rettere said:

What if Sloane was errata'd so the accuracy effect only worked vs ships?

Why would or should they do that?

8 minutes ago, Rettere said:

What if Sloane was errata'd so the accuracy effect only worked vs ships?

Why?

Seems like an elegant solution to the rules issue currently being discussed; also seems to be the way the card was intended which was to beef up imperial anti ship firepower but it necessarily create god wings of tie fighters massacreing everything in their path.

And it would still be more intuitive than the final version of RLB!

5 minutes ago, Rettere said:

Seems like an elegant solution to the rules issue currently being discussed; also seems to be the way the card was intended which was to beef up imperial anti ship firepower but it necessarily create god wings of tie fighters massacreing everything in their path.

And it would still be more intuitive than the final version of RLB!

It would make Sloane weak.

Plus it doesn't solve the interpretation problems.

1 hour ago, Rettere said:

Seems like an elegant solution to the rules issue currently being discussed; also seems to be the way the card was intended which was to beef up imperial anti ship firepower but it necessarily create god wings of tie fighters massacreing everything in their path.

And it would still be more intuitive than the final version of RLB!

And make Rebel Aces powerful again. Sloan is NOT that powerful. What if someone takes make squadron of tie fighters, how the heck are they going to activate them? It becomes counter intuitive as then you dont have enough ship firepower.

2 hours ago, Rettere said:

it necessarily create god wings of tie fighters massacreing everything in their path.

Dude. Sloane does very little directly in the squadron vs squadron game.

By far her biggest impact on the squadron game is indirect, in that she allows you to bring a full antisquadron wing by making that wing effective against ships too. Changing her effect against squadrons would do virtually nothing to change that.

4 hours ago, ripper998 said:

How is it deleting an expensive ace? First you have to roll the ACC. And as you said, whats the difference if you just use the acc instead of sloaning the Defense token with it? To roll 6 dice with an interceptor you need to have howlrunner nearby and active it with a ship using flight controllers. Thats an additional 21 points you have to spend to get those two extra dice. Nevermind the fact you also have GH and Jan to help mitigate the damage that sloan cant touch.

Now imperial aces vs imperial aces is a bloodbath. I have lived through it. It aint pretty.

If it wasn't effective at deleting aces I'm not sure you would see people bemoaning the Nova nerf. It deletes an expensive ace because people are talking about it in regards to scatter aces. If you use Sloan RAW it means that you a Tie Interceptor in Sloan's ball of death has a decent shot of wreaking almost any scatter ace. It's also not 21 points to make 1 Tie Interceptor better. It's 21 points to make THEM ALL better. Your point about Jan and GH also cuts both ways. Sloan doesn't do crap against them so it shouldn't matter what they decide to do at Nova. Although if you concede that you pigeon hole yourself into forcing people to play a certain build which isn't necessarily good for game design either.

You also can't just limit play balance to Rebs vs Imps. The squadron game is already a little two point and clicky already, IMO often being resolved on who activates at the right time especially in your Imperial Aces vs Imperial Aces example. My point was that the game designers probably wouldn't create a card that turns any Alpha strike into God mode.

BUT just to reiterate: "Honestly, I could play it either way and feel fine about it, I just felt like chiming in because of the sky is falling mentality that seems to pervade this thread (this isn't directed at you Ripper). I'm sure that people will still find Sloan effective for her points." - Me (so I'll leave that as my last sentiment in this thread)

18 minutes ago, ImpStarDeuces said:

If it wasn't effective at deleting aces I'm not sure you would see people bemoaning the Nova nerf. It deletes an expensive ace because people are talking about it in regards to scatter aces. If you use Sloan RAW it means that you a Tie Interceptor in Sloan's ball of death has a decent shot of wreaking almost any scatter ace. It's also not 21 points to make 1 Tie Interceptor better. It's 21 points to make THEM ALL better. Your point about Jan and GH also cuts both ways. Sloan doesn't do crap against them so it shouldn't matter what they decide to do at Nova. Although if you concede that you pigeon hole yourself into forcing people to play a certain build which isn't necessarily good for game design either.

You also can't just limit play balance to Rebs vs Imps. The squadron game is already a little two point and clicky already, IMO often being resolved on who activates at the right time especially in your Imperial Aces vs Imperial Aces example. My point was that the game designers probably wouldn't create a card that turns any Alpha strike into God mode.

BUT just to reiterate: "Honestly, I could play it either way and feel fine about it, I just felt like chiming in because of the sky is falling mentality that seems to pervade this thread (this isn't directed at you Ripper). I'm sure that people will still find Sloan effective for her points." - Me (so I'll leave that as my last sentiment in this thread)

This. I'm amazed at how people think that just because something isn't ruled the way they want suddenly the game is terrible and someone has ruined their chance at a championship. Honestly, if your ability to play this game hinges on 1 ruling in 1 tournament you're putting a few too many eggs into that basket. "get good" is my snarky response to that belief structure.

So much heat over Sloanes ruling.

Secretly all the Riekkan players are cheering.

54 minutes ago, Irokenics said:

So much heat over Sloanes ruling.

Secretly all the Riekkan players are cheering.

We can only cheer for this turn, Rieekan's on the dying ship.

10 hours ago, ImpStarDeuces said:

Then again you could just forgo the Sloan affect and just accuracy the scatter which is super likely if an interceptor is rolling 6 dice with a reroll.

See, this is silly. Why bother taking Sloane if you're not even going use her ability (nerfed or not)?

27 minutes ago, Archangelion said:

See, this is silly. Why bother taking Sloane if you're not even going use her ability (nerfed or not)?

to block the ability and kill the scatter ace? If you roll 6 dice with an interceptor (4 + howl + flight) and get 1 acc and 5 damage yes, you should use the acc to block that scatter as "most" scatter aces only have 3 hp and that brace still stills them(Stupid A wing extra hp blah blah blah). even against the a wing its 3/4 of it's life in one shot.

39 minutes ago, Archangelion said:

See, this is silly. Why bother taking Sloane if you're not even going use her ability (nerfed or not)?

Because the primary application of her ability is not the squadron engagement. It's for attacking ships. The antisquadron application is the nice little bonus that's sometimes nice and sometimes not.

Sometimes I opt to not eat the cherry on my large strawberry malt, but I'm always going to eat the delicious ice cream underneath.

9 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

Because the primary application of her ability is not the squadron engagement. It's for attacking ships. The antisquadron application is the nice little bonus that's sometimes nice and sometimes not.

Sometimes I opt to not eat the cherry on my large strawberry malt, but I'm always going to eat the delicious ice cream underneath.

So why are there so many people using her for her anti squadron ability?

I see the end tidbit of her ability as the cherry. Making non-bombers slightly more effective at getting damage through if they roll a crit. It's an okay ability. But not one that would make me take her over another admiral. If I wanted fighters that hit capital ships I would take bomber squadrons and forgo the reroll and take the crit as a hit.

13 minutes ago, Archangelion said:

So why are there so many people using her for her anti squadron ability?

I see the end tidbit of her ability as the cherry. Making non-bombers slightly more effective at getting damage through if they roll a crit. It's an okay ability. But not one that would make me take her over another admiral. If I wanted fighters that hit capital ships I would take bomber squadrons and forgo the reroll and take the crit as a hit.

In the case of hitting ships, she is powerful as she can spend defense tokens, spend, not exhaust. It means your lowly Tie can now set up the enemy ship for a pounding from your ships without recourse to decent defense and as a bonus, they still work 'better' vs aces.

You could say Sloane gave the ISD a boost :-)

I keep hearing 6-dice TIE Interceptors being thrown around to prove one thing or another about Sloane.

But actually, those are the ones for which Sloane (or the way she is ruled) makes very little difference. If the typical outcome is 1-2 acc + 2-3 dmg, you're going to get some damage through with or without her.

Sloane makes a much more substantial difference for multiple small attacks, e.g. from TIE Fighters, TIE Advanced, and especially counter attacks. There you might roll 2 acc (where she changes the result from "nothing" to ,"spend the scatter"), or 1 acc and 1 damage (where she changes the result from "spend the scatter, or take 1 damage" to "discard the scatter, or spend the scatter AND take 1 damage").

EDIT: The last bit depends on the interpretation of Sloane, of course. Under RAW, only the underlined outcome is possible. The Sloane ruling makes a difference - just not to 6-dice alpha monsters.

6 minutes ago, DiabloAzul said:

I keep hearing 6-dice TIE Interceptors being thrown around to prove one thing or another about Sloane.

But actually, those are the ones for which Sloane (or the way she is ruled) makes very little difference. If the typical outcome is 1-2 acc + 2-3 dmg, you're going to get some damage through with or without her.

Sloane makes a much more substantial difference for multiple small attacks, e.g. from TIE Fighters, TIE Advanced, and especially counter attacks. There you might roll 2 acc (where she changes the result from "nothing" to ,"spend the scatter"), or 1 acc and 1 damage (where she changes the result from "spend the scatter or take 1 damage" to "discard the scatter, or spend the scatter AND take 1 damage").

Very much what is said here.

2 hours ago, DiabloAzul said:

I keep hearing 6-dice TIE Interceptors being thrown around to prove one thing or another about Sloane.

But actually, those are the ones for which Sloane (or the way she is ruled) makes very little difference. If the typical outcome is 1-2 acc + 2-3 dmg, you're going to get some damage through with or without her.

Sloane makes a much more substantial difference for multiple small attacks, e.g. from TIE Fighters, TIE Advanced, and especially counter attacks. There you might roll 2 acc (where she changes the result from "nothing" to ,"spend the scatter"), or 1 acc and 1 damage (where she changes the result from "spend the scatter or take 1 damage" to "discard the scatter, or spend the scatter AND take 1 damage").

EDIT: The last bit depends on the interpretation of Sloane, of course. Under RAW, only the underlined outcome is possible. The Sloane ruling makes a difference - just not to 6-dice alpha monsters.

Exactly. A tie intercepter isn't rolling 6 die against a ship. It's rolling 1.

New poster here, hello everybody. I don't see the cause for doubt really but I'll be the first to admit I may be missing something. Here's how we see it, me and my regular opponents.

A fighter with Sloane as its admiral spends an Accuracy to cause an enemy Defence Token to be spent, IE flipped from green to red. The defender doesn't get any benefit from this as to get the Evade / Scatter/ Brace / Redirect effect it has to be the defender spending the token not the attacker.

That token can not be spent again and thus discarded during that attack. The one exception to this would be ECM which allows a token targetted by an Accuracy to be spent and as it is a card effect it takes precedence over the rulebook statement that a token can only be spent once during an attack.

If Sloane's fighter spends an accuracy on spending an Exhausted, IE red Defence token, that token is burned, again the defender gets no benefit from it.

I've been a historical wargamer since 1981 so I've got a bit of experience when it comes to rules and I really can't see any other interpretation.

All that said, the organiser may well know something that we don't, be party to information that we don't have. I can see it's awkward for him, he is left open to accusations of manipulating the rules or ignoring them. That's unfair if he is bound by some kind of non disclosure agreement.

Over here in this part of Northern England we will just play the rules as they are written, I don't mean this to be disrespectful but what happens in an American tournament doesn't really affect us. It would seem much easier for you guys to have played RAW until FFG amend them, if indeed that is their intent. After all if you don't play to the rules, what's the point in having them? Also we don't see any sign of FFG wanting to change them. Other than the statement from the gentleman Marshalling your big tourney, there seems no sign that FFG are inclined to change anything, indeed unless or until we hear differently we can only assume they think the rules are clear and they are happy with them as they are.

On 02/08/2017 at 5:34 PM, Bolshevik65 said:

The one exception to this would be ECM which allows a token targetted by an Accuracy to be spent and as it is a card effect it takes precedence over the rulebook statement that a token can only be spent once during an attack.

Except that the Defense Token is being targeted through Sloane's ability, yes the fighter has to roll an Accuracy, and spend it to activate the ability, but the Accuracy is not what is targeting the Defense Token. As such ECM would have no effect here.

That's my take on it.

20 minutes ago, Archangelion said:

Except that the Defense Token is being targeted through Sloane's ability, yes the fighter has to roll an Accuracy, and spend it to activate the ability, but the Accuracy is not what is targeting the Defense Token. As such ECM would have no effect here.

That's my take on it.

A take that isn't actually supported by the rules, though - as discussed here:

I'd like to shift gears here for a moment, please. I read through all 15 pages and I don't think it's been covered.

IceQube discussed the ways the various task force cards work.

From my reading, there could only be one way for them to work, but he talks about them 'not stacking'. I don't really even understand how they could stack, whether you're reading it to abuse it or not. Could someone please explain whatever alternate view point about how they work is?

12 minutes ago, Rocmistro said:

I'd like to shift gears here for a moment, please. I read through all 15 pages and I don't think it's been covered.

IceQube discussed the ways the various task force cards work.

From my reading, there could only be one way for them to work, but he talks about them 'not stacking'. I don't really even understand how they could stack, whether you're reading it to abuse it or not. Could someone please explain whatever alternate view point about how they work is?

If you have 4 hammerheads with TFA, and one takes 5 damage, if stacking was allowed you could exhaust the other 3 to have the original take 2 damage, and the others take one a pop.