4 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

I think that this is a much more interesting question, and I'll say up front that I haven't thought through it all the way.

The reason I think it's interesting is that TFA specifically says that the second ship is being dealt that damage. So, if that damage was the first point, which would result in a faceup card... is that faceup dealt to the second ship?

I dunno and I have work to do so I can't dig all the way through it right now.

That one I worked my way through a couple of weeks ago... The wording stacks up to be able to pass the default, or XX9 - because, as you said, you are suffering the damage for them, rather than a Biggs-like effect, where the damage is reduced, and then new damage (not from that attack) is applied.

9 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

That one I worked my way through a couple of weeks ago... The wording stacks up to be able to pass the default, or XX9 - because, as you said, you are suffering the damage for them, rather than a Biggs-like effect, where the damage is reduced, and then new damage (not from that attack) is applied.

I don't think it is correct. Keep in mind that damage is just damage. It's not a card, it's not faceup, its just a number of points of damage. Once that damage is suffered via "suffer damage" process it is being translated to a shield loss or face down damage cards being dealt. Given that critical effect is independent from damage (it really is), the second TFA ship doesn't have that critical effect applied to it and therefore the damage card it receives (assuming it is a damage card and is not a shield loss) is dealt face down.

(On the other hand if TFA ship 1 is shieldless and receives 2 damage with a standard crit effect and decides to use TFA and send one damage to TFA ship 2, the remaining 1 card that it's going to receive is going to be face up)

6 minutes ago, PT106 said:

I don't think it is correct. Keep in mind that damage is just damage. It's not a card, it's not faceup, its just a number of points of damage. Once that damage is suffered via "suffer damage" process it is being translated to a shield loss or face down damage cards being dealt. Given that critical effect is independent from damage (it really is), the second TFA ship doesn't have that critical effect applied to it and therefore the damage card it receives (assuming it is a damage card and is not a shield loss) is dealt face down.

The Critical effect doesn't apply to the Ship.

It applies to the attack .

"The First Damage card dealt by this attack is face up."

And the second ship is suffering damage from the attack (due to the second ship suffering that damage for you )...

Which, as I said, is clearly different from Biggs' effect, where the point of damage from that attack is prevented , and then a new point of damage is generated. Which is why, for example, Gallant Haven doesn't protect from the Biggs point of Damage.

1 minute ago, Drasnighta said:

The Critical effect doesn't apply to the Ship.

It applies to the attack .

"The First Damage card dealt by this attack is face up."

And the second ship is suffering damage from the attack (due to the second ship suffering that damage for you )...

Which, as I said, is clearly different from Biggs' effect, where the point of damage from that attack is prevented , and then a new point of damage is generated. Which is why, for example, Gallant Haven doesn't protect from the Biggs point of Damage.

Ahh. Need to check. I relied on XX9 effect definition which is "The first 2 damage cards dealt to the defender by this attack". If the wording is like that then I do agree with you as far as the standard crit effect is concerned.

1 minute ago, PT106 said:

Ahh. Need to check. I relied on XX9 effect definition which is "The first 2 damage cards dealt to the defender by this attack". If the wording is like that then I do agree with you as far as the standard crit effect is concerned.

NO NO, youi're Right!

“E: If the defender is dealt at least one damage card by this attack, deal the first damage card faceup.”

The Defender is Specified in the Default, Too!

Goddamn. That sorts that out at least...

I would say that my inept conclusion would be:

Did you use APT during an attack? Yes.

Did you suffer damage from the APT? Yes. (Ships and squadrons can suffer damage from attacks, obstacles, and other game effects .)

Then TFA could be used. I know, I'm dumb.

SO, TL;DR for people:

1) APT shouldn't be able to be Bounced.

2) The Default Crit can't be Bounced, as its only Cards on the Defender.

3) Statement 2) also applies to XX-9s.

... This summary brought to you by the Dras didn't Practice-What-He-Preaches Foundation, in association with READ THE **** RULES YOU MORON Productions...

4 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

SO, TL;DR for people:

1) APT shouldn't be able to be Bounced.

2) The Default Crit can't be Bounced, as its only Cards on the Defender.

3) Statement 2) also applies to XX-9s.

... This summary brought to you by the Dras didn't Practice-What-He-Preaches Foundation, in association with READ THE **** RULES YOU MORON Productions...

Can you explain it then? Why does having "the Defender" make a difference?

And trust me, I've got the rules right here and have read them and am reading them...

4 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

Can you explain it then? Why does having "the Defender" make a difference?

The second ship suffering damage isn't the defender.

The Defender is the target of the attack. because you, as the attacker, nominate the Defender and if the Defender is a ship, the Defending Hull Zone... You have control over that.

Just because you take a point of damage from the attack, doesn't mean you're the defender.

There's no defender rules applying to the second ship - it can be any hull zone, for example... The defender doesn't get to nominate and choose it.

So I attack a Hammerhead. I do a bunch of damage, and elect the Default Critical.

The Hammerhead player says he'll use TFA on the first point of damage... And shunts it to a nearby hammerhead that has no shields (poor thing..)... I do a face-down damage card, because the Default Critical does not apply... That Hammerhead is not the defender...

... But then the remaining damage blows through the Target hammerheads' shields and I hit hull... That card will be face up, because it is the first damage card dealt to the defender .

...

As for APT. As Ard has hinted... A Damage Card is not Damage. Suffering Damage is Suffering Damage... Suffering Damage may result in a damage card, but it is not the same thing...

Same as, you know, Spending a Token versus Discarding a Token... Spending may result in Discarding, but Spending does not equal discarding...

My respect for all of you ( @Drasnighta , @Ardaedhel , and @PT106 ) could not be any higher, so I know you are right...

I unfortunately don't get it yet.

2 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

My respect for all of you ( @Drasnighta , @Ardaedhel , and @PT106 ) could not be any higher, so I know you are right...

I unfortunately don't get it yet.

Well, the Vassal FAQ has been updated for you.

Let me see if I can explain why TFA does not bounce APT @CaribbeanNinja

It actually does relate to Fire Control Team ruling.

If a ship with this card equipped resolves both the XX-9 Turbolasers critical effect and the standard critical effect, only the first 2 damage cards are dealt faceup.

If a ship with this card equipped resolves both the Assault Proton Torpeodes critical effect and the standard critical effect, only the damage card dealt by resolving Assault Proton Torpedoes is dealt faceup.

The FCT FAQ makes a distinction on how crit effects can stack and what is happening. It took me a very long time to understand this. The reason APT and the standard do not stack is because the standard is looking at how many damage cards are being dealt face up.

Each ship has the following standard critical effect: “If the defender is dealt at least one damage card by this attack, deal the first damage card faceup.”

Easy enough. The same applies to APT and XX9. APT deals a damage card face up, and XX9 says the first 2 of the attack are face up, so the first hull damage from the attack is dealt face up.

We are specifically looking at damage cards , not damage. But damage can result in damage cards .

When a ship suffers damage, it suffers that damage one point at a time. For each point, reduce the shields in the defending hull zone by one. If the defending hull zone has no shields to lose, deal a facedown damage card to the ship instead.

I look at it like this:

Damage ---->Damage cards

APT simply skips over the damage step. It never happens. You are dealt a face up, so it never qualifies as damage, yet it regards to the health of the ship, it is damage. It's really hard to wrap your head around, because the APT is and is not damage, depending on what you are looking at.

TL:DR

APT never counts as "keyword" damage in regards to the attack steps. It counts as a face up damage card.

I think I'm starting to understand the argument here @Undeadguy . And I'm sorry I'm totally dense on this.

Let me ask this question? Did I suffer any damage as a result of APTs? You're saying "no" but I see that card sitting on my ship and it hurts. I would classify that as damage from "another game effect."

6 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

I think I'm starting to understand the argument here @Undeadguy . And I'm sorry I'm totally dense on this.

Let me ask this question? Did I suffer any damage as a result of APTs? You're saying "no" but I see that card sitting on my ship and it hurts. I would classify that as damage from "another game effect."

That's the problem between a colloquial term and a rules definition .

You're taking the colloquial term at its face value.

Its just the rules define things differently .

Ok so in the FCT ruling if what you guys are saying made sense, then why wouldn't the APT go off, and then the standard crit next? If the APT wasn't damage, wouldn't the standard flip also happen?

2 hours ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

Can Task Force Antilles be used when an opponent wrecks you with APTs?

No. APT doesn't cause damage, it deals one face up damage card. End of story

4 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

Let me ask this question? Did I suffer any damage as a result of APTs? You're saying "no" but I see that card sitting on my ship and it hurts. I would classify that as damage from "another game effect."

I think we're focusing on different phrases here.

You're equating receiving a damage card to suffering damage . I'm saying that there's a mechanical disconnect between the two.

My reasoning is that you cannot say:

* If a ship s uffers damage , you deal damage cards to a ship (ignoring shields or anything else).

* Therefore, if you deal damage cards to a ship, it has suffered damage .

The converse statement does not follow from the original .

2 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

Ok so in the FCT ruling if what you guys are saying made sense, then why wouldn't the APT go off, and then the standard crit next? If the APT wasn't damage, wouldn't the standard flip also happen?

The F-C T ruling made little sense at the time (other than limiting Dodonna crit-fishing). So I'm not sure it's such a great yardstick.

3 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

Ok so in the FCT ruling if what you guys are saying made sense, then why wouldn't the APT go off, and then the standard crit next? If the APT wasn't damage, wouldn't the standard flip also happen?

The standard critical effect is “E: If the defender is dealt at least one damage card by this attack, deal the first damage card faceup.”

Because the standard critical applies to the first damage card dealt by this attack , and does not mention suffering damage .

IMO, the only question the APT/FCT ruling answered was whether the resolution of a critical effect is part of the attack. Any damage that the critical effect may have done--whether "suffer damage" a la ACM or "deal a card" a la APT--is part of the attack, it's just divorced from the "total damage" as referred to by the brace token's effect.

As an APT player I'm glad this is the overwhelming consensus. I just wish I could explain it to the goober that is running stupid TFA Hammerheads (rhymes with Bruthiness, starts with a T)

To expand on what Ardaedhel said about timing windows will allow you to explain to the goober CN.

Lets say you have a Raider with APT & OE.

it has a conc fire order, attacking with its front arc, so you gather dice, 2 blue 2 black and add one black with CF dial.

You roll, blank, blank, hit/crit, hit, crit,
In modify step you reroll the 2 blanks, and get a hit/crit, and another blank.
The Defender spends Def tokens (Brace / Redirect)
The attacker resolves a critical effect (this is where a face up card is dealt by APT or ACM deals 1 damage to both adjacent hull zones)
The attacker totals damage, 6 in this case.
The Brace reduces the damage to 3.
The defender suffers 3 points of damage, on a one for one basis, first on shields, then on hull. (this is where TFA is resolved by the defender)

There is very specific wording used in this game for timing windows, TFA says "when you suffer damage from an attack."

Attack is the first keyword, attack is a specific event with a specific chain of steps for its resolution.
Suffer Damage is the next keyword, which is a specific part in that chain of steps resolved during an Attack.

Basically you cannot use TFA because you do not have the legal opportunity to do so, until after the damage card was dealt face up.

2 hours ago, TheEasternKing said:

To expand on what Ardaedhel said about timing windows will allow you to explain to the goober CN.

Lets say you have a Raider with APT & OE.

it has a conc fire order, attacking with its front arc, so you gather dice, 2 blue 2 black and add one black with CF dial.

You roll, blank, blank, hit/crit, hit, crit,
In modify step you reroll the 2 blanks, and get a hit/crit, and another blank.
The Defender spends Def tokens (Brace / Redirect)
The attacker resolves a critical effect (this is where a face up card is dealt by APT or ACM deals 1 damage to both adjacent hull zones)
The attacker totals damage, 6 in this case.
The Brace reduces the damage to 3.
The defender suffers 3 points of damage, on a one for one basis, first on shields, then on hull. (this is where TFA is resolved by the defender)

There is very specific wording used in this game for timing windows, TFA says "when you suffer damage from an attack."

Attack is the first keyword, attack is a specific event with a specific chain of steps for its resolution.
Suffer Damage is the next keyword, which is a specific part in that chain of steps resolved during an Attack.

Basically you cannot use TFA because you do not have the legal opportunity to do so, until after the damage card was dealt face up.

Yes.

What's even better: it's supported by the RRG!

Step 5 of the Attack procedure:

"The attacker can resolve one of its critical effects. Then the attacker determines the total damage amount. Then the defending squadron or hull zone suffers that total damage, one point at a time."

1. Resolve crit
2. Suffer damage

Its really not hard to explain, you resolve any crit effect, before you suffer damage. APT gives you a face up card on your ship, before you suffer damage part of an attack. Same for ACM if you dont have shields to the sides from your attack. 2 Damage card is given to your ship, before you suffer damage.