Just now, Undeadguy said:

(...) then they can do whatever they want.

RLB, FireControl+APT and XI7vsAP tells us that already, my'friend, regrettably.

1 minute ago, Drasnighta said:

Is it a Logic "TRUE", or is it a Divide-by-Zero Error ?

... I mean, I brought it up, and I have a playtester who-shall-not-be-named telling me that this was something thought of and 'approved'.

It is a logic true, however it is very dependent on the exact statement. For example the answer to the question "Are any of the player 1 ships in the play area destroyed" would be No.

Just now, Drasnighta said:

RLB, FireControl+APT and XI7vsAP tells us that already, my'friend, regrettably.

Right, but those came as clarifications after the release. If FFG knew of this combo before hand, than they either don't care or want cheesy combo fleets like this. Neither bodes well for the game.

5 minutes ago, PT106 said:

It is a logic true, however it is very dependent on the exact statement. For example the answer to the question "Are any of the player 1 ships in the play area destroyed" would be No.

The Hyperspace FAQ seems to infer (but not prove) that it is possible to only have 1 Ship, and have that ship in Hyperspace, and have a game worth playing:

With:

During setup, if the second player must deploy a squadron but cannot because he or she has no ships in the play area, his or her squadrons that are not set aside are destroyed.

That means you can have a situation where you're not deploying any ships, so excess Squadrons are destroyed... If the inferance was that the game ends in a 10-1... I'm sure it'd say the game ends...

Again, one can infer from that, that not having any ships on the field at all, is not the same as having all of your ships on the field destroyed/

Again, I uderstand this is simply an inferred rule, rather than a rule statement itself... But what else do we have that leans either way?

2 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Right, but those came as clarifications after the release. If FFG knew of this combo before hand, than they either don't care or want cheesy combo fleets like this. Neither bodes well for the game.

If someone sees Raddus with profundity in the setup and STILL chooses HA, then that is on their hands, right?

Hold up.

Just a second now.

What is the activation order for this?

MRW I get mentioned in some new thread:

Hyperspace in a medium or smaller ship with Raddus and 3 squads, Raddus brings in Profundity, Profundity brings in small ship with maybe more squads (RLB) @Undeadguy

1 minute ago, Undeadguy said:

What is the activation order for this?

All of the Cards involved (Hyperspace Assault, Raddus and Profundity) all share the timing of "Before Deploying Fleets"

So you would resolve them in the order of your choice.

That is why I specified the order above.

Does deploying from HSA still allow for Raddus and Profundity to trigger even when they are off the board?

Just now, Undeadguy said:

Does deploying from HSA still allow for Raddus and Profundity to trigger even when they are off the board?

That may be a sticking point - all of them share the same timing event.

Going in to Hyperspace is not an issue.

Bringing them all out at once, perhaps that's a bottleneck...

3 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

1 minute ago, Undeadguy said:

...

Just now, Drasnighta said:

That may be a sticking point - all of them share the same timing event.

Example:

CR90 is put under Profundity.
Produndity is put under Raddus.
Raddus on Admo is put under HSA.

Round 3, I deploy Admo via HSA. Since Raddus was not on the table, his trigger never happens.

It's at the start of any round. He is never there for the timing window.

Just now, Undeadguy said:

Example:

CR90 is put under Profundity.
Produndity is put under Raddus.
Raddus on Admo is put under HSA.

Round 3, I deploy Admo via HSA. Since Raddus was not on the table, his trigger never happens.

It's at the start of any round. He is never there for the timing window.

I see what you're saying, and I tentatively agree.


(See, I don't mind being proven wrong at all. That's why I encourage discussion, rather than name calling.)

I don't think there are any rules limiting how many "start of turn" effects you can use though, are there?

1 minute ago, Geodes said:

I don't think there are any rules limiting how many "start of turn" effects you can use though, are there?

No, but until they are on the Table, the Rules for Profundity and Raddus won't exist .l

If they don't exist, then they can't have the same timing with Hyperspace Assault, because you have to resolve Hyperspace assalt (IE, determine its timing) before they exist.

And if you've Resolved Hyperspace Assault, you have passed the timing point in which you would decide the order - you don't get to go back.

So I guess I caught something FFG nor the play testers saw huh. What has my life become, sitting on the floor discussing rules for this game eating ice cream and drinking tequila while my cats claw at me for affection.

Just now, Drasnighta said:

No, but until they are on the Table, the Rules for Profundity and Raddus won't exist .l

If they don't exist, then they can't have the same timing with Hyperspace Assault, because you have to resolve Hyperspace assalt (IE, determine its timing) before they exist.

And if you've Resolved Hyperspace Assault, you have passed the timing point in which you would decide the order - you don't get to go back.

I see what you guys are saying. That makes sense a little. I just don't know about being passed any point in a time block that is nebulous. I was unaware there was an order that was determined. Like, there is no check during the start of a round that says/inferred: "Abilities that are currently available may now be acted upon" in such a manner as do discount effects that compound from actions during that step.

Just now, Undeadguy said:

So I guess I caught something FFG nor the play testers say huh. What has my life become, sitting on the floor discussing rules for this game eating ice cream and drinking tequila while my cats claw at me for affection.

We all aspire to that life. At least I have cats and freeze pops.

1 minute ago, Undeadguy said:

So I guess I caught something FFG nor the play testers saw huh. What has my life become, sitting on the floor discussing rules for this game eating ice cream and drinking tequila while my cats claw at me for affection.

I wish I had tequila.

Or Icecream.

Or something that wanted affection.

My cats only want me because my girl friend isn't home. I'm their back up plan when they want to be pet. Even then, they aren't very happy.

Just now, Undeadguy said:

So I guess I caught something FFG nor the play testers saw huh. What has my life become, sitting on the floor discussing rules for this game eating ice cream and drinking tequila while my cats claw at me for affection.

I didn't even get that far. I posted that gif from the parking lot of the bottle shop thing I was supposed to be getting Cold Ones from.

The thing I would LOVE to see happen to this. . .

1. Dras keeps his entire fleet in hyperspace.
2. Opponent Strategics all three tokens into a pile, parks fleet around them so it's impossible to deploy a ship at Range 1. Stops.
3. Dras moves tokens after not deploying.
4. Opponent Strategics them back into place.
5. Rinse and repeat until Turn 6.
6. Laugh.

This is really similar to something that happened at a national 40k tournament. One player was trolling people all day with an entire army that started off of the table and came on the long board edge. He played a Ravenwing or White Scars (IIRC) player who zipped all of his bikes across the board and blocked the entire long edge. Troll player's entire army was unable to come onto the table and was destroyed. Massacre.