Maybe this will help, Darth Meanie (but also maybe not): Extra Munitions is not "an extra piece of ordnance" any more than Munitions Failsafe is "an extra missile or torpedo."

Both of them are game-expressed ways to avoid discarding the cards that represent capabilities of a ship.

The issue you're having is that you equate Extra Munition as "a second bomb," whereas I bet you don't equate Munitions Failsafe as "a second torpedo." (The quantum nature is even the same: Do I have a second torpedo? I don't know! I won't know until I hit or miss with the one I do have! And if I miss, I might even have a third torpedo!)

If you can wrap your head around Munitions Failsafe, I'm confident you can get past the state-of-existence issues you have with Extra Munitions.

I 100% agree that should not be able to use Minefield Mapper and Extra Munitions to drop 2 bombs from one bomb upgrade card in deployment.

However the indications I have are that it's going to ultimately go the other way and just be one of those 'because FFG said so' things that contradicts the rules as written.

And because there are numerous examples where things don't work the way they are written to work is why we need an FAQ, and why just repeatedly pointing to the rules and going 'read this, dumbass' achieves nothing.

44 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Yeah, prolly.

I guess this is how I look at it: Card = Bomb. EM = +1 Bomb. Use Token instead of a new card. Thus, Token = Bomb. If Card = Bomb, and Token = Bomb, then Token = Card.

But, in gameplay, that's not true. I have 1 Real Bomb and 1 Ersatz Bomb that may or may not function like a Real Bomb depending upon the circumstances of play.

Thus, the gameplay mechanic is ruining my notion that Extra Munitions are in fact, Extra Munitions aboard my ship.

It’s not that an upgrade card is a bomb and an em token is another bomb. Each car for token representa the ability to DROP a bomb. The bomb itself the tokens you drop, not the card/token. An airplane and a helicopter are both able to drop bombs, but that doesn’t make an airplane a helicopter.

Just now, Stay On The Leader said:

And because there are numerous examples where things don't work the way they are written to work is why we need an FAQ, and why just repeatedly pointing to the rules and going 'read this, dumbass' achieves nothing.

But where does that stop? If "FFG could go against their own rules and make the call in the other direction" is a justification for needing a FAQ, exactly what in the game can possibly be released that doesn't need a FAQ? Literally everything could end up, "Well, FFG is ignoring their own rules and going the other way."

At some point, isn't it reasonable to rely on the rules? Then, if FFG ignores their own rules and goes the other way, well, we just have to shrug wryly and go, "Oh, they so wacky."

1 minute ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I 100% agree that should not be able to use Minefield Mapper and Extra Munitions to drop 2 bombs from one bomb upgrade card in deployment.

However the indications I have are that it's going to ultimately go the other way and just be one of those 'because FFG said so' things that contradicts the rules as written.

And because there are numerous examples where things don't work the way they are written to work is why we need an FAQ, and why just repeatedly pointing to the rules and going 'read this, dumbass' achieves nothing.

Oh I agree we absolutely NEED the faq on Minefield mapper. Regardless how easily some of us think it fits into the rules, clearly plenty of other people disagree, so it should be in there regardless to settle the dispute.

And FFG could easily say the intentions for it to work with EM tokens and to faq it that way, even if the current rules indicate the opposite. The issue is that we have to rule based on the rules, not the possible intent (outside Of edge cases where they’ve broken their own cards to not work without assuming some intent)

15 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Maybe this will help, Darth Meanie (but also maybe not): Extra Munitions is not "an extra piece of ordnance" any more than Munitions Failsafe is "an extra missile or torpedo."

Both of them are game-expressed ways to avoid discarding the cards that represent capabilities of a ship.

The issue you're having is that you equate Extra Munition as "a second bomb," whereas I bet you don't equate Munitions Failsafe as "a second torpedo." (The quantum nature is even the same: Do I have a second torpedo? I don't know! I won't know until I hit or miss with the one I do have! And if I miss, I might even have a third torpedo!)

If you can wrap your head around Munitions Failsafe, I'm confident you can get past the state-of-existence issues you have with Extra Munitions.

Touche, monsieur, and very well played.

I'll put my hand down and go to the back of the class now. . .

2 hours ago, Managarmr said:

Also

Jabba's sloppy formulation

Cikatro Vizago and the never ending cloaking device

Did the C-roc's blue line get a clarification?

C-DOC clarified in FAQ 4-3-3.

Jabba and citrako questions are plentiful....

4 hours ago, clanofwolves said:

Bombs, bombs, bombs, bombs........ugggggg.

Put your foot down @Stoneface, tell the dude, "no more bombs, they're illegal, period."

Bombs are ok. A PITA but ok. There are other things that get me wound up more than bombs.

2 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

"causing arguments" != Unclear wording

Some people are either too sure of themselves or too lazy to look up things in the rule book because they've played the game enough to believe they understand everything intuitively

The wording is more than sound given the definitions presented in the rules reference. Not reading them is no excuse to pawn off MM as "unclear"

You forgot a third option. Interpretation.

53 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

It’s not that an upgrade card is a bomb and an em token is another bomb. Each car for token representa the ability to DROP a bomb. The bomb itself the tokens you drop, not the card/token.

Oh, willful potential bomb spaciness. That makes so much more sense than thinking my ship carries bombs.

59 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Do I have a second torpedo? I don't know! I won't know until I hit or miss with the one I do have! And if I miss, I might even have a third torpedo!)

If you can wrap your head around Munitions Failsafe, I'm confident you can get past the state-of-existence issues you have with Extra Munitions.

I changed my mind. I'm going to think of MF as "boomerang vector fins," where, if the missile doesn't strike something and explode, it circles back around and gently slides back into place in the missile tube for the next attempt.

Because even that is less disturbing to me than "second missile spaciness potential."

I would like a rules clarification in the FAQ that states exactly how Accuracy Corrector Works. Because some say it works with Ethan, some say it works with Autoblaster turret and others disagree. Some argue that the Autoblaster Cannon, works differently too. Like TO's ETC.

Just make one way or the other, I don' t care which, but be consistent.

It's been 3 years and they still haven't addressed/updated the CLUNKY wording in regards to Focus/Evade/Stress and Epic Ships. Namely, how can an Epic Ship spend Esege's Focus as if it were their own when Epic Ships are not affected by Focus tokens? As this reads, sure, spend the Focus... it has zero effect -- funny how many people fight about this. Wait, kidding. It's EPIC, not many people...

30 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

You forgot a third option. Interpretation.

you mean poor interpretation, due to not reading the RAW

"

" (Rules Ref, page 8)

MM triggers once "During steup, after the Place Forces step":

1."discard any number of your equipped (bomb) upgrade cards

Equipped (bomb) Upgrade Card NOT an equipped (bomb) upgrade card

2.) "When you are instructed to discard an Upgrade card, you may discard 1 ordnance token on that card instead" - Extra Munitions

3.) "place all corresponding bomb tokens etc etc."

4.) process does not repeat, because you cannot resolve MM more than once during the timing specified on the card

if it did, you'd be able to map the cluster mines again

31 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

you mean poor interpretation, due to not reading the RAW

Dude, I'm right here. . .

39 minutes ago, lazycomet said:

It's been 3 years and they still haven't addressed/updated the CLUNKY wording in regards to Focus/Evade/Stress and Epic Ships. Namely, how can an Epic Ship spend Esege's Focus as if it were their own when Epic Ships are not affected by Focus tokens? As this reads, sure, spend the Focus... it has zero effect -- funny how many people fight about this. Wait, kidding. It's EPIC, not many people...

34 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

you mean poor interpretation, due to not reading the RAW

"

A card ability cannot be resolved more than

once during the timing specified on the card.

For example, a card with the timing of “when

defending” cannot be resolved twice by the

defender during a single attack

" (Rules Ref, page 8)

MM triggers once "During steup, after the Place Forces step":

1."discard any number of your equipped (bomb) upgrade cards

Equipped (bomb) Upgrade Card NOT an equipped (bomb) upgrade card

2.) "When you are instructed to discard an Upgrade card, you may discard 1 ordnance token on that card instead" - Extra Munitions

3.) "place all corresponding bomb tokens etc etc."

4.) process does not repeat, because you cannot resolve MM more than once during the timing specified on the card

if it did, you'd be able to map the cluster mines again

Maybe you can consult with FFG on a Rules pack, because you made this pretty clear. thanks,

Now all we need is what Place a bomb means, since people will still say you can place each individual cluster apart from each other rather than together.

51 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Dude, I'm right here. . .

aww, I'm not thinking any less of you guys

Guess the language came off strong, but I am a bit peeved not of people who just got it wrong or are uncertain, but those who insist it works the way it doesn't. seriously I still remember and am salty about the TIE Adv. Prototype Tie/x1 fiasco

Being peeved makes my language rougher than it ought to be

Sorry about that

1 hour ago, lazycomet said:

It's been 3 years and they still haven't addressed/updated the CLUNKY wording in regards to Focus/Evade/Stress and Epic Ships. Namely, how can an Epic Ship spend Esege's Focus as if it were their own when Epic Ships are not affected by Focus tokens? As this reads, sure, spend the Focus... it has zero effect -- funny how many people fight about this. Wait, kidding. It's EPIC, not many people...

I've never understood why people have so much difficulty with this one. There is a difference between "affected by," which is passive, and "able to benefit from," which is active. There is room between those two things for a Huge ship not to be able to have focus tokens (because having a focus token assigned is passive, which can't happen), but still be able to benefit from focus tokens if some other effect permits it (like Esege).

It's not that hard to understand the ruling. It's not ideal, no, but it's not hard to justify.

(Making a note of this for re-write in my "re-write Huge/Epic rules project.")

No ship is “affected by” having a focus or evade token the way you’re interpreting. IMO you’re only “affected” by them when you spend the token to do something. It’s not like there’s a “focused” or “evaded” keyword used based on having those tokens. The closest would be Poe’s ability. I actually agree that they shouldn’t be able to use Esege’s focus, it it was rules that they can, so whatever.

Actually, there are many abilities that depend on the presence or absence of tokens. Poe is only one of them.

6 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Actually, there are many abilities that depend on the presence or absence of tokens. Poe is only one of them.

Some even consider these abilities to be... unnatural.

11 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

I am actually going to play MM for the first time tonight, and I'm going to play it broken. We'll see how much chaos that causes.

So, as promised, I used 1 Punisher to deploy 4 cluster bombs (in epic).

2 things to note:

1. The Punisher did not manage to make any meaningful contribution the rest of the game. But, since it MMed, it didn't seem like lost points.

2. In the long run, I did as much damage to myself with mines as I did to the enemy.

So, not sure I think MM is broken in either version.

Also, since my brother was not in the know, I explained the current debate, and he also thought the RAW was stupid. So, I suspect we will homebrew MM to work as token + card regardless of a FAQ. (We continue to play Palpatine pre nerf, too.)

boys it is fine we got the reddit faq

wait

I don't want any FAQ, or incase it will return all cards as they say in the cards! Sorry! I'm throwing so much hate on FAQ at the moment, they suck!