So I recently heard players comment on how Torkil Mux’s 2.0 ability goes on indefinitely out of his firing arc as it does not state the range for his ability.

“At the start of the engagement phase, you may choose 1 ship inside your firing arc, if you do, that ship engages at initiative 0 instead of its normal initiative this round.”

uh... and how are we measuring this again?

I think we should be smart enough to conclude arcs only extend to range 3. FFG is cleaning up unnecessary wording, and this is a prime example of just that. If the tool you provide players to measure distance only goes to range 3, and there is no accurate way to measure range within a firing arc beyond that, it makes sense that abilities that are range 0-3 in your firing arc are just written as “in your firing arc” now.

If you disagree, please let me know how we are to accurately measure range beyond range 3 for abilities like this.

Wait for the full rules?

17 minutes ago, Kdubb said:

So I recently heard players comment on how Torkil Mux’s 2.0 ability goes on indefinitely out of his firing arc as it does not state the range for his ability.

“At the start of the engagement phase, you may choose 1 ship inside your firing arc, if you do, that ship engages at initiative 0 instead of its normal initiative this round.”

uh... and how are we measuring this again?

I think we should be smart enough to conclude arcs only extend to range 3. FFG is cleaning up unnecessary wording, and this is a prime example of just that. If the tool you provide players to measure distance only goes to range 3, and there is no accurate way to measure range within a firing arc beyond that, it makes sense that abilities that are range 0-3 in your firing arc are just written as “in your firing arc” now.

If you disagree, please let me know how we are to accurately measure range beyond range 3 for abilities like this.

a) I had to measure an arc out to range 4 three separate times judging the Phoenix System Open. You just have to start adding range rulers together.

b) I agree, though. The wording on a lot of abilities seems to indicate that there will be an "arcs only extend to range 3" rule in the book. Maybe amended in the future for longer-range epic weapons. I don't want to have to measure Soontir's bullseye arc all the way to the Inaldra hiding in the far corner of the map.

I disagree based on the following:

A firing arc extends across the play area. Rules reference page 11

Firing arc example pic on page 6 of the FAQ shows the arc extending beyond range 3

as far as measuring goes, I guess you could use an epic range 5 ruler or a laser to see if someone is actually in your arc.

this is for 1st E. 2nd E may have different rules.

If his ability affected a ship in arc, and the arcs extended indefinitely, he could sit near the board edge with the Moldy Crow primary and his mobile arc lined up to pick and choose pretty much any ship.

8 minutes ago, PanchoX1 said:

I disagree based on the following:

A firing arc extends across the play area. Rules reference page 11

Firing arc example pic on page 6 of the FAQ shows the arc extending beyond range 3

as far as measuring goes, I guess you could use an epic range 5 ruler or a laser to see if someone is actually in your arc.

this is for 1st E. 2nd E may have different rules.

I could quote several 1st edition rules that we already know are wrong for 2.0.

31 minutes ago, Kdubb said:

there is no accurate way to measure range within a firing arc beyond that

Just saying, official range rulers go out to range 5.

3 minutes ago, skotothalamos said:

I could quote several 1st edition rules that we already know are wrong for 2.0.

yup, you could. And I could go back and reread the OP and realize he was specifically stating 2nd e Torkil and learn that my response was not really all that relevant......

glad I mentioned it may be different in 2nd E

agree? no

assume? yes

on the basis that the designers don't have to write "at range 0-3" on every flipping card

3 minutes ago, kris40k said:

Just saying, official range rulers go out to range 5.

Are these available for anything outside of epic? Because 2.0 won’t have any epic ships available at start. Would be asking a lot to request players to buy a 1.0 epic ship to make the measurements for 2.0. And even those only go out to range 5.

All in all, I just don’t see why FFG would introduce something so clunky that will just delay games significantly when a ship is across the map and in question of being in or out of arc. The rational conclusion to come to is firing arcs extend from range 0-3 in 2.0 for simplicity’s sake.

5 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

agree? no

assume? yes

on the basis that the designers don't have to write "at range 0-3" on every flipping card

I guess I should say we agree that the strongest assumption is that a firing arc extends only from range 0-3 with the abilities we are seeing that do not give a range identifier. Obviously, we will only know for certainty what the case is for certain when the game is released.

Firing arcs will be defined as range 0-3

In the epic ruleset, huge ship firing arcs will be defined as range 0-whatever

3 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

Firing arcs will be defined as range 0-3

In the epic ruleset, huge ship firing arcs will be defined as range 0-whatever

yeah That seems right. anyway, rules will clarify it. We don't have to agree, just wait

4 minutes ago, Kdubb said:

Are these available for anything outside of epic? Because 2.0 won’t have any epic ships available at start. Would be asking a lot to request players to buy a 1.0 epic ship to make the measurements for 2.0. And even those only go out to range 5.

All in all, I just don’t see why FFG would introduce something so clunky that will just delay games significantly when a ship is across the map and in question of being in or out of arc. The rational conclusion to come to is firing arcs extend from range 0-3 in 2.0 for simplicity’s sake.

why assume?

why not just wait until the rules are published?

3 minutes ago, Icelom said:

why assume?

why not just wait until the rules are published?

Because there are players who are choosing to proxy revealed components of 2.0 and are using guesswork for the aspects we do not have available to us. Without point costs -and even more so, without upgrade slots- it is a pretty shaky endeavor to play with pilots not included in the demo games we’ve seen. But excitement for the game has exceeded the need for concrete information in some parts, and this particular issue has been one that, while not a major one (considering we are playing with an incomplete rule set anyways) has irked me quite a bit, so I wanted some discussion.

If I posted this and everyone gave me sound reasoning as to why the ability should and could reasonably extend on into the infinite, I would have humbled myself and gave way to that reasoning.

I would think that in 1 and 2 it would be to range three. I understand how people could argue because it doesn't say it explicitly, but common sense to me would say range three.

14 minutes ago, JediRush24 said:

I would think that in 1 and 2 it would be to range three. I understand how people could argue because it doesn't say it explicitly, but common sense to me would say range three.

In 1 they add the range on to ships with in arc ability (Ethan abhat,FAA).

This is because in rule reference page 11 they say the arc extends across the play area, and faq page 6 show arc beyond three.

So not only is it not that it isn't stated explicitly, but it is stated explicitly as the opposite of your assumption.

I hate the common sense argument with rules issues because if the sense was common the discussion wouldn't be happening. Assuming your stance is the common one without rule checking just leads to a dozen different "common" senses. Or in short. Common sense isn't common.

Just feel ridiculous to assume that something extends beyond range three

In 1.0 it's not assuming, it's following the rules. In 2.0 we don't have the rules. I choose to assume nothing about this. If you don't have the rules needed to play a ship? Don't play it. Or house rule it while aware that you may be playing it wrong and have ideas and habits that need to be broken on release.

9 minutes ago, JediRush24 said:

Just feel ridiculous to assume that something extends beyond range three

it's not logical at all. I would just park a naked Jan Ors in the corner with a bandit. have the two bump all day while my hitters run around hitting things.

The most likely outcome is that in the 2.0 rules it’ll state “in arc” is both in the actual arc AND range 0-3, to prevent them from having to explicitly say so on every single card.

I can just imagine Frank or Alex reading these threads and faceplaming hardcore.

I think it's very safe to assume, yes. I don't believe that there's been any use of 'range 0-3 in firing arc' on any of the cards so far. Range has only been declared when it's either not range 0-3 or out of arc.

I’m sure the rules will specify that “in-arc” means R 0-3

If the firing arc extends forever, then it never forms an arc. Terminating the arc at range 3 does form an arc (with a flat spot in the middle). So therefore since it’s an arc, it must terminate somewhere with the shape of an actual arc, and range 3 seems like the perfect choice. In summary, I will slap anyone that says their arc extends beyond range 3.