1 hour ago, OoALEJOoO said:FFG is really smart!!
Post a beta of the manual online, have the fans audit it for free. Nothing wrong with this, I just wish they were a bit more transparent.
You say that as if FFG isn't already printing loads of the core sets right now in order to meet the release in two months.
The rules booklet will be the last product printed. I'm betting there are a few text tweaks being made right up to the last few days before the kits are released.
My question though, and I'm sure I've missed it somewhere, Pilot Skills.
I keep looking for the EPT badge, Astromech icon, etc. Whenever I see a Ship card, or Pilot card I'm looking for the upgrade slots. I am sure I've missed them, can someone point them out for me?
Thanks.
Edited by TheEldarGuy13 minutes ago, TheEldarGuy said:c an someone point them out for me ?
They’re in the squad builder (app or website) not on the cards. This is so that upgrade slots can be removed without errata. They learnt that lesson from the Jumpmaster.
The only thing on the cards now are the actions a ship can take, the pilot skill or flavor text, as well as the usual shield, hull, agility, attack value, initiative (the new pilot skill level), and force power depending on the pilot. Upgrade slots like EPTs, turrets, cannons, bombs, torpedoes, missiles, crew, and squad cost will be revealed on the ship builder app (smart phone app or web app) and the PDF you can download. They did this to adjust upgrade slots and point value if a ship is under costed, over costed, or there is some kind of insane upgrade combo that makes the ship/pilot too powerful.
10 minutes ago, Sasajak said:They’re in the squad builder (app or website) not on the cards. This is so that upgrade slots can be removed without errata. They learnt that lesson from the Jumpmaster.
Right, so when we see the demo 2.0 games, they must be using additional documentation provided, or the quick start cards.
That makes me feel a little better.
8 hours ago, -Istaril said:I understand it's not the RR, and the RR will supercede this, but... it is a bit sloppy. For instance, there's a bunch of "cannots" that we already know pilots can override, and should be written in such a way as to avoid an absolute.
This has always been the case right from the beginning of 1e. There's an order of precedence in the rules of this game - the core rules (rulebook and rules reference) set out general rules, which ships and upgrades then provide exceptions to.
12 hours ago, Ixidor said:I think y'all are overthinking the action step a bit in regards to failed actions.
There are no rules for a failed action. That means there are no rules for choosing an action if your action fails. That means that if you can't complete it, there's nothing in the rules that says you can do something else.
They really should have done a better job of that here but I expect that to be more fully fleshed out in the RRG.
This is exactly right.
Everyone is reading this document with their 1e goggles on. They've forgotten that we were only allowed to perform a different action after the first failed because the 1e rulebook specifically said it was allowed. The new one doesn't. Therefore, you can't.
Admittedly I don't see why they couldn't have just added one more sentence to make it super clear - "If you cannot complete an action, you cannot attempt to perform a different action instead".
12 hours ago, gamblertuba said:• If a ship is destroyed during the Engagement phase, it is removed after all ships that have the same initiative as the currently engaged ship have engaged. This is called the simultaneous fire rule, which represents that ships with the same initiative are essentially attacking at the same time.
This is a change yes? The initiative of the destroyed ship does not matter. Whether the destroyed ship has attacked or not does not matter. Seems like a simpler solution. Is another buff to Howlrunner unless I am cornfused.
Yeah, this is a change and an interesting one at that.
Simultaneous fire only applied to the two engaged ships in 1e, right? If you destroy someone the same PS as you, they get to shoot back. But if they're lower PS than you, they get removed then and there no matter what else they have on the board.
This says that if your I6 pilot destroys their I3 pilot, their I3 ship isn't removed until their other I6 pilot gets to engage. That could potentially be big on pilots with the right abilities.
It's convoluted, but as written there I think there might be a situation where zombie Biggs could tank 1 extra damage, for example.
Kaa'to Leachos would get to steal one last token from a 'dead' ship, etc.
6 hours ago, TheEldarGuy said:The rules booklet will be the last product printed. I'm betting there are a few text tweaks being made right up to the last few days before the kits are released.
My question though, and I'm sure I've missed it somewhere, Pilot Skills.
I keep looking for the EPT badge, Astromech icon, etc. Whenever I see a Ship card, or Pilot card I'm looking for the upgrade slots. I am sure I've missed them, can someone point them out for me?
Thanks.
The printed rulebooks need to be in the box already (and for some time since they are having this available at Gencon) if we’re getting this by release date. It’s possible that the rules reference will be more complete. I have a hard time imagining this one will be different though because they just need to post the current file.
Edited by AlexW`The rules booklets are definitely finished.
The online-only Rules Reference will probably be getting edited until it goes live at GenCon.
4 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:This has always been the case right from the beginning of 1e. There's an order of precedence in the rules of this game - the core rules (rulebook and rules reference) set out general rules, which ships and upgrades then provide exceptions to.
I am aware that card texts overrule rules text, granting additional permissions. However, in X-wing 1.0 (and in basically every FFG game to date), a "Cannot" is absolute. No rules text can override a "cannot".
2 minutes ago, -Istaril said:I am aware that card texts overrule rules text, granting additional permissions. However, in X-wing 1.0 (and in basically every FFG game to date), a "Cannot" is absolute. No rules text can override a "cannot".
This is just plain wrong.
The rulebook states that you cannot perform actions whilst stressed.
Tycho and Primed Thrusters and Cntraband Cybernetics all overrule that.
Just to pick a single example of many.
--
You're misrepresenting the rule, which in its completeness, (paraphrased), is that WITHIN a level of precedence, cannot overrules everything else. Missions>FAQ>Ships/Upgrades>Rules Reference>Learn to Play being the order of precedence, with missions being highest.
So, a cannot in the rules overrides a can or may in the rules - i.e., after executing a manoeuvre, a ship may perform an action - but it cannot if it's stressed.
But a may on a ship or upgrade overrides the core rules - so tycho can perform actions whilst stressed - but a cannot on a ship or upgrade wins over that - so tycho cannot perform focus or evade actions at r1 of Carnor, stressed or otherwise.
And the FAQ overrules both (and a cannot in the FAQ overrules a can in the FAQ), and mission rules override everything else if you're doing that mission (ditto).
14 hours ago, Ixidor said:I think y'all are overthinking the action step a bit in regards to failed actions.
There are no rules for a failed action. That means there are no rules for choosing an action if your action fails. That means that if you can't complete it, there's nothing in the rules that says you can do something else.
They really should have done a better job of that here but I expect that to be more fully fleshed out in the RRG.
As writed, I read that you can't physically fail any action
12 minutes ago, Cerve said:
As writed, I read that you can't physically fail any action
There's nothing defined for what happens if you can't lock any objects, what happens if you can't complete a barrel roll, or what happens if you can't complete a boost. Therefore, nothing happens and you move on.
Compare to first edition, which has specific language in the rules about what happens when you fail the action, allowing you not to commit to it.
Believe me, printing is my thing.
When I open the online rulebook, aside from the images, every scrap of text is able to be edited, even the numbers on the cards. If this was the final copy, the document would be locked down hard.
It might only be grammar, and maybe an occasional rule, but like the High School students they're targeting, the paper won't be finished until the last minute.
57 minutes ago, TheEldarGuy said:Believe me, printing is my thing.
When I open the online rulebook, aside from the images, every scrap of text is able to be edited, even the numbers on the cards. If this was the final copy, the document would be locked down hard.
It might only be grammar, and maybe an occasional rule, but like the High School students they're targeting, the paper won't be finished until the last minute.
My point is that in order for this stuff to be on the shelves by release date it's already packed and maybe (edit: definitely) on the way -- that "last minute" has pretty much passed, especially with the process for changes FFG needs to go through. That's not even considering that they are selling copies in about 3 weeks at Gencon or that people have already been sent preview copies.
Edited by AlexW53 minutes ago, TheEldarGuy said:Believe me, printing is my thing.
When I open the online rulebook, aside from the images, every scrap of text is able to be edited, even the numbers on the cards. If this was the final copy, the document would be locked down hard.
It might only be grammar, and maybe an occasional rule, but like the High School students they're targeting, the paper won't be finished until the last minute.
The online version is editable.
The print versions are already on a boat and have been for some weeks if not months.
4 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:The online version is editable.
The print versions are already on a boat and have been for some weeks if not months.
And then they need to match any changes on the online rulebook with an FAQ?
Just now, AlexW said:And then they need to match any changes on the online rulebook with an FAQ?
If there are any. But I doubt there will be any, as the live online thing is the Rules Reference, which we've not seen yet. WHy change the in-box rulebook at all when the Rules Reference is online and supersedes it anyway.
3 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:Yeah, this is a change and an interesting one at that.
Simultaneous fire only applied to the two engaged ships in 1e, right? If you destroy someone the same PS as you, they get to shoot back. But if they're lower PS than you, they get removed then and there no matter what else they have on the board.
This says that if your I6 pilot destroys their I3 pilot, their I3 ship isn't removed until their other I6 pilot gets to engage. That could potentially be big on pilots with the right abilities.
It's convoluted, but as written there I think there might be a situation where zombie Biggs could tank 1 extra damage, for example.
Kaa'to Leachos would get to steal one last token from a 'dead' ship, etc.
Howlrunner leading Obsidian squad vs Blue escorts with initiative. Blues kill howl during their engagement. Howlrunner sticks around to support Obsidian until all of them have fired.
3 minutes ago, HolySorcerer said:Howlrunner leading Obsidian squad vs Blue escorts with initiative. Blues kill howl during their engagement. Howlrunner sticks around to support Obsidian until all of them have fired.
Ooh, very nice.
That's probably the most powerful example yet. There's so many subtle ways that swarms have been buffed. I think Howl + Inferno Squad is going to be absolutely fantastic.
2 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:This is just plain wrong.
AH, yes, I see the X-wing 1.0 RR establishes a priority of source for those things - my apologies. Previous games (e.g. LCGs) have made cannots absolute regardless of source, and ensured they worded anything they wanted to have cards build exceptions to as "may not" "does not" or other word choices.
10 hours ago, HolySorcerer said:You say that as if FFG isn't already printing loads of the core sets right now in order to meet the release in two months.
Good point. I said they were smart, but probably not smart enough to have posted it before printing. Their webpage doesn't show the Core Set (or anything 2.0e related) at all in their upcoming products page, I would expect to meet a September release, it should be "at the printer" with a "on the boat" by August.
Anyway, this should shed some light on FFG's manufacturing timing. We can compare the PDF posted online to the actual manual that comes with the Core sets and draw conclusions from there.
23 minutes ago, OoALEJOoO said:Their webpage doesn't show the Core Set (or anything 2.0e related) at all in their upcoming products page,
Scroll down to the "In Development" section.
2 minutes ago, JJ48 said:Scroll down to the "In Development" section.
Seems they get filtered out if you filter by "Miniature Games". I see them now as you say they are listed as "In Development" maybe this means they have not started printing yet? Latest update on the Core Set is 5/16/2018 but it still shows "In Development" and not "At the printer"
Boy this is a slow day, discussing stuff like this...