What does the card mean?

Attack[lock]: just means you need a lock on the defender right? Don't need to spend to fire?

Do you have to spend 1 energy every time you attack? Realistically, this should be included before the :, not after.

4 dice? Range 2-3, secondary weapon, no range bonus at R3 for defender?

If you have no energy can you use this weapon?

@ me please if you respond cuz I would love to know

You must unlearn what you have learned. Read the card. Do what it says. Don't do what it doesn't say.

1: Yes, it requires you to have a lock to attack.

2: No, it doesn't require you to spend the lock to attack.

3: Yes, you have to spend a charge to attack.

4: Yup. Though the term is now 'special weapon' not 'secondary weapon'.

5: No, if you have no charges left on the upgrade, you have none to spend, so you can't attack with it.

Don't second guess yourself, you've understood it fine.

3: Yes, you have to spend a charge to attack.

5: No, if you have no charges left on the upgrade, you have none to spend, so you can't attack with it.

This and this are not exactly obviously meaning what you think it means.

45 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

3: Yes, you have to spend a charge to attack.

5: No, if you have no charges left on the upgrade, you have none to spend, so you can't attack with it.

This and this are not exactly obviously meaning what you think it means.

I'm confused about what you're trying to say here. Can you explain?

The card says you need a Target Lock - that's what he Attack: [Lock] header means, as explained in the rules. You don't have to spend it. The card tells you to spend a Charge so you need to spend a Charge. If you have no Charge you can't fire as you can't fulfil the requirements to fire the torpedo.

Think of charges on missiles and torps as Extra Munitions tokens. It makes a little more sense.

3 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

Realistically, this should be included before the :, not after.

Nope, it's in logical order.

Target lock is the requirement . You must have this before you can perform the attack.

Spending a charge is the cost . If you meet the requirement (have a lock) you may then spend a charge to perform the attack.

The rest of the text is the effect . If you meet the requirement and spend the charge, you may perform the attack, roll dice and change one hit result to a crit.

Huh, you know what's interesting is that, the way the card is written, it sounds like you can use it even if you have no charges to spend. I don't think this is intended, but here's how I read it.

The colon appears to divide the text into two sections, the requirements on the left, and the effects on the right. The requirements list the Lock requirement, and the effects say to spend a charge, and to modify a dice result.

You might not roll any hits, and thus wouldn't be able to modify the dice. This clearly isn't a requirement for using the card. Similarly if you don't have any charges, you cannot spend a charge. By the same logic that shouldn't prevent you from using the card.

However, if the requirements section is defined as being the first line on the card, then it would work as intended; you have to spend a charge and have a Lock.

This is confusing to me as well. The way the card is written it sounds like you would only spend the charge if you want to modify a hit to a crit. It would make sense that you have to spend the charge token if it was to the left of the : instead of the right. I do understand that you don't have to spend the lock, but OP's Q3 and chadious' point make a lot of sense.