As I said before I don't have a strong feeling on this but my reasoning that it works in that FFG have made a clear distinction between 'Attacking an target in Front Arc' and making a ' Front Arc 'Attack. It's the reason Dengar cannot use Fearless but can use his ability.

Outmanoeuvre uses the wording like Fearless , which, strange though it may seem, doesn't care which arc your target is in it cares what the arc on your weapon is. The YV-666 cannot use Fearless as well and the arc printed on it's gun is wrong. So following the Fearless ruling the YV-666 cannot use Outmanoeuvre either as it cannot make ' Front Arc 'Attacks. Krassis isn't changing your Front Arc Attack to a Rear Arc Attack rather just letting you use one in the other.

From the original question, through the thread, there appears to be some confusion.

Fantasy Flight have stated that each arc is a separate entity, and each will only trigger certain weapons, effects, talents, and abilities.

The icon on Outmanoeuvre is a Front Arc, everybody agrees on that. The firing arc on most Missiles and Torpedoes is the Front Arc, again, everybody appears to agree on that, so, based on a T65 X-Wing firing Torpedoes, with Outmanoeuvre, it would trigger.

The confusion appears to stem from the fact Krassis Trelix allows you to fire these weapons from the rear firing arc of the Firespray.

The wording on the cards is actually very clear, currently, as the attack arc type is not changed. Neither is the condition to use the talent. The only change happens on the table, not on the cards. The ability to perform a V arc attack out of a different location doesn't change the Arc requirements on the card, therefore, it would kick off linked abilities/talents, or whatever, except for abilities or upgrades that would trigger off a ^ firing arc attack, because that is not what you are performing.

3 hours ago, Damo1701 said:

a V arc 

Two pages in and I finally just realized that you mean front arc when you write that. I was reading it as an arrow (pointing down) instead of an arc facing up. ... I'm so much less confused now.

Anyway, I agree. I don't think anything about Krassis changes the attack arc. Again, for the same reason as turret arcs: abilities care about the printed attack arc type (front, rear, turret, or half), and not the physical arc used by the ship to measure from. (Except for those abilities/weapons that say "if the defender is in your [some arc]", which is different.)

keep in mind that the requirements for an attack still have to be met - see rules reference pg. 5:

the defender still needs to be in the attack arc!
so krassix has to use the rear attack arc.
there is only one way that he can do that:
by "adding" the rear attack arc symbol to all his equipped special weapons (thats what his pilot ability should say imho).

that way it is easy to see, that outmaneuver will NOT work with krassix rear attack arc.

58 minutes ago, Cassan said:

keep in mind that the requirements for an attack still have to be met - see rules reference pg. 5:

the defender still needs to be in the attack arc!
so krassix has to use the rear attack arc.
there is only one way that he can do that:
by "adding" the rear attack arc symbol to all his equipped special weapons (thats what his pilot ability should say imho).

that way it is easy to see, that outmaneuver will NOT work with krassix rear attack arc.

Card text overrides rules, so it all works. He doesn't have to add the Arc symbol to the card as his text makes it legal. You're conflating a weapon with an Arc symbol and making an attack to a specific arc which although they use the same symbols are different.

49 minutes ago, Cassan said:

keep in mind that the requirements for an attack still have to be met - see rules reference pg. 5:

the defender still needs to be in the attack arc!
so krassix has to use the rear attack arc.
there is only one way that he can do that:
by "adding" the rear attack arc symbol to all his equipped special weapons (thats what his pilot ability should say imho).

that way it is easy to see, that outmaneuver will NOT work with krassix rear attack arc.

Except his pilot ability doesn't say that, so it doesn't work that way. We have to interpret the card as it was written and not how we think it should have been written.

Key in on the phrase "You may perform [front arc] special attacks" which leaves the impression with some, and not without reason, that the attack can be considered both a front arc attack and a rear arc attack.

30 minutes ago, nexttwelveexits said:

Key in on the phrase "You may perform [front arc] special attacks" which leaves the impression with some, and not without reason, that the attack can be considered both a front arc attack and a rear arc attack.

I don't think you could consider it a [Rear Arc] attack. It's a [Front Arc] attack that's being performed from your rear arc. A theoretical card that triggers while you perform a [Rear Arc] attack couldn't be used during Krassis's backwards shot.

Edit: as pointed out below, it would still trigger abilities that trigger when attacking a target in your rear arc, just not abilities that specify a [Rear Arc] attack.

1 minute ago, player2072913 said:

I don't think you could consider it a [Rear Arc] attack. It's a [Front Arc] attack that's being performed from your rear arc. A theoretical card that triggers while you perform a [Rear Arc] attack couldn't be used during Krassis's backwards shot.

Yeah, it would still be a [Front Arc] attack, but it would trigger things which care about being in the [Rear Arc] . I don't think there are anything things which care about that right now.

Quote

Card text overrides rules, so it all works. He doesn't have to add the Arc symbol to the card as his text makes it legal. You're conflating a weapon with an Arc symbol and making an attack to a specific arc which although they use the same symbols are different.

his ability allows you to perform an attack. there is no rule on his card that overrides how you execute that attack.

Quote

Key in on the phrase "You may perform [front arc] special attacks" which leaves the impression with some, and not without reason, that the attack can be considered both a front arc attack and a rear arc attack.

an attack cannot be both a front arc attack and a rear arc attack. see above rr ".. the opposing ship needs to be in the attack arc".

Quote

I don't think you could consider it a [Rear Arc] attack  .

if it is not a rear arc attack then you couldnt perform the attack at all. there is always an attack arc while attacking (see definition above "attack arc").

4 minutes ago, Cassan said:

an attack cannot be both a front arc attack and a rear arc attack. see above rr ".. the opposing ship needs to be in the attack arc".

if it is not a rear arc attack then you couldnt perform the attack at all. there is always an attack arc while attacking (see definition above "attack arc").

The language can reasonably be interpreted as defining the attack as a [front arc] attack.

I don't know if this is how it actually works (doesn't seem clear to me), and I don't know how FFG will clarify this question, but the people arguing that Outmaneuver works that aren't twisting the language or ignoring rules. You can definitely look at that card and come away with the impression that the [front arc] icon applies to the attack regardless of it happening in the rear.

49 minutes ago, Cassan said:

his ability allows you to perform an attack. there is no rule on his card that overrides how you execute that attack.

That's literally all his ability does. Again, being in an Arc is not the same as performing a [Front Arc] attack. It's a really important distinction as it affects a lot of cards now. So when he shoots someone behind him the defender is in his rear attack arc, and his ability says you can use a [Front Arc] attack weapon if you want. A [Front Arc] attack weapon is a type of weapon not a type of attack as confusing as that is int he current rules.

Just now, AramoroA said:

Again, being in an Arc is not the same as performing a [Front Arc] attack  .

I never said that.

Just now, AramoroA said:

A [Front Arc] attack weapon is a type of weapon not a type of attack

who mentioned a "[front arc] attack weapon"? there simply are weapons who are restricted by the attack arc (e.g. the [front arc] attack arc).

and the attack performed by such a weapon is a e.g. "[front arc] attack", if you are using this attack arc.

what trellix does is allow you to perform an attack with weapons that are normally restricted by the [front arc] attack arc in your standard rear arc.

while performing the attack there are several steps. one step is to measure range. the requirement for measuring range is:

meeting this requirement is only achieved by using the [rear arc] attack arc (otherwise you cannot measure range at all), which in turn does NOT meet the requirement for outmaneuver (where you have to use the [front arc] attack arc to trigger it).

The ship is in the attacker's attack arc. Being in Arc is not the same as using a [Front Arc] attack weapon. It's why Fearless doesn't work on Dengar as you have to use a [Front Arc] attack weapon not just attack something in your front arc.

Now it 95% of cases you use your [Front Arc] attack weapon and shoot something in your Front Arc. Krassis changes this and lets you pick a [Front Arc] attack weapon and use your rear arc to shoot with it, that does not stop it being [Front Arc] attack weapon and that's all Outmanoeuvre looks for, it does not look for the actual arc used in the attack.

3 minutes ago, AramoroA said:

The ship is in the attacker's attack arc. Being in Arc is not the same as using a [Front Arc] attack weapon. It's why Fearless doesn't work on Dengar as you have to use a [Front Arc] attack weapon not just attack something in your front arc.

Now it 95% of cases you use your [Front Arc] attack weapon and shoot something in your Front Arc. Krassis changes this and lets you pick a [Front Arc] attack weapon and use your rear arc to shoot with it, that does not stop it being [Front Arc] attack weapon and that's all Outmanoeuvre looks for, it does not look for the actual arc used in the attack.

Just jumping in to say I agree that this is how this interaction works.

Quote

The ship is in the attacker's attack arc. Being in Arc is not the same as using a [Front Arc] attack weapon. It's why Fearless doesn't work on Dengar as you have to use a [Front Arc] attack weapon not just attack something in your front arc.

why do you keep repeating this. i never said that..

2 minutes ago, Cassan said:

why do you keep repeating this. i never said that..

Because it's the only part of the rules that matter. You keep on saying that the target has to be in the attackers attack arc, but missing the part where that is irrelevant for the interaction here.

2 minutes ago, Cassan said:

why do you keep repeating this. i never said that..

because you said this:

3 hours ago, Cassan said:

the defender still needs to be in the attack arc!
so krassix has to use the rear attack arc. 
there is only one way that he can do that:
by "adding" the rear attack arc symbol to all his equipped special weapons (thats what his pilot ability should say imho).

that way it is easy to see, that outmaneuver will NOT work with krassix rear attack arc.

And that looks a lot like what he's responding to.

there is no such thing as a "[front arc] attack weapon", just weapons that have a restriction defined by the attack arc (e.g. the [front arc] attack arc).

when you use this weapon to shoot in the standard rear arc with trelix the "[front arc] attack arc"-restriction is still on the weapon, right.

but you dont use the [front arc] attack arc while performing the attack. you use the [rear arc] attack arc.

outmaneuver refers to the [front arc] attack arc, which you dont use.

Just now, MockingBird ME said:

And that looks a lot like what he's responding to. 

just not true. im talking about attack arcs there. not being in arc.

@Cassan are you then suggesting that a Turret pointing forward would work with cards like outmaneuver?

@MockingBird ME no. i dont suggest that. where did you read that?

@Cassan I'm asking because you seem to be stating that the arc of the attack, not the arc of the weapon as printed on the card, is what's important for outmaneuver.

Just now, MockingBird ME said:

the arc of the weapon as printed on the card

this is the attack arc restriction of the weapon.

outmaneuver on the other hand refers to an attack arc, specifically the [front arc] attack arc, that you use while performing an attack.

so yes, i say the attack arc matters for outmaneuver. not the restriction on the special weapon.

especially in this case where trelix lets you perform an attack in the standard rear arc, ignoring the "[front arc] attack arc"-restriction.

1 minute ago, Cassan said:

outmaneuver on the other hand refers to an attack arc, specifically the [front arc] attack arc, that you use while performing an attack.

If it's referencing only the standard arc you're using while performing the attack and not the arc on the card why wouldn't a turret pointed in the correct direction trigger it. The text on turret arcs is "The turret arc indicator points toward one of the ship’s four standard arcs. The standard arc that the turret arc indicator is pointing toward is a ? in addition to still being a standard arc. While a ship performs a ? attack, it can attack a target that is in its ? arc." with the missing images just being the turret symbol.

Similarly if making an attack with a full arc weapon against a ship in your front arc, do you think outmaneuver would work for that?