@AramoroA

- what part of the faq/rr are you refering to exactly? i cannot find the phrase "is looking for an icon".

the definition of attack arc is:

the attack arc corresponds to the wepon the attacker is using. sure - the attack arc has to be on the restriction whitelist.

- outmaneuver says: "while you perform a [front arc] attack..". it does not ask "what arc was on the weapon". it simply states that you perform an attack. how to resolve an attack is defined in the rr. one step is to determine the attack arc that is used for the attack. this is the step that does or does not trigger outmaneuver.

22 hours ago, emeraldbeacon said:

1. Does a special weapon merely indicate the required location of the attack (forward-facing arc, turret, bullseye, etc), or is it a definition of the attack arc of that weapon?
2. Does Outmaneuver care about the location of the attack , or the defined attack arc (front arc attack), or do both elements need to be true?
3. Does Krassis Trelix change the location of the attack , or the defined attack arc , or both , of "Front Arc Attack" weapons?

1. The card indicates the Attack Arc of that weapon. Forward firing arc for Torpedoes, Bullseye for Heavy Laser Cannon, Turret for Dorsal/Ion Cannon Turret.
2. Outmanoeuvre States it needs the Attack Arc of that weapon. Hence YV-666 with Ion Cannon can use Outmanoeuvre. Whereas with Primary Weapons, it may not, nor may it use it with Outmanoeuvre.
3. Krassis Trelix, so far, only changes the location of the attack, not the Attack Arc of the weapon he is using, this is one of those situations that provides an exception to force a single requirement. However, the ability does not say to change the inherent properties of that attack, such as charges, if present, attack dice, or firing arc. What it does do, is provide an exception for location as to where you fire from, not what type of weapon it is.

As has been said, ships with Primary Turret weapons cannot use Outmanoeuvre unless they have special weapons that require that same firing arc. Ships with a full-frontal firing arc cannot use Outmanoeuvre, unless they have a special weapon that uses that arc.

With those in place, it's clear to see that the arc printed on the weapon card is what triggers Outmanoeuvre. Not the location.

The simplest thing to do would be for FFG to change Outmanoeuvre to say "Primary attacks" for the trigger, which clears this whole thing up nicely, as we know turrets pointed out the front AREN'T Front arc attacks, they are Turret Arc attacks, and all other weapons are meaningless.

Just now, Cassan said:

@AramoroA

- what part of the faq/rr are you refering to exactly? i cannot find the phrase "is looking for an icon".

the definition of attack arc is:

the attack arc corresponds to the wepon the attacker is using. sure - the attack arc has to be on the restriction whitelist.

- outmaneuver says: "while you perform a [front arc] attack..". it does not ask "what arc was on the weapon". it simply states that you perform an attack. how to resolve an attack is defined in the rr. one step is to determine the attack arc that is used for the attack. this is the step that does or does not trigger outmaneuver.

You have fallen over your own logic there, unfortunately.

The Secondary weapon is still using its condition, but, Krassis is overriding that requirement, but not the nature of the weapon.

5 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

The Secondary weapon is still using its condition, but, Krassis is overriding that requirement, but not the nature of the weapon. 

- there are no "secondary weapons".

- there are no "conditions" on weapons.

- what do you mean by "is still using its condition"?

- why is krassis overriding anything? where do you get that from?

- what is "the nature of the weapon"?

4 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

You have fallen over your own logic there, unfortunately. 

im pretty sure i havent fallen that bad.

7 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

Krassis Trelix, so far, only changes the location of the atta  ck, not the Attack Arc of the weapon he is using

there is no such thing as "the location of the attack", unless you are refering to the attack arc or "something being in arc".

12 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

As has been said, ships with Primary Turret weapons cannot use Outmanoeuvre unless they have special weapons that require that same firing arc. Ships with a full-frontal firing arc cannot use Outmanoeuvre, unless they have a special weapon that uses that arc. 

this is exactly what i and the faq is saying - see above.

12 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

With those in place, it's clear to see that the arc printed on the weapon card is what triggers Outmanoeuvre. Not the location. 

its neither clear (see 4 pages of discussion so far) nor is your argument valid (there is no such thing as a "location").

16 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

The simplest thing to do would be for FFG to change Outmanoeuvre to say "Primary attacks" for the trigger, which clears this whole thing up nicely, as we know turrets pointed out the front AREN'T Front arc attacks, they are Turret Arc attacks, and all other weapons are meaningless. 

why nerf outmaneuver? the whole point of the discussion is the question: can you trigger outmaneuver with krassis and an equipped special weapon.

special weapons that use the [front arc] attack arc DO TRIGGER outmaneuver (not "meaningless").

It's really simple.

Krassis Trelix says you may perform Front Arc Special attacks out of your Rear Arc.

All Front Arc special attacks - missiles, cannons, torpedoes are Front Arc attacks. They all trigger Outmanoeuvre.

There is no denying that.

They do not, magically, become Rear Arc attacks. They are just performed as though the rear arc is the front arc. Because it doesn't say otherwise.

Obviously, Outmanoeuvre needs some clarifying, because people are unhappy with the idea of a single Initiative 3 pilot with a special ability can use it while performing a legitimate attack, fulfilling all the conditions stated.

As people have said and shown:

Torpedoes are front arc attacks. You can't change that. They Trigger Outmanoeuvre. You can't, yet, change that.

Krassis Trelix, as an Initiative 3 pilot can fire any of the Special Attacks that require, on their card, the Front Arc, out of his rear arc. That still doesn't make them rear arc attacks, as the attack type is determined by the weapon card.

Trelix just says, ooh, do this from here instead if you want.

Just like a veteran turret gunner can fire forwards, as a bonus attack, after forward fixed weapons, like on a Y-Wing.

37 minutes ago, Cassan said:

@AramoroA

- what part of the faq/rr are you refering to exactly? i cannot find the phrase "is looking for an icon".

the definition of attack arc is:

the attack arc corresponds to the wepon the attacker is using. sure - the attack arc has to be on the restriction whitelist.

- outmaneuver says: "while you perform a [front arc] attack..". it does not ask "what arc was on the weapon". it simply states that you perform an attack. how to resolve an attack is defined in the rr. one step is to determine the attack arc that is used for the attack. this is the step that does or does not trigger outmaneuver.

It's int he FAQ on Arc that I quoted on the last page.

Quote

A [Front Arc] attack uses the [Front Arc] icon above the attack value as shown on its ship card.

This FAQ entry specifically mentions Outmanoeuvre, is it requires you use a [Front Arc] attack , which means the [Front Arc] icon on the card.

The bit of the rules Krassis changes is that normally I would have to use a [Front Arc] attack with my front attack arc but the icon above my attack value is still the [Front Arc] icon, so it's still a [Front Arc] attack.

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

All Front Arc special attacks - missiles, cannons, torpedoes are Front Arc attacks. They all trigger Outmanoeuvre. 

There is no denying that.

i deny that - not that simple:

missiles, cannons, torpedoes are special weapons. they all can perform attacks using the [front arc] attack arc. and yes, they all trigger outmaneuver.

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

They do not,  magicall  y, become Rear  Arc attac  ks  .

true, weapons cannot become attacks. but weapons can use the [rear arc] attack arc.

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

They are just performed as though the rear arc is the front arc. Because it doesn't say otherwise.

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

They are just performed as though the rear arc is the front arc.

thats not what is says.

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

Obviously, Outmanoeuvre needs some clarifying, because people are unhappy with the ide  a of a single Initiative 3 pilot with a special ability can use it while performing a legitimate attack, fulfilling all the conditions stated.

not sure who "the people" are. i am not unhappy, because i think outmaneuver doesnt trigger with krassis using his pilot ability.

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

Torpedoes are front arc attacks. You can't change that.

torpedoes are special weapons restricted to the [front arc] attack arc.

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

They Trigger Outmanoeuvre. You can't, yet, change that.

true, why would i want to change that?

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

Krassis Trelix, as an Initiative 3 pilot can fire any of the Special Attacks that require, on their card, the Front Arc, out of his rear arc. That still doesn't make them rear arc attacks, as the attack type is determined by the weapon card.

again, weapons are not attacks. what is an "attack type"?

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

Trelix just says, ooh, do this from here instead if you want.

?

31 minutes ago, Damo1701 said:

Just like a veteran turret gunner can fire forwards, as a bonus attack, after forward fixed weapons, like on a Y-Wing. 

this works because vtg with a turret pointing forward and the primary weapon are using different attack arcs. just like trellix can use different attack arcs (primary and special).

@AramoroA you are talking about this faq-entry?

- this faq-entry clarifies the difference between "something is in arc" and "you perform a [front arc] attack".

- concerning the mentioning of the printed icon:

"A [front arc] attack uses the [front arc] icon above the attack value as shown on its ship card."

or more generic with the lengthy words of the rr: while performing an attack, you are using one of the available attack arcs - shown on your ship or special weapons - that your ship is restricted to.

17 minutes ago, Cassan said:

- concerning the mentioning of the printed icon:

"A [front arc] attack uses the [front arc] icon above the attack value as shown on its ship card."

or more generic with the lengthy words of the rr: while performing an attack, you are using one of the available attack arcs - shown on your ship or special weapons - that your ship is restricted to.

You've inferred wording here which does not exist in the rules.

When performing an attack as part of the declare target step you choose an attack arc which matches the arcs on my ship or upgrades. So you select your Ion Cannon, now Krassis says you can perform this out of your rear attack arc, Karrais doesn't change the arc on the weapon, it's still a [Front Arc] attack. All he changes is the arc you get to select a target in. When you're seeing if your Outmanoeuvre triggers, you check if you made a [Front Arc] attack, which is defined by the arc printed on the ship or upgrade you're using. Nothing is checking the attack arc that you actually used, just the arc on the weapon corresponding to the attack you made. Attack Arc is a defined game term, if they meant attack arc then they would have said that, but they didn't. The little [Front Arc] symbol just means front arc, nothing to do with your attack arc.

If Krassis added a [Rear Arc] to the weapon or something like that you'd be right, but he doesn't. He just lets you do something which must explicitly be a [Front Arc] attack from the rear.

24 minutes ago, AramoroA said:

Karrais doesn't change the arc on the weapon  , it's still a [Front Arc] attack.  All he changes is the arc you get to select a target in. When you're seeing if your Outmanoeuvre triggers, you check if you made a [Front Arc] attack, which is defined by the arc printed on the ship or upgrade you're using. Nothing is checking the attack arc that you actually used, just the arc on the weapon corresponding to the attack you made.

"the attack arc that you actually used" is the very definition of attack arc.

there is not one card that uses the phrase "attack arc", its always abbreviated.

these are the 3 definitions of arc-types in the rules reference: arc , firing arc and attack arc

- any arc-symbol combined with the word "attack" on cards refers to the attack arc .

- arc-symbols in phrases like "has to be in.." are arcs (like front standard arc, bullseye arc, full front arc, etc.).

- arc-symbols with the phrase "firing arc" are - well - firing arcs .

4 hours ago, Cassan said:

e.g. take a ship with multiple attack arc icons like asajj. she can use the [front arc] attack arc or the [turret arc] attack arc while attacking with her primary weapon.

she can not use any other attack arcs. the attack arc restrictions are a whitelist.

Trick question. If Dengar uses his turret primary attack to attack a target in his front arc, does Outmaneuver trigger?

22 minutes ago, emeraldbeacon said:

Trick question. If Dengar uses his turret primary attack to attack a target in his front arc, does Outmaneuver trigger?

no, outmaneuver doesnt trigger.

dengar has no primary [front arc] attack arc. so his primary turret weapon uses the [turret arc] attack arc.

but dengar can equip a torpedo which has the [front arc] attack arc. attacking with the torpedo would trigger outmaneuver.

Here's an interesting thought experiment. Biggs Darklighter is directly in front of Krassis, who attacks backwards with his ion cannon at another rebel ship close by (at r1 of Biggs, so all 3 ships are close by in a line with the firespray in the middle). Can Biggs cancel a result? What if both ships are behind Krassis?

Text: While another friendly ship at range 0-1 defends, before the Neutralize Results step, if you are in the attack arc, you may suffer 1 [Hit] or [Crit] t o cancel 1 matching result.

2 hours ago, Cassan said:

no, outmaneuver doesnt trigger.

dengar has no primary [front arc] attack arc. so his primary turret weapon uses the [turret arc] attack arc.

(continuing the trick question) But, according to your logic, why wouldn't Dengar gain the benefit of Outmaneuver, when performing a primary (turret) attack via his forward firing arc? After all, you said...

2 hours ago, Cassan said:

but dengar can equip a torpedo which has the [front arc] attack  arc. attacking with the torpedo would trigger outmaneuver  . 

So... if Dengar cannot gain the benefits of Outmaneuver via a Primary Turret Attack via his forward firing arc, but can gain the benefits on a Proton Torpedo attack which uses a Forward Attack Arc, what is it that's creating that distinction? They are both attacks via the forward facing arc. Aren't you arguing that Outmaneuver looks for which firing arc is being used?

6 minutes ago, emeraldbeacon said:

(continuing the trick question) But, according to your logic, why wouldn't Dengar gain the benefit of Outmaneuver, when performing a primary (turret) attack via his forward firing arc? After all, you said...

So... if Dengar cannot gain the benefits of Outmaneuver via a Primary Turret Attack via his forward firing arc, but can gain the benefits on a Proton Torpedo attack which uses a Forward Attack Arc, what is it that's creating that distinction? They are both attacks via the forward facing arc. Aren't you arguing that Outmaneuver looks for which firing arc is being used?

dengar doesn't have a (forward arc) primary attack. dengar checks if the attacker is in his (forward arc), but the attack is still a (turret arc) attack, since that's the only primary the jumpmaster has. proton torpedoes, on the other hand, is a secondary (forward arc) attack.

i agree that the main question is still unclear, though. the wording on krassiss card is confusing.

my opinion is that outmaneuver shouldn't trigger when krassis attacks with a secondary (forward arc) out of his (back arc), but that's just my opinion. krassiss card doesn't say it changes the definition of a secondary (forward arc) attack, just that he may perform (forward arc) secondary attacks out of his (back arc), so according to the rules as written, krassis should be able to trigger outmaneuver when firing a secondary out of his (back arc).

it's just a question of how you interpret what his ability does. i interpret it as changing the attack to a (back arc) attack - and so i don't think it should trigger outmaneuver. how ever, that's just my interpretation - and the argument for him being able to trigger outmaneuver is valid.

my recommendation is that we all agree to disagree. this question has been posted to the FFGs rules questions, no?

Very much agree.

Until there is a definitive ruling on that, then I guess we all apply the following:

1. If OP Event, ask TO before event starts, while you are still list-building.
2. If Casual, ask the opponent, if you disagree, roll a Die for it and agree on the outcome for the whole game.
3. Have fun, push plastic spaceships around, and make pew pew noises until satisfied.

1 hour ago, meffo said:

krassiss card doesn't say it changes the definition of a secondary (forward arc) attack, just that he may perform (forward arc) secondary attacks out of his (back arc), so according to the rules as written, krassis should be able to trigger outmaneuver when firing a secondary out of his (back arc).

why does the trelix pilot card have to say something explicitly, that is implicitly accepted on every other weapon upgrade - namely the normal steps of performing an attack including determining the used attack arc..

really looking forward to an official clarification - i post ffgs answer as soon as i get it.

19 minutes ago, Cassan said:

why does the trelix pilot card have to say something explicitly, that is implicitly accepted on every other weapon upgrade - namely the normal steps of performing an attack including determining the used attack arc..

really looking forward to an official clarification - i post ffgs answer as soon as i get it.

to be clear, of course. "You can perform (front arc) special attacks from your (back arc)." actually means, in plain english (with a dash of FFGs hieroglyphics), that even though you're firing out of your rear arc, you're still performing a (front arc) attack. it seems ridiculous and silly to conclude this, i agree, but it's what the card says.

of course, outmaneuver says "While you perform a (front arc) attack, if you are not in the defender's firing arc, the defender rolls 1 fewer defense die." - and it seems to me that you're definitely no longer performing a (front arc) attack while you're firing out of your rear arc, but i still see why people could interpret it the other way around, based on what krassiss card says. after all, cannons, torpedoes and missiles are all (front arc) attacks, no matter what other abilities let you do with them - and by that logic they should let you use outmaneuver.

krassiss card should say something along the lines of "you may perform special (front arc) attacks as (back arc) attacks instead."

lets just wait and see. i hope we're right on this one. on the other hand, krassis would become more viable if we were wrong - and that wouldn't be the end of the world.

53 minutes ago, meffo said:

after all, cannons, torpedoes and missiles are all (front arc) attacks

and that is not correct. the named weapons are just restricted to specific attack arcs. and while performing an attack you use one of the available attack arcs.

whatever.. we'll see.

I will say that, until I read all the cards involved, I was firmly in the No portion.

However, reading the cards, and the section about arcs in the Rules Reference, as well as the Dengar question, that did change my mind.

End of the day, it's plastic spaceships, and, a game

wait, what? how is dengar contradicting trelix not working with outmaneuver?