1 hour ago, Managarmr said:Commuting right now, so I cannot measure. Can the Vultures move off with their 2 straight before the charge blows and clear themselves? That would be a mind game, fly-off because a bomb might be dropped, or stay put and hail the bomber trying to pass by with cross-fire?
If they do fly off, they're no longer stationary on a rock. Mission accomplished.
3 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:Which comes back to what Matanui3 said about being in the right spot, which in both cases your ship's starting position is. I'll admit I was wrong about the needing a full quarter base part though.
Yeah that's what I was responding to, you don't need to clear it by a quarter base, you just need to clear it (usually). My favorite thing is to watch Heimfire like a hawk and point out any nuanced error in anything he posts!!!! Victory!!!
Just now, prauxim said:Yeah that's what I was responding to, you don't need to clear it by a quarter base, you just need to clear it (usually). My favorite thing is to watch Heimfire like a hawk and point out any nuanced error in anything he posts!!!! Victory!!!
You have some weird hobbies...
2 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:You have some weird hobbies...
Meh. Arguing on the internet and being mediocre at xwing. What else am I supposed to do until Cyberpunk 2077 comes out?
12 hours ago, Herowannabe said:I think the fact that the vulture droids park in the middle area of the map makes a huge difference, too. With traditional fortressing, they would usually set up in the corner, so you couldn’t fly past their firing arcs without flying off the map.
With vulture droids, you can fly past them, get behind them, flank them, etc. There are so many more counter play options.
@Rexler Brath might I ask, what exactly did you find confusing or what did you disagree with in my post?
Seismics will be the opportune bomb when separatist vulture droids come in to play.
The OP has a point, how does the ruling on stationary ships go into effect with the current tournament rulings? Granted it is a very thoughtless TO that takes your game away because your vulture droids have all landed on asteroids. However I have said before that the current ruling on fortressing was insufficient and mechanically unsound.
I still say that instead of a TO walking up to your table and say move or lose , if ships don't move for a 2nd turn in a row and don't have a stop (or upgrade equivalent) then they should just take a face up damage card as in being in a collision. That way it stops the fortressing that people have a problem with (2 or more ships facing each other) while still allowing for vulture droids landing.
Edited by Marinealver3 minutes ago, Marinealver said:The OP has a point, how does the ruling on stationary ships go into effect with the current tournament rulings? Granted it is a very thoughtless TO that takes your game away because your vulture droids have all landed on asteroids. However I have said before that the current ruling on fortressing was insufficient and mechanically unsound.
I still say that instead of a TO walking up to your table and say move or lose, if ships don't move for a 2nd turn in a row and don't have a stop (or upgrade equivalent) then they should just take a face up damage card as in being in a collision. That way it stops the fortressing that people have a problem with (2 or more ships facing each other) while still allowing for vulture droids landing.
There should be no ruling on fortressing.
Fortressing to the extremes that people are talking about is a bad strategy and doesn't go well. Fortressing only became more common towards the end of 1.0 because there were things like Miranda and Ghost Fenn that could arc-dodge with a turret so fortressing was the only way to actually hit them. In a healthy meta, fortressing isn't neccesary so it doesn't happen because it's boring and ultimately we play X-Wing to have fun.
Also, actions are sacrificed to fortress and thus your squad is horribly ineefficient. It became a problem in 1.0 due to action-independent mods, which are largely taken down now. I don't think there's any credibly dangerous fortress in the game if the rule went away, besides those fortresses that are already legal.
As pointed out months ago with 4-LOM and having something do donuts in the deployment zone, it's quite possible to fortress still without breaking the rules. The ruling is sloppy and only allows for potential abuse by bad TOs (luckily I have yet to see a TO who would do anything of the sort) without actually improving the health of the game.
Am I blind? You can only have grappling struts Open for a single turn anyway before needing to do another manoeuver from what I can see.
You ignore obstacles at range 0 and while you move through them. After you reveal your dial, if you reveal a maneuver other than a 2 Straight and are at range 0 of an asteroid or debris cloud, skip your Execute Maneuver step and remove 1 stress token; if you reveled a right or left maneuver, rotate your ship 90° in that direction.
After you execute a maneuver, flip this card.
So you land on an astro, next turn either stay there or turn 90, then you're struts are closed again and you have to input a real manoeuver that should make you clear the asteroid if it's not a hard 1. And of course all of that run the danger of just being seismic-ed, on a 3 health ship. That seems pretty limited to me.
Edit * I see it now, and I was truly blind, litterally posted the relevant passage. All's good chaps, move along!
3 minutes ago, DarthSempai said:skip your Execute Maneuver step and remove 1 stress token; if you reveled a right or left maneuver, rotat e your shi p 90° in that direction. After you execute a ma neuv e r
Read that first and last line again. 👍
13 minutes ago, SpiderMana said:Read that first and last line again. 👍
yeah somehow I skipped the part that said : Skip your execute maneuver step. Silly me!
7 minutes ago, DarthSempai said:Am I blind? You can only have grappling struts Open for a single turn anyway before needing to do another manoeuver from what I can see.
You ignore obstacles at range 0 and while you move through them. After you reveal your dial, if you reveal a maneuver other than a 2 Straight and are at range 0 of an asteroid or debris cloud, skip your Execute Maneuver step and remove 1 stress token; if you reveled a right or left maneuver, rotate your ship 90° in that direction. After you execute a maneuver, flip this card.
So you land on an astro, next turn either stay there or turn 90, then you're struts are closed again and you have to input a real manoeuver that should make you clear the asteroid if it's not a hard 1. And of course all of that run the danger of just being seismic-ed, on a 3 health ship. That seems pretty limited to me.
You are incorrect. If you are at range zero of an obstacle you skip your execute maneuver step. You didn't get a maneuver so you can't execute one. After "landing" on an obstacle and opening struts you are there largely until you choose to go somewhere else by revealing a two straight or doing a barrel roll off the obstacle except with intervention of your opponent. The opponent could remove the asteroid with seismic charges (so could you I guess,) or tractor you off. I also think you can be ionized and forced to execute an ion maneuver.
12 minutes ago, Frimmel said:You are incorrect. If you are at range zero of an obstacle you skip your execute maneuver step. You didn't get a maneuver so you can't execute one. After "landing" on an obstacle and opening struts you are there largely until you choose to go somewhere else by revealing a two straight or doing a barrel roll off the obstacle except with intervention of your opponent. The opponent could remove the asteroid with seismic charges (so could you I guess,) or tractor you off. I also think you can be ionized and forced to execute an ion maneuver.
Oh, right! When you're ioned, you don't reveal a maneuver.
When people have never read a rule they think applies..... /face palm
From the **** tournament regs (pg 5) :
The criteria in the game state for fortressing are as follows:
• Due to the maneuvers that a player has selected, all of that player’s ships
have overlapped one another in such a manner that none have changed
positions on the board for two or more consecutive rounds.
• That player could have selected maneuvers that did not result in the same
game state.
Link to the printer friendly pdf on the X-Wing Second Edition main page: https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/d1/88/d1884752-34e1-4ad6-a992-824f41694a03/x-wing_20_tournament_regulations_printer_friendly.pdf
Another thought back on the original topic: the very term fortress invokes imagery of heavy, tank-like ships. Any fortressing strategy I saw in 1e (mostly just for kicks, nobody trying to be overly competitive, no) involved at least one large, tanky ship, and I think they other ships tended to be pretty tanky as well.
Conversely, Vultures are like bugs: annoying, but you can squish them without a second thought (so long as they don't evade you). They're only problematic when there are too many to squish.
18 hours ago, JJ48 said:Oh, right! When you're ioned, you don't reveal a maneuver.
I think ion weapons will be a much better "just in case" inclusion in lists than seismic charges.