7 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

I get that someone who's making a big deal about it is being somewhat of a jerk just trying to get a cheap win off a technicality...

The use of the word "somewhat" is being incredibly generous. I can't imagine a legitimate argument that using one falcon model for another could possibly cause confusion between the two players. That does not change the fact that using different paint schemes is permitted under the rules but using one YT-1300 as a different YT-1300 is not, but lets be honest and not pretend that the alternate model rule has any kind of substantive impact on the actual gameplay.

2 hours ago, XPav said:

So let's say I repainted a YT-1300 into something else, and made a replaceable dish so I could put rectangular vs round on it. I obviously use the proper cardboard for the faction (Scum, Rebel, or Resistance) I'm flying it with. Would any TO notice or complain? Are they going to start counting barrels on the turrets?

The rules state that you can customize your ship however you want as long as it is clear as to which ship you are flying. As long as you are using the correct pilot card, dial, and ship token there shouldn't be an issue - especially between the rebel falcon and the resistance falcon. Honestly, do people really look at the communication dish on top as the distinguishing factor as to which ship it is? I certainly don't. I have the capacity to remember that if somebody says "I am flying rebels" and they have a falcon on the board and applicable card and dial then I can assume with a fair bit of certainty that it is a rebel falcon. Especially if they are also flying Luke, or Wedge, or Leia crew, or U-Wings or B-Wings, etc.

From FFG's tournament regulations:

"Players are welcome and encouraged to personalize their squads according to the following rules: • Players may paint their ship miniatures. They cannot modify a ship miniature in any way that would create confusion about which ship the miniature represents."

They aren't saying you can't modify, they are saying just so long as it doesn't create confusion about what it represents . Can a Scum YT-1300 represent a Rebel YT-1300? Certainly. And it certainly shouldn't be confusing in that fact to anybody you are playing against. Anybody who says they are confused by a YT-1300 representing a different YT-1300 is just being a turd and mean-spirited.

But also from FFG's tournament regulations:

"All ship cards and ship bases in a player’s squad must belong to the same faction. If a player’s ship has different versions in more than one faction, the player may use any version of the miniature and dial that match the full ship name when assembling a squad . All dials must be from Second Edition. Plastic dial backs from the premium maneuver dial kit may be used."

So FFG says on one hand you can customize as long as it doesn't create confusion, on the other they say you have to use a miniature and dial that matches the ship name.

Final edit: Take off the communications dishes on all your YT-1300s. Then there will be less for somebody to want to be confused about.

11 minutes ago, Skitch_ said:

The rules state that you can customize your ship however you want as long as it is clear as to which ship you are flying. As long as you are using the correct pilot card, dial, and ship token there shouldn't be an issue - especially between the rebel falcon and the resistance falcon. Honestly, do people really look at the communication dish on top as the distinguishing factor as to which ship it is? I certainly don't. I have the capacity to remember that if somebody says "I am flying rebels" and they have a falcon on the board and applicable card and dial then I can assume with a fair bit of certainty that it is a rebel falcon. Especially if they are also flying Luke, or Wedge, or Leia crew, or U-Wings.

From FFG's tournament regulations:

"All ship cards and ship bases in a player’s squad must belong to the same faction. If a player’s ship has different versions in more than one faction, the player may use any version of the miniature and dial that match the full ship name when assembling a squad. All dials must be from Second Edition. Plastic dial backs from the premium maneuver dial kit may be used."

The above mentions nothing of miniatures. [ Um , look upwards a couple lines of text. I bolded it for you. ]

"Players are welcome and encouraged to personalize their squads according to the following rules: • Players may paint their ship miniatures. They cannot modify a ship miniature in any way that would create confusion about which ship the miniature represents. "

You are allowed to modify just so long as it doesn't create confusion about what it represents . Can a Scum YT-1300 represent a Rebel YT-1300? Certainly. And it certainly shouldn't be confusing in that fact to anybody you are playing against. Anybody who says they are confused by a YT-1300 representing a different YT-1300 is just being a turd and mean-spirited.

That being said, if someone has been clear as to which of the YT-1300s the miniature represents and they're using the correct dial, baseplates and pilot cards for the faction they are playing, a person making an issue of it (fellow player or judge/TO/marshal/whatever) is being an ***. Yet, CYAJIC is probably the best way to go about it because ***** are sadly not extinct.

1 hour ago, XPav said:

But how much better will the engine glow be on the re-releases? That was my real question!

You will be too worried about actually flying the thing in your tournament to care about how it looks as you move it around the board. Get the cheap one.

In my opinion, don’t buy the other model unless you want it. There is no real reason to buy the other YTs unless you need them.

That said, if you want another YT, I’d just buy the old model on the cheap over the new wave 4 model.

6 hours ago, Rapture said:

I can't imagine a legitimate argument that using one falcon model for another could possibly cause confusion between the two players.

Also, which has yet to be pointed out, the opposing player will know which ship you are flying from context alone:

YT-1300 with a Y-Wing = Modified

YT-1300 with a T-70 = Scavenged

YT-1300 with a Mining Guild TIE = Custom

Since no one can have a one-ship list, there will always be an accompanying ship that is a tell.

The YT-1300 is a gray area because it's officially a different ship in each faction rules-wise, but it's the same ship in-universe (to the point where each miniature is modeled off of the actual same ship, being the Milennium Falcon obviously). This means that there is a rules conflict unlike the Z-95 or the Arc, but model-wise, the ships are so similar as to be nearly indistinguishable unlike any other ship except perhaps the A-Wings now.

Even the slightest paint job or model modification done by a player could remove the distinctions between the different YT-1300s, which would normally, technically be a violation of the rule about making sure you don't create confusion between different kinds of ships. But arguably, the base models are similar enough to violate the idea of that rule all on their own.

That's why past rules threads have tended to agree that it's not really a problem. Like violations argued with the earliest cross-factions ships, it's not usually important if the ship you might confuse it with isn't even available on your faction. You can't fly a Custom YT-1300 and a Scavenged YT-1300 together and try to trick someone with which is which.

If you're really concerned, I'd suggest detaching the Escape Craft from Lando's Falcon, but other than that I wouldn't worry about it at all.

I'm tempted by the new Falcon though, because I really prefer the engine glow.

@Hiemfire

You fly whatever Falcon you **** well please. I know I do. Just make sure the dial's right and show it to your opponent to verify it is the correct dial. There should be no trouble after that. At the end of the day, it's just plastic.

Just a suggestion. Read this over and if you have any issues with it take it up with FFG:

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/d1/88/d1884752-34e1-4ad6-a992-824f41694a03/x-wing_20_tournament_regulations_printer_friendly.pdf

I've just been giving fair warning and really couldn't care less what you put on the table as long as the cardboard and dial matches the faction of the rest of your list. Its your *** and wasted cash if you get tossed out by an ******* TO that decides to enforce the letter of the regs, not mine...

If anyone complains just walk away from the game to be honest. I'd rather lose and have a break than play someone who would complain about which Falcon model you have. They might enjoy their 75 minutes to think about what they've done.

5 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

Just a suggestion. Read this over and if you have any issues with it take it up with FFG:

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/d1/88/d1884752-34e1-4ad6-a992-824f41694a03/x-wing_20_tournament_regulations_printer_friendly.pdf

I've just been giving fair warning and really couldn't care less what you put on the table as long as the cardboard and dial matches the faction of the rest of your list. Its your *** and wasted cash if you get tossed out by an ******* TO that decides to enforce the letter of the regs, not mine...

I understand your point that **technically** a problem could ensue.

In practice, I would love to see an actual example where it happened though.

There is no question about the rule, but the community members' public opinions about this issue are important. I think that saying something like, "There is a rule that has no impact on play that a TO could enforce," is unhealthy. Sure, FFG makes the rules, but TOs are responsible for enforcement and exceptions. No one should be acknowledging that a rule is completely irrelevant while also saying that there is a legitimate concern that it could be enforced. For me, a TO booting someone for using the wrong YT-1300 model while using the proper dial, pilot card, and base tile would justify the same response as the TO booting a player because the TO did not like that person's haircut. I would immediately leave that tournament and I am happy to say that I believe that the vast majority of the players in my local community would do the same.

19 hours ago, XPav said:

But how much better will the engine glow be on the re-releases? That was my real question! 

So I didn't notice the whole "striking engine glow" line in the new falcon description. There was a line about the engine glow in the preview article as well. What are the chances this is the first model with an actual LED engine light built in? They've seen all the custom versions.

30 minutes ago, Rapture said:

For me, a TO booting someone for using the wrong YT-1300 model while using the proper dial, pilot card, and base tile would justify the same response as the TO booting a player because the TO did not like that person's haircut.

Except one is against a rule and the other isn't. And I think the concern is less that some super-stickler TO is going to just boot players, and more that some jerk may decide winning by any means is more important than having fun and invoke the rule, putting the TO in an awkward position. If he enforces the rule, he looks like a jerk too, and may see people quit coming to his tournaments. If he doesn't enforce the rule, then the jerk might complain to FFG and cause trouble for the TO for picking and choosing which rules to enforce. Is it unlikely? Sure, but until FFG decides otherwise, the fact remains that the rules say one thing, even if the vast majority of players play differently.

And before people start saying that no one would be that big a jerk because there would be backlash, I believe some players simply wouldn't care, so long as they won. My local game store owner said he no longer runs X-Wing tournaments because he found that every time he did, there were some players who would drive from hours away to attend and win the majority of the prizes to add to the collection they already had from winning other local tournaments (apparently, they'd often even use some of the prizes during the tournament, showing off that they had already won other copies). The frustration was driving away the local regulars, and the travelers never spent any money on product at the store, so the owner quit tournaments and just hosts game nights instead.

My long-winded, rambling point is that if such people who are obsessed with winning aren't playing with their regular, local group, why would they care about how bad their reputation is or how much of a jerk others see them to be?

19 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Except one is against a rule and the other isn't.

And we are capable of considering a rule and its impact to decide whether it should be enforced. This is typically a cue for a slipper slope argument where someone tries to say that, before we know it, people will be using grasshoppers and corks instead of models, but hopefully we can be reasonable enough to agree that the enforcement of this particular provision is a unique case.

19 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

My long-winded, rambling point is that if such people who are obsessed with winning aren't playing with their regular, local group, why would they care about how bad their reputation is or how much of a jerk others see them to be?

This is the kind of pretending that I am saying is unhealthy. A TO enforcing that rule that does not have any impact on the game does not look like a jerk, but, rather, is a jerk. If you think that FFG, which is a company that has bowed to the will of its player base before relating to rules that do not have an impact on gameplay, is going to inflict a public punishment on a community organizer in an effort to preserve a rule that no one can reasonably justify, then you are not giving FFG enough credit. FFG is not in the business of needlessly injecting controversy into its pool of customers and has no desire to subject itself to criticism.

23 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

And before people start saying that no one would be that big a jerk because there would be backlash, I believe some players simply wouldn't care, so long as they won. My local game store owner said he no longer runs X-Wing tournaments because he found that every time he did, there were some players who would drive from hours away to attend and win the majority of the prizes to add to the collection they already had from winning other local tournaments (apparently, they'd often even use some of the prizes during the tournament, showing off that they had already won other copies). The frustration was driving away the local regulars, and the travelers never spent any money on product at the store, so the owner quit tournaments and just hosts game nights instead.

My long-winded, rambling point is that if such people who are obsessed with winning aren't playing with their regular, local group, why would they care about how bad their reputation is or how much of a jerk others see them to be?

Remember that a TO would have to enforce the rule, not the player. My point was simply that no reasonable TO would attempt to enforce this rule and that, if a TO did, any reasonable members of the community, most likely at the event itself, would correct the TO's behavior. You might imagine that conflicting points of view might be aired should that confrontation occur, but they would be resolved very quickly by the TO or another player simply asking the complaining player whether he is legitimately confused by the model being used to the point that the complaining player is mistaking it for another ship despite the various other components, one being about two inches below the model itself, providing definitive proof as to what the model is representing.

9 minutes ago, Rapture said:

FFG is not in the business of needlessly injecting controversy into its pool of customers and has no desire to subject itself to criticism.

Except that this issue has existed for a while, and FFG has yet to address it. If things happen as you say, it would have to involve FFG changing or at least clarifying the rule. Until they do, any fair-minded TO would have to side with the jerk, or else he's not following the official rules. Most of the time, everyone just looks the other way, but if a jerk really forces the issue, there is only one call that could legally be made.

12 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Except that this issue has existed for a while, and FFG has yet to address it. If things happen as you say, it would have to involve FFG changing or at least clarifying the rule. Until they do, any fair-minded TO would have to side with the jerk, or else he's not following the official rules. Most of the time, everyone just looks the other way, but if a jerk really forces the issue, there is only one call that could legally be made.

Depending on how long you have been around, you should be aware that FFG lets problems fester until they draw enough attention to warrant someone taking the time out of their work day to correct them.

I do not believe that you believe that a TO should side with an exclusionary rule that has no impact on gameplay and I do not believe that the vast majority of the community does either. Would you be advocating for compliance if FFG released an updated rule sheet that stated, "Players wearing green shirts should be disqualified at the beginning of the second round or any tournament unless they can name five planets visited in the original trilogy of Star Wars Movies?"

A TO is fully capable of assessing this rule and determining it to be exactly what it is, which is a rule designed for the sole purpose of selling additional product. If there was no a base tile or pilot card preventing any confusion, I would have to agree that there is a justifiable basis for the rule and that it should be enforced. As that is not the case and the sole purpose of the rule does not preserve the aesthetic of the game or the integrity of the gameplay, than any TO that enforces this rule to exclude a player is accomplishing nothing and should be ridiculed appropriately.

However, if you would punish the green-shirted individual referenced above and see the written rules as unassailable regardless of their intent or impact, then we will have to agree to disagree and go our separate ways.

Maybe I'm simply ignorant to how much power TOs have. Do TOs have the authority to decide, on the spot, that they simply will not enforce a rule?

23 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Maybe I'm simply ignorant to how much power TOs have. Do TOs have the authority to decide, on the spot, that they simply will not enforce a rule?

Whether or not someone can (or should, really - an individual has free will and can do whatever they want) do something is typically a question of the consequences.

Answer these two questions:

1) What would the consequence be if a TO enforces an arbitrary rule that is exclusionary?

2) What would the consequence be if a TO does not enforce an arbitrary rule that is exclusionary?

But, you skipped responding to my question about the player in the green shirt. If you would not enforce that rule that I made up, assuming that it was incorporated into the actual rules by FFG, what sets it apart from the actual rule that we are discussing?

To directly respond to your question, I think that a TO does have the authority not to enforce arbitrary rules as no one has standing to object to the lack of enforcement due to no injury being suffered.

33 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Maybe I'm simply ignorant to how much power TOs have. Do TOs have the authority to decide, on the spot, that they simply will not enforce a rule?

TOs have a lot of discretion. Like policing, the legal system, or any other sort of rule-encforcement, it's about context and about the spirit of the law as much as the letter of the law.

This rule exists so that players do not do one of the following things:
(1) Use non-FFG things as their ships (e.g. MicroMachines or Shapeways ships or LEGO or whatever). One could buy a Rebel Conversion Kit, a pile of cheap micromachine ships, and some base packs and play the game without buying any actual ships from FFG. FFG does not want this, and they certainly don't want to condone it. So the rules say you have to use official products that match the official components.
(2) They also don't want people doing stuff that is confusing, like putting your TIE Fighter on your Bomber base and your Bomber on your TIE Base. Seems obvious, but better to have an explicit rule that says you cannot do this.

As written, using a Resistance Falcon on a Rebel base violates the spirit of (1) but not of (2). To the degree that it violates (1) is certainly a lot less than someone using micromachines or little cardstock ship silhouttes or something. The players are still clearly playing a nice, visually immersive game of X-Wing using stuff they bought from FFG. No TO is going to care about that, except maybe at Worlds or something where FFG Staff have to police the stuff that goes on stream to adhere with the letter of all of FFG's rules and policies. And even then they'd likely just bring the player an appropriate model to use during their officially FFG-streamed game. Barring that, even on a 3rd Party stream, I can promise you the FFG TOs would allow cross-factional YT-1300 models (I've seen them allow LEGO ships on a 3rrd Party stream at the 2018 World Championships).

17 minutes ago, Rapture said:

To directly respond to your question, I think that a TO does have the authority not to enforce arbitrary rules as no one has standing to object to the lack of enforcement due to no injury being suffered.

In other words, they don't have the authority, but to admit such would damage your case so you'll try to qualify it as much as possible.

Now we can answer the green shirt question. If FFG implemented such a rule, which was unambiguous and didn't conflict with other rules, then yes, a TO at an event following the official rules would be obligated to enforce it. Of course, players knowing such a rule would be wise to dress accordingly, but that doesn't change the rule's existence.

FFG has a bad rule. However, if we go to a tournament using these rules, we agree to abide by them whether we like them or not.Absolutely I think FFG should exempt the YT-1300s from the rule, but until they do, that's what's official.

13 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

In other words, they don't have the authority, but to admit such would damage your case so you'll try to qualify it as much as possible.

Now we can answer the green shirt question. If FFG implemented such a rule, which was unambiguous and didn't conflict with other rules, then yes, a TO at an event following the official rules would be obligated to enforce it. Of course, players knowing such a rule would be wise to dress accordingly, but that doesn't change the rule's existence.

FFG has a bad rule. However, if we go to a tournament using these rules, we agree to abide by them whether we like them or not.Absolutely I think FFG should exempt the YT-1300s from the rule, but until they do, that's what's official.

I literally answered your question and explicitly stated that a TO has the authority, by clear and simple implication, to do whatever they want with arbitrary rules. Go back and read my last post again. Start from the bottom and see if you can find the part that says. " To directly respond to your question ." I can't identify why you are having trouble understanding my answer, so you will have to try to explain you issue to me.

Your position supports arbitrary rules (which FFG has an occasional tendency to impose) that provide no benefit while also inflicting harm on the players. As a player, I reject your position. If you actually found yourself in a room trying to enforce the "Green Shirt Rule," I can't imagine a group of people that would support you. But, like I said, if you are willing to punish players with a rule that you cannot identify the purpose of, then we have an irreconcilable difference of opinion.

4 minutes ago, Rapture said:

while also inflicting harm on the players  .

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 Inconvenience =/= Harm. Nice try though.

10 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 Inconvenience =/= Harm. Nice try though.

You would not consider being involuntarily removed from participating in an event that you paid to play in "harm?" I suggest that you look up the word. I am sure that you are desperate to try to prove a point (for some reason), but try to stay reasonable.

Edit - Forgot to be childish: 🤣 🤣 🤣

1 minute ago, Rapture said:

I literally answered your question and explicitly stated that a TO has the authority, by clear and simple implication, to do whatever they want with arbitrary rules. Go back and read my last post again. Start from the bottom. I can't identify why you are having trouble understanding my answer, so you will have to try to explain you issue to me.

Your position supports arbitrary rules (which FFG has an occasional tendency to impose) that provide no benefit while also inflicting harm on the players. As a player, I reject your position. If you actually found yourself in a room trying to enforce the "Green Shirt Rule," I can't imagine a group of people that would support you. But, like I said, if you are willing to punish players with a rule that you cannot identify the purpose of, then we have an irreconcilable difference of opinion.

Purpose of the rule is completely irrelevant to whether the rule exists. There is no ambiguity to what the rule says, so it is on FFG to fix the rule; not on the TO to decide whether or not they believe it to be arbitrary.

And if the green shirt rule existed and was known, why on earth would someone attend a tournament where it was in effect without preparing accordingly? In the case of the YT, proper preparation would be to buy the proper ship, borrow the proper ship, or fly a different list. The same options anyone else has who wants to use conversion kit parts for more ships than they own.

Will the rule be enforced if you do your own workaround? Probably not. However, it's a risk that's on the player.

2 minutes ago, Rapture said:

You would not consider being involuntarily removed from participating in an event that you paid to play in "harm?" I suggest that you look up the word. I am sure that you are desperate to try to prove a point (for some reason), but try to stay reasonable.

If you pay to play in an event, you agree to abide by the rules of that event. If you can't/won't follow a rule, you would be wise to stay out of the event unless you can confirm beforehand that the particular rule is not in effect for that event.