Apologies for this simple question. I tried Google search and couldn't find the answer.
If I activate and move a ship and it overlaps another ship (non flotilla) I'm aware that both ships take facedown damage card and then the moving ship reduces speed until it can be placed (I also aware that this is the one case where a ship may be placed overlapping manuever tool).
If this results in overlapping an obstacles (station/asteroid) do you gain/suffer the benefits/bad stuff?
Yes, you can 'land*' on Stations & Asteroids... in some cases this is the only way to gain the beefit
* by 'land' I mean end your movement on.
Yes if the final position of your ship (after moving back along your manoeuvre tool to the legal landing spot) is on an obstacle then also apply the effects of the obstacle.
These 2 effects (damage from the other ship and damage/repair from the Rock/Debris/Base) occur at the same time so it is your choice which order you do them. You could for example choose to take the damage form the enemy ship first and then immediately repair it from also landing on the base.
thank you both!
Just one small correction. 🙂
The ship damage from overlapping is NOT at the same the asteroid overlap damage.
The ship damage (the “ram” damage) comes first - during the maneuver ending.
Then AFTER the maneuver has ended, comes any obstacle overlap effect.
Its really technical, but it is how it is 🙂
A technicality indeed, but important to know if your ship was on one hull when it rammed and landed on the base in the same move.
On 4/23/2019 at 12:01 PM, Drasnighta said:Just one small correction. 🙂
The ship damage from overlapping is NOT at the same the asteroid overlap damage.
The ship damage (the “ram” damage) comes first - during the maneuver ending.
Then AFTER the maneuver has ended, comes any obstacle overlap effect.
Its really technical, but it is how it is 🙂
Thank you for clarifying the explicit timing of the "ram damage" versus the obstacle effect (good or bad).
If a ship were to bump another ship causing it to finish on an obstacle while also displacing squadrons, and the damage from that obstacle would kill the ship would your first move the squadrons around the base or just say nah?
In order to be killed by an overlap, you have to complete the movement, in either case.
This includes placing, displacing et al.
Can I piggyback on this topic for a similar clarification? This came up in a game last Friday.
Situation: An ISD going speed 2 attempts to maneuver, but can't avoid colliding with a GR-75 at speed 2 or 1. If a speed 2 maneuver would have been possible, the ISD would have landed on a debris field, however, due to the collision, it didn't actually move as it stayed at speed 0.
End result: The GR-75 takes one damage card, the ISD takes none from collision. What we need clarification on is does the ISD take 2 damage from the debris field? One of us believes yes because it would have overlapped the obstacle had the maneuver been completed. The other believes no because the final position of the ISD was right where it started (not on the obstacle).
It does not.
This is the main difference between ram damage effectively applying “while completing the maneuver”, but obstacle overlap is “after completing”.
You never actually placed on and thus overlapped the obstacle .
Edited by Drasnighta
4 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:It does not.
This is the main difference between ram damage effectively applying “while completing the maneuver”, but obstacle overlap is “after completing”.
Gotcha, thanks!
I'm looking at one of your older replies about clarifying rules for APTs from a different post. You seem to have an outstanding understanding of the rules! Are you a judge or rules adviser or something like that? I used to play a lot of Magic and am used to seeing a lot of people in that capacity. Not sure if it's the same for the Armada community.
3 minutes ago, ArmadaMatt said:Gotcha, thanks!
I'm looking at one of your older replies about clarifying rules for APTs from a different post. You seem to have an outstanding understanding of the rules! Are you a judge or rules adviser or something like that? I used to play a lot of Magic and am used to seeing a lot of people in that capacity. Not sure if it's the same for the Armada community.
Officially, I am just a crazy person 🙂
Although I do run tournaments, I’m not affiliated with FFG in that official sense. The closest we have to an official non employee judge is @i2xCross , who is the Judge for Worlds.
Otherwise, actual rules responses and Answers only come from the designers themselves via email or FAQs
40 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:Officially, I am just a crazy person 🙂
Although I do run tournaments, I’m not affiliated with FFG in that official sense. The closest we have to an official non employee judge is @i2xCross , who is the Judge for Worlds.
Otherwise, actual rules responses and Answers only come from the designers themselves via email or FAQs
Well from one crazy person to another, bless you!
It's kind of strange to me that there is no OP judge program for Armada. How are store championships and regionals judged? Just by the TO and you hope they have a good enough understanding of the nuances to make correct calls? I know Armada doesn't have quite the type of prize support on the line that a game like Magic does, but it still seems weird to me.
24 minutes ago, ArmadaMatt said:Well from one crazy person to another, bless you!
It's kind of strange to me that there is no OP judge program for Armada. How are store championships and regionals judged? Just by the TO and you hope they have a good enough understanding of the nuances to make correct calls? I know Armada doesn't have quite the type of prize support on the line that a game like Magic does, but it still seems weird to me.
That is exactly it local event managers are empowered. - there is a feedback section to comment on problems with Stores or TOS, but for the most part, Armada doesn’t need much more than that. The rules compared to many games are straightforward and easily managed.
In fact, the last time a grassroots movement attempted to even postulate the idea of having a unified set of people giving unofficial rules advice, there was so much blowback that people like me (who didn’t propose it, but we’re named) got abuse over it.