So I recently made a list with Cikatro where he swaps DMS off of half the list and onto the other half, leaving me with two Kihraxz Fighters that each have two copies of Deadman's Switch and a YV with two copies of Contraband Cybernetics. (The second copy of CC is stored in the nearby Z95 who holds it until he needs it.)

I confirmed this should work online among other players and then took my dumb little idea to a LGS to show off. The guy there who acts as TO said that this wasn't allowed since the rules say that ships can only equip one copy of any upgrade.

So now I'm still pretty sure that my build and internet are right, but I want to be able to prove this to him so I can continue to use this dumb trick.

Alternatively, if I'm actually wrong then it'd be great to have that too.

Anyone have an official thing that would settle this?

There is some debate about this currently. But yeah, I think most of the internet is stating that the limits that TO said..

Quote

A ship cannot equip more than one copy of an upgrade card with the same name.

Is only during the Squad Building, and once you are past Squad Building, those rules no longer apply and that Cikatro overrides those restrictions. We have yet to hear FFG's official ruling on this, but i can see both sides and honestly, id be ok with either ruling.

Thinking logically, I'd say FFG will likely rule that those restrictions remain in effect for the entire game, so you can't double up upgrades mid game. If for no other reason, so FFG doesnt have to always have to consider how two of the same upgrade will break a list build. Given how much they had to do that in 1E (having to consider how ALL upgrades would react with each other, which limited their creative options), i think they probably want to avoid that as much as they can.

Q: Can Cikatro Viza go [ 󲁒 ] exchange an 󲁘 upgrade card onto a ship that could not normally equip it (such as equipping a Stealth Device to a Z-95 Headhunter and then exchanging it with a Rigged Cargo Chute on a YV-666)?

A: Yes. Restrictions are ignored after setup unless noted otherwise.

Seems pretty clear to me.

Rules ref, page 27.

This works just fine, although it's a lot of setup for the payoff.

The Rules Reference entry that spaceinvader quoted above is the only official precedent we have on Cikatro and since it clearly says, "Restrictions are ignored after setup unless noted otherwise." that's all I would need to see to rule in favor of illicit stacking (until a specific clarification prohibits it)

EDIT: under Squad Building it is much less ambiguous. See my post below ...

I am one of those in the can't-do-this camp, because I consider the rule in question to be a game rule rather than a list-building restriction.

4 hours ago, Lyianx said:

Thinking  logically, I'd say FFG will likely rule that those restrictions remain  in effect for the entire game,  so yo  u can't double up upgrades  mid game.

It might be reasonable to expect that change in the future if it becomes a problem, but that would not be consistent with existing rules/FAQ so logically I disagree that the restrictions remain in effect during the game after squad building.

EDIT: under Squad Building it is much less ambiguous than under Upgrade Cards , although it would be nice to see clarification on which is correct. See my post below. ..

1 minute ago, Maui. said:

I am one of those in the can't-do-this camp, because I consider the rule in question to be a game rule rather than a list-building restriction.

The rule specified at the start that it's for building a list though.

1 hour ago, Maui. said:

I am one of those in the can't-do-this camp, because I consider the rule in question to be a game rule rather than a list-building restriction.

It's in the same list with size restrictions, which per the given example in the FAQ section are ignored by a Cikatro-switch.

EDIT:

@Maui. Were you starting from the Squad Building rule while I started from the Upgrade Card rule?

The FAQ says that Cikatro ignores restrictions. The RRG says that restrictions are printed on a box in each individual card. The rule in question is not printed on any upgrade cards and is therefore a rule and not a restriction. I don't read anything into the rule being listed alongside list building restrictions, because every other restriction is printed on the card, and because the rules reference is chock full of wonky list formatting.

EDIT - I'd just like to add here that if I went up against someone in a casual game who wanted to use this trick, I wouldn't stop them. I don't think it's clear one way or the other. If I ran into it at a tournament, I'd check with the judge, and I'd have zero problem with the judge ruling that it works fine. I am not a judge myself. All I'm saying is, if someone asked my opinion or if I were judging a tournament for some reason, I'd treat the no-multiple-upgrades rule as a rule.

Just now, Maui. said:

The FAQ says that Cikatro ignores restrictions. The RRG says that restrictions are printed on a box in each individual card. The rule in question is not printed on any upgrade cards and is therefore a rule and not a restriction. I don't read anything into the rule being listed alongside list building restrictions, because every other restriction is printed on the card, and because the rules reference is chock full of wonky list formatting.

Excellent argument and the entire reason this thread exists.

@Maui. That is a solid argument to which I would counter that in most lists in this Rules Reference the writers use "Additionally:" between a specific list in the rule and the additional list of umbrella addendums. The absence of that "Additionally:" as seen in so many other lists throughout the document implied to me that there is only one list in Upgrade Card Restrictions, but given the overall level of technical writing mistakes I would not be surprised if it was mistakenly omitted from the Upgrade Cards restrictions lists.

Examples of use of "Additionally:" include:

Dice Modification p8-9, where it separate the list of what is dice modification from general rules about dice modification.

Ion p12, where it separates the numbered list of steps during activation from the list of general info

Lock p12-13, Maneuver p13, Obstacles p13-14, and more.

EDIT: under Squad Building it is much less ambiguous than under Upgrade Cards , although it would be nice to see clarification on which is correct. See my post below...

On the flip side, if I had read the Squad Building rule on p18 instead of the U pgrade Cards rule on p19 I would have seen a very different list while forming my initial opinion!

Under Squad Building the list goes like this:

• Each ship has an upgrade bar...
• Nearly all game modes limit ships to a specific faction...
• Some upgrade cards have ship-size restrictions...
• Some upgrade cards have ship-type restrictions...
• A squad’s cards are restricted by the rules of limited cards and solitary cards.
• A ship cannot equip more than one copy of an upgrade card with the same name.

(Bold emphasis mine) this list is very clear that the "no duplicates" rule is not a restriction, but in fact a definite "cannot" which requires a specific exemption to overcome!

7 hours ago, nitrobenz said:

On the flip side, if I had read the Squad Building rule on p18 instead of the U pgrade Cards rule on p19 I would have seen a very different list while forming my initial opinion!

Under Squad Building the list goes like this:

• Each ship has an upgrade bar...
• Nearly all game modes limit ships to a specific faction...
• Some upgrade cards have ship-size restrictions...
• Some upgrade cards have ship-type restrictions...
• A squad’s cards are restricted by the rules of limited cards and solitary cards.
• A ship cannot equip more than one copy of an upgrade card with the same name.

(Bold emphasis mine) this list is very clear that the "no duplicates" rule is not a restriction, but in fact a definite "cannot" which requires a specific exemption to overcome!

The very fact that it is restricting list building choices makes it a restriction...

16 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

The very fact that it is restricting list building choices makes it a restriction...

My point from that quote is that the no duplicates rule is not called a restriction verbatim under the Squad Building rules even though it does appear in the list of "rules in the restriction box" under Upgrade Cards on the next page.

At this point I think that the writers did accidentally omit "Additionally:" from the list under Upgrade Cards to separate the list of "rules in the restriction box" from the one general rule, which does not actually appear in any restriction box in the game. Abreviated rules quoted below from p19 with my commentary in parenthesis:

Some upgrade cards have one or more of the following rules in their restrictions box:
• Rebel/Imperial/Scum: This upgrade can...
• Small/Medium/Large/Huge ship: This upgrade can...
• Ship-type: If there is a type of ship listed, this upgrade can...
• Action: If there is an action icon, this upgrade can...

("Additionally:" should go here)
• A ship cannot equip more than one copy of the same card.

• A squad’s cards are restricted by the rules of limited and solitary cards. (And this should be moved above the "Additionally:" to join the rest of the restrictions that are not absolutes)

To be clear, I'm still ambivalent on which way FFG is likely to lean on this, but if I were making a ruling based on rules as written I am leaning towards no duplicates for Cikatro. I think FFG will just let ground level Marshalls rule on the spot until some list dominates with a double illicit, then they will make the clarification that should have existed from day one 😑