4 hours ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Non-0-speed maneuver makes no sense at all.

Well, I think it makes quite some sense. The normal term is "speed-1-maneuver".

Admiral Ozzel - At the start of the first round, you may execute a speed-1 maneuver.

Engine Techs - [navigate]: After you execute a maneuver, you may exhaust this card to execute a speed-1 maneuver.

Infiltrator III (RITT custom Commander ability)- [...] At the start of the first round, up to 2 friendly ships may perform a speed-1 maneuver.

Harrow - [...] When you execute a speed-1 maneuver, during your Determine Course step, you may change your first yaw value to “II” until the end of your activation.

Rift Attack Objective card - [...] End of Round: Each ship at distance 1-2 of the gravity rift that is at speed-1 or lower suffers 1 facedown damage card. [...]

Rift Ambush Objective card - [...] That ship must execute a speed-1 maneuver with a yaw of “–“. [...] Special Rule: Once per activation, after a ship executes a maneuver, if it is at distance 1-2 of the gravity rift, it must execute a speed-1 maneuver with a yaw of “–“. If that ship belongs to the second player, it may use its speed-1 yaw value. [...]

There are quite a number of examples of calling it a speed-X maneuver. The only exception so far is Quantum Storm.

Quantum Storm - M: After you execute a maneuver, you may exhaust this card to execute a 1-speed maneuver with a yaw of “-”.

For whatever reason that was done, I frankly don't know.

Anyway, I really doubt that the Onager Expansion will introduce movement rules for spinning a ship at speed-0.

"Executing a speed-0 maneuver" basicly means not-moving, so you can't gain any yaw at any joint.

I think the card only makes sense if it refers to a speed, really any speed, but above 0.

So how do you call it? A non-speed-0 maneuver or a non-0-speed maneuver? I think the latter is simply just less ambigious and doens't call for an FAQ clarification right away.

Edit:

In addition, there is a linguistic reason.

"While executing a non-0-speed maneuver, you may exhaust this card to gain a yaw value of 1 during that maneuver."

If the card only refered to a "0-speed maneuver" there would be no reason to specify anything about "that maneuver". In this case the card would just read "During a 0-speed maneuver you gain a yaw value of 1."

"... that maneuver" only makes sense in a sentence with more possible maneuvers. Ergo, all speeds apart from the 0-speed maneuver. All non-0-speed maneuvers.

Just now, JadinED said:

Well, I think it makes quite some sense. The normal term is "speed-1-maneuver".

Admiral Ozzel - At the start of the first round, you may execute a speed-1 maneuver.

Engine Techs - M: After you execute a maneuver, you may exhaust this card to execute a speed-1 maneuver.

Infiltrator III (RITT custom Commander ability)- After deploying fleets, you may pick 1 friendly non-huge ship up and redeploy it within your deployment zone. At the start of the first round, up to 2 friendly ships may perform a speed-1 maneuver.

Harrow - You gain 1 additional Z icon in your upgrade bar.

When you execute a speed-1 maneuver, during your Determine Course step, you may change your first yaw value to “II” until the end of your activation.

Rift Attack Objective card - [...] End of Round: Each ship at distance 1-2 of the gravity rift that is at speed-1 or lower suffers 1 facedown damage card. [...]

Rift Ambush Objective card - [...] After deploying fleets, the second player may choose 1 enemy ship. That ship must execute a speed-1 maneuver with a yaw of “–“. Then the second player may increase or decrease that ship’s speed by 1, to a minimum of speed 0.

Special Rule: Once per activation, after a ship executes a maneuver, if it is at distance 1-2 of the gravity rift, it must execute a speed-1 maneuver with a yaw of “–“. If that ship belongs to the second player, it may use its speed-1 yaw value. The gravity rift does not have the ability to temporarily reduce that ship’s speed during this maneuver. [...]

There are quite some examples of calling it a speed-X-maneuver. The only exception so far is Quantum Storm.

Quantum Storm - M: After you execute a maneuver, you may exhaust this card to execute a 1-speed maneuver with a yaw of “-”.

For whatever reason that was done, I frankly don't know.

Anyway, I doubt the the Onager Expansion will introduce movement rules for spinning a ship at speed-0.

"Executing a speed-0-maneuver" basicly means not-moving, so you can't gain any yaw at any joint.

I think the card only makes sense if it refers to a speed, really any speed, but above 0.

So how do you call it? A non-speed-0-maneuver or a non-0-speed-maneuver? I think the latter is simply just less ambigious and doens't call for an FAQ clarification right away.

I said that because speed 0 has no yaws and they're not possible to use until a new ruling. So non-0-speed is basically when it performs a maneuver as adding yaw to a speed 0 means nothing so that wouldn't interfere.

And that's is my logic. Without a special rule for speed 0 maneuver non-0-speed maneuver here makes no sense. And with a special rule then why not simply a speed-0 maneuver?

Of course with the special rule it could also be a non-0-speed.

1 hour ago, Zamalekite said:

But is there a mechanism for an upgrade card, other than titles, to be for one ship type only? If it's not experimental it'll need to be a new Starhawk only type of slot

Always when there is new stuff people try to use only existing rules as framework.

But every time FFG makes a little rules insert that explains everything 😁

I get where you're coming from.

Nav Teams

[Navigate]: Your [navigate] tokens can either change your speed or increase your yaw value by 1.

This cards doesn't care about the possibility of a speed-0 maneuver at all. It just states that your yaw value increases by 1 / you gain a yaw value of 1.

So your question why they even mention the possibility of a 0-speed maneuver now, is certainly valid.

I guess the way upgrade cards are written and proof-read have changed over time. Perhaps someone else's in charge of writing the upgrade cards in the first place. There are several slight variations in how the upgrade cards and objective cards are written and worded in Rebellion in the Rim.

One example.

In the Core set and old expansions, a card would read an [accuracy] icon and an [evade] token.

These following cards are new.

These maybe typos. Or maybe someone else writes and proof-reads the rules now.

1 hour ago, JadinED said:

I get where you're coming from.

Nav Teams

[Navigate]: Your [navigate] tokens can either change your speed or increase your yaw value by 1.

This cards doesn't care about the possibility of a speed-0 maneuver at all. It just states that your yaw value increases by 1 / you gain a yaw value of 1.

So your question why they even mention the possibility of a 0-speed maneuver now, is certainly valid.

I guess the way upgrade cards are written and proof-read have changed over time. Perhaps someone else's in charge of writing the upgrade cards in the first place. There are several slight variations in how the upgrade cards and objective cards are written and worded in Rebellion in the Rim.

One example.

In the Core set and old expansions, a card would read an [accuracy] icon and an [evade] token.

These following cards are new.

These maybe typos. Or maybe someone else writes and proof-reads the rules now.

No. I am just coming from the fact that adding yaw values to a speed 0 do nothing, there is no difference between writing

"When you execute a non-0-speed maneuver" or "when you execute a maneuver" regarding to yaw values.

Anyways, I am not sure what to gain a yaw value of 1 means. Effects usually increase yaw values or change yaw values. That wording is weird. A maneuver has as many yaw values as joints (first, last) and those yaw values are of "x". That wording is definitely new. It makes sense to increase/decrease (nav teams) or to change one value to another (Jerjerrod, Harrow), but to gain a yaw value is something new, and the only speed that has not yaw values is speed 0. So either they really messed the wording here or there is something else.

Just to be clear. There are quite a number of ways to express that a ship gains an additional click on one of the joints of the movement tool. If the way this is phrased changes over the years, so be it.

Obviously, the priorities of the FFG Armada team in the last year or so was to introduce and playtest new rules and loads of novel and nifty ideas.

Raid tokens, self-inflicted raid tokens for suicidal berserk ships (Cmdr. Beck), proximity mines, obstacle movement, zombie SWARM squadrons, custom commanders, gravity rifts, Exogorths, Purrgils, Defectors, Allies, a Prototype.

And most importantly, SALVO.
If this is the priority, I'm all for it.

I can't wait to play Surprise Attack, Doomed Station and Double Agent just to name three of them...

On 8/3/2019 at 10:18 AM, JadinED said:

• Gunnery Chief Varnillian
(Weapons Team)

After you deploy, place 1 red die set to a blank face on this card. If you are second player, set it to any face instead.

While attacking a ship, you may exchange 1 die from your attack pool with the die on this card. Both dice results are set to the same face.

I don't get what's the point of the last sentence... If I'm first player I can replace any card with a blank red? O.o

6 minutes ago, Norell said:

I don't get what's the point of the last sentence... If I'm first player I can replace any card with a blank red? O.o

This is what it looks like, baed on the Wording written above:

You start with a blank red on your card.

You roll your attack dice. You roll too many ACCs to be of any use to you. So you change out the Blank on the card with an ACC you've rolled (before you spend it worthlessly hitting one of a redundant token, for example)

Now, you have an ACC on your card.

So next time you shoot, and you *don't* get an ACC you REALLY want... Then you can sub that in for something instead.

Or perhaps instead of an ACC above, you fire your first shot and completely either overkill an Enemy or fail to get a killing blow when they have scatter/evade... WHy not save a Red Double, exchanging it for the blank, before the Enemy Evades or Scatters it? Or perhaps after all of your rerolls you only have one black Hit/Crit and your target has Brunson? Letting you snag that Hit/Crit for LATER before its removed/deleted.

That way, the next time you know you're starting with at least 2 damage.

1 minute ago, Norell said:

I don't get what's the point of the last sentence... If I'm first player I can replace any card with a blank red? O.o

Any blank die to a blank red. It is really weird, yes.

The red die is speculation so maybe you can place just 1 die (unlikely due to the gap) or another color (definitely not blue). But blao or red the quality of this card as 1st player will depend on your dice manipulation capability.

1 minute ago, Drasnighta said:

You start with a blank red on your card.

You roll your attack dice. You roll too many ACCs to be of any use to you. So you change out the Blank on the card with an ACC you've rolled (before you spend it worthlessly hitting one of a redundant token, for example)

Now, you have an ACC on your card.

So next time you shoot, and you *don't* get an ACC you REALLY want... Then you can sub that in for something instead.

Or perhaps instead of an ACC above, you fire your first shot and completely either overkill an Enemy or fail to get a killing blow when they have scatter/evade... WHy not save a Red Double, exchanging it for the blank, before the Enemy Evades or Scatters it?

That way, the next time you know you're starting with at least 2 damage.

Like like like like

5 minutes ago, Norell said:

I don't get what's the point of the last sentence... If I'm first player I can replace any card with a blank red? O.o

From how I read it, the die you swap on stays on until the next swap and so on...

So, if you're first player and start with a blank die, you can swap it out for a better die that you don't need on an attack (extra accuracy, extra damage after a ship is destroyed). Essentially you can save overflow dice for later, it's a nifty card.

2 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

You start with a blank red on your card.

You roll your attack dice. You roll too many ACCs to be of any use to you. So you change out the Blank on the card with an ACC you've rolled (before you spend it worthlessly hitting one of a redundant token, for example)

Now, you have an ACC on your card.

So next time you shoot, and you *don't* get an ACC you REALLY want... Then you can sub that in for something instead.

Or perhaps instead of an ACC above, you fire your first shot and completely either overkill an Enemy or fail to get a killing blow when they have scatter/evade... WHy not save a Red Double, exchanging it for the blank, before the Enemy Evades or Scatters it?

That way, the next time you know you're starting with at least 2 damage.

But it seems like the exchanged dice must have the same face? Or what is the face thing saying?

1 minute ago, ovinomanc3r said:

But it seems like the exchanged dice must have the same face? Or what is the face thing saying?

I think its saying:

Don't change the die faces from what they are.

Actually Exchange the Dice Themselves.

(So don't turn one to a blank and the other to the other result. Physically move the dice without changing what they show)

1 minute ago, Drasnighta said:

Don't change the die faces from what they are.

Bingo.

Well, that's a really cool weapons team.

On 8/5/2019 at 3:26 AM, JadinED said:

Ah, btw, the letters that can be seen on the title cards of the Onager Star Destroyers just say "Osk Nern" = "ON", which is probably just the abbreviation for Onager. Does anyone have an idea why there are the letters instead of a silhouette?

It applies to more than one class, or it's like the upgrade type like in X wing.

The 7th Fleet & the Rebel equivalent marked with Aurebesh instead of silhouettes

Now as both of these are unique titles, I'm more inclined to thing that is in place of the silhouettes as they are too similar to hammerheads

On 8/5/2019 at 5:47 PM, ovinomanc3r said:

Well, that's a really cool weapons team.

More like funny? What would that ability be worth? 1 Point? A bit more for a secondplayer because you dont start with a blank....

2 hours ago, DScipio said:

More like funny? What would that ability be worth? 1 Point? A bit more for a secondplayer because you dont start with a blank....

Not sure but I guess the ability to save a double hit from a scattered attack to paint your face later on the game worth more than 1 point

30 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Not sure but I guess the ability to save a double hit from a scattered attack to paint your face later on the game worth more than 1 point

That is true, when you dont take into account how often that will happen, including the factor that you dont already saved a duble hit with it.

Dont get me wrong I like the card a lot, I just fear that you wont get a lot of bonus from it.

Depends on what else you have on the ship, depends if the card is an exhaust /discard to use as well...

that being said I can see it being 2 or 3 points... if it was 1 then it would be put in as 'I have this slot free at 1 point so why not' not a what do I leave off ....

The 2 cards on the back of the Onager probably link to the special firing arc, I'd assume they cost 0, and take a unique upgrade slot (like experimentals, something like 'Experimental weapons system') and would determine how you can use it, the one with two thinner blue lasers would allow for 2 shots, and the red 'Bombardment' with the thick laser would limit to one shot but make it stronger (add dice? reroll?)

On ‎8‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 2:39 AM, JadinED said:

I just realize, Rakehell could also just simply be:

[Navigate]: While executing a non-0-speed maneuver, you may exhaust this card to gain a yaw value of 1 during that maneuver. 

🤔🙄🙂

IMHO, that's not the right name anyway.

"Heaven" and "****" are human-Earth-our-galaxy terms, and pretty rarely used in Star Wars (indeed, I can't actually think of any uses outside of now-'Legends' EU stories)

Rakehome

Rakehound

Rakehit

Rakehew

Rakeharm

Rakehard

Rakehold

Rakehurt

Rakehate

...etc

5 minutes ago, xanderf said:

IMHO, that's not the right name anyway.

"Heaven" and "****" are human-Earth-our-galaxy terms, and pretty rarely used in Star Wars (indeed, I can't actually think of any uses outside of now-'Legends' EU stories)

Han says "I'll see you in ****" in ESB, I think. So it's apparently a universal concept.

1 hour ago, Bertie Wooster said:

Han says "I'll see you in ****" in ESB, I think. So it's apparently a universal concept.

This exactly.