PLEASE VOTE ON THE FOLLOWING POSTS, NOT THIS ONE

Use the Reactions here to vote. Another great thing is you can change your reaction over time.

Bring other friends, groups and users here to vote.

---

Issues:
Should FFG address these issues in changes game rules or errata?
(See below posts)

Reasoning:
We assume this will increase the skill needed to play the game in a good way and will make decisions and flying matter more. Again, this assumes that "decisions and flying matter more" would make the game more fun to play or more rewarding for skill and practice.

Context:

Created and explained by MidWestScrub very well

https://midwestscrub.wordpress.com/2019/09/11/complaining-about-space-farts-or-why-gas-clouds-are-bad-for-the-game/

=====

With new points, do we still need this?

I think yes.

1. Should Gas Clouds have more negative impact for either flying through them or landing overlapping them?

Vote ❤️ for yes, 😕 confused for no, Vote 😆 for mixed answer/alternative-opinion

Addendum1: [Consistency] Should all obstacles explicitly force losing the default action?

Vote 🏆 for yes and yes. Vote 😭 for no and no. Vote 😆 for mixed answer

Issues 2 and 3 can be resolved in errata here also.

2. Should "after fully executing a maneuver" abilities become errata'd to "after fully executing a maneuver and if you did not overlap an obstacle this round" Precedent: Tie Defender x7 errata in 1.0.

Vote ❤️ for yes, 😕 confused for no, 😆 for mixed answer/alternative-opinion

3. Should FFG revisit and check new abilities with the "after executing a maneuver" (without "fully") to avoid exploit?

Vote ❤️ for yes, 😕 confused for no , 😆 for mixed answer/alternative-opinion

reserved

now THIS is reaction farming

(just kidding, thanks Blail)

Just now, Kieransi said:

now THIS is reaction farming

(just kidding, thanks Blail)

I prefer to call it moisture and salt farming. Tears yknow.

7 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

2. Should "after fully executing a maneuver" abilities become errata'd to "after fully executing a maneuver and if you did not overlap an obstacle this round" Precedent: Tie Defender x7 errata in 1.0.

Vote ❤️ for yes, 😕 confused for no, 😆 for mixed answer/alternative-opinion

I voted yes, because I fundamentally agree with the change to the mechanics, but I think the phrase "fully executing a maneuver" shouldn't have to require an addendum with additional text. Just change the rules definition.

I think some abilities were designed to still activate on a bump. They knew what they were doing when they specified some as "fully execute" vs just "execute."

Additionally, if you hard errata in a rule that you need to fully execute a maneuver in order to get the benefits of executing a maneuver...you can then stun-lock someone with a single ion token. They'll never clear it, because they'll never fully execute the maneuver, and if there is an errata, that means they'll never execute it either. Same with stress and strain.

Even if you put in clarifications, it makes it much much messier than it is now.

I do, however, fully agree that gas clouds should have some kind of penalty. Right now they're far too beneficial for no drawback. I dislike the idea that every obstacle explicitly strips the action step; two already do, and adding that clause again will likely muddy the waters a bit.

Gas clouds should provide an ion token when flying thru.

9 hours ago, Redd9 said:

Gas clouds should provide an ion token when flying thru.

That potentially puts us in tractor **** meta.

18 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

Addendum1: [Consistency] Should all obstacles explicitly force losing the default action?

I don't really understand the point of this clarification?

18 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

3. Should FFG revisit and check new abilities with the "after executing a maneuver" (without "fully") to avoid exploit?

It's plausible there's some less common ones I'm forgetting, but I don't think I have any problems with the existing set of abilities. Making fully execute == no obstacle satisfies me plenty.

2 minutes ago, svelok said:

That potentially puts us in tractor **** meta.

I don't really understand the point of this clarification?

It's plausible there's some less common ones I'm forgetting, but I don't think I have any problems with the existing set of abilities. Making fully execute == no obstacle satisfies me plenty.

Yeah, most of these are pretty niche and have drawbacks of their own (e.g. Unkar Plutt). I suppose some could be errata'd, but the basic idea is fine if not abused.

Fully executing a maneuver should include not hitting obstacles, period.

Gas clouds should deplete a force token, so they aren’t no-penalty for aethersprites.

FFG should always check abilities for exploits, no matter what they are. That third question is thus kind of redundant.

52 minutes ago, svelok said:

That potentially puts us in tractor **** meta.

So? No obstacle benefits non-force users in the same way that gas benefits force users.

Obstacles should cause serious problems when flown through or thrown on. The great def bonus needs to have an equally strong drawback. Or clouds have the adsen language, no further actions this round, or cannot activate any upgrade, ship, or pilot ability or effects. Strain or deplete instead of ion? Seismic charges on gas clouds measure range 2 instead of r1?

How about: A shot obstructed by a gas cloud detonates the gas cloud. Anything at range 0 of the gas cloud takes 1 hit.Then remove the gas cloud from play. (or don't maybe?).

The free evade still works. Tractor is a threat. Blocking onto gas is now a valid tactic.

13 hours ago, Redd9 said:

Gas clouds should provide an ion token when flying thru.

3 hours ago, svelok said:

That potentially puts us in tractor **** meta.

Well, I would make it a roll for damage/effect rather than auto ion.

Maybe make them limited.

During deployment, a player may substitute 1 asteroid for 2 gas clouds.

If both players select, there are 4 asteroids and 4 clouds.

Let's just change generic gas clouds to tibanna gass:

Effect: after passing or overlapping a tibanna gas, gain one tibanna gas token.

Tibanna gas token: if you are hit by an attack, you MUST remove one tibanna gas token per hit. For each tibanna gas token removed, transform one hit into a crit. You may remove one tibanna gas token after performing a speed 3 or higher manoeuver.

Personally I'd rather see them bring a new mechinic to the game. A defensive option.

Let the clouds completely block line of sight when determining shots. It was something i always wished asteroids would do but instead they only added an evade die.

It gives players a reason to use them to make arc dodging a little better and give you a way to keep your key ship(s) alive that your opponent is trying to focus fire down asap

It lets people be smart about placement and where they want to fly. It will also benefit support ships that don't do much other than help their teammates out by passing tokens and what not

16 minutes ago, executor said:

Personally I'd rather see them bring a new mechinic to the game. A defensive option.

Let the clouds completely block line of sight when determining shots. It was something i always wished asteroids would do but instead they only added an evade die.

It gives players a reason to use them to make arc dodging a little better and give you a way to keep your key ship(s) alive that your opponent is trying to focus fire down asap

It lets people be smart about placement and where they want to fly. It will also benefit support ships that don't do much other than help their teammates out by passing tokens and what not

Someone suggested flying over them gives you just a disarm, which would come out to a similar effect. Perhaps deplete would be more fair: you're getting extra defense, but you're giving up more of your attack to get it.

I don't want to see the gas clouds cut attacks off completely , but I do enjoy that there's a more powerful defensive option available. If flying over them gave you a deplete, that makes them less bad than asteroids when you're tractored onto them (at least you can still shoot) but if you're hiding behind them, your shot will be worth next to nothing with -1 die and the defender getting an extra die plus autothrusters.

I'm glad this poll is meaningless, nothing would ruin this game faster than democracy

If you agree: Use any react
If you disagree: Donate $50 to Cool Earth

2 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Well, I would make it a roll for damage/effect rather than auto ion.

^100% Yup. I definitely think that gas clouds should follow consistent logic with the rest of the obstacles. Both other types are roll for effect.

I have to confess, though, I don't see how ion tokens would be thematically related to gas clouds - I'd probably choose a different effect. Any examples we have of gas cloud interference in movement in the movies or TV shows seem to be related to visibility or susceptibility to massively magnified damage (i.e. the Rebels episode where Ezra et al are trying to avoid the TIE/d prototype - although as I think of it, that might be a Clone Wars episode with Y-Wings. I don't remember exactly, though it was one of the coolest episodes). I also don't agree with strain being the penalty. I'd probably go with an effect that makes it more hazardous both offensively and defensively - i.e. "when you overlap or move through a gas cloud, roll one attack die. On a [Focus] result, you cannot modify your dice rolls this round. Alternatively, @Redd9 gives some good potential effects above.

16 hours ago, Redd9 said:

Gas clouds should provide an ion token when flying thru.

Strain. They should assign strain. The same way debris gives stress.

The defensive element of gas clouds and the lack of consequence for flying over are (mostly) separate problems

Jedi get the benefit of both, as one more case of how Jedi are 1000 different advantages rolled together at once, but mostly otherwise it's different units abusing each aspect - aces hiding behind clouds and ships like tavson or tie swarms throwing themselves over them to have "no restrictions" on their lane of attack.

Gas clouds should have from the start added a strain. Sure you get 1.0, but they are an obstacle, they should be a hinderance not a help.

Before someone says rocks and tractor beams. Rocks hurt bad flying on both sides.

2 hours ago, Archangelspiv said:

Gas clouds should have from the start added a strain. Sure you get 1.0, but they are an obstacle, they should be a hinderance not a help.

Before someone says rocks and tractor beams. Rocks hurt bad flying on both sides.

How exactly is losing an action a form of help?