In the last Rules, this part :

Quote

If an effect triggers after a ship is destroyed, the effect resolves immediately before the ship is removed.

as been change by this :

Quote

If an effect triggers after a ship is destroyed, the effect resolves immediately , before the ship is removed.

A small "," has been added between "immediately" and "before".

For me that means the effet now trigger immediately when the ship is destoyed, not when it is removed.

Another clear change was done to the attack rules saying that attacker and defender effect that trigger on a destroyed ship now trigger at the end of the attack.
That seems to confirm that the intent is indeed to change the timing.

What do you think of that ?
I have seen nobody talking about it, but this seems like an important change. (And it explains why TA-175 is now 9 points.)

It's also worth looking at the rules for performing an attack. "After destruction" abilities have been moved to the Aftermath step, like "after attacking" and "after defending" abilities.

5 hours ago, NerroSama said:

I have seen nobody talking about it, but this seems like an important change. (And it explains why TA-175 is now 9 points.)

The reason is probably the pretty clear changes to the Aftermath step. Folks don't need to puzzle out what the changes in the destruction rules, since they're explicit in the Attack/Aftermath sections.

I guess I have become paranoid about rules after spending to much time on the forum 😅

18 hours ago, NerroSama said:

What do you think of that ?
I have seen nobody talking about it, but this seems like an important change. (And it explains why TA-175 is now 9 points.)

There was some talk about it in the rules update thread someone started when the current version dropped. It was one of many things quickly brought up, acknowledged, and never mentioned again 😕

And yes, I think it does justify some of the increased value of TA-175

12 hours ago, NerroSama said:

I guess I have become paranoid about rules after spending to much time on the forum 😅

Maybe 'paranoid' isn't the right word... Try 'nerding out on the details' 😜

TA-175 also got nerfed because it was a big part of one of the most powerful squads in the game, even before the timing updates. Sear Swarm was a really strong list, and FFG chose to nerf the TA-175/Sear combo, rather than Vultures.

1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

TA-175 also got nerfed because it was a big part of one of the most powerful squads in the game, even before the timing updates. Sear Swarm was a really strong list, and FFG chose to nerf the TA-175/Sear combo, rather than Vultures.

You mean increase the cost? I mean, that makes more sense than nerfing ships that benefit from a combo, rather than the combo itself right? If the vultures were only good because of that combo, then something is wrong them them, and it would never be really fixed so long as they can rely on that combo to prop up their flaws.

4 minutes ago, Lyianx said:

You mean increase the cost? I mean, that makes more sense than nerfing ships that benefit from a combo, rather than the combo itself right? If the vultures were only good because of that combo, then something is wrong them them, and it would never be really fixed so long as they can rely on that combo to prop up their flaws.

Potentially some of both. Depends on the case.

I can totally envision times where both the combo and the ships benefiting from it deserve nerfs (Drea VTG Loks, for example), and there cases like this where the Vultures are probably close enough to fine, but Sear/TA-175, or Ensnare Nantex, can put them over the top.

44 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Drea VTG Loks

The cumulative nerfs to Drea Loks went overboard. Adjusting Drea and VTG would have been fine, FFG hit everything involved in the list and buried it harder than they hit Whisper/Redline/Soontir...

3 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

The cumulative nerfs to Drea Loks went overboard. Adjusting Drea and VTG would have been fine, FFG hit everything involved in the list and buried it harder than they hit Whisper/Redline/Soontir...

45 for a Scurrg when it's 41 for a Kimogila is a touch excessive, even if only by like a point or two. The funny thing: Lok at 45 is still cheaper than release price.

8 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

45 for a Scurrg when it's 41 for a Kimogila is a touch excessive, even if only by like a point or two. The funny thing: Lok at 45 is still cheaper than release price.

I know, I went back over the points pdfs. I still feel it is more expensive than it needs to be. VTG is fine where its at (it didn't need to go down in the Jan 2019 update and the + two points it got in this one makes sense with the reduction in the cost of the Y-Wings and the Starfortress), Drea is a little to high (could go down a couple of points, 2 tops, and should be fine) and Turrets are okay at 3 and 5.