Just sayin....

the only issue will be range calls

An easy bypass would have been 'You must target someone in the closest range bracket to you.' Range tiers are very unambiguous and it doesn't reduce the downside of the upgrade that much.

It is a minor issue in casual play, but yeah it is sorta a problem when precision really matters.

35 minutes ago, dezzmont said:

An easy bypass would have been 'You must target someone in the closest range bracket to you.' Range tiers are very unambiguous and it doesn't reduce the downside of the upgrade that much.

It is a minor issue in casual play, but yeah it is sorta a problem when precision really matters.

That could be interpreted to mean that you may only ever perform attacks against enemy ships at range 0

1 minute ago, Maui. said:

That could be interpreted to mean that you may only ever perform attacks against enemy ships at range 0

Well yes, I didn't try to future proof my wording and just meant to get the intent across.

"You must select your target from within the closest legal range bracket you may fire upon that contains a legal target" or something.

For an example case: if you have two targets at range 2 in arc, a target at range 3 in arc, a target at range 0 in arc, and a target at range 1 out of arc, you must shoot at one of the two targets in range 2, and are unable to shoot at any other targets, nor are compelled to 'try' to shoot someone out of arc or at range 0 (Unless your ship is capable of range 0 shots somehow).

42 minutes ago, dezzmont said:

Well yes, I didn't try to future proof my wording and just meant to get the intent across.

"You must select your target from within the closest legal range bracket you may fire upon that contains a legal target" or something.

For an example case: if you have two targets at range 2 in arc, a target at range 3 in arc, a target at range 0 in arc, and a target at range 1 out of arc, you must shoot at one of the two targets in range 2, and are unable to shoot at any other targets, nor are compelled to 'try' to shoot someone out of arc or at range 0 (Unless your ship is capable of range 0 shots somehow).

That is what it says, though. The sticking point is what if you have a ship at range 1 in arc, but also a ship at range 3 with your missiles locked on?

Honestly, once we get a ruling about whether you select the weapon you fire before or after checking this restriction, there won't be any issues.

2 hours ago, Matanui3 said:

That is what it says, though. The sticking point is what if you have a ship at range 1 in arc, but also a ship at range 3 with your missiles locked on?

Honestly, once we get a ruling about whether you select the weapon you fire before or after checking this restriction, there won't be any issues.

I'm of the mindset that weapon selection happens before target selection, so locked-on missiles can get around ATP. That's how it's been since the Biggs days back in 1e, and the Attack rules steps have choose weapon before choose target still.

Is there room for potential debate? Maybe, but this is one of the longest precedents in X-Wing, and I don't see significant compelling evidence or arguments to challenge it yet, at least not without dev input.

Rulings with regards to secondary weapons have always been liberal. I doubt it was intended to force you into a primary attack on the closest ship if you have a choice of a farther ranged ship with a secondary. You will have to shoot at the closest eligible with that secondary but the weapon requiring a lock will come in there because of "valid."

It really shouldn't. The definitions are clear, if it was supposed to be the closest valid target, it would say that. It doesn't.

6 hours ago, JBFancourt said:

Just sayin....

I don't see how at all. You're not measuring physical closest to closest. If there's more than one ship in the closest range bracket (say 2 ships at range 2, and 1 at range 3), then you choose one of those ships in the closest range bracket (choose one of the ships at range 2).

6 hours ago, dezzmont said:

An easy bypass would have been 'You must target someone in the closest range bracket to you.' Range tiers are very unambiguous and it doesn't reduce the downside of the upgrade that much.

It is a minor issue in casual play, but yeah it is sorta a problem when precision really matters.

This is the heart of what I was talking about... I’ve already seen near table flips over what RANGE BRACKET a ship is in or if someone is parallel or not...

...let alone 3 ships all at range 2. How are you even supposed to quantify this? Mark your range ruler with a sharpie???

How does TTS and Vassal prepare for this???

52 minutes ago, MegaSilver said:

I don't see how at all. You're not measuring physical closest to closest. If there's more than one ship in the closest range bracket (say 2 ships at range 2, and 1 at range 3), then you choose one of those ships in the closest range bracket (choose one of the ships at range 2).

Yeah.... that’s just it tho. You can’t just pick one. You MUST determine the closest one.

PREPARE THE PROTRACTORS, SIRE!!

1 hour ago, CaptainJaguarShark said:

It really shouldn't. The definitions are clear, if it was supposed to be the closest valid target, it would say that. It doesn't.

It literally says that... or it’s late and I’m missing your point. 🤔

Just now, JBFancourt said:

Yeah.... that’s just it tho. You can’t just pick one. You MUST determine the closest one.

PREPARE THE PROTRACTORS, SIRE!!

It doesn't say the closest target, though. It says a defender at the closest attack range. Range is well defined (the numbers on the ruler), and attack range is that but in a valid attack arc.

I can see issue where there's debate whether you can use a long range secondary weapon instead of your primary if there's someone at range 1 and someone at a longer range.

Just now, CaptainJaguarShark said:

It doesn't say the closest target, though. It says a defender at the closest attack range. Range is well defined (the numbers on the ruler), and attack range is that but in a valid attack arc.

I can see issue where there's debate whether you can use a long range secondary weapon instead of your primary if there's someone at range 1 and someone at a longer range.

Oooo..... I got ya! SPICY. Never thought of it that way. 🤔 🤔

@CaptainJaguarShark

So if there are 3 ships all at range 2, you’d say I could pick any of those???

Just now, JBFancourt said:

@CaptainJaguarShark

So if there are 3 ships all at range 2, you’d say I could pick any of those???

Yes, as long as there are no valid defenders at range 1. Then since all three ships are in range 2, you can choose any of them while you have this card equipped. If there was a ship at range 3 as well, it would not be valid.

Barring a ruling on how secondary weapons interact, I'm unsure about that, honestly.

Ok phew 😅

Crisis adverted. Thanks 😊

1. Declare Target: During this step, the attacking player identifies and names the defender of the attack.

a. Measure Range: The attacking player measures range from the attacker to any number of enemy ships and determines which enemy ships are in which of its arcs.

b. Choose Weapon: The attacking player chooses one of the attacker’s primary or special weapons.

c. Declare Defender: The attacking player chooses an enemy ship to be the defender. The defender must meet the requirements defined by the weapon.

d. Pay Costs: The attacker must pay any costs for performing the attack

I'd be inclined to agree that you get to choose the weapon first before declaring the defender, as above. If its a secondary weapon that requires a lock then the ship that is locked is the only valid target. Unless you have something like an R3 astro allowing two locks..

See post below

9 hours ago, CaptainJaguarShark said:

It doesn't say the closest target, though. It says a defender at the closest attack range. Range is well defined (the numbers on the ruler), and attack range is that but in a valid attack arc.

I can see issue where there's debate whether you can use a long range secondary weapon instead of your primary if there's someone at range 1 and someone at a longer range.

I'm sorry, but I disagree with this....The card says that when you perform an ATTACK (Doesn't say primary or Secondary), you must choose a defender within the closest rang band. If you choose to try to fire missiles when there is another legal target within a closer range band, you fail that attack and must shoot the ship that is closer. This card is a must affect . There is no other option here. I can see a case being made if the card said primary attack, then you can do all these shenanigans, but it says attack. I would believe that include primary, turret, and secondary or any other kind of attack that a ship can do with the tech slot . FFG has been good with being specific if they want a desired affect. If they want this to say primary only, they would have said primary attack, but they went with a general attack instead. The desire affect of this card is to help generics shoot "better" by shooting the closest target. Look at the LAAT ship ability for example. For that it says when you perform a non turret attack, you may spend a charge on this ship to have that ship re roll up to 2 of its dice. Very specific wording. Synchronized Console for the republic is another one with very specific wording of when and how you can spend TL to have a friendly acquire a lock. You can't use Heavy Laser cannon out the back with the Tie Brute. You can 't use Marksmanship on resistance A wings due to only having a turret and no bullseye arc (I think). The point is that you can't do alot of things due to specific wording.

That's just not how the rules work. You are reading like it is conversational language. It is not. This card affects step 1.c Declare Defender. It says nothing about forcing you to choose a weapon, only your target.

1a Measure range to everyone

1b Choose a weapon

1c Choose a valid target that is in the closest attack range.

Proton torps can only select locked target. Prockets can only select a target in the bullseye. Ion turret can only choose a target in the mobile arc. Nantexi can even choose bullseye or mobile. THEN the card comes in and says you have to choose from among the valid targets in the closest range.

That's my reading of the technical language and how FFG has interpreted rules since 1st Ed.

36 minutes ago, 97Starvipper said:

I'm sorry, but I disagree with this....The card says that when you perform an ATTACK (Doesn't say primary or Secondary), you must choose a defender within the closest rang band. If you choose to try to fire missiles when there is another legal target within a closer range band, you fail that attack and must shoot the ship that is closer. This card is a must affect . There is no other option here. I can see a case being made if the card said primary attack, then you can do all these shenanigans, but it says attack. I would believe that include primary, turret, and secondary or any other kind of attack that a ship can do with the tech slot . FFG has been good with being specific if they want a desired affect. If they want this to say primary only, they would have said primary attack, but they went with a general attack instead. The desire affect of this card is to help generics shoot "better" by shooting the closest target. Look at the LAAT ship ability for example. For that it says when you perform a non turret attack, you may spend a charge on this ship to have that ship re roll up to 2 of its dice. Very specific wording. Synchronized Console for the republic is another one with very specific wording of when and how you can spend TL to have a friendly acquire a lock. You can't use Heavy Laser cannon out the back with the Tie Brute. You can 't use Marksmanship on resistance A wings due to only having a turret and no bullseye arc (I think). The point is that you can't do alot of things due to specific wording.

I don't think the card having any weapon restriction proves your point. It's simply allowing this to trigger with abilities like snap shot.

As the card states "you must choose a defender at the closest valid attack range."

As the steps I posted above clearly state, you get to choose the weapon before you declare the target.

I don't think the intention of this card is to strip the player of so much agency they cannot even choose to use thier secondary weapons.

If your choosing a secondary then you must pick closest VALID target with that weapon. If the weapon has restrictions, range 2-3, and you have a target at range 1 then it is not a valid target for that weapon. If the weapon then has a lock resriction and you have targets in range 2 and 3 but you only have a lock on the one at range 3 than that is the only valid target. No fuss.

3 hours ago, 97Starvipper said:

I'm sorry, but I disagree with this....The card says that when you perform an ATTACK (Doesn't say primary or Secondary), you must choose a defender within the closest rang band. If you choose to try to fire missiles when there is another legal target within a closer range band, you fail that attack and must shoot the ship that is closer. This card is a must affect . There is no other option here. I can see a case being made if the card said primary attack, then you can do all these shenanigans, but it says attack. I would believe that include primary, turret, and secondary or any other kind of attack that a ship can do with the tech slot . FFG has been good with being specific if they want a desired affect. If they want this to say primary only, they would have said primary attack, but they went with a general attack instead. The desire affect of this card is to help generics shoot "better" by shooting the closest target. Look at the LAAT ship ability for example. For that it says when you perform a non turret attack, you may spend a charge on this ship to have that ship re roll up to 2 of its dice. Very specific wording. Synchronized Console for the republic is another one with very specific wording of when and how you can spend TL to have a friendly acquire a lock. You can't use Heavy Laser cannon out the back with the Tie Brute. You can 't use Marksmanship on resistance A wings due to only having a turret and no bullseye arc (I think). The point is that you can't do alot of things due to specific wording.

You don't seem to be arguing against anything I said in my post, except maybe the part where I said I wasn't sure how it works with secondary weapons? You're arguing against my stated uncertainty?

But as others have pointed out, you pick your weapon before you pick the defender, so that actually squares that away nicely.

terget