Hey everybody,

Some folks have been messaging me with questions about some of the new Clone Wars content and how certain card interactions work. Thank you for that level of trust!

With all the Armada Devs having been layed off, and not knowing when AMG will start answering questions. All I can do is try my best to help.

Please feel free to either keep DMing me or drop your questions here just so I can keep a tally of what questions are ongoing. I'm starting the process of getting Clone Wars KARM made, but it likely won't be ready until a month or so after release as things take time to write up, debate with other judges, and try and also get developer feedback (not a guarantee, but its nice when it happens).

I'm just as excited to dig into all the new rules as everybody else.

*Please note, that nothing is officially endorsed by FFG, however I have Judged at GenCon 2019 and would of Judged alongside Brooks at Worlds 2020 and remain in active communication with Ian Cross (multiple armada Worlds Judge) as well as several other individuals (Such as Drasnighta) that are well-versed in the Armada rulebook. You can see these discussions happen on the community run Star Wars Armada Discord.

Thanks for all the hard work you do. We all appreciate it.

Thanks for the work. I will drop some I think may need some clarification, even those "just to be safe".

1st. Ahsoka Tano

Must the target of the attack be at distance 1 from Ahsoka or at distance 1 from the chosen friendly squadron?

I might be wrong but until now every distance/range check either comes with the point you measure from specified or is supposed to be done from the source of the effect (usually "you"). Here the friendly squadron attacks but Ahsoka "resolves". There is room to argue the enemy squadron must be at distance 1 from Ahsoka (See Jendon)

Jendon also enable an attack for a friendly squadron. The distance 1 limit is not required. The attack already consider that limit.

2nd. Kit Fisto

Can I choose to trigger his effect with exhausted defense tokens?

Asper the RRG when an exhaust defense token is spent, it's discarded. I guess it could be argue that discarding it is part of the effect therefore you have two effect with the same timing but I'm not sure that's true. Spending and discarding are the same "event" here (even though they are not the same thing). It's more like when yo do A under X condition, you're (also) doing B. It's weird cause if you can't choose to discard an exhausted defense token with this ability they could have written "readied" token for more clarity. If the idea is you could, then they could have written "when you spend [...], you may discard it instead". I guess the problem here might be they want to enable accuracies against it and they weren't sure what would be the best way to express it.

3rd Nevoota Bee

Do all non-unique squadrons actually benefit from BOTH effects?

Iknow what the article says as you know we can't really trust them. But for me it reads only one way. Every non-unique squadron you activate has swarm, therefore they may reroll. I'm quite sure it's not RAI though.

4th Swivel-Mount Batteries

Does salvo attacks loose a die when a side hull zone is marked with a focus token?

I think it doesn't cause when you "salvo" you don't attack from anywhere. I'm pretty confident about it but is it RAI? Also salvo mechanic is one of the more tricky ones; every clarification about it will help the less experienced players.

@ovinomanc3r no snipe with Ashoka, hence distance 1

Spending a token discards it. Discarding a token does not spend it. Kit can discard exhauated tokens, but he cannot brace and reduce damage by 3 simultaneously with the same token.

3 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

@ovinomanc3r no snipe with Ashoka, hence distance 1

Spending a token discards it. Discarding a token does not spend it. Kit can discard exhauated tokens, but he cannot brace and reduce damage by 3 simultaneously with the same token.

But that's cause you resolve one effect instead of the other. When you spend the exhausted token, the token is gone for good. How you're gonna choose to discard it? You already did it!

And about Ahsoka, I'm sure that's the idea, but still it doesn't specify where you measure from and one could argue "at distance 1 (from Ahsoka)" would overwrite the attack limitation. It's not like I cannot imagine what they want, it's about stuff I think they should clarify.

Thanks for letting me know about those @ovinomanc3r ! I will add them to my list to look into and will hopefully have answers by the end of December.

Hard at work on the initial draft! Please feel free to drop any and all Clone Wars related questions here.

On 11/21/2020 at 8:19 PM, ovinomanc3r said:

How does a generic squadron that has been activated by Nevoota Bee interact with Reserve Hanger Deck if it gets destroyed by counter fire during its activation?

4 hours ago, Flengin said:

How does a squadron generic squadron that has been activated by Nevoota Bee interact with Reserve Hanger Deck if it gets destroyed by counter fire during its activation?

All seems to indicate that that interaction works. With Nevoota Bee the squadron gains Swarm until the end of its activation. The counter occurs after step 5 of the attack which is still during that squadron's activation, so at the moment it was destroyed it had Swarm so I see nothing indicating that Reserve Hangar Deck cannot be used in that case.

That interaction works. Yes. (The Nevoota Bee, RHD, and counter part of it)

g

If I read this right I‘ve to use a CF by the ship itself AND a token from another ship?

On 11/21/2020 at 10:19 AM, ovinomanc3r said:

4th Swivel-Mount Batteries

If I read this according to the old cards using of „While attacking“ (especially DTT) I assume that

1) I can add a black die from an adjacent hull zone even when attacking at long range and

2) When attacking from an adjacent side I roll dice first and can then remove a blank?

Question: Scout + Infested Fields

What happens if I deploy a squadron with Scout overlapping an obstacle with an Infested Fields objective token? Can I collect that token during setup?

For reference...

Scout: While deploying fleets, you can be placed outside of deployment zones and do not need to be at distance 1–2 of a friendly ship, but must be placed beyond distance 1–5 of enemy ships or squadrons. (RRG pg. 19)

edit: Note - the question is really "what happens if I can get a squad on an Infested Fields obstacle during setup?" Scout just happens to be the thing enabling such a deployment. I believe you could theoretically do it w/o Scout if you positioned the obstacles & deployed ships --> squads correctly. But I imagine we'll see this happen more frequently with Scout in the game.

1 hour ago, LazorBeems said:

Question: Scout + Infested Fields

What happens if I deploy a squadron with Scout overlapping an obstacle with an Infested Fields objective token? Can I collect that token during setup?

For reference...

Scout: While deploying fleets, you can be placed outside of deployment zones and do not need to be at distance 1–2 of a friendly ship, but must be placed beyond distance 1–5 of enemy ships or squadrons. (RRG pg. 19)

edit: Note - the question is really "what happens if I can get a squad on an Infested Fields obstacle during setup?" Scout just happens to be the thing enabling such a deployment. I believe you could theoretically do it w/o Scout if you positioned the obstacles & deployed ships --> squads correctly. But I imagine we'll see this happen more frequently with Scout in the game.

Overlaps only occur on *movement*.

You don't *Move* during Deployment. You are Placed or Deployed.

Ergo, Nothing Happens, and you can't claim it until you *Move*.

3 hours ago, KaLeu said:

g

If I read this right I‘ve to use a CF by the ship itself AND a token from another ship?

Yes, you'd need to resolve concentrate fire command on the ship you have, and then also discard a CF token from another friendly ship in order to resolve this card effect.

3 hours ago, KaLeu said:

If I read this according to the old cards using of „While attacking“ (especially DTT) I assume that

1) I can add a black die from an adjacent hull zone even when attacking at long range and

2) When attacking from an adjacent side I roll dice first and can then remove a blank?

1) yup, this was even cleared up in new RRG.
2) No, you must pick which dice to remove from the attack pool when you gather dice. Not after you roll.

28 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Overlaps only occur on *movement*.

You don't *Move* during Deployment. You are Placed or Deployed.

Ergo, Nothing Happens, and you can't claim it until you *Move*.

Dras is correct, "Overlap" is a defined game term in RRG. meaning, you need to resolve "Overlap" as to how the rules state how "overlap" is resolved, not just the pure english wording.
Thus, overlap only happens after ending movement. Not from placement or deployment.

@ovinomanc3r
I haven't forgotten your questions, I just haven't had time to dig into them. Rest assured, when I can get to them and get them thoroughly discussed with other judges. I'll post our conclusions here.

Does Nevota Bee work with Reserve Hangar Deck?

Example: Nevota Bee gives a fighter 'Swarm' until the end of its activation. The fighter is destroyed before it activates. Reserve hangar decks allows you to discard the card to return the fighter to the board.

RHD doesn't say 'printed keyword swarm', hence the query.

36 minutes ago, flatpackhamster said:

Does Nevota Bee work with Reserve Hangar Deck?

Example: Nevota Bee gives a fighter 'Swarm' until the end of its activation. The fighter is destroyed before it activates. Reserve hangar decks allows you to discard the card to return the fighter to the board.

RHD doesn't say 'printed keyword swarm', hence the query.

Nevota Bee works with RHD if the non-unique squadron that was activated, and gained "swarm", is destroyed during that ships activation. Yes.

21 minutes ago, Karneck said:

Nevota Bee works with RHD if the non-unique squadron that was activated, and gained "swarm", is destroyed during that ships activation. Yes.

Circumstantially useful, but also rather cheeky, recovering a 17-pt squad for 3pts.

On 11/21/2020 at 8:14 AM, ovinomanc3r said:

And about Ahsoka, I'm sure that's the idea, but still it doesn't specify where you measure from and one could argue "at distance 1 (from Ahsoka)" would overwrite the attack limitation. It's not like I cannot imagine what they want, it's about stuff I think they should clarify.

It's a different sentence begining with "That squadron", so to me that indicates that when it says "an enemy squadron at distance 1" it's referring distance 1 from "that squadron" and not from Ahsoka, which was left behind in the previous sentence.

But I'm no native english speaker so I may be wrong.

18 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Overlaps only occur on *movement*.

You don't *Move* during Deployment. You are Placed or Deployed.

Ergo, Nothing Happens, and you can't claim it until you *Move*.

17 hours ago, Karneck said:

Dras is correct, "Overlap" is a defined game term in RRG. meaning, you need to resolve "Overlap" as to how the rules state how "overlap" is resolved, not just the pure english wording.
Thus, overlap only happens after ending movement. Not from placement or deployment.

Appreciate the responses, gents! When I first was looking at this interaction, I was thinking the same thing— overlap needed movement. However, when I went to look for a definition of overlapping in the RRG to support that assumption, I couldn’t find one. So while the “plain English” vs. “rule definition” makes sense in many parts of the game, without a specific definition, we’re left to piece together overlap based on common sense (i.e., plain English), and what we can derive from the references to overlap presented in the game and the RRG. What I found while researching were rules, effects, and scenarios that seemed to contradict that idea!

I did waaaaaaaaay too much digging on this (see below!). But ultimately, what I found can be summarized in this question:

How can a flagship deployment satisfy the station overlap condition of Surprise Attack , but a squadron deployment not satisfy the obstacle overlap condition of Infested Fields ?

I think that comparison is enough to understand the conclusion I came to. However, if you have too much time on your hands (like I apparently did lolololol), you can read this walkthrough of my thinking, and check my math and tell me where I’m wrong (as I’m very likely to be!). 😄

Overlapping rules

There's no definition of overlap in the RRG (i.e., "an overlap is when..."). Though it has its own section in the RRG (pg. 19), the rules only state what happens as the result of an overlap not what an overlap is (from what I can find, might be missing something!).

What we get are instructions for certain scenarios that involve overlapping (again, not a definition). The Overlapping section in the RRG gives us rules for these scenarios:

• “ If a ship executes a maneuver and its final position overlaps one or more squadrons …”
• “ If a ship executes a maneuver and its final position would overlap another ship …”
• “ If a moving ship or squadron overlaps an obstacle token …”

The closest we get to a general definition of overlapping (that I can find) is a statement about what an overlap is not in the FAQ for Movement (p 33):

• Q: If a ship executes its maneuver so that it is exactly touching another ship or squadron at its final position, did the ship that moved overlap the ships or squadrons that it is touching?
• A: No.

Obstacle rules

The rules for obstacles , however, gets us muuuuuch closer to what we’re looking for. From page 12 of the RRG…

When a ship or squadron overlaps an obstacle after executing a maneuver, it resolves an effect that depends on the type of obstacle it overlapped:

[…]

• A ship or squadron overlaps an obstacle if part of its base is on top of the obstacle token after moving (excluding activation sliders). Ships and squadrons can move through obstacles without issue.

That bullet seems pretty cut and dry! Squadrons overlap after they move. Exceeeeeeept…

That bullet is a clause of the original part of that rule. It’s conditional to the original trigger of “ When a ship of squadron overlaps an obstacle after executing a maneuver .” This section is specific in what it’s describing. It saying that the trigger for this after-you-maneuver effect is checking what you’re on top of after you move. It’s not saying that the state of being on top of something is only ever checked when you move.

Now, that reading feels pretty, preeeeeeetty rules lawyer-y. 👨‍⚖️ Just based off of those rules, I’d be inclined to say that it’s too hair-splitting. However, there are other explicit rules and scenarios in the game that deal with overlapping that have nothing to do with movement or maneuvering . That’s where things get complicated.

Non-movement overlapping

There seem to be three other main forms of overlapping (that I can find) referenced in the game. Again, since there’s no specific definition, I’ll give you my summarization (which could be both inherently wrong and wrong in summary, so please double check me!). They are what I’ll call the “state of overlapping,” “placement overlapping,” and “deployment overlapping” (clearly the more relevant one, here!).

• State of overlapping — the binary check of “are you or aren’t you on top of something.” We see this non-maneuver scenarios like…
  • Line of Sight rules: “ While a ship is overlapping an obstacle and the attacking hull zone’s traced line of sight does not pass over a visible portion of that obstacle (or another obstacle or ship), that attack is not obstructed .” (p 10)
  • Fire Lanes : “ If a player’s ship or squadron overlaps an objective token, his opponent controls that token ”
  • Jamming Barrier : “ While attacking, if neither the attacker or defender are overlapping an objective token …”
• Placement overlapping — when a piece is put on top of something in the play area as a result of a “place” effect. I won’t get into all the effects that give “place” instructions (Hondo, Place Obstacles step of Setup, etc.) because they’re everywhere! I will draw attention to a couple placement overlapping rules:
  • “ If a squadron is placed on an obstacle as a result of being overlapped, it does not resolve the effects of overlapping. ” (p 14)
  • “ A squadron cannot be placed so that it would overlap another squadron or ship, ” (p 14) and “ Q: Can a ship be placed so that it overlaps another ship? A: No. ” Aka the “we ain’t playin’ space Jenga” rules.
• Deployment overlapping — conditions regarding whether or not a ship or squadron can, can’t, or must be overlapping another piece when it deploys. We see this in…
  • Raddus : “ That Ship cannot be deployed overlapping squadrons …”
  • Profundity FAQ : “ When the ship set-aside using this effect is deployed, it can overlap squadrons. If it does, place those squadrons as if the deployed ship had overlapped them while executing a maneuver. ” (p 48)
  • Hyperspace Assault : “ The ship can be deployed overlapping squadrons; ”
  • Fleet Ambush : “ He cannot deploy ships or squadrons overlapping obstacles in the ambush zone. ”
  • Surprise Attack : “ While deploying fleets, the first player must deploy their flagship before deploying any other ships. Their flagship must overlap the station ”
  • Surprise Attack FAQ : “ While deploying fleets, if the first player’s flagship is a huge ship, it must overlap the station and also touch that player’s edge, if able. If that flagship cannot meet both restrictions, it must be placed overlapping the station with its rear hull zone as close as possible to that player’s edge. ” (p 37)
  • Huge Ship : “ A huge ship cannot be deployed overlapping obstacles. ” (p 8).

In “deployment overlapping,” we see that there are clear triggers checking non-maneuver overlapping during deployment. Notably, they aren’t only in the negative — Profundity, Hyperspace Assault, and Surprise Attack all allow an affirmative deployment overlap.

Surprise Attack is the most compelling because after you successfully deploy your flagship on the station, it is in a state of overlap . We know this because it has to be to satisfy the condition of the objective effect.

It’s also compelling because it directly addresses obstacle overlap during deployment . You could make an argument that the “ on top of the obstacle token after moving ” (p 12) bullet quoted above is definitive for obstacles; obstacle overlap only happens after movement. But here we see that’s not true, because the flagship does overlap the station during deployment.

So why the bullet for on overlapping and moving in the obstacle section?

Obstacle effects

Let’s go back to the main clause of the Obstacle section in the RRG (p 12) to which all the rest of the info is dependent (as bullets of the main clause): “ When a ship or squadron overlaps an obstacle after executing a maneuver, it resolves an effect that depends on the type of obstacle it overlapped: ” Note that the “effects” that follow are the ones we all know and love for obstacles (debris field = take 2 dmg, asteroids = 1 face up, etc.).

This section of the RRG is only describing those specifics effects and how to trigger them (ending up on top of them after moving). It doesn’t provide definitive explanation for everything related to obstacles in the game (see the related topics listed in that section). We can agree, though, that it does provide the definitive rules for those specific effects.

The key distinction with Surprise Attack and Infested Fields is that those aren’t obstacle effects , they are objective effects . They’re caused by the objective card; they aren’t inherently one of the obstacle effects outlined in the Obstacle section of the RRG (p 12).

Use cases

We can examine this logic with a few hypotheticals.

Let’s imagine there was an upgrade card that included this text: “ Before deploying fleets, deal 1 face down damage card to this ship .” You have that upgrade equipped to your flagship, and you’ve chosen to play your opponent’s Surprise Attack objective.

• When you deploy your flagship overlapping the station as instructed by the objective, would you then remove that damage card? No , because the removal of damage by the station is its obstacle effect which is triggered by overlapping after a maneuver.
• Would that flagship be overlapping the station? Yes . It has to be to satisfy the objective. Even though it hasn’t triggered the obstacle effect , it is still overlapping the obstacle.

Another example: Chart Officer + Infested Fields . Imagine you have Chart Officer equipped to one of your ships, and you’re playing Infested Fields . After completing a move with that ship during the Execute Maneuver step of the Ship Phase , it ends on top of an asteroid with an objective token. You then discard Chart Officer .

• Would you take one face up damage from the asteroid? No , Chart Officer negates that obstacle effect .
• Would you remove the objective token and gain 1 victory token? Yes , because that is an effect of the objective not the obstacle.

While that might seem like an odd example because you’re still moving (thus reenforcing overlap = move), remember that the “did you move?” check is a clause dependent on obstacle effects . So logic would dictate that if overlapping required movement, and movement is checked as part of an obstacle effect , if you don’t resolve obstacle effects through Chart Officer then you never check for movement and can never have been said to overlap .

That just inherently doesn’t make sense; clearly you are overlapping . What we see here is that obstacle effects can be separated from the “state of overlapping.” If we’re doing that separation, we have to acknowledge that the movement check goes with the obstacle effect not the “state of overlapping.”

Conclusion

Holy ****, I wrote too much and spent too much time thinking about this!

In summary, what I found is…

• There’s no specific definition of overlap in the RRG
• There is a connection to overlap after moving in the Obstacles (p 12) section, but only in reference to triggering the explicitly outlined obstacle effects
• There are rules for overlapping that don’t relate to movement (e.g., Line of Sight , p 10)
• There are cards that have effects for to non-movement overlapping (e.g., Fire Lanes )
• There are upgrades that have effects for deployment overlapping (e.g., Raddus )
• There are objectives that have effects for deployment overlapping (e.g., Surprise Attack ).

Again, I’ll leave you with the question I posed at the beginning:

How can a flagship deployment satisfy the station overlap condition of Surprise Attack , but a squadron deployment not satisfy the obstacle overlap condition of Infested Fields ?

Thank you for coming to my TEDTalk. Please tip your waitresses. Goodnight. ☠️ ☠️ ☠️

1 hour ago, LazorBeems said:

Appreciate the responses, gents! When I first was looking at this interaction, I was thinking the same thing— overlap needed movement. However, when I went to look for a definition of overlapping in the RRG to support that assumption, I couldn’t find one. So while the “plain English” vs. “rule definition” makes sense in many parts of the game, without a specific definition, we’re left to piece together overlap based on common sense (i.e., plain English), and what we can derive from the references to overlap presented in the game and the RRG. What I found while researching were rules, effects, and scenarios that seemed to contradict that idea!

I did waaaaaaaaay too much digging on this (see below!). But ultimately, what I found can be summarized in this question:

How can a flagship deployment satisfy the station overlap condition of Surprise Attack , but a squadron deployment not satisfy the obstacle overlap condition of Infested Fields ?

I think that comparison is enough to understand the conclusion I came to. However, if you have too much time on your hands (like I apparently did lolololol), you can read this walkthrough of my thinking, and check my math and tell me where I’m wrong (as I’m very likely to be!). 😄

Overlapping rules

There's no definition of overlap in the RRG (i.e., "an overlap is when..."). Though it has its own section in the RRG (pg. 19), the rules only state what happens as the result of an overlap not what an overlap is (from what I can find, might be missing something!).

What we get are instructions for certain scenarios that involve overlapping (again, not a definition). The Overlapping section in the RRG gives us rules for these scenarios:

• “ If a ship executes a maneuver and its final position overlaps one or more squadrons …”
• “ If a ship executes a maneuver and its final position would overlap another ship …”
• “ If a moving ship or squadron overlaps an obstacle token …”

The closest we get to a general definition of overlapping (that I can find) is a statement about what an overlap is not in the FAQ for Movement (p 33):

• Q: If a ship executes its maneuver so that it is exactly touching another ship or squadron at its final position, did the ship that moved overlap the ships or squadrons that it is touching?
• A: No.

Obstacle rules

The rules for obstacles , however, gets us muuuuuch closer to what we’re looking for. From page 12 of the RRG…

When a ship or squadron overlaps an obstacle after executing a maneuver, it resolves an effect that depends on the type of obstacle it overlapped:

[…]

• A ship or squadron overlaps an obstacle if part of its base is on top of the obstacle token after moving (excluding activation sliders). Ships and squadrons can move through obstacles without issue.

That bullet seems pretty cut and dry! Squadrons overlap after they move. Exceeeeeeept…

That bullet is a clause of the original part of that rule. It’s conditional to the original trigger of “ When a ship of squadron overlaps an obstacle after executing a maneuver .” This section is specific in what it’s describing. It saying that the trigger for this after-you-maneuver effect is checking what you’re on top of after you move. It’s not saying that the state of being on top of something is only ever checked when you move.

Now, that reading feels pretty, preeeeeeetty rules lawyer-y. 👨‍⚖️ Just based off of those rules, I’d be inclined to say that it’s too hair-splitting. However, there are other explicit rules and scenarios in the game that deal with overlapping that have nothing to do with movement or maneuvering . That’s where things get complicated.

Non-movement overlapping

There seem to be three other main forms of overlapping (that I can find) referenced in the game. Again, since there’s no specific definition, I’ll give you my summarization (which could be both inherently wrong and wrong in summary, so please double check me!). They are what I’ll call the “state of overlapping,” “placement overlapping,” and “deployment overlapping” (clearly the more relevant one, here!).

• State of overlapping — the binary check of “are you or aren’t you on top of something.” We see this non-maneuver scenarios like…
  • Line of Sight rules: “ While a ship is overlapping an obstacle and the attacking hull zone’s traced line of sight does not pass over a visible portion of that obstacle (or another obstacle or ship), that attack is not obstructed .” (p 10)
  • Fire Lanes : “ If a player’s ship or squadron overlaps an objective token, his opponent controls that token ”
  • Jamming Barrier : “ While attacking, if neither the attacker or defender are overlapping an objective token …”
• Placement overlapping — when a piece is put on top of something in the play area as a result of a “place” effect. I won’t get into all the effects that give “place” instructions (Hondo, Place Obstacles step of Setup, etc.) because they’re everywhere! I will draw attention to a couple placement overlapping rules:
  • “ If a squadron is placed on an obstacle as a result of being overlapped, it does not resolve the effects of overlapping. ” (p 14)
  • “ A squadron cannot be placed so that it would overlap another squadron or ship, ” (p 14) and “ Q: Can a ship be placed so that it overlaps another ship? A: No. ” Aka the “we ain’t playin’ space Jenga” rules.
• Deployment overlapping — conditions regarding whether or not a ship or squadron can, can’t, or must be overlapping another piece when it deploys. We see this in…
  • Raddus : “ That Ship cannot be deployed overlapping squadrons …”
  • Profundity FAQ : “ When the ship set-aside using this effect is deployed, it can overlap squadrons. If it does, place those squadrons as if the deployed ship had overlapped them while executing a maneuver. ” (p 48)
  • Hyperspace Assault : “ The ship can be deployed overlapping squadrons; ”
  • Fleet Ambush : “ He cannot deploy ships or squadrons overlapping obstacles in the ambush zone. ”
  • Surprise Attack : “ While deploying fleets, the first player must deploy their flagship before deploying any other ships. Their flagship must overlap the station ”
  • Surprise Attack FAQ : “ While deploying fleets, if the first player’s flagship is a huge ship, it must overlap the station and also touch that player’s edge, if able. If that flagship cannot meet both restrictions, it must be placed overlapping the station with its rear hull zone as close as possible to that player’s edge. ” (p 37)
  • Huge Ship : “ A huge ship cannot be deployed overlapping obstacles. ” (p 8).

In “deployment overlapping,” we see that there are clear triggers checking non-maneuver overlapping during deployment. Notably, they aren’t only in the negative — Profundity, Hyperspace Assault, and Surprise Attack all allow an affirmative deployment overlap.

Surprise Attack is the most compelling because after you successfully deploy your flagship on the station, it is in a state of overlap . We know this because it has to be to satisfy the condition of the objective effect.

It’s also compelling because it directly addresses obstacle overlap during deployment . You could make an argument that the “ on top of the obstacle token after moving ” (p 12) bullet quoted above is definitive for obstacles; obstacle overlap only happens after movement. But here we see that’s not true, because the flagship does overlap the station during deployment.

So why the bullet for on overlapping and moving in the obstacle section?

Obstacle effects

Let’s go back to the main clause of the Obstacle section in the RRG (p 12) to which all the rest of the info is dependent (as bullets of the main clause): “ When a ship or squadron overlaps an obstacle after executing a maneuver, it resolves an effect that depends on the type of obstacle it overlapped: ” Note that the “effects” that follow are the ones we all know and love for obstacles (debris field = take 2 dmg, asteroids = 1 face up, etc.).

This section of the RRG is only describing those specifics effects and how to trigger them (ending up on top of them after moving). It doesn’t provide definitive explanation for everything related to obstacles in the game (see the related topics listed in that section). We can agree, though, that it does provide the definitive rules for those specific effects.

The key distinction with Surprise Attack and Infested Fields is that those aren’t obstacle effects , they are objective effects . They’re caused by the objective card; they aren’t inherently one of the obstacle effects outlined in the Obstacle section of the RRG (p 12).

Use cases

We can examine this logic with a few hypotheticals.

Let’s imagine there was an upgrade card that included this text: “ Before deploying fleets, deal 1 face down damage card to this ship .” You have that upgrade equipped to your flagship, and you’ve chosen to play your opponent’s Surprise Attack objective.

• When you deploy your flagship overlapping the station as instructed by the objective, would you then remove that damage card? No , because the removal of damage by the station is its obstacle effect which is triggered by overlapping after a maneuver.
• Would that flagship be overlapping the station? Yes . It has to be to satisfy the objective. Even though it hasn’t triggered the obstacle effect , it is still overlapping the obstacle.

Another example: Chart Officer + Infested Fields . Imagine you have Chart Officer equipped to one of your ships, and you’re playing Infested Fields . After completing a move with that ship during the Execute Maneuver step of the Ship Phase , it ends on top of an asteroid with an objective token. You then discard Chart Officer .

• Would you take one face up damage from the asteroid? No , Chart Officer negates that obstacle effect .
• Would you remove the objective token and gain 1 victory token? Yes , because that is an effect of the objective not the obstacle.

While that might seem like an odd example because you’re still moving (thus reenforcing overlap = move), remember that the “did you move?” check is a clause dependent on obstacle effects . So logic would dictate that if overlapping required movement, and movement is checked as part of an obstacle effect , if you don’t resolve obstacle effects through Chart Officer then you never check for movement and can never have been said to overlap .

That just inherently doesn’t make sense; clearly you are overlapping . What we see here is that obstacle effects can be separated from the “state of overlapping.” If we’re doing that separation, we have to acknowledge that the movement check goes with the obstacle effect not the “state of overlapping.”

Conclusion

Holy ****, I wrote too much and spent too much time thinking about this!

In summary, what I found is…

• There’s no specific definition of overlap in the RRG
• There is a connection to overlap after moving in the Obstacles (p 12) section, but only in reference to triggering the explicitly outlined obstacle effects
• There are rules for overlapping that don’t relate to movement (e.g., Line of Sight , p 10)
• There are cards that have effects for to non-movement overlapping (e.g., Fire Lanes )
• There are upgrades that have effects for deployment overlapping (e.g., Raddus )
• There are objectives that have effects for deployment overlapping (e.g., Surprise Attack ).

Again, I’ll leave you with the question I posed at the beginning:

How can a flagship deployment satisfy the station overlap condition of Surprise Attack , but a squadron deployment not satisfy the obstacle overlap condition of Infested Fields ?

Thank you for coming to my TEDTalk. Please tip your waitresses. Goodnight. ☠️ ☠️ ☠️

Wow, first of all, great analysis. Now I'm no judge or anything near, but if I'd like to give my opinion on the matter.

To me the overlapping during setup of Infested Fields doesn't remove the token because that effect is still not actve during setup. As I understand, no card effect is active during setup unless stated otherwise and for objectives, the part active during setup is the one under the "Setup" part of the text (it's important to clarify that I haven't look at every single objective to see if there are exceptions to this). If the rule is under "Special Rule" (like the overlapping rule of Infested Fields), it doesn't work during setup. That's my reasoning for this case, although I may be wrong and maybe the whole text of the objective cards are meant to be active also during setup.

@LazorBeems

That is... a lot. I applaud the effort you've put into your research and trying to understand Armada complexity. Not many people make this additional effort, and I encourage you to continue to do so.

Something I will state to establish some credentials, is that I've spent years on the Armada rulebook. That doesn't mean I'm always right, but I have enough experience and was trusted enough to be a Judge for GenCon 2019, and a Judge Worlds 2020 (if it would of happened).

That said, in some cases, you are drawing some inaccurate conclusions or not taking the entire RRG or FAQ and Developer responses into account.
I'm not certain if English is your primary language. I'll do my best to try and explain.

Quote

Appreciate the responses, gents! When I first was looking at this interaction, I was thinking the same thing— overlap needed movement. However, when I went to look for a definition of overlapping in the RRG to support that assumption, I couldn’t find one. So while the “plain English” vs. “rule definition” makes sense in many parts of the game, without a specific definition, we’re left to piece together overlap based on common sense (i.e., plain English), and what we can derive from the references to overlap presented in the game and the RRG. What I found while researching were rules, effects, and scenarios that seemed to contradict that idea!

I did waaaaaaaaay too much digging on this (see below!). But ultimately, what I found can be summarized in this question:

How can a flagship deployment satisfy the station overlap condition of Surprise Attack , but a squadron deployment not satisfy the obstacle overlap condition of Infested Fields ?

I think that comparison is enough to understand the conclusion I came to. However, if you have too much time on your hands (like I apparently did lolololol), you can read this walkthrough of my thinking, and check my math and tell me where I’m wrong (as I’m very likely to be!).

"Overlapping" is a defined game term. As you mention, it has an entire section on it. In that section, it states this.
"If a squadron is placed on an obstacle as a result of being overlapped, it does not resolve the effects of overlapping"

Also
you're are missing some FAQ responses on some objective that are extremely similar to Infested Fields
FAQ on " Navigational Hazards " which states
"A ship or squadron only resolves an obstacle’s effect when it overlaps that obstacle after moving ."

Also FAQ response on Dangerous Territory

"This card’s Special Rule effect resolves during the Move Ship step while executing a maneuver ."
The Special Rule being

"Special Rule: When a ship overlaps an obstacle , the ship's owner may remove the objective token on that obstacle to gain 1 victory token.

When one of the second player's ships overlaps an asteroid field or debris field, that obstacle has no effect."

There is also this from Obstacles section to consider.
"When a ship or squadron overlaps an obstacle after executing a maneuver, it resolves an effect that depends on the type of obstacle it overlapped."

Based on these, we have precedent that "overlapping" and thus "Overlap" only happens "after moving". And that the game only considers overlapping an obstacle or any of its effects as something that is only done " after moving " .

The only time we have precedent for a ship even being ALLOWED to be "placed" "overlapping" squadrons is Hyperspace Assault and Profundity 's set aside ship and only because that objective and FAQ very clearly states that you can do so, otherwise you CANNOT per RRG. Even then, this "placement" aka "Deployment" is still NOT resolving the effect of "overlapping".

OTHERWISE if ships were to be deployed by something like Hyperspace Assault or Raddus , and those ships "deployed" on top of an obstacle, like an asteroid field, they would HAVE to resolve obstacle effects. Which is absolutely not the case, because we know when something "deploys" it is a "placement". I will explain this further on.

Infested fields requires that a ship or squadron "overlap" an obstacle in order to remove the objective token. We know that overlapping an obstacle can only happen "after moving". Movement is required to resolve overlapping, and thus claiming the objective token.

This is FURTHER enforced by how overlapping squadrons on a station is resolved.

“ If a squadron is placed on an obstacle as a result of being overlapped, it does not resolve the effects of overlapping. ” this again enforces that "placement" is not "movement" and thus, not resolving the effect of overlapping.

For Example, if you overlap a ton of squadrons on a station, when those squadrons are re"placed" back down on the station. They do NOT get to heal a health from doing so, because they do not resolve "overlapping".

Also consider how squadron Hondo and squadron Mauler interact, in that "placement" is NOT "movement".
Hondos ability reads "During your activation, instead of attacking, you may toggle the activation slider of 1 squadron at distance 1 to the activated side. If it was already activated, you may place it anywhere at distance 1 of you."
If you use Hondos ability on Mauler, Mauler is "Placed" in a new position, not "moved", thus not triggering Maulers ability to splash damage out to all enemy squadrons engaged.


Again more enforcement about "placement" is not "movement", and thus not "overlapping".
Per Setup
"Squadrons must be placed within distance 1–2 of a friendly ship and may be placed outside of deployment zones (but within the setup area)."

"The setup area is the region of the play area in which ships, squadrons, obstacle tokens, and objective tokens are placed during setup ."

Quote

Again, I’ll leave you with the question I posed at the beginning:

How can a flagship deployment satisfy the station overlap condition of Surprise Attack , but a squadron deployment not satisfy the obstacle overlap condition of Infested Fields ?

Deployment is NOT movement. Deployment is "Placing" a ship or squadron. When you place a ship "overlapping" something when it deploys". yes it is overlapping per english wording, but it is not resolving the effect requirement of "overlapping" in that the "overlapping" effect ONLY can happen " after moving ".

Thus when you "place" the flagship "overlapping" the station. It it satisfying the requirement that the ship is overlapping the station in placement, but it is NOT satisfying the requirement of resolving the "overlapping" effect as defined in RRG.

Thus again, when a squadron is "place" in deployment or otherwise "placed" on an obstacle in Infested fields, it is NOT resolving the effect of "overlapping" because "overlapping" can only be resolved "after moving".


I know this is a lot, and I hope this helps clear up some confusion.