I have made my case and used the rulebook, as have you and several others, all coming to the same conclusion. The refusal to accept reasoned arguments, and supporting that refusal by misquoting cards and ignoring known rules interpretations, is very frustrating to those of us who are genuinely trying to help someone learn the game. But you are right, I should have not responded so vehemently. I'm sorry.

And, as you know, I don't have many hairs that are not gray already…

If you need a hypothetical analogy to help you with coming to terms with the mechanics, this is the best I can offer:

Stealth Device makes it harder for other ships to target you. Flying through an explosion, over a mine, or into an asteroid can still cause you damage… but the enemy still hasn't gotten a proper beat on you.

However, once someone rolls a successful hit against you directly, the stealth device becomes useless because they have finally successfully targeted your ship.

The rules are very clear about what a hit is. And though I totally understand the arguement about the splash damage being generated by an attack, it is still not a hit that occurs when the Assault Missile does secondary damage.

Good luck. And try not to feed the trolls.

Bazinga's latest post actually does lead to a potential angle that could prove the hit argument. I stated my piece already, and such so I won't repeat it, but his addition might be the start to how a rules clarification by the devs would sway to the other side.

Hit against you directly? I don't remimber that on the stealth card at all. The way I see it is that you either are or are not damaged. Why don't you loose an ion cannon when you get hit? Because it doesn't say so on the card. Some one once had the best solution to debates like this and it was."you can choose to play how you want and I can choose not to play with you." Not trying to be a rules lawyer just trying to have fun here. Some one trying to say a hit is some how different than damage. They really needs to be playing this game because they must be from a different planet.

Ozmodon65 said:

This is not a good way to make your point - you'll be sadly surprised if you enter a tournament thinking that hits and damage are the same thing. Damage does not remove the stealth card - hits do.

It's not rules-lawyering to figure out the right answer to a question.

I give up. You've found me out. I am in fact from the planet Skyron in the galaxy of Andromeda.

Ozmodon65 said:

This is funny. Read your own post carefully, and look at the shift in the words you used. I even bolded them for you.

Stealth Device is not lost when you're damaged, so whether you are or are not damaged is irrelevant. If it were, it would say "damaged" or possibly "damaged during an attack". It is lost when you are HIT. "Hit directly" isn't on the card because it's a nonexistent concept. Some of us have been using it to try and help you understand. There's only one way a ship can be HIT, and that is defined in the rules. Taking damage - even taking damage during an attack - isn't it.

I think we should all give up on this. It's been explained as many different ways as we can come up with. Anyone still claiming anything different is basically just saying that's not how they want to play it. And that's fine - house rule it all you want, but at least acknowledge the proper ruling, and please ensure you don't decieve anyone as to the correct ruling.

A hit is the the weapon actually targeting you and hitting you, damage is the effect that the hit may have caused. you can hit a ship but the hit might ricochet of, causing next to no damage, or it could penetrate the hull causing damage. this is the difference between hitting and damaging. An example: Asault missiles hit the ship, ship fails to evade, missiles penetrate ships hull causing damage, shrapnell and explosion radiate out from he ship and cause damage to surrounding ships, they didnt get an evade because they werent prepared for the damage,maybe focusing on the battle, some of the ships have shields which absorb the damage(lucky them). this is my version of how the rules work thematically. sorry if the spelling is off but think it is unfair to blame someone for bad grammar, we are not all literate,but its this diversity of people that make the game interesting. If people are going to post on here asking a question aor have a query, then maybe they should take time to read replies, as those people have taken time and care to write one. peace.

mrgoodtrips said:

It's a somewhat misleading example because the Assault Missiles only hit the ship if the ship fails to evade (the example makes it seem like being hit is independent of the defense roll).

Here's a counter example from the rules that shows how you could do the opposite: lose stealth device without taking any damage:

Biggs is equiped with a stealth device and is flying nearby a Falcon with Draw Their Fire. Krassis has closed to range 1 of Biggs and fires his primary weapon, rolling a crit and 3 hits. Biggs also gets a crazy lucky roll with 3 evades. Biggs is considered to be hit, because there is an uncancelled critical hit and loses the stealth device. However, the Falcon decides to use Draw Their Fire to take the critical result and as a result loses a shield from the damage instead of Biggs.

your example is sound, was trying more with my example to show some of the previous posts that difference between hitting and damage and that they are two seperate things. Think that a lot of people read into the cards too much rather than reading as written, I myself did this when I started playing x wing coming from a wargaming background a lot of my opponents would read into the rules to exploit loopholes. I am no way implying that this is happening on these threads, just trying to explain it simply for the new player in a simpler context as there are alot of repeats of the same question and missinterpritation of the rules. I think for the new player alot of the cards dont make sense until they played a few times. Maybe some of the more veteran players could get together on here and adress some of the most coomon rules questions, even going sofar as a official response from ffg to back this up. This should not be neccessary but there are hose gamers out there who warrant a response "officially" although personnaly i tend to go with the majority decisions on the forums. The forums are a mess with long loading times and sometimes trying to find a thread with an answer can be a nightmare. Alot of the people who post do it because they care alot about the game and wish for everyones experiences with it to be enjoyable, its just unfortunate that because of the use of language a lot of games end up needing erratas and faq updates.

Don't get me wrong, your example was a good one in general, only the implication that hit was independent of evades was a problem (another common misconception is that rolling any hit results counts as not missing, and thus keeps Luke/Gunner from triggering). My example wasn't aimed at you, but at just trying to look at the original question from a different angle.