Pretty straight-forward question here. Can a player use Deploy the Fleet multiple times to lower the cost of 1 Capital Ship?

" Action: Damage this objective to reduce the cost of the next Capital Ship unit you play this phase by 1."

Does using the action force you to use it now or can you use it multiples times ie. Kuat Reinforcements?

son_of_horus said:

The action schedules a benefit that will take effect next time you play a capital ship unit that phase. You can use the action multiple times to continue reducing the cost of that ship. You can even take other actions in between using Deploy the Fleet and playing the capital ship, as long as that action is not also playing a capital ship.

dbmeboy said:

How else could it work? Dbmeboy is certainly correct here.

Send it in if you want to, but there's no other way it can work. Nothing in the card's text suggests that playing the Capital ship must be the next action you take. Nothing in the text or rules suggests that you can't gain the benefit of this effect multiple times.

It is the "Reduce Cost by One" vs "Damge X times to reduce cost by X" that gives me pause. No matter how many times I reduce the cost from six to five, the end result is still five. It does not say effective cost, and cost is defined in the rulebook as the number in the right hand corner.

Niranth said:

Your own argument answers the question there. The first use of Deploy the Fleet reduces the cost by one, not the "effective cost." That creates a new cost. The second use can then reduce the current cost by another one, again creating a new cost. The concept of "Cost" vs "Effective Cost" is not one that exists in the rules.

Here would be some consequences of having "cost" = "printed cost" and "modified cost" = "effective cost" -

1) Mandalorian Armor or other cards that increase damage capacity wouldn't work. They would only create a "effective damage capacity," but the rules have cards destroyed when damage exceeds the "damage capacity" not the "effective damage capacity."

2) No cost reduction effects would work either, as you have to pay the card's "cost" to play it, not the "effective cost."

Here's a reason to have a repeatable "reduce cost by one" effect instead of an X effect:

If you could deal X damage to the objective to reduce the cost of the next capital ship by X, you could overkill the objective to play any capital ship for free. Doing it one activation at a time keeps you from using it once you've done enough damage to destroy the objective.

In the end, the question still stands. Is this a quote or is it your (very considered) opinion? As FFG is not willing to answer questions in the forums, there is a chance that they can answer the same question two different ways. The fewer times they are asked, the less this is likely to happen.

Also, you would certainly agree that enhancements are different than actions. So I do not see how your example of Mandalorian Armor is germane.

Finally, the addition of the word to the effect of "until you reach the damage capacity of this objective." is all that is needed to keep the reduction in line.

I am playing the devil's advocate here. But now I am curious, if I destroy one of my objectives, does it count for me or the light side? I'll have to check the rules. :^P

Niranth said:

As far as the question about destroyed objectives goes, the answer is on page 23 of the rulebook:

When one of a player's current objective cards is destroyed, it is placed in his opponent's victory pile.

Doesn't matter who destroys it. If you destroy your own, you are helping your opponent out.

Niranth said:

Strange… I was pretty sure I already replied to this… apparently the forums ate my response.

1) No, I am not an official FFG representative. Also, when I post something that is a response straight from FFG I will always identify it as such clearly. I do, however, have a pretty good understanding of the rules and can generally handle answering questions that aren't at all ambiguous by the rules.

2) The Mandalorian Armor example had nothing to do with being an enhancement vs an event or a constant effect vs an action. It was all about your supposed distinction between "cost" and "effective cost." Just as Mandalorian Armor changes the damage capacity of the enhanced unit, Deploy the Fleet changes the cost of the next capital ship played. That's the parallel

3) The rulebook is actually very careful to not leave the situation where the DS destroys their own objective ambiguous. It uses the passive voice to keep it so that any time a DS objective is destroyed it goes to the LS victory pile (or vice versa).

Edit - looks like I got ninja'd on the last point…

Actually, that was only part of the half-formed questions i had. The other involved the tournament tie breaker, in the case of both DS decks winning. It doesn't specify until the third paragraph, which details the special circumstance of a true tie. It is something that they may want to clean up.

Niranth said:

I'm not sure how we got to tournament tie breaking rules from this discussion…

What more do you want from the tournament rules? There's a bold-faced heading "Each player wins with his dark side deck." That is followed by a 3-sentence paragraph. The first sentence tells you what to count to determine the tie breaker (total objectives destroyed). The 2nd sentence is a short one that pretty much just repeats that the person that "won" the tiebreaker gets a bonus point for the modified win. The third sentence tells you what to do if the tie breaker is also tied (each player gets the 2 points for the game they won and nobody gets the bonus point).

I had forgotten how slow these forums respond! It is my fault for the off topic jaunt, sorry. I'll concede that you can damage "Deploy the Fleet" multiple times with some reservations about my sanity.