Good to know at least, thanks for asking and posting!

There must be an elegant rules fix for this issue that requires minimal errata.

The current issue would be that we can only declare targets inside our primary arc , making turrets not work outside of arc, right?

Will. Think on this.... Maybe it's not needed to continue playing, but there must be a way that doesn't screw with Biggs and rebel captive.

If the wording allows you to declare any target that you could hit with an equipped weapon,.... And step two is the weapon declared must allow you to hit the declared target... Do you screw anything else up? (Note wording is not perfect here, but I think the idea is close... Maybe someone can take a crack at it....)

Edit: My idea would not work either.

But changing targeting to rules to let you target anything in step 1 you could potentially hit should be able to solve the problem.

Overall the new FAQ is good, and answers a lot of our outstanding questions. But there are a few that have me stumped.

I'm not one to whine about "This should be an errata!!" but there are a few entries in the new FAQ that are confusing at best, and seem to directly contradict the cards as printed at worst. I'm hoping someone official might notice this, and expand on the clarification so we can understand why they work.

Q: Can “Dark Curse” be the target of a secondary weapon attack that requires the attacker to spend a focus token?

A: No.

Concern: Dark Curse's ability starts with "When defending..." Most secondary weapons say "Discard XXX to perform this attack." The new errata to page 10 clarifies an attack as being all 7 steps. Assuming that we have to discard before the attack, Dark Curse shouldn't be defending yet, so it should be legal to spend the token. The actual timing and rules for how to handle secondary weapons in an attack is sort of a jumble right now.

Q: If a ship using Cluster Missiles misses with the first attack and then triggers Gunner/Luke Skywalker, can it still perform the remaining attack granted by Cluster Missiles?

A: Yes.

Concern: The last line of Gunner says "You cannot perform another attack this round." This answer seems to ignore that part of the rule. What gives?

Q: If a ship barrel rolls or boosts onto a proximity mine token, does the token detonate?

A: Yes.

Concern: Proximity Mine says "When a ship executes a maneuver, if its base or movement template overlaps this token..." Boosting and Barrel Rolling aren't maneuvers, so how can they trigger the detonation?

The really catastrophic one is the Dark Curse. A list with 4-5 HWK290 with blaster turrets would have absolutely no chance whatsoever against a single, possibly stealthed Dark Curse. Give. Their main weapons are 1 attack die only.

It's okay that certain ships excel against others. But THIS???

I am not even going into detail about phases and attack resolution. I don't care about that i just want a fair ruling for this...

Elegant or not. Just add Blaster turrets (and possibly Deadeye) work against Dark Curse. The idea was originally that you could not alter Dice with focus against Dark Curse. Now saying that you can not spend Focus for any reason against him is just a bad decision if you ask me.

Overall the new FAQ is good, and answers a lot of our outstanding questions. But there are a few that have me stumped.

I'm not one to whine about "This should be an errata!!" but there are a few entries in the new FAQ that are confusing at best, and seem to directly contradict the cards as printed at worst. I'm hoping someone official might notice this, and expand on the clarification so we can understand why they work.

Q: Can “Dark Curse” be the target of a secondary weapon attack that requires the attacker to spend a focus token?

A: No.

Concern: Dark Curse's ability starts with "When defending..." Most secondary weapons say "Discard XXX to perform this attack." The new errata to page 10 clarifies an attack as being all 7 steps. Assuming that we have to discard before the attack, Dark Curse shouldn't be defending yet, so it should be legal to spend the token. The actual timing and rules for how to handle secondary weapons in an attack is sort of a jumble right now.

Q: If a ship using Cluster Missiles misses with the first attack and then triggers Gunner/Luke Skywalker, can it still perform the remaining attack granted by Cluster Missiles?

A: Yes.

Concern: The last line of Gunner says "You cannot perform another attack this round." This answer seems to ignore that part of the rule. What gives?

Q: If a ship barrel rolls or boosts onto a proximity mine token, does the token detonate?

A: Yes.

Concern: Proximity Mine says "When a ship executes a maneuver, if its base or movement template overlaps this token..." Boosting and Barrel Rolling aren't maneuvers, so how can they trigger the detonation?

All 3 are good points you make.

The really catastrophic one is the Dark Curse. A list with 4-5 HWK290 with blaster turrets would have absolutely no chance whatsoever against a single, possibly stealthed Dark Curse. Give. Their main weapons are 1 attack die only.

It's okay that certain ships excel against others. But THIS???

I am not even going into detail about phases and attack resolution. I don't care about that i just want a fair ruling for this...

Elegant or not. Just add Blaster turrets (and possibly Deadeye) work against Dark Curse. The idea was originally that you could not alter Dice with focus against Dark Curse. Now saying that you can not spend Focus for any reason against him is just a bad decision if you ask me.

"It's not impossible, I used to bulls-eye womprats in my T-16 back home..."

I understand it makes "Dark Curse" a terror to Blaster Turret lists, but how many of those do you think there are going to be? Who's going to buy 4 HWK-290 expansions?

And the other point is that the HWK-290 gets 2 attack dice at range 2, and if one of the pilots is Jan, then the attacker can have 3 attack dice. "Improbable, unlikely, but never impossible."

I'm breaking my own rule, by repeating myself,

Three reasons this doesn't bother me.

1) We're upset that a fighter with stealth can very likely take out multiple freighters without getting a scratch. It's a fighter and they are freighters; this seems okay to me.

2) Even if it wasn't freighters then he's knows how to counter a single weapon system, it happens. That happens in real life and it's only one thing

3) Finally if anything this promotes a more balanced fleet which, to me, make more sense. While I'm sure there are plenty that may want to field an all freighter assault force and an all whatever (pick your single ship of choice) force when you do there may be a perfect counter. More balance, more variety, more ships.

For me that's not a problem and like Parakitor said "Improbably, unlikely, but never impossible."

Actually, I'm buying 4 hwk expansions - and will be using the afforementioned hwk list - I think it has some neat potential. I don't for see dark curse being impossible with the blaster turrets - I do think though, that he would have to be targetted early on, while you have all of your ships

Evade will make one attack against him not matter - but not all 3. The real trouble will be using the HWK dials to get into range 1 to get dual attack dice against him - but Jan will indeed help get the extra die. I can see going 3 blaster turrets and one ion cannon just to help deal with the problem - both making it easier to get damage against DC as well as putting him somewhere where you can gang up on him.

Endgame - with 1 or maybe 2 hwk's left against DC would be really improbable.

- Not explicitly stated, but presumably this handwaving should extend to other weapons which have problematic effects like Cluster Missiles, and just play as they seem to be intended without trying to fit them into the rules.

So there we go. The formal rules are for weapon selection during Step 2, this does create problems but we can't expect them to be fixed any time soon, so we just roll with it.

Coming from a long background of playing miniatures games and not so much card games, I'm really happy with those answers.

Red I agree, lots of games both miniatures and counters, but never have I see so many issues and I seen some pretty bad rule sets.

I'm glad this fell into the keep it simple as intended category.