Just a quick noob question that I couldn't find a clear answer to:

Is it only the final position of a ship's base that determines if it has to leave the board? In other words, if part of the turning template goes off the map, but both the starting and end points result in the ship's base still being on the map, is the ship lost or does it stay in play?

Thanks, Gary

The way I read it, page 17 'Fleeing the Battlefield,' it says if any part of the base GOES outside the play area. Maybe tourney players can clarify but go me that reads - actually I take it back. The other rules basically say your ship doesn't actually travel down your move template, per se, just goes from start to finish. If you wanted to get technical I'd almost say, on second thought, it only matters where your base ENDS the move, on the off chance you somehow could start and end the move fully in play.

Allow me to direct you (both) to page 3, 2nd column of the latest FAQ:

O verlapping

Q: Can overlapping other ships cause the

active ship to flee the battlefield?

A: Yes. If any part of the ship’s base in its final

position (after moving backward) is outside the

play area, then the ship has fled the battlefield.

It is clear that it is only the final position that matters, not the template.

Hope that resolved that bit

CW's second thought is correct.

Ships do not travel the path of the template - they basically just teleport from one end to the other. The "flight path" is generally simulated by rules which check the position and potential overlap for the maneuver template.

Since the "edge of the map" check doesn't have any rules for the template, only the final position of the ship matters.

CW's second thought is correct.

Ships do not travel the path of the template - they basically just teleport from one end to the other. The "flight path" is generally simulated by rules which check the position and potential overlap for the maneuver template.

Since the "edge of the map" check doesn't have any rules for the template, only the final position of the ship matters.

Luckily it is not only "his thought" it is handled in the FAQ too :-)

silashand: if you havent already experienced the situation; I can assure you that it is quite a nervewrecking time when you suddenly realise (during a game round) that you might come off the board in the next round. Care should especially be taken when pointing a partially ionized large ship towards the edge when it is close to it, I speak of experience :-)

I had a buddy run his Firespray off the board recently. It was just a tiny bit, so I told him if he could steer it back ON the table fully next turn, I'd give him a pass. He wound up still half off the table. But yeah in a non house setting I think that corner peeking off is instant flee.

So...

I earned a bit of infamy when I first started playing in our league. In 3 successive games, I managed to fly Darth Vader off the board, then flew Boba Fett off the board twice. It takes a particular brand of clumsiness to fly Boba Fett off the board at all, much less twice in a row.

So...

I earned a bit of infamy when I first started playing in our league. In 3 successive games, I managed to fly Darth Vader off the board, then flew Boba Fett off the board twice. It takes a particular brand of clumsiness to fly Boba Fett off the board at all, much less twice in a row.

Darn, that's tough, and eventhough this isn't a measuring contest (!) I will share my blunders:

Also managed to fly a fully loaded and unharmed DV off the board, but that experience taught me that no matter how many times you turn your TIE-Advanced dial a ↰1 or 1↱ will not magically appear.

My greatest/worst mistake however was just shortly after Wave 2 where I (cleverly I thought) had set my Falcon with engine upgrade up near one side edge. I was facing 2 BH's, both with Ion Canons. For my opening move I blasted forward followed by a Boost ⇖1 in order to be able to shoot at one of them . I did hit them, but when they fired back they both ionized the Falcon, so in Round 2 it flew over the edge. Basically game over

So...

I earned a bit of infamy when I first started playing in our league. In 3 successive games, I managed to fly Darth Vader off the board, then flew Boba Fett off the board twice. It takes a particular brand of clumsiness to fly Boba Fett off the board at all, much less twice in a row.

That's harsh. My buddy, first game we introduced asteroids, suicided Vader on them. I'm not sure he ever even got SHOT. it was like the world's worst game of pinball.

A friend lost ships in a tournament because his template (not final position of base) went off the map. I showed him later right where this is covered in the rulebook. He did not want to raise a stink with the TO at the time.

"Surprise" flying a big ship off the map is likely more common than accidentally flying a small ship off. I say that because while you may account for the template's location you just underestimate how much space that large base takes up. What could be a "safe" maneuver for a small ship can be "good bye" for a large one.

I'd like to add a thought that crossed my mind.

With the advanced sensors upgrade, and per the rules as written, it *could* be possible for a ship to use a 'Boost' bank action to move total or partially off-map, and then, using a hard turn maneuver to fully return to the play area.

Since the 'fleeing the battlefield' rule only especifically affects maneuvers (and remember that boost is not a 'maneuver'), and since only the 'final position' of the ship counts to see if it fled, in theory, that course of action is legal.

However, it smells a little fishy, and I wonder if it should recieve the same treatment as FFG did with the proximity mines, which is applying its effects to boosts and barrel rolls, even not being technically maneuvers.

... Your thoughts?

I'd like to add a thought that crossed my mind.

With the advanced sensors upgrade, and per the rules as written, it *could* be possible for a ship to use a 'Boost' bank action to move total or partially off-map, and then, using a hard turn maneuver to fully return to the play area.

Since the 'fleeing the battlefield' rule only especifically affects maneuvers (and remember that boost is not a 'maneuver'), and since only the 'final position' of the ship counts to see if it fled, in theory, that course of action is legal.

However, it smells a little fishy, and I wonder if it should recieve the same treatment as FFG did with the proximity mines, which is applying its effects to boosts and barrel rolls, even not being technically maneuvers.

... Your thoughts?

I know someone might agree with you, but I would that it would do since normally we state that when maneuvering it is only the ships starting and final position that matters when determining if a ship is destreoyed/fleeing from the play area. And even though one could argue that it is after "finishing an action" it IS also "before perfoming the maneuver" so In my book you would have crashed that ship, but others might (probably) disagree with me.

I don't think you would be allowed to perform the boost or barrel roll, but it isn't specifically addressed in the rulebook.

If I were the TO in a tourney I wouldn't allow it

I don't think you would be allowed to perform the boost or barrel roll, but it isn't specifically addressed in the rulebook.

I'd have to pull out my rulebook to actually confirm it, but this to me sounds right. I think if your boost or barrel roll carried you off the edge of the table it wouldn't be considered a legal action. You'd be allowed to measure it, see you'd go out of bounds, and have to do something else.

Doesn't seem to be anything actually prohibiting it. Does feel pretty wrong, but the rules seem clear.

It wouldn't be limited to Advanced Sensors, either. I don't see any reason you couldn't move to near the edge, Boost in a way that leaves you outside the play area, and then use your next maneuver to bring you back in.

It does feel pretty unintended, and this is one of those cases where I really wish they'd done more to clarify the actual structure behind the boost/prox mine interaction rather than just saying "Play it THUSLY!" Hopefully we might get that when the next FAQ update hits in February.

The limitations for Boost or Barrel Roll address other ships and obstacles, but not the edge of the board.

Fleeing the Battlefield addresses maneuvers, but nothing else.

The limitations for Boost or Barrel Roll address other ships and obstacles, but not the edge of the board.

Fleeing the Battlefield addresses maneuvers, but nothing else.

They really should have dubbed Boosts and Barrel Rolls and the like 'Free Maneuvers' or something like that. Ok, they're not free , because they require an action, but if they'd called them a something maneuver - a Maneuver Action (I kind of like that), it would have cleared up a ton of confusion.

They really should have dubbed Boosts and Barrel Rolls and the like 'Free Maneuvers' or something like that. Ok, they're not free , because they require an action, but if they'd called them a something maneuver - a Maneuver Action (I kind of like that), it would have cleared up a ton of confusion.

Agreed. I'd have to take a careful pass through the abilities to make sure you couldn't trigger anything unintended because of this, but some careful wording should be able to avoid that even.

<shrug> But we have to live with the rules we've got. I don't think anyone has actually thought of this before, so it's probably not a huge deal to change it, but especially if word gets out I'd make sure to announce it before an event if you planned to change it.

The limitations for Boost or Barrel Roll address other ships and obstacles, but not the edge of the board.

Fleeing the Battlefield addresses maneuvers, but nothing else.

Buhallin, this is one of the situations where I agree with you "by the letter" of the rules, but at the same time I think (like you stated in the previous post) that it seems like it is more of a case of neglect.

It's sort of funny that it have never popped up before now, certainly not anything that have come up as an issue during the many games that we've played in our group, so intuitively people in the group (and I) must always have considered it "out of bounds"

The simplest, least invasive way for them to fix it would probably be to just FAQ, "Does the space outside of the legal playing area constitute an obstruction? Yes. Yes, it does."

Can't boost or barrel roll into an obstruction, so problem solved.

Buhallin, this is one of the situations where I agree with you "by the letter" of the rules, but at the same time I think (like you stated in the previous post) that it seems like it is more of a case of neglect.

And I actually agree with you on that.

Believe it or not, there are cases where I believe in applying RAI. I just have a very exacting standard for it. This one happens to meet them all.

That said, if you as a TO are going to deviate from the rules as they are clearly printed, you need to announce that so everyone knows and is on the same page for it.

I agree with the general consensus. I'd neither allow it.

Not to mention I would take several real-life stress tokens if someone barrel-rolled or boosted over the edge and still had the nerve to not to destroy his ship but also to fire on my ships on the combat phase.

Buhallin, this is one of the situations where I agree with you "by the letter" of the rules, but at the same time I think (like you stated in the previous post) that it seems like it is more of a case of neglect.

And I actually agree with you on that.

[...]

That said, if you as a TO are going to deviate from the rules as they are clearly printed, you need to announce that so everyone knows and is on the same page for it.

I have to agree and all points.

I think that going over the edge even for boost etc. should destroy your ship. Please don't be annoyed but I think it makes sense and goes with the flow. Probably just a 'case of neglect' but to be safe it don't hurt to announce it or ask up front like Buhallin said.

It's always better to be playing from a common understanding and agreement.