since FFG FAQ that Cluster Missile is two attacks, and FCS says after you perform an attack you may acquire a target lock on the defender are you allowed to use said target lock on the second attack from the cluster missile?

I don't see nothing that prevents so, other that there's no ship capable of equipping both FCS and Clusters at this moment but it would work for a self-made custom ship.

You spend a target lock to fire the missiles, you perform your 1st attack, you gain a new target lock, you perform the 2nd attack and you can spend your previous target lock to modify the roll, finally, you gain another target lock.

since FFG FAQ that Cluster Missile is two attacks, and FCS says after you perform an attack you may acquire a target lock on the defender are you allowed to use said target lock on the second attack from the cluster missile?

I don't see nothing that prevents so, other that there's no ship capable of equipping both FCS and Clusters at this moment but it would work for a self-made custom ship.

You spend a target lock to fire the missiles, you perform your 1st attack, you gain a new target lock, you perform the 2nd attack and you can spend your previous target lock to modify the roll, finally, you gain another target lock.

Jehan makes a good point in regard to the fact that no ship currently available have the option to carry both AS and Cluster Missiles.

In regards to whether or not one would (in the hypothetical situation with a ship having both FCS and CM) be able to do as outlined by Jehan we are getting back to an intense and ongoing debate.

However eventhough I am a "Rules as Intended" (RaI) type on the matter of CM (I fully respect and follow the current FAQ on the topic) I do hope that then even the most hardcore "Rules as Written" (Raw) person would agree that it would be a stretch to aqcuire 3 subsequent TL and spend 2 of them in a CM attack. And yes, I know the FAQ says that CM (perform this attack twice" is in fact 2 separat attacks, but IMO the hypothetical situation at hand with FCS/CM goes against what I personally (emphasis on personally) believe to be the mechanics/intend of the FCS.

Alas, let the storm begin on this entirely hypothetical issue

Huh, that's a good question. As was said, it's MOOT at the moment, since no ship right now can mount missiles and a system upgrade. So I don't even want to ponder it too deeply and worry about all the possible implications and precedent set one direction or the other - it may not be an accident this combination doesn't exist, after all.

Off the top of my head, I'd be tempted to say RAW, it would sure seem to imply that you could spend a target lock, fire CM, get a target lock, fire the other CM, get a target lock (if you rolled so badly the thing was still alive). But that said, I wouldn't be surprised to see them either flat out rule "no, you cannot do this," or addend the rules to say that you can only acquire one target lock on a particular target each round (unless specifically allowed to do so by someone like K6).

And even then, looking over the text of R5-K6, it says this, emphasis mine: "After spending your target lock, roll 1 defense die. On a <evade> result, immediately acquire a target lock on that same ship. You cannot spend this target lock during this attack. "

So I think a really simple solution - unless one of the newer abilities with a Lambda pilot or somebody I'm forgetting directly contradicts this - would be for them to simply make "You cannot spend more than one target lock per turn," or "You cannot spend more than one target lock per target per turn" or something a rule they add in.

But knowing FFG, if such a combo ever did exist, the odds are that they would simply let people stew in confusion and frustration for a few months and then simply have an FAQ that says "hey, can you do THIS?" "A: No."

Cluster Missiles are really screwy to begin with, and they get even more screwy because of the general issues with secondary weapons. And it is a hypothetical question, but hypothetically...

It should work. The attacks are clearly independent. We have other abilities like Gunner that rely on you finishing your attack, and we know those can trigger after the first Cluster shot. It's also generally accepted that Vader can trigger after each Cluster shot. So I don't see any reason why the Fire Control System wouldn't trigger after each attack. And if it does, there isn't anything prohibiting you from using that target lock on the second shot, and then regaining the lock again after the second shot.

Equally hypothetically, I think the same would actually apply to R5-K6. You wouldn't be able to spend the regained target lock on the first attack because of his text, but you would on the second because it's a different attack.

That's true, I was misreading him somehow (her? It?) - it does say "on this attack," not "during this round" or whatever.

I think I'm with Buhalin, in that I don't see anything PREVENTING it from working, but would also be surprised if FFG let it work for very long, however inelegantly they decided to put their foot down and quash it. But who knows - and like I said: it may not be a complete coincidence that no ship has those two options on it.

Ugh - Cluster Missiles - more like Cluster Fu,,,,well, you know.

I will call this a case of RaW's WANTING it to work this way ;-)

Let's hope that they never cross the streams on this one!

sorry guys, didn't even realize it wasn't possible, it was late at night when i posted. Hopefully we will never run into this situation

So with the Shuttle with FCS and Gunner, does the fact that FCS only says "after" and Gunner says "immediately after" cause Gunner's attack to not allow FCS first?

I think that's correct Drakhan.

So with the Shuttle with FCS and Gunner, does the fact that FCS only says "after" and Gunner says "immediately after" cause Gunner's attack to not allow FCS first?

Yes. As came up in another thread, it appears that the reason some things say Immediately and others do not is precisely for situations like this one. Immediately forces one to happen before the other, which would normally be simultaneous and resolved in any order you wanted.