can you use the range ruler to see if you can barrel roll out of a ships firing arc? ex.. placing the range ruler on the attaching ship arc to see if you roll out of it.

Depends a lot on your opponent. FFG has been frustratingly unclear and imprecise on it.

The last entry in the current FAQ covers the "Competitive Rules Addendum" that basically says you pick a direction to roll, and if you can complete it, you must follow through. So no pulling out the template to check before hand.

Whether this rule is "on" by default, whether your opponent can invoke it at will, whether you have to follow it if he does, and the level of douchebaggery involved if he does is still a matter of hot (although generally idle) debate. Some people play it as the norm, others let everything measure freely, and some will blacklist you from playing with them if you ever even suggest following it.

Take a look at the FAQ, and my honest suggestion is to clear with your opponent before a game (or the TO, if an event) what standard will apply. Easier for everyone that way.

I think he means using the attack range ruler not to premeasure anything, but to 'extend' the FoV lines on the opponent's ship-base in order to better see if the barrel roll will get him out of arc. He's not trying to measure for range or if he can perform the barrel roll itself, he only wants to draw longer FoV lines.

Though your intentions may be 'pure', they can be easily misunderstood by your opponent. Using a ruler without markings (so you don't gain any information about range) or something like a paper sheet could be ok, if everyone agrees.

Here's what I usually do: Position yourself in such a way that the FoV line in question is directly aimed to you, then, put your eyes nearly at the table's level... If done right, you should see the FoV line as perfectly 'vertical' relative to you. This way is much easier to judge if something crosses the 'line' or goes on either side of it.

_{Thank you for the replies. I will post them to my league board.}

I guess I would tend to err on the side of the rules stating that, in essence, you measure when you need to measure.
It specifically says you can measure to see if you're physically able to barrel roll without overlapping a ship or obstacle. It does not say anywhere that you're allowed to carefully measure your opponent's fire arc, beyond the MkII Eyeball. In fact, I'm not aware (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) of any rule anywhere in the game that allows you to measure the other player's fire arcs under any circumstances.

To me it's just one of those rules where there's not yet a definitive answer either way, but there's a lot of circumstantial evidence against being allowed to do so, and no direct support for allowing you to do so that I know of. So IMO it falls into that 'just because you want to and the game doesn't specifically say you can't, doesn't mean it's legal' grey area.

That said, if you want to house rule it, or your opponent is cool with it, knock yourself out. If someone tried to do that to me in a tournament setting, I'd probably call over a judge to get a ruling. I fly B-Wings a lot and it never even occurred to me to try and premeasure firing arc when deciding if I wanted to barrel roll, because, as I said, I'm not aware of any rule that lets you measure the other player's fire arcs under any circumstances ever.

The only time that has ever come up is when we're trying to reach a consensus on whether something is within range/arc, or the minis are way over on my side of the table and he asks if I can double check it for him since I'm closer.

To me it's just one of those rules where there's not yet a definitive answer either way, but there's a lot of circumstantial evidence against being allowed to do so, and no direct support for allowing you to do so that I know of.

I wouldn't allow this if I were a TO, or even just playing.

What you're basicaly asking for, is to see if doing a barrel roll will get out out of the arc of fire before deciding if you should do it or not. I can't see any thing in the rules that comes even close to allowing this.

I don't think anyone would ask to check the arc of fire before picking a manuver on their dial... Which normaly wouldn't work well... But Fett or Fetagtor could use it.

So no, this smacks of even worse then being able to premeasure for range before using a TL or focus.

I'm agreed with you, Vanor, in case that wasn't clear.

All I was saying is I don't see anything that specifically addresses this, but I think there's definitely some clear precedent on the side of NOT allowing it. As you said, it smacks of premeasuring, which is generally not allowed.

And the fact is, it really shouldn't even be necessary . Your ship either moves before the other guy did, or it doesn't. If you move first, you don't know precisely where he's going to wind up, so there's nothing to measure. You have to guess where he's going to be, and then guess whether a barrel roll (and how far, to which side) would help you arc dodge.

If he moved first, and he's sitting there on the table, you can SEE where his fire arc is. Just look at it. You don't need to pull out a ruler and measure it; much like figuring out moves, avoiding collisions, etc, the game rewards those with a good spatial awareness and punishes those who lack it.

There's either no reason to measure, because you don't know where his fire arc will land anyway yet, or there's no reason to measure, because you can just eyeball it and then figure out if a 1-speed lateral move will get you out of the way or not. It may or may not clearly get you out of his arc, but you should be able to eyeball it quick and at least get an idea if it's even worth trying or not.

I'm agreed with you, Vanor, in case that wasn't clear.

It was That's why I "liked" your post. I was just adding my 2 cents in and used what you said as a jumping off point.

If he moved first, and he's sitting there on the table, you can SEE where his fire arc is.

I think that's the whole point of the OP. To make sure that the barrel roll would in fact get you out of the arc. I'd guess it was a close call, maybe too close to eyeball.

With that being the case, then it makes checking the arc of fire even worse, because the person isn't quite sure and wants to double check before commiting to a given action.

IMO unless the rules allow you to do such a thing, you should assume you can't.

Gotcha, just double checking. Didn't see the Like - I have, uh, sixteen "likes" that I haven't gone and looked through yet. They sort of keep piling up.

But yeah I'm totally with you on this one. I think it goes counter to the spirit of (not) premeasuring, and that it's really fairly unnecessary. If the guy who might shoot you has already moved, you can SEE where he can shoot, and should be able to get a pretty good idea if rolling would help or not.

And then you're right back into the game 'encouraging' you to get good at eyeballing that kind of stuff, as you're forced to do with any regular maneuver, and not measure them out ahead of time before setting your dial.

Hmm... Since the rules explicitly state that both fire arc and range can be 'measured' when declaring an attack (and you could change targets if any of those criteria fail)... I believe that you cannot simply 'measure' -in rules terms- prior to the combat phase. Outside house rules or sportsmanship, of course.

So, again, our only options are our old trusty 'eye sensors' and 'brain targeting computer'.

I believe that you cannot simply 'measure' -in rules terms- prior to the combat phase.

Actually you can. You can measure for Target Locks, and that takes place outside the combat phase.

That doesn't change my mind about this. But it's best to be accurate about what the rules do and don't allow.

Edit...

And then you're right back into the game 'encouraging' you to get good at eyeballing that kind of stuff

As an asside, I wonder if this isn't one of the things that seperate miniture games from board games.

I still see people commenting about how expensive X-Wing is compared to other board games. To which I normally point out it's not a board game, and actually quite cheap. But it just occurred to me, that the need to measure and more to the point, eyeball something is one of the dividing lines.

That, and a board.

But yes, in all seriousness, it's not a board game - although to be fair, there are some hella expensive, expandable board games out there that have nice painted miniatures and ALSO blur the line, from the other direction. Just go check out the Descent stuff, or the Arkham Horror stuff - Arkham, you can buy painted minis for every single monster and investigator in that game. Hundreds of them - not counting the actual major and minor expansions for the game itself.

But it's definitely a board game.

So anyone approaching it from a board game angle, used to $40-60 board games and rare expansions will probably get sticker shock. Anyone used to fielding massive armies of 40k stuff, and having to own all of the tools and paints and everything to assemble and paint them yourself, probably sees it as a bargain even before factoring in time and effort.

although to be fair, there are some hella expensive, expandable board games out there that have nice painted miniatures and ALSO blur the line, from the other direction.

Or monsterpocalypse that kind of does the same thing.

But anyway... My point wasn't the is it, or isn't it a board game. It's more that in X-Wing like other miniture games, part of what seperates the good from the great is the ability to eyeball the distances and angles.

That is the only reason I can think of that you aren't allowed to pre-measure. For most games, the fluff behind the game, not only would allow it, but actually make it a given.

Unless someone wants to try and argue that Space Marines with their high tech armor lack laser range finders... Something you an get right now for around $100.

I always liked the idea in X-Wing it's not that they don't have those things, it's just that everything is happening so fast that the PILOTS have to eyeball it and use their reactions a lot of the time.

MonPoc? ****, digging deep, son. Good example though.

But yeah I agree; I think the really great players are the ones who can eyeball a move and figure out "yep, I think that'll totally fit" and then pop a ship into a space where you thought you were safe from them. Pull a bank or a K-turn or a barrel roll that comes perilously close to hitting an asteroid or whatever. The ones who make the risky moves look safe, because they pull them off with such confidence. It's a cool skill that, like you said, a lot of similar games don't make you develop.

It's a cool skill that, like you said, a lot of similar games don't make you develop.

Not to degress too much from the topic, but in a way it still fits...

I started playing MonPoc a few years ago because I thought my youngest son would like it. I found it kind of intersting and started playing it a bit on Vassal. I pretty much stomped the other guy in the first few games I played. I then realized that the game really didn't have much depth to it.

That may sound kinda insulting to those who liked it. But for me, being used to games like 40k and Warmachine... Having a gridsquare map so you knew exactly how far away everything was, how many moves it would take to get there, what attacks to use, ect... It just was a bit too easy.

X-Wing however seems to be able to allow the accessablity you normally get in a traditional board game and the depth of something like 40k.