Reading that card, my understanding is that you must meet the criteria of being in the fire arc of the enemy. If you are, you may choose to get a target lock or not. You will perform the boost action regardless of whether you get a TL or not, but you must have met the criteria for being in the enemy's arc to get the boost action.
Regardless, I think we have plenty of time for FFG to update the FaQ regarding this card's use before we actually have it in our hands.
Reading that card, my understanding is that you must meet the criteria of being in the fire arc of the enemy. If you are, you may choose to get a target lock or not. You will perform the boost action regardless of whether you get a TL or not, but you must have met the criteria for being in the enemy's arc to get the boost action.
Regardless, I think we have plenty of time for FFG to update the FaQ regarding this card's use before we actually have it in our hands.
I think the fact that the first sentence only has a range requirement is what's making people think the arc may have nothing to do with the boost part of the action.
Though what you're saying makes sense to me. I don't see why you should get a boost of an enemy ship is just nearby but ignoring you entirely.
OK, game designer's logic incoming:
Ponder this - why did FFG put this on a card if it wasn't supposed to be used ALL at the same time?
It is clearly stated as an Action to be used instead of regular actions (Target Lock, Focus, Evade, Barrel Roll). The only ships it can be used with are those with droid slots (E, X & Y) that coincidentally don't come with Boost as a standard available action. They all have Target Lock already. You can take a Target Lock on ANY ship at 1-3 as a standard action.
BUT, by using R7 you are trying to gain the boost action as well as the Target Lock , which can only be used after the above conditions on the card are met. The "if/then" statement couldn't be more clear. The Action here is the WHOLE card, not just some bits.
WHY would FFG allow a choice of Target Lock OR Boost on one card when the Engine Upgrade card can give you the Boost action and Target Lock is already an available action?
This card is clearly allowing the player to acquire a Target Lock THEN Boost thus giving him a double action. The fact that it says "may" for both actions doesn't make them suddenly individually optional. Why would you choose to use this card just for a target lock and not boost also? If you wanted to Boost only, FFG assumes you would take the Engine Upgrade.
If you took an E-Wing (or X, or Y) with an Engine Upgrade, you would be able to Target Lock OR Boost as an action, not both in the same turn. The intention of the R7-T1 card is to provide both, but with restrictions on the Target Lock. This is a defensive card, hence the requirement that you be in their firing arc at range 1-2. The boost should hopefully put you either further away, or even outside their firing arc. If the price to pay is a shorter range Target Lock, it sounds pretty good so far.
As for timing issues, it states acquire Target Lock THEN Boost, not the other way round. If I was organising a tournament and this came up, there is absolutely no way I would allow a player to use this card as a boost only option. Anyone trying to use this card JUST to use the Boost action part are treating it like a cheap Engine Upgrade and I don't believe that was the idea behind the card to start with.
PS: The reason they put a full stop in there was to break up a long sentence. That's how the English language works.
OK, game designer's logic incoming:
Ponder this - why did FFG put this on a card if it wasn't supposed to be used ALL at the same time?
It is clearly stated as an Action to be used instead of regular actions (Target Lock, Focus, Evade, Barrel Roll). The only ships it can be used with are those with droid slots (E, X & Y) that coincidentally don't come with Boost as a standard available action. They all have Target Lock already. You can take a Target Lock on ANY ship at 1-3 as a standard action.
BUT, by using R7 you are trying to gain the boost action as well as the Target Lock , which can only be used after the above conditions on the card are met. The "if/then" statement couldn't be more clear. The Action here is the WHOLE card, not just some bits.
WHY would FFG allow a choice of Target Lock OR Boost on one card when the Engine Upgrade card can give you the Boost action and Target Lock is already an available action?
This card is clearly allowing the player to acquire a Target Lock THEN Boost thus giving him a double action. The fact that it says "may" for both actions doesn't make them suddenly individually optional. Why would you choose to use this card just for a target lock and not boost also? If you wanted to Boost only, FFG assumes you would take the Engine Upgrade.
If you took an E-Wing (or X, or Y) with an Engine Upgrade, you would be able to Target Lock OR Boost as an action, not both in the same turn. The intention of the R7-T1 card is to provide both, but with restrictions on the Target Lock. This is a defensive card, hence the requirement that you be in their firing arc at range 1-2. The boost should hopefully put you either further away, or even outside their firing arc. If the price to pay is a shorter range Target Lock, it sounds pretty good so far.
As for timing issues, it states acquire Target Lock THEN Boost, not the other way round. If I was organising a tournament and this came up, there is absolutely no way I would allow a player to use this card as a boost only option. Anyone trying to use this card JUST to use the Boost action part are treating it like a cheap Engine Upgrade and I don't believe that was the idea behind the card to start with.
PS: The reason they put a full stop in there was to break up a long sentence. That's how the English language works.
Again, I disagree.
This card gives precisely a limited boost action. You can boost, but only if you have an enemy near you. If you wanted to boost whenever you want, you should take the 'engine upgrade' card instead. But this little cute R7 unit offers a limited version of the boost action. And as a cherry on top, if you are inside your designated enemy firing arc, take a free target lock.
Also, by taking this limited boost, your ship's 'modification' slot is still free to take a hull, shield upgrade... or whatever.
Edited by Jehan MenasisWhat makes sense "cinematically" to me is that the astromech is trying to get you out of the target's fire arc with the boost action. As the astromech is effectively a TL action at range 1-2 you have a better chance to get out of the fire arc (narrower arc than out to range 3) with the free boost. If you don't use the TL action then the astromech thinks you've got everything sorted so doesn't apply a tweek to the engines for the boost.
I think that's part of the problem... Since people don't fully understand the effect, they are trying to visualize it 'cinematically' in order to 'make sense' in their heads.
They are trying to understand 'why' and 'how' R7 does that, rather than simply applying what the card says.
But flavour explanations are not the most optimal way to analize what a card does 'mechanically' wise.
After rereading the card and seeing there is no comma, I have to amend my statement. It's two separate actions, both conditional on being within the firing arc and at range 1-2, either of which could be taken and that must be resolved in a specific order.
After rereading the card and seeing there is no comma, I have to amend my statement.
But that's not what the card says really.
It says "chose an enemy at range 1-2." then goes on to list two things you may do.
"If you are inside that ship's firing arc , you may acquire a target lock on that ship."
"Then, you may preform a free boost action."
The condition of being in the targets firing arc is listed as part of sentence for the TL action. It doesn't seem to be a condition for the boost action, only that you be with in range 1-2.
If you needed to be in the firing arc for either or both actions, then that requirement should of been listed in the first sentence.
Edited by VanorDMThis doesn't make any sense... you have to meet ALL the prerequisites to activate the action, and the single action includes a target lock followed by a free boost. In order to boost, you MUST have declared a target lock. The action allows you to do the following, IN THE ORDER LISTED!
1. Declare an opponent.
2. Declare R7-T1.
3. Verify Range 1-2.
4. Verify enemy firing arc.
5. Acquire Target Lock on the opponent.
6. Boost.
7. IN THAT ORDER!
It is still a powerful card. The cost reduction is because it has VERY specific activation requirements that will not always apply. Sounds to me like people are just trying to find a way to get a 3 point engine upgrade. Guarantee it will be FAQ'ed.
As VanorDM said, if the firing arc were a requirement for everything it would have been included in the sentence with the requirement to be at range 1-2.
"Choose an enemy ship at Range 1-2 that has you in its firing arc. You may acquire a target lock on that ship. Then, you may take a free boost action."
It is not worded that way, however. Neither is it worded in a way that would require you to be in arc to take the boost. It is instructive that those who advocate this belief are compelled to reword it when stating their position. They either add words (and, if), or change the punctuation (period becomes a comma) or both. This is because, as written, the free boost action is not contingent on being in arc.
The real issue is that punctuation has real meaning, as does sentence structure, despite the fact that people in general and Americans especially tend to ignore those rules when speaking. You don't simply add periods willy-nilly in order to break up long sentences, or add commas wherever you believe you should take a breath. A sentence is a single complete thought. A second sentence is not reliant on previous sentences. In order for a sentence to reference a previous thought, it must contain within itself some indication that it does so.
Edited by KineticOperatorI hope FFG is reading this, so that they can make the proper adjustments to the card text so it all makes sense to everyone.
I hope FFG is reading this, so that they can make the proper adjustments to the card text so it all makes sense to everyone.
I'm afraid it's already too late to change the card. Which means an errata in the FAQ.
I'm afraid it's already too late to change the card.
They might be able to change it yet, it's not likely but anything is possible.
But I'm also not sure you could word it much more clearly without needing to adding enough text that it may not fit on the card. I'm also not sure it's needed.
This seems like a good example of what should be in a FAQ, because once they state clearly how it should work, there's no real need to change the wording.
It is still a powerful card. The cost reduction is because it has VERY specific activation requirements that will not always apply. Sounds to me like people are just trying to find a way to get a 3 point engine upgrade. Guarantee it will be FAQ'ed.
What is the the problem? You can only boost when in range 1-2 of an enemy ship. Hence, it's cheaper than a full Engine Upgrade, that allows you to boost whenever you want, without limitations.
The free Target Lock, is a small bonus added to it, that has its own requeriment: Being in the firing arc of an enemy.
So, R7-T1 allows you to:
It seems to me a very versatile upgrade.
It seems to me a very versatile upgrade.
Two other things to consider.
It's a Droid, so there's a opportunity cost involved, but also a opportunity benefit, as it doesn't take up the modification slot.
It's also unique, so you can only use 1 per list.
One thought about the TL: You acquire a TL. You do not perform a TL action. If you happen to get another action this round (squad leader, Lando) you may still perform a TL action. Could be useful if the expert handling target removed the TL between your actions. Or for some interaction with Kagi.
One thought about the TL: You acquire a TL. You do not perform a TL action.
Interesting, didn't consider that. But it would be kind of the same thing as some of the "get a Focus token" abilities out there.
I think it's a "bonus action with requirements" attached to a reduced utility engine upgrade. If you think it's powerful... it is. It's also a unique so there's that as well.
A sentence is a single complete thought. A second sentence is not reliant on previous sentences. In order for a sentence to reference a previous thought, it must contain within itself some indication that it does so.
I'm not sure what card you guys are reading. I've seen arguments that claim you don't have to be in range or firing arc to use this. The CARD is the action, not part of it - the whole card. It is clearly broken into a sequence to follow.
It doesn't say " Choose an enemy ship at Range 1-2 and get a free Boost, by the way get a free target lock as you go past if you want "
The argument for the IF/THEN statement is valid because those are the words used on the card.
WARNING: Dictionary definition incoming!
IF: conjunction.
in case that; granting or supposing that; on condition that, when or whenever.
as in IF you are in range and arc, target lock.
THEN: adverb.
at that time, immediately or soon afterward, next in order of time, at the same time, next in order of place, in addition, in that case.
as in THEN you may perform a free boost action. The word THEN links it to the previous condition. If the intention was to provide a boost action independent of the target lock, FFG would not have included the word 'then'.
ADVE RB: any member of a class of words that function as modifiers of verbs or clauses
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/if?s=t
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/then?s=t
The arguments that claim you don't need to target lock in order to use the boost are basically saying when you read a card, just read the bits you want to use. By stating that a particular sentence is not related to others on a card just because it's a separate sentence would set an alarming precedent. If we start ignoring sentences on cards, then Push the Limit and Elusiveness just got better, because I can now ignore a sentence on the card, namely the last one. Expert Handling and Opportunist - ignore the second sentence. The list can carry on, but I think I've made my point. The Action is all conditions on the card. Otherwise, you're treating it as a cheap Engine Upgrade (with slight restrictions) that doesn't take up a modification slot. Can we now pick and choose some conditions on some cards and not others. I don't think so.
No one is ignoring sentences. In fact everyone is following the sequence.
1. Choose an enemy ship at range 1-2. ---> All enemies at range 1-2 qualify for this requisite, regardless of firing arcs. The ability is activated by chosing any enemy ship at range 1-2.
2. If you are on that ship's firing arc, you may acquire a target lock on that ship. ---> Now, you can get a TL, but only if you are in your chosen ship firing arc. Being inside its firing arc is a requisite for acquiring the Target Lock. If you chose a ship at range 1-2 and you are not on its firing arc, you cannot acquire the Target Lock.
3. Then, you may perform a free boost. ----> Using your dictionary definition, "Then" means "next in order of time/place", so the next thing in order/place that we do is performing a free boost action, since we correctly activated the card by chosing an enemy ship at range 1-2.
Edited by Jehan MenasisParravon, you should probably avoid being pedantic and rude, especially here. The people you are disagreeing with are neither stupid nor uneducated.
The truly humorous point is that your post argues against your point, especially the parts where you post definitions.
"IF: conjunction.
A little bird told me there is a submit rules question button link somewhere on this page
Beware, all this argument leads to anger, and that leads to the dark side. (Which is probably ok, because then you'll switch to the empire and the problem goes away. There is balance in the force )
Edited by Ravncat
The real reason the card is written as it is is so people can fill in the time while they wait for models revealed months ago. I still think Dark Curse vs Blaster Turret was the best topic followed by my personal favourite: why does the shuttle not have a rear fire arc.
People are arguing over the semantics of a card that isn't due out for several months yet. You can't use it in games yet, so just wait for the **** errata and chill out. Yes, the wording could have been a little clearer as there is some ambiguity, but we're not likely to come to something definitive without FFG stepping in and clarifying how it is supposed to be played.
People are arguing over the semantics of a card that isn't due out for several months yet. You can't use it in games yet, so just wait for the **** errata and chill out. Yes, the wording could have been a little clearer as there is some ambiguity, but we're not likely to come to something definitive without FFG stepping in and clarifying how it is supposed to be played.
But, but mah advanced playtesting...