This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
Socialite
#562874
I would like clarifications on these questions:

So when a self-controlling dilemma "attacks all ships here", does it attack each one individually? Are all opposing ships allowed to return fire at once?
Say I have 4x Type 9 Shuttlecraft and Planet Killer is attacking. What happens?
Does Planet Killer damage all of them at once (weapons 10 vs shields 5) and then move along?
Does Planet Killer damage all of them, then get damaged itself (combined weapons 20 vs shields 16), then move along?
Does Planet Killer damage one of them, then get return fire from all of them which damages it, then damages another one, then get return fire from all of them which damages and destroys it?
Does Planet Killer damage all of them, but get destroyed because when it attacks each ship, each creates a separate 'enagement' wherein all shuttles can return fire (thus, 4x return fire battle damage), thus producing enough return fire damage to destroy it at the end of the battle?
Why does the rulebook sidebar introduce the term 'engagement' without defining it anywhere?
Last edited by JeBuS on Fri Sep 24, 2021 3:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
Socialite
#562882
Summary of a Discord discussion with @Keiimaster and @eberlems:

"Engagement" as a game term, is poorly defined and leaves any of our analyses with quite a lot of space to be incorrect.

Based on the wording of the rulebook:
"Some cards, like Nine of Seventeen (Multiplexor Drone), allow ships to target multiple enemy cards in the same attack. This expands the fire (or return fire) portion of the battle into two or more engagements. Each engagement has only one target, but it is possible to have multiple cards firing upon that target.

All engagements use the same current tactic (if any)."

It sounds as though an 'engagment' is Ship Battle steps 5 (Open Fire) and 6 (Return Fire).

Based on that, we proceed through steps 1 through 4, with Planet Killer initiating an attack on all 4x Type 9 Shuttles. In this scenario, all shuttles are returning fire. Then, an engagement (steps 5 & 6) happens for each shuttle, wherein one shuttle is targeted by PK, but all 4x shuttles return fire. Then, step 7 (Damage) occurs. All 4x shuttles are hit once (a single shuttle per engagement). PK is damaged 4 times (damaged once per engagement).
So, PK goes boom, all the shuttles are damaged.

Feel free to poke holes in this argument. I know the 'engagement' part of the rules is wide open for interpretation. But since it specifies that the same tactic is used for all engagements, I'm forced to believe that an engagement isn't an entire battle itself (steps 1 through 8 ), but rather limited to some subset of steps after step 4.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Goateed
Community Contributor
1E American National Second Runner-Up 2020
#562884
JeBuS wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:07 pm Summary of a Discord discussion with @Keiimaster and @eberlems:

"Engagement" as a game term, is poorly defined and leaves any of our analyses with quite a lot of space to be incorrect.

Based on the wording of the rulebook:
"Some cards, like Nine of Seventeen (Multiplexor Drone), allow ships to target multiple enemy cards in the same attack. This expands the fire (or return fire) portion of the battle into two or more engagements. Each engagement has only one target, but it is possible to have multiple cards firing upon that target.

All engagements use the same current tactic (if any)."

It sounds as though an 'engagment' is Ship Battle steps 5 (Open Fire) and 6 (Return Fire).

Based on that, we proceed through steps 1 through 4, with Planet Killer initiating an attack on all 4x Type 9 Shuttles. In this scenario, all shuttles are returning fire. Then, an engagement (steps 5 & 6) happens for each shuttle, wherein one shuttle is targeted by PK, but all 4x shuttles return fire. Then, step 7 (Damage) occurs. All 4x shuttles are hit once (a single shuttle per engagement). PK is damaged 4 times (damaged once per engagement).
So, PK goes boom, all the shuttles are damaged.

Feel free to poke holes in this argument. I know the 'engagement' part of the rules is wide open for interpretation. But since it specifies that the same tactic is used for all engagements, I'm forced to believe that an engagement isn't an entire battle itself (steps 1 through 8 ), but rather limited to some subset of steps after step 4.
So what happens if both players have ships there when the attack goes off? Do they become a combined force?
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
Socialite
#562887
Armus wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:20 pm So what happens if both players have ships there when the attack goes off? Do they become a combined force?
No, according to the glossary:
self-controlling icon wrote:When a [Self] card is attacking both player's cards, it does so as two separate battles. The player whose turn it is chooses which happens first.
I'll just point out for clarity here that it says "separate battles", not "separate engagements".

And at least in theory, that glossary entry doesn't account for situations in which a single player has multiple, non-compatible forces.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
1E World Champion 2021
Architect
Community Contributor
#562905
JeBuS wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 10:26 am Why does the rulebook sidebar introduce the term 'engagement' without defining it anywhere?
The unilluminating answer to this is, "because that's what the Glossary did."

The only slightly more illuminating answer to this is, "no one ever asked." From what I can see, this gameterm from 2002 has only been discussed twice in the 1E public forums in the CC era: here and here.

(There's lots of discussion of player engagement, and the 2E concept of engagement, but the 1E "multiplexed" engagement only shows up in these two threads.)
So when a self-controlling dilemma "attacks all ships here", does it attack each one individually? Are all opposing ships allowed to return fire at once?... It sounds as though an 'engagment' is Ship Battle steps 5 (Open Fire) and 6 (Return Fire).
Based on the text, "This expands the fire (or return fire) portion of the battle into two or more engagements" (emphasis added), I think the correct interpretation of the current text is that, when a self-controlling dilemma "attacks all ships here," it repeats Step 5. Open Fire until all cards have been fired upon. I do not think Step 6. Return Fire repeats at all in this scenario.

(By contrast, if a Borg Cube with a Multiplexor Drone aboard were attacked by opponent's armada, the Step 5. Open Fire would be a single step, but Step 6. Return Fire would be repeated until the entire armada had been fired upon.)
Say I have 4x Type 9 Shuttlecraft and Planet Killer is attacking. What happens?
My interpretation of the current text:

Step 1: Declaration. Planet Killer "declares" attack (by rule rather than by voluntary declaration).

Step 2: Initiation. Defending player announces declares will return fire with all 4 shuttlecraft.

Step 3: Responses. Either player can play appropriate responses to the start of battle now. We'll assume neither player does.

Step 4: Tactics. Defending player draws Tactics and selects one for this battle, if applicable. (The Planet Killer, as a [Self] card, cannot.) We'll assume she doesn't.

Step 5a: Open Fire I. Planet Killer fires on Shuttle A and registers a hit.

Step 5b: Open Fire II. Planet Killer attacks Shuttle B and registers a hit.

Step 5c: Open Fire III. Planet Killer attacks Shuttle C and registers a hit.

Step 5d: Open Fire IV. Planet Killer attacks Shuttle D and registers a hit.

Step 6: Return fire. All shuttles return fire and register a hit.

Step 7: Apply damage. All ships involved took a hit, so all get [Flip] [Flip] (or a rotation damage marker if their opponent is not using a Battle Bridge).

Step 8: Resolution. Battle is over. Everyone is stopped. Everyone is damaged.
User avatar
 
By Keiimaster (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
1E The Neutral Zone Regional Participant 2021
#562909
[Self] is not stopped as it is not a ship, and by rule it then moves...in the case of Planet Killer
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
Socialite
#562913
BCSWowbagger wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 4:24 pm Step 8: Resolution. Battle is over. Everyone is stopped. Everyone is damaged.
For the record, I like this answer the best of all possibilities we came up with. But I think we need more rules written to support it. :twocents:
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
1E World Champion 2021
Architect
Community Contributor
#562922
Keiimaster wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 5:00 pm [Self] is not stopped as it is not a ship, and by rule it then moves...in the case of Planet Killer
True.
JeBuS wrote:
BCSWowbagger wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 4:24 pm Step 8: Resolution. Battle is over. Everyone is stopped. Everyone is damaged.
For the record, I like this answer the best of all possibilities we came up with. But I think we need more rules written to support it. :twocents:
Seems reasonable.
User avatar
 
By WeAreBack
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#563079
I should have realized the potential for using Ravenous Hunger against a completed mission, since the whole thing basically works like Unstable Matrix only againts your opponent.

On the related issue of all of the "opponent's choice" cards for spacelines, the problem is the effect on decks with one super short spacelines. Maybe you want to play a non [AQ] that just has one critical location like Monitor Population, Mine Dilithium, Disrupt Alliance, Conduct Perilous Trade or Internment Operations. Basically, Obsession and Urgent Warning are totally useless: the opponent puts the [Self] card on the 1 mission spaceline unless you have a giant fleet obviously sitting there waiting to destroy it in a single turn. Unless you're holding a hand full of wormholes you've got to go at least 3-4 missions non- [AQ] (depending on span) or stick to [AQ] yourself.

On the second related issue of the attack on multiple targets (say those Type 9 shuttlecraft), I noticed that tactic cards were assumed out of the analysis. They should not be.

Critically, the "multiple attacks , but only one return fire" structure of a battle with a [Self] ship has important implications for strategy, as it seems to be that defensive tactics are far more valuable. Imagine for a moment that the one tactic you played for all four of your 4 Type 9 Shuttlecraft was Evasive Maneuvers, none of your shuttlecraft would take a hit. (Shields 5+4 printed on tactic card +bonus of 2 because the shuttle has no staffing icons = defense of 11, which is greater than weapons 10.)

On the other hand, during the return fire step -- which all four shuttles participate in together -- the attack total would be 5+5+5+5-2, which still scores a hit on the Planet Killer. That is, every shuttle gets the defensive benefit, but they take the attack penalty collectively just once.

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong here, but this suggests any Obsesion deck should have a tactic deck made up of mostly It must be destroyed along with Evasive Maneuvers, with a few others sprinkled in to keep things lively.
What's Wrong with Achievements?

Yeah, why can’t I use Kim or the new Chakota[…]

Recovered doesn't say that it prevents deat[…]

If I remember right, he had 3 scattered throughout[…]

Is that dude with the funny hat dropping Star Wars[…]