[phaserihardlyknowher]

It's not about control, it's about effect.

My cards aren't affected by things on my opponent's side of the board generally, so why should it be different here?

I feel like the very nature of these cards is that they entail risk to you as well as your opponent. That's true of nearly all cards of this class, right?

[Hoss-Drone]

@Armus I suppose the counter argument would be that the rules state that they're not under my or your control. I think the rules basically make a separate type of player.

It's not about control, it's about effect.

My cards aren't affected by things on my opponent's side of the board generally, so why should it be different here?

A card with the icon represents a vessel or entity that is not controlled by either player.

This is the operative line that is the basis for my ruling. Since the card thats trying to figure out what it attacks is not on a side, it will look at all sides and attack anything that matches any of them.

@Armus What do you mean your cards are not generally affected by cards on your opponents side of the board? When an opponent plays a Kevin Uxbridge on your Atmospheric Ionization is that not a card on the opponents side of the board affecting your card? I can think of a hundred examples - thats typically HOW card games work?

[Armus]

@Armus I suppose the counter argument would be that the rules state that they're not under my or your control. I think the rules basically make a separate type of player.

It's not about control, it's about effect.

My cards aren't affected by things on my opponent's side of the board generally, so why should it be different here?

A card with the icon represents a vessel or entity that is not controlled by either player.

This is the operative line that is the basis for my ruling. Since the card thats trying to figure out what it attacks is not on a side, it will look at all sides and attack anything that matches any of them.

@Armus What do you mean your cards are not generally affected by cards on your opponents side of the board? When an opponent plays a Kevin Uxbridge on your Atmospheric Ionization is that not a card on the opponents side of the board affecting your card? I can think of a hundred examples - thats typically HOW card games work?

I meant in the specific context of missions. When I'm looking at a mission the only relevant side is the one facing me. If I'm playing , Compromised Mission is a perfectly fine choice to include in my deck, but if I'm playing , not so much. Why? Because my cards don't "see" the icon and aren't in any way affected by it. Going back to the Construct Depot example, if it's your copy, there's no icons on my side so why should SE target my ship at that mission? More generally, why should this situation care about the other side of the mission with respect to my cards when no other situation I can think of does?

I see @BCSWowbagger is back from vacation, maybe he can chime in here and tell me I'm wrong and shut me up.

[Hoss-Drone]

It's not about control, it's about effect.

My cards aren't affected by things on my opponent's side of the board generally, so why should it be different here?

A card with the icon represents a vessel or entity that is not controlled by either player.

This is the operative line that is the basis for my ruling. Since the card thats trying to figure out what it attacks is not on a side, it will look at all sides and attack anything that matches any of them.

@Armus What do you mean your cards are not generally affected by cards on your opponents side of the board? When an opponent plays a Kevin Uxbridge on your Atmospheric Ionization is that not a card on the opponents side of the board affecting your card? I can think of a hundred examples - thats typically HOW card games work?

I meant in the specific context of missions. When I'm looking at a mission the only relevant side is the one facing me. If I'm playing , Compromised Mission is a perfectly fine choice to include in my deck, but if I'm playing , not so much. Why? Because my cards don't "see" the icon and aren't in any way affected by it. Going back to the Construct Depot example, if it's your copy, there's no icons on my side so why should SE target my ship at that mission? More generally, why should this situation care about the other side of the mission with respect to my cards when no other situation I can think of does?

I see @BCSWowbagger is back from vacation, maybe he can chime in here and tell me I'm wrong and shut me up.

I dont get why you are not comprehending that "your cards" = Cards you control and is not under anyones control and therefore = no one's card and thus by definition isnt going to follow your logic of mine vs theirs in how it looks at a mission?

[phaserihardlyknowher]

I meant in the specific context of missions. When I'm looking at a mission the only relevant side is the one facing me. If I'm playing , Compromised Mission is a perfectly fine choice to include in my deck, but if I'm playing , not so much. Why? Because my cards don't "see" the icon and aren't in any way affected by it. Going back to the Construct Depot example, if it's your copy, there's no icons on my side so why should SE target my ship at that mission? More generally, why should this situation care about the other side of the mission with respect to my cards when no other situation I can think of does?

So just as some food for thought, how does this play into something like Explore Interstellar Matter, where my opponents side has text that explicitly impacts me? On the other hand, cards like Cytherian Lure are presumably written symmetrically to avoid this exact problem.

[phaserihardlyknowher]

I dont get why you are not comprehending that "your cards" = Cards you control and is not under anyones control and therefore = no one's card and thus by definition isnt going to follow your logic of mine vs theirs in how it looks at a mission?

I just thought of the closest example I can think of. Warped Space specifically looks at the owner's side.

Any card that moves like a ship with RANGE, such as or The Sheliak, uses the span on the end toward the moving card's owner.

Take that for what it's worth but it both implies that the moving card has an owner and that it's looking at a specific side of the mission.

[JeBuS]

I dont get why you are not comprehending that "your cards" = Cards you control and is not under anyones control and therefore = no one's card and thus by definition isnt going to follow your logic of mine vs theirs in how it looks at a mission?

I just thought of the closest example I can think of. Warped Space specifically looks at the owner's side.

Any card that moves like a ship with RANGE, such as or The Sheliak, uses the span on the end toward the moving card's owner.

Take that for what it's worth but it both implies that the moving card has an owner and that it's looking at a specific side of the mission.

"Owner" doesn't mean "controller". Also, because it has a specific rule about which side it looks at, I think that lends more credence to the idea that normally it would look at the whole card.

[Hoss-Drone]

I dont get why you are not comprehending that "your cards" = Cards you control and is not under anyones control and therefore = no one's card and thus by definition isnt going to follow your logic of mine vs theirs in how it looks at a mission?

I just thought of the closest example I can think of. Warped Space specifically looks at the owner's side.

Any card that moves like a ship with RANGE, such as or The Sheliak, uses the span on the end toward the moving card's owner.

Take that for what it's worth but it both implies that the moving card has an owner and that it's looking at a specific side of the mission.

"Owner" doesn't mean "controller". Also, because it has a specific rule about which side it looks at, I think that lends more credence to the idea that normally it would look at the whole card.

This.

[phaserihardlyknowher]

"Owner" doesn't mean "controller". Also, because it has a specific rule about which side it looks at, I think that lends more credence to the idea that normally it would look at the whole card.

Fair enough on the "owner" part, but I was just referencing that because it implies some directionality is relevant to , regardless of whether they are "yours" or not. Sheliak is not "yours" but it still respects your side of the mission.

As to your logic, I'm not sure what we can infer from the glossary beyond that it probably needs an official ruling since I think you could infer the complete opposite (we have a ruling that says it looks at the owner's side and it's the only close to relevant ruling).

For what it's worth -- which is nothing -- I agree Kevin's opinion because it seems consistent with the design intent of the the card and in general.

[Armus]

I just thought of the closest example I can think of. Warped Space specifically looks at the owner's side.

Any card that moves like a ship with RANGE, such as or The Sheliak, uses the span on the end toward the moving card's owner.

Take that for what it's worth but it both implies that the moving card has an owner and that it's looking at a specific side of the mission.

"Owner" doesn't mean "controller". Also, because it has a specific rule about which side it looks at, I think that lends more credence to the idea that normally it would look at the whole card.

This.

Ok, now that I'm on my computer and able to incorporate references in posts easier, let me try to show my work:

No personnel may report "for free" at this location. End of every turn: Attacks all ships matching mission's affiliation icons, then moves.

Unless otherwise specified by a card, each player is affected by the following only on the end of the mission facing them (and only on their copy, if both players seeded a copy or version of the mission): mission requirements, special instructions (italic game text), affiliation icons (or other indication of who may attempt a mission), point box, and span.

All emphases mine. SE doesn't specify that it looks at both sides of a mission for a given player interaction, so the rulebook entry would apply. As a player, I'm definitely affected if SE attacks my ship, but since it triggers on a variable that is called out in the rulebook entry, SE should only be looking at the icons on my side of the mission when determining whether or not my ship gets attacked.

It doesn't matter who controls or owns the card, it's the effect that is governed by the rules entry, and to me the conclusion is pretty clear.

[JeBuS]

@Armus The icons on one end or another don't affect you, as a player, during the SE interaction; Spaceborne Entity does.

The icons on the mission do affect Spaceborne Entity force. The question is, which icons?

[phaserihardlyknowher]

It doesn't matter who controls or owns the card, it's the effect that is governed by the rules entry, and to me the conclusion is pretty clear.

Just so I'm clear on what you mean, imagine I'm playing and you're playing . If you seed Spaceborn Entity and it gets to Battle of Cardassia, it attacks me because on my side it matches the affiliation icon, but it doesn't attack you because on your side it doesn't have a matching icon?

Edit: I should add that I seed BoC in this scenario. Thus the are facing me and are facing my opponent.

[Armus]

It doesn't matter who controls or owns the card, it's the effect that is governed by the rules entry, and to me the conclusion is pretty clear.

Just so I'm clear on what you mean, imagine I'm playing and you're playing . If you seed Spaceborn Entity and it gets to Battle of Cardassia, it attacks me because on my side it matches the affiliation icon, but it doesn't attack you because on your side it doesn't have a matching icon?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

[Armus]

@Armus The icons on one end or another don't affect you, as a player, during the SE interaction; Spaceborne Entity does.

The icons on the mission do affect Spaceborne Entity force. The question is, which icons?

Are you seriously making the argument that getting attacked by SE does not affect me?

[JeBuS]

This game makes a distinction between the player and the forces.

You, as a player, are not affected by the icons. SE, as a force, is.