ECM Turret - 2007/09/12 19:51i have a questian about ECM Turret. It says "Defending ships in your home region gain Sensor Dampen 1" but what happend if the ship has sensor dampen too? has omen now sensor dampen 1,3 or 4 if he defends? and what about 2 or 3 ECM Turrets?
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Snooby
User Cruiser
Posts: 116
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/12 19:59GAIN implies that they do not already have it. If they do, and it's 2 or more, they keep it what they have. The effect of multiple turrets is not cumulative.
Post edited by: Snooby, at: 2007/09/12 19:59
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Are there actually rules anywhere that say a ship can't have Sensor Dampen as an ability twice? There is certainly precedent that a ship can end up with duplicate commands - and in the case of characters adding duplicate commands on the same side of the card, the numbers do add.
There are three possibilities:
1. They don't add. If a ship already has Sensor Dampen, it gets nothing. 2. It adds a unique new ability to the ship of Sensor Dampen 1, whether it has it already or not. So a Blackbird would have Sensor Dampen 1 and Sensor Dampen 3 as two distinct abilities which could each select a target. 3. It adds a new ability to ships that don't have it, and adds value to ships that do. So a Blackbird would have a single Sensor Damped 4.
There really isn't anything in the rules that directly addresses this. The pilot command tabs are the closest, and based on those I'd probably go with option 3. If either (2) or (3) are the case, I also don't see any reason why multiple turrets wouldn't stack. Again, though, no real rules to back this up.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Ryuteki
User Battlecruiser
Posts: 679
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/13 01:42Buhallin wrote: 3. It adds a new ability to ships that don't have it, and adds value to ships that do. So a Blackbird would have a single Sensor Damped 4.
There really isn't anything in the rules that directly addresses this. The pilot command tabs are the closest, and based on those I'd probably go with option 3.
That's the same reasoning I used. See, we CAN agree on things! -Ryuteki, Owner of the Rules! We're playing Monday evenings in IL, see www.games-plus.com for the address or email me at ryuteki AT gmail DOT com.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Brootal
User Battlecruiser
Posts: 490
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/13 02:32Personally I'd go with your option 2, the ship has
Sensor Dampen 3 Sensor Dampen 1
Each of which could choose a separate target (or the same target)
The rules have nothing about Abilities stacking, therefore it is reasonable to assume you can't stack them. The rules say nothing disallowing the same ability twice (which the card is granting) so it is reasonable to assume you can have the same ability twice.
That said, I think it would be reasonable for there to be amendment to the rules to state that these sorts of "numbered" abilities do stack.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Buhallin
User Battlecruiser
Posts: 514
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/13 06:47<nod> Both seemed reasonable to me... Option 3 has the advantage of extending an existent rule - for commands - to a similar situation. But this really is truly undefined.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
stevetheone
User Battlecruiser
Posts: 540
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/13 10:21When I saw this card I also thought about how it would effect ships with Sensor Dampening. For ease of play I decided that it would only effect ships that did not have that command already. This was also based on reading the card and asking if there was anything in its wording that contridicted that decision (e.g. Ships gain Sensor Dampening +1). The key word for me is gain. If a ship already has the ability it can't gain it again.
Clarification of this though would be good. The other suggestion have a lesser validity as I see it but my analysis of the card could be wrong and the others correct.We shall seed the stars with our scions and reap that harvest.
No expect the Spam, spam, spam, spam...
The administrator has disabled public write access.
rorik36
User Frigate
Posts: 56
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/13 12:33With the wording on Combined Harvest I would thing that you add a "Sensor Dampen 1" to the ship. If it wasn't suppose to be added it should say it doesn't stack or it won't be added to ship that already has "Sensor Dampen".
I guess we can wait and see what the official take is on it.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Buhallin
User Battlecruiser
Posts: 514
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/14 01:33Circumstantial evidence (pun intended) that it adds in some manner:
Uncovered Evidence: Target ship that does not have Exile gains Exile 2 and Bounty 2.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Snooby
User Cruiser
Posts: 116
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/14 03:16Resourcefulness says, in it's various options
"..Gain Retaliate +3"
This implies that it adds to existing Retaliate values, does not add a second Retaliate value and, by default, gives ships without Retaliate a value of 3.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Buhallin
User Battlecruiser
Posts: 514
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/14 13:22In the case of Retaliate, though, the difference is irrelevant. If I happen to have Retaliate 2 and Retaliate 3, that's going to do 5 points of damage back, exactly as if I have Retaliate 5. I thought the +3 was a very odd way to put the text there, but I don't think there's any interpretation that comes out with a different result. Because Sensor Dampen is an actively targeted ability, the "Extra or Add" distinction is more important.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Snooby
User Cruiser
Posts: 116
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/14 15:21My point, which perhaps i did not make clear, is that in the case of Resourcefulness there is a clear cut definition of what is intended.
If the card said "gains Retaliate 3" then it opens up the debate as to what this means to a ship which already has that ability;
Does it (a) ADD to an existing Retaliate value "Retaliate 2" becomes "Retaliate 5", (b) adds a second instance of the ability: "Retaliate 2" "Retaliate 3", effectively the same as (a) or (c) REPLACES it "Retaliate 2" becomes "Retaliate 3"
Resourcefulness explicitly states that it ADDS to an existing ability.
Cards which simple state "gains <ability> <value>", therefore, are either intended to add/replace an existing ability, not add TO an existing ability (except in the case of Retaliate where a second instance is equivalent to an addition)?
Make sense? Fingers on autopilot, have been up over 40 hours
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Buhallin
User Battlecruiser
Posts: 514
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/14 16:49I see where you're going with it, but I'm not really comfortable with it. If EVE weren't so completely riddled with wording inconsistencies I'd probably buy it, but as it is I'm not comfortable taking any single card as precedent, and certainly not as "This one is different, so we can use that to define the other".
Basically, your argument is predicated on the difference in wording being meaningful, which IMHO is demonstrably invalid with EVE right now.
If we have to take similar situations and try to infer the result in this case, I'm at least a little more comfortable (although not much) with using a rule (the command add) than I am another card.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Brootal
User Battlecruiser
Posts: 490
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/16 11:15That's why I picked option 2, by the wording it gains the ability, as opposed to adding to it. If you start saying it replaces, or cannot have the same ability twice, in my mind you are adding additional conditions that are not in the rulebook (At least not yet).
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Ryuteki
User Battlecruiser
Posts: 679
Re:ECM Turret - 2007/09/16 16:34Brootal wrote: That's why I picked option 2, by the wording it gains the ability, as opposed to adding to it. If you start saying it replaces, or cannot have the same ability twice, in my mind you are adding additional conditions that are not in the rulebook (At least not yet).
I based my choice of option 3 on the line under characters, "Duplicate commands add their power when activated together." Nothing else in the rulebook even starts to approach this question, though admittedly Sensor Dampen is an ability, not a command. It also matches the command I've followed forever, put forth by the old director of the Magi-Nation Rules Team: "Some good advice is, if you have a rules dilemma you can't solve, always assume the worst, i.e., the cards do not interact in a way so as to create a significant advantage for you/disadvantage for the opponent, because that's probably how it actually works." Thus, since it is more powerful to give a multiply-targetable Sensor Dampen, it probably adds together.
Post edited by: Ryuteki, at: 2007/09/16 16:35-Ryuteki, Owner of the Rules! We're playing Monday evenings in IL, see www.games-plus.com for the address or email me at ryuteki AT gmail DOT com.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
