Only the firing a drone at a friendly drone. The "SW hitting an impacted drone in tractor" is clear in the rules. (4F5c), in relevant part, "...(or if B hits A, which previously impacted and was stopped by a tractor beam)..."mjwest wrote:As a followup question to Paul, which part do you want me to ask about? The "firing a drone at a friend drone" part or the "drone hitting an impacted drone held in a tractor causes both to explode" part? I went ahead and asked about both, but I am curious as to which was actually bothering you?
1. The actual text of the rules (4F5c) states "You can target a seeking weapon on the enemy seeking weapon."
Your ruling is that the clear text of the rule is wrong and that "enemy" has no meaning. Additionally, all other aspects of "friendly fire" in Fed Com fail to hurt your opponent. If you tractor your own seeking weapon, it goes inert. If your unit is manned, you cannot fire at it at all, even to prevent its capture. Your ruling allows the only instance of targeting weapons on friendly units to cause damage to the enemy.
2. The enabling rule (4F5c) is in the section (4F5) which is all about defending yourself against enemy seeking weapons. So it is particularly odd to ignore the word "enemy" for a rule in that section.
3. The purpose of the second paragraph of (4F5c) is clearly to punish defenders who fail to - or are unable to - properly time their defensive drone launches. It is not the purpose of the rule to set up some "gotcha" situation where a drone user gets to nullify his opponent's use of defensive tractors after the tractor has already been employed defensively.
Obviously this last part is just an IMO, since Steve wrote the rule and only he can tell its actual intent. But, given that this is a rule that draws itself from a mirror rule in SFB and the rule does not have that intent in SFB (because SWs cannot be tractored at range zero of its target), my guess is that he could not have meant the rule to mean what you are saying it means (and, in fact, he did not draft the rule that way, because, as mentioned above, you have to ignore the word "enemy" in the enabling rule as that rule was drafted).

