Can you play a copy of a location that you have copy of in play already? (I know the answer is no but this leads somewhere)

Heres my question. Is it possible to just control 2 copies of the same location? One that you have not played yourself? i.e. Relocation? Would it be considered as coming into play on your side of the field and this ko'ing the previous copy?

Clarify for me plz. thanx.

You may have only copy of a given location face up in your resource row at any given time.

Thats fair. But the issue needs further clarification. Can I even legally target a duplicate of a location that I already have face up? Or does he get the relocation and I get the copy while ko'ing my previous location?

Partial text from Relocation:

<snip>
Target a location an opponent controls.
</quote>

The only targeting requirement is the location be controlled by your opponent. So yes, a duplicate location they control is a legal target.

And yes, he gets the Relocation and you KO your previous location.

You only KO a Location of yours if you *play* a location with the same name as one you already control. This doesn't cause you to play the card, so relocation is a valid way to have two locations of the same name at the same time.
This is subject to change, but that's how Alex said it works for now.

Let's have it from Alex then. Smells fishy to me.

Unique means you may only have 1 copy of the given card in play at any given time. Relocation does not get arround this. If you have two locations with the same name in your resource row, the one that was there first gets KOed.

I'm with Chad on this one. There's simply no way around the rules without a card that says otherwise.

"Let's have it from Alex then. Smells fishy to me."

It is from Alex. You may expect less replies from Alex to the forums now that my spot is official.

Well, ok, I guess that settles it. That may be how it works, but I don't agree that it should work that way. It would be nice to get an explanation of why UDE choose to interpet the rules that way.

I don't mind unclear rules but this is beyond unclear. How many other actions can be performed in contradiction to the rules?

It doesn't conflict with the rules. The rules don't say you may only have one copy in play at a time, just that if you play a copy while you control one already it will KO the old copy.

Page 8 says unique restricts the number of non-Army characters in play to 1.

Page 10 says locations are unique.

That is indeed an apparent conflict. However, Alex explained the mechanics behind Relocation netting you a duplicate location.

I think the rulebook needs errata removing the unique characteristic from locations. The restriction forcing a duplicate to KO an existing location upon coming into play will suffice.

It is more likely that the words "may only have one copy of ... in play" are more likely to change than making locations non-unique. And for the reasons that Alex explained.

Page 10 deals with equipment, not locations, page 11 deals with locations.

Bu nit-picking aside, the rules are very clear to me: you ONLY KO a location when you FLIP a location of the same name. It says that explicitly in the rules: 'WHEN YOU FLIP a location, place any other location you control with the same name into your Ko'd pile' (emphasis mine)

Since the rules also state that cards take precedence over the rules, and relocation DOES NOT say you must KO same locations you already control, and you are NOT FLIPPING said location using Relocation, then any locations you already control of the same name as the relocated one remain in play.

That said, if you relocate and THEN flip a resource location of the same name, the relocated one WILL KO.