DailyRich said:

I may have been a bit awkward in my wording.  What I meant was that I don't know that the ability on The Secret of Yavin 4 precludes redirection of another engagement to The Secret of Yavin 4 if it had already been engaged in the same conflict phase, assuming that had not been as a result of a redirected engagement caused by the interrupt ability from the TSoY4 in question.

For example:

DS engages The Secret of Yavin 4 (expecting I would have redirected the attack from A had he chosen that first).  Engagement resolves.

DS attempts to engage objective A.

I use the interrupt ability on The Secret of Yavin 4, redirecting the engagement to TSoY4.

Opponent says, "Hey, you can't do that.  TSoY4 has already been engaged this conflict phase."

Therein lies the question.  Can I redirect to TSoY4 if I haven't used its interrupt ability yet during a turn in which it has already been engaged?  I was leaning toward the answer being "no," but it certainly isn't clear.  I'm on the fence now.  The golden rule may mean that the text of TSoY4 trumps that it has already been engaged in the same conflict phase.

Budgernaut said:

But does that happen before or after attackers are declared?

bhosp said:

As per timing chart in the back of the rulebook:

Engagement
Resolution

Active player chooses one enemy
objective card to engage.

Active player declares attackers.
PLAYER ACTIONS

So it would be before attackers as you choose the objective you engage first, The Secret of Yavin 4's interrupt kicks in, then you choose your attackers.

It was mentioned in an earlier thread that attackers are declared before Secret can use its interrupt per playtesters.  That said, I tend to agree with Toqtamish's RAW assessment.  However, I wouldn't say that it's a solid case as you must have at least 1 attacker for an objective to be engaged (you can't declare an engagement with zero attackers - pg 18).  That gives credit to the argument that the objective is not engaged until attackers are declared, which is what playtesters were (reportedly) told.

dbmeboy said:

And that makes no sense with the RAW as it clearly says you pick an objective to engage. So reading that it means the objective is now engaged. I don't give too much credence to the playtesters, no offense to any of them, but who knows what changed after the playtesting period ended. Just have to keep holding our breath for the now late FAQ.

Toqtamish said:

Yes, step 1 is to pick an objective to engage, but it doesn't really say at what point the objective is considered to be "engaged."  Like I said, I tend to agree with your interpretation of RAW, but it's far from clear in the rules.  In this case I rather suspect that RAI is that attackers need to be picked first.