Can I deploy a EVO hacker remote without any human hacker in the list ? It`s a REM and therefore it theoretically would need a human hacker to be deployed too...
I think the rules are a bit unclear, but in this case the EVO Hacker counts for the purposes of deploying itself. The rule could potentially be amended to be "This piece of Equipment allows players to enlist REMs in their Army List, including any REMs which include this equipment".
Or, looking at it from the other direction: lists are verified when done, not while building. This way a hacker REM satisfies the requirement that the list has a hacker to enlist a REM.
Indeed. There is no actual "sequence' when writing an army list, so you just look at the list, see that it has REMs which require a Hacker, and also see that the list includes a Hacker.
Okay, and where is that written down? This seems like a reasonable rational, but I also don't remember seeing it written down anywhere. No offense, it just seems a bit clearer to note this in some manner for hacking devices. EVO is just the most obvious place, since EVO hackers are all REMs, unless there's an exception I'm forgetting.
The remote rule says: “Your Army List must include a Hacker or a TAG to include Remotes.” That doesn’t say “Must include X before it includes Y”. It’s just “If you have X, you need to have Y, too.”
See solkan's post. There is, literally, no sequence ever given for writing your army list or performing list-building checks in a specific order. You'd have to add rules to be able to do so.
True, but there's an implicit ambiguity as to whether that's inclusive or exclusive. Hence the OP question.
OMG, V must be that uber rare programmer I've heard about who never makes mistakes. Thank goodness that CB was fortunate enough to be able to hire him before somebody else needed a perfect programmer. /s
Fireteam restrictions don't break list composition. The list is legal, even if the Fireteam is not. Also @Rogujello. There's about as many mistakes in the Army code as there is in the Rules text themselves (ie many). But: you can only go on what's there: and what's there is that the default position is (barring known issues) Army is the rules.
Agreed, nothing is perfect. I'm mostly pointing it out since I think it's inherently ambiguous due to the nature of English, and game rules should be as clear as possible.
And I'm pointing out that it is unambiguous. Army provides an unambiguous answer to the question "is this list valid". It might be wrong from time to time, but it's unambiguous.
