That is definitely not a viable interpretation. I also think there’s a middle ground interpretation you are ignoring where a particular model’s stratuscloud can’t be reactivated, even if it’s reloaded, but different models each with a stratuscloud don’t affect each other. We are getting kind of deep if we are debating if reloading via baggage gives you a “new” stratuscloud or simply removes the “used” state from the stratuscloud equipment you started the game with.
It's still a very important clarification about how the stuff works. Note that I don't really care one way or the other about how it works. I'm saying that the RAW seem to read that you can reload and use the new/reloaded StratusCloud. But they're very confusingly written. Paging @ijw to the rules forum!
For what i read, you can reload the Stratocloud EQUIPMENT because it is Disposable(1), but you cannot re-enter the Stratocloud STATE because of the last cancellation clause. And all of those clauses are valid PER MODEL, so 5487 models with Stratocloud could generate 5487 Stratocloud area.
Part of the problem, and one of the reasons I'm fairly sure there is a mistake, is that the clause calls out the Player specifically. I am more and more sure that the state text is meant to only apply to the specific instance of the Stratuscloud. Otherwise there are to many inconsistencies. On top of that we have in this very thread evidence that whomever enters the rules to the wiki can mistype and not be caught immediately.
Who enters a state? A model. Who cancel the state? A model. Once A MODEL cancels this state you, Player, cannot generate again the state for that model...
IF the intent is for Stratuscloud to be used only once per trooper during an entire game the rules do a terrible job of telling us. I agree with @colbrook in that using the Disposable trait with one bullet stating the equipment can't be reloaded is what's needed. However, wording such a clause to match the rules does seem awkward for a few reasons. Baggage is automatic equipment. One of it's effects allows us to use a short skill to cancel the unloaded state and/or "recover the complete use of all his Disposable weapons and pieces of Equipment". There is no skill name for this action. So if gear can't be reloaded, there is no specific term to reference. Referencing Unloaded isn't possible either. The moment one item is depleted it's the trooper that enters the Unloaded state, not their equipment. Meaning not being able to cancel the Unloaded state prevents other gear from being reloaded. The equipment could be immune to Baggage but's very broad and has other unwanted implications. So without changing/improving other rules (which is what I would do), how does Stratuscloud word this clause? Once this equipment expends all it's uses and becomes disposable (0), it cannot recover them through the use of Baggage or an equivalent skill. Edit, is the Unloaded state even necessary in this game? We must track the uses of our disposable gear anyway. When we hit zero, do we really need to place a marker down next to our trooper?
Then why do the rules specifically call out the player? Why not simply say the model? Or could it be that the intention is to say the player can't simply turn it on again without fulfilling the requirements of activation, ie reloading and spending a short skill/aro? Unlike most optional skills where you can choose to turn them off and back on at will.
Unfortunately, an official ruling can go against what we think was their intent. It doesn't really matter how much sense we think it makes to us. The wording, structure, or consistency can all be misleading. Rulings can and are made claiming the written rules support their intent. Regardless how wrong they may seem to us. I wouldn't be surprised if their original intent was sometimes ignored just so they don't have to admit a mistake or change a published rule as well.
I can accept that @Ginrei, but until we get an official ruling, from CB, I don't see the relevance of the point. Or are other people empowered to make official rulings? Honest question, as you can see I am new to the forums.
It was meant as a heads up to not expect very much. Don't expect the ruling to actually make sense within the rules. And don't expect the ruling to be truly official... because I have no idea what that means on these forums. The highest authority seems to be those with 'Staff' in their title. Then there's @ijw & @psychoticstorm for whom their official status is less clear. I've seen threads closed after they make rulings, which implies it's either official, they think they're correct, or they just don't want to be bothered to discuss a topic further. Rulings and FAQs seem to be structured or follow a process about as well as the RAW do.
Or maybe... it's so the CA player can Sepsitor the Stratocloud model, recharge the item using an Ikadron, and then activate the Stratocloud? I mean, it's the ONLY situation in which all of this makes sense by RAW. At least to me :S
Which is about as vague as the rules themselves. If his rulings are official, there should be a clear indication of this. Otherwise, it's simply popular opinion because the majority of the forum backs him.
Except that bold+italics part is not in the rules text. Which brings us back to the point where one reading is that you can reload the (Disposable) StratusCloud and go back into StratusCloud State because it's a fresh piece of equipment; that you can reload the (Disposable) StartusCloud but cannot go into StratusCloud State because a player cannot activate StratusCloud after it has been canceled with any number of active StratusClouds in your army; OR that you can only have one StratusCloud active at all because a player cannot activate StratusCloud after it has been canceled. Had CB replaced the word player with model, things would be much clearer, we would be arguing between options 1 and 2.
I agree that “player” was a poor choice, but given that Infinity models themselves have no agency and the player, ultimately, decides on all skill executions, I think we can safely strike option number 3 from the debate.
Except that in all other situations they do call it from the models perspective. For example: The Hacker declares the attack, not the player. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing that I think option 3 is the right option, just that the rules have been written very unclearly, and so if we go RAW it is a valid interpretation.
Got another one beside the Sepsitor, a little less convoluted (ok, more, but doesn't need a sepsitor on the enemy's side) but quite strange anyway: Option #4: I start the game without Stratuscloud. During my first reactive turn, while the Stratuscloud has still not been canceled, I ARO "Stratuscloud" (it has the label ARO, after all). On my turn after my first reactive turn (Active turn 1 if I did not went first, or active turn 2 if I did), I activate another Stratuscloud (2nd model, or maybe 1st after being reloaded). Now I have 1 stratuscloud that will be cancelled after I finish this active turn, and another that will be cancelled when I finish my next reactive turn. Since the cancellation clause points as an absolute negative to new stratuscloud state after it has been cancelled, this nets me a single player's turn extra (3 out of 6 in a whole game). Frigging mess.
But, if you read that line as related to only that specific model, all the mess is instantly Kondo'd...
