All that whining about using orders to do something that is not shooting - it's like we're playing a game about OBJECTIVES and CLANDESTINE OPERATIONS, where completing an objective is more important than building the most optimized shooty-killy list, right?
Nobody said anything about orders better spent on shooting specifically. Any sort of scenario objective that is barely interactive for another player in a practical sense does very little besides taxing tools you're given by base rules of the game. Would you not question the line in scenario description that says "So you play this scenario as normal, but you either have 2 less orders or less VP, choice is yours". What's even the point of that? How it's a fun addition? And that's basically Xenotech, in practical sense. And I'm not even talking about how those 2 orders don't scale with army size, kicking already hurting list concepts while they are down. That would be slightly different if it was just run-of-the-mill escort mission, or if you had to drag that VIP further, but your opponent can't really interfere with this objective on most tables, making it little more than "at the beginning of the game, spend 2 orders".
I dislike it because it heavily favors some armies more than others. It's MUCH more easy to complete the objective with Doctor Worm or that Aleph guy than it is with a disposable Warcor, just saying.
Yup. Though Thamyris is rarely run in my experience. The main problem with the rule is that we've got this O-12 liason, this thing with Journalists, and Datatrackers are still in the game. I was hoping for a streamlining of the ITS rules, I hoped wrong.
IA is fucking weak dude and it's buried dead after Dahshat shat all over the army. There's absolutely zero reason to play the army as it stands, other than cool factor. It's a HI-Sectorial that shoots worse than MO, CC's worse than MO, have less survivability than MO and they have worse options for TAG's than MO. Also none of the problematic units were fixed or touched at all. The army is a disgrace in its current form. I like playing the sectorial but it's utter garbage, make no mistake. @H̶e̶c̶a̶t̶o̶n̶ @Triumph was absolutely right on the money. (and this isn't to poke any anger over MO or MO-players)
Fuck me, I mentioned the wrong person. Sorry, it's just because I saw you qouted one of my posts earlier that I entered your name xD
It's funny how some of MO folks keep wishing for IA stuff while apparently there are IA players who say they are worse MO. But we digress.
It funny to read critics of a fluffy rule, using fluffy arguments like CA dont need a journalist because CA is going to complain to concilium?. If the CA or Tohaa journalist appears was because people said that is unfair that CA or Tohaa do not have a journalist to accomplish this OP. And the OP is an extra OP, so you can just playing ignorig to spend a lot of orders in a warcor, you can achieve maximum points in any missions without them. Any way, I only want to say to be polite to all the users, or we will force to report this to Concilium (I mean close the post)
What a pain it probably is to read this forum when you are a rule creator trying to make new stuff ... Tohaa and CA probably record stuff and use it for propaganda. Makes perfect sens to me. I want to say thank you to @HellLois for coming up with this new idea about the warcor.
TBH, I don't like the Liaison Officer too. If you planned to play a full camo list, it forces you to reveal that one of them is a real trooper and a FO on the top of it. But about the Concilium Watch, I really like this.
What is the big deal with this "you can already score maximum points, so extra point doesn't matter"? A point is a point. It can turn your loss into a tie, a 2 tournament points victory into a 3 tournament points victory etc. Cases when this point doesn't matter are no different from cases when any other VP you can earn doesn't matter, and the only case when the extra nature of this point comes into play is when you score a major victory anyway, so this distinction is of no consequence again. Psychological tricks like "it's not a penalty, it's a bonus" stop working when result is determined by point difference, and this is when it becomes apparent that it's 1pt difference no matter how you slice it. This won't fool anyone. Well, except maybe A Mao Esquerda as he more or less stated above. And speaking of fluffy rules done right. If you want "just a little fluffy rule", you could do something similar to Space Wolves 4E Oath system where benefits of the rule were explicitly bragging rights (and an excuse to raise a cup to champion's success), but the system was still fun in a fluffy way because it was encouraging people to give more personality to their dudes and to invest in customizing their appearance to represent that personality. That's part of what fluff is about. It's about a story. And speaking of narrative, good stories love consistency and being convincing. You don't achieve that through scenario involving a completely arbitrary list of concillium-banned weapons that barely differ from some other pieces that aren't banned. His point is that it gives away that this marker is a real trooper and a FO, which is exactly what he is saying in that post.
Sure thing, several of us pointed that, fluff wise, it has logic (seed discord for the CA, unite humanity for the humans, and their own game for the Tohaa as always). The problem with the Journalist part is, simply, the list and the raw contradictions (by http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Twin_Weapons and the FAQ we have confirmation that a rifle + light shotgun is not the same as/does no RAW contains a light shotgun, for example), while saying "all weapons with native ammo of the type E/M, shock, and viral, and all template-capable weapons" would have been a fast and easy to check enough (while being clear that Marksmanship won't turn your sharpshooter into a Concilium weapons violation). Giving O12 an exception to the rule after confirming Peacekeeper would not have relevance outside of campaigns was... not fortunate. As for the O12 Liasion, the rolling at +3 allowing a token rerroll is kind of... hard. Keeping the dude alive until then while the opponent knows it will be hard enough, and to see it negated at the last moment by a bad roll can be really frustrating. That being said, the big problem I see with this mechanic is that the Datatracker rules are still in, so now we have to track in some scenarios a Datatracker, a Liasion, and their impact in the scoring.
Yup. That kind of stuff shouldn't be in ITS. Then again, we had the B4ckd00r "event" where every faction had characters put in Space Jail with no attention paid to what it did for balance. Yeah, overall it's just too clunky, and the whole "this special new faction gets to cheat" isn't helping things.
That made me smile. When you are so badass that deploying you counts as Geneva convention violation, alongside with, say, using weapons of mass destruction against humans.
In all honesty, Concilium Watch is a better mechanic than Xenotech. Hopefully we'll see still better mechanics in the future.
this happens with DataTraker rule :P not with Liaison Officer rule, Liaison Officer can be in camo marker (not in hidden deployment, is not the same) And DataTracker didnt generate so much discussion xD I only want to say that its no so mandatory like xenotech. I know that a point is a point, and thats the reason, If a player do me an alphastrike i have some options to get some point. I know. The peacekeeper relevance, was included because players said at their moment that this rule needs more use xD but you are right