"At least 2020, 3 more sectorials" I guess he could mean "in 2020, at least 3", though I took it to mean "at least this year, we're doing 3" as in not guessing other years. Who knows, we'll see. :)
I hope they keep the flavor in the description of the skill (i.e. skill fluff) and in the unit fluff. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Canadian seminar Edit: Watched. Nothing new except a teaser for a new expansion of Aristeia! and the new title for Op. Kaldstrom
Fat1/2 are not changing, but the changes to the underlying critical mechanic should reel it in somewhat.
This clashes with CB's business model in the style of swc boxes. Anyone got news if CB's policy on proxy's is going to remain unchanged in the transition to N4? On the other hand, this may also just be a code1 thing. No proxy's/conversions required and the experience being more right out of the box does hit me as a beginner friendly design choice.
If fatality is staying, I guess their commitment to practical naming was short lived. This is one of the worst offenders.
fatality /fəˈtalɪti,feɪˈtalɪti/ noun 1. an occurrence of death by accident, in war, or from disease. Units possess skills. Units with Fatality do not possess a fatality or fatalities, nor are they fatalities themselves. Therefore it is a terrible name.
With how much CB steals from pop culture, I thought the reference was clear? Also, the meaning of the word is MUCH broader than what you presented (Merriam Webster's here) and very applicable to the skill that literally makes stuff more deadly, destructive, providing a more deadly outcome. I mean, CB have often been very tone-deaf linguistically, but this is not the case.
None of those things are possessed by the bearer. It's just a shitty MK reference. Even if it was a reference to MK, then you'd think the skill would have something to do with horribly mutilating your defeated opponent, which it doesn't. Shoehorned pop culture memes are for flavor text, not rule names. It's not a better name than Damage +1 or increased critical chance. All the definitions are not or barely applicable, which is contrary to what was said about literal skill names.
That's assuming Fatality is not going to modify crits exclusively. The damage increase that TAGs are using might no longer be called Fatality at all.
Yes, they could just group together several special rules into a generic "this is a TAG" rule that provides several traits to the unit: Cannot enter Prone Cannot declare Cautious Movement -6 to Dodge and Change Facing +1 Damage with CD weapons Irregular Order just for itself CC atacks are considered Anti-Material ... and so on.
Indeed. And let's say crits change to "critical damage only when the roll is a win" and Fatality +1 could mean that Qiang crits on a 15 and 16 (in optimal circumstances) while Sheskin with Fatality 2 and BS 15 does so on 16, 17 and 18 (in optimal circumstances) . Just as an example. And example, people. I don't sit on info on how crits will work.
The Kaldstrom teasers start. I wonder if YJ will take lessons learnt from Red Veil, and infiltrate via a porta-potty.
