I wonder if thats a typo. Its odd they would nerf the Jujak so soon after its release. Has anyone asked if its a typo?
I would like to remind people that normal, civilized discussion, is encouraged. Personal attacks, attacks to CB stuff, extreme, unnecessary, vulgarity and contemporary politics especially adversarial, are not. Relevant posters should consider themselves warned. Please do continue in a normal discussion, thanks.
If the current wording stands for cancellation it requires them to declare a skill, which I don't think is happening because otherwise that'd provoke AROs?
I would expect the current wording of Suppression Fire not to stand, otherwise you'd be able to put a Camouflaged trooper into Suppression without breaking the state.
Considering that this is something you use as second player, you are the one to declare aro's so as long as this ability is worded as some sort of pre game order then nothing has to change. Unless both players can use this, then something has to change.
Perhaps you will be able to be in Suppresive Fire Mode with the Holoproyector, at least until you declare Shoot as your action...furthermore it would be cool if the same applied to camo troops, however having to set down the SF token besides the Camo Marker which Holds the Troop in said State. As far as I am aware SF was a State and not an attack, entering the state during an order was considered an attack action, however using Warning! You could change your facing without breaking the SF state, if any of this holds somewhat Similar I don’t see why not. I mean, you’re still spending a Command token per trooper in SF mode, along with the Command token for order denial you can quite possibly overdo it to your own hazard.
I think you're discussing something different than what me and Triumph has been bouncing around. We're discussing whether it's possible to deploy a trooper in holoecho, over a wide area, and then putting that trooper in Suppression without breaking Holoecho state or if the rules might prevent that. This is not something you'd be able to do using regular orders (we presume). In either case, why do you think the active player using this command token use might cause an issue?
Did anyone mention yet that Extreme Impetious is gone? Our KuangShi would not run towards enemy lines with that (if no other changes). Pretty big deal!
Impetuous now runs for the enemy DZ, and it's possible you can't choose not to use the Impetuous order if there is not Extreme Impetuous anymore (kind of a throwback to N2)
I don't think so. They did say that Extreme Impetuous is gone and gave some info on how Impetuous movement works, but they did not for sure say it was voluntary to do it as far as I can remember.
If they kept the voluntary one Impetuous means very little, and Frenzy almost nothing at all. I really hope they didn't, but all I'm seeing about N4 points to them doing it.
Given the new relatively constant cover it does mean it's the most likely way a unit finds itself without the cover bonus.
Depends on what your tables look like. Frenzy on Jing in conjunction with gaining elevated cover will be something you need to play around assuming Frenzy continues to exist.
Maybe? Depends what among everything else ends up changing. They'd still need to see a fairly significant point cut, in my book.
