My thoughts are that it matters a lot less than people think. If your total Order Pool of Regular Orders + Irregular Order + Tac Aware = 10 or less then you're immune to the Order stripping with Command Tokens. In N4 in a 1 GC list with the Avatar, you had 10 Orders +2 Lt Orders + TA = 13 Orders in your first turn, with two of those removed it would be 11. In N5 with the same parameters, you have 10 Orders + 1 Lt Order = 11 Orders in your first turn that's unable to be lowered. With the additional Command Token, you can flex into an Order if needed. Given that you only need two for a Speedball, you have three Tokens that you can flex into additional Orders at any turn. Edit: This calculation is wrong as I forgot that the Avatar has Strategos and that Order flexing is an ITS feature.
Correct calculations. The Avatar has Straegos. So prior you had 12 Orders + 1 TA = 13 Order Pool, remove 2 with Command Token = 11. Now 11 Orders and you can take one AD or HD Trooper = 10 visible Orders and immune to Command Token. It makes the special Troopers more important rather than the list just being the Avatar + friends. Order flexing is an ITS feature, so it'll easily be gone in a new season. The +1 Command Token means that after the two for Speedball have been used there's one Token each turn for a Coordinated Order and the ability to put four models in Suppression Fire at once is rather good.
That is uncorrect too... Strategos is an Optional Skill. You can still have 10 Reg/Irr/Tac Orders + 1 Lt Order (who knows who you will use that on...) and be immune to order stripping.
While I'm not a CA player I think @quaade made a point, since strategos isn't mandatory, you still could have 10+1 order for the avatar (Lt), it would be a really really strange way to play if going first avatar didn't spend at least one order. So, you still could force nobody taking orders from your pool. From outside it looks like most complains about profiles being "garbage" in N5 are being place upon profiles which were a little over the average power (Avatar, Bearpode, Eudoros...), while Avatar now isn't as good as it was in N4, is cheaper points and swc I believe, add that to a lot of HI being too cheaper in N5 than they were in N4 and you have it. I mean, Avatar should be able to have more interesting friends in N5, or CA list should be less Avatar dependent, which should be a good thing. Plus, don't forget now Multispectralvisors have more enemies (albedo) so it would be less normal to face too many of that ones, and ARO is less effective, so Avatar still go wild killing and do Avatar things. Yes, maybe now isn't the first profile you select on the list because as Lt CA has now other options as good as the Avatar, but only different ones. Which I think should be a good thing. So, my advice, forget about N4 and play the N5 Avatar and check how it performance is with N5 thinking, not N4. Isn't easy, I know. I fail sometimes to do it with the armies I play, but I remind myself... this is N5, not N4. Small differences, yes, but big ones while trying to make list to work.
1/ Avatar doesnt have Tac Awa 2/ Invisible orders still count to the limit for being inmune to be stripped
1 was the OLD Avatar which did have TA. 2 Order Stripping is done AFTER the turn 1 Order Count. Non-deployed models are never added to the count. The way you describe it would reveal the presence of non-deployed models.
Yes, is done after order count, BUT it says Lists orders. Not deployed orders or orders in the pool. So, you deploy 8 figures, you have in reserve 2 Hidden Dep and a parachutist. Make your order count. 8 orders + Lt order. But in the list, you have 11 orders+Lt, so RAW i can strip you 2 orders because your LIST have more than 10. The fact that is made after the order count is to know where you have those orders and decide from which group i can remove them
RAW it must be applied as Fari states, as strange as it may sound to call to "list orders" instead of pool orders. I believe the intention is to recover the Limited Insertion lists, but also to close the door for stacking tacAware for having 15+ orders also able to move fireteams... As you say, it's pending for FAQ, but until then the RAW is quite clear, I think.
RAW makes no sense as it negates the purpose of AD and HD which is to give the opponent paranoia that something might be there. You would be able to ask your opponent if the list has unseen Orders in the CG and then remove them which also removes the layer of paranoia because the opponent will know if they should be afraid of those or they can just ignore their potential presence. If anyone insists on "You must inform me of troops that are potentially non-existent" I would just pack my models and congratulate them on their incredible tactical acumen giving them victory. before we even played.
The question is binary: "Are you inmunne to the tripping of 2 orders Y/N?". The reasons can be many, and they do not inform of non-existant troops. My suggestion is to NOT use this "Limited Insertion" until clarified, frankly. I have yet to see a single tournament list playing for that, since losing 2 orders on the first turn (or 1 if you have counterintelligence... which usually means you will not lose any since that ratio is seen as not worthy at all) does not compensate for having a list with 14 orders, not to mention flash pulse are back as orderburners and walls against Immunity troops. Also, please consider that both the spanish and english rulebooks state the orders in the list explicitely, so I doubt there is any option for RAI here. Now, I think there will be 2 ways: CB will strip the option entirely is the most likely, since they would have less headaches and there isn't much interest in the idea, in general, or they reformulate it, hopefully as an ITS extra so we can have some variety with all playing in closer conditions. As for rewording, I would simply state that a list (to consider camo troops with tac aware) with neither TacAware nor a second Combat Group can't be striped of 2 orders if going first.
You must inform me about a second combat group, even if it consists in only invisible units, so here is the same deal
By your own reasoning, the Courtesty List you give your opponent is also a LIST. It can also easily be fixed if the text is changed to "If no combat group has more than a total of Regular + Irregular + Tactical Orders higher than 10 then this is unable to be used." Also, if you RAW you ignore context. There's plenty of RAI that implies that the RAW reading is flat-out wrong. Context. It's explicitly stated that you have to inform your opponent on what you mention as you must say what profiles/markers belong to what CG. This is what the courtesy list says "The presence of Troopers possessing the Combat Jump or Parachutist Special Skill. The presence of Hidden Deployment Troopers."¨ If your opponent can strip Orders despite them being there you have to inform the opponent of the presence of those models.
It is, but is not the Army List Yes, now i know the presence of that models, but i still dont know their identities, like with the invisible second group. Is like Xagroth said. Is a simple Y/N question
The presence is the presence and means the presence of them, as in, are they there, rather than their specific identity. The intent with these models is the paranoia of whether these models are present. shell games extend to more than just Lts. There is no Y/N, only something taken out of context. There's no need for an FAQ on it, though it would be nice, as there are more descriptions of how to keep the models completely hidden in any and all respects from the opponent than this one instance where they have to be revealed. The RAW interpretation is similar to a technical truth and a technical truth is only possible by omitting context and omitting context, in the case of a technical truth, is a lie of omission, and a lie of omission is still a lie. In these cases, it results in a warper interpretation and falsehoods as people think their interpretation is true. You can only get that interpretation if you ignore the context of everything else regardless of what language it's written or translated into since once you add the full context it becomes clear what the text expressed means. There's no RAI or RAW in this, just reading the rule in the full context of what it exists in. That's also literally how the law works. No one in the field or with a knowledge of the field of law and legal matters ever interprets it based on what the specific thing says, they interpret and analyse it on the merit of the full context that the specific rule exists in, and if they do it's in extremely Lionel Hutz levels of bad faith.
Context is not provided in the rulebook, and rarely in CB's FAQs, so I don't know where are you finding such "context". RAW is not RAI, and RAI requires knowing CB's intentions; while I agree we believe we have a good idea of CB's intention (Limited Insertion without abusing TacAware, but NCO seems fair game), the redaction can use a rethinking, but RAW is exceedingly clear, even if the conditions are surprising. Also, remember that there is a list of official valid rules in the ITS booklet, which I hope will be correct before summer since the Wiki is still C1/N4 only (psychoticstorm wink win nudge nudge :p ), but is otherwise limited to the Game Rules and Army at this moment ) since there's no FAQ nor N5 wiki). I simply can't follow your reasoning here. It is not possible to go into negative orders, so if your list has a second BUT empty Combat Group, I cannot strip orders from said group. I will know you have a second group with models, because Combat Groups are Public Information (this, btw, was answered by CB during the Limited Insertion time, because the Courtesy List already showed up with an empty second group), I won't know how many models or which models, but I will know that group is there. You must inform your opponent about to which Combat Group everything in the table belongs to, Hidden Deployment or DA troops are not on the table, and as such their existence is Private Information. The camo markers on the table are not PI (only their contents are), and so their group must be informed. This is because each group's orders are exclusive of that group, so it's needed to make informed decisions for gameplay. The usual is also to ask for the orders available (Public Info) for each group, combining both data to decide the order striping.
I'm with your in how understand about to sustract orders, I already explain why in rules section. With this particular some people are doing hard RAW, since they look to forget similar wording is while explaining the pool, plus the timing to remove 2 orders, after order count... Once again, timing is really important. Btw, in spanish satellites rule is being applied RAI, so no orders taken if total is 10 or less. No need to count hidden deployments
