I've heard it said that the Targeted state doesn't apply to non-troopers i.e. deployable equipment, with the justification that the Targeted state only talks about troopers in its own rules. If this is the case, why then can the Disconnected state be applied to deployables? Are we meant to treat MadTraps et al as if the Disconnected state does nothing to them?
Because the rules say so. http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Perimeter A Perimeter Item which is not in Stand By Mode will enter the Disconnected state at the end of the Order in which it breaks Coherency with its bearer or if its bearer enters the Isolated, or any Null state. The Disconnected state applies to Troopers, like all of the states. But if a rule says to apply it to something that is not a Trooper, you apply it. It is something called exception.
And the rules say to apply the Targeted state to anything you hit with Sat-lock or Forward Observer. Same kind of situation. If you don't think that you can put deployables into the Targeted state but think they can be Disconnected, you don't have a consistent viewpoint.
Personally I'm of the mind we should just apply states to anything with a profile (or part thereof). So like, Tinbots don't receive states, but Perimeter weapons can. It's worth noting if you hardline the "but it says trooper so it only applies to troopers" argument mines kinda just fall apart, in a lot of ways but this is the most egregious of them. Enemies cannot declare Attacks against a trooper in the Camouflaged state without previously Discovering that trooper, or declaring Intuitive Attack. Also, arguably, you don't actually put down a camo marker... While Camouflaged, troopers are not represented by a model on the table but by a Camouflage Marker (CAMO).
Do you read a clear statement like the one quoted from Perimeter (that allows the state to be applied to a non-Trooper)? Nope. So you are (again) extrapolating something that IS NOT in the rules. Feel free to think otherwise, but the rules say so.
There's nothing in the rules that says "This applies even though the Perimeter weapon is not a trooper." You're using circular reasoning. Forward Observer and Sat-Lock say "target." Not "trooper." If it *only* worked on troopers don't you think it would have said so?
States, apart when stated, are applied to Troopers. If you read again the Perimeter rules, they states that a Perimeter Item can enter the Disconnected state. If you do not want to read it, suit yourself. I'll not interfere again with your view.
The rules say that they are applied to Troopers, period. There's no allowance in the general rules on States for them to affect equipment or scenery, and yet they do. Deployable weapons can be targeted and attacked, and Forward Observer and Sat-lock say they put their target into the Targeted state. Nothing about troopers. Applying the Disconnected state to anything but a trooper would be illegal in the game rules under your paradigm, and anything that told you to do it should be ignored. The fact that you don't see the hypcrisy in your viewpoint tells me you're not so much concerned with what the rules say.
As I see it, http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Game_Elements:_Terminology_and_Alignment is sufficiently defunct that the only way to play is to assume every figurine is a trooper unless the rules explicitly tells you they are not. That's how the rules seem to have been written anyway.
Pick your poison. It's funny you should mention Engaged state, though, considering all the mess that is attacking Scenery items such as AC2 in melee.
Most states' Effects mention troopers and nothing else, so don't do anything even if the non-trooper is put into the state. Targeted being the prime example. In the case of Disconnected Perimeter Items I think it's OK, because Perimeter itself will get turned off, without reference to needing to be a trooper: Automatic Special Skills and Automatic Equipment have no effect while in the Disconnected state.
That's specifically why I mention it. I agree that the terminology section is largely defunct BUT I don't think the solution is 'everything can enter any state' / 'Trooper actually means practically anything'.
I think the big problem is that the rules over-use the word "trooper" when it should be using "model", or possibly that it's lacking a definition for a game element capable of declaring, but not receiving, orders.
What do you think about using Guided ammo against targeted deployables, then? Guided ammo doesn't require that its target be a trooper, just that it be Targeted.
Perimeter Items aren't affected by the Targeted state because they're not a Trooper. This has been discussed previously and @ijw has stated his position. Although technically BS Attacks are made against Enemies (a subset of Trooper), so as best as I can tell RAW the only BS Attacks allowed against Perimeter Weapons (in the Perimeter Weapons reactive) are Deactivators and Minesweepers (because these weapons specifically state they can be used against Deployable Equipment). BUT nobody plays that way, everyone interprets the "capable of... receiving Attacks" line in the definition of Deployable Equipment as permitting any attack that would otherwise be permitted in that circumstance. "Deployable weapon. Game element with a Troop Profile that may belong to the Army Listof some players, and is capable of performing and receiving Attacks." @Mahtamori Marker is just as bad as Trooper. A Tinbot, a Mine and a game element in a Camouflaged state are all Markers. Which of them prevents Cautious Move? Also it shouldn't be 'model': a Tinbot is a model. It should be 'figure' which is a model with a profile (ie. a Fast Panda is a figure). OTOH It'd be highly amused if Figures and Troopers could become Engaged. O Yoroi getting B3 CC when you get it and its Koalas into B2B with a target would be cool :)
