1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Immobilized Engineer and G:Servant

Discussion in '[Archived]: N3 Rules' started by nazroth, Jan 13, 2019.

  1. nazroth

    nazroth 'well known Nomad agitator'

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    3,139
    Hello everyone.
    First: I am only a representative for this question, the idea is not mine. I am not presenting my opinion on it. Just drop the question here for peeps to sunk their teeth into.

    Hipothetical situation: Engineer has a G:Servant. Engineer is Immobilized-2.
    Question: Can G:Servant be used to remove Immobilized-2 state from the Enginner?

    From Wiki G:Servant:
    From one of examples:
    Wiki: Order Expenditure Sequence,
    Wiki: Engineer,
     
  2. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    Yes you can use your own G-Servant to unglue yourself. For G: Servants to function at all you need to be able to declare Engineer/Doctor when that skill is only valid for the G: Servant anyway.

    IE. If the Engineer isn't B2B with something that needs Engineering then Engineer isn't a valid declaration for the Engineer.

    It's been discussed before, so should be Googlable.

    Edit: yes, as per IJW's third post.

    https://forum.corvusbelli.com/index.php?posts/89824/
     
    #2 inane.imp, Jan 13, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2019
    daboarder and Wolf like this.
  3. nazroth

    nazroth 'well known Nomad agitator'

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    3,139
    Wolf, Smiler and oldGregg like this.
  4. Wolf

    Wolf https://youtube.com/@StudioWatchwolf

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    969
    Yes, but apparently thats all right because, as the Directors themselves like to say “We’ve already told you”.

    This is a Galician way of saying “Even though we’re very kind, intelligent and creative people, and we know know a person’s understanding of something isn‘t directly related to their ability to explain it: and even though we accept that English is not our first language and that we’re not entirely bi-lingual for the purposes of describing a very complex game; its your fault you don’t understand us, not ours. And could you please stop pesterimg us about this - we’re very busy with other, new and shinier projects.”

    (And I’m sorry if all this sounds tired and bitter and cynical, but I am, so that’s oftem how it comes out.)
     
    LaughinGod, Vtarin and jimbo slice like this.
  5. daboarder

    daboarder Force One Commander
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,686
    Likes Received:
    5,510
    The FAQ queue is huge, has been for a long time
     
  6. nazroth

    nazroth 'well known Nomad agitator'

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    3,139
    @Wolf I can totally understand bitterness and cinism man. I do not think that CB blames their community for not understanding - I am pretty sure they know how complex their game is and that some rules might use polish, still the way it is being handled leaves a lot of us dissapointed to a point of getting bitter. So yeah, I can relate ;)

    Yeah, managing FAQ in a more organized manner is a problem in itself.
     
    toadchild likes this.
  7. Wolf

    Wolf https://youtube.com/@StudioWatchwolf

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    969
    To be fair to my favourite game designers, clarifying this rule in an FAQ would be a pretty low priority because, as IJW's original answer implied, its meaning may not be obvious, but it is explicable from the written rules, and if you think it through you'd likely be correct.

    And it's demonstrable that people correctly do surmise CB's intentions when they take the time to read and understand the rules for themselves - even when being instructed to the contrary by more experienced players on “the way it’s played”.

    But these observations don't excuse CB's lack of interest in providing a system for providing regular updates, clarifications and FAQ.s, because their purpose is not to clarify the rules that THEY find unclear, but to clarify the rules that WE find unclear!

    I think that strange disconnect may be due language differences, where their Galician Spanish appears comfortable with very permissive language, whereas UK English requires plenty of use prohibitive clauses such as "may not" or "but not also" etc.

    It may be reasonable to surmise that Galicians (or at least these particular Spaniards) are comfortable with their permissive language for Infinity; but then it's equally reasonable to allow that English readers aren't. Suggesting otherwise is pretty conceited.

    Yes, the problem is with the way it’s being handled. I don't think think it's ever acceptable to say ‘you should understand us’. In any communication protocol, it has to be the sender's responsibility to communicate the message clearly, not the receiver's responsibility to understand the message. Because as unreasonable as that may seem, nothing else is actually workable.
     
    #7 Wolf, Jan 14, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2019
  8. oldGregg

    oldGregg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2018
    Messages:
    1,169
    Likes Received:
    1,010
    This is exactly why I don’t play in competitive public events. I used to in other games, (like warmahordes, 40k, fantasy, xwing, etc), but the lack of a solid, sanctioned, faq leaves so much for an organizer/judge to determine. When that happens, you can win or lose matches off some really stupid, unexpected rulings.
     
    #8 oldGregg, Jan 14, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2019
    Bobman, theradrussian and Wolf like this.
  9. eciu

    eciu Easter worshiper

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,002
    Likes Received:
    4,661
    In the meantime how many "do and undo" rules we have faced ?

    I can remember:
    "Coordinate order with regular order from other combat group"
    "Shock & 2W NWI units"
     
  10. Zewrath

    Zewrath Elitist Jerk

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    2,000
    Likes Received:
    3,484
    I'm sorry but couldn't help but chuckle a bit with the 40k one. Never in my life have I played a competitive game that required such a stupendous amount of FAQ, community FAQ and several house rulings to even barely function at a core level. At least the overwhelming majority of CB FAQ's are outer edge cases, with noticable exceptions, such as 2W + NWI vs Shock and the Coordinated Order that didn't need a Regular Order from the same combat group (which, luckily, was short lived as that was gamebreakingly retarded). I fail to see how anyone has ever lost to unexpected rulings, in fact the only time I've heard of such things was due to TO's who were demonstrably wrong and as a consequence made entirely erroneous rulings, which is not the fault of the game but rather a fault of the TO's.
     
    #10 Zewrath, Jan 14, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2019
  11. jimbo slice

    jimbo slice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    228
    Didn't Gutierre basically say this in one of the Uprising justification articles? Or maybe it was a podcast?
     
    Hecaton likes this.
  12. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    7,205
    Likes Received:
    6,535
    There are somethings that the rules self-contradict on or are just unclear, so it's left to TO's to figure that shit out.
     
  13. Zewrath

    Zewrath Elitist Jerk

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    2,000
    Likes Received:
    3,484
    It's not that I find that statement implausible by any stretch of the imagination but it would certainly carry more weight if you provided small examples to prove your point, otherwise I'd be inclined to believe that you took my statement about faulty TO's personal.
     
    #13 Zewrath, Jan 15, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2019
  14. Wolf

    Wolf https://youtube.com/@StudioWatchwolf

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    969
    I'm not sure about that, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised. I’m just repeating what was said to me and a group of others in person when discussing the whole ‘open information’ meme 18 months ago.

    There was nothing privileged about those exchanges, and they’ve expressed the same attitude in subsequent exchanges too. They're not shy about their attitude, so I’m not shy about repeating it. Their stance baffles me, and this is the best apologetic I can offer:

     
  15. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    7,205
    Likes Received:
    6,535
    A simple one would be climb - how do you measure it? Do you get a free movement equal to your base length at the end? The examples in the rulebook contradict the text, seemingly. (This is part of the reason why "More examples!" is a wrongheaded request from the rules team - there's no point, in fact it will only make things more confusing, if they don't take the time to make sure the people writing the examples know the rules).

    A more particular one is Intent, but I've only seen people on the internet argue against it, never in person.
     
    Zewrath likes this.
  16. nazroth

    nazroth 'well known Nomad agitator'

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    3,139
    Guys, maybe we can move this discussion somewhere?

    @HellLois is it possible that this question would find it's way into the next FAQ?
    @psychoticstorm could you please cleanup offtop to which I too have actually contributed in here, so that only topic related stuff is left?
     
  17. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    So everything from when @Wolf started posting?
     
    chromedog and Hecaton like this.
  18. nazroth

    nazroth 'well known Nomad agitator'

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    3,139
    I don't know, I am a simple man. I try to ensure that this question being put in FAQ is being treated seriously. Now we have Hecaton here and mention of intent... From here on a slippery slope is the only probable outcome.

    As mentioned before - I too contributed to offtop, so it's not like I try to shut others up. Just want to preserve the topic.
     
    Vtarin and A Mão Esquerda like this.
  19. Wolf

    Wolf https://youtube.com/@StudioWatchwolf

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    969
    Bloody hell Son, you really phoned that one in. Make an effort with your tribalistic bullshit, will you? :smile:
     
  20. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    First 3 posts were on topic. The fourth post added no value and started the off topic conversation. Everything from that point on was off topic. The easiest way to accurately describe that while simultaneously making culpability clear is "from when @Wolf started posting": it's not my fault the shoe fits.

    We have a thread about the state of the rules and the complexity of the game already: you could confine your toxicity to that thread and I wouldn't have anything to point out.
     
    Robock, chromedog and Hecaton like this.
  • About Us

    We are a company founded in 2001 in Cangas (Spain), and devoted to design and manufacture games and figures. Our main product, Infinity the Game, was born with the ambition to satisfy the most demanding audience, offering the best quality.

     

    Why are we here?

     

    Because we are, first and foremost, players.

  • Quick Navigation

    Open the Quick Navigation