It's up to you, but rules as written are pretty clear. Activation comes first. Assigning Team Leader comes second. You need TA model to be assigned as Leader to activate Fireteam using TA order. I see where did confusion came from, but I'm pretty sure timings exist. That document changes nothing in that regard regardless of [Errata] label used by authors. Do you mean literally impossible or just impractical? Because the way I interpret rules, you can use that order whenever TA model was assigned Team Leader on Fireteam's previous activation (or Fireteam creation when applicable). I also think you can, after activating Fireteam with TA's Order, immediately re-assign another Team Leader, including other TA or NCO models to use their Orders / abilities to consume Lt Order next activation. Not impossible in a literal sense, just unwieldy. As a tradeoff, you get to expend extra orders given by these rules on Fireteam activation with anyone becoming Team Leader that activation, not just TA/NCO model - as long as you also expend some orders on assigning TA/NCO models Team Leaders in advance. Then again, I don't see problems with that because those rules normally belong to "active models", and when they don't, you can use those required orders to Move-Move or something. You will probably have to do that at least once per turn when your list is this top-heavy. Even if you interpret the rule* the way that you are obliged to both have TA model as TL before activation and to become TL that activation as well, you can still almost always use that order unless model dies before you can do so, but that's given. But in that case it's not literally impossible to use TA, just very, very unwieldy. And arguably makes minority of TA models to lose a lot of value. It would be more intuitive if rules were very clear on "activating Fireteam TA model belongs to as long as that TA model becomes assigned Team Leader that activation" or something, but we have what we have. * - I don't, because I don't think one sentence refers to two separate things here.
Not really, this is the case of terribly written rules that aren't clear at all. Point 1: Point 2: So because we now know how point 1 & 2 works let's look at what TA states, regarding Fireteams: Again, this is merely badly written rules. They do not mean that he needs to be Link Leader as a prerequisite to use his TA, they want to make sure that if you are using his TA in a link, he needs to be the link leader for the entire order, so that the person using TA isn't merely fuelling firepower and ammo to Tai Sheng or the Zuyong HMG. It's meant to be sort of a "restriction" so to speak, rather than a "true" Regular order.
While I see the argument now, looking at rules more closely, I'm still not a psychic to say what CB wanted. I'd rather discard those sentiments from discussion. Well, being honest, even under the most restrictive interpretation (which seems to be the spirit of the document) most TA profiles are pretty comfortable with being required to activate at least 2 times per active turn. Yan Huo Haris, a backline link with TA combi, seems to be the main victim here.
I actually totally agree. It's sometimes baffling to see what CB "really" wanted. The best example that springs to my mind is the Kriza Borac. Clear answer from CB that CLEARLY answered yes to the question if Full Auto 2 worked in ARO, while making a Mk.12/SMG profile with a 360°-Visor that seems like it was designed to fully capitalize from the Full Auto rule, by making a "suppression unit". Turns out that was never intended and was never a part of design philosophy behind the unit.. lolwut.
I'm totally done with the Liu Xing. 3 out of 4 games I've lost the jump roll. Two of them going off table. Unfortunately, to use he's explosion skill, you are going to want to use it on the light troops kept in the back much of the time or just to get a good killer in the back of his force. But that PH12 makes it really chancy. I don't mind it as much with tigers because if it' happens them at least they are not a min 32pt. lead balloon.
How so? Also, part of his nerf was actually also from FAQ: Q: For a trooper with more than one weapon with the Suppressive Fire trait, must we declare which one he uses to enter Suppressive Fire state or can he use any of those weapons while in this state? A: When entering Suppressive Fire state, you must choose which weapon the trooper will use.
It's the difference between the two complaints. "CB doesn't even know what they originally meant" and "CB never fixes stuff that's broken with their rules" The Kriza Suppression and Full Auto interaction was working as they were intending, but they received data that told them they had to change it.
Hmm.. Not sure I follow. :/ Anways, I won't derail this thread about IA so to get back to the topic, I will definitely change my vote in this topic to "Not that fond about IA", if the restrictions of Tactical Awareness actually becomes legit.
Looks like that Warcor FAQ isn't official policy... From the official Facebook page: "With the release of the “Warcor Worldwide FAQ” and the events that occurred in its aftermath, Corvus Belli feels the need to make the following statement: ● We have always supported and will continue to to support fan initiatives that improve the game - especially if they come from our Warcors, which we view as key pieces in our international recruitment strategy for Infinity and Aristeia! We love the passion within our community, and we think that each and every warcor helps us grow. That’s why we agreed to allow the -internally called- “Warcor Worldwide FAQ” to be written by a group of Warcors, despite the fact that it was not going to be an official Corvus Belli document. It was always our intention to carefully read the document once it was completed. ● We firmly reject any sort of disrespect in ANY of our official channels, no matter where or whom it comes from. Everyone has an opinion and a right to be heard, but we will not tolerate last weekend’s disrespectful behaviour. The warcors responsible for such actions will immediately be removed from the Warcor program. ● Once we reviewed the document, the “Warcor Worldwide FAQ” - we found it did not meet the standard that we as a company strive to produce. We want to be very clear that Corvus Belli does not recognize the document. It is an unofficial text that can mislead players. It also is not endorsed by the entire warcor community, and it contains a great deal of incorrect information and misinterpretations of the rules. We hope that these events have a silver lining, and we can learn from them in the future. Thank you for your time."
Now, if CB follows that with a document on these topics of their own... On using AD4 in general and Shooting Stars in particular: I think it's a huge risk to do so without DLZ rule, even then it is worth considering using Assisted Landing (they do stack, right?). 40% chance to lose an important attack vector before opponent even tries to do anything about that is huge.
Yep. PH12 is just too low and makes no sense for the background of it, either. I tried using it once, and it ran into the same problem, rolling off the table. Even with Controlled Jump on, you're still only looking at a 75% chance of landing before your opponent decides to intercede with their own hacking. That's a huge investment of points and orders to make on a unit that will only hit for damage 12. Worse yet, when you fail (and you have to expect to fail at least a quarter of the time with this), you're basically done. The only profile worth using at all would be the BSG, and once that fails the roll, there's nothing he can really do with much efficiency. The other versions might have some utility if they walk on or fail their roll, but they end up being inferior in the same function as the Tiger for a higher cost at that point anyway. I really want to like the Liu Xing. It looks awesome, I really like the model, and I love the premise, but it all is just far too weak and unreliable to justify its value.
And it seems like such a waste to bring it on from the side. It might be good with a Spitfire but he's really expensive. A Tiger Spitfire is cheaper pts and swc. Of course I'm talking Vanilla in that respect.
Yup. It *can be made* to work that way, but it's immensely clunky and an epic pain in the ass in practice. Hallelujah!
Yes Jumping is a high risk thing, but after several games i don`t want missing them. I never jumped ok but having a "2Wound" HI moving in from the Side is awesome. Normaly i prefer the Spitfire. My standart tactic is bringing him in first turn pumping orders shooting and killin as much as i can, if he survives i put him in suprressiv fire. After i`m done i shuffel and bring the rest of the Army into position using tacticla Awerness and NCO. Second Round i start playing the Mission. Until now it works quiet well.
So far I've enjoyed using the LiuXing. I had successful landings using the aid of a hacker, and the Explode LX works quite well killing engineers,doctors,etc...thus crippling the specialist pool of your rival.
Isn't that like the statistical opposite of what should happen? I'd probably hate on profiles who performed well below expectation. I've had good success with the multi rifle after some people convinced me of his utility over the bsg. He's dropped in 2/3 times, and the 3rd time was still a 2 wound BS 13 multi rifle specialist. While the other 2 times has effectively won me the game. I think for certain missions the Liu xing is great. Its not an all rounder like the tigers, but I've found a role for him in a few missions already - mostly around being a veteran troop heavy infantry specialist worth a chunk of points.
Last weekend I rolled a 15 and would have been fine if I had remembered do use the hacker. He went off table and never did anything again. Second game i rolled an 18. no matter what it's bad. he at least moved up from the table edge and did use an ADHL to glue the Asura Lt. HD in Hunting Party! Another time he deviated into the middle of the board and then was shot in the back my a Daktari of all things.
