Ok, fine, but there's no reason that the ruling about it requiring at least one trooper of the base trooper type follows from the rules.
Not simply, but that's part of it. It should have said "this trooper can count as any other trooper for the purposes of creating fireteams."
No, I'm saying there's no order to troops joining a fireteam. They all become part of it simultaneously when it's created (setting aside...
Why would there be? There's no rationale to begin with.
I'm actually down with stopping McMurrough from doing that. Would slow him down.
I understand the intent of what's being said, I just think it's a major problem that a CB employee will say something about how the game should be...
There's no fireteam to join before it's created. There's no "joining," per se. If replacing the last member of the fireteam with a trooper that...
What if someone showed up to a tournament this weekend, not having heard about the change, and found out their list couldn't make a 5-man fireteam?
The answer doesn't follow from the rules. Moreover, there's no changelog or notification of update.
How would someone who doesn't comb through the forums obsessively know about this change? It needs to be in the FAQ to count.
The only reason HellLois posted it here was because of that podcast and people asking if it was real.
It's not even a solution. It doesn't help at all, in addition to making the precedent that podcasts are part of the rules now.
Have they? Dashat is good but it's no OSS.
It's not. And creates the precedent that a CB employee's extemporaneous comments on a podcast can change the rules instantly. This isn't a good...
Also it's really weird and awkward to make this rules change and then not update the FAQ. Honestly, if it's not in the rulebook, and not in the...
See, you just showed why it wouldn't. It was a funny thing to do, but not overpowered in a way that this will fix.
