1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra Política de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

Advice for Avatar list

Discussion in 'Combined Army' started by Baoh, Jan 17, 2018.

  1. timmy

    timmy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    28
    I usually I build an avatar list with q drone since they work very well both on attack and defense but I use them in most of my combined lists so I wanted to give the Noctifier a chance. I've missed with him plenty before which is infuriating but that game he hit all of his shots on the enemy tag and provided a surprise that kept my Avatar alive.

    Using a Kurgat instead of Worm actually seems like a pretty good idea if it saves 6 points. I haven't really thought about it much before.
     
    Baoh likes this.
  2. C0MR4DE

    C0MR4DE Malfunctioning Unidron

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    75
    No, it was answered by an other player(warcor), and closed. And as we know everyone can make a mistake.
    As you can see, who answered that q was Toad, and he did not make any compliment about it, just you.
    If you read the engineer rule, it is totally clear.
    The main point of G: rem is the unc. LvLs
     
  3. Spleen

    Spleen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    382
    Warcor's don't have the authority to close threads, it was closed by Palanka and, given the "best answer" doesn't have any actual votes, it was done after they locked the voting system which means he also manually marked it as the best answer.

    The thread clearly outlines the discrepency between the language at different points in the rules and the answer saying "only remote presence" was still marked as correct.

    It's a response from a CB staffer tasked with clarifying rules on the forums for a period of time and is the closest thing to a FAQ we have, to dismiss it is ridiculous.
     
  4. xagroth

    xagroth Mournful Echo

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,559
    Likes Received:
    4,424
    I just checked the rulebooks (I usually work from the Wiki because, you know, indexing. And it's lighter than the rulebooks most of the time. And ir has the FAQ integrated in the relevant places...). The problem I was having with this is simply that the Wiki says "ghost" on the engineer skill, while the rulebooks state "Ghost: Remote Presence" both in spanish and english.

    Since the wiki is below the rulebooks in "trustyness", yeah , you cannot spend command tokens to rerroll engineering or doctor rolls on any Mnemonica troop.

    However, as @ijw has noted aswell... the Strategic use of Command Tokens in the Core Book (page 156 on spanish PDF, 148 on english PDF) states you can use a command token to rerroll any engineering test done on troops with the "Ghost" special skill.

    Take that as you want, but I'd say the chapter devoted to Command Tokens has more weight than footnotes on a skill -.-U (and I don't even play an Avatar)
     
    #24 xagroth, Jan 22, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2018
    Barrogh and Gaffles like this.
  5. Baoh

    Baoh New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    1
    When use Q-drone in avatar list you include an hacker device as well for assisted fire? It's hard to find points even for a simple morat hacker!
     
  6. Barrogh

    Barrogh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    1,762
    Likes Received:
    1,450
    @xagroth
    We can also say that permission to re-roll for G:RP (Engineer skill?) is not actually in conflict with permission to re-roll for Ghost period (CT) :yum:
    Very RAW, but hey.
     
  7. xagroth

    xagroth Mournful Echo

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,559
    Likes Received:
    4,424
    No, the PDF books have more weight than the Wiki, and the books state on the Engineering entry that only Ghost: Remote Presence get a rerroll. However, in the tactical use of Command Tokens it is written (both in the books and the wiki) that you can use them to rerroll failed medic tests over models with a cube, or engineering tests over models with Ghost (period), thus creating a disagreement in the same document.

    My interpretation is that, since IJW has said the Wiki text is the source text for the books, and that the Command Token section is first (and wider) than engineering, plus that the Avatar is a 130 pts 3.5SWC (nearly half of your list!) being able to rerroll 4 failed engineering tests is not something that breaks the balance, even if the Skiavoros also gets a helping there (no luck for the Charontid or Anathematic, though).
     
  8. Barrogh

    Barrogh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    1,762
    Likes Received:
    1,450
    Well, that's my point, CT section gives a permission to re-roll for any Ghost. Engineer section contains another, more specific permission, but there is no text that would cancel other permissions given to you, so you're free to do as CT section says.

    Let me bring an analogy: rulebook says that you can Move in base contact with models you can reach as per other general movement rules. Existence of that specific permission does not cancel more general permission to move anywhere you can reach as per those same rules.

    Now, it does open up a venue for doubt whether there is an oversight by authors, but RAW there is no conflict in the rules.
     
  9. xagroth

    xagroth Mournful Echo

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,559
    Likes Received:
    4,424
    Yes there is, and needs adressing, since one rule is more restrictive (Engineer) and the other is more premissive (Command Token), and both are on the same book. It's kinda like having a physics book telling you on the first chapter (values for scale: 1g=9.8m/s2) that gravity equates to 9.8 m/s2 and when you reach the chapter about gravity on Earth it says that g will be taken as 10m/s2 (the common rounding at secondary school) without any kind of explanation.
     
  10. Barrogh

    Barrogh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    1,762
    Likes Received:
    1,450
    The reason clarification is needed is because being humans, we see that there are two sentences in the book that try to define the same rule, and that if one of those examples gives us broader conditions, then it's possible that author(s) could make a mistake either in one of them (by including more sufficient conditions than they had to), or in another one (by not including some of sufficient conditions that had to be put there). That means the RAI (rules as intended) could go both ways, and we cannot say which one without said intention being stated by game designers.

    That's why I said RAW. RAW don't always represent what authors wanted them to, but they are there to use without guesswork on intentions.

    In your example you brought 2 mutually exclusive assertions, but it isn't really the same as our situation. Different rules found in the rulebook exist together, and they all are valid as long as we meet all the conditions and requirements for each and every one we invoke - unless one of them tells us to ignore another rule that would otherwise be in play (like Stealth tells us to ignore ZoC ARO rules under certain conditions, as long as Stealth itself is in play... and is not cancelled entirely by SSL2, for another example).

    The two permissions exist independently and neither explicitly has anything to say about another, both are valid, so you can take either and go with it. One valid permission with all its conditions fulfilled and no extra prohibitions being applied at the same time is enough for your move to be legal.

    That's RAW.

    RAI, we know that one of the two interpretations involved is incorrect, but we must wait for developer's word since it really can go either way. Until then we can only go with some sort of player agreement that may or may not involve one of the existing RAW interpretations.
     
  11. C0MR4DE

    C0MR4DE Malfunctioning Unidron

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    75
    Read ijws answer in the wiki section about this.