Entire Order and the Order Sequence

inane.imp · Mar 9, 2020

DukeofEarl said: ↑

The Explode Template is placed when landing happens and so is present in Stage 4 providing applicable AROs including Dodge vs out of LoF.

There is no Stage 6 of ARO in Entire Orders. All actions being discussed happen simultaneously in Stage 4, generating and such as applicable. Think of it like how Quantum Dodges generated.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was going to post something today. I've discussed it in my meta.

It turns out that CB doesn't believe in an Oxford comma:

"second Short Skill[,] or ARO".

Which means we haven't resolved @Mahtamori questions.

DukeofEarl · Mar 10, 2020

Sure we have

Will Trooper 2 have a chance to declare Dodge as well or does reacting to an Entire Order effectively remove the second ARO opportunity?
Click to expand...

Yes. The mine is activated during the ARO step and the template is placed allowing Trooper 2 to declare Dodge per the Template rules. This is because a Mine detonating is neither an ARO nor an Order and happens automatically when triggered.

In the event that the answer is that AROs can be gained and spent during the same ARO step; could you please elaborate on how this works mechanically within the rules?
Click to expand...

The Opportunity to ARO is generated immediately when the template is placed. There is no need for the Second ARO check (does not happen in Entire Orders due to the lack of a Second Short Skill being declared) as it happens in phase 4 all simultaneously. Unlike the specific Guts in to a Mine case it is all happening before Resolution when AROs can be declared.

Assume sub-question 1 is in the affirmative and that Trooper 2 is a Hacker and reacts with Hack Transport Aircraft. Does being covered by the AP Mine's template prevent Trooper 1 from declaring a BS Attack to the AD Trooper's final position because of the micro-sequence created by Hack Transport Aircraft is causing Trooper 1 to declare reaction to the mine prior to the AD Trooper being on the table?
(If sub-question 1 is negative - that is that AROs gained during an ARO step can not be declared in the same ARO step - then this question doesn't need answering)
Click to expand...

That is how I read the situation, yes. There is nothing in AD or HT to exclude this from happening.

Log in or Sign up

Entire Order and the Order Sequence

inane.imp Well-Known Member

DukeofEarl Well-Known Member

About Us

Quick Navigation