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

IA: Hulang shocktroopers

Discussion in 'Yu Jing' started by Cannon Fodder, Apr 5, 2019.

  1. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,004
    Likes Received:
    9,435
    Yes, when CB changes the phrasing in the rule!

    Until then, rules as written say that a hacker gets to either declare Hack Transport Aircraft or lose their ARO.

    It sucks for the hacker, and it still doesn't make the Liu Xing worth taking.
     
  2. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    4,659


    No, the Shock + NWI or Dogged + 2W issue was changed without the wording of the rule changing.

    Nah, you only have to declare AROs for AD once the final position is determined, as an exception to the normal order resolution sequence, so I think you get a pass on that. The part about losing your chance for an ARO is only really applicable if you are, in general, allowed to declare an ARO after declaration of the Entire Order, and you cannot do that for AD. But then HTA is an exception to an exception.

    We have two compounded exceptions to general rules and no information for how to resolve them, really. It's unclear.
     
  3. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,438
    Likes Received:
    7,996
    Yeah, and both ZoC and Shock FAQs were reversed by a new FAQ. You know that the FAQs don't mean "clarification" and that CB are perfectly happy posting erratas as FAQ entries.
     
  4. Alphz

    Alphz Kuang Shi Vet. Retired.

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    2,163
    So I was writing lists and came up with this and realised, if the hulang had nimbus that might be quite useful. It would allow IA to leverage the burst and order bonus against other sectorials, in a interesting way.

    otherwise I think it might have a role here deploying a bit deeper as a sort of defence in layers. And could attack of the fire power punches a hole, or counter attack whatever might try slow down the Haris attack.
    Worst case the hulang presents another threat vector to the two links, which means the opponent might stretch too thin somewhere.

    There's a few ways the list could be better but I'm keen to try it.

    Random──────────────────────────────────────────────────[​IMG]10
    ZÚYŎNG (Fireteam: Duo, Tactical Awareness) HMG / 2 Breaker Pistols, Knife. (1.5 | 38)
    ZÚYŎNG (Fireteam: Haris, Tactical Awareness) Combi Rifle + 1 TinBot B (Deflector L2) / 2 Breaker Pistols, Knife. (0.5 | 34)
    TAI SHENG Mk12, Chain-colt, Stun Grenades / Heavy Pistol, Knife. (0 | 45)
    ZHANSHI Paramedic (MediKit) Combi Rifle / Pistol, Knife. (0 | 13)
    ZHANSHI Combi Rifle / Pistol, Knife. (0 | 11)
    ZHANSHI (Forward Observer) Combi Rifle / Pistol, Knife. (0 | 12)
    HǍIDÀO (Multispectral Visor L2) MULTI Sniper / Breaker Pistol, Knife. (1.5 | 37)
    SHÀNG JÍ Heavy Rocket Launcher, Light Shotgun / Pistol, Shock CCW. (2 | 39)
    Daoying Lieutenant L2 Hacker (Hacking Device) Boarding Shotgun / Breaker Pistol, Knife. (0.5 | 29)
    HÚLÁNG (Fireteam: Duo) 2 Submachine Gun, E/M Grenades, D-Charges / Pistol, Monofilament CC Weapon, Knife. (0 | 41) 6 SWC | 299 PointsOpen in Infinity Army
     
  5. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,077
    Likes Received:
    5,878
    Yes, it has been pointed out.

    On the ARO what was the question/ answer with nuance?
     
  6. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,438
    Likes Received:
    7,996
    That was directed at Hecaton who argued that a certain type of FAQ isn't an errata but a clarification, which I find to be a particularly weak argument coming from another long-in-the-tooth forum member, so he should damned well know that a question-answer can be just as much an errata as an actual rewrite is.
     
  7. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    4,659
    No, that's not what I was arguing. I was arguing that just because IJW says one thing doesn't mean a FAQ won't say another.
     
  8. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,438
    Likes Received:
    7,996
    You: "Certain FAQ rulings have shown that not to be true."
    S9: "Yes, when CB changes the phrasing in the rule!"
    You: "No, the Shock + NWI or Dogged + 2W issue was changed without the wording of the rule changing."
    Here's what I see as being the problem with your argument; I know what your aim was, which is to show that IJW isn't always right, but the argument you use to try and illustrate this says very literally that sometimes the FAQ contradicts what IJW says. This doesn't mean that CB proved IJW wrong like you claim, because it often means CB has decided to simply put change the way they think the game is meant to be played. As is the case with the double FAQ on Shock.

    What I mean is, IJW is a very reliable source of information on how the rules are intended to be played. CB might change things, but this does not reduce the validity of what IJW writes. That we can also trust him not to shitpost is a fairly sizeable bonus, wouldn't you say?
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  9. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,077
    Likes Received:
    5,878
    To reiterate myself.

    I understand that some FAQ are more an errata than a FAQ, it has been pointed out and I am aware of the complain and up to an extend I agree a separation could be done.

    After that I asked what was the ARO question and answer about hackers and combat jump?
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  10. Mc_Clane

    Mc_Clane Zhànzhēng bùzhǎng
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2017
    Messages:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    2,336
    Hulang VS Achilles
    • Achilles marked through repeater (2 orders)
    • Dodge on 12s Vs SpecFire on18s
    • 3 E/Mnades went to waste on especulative. Especulative EM grenades has less than 30% chance of success on achiles
    It's simply better a EM direct template. Specially a zapper that closes you to your target, or an e/mauler that applies a -3 on achilles dodge.

    E/M grenades on speculative can work on Remote likteams pretty good. Taking them in couples under the template, with a -6 on dodge with their low PH value
     
  11. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,004
    Likes Received:
    9,435
    The question is, is a hacker capable of declaring Hack Transport Aircraft when an AD trooper declares arrival in a place of Declare HTA or lose anyother AROs?

    As most of us are reading the rules as written, that answer is "Yes. It sucks to be the hacker, but their opportunity to declare ARO was at the Hack Transport Aircraft stage, so if they refuse to declare there they don't get to declare any ARO."
     
  12. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    4,659
    It's disingenuous to present that as correct when it's in question.
     
  13. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    4,659
    My point is that while IJW has a relationship with CB, he's not CB, and his extemporaneous forum posts are not official rulings.
     
  14. A Mão Esquerda

    A Mão Esquerda Deputy Hexahedron Officer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,893
    Likes Received:
    1,913
    Which is the most correct reading, since after all they got a chance for an ARO as soon as AD: Combat Jump was declared.
     
    Mahtamori likes this.
  15. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    4,659
    Considering that by default AD doesn't allow AROs on declaration I'd think not.
     
  16. Alphz

    Alphz Kuang Shi Vet. Retired.

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    2,163
    Well I guess trying to get on topic is foregone.

    AD doesn't do anything special about disallowing ARO's. It just doesn't normally trigger them until semi resolved.

    While is not explicitly spelled out how the AD and HTA interaction works.

    its super clear that the hacker getting TWO aros does not fit the framework of the rules.

    So you're left with;

    1. What IJW said.

    2. Fuck, I guess its broken and we'll go home.
     
    A Mão Esquerda and Mahtamori like this.
  17. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,004
    Likes Received:
    9,435
    So a hacker can declare two AROs to an arriving AD trooper?

    They get a chance to declare Hack Transport Aircraft at the point the AD trooper declares arrival. I would have thought that we were all on the same page that if you do not declare your ARO when you have the chance, you lose it (barring the Sixth Sense rules about Delay ARO).

    Then, if the AD trooper is landing within 8" of said hacker, they'd get another ARO?

    How the hell does that work?
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  18. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    4,659
    Nah. It definitely disallows AROs at the normal time you would; upon declaration of the entire order, a trooper that has LoF to the position of the AD trooper cannot declare an ARO to, say, shoot.

    Or 3. HTA has special ARO timing (because it does) and anyone who doesn't take an ARO on declaration can still take it upon resolution of the order.
     
  19. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    4,659
    Obviously not. They'd get to choose.

    AD has special allowances for when you make AROs in response to it, to the point where I don't think that the "use it or lose it" context for AROs applies; that's written in the context of AROs being taken at the declaration of short skills or entire orders.
     
  20. tox

    tox SorriBarai
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    1,618
    Likes Received:
    1,722
    Do we really need to derail every frigging topic with things already discussed, FFS?

    Any long time YJ players, have you ever used a Shikami? Hulang is the same. Apparent lower mobility (loss of C+/SJ but gain of FD2), but far better equipped for close quarter encounters (high burst weapons, E/M grenades, LFT, Mono CCW, D-Charges).

    It is not a bad profile per se, it has A LOT of competition in the same point cost bracket.
     
    Solar, Zewrath, Space Ranger and 3 others like this.