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 PolĂ­tica de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

Jammers not getting Fireteam bonuses?

Discussion in 'Rules' started by Hecaton, Aug 18, 2019.

  1. Andre82

    Andre82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    455
    Likes Received:
    547
    I have always thought CB had a more casual frame of mind as opposed to cooperative gaming but it has been getting better.
    This sort of rules issue is embarrassing to have happen but will no doubt be addressed in the next faq.

    If it was HL judging the round however I find myself wondering if they played without intent.
     
  2. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,399
    Likes Received:
    4,278
    That's honestly not good enough. If it's not in the rules, you can't make a ruling on it. No "secret rulebook."
     
    meikyoushisui likes this.
  3. Urobros

    Urobros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    728
    I'am totally agree with the point of made the comunication to all the players, at least before the tournament begining. Of course it would be a lot better if all the "FAQ" and rules decisions were made before the time line to send the lists. But no private FAQ exits.

    I'am totally understan the no burst bonus, because, in no place can be find that jammer is a BS weapon. Be a BS weapon isn't exactly the same as "do a BS attack". And technical weapons allow to use VOL instead BS atribute. Still, this don't convert jammer into a BS weapon. But what I can't understand is the no +3 Bonus for a Five Member Fireteam, because the "bonus" goes into othe atributed used to perfon the Balistic Attack.

    What I'am trying to say is that the rules itself aren't so easyly to interpretate even making RAW, because if RAW then jammer ins't a BS Weapon, so we can understan as players of Infinity, why the refferees decision could come into this. No bonus at all. Simpliest.
     
  4. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,399
    Likes Received:
    4,278
    @Urobros The Jammer is a BS Weapon. It's a Technical Weapon, which is a kind of BS weapon, and it's listed in the BS weapon charts. Moreover:

    It specifically says all mods apply. This ruling was in error.
     
  5. Zewrath

    Zewrath Nordic Master

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    1,755
    Did it have any meaningful impact in the game?
     
  6. Urobros

    Urobros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    728
    I continue saying that "can make" can't be taken as "is a", it is not at all the same meaning. Be a Technical Weapon don't make the weapon a BS weapon automaticaly. Flash pulse has in his description the wording "BS Weapon" which jammer don't have. Yes "all the bonuses" to BS (atribute, because is what it changes for Will when using technical weapons) can be applied so, +1 Burst apply on "BS Weapons" but +3 Will on the atribute. It isn't the same.

    Most of people do the inference from "technical weapon" or "do a BS attack" directly to "BS weapon", but it isn't the same. If we say number 5 is equal to number 3 because both are numbers only mathemathicians will be agree with that, because in some cases it could be true (what base are you using to do the maths, for example), but for most people number 3 isn't equal to number 5, and nobody do the "inference".


    A technical weapon is, for definition, a BS weapon? No.
    A techincal weaon could be a BS weapon? Yes, it could.
    Is jammer a technical weapon? Yes. So, it is a BS weapon? No.
    Using BS Attack makes the weapon a BS weapon? In reality, probably, in Infinity? Not for sure. Because the rules are only making a description of how the things works.

    Maybe it is only one more mistake not include in the jammer's description the wording "BS Weapon", but we can't know this in anyway, so, for rules descriptions Jammer is only "one technical weapon which uses the BS attack to works in game". Nothing less nothing more.



    Yes, a lot, it ins't stadisticaly speaking the same trying to isolate somebody with burst 2 than burst1.
     
  7. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    382
    Likes Received:
    329
    What is a BS weapon? There is no definition in the rulebook or the wiki. It is just a meaning to referring to ranged weapons (all rulings about BS weapons tend to that), not a rule itself.

    The ruling seems to be just something they decided for the tournament. Who? Maybe ask the organizers.
     
  8. xagroth

    xagroth Mournful Echo

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,559
    Likes Received:
    4,424
    Specops with jammers in fireteams. The final was Varuna Vs OSS, and Varuna has Fusilier Specops and AVA:Total on Fusiliers. So yeah... dunno if the list used included a linked fusilier, or if he had a second list with a linked fusilier, but the issue certainly reached the tournament from the first to the last game.

    "Count As" spawned a lot of discussion about fireteams. I'm just saying that the rulebook says one thing, and suddenly we get rulings that seem to come from thin air, supposedly supported by the rules...

    Hopefully this is because CB is using N4 rulebooks at this time.
     
    Hecaton likes this.
  9. meikyoushisui

    meikyoushisui Competitor for Most Ignored User

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    1,287
    Likes Received:
    1,669
    It's increasingly clear to me that CB doesn't read the English forums at all. Even if you tag a CB employee it's 50/50.

    If anyone used the jammer and lost the f2f or their opponent made the BTS save at any point, it's meaningful.
     
  10. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,399
    Likes Received:
    4,278
    They're confused about this over on the Spanish side too.
     
  11. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,399
    Likes Received:
    4,278
    Yeah it is. The description for Technical Weapon, which I posted above, describes how all of the BS mods apply to it.
     
    #31 Hecaton, Aug 20, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2019
  12. xagroth

    xagroth Mournful Echo

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,559
    Likes Received:
    4,424
    I'd say they only read the Warcor forum, regardless of the language, but /shrug.
     
  13. Urobros

    Urobros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    728
    No, not really. The rule talks only about the atribute, nothing more:

    <<Technical Weapon. This weapon can make BS Attacks, but uses the WIP Attribute in place of BS. When using this weapon, consider all rules and MODs that would affect the trooper's BS as affecting his WIP Attribute instead.

    Trooper BS I'am pretty sure is refered to Balistic Skill from the troup profile and WIP same. So, still no clue of Technical Weapon=BS Weapon in the rules.
     
  14. Urobros

    Urobros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    728
    Yeah, "count as" never should be use except when "no exceptions could be showed", but in the case of the "jammer" or "technical weapon" the wording "count as" isn't used. "Can make" is clear enough to understan "how to use" the Technical Weapon but not to convert it into a BSWeapon. At least is how I understan all this stuff. I recognice it could be a problem of my english comprehension.
     
  15. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    382
    Likes Received:
    329
    but what is a BS-Weapon? in the wiki, it just redirects to BS Attack
     
    DukeofEarl likes this.
  16. Savnock

    Savnock Nerfherder

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    439
    No, this ruling was not "in error." It addressed a serious rules problem that is well known and that has not yet been FAQed out. It was a good ruling to keep gameplay fair. That is in no way an "error" unless one is such an exploitative RAW asshat that they want to exploit a glaring problem like B2 WIP 17 SSL2 Jammers, to the detriment of most opponents' enjoyment of the game.

    Perhaps it could have been announced better. A publicly-available event FAQ sounds like a good idea in future.

    The great thing about being the people who make a game is that you can tell a group of players (for example a tournament) that you are human, you make mistakes, and some of those mistakes get through editing, playtest, etc., and that a particular rule needs to go.

    If someone built their force around something so obviously broken as that B2 WIP17 SSL2 Jammer loophole, that identifies them as someone who was going to use such brokenness as an unfair advantage rather than playing sportsmanlike and avoiding it. IMO they deserve to lose that unfair advantage as a surprise "gotcha" (not like they really lose anything, you still have a Jammer that dodges spec fire etc. well and has a great defense team).
     
    Dr. Nik likes this.
  17. xagroth

    xagroth Mournful Echo

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,559
    Likes Received:
    4,424
    Sadly, you are not taking into account MONTHS of questions in the forum that were ignored, WEEKS of time to send the lists with no word about this, then to get to the tournament and get told "jammers get no Fireteam bonuses" ONLY if you asked.

    So it wasn't even announced, as far as I know... And if the rule is broken, the Jammers have been denounced as too powerful for their cost for YEARS (Mutta 'Wiah), why in the Nine Hells do they not only add them to the Specops tables, but add Specops to the final tournament?

    It's a "hold my beer" moment on how to scr*w over things. Dropping the blame on players who COMPLIED TO THE LETTER with the written rules that HAVE NOT CHANGED IN YEARS is, quite simply, uncalled for.
     
    n21lv, Hecaton, oldGregg and 6 others like this.
  18. Savnock

    Savnock Nerfherder

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    439
    Oh, I get that the rules have been obviously broken for some time. And while Jammers themselves suck, they're not game-breakingly bad (just -bendingly maybe) due to their relatively limited availability and unit cost on everything but Mutts (don't get me started there).

    And you're right that ruling like that should be announced both explicitly and at least a bit in advance of the tourney.

    But if you built your force and tactics specifically around something as broken as B2 WIP17+ SSL2 no-LoF linked Jammers, you definitely deserve to get that pulled out from under you at the last minute.

    And you -still- got a normal Jammer protected by a linkteam, so anyone claiming that a last-minute ruling on this actually worsened their position is highlighting themselves as a genuine tosser. |

    Objecting to the method and delivery of the ruling on general principle is fine, but anyone who thinks the weapon RAW was okay is smoking something.
     
    #38 Savnock, Aug 20, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2019
    Urobros likes this.
  19. Savnock

    Savnock Nerfherder

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    439
    As for why they added Jammers to the SpecOps tables, it might be because those tables were being built for N4 as much as N3, and there's a nerf already inbound for Jammers (which probably also explains why they haven't fixed them period).
     
  20. xagroth

    xagroth Mournful Echo

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,559
    Likes Received:
    4,424
    Oh, don't get me wrong, I consider the base Jammer Op enough XD

    Incidentally... The Feuerbach is NOT considered a BS weapon RAW... so no FATality nor Fireteam Bonuses... Sogarat nerf much?

    Grenade launchers aren't either, so Ghulam NCO can't RAW throw 2 smoke templates on active turn.

    Rocket Launchers, Molotk... several weapons, in the end, lack a formal cathegory XD