Hi guys! In N3 pherobooster successful shot did count for completing Forward Observer classified objective. I can not find any references to that in N4. Could someone help with that? Thank you.
Technically an ITS question for @Koni to consider for season 13. Unfortunately the classified deck remains one of the most inaccessible rules sources that Corvus Belli produces, but... I agree that there are no rules that contain the necessary text to make it function as a Forward Observer attack. Unless they FAQ it or you house rule it otherwise, Pherobooster should not be able to accomplish missions that specifically ask for Forward Observer or Spotlight.
I've put a couple of rules into the solved list that @tox pointed out had solutions. Don't hesitate to point out if something has a satisfactory answer, or if you think a question doesn't fit here or should be added!
It was pointed out to me that the question of how to handle partial cover and irregularly shaped scenery items kept being asked, so I took the suggestion to upgrade it to kind of highlight that it'd be nice to have it answered as it was frequently asked.
This came up in another thread started by @Tanan https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/unconscious-camouflage-and-cautious-move.40732/#post-424405 Basically the question is, do Unconscious troops have LoF and do they have ZoC. RAW it looks like being unconscious doesn't turn off either of these things, since they aren't skills. That means that Unconscious troops may be able to prevent an enemy trooper's Cautious Movement and/or attempt to return to a Marker State. @Mahtamori I haven't yet discovered anything in RAW to prevent it but it feels like it shouldn't be possible and should get faq'd. Thoughts? Related to this... would something like a Wildparrot (which is a mine and therefore is specified to have 360 degree LoF) and which is also a Model, prevent cautious movement within its LoF?
Added the unconscious vs camo question. Also added an answer proposal to a question that's been in there for a while - the one about shooting triggering mines.
I still actually disagree that you remove a Mine immediately. I think you remove the Mine during Resolution - which has implications for movement (it triggers immediately and when it triggers - ie the order in which - it is removed, nothing says that it is immediately removed) . I've made this argument in several of the previous threads discussing that issue: it's the minority opinion, but no one has convinced me that I'm wrong or that removing it immediately is actually better.
I don't follow. One of the listed effects of the mine is: "Once a Mine triggers, it is removed from play". why would this line be done during resolution but this line: "Once on the game table, Mines must trigger when an enemy Model or Marker declares or executes a Skill or ARO inside their Trigger Area" be done effectively during the same step as aros? if it is removed during resolution then wouldn't its entire trigger sequence also be done during resolution?
A small note on FAQ 1.2: I'm holding off updating the tracker for a while as additional information is forthcoming from CB, when I know what information is more correct I'll make a pass and remove stuff that is outdated and add stuff that's new.
I have updated the first post. If there's something that is answered that's still in here please let me know. As always, also let me know if there's questions that deserve being on the list with a link to the thread where it is being discussed.
I know there is a thread where this has been discussed... but I feel like it's still inconclusive and we don't have CB-certified answer for whether Enhanced Reaction's Burst 2 in ARO gains the fireteam +1B bonus or not. As someone who's playing Onyx right now w/ Unidron Core, I'd love it to not be up to my opponent's discretion on whether I'm allowed a net B2 or B3 in ARO. Fair to call this an unanswered question?
I think at the very least it deserves a reality check. It's not mathematically the best option at all times and it only works in ARO, but a lot of people feel it is strong enough that they think it is probably not allowed. I'll add it.
Moved the entries that the 1.3 FAQ answers over to the resolved thread. Let me know if there's content that I missed that should be moved or if there's threads that I missed that should be added to the list. Waiting for someone to post a thread about the Berserk FAQ conflicting with the Fireteam skill declaration FAQ ;)
