Right so just a few questions on exact wording of stuff that could do with just clarification - If grenzers-spector-perseus all "count as securitates for fire team purposes" does that mean this link is technically a securitate link, as it makes not mention of needing a true securitate to be one and that these troops count as securitate -if so does that mean only difference between a grenzer link and a securitate link is "I say its this one not the other one" cause to me rules as intended it should require a normal securitate but rules as written suggests it doesnt. Which means the only difference between being able to add an interventor to this link is whether or not I decide this link is a grenzer link or a securitate link. Most other factions would list securitate link as "1-5 securitate, may include 1-4 grenzers, raoul, perseus" rather than they all count as securitates. This follows on to a chat we had been having in discord -Perseus counts as a securitate or grenzer, does his haris option count him as a securitate or grenzer to start with, allowing him to link with either 2 grenzers or 2 securitates cause at his base he is technically a grenzer/securitate with haris -to me this would actually make the Perseus haris kinda worth it as I really dont like the normal raoul-perseus-bot haris Its mainly a thing with the new wording of "counts as x" as only thing that used the wording before was spec ops characters who were not big enough to form a link of themselves. For example if yuriko oda had haris option and she counts as a keitsotsu would she be able to default to keisotsu haris team.
he is a grenzer/securitate with the haris skill only. But he is not in a sectorial that allows to form a securitate haris fireteam.
But grenzers can, so can you do raoul/perseus as a grenzer haris (and stick in an interventor cause its technically a grenzer link) - scratch that he cant link with grenzer that way
Perseus cannot form a Haris with Securitate as they cannot Haris, and therefore cannot form a Haris with Grenzers who are being counted as Securitate. Spector can join a Grenzer Haris while counting as a Grenzer, however.
Ye think that answers that, though still kinda confused on if you can form a full "securitate core" that has no securitate in it or not SECURITATE Core, Special Special Fireteam. The Grenzers count as Securitates for Fireteam composition. as for example the other hyper mix core in JSA leaves no way for you to replace all the keisotsu Special Fireteam: Core. Either 1 Kempeitai and up to 4 Keisotsus OR 2 Kempeitai and up to 3 Keisotsus. Special Fireteam: Core. 1 Kempeitai + 1 Domaru + 3 Keisotsus. from my reading it seems 5 grenzers (can put in roul or perseus aswell) can be called a securitate link (especially if I wanted perseus in) but would bar me from adding interventors, unless I swap out perseus then the link can be either grenzer or securitate depending on what I say it is at start of the match, or add an interventor which would lock it as a grenzer link. Its just kinda wierd, shcrodingers link.
I feel there should be a distinction between Securitate special character who count as securitate and the other non-securitate. Such that the fireteam should include at least 1 securitate or securitate character. (For example a hypothetical link that requires 1 druze and a couple of other guys should be fine using the chief arslan instead.) but so far the rule doesn't make that distinction between a securitate character counting as a securitate, and any fireteam extras also counting as securitate.
You can't take Perseus and an Interventor or Securitate and an Interventor in the same link. It doesn't seem that complicated to me. I can't see this generally being an issue anyway, as aside from SWC weapons and the FO the Securitate is a better choice. Perseus doesn't really mesh well with Grenzers anyway. He wants to move forward and Grenzers want to hang back.
I would love to have Perseus as a 5th Grenzer in a Interventor link, but as I understand that's not possible. But yeah having him and Raoul paired with a Shotgun and Spitfire Grenzer is legal though (as Securitate). Which isn't a bad way to do it.
So, I was under impression that you need a real Securitate with Fireteam: Core rule to create what counts as "Securitate Core" in order to add any troopers that can count as Securitate for Fireteam composition. But apparently this isn't a real requirement because there are Sectorial Fireteam lists that count as alternative way of getting permission. I'm still not sure how do I read that though. Sigh. Why can't everything be rolled into a set of Special Rules (Fireteam: whatever) without this three-fold redundancy everywhere?
Because they want to give flexibilty and limit it. Something like less powerful but more flexible fire team might back a solution to streamline it, but that's something for future. Maybe?
Honestly TJC's PDF is one of the cleanest explanations of possible links. It's certainly better than HSN3.
There is no "Fireteam: Core" skill for the Securitate to have. Army puts a note in the skills/equipment section as a reminder of which troopers can form Fireteam: Core, this has been noted as misleading. As ever the Sectorial chart (or list of Fireteams wiki page) is the authorative source DBS can also do a similar Druze Fireteam without an actual Druze, though only up to 4 members (Arslan, Valerya, Brawlers, and a Clipper).
So the puppetbots got updated so the AP Marksman doesn't cost SWC anymore, so that's cool if people haven't already mentioned it.
CB's New Stuff gets released accuracy guide: 1. Stuff is teased. This is inaccurate as fuck. 2. PDF drops and Army (not mobile) is updated. Army has lots of errors. PDF is fundamentally accurate, and if in doubt use it. 3. Army is updated, eventually it actually matches the PDF. Use Army or PDf. 4. Army is updated to fix an issue that wasn't originally noticed in the PDF. Army is correct, the PDF may or may not be. We're just about to hit 3. What I'm saying is that the AP MMR always was 14pts/0SWC. There hasn't been a change to how useful they are.
MMRs are new KHDs. Nah, just kidding. But seeing all these new MMRs around makes me think that CB should come up with combi MMR rangebands, slap them onto MULTI MMR... And then give it, with fanfare and all, to someone who isn't PanO. This is how you instigate riots.
JSA says hi? But yes, my PanO friend rages about a lack of 0 SWC weapons that aren't Combis. Re: Puppets. I really don't think 1 burst is 1.5SWC, 2pts and losing AP. Why go with a Puppet RF over the AP MMR?
