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

Riotstoppers versus Camo Markers

Discussion in 'Rules' started by Section9, Aug 27, 2019.

  1. solkan

    solkan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    761
    Likes Received:
    1,278
    See the FAQ, currently page 4, near bottom right, the entry concerning moving through allied markers, which specifically mentions camo markers.

    At this point, the only thing left to conclude is that the bullet point you quoted only refers to enemy camouflage markers. Because you sure as hell can’t be worrying about base contact stopping you at that point.
     
  2. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,470
    Likes Received:
    8,046
    I don't think that's sufficient to allow you to get into base contact with the camo marker. Move through, yes, but not touch.

    That said, just spend an order on the camouflaged trooper and declare Reset to cancel state or have a trooper Discover the Marker like @xagroth wrote earlier.
     
  3. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    491
    well, in a "fluf-logical" way, glue should not reveal camo: the dude will remain camoed, with the glue making him imposible to move, and the enemy will look at the glue and see "nothing"
     
    Arkhos94 likes this.
  4. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,825
    Likes Received:
    4,674
    That's certainly an ignorant statement. The FAQ has changed the written rules plenty of times.
     
    theradrussian and Tanan like this.
  5. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    491
    yes... I know. so what? what is a FAQ: Frequent Answered Questions... and ruling with answers is simply wrong (that is what I try to say in that post that you, in your great knowledge, didn't even try to understand)

    CB has changed rules using FAQ, several times (we all know that), and lots of those times they created new problems because the FAQ affected other rules in a non-intended way. If they errated what needed to fix, and they used FAQ as is supposed to, this would work better.
     
  6. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,034
    Likes Received:
    9,463
    Yeah, CB is really abusing the label FAQ. If it's a rules change, call it an Errata (or even Rules Change). If you' are clarifying something using the existing rules, that's an FAQ.
     
    Hecaton, Alfy, theradrussian and 2 others like this.
  7. Tanan

    Tanan Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2019
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    17
    I have always wondered why CB chose to communicate this way. Telling a bold faced lie makes you look foolish, petty and weak.
     
  8. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    5,283
    Likes Received:
    10,701
    That's how it's been labelled for the last 3-4 PDFs.
     
  9. Arkhos94

    Arkhos94 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,438
    Likes Received:
    1,373
    Maybe it should also be on the document title (FAQ/Erratas) and on the name of the download section of the website
     
    Hecaton likes this.
  10. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    491
    yes, they are separating it now, but there still remain some FAQs that do changes in rules and can create confusion. I hope for N4 that those documents are treated like that from the beggining.
     
  11. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    5,283
    Likes Received:
    10,701
    Sure, but CB are finally using 'FAQ' and 'errata' as expected by the players.
     
  12. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,034
    Likes Received:
    9,463
    Finally.

    Only took them, what, 12 years? *grumble*


    I'm OK with the document just being named 'FAQ' even if it includes errata, as long as each item is tagged correctly.
     
    theradrussian and Armihaul like this.