A seed soldier with ltd camo. Chooses to hatch at the start of a turn. Hatch requires no roll, is a short movement skill and you have not met any cancellation clause for ltd camo state. If you hatch do you retain camo on a seed until you break it or not? Reason for not getting camo: Developed form doesn't have the ltd camo skill Reason for keeping camo: you have done nothing to cancel the state so remain until it's cancelled.
Limited camuflage doesn't have any clause like the CH2 anc CH3 ones saying that is the ability allow the model to be in the state, and hatch wouldn't break the state so from a RAW pow he could keep it. However I don't play Shavs, so I'm not 100% sure about this one.
Interesting question. We know that a Draal doesn't lose an active stratuscloud when it loses its symbiont armour, so losing equipment at least is not grounds for cancellation. Seems no reason why skills shouldn't work consistently.
Depends on if you need a skill to upkeep the state provided by the skill or not. While the hatch doesn't break camo, the lack of camo of any level on the developed shape would seem to imply the intention was for the develooed shape to not have camo. Not that I really think seed soldiers with camo after hatching is a problem but still.
Reason for not getting camo: Seed-embryo cancellation rules incompatible with remaining in a marker state. http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Seed-Embryo_(State) Whenever the Seed-Embryo state is cancelled, replace the Seed-Embryo Marker with the trooper's model, facing whatever direction the owning player chooses.
That's a good point but I don't think it proves the state is canceled at 100%. That's from the rules of seed-embryo state, which only consider that state (and there is no info about interactions with the camuflage state). Following that RAW, you'd put the model, but you wouldn't cancel the camo state, so you have a camouflaged model in the table (and the game explode)
Well, the use of "model" is pretty telling - not a marker, but a model. And since the seed soldier does not have Ltd. Camo, or any rule allowing it to be deployed as a marker when Seed Embryo is cancelled I think it's fairly certain that a seed soldier cannot use Ltd. Camo and it is just there to protect the egg.
This is... not a great take. As Kraken1130 says, a trooper in Camouflaged state is explicitly a marker, and is not represented by a model. You can't have a 'camouflaged model' on the table. While Camouflaged, troopers are not represented by a model on the table but by a Camouflage Marker (CAMO).
My point is these rules are not considering the user might be in a CAMO state, the interaction with the CAMO state rules aren't defined and it's not clear wheter the limited camo ability is necessary or not. It could be both. XDD. It's indeed an horrible take. I was using reduction to absurdity to show what happens if you try to apply that rule as it is ignoring the CAMO state.
So to confim. Seeds don't get to keep camo until they break it when they hatch? I'm unsuprised, as seeds are awful. But it's good to know. If that is the case.
Yeah, camo is cancelled on hatching. But if you do it in active turn you do at least retain the surprise shot modifier if you attack as the second skill (same goes for decoy).
I would argue that the lack of a CH skill on the developed profile is all you need. All CH skills that give marker states explicitly call out the trooper being able to be in that state (in addition to how one might get there). Since the developed profile has no skills that allow it to be in the CAMO state, it simply isn't.
Really? I think Seed Soldiers and Cadmuses both have pretty attractive price points, and I think they're currently the only troops with the seed-embryo rule.
Cadmus is good because of its Interaction with decoy. Which I will absolutely agree is a unit that is worth its cost. However: (and I'll preface this by saying yes I know cross comparisons aren't super helpful but it's just a rough guide, I'm also saying units don't have to be the same in How they are good but they should still be good) Foxtrot fo 18pts Seed soldier to 17pts Seed loses: camo (picks up much cheaper ltd camo) Infiltration (picks up cheaper fd2) Antipersonnel mines (picks up chest mines,I'm not sure if the seed skill is considered a discount on costing or it costs points but it absolutely should be a discount) Seed gets: shas rule (can be useful but hardly as useful as being able to respond without first hatching) Combi over a rifle (a one point cost and marginally better) Dep (useful but way less useful when you have to had hatched before using it) and at that stage you are out of marker and b1 Point being the foxtrot is in nearly every situation better than a seed. Like I said, I don't expect units to be the same in how they are good. It's just mind boggling that this is the restrictive nature they put on seeds. Considering every time they buff an awful rule they tend to be quite significant buffs (posthumans) seed change seems quite restrained. Seeds will still see use. But man they are not a good unit. (And those units can still see play because they are needed, regardless of them not being optimised)
Heh, I think most skirmishers come out looking bad compared to Ariadna’s. In the broader context of the fact that CA has generally expensive troops, I still think they’re pretty decent.
Compare with a Zanshi instead. ARM -> BTS for 0 points, +DEP. Seed shape is 4 points which comes with increased first-round survivability that's way better than shooting back and FD2 (which isn't actually all that expensive, but it's nice to have). I've face Shas players use them as essentially two-shot mines with FD2 giving freedom to deploy at choke points. and then just let them generate orders and confusion and do nothing else with them.
Yeah, my experiences with and opinions of Seed Soldiers are substantially different. Bear in mind that a Combi Rifle is three points more expensive than a Rifle, that you get a Direct Template Weapon without needing to pay for Minelayer and that seeds have +2 ARM and +3 BTS compared to a Foxtrot.
I don't understand how you all are so sure that CAMO is canceled. There isn't a single cancelation clause triggered, nor is said anywhere the camo state is canceled. For me this is something that would need a clarification.
