On first read through the ITS 12 rules it appears that it is now possible to strip orders from single combat group lists. Is this correct? I've so far found nothing in relation to limited insertion at all.
so not only 17-19 orders player should go down to 15, but 10 orders players should also move up to 12-15. OTOH for 12 orders players in N2 who were encouraged to drop to 10 in N3, they can now bring back 12 order lists. As the 1 or 2 model support group won't remove the non-existant order stripping shield.
It does railroad limited insertion lists towards either not being limited insertion or focusing on adding bonus orders to lists, but on the other hand it was an older rule that was designed to protect 10-11 order lists from having orders removed. With examples of lists cramming 15+ orders they can run through TAGs/Core links now in single combat group lists it makes less sense for an Avatar with 14 orders to be claiming protection a 12 or 13 order two combat group list is denied from seeking.
Yup, but it also means that you can basically only do low-body count in factions with units supporting it, and there are factions with specific build archetypes that is playing on hard mode as a result
i am in agreeance with this. my fear with the LI lists was that certain lists could run 14+ orders with 10 models. and with the boon to heavy infantry and tags, is no longer such a weakness and can be quite oppressive. I would have preferred if they stated that you cannot reduce their order pool to below 10 total orders (regular + irregular).
I don't think I've actually seen any only ten order lists in N4. Even phalanx rolls in with an easy twelve in their heaviest lists, and while you could theoretically do a list built around Achilles that would be 10 regular + Lieutenant I'm not convinced we need an ITS rule just for that. What are the other potential use cases that nuLimited Insertion would enable? Military orders maybe, but they're getting a 2021 rework. Maybe a TAK pain train list or a few other similar things. Basically: I agree with your premise and would be happy to see it in ITS13, but for ITS12 there's a good case for having kept the extra rules as simple as possible while the meta is still establishing itself.
I've made myself several Morat and Tohaa 10-slot lists that I was quite happy with. Especially Morats with 2x Raicho and Tohaa around Gorgos. Generally, some armies it's hard to make lists around the expensive stuff and not make them LI.
TAGs have tactical awareness, so a 10-trooper list can still have more than 10 orders. Which means that even if you lose 2 orders from command tokens, you still have more than 8 to work with.
If you were happy with them, why do they need an ITS rule buffing them? Also I'm not sure we're all on the same page because those are 11- and 12-order lists with tactical awareness.
Because their saving grace, despite low troop count (the opponent's ability to focus fire on fewer targets, fewer effective Wounds on the table, fewer models to achieve mission objectives, etc.), I was at least safe from being robbed of 15-20% of the most important currency in the game, Orders. It's one thing to start with 10 slots and 12-14 orders and entirely another to do the same with 10-12. Not to mention lists that actually brought 10 Orders which are now utterly gimped into 8 Orders. If the anti CT strat rule was not only a reasonable but well accepted and unchallenged, necessary assistance for LI lists in ITS11 and prior, why it being missing now is somehow not seen as a problem? Do you mean that all this time LI protection was a mistake and shouldn't have been a thing? That those lists did not require that assistance after all? The lists we seem to be supposed to make gravitate away from extremes - no more than 15 slots, no real reason taking 10 slot lists anymore either. Seems like everyone will be playing 12-15 slots, at this point probably attempting to max out the aforementioned Most Important Currencty of the game, the Orders, at exactly 15 slots + special skills. And I, for one, find it to be an issue.
N4 is a big change and has restructured combat groups, so I'm ok with them removing this limit for this season. The gap between single group and multi group lists is likely the smallest it's ever been, and there are other options for the strategic command token spend that are competing with order stripping. If it's still a problem that greatly hampers single group lists, they can always bring the rule back in ITS 13.
The same "argument" has been given vs Tactical Window - if it's too bad, they can adjust it next season. Which means, we're stuck for a year with being forced into a narrow limit of slots per list and who knows what other problematic adjustments will show up next year instead.
Sure, that's valid. I haven't played enough games of N4 yet that I'm confident about what the impact of allowing order removal against single-group armies is; maybe you're ahead of me on that front. It seems less bad to me than it was in early N3, where you were also allowed to do this, but there weren't any ways to boost your order count above 10 in a group - neither tactical awareness nor NCO existed at that time.
So far I've seen lists of 10, 11, 12, 14 and 15 troopers, with 15 being (almost totally unsurprisingly) the most common. No 13-trooper lists yet, curiously. None of those felt like they were suboptimal in any way given the troopers in them. I think my favourite was the 11-trooper phalanx list, which had a full primary combat group led by Hector, with the secondary combat group containing a warcor along to report on their victories. It felt really solid and was highly effective, as well as being something we would never have seen if Limited Insertion was still a rule. In short, I don't feel like there needs to be an incentive specifically to build a 10-trooper list any more than I think there needs to be some specific incentive to build a 9-trooper list (which is prima facie nonsensical, right?). There's a very light argument for protecting the order pools of smaller-troop count lists that can't reach high order counts, but the game is literally only a couple of months old, so it's a loooong bow to draw to suggest it's a balance issue in need of attention. Edit: basically, the point I'm fumbling toward here is that incentives can be as significant a constraint on diversity as restrictions, and they need to be treated carefully. I'm glad Limited Insertion isn't present in ITS12 and I think it was the right call to exclude it for now.
This is what I'm running in RAL2 now. My other one is a dual-Raicho 10-list. RAL 02 ────────────────────────────────────────────────── GROUP 1 10 1 SURYAT (Lieutenant [+1 Order]) Heavy Machine Gun ( | TinBot: Firewall [-3]) / CC Weapon, MULTI Pistol. (1.5 | 45) YAOGAT MULTI Sniper Rifle(+1B) / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (1.5 | 35) YAOGAT Boarding Shotgun, Panzerfaust / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 27) ANYAT K1 Combi Rifle, Chain-colt, Smoke Grenades, E/M Grenades / CC Weapon, Heavy Pistol. (0 | 24) SURYAT (Tactical Awareness) Heavy Machine Gun ( | TinBot: Firewall [-3]) / CC Weapon, MULTI Pistol. (1.5 | 44) MORAT VANGUARD K1 Sniper Rifle / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (1 | 18) MORAT VANGUARD (Forward Observer) Combi Rifle, Flash Pulse / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 15) MORAT VANGUARD (Forward Observer) Combi Rifle, Flash Pulse / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 15) MORAT VANGUARD (Paramedic) Combi Rifle ( | MediKit) / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 16) ZERAT Boarding Shotgun, Shock Mines / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 24) GROUP 2 3 2 IKADRON (Baggage, Repeater) Light Flamethrower(+1B), Flash Pulse / Pistol, PARA CC Weapon(-3). (0 | 9) DĀTURAZI Chain Rifle(+1B), Grenades, Smoke Grenades / Heavy Pistol, DA CC Weapon. (0 | 14) DĀTURAZI Chain Rifle(+1B), Grenades, Smoke Grenades / Heavy Pistol, DA CC Weapon. (0 | 14) 5.5 SWC | 300 Points Open in Infinity Army
Wohoo! Complete set :) That's a cool list - K1 Sniper Vanguard is an unexpected choice although I suppose he's really not too expensive these days.
Cheers :D Thanks! 1 SWC and 3 pts above a basic mook, so yeah. And if the link is broken or I want to set it up stronger, Anyat can join it too. This is my 2x Raicho list. I specifically liked it for the effective 14 orders (NCO Raicho using the 2 LT Orders). With 12 on turn one... Eh, probably still playable, but not as great. 2 raicho ────────────────────────────────────────────────── 10 2 RAICHO (NCO) MULTI Heavy Machine Gun, Heavy Flamethrower / CC Weapon. (2 | 77) RAICHO PILOT Combi Rifle, D-Charges / Assault Pistol(+1B), CC Weapon. (0 | 0) RAICHO MULTI Heavy Machine Gun, Heavy Shotgun, Mine Dispenser / CC Weapon. (1.5 | 82) RAICHO PILOT Combi Rifle, D-Charges / Assault Pistol(+1B), CC Weapon. (0 | 0) SURYAT (Lieutenant [+1 Order]) Heavy Machine Gun ( | TinBot: Firewall [-3]) / CC Weapon, MULTI Pistol. (1.5 | 45) ANYAT K1 Combi Rifle, Chain-colt, Smoke Grenades, E/M Grenades / CC Weapon, Heavy Pistol. (0 | 24) MORAT VANGUARD K1 Sniper Rifle / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (1 | 18) MORAT VANGUARD Combi Rifle / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 14) MORAT VANGUARD (Forward Observer) Combi Rifle, Flash Pulse / Heavy Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 15) IKADRON (Baggage, Repeater) Light Flamethrower(+1B), Flash Pulse / Pistol, PARA CC Weapon(-3). (0 | 9) IKADRON (Baggage, Repeater) Light Flamethrower(+1B), Flash Pulse / Pistol, PARA CC Weapon(-3). (0 | 9) R-DRONE Flash Pulse / PARA CC Weapon(-3). (0 | 7) 6 SWC | 300 Points Open in Infinity Army