1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Wildcards (not) replacing all Fireteam core Troopes

Discussion in '[Archived]: N3 Rules' started by Hachiman Taro, Jun 2, 2019.

  1. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    How would adding a Special Skill called Fireteam: Core achieve that?

    I'm not being sarcastic, I literally don't see how it would help when using Fireteams as they currently are.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  2. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,470
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Ok. Then if one requirement can be oversteped like that, another requirements could be too. Right? I know it doesn't work like that.

    No. Its not inherent, is a contradiction the moment there are two possible interpretations of that "any", but one oversteps one rule, and the other doesn't. There are a lot of ways of implementing what you mean, come simpier, some more complex. I just wanted to state that the rule we are talking about is not well explained and bring holes.

    Sorry mate, but this logic you are applying is not making sense to me. Even if there is an example, that would not be the first bad example that doesn't abide by the rules. The thing you are saying is that wildcards can ignore requirements for team composition when there is no rule for that, even when that overstepping in another rule requirement should be stated completely in the wildcard rule (because otherwise, you should try to use both rules at the same time, which is possible).

    Maybe I am wrong and my english is lacking to fully understand your point, is possibe. But maybe I am understanding it completely and there is a hole in the rule as is written and needs an extra check
     
  3. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    428
    I agree, it wouldn't help currently. The rules would have to change one way or the other to accommodate a single method.

    I'm merely pointing out that the current system uses two different methods when it should be using one. Which one it should be and how exactly it should work requires planning and thought.
     
    Ogid likes this.
  4. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    I think we're still talking 'past' each other. Having a Wildcard be part of a Fireteam requires them to replace a listed member of the Fireteam, because even a non-special Fireteam still lists members from the same unit. That doesn't let you ignore other Requirements to form a Fireteam, such as including a trooper with Haris or Duo.

    I don't think a single method would be possible, without changing Fireteam composition beyond all recognition, because the various Fireteams simply don't work that way. All Fireteams using both methods would be another matter.


    As a general note, not to any poster in particular - when I says this added rule works, don't confuse this for me being happy with the Fireteam composition rules. I'm not, which is the reason why I wrote the stickied summary thread and the list of Fireteams on the wiki.
     
  5. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,470
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Yes, but not all members of all fireteams are mandatory. You can see there are some like "until 2 of X" and others with "2 of X". In the first type, I see no problem with the rule, but in the second one, if the wildcard is not of X or counts as, I can not see how can be substitute one of them, because doing so, is ignoring a requirement por that fireteam
     
    Ginrei likes this.
  6. CabalTrainee

    CabalTrainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    740
    The new 40k GW erratas are actually really good. People should look at those if only for inspiration. They are full of explanations why stuff changes and what the reasoning behind the change is. They even regularly admit changing stuff into the wrong direction like
    "We changed x which after looking at your feedback broke the army z. So now we are looking at it again to work as intended. So we change it to y."

    This makes discussions about rule changes actually very structured because you know the intent and can easily argue for/against them.
     
    toadchild, Section9, Berjiz and 2 others like this.
  7. Space Ranger

    Space Ranger Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    5,931
    Likes Received:
    5,079
    The goal is to make it less confusing for the player. So that would be the point of making it a Skill. It's confusing when you have some things a skill and others not but they still act like one.
     
    Section9, Ginrei and Ogid like this.
  8. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    755
    100% agree, what I feel Infinity rules lacks the most is context. After reading all the rules and playing a few times you start to understand the sense of this and that rule. Some extra verbose (not in the main rules, but as an extra) would also help to identify the RAI in cases where the wording isn't clear.

    The fireteam:Core not being an ability is not that important, but I understand the @Ginrei point about coherency.

    This one doesn't seem so confusing. Wildcards is saying that they can take the place of any trooper and in the own wildcard rule it states that the Haris/duo skill still needs to be present. In the fireteam:core rules is it stated that you need at least 1 original/count as.
    This rule seem well structured now.

    It's true that a special haris needs X+Y+Z but the same could be said for a normal Haris of W+W+W/W+W, why could you change a W for A but not Y for A? In both cases you are introducing an "ilegal"* model in that Haris

    *Ilegal not counting the wildcard rule
     
  9. Ginrei

    Ginrei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    428
    I think the implication is that the way a Fireteam's composition is written changes the requirements to create them.

    Fireteam -> Minimum Requirements:
    • Trooper X + Trooper Y + Trooper Z = 1(Trooper X) + 1(Trooper Y) + 1(Trooper Z)
    • 2(Trooper X) + Trooper Y ========= 2(Trooper X) + 1(Trooper Y)
    • 1-2(Trooper X) + Trooper Y ======= 1(Trooper X) + 1(Trooper Y)
    • Up to 2(Trooper X) + Trooper Y ==== 0-1?(Trooper X) + 1(Trooper Y) I'm not sure how CB treats this one.
    'Counts as' is applied consistently and can replace any or all relevant troopers listed in the requirements above.

    'Wildcard's part of or join' is being treated inconsistently. In a Fireteam: Core, they're allowed to replace all but one of the troopers listed. But in a Haris they can replace all the troopers listed. With the added requirement someone must have the Haris Special Skill.

    I know this discrepancy falls under the restriction @ijw mentions, but the game can do without these arbitrary exceptions.
     
  10. Cartographer

    Cartographer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    738
    Likes Received:
    1,216
    His point is that Fireteam: Haris and Fireteam: Duo have required troopers (the ones with the skill) and you cannot substitute those troopers using a wildcard*1.

    If a specific trooper is required for one fireteam, and cannot be substituted, why then, if a specific trooper is required for another fireteam, such as in a "special" Fireteam: Core with 5 specific members (e.g. Crusade), can any of those required troopers be substituted for a wildcard?

    Right now it's "because the example says so", which is pretty much a given for a couple of rules in infinity.

    *1 unless the wildcard also has that skill, but not all wildcards are equal.
     
  11. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,470
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    And where is that explanation? Because all I can find is that 'wildcard can be part of any fireteam', no more explanation, and the extra in the wiki only applies to core fireteams
     
  12. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    755
    Let me try to explain it better:

    You have 2 requisites for Haris: 1 is including a Fireteam:Haris ability and the second is including legal troopers for that fireteam.
    • A standard Haris must include the 2-3 from the same unit
    • A special Haris must include the listed units
    Then, you have the Wilcard rule saying: you can include this unit instead of one of the "must" but remember to also include the Fireteam:Haris skill.

    So this rule is well structured to me, you have the Haris rule stating how it works and the wildcard saying what you can sustitute (basically anything but the Fireteam:Haris unless he brings the ability)
     
  13. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    755
  14. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    I see the distinction you're making, but going by the Fireteam Requirements it's not one that exists. Fireteams either consist of members from the same unit, or as listed in their Sectorial chart. There is no functional difference between "until 2 of X" and "2 of X" in terms of those specific units being mandatory.


    Again I can see that, but I think most of that confusion coms from Army showing a non-existent Skill, instead of having a proper 'Fireteams you can make with this unit' layout.

    My view is that you're looking at it slightly back-to-front. Think of it in terms of what's required, instead of what can be replaced:

    For a Core, you need a member from the listed units for that Core.
    For a Haris or a Duo, you need a member with Haris or Duo.

    Wildcard is then being treated consistently.
     
    inane.imp and A Mão Esquerda like this.
  15. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    755
    Ah ok, I see it now. I read that rules summary but I didn't notice that wasn't structured like that in the wiki.

    Well, this seems like an official rulling, but it's true that this needs to be also in the wiki as clear as in that post.
     
  16. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    @Ogid which post are you replying to?
     
  17. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    755
    I was replying to @Armihaul but you ninjed me XD.

    I read your rules summary in the sticked thread with the clarification under the Wildcard rule and didn't notice that wasn't in the wiki exactly like that. It's kind of clear that you need the ability to form a legal Haris; but at the same time I can understand some players can't see that so clear.
    Sometimes an extra line stablishing the rules priority or making a friendly reminder even when not 100% necessary doesn't hurt and can help a lot.
     
  18. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,470
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Ok. All those rules I was missing are in the forum, not in the wiki or the official documents. Now is clear, thanks
     
    Ogid likes this.
  19. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    7,205
    Likes Received:
    6,535
    That isn't true, though.
     
  20. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Always follow the footnote...
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  • About Us

    We are a company founded in 2001 in Cangas (Spain), and devoted to design and manufacture games and figures. Our main product, Infinity the Game, was born with the ambition to satisfy the most demanding audience, offering the best quality.

     

    Why are we here?

     

    Because we are, first and foremost, players.

  • Quick Navigation

    Open the Quick Navigation