Command Lances are defined in ASC on page 153. My question is related to a conflict between the following passages:
In this formation, 50 percent of the units must have one
of the following unit roles: Sniper, Missile Boat, Skirmisher or
Juggernaut. One additional unit in the lance must be a Brawler,
Striker or Scout.
None; as long as the lance’s composite units are
of at least 3 different unit roles, the formation may be classified
as a Command Lance.
So, if a lance consists of a sniper, missile boat, skirmisher, and juggernaut (all roles from the first array to be satisfied, and nothing from the second) it either may or may not qualify as a command lance depending on how you read the interaction between the two rules.
I presume the way it works is that everything after the semicolon in "ideal role" is extraneous (and unfortunately contradictory) explanation. That is, the requirements rule is exactly correct and the ideal role rules mean to say there simply is no ideal role.
But I recognize that the ideal role rule could instead be saying "everything" is an ideal role
so long as there are at minimum three different types present; therefore any three different roles qualify for a command lance under virtue of the ideal role rule on ASC page 149-150.
Can you clarify which is the more correct reading?
