DUring a tournament today, our TO ruled that some premesuring was allowed during deployement. For example : - my opponent was allowed to mesure the distance between his lamed and his netrod to be sure both could not be hit with a boarding shotgun I remembered pre-mesuring during deploymenent was allowed only to check legality of the deployment (chezcking mine are in ZOC of the minelayer, that ghost-synchro are in range of their owner, checking the limit of the ZD) but nothing else Can someone tell me what the RAW/FAQ say ?
You’re correct. He can’t do that. The only things you’re allowed to measure during deployment are: 1. DZs 2. Table halfs 3. Zones for AD 4. Coherency So, what he can do is deploy anything that requires coherency in exactly the same 2 positions and check coherency. But that’s kinda a dick move.
Can you tell me how you argue that based on RAW/FAQ ? I tried to find RAW to support that but couldn't
Infinity is a permissive ruleset: if it’s not covered by the rules you can’t do it. Those are the only times pre-measuring during deployment are covered by the rules. Measuring to check weapon ranges/template effects between two points on the table certainly is not. They won’t be able to find something that says ‘you can do this’, ergo they can’t.
Huh. Somehow I've missed some of those permissions. Hopefully that means I won't be failing Impersonation rolls that are supposed to be 100% success chance* again. * - what actually happened is that I accidentally waded into enemy DZ which I had no intention to do, so I decided I had to roll. And then failed that one.
By the way, where is it writen that you can mesure the deployement zone ? I looked but couldn't find it
During your deployment phase you could deploy any miniature and than remove it if you don't like the final position. So you can use 2 miniatures with S1 or S2 for measuring distances in your deployment, because their bases are 1" in diameter. I don't think, that measuring distances in your own deployment is something illegal. It's just wastes more time without ruler.
You have to be able to measure the deployment zone or else you don't know where you can place your troops. http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Initiative_and_Deployment Deployment Rules To deploy your troops on the table, follow these rules: The base of each troop must be entirely within the Deployment Zone.
1. Using the seqential placing of a S2 model to 'measure' distance is legal. 2. Measuring coherency between two models who have a coherency requirement is legal. 3. Measuring the distance between two models who don't have a coherency requirement is not. The moral position that 'I'm ok with measuring during deployment because all it does is save time' is a YMMV thing. This is not a rules question: it's a question of whether you consider using 1 and 2 to achieve 3 to be a good sportsmanship or not. If you're ok with using 1 and 2 to achieve 3, then practically you should just allow 3 as it speeds up gameplay and doesn't allow anything that wasn't already technically feasible. In my meta I expect that we would not be ok with that; but if I was playing in a meta where that was the norm I'd probably just shrug and accept it.
I've long been interested in etiquettes that practice fairness - demonstrating a player's fair play without being asked. I look for practices that can be used unilaterally - without needing the other player's co-operation; and that help keep the practitioner themselves fair. After being horribly cheated in an ITS a few months ago, I talked it through with some of the other competitors and we came up with the following etiquette for deployment: Having deployed the last unit, a player can display a tape measure against each of their most forward-lying troops in turn, inviting their opponent to check with them that the Deployment Zone (DZ) depth has been respected, including Forward Deployment (up to an extra 4"/10cm forward of the usual DZ). The opponent needn't pay much attention unless something looks awry, and there's for the practitioner that is that if they have mistakenly deployed a unit too far forward - which can be an honest mistake that's too easily made, then they themselves can apologize and demonstratively correct it before the game gets under way. It's a small thing, but it works pretty well, and the question of whether or not anyone was actually cheating - which I think can be terribly corrosive to a group need never arise at all, because the error - intentional or not can be corrected before it actually matters.
Why did you go for this instead of the standard technique of marking the edge of the DZ before deployment?
meh, we play on game mats regularly and people who play on the same game mat or the same terrain features are going to know those distances or measured them at some point. To disallow my opponent from doing some quick measuring within their table half, provided it doesn't take excessive amounts of time, seems pedantic to me. In an ideal world I would agree that you shouldn't do any measurements, but in a perfect world we wouldn't play on mats with recognisable features which the dimensions might be known. While I was learning kuang shi, I regularly measured what 4" would look like for that impetuous move. I don't need to anymore, particularly on mats I'm familiar with. If I was playing someone new and they wanted to do that I wouldn't care. Its literally 1 move of information, and would be trivially easy to ascertain while "measuring their deployment zone" so why stress about it? I guess the purists might argue I should do it on my own time, outside of games, but it takes like 2 seconds...
Not to mention that if you use MicroArt Studio's Terminus Segments Modular Map mats you can provide handy built-in pre-measurements and (those who fondly imagine me too draconian about rules kindly take note) we love it! Spoiler: Modular Map in use This is our current #1 Table, set up for casual games of 20x20 Investigate Alien Artifact (the 'artifact' is in the middle there) with 'canals' (Difficult Terrain) running through the map.
Well, indeed. After the event we were asking how the hell I'd managed to let a guy with a frankly well-deserved reputation for cheating in other tabletop games put a Tohaa sniper an entire base-width forward of the DZ - in cover and in a Foxhole in the first place! You'd think at least some alarm bells would be ringing in my head, wouldn't you? But that's always the way with being the victim of a confidence trick; the con-man's skill - by definition is to get your confidence! So the question that's coming up here is really "How do you guard against the 1% of smooth and practiced con-men without also ruining the 99% of the games you'll play against entirely fair players?" I don't want to add more rules to spoil relaxed and enjoyable games against my friends. I seem to remember a friend unintentionally doing something like this that also completely changed that game, but we didn't care, and had a good laugh about it! I think I'm about developing Practices Of Fairness™ that keeps things relaxed and casual, helps catch genuine errors that might spoil a game, and that will catch deliberate bullshit on the rare occasions when it's being perpetrated - it's a properly non-trivial question.
You could be hit in a face and be banned to play in few cities in some communities))) Fights because of toy soldiers are not so uncommon thing)))
You simply ask your opponent to check the farthest model deployed in DZ as soon as he ended his deployment. We do this all the time. If that one is ok, all the rest is ok. Otherwise, you ask him to fix the position, any other wannaberunner will go back at the same time. And be prepared to do the same even if not asked. This is where sportsmanship meets reason.
That sounds like a simple and effortless approach for a familiar group, and it sounds like you have a great group; but it does seem rather peremptory for unfamiliar opponents. How has it been received by people you didn't know, at away matches or suchlike? I think managing the deployment situation in Infinity is a little like managing identification marks for golf balls in golf (which most excellent game-within-a-sport has the best-developed rules and etiquette of any I know) but where the relevant rules are only these: Rule 6-5 “The responsibility for playing the correct ball rests with the player." and Rule 12-2" Each player should put an identification mark on his ball.” That is to say that both accuracy in Infinity deployment and identifying marks on golf balls are things we're properly supposed to do for ourselves, and that there isn't any rule or formal etiquette about how to manage either of them. In the golf situation, a similarly unilateral approach to my deployment practice would be to unilaterally put a mark on my ball with a Sharpie at the first tee, then show it one or other of my playing partners and offer them the pen if they need it themselves. (In fact, I used to mark by golf balls by the box using a Cunning Device that was supposed to help me roll it into the hole more better (yeah right). But I used to pretend to mark them on the day to help the others out.
