Its there to deal with perspective, IE if one troop is looking through a window less than 3x3 large at a miniature out in the open. The mini at the window can see 3x3 of the troop out in the open but the troop in the open cannot see 3x3 of the guy on the other side of the window. Mutual awareness however kicks in and they can see each other.
Mutual awareness still applies. If you're prone on a roof even slightly off the edge you're actually not showing a 3mm square to anyone that's below your elevation. I'd say mutual awareness applies or you get into situations where you can sit slightly back from the edge of a roof and shoot everyone below and they are unable to respond. You don't need to have 3mmx3mm square showing from your silh, only be able to see that amount on your target in order to shoot. I'm not advocating for that but this is why we need it. I am also not a fan of rear arcing though feel the if it's CB's intention to only cover one side of a building if you're flush against it to state it rather than give an example where we need to extrapolate it. I for one see the FAQ diagram showing strange positioning. I think CB should consider the implications of this on dense tables. This ruling creates another reason for body/order spam. Is it that terrible to allow a figure to cover both approaches? It does make low order lists more viable as you're not as easily flanked. Your opponent still has an advantage being their active turn but atleast you're not forced into normal rolls due to numbers and terrain density.
Is there actually anyone who thinks facewalling double corner watching is worse for the game than death-from-behind-from-in-front-from-above?
no mate, you fundamentally mis-understand the point of MA. Its not there for LOF from your back, absolutely not, and that couldnt be clearer.
I think he was agreeing with you, but giving a different example of why it's needed. If you are on a roof, it should be possible to show less than 3mm x 3mm to anything below while drawing LoF for more than 3mm x 3mm to a target as long as it's sufficiently far away. MA means that the target gets to react instead of just sitting there (granted, you have to ignore the entire death-from-above conversation we are currently having...)
ah right, I misread it, I thought he was talking about it from a perspective we have discussed before. My mistake
You can't watch both corners. And the above thing... Do you really move millimeter by millimeter to get in those positions? Seriously, I really wonder how people play this game. In over a dozen of tournaments I never had such a situation. I think some people use such corner cases just to create odd situations to their advantage. Enjoy the game more... And stop blaming CB. They care very much about the game and its community.
I agree. But there are people who are obsessed with them being able to have perfect positioning. So they will demand you accept that they tell you what happens, or else they threaten to move their models mm by mm asking "can you see me now?" They should give up both approaches, I agree.
If you’re further away from the wall the difference in position from seeing the back of the base and the enemy getting LoF is over a Cm. No ones trying to get an unfair advantage (as both players can do it) just understanding the rules CB have written
I guess the issue is measurement and how easy it is to measure. Can you measure 1mm, 3mm, 5? That’s the whole issue with slicing the pie, it’s ambiguous. Players kindof have to decide what’s possible or not
(Post is ignoring the vertical concept, pretty sure everyone agrees it's a bad thing and so skipping it entirely) If people don't think it can be done because getting the correct LOF only exists via intent and not actually a placement that can be easily gotten to, then why should a rule that never comes up even exist. We argue and fight for a rule that no one actually wishes to use as it only exists in math and NPEs that social convention stops us from doing. If it is a place that can and should be moved to with intent and/or physical placement then corvus both succeeded at its goal and I'm sadder by it but will use it as the next man. Im just not confident that people playing the game want this to become standard place. My biggest concern is not for the idiot staring at a wall but at a guy standing next to ramparts. There will be angles from the far lefts and rights that can get the back first and so an aro model who has cover but isnt staring at a wall and can still get shot without an aro option.
Yes. Infinity, as defined by the makers of the game, "recreates Direct Action operations, which are quick, lethal, and very risky. Missions are executed in the midst of a combat zone or behind enemy lines, but always in critical areas where the level of risk is the highest." It is not a game of meaningful AROs, always getting to have your way, or feelings. What is it you don't want people to accept about the rules?
Most of the laser pointers that I’ve seen are a pretty good approximation of “a part of the volume of its target with the size of the target's head, or a minimum size of approximately 3x3mm (the size of the black squares on the Silhouette Templates).” Because that’s about how big the dot needs to be to see it. As an aside, this still isn’t as bad as the 2nd edition flame wars about models gaining/losing reciprocal line of fire because of moving. @.@;
I believe it is in the Human Sphere N3 book, in an appendix titled, "So Your Opponent Is A Snowflake." It goes on to discuss safe spaces, something about buying your opponent a few Infinity licensed coloring books -- which we have yet to see, BTW-- a box of crayons from Vallejo -- more vaporware -- and of course, a nice sippy cup with the big orange N logo on it. With that out of my system... This is a 3-d game. CB would do us all a favor by producing 3-d diagrams to illustrate the example they give in the ruleset. The LoF is a 180° arc in vertical and horizontal dimensions and so I would like to see it shown as a hemisphere in all of these illustrations. A few photos of minis positioned appropriately and the LoF hemisphere superposed would help a lot more than the abstract 2-d examples. It would unambiguously show that what the OP asks is possible. Bostria likes taking photos of the minis. Assign him the task. My opinion is that positioning your mini to use intervening cover/terrain to block LoF from the target, both horizontally and vertically, is a fine tactic, a smart thing to do, really; figuring out how to avoid taking an ARO is a good thing. I am not troubled by it at all. It is something that does happen IRL. I did it to opponents when I was playing paintball. And I've been on the receiving end of it too. For those seeking verisimilitude, do remember that humans, and presumably anthropomorphic aliens, do not have actual 180° fields of vision. They do have 120° visual fields in the horizontal and 150° visual fields in the vertical. ( 70° up and 80° down.)
While I don't disagree with the general premise, it seems that guarding against this tactic is considerably harder in the vertical space compared to the horizontal space. To put it another way, it is trivially easy to do this against someone if you have superjump and there is very little your opponent can do to counter it. You simply can't face your troop so that it is looking up. Contrast that to the strictly horizontal space where you can't cover more than one corner at a time if you are against a wall, but you certainly can cover both corners if you are far back enough, or have one troop per corner, or can actively choose to guard one corner or the other, or... Note: I am simply saying that "death-from-above" may be an unintended consequence. If CB decides it is intended, I suppose I can accept that tactics are going to have to drastically change and vertical superiority can single-handedly win games. As usual, you can engineer a fluff reason for just about anything (I don't know how many times I've hit my head on a tree branch as I'm doing yard work in a wide-brimmed hat).
I mean, there's no need to be rude about it. One of the hallmarks of Infinity is its interactivity, and it's not unreasonable for someone to feel like something untoward is going on if their opponent is suddenly playing in such a way as to prevent them from ever making meaningful AROs.
