W8 a LOF graphs : first one shows no lof secound shows an existing one but : how this looks when in motion ? on picture A - lets say Blue one starts in total cover but in front arc - then declare move and ends where he is and declare shooting - this will count as no lof or as a lof as at the begining of an order he was in fron arc ? picture B - if he moves an 3 mm forward will he be in LOF or not ? - and declares shooting this 3 mm forward ? In case of first picture a blue unit must start his order movment beyond a green front arc - then get to corner get a peek a boo and shoot and not end at any point of movment in a front arc of green to fulfil the requirment ? (so only aro that can be done will be change facing ? ) - i just have a problem to visualize this as all things happends at same time and if any of thous units move accros the wall a 4 inches they all will be in front arch at one point 0-o' ... so this would mean an green one could just declare change facing in his Zoc and adjust an angle .... so only Stealth units can do this trick ?
@Razi bemused, rather than antagonistic. :-( Please bear in mind that LoF arcs being checked from the back of the base instead of the middle is something that I’d considered as a suggestion for the LoF errata, but already discarded because of the impracticalities (having actively played it in games). For U-shaped bases (or anything sitting under the base) there are the issues that other players have mentioned, but also any shape other than round causes problems as soon as you have a trooper that’s in a corner, or wants to face away from a wall at an angle etc. Plus the large base size issues with the Maghariba Guard (and lesser issues with 55mm bases) get made even worse, making it even harder to place them in smaller areas. In a worst-case scenario, a Maghariba Guard gets pushed out from scenery by more than half an inch.
Unless I'm totally misunderstanding what you dislike about the FAq or what you propose the "new" bases to be
Kudos for releasing FAQ. Stealth resolution is well... controversial... Bit sad that the question about attack label on smoke is not known, but apparently we will have to wait for it ;)
It's all about a single point in the movement. Where blue started doesn't matter, all that matters if there is a point in blue's movement where green can gain LOF and it's at this or these points that green can shoot (or Dodge or do any of the other LOF AROs)
On the upside the ITS season is more than half over and ITS 11 probably won't have xenotechs anymore.
First, one snicker. This FAQ is as many pages as the N1->N2 change document! Exactly. ============= Oooh, Kinematica increases Engage range!
For a tournament we're planning this summer we're gonna do a custom mission where your goal is to get your own xenotech killed.
Noooo! This doesn't faithfully represent my Rodoks' special training to shoot people in the butt from weird angles! /s
This is an excellent first cut on the new and improved FAQ process. A huge thanks to everyone involved.
In your diagram, thank you btw, there is no mutual LoF if we play it how I suggest. The active trooper gets a normal roll. Which is different than what CB is proposing because the terrain is blocking LoF. However, just tilt the angle a bit in your example and the target could have seen around that corner. This outcome makes sense from any angle I look at the situation. There is now no need for talking about LoF angle vs LoF in the rules or between players. There is only LoF. So the target has none because something is blocking their LoF or the enemy is behind their LoF. The active troopers visible position is entirely behind the target so thematically it works as a back attack and normal roll. This makes sense to me and also simplifies the rules. Sounds like a win win. As @maru is asking, Does the current interpretation of the rule mean the target below gets to fire back? If anyone can point me in the direction of a better web drawing program, please do =).
