I understand the logic of the scanning, but how does he shoot without changing facing? It's kind of possible one way (the side where the gun points, you could shoot behind you) and completely impossible the other way. Now, I understand it's a mini game, so there's a good level of abstraction, but isn't that what the arc of fire is for? Shooting beyond it feels wrong...
But you are not shooting "behind you": the base of the model represents the space that the model can occupy during the game, and the trooper is not static in the exact same pose as represented by the miniature you play with. This picture is a great example of what "shooting behind you" looks like in action: the trooper suddenly realized that someone has appeared just in the limit of her vision and turns and shoots while taking a step back.
Oh I understand minis are only an abstract representation. My point was that I thought that was what the arc of fire was for: to represent the full range of what a mini can see and shoot at. To put it another way: something moves behind me within my 8" and so according to the rules, I can "sense" it, and I could change facing; applying the same principles you outline, why shouldn't I be able to ARO BS it right away, taking a step back and shooting over my shoulder? I'm fine with applying the rules as they stand, they're not particularly difficult, but I maintain it's bloody counter-intuitive.
The previous ruling was arguably even less intuitive, as you could shoot someone in the back, from in front of them.
Not sure who handles the website but the Faqs button on the left of the downloads section gives me an out of date faq. Maybe worth removing this if the faq lives in the rules subheader too.
Either ruling has situations where it's counter-intuitive, but this one ended up being less damaging to play overall. For the record (and to illustrate for @Alfy), the way this works is that if you are approaching from an elevated position, you can see the rear of the enemy silhouette before you see the front. Therefore you can be directly in front of them, but LoF only exists between the upper edge of your silhouette and the top/back area of theirs. Since the point is on the back half, they don't get LoF, and you can shoot them without triggering an ARO.
I’ve been thinking hard about this for 15 minutes, going back to the rules, I still don’t get it. The rules say you can draw the line from any point in the troop’s volume to any point to the target’s volume, so it can start from the back. As far as I can read, it does not matter where in the volume you start, even the small tip of the back of the base, you have LoF if the line goes unobstructed through the front arc (which by the way is turned upside down in the FAQ’s ruling, now your vision can be obstructed AND you can shoot outside your front arc, obliterating both requirements). I know I must be missing something, but what?
I assume you’re asking about the original rules, not the updated version. There was some contention about how to read this, but what you’re skipping is the line above the bullet points: In Infinity, troops have a LoF angle of 180˚, that is, they can see with the front half of their base. Players should clearly mark the limits of that arc on their troops' bases. This is saying that the origin point of your LoF has to be in the front half of your base. This was made explicit in a previous FAQ https://assets.infinitythegame.net/downloads/faqs/en/v1.5/faqs.pdf As we can see on the graphic, the Fusilier can draw a LoF from any point of his volume to any visible point of the volume of the Reverend. The Fusilier is within the 180o front half of the Reverend, but she can’t draw a LoF from her 180o front half, because the scenery block the line, so she can’t shoot.
Ah, ok, I get it now, sorry for that. But why make it so complicated instead of properly defining the front arc as the front half of the base raised to infinite height? Then it’s just: “LoF must go from any point in the troops’ volume, unobstructed, to any point in the target’s volume, crossing the front arc”? One sentence, and no looking through walls. Thanks for the patience to explain all that to me. But I admit I’m still flabbergasted at both the issues raised and the final solution.
If you look through old threads you can find a lot of suggestions. I’m the end there are a bunch of different things that could have worked.
Because this way simplifies a lot the defense... If you are willing to leave a basic trooper hugging the wall and looking at it (for example in the center of the long side of a container), he can ARO any enemy coming from his 180º once said enemy leaves Total Cover, regardless of where he is coming through (left, right or up; sure, the enemy gets cover and your guy does not), while before this lates FAQ he would be a sitting duck able only to Change Facing against enemies coming from any of those vectors (because the enemy can stop their movement with some part of their Silhouette looking at the target part that is not his 180º frontal arc).
I had to make a doodle to figure it out (man it's hard to speak about angles without drawings!), but I see what you're saying now. Well yeah, if people want to cover both corners of a wall with a guy standing nose against it, there's not going to be a "logical" solution. I take it gameplay took precedence. Again, sorry if I sounded argumentative. I didn't expect to have problems getting facing and LoF in this game, but I guess there's a long body of arguments I need to get used to.
Love, hate and everything inbetween... The community devoted months to the "I shoot you from your face but it's you back" thread. It's like "playing by intent", all hell breaks loose when that gets talked about XD
I've just taken some time since my last post to read a bit more on the subject, and I am now aware of the wonderful concept of "pie slicing". The things one can't unsee... I can see how the current solution just makes it easier for everyone, however much some examples might look wrong.
