How would you resolve this? I have a KHD in a HD state. 1. My opponent activates a Camo Marker (the content of which I don't know) and moves it (without Stealth) into ZOC of one of my Repeaters but NOT in ZOC of the HD KHD. 2. ??????? 3. My opponent reveals as a AHD and declares their second short skill. 4. ??????? Technically, I got an ARO at step 2. but did not become aware of this fact until 4. Do I lose my ARO at 2, or can I declare an ARO at 4?
You do not get an ARO in step 2, because the Camo Marker employs stealth while moving with the first short skill. By revealing Stealth is cancelled and you get your ARO If your Gamepartner declares not using stealth during his ARO you could delay because of the movement through Repeater (I think).
A normal KHD does not have any ARO Hacking Programs that work against Camo Markers (which I think means "it does not have White Noise"), so you do not get an ARO during Step 2.
This is the interaction that I'm trying to get at. But yes, at step 2 no AROs were valid so there is no ARO. Delay only comes in if you had a valid ARO. I was making it overly complicated: cheers.
You *could* declare delay.... but you're not obliged to. I'm not even certain that it's an option....
I disagree, delay isn't a skill declaration. You need an ARO to delay in order to be able to delay your ARO. Since during Step 2 you have no ARO, you also can't delay it.
Hackable is Open Information only if the troop is using a Holoprojector, if the marker moves and you have a let's say Securitate hacker in ZoC you still would not know if it's or not a hackable troop. Also, declaring a short movement order (like Move without using Stealth, which is optional) does not break Camo, per the Camouflaged state In that regard, it does not matter if the camo uses or not Stealth. He would need to get out of Camo state (for example, by discovering something like a mine) thus forcing you to ARO with the hacker. He has noted that the camo does not use Stealth (optional skill). Not using Stealth while moving does not reveal the camo, aswell, since he has made a short movement order that does not require a roll (Move). The point, however, is that a) you don't know if the marker is hackable or not, thus not getting an ARO, and b) even if you did, it is a marker and you can declare Delay in Step 2, because of the allowed AROs against markers are Discover, Dodge and Change facing, and you can always Delay your ARO against a marker. I think your opponent means that you needed to have "shown up" your Hidden Deployment troop to declare ARO with it, however you are forced to do so as soon as you get an ARO option... the problem is that Hackable is Private Information unless the marker is a Holoecho, so you cannot place the TO marker and say "this marker delays ARO" until the enemy marker reveals itself.
You don't have an ARO against the camo marker through the repeater, with the assumption there was no LOF at any point. So you actually haven't received an ARO until step 4. Even if you're aware the camo marker is a hacker of some type (it de camo'd then re camo'd during the game) it doesn't change the part where you can't attempt to hack a camo marker. "Enemies cannot declare Attacks against a trooper in the Camouflaged state without previously Discovering that trooper, or declaring Intuitive Attack."
Wrong argument here, the camo marker doesn't use stealth (as written in the initial post and others) so it could generate an ARO while in hacking area. The question, as told by Xagroth, is "do you know if the camo marker is hackable or not". Two options there : - You think camo masks the hackable caracteristic. Then you don't have any ARO in step 2. - You think camo doesn't mask the hackable caracteristic. Then, when entering the repeater zone, the camo player should inform his opponent of his camo marker's hackable caracteristic, which generate an ARO to all hacker of the reactive player. As Dodge, Change Facing and Discover are not possible as you don't fulfill their requirement, only delay is possible.
not only if he's hackable or not, but also what exactly he is, because what he is determine which program works, and if no program works then that means the hacker has no ARO. HD+ can always whitenoise (delay until he's revealed and then whitenoise, same as when you have a combi that works against any type of model), but KHD cannot do anything to a non-hacker HI while other HDs can delay their aro against a HI in order to use a program if revealed. I don't think the camo player has to say if the model is specifically a hacker, a HI/REM/TAG, an owner of Comm equipment that could be blacked-out, or none of the above. Therefore, the reactive player have no reason to believe he can hack (or delay his hacking ARO), has no opportunity to ARO at step 2 (as hack is not an option), and can later declare a hack ARO at step 4 if the model is revealed as he had no opportunity to do it earlier.
A bit out of topic here: Can a camo not use stealth? Isn't it an automatic skill for 'em? What could be the point of not using it?
Automatic and optional. Stealth is a decent tool for avoiding hacking and a few other inconveniences, but it's usually better to not use it in order to provoke bad AROs or to fish for HD (they have to leave HD in order to Delay). It's one of those skills that are most powerful when not used.
Fixed XD If the enemy hacker is not in a Marker state, then his information is public, so you know what programs to use. If it is under Holoprojector of any kind, only the Hackable characteristic is revealed, but the things that mess up are the Holo1 (which requires to give up the usually more attractive Holo2 options). So a Kanren KHD masquerading as a Hsien moving inside an enemy Hacking Zone has to say "I am hackable", but has no obligation to say "I am a hacker", unless the controlling player wants to drop the holo to force the issue (like, the enemy is a KHD, so he won't be declaring ARO after the first short order). Of course, another interpretation that is unrelated to this is "a KHD Kanren disguised as Hsien walks by the ZoC of an enemy KHD", where we go into the "You have to say you are hackable...or you MUST say you are hackable by your troop" :S
I agree, but I was talking about this thread concerning Camo, who may or may not be a hacker, forfeiting stealth and walks in repeater coverage (which only extends ZoC for hacking purposes only). I was replying to Arkhos94 that if you consider that a non-stealth camo susceptible to get hacked provoke an ARO opportunity to hackers (who must announce their Delay, which matter only for Hidden Deployement and hacker maskerading as non hacker) then the camo player must not only declare Hackable but also hackable by what. Personally, I think the non-stealth camo does not provide hacking aro opportunities because you have no ways of knowing if your hacker can or cannot attack him with his Programs. OTOH, non-stealth non-camo do give out hacking aro opportunities to hackers who have valid Program to use (like Blackout against a Zero Deployable Repeater).
Probably the more sensible way to play, rather than allowing networks of repeaters to fish for private information which I highly doubt is intended, and also isn't even required to be given by the rules in this scenario.
So, The camo marker has moved without stealth. But the contents of that camo marker are expressly hidden information. The cleanest resolution is that there is no ARO generated until such a time as the camo token reveals its hacking status (IE it drops camo to hack something) or is revealed and activates again. Here is a perfect example of the difference between holo hackabillity and camo hackabillity, Camo is expressly private information and an ARO is not generated mechanically because of the camo marker state of the troop hiding that private information, along with the restriction of targeting camo markers we can see why the rules work this way, the AROing player cannot be forced into a catch 22 by not knowing the hacking nature of his target. The hackability of holo however is open, must be divulged and this makes sense as you may target a Holo echo, therefore it unequivocally has generated an ARO, as such the AROing player must be in possession of all open information to make an informed choice.
