In my enemy's turn, I get less able to judge LOF and ZOC of my XO Hac Tao in HD whenever my LT gets killed for some reason.
Oh, come on, let's not bring the What Shan't Be Named into every discussion. It's really about how to handle a situation when your opponent has obviously brainfarted and disclosed the location of their HD troop to you unintentionally. People in the WGC group are divided between revealing the marker, removing the model as if the interaction never happened and cancelling the ARO while keeping the marker on the board. The question I have is about what would you do with the information received on the opponent's HD that you shouldn't have had if the brainfart didn't occur, and how to handle the situation.
Then the WGC conversation is displaying a remarkable lack of understanding for the game. There are only two options: The ARO happened but was invalid, and therefore becomes an Idle. The original declaration revealed the HD Marker. It ends with a TO troop on the table. (ie. Engage vs a model 3" away when you don't have Kinematica) The ARO never actually happened. Nothing is placed on the table. (ie. Declaring Change Facing vs a model that was >8" away and never in LOF) Either way. Your opponent has made a mistake, so long as they are experienced enough to know better, I'd punish their mistake.
You're missing the point. The ARO should've never happened, but the opponent has made a mistake and disclosed the location of their HD troop to you. So something is already placed on the table and you need to decide what to do with this. I would say that punishing them by revealing the HD troop is too harsh, because we all make stupid mistakes from time to time, and if this happened to someone fairly new to the game, it would drive them away from it. So my solution would be to cancel the HD state and place the TO marker on the board. You still punish the opponent for not checking their AROs properly, while also allowing them a chance to execute their strategy at least partially.
No, I precisely get the point. My answer is 'nothing is placed on the table'. Or more fully: There was no ARO; nothing happened that could cause a model to be placed on the table; consequently nothing is placed on a table. If, perchance, you have cluttered the table with a miniature that does not belong there best you get rid of it.
Oh, then please pardon me for assuming wrongly. Now, next question would be: what would you do with that knowledge you gained (I mean the HD model's location)?
I'm not sure i understand the reference, but this thread is just a compilation of rules that are not accurately defined or have an outcome that players find "gamey" and wish changed. This thread is just of an outcry to fix the rules. I love this thread.
There will always be improvements needed to any rule set. It's just a fact of life when you're interested in games of this complexity. Though I do still wish they had gone with an e-pub for open beta testing of 3rd edition before publishing the hard copy.
Note that if the HD model was actually allowed to be placed on the table in this case (instead of getting rid of it, like imp pointed out), then there is actually an advantage gained by the player that made the mistake (depending on how many orders the opponent has left) in that next turn there will be an extra order that shouldn't be there. This is the opposite of what you want. If a player makes a mistake, they should be punished for it, not the other way around. I don't think it would be any different than something like this: Player A: OK, I'm going to use my Lieutenant Order on this R... oh wait. Nevermind. Player B: Cool, thanks for the (unintentional) help.
This Hidden Deployment discussion is about what to do when a situation outside the rules has occurred. The answer would have to be "whatever you and your opponent agree on."
I have heard an amazing statement that applies lightly to this situation. You cannot write rules to people who do not follow the rules.
It's difficult to follow rules that are written in a way that provokes heated discussions and way too many odd issues like sticking to the wall in Engaged state. I wish CB would follow the WotC approach and design Comprehensive Rules for Infinity.
