Firstly I'll expose the actual rule wording, then I'll enter the question/conflict/typo SURPRISE ATTACK: Requirements: ► To use this Special Skill, Troopers must be in Marker form (Camouflaged, for example) at the start of the Order in which they are activated. DECOY ► The Trooper with this Special Skill is represented by up to three Decoys: the Decoy 1 Marker, the Decoy 2 Marker and the actual Model, or Marker if the user has that choice. The player must note in secret which of these Decoys represents the real user of this Special Skill, with the others being mere replicas. HOLOMASK STATE: Activation: ► During the Active Turn, Troopers may only return to HoloMask State by consuming 1 Entire Order, outside the LoF of enemy Markers or Troopers. Effects: ► While in HoloMask State, players don’t place the HoloMask bearer’s Model but the Model of any other Trooper [...] HOLOECHO STATE: Effects: ► While in Holoecho State, the Trooper is represented by three Holoechoes: the Holoecho 1 Marker, the Holoecho 2 Marker and the actual Model. So, So, only Markers and nothing about miniatures into "special states" As I read holomask, No Marker state is mentioned and Surprise Attack won't trigger exiting this state. So, Why making able the trooper to go back to holomask state if it won't benefit from it? As I read in the holoecho state and Decoy, the actual model is not a marker, so it can't benefit from surprise attack. This reduces the options to hide the troop if you want to benefit from surprise shot. If I where to guess how this interaction is intended to work, I would probably say all of them, Decoy Model, Holomask state and Holoeho Model count as Marker states... and I think is also the most interesting case scenario. In that case the actual text of the rules (PDF and Wiki) should include the that reference word "marker" for both cases, or either the Surprise attack should include them somehow changing the wording of the rule. EDIT: Another point that Has changed and I don't know if its intentional is the existence of NFB on both Holomask and Holoproyector... so It's not Allowed to activate both on deployment at the same time and is not considered as an option to activate both at the same time while expending an order. This is a huge nerf to Hackable holoproyected troops (like kanren hackers or Ayyar), that rely almost completely on the holomask to avoid being hacked on deployment. This is also detrimental to patroclus due to Mimetism -6 being NFB too. In my opinion neither of them should be NFB. It may be intentional to avoid that an holomasked troop could benefit from replicated passive Skills/Equipment like mimetism. But It's weird. If you're trying to holomask a ninja or a dakini, and that troop doesn't have mimetism you're giving up that you're not a ninja or a dakini immediately. I think those specific cases are not such a huge impact. It just improves the Hiding/advancing capability of an holomasked troop. Not It's Shooting capability nor it's defense against their main enemy... the templates. Can anyone from the developing team respond what to do in this cases? @ijw, @HellLois ?
HoloMask doesn't give Surprise Attack, didn't in N3, doesn't in N4, because it isn't a marker state. Holoecho State lets the user use Surprise Attack, it's the last bullet point of the effects of the state.
I think there's a difference between a Marker and a Marker State. And I think Holoecho is missing the Marker label, but it does have a text stating that Surprise Attack can be used while in the state
Two things: 1. It's explicitly stated that you can combine the effects of Holomask and Holoprojector in the Holoprojector rules. 2. In N3, both Holoprojector (L1) and Holoechoes (L2) had NFB. The rules haven't changed. If you have both skills, you turn on Holoechoes and turn to the bullet point that says "The effects of the Holoecho state can be combined with the effects of the [Holomask] state". That text is in bold on the second page, about the middle of the green box for the Holoecho estate, just like it was in in Effects text for the Holoechoes state in HSN3.
Is a holo echo marker a valid target to shoot at? Or do I have to discover it first (or delay my ARO to wait if it looses marker state with the second short skill?)?
Yeah, they're considered real troopers for ARO purposes. From the state description on p122 "Holoechoes are considered real Troopers in regard to providing AROs, checking LoF, and activating Enemy weapons or pieces of Equipment (Mines, CrazyKoalas, etc.)." EDIT: Looks like you can also delay against a holoecho in the same way you can against camo/impersonation.
I am confused that there is a bulletpoint reading: "in order to know if a holoecho is the bearer or just a holographic decoy, the enemy must pass a discover roll against that holoecho" (p.155 & p.122). This point just makes sense if I am not allowed to shoot holoechoes (forcing a saving roll reveals the holo echo marker according to p.123)
It gives it to you as an option, although I can't think of many situations where you'd rather discover than shoot. The holoecho state definitely doesn't include the restrictions on declaring attacks against it that Camo and Impersonation do though.
1) Not exactly, There is the intention, and there is what the rules actually say. The ruling you mention is the holoechoe state (is not the same thing as the holoproyector piece of equiment). And it sais as it follows: As we read it, both states can be stacked up but both pieces of equipment that enables the use have the NFB label, and by that you can't use both pieces of equipment at the same time. And as a second argument, there is no mention to activating both pieces of equipment with the same order. Or any mention that entering one of those states after the other would not break the previous one if you want to activate them on tandem. There is no other posible way of actively getting both states but trough those pieces of equipment so there is no way of stacking both states even if the state has a mechanic to actually combine both. 2) Yes, both have NFB but you didn't have both serparetedly. You had one that had the uses and effects of both Let's actually analyze the situation: No holoprojector/holomask troop has Mimetism or albedo. Even if the trooper can holomask a trooper that has camouflage, or suplantation, It can't actually be deployed on those marker states by any means and the rest of the NFB skills/equipment activation (camouflage, suplantation cybermask, white noise, ) would break the Holoechoe/Holomask on activation, and vice versa. there is no paragraph stating that those skills can be triggered So the only rules that could be applied if NFB would be taken out of Holomask/holoproyector are mimetism and Albedo. both skills can improve the troopers advancing capability. Holomasked troops could be invisible to visors, or apply negative modifiers to enemy ARO shooting troops while moving. But once the trooper does any skill that's not a move, It breaks, so the trooper can't make an offensive use of the skill. And regarding the falsely feared Auto-Holopreyected with supressive fire... yes, those echoes could aparently stack a lot of modifiers, but those holoechoes can't shoot, can't benefit from SF modifiers without using the suppressive fire profile, so that would provide a little survivavility to holoproyected troops and holoechoes, but sacrificing the chance of shooting. once you shoot you would loose the fake mimetism/fake albedo. And that fake survival imagage is still totally vulnerable to templates and discover+shoot (double chance of breaking the holoechoe). I think it would be an interesting feature to holomask. something that could encourage to recover the state during a game without making users killer machines. And regarding holoproyector, it can be an interesting tool give holoproyected troops a little more survival or a little more chance of getting to the place they need. At least CB doesn't loose anything giving it a second look. and they've touched some of this with patroclus on N3 so at least it doesn't break any important rule My conclusion is that at least one or both pieces of equipment should miss the NFB label, and they need to add an extra line to Holoproyector addressing the activation of both pieces at the same time to make it work properly. And if they remove both labels they're clearing the path to Patroclus mechanics on next army update Holoproyector doesn't give surprise attack they're different skills. The same happens with killer hackers that doesn't have surprise attack and holomask. The question is, if they give surprise attack to a holomask troop, can it actually use the skill while exiting the holomask state? or are they shutting that door before it could be opened?
No, HoloMask isn't a marker state and doesn't let you use Surprise Attack. Again, this is no different to Holoprojector lvl1 in N3.
I'm not saying the actual rule say it is a marker state. I'm just wondering if they should actually consider it, and keep the door open for it to be a thing. Cme on! an enemy soldier handling a pistol walks towards you. wouldn't you be surprised if suddenly it changes to be a HI and fires an HMG or a sniper rifle to you? Shouldn't CB have the gate open to use holomask as that kind of tool for the future?
So you missed the point I was making that the structure of the rules is EXACTLY the same as it was in the previous edition. If you'll scroll back, you should notice that I was replying in quote to your claim that it isn't allowed to use both of the skills at the same time in deployment. Do you really need N3's half column example repeating what the bullet point says is true to demonstrate that to you, instead of just having three paragraphs of bullet points spelling out what happens when you have both skills? Because, again: 1. In N3, Holoprojector L1 and Holoprojector L2 are both labeled NFB. In N3, the text says "» The effect of the Holoecho state can be combined with the effects of the Holoprojector L1 state. ..." The Holoecho state is the state produced by L2. 2. In N4, Holoprojector and Holomask are both labeled NFB. In N4, the text says "The effect of Holoecho State can be combined with the effects of HoloMask State." In both cases, the text then proceeds to explicitly spell out what that means. 3. The NFB labeling on the various skills has not changed between N3 and N4. In both editions, being able to use the two skills together relied on a person being able to read the words "The effects of ... can be combined with the effects of ..." as saying that you get to do the thing specified even though the NFB rules would normally stop you. If you'd like to double check for yourself, the N3 rules are still in the downloads section of the website under Downloads/ Rules. Mimetism has NFB in both N3 and N4. The reason I quoted your post was that you made the claim that these were changes to the rules between editions. They aren't. Disclaimer: Frankly, I hope they find something better to make Patroclus special in N4, and let Holoprojector L3 go into the same 'overly complicated and ultimately unnecessary' rules bin as "AI Beacon".
Forget N3 said anything. I'm pretty well versed on N3 rules. But It's a false premise to grip an obsolete edition as and argument about how the new edition works or what are their intentions. Firstly and foremost the new edition text is what we should interpret and use, then they can publicly say it's intended to work like this or like that, make a faq or just leave it to interpretation... but a faulty text raises unwanted questions and conflicts during matches and an excess of FAQ volume. So they should try to avoid those issues and correct them as soon as posible. And if a rule does'tn need 2D/3D visualization and is rightly written it doesn't need examples And again, Holoecho state is the intended destination, Holoproyector is the gate to access that destination. If the gate excludes the option to be used in conjunction with other rules, the destination can't do a thing to compensate. there is a sequence and a hierarchy on how rules are used. That same hierarchy is what is what's usually used to solve conflicts (Aristeia core rules are a good example of this). You can't break the hierarchy while writing the rules because it gets you to unnecessary conflicts that need to be addressed in FAQs and adendum
