Every game of infinity I've played for the last three years suggests the thing you're worried about does not meaningfully exist and to the extent that it does, it's a convenience.
Intent is cheating and I will hear nothing otherwise. LOF is clearly not open information any longer in N4 and we must adapt so I have informed the men that henceforth we will play Infinity as only the most elite Polish people play. At all further tournaments the TO will provide blindfolds for the players. Failure to wear them at all times you are not declaring an ARO or an Order will result in disqualification. Should you accidentally gaze upon a model that was not involved in the execution of an order, thereby unfairly gaining a tactical advantage of what LOF it might possess the TO will wipe your short term memory by inflicting a concussion on you. The LGS owner has kindly provided a sock and a spare Maghariba guard to facilitate this. Furthermore to make sure nobody maintains illegal knowledge of LoF from a previous order during the game all players must maintain a blood alcohol reading higher than 0.1 during their games, this will be done at the player's expense.
Several tournaments have play tested this measure already. It is excellent and should be implemented more widely.
This is not the case in my local meta and many of the games I've played online. Also keeps popping up here in the Forum, so eh?
The joke is all the arguments about the final position ignore pop out attacks. Probably half the BS attacks I declare start and finish with the model in total cover. Am I expected to pantomime my move and have the legitimacy of the pie slice checked midway through my declaration?
How else do you expect me to check if I have one, two or more ARO if you do not show me the full path of movement, with the extreme point where you turned back included? That's required by the movement rules. You must measure the complete route of movement.
Fairly easily resolved by using a silhouette template to represent where you’ve gone. In a quick way, saying “I’m going to peak around this corner them move back, here is the fullest extent of my peek” using the silhouette marker, and you check LoF.
He actually has to do it in N4 because how else will he satisfy the requirement of the Movement rules to measure the full route? That's what I meant, the movement and placement cannot be virtualized, because the route has to be measured in full.
TBF even with full intent you should mark the most extended movement. Things like ZOC AROs and HD mean exist, so this interaction needs to be accounted for: "OK, I think position lets me see the TR Bot but not the Sniper next to it, I move to that postion and back again?" "Sure, that looks right. You happy with that position?" "Yup" "OK I declare BS Attack with a HD trooper who can see you there and I also declare Oblivion with my Custodier" In practice, you can usually simply request you opponent marks the position when it's relevant and let them get away being looser when it's not.
So there seems to be two parts of this conversation. First is the usual Intent vs. Physical dumpster fire, and I'm not interested in engaging with that for much the same reason that CB seems to avoid it. There's nothing new here as far as I can see that'll change the way that people I know play the game. Second is this issue of can you know LoF outside of ARO declarations, and frankly I don't understand why this is a question. BS attack requirements: So, to be _able_ to declare as active or reactive player, you need LoF. LoF is established as a pair of points (two points being needed for a _Line_ of Fire) along the movement path of the active trooper during declaration. I don't see how that's possible (or practical) without both the active and reactive player checking LoF and selecting fire points. The reason checking LoF is called out in the ARO sequences is b/c there may be defensive LoF that the active player didn't yet check (for instance, from a hidden deployment trooper) that the reactive player needs to be able to check before revealing.
In general, the N4 rules rewrite simply does not support "virtualized" trooper positioning inherent in some of the intent shenanigans. You can't go "I just pop out of the corner enough to see the first of the three snipers". The route has to be measured. The extreme movement point has to be marked to check for Silhouette vs LoF, possible HD ARO, satisfy the above BS Attack rules. If you want to pie-slice, go ahead, but you need to do it yourself, with actual model placement in its final position. If it turns out you've made a mistake and moved the model too far - tough luck, you get two or three ARO instead of one. The Active turn is already overwhelmingly powerful, especially with Alpha Strike builds in N4. There's really no need to boost it even further with permitting Active players to always assume they've made a perfect model placement.
It isn't a question. Everyone knows you can check LoF at any time, except this one guy who thinks that bending over the table is cheating.
how do you interpret the rules boxes above, then? You need LoF to declare. Can Active players only shoot at targets that reactive players establish?
This should be stickied in such a way that it appears at the top of every single page of every rules debate using the word "intent" in a post.
