I really don't think deploy and place are different. Take the text for fast pandas as another example of a deployable EFFECTS By expending one Short Skill or one ARO, without any Rolls needed, the user of this piece of Equipment can deploy the FastPanda model a maximum of 8 inches from his base. To deploy a FastPanda, place it next to the user's base and then move it as if it had declared the Short Movement Skill Move with one single MOV value of 8 inches. FastPandas are placed at the Conclusion of the Order. Here it says the placing the piece of equipment on the board is what you do when it is deployed. Even if it were different, it also specifically states that they are placed at the conclusion of the order.
According to the Question answered by Hellois, the mine can't be place because is done at the conclusion. So, if the troup die the spot will be free... And things like this happends when all actions are "simultaneous" but only not when they aren`t simultaneous... Some times the time is compressed in Infinity and others not. https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threa...with-movement-declarations.25662/#post-171879 As some players said, remember that the mine are no considered deployed until the Conclusion of the Order. In this case I see that you cant deploy the mine.
Added both question to the unsolved question thread : Coordinated BS attack including a deployable weapon Spoiler Original topic : https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/how-do-the-targetless-deployables-work-with-increased-burst-coordinated-orders.33866/ 4 troopers are coordinating a BS attack on Joan of Arc. Trooper A of them is using a BS weapon that can deploy a deployable equipment (pitcher, drop bear, mine dispenser). Trooper A pass his BS attack roll. Question A : Joan of Arc is killed by trooper B, C and D attacks, is the deployable equipment placed in her previous location ? Answer : A1 : Yes, the deployable equipement is placed at the end of the order and Joan is not here at the end of the order A2 : No, order expenditure sequence says step 8 "Effect" apply the effect of the roll (placing deployable) before the ARM roll. So Joan is still alive when the deployable should be placed, blocking its deployement Question B : Joan survive but choose to fail her gut roll and flee 5cm away. Is the deployable equipment placed in her previous location ? Answer B1 : Yes, the deployable equipement is placed at the end of the order and Joan is not here at the end of the order B2 : No, order expenditure sequence says step 8 "Effect" apply the effect of the roll (placing deployable). Joan fleeing happen at step 9. So Joan is still here when the deployable should be placed, blocking its deployement Mine AROs Overlapping with Movement Declarations Spoiler Original topic : https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/solved-mine-aros-overlapping-with-movement-declarations.25662/#post-171879 (solved question by helllois) https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/how-do-the-targetless-deployables-work-with-increased-burst-coordinated-orders.33866/ (new question : what happen if the "blocking" trooper die/move) A Krakot is declaring move in view of a sin eater and a zero. The zero is declaring "laying a mine" as his ARO. The sin eater is declaring BS attack. The Krakot is declaring move as his ssecond short skill and end up 0.0001 mm away from the zero base, at the spot where the mine should have been layed. Based on the solved question by @HellLois, the mine cannot be placed because the Krakot is in its location. Question A : The Krakot is killed by the Sin Eater BS attack ARO. Is the mine placed in his previous location ? Answer : A1 : Yes, the deployable equipement is placed at the end of the order and Joan is not here at the end of the order A2 : No, order expenditure sequence says step 8 "Effect" apply the effect of the skill (placing mine) before the ARM roll. So the krakot is still alive when the mine should be placed, blocking its deployement Question B : The Krakot survive but fail his gut roll and flee 5cm away. Is the mine placed in hisprevious location ? Answer B1 : Yes, the deployable equipement is placed at the end of the order and Joan is not here at the end of the order B2 : No, order expenditure sequence says step 8 "Effect" apply the effect of the skill (placing mine). The krakot fleeing happen at step 9. So the krakot is still here when the mine should be placed, blocking its deployement Tell me if you think I mis-write something and should correct it I don't agree with that : conclusion of the order is step 9. Gut roll is step 9 but ARM roll (and death) is step 8 "effect" So if the opposing trooper is killed => he is not there at step 9 so you should be able to deploy your mine/repeater... (in both question above) If the opposing trooper flees (failing his gut roll), then both fleeing and placing the deployable happen at step 9. It's simultaneous so it's a very grey area. => no opinion here
Fair. But you're arguing that the outcome of a successful Order / ARO is not applied in the step where the out of a successful Order is supposed to be applied. A fundamental truth about CB's is that they're not written as tightly as we read them. I'm perfectly happy to play that if the Krakot dies the Mine is placed. It's practically irrelevant and has the benefit of being when the rules say. Re: Guts. It's simultaneous so the space counts as occupied. Same reason that to prevent the Mine being deoloyed the Krakot only needs to walk over it not stop in the position it is being Deployed.* But, honestly, I'm pretty much certain that they meant Effects. I know there's another example where it's clearer but for the life of me can't remember where it is. * It seems possible to extend this argument to the Dead Krakot, but it doesn't work. 'All at one time' applies to Orders and AROs and we know from Explode that events that happen in Step 9 are not simultaneous with Short Skills / AROS (model starts within template distance of a Kuang Shi, moves 4" backwards and shoots Kuang Shi, Kuang Shi Explodes, model isn't hit by Explode).
Can the rules simply be written to allow deployable equipment and mine markers to be placed underneath troopers after the deployment phase? If they don't need to block movement, standing on them doesn't feel like it would cause any problems. This would prevent both active and reactive players from having their actions nullified by their opponents movement. Mines for example could still be placed in the deployment phase as camo markers. During play they could be placed in a new marker state so they still need to be discovered but would allow ARO placement under troopers etc.
It might be a way, but I feel that would confuse a lot of players, and that is also a whole new mechanic. I'd rather some extra safety rules in the deployment of deployables to avoid the "I walk into your mine so you never place it". That feels cheesy. Something as simple as allowing the model that is placing the deployable to place it 0.01 mm away from a model, if that model ends in the same spot where he declared that was going to deploy it.
Without removing some functionality, I'm not sure how we can make such a rule less confusing. Camo levels would probably be a little less confusing. One level for unknown camo markers, another for known mines etc that we can walk over. Currently we need to maintain the mind games from deployment regarding whats a trooper or a mine, and how we interact with them. To avoid negated actions, placing a mine 1mm to the side is not always possible as terrain can prevent this. It also provides less freedom compared to the alternative. What if both players try to drop a mine in the same place during an order? How does that get resolved?
Maybe in some cases the scenery would prevent the mine for being placed (but that would only happens in niche scenarios), but it would be much harder to deny the placement with just a movement than right now. The other alternative open some extra problems, mines in CAMO state have a S2, if a player is allowed to stay just in top of them there could be problems with the LoF of the overlapping S, the model bases won't be in full contact with neither the table or the marker, some player could understand that it's ok now to walk over other models... it generates many more problems and inconsistencies than it solves imo. Good question about the double mine... in this case I guess neither is placed? Not sure about this one...
I'd be very reluctant to dismiss any potential issues with a rule because any problems created are niche. What if CB has been doing that all this time :P. I'd prefer to keep looking for a better solution. But I agree that your idea is still better than the current version and the easiest to implement right now.
Warmachine/Hordes: For various purposes, the Attack Sequence (the rules for resolving attacks) includes a few different steps to resolve effects specified as "after the attack resolved". In Malifaux 2nd edition, the rulebook describes a five step process for resolving attacks. In order to actually explain to someone how effects work, you have to explain that there's an unlisted "After Step 5" step where various things get resolved. Malifaux 3rd edition tried to do better for their action resolution chart, but still have a few unnamed "You've still got stuff going on that you need to resolve" steps when an action starts generating other actions. I'm not going to say that CB couldn't do better, but a lot of those resolution sequence charts don't survive contact with the special rules sections.
I agree, a perfect rock solid rule system is very hard to do. But I have faith we will come closer than we are now.