You have to read Helllois' answer in sequence, and not just read the bit about smoke in isolation. Helllois "When you declare an attack, you have to select a target, so when you place the center of the Circular Template over the center of the main target's base (...) smoke is a special case (...) you can target a spot on the game table" So, the special case with smoke is that the target is "a spot on the game table", the sequence of the attack is not different.
Hm, that's the first piece of evidence that leans towards B. But it's a single line that may in fact be referring to troopers as main targets - it seems so unsupported by the rest of the text. I'd like something more concrete than this as the whole basis for version B!
This doesn't answer the question as when I target the spot on the game table I do so by placing a template. In order to make it version B I would do what I am accustomed to doing, which is place a marker where I intend to throw smoke and then use that as a reference for the smoke template. That is a missing step between targeting a spot on the table and placing the template, however!
The sequence of how targets are selected and when templates are placed are specific and known. For targetless weapons the only mechanical difference is what can be a target, not how you select it. Additionally, please consider that you just argued "but I'm doing it using A, and B is different, therefore B can't be the correct answer" when the question is if A or B is correct. What we as players do is not actually relevant to answering what the rules are trying to convey. Edit: the key to keep in mind here is that as the template approaches the table, where you intend might change as well - specifically what you intend will typically have fixed border conditions (you need this LOF blocked and it needs to touch that wall), but typically you won't have a target point in mind. As such, placing the template as a means to specify target point is very different. For example: in my meta it is common to measure paths before declaring movement, even though several of us know this is against the rules. This doesn't make it correct, several of us just play wrong.
Consider the marker as less of an official step and more of a visual aide that ensures you can keep track of the point on the table you choose to target. It would be perfectly rules legal in my eyes to state "I am targeting here", point at a spot on the table, and then carefully lay the template down so that the centre is directly over it - it would just be tedious. Adding in the extra step of placing a marker is just a voluntary thing players do to make it less tedious.
Let me REALLY muck things up here :D :D :D So I posted above saying that Version B was Rules As Written, but in the beginning of that post, I also explained a possible alternate interpretation whereas the rules don't actually tell you HOW to select your target (point on the ground). Nowhere in the rules does it say you can't lay down the template immediately after declaring your intent and then determining it's final positioning (aka fiddling). Rules As Written, measuring only has to do with checking ranges. Placing a template over your intended area and fiddling with it is NOT measuring in a RAW sense of the word. Measurement (RAW) is when you measure from the model to the center of the template to determine range MOD. Here's a video of Carlos from Infinity placing a smoke template exactly as described in Version A:
Now, admittedly, this video is from 2015, but placing templates in the way the above video does is pretty much (to quote Azuset) "How literally every other war game does it."
You know what would be amazing? If Infinity had an official rules clarification team that read forum post debates and responded with examples and rulings like Games Workshop used to. It'd be really good social media content to publish as well. Look for hot topics, write an article or video, push out to all the social media platforms. They could be clarifying each rules as a P.R. tool. Does this exist?
It's at 11:32. I accidentally scored a critical when randomly clicking the video progress bar. Why can't I do that in-game? To be fair, rules mistakes are very common in their demonstration videos, sometimes because they play laid back and sometimes because of demonstration purposes. It's also important to point out that while "literally" every other war game does it like that, "literally" every other war game also has pre-measuring because it has become common design principle that it's not the access to information about the game state that should determine the game but what you do with the information.
It's also at 7:05 He places smoke twice :) Both times he fiddles the template to how he wants it. They are playing casually, for example, he doesn't measure range to the center of the template because they both know what range band it is within from experience of playing.
The closest we have is @ijw . CB doing it would require them hiring 3-5 people to read the forums pretty much 24/7 (minimum of 3 people, just to cover all 24 hours a day, and actually more like 5 people to let people have days off and stuff), write the articles/make the videos, and publish them. While doing all this, they also cannot do useful things at CB HQ like cast models or pack blisters. 5 full-time employees who do NOTHING but read the forums. And also, 5 people who know how the game is intended to be played at the highest level and with all the rules interactions. AMEN!!!!
Official rules clarifications are what the FAQ is for. As @Section9 says it wouldn't make economic sense to create a forums team, and we're already getting occasional clarifications from @ijw anyway.
No video of someone official to infinity showing how to play infinity should ever be used to understand how to play infinity.l because they don't know how to do something as basic as placing a smoke template?
Pretty much, yeah. The order I'll always prioritise in is: The FAQ, official clarifications from the forums, RAW from the wiki, how people around me play it, and finally, how it is in official videos. We can't really give Carlos shit about it - it's a confusing bloody game and his job is making it look cool, not doing it right.
I can and absolutely would. It's his job to know the game so he can make it look cool. Confusing stat lines or even how a new ability works are one thing, but if you don't know the basics of the game you are demonstrating in an offical video... maybe you should not be making the official videos... All of this assumes however that it is not being done correctly. Tell it is in the FAQ I would accept this video as how it is supposed to be done.
We play it as A, and don't see us changing any time soon TBH If someone makes a big fuss about it I can see it being enforced for them, but I can also see that person not getting a lot of games
Fuck me the way this thread is going you'd think bostria doesn't know what a face to face is. Look the different between the two versions is niggling over one or two words and some conventions for something that ultimately isn't game breaking. Bostria probably has a hundred different versions of the rules in his head. Sorry he doesn't understand the newest rules lawyering of a relatively mundane aspect of the game in his second or even third language. Dial it back a little team.
As long as everyone who's playing is on the same page i think this is fine. Id be ok if this was clarified in N4
