Hi guys, I would like to have an official ruling of Corvus Belli on the intention for rules of Speculative Attack in the N4. Please check the image below and provide me with the correct way how word trajectory shall be treated, since some of my opponents think that point of speculative attack shall be only possible to target using real world Ballistic Trajectory.
I've seen it ruled in N3 that you can spec fire a nade into a room even if the door opening is BEHIND the building, lol.
For the sake of game simplicity, since Infinity has mostly got ridden of "real world trajectories" (like the old "shadows"), "smart" trajectory is the correct answer. I know you want an "official" answer but this is the rule: 'It must be possible to draw a trajectory between the Trooper and the impact point." No real world implications, no limitations, no nothing. The rule may use a FAQ since this came up also a bit in N3, but "a trajectory" is simply that. Green is a trajectory, so it is fine. Explain it as you want, the difficulty being tied to performing a series of ricochets, finding a ventilation shaft to squeeze the grenade in, whatever, Rules are an abstraction.
CB is out of office until the 3rd, but they'll likely not answer this anyway. IJW might answer and he's on the rules team, though he's answered this several times the past bunch'a'years. Trajectory is any path at all, 'cause back in N2 when they used a simplified version of traditional trajectory (aka shadow zones) people just didn't use Speculative Fire.
Huh, I was under the impression that by 'trajectory' they meant a straight line shot with up/down parabolic movement. I feel like that's what it should mean at least.
Since there's no other text or guidance, all it requires is that any path exists. N3 FAQs were consistent that the only way you could be safe from spec fire was to be in a completely sealed room with no open doors or windows.
Does the word 'trajectory' at least define a curve of a single direction? That is to say, in the event that the only way the line could be drawn was an S-shape in order to connect to the target, is that still valid? It feels weird to even specify 'trajectory' if what the rules actually mean is simply "you can hit anything without any LoF as long as it is not a sealed room"... because actual trajectory doesn't seem to even factor into it.
Super-jump talks about a parabolic path, but that language isn’t used here (nor was in in N3). Here’s a comparison to what it was like in N2, when terrain shadow could block parabolic weapons.
Because the alternative is to start arguing about how many direction changes, and how great the direction changes can be, and for which weapons, when “trajectory” is just a path. That’s all that word means. Seriously. It would be plausible for grenades to be fired on timers and bounced. It would even be plausible for grenades to bounce by remote control. It would be plausible to rockets to make multiple turns. So all sorts of complicated trajectories would be plausible for different types of weapons. But what gain for the game is there to make any of those distinctions, saying that weapon X can do ballistic indirect fire, weapon Y can change direction N times, and weapon Z can bounce? All that leads to is people arguing over how many times a grenade can bounce, instead of just having the rules say “It’s okay, it’s the future.”
Asked and answered https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/speculative-attack.37807/ "Just curious, Does the new requirement that you must be able to draw a "trajectory" to the impact change anything, or can you still do speculative bank shots off multiple walls?" -ME "In practical terms it’s identical. You need to be able to draw a route, so can’t get into sealed rooms etc." - IJW
