I put it in the solved section, but I've written partially solved by FAQ because the FAQ is partially misleading. There is a requirement for a trooper to "draw LOF" to another in the rules that states the target must be in the LOF arc, from conversations with IJW it's clear that this requirement is not meant to be applied to the FAQ entry even if that's not specified. Edit: I have updated the solution to clarify this point. I do think it's important to note how the FAQ entry diverges from the intended answer because I could never arrive at the intended answer just reading the rules and FAQ myself.
Looks like you've update it again - I like the new version better, it's more clear :-) Might want to change the "left to answer" wording - it wasn't clear to me that that was part of the original question, I thought you were saying that that was still left to answer now.
Not sure if I missed that somewhere else but this is still very much an issue. Allowing to declare obviously illegal non LOF AROs to i.e. cancel Hidden Delpoyment is currently entirely RAW legal and I'd really like confirmation on being intended fallout of the FAQ, so it doesn't come up every time someone runs a TO Lt going 2nd.
Yeah, I don't think it's an "issue" in the sense of being an unanswered question, since the rules are clear. It's an issue in that there are players who will insist otherwise and accuse the HD player of being gamey, which is bad for the game. Official confirmation is needed to solve that issue, not the rules issue.
Zone of Control stuff we know the timing of so I don't think that is currently unclear. Unwanted, maybe, but not unclear. I don't see a good way of mechanically telling you how bad your judgement of ZoC may be without pre-measuring it. I think the unclear part I've marked is when the Effects themselves act as requirements and doesn't tell how to resolve it.
It's not obvious, counterintuitive, entirely gamey and made possible by an FAQ aimed at clearing up a Hacking interaction iirc. I'm not arguing it should not be possible, I'm saying I'd really want an FAQ to have confirmation on an interaction (or exploit) that will come up time and time again. Precisely the problem. The rules don't care if you guess ZOC wrong 8.1" or 37". You get to declare that ARO, idle and break your Hidden Deployment against your opponent's Order with no downside (unless he forfeits using his last Order entirely). To me the blame here is on the rules making this count as an Idle, rather than retrocatively cancelling the ARO activation altogether. But that's not gonna happen in N4, for N4 we're stuck with this, so you can use it. Which in turn makes me ask for dedicated confirmation on this particular interaction, so we few who are aware of it aren't the only ones who get to use it.
More accurately, the rules don't require you to guess ZoC at all. That was N3. In N4, you just declare an ARO and measure to check its validity when the time comes.
Bit of a round-a-bout but I've added the question on breaking Hidden Deployment by way of making a new thread so that it can be discussed without clogging up this thread. What about the issue of Effects that act as Requirements? Is the question still relevant? Closest thing I can think of is Place Deployable where a mine tells you to not place it with an enemy Camo inside ZoC - though I guess the FAQ indicates that you just re-place the mine in a position where it doesn't violate the Effects before you measure distances.
I think this is specifically a question about whether you can declare a CC Attack against a target with which you're not in s2s contact (so that the attack will become valid if they enter s2s contact later in the order). I think it's still applicable and unanswered, but perhaps the question can be updated post-FAQ. From the FAQ, we have this: Q: How do LoF and ZoC Skill Requirements work? A:LoF Requirements must be fulfilled when declaring Skills. ZoC Requirements must be fulfilled during the Resolution step. So, keeping the approach the FAQ, perhaps the question is now: Q: How do s2s Skill Requirements work? A: Unanswered...
Updated the question and moved it down in urgency (I don't see most people trying to declare CC Attack "just in case"). I can see the potential that that topic sparks another question: What happens if a unit's skill declaration fails the requirements check against one of two targets? However, an answer on how S2S requirements work will probably kill the practical impact of that question.
"2. White Noise, the related question? No, that's a target and you pick spot before measuring ranges." White Noise doesn't have a Target (this is important for Coord White Noise). Because it's not a target you have to pick the position at Declaration. So it should read: "2. White Noise, the related question? No, White Noise doesn't have a target so you place the template before measuring ranges." Which leaves open the question: "what happens when you place the template illegally?" (Which also applies to Deployables). Note it's an illegal declaration because it doesn't fulfil the effects of the declaration, which the rules don't deal with. The rules deal with not fulfilling the requirements of the declaration. Also, cheers on updating this. It makes it easier to follow the issues when you've been away for a while.
The target's position is picked before measuring, the target is part of declaration. Since for both smoke and White Noise (whether explicitly so or otherwise) the target is a point on the board, there's not much possibility of their target to change position during an order. I think the second one calls back to the question whether you use the template as part of the selecting target process or not, and all indications we can glean from N4 is that you do not (see the plasma carbine/rifle example) and I see no reason why white noise would work differently - meaning if it's placed out of range it's out of range and you get to Idle. The one thing going against this is that the FAQ says a blocked deployable may be repositioned, but I don't see that being fully applicable to White Noise.
Smoke targets a point on the board whereas White Noise does not. They're not at all the same and don't work in the same way: White Noise is much more similar to Deployables, which also don't have a Target. This means when I Coord Smoke I need to act against one target (a point on the board), whereas for White Noise I can Coord it and put down multiple different zones in different places. There literally is no target or Target's position to choose for White Noise. The only detail that needs to be decided is the position of the template, this needs to be decided at declaration.
Did we come to a resolution about ammo types shooting into cc in that thread? Might be a good question to add as well. it is concerning the ammo types call out application on successful attacks.
Honestly, if we get an answer to the first question, I think we'll get one to the second one as well...
Can you or can you not gain wounds by using a Coup de Grace against unconscious enemies via Protheion? The rulebook says you can, but @ijw says you can't.