Pretty damn sure everything with Camo as well as which Combat Group it's part of is Private Information. Army 6 is as official as it gets and Camo troops don't show up on the courtesy list, no? Wouldn't be the first time a tournament misinterprets a rule or accidentially changes an existing one. I do remember that Army 6 has (had?) a bug that hides your second Combat Group if there is only AD/Camo in it. But we know the amount of Combat Groups is Open Information from a discussion on the old forums.
Sooooo . . . if you're going second is this even an issue? You don't do an order count until the beginning of your turn, so when would you be informing your opponent of what is in each combat group...? Obviously it's not at the courtesy list stage because your camo markers aren't on there for a reason; as Tesla says, their information is private.
Well in a sense they have more weight than CB themselves, since that's how the game is played at the highest level. You can say it is all you want but that's not how it's played. It was a surprise to me too. The judges at the Interplanetario are more official than that...
If it's not CB it's not official. TOs can rule in any manner they want for the tournaments they run. The Interplanetary is just a high profile event that CB hosts, but a local gaming group runs the event. In any manner though, minelayer could literally be that the mine is placed out of camo with a giagantic sign that says becareful of this and it would still totally be worth .5 swc. Even if you opponent know a camo marker is a mine, it's still something they have to deal with and be cautious with. It saves you two orders placing it with minelayer and it costs your opponent at least one order to deal with it.
Calling it that and it being that are two separate things. More of the Spanish plus the euro portion of "rest of the world" with 5ish from the US region championships... Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
The relative utility of it is something that can be debated, but I was always under the impression that it was supposed to force your opponent to do a bit of guessing. Yes, it is still useful to start with a mine on the board even if your opponent knows what it is. As far as TOs go... that's a problem. And because how TOs rule affects how players play the game more directly than what's actually in the rulebook, or how CB rules, the lack of standardization is definitely an issue, especially at the highest-profile event.
Well, it's especially not if they're playing with rando club judge's house rules, but it seems incorrect to advertise it as using the Infinity rules set if that's the case...
You'll have that with any gaming system. Sometimes there is gray areas in the rules that need immediate clarification to keep the game running smoothly. CB give TOs the power to resolve rules issues in a timely manner. If CB rules on it in one of these time crunch matters then it is taken as rules law, hence why they don't do it. Rather they take issues that need to be FAQed and play test the crap out of it multiple ways and debate it before releasing a ruling.
Some systems are much more robust in this way. What's more, I think you're giving CB too much credit as to the amount of playtesting they do on a lot of this stuff. Simple rules calls like that aren't playtested extensively; they're just called differently by different people, and without CB being made aware of it, they'll remain gray areas, and people will continue to get surprised by some idiosyncratic TO's interpretation. The rules need to be standardized more fully. Top-tier tournaments should not be making surprising or murky rules calls if we want a robust and healthy game.
yeah nah, there was extensive discussion on this on mayacast. And as concluded the only way that the rules work is that what combat group a model is is part of its "contents" and therefore private information. This is a ruling that IJW now also supports.
why, because ambush camo thats why. because equipment and tokens cannot be a part of a combat group only troops can. As such for ambush camo to actually work the "combat group" of the camo token must be private and therefore must be considered part of its contents
I mean, I get that that makes logical sense as a rules interpretation; that's what I, myself, would support. . But is it likely that it will be ruled that way at those events?
As far as I know this has been the majority way of playing the game since N3 came out and formally defined private information. So I think that it is highly likely that that is how it will be ruled in any tournaments that you find yourself playing in the near future.
How far are we willing to trust an unpublished TO guideline that was never communicated to anyone but some of the TOs and a minority of the players? Not very is my answer.
I'll pay attention to bizarre TO decisions from Spain that make no sense next to actual, written game rules (e.g., per Daboarder's post, ambush camo) when they appear in a FAQ. Otherwise, nah.
