The massive difference is that faq doesn't specify if you can shoot from somewhere you have been in that order yet. And this is the main problem, because if you can't then there is no aro baiting against DTWs, at least it doesn't involve free shooting.
The current faq? No, in the current faq allows active trooper to move after reactive player has declared AROs, which allows all kinds of baiting. The root design flaw in the system is that active and reactive troopers should have same requirements for BS and CC attack. Like I stated previously, active and reactive skill declarations should have different requirements.
If I understood correctly a few posts in this thread and the FAQ wording, the reactive model can declare a BS attack with a DTW and place it at the moment of declaration, the active model can declare a BS attack with DTW, but must place it the moment it declared it, before moving. So the active model can try to not move into the DTW templet and make the attack idle (no target) and likewise the template it chose to use is invalid because there is total cover between the active model and the target. So if I understand it correctly the major difference from before is for reactive models, the template must be placed before the active model declares it's second short skill move and the active model cannot make a BS attack with TDW and move from a position that is outside of their LOF.
The suggestion was that "Short Movement Skills" must be declared first, I highly encourage you to reread the suggestions before commenting on them being arbitrary and gut reactions. Not only that, but there is absolutely no reason to ever declare idle in this game, it's a skill you perform when you failed a declaration, but it's a completely useless skill to declare. It is strictly better to declare Move (0") in every single situation that you would want to declare idle. (Move gives you 360 degree vision, Idle doesn't) This is anything but a gut reaction, I am well aware of the impact of the suggestion that I made. After having played N4 for well over 400 hours and having spend at the very least the same amount discussing rules and engaging with the community I am moderating over on Discord. You can imagine that the subject of that complete mess of rules we've had to deal with in the past year and a half and the possible changes were often the core of the topic. Forcing movement first is not arbitrary, the Short Movement Skills (Move, Jump, etc.) have built in resolution at their declaration, they fundamentally function differently than every other skill in the game. This suggestion forces the player to resolve those first, so that the other declarations can not be baited or pre-emptive. (The exception of bait left would be to Move->Move, which could still force the opponent to not be able to shoot, but that's been a thing since the very beginning of Infinity and it also doesn't make anybody get shot for free)
The FAQ issue, explained simply... BS Attack (non template) do not need to meet requirements at declaration, BS Atttack (template) need to meet all placement requirements at declaration. - - - - - Example: Active Trooper is around a corner, in ZoC of Reactive Trooper A: BS Attack (non-template shot) from this point around the corner that I will move to (Doesn't need to meet any of the requirement at declaration) R: <Cannot use a template, as placing it down would not hit anything legal at declaration> A: Move to the point where the shot would be taken. This makes it so the reactive player can never use a DTW as an ARO. - - - - - The highlighted suggestion that HellLois quoted implies that they will add the following thing... "Templates must be placed at declaration, but stay until resolution to see if their requirements are fulfilled" (obviously not the same wording, but we get the idea here) This would cause another massive issue where... Active Troopers (let's use pupniks for example) are around a corner, in ZoC of Reactive Trooper A: CC Attack R: Template this corner, Chimera is main target A: Move everyone but the Chimera in BtB with the opponent and CC them unopposed. This makes it so the main target is out of the template, the attack fails and the trooper is attacked unopposed. (Mind you that this issue ALSO EXISTS WITHOUT THE USE OF TEMPLATES and only using regular BS Attack instead, with current FAQ and with suggested suggested change to FAQ by HellLois) Another example... Active Trooper (anything with a sync that has a gun) is around the corner, in ZoC of Reactive Trooper A: BS Attack (non-template shot) from this point around the corner that I will move to (Doesn't need to meet any of the requirement at declaration), same kind of declaration for the sync. R: Template this corner, Whichever is main target. A: Move the one that isn't main target and BS Attack them unopposed. This makes it so the main target is out of the template, the attack fails and the trooper is attacked unopposed. (Mind you that this issue ALSO EXISTS WITHOUT THE USE OF TEMPLATES and only using regular BS Attack instead, with current FAQ and with suggested suggested change to FAQ by HellLois)
Much as I like your suggestion isn't the move+move.into.CC the reason we have this genealogy of rulings? If they wanted to fix it so badly that they made those rulings, I don't believe CB will just "let it go".
Ironic that you’re calling people out for having “poorly thought out, gut reactions” when you didn’t even bother reading what they wrote. Makes you look pretty silly.
You are correct apologies for that, you indeed said short movement skill, so beyond exceptions the player is limited to move, discover and idle as their first short skill, for practical terms with really few exceptions like discover and BS attack, just move, and while it seems to not be shared here, the option to open with a non short movement skill and then follow up potentially with either a move or a discover short skill and in general keeping the movement path of the active model concealed before the opponent makes a commitment in AROs, is an option that enriches the game not diminishes it.
Yes, we lose this interaction, which in my opinion is only relevant when you are moving multiple troopers as an Active Player. (You can bait the opponent into only being able to shoot the fireteam leader, and then move your fireteam across a gap.) Because if you only have a single trooper, this concealed information is incredibly laughable and honestly pretty damn irrelevant to the game. (The difference being that they could get a +3BS if you decided to move out of cover should they Dodge, which the optimal play is pretty fucking easy to figure out and +3 nearly never makes a difference in that given scenario) If anything, you're concealed LESS by declaring your BS Attack first, since you lock yourself in your critical action. But if you move first, you're concealing a lot more information and possibly forcing forks. What doesn't enrich the game though, is the complete mess of rules issues that we've been dealing with for the past year and a half, and the new ones that just appeared because of patches upon patches of rule changes that haven't be thoroughly thought through or even explained / justify to the player base. And is letting us all wonder what is even the intent of those changes.
Explain to me why? as it has been pointed out the only placement rules direct template weapons require is The requirements for the BS attack ARO are checked in the resolution phase.
Was the example not explicit enough? - - - - - BS attack (non-template) can be pre-emptively declared, as they are checked at Resolution, not Declaration. BS attack (template) cannot be pre-emptively declared, as they are checked at Declaration. This lets Active player declare BS Attack (non-template) pre-emptively, and forces the opponent to not be able to declare a BS Attack (template) (see my first example) - - - - - My second and third example are issues about activating multiple troopers at once in a world where active player can pre-emptively declare BS-Attacks. - - - - - Let me know if it still isn't clear, and if so, please explain what part isn't. I think my examples are pretty clear.
I will not disagree, in my defense beyond been late, in normal situations it would be move, discover or idle, so for practical terms, beyond a few exceptions it is only move.
No it is not clear since as it has been pointed out, the template can be placed the FAQ does not force the BS attack resolution to be observed, only the DTW placement to be valid, this is touching the models base and not going through the model.
Is touching the main target not part of the placement? It's a bit hard to figure out honestly, as there isn't any section with the placement label, explaining what the "All the placement rules must be fulfilled when declaring the Attack." are. https://infinitythewiki.com/Direct_Template_Weapons And every single examples that have the word placement in them pertains to how they are clipping or not certain models AT PLACEMENT (they all have the word placement in the examples that shows how the template overlap certain models or not). Not a single one of them has any mention of resolution. And we even have this example here... that says "In this picture, we have a Betatrooper who declares a BS Attack against a Fusilier with his Direct Template Weapon (a Nanopulser). He places it in such a way that it affects an enemy Camouflage Marker (CAMO). Since the Fusilier is not in the Area of Effect of the Teardrop Template, the Attack is cancelled and the Marker remains unaffected." The example doesn't talk about anything regarding the resolution. But it mentions PLACEMENT, DECLARATION and NOT TOUCHING the main target.
Should placement not care about the target (unlike what every single example on the DTW page seems to suggest), perhaps we could eventually hope to have anotations to the FAQ that explain what the intent of rules are? So we can finally, one day, stop trying to figure out what is RAI and where RAW doesn't quite match? It's SO frustrating trying to figure out if something was intended or not by the devs when we NEVER got to see ANY thought process for ANY decisions being discussed ANYWHERE. It's SO frustrating.
Correct, but, always speaking about the reactive player, you will not find out if the model will touch the main target before the second short skill declared by the active player. The FAQ says "All the placement rules must be fulfilled when declaring the Attack. For example, a Direct Teardrop Template must be placed so that it is in contact along the Trooper's movement path, and not from a point they haven't reached yet." As it has been pointed out the placement rules are "The narrow end of the Teardrop Template (Blast Focus) must be placed in contact with the edge of the Silhouette of the Trooper declaring the Attack. Every Trooper affected by the Template will suffer the Attack. The Template cannot be placed so that it would go through the Silhouette of the Trooper that is declaring the Attack (see example)." I too was under the impression the DTW could not be placed before this was pointed out.
But yet we have examples that say that if the template doesn't touch the target when declared, the attack is cancelled. Do we ignore that as part of the placement? Do we ignore all the examples that have the word placement on them and that pertains to touching the enemy? They all have the word "placement" are they not part of the "ALL the placement rules"?
Being a relatively inexperienced player (only about a dozen games of N4 under my belt) I usually keep out of any of the rules discusssion, but may I just say that making Short Movement Skill having to be declared first wold make SO much more sense to me. From how the rules (Code One and then N4) read when I first started this seemed actually to be implied (see the chart for example), and I was surprised when I learnt that it was not the case. Making the move first and then KNOWING at which point the figure was, where it can shoot from and being shot at takes so much uncertainty out of the whole thing, that it makes it MUCH easier for a newcomer to wrap their head around it.
The examples are definitely before FAQ changed things up, but are also devoid of context, the final example can be after the betatrooper moved, so there is no movement to be done, alternatively after the Fusilier finished moving and not coming close enouph. I am not arguing it is a drastic change, but given the information we read in this thread and what has been validated, it may not be what we think it is.
With all respect to @psychoticstorm, he's an Admin, not a rules guy. @Diphoration why not take this to CB directly? I appreciate the discussion being done openly here and I do support the Short Movement Skill being the only First Short option, but right now this topic seem to lead nowhere. Somehow Psychoticstorm fails to understand the issue, which is within his right but also leads to you guys going in circles. Wouldn't @HellLois be a better guy to talk to about this? The proposal is solid. It would streamline the game exponentially, removing a lot of fuckup situations from N4. Would make the game so much more accessible for new players and so much more intuitive.
