I have a Bashi Bazouk who wants to re-enter the holoecho state. They are in LOF of a camo marker. There is no uncertainty about the camo marker's identity; it's a mine, and was placed there by a draal last turn. Both players know it is not an enemy trooper. Can the Bashi re-enter the holoecho state?
It can not. (Below should be applicable to Holo and Imp as well) N3 Frequently Asked Question FAQ Version: 1.1 Q: Can a Camouflage Marker prevent that an enemy trooper from reverting to the Camouflaged state? If the Camouflage Marker were a Mine, would prevent it too? A: Yes, no matter if it is a Mine or a real trooper, as the Camouflage trooper trying to Camouflage again doesn’t know. Related Pages: Camouflage, Camouflaged, Mine
This is one of those areas where the rules as written are counterintuitive. If one of my troopers has LoF to an enemy trooper who places a mine, how is it placed as a mysterious mystery marker instead of a mine marker? Why do I have to attempt to discover it? “Boss, that there’s a mine.” “Shush, I’m trying to figure out what this thing is, it might be an enemy.” “I just told...ugh, fine. We’ll hold position while you stare real hard for awhile. Cool. This is fine.” “At ease trooper, HQ equipped me with this fancy visor for just such a dangerous and unpredictable moment.” “...”
Because you don't know exactly WHERE it is. Suppose it digs itself underground. You DO know there is a mine, you DO NOT want to find it with your toe...
“Placing mines: When you place a mine during a game turn, check to see if any enemy troops have LoF to the mine. If any enemy troops have LoF, the mine is placed as a normal mine marker of its type. If no enemy troops have LoF, the mine is placed as a camouflage marker.” Done. This also addresses the “can I re-camo/holo/etc.” question simply: If the mine is a camo marker, you don’t know what it is and cannot go to marker state. If the mine is obviously a mine, it’s not a trooper and you can go to marker state.
That makes sense except for the interaction with camo/TO/holo/imp this thread started off as. The unified rules for camo markers work great as an abstraction, but start to look weird when you pay too much attention to what they’re trying to simulate. I don’t object to the overall approach, but in a game with as many distinct ammo types and hacking programs as this one has, giving mine placement the same limitation we give other camo state abilities (i.e. you can’t enter marker state in LoF of enemies) doesn’t strike me as yuge rules bloat at first glance.
No it doesn't fix any problems. It's not an unreasonable mechanic on its own, but it doesn't fix it. Take a mine placed behind a planter. The enemy trooper doesn't have LOF to the mine, but will have to the camo marker. Take a unit moving to a spot where it has LOF to a mine that is still in Marker state and then wants to camo. Take a mine that is being placed in LOF of a mine that is still in Marker state. Arguably the simplest fix is that the active trooper simply declares re-camo in LOF of the Marker and then reactive player at resolution will reveal whether the camouflage marker is hiding a Trooper with LOF or not. The mechanic where it is the perception of the enemy that decides the skill is, I find, volatile, because it makes it uncertain when and if the rules are written from the God (Gamer) perspective or the miniature's perspective.
Honestly, you'd probably be able to make it "you can recamo whenever you want, but if someone declares an ARO in response then the recamoing fails". This also neatly resolves Camo Hackers recamoing in Hacking Area of an enemy Hacker and ending IMM/ISO in the Camo state.
