1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra Política de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

Is CB aware of the requirements to declare Reset?

Discussion in 'Rules' started by Hecaton, May 1, 2019.

Tags:
  1. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,155
    Likes Received:
    3,990
    Aight, that's all well and good, and is a good reminder that if you Reset vs. the non-Stealth enemy and then get hit with a hacking attack your Reset works against that hacking attack.

    Hold up - here, it's not so much that this prevents you from declaring Change Facing or Reset, but that you're not allowed to to begin with. The requirements for Reset are:


    So in these circumstances, you can't declare a Reset, and typically will be taking a hacking attack unopposed. (For example, a Unidron and an Umbra Legate hacker are in a fireteam together and move in an enemy Repeater area; an enemy hacker who had a program capable of affecting the Unidron would be forced to declare it at that point, allowing the Legate to throw a Brain Blast, Sucker Punch, or Oblivion unopposed.) Do we know if the FAQ is meant to be a clumsy way of expanding the ability to declare Reset to include this situation?
     
  2. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,379
    Likes Received:
    2,541
    Doesn't that dot point allow for reset in the situation from the Unidron?
     
    Hecaton likes this.
  3. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,155
    Likes Received:
    3,990
    No, because you're not in ZoC, just in hacking area.
     
  4. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,379
    Likes Received:
    2,541
    I was under the impression it was treated as the hacker's ZOC, and allowed for a non hackable trooper to give an HD+ the chance to toss out White Noise for example. @inane.imp you're more familiar with hacking than me am I doing that right?
     
  5. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,155
    Likes Received:
    3,990
    For hacking programs, yes. Reset is not a hacking program.
     
  6. meikyoushisui

    meikyoushisui Competitor for Most Ignored User

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    1,466
    ZoC and Hacking Area are two different things. A non-hackable unit in a hacking area doesn't (or shouldn't, at least) trigger a hacking ARO of any kind.
     
  7. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,155
    Likes Received:
    3,990
    Well it does if the hacker has White Noise.
     
  8. meikyoushisui

    meikyoushisui Competitor for Most Ignored User

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    1,466
    It absolutely shouldn't if it does. Can you explain the logic behind it working that way?

    Double-checking, I can't find any rules for the conditions under which a hacking ARO is valid at all.
     
  9. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,155
    Likes Received:
    3,990
    Since there aren't any requirements to declare White Noise, and it's an ARO, you can declare it if anyone does anything in your hacking area.
     
  10. Hachiman Taro

    Hachiman Taro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2018
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    726
    And I think that's deliberate.

    It would be better if you could always Reset if you have any other valid ARO though.
     
    inane.imp likes this.
  11. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    4,212
    A hacker may react with Hacking Programs within their Hacking Area as if it were their ZOC.

    A. The Unidron is not a Hacker
    B. Reset is not a Hacking Program

    "Hackers in the same Army List as the Repeater, and their possible allies in multiplayer games, can hack in the Zone of Control (8-inch radius) of the Repeater as if it was their own.

    In the same way, they can also react with Hacking Programs to enemy Orders declared in the Zone of Control of the Repeater as if it were their Zone of Control"
     
    #11 inane.imp, May 1, 2019
    Last edited: May 1, 2019
  12. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    4,212
    Also Shield-2/3 programs.

    Allow both of those things and most of the hacking related issues with Stealth + non-Stealth go away. AHDs still get screwed though, but they need a lot more love anyway.
     
  13. toadchild

    toadchild EI Aspect
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    2,374
    Likes Received:
    4,510
    I think “is CB aware” is the wrong question.

    I do think that Reset’s conditions should be revisited to make it a little easier to declare in both the active and reactive turns.
     
    Icchan, ChoTimberwolf and inane.imp like this.
  14. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    4,212
    The active turn issue is the more egregious one:

    3. I move my TAG within ZOC of a SSL1 Hacker/Jammer
    4. My opponent delays their ARO
    5. I can't Reset because none of the requirements have been met
     
  15. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,155
    Likes Received:
    3,990
    I mean if they *are* aware, it means that suggesting the second part is a moot point; they've considered that idea and discarded it.
     
  16. toadchild

    toadchild EI Aspect
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    2,374
    Likes Received:
    4,510
    I don’t want to start a fight or anything; it’s just a thing I’ve noticed about how you frequently phrase things.

    First off is that Corvus Belli isn’t a single entity. It consists of a bunch of different people who are going to have a bunch of different perspectives on the rules and differing degrees of ability to change them.

    Second, it’s possible to recognize that something is a potential problem, but not have addressing it as a priority. To give an example, the existence of the WHD clearly indicates that they are aware of some of the hacking ARO timing issues and wanted to address them, even if the way they did so is not entirely to my liking.

    Third is that the recent FAQ is slightly odd in its assertion that you can reset in the case of mixed AROs through a repeater, which brings us to this thread. Does CB know? I think at least some of them may not have considered it past the intuitive response of “oh well you can just Reset”. Based on that wording, I think that corner case probably got overlooked in the FAQ process. They certainly have the same level of access to the rules text as we do, so now that it’s been brought up they can revisit that and see that there’s more to it than that. But so let’s assume “they” (whoever is responsible for rules and FAQs) know now. Even if they want to fix it, I’m not expecting anything before the next FAQ update in July. That doesn’t mean they don’t know or don’t care, just that they don’t think it’s such a pressing issue they have to make an unscheduled errata just to deal with it.

    The new FAQ process seems good, but I don’t expect it to be perfect. The LoF errata was a long time coming, and adjustments to AROs, stealth, and Reset may take a while as well. We all want the game to be as good as possible, and so does CB. It’s good to bring up weird interactions for community discussion and analysis, so please don’t think I’m trying to shut you down. As I said at the top, I just don’t think you were asking the right question.
     
    Reynard, Teslarod, oren_dotan and 9 others like this.
  17. JoKeR

    JoKeR HAWZA Instructor
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    296
    @inane.imp i think you still can:
    all the reqisites (range, ZOC, etc) checked at the resolution step.
    so you can declare Reset & if your enemy attack you with comms/hacking attack, you meet the requirements in that moment. if he not - your reset become Idle, but you not suffer anything.
     
  18. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    4,212
    Requirements have to be valid at Declaration. It's the same issue that prevents pre-emptively declaring BS Attack when you don't have LOF.
     
    BLOODGOD likes this.
  19. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,996
    Likes Received:
    5,677
    In theory this line of repeaters
    means the repeaters ZoC is an extention of the hackers ZoC.

    The reset is a known issue and I hope it gets fixed to be in line with all other dodges because SSL2 hackers are an issue for the active player.
     
  20. Zewrath

    Zewrath Nordic Master

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,705
    No, you're mixing the terms up. Look at this:

    "Hacking Area
    This term refers to the Area of Effect of Hacking Programs when it covers not only the Hacker's Zone of Control (ZC), but also the Zones of Control of all usable Repeaters."

    The hacker have a ZoC and the Repeater have their own, seperate and unrelated, ZoC. The HACKING AREA, hower, is INSIDE the ZoC of the Repeater and the Hacker but it ISN'T THE SAME as Hacker having ZoC of inside of a repeater. Otherwise the Hacker would be able to declare Change Facing etc. when someone passes a repeater. Further, if what you're saying is true, then the HVT: Espionage would be able to completed via a Repeater and not the Hackers ZoC (which is specifically mentioned), as you're now treating all repeaters as the Hackers ZoC, which as far as I'm aware, isn't the case.