If it doesn't say, then it doesn't happen. It's impossible to write rules by saying what will not happen, because there is an infinite amount of things that can happen, so instead rules are written stating what happens.
So hitting Camo Marker doesn't trigger a hit to the Camouflaged trooper, because it's not explicitly mentioned? Surely you aren't saying that camouflaged troopers are effectively immune to all attacks.
No, we're saying that it's possible for the mine and the camo marker to be different sizes, so hitting one won't always hit the other.
How can template touch the mine (base), when the mine isn't on the table? This interpretation also creates gotcha situations in full LoF situations, where mine controller can say that he didn't feel that the template was placed in a way that it touched the (missing) mine (base). Therefore, the action is wasted. I have provided several rules quotes that imply that hit against camo marker is always a hit against the camouflaged trooper. I have seen zero rules quotes that say to opposite.
Yes we do. As others have said, if you dont hit the mine at S0 under the S2 token, then you dont hit the mine
No, what you've shown us are quotes that says the Marker is affected. Hitting the top of an AP Mine's Camouflage Marker affects the Marker, but not the Mine. Now, a Camouflage Marker isn't actually capable of taking damage from most (if not all) Direct Template Weapons, so the effect will be fairly close to null. As the AP Mine's controller, the other player has to inform the attacker that they hit the Marker but that there is nothing that would be forced to make an ARM/BTS Roll because of it. Similar story with an Ambush Camo Marker, which hides nothing. You may think this sounds like bullshit, and in part I agree with you, but this is a quirk of the Camouflaged State's cancellation clauses which requires the Camouflaged trooper to be hit and not the Marker itself. In the ideal circumstances, I would say that the Marker being hit by any attack would cause a cancellation, but that's not currently supported by the rules.
Also, hitting a Mine that is not in cover with a Intuitive Attack, without it also blowing up in your face, is really tricky with a large template, and effectively impossible with the small teardrop.
Okay, I now think that I understand your reasoning. The camouflaged trooper/mine is actually secretly on the table. When a camo marker is targeted, you score two hits: one hit to the camo marker and one hit to the camouflaged trooper. —> hit against camo marker does nothing and is ignored (?) and hit against camouflaged trooper triggers ARM/BTS roll. Then why in all examples they speak about hitting camo marker and not about hitting camouflaged trooper? Poor editing?
Because the examples are about troopers the same size as their marker, so the distinction is irrelevant.
Yeah, should probably add an example of a shot at a camo'd mine in cover for the next FAQ. @ijw , can we get this added to the list of things for the next FAQ?
