This would be one of the few situations I would advocate the use of Mercs. Instead of fitting a different MSV sniper in every faction to counter Smoke, just give MSV2 to Armand or whatever Aristo they're shoehorning into Infinity that week. This also goes for Nimbus Grenades and other pieces of gear that are becoming increasingly very important, but unevenly distributed.
Smoke and vm2 have been in the game since the beggining, but now the acces to both have changed and there is a power swift, but there are more reasons for that powet swift apart of those 2, and not all armies have been toned in the same way With all that, I think some people is associating those 2 weapons with the cause of the power swift because those are very noticeable army options, but for some armues, those are necessary tools, while for others are extra freebies.
That's one of it's menanings, but we are not talking about food here. In a rules-debate context , "consistencia" is equivalent to "consistency". As per the same link you provided, "Trabazón, coherencia entre las partículas de una masa o los elementos de un conjunto" (in bold the relevant words).
"Coherence between elements of a conjunt" and "be the same" are different things. They can be different and still be coherence Unless we reach for an extremely restrictive meaning, in which then, the game has a lot of inconsistencies, as for example, the ones I named before Or we use in a broad way to talk about what is good for the game, or in a narrow one and we go to very exact rules, but not changing depending on what the topic is, that is also inconsistent
Consistent isn't the same as equal. A series of numbers arranged as {0,1,2,3,4,5,6} is consistent, a series arranged as {2,1,4,0,3,5,6} is inconsistent, neither is a series of equal numbers. In the case of smoke you have; Template attack works by touching Visibility zone works by touching Template attack and visibility zone works by touching You suggest Template attack and visibility zone to work by being fully within. This makes it inconsistent when the effect's two constituent parts both work the same way, but when the two effects come from the same source it suddenly does not. I highly doubt that Spanish defines logic so differently that this would be described as consistent in Spanish but inconsistent in English.
I suggest for zones (specifically visibility zones) to work by being within, because it will be consistent with line of vision, which works with straight lines from one point to another. Here an extreme example (again, maybe I need a picture of it): having a dude protected by smoke because it has a 1%of him "obscured" by smoke, and one dude behind him is 95% behind the smoke and the other 5% behind the first dude, but is completely visible because is not touching smoke. It is consistent at the moment with template weapons? Of course, yes. Is a template weapon? Only when shoted, and is not necessary to be one IMO. Ia it consistent with line of sight rules? No. Why do it need to be consistent with template weapons but not with line of sight, when is something more related to LoS? Also, as I stated, we have 3 different ways of putting zones in the game, and all 3 are different, not consistent between them. We are using the same rule for different purposes, and that can or nor be good depending on the rule and interactions. Why so much fear to think about changing a rule to solve a crack?
But they are not the same, just it works in a consistent way because it's the same behaviour regardless of being a fire circular teamplate from a Rocket Launcher or a Smoke teamplate from a Smoke Grenade. We all now that there are indeen inconsistencies in several rules of this game, but changing an important element of the gameplay such as Smoke Teamplates is something to be carefully considered for N4, not for the current edition, because it would affect to the balance of many models and Factions.
