NCO and Lt.

Nope, you just spend the lieutenant orders. NCO is not a private skill, so your opponent already knows which models have it.

 

No, you simply spend it on the NCO as if it were a regular order.

 

Technicality - when using the NCO automatic skill, since I am "considering the LT Order as another Regular Order for said combat group" (NCO and LT don't have to be in the same one), do I need to openly state that I am specifically spending "an LT Order as a Regular Order" or can I say "I'm spending a Regular order on <the name of the NCO trooper>" and leave it to the opponent to figure out? This could help avoid revealing an obvious LT+1 Order.

 

The number of orders you have is open info. If you generated 2 lieutenant orders, your opponent knows that already.

 

Bear in mind that using the Lt. Order doesn't actually force you to reveal your Lieutenant's identity, it's just that normally you can only use your Lt. Order on the Lt. so unless your opponent is having one heck of a bad day it's pretty obvious who it is.

It's a bit like putting down an S6 camo marker in PanO, you don't have to tell your opponent that it's an Uhlan, but they still know it's an Uhlan.

 

Does using NCO reveal your LT? No.
Does using NCO reveal that you are using NCO? Unclear at this point.
It is not clear whether NCO is a skill you need to declare; "I'll NCO this LT order to activate my Camouflage Marker here"
It is not clear whether you need to reveal that the NCO trooper considers the order a Regular Order "I'll use this LT Order as a Regular Order to activate this Camouflage Marker"

There are a few troopers where this is an issue:
Hac Tao Heavy Machine Gun - Not actually an issue if you know Yu Jing LTs well enough.
Patroclus - Holomask allows them to disguise as a LT unit.
Hafza LT - Holomask allows them to disguise as a NCO unit
Sepuclhre Knight LT - Holomask allows them to disguise as a NCO unit

 

Do we have any NCO Camouflage units? Because that would narrow "what is that camo?" game as well.

EDIT: Scots Guards for Ariadna, for sure. Two NCO profiles under Camo in the whole army.

 

I very strongly advise that you don't go down this route.

NCO does not have the Private Information Label. Your opponent will know if it's being used.

 

Thank you for clearing this up! This was exactly what I was hoping would be the answer.

This was brought up in this thread previously: https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/nco-in-camo-state.38386/
and it never got settled.

 

So to clarify, a Moira LT spends an Lt order I have to say either:
"I activate this Moira and spend the Lt order I use NCO to treat it as Regular"
Or
"I activate this Moira and spend the Lt order as an Lt order"?


Does that apply when the NCO skill is covered by a situation where it IS private information?

IE for a Hafza Lt Holomasked as a Sekban I need to say "I activate this Sekban and spend the Lt order as an Lt order"

How does this work with other skills that lack the Private Information label but are 'hidden' due to Holomask or a Marker state? Does my opponent know that I used the skill even though the they're in a Marker state? For instance, a Zero Minelayer do I need to inform my opponent that they used Minelayer to deploy a Mine?

 

@inane.imp given the answer provided, an LT using the LT order without piping it through NCO wouldn't need to declare that they are not using a skill they don't have. You do have to be careful so that you're not giving the opponent the wrong impression when activating units with NCO, though, as this means your opponent should be able to take it for granted that the omission of NCO is admission the LT-using unit is the actual LT.

The question on Deployment Skills though is interesting, and I can see an implication for Strategos in regards to Sun Tze and Saladin, both of which tend to want body doubles to ensure their safety - does the source of Strategos need to be identified?

 

Polite request - please do not take things that I've said and apply them to a different situation which wasn't being discussed and which is not equivalent.

You're fully aware that Automatic Skills etc. that are used during an Order/ARO, and Automatic Skills etc. that are used during Deployment are not the same situation.

An answer for ONE of those situations has no bearing at all on the other situation.

 

A Sombra moves 5" through Zero G terrain in a Marker state.

Do you need to declare you're using Terrain (Zero G) not Terrain (Total)?

 

@ijw I didn't, I asked - to paraphrase - "hey the way you phrased your answer is potentially extendible to a different situation, how does it work in that situation?"

In fact in a different thread I'm specifically arguing "hey we shouldn't take what IJW said out of the context in which he said it".

 

Why should you? https://infinitythewiki.com/Terrain?version=n4 states that Terrain Total applies to all terrains now (you no longer make a choice); the problem would be about those models with 2+ terrains listed, where you need to make a choice (which I respectfully think is a bad idea: give them all at once and several problems dissappear, force to choose and we need to write down terrains once we know which ones the table has...). Also, Terrain is Automatic (optional), so...

Besides, https://infinitythewiki.com/Open_and_Private_Information states that the content of the markers are private information, so until the camo reveals the model, there's no need. Besides, you would need to have a troop with 2+ terrains and play in a table with at least 2 of that troop's terrains for the issue to matter.

 

This seems like the easiest one to answer. Saladin might not even be on the table yet when Strategos is used to hold back an extra model. So presumably he himself isn't declaring a skill - your ability to hold back an extra model is a result of having an Lt with Strategos but it isn't something the Lt does as an action.

I think it's also safe to assume that Minelayer doesn't have to be declared either. I mean, that's kinda the point. We can take ijw's "skills used during deployment are different from skills used in an order" as the reason.

This one is really interesting. I would like to know as well. The ruling on NCO would certainly suggest "yes."

There's a similar question as to whether and when a camo token has to declare that it's using Stealth when moving. But that one may have to wait for the FAQ clarification on ARO generation and invalid ARO declaration.

 

Because NCO is Automatic, Optional and IJW strongly recommends that we reveal its use.

I think Terrain is the same type of scenario.

 

I would probably say the model had "a relevant terrain skill" if I moved an obviously odd movement range. This is in the spirit of keeping private information private while still giving my opponent all the relevant info they are due.

If we go too far down this hole we end up with questions such as if a Sphinx can pretend to be an Anathematic by moving only 4", or if I have to tell my opponent that my maximum legal first move value is 6".