1. Meirroball Can I use mirrovall as an aro to get ftf roll with the attacker? 2. Endgame Taquel is in smoke. He is declaring endgame a comms attack on unit A with 6sense who would have lof (if not for a smoke) to taquel. Can A shoot?
Not really sure, but this is what I think: 1- Yes, as with a typical Smoke grenade it's a FtF roll even if your attack it not targeting the one attacking you. 2. Yes, because despite being a Pheroware skill that doesn't require LoS, Sixth Sense allows a trooper to "to respond to Attacks (and only Attacks) directed at them by enemies outside their LoF", and if I'm not wrong the Pheroware Endgame is an Attack (specifically, a Comms Attack).
Unfortunately, SymbioBomb is a different skill, so using it alongside another triad member using a BS Attack or a Pheroware will break the fireteam. :(
1: Yes 2. Anyone can declare BS attack against Taquel in this case, but those without 6th sense suffer -6 MOD. This doesn't really matter, because everyone nowadays is packing direct template weapons, which hit automatically.
Regarding question 2, here's the rule: Any Trooper who is the target of a BS Attack into, through, or out of a Zero Visibility Zone may respond to the attacker, provided the Trooper is facing the attacker. Note that it says "into, through, or out of". If Taquel and/or the target(s) is standing inside (or touching) the smoke, the unit targeted and only the unit targeted, can perform a BS Attack in response among those who do not have LOF. If Taquel and the target are both standing outside the smoke zone, the unit can not perform a BS Attack in response even if the smoke is the thing blocking LOF. Yes, this distinction is kind of b.s. Same applies to speculative fire, by the way, and the logic is precisely the same in Spanish even if the exact wording differs with regards to the case of "through" (which we are not dealing with here). Anyone can declare a BS Attack as ARO, but only those with LOF or who are attacked "into, through, or out of" the smoke's area may actually perform their skill declaration and the others will fail requirements. In the scenario posted in the original question, Sixth Sense only matters as with regards to what MODs the target applies to their response.
Sorry, i still don't understand. You are saying that if both models are outside smoke, then the comm attack does not count as shooting through smoke; but that if either model is in smoke, it then counts as shooting into/out of smoke ? My understanding is that through and into/out of are from the same family of word and acts the same. If a dog (or a LoF) goes into a building and then out of it from the opposite end, it is considered, by common definition, as going through the building. So either a comm attack count for all cases of going into/out of smoke and going through smoke; or it neither count for going through nor into+out of smoke.
As far as I know, it's unresolved whether a comms attack goes "through" smoke, where a straight line between the attacker and target goes through the smoke. If you can shoot back when you or the attacker is inside smoke, but not when the smoke is between you, then it's almost certainly unintended, and a rare case where RAI may actually be easily determined. But RAW, I'm not aware of any answer as to whether a comms attack travels in a straight line between attacker and target (thereby passing "through" intervening scenery and smoke), or whether a comms attack sort of teleports directly to the target without passing through anything.
Pheroware is a BS Attack with the No LOF trait, as such it never crosses the zero visibility zone, much like a speculative fire attack. Using your example of a dog; If the dog starts inside the building it will teleport out, so that is fine. If the dog teleports into the building it is moving in, so that's fine. However, if neither the dog's starting position nor the dogs end position is inside the house - how do you know the dog moved through the house when the rules don't even say the dog moved at all? Previous edition answers had IJW arguing that a literal reading of the rules result in this behaviour. A "No LOF" attack doesn't ever cross a zero visibility zone, so the only cases where the return fire clause will be satisfied is if either shooter or victim is inside a zero visibility zone (that the victim doesn't ignore). (Further check on rules, MSV doesn't actually ignore the Zero Visibility Zone, it just removes penalties from them and allows LOF through them, though I can't think of a situation where this distinction is relevant)
Thank you I understand better for No LOF through. I still find it odds to count it as out of / into. I would like to argue the following. How can you count it as LoF out of smoke, when there is no lof in the first place ? Thinking of it, the L in LoF supposes a continuous series of adjacent points, but with Comm Attacks, there is no continuous series of points that can move out and into smoke. But perhaps this was already argued; and IJW said that No LOF should still be counted as if there was an LoF that existed and which could be "moving out of or into" zones. I'd prefer that we simply consider it like hacking and have an attack that is simply occurring between two target without any regards to LoF and if such LoF is moving out of a zone. But I can understand applying it as you were saying, and applying it the same to Speculative Fire, where if you are in smoke then it is unavoidable that you are shooting out of smoke. But if there is smoke in between the target, then you can simply avoid the smoke as the spec fire only need any valid path to exist between source/destination (ie. no closed off building). So a case of No Lof that still consider weather you are in smoke or not.
The rules for returning fire through smoke doesn't say the LOF of the attack needs to come from inside or going into the "house", it says the attack needs to do that. The only point the rules for returning fire says something about LOF is in Spanish where the LOF needs to cross the zero visibility zone or the attack (not LOF) needs to come from inside or go into the zone. I think the one out for a literal reading is that No LOF label says that the attack "does not require LOF" meaning that it might still have an LOF and as such could still be considered crossing a zero visibility zone
