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

Sixth Sense, LOF and Silent.

Discussion in 'Rules' started by Gero, Jul 12, 2019.

  1. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    754
    That not my reading of Sixth Sense:
    My reading of that is different. It doesn't say it works like a 360º visor, but that let the model ignore a requisite (LoF). And also, the 360º vision of CC is limited to CC, the model cannot trace LoF outside CC when engaged.
    So, when the model declares a CC attack, that clause activates for the entire order. And now the reactive model can declare a BS attack at some point before the other model reached B2B. If the justification in the ZVZ was the LoF, it would work the same:
    • The active model declares CC, SSL2 enable BS attack without LoF, reactive model can shot. But that doesn't happen for the ZVZ rule:
    Which, now that i'm reading it... the BS attack may ignore the LoF requisite thanks to SSL2, so it could theoretically be also declared :/

    This is why that FAQ is dangerous, the FAQ goes against that; one of the gold rules of inifinty with that reasoning.

    If SSL2 would work like a 360º visor, then it would work like that, and maybe it's the intended functionality. I'll take your explanation as the RAI until SSL2 is reworked; but the RAW in this case guide the player for a very different path.
     
  2. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    5,548
    Likes Received:
    11,318
    "and regardless the facing of the user"

    If you're attacked, you get to ignore your facing for that attacker.

    No it doesn't. There is only LoF in base contact, no matter what point in time in the Order you are looking at.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  3. Gero

    Gero Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2018
    Messages:
    135
    Likes Received:
    71
    I can see the FT:Delaying their ARO as Valid due to ignoring the stealth part, Sixth sense doesn’t affect Silent Trait so technically, the only guy who got Attacked becomes unable to Answer the Attack? Though he is being the target of an Attack and thus Sixth sense kicks in...meaning he will be able to ARO normally and the rest of the FT can only declare change Facing as Sixth sense won’t Kick in for them due not to being targeted by an attack thus their ARO cannot be derived from the Attack second short skill, since Silent prevents them from such for not having LOF to the attacker.

    This is what I’ve gathered and thought about the issue.
     
  4. Gero

    Gero Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2018
    Messages:
    135
    Likes Received:
    71

    Sorry for the Double Post truly, But it does apply the valid effects of Silent, like the Troopers who didn’t have LOF cannot declare ARO against the Attack declaration but they can declare ZOC ARO due to the movement inside ZOC.
     
  5. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    754
    But that doesn't give you LoF, one effect is ignoring your facing and the requisite of LoF and other very different one is having 360º vision arc, and also the wording of both aren't even close.
    But don't get me wrong. I'm not saying this works like this, obviously you know better how this works. I'm saying that accordingly with how this works, the RAW is extremely missleading, opposit meaning levels of misleading in some scenarios.


    Let's imagine a player who read the ability and understand what I understood. a.k.a you ignore the LoF and facing requisites instead of the 360º visor thing.
    For this player in the SSL2 and Smoke case a BS attack would be legal if the enemy declares CC attack (he is attacked, all happens at once, for SSL2 he can ignore the LoF requisite, so he can declare BS attack). But then he finds this FAQ:
    The reading of that FAQ for a player that followed the RAW without knowing how that is supposed to work is: "OK, so SSL2 is not retroactive for some reason in this case, you can't apply SSL2 to the first part of that order" breaking that golden rule of infinity.

    My point is that like in the saying "Caesar's wife must not just be honourable, but must appear to be so", with rules it's the same thing; "Infinity's rules must not only be coherent, but must also appear to be so" and in this case those rules looks like a b***h!
    So as you said before, Sixth Sense needs a rewrite badly.
     
  6. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    5,548
    Likes Received:
    11,318
    I don't understand. What 'instead'?

    Being able to ignore your facing against attacks is identical to having a 360 Visor against attacks. It's literally the same thing.

    EDIT
    Now I'm just confused. What's stopping SSL2 from being applied retroactively?
     
    #26 ijw, Jul 12, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2019
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  7. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    754
    It's almost the same, but in some game scenarios it's different:
    • ZVZ
      • 360º visor: You can't trace LoF, so you cannot BS
      • Ignore requisites: BS attack don't have a LoF requisite so you can target through the ZvZ (your combi become a Jammer)
    • Speculatives/Guided from total cover
      • 360 visor: You can't trace LoF, so you cannot BS
      • Ignore requisites: Theorically you can (see above), however the 2 points about Speculatives and Guided in SSL2 say that you can't, so you can't.
    The way SSL2 is worded may lead to think the ignore requisites meaning (and also the fluff of sitxh sense, being like a supernatural instinct that let you react "without actually seeing him")
    With the reading of ignoring requisites, you could target through the ZVZ (see above); so the FAQ telling you you cannot use the BS attack lead you to that conclusion. This is a case of a wrong starting point (ignore requisites) that twist the whole reasoning.
    With the 360 visor reading is congruent with that golden rule.
     
  8. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    5,548
    Likes Received:
    11,318
    OK, I think I see where the miscommunication is.

    Sixth Sense doesn't grant you LoF and doesn't allow you to ignore requirements for LoF in your reaction. It just lets you get a Face to Face Roll. The bit in Sixth Sense that lets you shoot back against someone behind you is "regardless the facing of the user".

    So it's not ignoring requirements.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  9. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    754
    I'm trying to make sense of this, I swear; but the meaning of that line just slips through my fingers...
    How can you attack without LoF but without ignoring the requirements for LoF?? Or you have LoF or you ignore the requisite, if you don't have LoF and cannot ignore the requisites you cannot attack.
    However if the ability let you perform the FtF without having LoF then it's ignoring the requisite.
    And the facing of the user is important but the LoF is also important, if my model is facing towards an enemy but that enemy is behind a ZVZ or a wall, that model can't attack it.

    As I said before, that line is extremely misleading. What you explained here it's something that I wouldn't be able to figure out by myself for how it is worded.
     
  10. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    5,548
    Likes Received:
    11,318
    You can't. That's the point.

    Note that Sixth Sense doesn't say that you can attack back, just that you can react.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  11. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    754
    If you were any other used, I would think i'm being trolled hard :P

    So you don't meet the requisited to attack back, but can attack because you are reacting. However it's ok to do the "ilegal" attack back, but doing the ilegal attack back through a ZVZ would be clearly too illegal.

    [​IMG]
    I need a break XDD
     
  12. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,989
    Likes Received:
    4,846
    @Ogid The issue is that the text of Sixth Sense *does* say what you think it says, and @ijw is wrong with his "Sixth Sense doesn't let you attack, it only lets you react" comments. Think of the FAQ as an errata; there's a bunch of warcors on the FAQ committee who never actually read the rules that closely, and their instinct upon realizing they've been misapplying the rule is to change the rule to fit their preconception.

    It still begs the question of what "without LoF" in Sixth Sense means. The answer seems to be "nothing, ignore that, pretend that that bit of printed rules doesn't exist even though it clearly does."

    Amusingly, elsewhere in the FAQ they say that attacks which don't need LoF (Jammers) ignore vision modifiers, so maybe it was that? But no.
     
    #32 Hecaton, Jul 12, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2019
    Ogid likes this.
  13. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    5,548
    Likes Received:
    11,318
    Like I said, it's legal to attack back against someone behind you, because you get to ignore your facing.
     
    A Mão Esquerda and Ogid like this.
  14. Diphoration

    Diphoration Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2018
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    490
    Here is my point of view.

    Sixth Sense allows you to react to -the attack- regarless of facing.
    • Allows the user to respond with a Face to Face Roll to Attacks (and only Attacks) directed at him by an enemy outside his LoF and regardless the facing of the user.
    Now, the FAQ shows that you can't retroactively shoot the person before they reach base to base if they declare a CC attack on you after from out of LoF.

    You may only respond to the attack, and a CC attack is -only- declared while locked into BTB.

    If you could retroactively pick any spot to shoot the person when attacked from behind, the FAQ would be wrong and would allow you to attack the person at any point of their movement regardless of the zero visiblity zone. The third point of Sixth Sense level 2 would let you do it.
    • Sixth Sense L2 allows its user to respond to Attacks against him through a Zero Visibility Zone without suffering the usual -6 MOD.
    I think the intent of the FAQ shows that you don't actually get to shoot them at any point.

    I do not think you can shoot at someone who entered BtB before you had vision on them.
     
    Ogid likes this.
  15. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,989
    Likes Received:
    4,846
    It also lets you respond "even without LoF to the attacker." If you can ignore facing, you can ignore LoF, rules as written in the rulebook. If we take the FAQ ruling as an errata, that's fine (though technically you can still retaliate vs. spec fire through a solid wall with it).
    It doesn't "show," it "says."

    That doesn't mean you can't shoot them on their way in.

    Now you're getting it...


    ...nope, you lost it.
     
  16. Ogid

    Ogid Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2018
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    754
    Yep, the RAW is closer than my reading; I'm not backpedaling there. However @ijw is one of the few links we have with the RAI; so as this is supposed to work like that, i was trying to understand it. But in this case the RAI is very hard to justify.
    The SSL2 wording need some love, and the only way to get that is explaining where the missunderstandings are.

    Lol, I hope not. If I changed a rule each time i played it wrong, i'd be playing to my own game by now XDD.

    In this case I'm going to take your word as a ruling that this works like this, but my brain can't parse SSL2 like that.

    And this is just what I was saying before. That FAQ plus the wording of SSL2 can be read as if SSL2 were an exception to the golden rule of "everything at the same time" instead of a particular case for the rules of ZVZ
    @Diphoration came to the same conclusion than me.
     
  17. Diphoration

    Diphoration Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2018
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    490
    Also, does Sixth Sense even matter in that situation?
    • Allows the user to respond with a Face to Face Roll to Attacks (and only Attacks) directed at him by an enemy outside his LoF and regardless the facing of the user.
    The trooper was never attacked by an enemy outside of his LoF.

    edit: forgot the word never.
     
  18. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,989
    Likes Received:
    4,846
    Basically, no, since they've explained away the relevant bullet points of Sixth Sense, despite them being printed in the rules.

    Honestly it sounds like some warcor getting salty he can't just smoke + melee an enemy sixth sense trooper like everything else, and doesn't like the idea of having to adapt his strategy.
     
  19. Diphoration

    Diphoration Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2018
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    490
    I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. You can smoke + melee an enemy with sixth sense like everything else.
     
  20. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,989
    Likes Received:
    4,846
    Until this FAQ, no you couldn't.