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

[SOLVED] Mine AROs Overlapping with Movement Declarations?

Discussion in 'Solved Rule Questions' started by fenren, Oct 29, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. fenren

    fenren Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2018
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    35
    What happens at the conclusion of this order?

    1 - A pair of active troopers declare movement as their first short skill, ending their movement next to a reactive trooper in camo maker state.

    2 - The reactive player declares placing a mine as their ARO (in base2base with their trooper) revealing the reactive camo trooper.

    3 - The active player declares movement, moving the pair of active troopers into base2base with the second short skill of the order

    4 - The declared "Desired" path for the first and second short movement skills of the active player and the declared placement of the mine by the reactive player overlap.

    In the below example we have a camouflaged mine layer, who is prone in a corner on-top of a building, and is facing toward the center of the roof. Two climbing plus troopers use their first short skill to come up onto the top of the building and move as close as they can without being in base to base contact with the camo marker. The reactive player declares placing a mine as their ARO, revealing the reactive trooper. The active player moves his troopers in base2base as the second short skill. On conclusion of the order the players stare at each other wondering what to do next...
    MineQuestion.png
    A) The mine is canceled on Conclusion of the order, because an enemy trooper is there.

    B) The mine is placed and the active trooper's movement is cut short just before the mine

    C) The enemy trooper moves and the mine is placed below them because, "In Infinity, Orders and AROs are simultaneous regardless of the Skills declared."

    D) None of the above... HELP!


    As a Mine never triggers if the Small Teardrop Template affects an ally, successfully placing a mine in this situation would mean the active troopers, assuming they win in close-combat, may be subject to the mine triggering later in the game on their next order or ARO declaration.
     
    NorthernNomad likes this.
  2. DukeofEarl

    DukeofEarl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,216
    Likes Received:
    1,169
    I am not sure if it is covered, but it would make sense that the trooper could not move over the mine as it was declared first.
     
  3. MikeTheScrivener

    MikeTheScrivener O-12 Peace Kepper

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    2,485
    Mines are placed at the "conclusion" step of the order, if there isn't sufficient place to put one or the space you nominated is now occupied you perform an "idle" instead
     
  4. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    4,218
    Mines are placed at Declaration, Mine placement resolves at Conclusion.

    This means that there's a where the mine placement is known but the mine isn't technically on the table.

    The reason this timing exists is to prevent Mines triggering on the order they're placed. My understanding is that @mike's interpretation is an unintended consequence of that.

    Personally I prefer playing it that you can't move through a Marker thats on the table even if that Marker doesn't technically exist yet.

    There's another thread on this that someone should see if they can find.

    https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/mines-question.24484/
     
    #4 inane.imp, Oct 29, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2018
    daboarder and DukeofEarl like this.
  5. fenren

    fenren Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2018
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    35
    Thanks for the feedback, we played it as the mine not being placed at the time.

    The ability to end movement where mine placement is noted during ARO declaration, thereby forcing cancellation on Conclusion of the order, nerfs mine AROs, but is still better than not having an answer.
     
  6. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,054
    Likes Received:
    7,584
    Just FYI: the situation in the original post has an illegal ARO declaration. Because the Move is done immediately when declared the AROing trooper is trying to place a mine inside an enemy trooper, something that is not allowed. (You can replicate your actual question simply by having the active troopers stop their Move 2" away from reactive minelayer)
     
    DukeofEarl and inane.imp like this.
  7. Ben Kenobi

    Ben Kenobi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,234
    Likes Received:
    1,272
    I don't get it. Which rule (FAQ/Wiki/PDF) is used in this situaion.
    I don't say, you are wrong, I only want to understand it.
     
  8. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,054
    Likes Received:
    7,584
    Just the basics.

    Movement that does not require a roll is executed immediately according to the general movement rules and you're not allowed to place game element inside other game elements.
     
    Nemo No Name likes this.
  9. Ben Kenobi

    Ben Kenobi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,234
    Likes Received:
    1,272
    Can you then always prevent your oponent from placing the mine when you occupy the place where he wants to place his mine or is it placed after the movement of the active trooper.
     
  10. solkan

    solkan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    691
    Likes Received:
    1,153
    That’s the thing. For as much as people keep saying “everything is simultaneous” for Infinity, a whole lot of it isn’t anymore and that simultaneity gets replaced by sequential declarations and a certain amount of retroactivity. For instance, active turn movement is declared and resolved, and then you have retroactive of shooting and actions along that movement path.

    What the rules for mines say is
    • Mines or Camouflage Markers are not considered deployed until the Conclusionof the Order.
    But it also says

    • By spending a Short Skill or ARO, the user places a Camouflage Marker (CAMO) on the game table to represent the camouflaged Mine.
    • In the Active Turn, the trooper can deploy the Camouflage Marker in base contact or, if he moved, in base contact with any part of his route. In the Reactive Turn, the trooper must deploy the Camouflage Marker in base contact.
    So when you declare the Mine ARO you place a camo marker on the table, and that camo marker isn’t considered deployed until the conclusion of the order.

    What does “deployed” mean? We know it means that the mine won’t activate the same order it’s declared, and can’t be shot or otherwise mineswept the same order. But is the camo marker there for the purposes of the old “You can’t move into base contact with a camo marker” rule?

    As far as I can tell, it is. Because that’s the simpler solution, the one that doesn’t cause any quantum snap backs or any of the other 2nd edition mess that N3 was trying to eliminate. The marker was placed on the table, future movement is now constrained to go around it.
     
    Ginrei, BLOODGOD, fenren and 2 others like this.
  11. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,054
    Likes Received:
    7,584
    I think you and I are not on the same page. But let's roll with it.

    "Can you always prevent your opponent from placing a mine?"
    If you're close enough. Please refer to @inane.imp answer.

    "...when you occupy the place where he wants to place his mine..."
    Well, you can't place the mine there at all, which is what I'm pointing out. So if you completely box in a Guilang at any point prior to them getting an ARO, the Guilang won't be able to declare AP Mine skill as ARO to place an AP Mine because there's no space to place the mine in.

    "...or is it placed after the movement of the active trooper"
    As per the rules, the mine isn't actually placed until the end of the order. Please refer to @inane.imp answer.

    Please note that the same applies to Dodge ARO movement! You can use your second short skill to body-block Dodge movement if your opponent declares the Dodge to a place you'd rather not them move if you're close enough.
     
  12. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,054
    Likes Received:
    7,584
    "Is not considered active until the Conclusion of the Order" would have been neater - but I don't think body-blocking using mines is a very good interaction.
     
    fenren likes this.
  13. HellLois

    HellLois What the Hell...Lois?
    CB Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    636
    Likes Received:
    1,911
    As some players said, remember that the mine are no considered deployed until the Conclusion of the Order.
    In this case I see that you cant deploy the mine.

    Edited: I misread that there are two troops. :P
     
    #13 HellLois, Oct 30, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2018
  14. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    4,218
    Is this also true then?

    Step 3: Alice does something in LOF of Bob
    Step 4. Bob deploys Mine in ARO (placing the marker)
    Step 5. Alice moves into the space occupied by the marker
    Step 6. Bob's deploy Mine ARO is no longer valid and becomes an Idle

    Or, was Alice not allowed to move into the space where the marker is and the Mine will be placed at the Conclusion of the order?

    Edit: just changed the verbiage of the second option to make it clearer.
     
    #14 inane.imp, Oct 31, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2018
  15. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,405
    Likes Received:
    2,597
    Wait, are you saying if I move towards a model, they elect to ARO place a mine, then I declare a second move order overlapping the mine, I can effectively cancel the mine placement and waste a mine charge?

    I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand it seems like a janky rules interaction, on the other hand a trooper is fumbling trying to lay explosives and someone runs up and kicks it out of his hands?
     
    inane.imp likes this.
  16. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    4,218
    No reason it needs to be limited to Deployables either:

    Step 3. Alice fires an LFT at Bob.
    Step 4. Bob Dodges declaring his path
    Step 5. Alive moves so that she is now in the path of Bob's Dodge
    Step 6. Bob's Dodge becomes an Idle because the path is no longer valid
     
    Ben Kenobi and Hecaton like this.
  17. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,405
    Likes Received:
    2,597
    I figure that Bob would just move the furthest distance he could then stop in this scenario which includes a possible 0", just like declaring movement in general. He can't specify an exact stopping point anyway because you can't pre-measure the dodge movement.
     
  18. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    4,218
    Yeah. That's how I'd rule it as well: stop the putative 1mm short of B2B. But that's just making stuff up to make it work on the table. RAW there's an immovable object and irresistible force.

    Dodge says:
    "Movement resulting from Dodging in Reactive Turn can never be used to enter base to base contact with an enemy. Only the Common Skill Engageallows that."

    General movement rules say:
    "A trooper's Movement ends automatically whenever he enters base to base contact with an enemy, even if the movement route specified is cut short as a result."

    Thus making a declaration that moves a Dodge into B2B is not covered by the rules and consequently must be invalid. Declarations that are invalid at resolution are resolved as Idles.
     
  19. ev0k

    ev0k Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    312
    Likes Received:
    344
    I'd rule that as the dodge movement was declared before the regular movement in the order sequence, it has precedence over the regular movement, resulting in the active player being blocked.
     
  20. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    4,218
    Which *seems* to be the opposite of what @HellLois is suggesting.
     
    BLOODGOD likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.