"Private Information is information you can keep to yourself that your opponent cannot ask about. Your Private Information remains secret until a specific game event forces you to disclose it." I'm pretty sure that CB hasn't ruled what this means in practive regarding public information. I would argue that the designer's intent is that the opponent has an obligation to ask the questions. You don't have to disclose anything proactively. I think it boils down what are legal public questions and what are legal answers to public questions. You should defintiely consult your TO for possible lists of legal public questions before answering any. Are following legal public questions that must be answered truthfully? - Tell me all the possible troop shenanigans possible for your army. (opponent must reveal holomasked troopers pretending to be minelayers etc.) - Tell me which troopers can be your LTs considering your LT skill, deployed troopers and holomasks. - Tell me how many troop slots are visible? (opponent must inform that camomarkers A and B might be decoys or mines but not markers C and D etc.)
As far as I am concerned? No. No. However, it would be courteous to tell your opponent if he asks that. Including the answer "none that you can see" (because hey, I have access to Holomasks). I'd expect a novice player (or someone totally unfamiliar with a given army) to ask such question, a veteran player, well, that'd be surprising. Again, answering such a question is in my eyes going an extra mile to be a good sport about the game: an opponent is absolutely within his right to answer "Sorry, that's not a public information." No. I consider it totally okay to ask "so how many models do you have on table?" and to be answered "well, a dozen models and half a dozen camo markers". Does it imply that some of the camo markers are Mines or Decoys? Well, most likely. does it mean some of the models are, in fact, Holoechos? Quite possible. However, contents of a Camo Marker (and whether a model is, in fact, what it is, or a Holoecho. Or Holomasked) is, again, private information. All in all, if a model is on tabletop, the opponent is entitled to all the public infomration about it. Inc. the amount of Disposable ammo left. If the model is a camo marker (I use kitbashed plastic figures painted in camo to represent these), he's entitled to be told "this is a Camo Marker". Whe would I tell my opponent all of the above? Because he can as well have learned my army by heart, or try and recreate my list on hand via Army. Which would take his attention and time from the game we're just trying to play. So I do my best to have a Courtesy List prepared, and will answer questions about models that appear on the table which weren't in the Courtesy List (because Aerial Deployment / Camo / Impersonation / Holo...).
@Errhile so @Paperclip did everything correctly regarding the holomasked trooper pretending to be minelayer?
In my meta, nobody would ask how many mines does that model still have on them. Not during Deployment phase (later in the game, as there's the matter of what got already spent, that's an another matter). Simply nobody would think of asking. But from the rules logic, I see no reason why you couldn't Holomask as a Minelayer short of one mine. I do not recall a rule preventing it: holomask allows me to represent any model of the same Silhouette value that my army is allowed to legally field. So it can be a FTO Beasthunter, there's no dispute about that. And FTO Beasthunter is a Minelayer, so it can - at deployment - have 2 mines on him (having used Minelayer skill to deploy one), or 3 mines (having not used it) - either of these options is a legal Holomask option in my eyes. Of course a Holomask can't fake a Camo Marker resulting in the Minelayer skill, but that's what a Camo trooper is there for. That being said, it is an interesting, if a rather niche question. And I'd love to hear the arguments why - in the light of what is written in the rules - it shouldn't work that way.
Short version: Because a) you choose your Holomask unit before deployment, and b) you can't use weapons or equipment of your Holomask profile. Long version: You decide which unit you want to holomask as before deployment. So in our example, you're choosing a Beasthunter with all his equipment intact. There's no option in the army builder to choose "a Beasthunter with only two mines left". Now, when you deploy your Raveneye as a Beasthunter, you're holomasking as that original profile. The "Beasthunter" can't lay a mine, because you are no Beasthunter, you're a Raveneye pretending to be one. If you lay a mine as the Raveneye during deployment, you can't use the Beasthunter's mines, just as you can't use the Beasthunter's other weapons or equipment. If that were possible, your Raveneye would still have all three mines once he comes out of holomask, since the mine you put down wasn't his. So when you lay that mine, your Raveneye loses one of his mines, but the Beasthunter doesn't. If your opponent asks, you have to tell him that Beasthunter still has three mines.
Correct! However: a. there is nothing that prevents you from choosing a Beasthunter FTO as the "cover" for your Holomask-capable unit even at the moment of generating your Courtesy List. Which - in a tournament environment - is mandatory to have, IIRC. So, you hand your opponent a list which does have the Beasthunter in it, and you do place a Beasthunter mini on the table when deploying. Despite neither being actually true - both being "faked" by Holomask. Please note that according to the courtesy list - the model has Mines (implying - full compliment of 3), and Minelayer skill. If it was a real Beasthunter, however, he cold deploy with 2 mines, and a Camo Marker within ZoC. b. And you aren't using them. There is no Mine laid - the Camo Marker in your ZoC is a different model in Camo state, not a Mine. Once the "two-Mines-left Beasthunter" drops out of Camo, he'd still be a Ravenseye with 3 Mines. Memory serving, they are even different kinds of mines, aren't they?
So when you see a minelayer model with a nearby camo marker, it is a good idea to ask "how many mines does that minelayer have left?" If the answer is "2", you know it's a real minelayer and a real mine. If the model is a minelayer holomasking as another ML, is the answer then always "3" (because the holomask mines are fake)? At that point, you wouldn't know whether the camo marker is a mine or a random camo trooper, then?
And that would border, IMO, on getting access to the other player's Private information. On the other hand, "fake/Holo Minelayer with fake 2 Mines" seems to avoid that problem. What is the downside of such a solution, then? For I do see only a pro here. What is the con...?
@Errhile I like your approach. When opponent ask about the number of mines you should definitely say "I feel that you are trying to access private information which is against the rules. Unless TO makes up a rule that forces me to reveal that information, I'm not saying anything. I will ofc put down a "Unloaded" token when they run out. Can be continue the game or is this a dealbreaker?" This line of thinking will make the Beasthunter FTO profile even more auto-include than it already is.
Well, if I get an answer like that, I will know just as much that that's a Raveneye as if my opponent had simply answered the question XD I still think it's a dubious play at least and a duchy one at most.
I honestly can't say whether I have used such a trick over the years. Definitely have used it with an actual minelayer once or twice, where asking about the amount of mines would've revealed that the Camo Marker cannot be a mine. But the opponent didn't ask. Whether it had any noticeable impact on the game, I honestly can't remember. So, for the flow of the game, let me stress it again, I see only an upside of allowing such use of Holomask shenanigans. I do not see any downside. I hoped, @burlesford that you - being opposed to this solution - could point me towards one. As I mentioned at the very beginning, I believe such tactic to be a very, very niche approach, because all it potentially allows you to do is try and hide one of your Camo models as a (potential!) mine. Is it any more dubious than hiding your true numbers behind a Holoprojector deploying as 3 actual, individual figures (well okay, this is expressedly permitted in the rules, if memory serves me)? Forgive me the tone, but I have for a long time considered Infinity to be a game where a lot of trickery and subterfuge, mindplay and skulduggery is not only possible, but should be expected. As long as you can expect your opponent to play the game honestly, that is fine. Otherwise... which of the Holoprojector's 3 echos is the actual model? Which one of the several identically equipped troopers is the Lt? What is hiding under each of the numerous Camo Markers (remeber, Ariadna can field a fully Camo'ed list, inc. options for a Camo Lt.)? If I wanted to cheat on these, it would be a child's play. If you wanted me to note it down for every single one of them - the game would become a slog. And take ages. This is not a game of chess, where exact identity and status of every piece on the board is clear at any moment. I have explained this to concerned watchers (some of them became players after a while): there are so many ways to potentially cheat within the allowed rules in Infinity that if I know someone is willing to cheat outside of the rules, I simply won't play them. It is not worth my time to play someone who is not willing to follow the rules. But as long as we stay within the rules, well, as Sun Tzu wrote, "All warfare is based on deception". If the rules allow me to deceive my opponent - by the use of Holo, Camo, Hidden Deployment, Decoys and a couple other rules I might be missing right now, it is all within accepted code of conduct. Of course, we come round to the question whether the specific use of a Holomask to depict a Minelayer short of one mine is allowed in the rules (as I believe), or not allowed (as @burlesford believes). At the current moment, my arguments weren't enough to persuade him to change his opinion, and - I'm very sorry - I haven't heard any argument that would persuade me to change mine. Until CB FAQs this matter (which is an interesting question to ask them about!), I guess it would be up to a TO to judge either way. And certainly leave on side of the argument dissatisfied...
We definitely ask about number of mines remaining on likely-Minelayer troops in our local group: I did it last week when facing a TLB army with 7 (iirc?) camo markers (at 200 points, jeebus). I would definitely accept @Errhile 's argument about Holomask being able to mimic a Beasthunter with only 2 mines left, since the rules are silent about state of equipment on the profile. Also it's more interesting. But this is definitely a FAQ-worthy issue.
Ofc you do this every time even if the Beasthunter is a real one and if it had used it’s minelayer ability.
We regularly ask number of mines left. It is clearly open info. I wouldn’t accept someone Holomasking anything else than the original profile: “duplicating from the imitated Model's Unit Profile”.
I now tell my opponent when I put my Raveneye down. The Minelayer skill is right on the courtesy list. I just need to tell him what type of mine it is.
How many x (mines, Panzerfausts etcetera) is not part of the private information: “Consider any piece of information on a player's Army List that is not explicitly Private as Open and knowable to all.” It’s pretty clear cut. Don’t Holomask a Minelayer.
The number is open information. The contents of mines is not. These pieces of information are Private in Infinity: Your Troopers’ Cost and SWC. The presence of Troopers possessing the Combat Jump or Parachutist Special Skill. The presence of Hidden Deployment troopers. The presence of troopers disguised by HoloMask. The contents of your Markers. The identity of Troops with Chain of Command or Counterintelligence. The identity of your Lieutenant.
Well, yes the content of the camouflage marker is private information, but I think if one sees a Raveneye with 2 E/M mines and a standing camouflage marker with mimetism -3 around him, well that marker most probably is an E/M mine.
Minelayer is an optional skill though, so theoretically you still can holomask as a minelayer without a mine deployed. However I'm not sure if it's practical at all.
It is if you don't want to use them all too fast. I'm not saying for a raveneye but you might for crazy koala, or madtrap.
