1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Where do you draw the line for intent?

Discussion in 'Access Guide to the Human Sphere' started by fkaos, Mar 7, 2018.

  1. fkaos

    fkaos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    38
    The thread in the rules forum regarding getting shot in the back arc from in front around a corner got me thinking. From drawing the actual interactions in drafting software I am finding the most of the time the zone to do this in are less than 1mm wide, and sometimes less than 0.1mm wide.

    My questions is how everyone would feel about someone using intent to literally split hairs to get a shot at your back?

    Personally, I think this tactic is bullshit and the faq ruling by CB is bad, so I would be a bit of a bad sport to anyone trying this on me and basically stop cooperating with the intent mechanic and just let my opponent work out LOF with the TO/judge if they really want to do it. In a casual game I would assume it won’t come up, but if so I would complain a bit but move on with the game and trust the dice gods to reward me
     
    Kahlain, Hecaton and AdmiralJCJF like this.
  2. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    10,126
    Likes Received:
    12,622
    Like I wrote last time this topic came up;

    Can we please not have this again?

    Last time it turned into a flame fest, the time before that it turned into a flame fest, and the time before that, too. We, as a community, have proven we can not discuss intent. Again and again.
     
  3. fkaos

    fkaos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    38
    To be fair I do not want to have a discussion about intent as a whole.

    If someone disagrees with playing by intent I would ask that they kindly just move along as this thread is not for them.

    I am looking only to have a discussion amongst players who use intent, and how they feel about slivers less than 1mm.
     
  4. kinginyellow

    kinginyellow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    519
    With the game want to have fun and intent speeds things up to have fun faster. We also all want that semblance of fair. To feel like the other guy is playing fair and not just exploiting arguably bad rules.

    My line in the sand of intent is that slicing the pie to shoot the target in the back while their lof is facing me is not allowed.

    I am in the position that the faq about shooting in the back was a bad rule. So i personally frown on exploiting this and so draw that line.

    See there was a discussion on shock v 2 wd recently. I dont like it as it seems like a nerf, but it doesnt make the gameplay on the table poor and against what would be "fair". It is something you list build around.

    The lof is bad as it directly makes the gameplay more "unfair"
     
    Hecaton and AdmiralJCJF like this.
  5. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    10,126
    Likes Received:
    12,622
    Can such ARO LOF even be reliably established?
     
  6. fkaos

    fkaos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    38
    In theory, yes. Below is a pretty standard scenario of a reactive trooper (pink) behind a 6” building at one corner looking straight at the wall. The active trooper (red) can come up to the opposite corner and there is a .026”/.66mm wide zone where red has lof to 3mm of pink, but pink cannot see red at all.
    5AD4A772-3DB3-4D34-8108-2B1F73163F19.png

    In practice obviously nobody can eyeball, or even measure with any accuracy on the table, distances less than 1mm.
     
    the huanglong and AdmiralJCJF like this.
  7. Stiopa

    Stiopa Trust The Fuckhead
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    3,799
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    In my group when we're in doubt about such minute details and can't measure it well with the models in place we roll a die.
     
  8. barakiel

    barakiel Echo Bravo Master Sergeant
    Warcor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2017
    Messages:
    2,262
    Likes Received:
    7,398
    I don't often look to logical explanations to justify gameplay rules, but I actually like the idea that you can't cover two corners at once. Being forced to pick one corner to cover is far more interesting from a gameplay perspective, especially with abilities like suppressive fire, smoke, direct templates, mines, kinematika engage, and other very strong defensive tools. Forcing your enemy to commit to watching one side or another is far more interesting to me from a gameplay perspective, instead of knowing that every Galwegian on the table becomes an omniscient, multi-directional defensive chameleon-eyed terror that's a freaking nightmare to get past.
     
    #8 barakiel, Mar 7, 2018
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2018
    Zewrath and daboarder like this.
  9. Wombat85

    Wombat85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    491
    I use intent and not just because it speeds things up. I take medication that gives me hand shakes and targeting issues at far reach. Should I not be able to pull off the same maneuver as everyone else because my disability requires medication preventing me from physically placing models with that much accuracy?
     
    TheRedZealot and Mask like this.
  10. fkaos

    fkaos Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2017
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    38
    The question I’m after is if they declare their intent to get in that tiny zone do you allow it? It’s not really about actual measurements themselves being close or unclear.

    But the flip side is that the active player gets zero risk rolls. It already sucks getting rolled on without the chance to shoot back, and I don’t think we need more of that. Plus I know from personal experience you don’t have any trouble getting past a few corner guards

    Like I said above I’m totally in favor of intent, and cases like yours are just one more reason why. Im just asking if you would let anyone do this maneuver on you using intent. Without intent this is pretty well impossible no matter how steady your hand are.
     
    T. Rex Pushups and Hecaton like this.
  11. Stiopa

    Stiopa Trust The Fuckhead
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    3,799
    Likes Received:
    8,146
    It depends. Usually we played with intent, but I'm working to convince others to adopt less intent-heavy play. With some success.

    There was a long and heated discussion about intent/non-intent styles not so long ago.
     
  12. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,914
    Likes Received:
    5,617
    I'd feel like an absolute bastard using Super Jump to get loads of normal rolls on someone. I don't feel like that should be allowed. I'm fine with the "can't cover both corners" thing, but not at the expense of sucking down normal rolls from someone above you.

    I'm pretty permissive with intent, the main place I draw the line is when new information gets added. Like when I reveal a hidden model, or once they know what my ARO's going to be.
     
  13. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,531
    Likes Received:
    6,926
    The moment this thread starts going the way of the others it gets locked ok?

    Please continue.
     
  14. Wombat85

    Wombat85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    491
    I would because I think being able to cover all corners is silly, you should have to pick a corner and live with it. Real life urban ops everyone isnt sitting flat chested against the wall looking left and right. The game is an abstraction, and I see CB ruling as an attempt to better align that abstraction to reality.
     
  15. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,914
    Likes Received:
    5,617
    Sure, but because it's a game and not reality that has other wacky consequences. So something's gotta give.
     
    T. Rex Pushups likes this.
  16. Wombat85

    Wombat85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    491
    Absolutly, but becuase of my issues I err on the side of why not, becuase Im sure at other times in the game they are doing the same for me.
     
  17. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,694
    Likes Received:
    2,073
    I'm fine with intent like that on the 2-D plane. As long as I know in advance I'm not going to be able to cover both corners with one model hugging a wall, I can plan around that. Adding the vertical direction, however, feels so dirty. I don't like it at all. I've never used it to get normal rolls myself (I guess I don't use Rodoks THAT often, though), and I'd probably avoid playing someone who insisted on using it as much as possible.

    I think the reason for the difference, for me, is that there is no way to face your model to guard against this. It will always be possible to get normal rolls on someone using SJ unless they are behind something that is lower than their Silhouette in the first place.

    Also, I don't expect this to devolve like the other threads because it should be mostly intent players talking to other intent players. Stuff like this is quite impossible if you don't play by intent, so it simply doesn't come up.
     
  18. Herr Hörn

    Herr Hörn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2018
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    53
    I don't think we would allow it in my group. We run mainly by intent, but generally if you cannot easily place the model in the position you want (i.e. there's only one or two mm of space for your ideal pie-slice), you can't really do it.
     
  19. daboarder

    daboarder Force One Commander
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,648
    Likes Received:
    5,400
    show them a 40 mm base looking at the wall ;)
     
  20. prophet of doom

    prophet of doom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    375
    In the case of what we see in the diagram, I would tell my opponent that he/she has to prove with a laser pointer that this is possible. If am then shown this diagram with the argument that this is geometrically indeed possible, but the player cannot be possibly to find that spot on the table, I would refuse to accept it. I think this is pushing intent way to far into the abusive corner. Intent is supposed to speed up the game and take some frustration out of it. The idea is not to find ever more geometrical patterns that can be abused because they exist in theory.

    Ok this is my personal opinion of this, everybody is entitled to have their own.
     
  • About Us

    We are a company founded in 2001 in Cangas (Spain), and devoted to design and manufacture games and figures. Our main product, Infinity the Game, was born with the ambition to satisfy the most demanding audience, offering the best quality.

     

    Why are we here?

     

    Because we are, first and foremost, players.

  • Quick Navigation

    Open the Quick Navigation