Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Read this thread here (if you dare!):

http://www.infinitythegame.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=11612

and then join me in hoping that when Interruptor shows up with a ruling he makes the right one!

Because they're on the verge of making a really, really silly one.

I just read through all of that. my head is now hurting so bad. Interruptor better make a good and clear call on this.

Wow that sounds like a bit of a poo-storm, probably better to just keep on playing as you have done and then see if there is ultimately an official update on the front page of the website..

Does anyone care to explain what the question is so I don't have to dive into a solidwastestorm of a thread to find out?

One of the CB guys ruled (this is subject to review now) that if a camo model reveals himself (in CC for example) he is considered visible for the entire order. It would make the impersonators and ninjas play differently but I like the idea (especially as our players just run up, trusting the camo to keep them safe until combat)

The problem is, what happens when a model can see the marker in the first half of the order, but not the second (when the camo model reveals itself)? If he is considered visible for the entire order, the first model, who now has no LoF @ reveal could still shoot the camo'd model as "everything happens at the same time"

Second ruling: As the active player, you don't have to declare your bursts after the opponent declares their AROs.

Example: A is a camo'd trooper, B is his unfortunate target, C is a Hidden Deployment sniper. A moves into LoF of B, who decides to withold declaring an ARO. A then declares he will shoot B. C now has LoF and declares he will de-cloak to shoot A.

If a defending camo marker de-cloaks to add another ARO, A can shoot both B and C with his combat camo attack if he desires.

I think someone pointed out that you have to declare targets prior to AROs but again "Everything happens at the same time" so is C a valid target?

As a newbie, it boggles the mind lol

Good summary KS - and really, given all that, I am extremely puzzled as to how someone at CB could even make the ruling that they did, given how many other rules it invalidates/changes and how much against common sense it goes!

Interesting. I've got to keep a close eye on this considering I play a lot of camo troops.

Now I'm confused.

I really should get some games in with my entirely camo army (or even at all ) so I know what the hell is going on with this

Reminds me of the "airburst" ruling.

I'm curious as to what that's about - maybe in a separate thread though?

If there's misconceptions on how it is played, supposed to be played, etc., it might be helpful for the rest of us beginners!

On topic - I'm wondering what's taking them so long ruling on this one!

Camo is a HUGE part of the game and I have to believe they will get this right, and quickly!

Alpharius wrote:

On topic - I'm wondering what's taking them so long ruling on this one!

Camo is a HUGE part of the game and I have to believe they will get this right, and quickly!

I have to admit, I'm shocked and more than a little concerned that they haven't officially answered this one yet...

You and me both Alpharius. I'd really like to know so that I can learn it the correct way.

I still can't believe that this hasn't been sorted out yet!!!

The friend of the brother of a friend of an uncle works for CB and said it would be out when they release the Raicho.

Alpharius wrote:I still can't believe that this hasn't been sorted out yet!!!

They've addressed simultaneity a week ago. Short version: "Revealing is not retroactive".

Not, however, the question about whether models in camo can defer their AROs without declaring "Wait", "Hold" or whatever (and thus revealing themselves).

Personally, I'd strongly disagree with the "not declared" method. The fact that Model A is using camo should not be something that lets Model B get in a scot-free (practically reactive combat camo) attack, as opposed to Model A being a non-camo troop and not having the option to defer the ARO.

Ah - I missed that - Thank you very much for pointing it out!

Of course, as you mentioned, there may still be problems...

Where's BlueDagger at?!?

Watching this with great interest given Camo's kinda a big deal for a lot of my troops.

Corvus ruled on this one that camo is the same way that people have always played it. The camo marker is revealed at the point in the order that it that it revealed it's self. If the camo marker moves into BtB with an enemy then a shoot reaction is only possible once it's in BtB contact and thus takes the shooting in CC penalty.

On the part of if you have to declare you are holding your ARO against a camo marker it depends on the model. If the model is in hidden deployment then there is no presidence that say you have to declare that model is holding it's aro (thus giving away it's existance) since it isn't on the board yet. All other models should state that the are holding their ARO or declare change facing/discover.

However it may be advantagous to say "there may be something out there and if there it is holding ARO". Weither you ARO or not it'll really screw with your opponent.