• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Time Online

    36d 21h 8m 39s

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About aVanst

  • Rank
  1. On another note does stealth make it that if you get into base contact it limits your opponents AROs even if they have LOF? If the Movement of the trooper with Stealth ends in base to base contact with an enemy and declares any non-Movement Short Skill, then the enemy can only declare CC Attack, Dodge, Reset, or those Skills that can be used in Engaged state.
  2. Thanks guys for the clarification because the rules are not very well written.
  3. I am sure this has been talked about a lot however, I cannot find an answer to this specific point. I've checked many of the previous forum posts and now have to ask. Can a model who has SSL2 shoot back at a guided attack to make it a face to face? Would this also work for being spec fired from total cover or a template hitting a friendly model near the SSL2 troop? Evidence -- " The Alguacil declares a BS Attack as the second Short Skill of his Order. Now that she is the target of an Attack, the Maakrep Tracker uses her Sixth Sense L1 to react as if she was facing towards the Alguacil. The Tracker chooses to declare a BS Attack so the Order is resolved with a Face to Face BS Roll between both soldiers. " "may react to an Attack with a Guided weapon declared against him from outside his LoF by declaring a Dodge, Engage... with an unmodified PH Roll, as if the attacker was inside his LOF. " This seems to imply that you don't need LOF and/or it treats the troop as if having LOF. Could someone explain why you can or cant "BS attack" back at models that you do not have LOF (and not just through smoke I mean no LOF available). Thanks
  4. Ok so the conclusion is that you can only ever dominate 1 (the one you rolled) quadrant. Thus to score »»Dominate more Assigned Quadrants thanthe adversary at the end of the Game (1 Objective Points). You must dominate your "assigned quadrant" and they cannot dominate theirs.
  5. That may let you move one of them yeah and to specify which one that makes sense (cant control your own) but doesn't imply they are separate for scoring reasons.
  6. But the rules say " At the beginning of the first Game Round, before the Tactical Phase of the first player, both players must roll a die on the Assigned Quadrant Table. The result of the roll will determine the Assigned Quadrant of each player" which means they are both assigned to each player. Because both quadrants are "assigned" and its plural "quadrants" doesnt that imply you can dominate either of the rolled quadrants to qualify for you OP? Why would one say "Assigned Quadrant" while the other says "Assigned Quadrants"? Even this objective implies you can dominate both rolled quadrant. Meaning the only thing about which quadrant is "yours" has to do with where you need to get your tag too. This mission is written very confusingly....
  7. This sort of goes along a thread I posted recently about hacking and measurements "ARO Misjudged" where it was identified that hacking programs don't have any requirements for being in ZOC or anything so as their are activated as one unit you could call a, at the time, illegal hacking program on De-Fersen in anticipation that he does something in that makes it legal - as an ARO has been generated. This way in step 7 of resolution you measure to see if an ARO is illegal/out of range ect...
  8. Ok cool beans figured it had been discussed.
  9. Also, i've noticed that stealth prevents AROs concerning Cautious Movement and Short Movement Skills (That dont require a roll) while in ZoC. However it doesn't prevent the ARO requirements of "Activating" in the ZoC of an enemy. Has this been addressed that stealth also protect from activating withing ZoC? ** Same thing happens with going prone versus ARO as activating the trooper in LOF is what gives the ARO and then he begins his movement already prone.
  10. Great that answers most of my questions so long as that works vice versa as well.. Thanks Wartrader. The declaration of the program isn't defined by range of effect as a requirement so it's all speculative. So the 2nd order that a player thinks is in range is a valid target for ARO and isn't ignored because of, in the measuring phase, the realization that he could have ARO'd the 1st skill.
  11. Ok, so hackers ect. should ultimately always declare an ARO regardless of range in case the 2nd order enters their ZOC. Also if they must declare its ARO on first opportunity its irreverent of when their first opportunity is (no ZOC etc.) if theres even a chance that its close to ZOC they have to at which point people can move where ever they want even entering ZOC? Do hackers and ZOC action benefit from the same rules for attacking them at any point of their movement? Or would you be forced to Idle if it was their 2nd movement that brings them into range?
  12. So ZOC based attacks/AROs are not allowed to pick at which point they effect a model during any of its travel (like say a BS attack does)? The root here is whether or not the order you ARO count towards your measurement steps = Player 1 ARO'd 1st Short Skill thus he cannot apply measurement to the 2nd Skill because that's the order in which they were declared? Which is overridden in BS attack saying you can choose at any point to attack your enemy during their order. Shooting version of this would be: Model on Suppression ARO's active model's BS attack, both think its in range so the active model precedes to move as his 2nd short skill forward towards cover which actually put him in range of the Suppressing range band (Say the active model is 25" away and BS attacks then Moves into 21" range). In this case, like the other situation, you would do step #7 Resolving Measurements and say that when the ARO was declared he was out of range so the suppression failed even though he is clearly now in the legal range as apart of his movement?
  13. Hey I am trying to find an answer to a situation that came up the other day and the book doesn't really cover it. The situation was a Reverend Custodier against a wall out of LOF as an Aux Bot approached her position. The first short movement skill brought the auxbot to the edge of the building but the player didn't think it was in range of a Hacking attack so he/she didn't declare any ARO. The second short movement skill brought the auxbot around the corner a little which the player did think was in range so he/she declared Oblivion-ARO. Upon measuring the paths the players found that the auxbot was not in the hacking area for the 2nd/ending short movement skill in which he declared the ARO but was in fact close enough when the Auxbot ended his first short movement. I understand that if you declare an ARO and it is illegal for whatever reason (Range, LOF, ZOC,) you idle in response which can lead to getting shot for the misjudgment however I am slightly confused if the ARO is technically legal but out of order. And if you fail to call an ARO when given the opportunity you lose the opportunity to ARO completely. Because of the order in which you resolve an order I understand that #7 (after aros and movement) is when you measure so that may be the answer to all my questions however I would like to clarify specifically. So the questions to the situation are: If a player misjudges the ZOC of a model and hence doesn't declare an ARO, but in fact they were close enough for the 1st short movement skill, do they fail and Idle their ARO that they declared on the 2nd movement skill (because of the opportunity to ARO has passed)? Or are you allowed to make that ARO at any point during their travel hence being able to target the Auxbot with the hacking program during his first movements pathing? If the declared ARO on the 2nd movement is "legal" because of the previous movement is it the Auxbot that misses out by not being able to declare a reset? When are you able to measure your ZOC to determine whether you failed or succeeded? Doesn't this measurement give information to the active player who can then stay out of ZOC because they now know the exact range that model has? Or as you only measure in step #7 do both players have risk the chance of their action being effected as neither are allowed to know whether it was a "legal" ARO or not. Is this situation different if it is reversed -- A hackable model moves towards a hacker out of LOF and the hacker declared a hacking attack, it "failed" due to ZOC and the hacker Idles? But with the 2nd short movement the model approaches again which would put him in range does this make the original ARO valid again because its all simultaneous. Thank you for the answer,
  14. I have read the ITS guidelines provided in their downloads (1.4) however it didn't directly address these things which is why I asked.Thank you for your answers!
  15. Hey weird question here that has to do with CC. Do models have 2x Bare Hands for the sake of Close Combat, thus giving them +1 burst?