• 0
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
jaque_froid

Aro etiquette

Question

So I've been playing a certain way and I'm not 100% sure I'm doing it right and I don't want to get free benefits accidentaly. I want to know exactly how this situation works in some different scenarios.

 

1. Someone moves 8.01" away from my trooper. I cannot tell if they are in zoc and I declare aro (no lof). I think my aro is lost and even if they move into my zoc I won't get another aro chance.

or if someone moves 7.9" from my trooper and I think they're out of zoc and then they move again further in, if we find out they were in fact inside zoc on the first order do I then not get an aro on the second half of the order? Am I allowed to check or not check if it's close? I just want to know what the process is when it's close?

 

2. Someone moves near a mine token close but not inside it's activation distance. If I check the distance and it is out did the mines chance to go off go away like with an aro?. Am I allowed to not check it if I don't think it's in? If it's close but seems out can I also chose not to check so I don't advertise that it's a mine?

 

 

3. Since zoc is measured at resolution does that mean if they were out of aro range after the first half, but moved in with the second half of the order, then the aro would become legal as long as it was legal by the resolution step?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

108 answers to this question

  • 0

1a: correct

1b: I think you'd loose your ARO. One thing is certain: you can't check until the order resolution phase...so you have to eyeball and decide to either delcare an ARO hoping you're in range or decide you're out of range and wait for them to declare second part of order.

2: mines act out of order/ARO sequence...they have to go off when an enemy trooper enters their activation range, so you can check anytime you think they might have triggered it, which can well be 2+ times during an order if they move in a funky way.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

2. You must check. Within reason. It's not defined well in the rules. It's in fact only defined that you must check if the active model enters the activation area. Remember that the teardrop isn't *quite* 8".

1 & 3. If it helps, consider the ZoC to be a range band for the respective AROs. Also, it helps if you use empty bases, silhouettes or the large-scaled tokens (MAS' old tokens are 25mm) to mark "points of interest" in a model's movement when an enemy starts moving close to your guys so that you can measure instead of making rough guesses.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

It's something I would like to know as well: can someone simply not check if your model was in range for ARO in the first half (if it's dubious) and wait for you to move closer, AROing then? It seems gamey...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

No, they can't measure until the resolution phase. If they declared an ARO when they didn't have one, they don't get it. If they didn't declare an ARO when they did have one, they don't get it.

As Mahtamori said, think of it as a range limit to ARO's (you can't pre-measure ranges) and maybe use silhouttes to mark positions when it's close, that works.

Same as if you declared a hacking attack, and it turns out upon measuring they weren't in your hacking area. You don't get to measure that before resolution either.

Mostly it's pretty eyeball able though.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, Equaton said:

It's something I would like to know as well: can someone simply not check if your model was in range for ARO in the first half (if it's dubious) and wait for you to move closer, AROing then? It seems gamey...

They can. Mark positions before second skill declaration and measure at resolution if they failed their mandatory ARO declaration at first opportunity or not. If they failed to declare ARO at first opportunity, I'd say they lose their ARO declaration completely. (Although to answer what you actually asked: No, they can't game the system in that way because <see above>)

I think the accuracy of this answer is 3 (IJW)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Just declare seperate AROs against both short Skills. If the first ARO was illegal you get the second one. If the first one was legal the second one is null and void.

It happens a lot because 8" is also DTW/Shotgun/Assault Rangebands and both players won't know if they can use Assault/are in +6/are in ZOC until you measure in the Resolution step.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I ask because I've had this game where my opponent ARO-hacked with his Hidden Deployment hacker in the second half, preventing me from resetting. We then learned that he was already in range for the first half and didn't know what to do...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I think the ZoC ARO declaration and resolution process would be way cleaner if premeasuring were allowed, with no loss of strategic/tactical depth.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
34 minutes ago, ToadChild said:

I think the ZoC ARO declaration and resolution process would be way cleaner if premeasuring were allowed, with no loss of strategic/tactical depth.

Just talking about the ZoC premeasure..... I'd be okay with that

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
47 minutes ago, Equaton said:

I ask because I've had this game where my opponent ARO-hacked with his Hidden Deployment hacker in the second half, preventing me from resetting. We then learned that he was already in range for the first half and didn't know what to do...

Technically, he would have had to delay ARO (if the HD model had LoS or you were sure they were in ZoC) revealing that something is there, but not what.  

I do not think you can declare an ARO with a HD troop on the second short skill unless you delayed the first one.  The exception being if they were not in LoF or ZoC at the end of the first short skill.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Just now, Sabin76 said:

Technically, he would have had to delay ARO (if the HD model had LoS or you were sure they were in ZoC) revealing that something is there, but not what.  

I do not think you can declare an ARO with a HD troop on the second short skill unless you delayed the first one.  The exception being if they were not in LoF or ZoC at the end of the first short skill.

Yes, HD models follow all the same rules as normal models as far as ARO declaration timings.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
45 minutes ago, ToadChild said:

Yes, HD models follow all the same rules as normal models as far as ARO declaration timings.

With the one caveat that they get to delay ARO as if the opponent were a marker no matter what, yes?

No.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Just now, Sabin76 said:

With the one caveat that they get to delay ARO as if the opponent were a marker no matter what, yes?

Nope.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
42 minutes ago, ToadChild said:

Nope.

Huh, not sure where I got that from.  I remember it coming up in a game, but now I can't recall if the enemy was in a marker state or not.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I feel like I understand it less than before now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
20 minutes ago, jaque_froid said:

I feel like I understand it less than before now.

Regular models, camo models, and hidden deployment models all follow exactly the same rules when declaring AROs.

If the active model is a marker, any reactive models (or markers, or HD) can delay their ARO.  However, this is an active declaration, so if you want to delay with an HD model you must downgrade it to a TO camo marker.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

If you're not sure of ZoC, declare an ARO.

If the enemy is out, you didn't lose anything.

If the enemy is in/gets in with the second skill. You simply let the enemy know what kind of ARO to expect beforehand. No the worst thing that can happen, i think

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
18 hours ago, Teslarod said:

Just declare seperate AROs against both short Skills. If the first ARO was illegal you get the second one. If the first one was legal the second one is null and void.

It happens a lot because 8" is also DTW/Shotgun/Assault Rangebands and both players won't know if they can use Assault/are in +6/are in ZOC until you measure in the Resolution step.

I think you can't, for the same reason that you can't say "I'll shoot you with the shotgun if we are within 8 otherwise I'll shoot you with the rifle"...you need to declare your complete ARO before measurments are taken, so you would need to eyeball it and roll with it.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
9 hours ago, Darkvortex87 said:

If you're not sure of ZoC, declare an ARO.

If the enemy is out, you didn't lose anything.

If the enemy is in/gets in with the second skill. You simply let the enemy know what kind of ARO to expect beforehand. No the worst thing that can happen, i think

If the reactive model is in HD, it looses reveals for potentially no reason.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
10 minutes ago, Equaton said:

If the reactive model is in HD, it looses reveals for potentially no reason.

of course. but HD models are protected if you don't declare ARO (and so don't reveal).

I guess you have to be really sure that the enemy is in range with HD models.

 

What do you suggest? measuring ZOC for the active model during all the movement path?

That way you can measure indirectly movements for the following orders on that figure, Aro rangebands, etc.

i'd say that's easier for ZoC aro, but far worst for general gameplay

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Okay the part I still don't understand is this.

 

If someone is outside of 8 and outside of life and I declare AROs (which is an illegal aro) but they move into 8 with their second movement... Since the distance is measured at resolution which is after the second order... 

 

Is my now illegal aro turned into a legal aro?

Basically, when a model comes near me, can I say "this model will aro dodge if at any time in your movement you are in my zoc"

 

Or could I say "my hacker will declare redrum as it's aro because you look close to my zoc, if your model is in my zoc at anytime during both short skills they are in my zoc I get to do my aro legally"?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 minutes ago, jaque_froid said:

Okay the part I still don't understand is this.

 

If someone is outside of 8 and outside of life and I declare AROs (which is an illegal aro) but they move into 8 with their second movement... Since the distance is measured at resolution which is after the second order... 

 

Is my now illegal aro turned into a legal aro?

Basically, when a model comes near me, can I say "this model will aro dodge if at any time in your movement you are in my zoc"

 

Or could I say "my hacker will declare redrum as it's aro because you look close to my zoc, if your model is in my zoc at anytime during both short skills they are in my zoc I get to do my aro legally"?

Yes because it's the only way of solving the situation without measuring ZoC of the active or reactive figure during declaration phase.

Infinity rules forbid measurements during other phases besides resolution phase, so it's the only way to solve the situation avoiding "gotcha" moments for both the players.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, det said:

I think you can't, for the same reason that you can't say "I'll shoot you with the shotgun if we are within 8 otherwise I'll shoot you with the rifle"...you need to declare your complete ARO before measurments are taken, so you would need to eyeball it and roll with it.

That is NOT the same thing.

If you have a Shotgun and a Rifle both are the same thing, a legal BS Attack. If it turns out you'e out of range or in bad rangebands, thats tough luck.

In my example you simply don't get to declare an ARO if you aren't within 8" for the first Short Skill. THIS IS NOT AND IDLE. So against the 2nd Short Skill you don't count as having declared ARO and can legally try again.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I think that would do wierd things to mines and expendable symbiobombs

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, Teslarod said:

That is NOT the same thing.

If you have a Shotgun and a Rifle both are the same thing, a legal BS Attack. If it turns out you'e out of range or in bad rangebands, thats tough luck.

In my example you simply don't get to declare an ARO if you aren't within 8" for the first Short Skill. THIS IS NOT AND IDLE. So against the 2nd Short Skill you don't count as having declared ARO and can legally try again.

I still don't think you can...you either ARO to the first short skill or to the second, I don't think you get to ARO to the first and then find out you weren't in range so you get a chance to ARO to the second short skill. IMHO you guess and then find out if your ARO was legal, if not you default to idle. There would be no sense in the rule that you default to idle if the conditions of a skill are not met upon resolution if you can declare more than one skill/ARO "with the benefit of doubt".

If you declare an ARO to the first short skill and during the resolution step you find out the conditions weren't met (being out of ZoC for a hacking ARO for example) I think it would default to idle, as per last bullet point of idle:

"The trooper is also considered to perform an Idle when he has declared a Skill not allowed by the rules. In such situation, the ammunition of Disposable weapons or pieces of Equipment is spent, too."

in this case you "have declared a skill" that is "not allowed by the rules"...no?

Am I missing something here?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0