• 0
Konuhageruke

Smoke granate shot on wall

Question

Can I use smoke granate and throw it on a wall?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

42 answers to this question

  • 0

I don't think that a vertical surface works as a valid targe, even for the Targetless trait...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

No, you can't. From the Smoke rules:

  • Smoke Special Ammunition is a non-offensive ammunition, so it does not require an enemy—or, in fact, any trooper at all—as a target, and can be thrown at any point on the table.

My emphasis.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, IJW Wartrader said:

No, you can't. From the Smoke rules:

  • Smoke Special Ammunition is a non-offensive ammunition, so it does not require an enemy—or, in fact, any trooper at all—as a target, and can be thrown at any point on the table.

My emphasis.

As usual, I'm happy to accept your answer, but how you reached the answer isn't clear from the rule you provided; can you provide the missing detail, please?
I don't know if others share that concern, but it's not clear what 'a point on the table' is supposed to mean for the purpose of this rule, and how it's applied to exclude walls.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
11 hours ago, IJW Wartrader said:

No, you can't. From the Smoke rules:

  • Smoke Special Ammunition is a non-offensive ammunition, so it does not require an enemy—or, in fact, any trooper at all—as a target, and can be thrown at any point on the table.

My emphasis.

So trooper on rooftop cannot those smoke grenade 2mm from own base ? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 minute ago, Eciu said:

So trooper on rooftop cannot those smoke grenade 2mm from own base ? 

My point exactly, thanks @Eciu.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
6 hours ago, Slowburner said:

but it's not clear what 'a point on the table' is supposed to mean for the purpose of this rule, and how it's applied to exclude walls.

same here, to me "any point on" is very broad and would include stuff like a point on the building which itself was on the table. or a point on a building which is on a building which is on the table. or a wall on a building on a table.

that said, i know there are rules preventing placing any kind of marker on a vertical surface because the marker won't be stable there. you need a flat horizontal target or slightly sloped target.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

The concept of "table" in Infinity is not your kitchen table or the mousepad playmat, it is any flat (or sufficiently near flat) horizontal surface* capable of fully supporting models. While not formally specified, it is used interchangeably with this concept throughout the book.

* I know this interpretation doesn't include stairs, ladders, ramps, Ramps, the top of smaller crates, or any other place that's kind of small-ish, sloped, but still a common target of smoke grenades as "table".

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
11 minutes ago, Mahtamori said:

The concept of "table" in Infinity is not your kitchen table or the mousepad playmat, it is any flat (or sufficiently near flat) horizontal surface* capable of fully supporting models. While not formally specified, it is used interchangeably with this concept throughout the book.

That seems a credible explanation, thanks @Mahtamori; but a quick whizz through the rules shows that vertical surfaces do get mentioned sometimes, eg. from Speculative Fire, p52 "Place the Template directly on the game table or horizontally over a piece of terrain, and never on a vertical surface or in the air."

So CB clearly do know the difference between horizontal and vertical if they wanted to exclude walls in that way, and it still leaves us with @Eciu's question about the flat surfaces of scenery. If they're valid, why are they valid? (And again, I don't particularly mind if this is a case of "CB didn't spell it out, but Wartrader tell us it means this or that", but I'd like to know if we have written references.)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
8 minutes ago, Slowburner said:

So CB clearly do know the difference between horizontal and vertical if they wanted to exclude walls in that way, and it still leaves us with @Eciu's question about the flat surfaces of scenery. If they're valid, why are they valid? (And again, I don't particularly mind if this is a case of "CB didn't spell it out, but Wartrader tell us it means this or that", but I'd like to know if we have written references.)

Well I think I know that @IJW Wartrader ment the "every flat horizontal" surface of square 3mm is a valid target for "targetless" weapon. I just wanted to point out that RAW it was a big clunky ;P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
12 hours ago, Slowburner said:

That seems a credible explanation, thanks @Mahtamori; but a quick whizz through the rules shows that vertical surfaces do get mentioned sometimes, eg. from Speculative Fire, p52 "Place the Template directly on the game table or horizontally over a piece of terrain, and never on a vertical surface or in the air."

So CB clearly do know the difference between horizontal and vertical if they wanted to exclude walls in that way, and it still leaves us with @Eciu's question about the flat surfaces of scenery. If they're valid, why are they valid? (And again, I don't particularly mind if this is a case of "CB didn't spell it out, but Wartrader tell us it means this or that", but I'd like to know if we have written references.)

It goes all the way back to the notion that the a horizontal rooftop is not scenery for the purposes of cover; and why rooftops don't have stats in the destructible scenery table.  In other words, the ground isn't considered scenery.

It's not defined explicitly because the authors assumed it was obvious.

1

Share this post


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

It goes all the way back to the notion that the a horizontal rooftop is not scenery for the purposes of cover; and why rooftops don't have stats in the destructible scenery table.  In other words, the ground isn't considered scenery.

It's not defined explicitly because the authors assumed it was obvious.

But doesn’t that mean, that AD troops can land on rooftops, provided there’s room to do so? I was under the impression that such a thing was not legal, as buildings are scenery.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 hours ago, Zewrath said:

But doesn’t that mean, that AD troops can land on rooftops, provided there’s room to do so? I was under the impression that such a thing was not legal, as buildings are scenery.

It is legal, but in most cases there are obstacles that forbids it due to template size.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
10 hours ago, solkan said:

It's not defined explicitly because the authors assumed it was obvious.

Thanks, @solkan; it will resignedly go on my ever-growing list of Things That Must Be Learned From My Infinity Elders And Betters ;) <sigh>

This sort of thing is very easily fixed by a sentence added here or there to 'living' documentation such as our wiki, or the official FAQs. So it's unclear to me why this does not seem to happen very much for Infinity, leaving so much scope for further confusion and difficulty. 

To take a well-known case in point, Wizards of the Coast have a long and appalling history of abusing English language and grammar; not using reserved words to simply clarify said abuses, and generally leaving everyone to un-learn English in order to understand how Magic: the Gathering works. (I dare any of you to tell me this isn't so! ;) )

But even WoC have Oracle, which provides official rulings for cards to help clarify what they meant when they wrote the card text. In that linked example, you can see they wrote several hundred words of clarification in the same month as it was published - despite their R&D process, and Beta testing, players still ran into all kinds of difficulites as soon as the card was published. It may not have been their finest wording, but they had a system in place to put it right, and help players out.

Now speaking for myself - but no doubt for many here on the forum too, I have greater love for Corvus Belli and their staff than other game companies such as WoC (can I get an 'amen'? ;) and I very much admire their commitment to the game. So could we not have a similar system of simply updating the wiki - or another document with rulings like this?

Since it's well within your purview @IJW Wartrader, can you shed light on this fairly obvious omission for us; why is the Wiki not updated with rulings like yours for this question as a matter of course; presumably this forum is ample evidence that whatever the authors think, the rules are very often not obvious. Is there anything in the works?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19 minutes ago, Slowburner said:

Now speaking for myself - but no doubt for many here on the forum too, I have greater love for Corvus Belli and their staff than other game companies such as WoC (can I get an 'amen'? ;) and I very much admire their commitment to the game. So could we not have a similar system of simply updating the wiki - or another document with rulings like this?

Agreed. The rules are what is keeping me from investing too much into this game/hobby. I had a few hundred dollars to spend this black friday on Infinity or PC games. I went with the latter because It's hard to stay motivated with Infinity when half the product irritates me so. I've come to the realization that Infinity is a hobby for when I need a break from my PC.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
23 hours ago, Slowburner said:

Since it's well within your purview @IJW Wartrader, can you shed light on this fairly obvious omission for us; why is the Wiki not updated with rulings like yours for this question as a matter of course; presumably this forum is ample evidence that whatever the authors think, the rules are very often not obvious. Is there anything in the works?

Paging @HellLois...

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I have to say being able to add rulings to the wiki would be super.

1

Share this post


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

I have to say being able to add rulings to the wiki would be super.

I mean obviously, if we were all Spaniards living in Galicia who'd been playing Infimity regularly for the last ten years or so, then such rulings and clarifications would be entirely superfluous... ;)

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 11/26/2017 at 6:53 PM, IJW Wartrader said:

No, you can't. From the Smoke rules:

  • Smoke Special Ammunition is a non-offensive ammunition, so it does not require an enemy—or, in fact, any trooper at all—as a target, and can be thrown at any point on the table.

My emphasis.

My read of "any point on the table" means anywhere you can tag in LoS and range.  So it's irrelevant if the grenade lands in a trashcan, or on a rooftop, or in a tree, or on the side of a wall.

Because if it's successful it generates the smoke template to an infinite height.  What it lands on is irrelevant.

wall smoke.bmp

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Well there is a difference between "any point on the table" and "any point of the table". At least I can see that difference.
If I give you a marker and then a task: put a dot on any point of the box, you'll do it. Then I ask to  put a dot on any point on the box, then most people will put it on top of the box. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
14 hours ago, Kainsaw said:

Because if it's successful it generates the smoke template to an infinite height.  What it lands on is irrelevant.

Well, yes; this is the problem with that language. It ought to mean 'a point on the table' in plain English, but apparently it doesn't. This is where @IJW Wartrader as the Rules Wiki editor and long-time associate of CB provides us good value on the forums (and presumably pays for terrible sins committed in a former life ;)) by telling us what the game creators actually meant to say. 

Hence, I very often ask people not to talk about 'rules as written' and 'rules as intended' which tends to imply that we're at liberty to work with one or the other; we're not - the game creators know exactly how to play their own game, and it's just unfortunate that the translation of the English rules leaves us with some vague and uncertain situations.

Hence also the suggestion that the Wiki is updated with a series of Rulings whenever something strange comes up. 

ps. I've moved across to the new forum; come on over - the water's lovely! ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
16 hours ago, Kainsaw said:

My read of "any point on the table" means anywhere you can tag in LoS and range.  So it's irrelevant if the grenade lands in a trashcan, or on a rooftop, or in a tree, or on the side of a wall.

Because if it's successful it generates the smoke template to an infinite height.  What it lands on is irrelevant.

wall smoke.bmp

Out of curiosity:

  1. How are you planning to orient the template?
  2. Why would it be possible to do this with LoF but not via Speculative Shot?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

 

31 minutes ago, IJW Wartrader said:
  • How are you planning to orient the template?
  • Why would it be possible to do this with LoF but not via Speculative Shot?

I'm sure @Kainsaw just meant 'hold it above above that, erm ... point on the table where the smoke landed, and visualize your column rising upward forever'. But it doesn't really matter if we can't do it, eh? ;) I think the point was that the English is unfortunately misleading, and could indeed use a cross-reference to speculative fire, rather than to suggest a piece of rules-lawyering.

(But then I would say that, because I like to think the best of people, and we know where that gets me, eh? ;) )

 

 

0

Share this post


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

Out of curiosity:

  1. How are you planning to orient the template?
  2. Why would it be possible to do this with LoF but not via Speculative Shot?

Now I'm curious. Are you suggesting I can't place smoke or spec fire anywhere the template doesn't sit flat on a surface at all points?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Spec Fire says that you're not allowed to airburst or choose a point on a wall.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

What kind of game situation is no airbursting or wall shooting supposed to prevent?

0

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