Shielding (c) revamp

[Rusty]

Shielding (a):
A player may only target an opponent's hit zone or reflected IR provided there is direct line of sight from the target back to one of the player's visible hit zones (VHZ being chest or either shoulder hit zone) and the player is sighting directly over his phaser barrel.

Proposed Shielding (a) wrote:
A player may only target an opponent's hit zone or reflected IR provided there is direct line of sight from the target back to one of the player's visible hit zones (VHZ being chest or either shoulder hit zone)

If we are going to look at it from both sides... IF you are showing a VHZ, Why does it matter where your gun is?

[Scorpion]

the fact still remains that while Chris' propsed change is the best, it conflicts with the current wording for Shielding (a) and needs work.

I think that you can still leave rule (a) as it is and use my proposed rule (c) modification. You must fulfill both rules, or you are shielding. Rule (a) is most easily called by a ref near the shooter. Rule (c) is most easily called by a ref near the target.

I see rule (a) as a codification of "best practices for holding your phaser" so that you are least likely to be shielding (according to rule (c)). I am afraid that if we get rid of (a) then a ref near the shooter will be reluctant to call shielding, even if the shooter has their phaser way out of the "triangle".

[tragedy]

A player may not deliberately target an opponent with their phaser unless they:

have a direct line of sight to the opponents visible hit zones,
or are sighting directly down their phaser barrel.

It still conflicts. You cannot have both. If a player has "direct line of sight" that allows a player to virtually hang the phaser out anywhere they please so long as they can "see" a hit zone (eg from the bridge/walkway to green tower corner when a player is crouched/hunched over you can see, say, his back zone, but don't have the angle you can (technically under this rule) stick the phaser over the wall and target the shoulder.

When targeting an opponent, the spot that is being targeted (which is usually an opponent's hit zone, but may be a wall in the case of a reflection shot), must have unobstructed line of sight back to at least one of the targeting player's shoulder or chest hit zones.

even without line of sight back.

It needs more work. You don't agree with the version I tried, so this version still needs work on it's wording, or the whole rule about what you may target needs to be amalgamated somehow.

[Gecko]

Between all the quotes I am a little confused as to what exactly your current revamped wording is supposed to be...

That said from what everyone has suggested thus far I can't really see the problem with the shielding rule's requirement simply being for direct, unimpeded LOS to a minimum of one Visible Hit Zone from either a) Any VHZ of the target's suit or b) the targeted point on a wall in regards to a reflection shot.

Where and how you are holding your phaser should not be a problem if you are offering at least one VHZ as a viable target for your target to return fire on. As long as the target has the clear ability of firing back why should anything else about the phaser or walls matter?

Obviously the rules will require (if they do not state already) a specific definition of a VHZ's as including the two shoulder sensors and where present the chest and back sensors.

[Gecko]

Stupid thing won't let me edit my last post...

About the only problem I see with this rule being that simple is long range shots through multiple LOS blocking walls (ie red tower/ramp to back/green towers through the bridge) perhaps you could make it that the LOS from target to shooter must be unobscured for a minimum of 3m (or any other distance you choose) for at least one VHZ measured from the shooter to the target. I really can't see anyone being able to very specifically and deliberately block all their VHZ's from targets in the back tower using the walls in the bridge if they were standing on the red tower/ramp to abuse that rule.

[anarki]

Stupid thing won't let me edit my last post...

I really can't see anyone being able to very specifically and deliberately block all their VHZ's from targets in the back tower using the walls in the bridge if they were standing on the red tower/ramp to abuse that rule.

except maybe troy cause he is like a blindshotting machine

[Gecko]

I just thought of one way to abuse the simple version with the 3m rule....

Shooting into back tower from green by raising your gun up to shoot over the back tower walls whilst standing in green tower. You theoretically would not be blind shooting by the simple rules as the walls blocking LOS to your VHZ's are +3m from you and therefore wouldn't count. However, if it were illegal to raise your phaser above shoulder height (or head height) this would automatically remove the ability to shoot like that without needing it to be covered by the shielding rules.

[tragedy]

At this stage the preferred wording for a revamped shielding rule is Scorpion's. I don't think that oulawing raising the phaser is going to work since quite a few others have also objected to the idea of a rigid "must have the phaser in front of the face" rule I don't think they'll like that much either.
Chris demonstrated to me on Monday last how easy it is to abuse a shielding rule with a measurement written in so that's out.

That said from what everyone has suggested thus far I can't really see the problem with the shielding rule's requirement simply being for direct, unimpeded LOS to a minimum of one Visible Hit Zone from either a) Any VHZ of the target's suit or b) the targeted point on a wall in regards to a reflection shot.

This is the best idea, I just believe that there needs to be something about how the phaser should be held or eliminate Part (a) entirely and forget about which way the phaser can be held - except I would make sure that players cannot cover the IR emission from the phaser as well

[Gecko]

Out of curiosity, how does Scorpion's wording work when the only visible hit sensor of the target is the phaser?

Example: Shooter standing on bridge. Target is shooting from ammo corner in back tower to new obs deck with their phaser visible to the shooter on the bridge.

Technically there is no LOS from any of the traget's VHZ's (Shoulders/chest/back, the gun sensors don't count for shielding?) back to the shooter. Or will there be two definitions for VHZ's?

Examples:
Target VHZ's: Shoulders, Chest, Back, Gun
Shooter VHZ's: Shoulders and chest only

[Gecko]

Don't worry I figured it out. Scorpion's wording for the targeted sensor has nothing to do with the "Visible Hit Zone" as it relates to the shooter's shoulders and chest so my example is completely legal for the shooter on the bridge as long as there is LOS from the phaser back to the shooter's shoulder/s and/or chest.

[tragedy]

When targeting an opponent, the spot that is being targeted (which is usually an opponent's hit zone, but may be a wall in the case of a reflection shot), must have unobstructed line of sight back to at least one of the targeting player's shoulder or chest hit zones.

Had a bit of a chat and demo with Chris in the field after practice last night. We're both on the same wavelength in as much as for reflection shots players should be sighting down/over the barrel.
So with this in mind I propose this ammendment to Chris' proposal:-

A player may only target an opponent's hit zone (a hit zone is defined in the glossary) or reflected IR provided there is direct line of sight from the target back to one of the player's visible hit zones. (a visible hit zone is defined in the glossary). If the player's target is reflected IR, then the player may only fire a shot at the target proved s/he is also sighting directly over the phaser barrel

The wording could possibly be better but the gist is that reflections happen, particulary with Gen 6. Players should not be able to just hang the phaser out anywhere to get a shot on them, even if it's possible there is line of sight back. I've ruled out using words like "may not target reflected IR" since there the rules actually say the act of targetting is "the act of pointing a phaser at a target in such a manner as to facilitate a shot of any type being fired at the target or the obtaining of a missile lock on the target" and I wanted to circumvent that to prevent technical breaches.

Also the glossary should be updated so that reflected IR has a definition

Reflected IR is suit-based infra red emission that reflect off a surface.

[Scorpion]

Sorry I've taken so long to get back to this. My proposal is to replace 13 (a) and (c) with:

A player may not deliberately target an opponent with their phaser unless:

(i) they have unobstructed line of sight to at least one of the opponent's visible hit zones, or are sighting directly down their phaser barrel

AND

(ii) the spot that is being targeted (which is usually the opponent's hit zone, but may be a wall in the case of a reflection shot) has unobstructed line of sight back to at least one of the targeting player's shoulder or chest hit zones.

My reasoning is:

Part (i) is pretty much the same as the existing 13 (a). It allows a ref close to the shooter to call a penalty if none of the opponent's lights are visible, and the shooter is not sighting down the phaser barrel. This type of shot is likely to be a violation of (ii) anyway, but I think having part (i) is important because it makes it easier for refs near the shooter to penalise someone using this "undesirable technique".

Part (ii) is as discussed previously in this thread. It allows a ref close to the opponent to call this penalty.

[tragedy]

I don't really. Something irks me about the use of the word "spot" and I still feel uncomfortable about looking "down" the barrel. I feel that people can hold the phaser out to the side and still be looking "down the barrel." To me "over" is a safer word. It makes the player keep the phaser under their eyes which puts them much more in keeping with the spirit of the rule.

[Scorpion]

Something irks me about the use of the word "spot" and I still feel uncomfortable about looking "down" the barrel.

I am equally happy with:

A player may not deliberately target an opponent with their phaser unless:

(i) they have unobstructed line of sight to at least one of the opponent's visible hit zones, or are sighting directly over their phaser barrel

AND

(ii) the point that is being targeted (which is usually the opponent's hit zone, but may be a wall in the case of a reflection shot) has unobstructed line of sight back to at least one of the targeting player's shoulder or chest hit zones.

Consider that by having "over", a player may have their phaser below their chestpack, and still be looking "over" the barrel. However, I don't think this gives you an advantage, so I don't care if it is worded that way or not.

[Nalang]

Sighting down the barrel of the phaser is looking from the back of the phaser over the top of the phaser and over the barrel of the phaser, making a 3-point straight line with the barrel, the back of the phaser and the players face.

Discuss?

[tragedy]

from http://www.lfboards.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=853

It says the same to me as well but IMO it can also allow you to have the phaser beside your face, or above it.