No, you place the template when you declare the attack to see who gets AROs, like all other template weapons.
Just so I'm clear, the current process for smoke grenades is: - nominate point - place template (to determine AROs e.g. dodges) - roll dice - remove template if dice roll failed Right?
Cheers. If that's the case, what was the big fufurah about smoke template resolution earlier this year actually about, then? (This is probably a question for a different thread)
I still believe it would be simpler to say "AP halves your bonus to ARM saves", cover or no. It would also be an improvement to the value of even ARM values, as they would round up while in cover when attacked by AP. On a side note, I also can't take any suggestion about how AP ammo should behave based on realistic physics when a Moderator is still better off removing their armour, draping it over a washing line and hiding behind it as Cover than they are wearing it.
Which one? - The discussion related to targeting: Can you put a smoke template on a corner of a building such that it covers both the ground and the top of the building? - The discussion related to the blast spindle: How do you figure out the volume covered by the smoke, when there are obstructions? -- Honestly, that sort of brings up what I'd like to see changed in N4: - Change line of sight slightly so that it's drawn to and from the black square sized and shaped area of the silhouette.
It gets funny when you drop a sniffer and sensor running - just like a Tetris stripping out... ;) The expression they make whenever their tiny camo trick unravels never tires me.
While it is a pretty strong counter, it seems like 90% of new players can't/don't get the very specific, non-glamourous models needed to run a Sensor properly. Off the top of my head, only Imperial Service can Sensor properly without any generic REMs. Camo being slightly easier to deal with en masse without compromising the value of a few Marker troops definitely wouldn't be bad for the health of the game, I've heard horror stories about TAK vs. TAK in battle reports.
Thats the way of learning(add snobbish attitude here) Also my humble wishlist for N4.. I want to see Invincible Army not being despised or looked down upon! D:
Oh, I forgot another important thing to consider. Please make sure to add a Skill label that denotes its type for the purpose of determining whether it causes a FtF roll or not, for the sake of all newbies and that bloody Special Dodge thing. I mean, I am still confused about interactions such as using a SymbioBomb to declare the use of Endgame Pheroware Tactic as an ARO vs CC Attack, for example.
I do that regularly and still loose against a skilled opponent, plus he knows what to target first with his antipode pack cruise missiles. If camo spam was literally the only feature of an army it would be a decent but not all-powerful skew. But with all other things combined, ariadna is a nightmare to deal with. And I think why it's so underrepresented is because a) you need to be pretty good at it, b) its a negative play experience for the opponent so people in general avoid it for that reason and c) its kinda fiddly and exausting to play
I agree. The begining of the "client journey" (us the player. Escepically the new player experience) is in bad shape. I made a long post about it here. https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/is-the-game-getting-too-complex.25677/page-21#post-198211. After a battlebox its VERY confusing on how to move on from there if you dont have an established Infinity community. I was in that boat. A clear path to follow including a complete time line of events is needed.
Grenzer FO in tunguska Deva in NCA or Aleph/OSS Devil Dog and Assault Pack in Ariadna Zulu Cobra All quite good options.
To some extent, the PDFs for the "Beyond XXX" are a good path. I like how they introduce incremental complexity mission by mission, although I still think it goes way too fast (you basically have to read half of the regular rules just to play the first mission). Still, it's nice as it comes with the minis and their specific profiles for the missions, so it's a one-stop shop for moving forward. But still, having just started, I agree with the sentiment and I could see a process of streamlining keeping everything that makes this game intact (including AD, Camo, and all that craziness) while significantly reducing the overload of information one has to take in. It reminds me of when Magic decided to remove obscure rules and similar-but-not-exactly-the-same effects, in a - successful - bid to make the game more approachable. Veterans screamed murder, but the result was just as much complexity, except without silly "gotcha!" moments. Thing is, I'm not sure Infinity veterans would agree, because veterans usually don't. For example, does the game really need both Dogged AND NWI (and then 2-wounds models!)? Wouldn't just Dogged do? I DO understand the different implications (now, after tons of reading), and I'm sure people who master these subtleties are happy with the current state. But this is the kind of thing I believe constitutes an unnecessary barrier for entry that veterans overlook.
What i would like to see for "standard" Heavy Infantry (Mobile Brigada, Janissary, etc.) is supportware. Giving them a support module or something (so you can't throw the same stuff on swiss or Kriza) and add specific supportware for hackers. Interesting supportware could be even just giving them small skills for 2 turns. Being able to give a standard HI veteran, stealth, hyperdynamics or sixth sense (well you would need to look at what makes sense) temporarily would make them instantly interesting toolbox units with a wide range of applications while elite HI would still beat their asses in the elites specialized field. I just love the idea of my hacker streaming Kung Fu subroutines from cyberspace into the HIs power armor mid-battle.
