1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The definite N4 Comments, Suggestions, Ideas, wishlist's and Bugs that need fixing thread

Discussion in 'Access Guide to the Human Sphere' started by psychoticstorm, Aug 6, 2019.

  1. toadchild

    toadchild Premeasure

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    4,262
    Likes Received:
    8,073
    Possession was already significantly nerfed in N3, such as the inclusion of the reduced statline that you use when activating the opponent's TAG. They clearly want it to exist in the game, but it's a problematic mechanic both because it makes AHDs need to be expensive while simultaneously discouraging people from wanting to even field TAGs. It's a lose-lose sort of skill.
     
    meikyoushisui and Modock like this.
  2. Del S

    Del S Tunguskaball

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2017
    Messages:
    1,178
    Likes Received:
    2,585
    Make possession rarer, like an upgrade to a few selected units. Replace it with some other programs in general usage.

    Like how about "gremlin", a program that gives negative buffs to the TAG as systems malfunction, or "failure to feed", jamming up a weapon and forcing a short skill to reset it?
     
  3. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    I'm always wary of "upgrade program" because it will typically mean such hacking becomes concentrated to Nomads and Aleph, or Combined.

    Instead, make possession target Ghost and reduce the damage. I.e. shift the ideal target of possession away from TAGs and onto Dakini and Rui Shi.

    Also, I'm not certain I agree Total Control is the defining strong point of AHDs as long as Oblivion exists.

    Preferable to both Total Control and Oblivion, I'd like to see AHD programs come in two varieties as an upgrade to Gotcha! : one which has good burst (3 or 4) with a small to-hit bonus and low damage of about 13 that causes IMM-1 for a couple of rounds (i.e. a bit more "Red Fury"), the other having worse burst (2) but causes IMM-2 for a couple of rounds.
    I.e. one that's easy to apply, particularly against non-premium targets, and one that can't be Reset out of but much harder to apply.
    Add in a souped up Spotlight (let's say unmodified WIP and B2, and why not ARO for good measure) and I think AHDs will be in a better spot both for not completely breaking lists relying on Hackables and for being a better tool in active turn.
     
  4. n21lv

    n21lv SymbioHate

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    767
    Cross-post from this post in the Rules subforum.

    ITS rules would certainly benefit from making a clear statement for every scenario objective on:
    * what are the requirements to fulfil the objective (exist currently, but often need post-release clarifications, so can be improved);
    * when are the points scored for this objective (inconsistent: some scenarios state this, some don't);
    * if it is possible to score a variable amount of points for the objective, how many points are scored for each distinctive way to fulfil the objective (exists currently and seems to be fine).

    UPD: In a perfect world, I would introduce a simple structure for scenario objectives block, where "instant" objectives are separated from "at the end of the round" objectives and "at the end of the game" objectives. This would make everyone's (players', TOs', @ijw, @Koni) life a lot simpler by providing proactive clarifications.
     
    Hecaton likes this.
  5. DukeofEarl

    DukeofEarl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,444
    Likes Received:
    1,385
    Can we still have the ayahuasca though?
     
    Hecaton likes this.
  6. TheDiceAbide

    TheDiceAbide Thank you for your compliance.
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    951
    Likes Received:
    3,128
    Completely out of left-field, but I'd love to see Impersonation L3 that lets the model deploy as an HVT. Caveat being that it counts as an HVT for scoring classifieds, etc., until it's revealed (activating for any reason at all would reveal it). So it's possible your opponent could take advantage of it, but in all likelihood, they're going to go for a classified and get their face shot off. :)
     
    bladerunner_35 likes this.
  7. n21lv

    n21lv SymbioHate

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    767
    This is a cool idea, but I doubt it will ever make its way into the rules, due to highly questionable interaction with the Season 11 rules that basically make Civilians immune to Damage. You are basically making your Impersonator immune until someone Discovers it, and also promotes a questional strategy which will make every opponent playing against an army with Impersonation L3 unit spend ridiculous amount of orders to Discover the HVT. Also, it will complely invalidate the 'Secure HVT' mission, which is usually available for the scenario, and by doing so, topple the balance of the game.
     
  8. TheDiceAbide

    TheDiceAbide Thank you for your compliance.
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    951
    Likes Received:
    3,128
    I know it would never make it in, but saying it would topple the balance of the game is a bit much. It would be immune to damage, until it activated sure, but so is any hidden deploy model, except in this case you know it's in one of two places (depending on the scenario)... which is why I said it should last until activated for any reason... if you move, you reveal, if you ARO, you reveal. All it would do for Secure HVT, if left unrevealed the entire game, would be to force the enemy to try and secure both HVTs on the table if they're unsure.
     
  9. n21lv

    n21lv SymbioHate

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    767
    You forget that you are allowed to place templates over HVT models, which would cause really wonky situations where you don't know what to do. Other thing that comes to my mind is syncing with your own Impersonator to keep them from AROs while repositioning then as you see fit and potentially clearing minefields thanks to bring immune to damage.
    True, a TO in HD is technically also immune to damage for it's not on the battlefield, but then its position can never be changed without you revealing the presence of the HD troop. In this case, as I described above, you can change the Impersonator's position by synchronising them with your regular troop. And since Civilians do not generate AROs, it is possible to move with them in such a way that they will never be targeted by an ARO so they don't have the chance to be Discovered.
     
  10. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    Civilians don't (normally) generate AROs but they do activate. So if you made it drop on any activation then Synchronising it (and subsequently activating the Controller) would reveal it.

    For drawing LOF through HVTs, you'd just allow it while it's in the IMP-3 state; equally for templates you'd just have her IMP-3 state Null attacks (just like IMP-1 and -2 so now).

    Provided that there were 2 HVTs on the table I could see it working from a technical POV.

    BUT you're now in the position of mucking with the fundamental Mission rules, which is inherently difficult to balance. Particularly for missions like Highly Classified or Countermeasures where obscuring the HVT is *extremely* good.

    So yeah, it's probably technically feasible but why? Is the complexities it would introduce so useful / interesting to be worth the cost? Personally I doubt it.

    It would probably be easier / more interesting to do in a Narrative mission with the Spec Ops rules and allow playets to deploy their Spec Ops disguised as the HVT. That way both players would be able to take advantage of it (if they chose to). Perhaps as a variant of Unmasking in a home brew campaign.
     
  11. n21lv

    n21lv SymbioHate

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    767
    I would say there are too many exceptions needed to make this idea work, so in my head that's a no. I really like the idea, though, it seems really fun.
    If I were to introduce it, I wouldn't make it an Impersonator, but something like Holoprojector LX. Impersonation is way too powerful in terms of deployment, and having access to previous levels will make it possible to revert to the 'Civilian mode', which is confusing when you're trying to combine it with other levels of Impersonation. And I like @inane.imp's suggestion that you're not allowed to replace any existing HVT, only deploying it as an additional one.
     
  12. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    It wouldn't be very different from how an Impersonation Marker works right now, the only difference would be as below abd In fact it would be incredibly simple and weak.
    1. Impersonation Markers cause templates touching them to fail, HVT state would simply not get hit
    2. You are not allowed to enter BTB with Impersonation Markers, with this HVT state you'd enter BTB unless specifically disallowing it which would give it away immediately. Note that while the trooper Moving into BTB would be theoretically allowed to move through the fake HVT, the trooper hiding as a HVT would enter Engaged state as soon as the enemy Moves into contact with them which would drop the State

    As I see it, it wouldn't actually offer anything worthwhile over Basic/standard Impersonation and the mucking around with ITS scoring would just make for needless complications and weakening of an already weak state.
    As cool as it might sound, I think the current Impersonation state actually does impersonate HVTs etc
     
    Berjiz and n21lv like this.
  13. The Holy Knight

    The Holy Knight Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2019
    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    180
    My opinions:

    -Remove Jammers or replace it with E/Marat
    - Remove Total immunity
    - Remove Frenzy
    - No discount for the cheap unit with Impetuous/Extremely Impetuous (this rule is a disadvantage for an expensive model because it can't benefit from cover, but not for a cheap unit that haven't problem to dead)
    - CC need a valid improvement (like more burst, a poor cc model can't run across the entire board under the enemy shots and do a single facetoface roll of attack, need to be brutal when it arrives in CC), or CC units need a big discount
    - stop the spam of Camo/To Camo units
    - TAG need improvement
    - ARM is too expensive
    - no more spam of cheap unit, more elite
    - I think there is too bonus difference from Fireteams of 4 members and the Fireteams of 5 members (and the +3 BS is too much).
    - Fatality lv 2 should be changed or removed
    - Multispectral Visor lv3 need a serious improvement
    - A lot of rules are too much similar or identical, like Guard and MartialArts for example, so need to change one of these types of rules (and it's paradoxical that MartialArts lv3 is better of MartialArts liv 4...)
    - I think that some linkable units (in fireteam) should have a different cost from vanilla to sectorial (in vanilla should have a discount), because there are some units that without team are useless and some units that in team becames too powerful.
     
    Berjiz and Hecaton like this.
  14. L2590

    L2590 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2019
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    36
    For a different take.

    I’m a very long time lapsed Nomad player/forumite (went by a different UN on the last forum). After basically a few years off I’m just getting back into Infinity. There were a few reasons I stopped, time being one of them (and that’s not really changed) but I figured I probably have a different enough perspective to add some, minimal, value to this wishlisting. At the same time, I’m under no illusions that I don’t have much grasp on how the community generally plays these days so feel free to ignore this as the uninformed ramble that it may be.

    And yes I'm aware this is long so I underlined the important bits. everything else is my reasoning for this.

    Why I quit in 2016.

    N3 was awesome. As someone who had played N2 since 2010, N3 was a huge upgrade in every way, not least because many of the worst excesses of N2 were removed (combat camo, old MSV3, old MSV+Smoke, the Vector Operator etc.).

    The main reason why I finally dropped it was because of how HSN3 was handled. Simply, when N3 came out it was obvious that much less effort had been put into those profiles that were not in the main book so many units I quite liked were suddenly dated (or more dated than they should have been). Sadly when HSN3 finally dropped it did little to address these issues with many units being left in the dust while some got massively amped up. This was most evident in the case of Bakunin: Moiras were at least slightly competitive with Riot Grrls as a primary fire team when N3 dropped because they had longer range weapons and specialists. Along comes HSN3 and Moiras get no further attention, despite their issues (slow and disproportionately vulnerable to low cost, spammable troops), while Riot Grrls get not only a long range option but a specialist to boot. To make matters worse, links were still largely one-dimensional, all or nothing affairs.I’m not saying every unit needed a rework but it didn’t change the fact that you were still left with limited ways to play sectorials and a lot of units that were outclassed in vanilla.

    Of course I love the core game, it’s lore and Minis so I kept an eye on things and I feel that since then CB has made some excellent moves forward, making e.g. CJC a lot more interesting with wildcards and more flexible link options and Tunguska was a delight to behold thematically and gameplay wise.

    So my main want for N4 is that everything gets an update/look over at once, not waiting around 2 years for a patchwork update and then another 2 to finally address some of the bigger core issues.

    Another reason I stopped playing is the difficulty in deciding what a coherent table should be – there were a lot of disagreements with how asymettrical tables should be in our group and honestly it was getting to the point that you could win or lose games depending on who built the table. I’m not a “Win at all costs powergamer” but it was very frustrating in tournaments especially.

    So with that, my second big want is a much more detailed and standardised guide to making tables. Ideally including a few set maps that can be made with pre-packaged terrain. My friends fear this could lead to tables being “figured out” but I don’t see that being a problem with Infinity being as dynamic and diverse as it is.

    Other stuff

    Those are the two biggies but here are a few other things I’d like to raise. I’m a great believer in the adage that the community are good at spotting problems but terrible at coming up with solutions so I’m going to keep them as brief as I can while getting my point across.

    Impersonators: Although N3 reduced many of the frustrating mechanics of N2 (no more Aquilla guard wins a game by walking around with the trigger held down vs Shas…), Impersonators, while manageable, are still very easy to abuse due to their limited counterplay. Their value isn't so much to get kills so much as to control huge amounts of space without spending any orders (since if you don’t deal with them they can just walk in and take their pick of targets). They’re so much easier and more efficient to use than they are to deal with so running into double Speculos or triple Fidays (inc Al Djabel) often just forces one player to lose their first turn unless they’re lucky, making Shas’ in particular a very miserable experience to play against. I’d like to see them toned down and simplified e.g. taking only a single discover roll to spot with more penalties for better levels of impersonation.

    SMGs: These are multi-weapons but are so much cheaper than standard multi weapons that they pack a disproportionate punch for their cost on some units. Having such cheap shock ammo can make some units feel very redundant too. I’d like to see them given a single ammo type and multi-SMGs being added for some units.

    Hacking: it seems several people here have this issue too but I’ll echo it nonetheless. I’d like to see more supportwear, less CLAW/SWORD programmes that are very functionally similar so that different units can make best use of different programmes. Removing the WIP penalty for spotlight would be nice too since it can be opposed with FtF.

    Killer Hacking Devices: Again this seems popular, but KHDs are so good that AHDs feel redundant and they’re cheap, no SWC and plentiful to boot. It’s got to the point that it doesn’t feel worth taking a hacker below an Interventor as no hackers are going to present a serious threat to HI without their brains getting blown out from half the table away. I’m also of the opinion they should cost the same as an AHD and/or get a nerf.

    Medium Infantry: Perhaps I’m biased as a Nomad player but I still feel that MOV penalty is a huge drawback to MI in general, especially compared to the growing number of more elite LI and HI. So I'd like to see them get more bonuses to compensate for their lower MOV. More recent MI have had more 4-4 MOV so I suspect this is an accepted issue but I thought it was worth adding a +1 to that.

    MSV3: MSV3 was an item I felt needed a nerf in N2 because it made whole strategies (especially in Shas) completely unviable since a single Aquilla could just run around holding down the trigger against everything. However in hindsight it may have been overnerfed and Aquillas often feel lacking now. So I feel it needs a small buff but not back to it's former self.

    Skill bloat: This is a small gripe but as I’m having to re-learn everything it’s very relevant. There’s been a lot of skills added since N3 was launched and many skills could be merged. Many of the CC skills in particular seem very redundant. Surely Protheion and Guard don’t need to be separate skill trees from Martial arts? Protheion can just be a CC weapon and Guard has much more potential to be a neat skill in its own right rather than a glorified CC skill that makes you a huge target.

    TAGS: TAGS have always been a bit of a waste of potential, and I’d be hard pressed to find a reason to run them over 2His. The new buffs they have got this ITS season seem like a good fix and I hope that they keep their current ITS buffs in some form as a permeant addition in N4 unless they prove totally busted or limp.

    Frenzy: This old chestnut but it’s still very relevant, some units benefit dramatically from the Frenzy points discount to the point where they just tread on other units and pack a disproportionate punch for their cost. A Riot Grrl with a multi-rifle is 7pts cheaper than a Birgada and only loses out on a LFT, 1pt of PH and ARM and V:Courange in exchange for a better dodge and MSV1… This gets very apparent in link teams and can make some fireteams infinitely better than their contemporaries within and between sectorials. On cheaper units I feel the formula works a bit better like Jaguars and Myrmidons but I hope some revisions are made to the points discount offered by Frenzy (e.g. lower discounts for HI).

    Posthumans: I expect this is a very personal thing but Posthumans got a number of massive buffs between editions (only counting as 1 troop being the most extreme) to try and simplify their rules. Coming back to the game to find that, RAW, they can all be deployed together as a hold back and, even with Netrods, cost as much as most elite HI with up to 4 times the wounds, has made playing against them a very frustrating experience. I should stress that I think Posthumans are one of the coolest units in the game from a gameplay and fluff perspective and I do understand that they were excessively complicated in N2 but I do feel they need a build in drawback because in my experience they do utterly dominate the flow of the game most of the time (our local ALPEH player won’t even use the deploy all at once rule because he things it should be just 1 proxy).

    Command Tokens: One of the best things in N3 was the addition of command tokens, which added a lot of depth for not a lot of rules. I would love to see more options for them. For example something like to 1-3 of of your own troops starting in suppression fire so it feels less like I’m being penalised for going first and more like my opponent is gambling on having deployed well enough that SF will work out for them.


    EVO hackers
    : this was an excellent addition to N3 as EVO repeaters felt like a points tax rather than a unit in themselves. However, and this is a very niche complaint, I do feel that not being able to co-ordinate hacking without them is a bit of a relic of their original incarnation and they still feel like a bit of tax if you want to run multiple hackers and actually get some order efficiency from them. I’d also like to see them get more utility even if hackers in general don’t.

    Fireteams: I love the increased emphasis on mix and match fire teams to make them more diverse but I do feel, like quite a few others, that there’s too many instances of elite troops getting to guest in cheap links rather than the other way around as made QK so appealing originally. It means that there’s less of a decision to be made on trading link power for flexibility elsewhere as the extra durability from added HI is rarely worth the extra cost in link teams. So I’d rather see cheap troops to pad elite fireteams rather than expensive units being guests in cheap teams e.g. “up to 2 Algucils may link with Brigada” than the other way around.

    Fatality: Fatality 2 is one of the most genuinely miserable skills added in the game. I can accept crits as they are, but a 10% chance of auto losing an FTF roll outside of CC is infuriating because it’s changed an equal situation into an unequal one without anything in the way of counterplay. I would like to see this nerfed to stop it being so frustrating.

    Crits: I’ve been a very firm believer in the value of crits but do admit it never stops being frustrating to die to a random shot, especially with the amount of shock in the game. As such, I’ll join in those who would like to see Crits made less lethal (e.g. just ignoring armour) – maybe with Fatality 2 keeping crits as they are?

    That’s all I’ve got. I know that was an essay and I firmly expect that some of my perceptions are not shared by the community at large, just chipping in here. The big ones for me are the two that stopped me playing 3 years ago: piecemeal updates of units and lack of guidance/standardisation on tables. I’ve come back because of the efforts CB have made since then and have a lot of confidence that N4 will be a big improvement on N3.
     
  15. Nuada Airgetlam

    Nuada Airgetlam Nazis sod off ///

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2018
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    3,019
    MSV3 completely removes one of the core defensive features (camo) of one of the weaker factions (Ariadna) and you want to buff that? O_o
     
  16. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    7,205
    Likes Received:
    6,535
    Relative to MSV 2, it's too expensive.
     
  17. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    MSV3 is effectively MSV2 with the Sensor's bonus to Discover rolls, but at the cost of MSV2, Sensor AND a bit more.
    I think the device has a fair and good functionality, but it's a bit expensive for what it does.
     
    Xeurian and inane.imp like this.
  18. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    AD: just allow any failed jump to get placed anywhere in the DZ if it scatters somewhere not allowed (al la AD:5 right now).

    Make AD:5 +3 to the AD roll.

    This and the current 'no requirement to have a template' would be all the buff that's needed for AD.
     
    Berjiz and Tourniquet like this.
  19. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    Earlier we had a suggestion to make AD3+ be a Short Skill, but I find myself asking whether the Face to Face roll with Hackers and potential Dispersion is an interesting mechanic at all and I'm also kind of feeling every time I use AD troops that they're a huge order hog.

    How would people feel if...?
    AD3: Place a blast marker in a clear area, then place figure completely inside it. Apply Dispersion of around 6 to 8". Obligatory unless unit has AD4 or AD5.
    AD4: Place a blast marker in a clear area, then place figure completely inside it.
    AD5: Place a blast marker in a clear area, then place figure completely inside it with no restriction on landing in base contact with scenery.
    No rolls and still Entire Order skills.

    Effectively this is a bit of a more linear upgrade on Airborne Infiltration
     
  20. Tourniquet

    Tourniquet TJC Tech Support

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    1,656
    Given how impactful a good drop can be the risk is necessary, also HTA allows the defending player to try and stop that AD murder machine from gutting their army. It's the same reason that Impersonators need to roll to get into the DZ or infiltrators rolling to make it past the 24" line.
     
    Sedral and Florian Hanke like this.
  • About Us

    We are a company founded in 2001 in Cangas (Spain), and devoted to design and manufacture games and figures. Our main product, Infinity the Game, was born with the ambition to satisfy the most demanding audience, offering the best quality.

     

    Why are we here?

     

    Because we are, first and foremost, players.

  • Quick Navigation

    Open the Quick Navigation