Looks absolutely sweet! I'd be keen as to give this a jam. Some feedback that you can take or discard as you want One bugbear I have with these systems is when levelling up is totally random - a melee guy rolling BS or a sniper rolling CC etc can seem fun to some, but sucks the fun from the game for others. Would be good is there was some element of choice in the personal development system. An easy one would be to roll two dice and let the player choose which one is assigned to which axis on the chart. IE a 16 + 2 could either be Sixth Sense (first roll 16, second roll 2) or IMM(Shock) (first roll 2, second roll 16). Is a level cap required? I reckon if you can get one trooper to survive so many missions, it can just keep rolling and rolling on that chart until it just ends up hilariously OP. The beauty of Infinity is that this OP trooper can easily be taken out by anyone with the right tactics. A fatality option on the injury roll. Combined Army units, operating behind enemy lines, can be a good analogue for a Merc company without the requirement of human elements in the team. The RP points represent the trickle of equipment and supplies reaching them through human territory. Experience: +1 XP if the model performed a face to face roll. +1 XP if the model lost a wound. These are relatively easy to track and honestly, more accurate than needing to actually score or damage an opponent with regards to how 'experience' works IRL. +3 for MVP, each player choosing a most impactful model from the other side for an EXP boost. If your players can't handle that honestly, why the fuck are you playing with them? We got Company!: A much simpler way to manage this is to just let the reactive player control the ARO from the Brawlers. Have used this before in special missions. I'd also give them 360 visor and force them to be deployed standing to minimize shenanigans (spawning behind a box facing a wall etc) Secondary Objectives in missions that grant EXP or RP rewards, but no objective points.
One thing that occurred to me the other day while I was thinking about this. You might want to just change bio-immunity to shock immunity. It would get around the issue with a BTS 12 Spec-Ops but still give some value to bio-immunity.
I actually don't think the BTS12 Bioimmune Captain's likely to be too overwhelming, since it eats a ton of XP that could get you an early HMG or other high-end equipment that can actually win games and build XP and rewards- though it will grow into a monster if the campaign's long enough.
I'll absolutely take them in consideration, as I'm eager to analyse and integrate them in the project :D A valid point. My objective in this game is to force the player to think outside the box, trying to creatively use combos created from random rolls. If it doesn't work, it's time to retire the unit to make space to another one! However I agree that a little predictability could be really useful to help a player to have some sort of control in the development process, avoiding completely broken units. I already received the suggestion regarding the choice in the axis, and I agree it could be a good option to address this issue. Another option I was working on is to give the players a direct choice in the stats development (e.g.: each rank the player choose if the unit gain BS/CC/WIP/MOV...) and maintaining a totally wild development table to compensate. No, not really. But I was doing math and I didn't felt more ranks were needed. A really efficent unit (gaining maximum amount of XP each combat), would have 60xp in an average 10-rounds campaign, while the minimum amount for a unit always present (so, without skipping matches) would gain 30 points, not enough to reach the last rank. True, more rounds mean more XP, and I can throw a couple more ranks to compensate the issue. However, I'm still aiming in avoiding the snowball effect, so I want to be sure that it will not impact negatively this topic, first. Uuuh, I never liked a "ops, you're dead" option. I'm ok with the wild random, but I don't want to create apprehension in a player each time the injury roll is invoked :D True. I initially thought that a human presence as "face" would justify the presence of Combined Army in the mercenary market. However it's just a minor RP issue, so I think the rule can be scrapped in favor of a more streamlined approach. I'm not really sure a quick development will work well in the game. With the current system, a ide unit will gain the first rank in about 3-4 games, less if he's actually doing something. I fear that gaining too much XP will quickly degenerate in a snowball. But I will give it a thought. It's a really good idea. It would be much easer to manage them in the game. Good idea!
Random question - how much playtesting has this had? I'm looking at 4 round missions with maximum five models (and typically less especially at the start of the campaign) and really wonder if there are enough orders present to have a meaningful game. Its like when you get your very first intro game to Infinity and its typically three models vs three models, and the turn count goes through the roof because each individual turn doesn't have enough orders to do very much. I'd be wary with the stat choices, as often theres an obvious and uninteresting choice for a unit (typically BS or MOV), but it is a good way to make sure that troopers are consistently getting stronger in a meaningful way with each level. In addition, removing the stats from the development chart helps avoid situations where a trooper has CC 34 or something after a couple of rolls. Personally I'd find that funny, but it could be a balance issue. The balance issue with brokenness is a real concern, but I think that this needs to be weighed heavily against its counterpart - getting absolute dumbos with unsynergistic abilities that aren't fun to use and leave players feeling ripped off or even bored. When it comes to broken, I think you should look at some of the options on the chart which are much, much better than others. IE MIM-6, or camo attack, vs IMM shock or MA1. That's whats going to lead to snowballing, far more than letting players optimize the characters to fulfil their roles. Those two skills in particular lead to problems - you can flank a MIM-6 trooper and still fail to kill it because of how strong a -6 modifier is, and camo pretty much always beats non-camo unless something special is happening to make that not the case. Definitely think that chart needs a rework regardless of the approach. There are overlapping skills that essentially waste a level up, in a game that takes ages to level up and with no current way to mitigate the problem - ie Forward Dep and Infil, or MIM-3 and MIM-6. There are also skills that are clearly better than others, and while perfect balance is maybe not an attainable goal, it doesn't make sense to me to be concerned about a player advantage but also hand out wildly different power levels to players at random, especially if its essentially just 'good version of skill or bad version of skill that does something very similar'. You mention earlier that if you get a derpy unit, retire them and free up a slot. If units take too long to level up, and you need to take this approach because the random ability they roll is terrible, this is going to lead to serious feelbads. [/QUOTE]
looks a really fun take on the small scale combats, looking forward to trying it out. like the idea of the covering fire skill and agree with what others have mentioned, maybe have different skill tables to choose between - melee, shooting, command etc.
Playtesting almost none at the moment (unfortunately the lockdown hit us badly so I had the chance to start testing it in a meaningful way). Hence the beta version of the document and the request for feedbacks and beta testers :p However the assumption of the five models are quite incorrect. The game starts with 7 orders + the lieutenant one (5 models + the captain + an extra order given by rules). The game spans during 4 rounds to compensate the fewer orders available, however the staying power is a bit higher (no cons in healing a unit, plus the chance to automatically revive a unconscious unit during each turn). On paper the order balance should be kept, and the contracts are built with this economy in mind (still, I imagine they cannot be truly balanced until tested on the field). I give it a thought. I'm not really concerned about different "tiers" of the skill, as in the word of Infinity there aren't game breaking skills. Putting in the table a Mimetism -6 together with a Mimetism -3 is a luck chance (like infiltration or forward deployment), but far of being a snowball. Those skills can be easily bought in a starting unit from the roster, and the game always teach they can be circumvented (the effort to circumvent them, however, can be discovered only after the beta test). However I strongly agree that there are several overlapping skills that can make a level-up useless, and I didn't thought about it. I have to avoid it, and the roll selection on row/column discussed previously can be an effective tool. I'm going to update the rule in the next version.
I'm a bit concerned about Bioimmunity, honestly. As I'm inclined to agree SpectralOwl point of view, I still find this spec-ops rules a bit dangerous, from a balance point of view. In Mercenaries the impact is riduced a bit (as only low-level troops - like Zanshi - can access to this combo), but still, I want to keep an eye on it.
Re; the captain, does "25 points" mean "25 EXP" and you reduce the RP cost of the profile from the EXP available? Can I purchase SWC weapons with my Spec Ops using the EXP (or points?) ie a Red Fury? Getting something like an MSV1 Mimetism Feubach regular as my Captain seems pretty good. Honestly finding the use of "points" and "RP" and "SWC" a little confusing at the moment.
It's much simpler. Basically the 25 points for the captain are the only exception of the general rules: those points are used to build the Spec-Ops that will be your captain (so you can buy weapons and skill following the spec-ops table, without worrying about any other value). Then, only RP and SWC points are used. The captain himself will be equipped using the general rules valid for any other troops: he/she will gain XP and ranks, will roll on the personal development table and can be geared using the tables described in the document. The spec-ops rules are used only in the first generation of the captain. So, basically you can build your captain with discounted equipments (like an HMG), using only your spec-ops points, or you can buy it later by spending RP and SWC.
I would posit that you will see a lot of SWC boat captains then, given how important SWC weapons are, how difficult it is to get them in this game (and that this is the only initial source), and how with the pricing of spec ops abilities they are actually rather cheap and arguably the only way to build most of them. Balance wise it may or may not be an issue, though I gotta point out that Fusiliers are *nuts* here with BS12 and crucially 11pts instead of 12+ which allows for Mimetism, MSV1 and a 5 cost SWC weapon, but it does change the playstyle and identity of the game quite a bit given that one of the really interesting facets of it was the lack of SWC weapons at the start. If you have TTS I'd be keen to playtest some of this! I re-read some of the rules and have a few questions and suggestions; Do Remotes generate XP and level up? Says nothing in rules, just seems weird so I figured I'd clarify. Would be hilarious to level up an Imetron or Netrod, give it +2 MOV or something. Booty and metachem, do these rules replace the usual rules or add to them? Perhaps use total XP instead of a resetting XP stat, its easier to track for players using pencil and paper. Allow SWC models if they are paying 0.5 SWC for a hacking device and nothing else. Admittedly thats a PITA to write rules for but I feel like hacker profiles are being excluded when they probably shouldn't be. CC weapons seem really expensive. They're typically one point in the main game, compared to like 8 points for a marksman rifle or some such, and I would argue this is for a reason. Allow for "heal rolls" for injuries between fights. Injuries will be a major source of drag on an army's progress, leading to them falling way behind in a really unenjoyable way. An army that takes too manyinjuries will be less able to earn the (rather high amount of) RP to heal them, and must spend the RP they do get on healing instead of getting stronger. There's a typo under Services - should say "until you have no spare RP in the treasury" Do peripherals level up in any way?
Yes, I quite expect that. In my vision the Captain should be elite punching unit, especially on early phases of the game. I'm curious to see if different approaches can be taken, but at the moment I assume swc weapons will be a very common choice in the captain generation. Yes, they will. At first I thought about putting a limit on REM, but I saw no benefit in adding exceptions that could hamper the choice of troops. Quoting a feedback I received on facebook: "Super Heavy Armor on an AI Beacon which has, by sitting idle for several contracts, obtained the rank of Veteran". And i find this thought quite funny :) They replace them Good idea, I'm going to change it in the next version. I'm not really keen to add an exception to manage the use of SWC points in the army list (only for an hacking device), so I have to give it a thought, first. I agree, I'm going to revise the costs of these weapons. Good idea. I would like to test the economy of RP first, so I can see how much effort I need to apply to balence the mechanics. But this is definitively a good idea to apply if the things will result too unfair. Thx, going to correct it. No, peripherals will stay as they are (no gains and no equipment). I will update the document with peripheral rules (they will be considered an "equipment" attached to the unit, rather than an assignable unit during the deploy).
Gonna try this mode real soon! Got a question. When declaring a Captain and building them with the 25-point spec-ops rules, do you have to pick the spec-ops profile stated in the sectorial you are using, or can you just pick whatever unit you want? Meaning, if my starting Sectorial is QK, for example, does my Captain have to be the Hafza or can I use someone like a Mobile Brigada for that role? EDIT: I guess that since the captain does not count towards the starting 40 RP cost – it means that you will have to stick to whatever spec op is given to you by your Sectorial, it makes sense to me now. But this begs the other question: can these 40 starting RPs be spent on anything other than units, e.g. equipment, weapons, armor, etc?
That's correct. You have to stick with the spec-ops given by the sectorial(s) you choose.. Yup. As stated in the related section, any unspent point is stored in the company treasury. So it can be used (even before the first match) to buy additional gear for your troops.
That's nice to hear! So I can start with a one-man army consisting only of my captain and after upgrading him in the Spec Op calculator also give him stuff like heavy armor with two wounds?
Two questions that came up whith "The Mole" today: Can there be more than one Mole if you succeed at more that one analyzing-attempts? The rules say that troopers heal at the start of each game round after the order count. How should you understand that? In the beginning of that player turn to which the unit belongs, or in each player turn or does every unit get the roll one time before the next complete round starts? Thanks for the efforts! At least the first game was real fun!
1. Only one Mole exists in the game. The other HVT (not yet analysed) are kept in the field in case the Red Herring twist is rolled. I'm going to clarify it in the next version of the document 2. It works exactly like Regeneration: it's a roll the player do for his own units, during his own States Phase. I will reword it to adhere to N4 description (this rule was written before N4 came out, so I agree it generates confusion as it's written). Nope! My fault, I misread the rule. Actually the recover happens at the start of the turn (rather than the end, as stated on Regeneration skill) Thank you for testing it, I'm glad someone is enjoying the game :D (I will pvt you to recover some feedbacks, if you don't mind)
Version 0.6 is out! Remember when I said that I will give you additional contracts in the next version of the rule? I LIED. Seriously though, I'm still working on interesting contracts, so I decided to update the version with several fixes and rule changes. Next time I will add new contracts, I swear :( In the meanwhile, as you can see from the change notes, I reworked few core mechanics in the rule, and I would like to explain why. First of all, the Captain creation. In the first iteraction of the rule I wanted to give the players a choice in the spec-ops creation: is it better a high-base value spec-op unit (like the Deva or the Muyib), without additional points for customization, or something more cheaper, with several points to be spent for additional equipment and skills? Well, as it turned out, the latter one. N4 Spec-Ops table are quite unbalanced, and it's easy to create a nigh invulnerable unit with few skills. So, being basically a no-choice, I decided to rework a bit the mechanic. Now each Captain will have a standard pool of points (12) that can be spent on the initial generation, removing some choices from very-cheap options, and adding flexibility to the expensive ones. The cost of the spec-ops unit will be instead deducted from the initial RP pool (that was increased as result, from 40 to 60). Now the cost of the Captain will impact on the general weight of the initial squad, rather than on the spec-op points, resulting in a more balanced starting position between the various factions. The second major change is related to the Insurance Token. What is it? Basically when a player lose a match, he/she's awarded with a discount on a single injury removal (from 10 to 5 RP), to be used before the next match. When I designed the injury system, I saw it as a RP sink. As the game progress, the players are forced to spend RP to maintain the troops at optimal efficency. It's a good way to keep the tension in the game, and avoiding RP hoarding between the matches. However this mechanic is quite dangerous in the early stages of the game: a losing player may be forced to spend all the gained RP to recover his/her units, lagging behind more successful players. I decided to add the Insurance Token in order to provide a bit of negative feedback to the game: a losing player will receive a little boost to reduce his/her losses, and stay competitive between a match and the other one.
It might be a good idea to put new/changed rules in red in each version of the doc, so that players who are testing know where to focus their attention. Leads to less edition mixups. Read through the new version, came up with these points of discussion; If not using N4 Spec Ops (good call), is it necessary to force the Captain to be a spec ops capable model - ie a cheerleader grunt? Whats the 'related table' for equipping your captain? Is it the standard/special/exotic table or another one? If its the standard table, are the Armor bullet points (not on the 'table') options too? If its the standard table etc then 'relk Page 5 is completely blank. Is there meant to be something here? The "injuries as RP sink" model is going to lead to snowball effects, as the winners will likely take less injuries than losers, and stronger armies will likely inflict more injuries on weaker ones, leading to more RP spent the weaker you are. It's usually better to reward winners more than it is to punish losers from a psychological standpoint so I would suggest looking at a way to mitigate this beyond just the Insurance token
