the best part about this change is that I think it will blunt the power of the worst offending vanilla Rambo pieces by spreading out the sectorial targets a bit more. before, if you could kill the _one_ guy in the core link, it was hard for your opponent to hit back. now, they will be able to have a few more options on the table, and it's harder to lock them out of functional, quality back up plans.
So far I like the thought of it more than the execution of it. It still baffles me as to why CB can't roll out changes more evenly across the factions. Some factions got a proper loving rejuvenation out of this and others got a slap-dash "can't be arsed" passover. I suspect there's more tweaking and developing to be done with this but it feels kinda hamstrung by the fact that these rules are in a pdf which came out after a major rules edition change rather than at the core of them. If it were me, I'd have delayed n4 and built the mechanic into the rules fully rather than tacking them on eith a pdf bandaid. As miffed as I am about the older factions treatment I can see benefits to the new rules so I'll give them a fair crack of the whip
I swear that wasn't there the other day, I was looking for it when I posted in @Knauf's thread and it wasn't listed in the OP either.
If I had to make a guess, I'd say that they released N4 without the Fireteam rules because of Code One, because of how both versions of the game share most of its components and rules; probably they didn't want to delay Code One and all its associated model releases.
With 10 primary factions owning a total of 32 sectorials (+Tohaa) among them, that's kind of to be expected that a major rules change causes a lot of overhead in the balancing department meaning you look at more generic solution to the stuff that's not in obvious need of attention (by whatever definition of "obvious"... obviously.). I think the next iteration of fireteams is due after summer so we'll see what happens then.
Mixed feelings here. I do like that Ballistic Skill inflation is being walked back a bit. Additional thoughts: It would have been good to have this a long time ago, before sectorials were built out with this dynamic in mind. As mentioned, a lot of sectorials were built with the idea that flexible wildcards were a key asset of their design. I feel this particularly strongly when I look at Varuna. I do mind the subjectiveness of what constitutes a "pure" link, and what doesn't. I've been playing Bakunin lately, and was surprised to see that Riot Grrrls can embed a super engineer (Fiddler FTO) and a super Doctor (Avicenna) and they both count as Riot Grrrls. That's quite an easy 5-man link that's going to shoot the pants off most opponents now. It's fairly cheap, chock full of utility, and can be padded out with other strong units to easily reach 15 orders and ITS viability. I look at other sectorials I play, and don't see anything remotely as strong. This wasn't such a big deal when it was just a matter of slapping an ORC into a Fusilier or Regular fireteam and letting him rock and roll. I also remember that hacking and guided missiles, the two most problematic issues I see this edition, aren't affected at all. This is also a significant boost to TAGs as active turn pieces. Do we need the meta to be more TAG oriented? I've already heard of two tournaments (one Australian, one Wester European... Germany?) that were won with double TAG lists.
Fuck me, why it is always Nomads with some next level stupid thing. What is the purpose of the frikking purity in this case ? Wait a second, where did I put my double TAG MO list ......
Probably on the shelf after one got bricked and the other got stolen and torched your DZ, repeatedly, after getting a pitcher yeeted down range on turn one.
While the fireteam changes are significant in terms of their impact on list composition, I am honestly underwhelmed by the lack of true rework, particularly with respect to fundamental features such as coherency, order declaration, members rejoining fireteams, and impetous/frenzy suppression. CB split up a few mods and changed the way that fireteam composition is determined, but both are things that I feel could have been released within a few months of N4 launching, rather than 1.5 years later. While I would have loved to see a complete ground-up reconstruction of fireteam rules (which is what I thought we were getting given the amount of time it took to arrive), I would have been satisfied if CB had just streamlined some of the clunkier rules and imbalances: Joining a fireteam should not suppress impetuous and frenzy. These states should exist regardless of fireteam status and using an impetuous activation should cause the trooper to leave the fireteam - just like how it works for irregular orders. These models got a price discount for a reason, so they should not gain +3 arm while also benefiting from improved order efficiency. Requiring all fireteam members to maintain coherency to the fireteam leader is what makes 5-trooper cores so clunky and difficult to play dynamically. This could be relieved by reducing the coherency requirement to "each member must maintain coherency with 2 other fireteam members, with the exception of duos who only require coherency with one another." CB took a small step towards fixing stupid things that cause links to break by changing the rule so hackers in a link can declare any program in ARO without being kicked out, this should be expanded. If the fireteam leader declares a movement skill in the active turn, the other fireteam members should be permitted to declare any other legal movement skill without leaving the link, including dodge. Similarly, if the fireteam leader declares a hacking program in the active turn, the other members should be permitted to reset - or alternatively, hacking programs should not activate the rest of the fireteam since they never benefit from fireteam bonuses. In ARO, all team members should be able to react with reset or hacking programs without leaving the fireteam and members should be able to mix discover, dodge, and BS attacks without leaving the fireteam. The rule requiring fireteam members who went unconscious or were otherwise kicked out of a fireteam to wait until the start of their next tactical phase to rejoin the fireteam is in my mind extremely harsh, particularly given the power and prevalence of the shotgun fork, and ignores the perfectly good states phase that CB introduced to the game. I would change the timing such that troopers who left their fireteam in a given turn may automatically rejoin if they are no longer in a null state and meet coherency requirements during the states phase of that turn - allowing regeneration to kick in if appropriate. This also incentives players to doctor/engineer unconscious or isolated troopers in their current active turn in order to regain fireteam bonuses before their opponent's turn. Please CB, give us something more.
That does require alot of sectorials to get reworked. Many fireteams become unplayable with that change. As much as I like the idea, it's a hell of a monkey's paw wish given that CB historically struggle to adapt all the sectorials to game wide changes at the same time (no different this time either). Plausible change, can't see any real issues that would come up from it. Alright this one is a solid No. The issue with allowing links to do this is you can just bullrush stuff into position this way. You're allowing the Leader to MOV+Shoot while the rest of the link defends itself with MOV+Dodge. The ARO piece now has to make a very painful choice between defending itself or taking a F2F that it may not win against a model that previously would be running in the open giving themselves up for a free shot. Similar story for your hacking idea, my Haidao could attack a hacker while the Shang Ji charges through his hacking zone while covering both of them with a -6 firewall while it MOV+Resets. I think allowing fireteams to do different things in ARO is fine, but definitely not in the Active turn. Active turn player already has a massive advantage you don't need to make it greater. The game already has a real problem with alpha strikes dominating the meta this just exacerbates pain train links running at people. Yeah this probably fine.
No. Because you’re just describing the ability to use a Fireteam as a vehicle to walk a bunch of impetuous or frenzy models across the table, and let them out of the Fireteam piece by piece without disbanding the Fireteam. If you meant “Impetuous models should still suffer the penalties of impetuous while in a Fireteam…”, as far as I know that rule applies to two fireteams—the Hungries hunting pack and the YJ fireteam. If you’re objecting to the cost discount, that just means the enabling trooper for each of those fireteams should cost more. I might agree with this until you wrote the words “including dodge”. No way in hell should the link team members be allowed to declare or perform dodge if the leader is doing something else (especially shooting). (Remember that Dodge is a Short skill, not a Short Movement skill, while the most of the movement skills are Short Movement skills.). ‘Everyone is the Fireteam should be able to do different things while still getting bonuses’ is silly.
I think playtime is the real issue here. Right now you have to measure distances from teamleader only. The suggested change can cause way more measurements and time consumption when maneuvering fireteam.
Anything Frenzy after 1 attack (like Asawira, Hospitallers, Myrmidons), Tanko, Witch Soldiers, Teutons, Kuang Shi, Hungries, Monks, Anything with Liang Kai, anything with Diggers, Varangians... fuckloads of other ones I can't think of off the top of my head.
It's about time CB just started releasing their boxes with basic weapon arms as well. There's no excuse for not having the standard combi/shotgun/rifle, whatever available outside of one model. It's frustrating that now they want cohesive links of one unit type for bonuses but don't provide a feasible way to do so.
I think it's reasonable from a game design point of view to have these rules as sectorial and fireteam specific boons, but that kind of means there has to be a trade off when they lose access to their team. As deep as the discount goes, it is trying its darnest to make sure there's no undue performance loss for these units particularly as Impetuous is self balancing by having an optional extra activation. Tell an IA player they will be able to get a Crane that goes batshit crazy if they kill someone for the price of a Zuyong and they'll probably take it over Zuyong everytime. Tell them the Crane is wildcard won't go crazy if they are in a fireteam and the IA player will forget Shangers and Zuyong exists. (Disclaimer: example is unrealistic, but Cranes with Regeneration do not exist) The other side of the coin is, if that's needed to balance some sectorials, why isn't sectorial specific benefits like that needed in others?
I'm not sure if this is sarcasm but aren't you basically describing an Asawira who is for all intents and purposes also a wildcard Crane with higher stat values and better guns for a fraction of the cost thanks to Frenzy and also has Regeneration?
Regardless of how exactly Impetous/Fireteam could be solved, Frenzy should still kick in when trooper is part of the link, and Impetous troopers shouldn't get cover bonus when being part of the link. Order efficiency they're getting thanks to being able to link is big enough of a bonus. Solving this via cost tweaking isn't really feasible, units in question would need to have two differently priced options, unlinkable and FTO. Allowing troops to leave fireteam using their Impetous orders - I think this might be acceptable, but requires testing.
So far I like it more than not. I too don't like them being able to ignore Frenzy/Impetuous. Although I'm really happy with my Monks being able to duo and haris. Though that comes with the cost of taking a more expensive character. Where others don't have that restriction. However, I suppose if they are irregular troops, they loose that order and Impetuous order. My main problem is Frenzy troops. I hope they make few changes to who counts as certain troops in the future. The Tian Gou is a lot harder to add to teams now. It needs to be done like the Haffza who counts as the troop depending on the team it's in. Has mentioned, one of the IA lynchpins was the Haidao, who now ruins any un-mixed teams. The few lists I tried making lists with it but I ended up not having any at all. I'm also foreseeing more 3-4 man unmixed cores just to get the +3 Discover. Especially in sectorals that can have 2 Haris. They can almost become like Tohaa. Tohaa obviously can mix a lot easier. But even they are subject to the Mixed/Unmixed rules. In fact they having unmixed Tohaa is very Un-Tohaa. I don't think I've ever seen someone take 3 of the same troop in Tohaa.
