If you don't use Blackout people aren't walking repeaters up to you or they are and you're letting them. I don't think hacking devices should get AROs against normal troops even Spotlight. It will massively slow the game down.
There is already a do-no-damage ARO in the system: Reset (which is 'Dodge' for hacking). I don't want more do-no-damage AROs, I want more lethal AROs!
It's not quite the same. This still neuters the Killer Hacker from doing anything to others with his KHD (since Blackout will turn off his Hacking Device). They are still vulnerable to Hacking, and still count as specialist, but cannot do any Hacking in turn (and would have to Reset).
OK, I follow the idea, but I don't think that CB wants to add temporarily or permanently killing equipment back into the game. We did that back in N2, with a whole list of equipment that was EM vulnerable. PanO Fusilier got EMP'd in N2, his Combirifle didn't work anymore!
I like that! Don't know why it was removed. :-/ Also, Blackout is already in game. It just doesn't have any modifiers, and I propose giving it modifiers as a way for regular and AHDs to defend themselves from KHDs without being deadly back.
Was complicated and hard to track, so was given up for better gameplay in N3 (as opposed to max realism in N2). hrm. I still think that the problem is that there are no 'range bands' for hacking programs, so whatever has +3WIP (or -3WIP to target) is automatically the best option in that situation. Hacking works differently from shooting, more like how CC worked in N2 (ie, poorly at best).
Well, Firewall is a bit like cover there. If you just want to improve AHD vs KHD, what about a CLAW-3 program that is a B2 blackout? (And let's call it 'Bluescreen'! :P) That's still something offensive, (it's not fitting to improve an AHD's defense,) but may make a KHD-user think twice.
The easiest way to get that back as a temporary "Jam your gun" program would be to give AHDs a program that inflicts Stun, potentially on non hackable models.
If an AHD worked more like a jammer that'd be sweet. Also if hackable was a discount, that'd be good.
Just going to float two ideas here which runs on the assumption that AHDs are maybe not taken because there's a draught in targets for them to target. Combine this with an apparent low discount on being Hackable (when compared to other skills that are relatively light on detriments *coughfurycough*). So, let's make being Hackable a very valuable asset. 1. AHDs to gain access to Shield-1 (simply for minor utility against armies without hackable targets) 2. Supportware targets changed and unified to the same targets as those targetable by Claw programs (i.e. Hackers, and Hackable targets) As a minor note, Assisted Targeting is, in the grand scheme of things, too strong. If it could grant Marksmanship 2 without also granting Marksmanship 1, it would be less... awesome... to put on a Swiss Guard or Avatar. Perhaps Assisted Fire to be the unloved stepchild which only gets to target REMs.
A funny thing would be to not (only) disable an enemy's hacking device, but to turn it (= the enemy hacker) into a repeater (until reset/engineered/whatever). And the possibility to hack (= posses) enemy repeaters as well. Isn't hacking more about controlling comm equipment thanfrying brains? But still, this won't help against non-hackable factions... Even worse: The weaker hackable factions (like Yu Jing or JSA) would suffer the most. But a Jammer-Program for AHD would be nice!
Occurred to me this morning that people don't mind taking 4-5 HI in a fireteam if they have the Fury discount, because it makes them cost effective. If hackable was a discount on a level with Fury, but the discount didn't "double up" with each other (i.e Riot Grrls cost the same, Mobile Brigada would cost less etc) that'd go a long way to making HI desirable and Fury HI a liability rather than basically a sexy points discount.
I think there's merit in redesigning infowar to more closely resemble the meatwar (but otherwise stay lightweight). Here's an outline of what I have in mind: Give hacking-related actions their own resource pool separate from Orders, which I'll call Virtual Orders. Virtual Orders are used in the active turn to perform a single Virtual Skill, which is used to carry out hacking attacks, interact with the environment or scenario, and shrug off the effects of certain non-lethal hacking attacks (via Reset). Virtual Orders are the only way to perform Virtual Skills. All Hacking Devices generate Regular Virtual Orders, except for Killer Hacking Devices, which generate an Irregular Virtual Order. Regular and Irregular Virtual Orders imitate Regular and Irregular Orders in their application. Hackable troops, such as Heavy Infantry, TAGs, and Remotes, generate Regular Virtual Orders while a friendly Combat Group has an active troop possessing any Hacking Device other than a Killer Hacking Device. Otherwise, they generate Irregular Virtual Orders. Troops in the reactive turn cannot react to Virtual Orders with an ARO. Instead, they use a Virtual ARO (VARO), which includes hacking attacks and resetting. Repeaters and hacking range are unaffected. Here's what I think this accomplishes: The hacking game is now another "invisible" layer on top of the normal game. It doesn't compete with the basic game for Orders. Hackers are freed up to do more than just "sit still and hack". They can use an Order to move and shoot, and then a Virtual Order to flip an objective or blast another hacker. Hackable units (and hackers in general) provide benefits for being used in larger numbers, granting more Virtual Orders for hackers to work with. Opens up the design space for environmental and scenario objects for hackers to interact with, as well as new hacking programs. EDIT Hackers are protected from other hackers in the active turn, provided they aren't spending Virtual Orders. This is a big deal for a lot of Assault Hacking Device troops, which tend to be hungry for normal Orders, such as DeFersen. Edit 2: I do realize an issue with separating AROs from VARO's, and that's the protection that hacking devices, like the AHD and KHD, are supposed to offer in the reactive turn. This would have to be reconciled some way. I'm not sure what it is in the context of my outlined system, but I want to point out that I recognize this issue/
I saw people talking about the chances of killing HI with a hmg vs assault hacking for an IMM or ISO state. Things looked pretty bad for hacking. However there is a compromise... You could bring a bulleteer.
I'mma stop you right there and say the game needs LESS layers upon layers upon tokens upon tokens. It opens up design space, but functionally your proposal only kicks the can down the road insofar as the issue being "KHDs make most other hacking devices a bad deal, and in some cases a laughable liability that you should avoid like the plague" Not saying I dislike it, but the game needs fewer barriers to entry, not more. EDIT: oh yeah, it also does nothing to grapple with the fact that the best counter to hackers is to not bring anything hackable (ariadna, to a lesser extent Haqq...). Or if you do want the Vorders to allow them to push buttons, you're invalidating most other specialist types who lack such a Vorder.
aka: spend on average 2 orders to only IMM-1 someone, which they can reset out of as an ARO to anything that they can aro to, while not actually killing them? If that's how you think orders are best spent, uh........yeah dude. Also, why use a prowler with no mods? Why use a prowler at all? Try a BSG spektr which is far cheaper, in good range (you have TO, you will get to good range), and see what the math says.
You havent understood it. The difference is in the whole Thing. Immobilize without any Risk. It is just a part of tactics. No Risk. Cleaning up with anotzer trooper. Do I really have to give u the whole move? Really? How many Orders would you spent to kill an HI like Hsien, Achilles etc.? yes. Prowler with CH, Hsien with MSV. What range? Both in Cover? It really doesnt matters. It is just an example. I am just a Beginner and no Mastermind. But ignoring the possibilities of Hacking is an disadvantage for you. Not each army Needs Hacker. But ignoring the chances is a fault.
