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

Zhanshi should have 19 CC...

Discussion in 'Yu Jing' started by Mahtamori, Sep 26, 2019.

  1. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    ...or more. This is the value where a Zhanshi who has no cover has roughly the same chance vs risk to wound a Combi-armed Fusilier or Kappa in cover as they would have if they used a Combi.

    It is still not as good as if they moved to a position where the Fusilier's cover was negated and used the Combi from there.

    Discuss (the futility of CC below 21)
     
    meikyoushisui, Savnock, WiT? and 4 others like this.
  2. ObviousGray

    ObviousGray Frenzied Mushroom

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    3,155
    Did you played Monster Hunter World recently m8
     
  3. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    It's far too grindy for my liking. Why do you ask?
     
  4. Ayaxs

    Ayaxs Crane agent, Yuandun division.
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    270
    Likes Received:
    298
    Running the numbers, it really should be just CC 15 (it is the first increase from CC13 for a spec ops) but really, i'll just be happy if they put the doctor and engineers as profiles for zhanshi, the increased AVA and linkability in IA would make them much more valuable, and brawlers already have them.
     
    Hecaton likes this.
  5. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    You're thinking of reactive turn, I ran my numbers on the curiosity of where it would start being worth playing with the goal of getting into melee
     
  6. TheRedZealot

    TheRedZealot Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    993
    Likes Received:
    1,529
    Is there a specific reason cheap line infantry should be looking at Combat as a potentially primary form of engagement? I don't really understand the motivation. Just because Zhanshi pay for the CC increase?
     
    toadchild likes this.
  7. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    Yup. This.

    It is not necessarily only Zhanshi, but the actual number I got highlights a problem in the design at large.
    There are a number of differences achievable with a ranged weapon to make granularity between weapons significant, but with CC you're looking at a specific and very high number to start competing with even the cheapest ranged weapons - and that's not even taking rangebands (or in CC's case lack thereof) into account.

    Basically, anything 19 and below *IS* entirely cosmetic. (Unless it's got something specific to back it up, such as IKOHL or EXP CCW)
     
  8. colbrook

    colbrook Grenade Delivery Specialist

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    9,294
    Likes Received:
    17,066
    CC19-20 is far better odds than shooting once you start coming up against TO/ODD.

    Though I'd posit that the real useful change to Zhanshi is having them cost the same as Fusiliers and Alguaciles, essentially getting the point of CC for free.
     
    Xeurian, meikyoushisui, WiT? and 2 others like this.
  9. TheRedZealot

    TheRedZealot Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    993
    Likes Received:
    1,529
    I think this is slightly incorrect. The differences in CC are -relatively- unimportant. But that isn't due to the fact that CC as a stat is under/over costed. Its because units don't typically have the supporting gear to go with it. The difference in stats isnt that expensive. However you pay a lot of points for that Combi Rifle the unit is toting around. Where as you pay very little for the pistol and knife they're also whipping out.

    You're looking at a unit that is something like 80% Costed for Shooting and 5% costed for CC and then complaining that its Shooting is better. Of course its better at shooting! But it can still make use of that CC in certain circumstances. The important thing is to identify those circumstances and understand the moments to apply them.
     
    Sedral likes this.
  10. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    By the same coin, it's going to be a lot less useful when going up against stuff with i-Kohl or Martial Arts - swings and balances I believe the expression is. Strictly gameplay-wise, CC of 19 is still grossly worse than shooting a Fusilier with a Combi Rifle, not least because a Combi Rifle can be employed from a safer distance where you take less AROs and a LOT earlier than CC. The saving grace for having 19 CC - the reason why it would cost any amount of attention span to consider it - is in the corner cases where you have been able to get sufficiently close to a TO/ODD figurine with worse CC ability than you (i.e. not a Ninja, not a Myrmidon, not a S.A.S, not Miranda, etc which cuts out a surprisingly significant chunk)
    I understand what you are trying to say, but those 5% costed for CC has no real applicable value which means that it's 5% over-priced. The same goes for everything that pays a comparable price for CC while not reaching effective 20+. The complaint isn't that it's made for shooting, the complaint is that it's not able to make use of something it is obviously paying for because it is never going to be good.

    This is not a case of where a model armed with a strong weapon and a puny weapon is still paying for the puny weapon (e.g. Heavy Rocket Launcher also armed with a Light Shotgun) or a case of where a unit has an extra gun that gives a slightly better option (e.g. Combi Rifle + Light Shotgun). However, much like the problem with the Combi Rifle + Light Shotgun, this is also about an overlap. It is ridiculous that the Combi + LSG should cost as much as it does over a straight combi, because the LSG doesn't add much due to the overlapping good rangeband. In the case of the Heavy Rocket Launcher it should be full price because the Rocket Launcher is -3 in the rangeband where the LSG is +6, but instead for many units with an additional LSG they pay extra to have access to a template while units that don't even have a positive rangeband at point blank gets a discount for getting the LSG (I'm talking about Rifle + Light Shotgun).

    So the complaint as it is is that units should start getting discounts when abilities overlap, as appropriate to the degree of overlap. As much as such could be determined (high CC on Yan Huo would complement their intended armament a lot more than high CC on the Shang-Ji does because the Shang-Ji is armed nearly exclusively (Spitfire profile being the only exception) with weapons that are good at very close range)

    --

    But beyond this there is also a conversation to be had about how skewed and maligned the CC system is in this game. CC removes variables such as cover, it mostly removes variables as opponents, it completely negates the active turn advantage for the player that's spending an order, and it boils it down to a constant chance rolled on a single dice that is immutable. For the units that don't have any meaningful stat, it is of utmost importance to stay out of that game while for units that have they will tend to have a fairly predictable outcome once they get there.
    Not unlike Warhammer 40K where units shot their guns only in their own turns, but when engaged in melee they suddenly attacked during their opponent's turn as well, which shot the meaningfulness of a comparably higher CC ability sky-high with the predictable outcomes that this entailed.
     
    Xeurian, DaRedOne, WiT? and 3 others like this.
  11. TheRedZealot

    TheRedZealot Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    993
    Likes Received:
    1,529
    Ok but from my perspective you sort of have 3 related ideas going on here.

    • CC is not good enough.
    • Zhanshi are over costed because they pay for CC14
    • All costs should scale as a result of how they play with the rest of the profile.

    The first and second are definitely arguable. The third I think everyone would agree with but I think its also already being done to some extent and its difficult to fully assess outside of the scope of a full army.

    You have touched on some interesting ideas though and I want to highlight a few for further discussion.

    But how do you determine when that ability is an assest vs. a burden. This is an issue that generally plague YJ for a long time so I'm surprised to see someone argue in favour of it. But If the Yan Huo became CC24 tomorrow and its price cost went up to match I'd be very curious to see how many people felt that was actually an improvement. Where as alot of CC oriented units also come with point blank weaponry, specifically because that layer of overlap has value.

    A unit that is trying to get in 8" for its shotgun is also very likely to be in a position where stepping into combat to neutralize a problem is a possibility.

    A unit that wants to sit on the back field and rev up a High RPM gun really doesn't want to stand there slapping someone else instead.

    Only sometimes you just dont end up using the knife and sometimes you really want that extra bit of defense.


    --
    Personally I love the CC system. There are basically 3 scenarios that happen and they're all quite predictable. And this makes them great parts of an arsenal without making them difficult to understand.
    • My unit has an overwhelming advantage and I should slice and dice this unit in half.
    • My unit is on equal footing and its a crap shoot, but I'm also ignoring all of your shooting modifiers/its my Reactive turn so its a better chance for me than shooting.
    • We're pretty much equal but you're a big stompy TAG and I'm a derpy little guy so I'm happy to not spend orders and sit there while you have to waste yours to win.
     
    WiT? and SpectralOwl like this.
  12. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    In general, Infinity is a system that favours highly specialised units with as cheap backup weapons as possible (generally speaking, Direct Template Weapons, but there are others). Of course, I don't think suddenly competent melee on Yan Huo, a slow unit that's already plagued by being dubiously costly, is going to be generally applauded. Yan Huo is a dummy that I used because it has no profiles with close range weapons (it's still got pistols, which are going to be better than going melee unless you get probably 20 or 21 CC), it's for illustrative purposes.
    Now, with that said, it's interesting to note that Electric Pulse is very, very, cheap and it is significantly better at presenting an obstacle in melee than what is commonly referred to by the fluff as "good" melee ability. This means that an army that's notable for having good melee ability across their troops such as Yu Jing (not talking about the monsters here) is still going to have their generic REMs be better in melee - particularly against mediocre or bad melee units

    But the key point I'm trying to bring up is; you should be paying for the utility you can get out of each ability, not the stats difference. Right now it's clear that there are a range of units, Yu Jing being over-represented, which clearly pay for a CC level they can't really use.

    (at the moment my most consistent theory on CC at lower levels is that you only pay for it if there is a similar unit in another faction that has lower CC - I can't get CC values price points to be consistent otherwise - which is sort of shitty because it relies on cross-faction comparison instead of inter-faction balance or the unit's own utility, and it makes it arbitrary)

    P.s. TAGs tend to have the CC ability level I'm talking about should be standard for troops that are noted as prioritizing CC a bit extra. Not the Pan-O TAGs, but many others. They will be able to effectively fight off those derpy soldiers - unless that soldier has Electric Pulse, of course.
     
    Dragonstriker and Hecaton like this.
  13. Barrogh

    Barrogh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    2,062
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    I don't see why would we want to actively look for active turn CC with default infantry with standard mobility/delivery. CC on them should probably be increased as highly as it's possible without making them even more expensive. But it will mostly serve as a deterrent against trying to cut them down in a smoke with impersonators.

    If anything, I'm more annoyed at them trying to grab premium guns they aren't exactly cut to use, like Multi Sniper rifles instead of normal ones. Oh well. At least they have okay FO profiles.
     
  14. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    Oh, I mean, with what they currently pay for CC (1 point) they should have 18 or 19 points of it ;)

    My opinion on snipers is that Multi Snipers should either be 1,5 SWC or increased points compared to Snipers - not both.
     
    Dragonstriker likes this.
  15. SpectralOwl

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,891
    Likes Received:
    3,130
    I do agree with Mahmatori that CC does need a general increase- you cannot close to base-to-base with a model you can see without losing cover, and everything has a pistol. That means that they are responding at, in the case of BS10 Metros, a target number of 13. That's equal to a Fusilier's CC score, so there's no good reason to close to CC with one of the worst fighters in the game with anything short of a dedicated CC trooper. The alternative is making CC Attack include a full short Move- it would still feature really bad odds, but significantly improve order economy to the point that it could be worth it since charging would be quicker than stopping to shoot.
     
    WiT?, Hecaton, Section9 and 2 others like this.
  16. Barrogh

    Barrogh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    2,062
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Tbh I think this is what Assault should do, on top of losing its specific penalty. But that's slightly off-topic I guess.
     
    Dragonstriker likes this.
  17. Shinen

    Shinen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2018
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    105
    If CC had another purpose, like for objectives (synchronize with hostile civs, because you have to grapple them) and you need to do that in some missions or you can substitute some skills with it (shooting pistols in cc with full burst+positive range mod with your cc skill) i wouldn't mind the extra points i pay in my YJ army...
     
    Xeurian and Dragonstriker like this.
  18. TheRedZealot

    TheRedZealot Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    993
    Likes Received:
    1,529
    But the easiest and most common way to get into CC outside of Impersonation/Camo is to trigger AROs on a corner and then round the corner into melee. Simple and easy to do for most units and no opposed shooting :D
     
  19. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,148
    Likes Received:
    9,666
    That is a good idea.
     
  20. AdmiralJCJF

    AdmiralJCJF Heart of the Hyperpower

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    3,532
    Likes Received:
    4,594
    It's long been my opinion that the perfect solution to the "CC tax" was simply to double what you got for that point.
     
  • 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