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. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    I mean, if we're going with the bomber analogy, it's like a bomber that exists to bomb strategic targets and tanks (HI, REMs, and TAGs), but are equiped with dirty bombs (Oblivion) and are somehow authorized to use bunker busters on nuclear power plants (Total Control vs TAGs)

    The shift in power is obscene to the point where prior to KHDs the AHDs were responsible for severely reducing HI use in several metas and almost universally making TAGs extinct. (Because they are strong, permanent and almost completely risk-free hard-counters, particularly in ARO)

    I've made threads on it before on how I don't think it's a good rock-paper-scissor situation (partially because of the factions that are good with scissors are also best at rocks), so let's leave it at that I think that it should be enough that programs that inflict IMM-B should be enough to control hackables (and recall that TAGs have improved BTS, but not improved WIP so getting out of IMM-B is as hard for a Jutum as for a Peacemaker) and if someone isn't able to take advantage of that, they probably have some more serious problems.
     
    Berjiz, toadchild, loricus and 2 others like this.
  2. RolandTHTG

    RolandTHTG Still wandering through the Night

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2019
    Messages:
    383
    Likes Received:
    494
    I think splitting the Total Control out from regular AHDs and making it a special upgrade like Maestro would be a good design choice. It would allow the game to distinguish elite AHDs that have the skill to take over a TAG from regular AHDs, who can only brick a TAG.
     
    NurseNursey, Tourniquet and Stiopa like this.
  3. Hisey

    Hisey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2018
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    132
    I'm a fan of this idea. At the very least it should be restricted to AHDs only, but it would be even better if it was on "elite" AHD's only. No one in a real world environment would ever use something as powerful as a tag if some bumpkin WIP12 line infantry fusilier could tap a few buttons and take control of it, let alone the advanced hacking possible from other factions and units.

    Another idea that could make possession both stronger and weaker would be a shift away from the ease of cancellation in exchange for an ongoing risk of using it.

    Borrowing from a certain RPG's "target may repeat the save at the end of each turn" mechanic, you could have every order spent on a possessed tag include a reset (with or without a MOD) by the owner in step 5.1 to wrest control of their tag back. To go along with this we remove the use of a command token to end the possessed state, and instead make it a reset (with or without a MOD) to end.

    This way every order you spend on a possessed tag to get it to fight against it's own army includes the chance to lose control of the tag.
    This would change the nearly trivial and guaranteed use of a command token to a reset that costs orders each time it's failed.
    It also means if your tag is possessed in your own turn, you can begin spending orders to reset it immediately and continue your turn rather than having to wait through your opponents entire turn.
    The exorcism hacking program is still on the table if the hacker has a better WIP than the tag, or the reset to escape possession includes a MOD.
     
  4. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    Keeping possession programmes in game for the "hacking elite" (e.g. Nomads, Haqq, Aleph) will change very little compared to the current situation, while only widening the gap between those who are mostly only able to use it as a local tool (e.g. Ariadna, Yu Jing, Pan-O). I think Total Control and Overlord are more reasonable when all the board isn't filled with literal no-go zones where you have 35% risk of losing 1/3 of your army at the grand total risk to the enemy hacker of 0%.

    So, IMO, if you remove it selectively, you need to remove it specifically from the factions that are currently very good at quantity hacking (lots of deployable repeaters, FastPandas, and pitchers). Problem is, quantity hacking factions overlap heavily with the quality hacking factions. (which is a dynamic Infinity is otherwise very good at avoiding - melee being another such blind spot, but unlike hacking is much harder to force on your opponent)
     
  5. loricus

    loricus Satellite Druid

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    2,613
    Not elite faction, but elite units. I think a better way to limit it is specific units that otherwise have less of a reason to be used. For example on Corregidor you could keep it off units like Jazz because she's going to be accidentally taken, and units like Bandit or Hellcat to keep it from being a surprise. Units like Wildcats or Brigada are better candidates. That prevents the faction from being able to be countered with no way to build against heavy armor, but prevents what I consider to be the biggest problems.
     
    SpectralOwl likes this.
  6. Hisey

    Hisey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2018
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    132
    Exactly, I'm picturing it only being usable on the best of the best assault hackers. Taking over an opponents tag should require extreme aptitude. The types of units with AHD that jumped to mind were things like Mary Problems, Umbra Samaritan and Scylla.
     
  7. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    Anything Nomad is exactly what you need to avoid because of how good they are at spreading hacking nets. That's where the problem is, Nomads, Haqq, and a couple of others. Now. If Hexahedron and Shang-Ji were the only hackers deemed elite in this way, it'd probably be a much more balanced situation because they are part of factions that have very limited repeater networks.
    Unless you dilute what makes for the Nomad identity by making deployable repeaters and elite hackers readily available to Ariadna, Yu Jing, Pan-O and their NA2 bastards.

    In my opinion, there are exactly zero, zilch, no, nada, factions that haven't got the weapons necessary to face TAGs in the traditional, non-asymmetric way, and exactly no factions without decent units to do it. Meanwhile, quite a few factions who are forced to do it with no or terrible hacking. And by luck (or is it CB's design?), there are exactly 0 (zero) factions or sub-factions who need hacking to deal with TAGs.
    So, as such, hacking by design has to be small benefits or you'll screw over either TAGs (and other hackables) for daring to be played in a setting where hacking hard-counters them, or you'll screw over the non-hacking factions by buffing TAGs so they are balanced to a hacking-rich environment. Or you need to introduce failure consequences to trying to hack HI and TAGs such as automatically suffering a DAM 13 hit if the target succeeds a Reset.
    (Incidentally, in N3 Assisted Fire is so good for REMs and REMs are so cost-effective in general that they're not exactly ailing, in my opinion, almost to the point where they're already in the over-buffed category)
     
  8. loricus

    loricus Satellite Druid

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    2,613
    Corregidor is just the only faction I feel comfortable calling out specific units like that.
    I totally understand and I don't disagree. It just doesn't sit right with me to just axe it.
     
  9. wes-o-matic

    wes-o-matic feeelthy casual

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2019
    Messages:
    633
    Likes Received:
    1,051
    I'd love to see hacking work differently on Remote Presence TAGs than it does on manned TAGs. For that matter, it would make a lot of sense in-setting for hacking to be used to take over REMs (including Palbots) or even Heavy Infantry, even if only briefly.

    One way to tweak things would be to treat certain (G) Skill troopers as valid targets for a program that works similarly to Total Control, but makes the target into a (G) Servant synchronized trooper for the attacking Hacker, and drops BTS to zero to make regaining control with Exorcism easier.

    It'd also be good to add an "offline" mode to (G) Remote Presence units and all TAGs that make them unhackable, at the expense of entering a special form of the Isolated state that can be voluntarily entered (Short Skill or ARO) or cancelled (Entire Order).

    SIGNAL OVERRIDE (CLAW-3) Short Skill/ARO
    Requirements:
    • The target must be an enemy unit with Ghost: Marionette, Ghost: Remote Presence, Ghost: Servant, or Ghost: Synchronized Special Skill
    Effects:
    • Allows the user to make a WIP roll against the target. A successful roll forces the target to make two BTS rolls against Damage 16.
    • Failing one or both BTS rolls causes the target to enter the user's choice of either the Overridden state or the Disconnected state.
    • The effects of this program persist until the end of the current player turn, or until the induced state is cancelled.
    • The range of this program is the Hacker's Hacking Area.

    OVERRIDDEN (State)
    Effects:
    • Troopers in this state cannot activate or receive Orders from their player's Order Pool, and are considered to be enemies by the rest of their owner's troopers.
    • A trooper in this state gains the Ghost: Servant Special Skill and loses any other versions of the Ghost Special Skill on its army profile while this state is in effect. It is considered friendly by the troopers of the player that caused this game state.
    • The Hacker that induced this state is considered to be the controlling unit for the purposes of Ghost: Servant.
    • A trooper in this state is considered to have BTS 0.
    Cancellation:
    • Same cancellation conditions as POS state. (Note: This rule requires modifying Exorcism to affect any unit in the Possessed or Overridden state, rather than specifying TAGs.)

    BACKBURNER (SHIELD-2) Short Skill/ARO
    This hacking program functions identically to Exorcism, with the following exceptions:
    • If the target is in the Overridden state, this program can damage the enemy Hacker controlling it. If the Overridden target fails two or more BTS rolls against this program during the same Order, the enemy Hacker designated as the controlling unit must succeed on a BTS Roll versus Damage 16; failing this roll causes the enemy Hacker to lose one point from its Wounds/STR Attribute.
     
    #2449 wes-o-matic, May 20, 2020
    Last edited: May 20, 2020
  10. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,470
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    HI were not used not because hacking in the first place, but because all the problem they had (And still have in non-LI vainilla armies), and KHD didn't make them appear (it helped, but it was not the main reason). Versatile fireteams and limited insertion rules are what made heavy-HI lists more viable. It it wasn't that, we would see more heavy focused vainilla lists on non-LI tournaments, but only a few people do it. And if hacking were so relevant, we would be seeing 2-3 KHD in more lists than we see them.

    hacking by dessign was a hardcounter for HI tech, not just "small benefits". Some faction have access to almost everything, or reduced costs to some weapons, or reduced SWC.... others have other tools like better hacking, and the because hacking is avaiable to almost everybody (except for a minimal representation in ariadna and tohaa) is a tool more of balance. A hi-tech-focused list should have it hard against a hacking-focused list, but at the same time, that hacking-focused list should have it hard against a Low-tech-focused list (And Low tech lists can be achieved by any faction). But at the moment, for hacking to be a hardcounter you need to overspend on it (hacking, repeaters and so) but a single KHD can screw that while a lowtech list remains as a problem.

    Hacking has a lot of problems at the moment: it needs overspending points on troopers, on orders to possition, and the poor combination it has of rof/penalties makes it not so reliable in active (in reactive it gets better because you are not the one spending not so secured orders). Stealth is also a problem for hacking because of that, and the factions whith more stealthed HI are also the hi-tech ones (and usually, the ones you might have problems in shoting). Also, some TAGs (and a few HI) cannot be dealt well with the standard anti-tank weapons (TO, ODD, camo/mimetism, MSV2, high armor.... with also the highest BS in the game), so to deal with those, there is the need for alternative options, like hacking, EM, adhesive, monofilament mines, etc. Initially adhesive was not a problem because it was in a few profiles and its low range +low rof made it unreliable, now ITS brings extra rof for some profiles, and gives it for free to much more of them, in certain missions, and there are even direct template of it, while applying a hard effect. EM is still the most used because it brings one of the stronger effects to HI/TAGS (imm2+iso), and is more avaiable, while monofilament mines remain the strongest but are also more limited. Hacking still brings one of the weakest crippling effects, and that's because everybody has access to it, but because of that, is more easy to see someone forfeiting hacking (or only bringing a single KHD) than a hacking-focused army.

    Even there are still people that say, since N1, that the tankunter autocannon was called the best hacker because hacking is worse than an EXP shot to the face! Obviously, it is said as a joke (please, nobody is saying seriously that a tankunter can do hacking), in N3 I've heard that with other troopers, but the essence is the same: hacking is only reliable when you have enought to force your enemy into bad moves in it, but in the meantime, direct confrontation with certain weapons works better against most of them.

    that overriden status, is really needed? if hacking should possess remotes and ghost troopers, just make possession viable against them, and do a few changes:
    instead of a fixed profile, it applies a malus to some of the atributes.
    maintain the option to shake it off with command token. Is not the same to take it out once, or several times in a turn
    because is more widespread, there could be the option for a reset in active turn. That reset could be repeated in different orders while the trooper gets a success in its roll (even if it looses the FtF), but it cannot be repeated if it fails (making it neccessary a friendly hacker to save it).

    creating a defensive program that bypass the FtF against the hacker but can damage him seems a bit overkill to me: it has the best things of KHD without having to do a FtF against the direct objective (only against the "overriden" trooper, which usually should have lower WIP due to the status). There is not a single weapon in the game that allows that kind of effect (if I win the FtF against this dude, that other has also to make a save or die). It could be made instead that, if the hacker gets inconcious/killed/isolated or gets in a status marker (i.e camo or imp, that is for balance control, the one possessing must remain active for him to maintain the control), the oberriden/possesed troopers become free. That way we have an extra way to deffend those troopers, but then, the command token should be reviewed.
     
  11. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    So Ariadna is just screwed, then, and can't compete? Because if hi-tech is rock and hacking is paper and low-tech is scissors, then hi-tech should have a noticable advantage versus low-tech (no it shouldn't, Infinity is more complicated than that, just like how hacking shouldn't be facerolling hi-tech like it basically was prior to KHDs made people knee-jerk AHDs to extinction)

    In either case, as far as power level is concerned, I don't think there is a need for stronger hacking programs specifically designed to make sure no one wants to play TAGs. IMM-B is significantly stronger than current IMM-1 and the sheer order-wasting potential is huge.

    @wes-o-matic I do agree that should anti-TAG specific programs remain, the POS version should be targeting Ghost skill. I don't think you need to specify Ghost skills in detail as I think C1 has hints that Jumper Z will be folded into its own skill without the Ghost prefix. So against REM TAGs you control them while against Manned TAGs you pop the pilot out and shoot it. This does necessitate that the pilots get moderated a tiny bit, the Sally pilot strikes me as just wrong with the KHD in this context ("Yay! I just got popped out in the hacking zone of an enemy AHD! Now, that's service") and the Yu Jing pilots need a gods damned FTF gun, even if it is just a Flash Pulse.
    Also, Exorcism should be Short Skill/ARO.
     
    meikyoushisui likes this.
  12. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,470
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    no, I didn't say that. I say that a hacking-focused list should advantage against certain kind of lists (hi-tech focused), and dissadvantage against certain other (low-tech focused). Nothing related to the balance directly between hi-tech and low-tech (which can be on even terms between them).

    Also, all armies can do low-tech (even IA, but I admit they have it harder to), so all armies can have advantage against a hacking focused list (so in a way, is more risky going hacking-focused than not), that's another reason why hacking is not abused at the moment. Ariadna has other ways to deal with high-tech, so I don't get why you get to that conclusion from my comment. Hacking is not the only one, just one more of them, one with drawbacks, and ariadna is one of those drawbacks
     
  13. loricus

    loricus Satellite Druid

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    2,613
    Basically the second hacking stops being a liability, hackable is a death sentence. Making the hackable units worth it anyways makes hacking required to deal with it. Not sure how to find that sweet spot. Just constantly rebalancing a pin.
     
    Tourniquet likes this.
  14. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    By reducing being Hackable to being a Complication not a death sentence while simultaneously making Hacking of general utility and a limited vulnerability.

    Unfortunately Possession is too spikey for that model, and so should be removed.

    Targetted, IMM and ISO effects that persist but can be Reset out of do conform to that model. Particularly if you couple it with a Hackable price discount for HI and Non-hackable for free.

    This then allows Ariadna the advantages of Hackable without the downsides to mitigate the downsides of lacking useful access to Hacking.
     
    Berjiz, loricus, Tourniquet and 2 others like this.
  15. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,470
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    if hacking were to lose power in exchange of utility, some factions would need a little buff to compensate what hacking is supposed to bring them, or some factions would need nerfs to compensate the fact that a hard counter gets nerfed. If hacking were overperfoming, abused as other options have been in the past, then a nerf would be deserved, but at the moment, nerfing something that is only being a nuisance for certain extreme lists, don't seem to me a good move
     
  16. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    You didn't say it, but you either didn't follow through to the logical conclusion or you have the opinion that hi-tech should not have an advantage. If Hacking has an advantage over Hi-tech that means Hi-tech has a matchup that it is disadvantaged against and as such it should have a matchup that it is advantaged against which would logically be low-tech - meaning since Ariadna can't do hi-tech nor hacking, they should be fucked according to the logic you used. Or Hi-tech should be fucked.
    Hacking is also not a thing you build a list around, it's support that you can add to lists built around light infantry, heavy infantry, skirmishers, etc etc. For most factions, at least.

    IA doesn't struggle with low-tech, surprisingly enough. Well, they don't have non-HI skirmishers, which is a bit of a disadvantage, but they're actually really good when built around light infantry, I've been having fairly decent success when maxing Zhanshi Core as it means I'm less likely to be fully locked down by Hacking and gives me extra resilience to order loss (ironically enough). Plus, it's the only way to get light grenade launchers, which is the universal solution in late-stage N3. What IA does poorly is hacking. Really poorly. Yes, good killer hacker, but no repeater network and very expensive and awkward AHD.

    Anyway, I do spot some circular logic here. Hacking is bad, because people are playing light infantry too much, so hacking needs to be boosted against heavy infantry/TAGs. Only problem is, hacking is part of the reason people are avoiding heavy infantry/TAGs (not the main reason, but certainly contributing reason).
     
  17. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    Nothing in Infinity is designed around having hard counters. People are playing, very successfully, factions that have none of these hard counters. Hacking IS getting an over-all buff in C1 compared to N3, most likely.

    Also, possession of 80+ points and 2+ SWC in a single order isn't exactly a "nuisance". It's a major power gain and often game-deciding.
     
    inane.imp likes this.
  18. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    Honestly, making Hacking less of a vulnerability and more generally useful that's a major buff even if the spikey peak power comes down.

    Possession is extremely rare compared to games where Hacking is either irrelevant or a detriment. I'd happily forgo that occasional spectacular success for more routine minor successes; provided that Hacking is also less of a vulnerability.
     
    dexterv, loricus, Hisey and 1 other person like this.
  19. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    While we're on the topic of hacking, let me gush a bit about how exciting hacking looks like for CodeOne gameplay. Note: these numbers are generated using N3 crits and against typical HI/REM (WIP 13, BTS 3) also assumes no Firewalls.

    IMM-B
    Active turn: 52% for attacker to gain the chance of rolling normal rolls for typically 1 to 3 orders vs. target.
    Reactive turn: 32% for attacker to stop the active model.

    Targeted
    Enemy is fully operational: 42.5% chance to Target.
    Enemy is IMM-B: 52% chance to Target, 29% risk of enemy escaping IMM-B
    Enemy is IMM-B and Targeted: 77.25% chance of wasting your opponent's order, 22.75% risk of enemy escaping IMM-B and Target
    Enemy is uses Airborne Deployment inside your Hacking Area: 62% chance of Target
    Enemy doesn't respect Targeted state enough to Reset: 62% chance to Target

    The fact that Spotlight doesn't have a -3 MOD for the user, that it works in ARO, that it applies a further -3 to the Reset-out-of-IMM-B MOD, and that it works on Light Infantry, etc, means that there's soooo much utility to be gained from C1 hacking. They've really boiled down hacking to the two base components in C1, all that's missing for N4 is Repeaters.
    Will hacking win you the game on its own? No, and it's not meant to. Will it give you universal advantages? Yes, you just need to figure out how to use it! Does it affect a certain type of target so much that it risks negating the unit type or mandate heavy discounts for that type? Not really. I don't think so at least. It's a minor disadvantage, certainly, but not so big that the compensatory discounts would cause run-on effects.

    I'm really excited to try both heavy-HI and hacking in C1 and what N4 hacking will look like. I really hope that they don't complicate it much more than this. Excellent, to the point, and good support for a universal advantage that can't be fully negated by not playing the hacking game. All that's missing is to be allowed to place Targeted on objectives :p
     
    loricus, Tourniquet, Sabin76 and 3 others like this.
  20. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    I'm particularly excited by "enemy doesn't respect Targetted enough to bother Reseting in ARO" into "Carbonite on +3 vs -3" or "EM Grenade causing IMM-B and ISO for -9 to Reset".

    It's not as hard a lockdown as IMM-2 + ISO is in N3 (it's a 20% chance to Reset out on a Normal roll for most HI) but it looks seriously cool as the set up for a combo.
     
    #2460 inane.imp, May 20, 2020
    Last edited: May 20, 2020
    A Mão Esquerda likes 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