Obligatory Grenade Launcher ppst

I think it's because pure core spec-fired grenades hitting on 13s would be rough as dogs.

Unleash the E/M spec-fire meta at your peril!

 

I think the issue is spec fire. Pure-core spec fire based strats are even more uninteractive and unfun to play against than GML strats, but you don't see them too often because almost no one can do them well. The only good spec fire set up I can think of is pure core Druze E/M GL in DBS. Giving GLs their +3 band back would make these strats more common and better - which would not be a good thing for the game.

Personally, I'd axe or radically rework spec fire as a mechanic while also giving GLs their +3 band. My personal take? Make spec fires always a normal roll (so dodging versus it is also a normal roll), and maaaaybe only a -3 opposed to a -6. That way it has some consistent utility in clearing stuff like rooftop repeaters, but makes it utterly inefficient if you are using it to attack enemy units unless you are either getting multiple units at once or hitting low ph stuff.

 

A pure core Loup-Garous is pretty good. Even getting a range bonus, a pure core would still be less oppressive than a GML. Druze and Loup would both be hitting on 12s, which is a lot easier to beat then the typical 18s for a GML. That's not to say it would not be uninteractive or unfun, but it certainly wouldn't be worse than GML.

If you made spec fire a normal role instead of a -3, same would need to be done for GMLs and any template that ends up hitting from out of los. Looking at the N3 weapons, it looks like the LGL and HGL were combined into one profile. The HGL was -3, 0, 0, 0, -3 ,-3, -6. The LGL was 0, +3, -3, -6, -6, -6, capping out at 48". Thus, it ended up being a boon to range, at the expense of accuracy. 0, 0, 0, -3, -6, -6. It did end up nerfing the utility of the GL for single models (Margot is sad), but it was a boon to the range for fire teams if they want to try to spec fire.

 

The thing that differentiates spec fire set ups and GML set ups it in my mind is that spec fire doesn't need any set up - you can start shooting to kill right away from the first order. At least GML requires you to put down a repeater somehow, spotlight the target, maybe deal with hackers in the area if there are any.

To kill a basic 1Wer sitting in a DZ, a GML set up needs a minimum of 3 orders - 1 to throw a pitcher, 1 to spotlight, 1 to GML. A spec fire strat only needs 1 - it's just that for most factions right now, spec fire strats have abysmal BS numbers meaning they lack consistency. Unless you are packing an E/M GL, spec fire strats also lack the punch to deal with HI and TAGs - although if you are, not even ECM (Guided/Hacker) and Tinbots can help your target.

And why can't we make all rolls involved in a order with spec fire normal rolls? For sure it'd be an exception, but spec fire is already a separate skill to bs attack - I don't think it would mess too many things up, no?

 

Spec fire does need setup to hit a dz, if you want a chance to hit. 0 range stops at 24", so to hit the dz, you've got to maneuver that core team up the field. So order use ends up being about the same.

I'm also wondering if we're thinking of the same thing regarding normal roles. By normal role, you mean treating it more akin to a DTW, where as long as you pass the dodge, the attack fails?

 

Fair on the first point, although the case of X-Visor GLs is worth noting.

And yeah the DTW analogy is a good one. Basically under my proposal, the impact template gets placed if the spec firing model makes a BS roll with a -3 mod, and any range mods. Once the template is successfully placed, any unit caught in it can make a normal dodge roll to avoid the template (at a -3 for not having LOF to the attack, unless you have 6S).

 

Hilariously, that's how I've been playing it, which has definitely reduced its efficacy. I think that is a better way to do it. I also think doing that for GMLs would go a long way to making that much less brutal too. X-visor GLs do make a difference, as that gets you up to 32". I play FRRM and have used that to try to dislodge tough pieces that I really didn't have any other way to deal with. They and Druze I think are the only ones that get that trick.

 

"Fixing" implies it's broken and it's not. Also should be in https://forum.corvusbelli.com/forums/rules-suggestions.246/ not rules surely?

 

Thread moved.

 

I think Emily is still the best spec shooter.

Note that speculative fire tactics didn't go away, and didn't get nerfed, in N4. They were buffed. Emily has a longer +0 rangeband than she had in N3, if memory serves, and everyone else got more lenient mods in the 16-24" band, so more can do that tactic at longer range.

I think the reason why we don't see it much anymore is, quite simply, that it is not order efficient enough compared to several other aggression tactics that were buffed or introduced since N4.

As it is, I argue that Grenade Launchers as a tool is sufficiently poor that it should objectively be considered broken/defunct. It is expensive, very unlikely to do damage, and typically on the very high end of orders per kill. A rather expensive points, and often SWC, burden for any unit that has them.
Smoke launchers being so cheap is a bit of an exception, but on solo units it's still very unreliable.

Oh. And I think the correct rangeband is 0 (0-8) | +3 (8-16) | -3 (16-24) | -6 (24-48)
Promote tactical use at medium range, discourage spam use at long range, punish spam use at extreme range.

Separate discussion is whather spec fire should allow bonuses other than range.