My idea might be extreme but I don't feel your armor should indicate what kind of troop you are. I also like the KISS principal, Keep it Simple Stupid. Armor should become equipment rather than a stat. Equipment like a gun, hacking deck, medikit, etc. I've been thinking of this in part due to situation MI seems to be in. MI is in a weird place where it's no longer MI. There's a lot of Light Infantry and Medium that's has the same ARM. So I propose that MI gets an ARM boost. It can be as good as HI but without the extra wound. Light Armor (ARM 0-3, BTS 0-9, 1 Wound) Medium Armor (ARM 3-5, BTS 3-9, 1 Wound) Heavy Armor (ARM 3-5, BTS 3-9, 2 Wounds) TAG (ARM 5-10, BTS 3-9, 3 Wounds) All other things like MOV, Dogged, NWI, etc can be done separately to make more unique troops. So what makes HI is that they gain a wound on top of their armor. MI have armor as good as HI but no extra wound. Profile example Zhanshi MOV, CC, BS, PH, WIP, W1, S, AVA Equipment: Light Armor (ARM 1, BTS 0) Skills: Dodge +1" Tiger Soldier MOV, CC, BS, PH, WIP, W1, S, AVA Equipment: Medium Armor (ARM 3, BTS 3) Skills: Combat Jump, Terrain (Total), etc. Some of the proposals have been to add other skills like NWI, Dogged, Shock Immune, etc. My problem with NWI and Dogged is that I don't want my troops going right to dead without a chance to doctor. It's especially important in missions that need pts on the table to win. But my main gripe is that it's yet another skill to keep track of! KEEP IT SIMPLE!
What purpose does this actually serve? Do we actually need a serious distinction between MI and LI? Does that actually add any significant value to the game? I don't think it does. Certainly not enough to require a massive overhaul of a core game stat.
Well they certainly seem to think there's a distinction between the armors. I personally think it's an old way of thinking. Like it's middle ages or something. But right now there's no distinction of what MI is. LI and HI have the same ARM values. I can live without amor becoming equipment. I like it as that because it's. little OCD of me I guess. Because that's what it should be. It's your gear just like your gun, hacking deck, or grenades. But I also think it can give them a bit more flexible combinations of things.
It's one of those vestigial pieces of the game that has continued from when it was first envisioned as a role playing game. It has little bearing on the game and doesn't require change. If you want to change it you need to actually make a real argument as to why such an overhaul actually brings benefit to the game, otherwise it's just pointless change for the sake of change.
The various categories (LI/MI/SK, Spec. Trained, HQ, etc.) also give them an opportunity to track and give different bonuses in ITS seasons.
Then how about the change is to make MI actually worth the points? Most MI right now should get a +1 boost to their ARM. Others keep suggesting things like NWI, Dogged, or Shock Immune for all of them but I thing that just complicates things. MI just needs to be better ARM than it is. Something that really is Medium.
Whether or not any MI profile is worth the points has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they're tagged as MI or LI. It comes down to what the profiles are given in the faction they are available in.
The issue with MI is complicated. They typically cost a lot for 1w trooper with mediocre armor. Typically it's an unoptimized unit with a mix of features that don't add up to a 24pt+ value. Fixing that means making the unit better to match the price, or reducing the price to match the unit, or making them perform in specific roles. However, the real issue is that CB uses the same costs for things going onto high stat HI as they do for it going onto basic line troops, and so the better the carrying trooper is, the more efficient the equipment is. MI have mediocre stats with no durability and carry gear that costs the same as if it were on anything else, making for a pretty poor deal if you can just get an HI (or equivalent) model to cover the role.
The issue is that ARM/BTS alone doesn't make that much of a difference. Between typical ARM 1 LI and ARM 4 HI there's only 15% difference of how well armor will protect its user. Right now LI vs MI distinction is pretty much meaningless. The question is whether it's better to eliminate MI as a separate classification, or to try to make it more meaningful. But if it's the latter, I find the proposed armor rework artificial. It introduces another distiction into the game without providing any benefit over the current system.
Well, the armor does more than that...but yea. It's still not something I want to bank an expensive 1W infantry on. 1 armor saves vs D13 on a 13 or higher, armor 4 on a 10 or higher, about 25% more effective right? That's a lot more likely. Add in cover and it makes an even bigger difference. I still don't like it as the defining trait though, and still think it sucks on 1W infantry. I'd rather see more profiles with different roles, and be optimized to do that thing.
My thoughts on this? Make it so if it has, say, two or fewer Special Skills/extra loadout pieces, it's Light Infantry. If it has more, it's Medium. Would at least be consistent.
It's a consistent rule, but so low a number would mean most LI would suddenly become MI. The question remains: do we even need the distinction between the two? Or is it a leftover type, rarely if ever coming into play, just like Veteran/Elite/HQ/etc. Troops? My opinion is that it should be left it place, should be given a broad common theme, similarly how HI are "ARM 3+, BTS 3+, 1W+NWI or 2W, Shock Immune and Hackable), while still allowing exceptions - just like not all HI have ARM 3, or any BTS at all. While I do find the idea of armor as a specific equipment to be cool, I feel like it locks the design too much - current freeform model allows for mixing and matching different stats to make unique units, though I feel like CB isn't using this system for all its worth. The issue is that we naturally tend to minimize the chance factor in our lists and games any - heh - chance we get; ARM makes it more likely to withstand a hit - taking it from 45% to 60% for example - but still leaves a significant risk of losing an asset after a single unlucky roll. NWI or multiple wounds, even without high ARM stat, means that most of the time it takes two or more such unlucky rolls to take the unit out - it might have only 45% chance of not taking a wound, but it has 100% chance of surviving, if it does take one. This means that - by the token of this natural tendency to take less risky option - we prioritize NWI or 2+ W over higher ARM. This is something CB should take into account more, when balancing units.
Extra wounds are for sure more valuable in many cases, especially with ARM 3-5. It let's to flub a roll, take a mine, etc. The game is so swingy nobody wants to have to risk it on an 1W model.
MI largely exists as shorthand for Up armoured premium infantry with improved stats and various skills and equipment to make it more versatile, than anything with any real mechanical impact in the rules. And also fill the mid ground points wise between LI and HI though in an era where there is HI that cost on par with LI that has gone out the airlock. But in a game where walking around a corner generally means eating 2+ DTWs thanks to everyone either having one or a shotgun makes the increased durability and increased offensive stats pointless. If anything they should lean into the aspect of MI that is the increased versatility and give them some point reductions on some skills or equipment so as to keep what they do but bring the overall cost down.
