The original version of the E/Marat (before the rewrite in Campaign Paradiso) was a circular template centered on the user (which also hit the poor Ghazi iirc).
powerfull... but less powerfull than IMM-2, inconscious, dead.... and only stronger than imm1 because imm1 can be shaked off so easilly, but its effect is not so dangerous. The miniature can still deffend themselves and be a treat
why? imm2 forbits the miniature affected to deffend, to do anything but discover. The only thing "softer" is that it retains its order for the pool. isolation limits its order to themselves (but don't negates it, and some units will have 2 for them) and cannot get orders from the pool. Nothing else. The miniature can do missions if its near enought, can deffend or do anything they could without the effect on in reactive. Some troopers are inmune (nobody is inmune to imm2), and for some other, once in possition, is not so crippling if they only need to enter suppressive fire with their order for them to be usefull.
Because: read the massive amount of discussions we've already had on the topic. Again; who what and where. Irregular trooper? IMM-2 is a lot stronger. Regular trooper whose only hope in life is to provide orders to more relevant troopers? ISO is a lot stronger. Anyone else? Depends on who, what, and who else is left to spend orders on. Edit: I keep mixing up which number the status that's permanent has
an irregular imm1 can still be freed by himself. IMM1 is the weakest of the crippling status, but there are not much irregular HI in the game (Because imm1 is mainly applyed by hacking, and a hacker is easier to kill than to get into imm1 (except for AHD, of course). If you want to look into exact but more uncommon situations, then ok, you might be right. But in the overall, in the most situations that can happen that status, imm1 is one of the weakest of them all (well, there are burnt or stuned, which are weaker) the same for imm2 and iso. In the most situations, against the most objectives it could affect, Imm2 is more crippling, more powerful because the trooper cannot deffend himself afterwards. Iso on the other hand, you still need to deal with the isolated trooper because he can become a nuisance. Both status can stop a rush attack, or limit the enemy options to do missions, but the imm2 cannot try futher if he don't take off the effect (Both need an engineer, and a imm enginer cannot take it himself), while the isolated one can still use 1 or 2 orders in next turns, and do aros to slow the enemy or even reach the objective with dodges if its near enoguth. So, usually, (if you like it better), in most situations, against most of the objectives in the game, isolation is not so powerful. What could be powerful are some troopers that could apply it too easily or in a maybe unfair way, but not the status itself. We do not know how it will change in n4, but, using the c1 rules as a base, Isolation migt go to a -6 wip (As with the imm-a, which is the old imm-2, both as long lasting effects that need an engineer). And it could be cumulative with other hacking status or with EM, so it could help into forcing a -9 or -12 to reset. That, in an isolated+immb trooper would be more crippling, even if they could try to shake it themselves in aro. But at the same time, both could be taken out at the same time without help; and isolation alone (from jammers, or EM to non-HI) would be much softer than now, because it could be taken off by the trooper (-6 is hard, but not too hard), and might end the turn he gets isolated, again free, so it will render hacking/jammer/em again to aro purposes and not to attack pieces
Again, we've been over this in a lot of places. Who, what and where. You can't give a blanket statement regarding which is more powerful without also knowing which direction the target is facing, where they are positioned, what other units there are in the army, how close to competing for the objective they are, and what delivery methods are used to impose the states on units. Isolation has a much stronger tendency to be applied out of LOF and has a much higher proliferation among units. Immobilization of the permanent variety tends to be applied at close range only and with LOF only with the effects being focused much more to specific factions. I can tell you from experience that once you've managed to glue the entire army on the other side and your opponent is ready to give up without playing their third turn only to be reminded "you know, you've got a specialist left and he's got 8 orders". Ditto when you've managed to isolate their entire army and they realize they're more than 4" from the objectives...
well, also by experience I can tell you that someone can Isolate one of those specialists and see no change because it can still do mission. Or isolate that important attack pice (i.e. kriza or asura) and put them in suppresive fire so it deffends the objective/area, while imm2 troopers can be directly ignored. The problem you talk about is a bad move directly, because is a hard focus on crippling and ignoring mission, is the same as killing too much and see that the last turn is the next one of the enemy. Also, you are mixing the status,the troopers that apply them, and who suffers them to value the effect of only one part of it in not so usual cases. But even taking that mix into account: most of the time isolation is less crippling than IMM2.
*sigh* I am not... I grow seriously tired of this dick measuring competition. There are way too many factors in both cases to directly compare them, and terrain as well as playstyle is a huge factor. Selectively ignoring that which doesn't suit your argument is the national sport of internet arguments and I'm getting tired of it as it makes it almost impossible to discuss nuances. I swear, if I would say I think O-12's blue is a bit too bright and want it slightly darker to make it less Pan-O, I'd have one person saying "fuck off that's CA's colour", another saying "why do you want black?" and a third claiming that I can always Reset against it so the blue colour doesn't matter.
I could say the same for "arbitrarily adding external factors to justify your argument". Yet me saying that would also be an ad hominem, which I don't like to do. If we talk about the status effect and its power (remember, this started because someone sayd that its a powerfull effect, and I tryed to explain why not comparing with the other crippling effects), adding situations (some more cornercase than others), troops (Where for some is more useful than for others, some have it easier to apply, etc) or the possible objectives of the effect, might be related, but not a reason to justify if its more or less powerfull, only the effects we were talking about and the comparison betwen them. is as if (a bit of a exageration), just because a wildcat could burn to dead a proxy mk2 and achiles in the same order (because positioning, bad moves, luck, etc), we could say that the wildcat is more powerful than both of them, and we all know that isn't true.
Of course it is! Delivery method matters a lot! Cost matters a lot. Ease of placement, range, expected position of target, range of targets, expected target, effect on fireteams, and so on. It. All. Matters. There is about 40 reasons I say I think ISO and IMM are relatively equal in effect, because there are a lot of qualities they have beyond just "can the target shoot back?". That applies to almost everything, including IMM-B. Now, Jammers aren't in CodeOne. We'll see if Jammers and/or ISO are in N4. Can we give this a rest until then?
N3 Isolation and IMM-2 I assume? I mean... one of them degrades your trooper to a Netrod (and if caused by E/M also inflicts the other state). The other makes your trooper irregular and cuts off a new, lonely Combat group within its previous Combat group. While they're not exactly comparable, I'd claim one is more severe than the other. Taking into account that we're mostly looking at somewhat active and expensive troops being affected rather than linetroopers.
Yes, N3. Like I wrote, that is an incomplete comparison. Who is affected, where are they affectrd, how easy is it to affect them, how much pre-game investment do you have to affect them like that, etc. It all matters. If something as simple as a meta change where HI suddenly become more common, it will result in a drastically different situation with sources of ISO being a lot more potent and easier to apply. If meta changes so that high-cost MI becomes The Thing, ISO gets harder to apply with fewer spurces and IMM remains relatively similar to now, making IMM comparatively stronger. If Warbands and Hyper-Dynamics become more common, it gets harder to apply IMM and you'll face opponents more willing to make tit-for-tat trades with their cheaper miniatures, thus devaluing IMM but increasing the value of Jammers. And so on. With regards to CodeOne (come on! We can do it! We CAN get back on topic!) the design shift seem to be that hard disables are toned down in strength, but made longer, forcing more tactical considerations than just spamming that one program that's hard to do something about, while reducing bookkeeping. And enticing you to waste orders on 50-50 chances of bringing your troopers back...
To me that's a more overall topic, or more related to metagame than to its effects of the status itself in the game Is ok for me. We can leave it to then, talk via mp or whatever you like.
My take on that differs a bit. I've suggested that exact change for IMM-2 and Isolation. Slap a negative MOD on it and let the Trooper try to get rid of it rather than making it Engineer only. CB did exactly that very nice change. This affects Order economy, list building and matchups significantly. You can now get out of IMM on the fly in 1-3 Orders (on average) if you can find a way to stop the other guy from opposing your roll. From my N3 experience most people run 2 Combat groups and at least group 1 is spearheaded by something ranging from a Spetznaz to a TAG. Group 2 will also have a bunch of mooks and there might be another big guy or just an elite Infiltrator like Dart. C1 looks like it tones tone baseline HI costs. So while we could run more Orders to fuel the same amount if Strikers, imho that hits a breakpoint where the benefit swings towards adding more or higher Quality strikers (mostly HI, since they reap the highest rebates). The Orc Haris in N3 costs as much as a Magister + Teuton Core. In C1 we haven't seen any Knights so far. But Fusliers. The baseline Orc relative to the Fusilier Order monkey made a massive swing. Orcs are a chunk cheaper and 6-2, HI Hackers look like they improved by a mile, ARM 4 is relevant, BSG FTF templates are gone and it's easy to claim Cover during your Reactive turn. Not very concerned that this will screw over Factions without focus on high end troops. Camo looks as strong as ever and I'd assume we'll see similar improvements for other "bag of stats" troops like Marauders. Overall C1 indicates we'll have more points available to cram stuff in our lists. But we don't see big adjustments on the lower end. As a result I'm kinda hoping N4/ITS puts a hard cap on Combat groups at 2. That would help with balancing and encourages a more natural list approach on both ends, when you don't have to counter lists with potentially 30+ Regular Orders worth of economy.
Am I the only one who is seeing the bonus dodge movement as fractions of an inch? For instance Liang Kai has a bonus of 0.064". Fractions of an inch seems awkward and of limited use? Apologies if this has been brought up already.
that might be because the game originally was dessigned in the international system, and the movement is based on cm... a 4-4 dude moves 10-10cm., which makes him move 5 in dodge, or 7,5, or 10, and so on
Yeah I thought of that too. But it seems to be intermittent and inconsistent (e.g. Liang Kai showed 1"/2.5cm when I last looked). I am also seeing this with other distance bonuses like Forward Deployment on Casanova for O12. Captured some screenshots as evidence...
What are you using, the website version (if so, on which browser and OS) or one of the apps (if so, iOS or Android)?
