I'm strongly disagree. What is happenning in N4 with the 5 member are some skills (markasmaship+multispectralvisor) mixed with the fireteam's bonus, it is here where the main problem resides. Nothing less, nothing more. I'm too of the opinion that vainillas should have access to some "units" which never can be found in a sectorial or specific set of skills or habilities. In the same way we have some profiles exclusives for a sectorial, we should have some exclusive vainilla profiles.
Too be clear. I'm not saying that 5mans are too powerful or whatever and thus need to go. My point is that they are "cumbersome, finnicky, annoying, dull". I would much rather have sectorials balanced around something else than the assumption that half of their combat group gets tied up in hardly movable, cumbersome blob.
I'm all for an option that allows to compete with BS15 Mimetsm/MSV2 HMGs. My complaint is mainly about the duality of 5 leashed models, on one hand you enable a Vet Kazak AP HMG with 4 cheap mooks that cost less than him, which is far from great. On the other hand you enable all 5 of those slots to die to a single Noctifier, also not great. I'd like to reign in both the reward and the risk and find a place in the middle. 3 is the number that works for Fireteams (looking at Tohaa as proof of concept, where that works perfectly alright with multiple 3 man teams on the board actively moving around). 4 is already too much (Steel Phalanx says hi, no one else plays 4 man teams). 5 means >90% of the time you sit in the DZ with an ARO piece out and wait for desperation to kick in or sit it out till last turn for a final push, if mission relevant. Having played a lot of MO early N3, with back then probably the most forgiving Core Link in the Game (Hospitalers + Magisters) that still was very stressful and not very enjoyable. Deployment is annoying, movement is annoying, planning every turn to not leave 3+ members vulnerable to teardrop templates (2 being unavoidable most of the time) is annoying. The magic number is three, I like three, three is nice.
Replace all Cores with Haris and remove the cap of 1? (maybe add a cap of 2 or 3, maybe not) Triad is still more flexible so Tohaa have their thing. Spiñal Corps still get their Tri-Core. Maybe need to tweak Enormoustacos a little, but with the flexibility of today's Fireteams I can see it working. Maaaybe restrict 4-5 man bonuses to Fireteams only made up of "Base" Troopers, but that might be heading too far into the weeds of complexity with the differences between Wildcard, can join, and counts as.
5 man core is fine, it's hard to use, hard to move around, and can die real fast if you mess up. Don't mess up. There are things that punish them, and there are things they are good at dealing with. Links are not easy (and they shouldn't be), but they are very rewarding when you do it right. The issues remain with the wildcard system and mixed links creating monstrous units.
How did you manage to quote something with my name, despite the fact that that’s not my quote and a quote from @Diphoration lol
I want to stress that it is important everyone considers all sectorials simultaneously because many are lacking. Whatever is to be done, it needs to be universally applicable. I feel like that's the biggest problem cause if enough of us agreed on something Inknow CB would make the change almost immediately cause look how fast the FAQ made changes. My opinion is the less arbitrary things are, the better. Below I wanna give another variation of thing I've already suggested and include stuff from others based on problems people have mentioned. 1 Cumbersome to move, I really liked someone else's idea of just making coherency rules require that a member be within ZoC of 2 other member inorder to reform with the team and not everyone within ZoC of the leader. This will actually spread the team out a bit and speed up the game if you and your opponent can tell just by eye balling that 2 other members are in ZoC of each member. Keep isolatio /null/coherency breaking the leader as an easy way to disband the team. This will also allow for better coverage against camo instead of 6thS. 2. Team Bonuses, some teams are a bit OP when adding in the bonuses after. Someone before had suggested capping the bonus result at 15, I liked that. Even others have suggested fireteams should only be for movement. My previous suggestions were that they should function like Co-Orders because the bonuses are arbitrary to me. I havent found the right fit yet but let's try this, if the team loses the current bonuses, this combination could replace it: -Orders only allow for one member at a time to Attack unless a Co-Order is made. - All members are allowed to enter the Suppresive Fire State, this is another thing that will help against camo. - Command Tokens are no longer required to reform the link of current members, only to change current members or add new members. - Co-Orders can be used normally on troops in and out of the team without removing team members. - Other member are allowed to Dodge or Reset while the leader Attacks. - AROs can be different without breaking the team. - The team is passively maintained and reformed of it's original members by the requirement of any 2 other members within ZoC and the leader a part of that chain of coherency. I know it's fairly different from what fire teams are now, but when they were first introduced they were hugely different from the rest of the game as well. This suggestion goes more along what others have suggested making fireteams primarily about movement. I believe this fulfills that intention without entirely taking away their combat effectiveness.
Both have access to strong noninteractive tools (Pheroware, hacking), and in the case of nomads, have A-tier gunfighting on top of that.
Pher Pheroware Tactics: Endgame is definitely a problem as it kills enemies relatively easily from outside LOF and with no risk to the attacking model. I disagree that Nomads are too strong due to hacking. Hacking is interactive because you can still ARO against it with other hackers using Trinity, Oblivion and Carbonite. This is more than you get with Pheroware which only let's you Reset. Also with Obilivion and Carbonite you can at least have a chance to Reset out of those states, unlike with Endgame which just kills models. Last thing, but what models do you consider to be A-Tier Gunfighters in Nomads?
Would the game benefit from a larger presence of secondary weapons in all sectorials that dont already have a good counter to hacking and pheroware that presents some sort of threat to these attackers or at least an ability to nullify a continued assault from these attacks? As far as I can tell 2. OP bonuses because of some fireteams and coherency for all fireteams. But what problems would arise from getting rid of fireteam core?
Not much really, beyond speaking my mind that I consider 5mans a design mistake that could be uncharitably described as "guys A have slightly better stats than guys B, but you have to stand on one leg when playing them". A mechanic that balances power with not-fun and is too baked into the system history and our perception of the game to be easily walked back. However if I were asked to suggest solutions, then I wouldn't be as hardcore as making everything Tohaa (more less). Just reducing cores to 4man max and then giving sects some extra edge to compensate could be quite enough. The compensations? Two come to mind: 1. slightly changing/rearranging link bonuses - perhaps giving duo (and everything up) 360 visor? Would shift weight from 4mans to haris and duo more, which I would also consider a benefit. 2. Unique profiles like Speculo minelayer. Or maybe in-sectorial points discounts for some troops. Probably a combination of both, with sectorials that are struggling getting more of the 2. I like it. I worry though that with mixed links and wildcards and such it could get quite confusing for your opponent and even the controlling player to exactly know who is and isn't part of the fireteam. On that note I think that, even though I like the concept of mixed links a lot I also would like that if only Haris could be mixed, while core had to be classic. Would make them thematic different and would cut some cheese without killing the concept of a mixed team of complementary specialists. Dunno. I'm old and the Internet is hard. I guess I fixed it if it's a problem.
This has been a great topic, which I have been following every day (thanks @Zewrath for starting it). @Rejnhard's earlier comment of three model Cores really got me thinking today, however. For what it is worth, I started playing early N3. I have only ever played Corregidor. In that time, I have always run a Fireteam: Core, as I feel I am handicapped otherwise. Despite that, I have always hated Fireteams. I have never had an Active Core perform (they are clunky to use and never achieved half as much as a Tomcat, Hellcat, lone Jaguar, etc), so after about a year switched to exclusively running Defensive Cores. These are boring, but effective (when deployed right!). When Haris and Duo were added to Corregidor I liked these more in concept, but did not like the options I had available. I ran a Haris in perhaps every second list, which sometimes performed. (Obviously, I need to switch to vanilla one of these days!) From what I understand, Fireteam: Core was originally added to the game to make otherwise unattractive unit options desirable, and even major features of a sectorial. In my mind, this is good for two reasons: the players get more viable options, and CB gets to sell more minis. Win-win! Today, they have into a way to turn an A-tier gunner into an S-tier gunner, which a lot of people find a negative experience. What if Fireteam: Core were returned to only being specific models, no Wildcards, and required three models for the full bonus? Perhaps a very small, carefully curated list of 'counts-as X for Fireteam purposes' (I am mostly thinking Dire Foes, as the old ones were clearly designed to join a Fireteam: Core of line infantry). For an example, I have a Fireteam: Core of three Alguaciles. I have a HMG, a Grenade Laundry, and Lupe Balboa. The whole Fireteam gains +1B, +3 WIP for Discover, +3 BS, maybe Sixth Sense (I am on the fence to whether than needs to stay or go). In this situation, Alguaciles are a useful option to add to my list; I have not made a single N4 list that includes any Alguaciles. Not everything that currently had Fireteam: Core really needs it any more, especially if all Fireteams were reduced to three models. In Corregidor, I do not feel Evaders, Jaguars, or Wildcats would need Core (they are good units without the +3BS, etc). They are great Haris starters, and Evaders feel like they were designed to be Wildcards in Haris and Duo. I am not sure about Mobile Brigada. They are a good Wildcard, but having only a single Core option is too limiting. I have not been able to decide whether or not a three-man Brigada Fireteam: Core is a good thing or not. Haris and Duo could remain the mix-and-match option. Haris only gets +1B; Duo gets nothing. Wildcards can join any Haris or Duo, allowing for may fun, tactical options. Triad seems perfectly fine to me as-is. I could not possibly comment on Enomotachos. Another thought I had was around +1B in ARO. BS Attack (+1B) only applies in the active turn, while +1B for being in a Fireteam applies to both. Besides being confusing for new players, I feel it simply makes no sense anyway. Should Fireteams get +1B in ARO? I feel like they should, but I think the question needs to be asked. If it is good for the game to have certain models access B2 AROs, should BS Attack (+1B) function in ARO? I am sure there are individual models that would need a rebalance if this happened, but if B2 AROs are good for the game, why not allow dedicated shooty (solo) units access to them? This would mean Vanilla also has access to this 'good for the game' mechanic (in my inexperience, I have no idea if that is good for the game or not).
Fireteams are here to stay, they are flavorful despite current rules and CB makes a lot of fireteam boxes... @HellLois The hard cap on BS at 15 is the cleanest mitigation on power and BS 14 or 15 troops are still getting every other bonus. Coherency requirements being reduced to team members to be within ZoC of just 2 other members and not the leader makes them less cumbersome. I suggest CB make a strong consideration for fire teams to allow at least one member suppression fire and/or different AROs. None of these ideas are mine but I fully support them as being the fastest and easiest to implement within a month or two.
This thread got me thinking last night about the fact that current Fireteams rely on quantity scaling to assign bonuses, so more members equals more bonuses/better bonuses. Rather than that approach, I wondered what it would look like if the type of Fireteam was actually the only thing responsible for bonuses - such that bonuses were independent of how many members the Fireteam had. I also wanted to play around with adding bonuses beyond the existing Burst, MODs, and Sixth Sense to make the different Fireteam types feel like they enable different play styles. Disclaimer - I put this draft together in about an hour, so please excuse any typos. I will edit if you point out a mistake/error. I don't play Steel Phalanx or Tohaa, so my concepts for Enomotarchos and Triad are from an outsider's perspective and probably need more work. Finally, I included some of the coherency proposals that were previously discussed in this thread. General Rules Fireteams having 3 or more members must ensure that each member remains in coherency with at least 2 other members. Coherency is checked at the beginning and end of each order. Fireteams may be cancelled at any time. Fireteams may be formed by spending a command token During the states phase of each player turn, if the Fireteam has not been cancelled then troopers who left will automatically be able to rejoin it if they meet the Coherency requirements. Unless otherwise specified, existing Fireteam rules regarding Fireteam skills apply. Fireteam: Duo Concept: A pair of troopers that are coordinating with one another to advance up the field (bounding) Eligibility: 2 troopers of the same unit with the Duo Skill, there is no limit on the number of Fireteam Duos that may be formed. Both troopers must remain in coherency with one another. Bonus: When activated, place the Duo leader token on one trooper – the remaining trooper will behave as if it has Peripheral (Synchronized) for the duration of the order. In the active turn, both troopers will have their burst reduced by half. Fireteam Duo does not eliminate the effects of Frenzy or Impetuous Fireteam: Haris Concept: A hunter-killer team that is formed to increase combat effectiveness Eligibility: Up to 3 troopers, at least one of which has the Haris skill, 1 Haris allowed at a time Bonus: When activated, place the Haris leader token on one trooper – this trooper will gain Burst (+1). In the reactive turn, all members of the Fireteam gain a 360-degree LoF arc. While in a Fireteam Haris, the effects of Frenzy or Impetuous do not apply Fireteam: Core Concept: A close-knit group of troopers formed to provide a base of fire for the rest of the army Eligibility: Up to 5 troopers, all from of the same unit (or “counts as”), Wildcards may not join unless they otherwise meet the requirements, 1 Core per army Bonus: When activated, place the Core leader token on one trooper. In the active turn, the Core leader will gain a +3 MOD to their BS attacks. In the states phase of the player’s turn, the player may select up to 4 members of the Core team to enter the Suppressive Fire state without breaking the integrity of the Fireteam. This suppressive fire state is automatically cancelled during the player’s next Tactical Phase. In the reactive turn, all members of the Fireteam gain Sixth Sense and any trooper that did not enter the suppressive fire state will gain Burst (+1). While in a Fireteam Core, the effects of Frenzy or Impetuous do not apply Fireteam: Enomotarchos Concept: A close-combat team that is able to react independently to threats while advancing Eligibility: Up to 4 troopers, at least one of which has the Enomotarchos skill, there is no limit on the number of Fireteam Enomotarchos that may be formed Bonus: When activated, place the Enomotarchos leader token on one trooper. In the active turn this trooper will gain Burst (+1). In the active turn, anytime the Enomotarchos leader declares BS Attack or CC Attack, the other members of the link may choose to declare any Evasions Skill instead of idling. In the reactive turn, all troopers gain Sixth Sense and each member may choose to ARO with any Evasion skill, CC attack, or BS attack, regardless of what other members declare, without leaving the Fireteam. While in a Fireteam Enomotarchos, the effects of Frenzy or Impetuous do not apply Fireteam: Triad Concept: A symbiotic combat team that acts as a single unit Eligibility: 3 troopers, all of which must have the Triad skill, there is no limit on the number of Fireteam Triads that may be formed. A Triad is automatically cancelled in the states phase if it has fewer than three members. Bonus: When activated, place the Triad leader token on one trooper – this trooper will gain Burst (+1). In the reactive turn, all members of the Fireteam gain a Burst (+1) and a 360-degree LoF arc. All members of the team also gain +3 MOD to Discover in both the active and reactive turns. While in a Fireteam Triad, the effects of Frenzy or Impetuous do not apply.
Unless who gets what fireteam options changes I feel as if this wont work for everyone. JSA for example with their multi samurai lists would benefit more from Enomotarchos while still allowing Oda and Kempeitai to Wildcard, likewise for other Warband style Fireteams. If this change was implied, I must have missed it. But yes I could like this. Spread Triad and Enomotarchos around more to make the feel of fireteams not so much of a who has the larger fireteam wins but who has the right fireteam for the situation. Essentially the fireteam bonuses for each type become separate tools to add to the tool box. I would however still like Wildcard and can-joins because of the flavor. Also, this would require alot of play testing, that being said, I really like how flavorful it sounds.
This hard cap specifically affects some units that are not the main offenders. I don't think anybody is looking at an orc hmg in a core and shivering in their boots.on the other hand other units will continue to cheat the system by simply being bs12 or 13 and mimetism with the same core bonuses. Swinging firefights even further in their favor vs their old competitors. Models with marksmanship will also continue to cheat the same system .it is not really an applicable nerf to the fireteam bonuses when those skills that allow you to circumvent the system aren't even expensive to begin with. I'd say I'd voice my support for teslarods suggestion of limiting fireteams to 3 man, and potentially offering full bonuses at that size .
