I think everyone under the template needing to beat the face to face is a bit too much. What makes more sense to me and how my first home games were played by accident- BS attack with impact template is declared, template is placed to see who would be affected by a successful roll. the main target makes a face to face roll, other units affected make a normal roll (a normal dodge to be unaffected or a normal attack while taking the templates effect) Essentially this would let fire teams move around easier. Currently, a missiles launcher or the threat of a hidden missile launcher can make activating a fire team a really terrible proposition. Missiles in ARO are rolling anywhere from 1 dice on 12s to 2 dice on 16's (even 19's with the bolt) that's higher than most units dodge on one die. Dodging the template's AoE by a normal roll would also have the benefit of softening the guided strategy which seems to be a big frustration for a lot of players right now. I am a big fan of hacking and guided and wouldn't mind it being a little less efficient.
IIRC it worked like that in a previous edition. Would support a change along these lines, but I imagine it works the way it does because of some obscure rules interaction. I disagree with this being a partial solution to guided. The real solution to that element of guided is not clumping, and we don't really make that better in a useful way by making it less effective rather than simply learning not to clump.
I'd honestly wager that the reason it works like it does at the moment is so that units shouldn't have an easy time dodging impact templates. I don't think the secondary targets got any chance to avoid the attack at all in N2 - if the primary target failed their FTF or if the attacker shot from camo then they were all just SOL hoping ARM rolls saves them.
Playing vanilla I don't sweat getting clipped by a template too much but I find fire teams pretty difficult to deploy safely on infinity terrain. I find most buildings I play on have a few specific way to get two units on a roof safe from templates and it usually leaves one open to attacks from units that get elevation. I can see that being an intentional cost to bringing fireteams, but 1 guided roll on an 11+ meaning every line trooper on a roof crits or dies? As the guided player, I'd be okay with it being less efficient if it helps my opponent have a good time.
I Don't be silly, no one is going to walk their fireteam out in front of a MSV2 Missile Launcher that they know is on the table.
Yes my worry with Agema gaining MSV2 and Hidden Deployment is that there will be a series of NPE for some games.
I prefer either play based solutions ("don't clump" etc) or core mechanic based solutions (change how pitchers work etc) over mathematical based solutions (leave it as it is, but worse numbers), as just altering the math allows swingy dice rolls to heavily impact the fun level of a game. GML is a big reason why I pretty much exclusively play vanilla. Links are mediocre as is, and so many things dunk on them super hard.
Yeah, In one of my earliest games, one of my friends I started playing with lost half the crusade fireteam to the ML in ARO >:D At my play level now she's mostly making movement difficult and shooting at tiger soldiers and the like with her pistol.
To be clear, would you consider dodging the template as a normal roll for the 2ndary targets a mechanical change or a mathematical change? On vanilla over fireteams, I agree. In my experience, having the freedom in deployment and movement to put troops where you want is better than getting some bonuses with limits on deployment and movement that create decision fatigue. A change in how impact templates work would make playing sectorials a little easier.
you said the secondary target could either dodge the template or take it to the chin and make an attack. but if they are in the link team; you cannot split the member declaration. either they attack (but only the leader does so) or everyone dodges.
Maths. It is simply changing the target number for a dodge from shooter's hit roll to users PH. For what it's worth, I'd still take this change over nothing. But I think changing how a lock is achieved or changing playstyles is a better direction. That freedom of deployment is key. When the primary defensive tech in the game is dispersion in space, needing to concentrate easy targets to receive value is a total nightmare IMO
Hmm. I didn't intend to say that. My point was that currently the team under the template could declare shoot, almost certainly loosing 2ndary team members or the team could dodge, still pretty likely loosing some team members and a worse face to face with the leader with no chance of removing the ML. I think forcing the team to dodge is the point of a surprise ML, wasting an order and threatening damage. I feel a noctifer missile launcher would still be well worth it if the main target had to win the face to face dodge but the rest of the troops had to pass a regular dodge.
I've used Noctifiers extensively for a very long time, and I can definitely attest to the feeling that they are too oppressive against links. They could do with losing a great deal of their average effect and still be very playable since it is the potential for a link team kill that makes them terrifying here. One time a clumped Mobile Brigada team move-moved into my Noctifier. Will never forget that... mostly because the dumbass managed to miss on 15. But that feeling of potential insanity will stick with me to my grave
