1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra PolĂ­tica de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

Poll: Should Engage be changed?

Discussion in 'Access Guide to the Human Sphere' started by Space Ghost, Apr 26, 2019.

?

Should Engage be changed to make it a more viable or attractive ARO option?

  1. No, it's basically fine as it is.

    34 vote(s)
    40.0%
  2. Yes, troops with CC special skills like MA or NBW should get a +3 mod to Engage.

    14 vote(s)
    16.5%
  3. Yes, as above but the +3 should be for FTF rolls only, not vs. Direct Templates.

    11 vote(s)
    12.9%
  4. Yes, all troops should use their CC attribute to Engage.

    12 vote(s)
    14.1%
  5. Yes, as above for FTF rolls only & continue to use PH vs. Direct Templates.

    3 vote(s)
    3.5%
  6. Yes, in some other way. (Please describe below.)

    11 vote(s)
    12.9%
  1. Leviathan

    Leviathan Hungry Caliban

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2018
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    798
    CC is an important close-quarters tool for dealing with otherwise untouchable threats. Run a flash pulse remote into CC with an obnoxious TO infiltrator and watch your opponent sweat over what to do. Get a ninja into CC with the enemy TAG - sure he's unlikely to do much damage without sinking a bunch of orders, but suddenly your opponent's overwhelming firepower is significantly lessened.
    It's a tool like any other, and its got a solid place in the game even without using close combat murder-beasts that crit on 11s and cause instant death.

    As for the way Engage currently works... why should it make you better at dodging incoming attacks? It's currently a Dodge with extra benefits - you seem to be looking to make it a no-brainer choice, and that's the last thing we need.
     
    CoveredInFish likes this.
  2. Space Ghost

    Space Ghost Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    100
    Actually, I think Engage should be a valid choice,not a no brainer choice. Right now it's neither most of the time, which is why it's so rarely used. And that makes no sense if you're a supposed CC expert standing within arms reach of an enemy.

    As far as the examples you cited go, what you've described is just using CC as a speedbump or order sink. Which is a fine use of CC as it currently stands - an order intensive sideshow and not a particularly integral part of the game.
     
    DFW Ike likes this.
  3. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,332
    Likes Received:
    8,427
    Bold+Italics emphasis mine.

    Exactly. You're playing into the Warband's strengths, doing exactly what the opponent wants you to do. That is not how you win any game. So of course you're screwed in that situation. Who the hell voluntarily gets within 8" of a Ninja/Fiday/Shaolin/Galwegian/Doggo?!? Shoot the things from outside 8" if at all possible!


    In N2, Close Combat was an utter waste of time. It was ineffective at actually causing wounds, if you actually survived to get into CC in the first place.

    Though getting into CC isn't supposed to be easy, CC does need to be deadly. Particularly in N2's 'highly realistic' game design. N3 changed design ethos from 'max realism' to 'better gameplay', but it still doesn't change how CC needs to work to be worth spending orders on.

    But I still think CC needs some changes. Not to mention fixing the variety of different charts involved. I think Guard should give +1B in CC across the board, because your furry friend is also biting the opponent. If you need to, then you can add Martial Arts to a model with Guard. Same with Protheion, let that rule just mean if the attack deals a wound the model with Protheion gains a wound, then add Martial Arts for other effects.


    In the US, there is a training concept called the 7-yard rule. (This is mostly for police and people carrying a pistol for self-defense, it's less applicable in open combat where you're carrying a rifle)

    The 7-yard rule means that if a threat is within about 7 yards of you, you cannot draw and fire a weapon before they are able to close and stick a knife or fist into you.

    It's really intended to be a statement about your awareness bubble, how you need to be paying attention to things around you at about 50ft/15m. It's also a serious enough threat that they make a specific target setup to train for it. Yes, that target falls forward, towards the shooter at the end of it's run, and it WILL hit you if you don't get out of the way! (It's only cardboard on wood sticks, so it's not likely to injure you, but it may bruise your pride a bit)

    But 7 yards/meters is roughly 4" on the table. Hey, that's Kinematika L2 Engage range! (and that 50ft/15m awareness zone you need to keep is roughly the 8" Zone of Control)
     
  4. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,379
    Likes Received:
    2,541
    This is wrong on two levels.

    Firstly, you may really not want to Engage into CC because what you're opting to Engage may be an actual CC threat. Take Achilles, CC powerhouse. Surely he would always Engage given the option? Wrong.

    Dodge to avoid a Hulang's flamethrower? Sure. Engage into the same martial artist with a monofilament sword? That for many players would be a hard pass on that.

    Secondly Engage has a range on it. Declaring Engage leads to the possibility of failure through misjudging range and delivering a normal roll to your opponent or an autohit if they have a flamethrower. It's all well and great for Kitsune to Engage at 4", but if it's right on the edge a player may well not be comfortable declaring Engage and opt to Dodge instead. Same conundrum any player with a warband runs into when trying to decide to try and chain rifle a questionable 10" away model or throw a smoke for safety.

    As an unrelated sidenote. Along with any potential changes to engage I'd also errata it to not work in conjunction with Hidden Deployment. Not because of any potential of overpoweredness, but just because model placement and measuring range would invite more arguments than it was worth in some cases.
     
    #24 Triumph, Apr 29, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019
    ChoTimberwolf likes this.
  5. Leviathan

    Leviathan Hungry Caliban

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2018
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    798
    Not disputing any of that.

    I'm saying, why should Engage be a form of Dodge with higher odds of success?
     
  6. WiT?

    WiT? Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    238
    Likes Received:
    335
    I agree that its time for a rethink of CC in infinity. I've come to the conclusion that, as a long time player who uses a lot of CC, I've been on the "its way less shit than N2" hype train for CC since the new edition and that has disguised the fact that actually its kind of mediocre.

    Minimum effort response? Make CC stats and PH cheaper. Cost can fix a lot of problems in a game, and is certainly behind a lot of the issues we're facing at the moment across many elements of the rules. Stop using Hyperdynamics as undercosted dodge and make the damn stat a fair price. Get rid of stupid shit like Guard, and rando levels on CC skills. If Protheion was just "Martial Arts, but can Unarmed to get a vampire effect" it would save a bunch of table checking right there.

    Serious +1 to this. One the main arguments for not making engage better is that it would improve Warband type troops at 3-4" away. Frankly the effectiveness of an autohit template means engage would need to be seriously strong before it will be consistently competing with it. Even something like a Galwegian engaging on 21 I would probably still just drop the chain, but at least it would be an option for certain circumstances.

    Edit:
    I think its mainly part of the "CC isn't good enough" narrative, and in that context I agree.

    Thematically, dodging something like a projectile or firing arc at a distance and ducking inside the effective area of a weapon are different enough that I could see Engage as being a more effective dodge.
    (based on my experience with Nerf guns lol, reality may vary)
     
    DFW Ike, Abrilete and ChoTimberwolf like this.
  7. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,379
    Likes Received:
    2,541
    Because it sucks ass right now, it's as you put it, a no brainer to not use it for 99% of situations where you could. Either delete it as rules bloat or make it viable in some way. This is one way to do that.
     
  8. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,332
    Likes Received:
    8,427
    Harder to dodge a bullet after it's been fired, but you can move faster than your opponent can adjust their aim at short range. One step at 7m away is a much smaller angle to shift than one step at bad-breath range.
     
    DFW Ike, daszul and Abrilete like this.
  9. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,379
    Likes Received:
    2,541
    Reality can go screw itself we're playing with cyborgs and stuff. Personally I subscribe to Engage should be a CC stat anyway because Gun Kata is cool
     
  10. Solar

    Solar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,426
    Likes Received:
    4,020
    CC is actually pretty strong at the moment. It's a tool and it absolutely has it's place. Anyone played against Taigha heavy lists recently? I don't want them engaging on a 21.

    Anyway you could have CC as the engage stat... It would mean that CC would need to cost quite a bit more. I think that the troops that might engage as an option are pretty aggressively costed anyway a lot of the time, but it's definitely going to cut down on their ease of putting them in lists. Which I'd arguably be fine with, admittedly.
     
  11. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,379
    Likes Received:
    2,541
    Yes, they're just like dealing with any other WB heavy army.

    Don't activate models in their face (so you don't get shitblasted by template weapons), kill them from range. Increasing their Engage roll doesn't change how you should be fighting them.
     
    DFW Ike likes this.
  12. Solar

    Solar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,426
    Likes Received:
    4,020
    I don't mind chain rifle AROs.

    I do mind dodges on a 21-22
     
  13. Ben Kenobi

    Ben Kenobi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,234
    Likes Received:
    1,270
    10 is the average for humans, as you can see the profiles of civilians.
    What you only see are the profiles for units.
     
  14. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    6,908
    I'm sorry, what?

    How are non-playable units even relevant? We're talking about opinions about a game mechanic for crying out loud! A very valid argument is that your opinion is that Engage is in a good spot as it is (I wouldn't agree, but that's a different story), but to make an argument based on profiles that're not even capable of Engaging, let alone that you don't even have a choice in playing with, is just trolling.
     
    WiT? and BLOODGOD like this.
  15. Ben Kenobi

    Ben Kenobi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,234
    Likes Received:
    1,270
    No, it's another approach. I see it from rhe perspective of a role player, where infinity comes from.

    I understand your point of view, but I have a different one.
     
    DFW Ike and Abrilete like this.
  16. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    6,908
    You know what, never mind. It doesn't matter. You clearly think Engage on 12 is sufficiently viable as an ARO, even if your argument is a bit strange.
     
    #36 Mahtamori, Apr 29, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019
  17. Solar

    Solar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,426
    Likes Received:
    4,020
    Dodging on a 12 is just as viable as engaging on a 12. It's what you do when you have no good ranged option, and that's fine.

    I feel like some people feel like you should be able to shoot with your CC! Throw a knife! It's better than using bs 11 with a pistol, which isn't viable!

    Maybe the reason Engage isn't that powerful is by design?
     
    Ben Kenobi likes this.
  18. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    4,883
    Likes Received:
    9,930
    I suspect Ben meant 'default' rather than 'average'.
     
    Abrilete likes this.
  19. Ben Kenobi

    Ben Kenobi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,234
    Likes Received:
    1,270
    Would have been the better wording, cause my understanding of average was misleading.
     
  20. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    6,908
    That example grossly and intentionally misrepresents what people are arguing.

    I'd say people are expecting Engage to not be the tool of desperation that Dodge is, but instead would like to see it projecting a threat-area around the martial artist instead of a mild suggestion that something bad might possibly happen if you get to close.

    This is of course complicated by a large number of chaff sharing martial competency with the real martial artists.

    Another way to see a suggestion like this, of course, is that Engage ought to be a CC Attack and not a Dodge at all. Other funky stuff that could be discussed is "do troopers really need a non-0 Engage range when a real martial artist has Kinematica?"
     
    CoveredInFish and ChoTimberwolf like this.