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 Política 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. Solar

    Solar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,421
    Likes Received:
    4,003
    It's representing what they want in the sense that both are about as grounded as each other as realistic expectations from the game.

    Admittedly, what they actually want is for it to do what it already does but for troops with high CC to be vastly better at it, which I think would be a mistake or require large a cost increase.
     
    #41 Solar, Apr 29, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019
  2. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,983
    Likes Received:
    5,654
    Dodge is not a desperation measure, it is a tactical option, engage is not supposed to be anything more than that, CC was never the primadona of the game and CC specialists are expected to be at their most effective in their active turn in not already engaged.
     
    Balewolf and Solar like this.
  3. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,362
    Likes Received:
    2,507
    It's a completely irrelevant point of view in regards to the game, but sure.

    I could agree with that point of view if Engage was actually a real tactical option. It's not a viable option to the point of you could delete it from the wiki tomorrow and nobody would notice, that's how useless and shit it is. So either delete the rules bloat because it's pointless to exist, or make it actually viable in some way.


    Because you are happy to statistically screw yourself over doesn't mean that you realistically should be solving the problem a different way.
     
    Space Ghost likes this.
  4. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    4,869
    Likes Received:
    9,905
    For what it's worth, the sole purpose of Engage as a game mechanic was to remove the rules issues with reactive Dodges into base contact.
     
    Section9 likes this.
  5. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,554
    Likes Received:
    6,858
    I never claimed it wasn't a tactical choice, by "desperation" I mean that it's almost always a choice you'd rather not have to take and you're doing it because it's the only realistic choice left (bar Change Facing, aka Dodge-But-Not-Moving) or you're desperate for a better position.
     
    Space Ghost likes this.
  6. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,554
    Likes Received:
    6,858
    Besides making life slightly more difficult for Fireteams and Synch troopers, what's the point of separating this ability into its own skill?
    Or does it have to do with the attach-to-movement aspect maybe?
     
    Balewolf likes this.
  7. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,983
    Likes Received:
    5,654
    Dodge is a choice, usually of maximising survival over chance of harming the enemy, as @ijw said above engage is a dodge allowing players base to base contact and has been created to solve (or contain) all the issues moving to base to base contact as a reactive model creates.

    @Triumph it is a choice, the fact you do not use it does not diminish it, with that logic we can delete CC too. also stop been unnecessary aggressive with your language it does become tiresome.
     
    ChoTimberwolf and Solar like this.
  8. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,362
    Likes Received:
    2,507
    That's not a fair comparison given that CC is something that actually happens on the table unlike Engage.

    As far as my language goes calling bad plays bad isn't aggressive. Telling someone to go fuck themselves would be aggressive, which much to my amusement I get PMs including that.
     
    Space Ghost likes this.
  9. Solar

    Solar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,421
    Likes Received:
    4,003
    Getting PM's saying that is unacceptable, and you should report them, but it also doesn't excuse being obnoxious outside of those conversations.
     
    ijw likes this.
  10. Ben Kenobi

    Ben Kenobi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,234
    Likes Received:
    1,270
    Not the game, but the game mechanics.
    If you are only looking at the crunch, you are right, but that's not the complete game.
     
  11. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    4,869
    Likes Received:
    9,905
    Agreed 100% with both parts.
     
  12. Triumph

    Triumph Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,362
    Likes Received:
    2,507
    Somebody finding you obnoxious isn't against anything here as far as I can tell. Or at least the metric I go by is Hecaton is still alive anyway.


    I was under the impression we were discussing mechanics here rather than fluff.
     
  13. Ieldin Soecr

    Ieldin Soecr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    154
    I voted for an alternative solution (Yes, in some other way). I think the skill in of itself works fine and only needs some small twecks to be more attractive im more cases:
    • Let the reactive player place his trooper and not the active player. This is the only instance in the rules in which the opponent is allowed to move enemy troopers that are not in a specific state (POS and SEPSITOR), with no obvious reason fo me. This interaction discorages the use of this skill as players fear that their trooper will be standing in a bad spot at the end of the order.
    • Let the trooper evade attacks even if he is outside of engage range and move directly towards the enemy trooper. I often take dodge over engage, even with CC troopers, because I'm not sure if my trooper within 2-4" to the enemy and I do not want to be idling because I misjudged by 0.1".
     
    Ben Kenobi likes this.
  14. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,983
    Likes Received:
    5,654
    Inappropriate PMs can, and are reported and are dealt with in due time.

    Discussing what other forum members behaviour may or may not be, especially in this manner, is not particularly nice or constructive, to put it mildly.
     
  15. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    4,869
    Likes Received:
    9,905
    The first thing that springs to mind is that the Engaging trooper being placed by the reactive player lets them block routes for the active player.

    Example - Active trooper A advances up a narrow alleyway. Reactive trooper R successfully Engages, and places himself 'further up the alley'. Now trooper A not only has to beat up trooper B, but actually take them to Dead (possibly via Coup de Grâce). Otherwise the Unconscious body will be blocking the alley and A will need to Jump or Climb past it.

    Another would be the reactive player placing trooper B in a corner where it's impossible for the active player to either draw LoF with other troopers, or get other troopers into combat.
     
  16. Ieldin Soecr

    Ieldin Soecr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    154
    I actually think interactions like this would make engage a viable and tactical option to use for both active and reactive player. the reactive player can use the skill to force specific situations if he succeeds and the active player can react to these options by using his second short skill to facilitate this (like move in a different direction so he cannot be blocked by the enemy or stopping from hiding).
    I would say that these options to block/slow the enemy should actually be wanted interactions of Engage/Dodge to make them interessting options compared to shot in more cases.
     
  17. WiT?

    WiT? Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    321
    +1 to the above. Engage reactively blocking passage is a good thing in my books. Engage using terrain to maximise the CC and lockdown potential is a good thing. Lets it do something that most other action or ARO options don't. I genuinely struggle to see how these are not good things - for me its like saying "A Sniper Rifle has longer range than most weapons, so other weapons unfairly cannot engage it in their best rangebands"

    The unconscious movement blocking is an issue with the rules, not with engage, though I agree it is an issue.
     
    DFW Ike, daszul and Balewolf like this.
  18. Space Ghost

    Space Ghost Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    100
    While I do appreciate the history lesson on where Engage came from, I do also have to agree that this bit of information - which is probably unknown to many players - is also (IMO) irrelevant to the discussion at hand. The poll is entitled "Should Engage be changed?" not "Where did Engage come from?" It's great that CB cleared up an old rules anomaly (people Dodging into base-to-base contact,) but that doesn't necessarily mean that the new Common Skill that resulted has provided players with a particularly viable or fun game option - as evidenced by how infrequently Engage is typically used, and how many people think it should be changed in some way. CB changes Infinity's rules all the time to address issues within the game (i.e. this season's Bravery and Landing Assistance rules,) and could easily change Engage too..
     
    DFW Ike likes this.
  19. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,983
    Likes Received:
    5,654
    Well giving the context of the decision allows the people in the discussion understand the reasoning and the difficulties been solved, it can create a better understanding of the rule, its mission, its place in the power balance and maybe result in better or more refined suggestions.
     
  20. solkan

    solkan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    670
    Likes Received:
    1,131
    Many, many forums ago when it was 2nd edition, and dodges could be declared to base contact, the “quantum intercept dodge” rules interpretation was brought forth upon the world.

    Active model A declares a Move. Model B declares ARO Dodge. If B wins the Dodge roll, A doesn’t get to the end of its movement path and instead stops where B intercepted it. Unless, of course, B’s not within 2” of A’s movement path, then B’s just Dodging.

    Imagine if N3 had kept that part, where whether you made it into base contact changed how Dodge worked, so Dodge had “Intercept Dodge” as a two page subsection.

    That, and probably the whole “Becoming Engaged by accident is bad” philosophy would likely be why they’re two separate skills. Especially when, for the sake of sanity in the order resolution system, they decided to teleport to Engaging trooper and not deal with invalidating AROs along the now invalid movement path.
     
    ambisinister and Section9 like this.