I do not think dropping reinforcements gaining an ARO is a good idea, out of sequence ARO is a can of worms better left untouched and sealed, our of sequence ARO in the (delayed) deployment phase is a can of worms better left untouched, sealed and buried in a box of concrete. I do not think it will work and the question then will become, if them why not anything and everything else?
It would be nice if there was some counterplay to the reinforcement drop, and it would be nice if the comms link trooper actually had a purpose. How about requiring a WIP roll by the comms link trooper after placing the drop pod token; If it fails (or if the comms link trooper is null), the opponent can move the token up to 4" in any direction (maintaining a legal placement). You can even let the EVO hackers in on the fun and have Controlled Jump affect this roll. It gives some interesting choices in how much you want to support a precise drop, and how aggressive/risky you want the drop position to be.
What's wrong with being able to ARO against models deploying in the midfield? Its very unfair and uninteractive when models can currently deploy right next to enemy model, and inside LOS without triggering an ARO. Not to mention it takes away from the atmosphere of the game. I'm not sure why you think it wouldn't work? It would be similar to how models can ARO against combat jump models, ie. Actually get to respond with an ARO, not stand around with their dick in their hand.
Because it is an out of sequence ARO. If we go with this logic, Guts and Dodge movement also move models in plain sight why not grant out of sequence ARO and trigger mines? Moreover, if deploying grands ARO (and we will ignore the question if this deployment grants ARO why not the other deployments?) then the reinforcements will be impossible to be placed in any area that would impact the battlefield and make the entire point of reinforcements pointless.
To preface this; I do not think having an ARO against Reinforcements would be good. I think people should keep their distance from the enemy side of the table if they wish to avoid having melee troopers drop too close, and that troopers deploying in line of fire of longer range units isn't as much game play impact as to be worth the limitation and mechanics woes. That said; it wouldn't be out of sequence ARO. It would be a rules change and be in sequence. Much like how Reinforcements deploying during the Tactical Phase instead of the Deployment Phase is outside sequence until the rules made it inside it. Also like how Impetuous are activations done outside the Orders Phase sequence. This would simply change it to a Tactical Phase activation Entire Order skill instead of deployment.
Deployment though is already a condition that happens outside of deployment phase, mines and other deployables, drop troopers, holo echoes, decoys and probably something else I forget are already use deployment rules outside of the deployment phase. Though yes, I agree, technically reinforcements introduce a deployment phase in the tactical phase of the game. I think that creating an ARO that can happen outside of orders expenditure is a more disruptive and serious issue though.
In that case let's just give all Reinforcements models: Combat Jump (Reinforcements) and Combat Jump (23) for no extra cost and call it done.
I personally prefer playing regular games, without reinforcements. Mainly because of three reasons: 1. Useless Commlink rules - as often posted before 2. Autowin for the 2. player in most missions - as often posted before 3. Fireteams! The mainlist plus the reinforcements share the same pool for fireteams. So vanilla can't use the theoreticaly nicew haris and Core options of the reinforcements, because the only fireteam option for vanilla lists is duo. And sectorials? When I play my sectorials (TAK and Starmada) I use my fireteamoptions in the main lists. So - even that the reinforcements offer some nice options for fireteams - I can't use them, because my pool of available fireteams is already used. I like some of the reinforcement models - but not teh actual rules. I personally just feel no incentive to play reinforcements.
Whitout having the new ITS missions, this is out of contest... Vanilla armies are way stronger than their sectorial counterpart (very few exceptions here). If CB gave them Core team too it would have been way too much. When you deploy your Reinforcements, you can freely create new Fireteams there, without spending CTs. If you want di do action with them, simply cancel the main force team and go with the fresh one!
I have only played 2 games using the Reinforcement rules, so a little hard to give really qualified opinions on the rules in game, so here are a few of my takes: Generally, I like the Reinforcements concept but I have found that first player to drop Reinforcements normally manages to get something done (flip a button/kill some hard to dig out AROs etc), this helps you feel you are clawing the game back, right up to the point at which the second player drops his Reinforcements. At that point the game swings back in favour of the dominant player and can be hard to ever recover from. List building with the compulsory Commlink makes life difficult and the additional loss of granularity in the Reinforcement section makes you feel like you're missing out on preferred list choices through lost points/SWC. I think this will take some getting used to but is currently putting players off in my group, locally. This difficulty in list building limitation feels further exacerbated with Shasvastii, if the Shasvastii Embryo rule prevents Reinforcements from dropping. Although I have yet to really ascertain if the Shasvastii Embryo rule is a major drawback in game. My gut feel is that it isn't, but there is potential for it to be, and therefore, your list building gets heavily influenced to lean into REMs and TAGs. This moves away from what Shasvastii is best at and almost invalidates the Sectorial in this game format (you'd may as well run Onyx or vCA if you want REMs). Like most people I dislike the Commlink tax in its current format (it feels very expensive at +10pts and 0.5SWC, given its compulsory and there is only a single profile in each faction/sectorial). If there were different profile options, then I'd be happier to pay for a Commlink trooper so I have some agency in my list building and troop choice. As it currently stands though the mandatory Commlink tax seems more of an expensive annoyance. So the options in my view are; 1) Remove Commlink entirely 2) Keep Commlink and assign it as you would assign a Master Breacher (or equivalent) and remove Commlink (+x Trooper bonus), but keep the ability to shift Commlink into the Reinforcement order pool for free 3) Provide different Commlink profile options I think option 3 would be my preferred choice, especially if this is further coupled with having to make WiP roll to accurately bring the drop pod down (as suggested elsewhere in the thread). At the moment the general concensus locally is the Reinforcements is ok but could do with some improvements for player to really want to play it. Right now it's simply an alternate game format that may get played occasionally but won't replace standard format. It is also highly unlikely we will run a formal event using Reinforcements any time soon. To help this game mode take off, I hope the new ITS15 and the Objectives deck will help encourage players to run the Reinforcements mod. However, to really help it take off CB need to ensure ALL Reinforcement packs are available by the end of Feb/early March (boosters can follow) AND some improvements (as mentioned above) need to take place. Sorry if this is a little negative, but I want to see Reinforcements succeed. My current fear is that this game mode may well die on the vine in its current state and without a speedy/compressed release schedule of the main faction Reinforcement boxed sets.
Generic/ Vanilla armies have available one Haris when using reinforcements (only for reinforcements).
New ITS season is now out, so time to revisit your concerns for/against last turn dropping. Pay attention to exclusion zones and fear Combat Jump Explosion. Look mate, just give it a rest and think about what it actually would mean if the rules said to use Combat Jump, and how the phases are structured for a few days. It's okay to think it's a terrible idea, and I'd agree with you on that, but there's no real disruption or extra weirdness that we don't already have, and certainly no run on effects for other rules.
Frontline is among ITS15 missions, so that avoidance is not always feasible. In that regards it's not needed: it's already Mechanized Deployment from N3, only that was a pre-game skill, but it can be implemented as a no-roll coordinated order "combat jump" in the Drop Pod ZoC. That way, even if an enemy trooper sees several Reinf trooops, can only ARO one. ALL Vanilla have been changed to allow for 1 Haris fireteam, only Reinforcements have Fireteam tables with anything else than Duos, so... In Sectorials I agree it may be a problem, forcing you to choose which Fireteam keep or not, but I have the feeling Corvus is not very interested in allowing pure Core anyways, and Haris are a more acceptable sacrifice, I think, but anyways forcing choices is a core concept of the game (better exemplified by our lovely old adage of a Chain Rifle/Assault pistol morlock moving in front of you and forcing your ARO). Ask, ye of little faith... and wonder at Frontline as part of the ITS15
That makes it 2,5 missions out of 19 that would have issues with reinforcements? I guess one could skip these.
Like I predicted, CB didn't have resources to commit to making Reinforcements specific missions or changes to existing ones to accommodate this extra. Which I understand and is one of the reasons I think this is bad extra, takes too much resources that CB clearly does not have to make it work. Community has to fix it for them, but even that is hard because how CB listens to feedback and implements changes. If I had to fix Reinforcements I would make it so that drop pod is a center for Eclipse smoke. Reinforcements when they come they provoke ARO, but they are covered in Eclipse so they are well protected still. And lose all the nonsense with Comlink trooper, have Reinforcements appear in second combat group, so any orders you have in that group will be usable by Reinforcements. Plus this give your opponent some counterplay since he can go for your order pool in second combat group in turn 1 crippling your order pool for Reinforcements. Mandatory drop for Reinforcements in turn 2 and no requirement for losing points, make it simple remove bookkeeping element and speed up the game.
You don't have to fix anything. You have to play with what seems to be the dedicated way to play them... the Operation deck that we are waiting... But no, this is a way better way to support the game for sure...
As I have to clean up the thread again... First and foremost this is the thread about reinforcements feedback so stay on topic and please don't clog up the thread. Secondly, feedback about playtesting has already been made in pages 5 and 6 so repeating it adds nothing to the discussion. Personally, I think, how much playtesting is, or is not, done and how it should be done is an opinion and not a feedback, I am not against it been discussed so I will again extend my offer to people who would like to discuss such a theoretical subject to open a thread in a relevant subforum and discuss it there, not here. Thanks.
No it's not. "Game mode is unpolished, you should playtest it more" is definitely feedback. Anyway, a few years ago CB adopted the "no new models no new rules" policy; this seems to be an effort to make everyone buy a new selection of minis. Frankly I'd just rather have the factions I enjoy playing (USARF and OCF) get another look rather than this.
