What I would like to see in N4: cost adjustment, to be fair across all factions higher cost for SMG or lowering their Burst or getting rid of special ammo no pointless CC on units (like Zhanshi costing 1point more then Alguacil for CC 14 insted of 13, which is pointless) or rework of CC so this 1 point matters TAGs should get Fatality 1 permanent, not just as a tournament bonus TAG pilots should be better to actually be used (e.g. Szalamandra Pilot should be able to hack without leaving his TAG) or all TAGs need to have an evac system TAG remote pilots need better WIP, 10 is to low for a general specialist who will mostly get -3 and therefor roll on 7 giving a penalty for impetous in link team or at least lower the discount making link team boni more logical, no +1Burst for all in reactive but only one member of the fireteam (like Apsara who can only buff one remote) MSV 1 should be able to see through smoke with -3 giving crits more damage/lower the armor instead of auto-wound would be nice, as it gets kinda depressing if your opponent crits way more then you make symbioarmor really vulnerable to fire, as it is now only 2+HP Symbiarmor are effected by the vulnerability please don't get rid of Tohaa, as a friend (who introduced me to Infinity) plays them and would be really sad if they are gone as he don't like Spiral or Sygmaa general use for lieutenant order which applies to all skills that use it (CoC, XO, NCO...) better wording for CoC and XO, so it does not need to be FAQed better use for Hackers better ARM/BTS for combat drones (S4) Some people wished for more Orders on expensive units, this sounds good, but i wouldn't go as far as having 3-4 on one unit. Maybe give TAGs 2 Orders, one from the TAG one from the Pilot or just give them Tactical Awareness
I'm suprised so many people want to nerf link teams particularly as hard as they do. I have never felt link teams were obnoxious. The only sentiment I can empathise with is mixed links creating very efficient choices. But even then there's a trade off and it hasn't felt over the top.
In regard to these items: A massive point of the SMG is the insane range it has compared to, for example, shotguns. The act of changing an SMG to a boarding shotgun cost, and the same max range, would be a good step forward. Something like 0-8" = +3, 8-16" = +0, 16-24" = -3. TAGs should keep Fat1, as they're inherently larger units that can carry larger calibers. I don't know of ANY ITS missions where specialists get an inherent negative anymore, so i think ancillary units being WIP10 standard is fine. After all: you're taking a TAG for the stompyness, not for the specialist! A TAG pilot being able to use their specialist ability while in the TAG is not a good idea, as it makes those with hacker profiles even easier to mess with. Also, how would you resolve a brain blast vs a TAG? I agree on MSV1 being able to see through smoke with penalty. This has the side effect of bringing it in line with the way MSV interacts with Camo. I think an impetuous unit in a link should still not be able to claim cover. That'll do. Crits is seen a lot here, and there are loads of options here. For me, the option to have a crit beat opponents roll (as it is currently), but have a save except with ARM0 would be good. As people have already mentioned, this bears little change to low ARM units, but still pose the risk for heavily-armoured opponents (which is where crits help the most against). Symbio-armour used to have a real vulnerability to fire, then they removed it. I would suggest symbio-armour counts as ARM0 against fire, and that'd do. As an out-there mechanic (that again has been mentioned a couple of times), my take on multi-order units would be as follows: For every 50pts (or part thereof) a unit costs, they add an additional order of the type they would contribute to the order pool. Limiting combat groups to 10 ir/regular orders rather than 10 order-generating units would be a natural way to limit rambo potential and maintain similarity to current methods.
Where are those rules? A supplement I missed maybe? I could find stuff for anti-materiel weapons but not much else and those seemed focused on very specific ‘destructible terrain’ rather than more genetically applicable to terrain at large?
Maybe I am misunderstanding but isn’t Infinity all about punishing your opponents mistake? While losing a turn to LoL of course is crippling it do not have to be the end of the game. In your example it seems more a problem with your opponent tilting and giving up? Same problem - being caught out and punished for it - could be said for AD, HD or any number of other skills. I can ge that not everyone likes the feeling of clawing themselves back from the brink, against all odds. I think - especially regarding crits - that a there is a general divide in Infinity between players (perhaps leaning towards being more competetive?) that want to be able to calculate their turn from start to finish and players (perhaps more casual?) that enjoy having to adapt to unplannable circumstances. Boiling these types into two stereotypes one is put of by having his logical ”perfect” plan being broken by something completely random (a critical hit) and one is put of by the feeling of being unable to do anything against a ”perfect attack”. Very much a feature or bug question. I think it is important for CB to cater to both types of players and if N4 would lean too much towards one or the other it would risk driving away many players. I personally like crits as some sort of way to simulate the chaos of battle. Though I could live with some of the suggestions in this thread as a sort of compromise. Hopefully I’m getting my point across.
There should be something missing for lists not bringing hacking. Because right now there is absolutely no downside of bringing "hackerless/no hackable" lists (its' only an advantage as you invalidate enemies choices/investment), aka make AHD relevant against non-hackable units (like typical LI/SK/WB etc.)
http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Scenery_Item_Profile_Chart (wall) http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Scenery_Structures http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Destroyed http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Scenery_Item_Profile_Chart (piece of street furniture) http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Destroyed (though the taxman taking issue with advertising in a tabletop game is a little out of the ordinary :P ) That one would be scenario specific, but Antenocitis Workshop vehicles are all officially statted: https://www.antenocitisworkshop.com/product-category/dfi/infinity-vehicles/ as a base to work from. I'd look at making impact damage the equivalent to falling (based on direct line distance travelled up to the impact point) and movement an entire order activating both the hacker and vehicle, moving the vehicle 8". You're on your own there.
There already is something missing: You are sacrificing heavy infantry, remotes, a whole slew of specialists and TAGs for the 'luxury' of not being hackable. To me that, plus the inability or added difficulty of completing some classifieds, is not a price I consider worth paying.
Ariadna or Tohaa often doesn't care for lack of HI or REMs and can bring multi-wound models without any usual downsides. They would be happy if you waste a lot of points to dominate info war. Inferior technology doesn't really feel inferior in this game. It just makes you immune to high-tech.
You forget that in order to get that advantage....you have to play Ariadna or Tohaa..... Isn't that enough to give them something....
Exactly. Inferior tech factions still have very similar tools in general to higher tech ones, although there are obvious exceptions. Honestly I feel like it would stick out less if Hackers had more support/utility programs. As is, they have a couple but are more geared for offense. When going against a low tech army, they become much more useless. Crazy idea: each faction with hackers should get a single, faction-specific buff hack program. Or just more faction-specific programs in general. Even if the programs end up similar, it would add a lot to flavor and faction identity. Tbh I'm all for the lore taking a short timeskip and just saying that all units now have Cubes (except the factions where it'd make no sense). It'd immensely help the flavor logic of why so many units are ran disposably.
I really hate the suggestion for crits to be a damage roll with ARM 0. This is not the right way to do it, it once again makes ARM a stupid stat. Change it to be an armor roll with +5ish (maybe more) dmg. It becomes almost unsaveable for low ARM units, but lets the truly tanky guys a chance to still shrug it off. The game is really lack a way to make units durable except through increasing their wound stat. Making armor actually be more useful would single-handedly give life to many units that already exist.
Armor truly is the red headed step child of Infinity. It's not useful, but has a lot of potential. Just need to change how some rules interact with it. I always thought Crits should just win the roll off.
