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

The definite N4 Comments, Suggestions, Ideas, wishlist's and Bugs that need fixing thread

Discussion in 'Access Guide to the Human Sphere' started by psychoticstorm, Aug 6, 2019.

  1. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,235
    Likes Received:
    944
    taking out SSL2 from fireteams can mean that those factions without MSV2 just loosing a long range defense against some dudes (maybe that's what some people want), if the enemy has smoke and MSV2, just forget to aro, and leave him move as they want. Also means that stealth, which has not much counters, to have fewer, and that makes even worse in hacking, because there is only two hackers with native sixth sense (maybe there are more, but I cannot find them), so stealth HI would become almost inmune to ARO hacking (and active turn hacking is not so productive)

    tacking out smoke on the other side, is just a "bring the bigger gun you can or die", because there are some ARO pieces that cannot be dealt the same for all factions.

    If all smoke becomes like eclipse...well, for some factions there is no difference..for some others means that they lose one option against some enemies, or a big nerf
     
  2. Tourniquet

    Tourniquet TJC Tech Support

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    1,012
    Smoke shouldn't exist on on spamable sub 20 point platforms (looking at you dirt cheap warbands), as it allows for far too much redundancy, too much coverage especially considering how powerful it is.

    Restricting smoke access would also mean that adding smoke to a list is conscious decision for its utility as opposed to a no brainer after thought.
    If I needed to pay 42/2 for an intruder and then an additional 20 to 30 something points for perseus, zondnautica or lupe then the cost gets to a point where its more of useful scalpel as opposed to hiding a MSV shooter behind a rolling smoke bunker and mowing everything down.
     
    theradrussian likes this.
  3. Nuada Airgetlam

    Nuada Airgetlam Nazis sod off ///

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2018
    Messages:
    1,427
    Likes Received:
    1,619
    Absolutely has to in Ariadna.
     
  4. micawber

    micawber Junkship Jockey

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2018
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    50
    We only habe tiny snippets of information. They might even change the nature of smoke from it's dualistic to a more gradual one. They could allow MSV1 to penetrate smoke but with a modifier or maybe look into smoke but not through it.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  5. Tourniquet

    Tourniquet TJC Tech Support

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    1,012
    Not necessarily, and it is something that can be fixed with a rework, and the only sub 20 point smoke profiles in ariadna I can think of are galwegians, Irmandinhos and Desperadoes which would be no real loss if they lost smoke, and french don't have any outside of duroc and the 112. The other sectorials all have smoke on other platforms that both want it more so they can do their own thing.

    Ariadna doesnt have MSV2 so having access to mass amounts of it is less of an issue outside of the same problem Tohaa presents of playing the entire game behind a wall of smoke that can't be seen through leading to the opponent unable to do anything.


    additionally ariadna has more than enough camo to work around lacking smoke.
     
  6. emperorsaistone

    emperorsaistone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    749
    Likes Received:
    771
    Imho the +3 BS for full Cores is not the problem. Rather id vote for the mixed linkability madness to end. This should be a rare thing and more along the lines, that one or two cheap models can join a link of expensive models and not that you can pack strong models in a cheap link.
    There has to be another way, to make sectorials competitive compared to vanilla. Sectorial specific loadouts are a first step in that direction.
     
    Berjiz and Tourniquet like this.
  7. Maksimas

    Maksimas Maxi

    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Messages:
    1,696
    Likes Received:
    1,342
    TBH, I think the best way of achieving that would probably be the removal of Wildcards and going back to pre-Coldfront mixed link standards:
    Special fireteams where X/up-to-X of Y can join Z.
    And X counts as Y for the purpose of fireteams.

    Granted, it'd probably be more busywork to implement than ''dude can join whatever'', but it would grant a greater control over what kind of teams can be made:

    Maybe making it ''tiered'' could also be an option.
    Most expensive dudes get to be with the second most expensive dudes, second most expensive dudes with the dudes second most expensive to them and so on.
     
    Tourniquet likes this.
  8. emperorsaistone

    emperorsaistone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    749
    Likes Received:
    771
    Yes for the first part, but no for the last, because that would again result in messy fireteam creation.
     
  9. Maksimas

    Maksimas Maxi

    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Messages:
    1,696
    Likes Received:
    1,342
    Yeah, that's why I added a maybe.
    I could understand if someone opted for the latter... but I'd honestly go for the former approach, kind of how it is in sectorials like Druze, IS or Tunguska-ish.
     
  10. RolandTHTG

    RolandTHTG Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2019
    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    177
    I think the tiered idea works as a principle for fireteam design, if not as a rule. If your "X of Y can join Z" rules always have Y and Z no more than 1 tier apart, you should remove most of the issues of one Big Guy and 4 cheerleaders.

    OSS is also that design, including that every character that can join a fireteam does so as a counts-as, and it still allows a bunch of really flexible teams.

    Edit: they do have one wildcard, a Missile Launcher Rebot, but It's generally considered a less optimal choice to include, especially as an attack piece.
     
    emperorsaistone likes this.
  11. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,538
    Likes Received:
    1,909
    It just occurred to me, so it's still half-baked, but what if each troop in a FT could only benefit from one bonus at a time (their choice depending on how many members they had)?

    Someone shooting you through smoke? Use SSL2 (but lose the +1 B and +3 BS).
    AROing someone under normal conditions? Use +1 burst or +3 BS depending on the situation (but lose SSL2 and the other bonus.)
    Active turn shooting with a high burst weapon? Use the +3 BS (but lose SSL2 and the +1 B)

    Thoughts?
     
  12. gregmurdock

    gregmurdock Extremely Beloved Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    This is actually a really good idea but I think it would have to apply to the entire team for simplicity. The bonuses are supposed to represent the additional members joining in so it makes sense that all their attention would be focused on watching each other's backs (SSL2), opening fire (+1B), or identifying targets (+3BS).
     
  13. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,538
    Likes Received:
    1,909
    Yeah, I see that. The idea was to be incremental. Right now all members get all bonuses. With different weapons and equipment, some bonuses might be better on different members in the same order (mostly thinking about ARO, here).

    I'm of the mind that fireteam bonuses are a major factor in playing a sectorial, so making heavy-handed changes are probably a bit much.
     
  14. loricus

    loricus Satellite Druid

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    2,381
    There are a lot of ways it could be fixed. But right now there are a lot of links that can be taken and plopped out seeing as much as possible every game, and there's little I can put in to my list to counter it. I would just like to see that eased up on. Give me a counter, make my current counters work again, make the links more costly to take, weaken the link. IDK. Everything else in the game I can build for if it came up every game.
     
    inane.imp and Superfluid like this.
  15. meikyoushisui

    meikyoushisui Competitor for Most Ignored User

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    1,561
    Likes Received:
    2,325
    I think they just need to be more choosy with the inclusion of smoke in sectorials or nerf smoke altogether. Ariadna smoke warbands don't feel egregious because there's no MSV2 to take care of it. Jaguars in Corregidor on the other hand feel disgusting because Intruders exist.

    For Smoke and MSV2 in particular, I feel like the increase of sectorial viability in the post-Druze game has weakened that a lot. Smoke shooting is still strong, but now it has to contend with incredibly strong SSL2 AROs taht are cheaper forever.

    I think this adds to much of a burden to management. Can you imagine needing 5 more markers for a Fireteam for this? I really don't feel like Fireteams need any nerfs right now.
     
  16. SpectralOwl

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,016
    Likes Received:
    1,542
    My 3-minutes-of-thought idea for the Smoke-MSV2+ interaction would be to rework Smoke so that it's Zero Visibility (including to MSV) unless the target is in ZoC, in which case it becomes Poor Visibility. Keeps Smoke handy for movement and objectives, but prevents situations where a gunner from across the table or a Warband three inches away can just attack without the other player being able to do anything about it.
     
  17. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,538
    Likes Received:
    1,909
    The idea was to choose on the spot, not previously. No need for markers, or any overhead. Just figuring out which bonus would be the best in whatever particular case you find yourself in that order.
     
    marskals and meikyoushisui like this.
  18. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    8,279
    Likes Received:
    10,355
    Also destroys smoke as a legitimate way of getting melee fighters into melee without being filled with chain pieces or roasted to death...
     
    loricus, emperorsaistone and Armihaul like this.
  19. SpectralOwl

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,016
    Likes Received:
    1,542
    Mines or MSV2 carriers (I've started keeping a Black Friar and his Nanopulser near my TAGs to counter this exact tactic) already impair Smoke in this role, they just require the other player to invest in extremely expensive countermeasures against 1-point Smoke Grenades.
    N4 Dodge allows movement, so a Kinematica L2 unit can cross ZoC in one Dodge, any other unit in two, or even less if you can use cover to start closer. Most melee fighters have high PH and about a 1 in 4 chance of being injured by a Chain Rifle on a Dodge. I figure that's a fair trade-off for cancelling out oppressive smoke-shooting and freeing up Fireteam design, especially since it allows for new design space in BS-focused Smokers with close-quarters firearms instead of always CC.
     
  20. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    8,279
    Likes Received:
    10,355
    Using a Ninja because that's easiest and closest at hand in my calc tab, that'd give them a 60% risk of going UNC and unless they make further changes to Dodge, a 30% chance of movement that can't be into melee.

    P.s. and it is all about forcing your opponent to invest into counter strategies if they don't want to run the risk. Melee is a very costly tactic for non-IMP units in terms of orders, after all
     
    #2260 Mahtamori, Apr 1, 2020
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2020
    SpectralOwl likes this.