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. Wizardlizard

    Wizardlizard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2018
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    66
    I am struggling with the crit hate. Inhave lost games due to a crit, and for sure schemes go awry because of it but I've enjoyed the balance of crits to . Take that swiss guard a stupid bs 10 combi just caused a wound.
    Without crits it becomes too much like those other games and mathhammer becomes a real thing. Please note this not include the total bs fat2 issue going on. 5% chance of a crit... if people aren't playing this game because of that...they shouldn't be playing this game.
    5% chance means nothing is guaranteed. I do believe 5% is the max it should be outside of CC. No bs over 20, no fat 2 link team. Now i do get that if I role 5 dice hmg my adjusted chance at a crit is more than 5% but I would rather deal with that another way and have no burst bonus on link teams and maybe the horrid 4 or higher burst guns dont get crits.
    Having said that - crits dont have to kill, negative 3 armor, or dont cancel out roles higher than them but always hit (so need a 4 roll a 4 but opponent rolls a 9 ya both hit) or no armor all could be better than insto death but we need the crit. It saves us from over min max lists and over optimized bunk out ther .
     
  2. solkan

    solkan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    742
    Likes Received:
    1,255
    N4 Wishlisting: We finally get past the nonsense and get to the Aleph/El slash fic. :alien::heart_eyes:
     
  3. Dixi

    Dixi New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2019
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2
    Crits: auto-win but normar arm.

    Orders: everything is fine but I think about some kind of utility order that can be used only to place equipment (not mines) or activate buttons.

    TAG: total immunity against non-heavy weapons (i wouldn't define "heavy" but it's quite obvious). While some weapons like panzerfaust should have negative modifiers when used against infantry for more specific use, not for spam.

    Higher cost for marker-abilities, impetous and jumper, lower cost for armor and msv. Redesign MSV3 ("discover and shoot" as a short skill instead of auto-discover) and biovisor (L2 should open imp-1 or imp-2 markers right away).

    Revamp speculative fire to avoid crazy trajectories.

    More terrain rules, clarify doors, windows and other popular obstacles. I think climbing should be a bit easier (make it a part of movement without c+).

    More private info. First of all I think of more Lt options for each faction and sectorial. Then, some kind of eqiupment / skills or ammo options could also be a private to favor mind games. This way hackers could also be used to scan enemies for their private info (maybe even finding / defusing enemy lt).

    More hacking (but less blatant options). The infowar should be redesigned. The hacking area should be increased and the variety of programs should not measure in burst/damage but in special effects. DHD should be able to defend allies or to uncover impersonators (as oppose to KHD). Buffing should not depend on repeaters.
     
  4. borings

    borings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2018
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    393
    i think you are closer to people in the crit thing than you might think. i mean, i dont think anyone wants crits completely gone, just for them to make more sense, which seems to be what you are suggesting as well. a suggestion ive heard that i like was that for each crit you roll in a F2F you hafta roll another of the same roll with the same modifiers, otherwise all the crit does is counter the opposing rolls. that way high burst weapons on low bs guys aren't as swingy.
     
    nazroth likes this.
  5. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,935
    Likes Received:
    9,335
    We got rid of the old scatter system because the miss pattern was predictable. It spiraled out from the center, instead of having random scatter.

    It was so predictable there was a thread on the ideal target location for dropping NetRods to avoid them scattering off table (IIRC, it was about 6" right and 6" short of table center)!


    That's because the entire design concept changed from "Most Realistic" to "Best Gameplay".


    Well, CB already designs models to cost a certain amount in each army, they just add or subtract rules or abilities to get to that points cost.


    For the love of all that is holy, THIS!!!!


    I like that idea! Spending 5 orders to press a WIP13 button and still failing is NOT good gameplay.
     
  6. Brokenwolf

    Brokenwolf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2019
    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    93
    What if Remotes could be taken over like TAGs can?
     
    daszul, WiT?, nazroth and 1 other person like this.
  7. Hachiman Taro

    Hachiman Taro Inverted gadfly

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2018
    Messages:
    457
    Likes Received:
    837
    • Rework Hacking to make it easier to understand and more worthwhile to do other things than just Supportware and Killer hack. It's a lot of complexity for not enough gameplay value right now outside of those things. For example if you could interact with scenery elements / objectives (ie open doors in hacking area / do WIP roll objectives in ZOC) or download 'wetware' (give a unit in hacking area a skill like climbing+ for a turn) it would make hacking more fun and interesting. Right now a lot of the best lists don't even have hackers outside KHD's, and that's a shame IMHO. Hacking feels like it should be a central part of the game aesthetic
    • Rework or recost Medium Infantry to be more worthwhile / have a better role (IMHO 4-2 move MI should get Shock Immunity for free, and ARM below 5 or so should cost less). This would fix a lot of under used units.
    • Make it clear whether optional skills are on or off by default, or you intentionally have to check with the owning player.
    • Go through the rules with a fine tooth comb and make every rules question raised on the forums that wasn't definitively resolved since N3 came out is crystal clear in English, preferably with an example that demonstrates the correct answer to the question.
    That'd do!
     
    Berjiz and Elric of Grans like this.
  8. Padre

    Padre Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2019
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    6
    It's easy to mistake a new edition for an errata. What we need to remember is that you don't usually release a new edition to re-balance a bunch of units. N4 means (most probably) fundamental changes that couldn't be handled with an Army update. That's why it's pointless to ask for Unit X to cost Y points or to nerf weapon Z because we don't know the context of a new ruleset.

    What I think might be as close to a consensus as we can get is that Infinity needs streamlining. Yes, yes, there's always a group of hardcore players that consider Multiterrain: Taco Bell to be a game-defining skill or people willing to swear a separate weapon profile for each Burst and Ammo combination is what makes Infinity special. I'm not going to argue with the insane though. It's just while I love Infinity, I can still hope for it to be more accessible. Not dumbed-down, accessible. I'm okay with a complex game, as long as it's not unnecessarily complicated and N3 has grown to be the latter. It's fake depth, stimulated by the rules bloat.

    Anyway, I'm not a game designer, so I humbly admit I might be just stumbling along here. But! Here's an idea: let each unit generate a number of orders, but at the same time have a limit of how many orders can be allocated to it. It's similar to how Influence works in Guild Ball: at the beginning of a round each model generates a number of "orders". Each player allocates the orders to miniatures before they take their turn, keeping in mind the order limit each mini has. Your TAG may be 3/4 - it generates 3 Orders and can be given up to 4 Orders, no more. What it means in practice is that you need to plan in advance, make decisions and take risks, because you can't transfer allocated Orders between models. It also means you can't go for a Rambo Extravaganza with all 10 Orders in your CG, you have to use more models in a turn. IMHO it creates a lot of design space for the developers - not only are you adding depth to the game with very little rules overhead, you are also introducing a factor that could be manipulated to differentiate profiles more. Need more oomph from your TAGs? Let them generate and/or take more orders. Want to get rid of 'cheerleader' profiles? Well, If you have leftover Orders you have to spend on your Kazaks, you will use them somehow lest you waste their potential. What do you guys think?
     
    Ogid, Genesis, Yog.0 and 1 other person like this.
  9. H1ghlander

    H1ghlander Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    45
    Admittedly, I'm not playing much these days, but I feel the lawn that is the list of special skills is seriously overgrown. The number of skills is probably my biggest hurdle to overcome.
     
    Berjiz and AngryPanda like this.
  10. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,935
    Likes Received:
    9,335
    N2 was N1+Errata. I printed off the old "entire paragraphs" update pdf, and it was shorter than the most recent (v1.7) FAQ. There were very few outright rules changes (Dispersion distance is the one I remember), lots of clarifications.

    Several other companies end up printing a 'new edition' to get all the errata incorporated into the base game.

    Admittedly, the N2->N3 change was much bigger than that, it was an entire change in design philosophy. I'm really hoping N4 isn't as big a change as N3 was.
     
    Cthulhu363 likes this.
  11. -Ghost-

    -Ghost- Shalashaska

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    350
    Oooo. Yeah, I like this. MI need their identity back. They're supposed to not be as limber as HI and lack maybe the ability to carry crazy assortments of weapons and ammo. However, they used to be identified by their lower cost, more gear that was offset by their movement and lack of an extra wound. Something needs to be done to make Medium Infantry feel like Medium Infantry. Whether it's a bigger weapon system, access to rules like Mech. Deploy, or more gear/skills it needs to be done. Right now they have to possess a marker state, possess V:Dogged, or possess FDL1/cheap to be of any merit.
     
  12. GHoooSTS

    GHoooSTS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    47
    This is the most insightful criticism of the game I have ever seen and I feel kind of stupid having never really thought of it before. Seeing the cost spectrum compressed from a 9-point order generating troop to a 40+ point 'does stuff' troop would be excellent and help reign in the size of armies.

    I don't like this idea at all. I'm in favour of allowing very expensive or otherwise special models to generate multiple orders (for their personal use ideally), but pumping a pile of orders into a single model is the most identifiable unique mechanic of Infinity after face-to-face rolls in my view. It makes the game extremely distinct from most games, and it takes some getting used to but is ultimately a huge plus. I don't mind 'cheerleaders' because I find one of the biggest differences between beginners and intermediate players is finding way to make 'cheerleaders' effective (I have described Infinity to some people as a resource management and worker placement game). It's also great because I don't give a shit about what line infantry are doing to be honest, I want my awesome centrepiece models running around doing stuff. If I wanted large amounts of evenly distributed activity, I'd just play a different game like Talon or something.

    As far as allocating orders before acting, Infinity turns are highly unpredictable (hidden deployed AROs, camouflage, criticals) and orders are the most important resource in the game. Losing a guy you put four orders into on the first order is effectively game over, especially in low-order lists or tight order-management scenarios.

    100% based
     
    Wyrmnax, Yog.0, Genesis and 1 other person like this.
  13. Tourniquet

    Tourniquet TJC Tech Support

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    412
    Likes Received:
    439
    They already did this with the KHD.
     
    RobertShepherd likes this.
  14. Nathonicus

    Nathonicus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2018
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    131
    Regarding crits, I would be surprised and saddened to see them go away. I think that the element of chance and consequence is needed to prevent the game from becoming too predetermined. The wound hurts, but that's the point. Without it, I feel the game would become way too predictable.

    The same goes for premeasuring. If you took away auto wounds on crits and premeasuring, I feel the game would become 'solvable' by a player.

    Regarding reducing the prevalence of very large 15 orders + armies, I think a scenario condition that awards points per model killed would be very interesting. Or even per causalty left behind. This would give people a reason to casevac their troopers. Leave no trace!
     
    n21lv, Cothel, Abrilete and 3 others like this.
  15. SpectralOwl

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    564
    Likes Received:
    896
    Might be a way to make Hacking more useful while keeping the intent behind AD3+ scatter; make Hack Transport Aircraft trigger the PHY roll for the incoming troop. Playing entirely outside the Hacking game would be a lot riskier if it meant enemy AD could be dropped reliably.
     
    Berjiz, Stiopa and DruidNei like this.
  16. toadchild

    toadchild EI Aspect

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    2,541
    Likes Received:
    4,841
    I like crits but I think you are overestimating how “solvable” Infinity would be without them. There’s still a lot of chance in a FtF roll.
     
  17. RobertShepherd

    RobertShepherd Brisk antipodean

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,060
    Likes Received:
    1,715
    That's more of an ITS thing than an N4 thing, but if White Noise runs another scenario design contest, you should for sure submit a scenario with that idea in it. It's a really interesting one.
     
  18. Genesis

    Genesis Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2017
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    18
    I really want to say something about close combat rules.
    actually, when u do cc, you have paid extra effort to move close compared to just stand and shoot the target. you paid more, and in general, you deserve more to pay back, like kill someone who can't be shoot down (like odd or really tough armor guy), or you have to pay much more to shoot down (like you have to pay several lives or use up your orders).
    in that case, close combat should be quick to resolve and deadly for opponents than shooting since you already paid more efforts and orders to get in close.
    but now cc is not like that, in most cases you only have B1, and d20 is not that stable so you may not get what you want, or worse, to be killed by some noobs after spending several orders. in other cases, ph12-13 is not that deadly without ap+exp weapons, so as a result, it may take you far more orders and lives to kill someone in cc than just shoot with no brainer.
    I think in a sci-fi game, close combat may not be that general cause you always have a gun. but when it happens, it must be silent, quick and deadly enough to kill the target in a split second.

    so how about resolve the close combat situation in one single order? you can just roll again and again till one side wins the combat and kills the other, till then the order resolves. that truly can reflect the bloody fist to fist combat, and save many orders to solve the problem once you reach close enough and pay off the efforts you move the guy.
     
    SKOZZOKONZ and Deltervees like this.
  19. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,218
    Likes Received:
    1,505
    I see what happened... I didn't account for change facing. In any case, I've moved back to the original thread for this discussion.
     
    ijw likes this.
  20. Nathonicus

    Nathonicus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2018
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    131
    You're certainly correct. I should have been more clear. I have seen people wishlist reducing the lethality of crits, and also people calling for allowing premeasuring - I was saying if you did both things it would make a much more predictable game.

    Cheers,