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 PolĂ­tica 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. RobertShepherd

    RobertShepherd Brisk antipodean

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2018
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    1,799
    That's interesting. Over in Australia there's a lot of variance of opinion on this. I know some very good players who will always take (and who for preference I would never give) first turn, and some equally good players who are very sharp deployers and extremely effective at weathering an alpha. Which way this particular weathercock swings tends to be down to faction and scenario mix as much as anything.
     
  2. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,462
    Likes Received:
    8,035
    My biggest concern with combat group size is actually the potential swinginess that happens last turn if the player going second has preserved enough orders for their main group. So for me it's about rear-loading rather than front-loading :)
     
    RobertShepherd likes this.
  3. csjarrat

    csjarrat Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,020
    Likes Received:
    936
    Yeah the whole first/second thing for me depends on mission. Some you want to get in early and others are best to go second (zone scoring ones particularly) I'm yet to find anyone who has a set preference for all the time
     
    Abrilete and DaRedOne like this.
  4. Brother Smoke

    Brother Smoke Bureau Trimurti Representative

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    1,391
    I would like to suggest that perhaps there should be some sort of "passive" skill to combat impersonators/marker states, since there seems to be so much confusion about how to play against them for new people

    Something like changing biometric visor to a "biometric detector" that automatically removes an enemy's marker state if they come within ZoC?
     
    armazingerz and Abrilete like this.
  5. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,821
    Likes Received:
    4,672
    Or if it was just like Sensor but could work in ARO.
     
    DaRedOne likes this.
  6. DaRedOne

    DaRedOne Morat Warrior Philosopher
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    1,927
    I think being able to ARO with sensor would both make sensor more interesting and severely limit camo as is. It would probably increase the cost of sensor, though. No LOF skills should be expensive
     
  7. eciu

    eciu Easter worshiper

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    3,530
    Likes Received:
    4,111
    How about just not allowing to deploy Imp withing ZoC of BioVisor and/or re-enter it in said ZoC ?
     
    Section9 likes this.
  8. Sabin76

    Sabin76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    1,605
    Would give some counterplay for deploying against CA or Haqq.
     
    Section9 likes this.
  9. armazingerz

    armazingerz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2017
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    196
    EVERYTHING you do in this game should be order efficient, otherwise it is too hard to win. And yes, I played the Sophotect and is the only engineer I don't feel disgusted to enlist because she is actually usefull engineering aside.

    I think merging factions and units could be the way to go. For example Al Hawwas and Huzakuts are barely the same.

    In chess the other player doesn't play during your turn, thus he can't delay you. Besides puting a clock sounds like a tricky way to fix core game problems.

    You need to understand the deepness of my proposal, I think Infinity is a game where you can change a lot of things and still will be a great game while you keep two principles: AROs and Orders. Imagine a game where 9 orders would be what you need, and 12 would be a lot. I think it would be easier to balance than a game where the most appreciated resource can face 10 order vs 18.

    If expending 10 orders in the first turn in the same unit to kill as much as you can is not a good tactic, then, by allowing it you are driving newbies to a wrong meta. And the experience is that kind of play is ruining a lot of newbies games.
     
  10. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,462
    Likes Received:
    8,035
    Here's something that's been bothering me a bit; conditionally scaling costs.

    Let's start with the low-hanging fruit, mimetism, while criminally cheap on certain models it is by no means evenly priced. As far as I can tell it mostly varies depending on ballistic skill and little else. While the cost at higher BS levels is more reasonable for its effect, it's the conditional part that I'm concerned about. There is some heed given to a given model's ability and how it stacks with Mimetism, but it stops at BS only, without any heed for how any weapon or equipment that is good is multiplied in value by it. At the extreme, Mimetism on a model armed only with a Contender wouldn't be worth much because there isn't much to multiply, while on the other extreme we have actual models in game and can be named; Q-Drone (Total Reaction, high burst, high range weapon, and low BS making Mimetism the cheapest possible) or Kamau (ticks all the boxes for scaling value; high BS, MSV2, Core-able, heavy hitting ARO weapon - will be replaced by Epsilon HMG if they ever get into a Core, of course) where the scaling is through the roof.
    And it's not so much that the models are outrageous as it is about internal and external balance. (A small disclaimer here; Kamau are difficult to face, but it's the Helots and Zulu Cobra you should be worrying about)

    Another example of what I mean is the unit type based price increases. A chief example of this is Forward Deployment. While it is not an argument that it gives the most benefit the stronger the unit receiving it is, the costs can be as low as literally untraceable for light infantry while it is as high as 6 points on Heavy Infantry, as evidenced by Sepulchre Knights. That's more than what a Light Infantry pays for Infiltration, a significantly stronger skill. But that could be fine in a world where a Heavy Infantry unarguably brought greater power to the table than any of the Light Infantry would, but we also have some pretty damned heavy hitters like Ko Dali who obviously doesn't pay much for that skill (although seems to be paying through her nose for Airborne Deployment, but let's not get side-tracked)

    Skills with this massive scaling difference risks making the game further lopsided towards a massed-unit tactics game by promoting multiple unskilled troops while punishing more elite troops

    Now, having conditional costs on skills isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I do hope that N4 re-examines what each skill brings to the table and what conditions that a skill actually start snowballing and increase costs in those specific cases only. A unit is the sum total of its parts and it seems like the developers are aware of this due to how this is used to create snowballing units in some cases and to create token units in others (units that are made to be bad options) and this sort of creates the atmosphere of guess work costs that other game systems use where it's not your priorities that primarily dictates which units you choose to build with, but a preset of primary picks designed by the developers.
    And then hope your favourite faction gets good primary picks.

    Otherwise, just do away with conditional scaling costs, because all it does is make it obvious that units aren't created equally and creates a sense of unfairness.
     
  11. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,821
    Likes Received:
    4,672
    Yup. If my NWI troops don't have shock immunity and are expensive, is that code for "Don't take them they're a trap option?"
     
    Tourniquet likes this.
  12. Tourniquet

    Tourniquet TJC Tech Support

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    457
    Likes Received:
    499
    Super efficient unit design is how we end with things like the Libertos, Ghazi, Proxies, and any sub 10pt warband. While efficient unit design isn't a bad thing when taken to the extreme it can have warping and detrimental effects on the game and game balance, as more often than not you are remove considerations such as opportunity cost from decision making. As for tactics, the most efficient play isn't necessarily the best play, and some mechanics need to less efficient to balance them, this is what makes the game fun interesting to play and leads to a lot of strategic and tactical depth that the game is known for. Just taking the efficient line of play all the time every time leads to stagnant and boring games where the outcome is solved before dice even start rolling.

    They really aren't the same, they may be similar in their role (Camo specialist) but past that they start to differ significantly especially in their secondary role.

    It's not that clear cut, sometimes going all out and running 10+ orders through a unit is necessary and a good strategy, other times it's going to be risky as all hell but necessary, or it is a plain stupid waste of orders. It all comes down to whats needed at that point in time to solve that particular board state. It then comes down to the newbies learning over time when they should and shouldn't do it, and how to do it effectively.

    As for ruining newbies games, if you are jamming a rambo piece down their throat turn one and killing everything and ruining the game for them when they've only been playing for a month or two, that's on you not the game. If you don't realise that mercilessly kicking a new players teeth in when you are trying to teach them the game or they just have a starter set and the beyond box and you throw Achilles at them, and hide behind the rules saying the game lets me do this so suck it up, you are the one at fault here.
     
  13. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,821
    Likes Received:
    4,672
    i.e. how you make good units.
     
  14. the huanglong

    the huanglong Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    1,055
    Likes Received:
    2,102
    Just get rid of fury and the associated cost reductions. Fuck it right off and all the trouble it causes.
     
    Hecaton likes this.
  15. eciu

    eciu Easter worshiper

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    3,530
    Likes Received:
    4,111
    And WB.

    And linked Fury/Impetues troops (yes I know it would gimp the MO but I certainly see an issue with both giving the mechanic which gaves discount&disadvantage but the disadvantage can be nullified by other mechanic which again puts even more power to said units)
     
    Papa Bey likes this.
  16. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,462
    Likes Received:
    8,035
    Not going to go into the unit I think you're referring to, but the combination you bring up is a very good example of where it is entirely reasonable to have scaling costs based on what the skill actually offers when combined with other attributes - Shock or Bio immunity (or having STR) is significantly better on a NWI trooper than it is on a regular 1 wound trooper. This doesn't mean that this combo should be quite as expensive as 2 actual wounds, of course, nor should Bioimmunity cost much on said 2-wound unit unless BTS is off the chart.
     
    Hecaton and SpectralOwl like this.
  17. meikyoushisui

    meikyoushisui Competitor for Most Ignored User

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    1,385
    Likes Received:
    1,892
    I'm proposing an out-of-rules solution for an out-of-rules problem, but you're asking for an in-rules solution to an out-of-rules problem. I don't think adding rules for something that should be considered basic decency is a problem. If it is, you either have bad opponents or your TOs are failing at their job.
     
    Brother Smoke likes this.
  18. the huanglong

    the huanglong Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    1,055
    Likes Received:
    2,102
    In the case of shock immunity + NWI, it's a case of scaling costs covering for poor game design.

    Imagine you started to see MSV everywhere. Every remote could get MSV for an order, MSV was casually added to sniper rifles, pistols and knives, MSV was handed out on a gun used to bring down the costs of suboptimal units and so on. Then to counter it, all the new mimetic units were getting "MSV immunity".

    http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Full_Auto

    God fucking damn it, it's already started.

    Shock immunity needs to go, then shock needs to be peeled off everything that doesn't have MULTI or CCW in its name, and then removed from every skill it's nested in.
     
    #1338 the huanglong, Nov 19, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2019
    Belgrim likes this.
  19. SpectralOwl

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    589
    Likes Received:
    930
    This I disagree with. Shock is an honestly useful ammo type since it's meant to do more than punish Devas and Umbra; it stops the likes of Dogged and makes sure units that go down, stay down. The issue is that CB has started pouring shock options onto everything for ridiculously low prices, and given just about every new NWI unit an immunity in order to get cheap 2W equivalence. Shock Immunity is certainly no problem on Moderators or Kamau for example, and Bioimmunity is a defining useful skill on Bolts, but it's seriously annoying when it's abused to create just about every HI/MI indecisive profile released since Yadu. I think this issue just boils down to "CB, please grow up and stop cheating at the rules you made up unless you're going to do it for everyone." Hopefully, that's N4, but I hope they fix it in the direction where I stop feeling that I need to take hideously overoptimised Characters with cheated-in 2W because CB wanted them to be resilient "Heroes" but didn't want them in power armour. I like the power armour, let me feel like it actually does something.
     
    Solodice, Berjiz, DukeofEarl and 4 others like this.
  20. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,821
    Likes Received:
    4,672
    This is exactly what I'm feeling. If there's any warcors reading this who talk to CB on the regular, pass it up the chain...