The title is quite telling. [Edit: I'd like to present you a new U-Turn program (basically a N4 version)] thus let's go right in medias res: The program is intended to be used by solely one hacker in the army list, therefore that one Hacker, equipped with an HD, HD+, EVO HD or no HD, is bestowed upon with the U-Turn Hacking Program as an Upgrade. The corresponding Token marks the lucky Hacker Model; Camouflage Markers or Hidden Deployed Toopers add the Token when revealing themselves the first time. After that happened the Token always stays visible. Of course it has to be noted down prior to the game which hacker is the one with the upgrade, for tournaments this has to be noted down on the private list and, if applicable, on the open list before the lists are checked by the TOs and the players are sorted to their tables. The reasoning of the fixed modified WIP is to not turn the tool of a guided BS Attack into a joke against factions with high-WIP Hackers. The -3 MOD alone is already really effective (90% normal hit chance becomes 75%) but the f2f vs. WIP 12 brings the chance to hit the actual target down to about 55% (vs. the Hacker's about 32%) that's a bit more than a coin toss. But the U-Turn program is still affected by Fairy Dust's and the Tinbots' Firewall thus there's still some leverage and order burning potential.
I apologize, but I can't figure out what you're trying to say here. It looks like you want to reintroduce the U-turn program, but with a funky token marking which unit has it? Is this just a rule you want to add into the game, where everyone gets U-turn on one of their hackers for free? Is this only in certain scenarios? I also can't figure out what you mean by "the reasoning of the fixed WIP." What fixed WIP? The -3 modifier from U-turn? You mention a "F2F vs. WIP 12", but Guided Attacks aren't F2F vs. Reset, they're F2F vs. Dodge. Also; U-turn program being affected by Fairy Dust and Firewall? What? U-turn wasn't a F2F roll in N3, it was just an automatic modifier, how could it possibly be affected by Fairy Dust or Firewall? You started your post with "The title is quite telling" and then proceeded to ramble incoherently. Please actually explain your suggestion.
I thought it would be obvious since the Missile Bot Madness is one of the most talked about topics and easy to follow since no element used to describe the rule is new. I actually can't understand that you don't understand (no intend to offend you here it's just that before writing it down I told some players about the rule and they did immediately understand what this program is doing), sorry. As soon as the opponent declares a BS Attack (Guided) your Hacker equipped with the U-Turn Program can try to nullify this BS Attack by winning a face to face roll against the opponent. Like hacking with Spotlight f2f against a guy shooting at your hacker. And the fixed WIP: please look at Attack MOD. You might see a familiarity to Combat Jump and PH. Nevertheless the BS Attack (Guided) has to win or tie the f2f with the U-Turn Hacker this happens with a propability of about 55%, the hacker wins, and therefore nullifys the BS Attack (Guided), with a propability of 32%. And this should result in higher survival chances for the actual target of the guided Missile which still has to / should dodge against that BS 15 shot. Thus if the Attacker MOD would be a discrete MOD (like e.g. 0 or -3) high-WIP Hackers would be, as already mentioned, exeptionally strong whilst low-WIP hackers would become too weak in case of a negative MOD. This U-Turn is a comms attack, comms attacks are affected by Firewalls. And yes, U-Turn worked differently in N3 but this is N4; this U-Turn works more like N3's Hack Transport Aircraft (WIP-6 f2f vs. PH) just against a Missile shooter (WIP=12 f2f vs. BS 15, 14 for the Nox Sniper & Chaksa Auxiliar) and not super bad for the user.
I had trouble understanding too. I feel like a paragraph is missing or something in the place where image is. You have one paragraph explaining how to include the program and then one paragraph explaining why you designed it the certain way. Feels like a paragraph in the middle devoted to how the thing works - without designers notes - would be easier to comprehend. If you want to fix hacker's wip and limit the program to one hacker, you could put it on evo. Doubt anyone would take more than one and they have 13 wip across the board afaik. Feels less gamey / immersion breaking than arbitrary limits that somehow apply to this one program only.
Oh you mean something like the following? Active Player Opponent Trooper O declares BS Attack (Guided) on the Target T. Reactive Player T is now allowed to declare Dodge, together with all "Bystanders" affected by the impact template. Hacker with U-Turn HU is now allowed to declare U-Turn despite not being O's target --> U-Turn imposes a -3 MOD on O's BS Attack (Guided); if T has ECM: Guided (-6) O has to apply the -6 instead of -3 as per the worst MOD convention Outcomes (O shoots with BS+3, HU hacks with WIP 12, T dodges with PH-3) O wins or ties vs. HU and wins vs. T --> T has to save O's hit O loses vs. HU --> T is safe, no Missile hits; T's dodge becomes "irrelevant" I personally despise the current EVO concept therefore I chose this more complicated way. And the least I'd like to see is that players would feel forced even more to take the EVOs.
Kinda. I think "the gml has to beat hackers hacking roll (done on fixed 12 WIP*) in addition to target's dodge roll, while also getting -3 cause of the program" would suffice. *Is that what happens btw? This is how I interpret the below part but I'm not sure:
Ok, with "fixed" I used the wrong word for this in my reasoning paragraph (I'll fix correct that ;) ).WIP=12 is handled like it's written in the MODs rules: the Hacker will basically roll on WIP 12. An actually fixed WIP 12 that would be handled like the ADS' CC value would turn the guided BS Attack into a 20% win chance adventure (a tie would still not nullify the BS Attack), that's way too effective for a single program as it's comprable to imposing a -14 MOD on the BS Attack (Guided). But then again if the BS Attack passes that bottleneck it could only be avoided if the target aquires a crit on its Dodge.
+1 to finding the first post very difficult to understand. My issue with U-Turn is that it does not address the primary problem with GML - being uninteractive. Simply rolling ARO dice is not inherently interactive. Yeah its better than what we have now, but it ultimately tries to address the problem by making the GML math worse - sometimes also allowing the choice of "reveal hackers to make the maths more worse". Having maximum one U-Turn (did I read that right?) and having U-Turn be strictly a -3 rather than a face to face seems like the worst version of what I said above. No agency to take or risk more hackers for better math, and a MOD is less interesting and impactful than a F2F. I prefer solutions that interact with how a GML strike is achieved. That mostly means modifying how repeaters appear on the game table and what can be done about them. Any sort of U-Turn program is not a very good solution if this is not also addressed. I do agree wholeheartedly on EVO hackers though. Fuck those things.
Ok, I'll consider putting more words up there. :) Honestly, I fail to spot the difference to "interactive" AROs here. In both cases you're "simply rolling ARO dice" and in both cases you calculated your best chances for the AROs. So to me the only difference is one way of attack leaves you with less options how to ARO than the other. The straight -3 MOD without any further participation was the N3 U-Turn and thus if you had 6 Hackers with either a HD, HD+, DHD and EVOD you could nullify the shot with the resulting BS -12 MOD. And yes, that's boring AF. United we stand! :D Unfortunately they just got an extra regular order in ITS 14
For me dropping Guided Missiles is the reward for using Forward Observer for full effect. Similarly, Spotlight is a low key benefit that hackers can grant against unit that they can't hack with a more high calibre program. Problem is, these two don't marry well because FO and Spotlight applies the same debuff. I would propose that possibly the issue might be that Spotlight and Forward Observer shouldn't grant the same debuff. I would simply name the state Forward Observer caused something different and let Guided shoot on that state only. Spotlight is still valuable without having a Guided missile to back it up, primarily since it's typically relatively "free" (This is of course before FO REMs got Marksmanship)
Yes to getting U-turn back, allowing the reactive player a -6 face to face to prevent missile attacks. It worked well in previous editions, it will work well in this edition. But no to complicated tokens etc. If you don’t like EVO remotes, take heart: CB are starting to spread EVO devices to other types of troops, and I bet it happens more in the future. And if they do bring back U-Turn, I bet we see it as an Upgrade program in some interesting places. (BTW I love EVO remotes, and always have. Using them well, like being good with AHDs, was kind of a secret superpower in pervious editions. B2 AROs on most of my remotes? Hell yeah!)
The -6 for the Hacker or the Missile Bot? Because the -6 face to face was only against Combat Jumpers back then. Oh, the token is just there if players would want to test play this U-Turn or in case if TOs want to implement it as a tournament special rule Yeeeah, the Wardriver suddenly became the 3rd best EVO Hacker after the E-Drone and Scylla :D So just strapping a Combi Rifle or LSG on the current EVO bots would be a big leap forward IMO. That is my biggest hope when getting this program "back"! Maybe even with a "return to sender" function that either allows the reactive player to target an enemy targeted trooper or just the attacking Trooper. I loved these EVOs too! Especially in Missions like Transmission Matrix where you could buff your Killer Hacker even more to first get rid of all the enemy Hackers, then spotlight whatever happened to touch the Repeater ZOCs, followed by a carpet bombing of Moderator Grenades and sometimes the GML <3 Or a proper Flash Pulse barrage during the reactive turn :)
I totally feel that. Spotlight beeing possible as an ARO and not been given the -3 mod is a HUGE improvement, nearly eliminating the use of the actual Forward-observer skill. I like the option of the Target state beeing applied as an ARO, but there should be at least an additional bonus for actually Forward-observing, which needs way more preperation and risk. Maybe the whole GML-Problem would be solved in a scenario like "An actuall F/O has to draw LoS to the targeted Modell. So u dont have the problem of modells beeing shot at while sitting in a bunker out of the blue sky. Or there is and additional State different from Spotlight, like Spotlight causes "Targeted State" which has the +3 MOD, and a different "Forward observered"-State which enables to beeing shot by weapons with the "Guided"-Trait. Not a good solution, but imho a better than it is actually. I dont think this will solve the GML-problem in a matter that is satisfying for anyone. The option to be shoot the own units with a realistic chance to happen will merely make the GML´s vanish completly. I kill enough units in my own turn without shooting them directly just by my moody dice. I dont need my own rockets flying up my TAG´s a$$
Crap, am I misremembering and mixing the two programs up? Ah, getting older does funny things to the memory… Wasn’t there a -6 on U-Turn too? Damn now I wish I had the old rules handy. Can anyone look that up please (ie was there a minus penalty for the reactive hacker using U-Turn)? Making U-Turn a “special terrain rule” or tourney rule is a good approach. But no need for the token IMO, just add the program to all EVO devices. I kind of like the idea of support-hacking remotes being defenseless against shooting: makes rear-lines attacks more fun and rewarding. If everything has a gun it’s a bit same-y. @Tristan228 ’s “return to sender” is an awesome idea, if it is limited to units already in Targeted state. In that case it’s quite balanced IMO, and a good reason to spend orders to clear Targeted. It does further empower reactive ARO-hacking through repeater fields though. So it would need to be added alongside improvements to Deactivators, to allow them to be used in ZoC without LoF against repeaters (as well as other deployables etc.).
that sounds realy like a good idea. As you said: getting rid of Target state could be (against GML-heavy armies) quite a thing. Deactivators in their current state are .....laughable. I realy miss options like the Minesweeper or (imho way better) the nullifier. drop it and create an anti-hacking area in Zoc or deactivate repeater in ZoC (i think the second options would be more easier to be executed and clarified by the rules than the first...) Unfortunatly i dont see smth like that happen in near future except building nice castles in the sky with funny looking banners on top.
ITS seems to be where new rules are being experimented with. Perhaps next season might include U-Turn and improved Deactivators, and maybe a hacking program or device to help punch through Tinbots (Icebreaker). They’ve been playing around with troops types in recent past: a season focused on rebalancing the current play issues in the hacking and equipment area would be a refreshing change. I love what CB are doing with ITS seasonal special rules these days, here’s hoping they’ll try a gear-and-hacking focus soon.
