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

Zhanshi should have 19 CC...

Discussion in 'Yu Jing' started by Mahtamori, Sep 26, 2019.

  1. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,935
    Likes Received:
    9,340
    What, where Harrison Ford was sick as a dog and didn't want to do a fight scene over and over and over again while trying to avoid puking all over the set? So he pulled the gun, shot, and the swordsman ad-libbed going down?

    I think there really should be an active-turn advantage in CC. Not just the decision to shoot someone instead, but something to make engaging a Monk or Ninja or Musashi or Knight on your terms more attractive.
     
    Xeurian, Shiwen and theradrussian like this.
  2. TheRedZealot

    TheRedZealot Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    921
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    I haven't played 40k in a while but in my experience of CC in Infinity is largely the same as 40k. Units that dominate at CC, dominate at CC. Units that Don't Dont. When you match two of the same together you never quite know how the cards will fall Charging or not. Infinity has a good deal less CC specialists but the specialists it does have are the same or more terrifying than any of the 40K ones were the last time I played.

    And due to how incredibly decisive CC is what makes it a viable list focus in Infinity. @borings on these forums specifically plays a Horde style melee list for example.

    If it was as easy as charging a Ninja/a Knight/whatever then people would be griping about how CC Specialists can't even beat non specialists in the reactive turn.
     
    Barrogh likes this.
  3. WiT?

    WiT? Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    385
    Been thinking about ways to make CC more interesting. Props to Mahtamori for bringing this up, as when I get into CC I'm usually so excited about it that I don't notice one of its glaring issues - that its one dimensional. As in, it does not have actual physical dimensions such as positioning and angles to play on, only the single value of "CC Power". The CC skills don't really offer choices, they are largely either a passive effect or a single optimal choice that effectively functions as a bonus.

    So how could we modify CC to make it interesting?

    First idea that comes to mind is to add that second dimension of location into the mix by having a charge skill. It could be short skill Move + Punch as was already mentioned ITT, or long skill double move plus punch, or something like MOV+Kinematica stat to determine the distance and then a punch. What I'd like is not only for such a skill to exist, but for it to also add to CC or to damage. Models can then choose between charging for a bonus, at the cost of allowing them to shoot back, or using the current change facing into melee to safely engage but without such a bonus.

    Another thing could maybe be to remove base to base contact, and make "engagement distance" anywhere from base to maybe 2" depending on skills and equipment. You can now lock down a larger area if you are a CC specialist, and different attacks become valid at different distances. Models engaged are stuck in position unless they have skills or make PH rolls or some such to close or extend it. A spear gives 2" reach, but isn't as potent as a sword. But if you have initiative, you "engage" the enermy at the distance that benefits you, and they are in some way stuck there and fighting at a disadvantage. This would also give you facings, where you would get benefits until the target manages to turn around.

    Obligatory Martial Arts having meaningful options paragraph. We've all heard that before.

    Lastly I've been wondering about options that are not "CC attack". Shooting is just the vanilla skill "BS attack", combined with angles, burst and distance for varied effects. CC doesn't have any of those, so perhaps we can modify the skill "CC Attack" to be different types of attacks - power attacks for damage, guarding for a defense bonus etc. Problem is, I don't know how to do this in a way that doesn't just turn into every unit you engage getting a bonus because it chooses a Guard skill, and CC ultimately becoming weaker.
     
    DaRedOne and SpectralOwl like this.
  4. colbrook

    colbrook Black Fryer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,661
    Likes Received:
    8,438
    You've just described the difference between Martial Arts levels.

    Want to block? MA 1 or 3
    Hit harder? MA2
    More offence? MA4
     
    Xeurian likes this.
  5. SpectralOwl

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    564
    Likes Received:
    896
    Should a brainwashed walking explosive gain a shooting advantage over a tank on legs? CB seems to think so, why should knives be any different? As a matter of fact, Shinobu performing a Surprise Attack MA5 for a whopping -12 modifier to enemy melee still goes down to a Fusilier if said Fusilier rolls a 1 and Shinobu doesn't crit too.

    I'm fine with the numbers in CC, my only issues are the lack of charge mobility to make it worth it for normal troops, the bad tables for MA etc. and NBW existing, and that last one's due to fluff. Do not tell me my elite martial artists with decades of training are useless because the other guy "has natural talent".
     
  6. colbrook

    colbrook Black Fryer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,661
    Likes Received:
    8,438
    I think that leads into another good question, should CC ever be worth it for normal troops outside of edge cases like joining a combat to provide ganging up bonuses? (which is incidentally a way to stack the CC in your favour in the Active turn)

    Or should bringing a knife to a gunfight be an option only for people who are really good with a knife.
     
  7. Ashtaroth

    Ashtaroth Aragoto GP Organizer

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2019
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    41
    I think it could add another dimension in game, to have another option. This game is about skirmishes, some of them might be fought in close quarters situations (like a lab or factory you're sabotaging), in those situations close combat, although incidental, may happen more easily. If you have a CC specialist, sucks to be them, if they have one too, epic fighting, if neither has one, then laugh while your Line Troops fishslap each other.

    I mean, yes, there are ways to make CC more engaging outside CC Specialists even if the dynamic is just in the equipment (maybe this CCW is light to carry and allows for an Assault movement skill; maybe that special Knife, stabs and pulls the enemy with a chain, or whatever). Or you give simple abilities, like tackling someone to the ground (Engage, I guess), just to give you another vector and or form of attack.
     
  8. colbrook

    colbrook Black Fryer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,661
    Likes Received:
    8,438
    On the other hand, these people have guns...
     
  9. SpectralOwl

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    564
    Likes Received:
    896
    Which is why I advocate the integration of a Move into CC Attack. Realistically, the only advantage knifing someone has over machine-gunning them is that you can stab accurately at a dead sprint. I simply think that should be modeled in-game to provide a useful trade-off between lethality and order expenditure. It would make many Turn 3s more interesting for sure, as it would allow for more moving to be done while still gaining some face-to-face rolls.
     
  10. Andre82

    Andre82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    571
    I am a bit late to the game.

    I mostly agree with you and I sympathize with this argument... but, this is only true if the goal is to make each unit balanced vs each other. When talking about faction balance this is not needed to be true, so long as the army is leveraging the weakness of the one troop for a strength someplace else.
     
  11. Ceilican

    Ceilican Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2018
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    173
    Yeah, melee units will do well against shooting units, but 40k had much less granularity. The difference between good and bad at melee wasn’t much, and even a shooty unit could claim an advantage over a cc unit if they were the ones to charge.
    The specialist will still have his skill advantages, nbw, ma, I-kohl or whatever. Let’s take it away from specialists, though. If a Zhanshi shoots at a fusilier in active, he has a good chance of winning the f2f. If he charges, the odds balance out significantly. I’d simply like to see the odds balance less in that circumstance.

    Right now, the correct answer is obviously to shoot. I’d like the correct answer to be more of a tossup, so that the player is making the decision, not the odds.
     
    Xeurian likes this.
  12. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    7,860
    This is true for game systems where the costs are arbitrary and where the abilities are dissimilar across each faction. Not the game system that CB has attempted to make. Also, those game systems tend to require a metric shittonne more play testing than CB exposes their game to. Not to mention that those systems, once there are sufficient amount of options, inevitably lead to some serious netlisting issues as players pinpoint each unit that is designed to be a weakness and simply avoids them.
     
  13. Andre82

    Andre82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    571
    If models are being "taxed" with useless rules bloat then they are arbitrary... with extra steps.

    Hehehe considering I am always looking for an excuse to bring up that I used to do just that... I stand by my point.

    You also need reps, proper tournament reporting, and Infinitys mission structure muddles the water... but give it time.
     
  14. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    7,860
    Different points of view. I think Warmahordes serves as an example of how hand-adjustment system can function and Warhammer as an example of what happens when not enough effort is put into it. Both perfectly playable systems, but one tends to lead to more release-sensitive and chaotic results than the other - notwithstanding that Warmahords has been accused of being so fine tuned that only specific lists work.

    My personal issue with hand-adjustments (any hand-adjustments) is that it requires some means of forcing you to take the disadvantaged units, which is directly opposite how list building in Infinity is meant to work (i.e. the Big Sell when talking to new guys); assemble who you think you need for the mission. Can't really do that if the game forces you to pick specific units, no?
    I don't personally think it's necessary to make a specific subset of units more or less expensive for a specific faction, simply having them be more or less competent should be enough - or for that matter simply having access or not to a specific combination of abilities. (See: smoke for Pan-o and parrots/pitchers for Yu Jing)
    More and better testing is always needed, as long as it makes financial sense. If it doesn't, then a more agile approach to balancing might be needed where tournament results and trusted community reps can guide patching similar to Blizzard's annual/biannual Starcraft 2 balance patches. Still need to pay someone to sift through the responses and pay a small group to do the balancing, but you don't have to host the playtesting events and you're able to spread the net wider with regards to who is a playtester as currently it seems like Infinity is informed by a single meta that plays differently from the rest of Europe (not to mention rest of the world).
     
  15. Barrogh

    Barrogh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    1,870
    Likes Received:
    1,602
    Except it's almost always "Want better odds for every preferrable outcome, whether empathizing safety or dealing damage? MA3.".
    It's basically the same as with KHD using Redrum in 98% of cases.

    This is why I think N4 need to do away with these tables as opposed to generalizing them even more like WiT? suggests. Alternative options are often barely different, sometimes very situational and for the most part are just noob traps.

    And to address the argument that it's all too simple and too binary. That is because what you are doing is rolling dice (which at best is only an illusion of player agency) to subtract a wound. You can either do that or fail miserably, or succeed. It is damn simple and binary, and there is always an optimal odds you'd want to have.

    We have things like Berserk and Chain Rifles, stacking -12, choosing non-lethal ammo, forcing bad AROs etc. when we need to alter possible outcomes significantly. Tossing some percentages around won't do that.

    Well, I don't know. To me the entire task of getting into base contact seems much less trivial than any amount of "how to gain LoF within my huge +3 rangeband?".

    All in all, I don't mind CC being a key to a specific lock.
     
    #55 Barrogh, Oct 9, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2019
  16. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    7,860
    When they re-did the Guard table it looks like they sat down and spent some quality time with http://inf-dice.ghostlords.com/n3/
    Each level represents roughly 5% to 7% better chance to incapacitate your opponent and almost the same risk against most targets I've compared. It's a much better table than Martial Arts in terms of game balance, but also a lot harder to remember. However, unless fighting Shinobu or Mushashi you'll go for your highest Guard level and then check what that does.
     
    #56 Mahtamori, Oct 9, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2019
    Dragonstriker likes this.
  17. TheRedZealot

    TheRedZealot Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    921
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    All the martial arts levels are actually optimal for a specific task. Some of those tasks are less common or some of those skills are more rare but they're all good at something.
    • MA 1: Is low cost/but the majority of the effectiveness of MA3.
    • MA 2: Is best against Hard Targets (Mostly punching boxes/TAGs).*
    • MA 3: Is more expensive/better against other CCers MA 1.
    • MA 4: Is best against low CC units (<=17 AFAIK)
    • MA 5: Is best against other CC specialists.**
    edit: As Mahtamori pointed out there are some caveats to these.

    *For Units without MA4+ (Ie: The majority).
    **Unless you want to accept a greater risk of mortality in which case you can swap to MA 3 to put a few % of success on both user's scores.
     
    #57 TheRedZealot, Oct 9, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2019
  18. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    7,860
    MA5 is best for Mushashi versus Shinobu, Makaul or Jerchilles if memory serves right. Shinobu is almost always better off using MA3 against other specialists.
    MA2 is best for punching boxes unless you have MA4 - yes, even if said box has ARM 8. MA2 is such a tiny benefit, I really hope it doesn't cost them Kniggits any extra points over MA1, it's more situational than Terrain skills IMO.
     
    Barrogh likes this.
  19. Space Ranger

    Space Ranger Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    2,165
    Likes Received:
    1,647
    All I know is, I want a good CC experience in Infinity and I’m not getting it.

    Yes yes I know you are going to say “But it’s a shooting game”. My question is, must it be that way? Can’t we have both? You bring a knife to a gun fight when you you are out of ammo. Sometimes I think of when a Ninja or Shaoln closes into close combat when the enemy is changing clips.
     
    SpectralOwl and Mahtamori like this.
  20. Andre82

    Andre82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    571
    I sligtly disagree. The big sell for me anyway was never "play what you like". I look at it as a toolbox. I don't like moderators, but I have used them to test some builds. MTG has done this forever with different colors having say different efficiencies in the effectiveness of weenie creatures or spot removal.

    Yah probably but I don't really mind. The fact you do is perfectly understandable, so don't take my arguing with you as much more then friendly argument for the sake of argument.

    Another cheaper option is to just make a bunch of stuff, test for degenerate issues, and let the community figure it out and fix it in editing.... by say giving Tags fatally or tactical awareness, Honestly CBs hands off but conservative approach to army balance is not awful and seems to be working, based on Vaulsc faction power ranking video. We will break it in time... but CB still has tricks to keep us guessing and we are not trying very hard yet.