|
Post by josephkerr on Mar 9, 2018 21:53:56 GMT
Partial immunity is a thing. You can have "immunity" and have it be partial, not "Feora jumps in a spaceship and bathes in the heart of the sun cause 'immune' to fire."
PPS Pagani: I really like some ideas in here! That being said, we're not going to be changing the name of the rule to Resistance or anything like that....
#MootPoint
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Mar 10, 2018 1:15:29 GMT
Partial immunity is a thing. You can have "immunity" and have it be partial, not "Feora jumps in a spaceship and bathes in the heart of the sun cause 'immune' to fire." PPS Pagani: I really like some ideas in here! That being said, we're not going to be changing the name of the rule to Resistance or anything like that.... #MootPoint They should introduce resistance and immunity so that they have more design space to design models line fire elemental that are properly immune to 🔥
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Mar 10, 2018 1:31:20 GMT
Partial immunity is a thing. You can have "immunity" and have it be partial, not "Feora jumps in a spaceship and bathes in the heart of the sun cause 'immune' to fire." PPS Pagani: I really like some ideas in here! That being said, we're not going to be changing the name of the rule to Resistance or anything like that.... #MootPoint They should introduce resistance and immunity so that they have more design space to design models line fire elemental that are properly immune to 🔥 I like this suggestion, and it was mentioned in CID: CookieMonster0127: Perhaps what you are suggesting, is that we change to resistant to lightning (less die) and immunity to lighning (no damage) PPS Pagani: This change is not on the table. Me again: Theyve closed the Immunity dev talk and basically, this change could just come through whole cloth or they have some other idea theyll CID, but it wont include immunity as currently working continuing.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on Mar 10, 2018 5:29:28 GMT
That is very unfortunate. This is going to really throw the game out of whack.
|
|
d3z
Junior Strategist
Posts: 129
|
Post by d3z on Mar 10, 2018 6:05:22 GMT
They should introduce resistance and immunity so that they have more design space to design models line fire elemental that are properly immune to 🔥 I don't think we've lost design space. Since it would be used sparingly on top of immunity, I'd expect there to be an additional rule on the back of the card (rather than a new advantage) for models like that if introduced: <insert name of rule here> - This model does not suffer damage from 🔥 attacks.
|
|
|
Post by dragonpup on Mar 10, 2018 15:00:11 GMT
"Wait, so I bathed myself in asbestos and only get -1D6 fire damage now?" -Every Cleanser who has not yet succumbed to black lung
Seriously tho, I think it's an overall good change.
|
|
|
Post by bskhacker on Mar 10, 2018 17:16:02 GMT
After reading a few battle reports I think some models will need another look if the change goes as is. My fear is that some models will be overlooked until they get their appropriate CID.
Other than that the change is interesting at the vary least.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on Mar 11, 2018 7:26:03 GMT
Partial immunity is a thing. You can have "immunity" and have it be partial, not "Feora jumps in a spaceship and bathes in the heart of the sun cause 'immune' to fire." This is game where magic exists...
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Mar 11, 2018 8:13:52 GMT
Partial immunity is a thing. You can have "immunity" and have it be partial, not "Feora jumps in a spaceship and bathes in the heart of the sun cause 'immune' to fire." This is game where magic exists... Ok, its silly that Feora rides a magic carpet into space and bathes in the heart of the sun cause 'immune to fire.' Or are u mentioning magic because it makes sense to u that Feora can be so magic that fire doesnt burn her but no fire can be so magic that it does burn her? Cause that also sounds silly to me. Bathe in a lake of lava all u want but theres magic fire in this game.
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Mar 11, 2018 8:14:05 GMT
Double post
|
|
spideredd
Junior Strategist
Summer Gamer
Posts: 588
|
Post by spideredd on Mar 11, 2018 16:08:35 GMT
I think that the change will help Repenters and Vanquishers see some more table time. Cleansers are a little sad though.
|
|
|
Post by Arch4ngel on Mar 11, 2018 21:09:13 GMT
The dictatorial approach on the CID forum worries me more than a little.
The general philosophical shift from hard denial to soft denial is something that has both advantages and disadvantages, and (in general) the consensus seems to be that it's good for the game.
That said, Privateer didn't address - and was explicitly punishing people for addressing - the ripple effects of the change. Which both defeats the whole point of having a community playtest forum (to sound out those secondary and tertiary impacts) and also makes it seem like they've just decided it's a change that's happening, consequences be damned.
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Mar 11, 2018 21:20:42 GMT
That said, Privateer didn't address - and was explicitly punishing people for addressing - the ripple effects of the change. Which both defeats the whole point of having a community playtest forum (to sound out those secondary and tertiary impacts) and also makes it seem like they've just decided it's a change that's happening, consequences be damned. Im not so sure that PP wont come back at us with a revision thats more low arm infantry friendly. That said, theyve had a ton of feedback from Company of Iron about how these rules do effect infantry. It could be something theyre testing, or it could be ready to go for the next update and they just CIDed it with CG because their immunities are so prevalent that they cant get meaningful testing of their capabilities without informing the tester base. I think its safe to speculate that current hard counter immunities are going the way of the dodo, but maybe they are planning softer changes.
|
|
|
Post by Arch4ngel on Mar 11, 2018 21:25:00 GMT
That said, Privateer didn't address - and was explicitly punishing people for addressing - the ripple effects of the change. Which both defeats the whole point of having a community playtest forum (to sound out those secondary and tertiary impacts) and also makes it seem like they've just decided it's a change that's happening, consequences be damned. Im not so sure that PP wont come back at us with a revision thats more low arm infantry friendly. That said, theyve had a ton of feedback from Company of Iron about how these rules do effect infantry. It could be something theyre testing, or it could be ready to go for the next update and they just CIDed it with CG because their immunities are so prevalent that they cant get meaningful testing of their capabilities without informing the tester base. I think its safe to speculate that current hard counter immunities are going the way of the dodo, but maybe they are planning softer changes. That doesn't explain why they were banning people for bringing up Nemo3, though. That's a model that hasn't been tested in CoI, and is currently everywhere in the international Master's meta. That should be an obvious basis for discussion of the impacts of these changes.
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Mar 11, 2018 21:29:25 GMT
Im not so sure that PP wont come back at us with a revision thats more low arm infantry friendly. That said, theyve had a ton of feedback from Company of Iron about how these rules do effect infantry. It could be something theyre testing, or it could be ready to go for the next update and they just CIDed it with CG because their immunities are so prevalent that they cant get meaningful testing of their capabilities without informing the tester base. I think its safe to speculate that current hard counter immunities are going the way of the dodo, but maybe they are planning softer changes. That doesn't explain why they were banning people for bringing up Nemo3, though. That's a model that hasn't been tested in CoI, and is currently everywhere in the international Master's meta. That should be an obvious basis for discussion of the impacts of these changes. Saying "Druids are adversally affected because theyre made out of tissue paper and the best reason to take them is the immunities" or "Cleansers explode in little balls of flame when they target each other which greatly changes their current use" was the kind of feedback they were looking for. "Without immunities my faction loses to X" is outside the scope of CID because its not discussing how the immunity change hurts the immunity models, it just points out that Nemo is a Female Dog, which isnt what theyre asking.
|
|