Future of shinobi?

Sparky79
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2017 8:59 pm

Future of shinobi?

Post by Sparky79 »

Heres the thing ...
Someone once mentioned that if the new hero classes were just added to LW 2 there would be 13 classes and that it would be too much.
And yeah, I agree, more so when you see how shinobi and reapers fill the same role. So what will happen to shinobi?

Dont get me wrong, I love them - especially in 1.4 (havent tried 1.5 yet) - where all three trees were great but reapers are better when it comes to scouting (can do more without breaking stealth and smaller detection area). Yes, shinobi are better damage dealers then reapers but that could be fixed with some tweeks. Not to mention that other classes could "pick up the slack" - like giving the sword build to assault.

Anyways - whats in the future of shinobi?
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Psieye »

One of the first questions for LWotC would be "do the new classes keep their class-specific weapons?" Pavonis had to make new models for laser weapons and coil weapons. They did that for the 'standard' weapons, but didn't for the Spark weapons. Will there be a laser and coil version of the Vektor rifle and Bullpup? If not, then the new classes will presumably just use standard weapons. If that is so, why not just give the sword to the Reaper? Give them a perk to not break stealth if they kill a lone enemy with the sword.
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
cryptc
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:35 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by cryptc »

Perhaps trying to fold the three hero classes into the 8 classes (mostly into shinobi, psi and ranger? tree), and then have the hero factions still use xcom classes but be more flexible in what perks they get to pick?

That way they aren't completely separate from the LW meta, and won't have any overpowered abilities that xcom soldiers can't have (maybe except some signature moves, if toned down).
cryptc
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:35 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by cryptc »

Or maybe the hero factions should be sort of "multi-class" troops, using one path from two different classes and a third unique one?

So Reapers use Shinobi and Sharpshooter, Templars use Psi and Shinobi and Skirmishers use Ranger and Assault (or something...)
Phaseless
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 9:06 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Phaseless »

Here's an idea: hero classes always get to pick 2 out of 3 skills on Level up, but have double the fatigue or something like that.
User avatar
8wayz
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:59 pm

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by 8wayz »

Gene-modded soldiers in Long War 1 had higher fatigue due to the mods (sometimes up to 3 more days of fatigue). That was balanced since every soldier could get those mods, including Psi-ones.

However, when you have Hero-classes which have 1 or possibly 2 of each one on your roster, the sheer fact that you have so few is balancing their abilities. Also, the only way to level them is by spending ability points, so they are not exactly easy to maintain in the first place.

Back to the Shinobi, the Scout class from Long War 1 was actually better in terms of scouting then the Shinobi. The latter can remain hidden for the duration of the mission but rarely does contribute to the fight. Some players even use a Target Shinobi with high defence and dodge to hunker down and do nothing but attract attention.

The Scout from Long War 1 was great for flanking targets and providing vision via Battescanners. The fact that it had a pretty decent weapon (the Marksman's Rifle) also helped a lot. In general, that class was pretty well rounded and could hold its own. For the same reason the Reaper feels a lot better for scouting than the sword-wielding Shinobi.

As a scout you should aim to keep your distance, not get into the thick of fighting.

I would really like to see the sword returned to the Assault class though.
cryptc
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:35 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by cryptc »

8wayz wrote:Gene-modded soldiers in Long War 1 had higher fatigue due to the mods (sometimes up to 3 more days of fatigue). That was balanced since every soldier could get those mods, including Psi-ones.
LW1 also didn't have incentives in form of bonuses for keeping a squad together on many missions. If that system is kept, then having fatigue vary wildly between units will make keeping squads together harder.

I guess it could be balanced with hero units gaining more fatigue and also not getting squad cohesion bonuses, making them just something you add to a squad when launching a mission, not a permanent part of one. But I feel this isn't a good compromise...
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Psieye »

I'm not convinced the new classes NEED to be hero classes when brought over to LW2. Assuming they don't keep their class-specific weapons (to save Pavonis making more weapon models), just let the player recruit as many as they want (given adequate resources). 4 simultaneously active squads is about the norm to aim for, if a player wants say a Reaper in all those squads then let it be. The new classes can be re-balanced to be more in line with ordinary classes instead of special OP units.

As I said in another thread, I don't believe in cramming as many classes as possible. The 8 LW2 classes (plus Spark and PsiOp) all have different roles (some better than others). In my mind, the Shinobi can be outright removed (for the Reaper) and no LW2 'base' class needs to wield the sword: the 'melee' role is what the Templar is made for and I could even see the Skirmisher designed that way. Likewise, the LW2 Ranger can be removed if Skirmishers just equip ordinary rifles or shotguns and inherit some of the Ranger's perks.

Or if people can't bear the thought of not using the Assassin's sword in LWotC, let the Gunner use the sword.
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
JulianSkies
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by JulianSkies »

Psieye wrote:I'm not convinced the new classes NEED to be hero classes when brought over to LW2. Assuming they don't keep their class-specific weapons (to save Pavonis making more weapon models), just let the player recruit as many as they want (given adequate resources). 4 simultaneously active squads is about the norm to aim for, if a player wants say a Reaper in all those squads then let it be. The new classes can be re-balanced to be more in line with ordinary classes instead of special OP units.
To be honest one other idea would be to make literally every class a hero, in that they ask use the AP level up instead?
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Psieye »

JulianSkies wrote: To be honest one other idea would be to make literally every class a hero, in that they ask use the AP level up instead?
Ah, I had meant 'hero class' as in 'usually you only ever have 1, maybe 2 of these in your entire barracks'. The AP perk picking is a separate discussion, which I'd start with "there is no common AP pool, everyone must earn their own AP". I'd much prefer "use this soldier a lot to unlock cool extras" over "stick them in the AWC tube for weeks".
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
JulianSkies
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by JulianSkies »

Psieye wrote:
JulianSkies wrote: To be honest one other idea would be to make literally every class a hero, in that they ask use the AP level up instead?
Ah, I had meant 'hero class' as in 'usually you only ever have 1, maybe 2 of these in your entire barracks'. The AP perk picking is a separate discussion, which I'd start with "there is no common AP pool, everyone must earn their own AP". I'd much prefer "use this soldier a lot to unlock cool extras" over "stick them in the AWC tube for weeks".
Amusing, I was considering almost the opposite for the new training facility, they're is no personal AP only global. This way you're still investing a strategic resource (much how time is) for new abilities.
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Psieye »

JulianSkies wrote:
Psieye wrote:
JulianSkies wrote: To be honest one other idea would be to make literally every class a hero, in that they ask use the AP level up instead?
Ah, I had meant 'hero class' as in 'usually you only ever have 1, maybe 2 of these in your entire barracks'. The AP perk picking is a separate discussion, which I'd start with "there is no common AP pool, everyone must earn their own AP". I'd much prefer "use this soldier a lot to unlock cool extras" over "stick them in the AWC tube for weeks".
Amusing, I was considering almost the opposite for the new training facility, they're is no personal AP only global. This way you're still investing a strategic resource (much how time is) for new abilities.
I'm now envisioning B-team MSGTs who only ever learnt 1 perk and went to officer school. I don't think I want to play a system that encourages me to min/max that hard.
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
JulianSkies
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by JulianSkies »

Psieye wrote:
JulianSkies wrote:
Psieye wrote:Ah, I had meant 'hero class' as in 'usually you only ever have 1, maybe 2 of these in your entire barracks'. The AP perk picking is a separate discussion, which I'd start with "there is no common AP pool, everyone must earn their own AP". I'd much prefer "use this soldier a lot to unlock cool extras" over "stick them in the AWC tube for weeks".
Amusing, I was considering almost the opposite for the new training facility, they're is no personal AP only global. This way you're still investing a strategic resource (much how time is) for new abilities.
I'm now envisioning B-team MSGTs who only ever learnt 1 perk and went to officer school. I don't think I want to play a system that encourages me to min/max that hard.
Hrm... True it can be pretty min max-y like that, I guess. The idea was to try and keep to the spirit of the LW AWC, you must invest a limited strategic resource to make a soldier stronger, this way you can't just make they soldier stronger, the soldiers with extra skills remain another set of scarce resources (resource scarcity is the soul of this mod)
Steelflame
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:35 pm

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Steelflame »

Here is how I see it. There is too much overlap between 12 classes as is, just way too much, other than having different types of Sparks. I'd say that we could actually roll the Technical into it's own Spark class designed as an aggressive positioning heavy weapons platform, while the current one would be converted into more of a squad defensive specialist. Templar and Psion could both train out of the Psi lab.

I actually already heavily like Grenadiers as their own class, and just think they could afford to have some way to refill grenades on missions. A good idea for that may be that if you kill grenade carrying enemies without detonating said grenade, they can drop similar to how stuff drops focus for the Templar. I think you could also give them the Salavged Flamethrower from the Advent Purifier and have that as their primary weapon, and replace the few weapon perks they have, as well as Tandom Warheads, with perks designed to enhancing said flamethrower. Making the range scale with Aim stat (1 tile per 10 aim?) could be what makes Aim actually important for some Grenadier builds, as it would give you a reloadable flamethrower unit with potentially fairly high range on said Flamethrower, at the cost of it being a small width compared to things like the new "technical's" flamethrower on the spark unit, so that you would only be able to hit multiple people either with a very aggressive flank or such. This solves the gripes about Grenadiers being "Rookie 2.0" that some people have by making them a far more solid and unique class.

This leaves us with Reaper/Shinobi, and Ranger/Skirmisher. It may actually be a good idea to roll these classes together into a more coheasive system similar to how Templars and Psi units share their own training area already in my setup. Currently, the Shinobi has a shooty build and a melee build. It could instead be changed to a hidden melee assassin who can sustain stealth after assassinating a unit, so long as they don't get flanked and spotted, or the current right side tree where its good at going loud with things like Reaper as a melee cleanup build. Reapers can then instead cover the old shooty tree of Shinobis, as well as their stealth build and claymore/Remote start setup. Both of them could have lower innate detection ranges than standard Xcom soldiers (although Shinobi, being almost pure melee in my setup, even lower detection range than the Reaper. Perhaps something like 75% on the reaper and 50% on the Shinboi, before perks?). If we want to go real crazy on the Shinobi, we could possibly make them take over the holotargetting tree from the Sharpshooter class, using the holotargetter as their secondary weapon, while their sword is their primary. This brings up the question about what to do with the Sharpshooter's own holotargetter line, and I think that may just be best to replace with either a pistol-lite tree (Several perks that directly buff pistols, but not be a part of the AWC pistol line, and using the pistol as a secondary weapon again), or a skill tree similar to the Hunter (From Shadow OPs class pack) that is more about supporting an aggressive Snapshot sharpshooter build.

This leaves Rangers and Skirmishers as what is left to fix up. This may be easiest to do just by changing what range tables both of them support. If we imagine Skirmishers, they would be high mobility multishot class, capable of zipping around the battlefield like Spiderman, capable of getting into close range to make use of their Bullpup and Ripjack. Their range table would leave them even less capable of ranged fighting than an Assault, and meanwhile Rangers would be the more defensive OW specialist who can function at range and take multi-shot, but not have the Skirmisher's mobility or capability to pull enemies out of cover.



Also, on the topic of how Psi/templar train out of the Psi lab, perhaps make the unlock conditions of the lab, as well as the other two faction's facilities, be based on finding those factions, rather than a research? Make the Resistance communications facility just upgrade further to keep building count down (Although I often find I don't need a second RC anyway, so long as you are aggressive on doing Liberation missions in many regions), and the Reapers use the Covert Ops facility, and the Skirmishers use another facility (The question being what facility. Perhaps Defense Matrix?). In this case, Covert operations should just be rolled into a default part of Resistance Communications research line, perhaps just as another step past the current one.
Sparky79
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2017 8:59 pm

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Sparky79 »

Not gonna quote your whole post Steelflame but I agree on many things you said.

However - if I were merging classes ...

Gunner + Technical = Heavy. A suppression tree, a "crit" tree and a flamethrower tree. Why shouldnt they have a choice to use cannon or flamethrower? After all, assault has a tree full of talents that require a shotgun?

Shinobi ... they have 3 specs: covert spotter, ranged fighter (love it) and melee.
Maybe split it between Reapers and Assaults.
Reapers already have covert (better then shinobis), their own sabotage tree - so why not give them a chance to equip rifles and smgs? And a third tree which is similar to shinobi ranged fighter tree (flanking, rapid fire, etc). And if you keep the current reaper talents just make them require the venerator rifle and they wont become imba.
Assaults get the melee tree instead of the arc thrower.
... if people like arc thrower give it to gunners instead of the knife or something.

Rangers also have 3 specs - the crit spec (with the shotty), overwatch spec and the "regular spec".
Now lets be honest - the overwatch spec is very, VERY similar to Specialists overwatch spec.
And you could tweek Skirmishers to absorb the other two specs.

So far thats 3 classes removed so we could add 3 hero classes and stay "golden". :D

But I would go one step further and as Steelflame mentioned training both templars and psi ops in the psi lab ... hows about merging them?
I am unsure about this one but maybe have the training work like a mix officers and psi ops. You level, you go train in lab, but choose a skill for level rather then from a semi random selection.
Steelflame
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:35 pm

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Steelflame »

I was actually avoiding merging classes, and instead shifted the class specialties to be more distinct.

I figured with us actually getting a flamethrower gun, the Grenadier could have one of the core complaints (Being a rookie 2.0) could be easily fixed by granting them a unique primary weapon, the Flamethrower. Sparks in general could afford more class diversity so that we could get something more similar to the Mecs of old than the Alloy Shivs of old, and a Spark would make an absolute ton of sense for a heavy weapons platform and would give them a very powerful and distinct purpose to bring them along with the fleshbags. With the default spark class we could just make them have more guardian/defensive setups.

Also, back on the hero class setups, we could make it so that you can only bring one of each faction's hero class on a mission. So if you bring a Templar, you can't bring a Psi, or if you bring a Shinobi, a Reaper is off the table. This means a higher opportunity cost on these classes.


Perhaps the Assault could get back his sword, and the stun gun be given to the Gunner and give the Gunner's knife to the Shinobi, but I do think that the class count can be fine if they are modified in focus to be a bit more distinct.

Also, I've never been a fan of the Specialist having the OW build. It just feels wrong, and like you are wasting what makes the specialist unique, their Gremlins and tech focus, and makes them and Rangers overlap too much. I'd almost like it if they had perks that could enhance the Skulljack, or their shooting by giving them things like Holotargeting as an innate perk instead of it only being an AWC or Spark perk. Perhaps some of the current "ghetto" hacking/combat perks like Interference and Air Drop that don't really fit the hacking tree, could be shifted into the more team support middle tree that has holotargeting and a few other team support skills, and some of those right side perks become Skulljack amping, such as one that gives an extra Skulljack charge each mission, or another that enhances the skulljack to grant the Specialist a defensive bonus until the jack is used up. The Skulljack already becomes a defacto part of the Specialist kit once you unlock and upgrade it because of the +25 hacking bonus and the fact that Skulljack's success rate scales on the hacking stat, it may as well just be embraced completely.
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Psieye »

Steelflame wrote: Also, I've never been a fan of the Specialist having the OW build. It just feels wrong, and like you are wasting what makes the specialist unique, their Gremlins and tech focus, and makes them and Rangers overlap too much. I'd almost like it if they had perks that could enhance the Skulljack, or their shooting by giving them things like Holotargeting as an innate perk instead of it only being an AWC or Spark perk. Perhaps some of the current "ghetto" hacking/combat perks like Interference and Air Drop that don't really fit the hacking tree, could be shifted into the more team support middle tree that has holotargeting and a few other team support skills, and some of those right side perks become Skulljack amping, such as one that gives an extra Skulljack charge each mission, or another that enhances the skulljack to grant the Specialist a defensive bonus until the jack is used up. The Skulljack already becomes a defacto part of the Specialist kit once you unlock and upgrade it because of the +25 hacking bonus and the fact that Skulljack's success rate scales on the hacking stat, it may as well just be embraced completely.
While I can get behind "leave OW builds to actual gun experts", I disagree that skulljack has to be an essential part of the specialist's kit. Specifically, I dislike perks which say "this does nothing until you unlock something midgame" - every perk should have some use with starter equipment. I do favour making a proper hacker build but that can be achieved by making perks give passive +Hack stat. Since you want the grenadier to be half flamethrower, I'd move the support grenade perks to the specialist. Maybe it'd be considered OP for a specialist to Rapid Deploy a bluescreen flashbang and hack all by himself - give him Salvo instead then so he can't move while doing all that.


The concept of assigning 2 classes per faction instead of 1 has some potential, but you're keeping them as scarce hero units and I dislike how you'd tie their training to tubes.
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
Steelflame
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:35 pm

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Steelflame »

Psieye wrote:While I can get behind "leave OW builds to actual gun experts", I disagree that skulljack has to be an essential part of the specialist's kit. Specifically, I dislike perks which say "this does nothing until you unlock something midgame" - every perk should have some use with starter equipment. I do favour making a proper hacker build but that can be achieved by making perks give passive +Hack stat. Since you want the grenadier to be half flamethrower, I'd move the support grenade perks to the specialist. Maybe it'd be considered OP for a specialist to Rapid Deploy a bluescreen flashbang and hack all by himself - give him Salvo instead then so he can't move while doing all that.


The concept of assigning 2 classes per faction instead of 1 has some potential, but you're keeping them as scarce hero units and I dislike how you'd tie their training to tubes.
For the Specialist, I'd assume it would be around a Staff Sergeant or Tech Sergeant perk, where you probably are already just about to be picking up Skulljacks anyway. I was also thinking on it, and I think a perk that would be a great replacement to Interference would be a nerfed version of the Shadow Ops Dragoon's Puppeteer skill (No CD hack, cost 1 AP), which makes Hacks only cost 1 AP and not end the turn, and reduces the cooldown on hacks by 2 turns, perhaps granting +5 hacking as well to help boost the hack odds a smidge.


I'd be fine with the tube training more being a formality of a short stint in the tube of only a day or two with no staff assistance, rather than the staff 2 scientiest to drop 3 week training down to a more reasonable 5 days for just psi guys. This is both to support allowing access to multiple perks in their trees (without them being able to learn everything, similar to current Psionics in LW2, just a lot of it), and keeping a smidge of downtime on them. Considering their training is tied to personal AP anyway more than XP, this means you don't have to worry if you need to pull them back to back, but leaving them at base to "tube train" a bit can also let their will replenish.
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Psieye »

Steelflame wrote:
Psieye wrote:While I can get behind "leave OW builds to actual gun experts", I disagree that skulljack has to be an essential part of the specialist's kit. Specifically, I dislike perks which say "this does nothing until you unlock something midgame" - every perk should have some use with starter equipment.
For the Specialist, I'd assume it would be around a Staff Sergeant or Tech Sergeant perk, where you probably are already just about to be picking up Skulljacks anyway.
It places a constraint on your build order. Some campaigns might delay proving grounds, some might rush it for a Spark but still ignore skulljacks. I don't think a soldier perk should place that constraint. No problem if the perk incidentally buffs skulljacks if you happen to have it unlocked, but it should still do something even if you are late to get skulljacks. Personally I'm thinking something like Full Kit Deluxe: extra charges for every consumable you bring in your inventory. Medkits, skulljack, smoke grenades - everything gets +1 charge. Heck, it could outright replace Field Medic.
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
Steelflame
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:35 pm

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Steelflame »

Psieye wrote:It places a constraint on your build order. Some campaigns might delay proving grounds, some might rush it for a Spark but still ignore skulljacks. I don't think a soldier perk should place that constraint. No problem if the perk incidentally buffs skulljacks if you happen to have it unlocked, but it should still do something even if you are late to get skulljacks. Personally I'm thinking something like Full Kit Deluxe: extra charges for every consumable you bring in your inventory. Medkits, skulljack, smoke grenades - everything gets +1 charge. Heck, it could outright replace Field Medic.
I could see that working out, although I'd make sure that wherever it is placed in the tree that it doesn't conflict with the desires of a hacker path.


The point of Specialist and the skulljack brings up a point though... I have always had a craving for a melee hacker class that doesn't have the Gremlin, and instead has a specialized Skulljack. The two primary tree ideas being one that focuses on being a brutal assassin ripping through advent soldiers with brutal uppercuts and slices (Sorta similar to the Templar's melee combat, while the other would be a ghost in the shell, undetectable to mechanical structures and units entirely, and capable of highjacking them after a dash. Once I get my hands on WotC and LW2 updates to it, I may try to design such a class to scratch that itch.

Perhaps if I ever make such a class I'd eventually go further and make it be associated with a new resistance faction along with the specialist. This would make codebreakers designed for specialized mec countering a more distinct aspect.
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Psieye »

Steelflame wrote: The point of Specialist and the skulljack brings up a point though... I have always had a craving for a melee hacker class that doesn't have the Gremlin, and instead has a specialized Skulljack. The two primary tree ideas being one that focuses on being a brutal assassin ripping through advent soldiers with brutal uppercuts and slices (Sorta similar to the Templar's melee combat, while the other would be a ghost in the shell, undetectable to mechanical structures and units entirely, and capable of highjacking them after a dash. Once I get my hands on WotC and LW2 updates to it, I may try to design such a class to scratch that itch.

Perhaps if I ever make such a class I'd eventually go further and make it be associated with a new resistance faction along with the specialist. This would make codebreakers designed for specialized mec countering a more distinct aspect.
Make the Ripjack double as a Skulljack. Problem solved: now you can punch anything AND hack them if they happen to be Advent.
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
Sparky79
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2017 8:59 pm

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Sparky79 »

Steelflame wrote:The point of Specialist and the skulljack brings up a point though... I have always had a craving for a melee hacker class that doesn't have the Gremlin, and instead has a specialized Skulljack. The two primary tree ideas being one that focuses on being a brutal assassin ripping through advent soldiers with brutal uppercuts and slices (Sorta similar to the Templar's melee combat, while the other would be a ghost in the shell, undetectable to mechanical structures and units entirely, and capable of highjacking them after a dash. Once I get my hands on WotC and LW2 updates to it, I may try to design such a class to scratch that itch.

Perhaps if I ever make such a class I'd eventually go further and make it be associated with a new resistance faction along with the specialist. This would make codebreakers designed for specialized mec countering a more distinct aspect.
... I made a big post on how I agree with you but the connection broke and it got lost. :o :o
So heres the short version:
I had the same craving.
An operative class which is a mix of shinobi (loose the melee tree and sword) and specialist (keep the hacking tree and loose the gremlin). The secondary is not a weapon but a hacking tool that gives the same bonus as a gremlin and fits/looks a bit like the gauntlet.

Another version was an operative that is based on the gunslinger from vanilla except the pistol is the main weapon, the hacking tool is a secondary, has no armour but wears civilian looking clothes (might have the grappling hook as an extra). The kickers are that if enemy is green, they have no detection radius, yellow, radius is 2-3 tiles, and if red - cover is blown. If they kill a lone target (skull jack or pistol fanfire) they dont loose "cover". Course if the body is found the advent goes to yellow. They could use remote C4/X4 to create exits and distractions. And you play them like a secret agent.
wizard1200
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 10:22 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by wizard1200 »

Psieye wrote:I'm not convinced the new classes NEED to be hero classes when brought over to LW2. Assuming they don't keep their class-specific weapons (to save Pavonis making more weapon models), just let the player recruit as many as they want (given adequate resources). 4 simultaneously active squads is about the norm to aim for, if a player wants say a Reaper in all those squads then let it be. The new classes can be re-balanced to be more in line with ordinary classes instead of special OP units.

As I said in another thread, I don't believe in cramming as many classes as possible. The 8 LW2 classes (plus Spark and PsiOp) all have different roles (some better than others). In my mind, the Shinobi can be outright removed (for the Reaper) and no LW2 'base' class needs to wield the sword: the 'melee' role is what the Templar is made for and I could even see the Skirmisher designed that way. Likewise, the LW2 Ranger can be removed if Skirmishers just equip ordinary rifles or shotguns and inherit some of the Ranger's perks.
I think that is the best solution, because in that case LW2 would have many classes with a lot of interesting gameplay mechanics and build options.
osiyeza
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 4:16 pm

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by osiyeza »

I agree with a lot of what is being said here. And lets face it there is a lot of things not totally working in the LW2 class system, though i like how different it is from the base game.

Im not sure if there needs to be something done with the new heroes. I would actually leave it like they are, just allowing to have only one of each class at a time, so they actually feel like unique resources.

I also like to play with only one spark, cause it makes sense to me history wise, but i understand not everyone is like me, and people may want the new soldiers to act as just new soldier clases.

Anyway i agree that there is too much overlap with the current class system. I would make the following changes, not fussioning the old with the new, but making the class system more unique.

Assault,
Make then recover their sword. It always felt weird to me to have the arc thrower in this class. They should be Aggresive damage dealers.

Shinoby,
This is the class i would change the most. And i love it the way it is. But most of the time I use them either as explorers or just a melee attacking unit that should be an assault. This unit should be more like in LW1, with the posibility of equipping an arc thrower or an holotargeter and having an specific tree for each. This class is a tactical support explorer unit, playing concealed most of the time, maybe with able to work as a marksman as a third option tree.

Sharpshooter.
Change the holotargeter, and recovering the pistols, this was the most funny class on the base game to play with. I agree that feels a little unrealistic the gunslinguer abilities. But lets be honest we all loved them. It would require some tunning down, and some rework, but i allways missed the secondary pistol. And never really felt the in love of the LW2 way of using pistols.

Ranger,
I like it the way it is. Its the default soldier. Maybe allow him to choose between more secundaries, like a pistol instead. But as this will likely create a mess, i think this class can just stay like this.

Gunner,
This class is a mess, the knife in a gunner is pointless and i thing noone has ever used too much. Any other secondary will literally improve this class... I would instead play brave here, he does not need secondary! Give him an extra item where he can use a extra ammobox or an extra ammo type. How cool would be if a gunner can use two different kinds of ammunition!! (Maybe to add a hability to change the current active ammo type). I also would make tracer bullets not to give an aim boost but to act as one turn holotargeters and only be usable for gunners and sharpshooters.

Grenadier\Technical
These two clases are a bit confuse, they overlap too much. I would combine them in a heavy class. Use as many people say, a flamethrower as a primary. So it will be much unique and distinct. The rocket launcher, would be back as an option for EXO suits and sparks, giving an option of an extra fuel \ grenade if you are using them on a heavy. Another option would be having the possibility of choosing between rocket launcher or flamethrower as primary. And keeping the grenade launcher as secondary.
Psieye
Posts: 829
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Future of shinobi?

Post by Psieye »

The 8 base LW2 classes are designed around one piece of equipment each - half being primary and half being secondary:
- Grenade Launcher
- Heavy Weapons (i.e. Rocket and Flamethrower)
- Gremlin
- Sword
- Shotgun
- Sniper Rifle
- Assault Rifle
- Cannon

Tactical roles feel like they were added on afterwards, equipment was the starting point. Note the LW2 classes are locked into their secondaries. I feel this is suboptimal and with the new WotC classes we have a chance to redesign classes. Then let's put roles first and then figure out what equipment/classes/builds make sense afterwards:
- Stealth recon
- Melee (i.e. range 1)
- Mid range (i.e. SMG effective range)
- Long range (with aim penalties for being too close)
- Squadsight range
- Overwatch
- Tank
- Demolitions/AoE
- Defensive Support (buffs, heals)
- Offensive Support (debuffs, +Aim, mind control, position manipulation)

That's 10 roles and IMO a class should be buildable into filling 2~3 of those roles. My suggestion is that we temporarily drop class names while we brainstorm class design and think purely in terms of what roles each class can fulfill. For example:

> Stealth/Def. Support/Tank
> Stealth/Demo/Off. Support
> Melee/Mid range/Tank
> Squadsight/Long range/Off. Support
> Long range/Overwatch/AoE

In doing so, we can think about "should this class be dead weight if ideal conditions aren't met?" - whoever has a shotgun should not feel useless when you can't afford to get close.
My three 8-man GOp squad Commander campaigns:
1st
2nd
3rd
Post Reply