Yes. I have been experimenting with a priest/technician with 25 WP who gives frenzy on the first turn, and then stays back spamming electric armor, and recuperating will points. (as casting armor costs 6 WP and no AP he can do this indefinitely).
As I said, the spitting incident happened only once - I thought it strange that I was spat at rather than being machine gunned, that’s why I remember it.
Anyway, perhaps I’m wrong and my recollections are inaccurate.
This really need a nerf, I try not do it because it’s a clear exploit, but in some cases I evaluate as very difficult I could use it a few turns.
I think that like Priest skills, this skill could cost one AP. Or for once just add a rule, no restore if any skill is used, and no skill once restore is used but this is working already.
OK, so you had only +20, so since the armors you were using had less than 25, the poison spit passed through.
And the rules I set to myself about “electric reinforcement” is:
Yes, it does and yes it is. I think the solution is for it to be a status, same as frenzy or marked for death.
The thing is, it’s not only awareness: in PP for the purposes of the attack the facing of the attacker never matters (except in case of Scylla’s special blaster attack), while the position of the target relative to the attacker always does (because different parts of the target are exposed).
The same happens with the crab with the deployed shield, it just feels especially weird when it returns fire to a shot coming from the back.
Let’s face (
) it, facing in PP is strange. Compare to Firaxis XCom where facing doesn’t matter at all for either attack or defense, and yet half the combat is about flanking.
As I said before, I would like RF to work more like it did on release, i.e. for the attack to activate the RF of enemies other than the target. I don’t mind if certain additional parameters are added limiting when RF occurs, as long as the AI is capable of dealing with them. That last part is important because, for example, making RF directional like OW, would make it trivial for the player to avoid it, because of the very high mobility of PP’s soldiers.
That is true, I am aware of that. Just to be clear, even though I focus only on rework of specific skill, RF in this case, I assume change of AI decision making process, some rebalance of other skills so it fits into rest of the skills and so on as well. For example, I’ve never seen enemy to change the OW cone angle. Every time it is the same default angle. It never covers the area it should or could and direction seems most of the time a bit… random.
Enemy OW isn’t totally random, it is in direction of enemies. I don’t know how see their range, so no comment, but yeah perhaps always the same.
OW UI is bad, I don’t want more of it with RF.
Old RF couldn’t be really exploited by AI, it was meaningless or a randomly a good block against Rapid Clearance. At reverse it was an exploit in players hands with adapted building, basic setup, SR and RF for most soldiers, OW becomes pointless and weak compared to old RF.
The facing tool addition would be a problem on player side. I definitely exploit RF against RF and not choose yourself the facing would be unbearable.
Allow back in cover before RF is calling to too many easy exploit, wall side step, shoot and immune to RF. If the AI doesn’t know exploit it, this will be a problem. If it does it will be a source of frustration, perhaps.
Give it 1AP cost is heavy, it will break many use cases, not sure a low WP cost will change anything.
Height looks limited, but it could worth a try, at lower height no RF.
I’m a bit concerned about your agumentation. Are you worried you won’t be able to exploit the skills as you like? For me, skills shouldn’t be exploitable in a first place.
What do you consider an exploit? That full cover gives full cover? You’ve mentioned that one of your ways of dealing with RF is to exploit some cover setup that will prevent RF from triggering. This seems like cheating to me and using design faults to your advantage.
Right now its hard to say it has use cases, because you’re using it all the time. You just have it always on. You don’t plan it, prepare it or have to take any cost into account. You’re just taking more advantage of it being the passive and you have it on every single ranged character that can have it.
Reducing number of what you think is a use cases, is exactly my point. Did Dash nerf and AP cost reduced its number of use cases? Of course it did, and by large margin. And I would nerf it even more if I could, and reduce number of use cases to something that would break almost every single current strategies. And that’s because its exploitable. Nerfed, not as OP as it was before, but still exploitable with Rapid Clearance.
Yes, those are basically the issues with changing RF.
It looks like a lot of work for something that basically only one enemy can currently do.
The parameters I’m thinking about is mostly to prevent player from exploiting RF. For example, should only work with auto weapons, or can activate only a limited number of times. Perhaps it even could be made into an active skill (though I would keep the cost at 0 AP) where the player has to choose who is covered by the RF (that is, if those soldiers get attacked, only then RF will activate).
Use cases are tactics where its role will be exploited more particularly. For example against crab RF OW Crab attack RF for a close range Overwatch. Without RF or kill ensured I look for some other option.
No skills? Wrong game. 
No you just see a blind automatic use, it’s not my point. Perhaps a few WP cost can do the trick.
That said you seem see more how nerf crabs I think and don’t care much in using it.
No exploits = No skills? That tells much about your gameplay.
Lol are you serious: you wrote “exploit the skills” not use skills exploits, sigh.
Forgive (or not), it’s probably language barrier, but is this exploiting faults in game design, or using game design exploits? Cause apparently it is supposed to be viable tactic against RF.
It’s just los smart use, at this point any use of rules will be exploit for you, or do you think you don’t have to adapt to rules and play like you do in other similar games?
Yes it’s a tactic, not that easy, requiring practice and learning, with not that many use cases, but it’s a tactic.
Lol 
Now that’s a very convenient way to explain using bugs in LoS to your advantage. You can’t argue with “if it is in the game, it is a rule” and “if I’m using it, it’s smart use not an exploit” attitude. 
Bug??? There’s no bug, it’s physic, even if perhaps sometimes approximate, but it’s really pure physical los and some parameters as side where weapon is fixed (crabs) or handled (humans). That’s why there’s a leaning curve and it’s not easy obvious tactic. But there’s no bug.
Don’t you dare using “physic” here. 
LoS is vector from A to B, and if vector from A to B exists, vector from B to A exists as well. No exceptions. Magnitude remains, just reverse direction.
“Not obvious tactics”, excuse yourself as you like.
And you whine because you find me unpleasant or this or that, huge, so much time lost with pointless arguing with you.
I’m arguing RF doesn’t fit current game design and is not in par with other skills and mechanics. Argue with or without you. 
I won’t be the first person to say this, but your “everything’s fine, learn to play” attitude isn’t the most pleasant way to contribute to discussion. So, what did you expect?
Poison damage was more potent in this case than machine gun fire.