Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

As per the title, and to avoid more OT in the N&R thread. We've had N3 since December 2014. We've had Human Sphere N3 since May 2016, which completes the ruleset. I've finally managed to get a grip on all the new stuff in Human Sphere-- there is a lot. By including so much to the game, I believe that CB has created needless complication. N2 was difficult to learn too, but not due to the amount required to learn, but rather due to the way it was written/translated.

-There are 30 hacking programs, and 6 hacking devices, and the EVO. In a game about shooting.
-There are 5 levels of Martial Arts.
-There are 23 (?) types of ammunition.
-There are ~154 entries on the Weapons Chart.
-A brief look a the ToC's shows 37 skills in HSN3, and 80 skills in N3.
-I'm not even going to try and count the number of units.

Even with the Army Builder and the handy charts it can produce, this is still too much. After all, to play effectively, one needs to know what one's opponent has. Relying on the Wiki during gameplay is tedious, and constantly looking things up in the books/PDFs even moreso.

A friend of mind who used to play has recently told me he has no interest in playing again because Infinity has become a "Lifestyle" game. By Lifestyle Game he meant something that you must play constantly, essentially to the exclusion of other games, in order to remain a competent player, and more importantly, in order to learn and remember all the rules and other information needed. Skip a week or so and you start forgetting things.

Now N3.5 would be N3 with all the material which adds very little to the game, including skills, weapons (Red Fury for example), and ammo consolidated/removed. Hacking would be streamlined. N3.5 would retain the complexity that arises in Infinity play, which is where the complexity should be, instead of in the choices made before the game.

Rather than just complain, I'd like to see discussion about what could be removed or consolidated or stream-lined to produce a game that can be played at a casual level -- that is to say, occasionally rather than constantly. At the very least, a way to modularize (a word?) the game so that we might ignore the bloat. (levels of play maybe?)

Suggestions on how and where to trim the fat?

The level of complexity is one of the things I find so satisfying about the game, I absolutely would NOT like to see it "streamlined" in any significant way, not even to bring it back down to N2 levels. A few minor consolidations of similar hacking programs and skills perhaps, but nothing like what you are asking for. I love the subtle differences beteween levels of skills and ammo and weapons and I'd prefer CBs efforts went into making the wiki into an offline app instead of rewriting the game again.

My own desired changes would be making Loss of Lt even less of a thing. I'd actually be fine with the complete removal of Lts, there's a good streamline for the game! Also, less emphasis on needing specialists for objectives in similar manner to the 20x20 missions where anybody can accomplish an objective but certain specialists will get a bonus. I'd love to be able to pick secret objectives that are worth less VP, or risk random secret objectives worth more VP. I'd also like a way to dial down the 15+ order lists and bump up the effectiveness of 9-12 order lists, perhaps by having expensive models add multiple orders, but having a max cap for how many you can spend in a turn. That would make heavy infantry and TAGs more viable, but still allow you to take 15+ model lists for more AROs

It would also be fine if somebody came up with an Infinity Lite version as a standalone game. I've used Deadzone and Pulp Alley with friends that I know wouldn't be into Infinity's level of detail. DZ and PA both have an opposed rolling system to mimic the ARO system, but are significantly simpler games. Both are fun, but neither are as satisfying to play as a proper game of N3 and I'd hate for the main game to lose that level of detail

I love infinity background, models and design. Really enjoyed playing the game in N2.......but it's too complicated for a casual pick up and put down game, and I don't have the time to dedicate to it playing constantly to keep up. Amongst my group, we all found the same and N3 didn't take off when we found it wasn't going to be streamlining the game. Now we use the minis for other games.

For playing once every couple of months mixed with other games and systems, infinity is impossible to handle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
We never really got a proper handle on N2 TBH, but muddled through. CB pandered to the wishes of their dedicated fanbase.......but at the expense of more causal players/play style.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
We never really got a proper handle on N2 TBH, but muddled through. CB pandered to the wishes of their dedicated fanbase.......but at the expense of more causal players/play style.

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
CB pandered to the wishes of their dedicated fanbase.......but at the expense of more causal players/play style.

This is definitely how it feels like it. Although they did make their miniatures larger with more open and flat surface areas for easier painting. However when it comes down to gaming system, armies and pushing the competitive aspect of the game, something went terribly wrong.

If you want a simplified version of the rules can't you use Operation Icestorm? And the rest of the things you think are adding complexity are optional anyway so don't take them if they are too complex? If you're not looking at having an uber competitive tournament list (or playing ITS missions) then you can easily make a 'fun' list with more basic units. If you are talking about friendly games then you should be able to agree what to use/ not use with your opponent beforehand but if you are looking for a universal list of what to include/ exclude then that will be tricky as different people like different things about the game. You may not like hacking but i know people where hacking was one of the main things that attracted them to the game in the first place.

It's not about the army lists for us as we have a very casual approach to our games, it's the gajillion special rules and exceptions that did for infinity in my group. Turtles on turtles on turtles when the rules should facilitate the game and not BE the game.

For fun me and my friend played a 600pt game, still finished in 2 hours. It plays like books based on furture military units, the opening chapters to the Star Strike novel is what I see Infinity Ops like. Every thing is codified so it easy to tell what thing can do at a glance. The biggest problem is all the cross referencing, like ADHL's go here to see effect then go here to see what the IMP-2 rules.

But, N3 is not going anywhere and in fact will have even more rules added with the next book. I also doubt CB sees it as a problem as they just keep selling more every year. Their is enough games out there for all types of players, other companies cover the other side. CB found their niche and I hope they don't change, if I want a different style game I just play other games.

I know more then enough GW players that dislike the rules love the models and keep playing GW. Like I tell them use the models for a different game system as you don't like GW system.

I love the depth of the game, but the OP definitely has a point. I played against the number 2 guy in the UK the other weekend and we still got loads of rules wrong, even though he plays multiple times a week. I've been a bit ill lately which has cut down on the number of occasions I have to play and I felt very rusty at a recent tournie. Even people who play all the time such as GMG and Gaming with the Cooler make mistakes, so what chance have I got?

I feel that HSN3 cleared up a lot of things, but also introduced a whole new swathe of rules to learn. For example, I've got a good grasp on the main rules but the new hacking stuff is one step too far, especially if you start adding repeaters to the mix. That's before the FAQs.

IMO the next edition [or even Acheron Falls] is going to be crucial to CBs long-term success. Get rid of the unnecessary stuff and streamline the game to the optimal complexity and they're laughing. Add too much complexity and they could cause their incredible game to break under the load of special rules.

Adding too much complexity is never good. Even PC games struggle with this and they have coding for needed calculus and random number generator. Generally I don't mind the depth of Infinity, however a person that knows all the ropes will have noticeable advantage over someone that's relatively new or more casual about his hobby. Adding the fact that armies don't feel balanced after N3/HS it simply creates a game that I don't want to pick up often although I do wish I'd had motivation for it.

Noir wrote:
But, N3 is not going anywhere and in fact will have even more rules added with the next book. I also doubt CB sees it as a problem as they just keep selling more every year.

Regardless of their stance, it doesn't mean that there aren't dissatisfied customers who are now experiencing regret for investing into their product. I guess they and their fan base would prefer not to hear anything from that part of the audience. They are free to ignore it and going with what they believe it's for the best. We are free to express what's on our mind (within terms and agreement).

Noir wrote:


I know more then enough GW players that dislike the rules love the models and keep playing GW. Like I tell them use the models for a different game system as you don't like GW system.

My aleph have been repurposed into a nice little Freeborn force for beyond the gates of Antares, and were already serving as a force for rogue trader games. When that new sci fi osprey comes out later in the year, both my JSA and Aleph will be used.

If what's said above about infinity getting more rules added......well, it's not really inviting me back in. Theres plenty of choice of games out there.

See I really don't see it that complex, well not after you learn the basics. A game last normal 60-90 minutes it takes less then 2-3 minutes to look up the more convolutedly layed out rules (the ones tell you go to pg #). It would only be easier if it had cards like PP or the Starwars ship games.

When you only play infinity 2-3 times a year, its not the easiest game to just pick up. Can't be bothered dedicating all my gaming time to it when there's a plethora of other things out there that require less intense dedication.

It would be nice if the army builder printouts had the option for a rules reference for whatever abilities your army uses.

I'm currently learning the Infinity ruleset in more detail after a fun experience with Ice Storm, and it seems to me, a majority of the rules are optional. The common skills, everybody has, but the special skills are only in play if you have a model with those skills on them. Same with weapons (which the army building web app will include in the army profile). Hacking and structural rules are in a separate section in the back (advanced rules). Warmachine is just as complex - perhaps moreso - but hides the complexity by putting the special rules on the units themselves, rather than listing all of them together. If you took every special rule in Warmachine/Hordes and listed them in a single book, you'd have a lot more than 80 skills and 154 ways of attacking across 12 different factions.

I think you could create a lite version of the Infinity rules by purposefully selecting the more esoteric rules/weapons/states and choosing not to use them or the models that require them, similar to how everyone in Ice Storm carries a combi rifle and there's no hacking, TAGs, impetuous orders, or specialty ammo. Ice Storm is a wonderful introduction to the game and it doesn't become exhausting until you get the rulebook and go from a handful of abilities to six dozen. I'd even argue that Ice Storm already creates an Infinity Lite, but that there should probably be an Infinity Intermediate that exists between Ice Storm and full ruleset.

The game is no longer casual. While parts were confusing in N2, it was a lot faster.

Sure, tons of customization can be cool, but I agree with the OP. All the apps in the world cant make the game easier. Theres just to much. At the very least they should do 2 versions. Your streamlined, pick up casual game and your tourney type games.

I used to have 7 armies, because I loved it so much. After lots of games of N3, the 3 hour games were to much for a skirmish game, and it felt to much like playing 40k.

I have since cut it down to 2 armies, and haven't played in quite awhile because there are faster more enjoyable skirmish games.

 Sqorgar wrote:
If you took every special rule in Warmachine/Hordes and listed them in a single book, you'd have a lot more than 80 skills and 154 ways of attacking across 12 different factions.

It's usually the action sequence that's causing questions and confusions. I find WM to do it more neatly, reason being that the WM system doesn't have an ARO in it. WM's special abilities generally don't require half of a page to understand how exactly the model is supposed to act on table. Infinity system likes to throw plenty of other rather unique interactions and gives you few ways to respond on them. Who or what triggers first and how this affects your D20 MOD/opponent's ARO can have relatively huge impact on how you respond or approach to the situation.

Some of the complexity feels a little bit overdone - it has to do with CB wanting to represent a great deal of gradient in the utility of different items. For example, the hacking programs are situationally better against very specific targets. Same with Martial Arts - there are cases where level 3 is better than 4, etc. I don't personally care for the huge gradient in efficacy - I think some of the rules can be streamlined (martial arts, hacking, etc.) and some of the rules need a tweak (impact template weapons - I really dislike the drop template --> now it's FTF on everyone hit.)

All told though, as a lifestyle game, I quite enjoy it. It's the only game I currently play, and the only game I'm currently interested in playing.

 TheWaspinator wrote:
It would be nice if the army builder printouts had the option for a rules reference for whatever abilities your army uses.

The army builder does. If you make a list, it provides all the options for hacking, weapons, etc that are present on that army.

I really love the models, but after reading the rulebook it is sadly not a game for me either. If it was like Malifaux's rules, where I can play without ever opening the rulebook besides to look at deployment, strategies and schemes, I would be so down. I can take a break from Malifaux and come back a month or so later and just pick it no problem. I can tell I can't do that Infinity.

But, like another poster said, they have found their niche in the market with their ruleset. It isn't for me, but I know plenty who love it.

 Knight wrote:
It's usually the action sequence that's causing questions and confusions. I find WM to do it more neatly, reason being that the WM system doesn't have an ARO in it. WM's special abilities generally don't require half of a page to understand how exactly the model is supposed to act on table. Infinity system likes to throw plenty of other rather unique interactions and gives you few ways to respond on them.

I think they are complicated in their own ways. Infinity definitely has a bunch of actions and interactions, but they tend to largely be common to most figures (I haven't read the hacking rules yet, but they look pretty complex). You can ask your opponent something like, "Can I jump off this rooftop?" and the answer will be yes, here are the seven steps you need to do it. "Can I peek around this corner, shoot at this guy, then move back into total cover?" Yes, here are the steps you need to take to do that. I think that Infinity probably answers more of these questions with "yes" than other miniature games, and has to be an extremely detailed and complicate game model to do so - but I think, so far in my readings, there is a certain internal consistency to it. I feel like knowing what options/actions are available is pretty easy and obvious, but maybe the steps needed to perform those actions are difficult to internalize completely.

Warmachine, on the other hand, answers "no" or at least "rules don't say" to almost every question. Can I go to the second floor of this building? Nothing in the rules about that. So Warmachine is a much, much simpler game model. But Warmachine's unit rules are almost entirely exceptions to that basic model, or sometimes, exceptions to those exceptions. This unit can only be hurt by magic weapons, this one can't be targeted outside of 8", this one doesn't have to pay double to move through woods, this one can move through solid terrain, this one is invisible, except when this other unit successfully fires a flare nearby which removes invisibility, and so on.

I find Warmachine much harder to learn because you end up failing so much early on due to the ignorance of the interactions of these exceptions. Warmachine players will tell new players that they'll lose their first twenty games, and if anything, that may be a generous assessment. If you randomly pick a group of new models, you'll lose. If you play against a new faction, you'll lose. If PP releases a new model, you'll lose. It really feels, to me, that with Warmachine, victory is more about experience than anything else, and if you ever find yourself at an experience deficit, you'll lose.

Age of Sigmar, on the other hand, is all about mods. Has a very simple "no" game model, but the majority of the rules affect rolls directly. Everything gives you a +1 to something, or else they are abilities that you call on - very rarely do the rules affect anything other than the unit in question. There's very little of the exception oneupmanship that's in Warmachine "I attack your guys", "they can't be attacked because they are stealth", "but I have an ability which nullifies that ability", "you are too far", "I'll move closer", "you are knocked down by my feat", "I can't get knocked down because I have this unit attachment", etc... I think Infinity is in a similar boat. These rules aren't based on what you can or can't do, but more about how potentially successful you will be if you try.

Who or what triggers first and how this affects your D20 MOD/opponent's ARO can have relatively huge impact on how you respond or approach to the situation.

Could you give an example of this? Like I said, I'm still learning the full rules, but I was under the impression that all actions in an order were simultaneous. What are the exceptions to this rule so I know what to look out for?

str00dles1 wrote:
After lots of games of N3, the 3 hour games were to much for a skirmish game, and it felt to much like playing 40k.

Plenty of reasons that this might be the case, and not to knock your ability or anything but were you routinely playing 3 hour games in which both players were experienced and knew the rules?

I play with a friend and we consistently take < 2 h....sometimes it's as quick as 1 h of actual gameplay. It doesn't feel anything like the 45 minute setup time of 40k.

Were taking 3 hours now, but we only have half a dozen games under our belts and are only just introducing link teams etc.
I can see games easily being done in half that time, barring socialising.

Best game I've played in 25ish years.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

str00dles1 wrote:
After lots of games of N3, the 3 hour games were to much for a skirmish game, and it felt to much like playing 40k.

Plenty of reasons that this might be the case, and not to knock your ability or anything but were you routinely playing 3 hour games in which both players were experienced and knew the rules?

I play with a friend and we consistently take < 2 h....sometimes it's as quick as 1 h of actual gameplay. It doesn't feel anything like the 45 minute setup time of 40k.

Towards the end I'm sure it was close to 2/2.5 hour games. Of N3 we played somewhere around 20-25 games before we stopped. I don't play 40k myself anymore, and haven't for years but for a skirmish game it just didn't fit. Love the models and fluff, but to much going on. I personally think MERCS is a superior game as its fast, same type of theme and everything is on your card, like Malifaux.

Nuggz, you play how often? BITD, I certainly finished games in under 2 hours, no problem. But that was because I knew the rules and the units and all that. Now, there is so much more. Just to keep up with it, to learn and to remember all the information, I would have to spend more time playing Infinity, pretty much play only Infinity, and unlike you ( as you stated) I'm interested in playing a variety of games. Monogamy is for marriage. We live in the Golden Age of Gaming, and I don't want to spend all my time on just one game. I'm just not into the "lifestyle".

Noir wrote:

...N3 is not going anywhere and in fact will have even more rules added with the next book. I also doubt CB sees it as a problem as they just keep selling more every year. Their is enough games out there for all types of players, other companies cover the other side. CB found their niche and I hope they don't change, if I want a different style game I just play other games...

No N3 is not going anywhere. And my objections are not to the style of the game. I like skirmish games. My objections are to the bloat.

CB has added so many marginal things to the game , perhaps, as suggested, to please some group or the other-- Think of the Killer Hacking Device and the White Hacking Device. Removing or consolidating them is possible without reducing the complexity of the gameplay. CB does adjust unit profiles-- and they need to look at the Ghazi IMHO. The Rulebook PDF can easily be updated, and an errata/FAQ maintained (as they are doing now) with rules adjustments. CB can trim the fat fairly easily. I think the term is "living rulebook".

I do hope that all they add with the next book is a smattering of new units and the sectorial lists. And nothing more.
.

I've never finished games in under 2 hours, because my friends and brother like to shoot the gak while playing. But if we didn't, we'd get games done under 2 hours. Had my first game in about 6 months the other day, not too much book flipping for things like ammo types.

Granted, we use my iPad for Mayanet, which makes it really easy to keep track of who is firing what, and the ammo types aren't all that complicated to remember. Where we come unstuck is hacking programs, but once we found the quick reference pages that got a lot faster as well.

I personally think MERCS is a superior game as its fast, same type of theme and everything is on your card, like Malifaux.

Well that's just like, your opinion, man!

I love the MERCS models, ever since the first 2 Yellow Jacket models were released long before there was a game to use them in. But the game itself fell very, very flat with me. I haven't looked at 2nd ed much, but I couldn't stand the card based movement of the first ed, or the need to keep rules so condensed that it all fit on a single card. Not when you only have 5 guys on the table, I need more crunch in a skirmish game, more detail. I WANT 2 hour skirmish games, I LOVE each model acting and feeling like a comprehensive unit in and of itself. For each model to have multiple options for each activation. I want my 10 guys to have the tactical level of play as a whole army in a platoon sized game. I love the almost RPG aspect the game has to it.

There's already so many games out there that DO streamline the rules, many of which I play and are perfectly fun. But I'm one of the fanboys that is glad that Infinity has been increasing the complexity. The last thing I want is for infinity to follow the Heavy Gear route and lose all that complexity for the sake of streamlining, only to make up for it by shoving more minis per side. That said, I wouldn't mind an "Infinity Blitz!" style game to come out alongside the main rules, much like Mantic is doing with Warpath and Warpath: Firefight, or Dust Tactics vs Dust Warfare. Battletech and BT: Alpha Strike. The old Rag'na'Rok and Confrontation. Starfleet Battles/federation Commander and Star Trek:ACTA. All of those games use the same models, yet different rules, to appeal to different gamers. Just leave my main N3 alone, please, come up with a MERCS conversion instead.

 -Loki- wrote:

Where we come unstuck is hacking programs, but once we found the quick reference pages that got a lot faster as well.

Have you looked a Captains Spuds Hacker Helper. Have not used the book for hacking since I found it. it can even be used offline.

 Sqorgar wrote:
I think they are complicated in their own ways. Infinity definitely has a bunch of actions and interactions, but they tend to largely be common to most figures (I haven't read the hacking rules yet, but they look pretty complex).

Warmachine isn't written for urban combat. One of most noticeable differences to someone who never had any experience from both systems is the amount of terrain and how armies use it. It allignes with my experience that most WM games and tables tend to be rather barren with perhaps few walls, a forest, a swamp and armies both clashing in the middle with pathfinder being hugely sought rule to make it easier for combo/assassination. Although it seems easy in theory, it's not uncommon to see people from CB's studio to get their own rules wrong and that is in their official video/game demonstration, there are benefits and downsides for both design philosophies.

There's very little of the exception oneupmanship that's in Warmachine "I attack your guys", "they can't be attacked because they are stealth", "but I have an ability which nullifies that ability", "you are too far", "I'll move closer", "you are knocked down by my feat", "I can't get knocked down because I have this unit attachment", etc... I think Infinity is in a similar boat.

I'm going to gently smile as Infinity players on official forum love the idea (or did) that their rules are nothing like WM's rock/paper/scissor system. Infinity has more soft counters, largely thanks to its clutch critical hit system.

Could you give an example of this? Like I said, I'm still learning the full rules, but I was under the impression that all actions in an order were simultaneous. What are the exceptions to this rule so I know what to look out for?

In theory it sounds easy, doesn't it. However once you need to declare multiple ARO (with legitimate reaction/LoF) with each miniature having its own special rules and equipment, it's easy to forget a MOD (mimetism, REM penalty, surprise shot not being applied in your ARO, penalty to discover), ARO (dropping a mine or a repeater as opponent moved through your ZoC), situations where a player didn't have a status token but gave his REM enhanced reaction and simply forgot he applied it, interactions with equipment such as Crazy Koalas or holoprojector level 2, shooting from low visibility/saturated zones and how MSV behaves in those situations etc.

It's a lot to keep track, unless you slow down and look at the rules, which is sort of a dull thing for me as it kills the pace and excitement of the game. I don't mind not getting every rule/situation resolvent completely right, however some players might have a problem with more laid back attitude. Games are serious business nowadays.

 TheWaspinator wrote:
It would be nice if the army builder printouts had the option for a rules reference for whatever abilities your army uses.

I'm using Word, copying rules/weapons that pertain to my force and printing them to go with my list.

 plastictrees wrote:
Were taking 3 hours now, but we only have half a dozen games under our belts and are only just introducing link teams etc.
I can see games easily being done in half that time, barring socialising.

Best game I've played in 25ish years.

Agreed... I think its suffering from the same thing Wh40k 2nd ed. Did. Battles were meant to be smaller and CB is just trying to accommodate their fan base growth and the size of forces fans collect.
The games should be played as intended small... Its a skirmish game after all. Very fun stuff.

Anyone want to trade 100s of dollars of unbuilt space marines for a starter box and a TAG?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Knight wrote:

In theory it sounds easy, doesn't it. However once you need to declare multiple ARO (with legitimate reaction/LoF) with each miniature having its own special rules and equipment, it's easy to forget a MOD (mimetism, REM penalty, surprise shot not being applied in your ARO, penalty to discover), ARO (dropping a mine or a repeater as opponent moved through your ZoC), situations where a player didn't have a status token but gave his REM enhanced reaction and simply forgot he applied it, interactions with equipment such as Crazy Koalas or holoprojector level 2, shooting from low visibility/saturated zones and how MSV behaves in those situations etc.

It's a lot to keep track, unless you slow down and look at the rules, which is sort of a dull thing for me as it kills the pace and excitement of the game. I don't mind not getting every rule/situation resolvent completely right, however some players might have a problem with more laid back attitude. Games are serious business nowadays.

I'm on the laid back side. I think this game really calls for chill skirmish level play. So many [Awesome!] intricate rules it deserves a little bit of a slower pace. I also think people should just start with a simple stuff to learn it. Like when I first got back into it I was [overly] concerned about ITS and winning.... SMH.
At this point I'm not even worried about fireteams.

I'm tryin to make sure I'm getting every ARO, learning cover to cover tactics and basic markers. Stick to the basics and have fun until you understand it better

I see Infinity as More Sci-fi RPG Tactics collectible game than actual Skirmish Wargame.

 Red Harvest wrote:
Nuggz, you play how often? BITD, I certainly finished games in under 2 hours, no problem.

Some weeks I don't play at all, but I usually get in at least 1 game per week, less often I'll manage to get 2. It also helps that I mainly play within a pretty small group, so there isn't a huge disparity in rules knowledge. I watch every Gaming With The Cooler and Guerilla Miniatures Games batrep too so that helps the rules knowledge.

Regarding your other points - I do think some of the new weapons introduced in HSN3 add a bit of complexity to the game that just doesn't need to be there (Red Fury - who cares. Chest mines - meh. Madtraps are cute though.) and the sheer breadth of hacking programs is ridiculous IMO.

Could it be streamlined? Absolutely. Removing some of the more obscure pieces of equipment, and about half of the hacking programs, would go a long way in making that happen.