I just saw what Infinity was today at my FLGS and realized what everyone says when they can buy 6 armies for the price of their one warhammer 40k army.

The size of an army in Infinity is about the same amount of models as a kill team game of 40k... Also there are no big models. They are all little people (or at least that I saw). Needless to say I wasn't impressed and anyone who says "I can but 6 infinity armies for the same price" well of course you can because the games are kill team sized.

That's massively oversimplified and does a great injustice to the options and depth present in Infinity.

There are also big models (TAGs) although they're not Baneblade/Knight/Whatever sized (more in the same league as a Tau battlesuit.)

But I'm still slightly puzzled as to what your point is? You seem to be arguing the fact that a player can play a full sized, tournament level game which is frequently praised for the quality of it's miniatures and the depth and relative balance of it's ruleset for demonstrably less than a below entry level game of 40K as a bad thing?

Written as a non-Infinity playing 40K gamer, before my impartiality is drawn into question.

If you like small battles then Infinity might be for you but I like bigger games and Infinity's rules are written for small scale battles and to get the same size battle in Infinity as you can in Warhammer 40k it would cost just as much if not more then 40k as the starter is $50 for 5-6 infantry sized models.

People are misleading when comparing a game they like more to a game that everyone else plays? I'm shocked.

And infinity is also 28mm, it's just not 28mm heroic, so the limb-width, hands, and head are more correctly proportioned for realism, rather than exaggerated to show detail.

In any case, yeah, what you noticed is a pretty common way of skewing things. It's never comparing buying a few deathwing off ebay and a DV rulebook to the same number of minis and rules, it always seems to be comparing six models to a 40k apocalypse army...

A function of a difference in expectation about what a full-sized army is, really. It makes 40k's ability to play huge games look like a liability instead of an advantage.

 Xerics wrote:
If you like small battles then Infinity might be for you but I like bigger games and Infinity's rules are written for small scale battles and to get the same size battle in Infinity as you can in Warhammer 40k it would cost just as much if not more then 40k as the starter is $50 for 5-6 infantry sized models.

In other news, don't buy a Mustang if you need to transport large quantities of tools or drive off road.

Infinity isn't a battle game, it's a skirmish game, which is why every time you move a model, you do so individually and the rules allow for a huge amount more options for what you can do each time you do so.

It isn't about comparing the games, so much as comparing accessibility, which is a huge problem for 40K (perhaps less so with the advent of 7th, time will tell)

Whatever others may argue, there's never been an occasion where you can get two troops, an HQ, codex and rulebook for 40K for the cost of one Infinity starter, which, with free rules, is the only investment needed for Infinity.

They do have big models. At the last games day a few weeks ago this guy had a huge dragon worm model thing. Dwarfed all the GW monsters in the painting competition. Was beautify painted but was very big.

But the nature, aesthetic and well the game itself is nothing like 40k. As many have said its really different. But its the kind of different that seems to attract people lately so who knows, could be worth the try.

 Swastakowey wrote:
They do have big models. At the last games day a few weeks ago this guy had a huge dragon worm model thing. Dwarfed all the GW monsters in the painting competition. Was beautify painted but was very big.

But the nature, aesthetic and well the game itself is nothing like 40k. As many have said its really different. But its the kind of different that seems to attract people lately so who knows, could be worth the try.

You're thinking of Warmachine/Hordes I think.

Infinity categorically doesn't have anything bigger than a Daemon Prince, at least not yet.

I do see how people who have grown up on a diet of GW games would struggle with Infinity though. There's so much more to think about, and mistakes can be costly, and quick, that when I played a few games, I found a few small games to be more mentally draining than a 3000pt game of 40K.

I'd happily take up Infinity, but I only have so many opportunities to play, and I already played 40K and X Wing, and I have Mierce's Darklands in the offing too, so it just didn't make sense to commit to another system.

One day though.

Accessibility is a huge problem for GW right now. Infinity is a pretty clear example of a game that you can get into for super cheap and people seem to enjoy themselves. I don't play it myself, but some friends do and they like it. And they're having no trouble getting people in with a pitch like "one box, a blister every now and again and the rules? free online or get a book. whatever works."

If anything the low model count of infinity should help the OP realize just how much 40k's model count has been artificially inflated to get as much money out of him as possible. You can have a great, deep gaming experience with far, far less of a cash squeeze.

What exactly is the point of this thread?

OP is shocked and angered upon finding skirmish games use less models than company scale battle games?

 jonolikespie wrote:
What exactly is the point of this thread?

OP is shocked and angered upon finding skirmish games use less models than company scale battle games?

Yeah. I was sorta thinking the same....

While you may not be impressed, I am. The current changes to 40k and the impact they have on Tyranids has made me less than excited to find my first game of 40k. Infinity though, I love the look of the models, the way the game is smaller, and the interesting rules.

Once things are more structured, I'll be picking up some Combined and a few TAGs to paint up and display.

frozenwastes wrote:If anything the low model count of infinity should help the OP realize just how much 40k's model count has been artificially inflated to get as much money out of him as possible. You can have a great, deep gaming experience with far, far less of a cash squeeze.

You can play a draigowing with as few as 3 models. You can play eldar with as few as 7. You can play a deathwing with 11, same as orks, and tons of CSM options.

Welcome to the brave new world of model inflation...

 Carnikang wrote:
While you may not be impressed, I am. The current changes to 40k and the impact they have on Tyranids has made me less than excited to find my first game of 40k. Infinity though, I love the look of the models, the way the game is smaller, and the interesting rules.

Once things are more structured, I'll be picking up some Combined and a few TAGs to paint up and display.

Don't look at the 7th Ed leaks then, not a great time to be a 'Nid player unfortunately.

Sorry for off-topic-ness.

I would not compare Infinity to WH40K in any event - I would be much more likely to compare it to Necromunda.

But the people that are arguing that Infinity is more affordable than Warhammer 40K do have a very basic point - the amount of money that you need to spend, just to play the game as it is intended, is much lower for Infinity.

That is pretty much all that the argument is about.

Yes, a team in Infinity is smaller than a single unit of Orks - but that team is all that you need to play the game. For the Orks... you will need to buy at least one more unit of Orks and a Command unit.

The rules for Infinity are better written, and they are available for free from the publisher - which chops another $75 MSRP off of the cost, and another $50 for the codex. (Necromunda used to be available as a free download from GW - but they killed that when they 'upgraded' their website.)

And, in my opinion, the miniatures for Infinity just look better.

But I still prefer Necromunda - over both Infinity and WH40K.... (It is the campaign system,the experience system and the flexibility of how you recruit and equip your gang that tilts the table in favor of Necromunda.)

The Auld Grump

 cincydooley wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
What exactly is the point of this thread?

OP is shocked and angered upon finding skirmish games use less models than company scale battle games?

Yeah. I was sorta thinking the same....

Thirded. I'm just not... seeing the point? The OP could have come to the same conclusion typing 'infinity battle report' into Google.

There is plenty of info about Infinity in the Corvus Belli forum here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/forums/show/59.page. Lots of threads for beginners.

It is a skirmish sized game, so at its largest 15-20 models per side, and that is a really bloated horde in a high point game. Mainly 10-15 models. It does have large models, called TAGs. Think Landmates, more or less.

It is quite different from what GW games players are accustomed to. It is very tactical. There is no netlisting. Some may like the change of pace. As noted above, rules are a free download, but also get the army lists and the scenarios and ITS scenarios for a complete picture. You could always proxy a few 40k minis to play the game, just to give it a spin, before committing to anything. Or even download the quick starter rules here http://www.beastsofwar.com/wp-content/uploads/Infinity-QuickStartRules-V1.pdf and give it a go. No reason to play only one game, especially if the second game is affordable...

My sig reveals my bias here

 frozenwastes wrote:
Accessibility is a huge problem for GW right now. Infinity is a pretty clear example of a game that you can get into for super cheap and people seem to enjoy themselves. I don't play it myself, but some friends do and they like it. And they're having no trouble getting people in with a pitch like "one box, a blister every now and again and the rules? free online or get a book. whatever works."

If anything the low model count of infinity should help the OP realize just how much 40k's model count has been artificially inflated to get as much money out of him as possible. You can have a great, deep gaming experience with far, far less of a cash squeeze.

My 1500 point army has 13 models (19 if you count the gunners for the three Vaul's Wrath Support weapons)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 -Loki- wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
What exactly is the point of this thread?

OP is shocked and angered upon finding skirmish games use less models than company scale battle games?

Yeah. I was sorta thinking the same....

Thirded. I'm just not... seeing the point? The OP could have come to the same conclusion typing 'infinity battle report' into Google.

LOL i am ragging on all those people who say they can "Just sell my warhammer army and get into affinity cause it's so much better and i can buy 6 armies for the price of one warhammer army" because they never tell you how big an army in Infinity actually is. Really an Infinity "army" is an Infinity team. and really the price per model is exactly the same in most cases. $50 for 5 models is the same price as 5 terminators so i don't see exactly how its supposed to be cheaper. Get 10 Tactical marines for less then 5 infinity models.

 Xerics wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 -Loki- wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
What exactly is the point of this thread?

OP is shocked and angered upon finding skirmish games use less models than company scale battle games?

Yeah. I was sorta thinking the same....

Thirded. I'm just not... seeing the point? The OP could have come to the same conclusion typing 'infinity battle report' into Google.

LOL i am ragging on all those people who say they can "Just sell my warhammer army and get into affinity cause it's so much better and i can buy 6 armies for the price of one warhammer army" because they never tell you how big an army in Infinity actually is. Really an Infinity "army" is an Infinity team.

I still fail to see why this is a problem. Infinity is a skirmish game. You can find this out by simply googling 'Infinity the Game'. It never, even in the game description in the rulebook or on the website, alludes to it being bigger than skirmish scale.

On top of that - while you personally prefer large battle games, others don't, or just have no preference. For some, playing a good skirmish game is better than playing a bad mass battle game.

 Xerics wrote:
and really the price per model is exactly the same in most cases. $50 for 5 models is the same price as 5 terminators so i don't see exactly how its supposed to be cheaper. Get 10 Tactical marines for less then 5 infinity models.

This is a valid complaint. Per model, Infinity is more expensive than 40k. However, it becomes less valid when you consider two things - army size and game balance.

10 Infinity models costs about twice what you'd pay for a box of 10 40k models. The difference is, that's it. You have your 300pt army. With 40k, you've got a few hundred dollars more to spend (sometimes more - without my Forgeworld stuff, my 1500pt Tyranid army cost me about $1000au). Add to that the balance of the game - there's very few, some would argue no, models that are not worth using. You can impluse buy a few good looking models, work them into your list, and it's suddenly completely different, and there's very little chance you bought models that just won't work in the list.

And finally, outside of models, all you ever need to buy for Infinity is 5-6 D20's and a tape measure. All rules (aside from the campaign system), army lists, weapon lists, troop profiles, counters, templates, etc are available legitimately for free. With 40k, you've got, depending on your country, a hundred to a couple of hundred dollars of rule books, codices and supplements to buy to get the rules and army lists.

So while, per model, Infinity is more expensive, it's far, far cheaper when you consider actually playing the game.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Xerics wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 -Loki- wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
What exactly is the point of this thread?

OP is shocked and angered upon finding skirmish games use less models than company scale battle games?

Yeah. I was sorta thinking the same....

Thirded. I'm just not... seeing the point? The OP could have come to the same conclusion typing 'infinity battle report' into Google.

LOL i am ragging on all those people who say they can "Just sell my warhammer army and get into affinity cause it's so much better and i can buy 6 armies for the price of one warhammer army" because they never tell you how big an army in Infinity actually is. Really an Infinity "army" is an Infinity team.

I still fail to see why this is a problem. Infinity is a skirmish game. You can find this out by simply googling 'Infinity the Game'. It never, even in the game description in the rulebook or on the website, alludes to it being bigger than skirmish scale.

On top of that - while you personally prefer large battle games, others don't, or just have no preference. For some, playing a good skirmish game is better than playing a bad mass battle game.

 Xerics wrote:
and really the price per model is exactly the same in most cases. $50 for 5 models is the same price as 5 terminators so i don't see exactly how its supposed to be cheaper. Get 10 Tactical marines for less then 5 infinity models.

This is a valid complaint. Per model, Infinity is more expensive than 40k. However, it becomes less valid when you consider two things - army size and game balance.

10 Infinity models costs about twice what you'd pay for a box of 10 40k models. The difference is, that's it. You have your 300pt army. With 40k, you've got a few hundred dollars more to spend (sometimes more - without my Forgeworld stuff, my 1500pt Tyranid army cost me about $1000au). Add to that the balance of the game - there's very few, some would argue no, models that are not worth using. You can impluse buy a few good looking models, work them into your list, and it's suddenly completely different, and there's very little chance you bought models that just won't work in the list.

And finally, outside of models, all you ever need to buy for Infinity is 5-6 D20's and a tape measure. All rules (aside from the campaign system), army lists, weapon lists, troop profiles, counters, templates, etc are available legitimately for free. With 40k, you've got, depending on your country, a hundred to a couple of hundred dollars of rule books, codices and supplements to buy to get the rules and army lists.

So while, per model, Infinity is more expensive, it's far, far cheaper when you consider actually playing the game.

Its 300 points now. I think in a few years when more official tournaments pop up it will creep up to 500 points per side and as more larger models come out over the years creep up another 250 points and so on and so forth and then the game becomes grossly more expensive then warhammer 40k.

 Xerics wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Xerics wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 -Loki- wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
What exactly is the point of this thread?

OP is shocked and angered upon finding skirmish games use less models than company scale battle games?

Yeah. I was sorta thinking the same....

Thirded. I'm just not... seeing the point? The OP could have come to the same conclusion typing 'infinity battle report' into Google.

LOL i am ragging on all those people who say they can "Just sell my warhammer army and get into affinity cause it's so much better and i can buy 6 armies for the price of one warhammer army" because they never tell you how big an army in Infinity actually is. Really an Infinity "army" is an Infinity team.

I still fail to see why this is a problem. Infinity is a skirmish game. You can find this out by simply googling 'Infinity the Game'. It never, even in the game description in the rulebook or on the website, alludes to it being bigger than skirmish scale.

On top of that - while you personally prefer large battle games, others don't, or just have no preference. For some, playing a good skirmish game is better than playing a bad mass battle game.

 Xerics wrote:
and really the price per model is exactly the same in most cases. $50 for 5 models is the same price as 5 terminators so i don't see exactly how its supposed to be cheaper. Get 10 Tactical marines for less then 5 infinity models.

This is a valid complaint. Per model, Infinity is more expensive than 40k. However, it becomes less valid when you consider two things - army size and game balance.

10 Infinity models costs about twice what you'd pay for a box of 10 40k models. The difference is, that's it. You have your 300pt army. With 40k, you've got a few hundred dollars more to spend (sometimes more - without my Forgeworld stuff, my 1500pt Tyranid army cost me about $1000au). Add to that the balance of the game - there's very few, some would argue no, models that are not worth using. You can impluse buy a few good looking models, work them into your list, and it's suddenly completely different, and there's very little chance you bought models that just won't work in the list.

And finally, outside of models, all you ever need to buy for Infinity is 5-6 D20's and a tape measure. All rules (aside from the campaign system), army lists, weapon lists, troop profiles, counters, templates, etc are available legitimately for free. With 40k, you've got, depending on your country, a hundred to a couple of hundred dollars of rule books, codices and supplements to buy to get the rules and army lists.

So while, per model, Infinity is more expensive, it's far, far cheaper when you consider actually playing the game.

Its 300 points now. I think in a few years when more official tournaments pop up it will creep up to 500 points per side and as more larger models come out over the years creep up another 250 points and so on and so forth and then the game becomes grossly more expensive then warhammer 40k.

It very well might. The tournament system added 400pt scenarios this year, which was met with rather mixed reactions. Some people liked being able to break out the heavy infantry linked teams that they've always wanted, others didn't like the additional size. It remains to be seen if it stays as an official scenario points level next season.

Recarding bigger models, Corvus Belli have flat out stated no, the game is not moving beyond being a skirmish game. They have, however, brought Antenocitis Workshop on board as a partner to make resin vehicles for the game. While they (and Antenociti) have stated they're for terrain or special scenarios only, who knows what the future will hold.

However, that has no bearing on the game right now. it's a skirmish game, and has never been implied to be anything other than a skirmish game. You didn't need to wait to see it at your FLGS to see this. Simply googling the game would have revealed this. You didn't need to make a thread 'ragging' on people who move to the system either just because you suddenly discovered the model count. it's just a pointless thread.

Thread of 2014 award for this.... I don't know what else to say really..!

 Xerics wrote:

LOL i am ragging on all those people who say they can "Just sell my warhammer army and get into affinity cause it's so much better and i can buy 6 armies for the price of one warhammer army" because they never tell you how big an army in Infinity actually is. Really an Infinity "army" is an Infinity team. and really the price per model is exactly the same in most cases. $50 for 5 models is the same price as 5 terminators so i don't see exactly how its supposed to be cheaper. Get 10 Tactical marines for less then 5 infinity models.

You seem to be missing the point that not everyone wants to play bloated 40K sized games, or that you can have more tactical depth with 10 mini's in Infinity (or many other skirmish games) than you can with 50+ in 40K. Yes on a per model basis Infinity is more expensive, but you'd never play Infinity with 40K sized forces (because there's too much depth, you'd be there forever), and you'd never play 40K with 10 standard infantry (because there's no depth to it).

Once you get over the figure count differences, you should be able to appreciate that with Infinity, you can get all you need to get started with a couple of unit options for less than the 40K BRB. That's a starter set, a couple of blisters and a handful of D20's.

I went in to my FLGS to pick up the Dwarf army book, but it was delayed, so I bought the Infinity rules instead and it's pretty good value. Even more when you consider that the actual rules on their own are completely free from the Corvus Beli website.

An "Army" in 40K could be only five Knight Titan models for a total cost of £425. It is unplayable without the codex for another £25.

I'm not sure how many Infinity models you can buy for £450.

 Xerics wrote:
$50 for 5 models is the same price as 5 terminators so i don't see exactly how its supposed to be cheaper. Get 10 Tactical marines for less then 5 infinity models.

Really, you don't see how it's supposed to be cheaper?

With your 5 infinity models, you can go download all the rules you need for free and play a fully involved game at a points level fully intended as normal sized by the designers (albeit at the smaller end of the scale).

With your 10 tactical marines, you then have to go buy an hq, a codex and a Rulebook before you can play a game. And that game wouldn't exactly be being played as 40k was intended. Your 1500pt army may only consist of 13 models, but they didn't cost you a total of $100 as 12 infinity miniatures would cost you, did they? The point being that there is no argument for access to "normal" sized 40k games being comparable in cost to access to "normal" sized infinity games.

In terms of the games themselves? Comparing platoon (or company) sized wargames to squad sized skirmish games is comparing apples and oranges. I appreciate that the comparison may have been impressed upon you by others, but it is a pointless comparison.

And it's a pointless thread. I'm not sure I understand why your thought process that day wasn't... "Oh, this is infinity? It's a skirmish game? That must be why I've heard said that you can buy 5 or 6 fully playable forces for the price of one 40k army. Well, that explains that. A skirmish game. It's not for me because I prefer BIG games and BIG models, but each to their own. And those chaps do look like they're having fun. Good on 'em."

I find the need to point out just how small of a model count you can make a 1500 point army to be indicative of the major difference. I salute everyone who had the foresight to build a low model count army and avoids putting your opponent through waiting while you move 70-100 miniatures.

How does this thread exist...

My cat isn't a dog. I for one am outraged.

This is exactly like that girl who complained why sushi is raw and why can't they serve cooked sushi.

It's also worth noting that in a game of Infinity, each model is much more important than a single model in 40k, where most of them serve as little more than wound counters who take up space on a board, each model in infinity represents a variety of diverse combat options.

Yes, you can build very low model count armies for 40k, but these tend to be very rare and extremely bad. Similarly, GW has been consistently moving their games in a direction that encourages the use of more and more models (or more big expensive models) on the table.

On the other hand, not only does Infinity's ruleset limit the scope of battles, but the fluff also places harsh restrictions on the size of any given sortie in-universe.

Kilkrazy wrote:I'm not sure how many Infinity models you can buy for £450.

I'm just starting in Infinity, I'll keep a log and let you know!

I bought a load of Infinity a few years ago when Corvus Belli did the special promotion with Beasts of War. I can't remember how much it all cost me however, looking at the website now, a pack like Jurisdictional Command of Corregidor

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2013/miniatures/jurisdictional-command-of-corregidor/

has got six figures for €37 which is about £5 per figure so you could get 90 Infinity figures for the cost of the Knight Titans army.

"Character" figures are more expensive, though, so probably you might get about 75 figures altogether, say 60 ordinary figures and 15 specials.

People like different games for different reasons. And some people only have time for 1 distraction from real life.

I very much like the look of infinity, and watched some people play it at Adepticon. Seemed fun, enough.

However, I have a game I enjoy for the models and the story, and I only have hobby time for 1 game.

 frozenwastes wrote:
If anything the low model count of infinity should help the OP realize just how much 40k's model count has been artificially inflated to get as much money out of him as possible. You can have a great, deep gaming experience with far, far less of a cash squeeze.

Sure. But that 'great, deep gaming experience' will be a different type of game, because there is nothing else out there at the moment that is really suited to games the size of a 40K game. So for those who actually like playing bigger games, it's not a matter of 40K being 'artificially inflated' so much as 40K simply being designed for a different scale of game.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
But the people that are arguing that Infinity is more affordable than Warhammer 40K do have a very basic point - the amount of money that you need to spend, just to play the game as it is intended, is much lower for Infinity.

Sure. And I can buy a bicycle for much less money than a car. Which is great... unless I wanted a car.

Yes, Infinity is more affordable than 40K... but that's because it's a different type of game. For those who enjoy skirmish games, that's fine. But it's still a bit of an odd comparison.

 Fafnir wrote:
It's also worth noting that in a game of Infinity, each model is much more important than a single model in 40k, where most of them serve as little more than wound counters who take up space on a board, each model in infinity represents a variety of diverse combat options.

There is a reason some refer to the basic infantry models in Infinity as "cheerleaders". The order pool mechanic means that you end up being in a situation referred to as 'order starved' if you just take the high points, high special weapons cost models and ignore the cheerleaders.

On the other hand, not only does Infinity's ruleset limit the scope of battles, but the fluff also places harsh restrictions on the size of any given sortie in-universe.

Not true. Ariadna, home to the Antipode tribes, is pretty consistently having to deal with huge massed battles to put down Antipode "rebellions".
Same thing with the planet of Paradiso, where the Human Sphere is engaged in all out war with the Combined Army.

And that's not even really getting into the Tohaa v. Combined war going on outside of the Human Sphere.

With the revelations of 7th edition 40k loose in the world...

I told my buddy I wanted to try Infinity this weekend. I am going to use my 40k models to do so.

insaniak wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:
If anything the low model count of infinity should help the OP realize just how much 40k's model count has been artificially inflated to get as much money out of him as possible. You can have a great, deep gaming experience with far, far less of a cash squeeze.

Sure. But that 'great, deep gaming experience' will be a different type of game, because there is nothing else out there at the moment that is really suited to games the size of a 40K game. So for those who actually like playing bigger games, it's not a matter of 40K being 'artificially inflated' so much as 40K simply being designed for a different scale of game.

Of course, the problem with this is that 40k doesn't really manage to do a good job of functioning at the scale it's 'designed' for.

Kanluwen wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
It's also worth noting that in a game of Infinity, each model is much more important than a single model in 40k, where most of them serve as little more than wound counters who take up space on a board, each model in infinity represents a variety of diverse combat options.

There is a reason some refer to the basic infantry models in Infinity as "cheerleaders". The order pool mechanic means that you end up being in a situation referred to as 'order starved' if you just take the high points, high special weapons cost models and ignore the cheerleaders.

That depends on how you spread your points, really. Furthermore, even the most basic cheerleader has the tools needed to be effective outside of order pooling, and offers a variety of tactical options for a low price.

On the other hand, not only does Infinity's ruleset limit the scope of battles, but the fluff also places harsh restrictions on the size of any given sortie in-universe.

Not true. Ariadna, home to the Antipode tribes, is pretty consistently having to deal with huge massed battles to put down Antipode "rebellions".
Same thing with the planet of Paradiso, where the Human Sphere is engaged in all out war with the Combined Army.

And that's not even really getting into the Tohaa v. Combined war going on outside of the Human Sphere.

But conflicts between forces within the human sphere are much more limited.

You're right in that the word 'any' is a bit of a stretch, but battles with factions that aren't the Tohaa or Combined army are fought at small scales. Antipodes don't count, since they're not even a faction.

jamesk1973 wrote:
With the revelations of 7th edition 40k loose in the world...
I told my buddy I wanted to try Infinity this weekend. I am going to use my 40k models to do so.

That's what I did. AROs can get a bit annoying, about as annoying as turning a corner and getting blasted in the face could possibly be. Also the orders mechanic is really neat when you think about it like an action movie. All of this just screams that I should love this game, but I've not been able to really get into it (I suppose that's what Gen Con is for).

I wanted to add that Infinity has probably the best 28mm models I have ever had the joy to paint. I've thought about picking up some CA models just to paint them.

jamesk1973 wrote:
With the revelations of 7th edition 40k loose in the world...

I told my buddy I wanted to try Infinity this weekend. I am going to use my 40k models to do so.

Yeah, do it.

It's just a rule set. Many of infinity's weapon profiles can be fairly well represented by a lot of 40k (or most generic sci if) stuff, eg assault rifles, grenade launchers, shotguns, rocket launchers, sniper rifles, etc.

Hope you find it fun.

 Fafnir wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
It's also worth noting that in a game of Infinity, each model is much more important than a single model in 40k, where most of them serve as little more than wound counters who take up space on a board, each model in infinity represents a variety of diverse combat options.

There is a reason some refer to the basic infantry models in Infinity as "cheerleaders". The order pool mechanic means that you end up being in a situation referred to as 'order starved' if you just take the high points, high special weapons cost models and ignore the cheerleaders.

That depends on how you spread your points, really. Furthermore, even the most basic cheerleader has the tools needed to be effective outside of order pooling, and offers a variety of tactical options for a low price.

Certainly but whether or not those basic cheerleaders get used as anything but order generators is a different story.
Which was the point I was making. Effectively the cheerleaders can, in some armies, be treated as nothing but ablative wounds.

On the other hand, not only does Infinity's ruleset limit the scope of battles, but the fluff also places harsh restrictions on the size of any given sortie in-universe.

Not true. Ariadna, home to the Antipode tribes, is pretty consistently having to deal with huge massed battles to put down Antipode "rebellions".
Same thing with the planet of Paradiso, where the Human Sphere is engaged in all out war with the Combined Army.

And that's not even really getting into the Tohaa v. Combined war going on outside of the Human Sphere.

But conflicts between forces within the human sphere are much more limited.

Well, that again is not strictly true. It is now in the timeline, but that has everything to do with O-12 and the new threat looming in the form of the Combined Army.

You're right in that the word 'any' is a bit of a stretch, but battles with factions that aren't the Tohaa or Combined army are fought at small scales. Antipodes don't count, since they're not even a faction.

Ehhhhhhhhhh...the Antipodes are a defining feature of Ariadna. They are the reason why you have different cultures in the Ariadnan nations.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
"Character" figures are more expensive, though, so probably you might get about 75 figures altogether, say 60 ordinary figures and 15 specials.

Except they aren't. Corvus Belli doesn't charge for effectivness, they charge for material used. Character models are the same price as any similarly sized model.

For example, Ajax and Tarik Mansuri are quite expensive, about what you'd pay for a remote individually. This is because they're both quite enormous, easily five times the metal of an infantry model. Whilst Achilles, arguably the most powerful infantry sized model in the game, costs the exact same amount as a Dakini Tacbot, a basic infantry that is the same size.

I know I am personally outraged that any company would try to cut into the margins of Games-Workshop by producing their own tabletop game. Games-Workshop invented the tabletop market, they have been market leaders for 25 years. For a company to have the gall as to produce another tabletop game should be measure enough that they should be scorned at all opportunities.

I mean, Games-Workshop has been working very hard on their Specialist Games, they just had to hide them from customers until they get them finished. And all we have to do is each buy a couple more 40k armies to show them how faithful we are. But no, we have been an ungrateful audience and Games-Workshop has witnessed this and provided a deserved punishment. They have increased costs to make-up for the fact that we haven't bought enough models, and they will continue to do so until we apologize and erase all mentions of any other, tawdry games like this so-called "Infinity."

The OP has made the message clear to us- forsake these foolish endeavors into heretical games and embrace your lords and masters at GW-London!

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
It's also worth noting that in a game of Infinity, each model is much more important than a single model in 40k, where most of them serve as little more than wound counters who take up space on a board, each model in infinity represents a variety of diverse combat options.

There is a reason some refer to the basic infantry models in Infinity as "cheerleaders". The order pool mechanic means that you end up being in a situation referred to as 'order starved' if you just take the high points, high special weapons cost models and ignore the cheerleaders.

That depends on how you spread your points, really. Furthermore, even the most basic cheerleader has the tools needed to be effective outside of order pooling, and offers a variety of tactical options for a low price.

Certainly but whether or not those basic cheerleaders get used as anything but order generators is a different story.
Which was the point I was making. Effectively the cheerleaders can, in some armies, be treated as nothing but ablative wounds.

The point is that they still pack much more utility than most of the models on the table in a game of 40k.

If we are going to compare prices and model counts we should also consider historical games, that typically have larger models counts than 40K but are cheaper because the cost of historical figures is much cheaper.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If we are going to compare prices and model counts we should also consider historical games, that typically have larger models counts than 40K but are cheaper because the cost of historical figures is much cheaper.

Which has what to do with a 40k gamer 'ragging on Infinity players'?

 -Loki- wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If we are going to compare prices and model counts we should also consider historical games, that typically have larger models counts than 40K but are cheaper because the cost of historical figures is much cheaper.

Which has what to do with a 40k gamer 'ragging on Infinity players'?

Nothing, I guess. But the Hail Caesar minis are growing on me, and they're really cheap by comparison.

Also:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If we are going to compare prices and model counts we should also consider historical games, that typically have larger models counts than 40K but are cheaper because the cost of historical figures is much cheaper.

Which has what to do with a 40k gamer 'ragging on Infinity players'?

Which he says Infinity is not cheaper than 40K because you don't buy as many figures, implying that 40K is not expensive. Clearly that is not factually accurate, so his argument is false.

 Accolade wrote:
I know I am personally outraged that any company would try to cut into the margins of Games-Workshop by producing their own tabletop game. Games-Workshop invented the tabletop market, they have been market leaders for 25 years. For a company to have the gall as to produce another tabletop game should be measure enough that they should be scorned at all opportunities.

I mean, Games-Workshop has been working very hard on their Specialist Games, they just had to hide them from customers until they get them finished. And all we have to do is each buy a couple more 40k armies to show them how faithful we are. But no, we have been an ungrateful audience and Games-Workshop has witnessed this and provided a deserved punishment. They have increased costs to make-up for the fact that we haven't bought enough models, and they will continue to do so until we apologize and erase all mentions of any other, tawdry games like this so-called "Infinity."

The OP has made the message clear to us- forsake these foolish endeavors into heretical games and embrace your lords and masters at GW-London!

Lol i don't actually buy from GW. I buy old modle sfrom e-bay. What i am saying is that people buying Infinity Armies" aren't really buying armies. What they should be saying when they rage quit 40K is that they are going to sell off their warhammer armies for multiple squads of Infinity as thats the level it is played on. Saying you are buying 6 Infinity "Armies" is a huge exaggeration when its only 5-6 models in the starter and usually not more then 10 per side which is a squad.

The question remains, what's your point?

Some people refer to them as armies, you refer to them as squads, it still pertains to "collection of models that allows you to functionally and legally play a game" in this context, and in this context, Infinity is cheaper to achieve this aim than 40K in nearly all but the most convoluted terms.

Infinity doesn't interfere with my 40k vice that much - It can be a drain if you overreach or get dragged in the competitve scene, but same can be said of 40k. If you stay casual, you can play Infinity with minimal investment and still have time and cash for other games.

Truth be told, I see Infinity not as a replacement for 40k but as a nice throwback to the days of Warzone and Necromunda, skirmish games my former club played in between or during lenghty 40k leagues and campaigns. Now, I don't play Infinity anymore, but I really hope 3rd edition raises enough interest in my area to be able to play it again.

IDK man, the usual 40k army is pretty small to me if you compare them to real armies. You'd hardly call 50 men an "army". Does that mean we shouldn't be calling them armies?!?!!!!!?

This is actually quite painful to watch.

Really, someone needs to post that 'implied facepalm' Tommy Lee Jones de-motivational poster, and then the thread needs locking.

I don't understand why people are so resistant to trying new rule sets, especially free ones. I love trying new games to see their mechanics and how the designer approached things.

Not sure why it has to a comparison of apples to oranges between the model count of a skirmish game and a mass battle game though.

Actually I'm not even sure what the point of this thread was.

Or why I'm even posting in it.

I'm outraged different people can like different things!

People should all like the same things. Ideally we would all like GW-produced things!

I'm also outraged that I can have an "army" of 4 Imperial Knights in GW's Warhammer. It's not a proper army, it's not even a Knight Platoon!

Talk about false marketing.

Come to think of it, my 500 point armies that I used to play Combat Patrol with (10 Tacticals, 5 Assaults, Rhino, Captain) were not proper "armies" either! It's disgusting! Armies, as the name suggests, should have hundreds of models! Thousands, even!

Sold to us by our benevolent overlords.

I have a Russian army that contains about 4,000 figures. They are 6mm of course.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I have a Russian army that contains about 4,000 figures. They are 6mm of course.

Now that's a collection worthy of being called an Army!

 Ailaros wrote:

frozenwastes wrote:If anything the low model count of infinity should help the OP realize just how much 40k's model count has been artificially inflated to get as much money out of him as possible. You can have a great, deep gaming experience with far, far less of a cash squeeze.

You can play a draigowing with as few as 3 models. You can play eldar with as few as 7. You can play a deathwing with 11, same as orks, and tons of CSM options.

Welcome to the brave new world of model inflation...

Nice red herring there.

Whilst they are all "legal" armies in 40k, none of them can reach the required points costs of a standard game of 40k.

Kilkrazy wrote:has got six figures for €37 which is about £5 per figure so you could get 90 Infinity figures for the cost of the Knight Titans army.

But that's an absurd comparison.

It's like saying that if you want a cheap automobile, you should buy your next car from Mercedes because you can buy 10 Mercedes CLA's for the price of a single Honda HSV.

Boy, Honda sure makes some expensive cars, I can't imagine how poor people would ever be able to buy any...

Well, I guess it also depends on how you look at it. Yes, you need less miniatures to play Infinity so that's why it is cheaper than playing with a 40k army. yes they are two different types of games. But they both do the same thing which is allowing you to play a game (maybe allowing isn't the right word but you get the general idea). TIme is the most precious resource here and it doesn't matter if it's a hundred miniatures or 10 miniatures. If anyone is like me then they only have a limited time to spend on playing games at which point all of a sudden the comparison does come into play. Infinity costs a lot less for the same hours of enjoyment as 40k in the end, no matter how you turn or look at it.

Sure, you can get by with playing a low model count list in 40k but even then it usually gets a whole lot more expensive than playing Infinity purely on the basis of the difference in costs for the rules. All that aside, the whole difference between calling them squads or armies is rather a bit silly. I played 40k when it was a skirmish game still with low count of models and even then we called them armies. So the model count is not that important, it's just a name for a group of mini's needed to play a certain game to me. Again, maybe I'm a bit simplistic in my line of thought there.

Water is wet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
I know I am personally outraged that any company would try to cut into the margins of Games-Workshop by producing their own tabletop game. Games-Workshop invented the tabletop market, they have been market leaders for 25 years. For a company to have the gall as to produce another tabletop game should be measure enough that they should be scorned at all opportunities.

I mean, Games-Workshop has been working very hard on their Specialist Games, they just had to hide them from customers until they get them finished. And all we have to do is each buy a couple more 40k armies to show them how faithful we are. But no, we have been an ungrateful audience and Games-Workshop has witnessed this and provided a deserved punishment. They have increased costs to make-up for the fact that we haven't bought enough models, and they will continue to do so until we apologize and erase all mentions of any other, tawdry games like this so-called "Infinity."

The OP has made the message clear to us- forsake these foolish endeavors into heretical games and embrace your lords and masters at GW-London!

Lol i don't actually buy from GW. I buy old modle sfrom e-bay. What i am saying is that people buying Infinity Armies" aren't really buying armies. What they should be saying when they rage quit 40K is that they are going to sell off their warhammer armies for multiple squads of Infinity as thats the level it is played on. Saying you are buying 6 Infinity "Armies" is a huge exaggeration when its only 5-6 models in the starter and usually not more then 10 per side which is a squad.

The point of saying I can get 6 armies for the price of 1 GW army has nothing to do with model count.

It has to do with you get 6 unique armies that play differently. Allowing the player to have variety and be playable at the same cost.

It you are looking for a large scale war game or a beer and pretzels war game, Infinity is not for you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I have a Russian army that contains about 4,000 figures. They are 6mm of course.

I thought my 10mm Napoleonic French army was impressive number.

Damn, that is awesome.

For what it's worth, 40k isn't a good 'beer and pretzels' game either. Not with a rulebook that massive and with that many errors and inconsistencies.

 Fafnir wrote:
For what it's worth, 40k isn't a good 'beer and pretzels' game either. Not with a rulebook that massive and with that many errors and inconsistencies.

I wasn't calling 40k Beer and Pretzels. Apologies if that is what I was making it out to be with my comment.

To clarify, one of the complaints or hesitations people have about Infinity is the steeper learning curve than most table top games.

If someone is making a point to find a quick, easy, and fun little minis games I would look past infinity.

If you wanna see 100+ minis on the table, then Infinity is not that game either.

But if you want the gold standard in sculpting quality, a dynamic game system that has more to it than "lets meet in the middle of the table and have a dice fest". Infinity could be your go to game.
Rules are free, that is all I can say regarding that.

My go-to beer and pretzels game is Gamma World. Although, with the scenarios I end up pulling out of my ass, we usually end up using hard liquor.

 Piston Honda wrote:

...To clarify, one of the complaints or hesitations people have about Infinity is the steeper learning curve than most table top games. ...

I would say more of an un-learning curve. The ruleset is sufficiently distinct from other tabletop games that players who have a lot of preconceived notions about tabletop games will have more troubles than people who are new to the hobby. My observation anyway. Malifaux has a similar unlearning curve, due to the cards instead of dice mechanic, IMHO.

As far as "army" goes, any force that represents less than several regiments certainly stretches the notion of the word. Unless you use the word to represent whatever *armed forces* you happen to have on the tabletop and/or in your collection, which is how I encounter it used.

 Red Harvest wrote:

 Piston Honda wrote:

...To clarify, one of the complaints or hesitations people have about Infinity is the steeper learning curve than most table top games. ...

I would say more of an un-learning curve. The ruleset is sufficiently distinct from other tabletop games that players who have a lot of preconceived notions about tabletop games will have more troubles than people who are new to the hobby. My observation anyway. Malifaux has a similar unlearning curve, due to the cards instead of dice mechanic, IMHO.

As far as "army" goes, any force that represents less than several regiments certainly stretches the notion of the word. Unless you use the word to represent whatever *armed forces* you happen to have on the tabletop and/or in your collection, which is how I encounter it used.

Agreed. After playing 40k for a long time and then getting into Infinity, the rules were a bit difficult to get used to. Notably, in Infinity, the cover rules are similar but different (requires base contact, can get cover vs templates, etc).

 insaniak wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
But the people that are arguing that Infinity is more affordable than Warhammer 40K do have a very basic point - the amount of money that you need to spend, just to play the game as it is intended, is much lower for Infinity.

Sure. And I can buy a bicycle for much less money than a car. Which is great... unless I wanted a car.

Yes, Infinity is more affordable than 40K... but that's because it's a different type of game. For those who enjoy skirmish games, that's fine. But it's still a bit of an odd comparison.

Yep - which is why I would compare it to the late-great Necromunda, not 40K.

But it does mean that Infinity can serve as an introduction to the hobby in general - with a much lower entry cost.

And that is also what a lot of those folks are arguing - get new blood into the hobby with an inexpensive game, there will be time to get your hooks into their souls later for bigger games.

That said - I came in from old style wargaming - Warhammer 40,000 would also be considered a skirmish game, for folks that grew up painting Prussians by the bushel basket. (I miss those days - that bushel basket would cost less than the starter box for 40K....)

I used to use Mordheim to snag people - and it succeeded at that task. A friend uses Necromunda.

My girlfriend was initiated into the cult of the dice by her mum - who played HeroQuest with her very young daughter.

A low entry point makes a big difference.

The Auld Grump

 Ailaros wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:has got six figures for €37 which is about £5 per figure so you could get 90 Infinity figures for the cost of the Knight Titans army.

But that's an absurd comparison.

It's like saying that if you want a cheap automobile, you should buy your next car from Mercedes because you can buy 10 Mercedes CLA's for the price of a single Honda HSV.

Boy, Honda sure makes some expensive cars, I can't imagine how poor people would ever be able to buy any...

That is my point. These comparisons are absurd.

 heartserenade wrote:
IDK man, the usual 40k army is pretty small to me if you compare them to real armies. You'd hardly call 50 men an "army". Does that mean we shouldn't be calling them armies?!?!!!!!?

If people would actually play the point size I want to play so i can field all 500 of my Eldar models then we actually could have small scale armies. I dont have anywhere near to 4,000 guys but I imagine Orks or IG could come close there if they did a 12,000 point army to match my Eldar (I think i'm actually getting closer to 13,000 and once my phantom arrives I will be over 15,000).

 Xerics wrote:
If people would actually play the point size I want to play

I think here lies your main attitude problem with the hobby.

40K is a skirmish game. The rules do not scale well up to large numbers of figures. Simply moving that many models is too time consuming and the UGOIGO turn sequence becomes more and more unbalanced the larger armies get.

 Xerics wrote:


If people would actually play the point size I want to play so i can field all 500 of my Eldar models then we actually could have small scale armies. I dont have anywhere near to 4,000 guys but I imagine Orks or IG could come close there if they did a 12,000 point army to match my Eldar (I think i'm actually getting closer to 13,000 and once my phantom arrives I will be over 15,000).

 Xerics wrote:
Infinity's rules are written for small scale battles.

 Xerics wrote:


i don't see exactly how its supposed to be cheaper.....

........I'm done.

 Xerics wrote:

 heartserenade wrote:
IDK man, the usual 40k army is pretty small to me if you compare them to real armies. You'd hardly call 50 men an "army". Does that mean we shouldn't be calling them armies?!?!!!!!?

If people would actually play the point size I want to play so i can field all 500 of my Eldar models then we actually could have small scale armies. I dont have anywhere near to 4,000 guys but I imagine Orks or IG could come close there if they did a 12,000 point army to match my Eldar (I think i'm actually getting closer to 13,000 and once my phantom arrives I will be over 15,000).

Nope, sorry, still low end of battalion. You've got a couple hundred thousand models to go.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
40K is a skirmish game. The rules do not scale well up to large numbers of figures. Simply moving that many models is too time consuming and the UGOIGO turn sequence becomes more and more unbalanced the larger armies get.

Was wondering when someone would bring that up...

The basic system behind 40K really isn't much different than the original system developed back when it was first released (yes - lots has changed...but you still have the same turn system and conflict resolution...if anything it has become more complicated). That game was a skirmish game, the current version of 40K is still a skirmish game.

You can generally see it on the time each game takes to play. A normal sized game of Infinity or Warmachine (who maintain they are skirmish games) takes about an hour to an hour and a half. A regular sized game of 40K takes 3 to 4 hours (based on what I have heard...and past experience from back in the 4th Ed period). Even with the more complex rules per figure of Infinity - if you were to give yourself 4 hours to play a game...you could probably field armies that were pretty close in size to 40K armies.

By comparison - proper "army" level games (company up to around a battalion - not a full army but a couple hundred figures including vehicles and what not) take around an hour to two hours to play. Even proper army level games (though they are moving outside of "wargames" and more into systems like Axis and Allies at that point) take an hour or two to play (they can of course take much longer if you leave yourself open ended for the victory conditions...but then again, games like 40K normally end because the 6 turns are up...not because they table their opponent).

Better game designers keep things like time to play in mind though when designing their games. Store owners would rather have each table have 4 or 5 games played during the course of a night per table as opposed to one or two. Most hobbyists have a limited amount of time to play as well - and if you are playing at home on a work night (or school night for those who are still wet behind the ears) after dinner you normally only have a few hours time to do much of anything before you need to pack things up.

 Xerics wrote:

 heartserenade wrote:
IDK man, the usual 40k army is pretty small to me if you compare them to real armies. You'd hardly call 50 men an "army". Does that mean we shouldn't be calling them armies?!?!!!!!?

If people would actually play the point size I want to play so i can field all 500 of my Eldar models then we actually could have small scale armies. I dont have anywhere near to 4,000 guys but I imagine Orks or IG could come close there if they did a 12,000 point army to match my Eldar (I think i'm actually getting closer to 13,000 and once my phantom arrives I will be over 15,000).

500 guys is not even close to a real life army. So by your definition, your "army" is not an army.

Bummer.

 heartserenade wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

 heartserenade wrote:
IDK man, the usual 40k army is pretty small to me if you compare them to real armies. You'd hardly call 50 men an "army". Does that mean we shouldn't be calling them armies?!?!!!!!?

If people would actually play the point size I want to play so i can field all 500 of my Eldar models then we actually could have small scale armies. I dont have anywhere near to 4,000 guys but I imagine Orks or IG could come close there if they did a 12,000 point army to match my Eldar (I think i'm actually getting closer to 13,000 and once my phantom arrives I will be over 15,000).

500 guys is not even close to a real life army. So by your definition, your "army" is not an army.

Bummer.

I said "small" army. Is it the entire force of the eldar? No. but in modern age the actual number of people fighting on the battlefield is not 500. Usually its small squads with air support, armor support if need be and alot of troops back at the base supporting the troops at the front. So total force no it isn't an army but its more akin to it then Infinity.

 Xerics wrote:


I said "small" army.

Then why can't 10 people be a "smaller" army? When does it become an army and when does it become just a bunch of guys? Do you get to decide what people should call what they have?

So total force no it isn't an army

So don't call it an army then. Call it "something closer to a real life army than Infinity" but don't call it an "army". Because it's not. Because you said this...

What i am saying is that people buying Infinity Armies" aren't really buying armies.

...guess what in your own words you didn't really buy an army.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
But the people that are arguing that Infinity is more affordable than Warhammer 40K do have a very basic point - the amount of money that you need to spend, just to play the game as it is intended, is much lower for Infinity.

Sure. And I can buy a bicycle for much less money than a car. Which is great... unless I wanted a car.

Yes, Infinity is more affordable than 40K... but that's because it's a different type of game. For those who enjoy skirmish games, that's fine. But it's still a bit of an odd comparison.

Yep - which is why I would compare it to the late-great Necromunda, not 40K.

But it does mean that Infinity can serve as an introduction to the hobby in general - with a much lower entry cost.

And that is also what a lot of those folks are arguing - get new blood into the hobby with an inexpensive game, there will be time to get your hooks into their souls later for bigger games.

That said - I came in from old style wargaming - Warhammer 40,000 would also be considered a skirmish game, for folks that grew up painting Prussians by the bushel basket. (I miss those days - that bushel basket would cost less than the starter box for 40K....)

I used to use Mordheim to snag people - and it succeeded at that task. A friend uses Necromunda.

My girlfriend was initiated into the cult of the dice by her mum - who played HeroQuest with her very young daughter.

A low entry point makes a big difference.

The Auld Grump

The only argument I can make about Infinity being a not so easy game to get into is that the models have a few small pieces that are hard to put together. Otherwise, I agree with the point of using a lower model and point count game in order to get more people in the hobby much more easy, as you do not have to spend a good amount just to play.

Also, is the OP implying that Infinity is not a game since it does not have 'armies' in the sense of 40k?

 heartserenade wrote:

 Xerics wrote:


I said "small" army.

Then why can't 10 people be a "smaller" army? When does it become an army and when does it become just a bunch of guys? Do you get to decide what people should call what they have?

So total force no it isn't an army

So don't call it an army then. Call it "something closer to a real life army than Infinity" but don't call it an "army". Because it's not. Because you said this...

What i am saying is that people buying Infinity Armies" aren't really buying armies.

...guess what in your own words you didn't really buy an army.

instead of taking snippets you might want to read the whole thing. You are taking small portions of an entire topic and twisting it to suit your needs. your as bad as the tabloids that fill the stands with piles of crap nobody cares to know.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seems like there is a massed amount of people posting in this thread that aren't reading the initial post or are twisting it out of context at this point.

Will a MOD please lock this thread I don't think there is anymore that needs to be said here as it is way off topic at this point.

 Xerics wrote:

Seems like there is a massed amount of people posting in this thread that aren't reading the initial post or are twisting it out of context at this point.

Will a MOD please lock this thread I don't think there is anymore that needs to be said here as it is way off topic at this point.

Well, as there was nothing of value to be said in the first place, this thread shouldn't even have been started.

~Tim?

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

Seems like there is a massed amount of people posting in this thread that aren't reading the initial post or are twisting it out of context at this point.

Will a MOD please lock this thread I don't think there is anymore that needs to be said here as it is way off topic at this point.

Well, as there was nothing of value to be said in the first place, this thread shouldn't even have been started.

~Tim?

If you aren't going to post something relevant please don't post. Threads already off rails to begin with due to posts like this.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
40K is a skirmish game. The rules do not scale well up to large numbers of figures. Simply moving that many models is too time consuming and the UGOIGO turn sequence becomes more and more unbalanced the larger armies get.

+1.

40k is a game where you have no chain of command or similar system, move each and every soldier, take into account their equipment, and remove each casualty INDIVIDUALLY. It clearly implies that 1 mini = 1 soldier. So, it's basically a platoon-level game, with a Lieutenant, maybe a Captain as "general".
Necromunda could almost have been an addon to 2nd ed 40k instead of a standalone game.

40k is definitely a "big Necromunda", NOT a "small Epic".

 Xerics wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

Seems like there is a massed amount of people posting in this thread that aren't reading the initial post or are twisting it out of context at this point.

Will a MOD please lock this thread I don't think there is anymore that needs to be said here as it is way off topic at this point.

Well, as there was nothing of value to be said in the first place, this thread shouldn't even have been started.

~Tim?

If you aren't going to post something relevant please don't post. Threads already off rails to begin with due to posts like this.

The thread itself was never about anything relevant. It was you attempting to troll people who play Infinity by stating what they're buying aren't 'armies'.

Even though, as stated multiple times, neither are the 40k 'armies' you're buying, by your own definition of the term using model count comparisons to real world armies.

So you started the thread to troll people for doing something you do yourself - buy small groups of models and call them an army.

This is a non-thread, and the only reason you're getting replies is it's fun to troll a troll.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

Seems like there is a massed amount of people posting in this thread that aren't reading the initial post or are twisting it out of context at this point.

Will a MOD please lock this thread I don't think there is anymore that needs to be said here as it is way off topic at this point.

Well, as there was nothing of value to be said in the first place, this thread shouldn't even have been started.

~Tim?

If you aren't going to post something relevant please don't post. Threads already off rails to begin with due to posts like this.

The thread itself was never about anything relevant. It was you attempting to troll people who play Infinity by stating what they're buying aren't 'armies'.

Even though, as stated multiple times, neither are the 40k 'armies' you're buying, by your own definition of the term using model count comparisons to real world armies.

So you started the thread to troll people for doing something you do yourself - buy small groups of models and call them an army.

This is a non-thread, and the only reason you're getting replies is it's fun to troll a troll.

Please re-read the original post. Seeing as how alot of Infinity players were stating that they could buy 6 "armies" without ever giving reference to the size of an Infinity "army". I feel like if they paid a small amount of money for the same number of models then they would have a valid point but since the price per model is literally the same there is nothing for those people to stand on.

 Tanakosyke22 wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
But the people that are arguing that Infinity is more affordable than Warhammer 40K do have a very basic point - the amount of money that you need to spend, just to play the game as it is intended, is much lower for Infinity.

Sure. And I can buy a bicycle for much less money than a car. Which is great... unless I wanted a car.

Yes, Infinity is more affordable than 40K... but that's because it's a different type of game. For those who enjoy skirmish games, that's fine. But it's still a bit of an odd comparison.

Yep - which is why I would compare it to the late-great Necromunda, not 40K.

But it does mean that Infinity can serve as an introduction to the hobby in general - with a much lower entry cost.

And that is also what a lot of those folks are arguing - get new blood into the hobby with an inexpensive game, there will be time to get your hooks into their souls later for bigger games.

That said - I came in from old style wargaming - Warhammer 40,000 would also be considered a skirmish game, for folks that grew up painting Prussians by the bushel basket. (I miss those days - that bushel basket would cost less than the starter box for 40K....)

I used to use Mordheim to snag people - and it succeeded at that task. A friend uses Necromunda.

My girlfriend was initiated into the cult of the dice by her mum - who played HeroQuest with her very young daughter.

A low entry point makes a big difference.

The Auld Grump

The only argument I can make about Infinity being a not so easy game to get into is that the models have a few small pieces that are hard to put together. Otherwise, I agree with the point of using a lower model and point count game in order to get more people in the hobby much more easy, as you do not have to spend a good amount just to play.

Also, is the OP implying that Infinity is not a game since it does not have 'armies' in the sense of 40k?

Mmmm.. okay, yeah. I can see that.

I didn't have that problem, but I can see it.

Infinity could really use some plastic models....

*EDIT* Or resin, for that matter.

The Auld Grump

 Xerics wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

Seems like there is a massed amount of people posting in this thread that aren't reading the initial post or are twisting it out of context at this point.

Will a MOD please lock this thread I don't think there is anymore that needs to be said here as it is way off topic at this point.

Well, as there was nothing of value to be said in the first place, this thread shouldn't even have been started.

~Tim?

If you aren't going to post something relevant please don't post. Threads already off rails to begin with due to posts like this.

The thread itself was never about anything relevant. It was you attempting to troll people who play Infinity by stating what they're buying aren't 'armies'.

Even though, as stated multiple times, neither are the 40k 'armies' you're buying, by your own definition of the term using model count comparisons to real world armies.

So you started the thread to troll people for doing something you do yourself - buy small groups of models and call them an army.

This is a non-thread, and the only reason you're getting replies is it's fun to troll a troll.

Please re-read the original post. Seeing as how alot of Infinity players were stating that they could buy 6 "armies" without ever giving reference to the size of an Infinity "army". I feel like if they paid a small amount of money for the same number of models then they would have a valid point but since the price per model is literally the same there is nothing for those people to stand on.

You are, again, applying your own incorrect idea of what consitutes a tabletop army, and attempting to troll others for not thinking the same way.

Army, regarding tabletop wargames, is a very loose description. Outside of small scale historicals or even smaller scale sci fi, nothing actually has the numbers to be called an army. But we do it anyway.

Price per model means nothing. A standard 'army' in Infinity is about 10 models. A standard 'army' in 40k is about 50 models. A standard 'army' in Warmachine (from what I've seen in my FLGS, I don't actually play it) is about 30 models. None of them have enough models to aptly fit the description of 'army'.

If someone says they can buy 6 Infinity 'armies' for the price of 1 40k 'army', they're not incorrect. They're buying 6 standard sized armies for Infinity compared to one standard sized army for 40k. They're getting about the same amount of models, but 6 times the variety. And again, 'army', as a loose descriptor in tabletop wargaming, is fine regardless of the game.

This thread is irrelevant. You simply applied your own false logic to the idea of what constitutes an army in Infinity without doing any research, then decided to make a thread attempting to troll people.

But don't you get it? A 40k "army" is not an "army" as well, as I and Loki have pointed out. Soooo.... why is using the word army misleading?

instead of taking snippets you might want to read the whole thing. You are taking small portions of an entire topic and twisting it to suit your needs. your as bad as the tabloids that fill the stands with piles of crap nobody cares to know.

Oh trust me, I've read the whole thing. I don't think I'm misinterpreting you. It's not my fault if, by your logic, you're contradicting youself.

SO if we follow your logic:

Deathwing and Draigowing players shouldn't call their army lists "armies". People who play in 500 points shouldn't call their army lists "armies" ONLY PEOPLE WITH 500+ MODELS HAVE THE RIGHT TO CALL THEIR ARMIES ARMIES. Bcause they're the size of a small army, yo.

Isn't that what you're saying? Model count should represent an army, and Infinity doesn't satisfy that model count (which means all those examples mentioned above fits in that category as well) therefore people shouldn't call it an "army". No one is misinterpreting when you said this:

Lol i don't actually buy from GW. I buy old modle sfrom e-bay. What i am saying is that people buying Infinity Armies" aren't really buying armies. What they should be saying when they rage quit 40K is that they are going to sell off their warhammer armies for multiple squads of Infinity as thats the level it is played on. Saying you are buying 6 Infinity "Armies" is a huge exaggeration when its only 5-6 models in the starter and usually not more then 10 per side which is a squad.

 Xerics wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

Seems like there is a massed amount of people posting in this thread that aren't reading the initial post or are twisting it out of context at this point.

Will a MOD please lock this thread I don't think there is anymore that needs to be said here as it is way off topic at this point.

Well, as there was nothing of value to be said in the first place, this thread shouldn't even have been started.

~Tim?

If you aren't going to post something relevant please don't post. Threads already off rails to begin with due to posts like this.

The thread itself was never about anything relevant. It was you attempting to troll people who play Infinity by stating what they're buying aren't 'armies'.

Even though, as stated multiple times, neither are the 40k 'armies' you're buying, by your own definition of the term using model count comparisons to real world armies.

So you started the thread to troll people for doing something you do yourself - buy small groups of models and call them an army.

This is a non-thread, and the only reason you're getting replies is it's fun to troll a troll.

Please re-read the original post. Seeing as how alot of Infinity players were stating that they could buy 6 "armies" without ever giving reference to the size of an Infinity "army". I feel like if they paid a small amount of money for the same number of models then they would have a valid point but since the price per model is literally the same there is nothing for those people to stand on.

Or maybe, just maybe, you are being picky about the words when it is in your favor and then hand waving things when the argument turns against you.

So, to define terms - 'Army' means the force used to play a game.

In Infinity an 'Army' can be a dozen figures.

In Warhammer 40K an 'Army' can be eight dozen figures.

Infinity assumes that the players will each have about a dozen figures for their 'Army'. And that those dozen figures are all that they will need.

Warhammer 40K assumes that the players will have about two dozen figures for their 'Army' - to start with, and that each player will want to expand that 'Army'.

Happier, now that terms have been defined?

The force or 'Army' that each player needs to play the game, beyond a starting level, costs a great deal more for 40K than it does for Infinity - simply because a player of Infinity will never need to expand his or her force beyond a certain point.

A single unit in Warhammer 40K costs as much as the entire force in Infinity.

It is fair to say that you did not like what you saw of Infinity - you are allowed to dislike the game.

What people are objecting to is that your argument is not about what you like or do not like, it is the way that you are claiming that it is not a less expensive game - when, objectively and demonstrably, it is indeed less expensive.

If you were to claim that each model in Infinity is not inherently less expensive than in WH40K.... a starter pack of Infinity miniatures, typically six miniatures, runs about the same price as a unit of ten space marines - but unlike that unit of space marines the Infinity starter can be used to play a game as the game is intended to be played.

So, the 40K player would need to buy at least one more box of space marines, and a command unit - which would also run about $40.

A similar argument can be made for WARMACHINE or Hordes.

The scale of the game is different, but the price per model is roughly similar.

Flames of War on the other hand.....

The Auld grump - who enjoys Over the Top, but trying to find folks that want to play a WWI game....

 TheAuldGrump wrote:


<snip>
Infinity could really use some plastic models....

*EDIT* Or resin, for that matter.

The Auld Grump

Won't happen. CB is quite set against plastic because that would mean outsourcing to China, and that they would have to fire a bunch of people in Spain to afford it. They have emphatically stated that they won't do this. I can respect this position too. Resin? Ah, there is an interesting subject. They like working with the metal because they have complete control over everything. Now, if they could get a resin that allows them to do the same things that they can do with the metal, but at a lower cost...

Size doesn't matter, baby. It's the motion of the ocean that causes the commotion.

CB sticks with metal for miniatures, because it gives the most possible detail and casting options, and the highest level of manufacturable quality.

Seriously, Infinity Miniatures have the least flash and mould lines of any I've ever seen, and I've owned, built and painted a lot of GW, PP, Wyrd, Spartan, Dark Age, Heavy Gear, Infinity, Reaper, and other minis.

I cannot imagine them ever using Resin, or god forbid, Plastic to reproduce the real detail they have on those models. The engineering cost in terms of sculpt flexibility and loss of quality would be catastrophic.

Oh, I won't argue about the quality of the miniatures - they are indeed quite good, and, as I have mentioned, I like them much better than the GW miniatures. (I prefer a 'true' scale to a 'heroic' scale.)

But plastic/resin is a lot easier to play around with, for modding. (My favorite plastic GW miniatures are from the period where arms, legs, torsos, and heads were all separate pieces, and could be mixed and matched at whim. I hate their current mono-pose models.)

The Auld Grump

 Xerics wrote:
I just saw what Infinity was today at my FLGS and realized what everyone says when they can buy 6 armies for the price of their one warhammer 40k army.

The size of an army in Infinity is about the same amount of models as a kill team game of 40k... Also there are no big models. They are all little people (or at least that I saw). Needless to say I wasn't impressed and anyone who says "I can but 6 infinity armies for the same price" well of course you can because the games are kill team sized.

Oh man....


This is how you started the conversation, now you backpeddled yourself into a corner with that shoe hanging out of your mouth?


Lets roll this back...

"I just saw infinity today for the first time, it really was quite different then what I expected to see, how on earth do you all handle it with all of those choices?"

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Oh, I won't argue about the quality of the miniatures - they are indeed quite good, and, as I have mentioned, I like them much better than the GW miniatures. (I prefer a 'true' scale to a 'heroic' scale.)

But plastic/resin is a lot easier to play around with, for modding. (My favorite plastic GW miniatures are from the period where arms, legs, torsos, and heads were all separate pieces, and could be mixed and matched at whim. I hate their current mono-pose models.)

The Auld Grump

That would be a concern if converting was a thing in Infinity. Outside of weapons swaps for missing profiles (which isn't strictly needed as WYSIWIG is pretty relaxed in Infinity) there's no reason to convert.

Even as someone who used to despise working with metal, I'll take it for Infinity models considering the detail on these things.

So wait infinity isn't 40k but actually a completely different game? Glad that was cleared up for me.

I cannot follow the logic behind the OP's arguments, I can see it a defensive stance, but I may be assuming too much.

In any case, if one compares Infinity to 40k as a wargame system then Infinity is cheaper wargame system, not only by model count, but overall things required to play.

At the cost of an average 40k army without extras, including books, an Infinity player can easily have a force with extras, the books and terrain to play and probably have enough funds left to get another force or two.

Is the model count the same, no of course not, should it be? no of course not, they are different systems and their respective manufacturers have set a different model count and entry price point.

So, what people say when they compare a wargame system to a wargame system is correct, Infinity is cheaper to get into and play with a proper force (or army if you are so inclined to say).

And if you are not impressed, by all means please feel free to use the free rules, army lists and army list building program to proxy a few games and see why Infinity is so well liked by its players.

To be frank, 40K is almost certainly the most expensive wargame system of any type to play, assuming you use the official GW models, although it uses small numbers of figures compared to mass battle historical games.

I cannot think of a more expensive system barring making your own custom project.

Historical and smaller scale games especially are impressively cheaper than most systems too.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
I cannot think of a more expensive system barring making your own custom project.

I've said this in other threads, but it's worth repeating. My 1500pt Tyranid army cost me nearly $1000au at retail. On top of that I've got a few things I bought simply to have, like a Heirophant. But that bog standard, 1500pt Tyranid army was nearly $1000au. Without considering rulebooks, supplements, the codex or even hobby supplies to build and paint it or dice and templates and such to actually play the game.

For that chunk of change I could have bought, as the OP was trying to troll about, 5-6 Infinity 'armies'. Not 10 models each, but 15 or so each to give myself variety. Buying at retail. If I wanted, I could even drop it to 3 'armies' and a boatload of awesome MDF terrain to make a kick ass urban table for my friends and I to game on, also bought all 3 source books, and templates and dice and tokens.

 -Loki- wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Oh, I won't argue about the quality of the miniatures - they are indeed quite good, and, as I have mentioned, I like them much better than the GW miniatures. (I prefer a 'true' scale to a 'heroic' scale.)

But plastic/resin is a lot easier to play around with, for modding. (My favorite plastic GW miniatures are from the period where arms, legs, torsos, and heads were all separate pieces, and could be mixed and matched at whim. I hate their current mono-pose models.)

The Auld Grump

That would be a concern if converting was a thing in Infinity. Outside of weapons swaps for missing profiles (which isn't strictly needed as WYSIWIG is pretty relaxed in Infinity) there's no reason to convert.

Even as someone who used to despise working with metal, I'll take it for Infinity models considering the detail on these things.

Yep - different aspects of the same hobby, even if we are talking about the same game.

I like converting miniatures, but a lot of folks just like to paint and play.

And, at its core, liking to convert models is a big part of why I prefer Necromunda to Infinity - the figures feel more like individuals.

I like messing with the models - which makes plastics better for my purposes.

Hell... I am looking at the plastics coming out for Malifaux... and I don't even play the game. (I may play Into the Breach, later....)

But if you just want to paint the miniatures the metal models have a heck of a lot more detail.

Both arguments are equally valid.

The Auld Grump

Personally never saw the "plastic is better for conversions" beyond GW metals who were both badly cast and thick, metal models are not that much more difficult to work with than plastics just different, of course the multipose plastics GW has are already segmented and this is what people usually refer to as "easier to convert" but to get a good natural pose from them is even more difficult (I would also argue this is kitbashing) than monopose models regardless of material.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Personally never saw the "plastic is better for conversions" beyond GW metals who were both badly cast and thick, metal models are not that much more difficult to work with than plastics just different, of course the multipose plastics GW has are already segmented and this is what people usually refer to as "easier to convert" but to get a good natural pose from them is even more difficult (I would also argue this is kitbashing) than monopose models regardless of material.

That also depends on the type metal, older mini's have softer metal and GW's white metal was not easy to work on.

One local guy is using the Reaper Bones sci-fi guys that sort of have that gears of war look for his infinity stuff. IMEF. That's what they're called:

https://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/imef

Six figures is not a lot, but he's going to combine them with resin bitz weapons like from Chapterhouse or Anvil Industries or whatever. That bones stuff chops up super easy. EDIT: Oh, it looks like Reaper has another six sci-fi poses in their Nova Corps guys: https://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/nova%20corp

Anway, back to the representation of an army on the table top:

For many historical players, representing an entire army is the norm. Ancient gamers, for example, will represent everything that was at a given historical battle. Same goes for middle ages and into the horse & musket era. And how do they represent 10,000+ troops per side?

Figure ratio. Or stand ratio. Each actual element you move around the table will have a certain number of figures on it but represent a historical formation. A single base with 4 or 10 or whatever miniatures on it could represent 1000 soldiers.

40k and Infinity are 1:1 whereas these other games are 1:X. So if you want to be pedantic, unless you are playing a 1:X game where each figure represents multiple soldiers, "army" is just a colloquial way to talk about the subset of your collection that is going to appear in the game.

That's all "army" means. It's also why it's true that you can get 6 Infinity armies for the price of 1 40k army. Because armies are just a subset of your collection that will appear in a given game.

If we are defining terms when someone says army in regards to a wargame they almost certainly mean a playable force or possibly just a bunch of models meant to be on the same side in game.

 carlos13th wrote:
If we are defining terms when someone says army in regards to a wargame they almost certainly mean a playable force or possibly just a bunch of models meant to be on the same side in game.

Exactly. And exalted!

Infinity does take a considerable investment in terrain though, if you're playing as described in rulebooks.

Love the miniatures and enjoy the game! Lots of ways to bring down the enemy, not just a single hard counter.

So does 40K.

Actually it takes a larger investment as you have to buy the very expensive GW official kits.

The only reason we use army in a wargaming context is that we are replacing our old green plastic army men with grey plastic army men.

Marx army men would work well with the Bolt Action rules I would think.....

MMMM.... Guns of Navarone, anyone?

 Swan-of-War wrote:
Infinity does take a considerable investment in terrain though, if you're playing as described in rulebooks.

Actually, thanks to the range of cheap MDF terrain out there, buying a table of Infinity terrain can be cheaper than filling out a 40k board, especially if you use the official 40k terrain.

If I bought my terrain from a popular Australian MDF terrain maker, Blind Pig Laser, I could fill out a board for less than $150au. Even going with an official partner, I could fill a board out with Plast Craft terrain for $150au easily.

$150au would get me 3-4 different ruined buildings for 40k, not nearly enough to actually fill up the recommended 25% of the table.

Infinity terrain is only expensive if you make it expensive by buying expensive terrain. The system is drowning in affordable official and unofficial terrain.

 Grot 6 wrote:
Marx army men would work well with the Bolt Action rules I would think.....

MMMM.... Guns of Navarone, anyone?

*Blink, blink*

Yes!

I ran a Fallout game, not that long ago, titled Guns of Splash Mountain... Guns of Navarone at the Happiest Place on Earth - with the Enclave putting a gun installation in that venerable attraction....

(Disneyworld had two main plots - the other was The Darkened Tunnels, with the cryogenically suspended remains of Uncle Walt....)

The Auld Grump - Walt Disney On Ice! (That really was an urban legend, when I was younger....)

 Swan-of-War wrote:
Infinity does take a considerable investment in terrain though, if you're playing as described in rulebooks.

Love the miniatures and enjoy the game! Lots of ways to bring down the enemy, not just a single hard counter.

my first games of infinity consisted of

VHS tapes, tissue boxes, salt and pepper shakers, those giant legos for little kids and sometimes a cat.

Infinity does need a lot of terrain, buying some of that professional stuff can be pricey to fill up a table. But objects around the house will fit the build as it would with most war games.

 Piston Honda wrote:

 Swan-of-War wrote:
Infinity does take a considerable investment in terrain though, if you're playing as described in rulebooks.

Love the miniatures and enjoy the game! Lots of ways to bring down the enemy, not just a single hard counter.

my first games of infinity consisted of

VHS tapes, tissue boxes, salt and pepper shakers, those giant legos for little kids and sometimes a cat.

Infinity does need a lot of terrain, buying some of that professional stuff can be pricey to fill up a table. But objects around the house will fit the build as it would with most war games.

Hell I use text books and that if I am demoing it and I am not at my FLGS. Sure it is not as optimal, but it works well if you do not have the money to buy the terrain or the time to create the terrain and you want to teach the game.

So, I'm an Armor Captain in the US Army. And thought I would jump in here with some fun. In the US Army (as in many other Armies), an "Army" is an actual maneuver unit

For scale. A Fire Team is 4-5 Guys. A Squad is two Teams, standard rifle squad is 9 men. A Platoon is 3-5 squads, so roughly 40 guys (varies greatly). A Company/Troop/Battery is 3-5 Platoons, roughly 150 guys. A Battalion/Squadron is 3-5 Companies, generally 400-1000 Soldiers. A Brigade Combat Team is 5-8 Battalions/Squadrons, and roughly 4-6 thousand Soldiers. A Division is 2+ Brigades, and clocking in at over 10,000 Soldiers. A Corps is 2+ Divisions, and finally, an Army is 2+ Corps.

The tournament standard in 40k is 1850. The cheapest base Troop unit I can think of in 40k is a Grot, at 3 points. If I filled my entire force with Grots I would have 617 grots (rounding up). This is still a Battalion level element. More realistically, most armies are hovering in the Platoon Plus to Company Minus level. 40k "Armies" are no more armies than Infinity ones.....that was a silly knock on Infinity (which I don't even play. DZC is obviously where it is at, hehe)

So you mean 500 models is *gasp* not an army?!? WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT.

 heartserenade wrote:
So you mean 500 models is *gasp* not an army?!? WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT.

If they were Spartans, they'd be 200 surplus to requirements to be an army

Well, those 300 is merely Leonidas's bodyguard. Not the actual Spartan army. And those 300 also have 300 helots (slaves) with them, so that's 600 at least. I might be wrong since this is from memory.

Man, I sound like a know-it-all.

Ancient historians were terrible. Herodotus basically just took down tales and legends as if they were facts. Pretty much everything the ancient stories tell of the battle was likely at least partially wrong. The Persian & Greek numbers definitely were. There was likely around 1000 Theban & Thespian hoplites present there as well as the 300 Spartan ones. And probably an equal number of sling and bow armed non-citizen/slave warriors. Herodotus' telling is pretty much no more believable than a movie rendition of it with war rhinos.

Well the fact he was the first to bother recording semi actual/ almost present (for his era) information, makes him the "first historian" but that does not make him or the ones after him perfect.

I think the estimation of around or slightly over 2000 combatants for the Greeks would not be wrong, maybe even more than that and we talk about the rearguard.

As far as Infinity terrain, thanks to the official and unofficial terrain companies one can make a table at under 150 EU, which is not that bad.

I love me my spartan scenics for infinity. $100 USD covers a 4x4 decent.

 Kilkrazy wrote:


I'm not sure how many Infinity models you can buy for £450.

I'd say you wouldn't be too far off if you said "most of them."

Wow! 4 pages too!

I have a space marine army with a few options. Probably cost over £1000.

I have an aleph army with a few options. Probably cost less than £100.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist now does it?

 cincydooley wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


I'm not sure how many Infinity models you can buy for £450.

I'd say you wouldn't be too far off if you said "most of them."

Depends on the faction.

For Aleph and Tohaa, I'd say 'all of them'. For any of the launch factions, yeah, most of them. Which would also open up between 2 - 3 additional sectorial army lists (soon to be 4-5 with the next campaign book).

So while 'most of them' is quite accurate, it's also worth noting just what that gets you in terms of in game flexibility. It's like getting Codex Space Marines, Codex Space Wolves, Codex Blood Angels and Codex Dark Angels all at the same time, with Codex Space Marines having everything from the others as well, but with some hard limits on how many they can take of certain units (like the old 0-1 limits)..

A game of Infinity takes more thought into strategy and tactics than a game of 40k. I sold my Imperial Fist "ARMY" and got two infinity ARMIES and some Warmachine stuff.

It's not about the size of the force, it's about the game. I now how two playble, full size forces for Infinity and the game is more rewarding for me. (That part's subjective, btw.)

Also, I like the mini's more. I like the realistic scale, the detail and the dynamic poses and character that some of the Infinity models have.

One thing to definitely keep in mind about 'skirmish' vs 'army' games as a discussion is that aside from modelcount, there's certainly the matter of UNIT count.

What do I mean by this?

10 Soldiers in Infinity are 10 Hard Units. As in, each one is an independently maneuverable game entity ,that does stuff like shoot, open doors, jump off ledges, throw smoke, hack cyberspace, etc.

In Warhammer 40k, 1 Commander, 2 Tanks and 30 Tac Marines are actually only 6 hard units. You have a Hero, 2 independently maneuverable tanks, and 3 squads of troopers who are pretty much just hitpoints for the unit, that contribute additional attacks, possibly from marginally different ranges. This is more extreme even in Fantasy, since you could have 100 figures being '1 unit' easilly, and their only game function is to provide a footprint for the unit, and act as a hitpoint counter.

In Warmachine, you could have 1 Warcaster, 3 Warjacks, and 1 squad of 10 guys.
This would be 5 hard units, one of which is consisting of 10 'soft' units.
This is because in Warmachine, the infantry unit that activates together as a unit, actually moves independently each with little interaction, can choose independent targets, and serve as individual blockers on your maneuvers and enemy maneuvers


---

Why does tihs matter? Because well, there really isn't a difference in pure gameplay of what constitutes an 'army'. Every one of these examples had similar numbers of units. Only some games have a lower physical modelcount, and have rulesets that require less models for an engaging game.

The other chunk is, how many armies can you make with your combination of units? In 40k, 1500 points may well be a playable list, but how much can you vary with that? In Warmachine, swapping out the Warcaster alone changes the game immensely. In Infinity, swapping out 3 or 4 individual soldiers turns your list into something very different.

So yes, those games are much cheaper to play than 40k. Individual models may be as expensive, but the games themselves are played with the same numbers of 'Units' (or more), but less physical models typically. While this does allow for an increased variation in the number of armies one can field for the same cost, as well.

 Killionaire wrote:
One thing to definitely keep in mind about 'skirmish' vs 'army' games as a discussion is that aside from modelcount, there's certainly the matter of UNIT count.

What do I mean by this?

10 Soldiers in Infinity are 10 Hard Units. As in, each one is an independently maneuverable game entity ,that does stuff like shoot, open doors, jump off ledges, throw smoke, hack cyberspace, etc.

In Warhammer 40k, 1 Commander, 2 Tanks and 30 Tac Marines are actually only 6 hard units. You have a Hero, 2 independently maneuverable tanks, and 3 squads of troopers who are pretty much just hitpoints for the unit, that contribute additional attacks, possibly from marginally different ranges. This is more extreme even in Fantasy, since you could have 100 figures being '1 unit' easilly, and their only game function is to provide a footprint for the unit, and act as a hitpoint counter.

In Warmachine, you could have 1 Warcaster, 3 Warjacks, and 1 squad of 10 guys.
This would be 5 hard units, one of which is consisting of 10 'soft' units.
This is because in Warmachine, the infantry unit that activates together as a unit, actually moves independently each with little interaction, can choose independent targets, and serve as individual blockers on your maneuvers and enemy maneuvers

That's a really good way of putting it. I might use this in the future (as opposed to a vague "immersiveness" or whatnot).

Basically 40k has a higher model count, but the models are often meaningless as actual game elements. The game element (or hard unit) is the entire squad. In Infinity every miniature is a game element/hard unit. In Warmachine/Hordes you have a hybrid where some effects target the entire squad while other mechanics (like actually making attacks or being subject to damaging attacks) are done on a model by model basis, so you get the 1:1 model:element ratio on the soft units.

The end result is that 40k, despite being an army game, actually has less tactical depth per miniature. And the larger footprint of the squads and large vehicles means you also can have way less maneuver and tactics than Infinity. You cram more models on the table, but actually get a shallower experience rather than a deeper one.

And now I desperately wish I didn't have a mortgage to pay because I want spend ALL THE MONIES on ALL the Infinity stuff.

I have handed out many Exalts here on this thread. Some things are just too funny or true not to.

I myself do not own an Infinity force but I am looking in to it, once I get a job.
The thing is 40K is dying for me. I have a small IG force but it has cost me through the nose (Around £4-500) for such a small (Barely normal game level) force when compared too the Warmachine Cryx army that has cost me.... less than £100 for an entire 35PT tournament legal army with two caster options. I also enjoy Warmachine more, and find the rules have less flaws.

Or the £100 I spent on a 750PT Darkage Forsaken force with a few options that is also at tournament level, and contains a special character (Saint Mary) for the commander. The equivalent in 40K would have bankrupted me.
The rules for Darkage are, once again, also free to download.

Non of these would be regarded as true armies by the OP's standards, with the IG having around 100 models plus 2 Chimera's, 1 Hellhound and 2 Sentinel's, The Cryx having 19 models and the Forsaken having 14 models.

Hell, my ancients early Carthagian era navy contains only 6 ships so far, with a 7th on its way, 2x Triremes (one is the command vessel) and 4x Biremes and a Pentacoster merchantman with another Trireme on its way along with another Bireme.

The OP seems to be a form of whiney child that does not why others like things that he does not, and seems to believe that his view of the TT hobby is the only one that it right and all others should bow down to him.
Its sad really, and rather pathetic but if he gets his kicks from 40K and is willing to keep on throwing hundreds of pounds at them then good for him.

Just a heads up for those who were reading this thread and getting interested:

Infinity has a two player starter box in the works. It will most likely be out in the fall.

Im in. By then I will hopefully have a job

[edit]

I also need to fully remove myself from the over bloated and massively expansive Skirmish-game-that-is-trying-to-be-a-large-scale-Battle-game that 40K has become.

Also, third edition will likely clear up most of the complaints that I, and others have had with the game.

First and foremost doing a better job on the rules writing. The latest version of the rulebook was a huge step forward, but there was still plenty of things that needed fixing.

Well, at least I hope they do something better with link-teams, keeping the concept of them, but making the implementation better.

Link Teams aren't being touched as far as we know, since they are a Human Sphere piece.

It's an entirely new edition, unless they've specific said they aren't redoing it, then there's no better time to redo a rule that has as many issues as link teams does.

 Vertrucio wrote:
It's an entirely new edition, unless they've specific said they aren't redoing it, then there's no better time to redo a rule that has as many issues as link teams does.

They've said they aren't.

N3 replaces, rewrites and fixes the second edition rulebook. It's designed to seamlessly work with Human Sphere and Paradiso and later Acheron Falls.

Content from later books will not be in N3. They went over this at Ficzone.

Well, that makes me a lot less interested in the new version then.

What's wrong with Fireteams?

Yeah, I gotta agree - what's wrong with fireteams? They're represent a leader and a supporting fireteam really well. Leader is covered by his buddies. The more cover he's getting, the better he can aim and concentrate his burst (represented by the +1 burst and +3 BS), and the better they are at covering him (represented by the Sixth Sense level 2).

I do admit I was hoping they'd do a 'one book to rule them all' deal with N3, but that's only because I get irritated lugging 3 books around with me. There's nothing wrong with the rules in Human Sphere or Paradiso aside from needing, like the main rules, a little cleaning up.

All they are doing is tightening up the interactions and how the main rules work (since apparently a lot of ex-WM/H players don't like them).

NOT rolling HS and paradiso into the main rules, not redoing fireteams (all versions of the rule - standard, Haris, Enomotarchos and Tohaa versions).

Just a reworking of the main rules. Maybe some new art, too (because some of the main rule artwork is ... dated)

You don't have to buy them if you don't want to - they WILL be released as a download later on.

 -Loki- wrote:
Yeah, I gotta agree - what's wrong with fireteams? They're represent a leader and a supporting fireteam really well. Leader is covered by his buddies. The more cover he's getting, the better he can aim and concentrate his burst (represented by the +1 burst and +3 BS), and the better they are at covering him (represented by the Sixth Sense level 2).

I do admit I was hoping they'd do a 'one book to rule them all' deal with N3, but that's only because I get irritated lugging 3 books around with me. There's nothing wrong with the rules in Human Sphere or Paradiso aside from needing, like the main rules, a little cleaning up.

After seeing the rules for link teams, they are unnecessarily complex, a product of taping the concept of a squad into an individual skirmish game after the fact.

I don't argue that the concept of a squad or fire team is needed in the game to make basic troops better to offset the power creep of later expansions and miniatures, but the implementation is junk and overall indicative of Infinity's inefficient rules, layout, and writing.

The best way to make it better is to make link teams as part of the core rules as a concept that is more interwoven with the core rules. This is why I think their decision not to combine the basic rules into 1 new edition is idiocy, and a bit money grabbing. They're so afraid of missing out on some paltry book sales that they refuse to solidify their rules. The sad thing is, Human Sphere and Paradiso are probably still just as valid if they combined the rules into the new edition, since those were campaign and expansion books that added more to the game than a few rules.

Warmachine players have every right to complain because, regardless of what people may think about Warmachine as a game, it has a very tight set of rules. Although these days I think Flames of War is written better now.

 Vertrucio wrote:
After seeing the rules for link teams, they are unnecessarily complex, a product of taping the concept of a squad into an individual skirmish game after the fact.

I again disagree. They're no more complex than the base rules of the game, and once you actually get the hang of them, they're a pretty simple mechanic. The problem is the usual one with Infinity - pages and pages of rules that could be summed up neatly on a single page, but due to the flowery nature of the Spanish language and the fact that they often reword translations to make them needlessly complex.

Link team rules really aren't complex - you learn this after actually playing them. Much like the game itself isn't really complex, which you learn after playing a few games. Simply making a judgement after reading them doesn't really work with Infinity because of translation issues.

 Vertrucio wrote:
I don't argue that the concept of a squad or fire team is needed in the game to make basic troops better to offset the power creep of later expansions and miniatures, but the implementation is junk and overall indicative of Infinity's inefficient rules, layout, and writing.

This shows a lack of understanding of the game. There is no 'creep'. Line infantry from the core rulebook are still 100% as viable after Paradiso as they were in the initial rulebook before Human Sphere. In fact, some factions basic line infantry are often cited as downright nasty, like Haqqislams Naffatun.

I won't argue about the layout and overall writing of the rules. It's bad. That's the reason there's a fan edit that modernises the way the rules are written. And you know what? This is why 3rd edition is being released. To have a better, more coherent framework to hang expansions off. It's not going to be a gameplay shakeup like a Games Workshop edition, and it's not going to roll all books into one. It's going to rewrite and retranslate the core rules and give them a better layout, while also doing some refinement and adding a few new things.

It's about fixing the very thing you are complaining about, though yes it's unfortunate that it's not touching later books. The fact you are 'less excited' for something that is purpose built to fix your greivances makes no sense.

 Vertrucio wrote:
The best way to make it better is to make link teams as part of the core rules as a concept that is more interwoven with the core rules. This is why I think their decision not to combine the basic rules into 1 new edition is idiocy, and a bit money grabbing. They're so afraid of missing out on some paltry book sales that they refuse to solidify their rules. The sad thing is, Human Sphere and Paradiso are probably still just as valid if they combined the rules into the new edition, since those were campaign and expansion books that added more to the game than a few rules.

They already are core rules that are interwoven with the core mechanics. They're not an optional supplement. If someone uses a sectorial list, they will have access to link teams and those rules, with no need to agree with the opponent. All of the interactions made by units with link teams, or link teams with units, use the core rules from the core rulebook. The link team rules only limit the actions that can be performed by the link or apply bonuses to the link and cover how to actually form a link.

This is why they aren't touching link teams. The link team rules themselves are fine. Because the basic link team rules are really quite simple. It's how they interact with the core rules that causes questions. The idea is fix the core rules to fix the questions coming from later rules that use them.

 Vertrucio wrote:
Warmachine players have every right to complain because, regardless of what people may think about Warmachine as a game, it has a very tight set of rules. Although these days I think Flames of War is written better now.

Who brought up Warmachine players complaining? This is the definition of a strawman. The only Warmachine comparisons have been about hard vs soft units and overall cost.

edit - a bit of rewording for clarity

 frozenwastes wrote:
Ancient historians were terrible. Herodotus basically just took down tales and legends as if they were facts. Pretty much everything the ancient stories tell of the battle was likely at least partially wrong. The Persian & Greek numbers definitely were. There was likely around 1000 Theban & Thespian hoplites present there as well as the 300 Spartan ones. And probably an equal number of sling and bow armed non-citizen/slave warriors. Herodotus' telling is pretty much no more believable than a movie rendition of it with war rhinos.

Herodotus said there were thousands of Greeks and hundreds of thousands of Persians with many more Persians uncommitted to the battle but in the region. This is entirely plausible. Achaemenid Persia had a population of 70 million people and the Shah sent everything he had at the Greeks because they menaced his empire and instigated rebellions in some of his most important territories in Egypt and Anatolia. His standing army was like 300,000 soldiers plus noncombatants and it at least doubled in size for the campaign which gives them over a million soldiers once the noncombatants are accounted for. The Greeks didn't defeat the Persians, defense in depth and the reality of logistics did. They ran out of supplies after Thermopylae and the vast majority of the army departed (conscripts) leaving a few hundred thousand (presumably the professionals) who faced a hundred thousand Greeks (Athens we know could field about ten thousand based on Marathon), the entire aristocracy rising up against the invaders at Plataea. The Greeks won the battle.

Likewise the Greeks had several hundred ships at Salamis (Athen alone could float 200 ships) and the Persians had well over a thousand ships drawn from every Mediterranean and Pontic port city under their control from Egypt to the Caucasus.

I don't know why this is so hard for people to believe. Herodotus is consistent with itself and other sources. Its just clearly describing something very large which some people want to doubt happened. Earlier armies didn't have the manpower of Persia on their side and later armies knew better than to send so many more men than you could supply long term. It was a fairly unique campaign with lasting consequences.
---

Anyhow, on the topic of army size, 40k is a squad based skirmish game and Infinity is a soldier based skirmish game. Rather than treating ten models as a unit like in 40k you use a single model in infinity. So a ten model Infinity force is the same as ten squad 40k force. That's all there is to it.