Now keep in mind, this is based solely upon my subjective view, my personal opinion, my touchy-feely, wishy-washy for lack of a better term...analysis?

To me, it feels as if INFINITY has lost a bit of its luster with the release of N3.

And I'm not sure why!

The rules seem great - a bit tighter...

The minis are fantastic - if maybe a little 'generic' looking as they transition to full-on CAD mode. (Scale Creep kind of sucks)

The game and company seemed to be riding a rising wave of popularity towards the end of 2nd edition, heading into N3.

It doesn't feel like CB is all that 'officially active' now too - at least not outside of Spain?

But...'something' just seems to be missing now...

...and I can't quite put my finger on it, and I certainly can't quantify it.

So, I ask you - am I just imagining all of this?

Is INFINITY and CB better than ever?

Is INFINITY more popular then ever, continuing its climb up the charts, with impressive year on year growth?

Absolutely yes.

The scale leap is atrocious and invalidated my entire fresh bought Corregidor army literally overnight. That's been a huge sore point for me and quite frankly does nothing to make me really want to play these days.

Additionally, we're now almost three years since the announcement of the book with the working title/project name "Acheron Falls" and still have zilch to show for it.
Add in their insistence about "Human Sphere and Campaign: Paradiso were thoroughly taken into account when writing N3" and there's a reason why I'm more active in playing X-Wing, 40k, and Age of Sigmar than I am with Infinity despite having a pretty good community locally.

Well that and their stupid ITS. So dumb.

In Australia Infinity is still massively growing. N3 enhanced it, it didn't slow it down.

Personally I've slowed down on it simply because I'm feeling a bit of burnout. I'll come back around but right now I'm more interested in other games, namely Malifaux, Imperial Assault and Zombicide.

Kan - I am not a fan of the Scale Creep either, though I suppose I know 'why' they did it?

And like I said, I can't really say what's making me feel this way.

For all I know, INFINITY is growing like mad still.

Though I also feel as if the traffic in the Infinity Forums here has slowed down as well...

I don't think it's scale creep so much as now finally able to set a definitive scale and stick to it using digital sculpting.

Most don't understand how ramshackle miniature production is, and for physical sculpting you're just sending art off to a sculptor and waiting for them to get back to you. If they finish, it's hard to outright say that they didn't do a job if it's out of scale.

I think the main problem is that instead of taking the time ahead of time to consolidate everything N3, they split the player base and effectively cut in half the number of usable models they had for the release of N3.

Even now we're missing updated rules for fireteams and a majority of the game's models. That's a very GW thing to do, release a new edition with only a handwave towards updating by expecting people to use the outdated N2 rules.

I've expressed this opinion many times, and it's interesting to see the effects of this now.

People are excited about the game until they realize how much if missing or only partially implemented. The models are great, but good luck using them. So people will likely buy the miniatures, and play sometimes, but it's hard to get really excited when there's so much stumbling on the rules front.

ITS is okay, but over reliant on complicated or specific objectives placements and terrain setups. I'd rather see them adopt something that works better with more impromptu table setups.

And there seems to be a real lack of substantive news out of CB HQ as of late too...

I'd say Annual holidays - more than likely - is the reason for that. I know V is away on holidays and probably a few others.

In many countries, paid holidays at the end of the year is the normal thing - many businesses close down for a couple of weeks, so even if you wanted to work, you can't.

 chromedog wrote:
I'd say Annual holidays - more than likely - is the reason for that. I know V is away on holidays and probably a few others.

In many countries, paid holidays at the end of the year is the normal thing - many businesses close down for a couple of weeks, so even if you wanted to work, you can't.

I think he is meaning more in general.

They've clammed up quite a bit in comparison to how they used to be regarding previews and the like.

I just played my first two games last weekend after running through Icestorm a couple of times.
Been buying the models for years, if anything N3 reduced the intimidation factor of jumping into the rules.

I can see that the transition to a new edition could have been cleaner, but I appreciate that they are really a very small studio.
The scale issues are frustrating, but par for the course.

I think they generally make smart use of their partners, not taking on stuff in house that they don't need to. They are definitely leaning on them too heavily for marketing. Exclusives are obviously their main currency, but it's isolating them needlessly.

I'm excited to be getting in to the game and for all the hobby possibilities it entails.

All I know is I am a little miffed at the lack of Marauder or Minuteman boxes.

Couldn't disagree more. I haven't been this passionate about a game in years and it has reignited my love for tabletop wargaming since I stopped playing 40k [for obvious reasons]. I can't comment on the growth of Infinity other than anecdotal stuff, but I played a league game last night, then spent 30 minutes talking about the lovely models and different tactics with a few of the other blokes from the club, who were just as passionate as me, and all owned multiple armies. A friend of mine who sold off most of his 40k stuff and began to drop out of gaming is now totally hooked and back in the hobby.

In response to some of the other issues mentioned, scale creep just doesn't bother me, and I often deliberately buy some of the older sculpts for that old school feel. ITS isn't perfect, but it is a damn sight better than lots of other games, which end up being a shootout to win based upon who rolls the better dice. I haven't encountered any rules problems with fireteams, they're there in black and white on the Wiki. Granting exclusives is a brilliant idea IMO, and supports those people growing the game, such as Guerilla Miniature Games, and directs traffic their way, helping them to expand as well. Finally, I would rather wait for Human Sphere N3 and it be a quality offering rather than it be rushed.

Overall, CB are still seeing a lot of growth, so presumably anyone seeing a downturn is seeing a local effect.

As far as lack of news is concerned, without having asked CB directly, my guess would be that this is due to the way we fans tend to take things out of context.

tyrannosaurus wrote:Couldn't disagree more. I haven't been this passionate about a game in years and it has reignited my love for tabletop wargaming since I stopped playing 40k [for obvious reasons]. [snip]

We feel pretty much the same. I have been collecting Infinity minis since day one and played a bit during N2, but it was hard to get to the people already oversaturated with other games coming out at the same time. The anime look did not help with the older crowd.

What turned the day was the starter set with which I could finally persuade other guys with too many games at hand to "Lets just open the box and go through the scenarios and then you decide if you like it or not". And so far, everyone has loved it!

And yes, the starter set is not perfect. And yes, the way they handled the rules update was -and still remains "spanish". And no, I do not understand why existing units get a rehash while we are still waiting for units to be produced as miniatures at all. Scale creep not such a big thing for me, it is a skirmisher, after all.

Also, all these things are only really important to people who have accompanied this game for a very long time. Like Kan. But where Kan has a weakness-oriented outlook (making him an excellent controller), other people tend to have a strength-oriented perspective (making them more suitable for management).

New players have no beef with CB for their "continued failings" and the worst thing that happens is that they are confused about missing or misrepresented rules (starter set vs. N3 full).

All in all, I would say Infinity activity has risen a lot around here. And CB is just back to normal "working behind the scenes" after they upped their promo game considerably to market N3.

Are you sure we are not talking about "old men's fatigue" here?

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
Couldn't disagree more. I haven't been this passionate about a game in years and it has reignited my love for tabletop wargaming since I stopped playing 40k [for obvious reasons]. I can't comment on the growth of Infinity other than anecdotal stuff, but I played a league game last night, then spent 30 minutes talking about the lovely models and different tactics with a few of the other blokes from the club, who were just as passionate as me, and all owned multiple armies. A friend of mine who sold off most of his 40k stuff and began to drop out of gaming is now totally hooked and back in the hobby.

In response to some of the other issues mentioned, scale creep just doesn't bother me, and I often deliberately buy some of the older sculpts for that old school feel. ITS isn't perfect, but it is a damn sight better than lots of other games, which end up being a shootout to win based upon who rolls the better dice. I haven't encountered any rules problems with fireteams, they're there in black and white on the Wiki. Granting exclusives is a brilliant idea IMO, and supports those people growing the game, such as Guerilla Miniature Games, and directs traffic their way, helping them to expand as well. Finally, I would rather wait for Human Sphere N3 and it be a quality offering rather than it be rushed.

I literally couldn't agree more with this post, the only thing I feel like people are bitching too much about is the scale creep, it's waaaay blown out of proportion and people act like the models are Imperial Knigths that stands next to a space marine. Yes, the Wildcat looks small, get over it, the rest really isn't that criminally bad.

 Zewrath wrote:

I literally couldn't agree more with this post, the only thing I feel like people are bitching too much about is the scale creep, it's waaaay blown out of proportion and people act like the models are Imperial Knigths that stands next to a space marine. Yes, the Wildcat looks small, get over it, the rest really isn't that criminally bad.

The Wildcats look small, the Hellcats look small, the Intruder with Combi-Rifle and MSR look small.

What you fail to grasp, or just flatout ignore in your haste to complain about "people bitching too much"?
Corregidor was in the midst of a redesign. All those small models? They are NOT going to get replaced anytime soon, and quite frankly it shows the "Spanish" side of Corvus Belli that treslibras is talking about. Spanish companies seem to take a very "whatever" look at these kinds of issues, and putting it bluntly?

They KNEW that they were doing the Alguaciles, Mobile Brigada, and other Corregidor models in CAD for Icestorm. The CAD process started when they finished the CJC dossiers from what I have been told. And rather than delaying/redoing the Corregidor releases to ensure consistency or doing other things like we saw with various other factions, they shoveled them out the door ASAP so that they could fulfill an imaginary deadline that they set themselves.

So yeah. You're welcome to think that people are "blowing it out of proportion", but I can tell you right now that they would NOT have gotten any of my money for the Corregidor starter sets I bought(2x CJC starters) or the associated purchases(2x MSR Intruders, Hellcats with HMG/Hacker x2, Hellcat with Boarding Shotgun x2, Geckos box x2, Iguana, Nomad Support Pack) if I had known that they were going CAD--because the differences are a hell of a lot more in person than you or others online make it out to be. It's especially notable to someone who prefers to spend time painting their models to a display quality rather than just "paint to play on tabletop".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alpharius wrote:
Kan - I am not a fan of the Scale Creep either, though I suppose I know 'why' they did it?

The problem is that while I can understand why they did it(they wanted more surface area for players to feel less intimidated by the fine detail of the models), I can entirely fault them for not applying that Scale Leap to Corregidor.

I have been playing 40k and other games for well over 16 years now. I had looked at infinity in the past but it looked over complicated and the models were just ok.

I have noticed that as of the last two years the quality of the sculpts and realism has increased exponentially. With rising costs elsewhere, great models, a variety of factions, decent fluff, etc, Infinity is very appealing to gamers. I personally think that the N3 physical rulebook along with the icestorm starter and recent usariadna starter has made it very easy for anyone to get into Infinity.

I dove in and found the rules are easy to understand, no longer seem overcomplicated, and have found the community to be one of the friendliest and nicest out there.

Personally I have only seen Infinity grow at an exponential rate around here. 40k on the other hand... well the tourney scene is pretty much dead!

N3 exploded in popularity, and has only grown the Infinity brand.

Complaints about model scale? I say cry me a river. The new models continue to look great, and I've been collecting three factions back since pre-Human Sphere N2. Including three generations of basic PanO Infantry and HI.

They're only looking better. The sole issues with scale are localized to a handful of models, many are likely to get resculpts (such as the entire Morat line), and so far all resculpts have been executed great.

The 'bugs' of edition transition were mostly handled by the FAQ, and HS3 will solve the rest.

I certainly hope so!

CB seems to have been rather quiet for the last half year or so.

I hope this just means they're really busy!

 Killionaire wrote:
N3 exploded in popularity, and has only grown the Infinity brand.

Complaints about model scale? I say cry me a river. The new models continue to look great, and I've been collecting three factions back since pre-Human Sphere N2. Including three generations of basic PanO Infantry and HI.

They're only looking better. The sole issues with scale are localized to a handful of models, many are likely to get resculpts (such as the entire Morat line), and so far all resculpts have been executed great.

And this is just the perfect example of not comprehending what the complaints about scale actually are about.

Virtually none of the complaints from myself or others were because of the resculpts/"revisions" being out of parity to the older models. We've known that Morats were being redone for a long while, and more importantly? They maintained a consistent scale throughout the redesign of the Morat line. That's not what happened with Corregidor, which is basically the only line that the "scale leap" notation applies to. Corregidor was being redesigned prior to Icestorm and was almost finished to boot, with a consistent scale being present throughout pre-Icestorm Corregidor models.

Then Icestorm hit and shot it to hell.

So please, if you want to make comments about people "complaining about model scale"? Get a basic understanding of the complaints that surround it.

 Killionaire wrote:
N3 exploded in popularity, and has only grown the Infinity brand.

Complaints about model scale? I say cry me a river. The new models continue to look great, and I've been collecting three factions back since pre-Human Sphere N2. Including three generations of basic PanO Infantry and HI.

They're only looking better. The sole issues with scale are localized to a handful of models, many are likely to get resculpts (such as the entire Morat fine), and so far all resculpts have been executed great.

The 'bugs' of edition transition were mostly handled by the FAQ, and HS3 will solve the rest.

That would be how most see the model scale. Except for a few that being it up ever chance they get. It not like a dead thread was start by the most vocal, but people really did not care enough to keep harping on it. Even the Infinity forum and Datasphere only has a few that keep on about the scale, that always start with the same people.

Infinity sells prove it not a real issue, even less on the board.

To piggyback on what Noir is saying - the scale creep doesn't really bother me. If it did bother me, I'd just buy the new models - problem solved.

The important thing about N3 is that it's a tight rules set that doesn't favor or discourage using older models since everything has a silhouette value. I'd rather have a solid set of rules, continuous revision of the line, and a little bit of scale creep than a game with atrocious rules, sporadic revision, and more or less consistent scale for a decade at a time (i.e., 40k).

In terms of Infinity stagnating due to N3, I haven't found that to be the case. There are a bunch of new people always arriving to play Infinity at my friendly local while 40k play has decreased. Given a sample size of one, I bought a new Infinity army a couple of days ago to try it out, whereas I really have zero interest in purchasing a new 40k army ever again unless there are significant rules changes across the board.

Yeah, that's a great option.

Let me rebuy an entire army because Corvus Belli couldn't be bothered to keep a consistent scale with a flagship range in the form of Corregidor.

Just to reiterate:
Corvus Belli KNEW that they were revamping Corregidor. They started doing so with the Campaign: Paradiso book. They made it abundantly clear that the reason we were getting Wildcats in the CJC starter box rather than Alguaciles was because they had plans to redo the main Nomad starter and they stated that pretty publicly over a year and a half in advance of Icestorm's release--which, spoiler alert, is(according to them) when they started messing with the computer-assisted designs for the Icestorm models. There is a reason I am so militant about this, as I was assured when the CJC starter came out that the Corregidor range was "futureproofed" and that they were CAD sculpts that would be worked from for other Corregidor models.

I bought in heavy for Corregidor on the basis of that assurance, as it was from someone whom I knew was working on the line and had a significant insight as to what was coming.

Put that on top of the "N3 will have everything you need to play right away!" nonsense and I think it should be rather clear why I have this specific axe to grind where a 300+ point collection of models gets literally screwed overnight by the fact that they would rather have put that CJC box and the accompanying models(Wildcat with Spitfire, HRL, Hellcat with HMG/Hacker double blister, Hellcat with Boarding Shotgun, Intruder with MSR) out ASAP than hold them back and explain that they were being redone to fit in with the forthcoming range.

So please. If you want to comment on the scale issue? Realize that not everyone buys models strictly for playing, and that for some people the overnight scale shift in Corregidor was a huge deal, effectively making it so that for anyone who wants to keep a consistent scale in their force cannot even do so with the range available now.

You're acting as if peoples' opinions on the scale issue are only valid if they have a problem with the scale changes.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
You're acting as if peoples' opinions on the scale issue are only valid if they have a problem with the scale changes.

I'm not the one saying that people are "bitching" or "whining" or that they should "get over it", now am I Nuggz?

Filter the thread. You'll never once see that I've told someone that their opinions aren't valid. I've tried to correct some misinformation that's out there, namely that this is some kind of widespread thing like there is a group of players complaining about the resculpts of older models.

That's not the case. It is almost entirely restricted to people who bought into Corregidor heavily only to see the massive scale shift that happened with, literally, the release of one boxed set.

Because repeating it over and over saying you guy just don't get it, in ever thread you can will make people think it a huge game ending problem. We get it you feel like they bent you over and went to town. But, as your scale creep thread proved, other then a few vocal people no one really cares about scale creep.

It was the "...if you want to comment on the scale issue..." part that struck me as dismissive of dissenting opinion.

Nobody is happy about it per se, I just don't see it negatively impacting my life. Except the change in scale of the Azra'il...that's got to be the worst scale change in the history of miniatures companies.

I honestly don't even feel comfortable fielding this guy as an Azra'il. I use him as a Janissary HMG or Fassed.

Fun fact: the original Az'rail was NEVER meant to be that small.

Scale doesn't really change a models purpose in a game. The old models or new models... use whatever you have! I can see why some would be upset if they spent a lot of cash only to have their army updated... hmmm.... sounds like what gw has done to many of us in the past. If it bothers some that much I would suggest this - just boycott the game and not buy it. Otherwise if you feel that strongly and still buy it, you are in essence supporting it.

It obviously doesn't bother the majority as I rarely hear the scale issue being brought up, and only a select few beat that bush to death.

I personally like the new models due to their sculpt quality and scale.

Bringing up the 2008 and 2015 Azrael is NOT an argument that Scale change is bad. It's actually arguing that SCALE CHANGE IS GOOD.

Why?

The old Azrael was DEFECTIVE. Seriously, it was a defective model. Pretty, but utterly smaller than my unarmored light infantry! This also applies to several other models, such as the Keisotsu, who are a full head shorter than non-japanese soldiers, and the Shang-Ji. Meanwhile, Female Orc Boarding Shotgun remains a 7-foot tall woman.

Corregidor was a special case. Namely, that while some models were reasonably to-scale, the Wildcats were never to scale, even compared with equivilent troops of older scale such as Bagh-Mari.

The fault then, is not the new troops. It's rather several old ones were too tiny compared to the average!

----

As for rules, well. ITS aside, nearly every aspect of N3 is a substantial improvement

According to Bostria, the Azra'il is correcting a mistake. It wasn't meant to be that small originally. The sculptor got it wrong. It probably wouldn't have been as big as it is now as CB didn't do super heavy infantry then, but it was definitely too small.

A better example would have been the Jannisarys, which they did a new scale for with the CAD designed HMG, then rescaled it 6 months later with the box release.

 Zewrath wrote:

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
Couldn't disagree more. I haven't been this passionate about a game in years and it has reignited my love for tabletop wargaming since I stopped playing 40k [for obvious reasons]. I can't comment on the growth of Infinity other than anecdotal stuff, but I played a league game last night, then spent 30 minutes talking about the lovely models and different tactics with a few of the other blokes from the club, who were just as passionate as me, and all owned multiple armies. A friend of mine who sold off most of his 40k stuff and began to drop out of gaming is now totally hooked and back in the hobby.

In response to some of the other issues mentioned, scale creep just doesn't bother me, and I often deliberately buy some of the older sculpts for that old school feel. ITS isn't perfect, but it is a damn sight better than lots of other games, which end up being a shootout to win based upon who rolls the better dice. I haven't encountered any rules problems with fireteams, they're there in black and white on the Wiki. Granting exclusives is a brilliant idea IMO, and supports those people growing the game, such as Guerilla Miniature Games, and directs traffic their way, helping them to expand as well. Finally, I would rather wait for Human Sphere N3 and it be a quality offering rather than it be rushed.

I literally couldn't agree more with this post, the only thing I feel like people are bitching too much about is the scale creep, it's waaaay blown out of proportion and people act like the models are Imperial Knigths that stands next to a space marine. Yes, the Wildcat looks small, get over it, the rest really isn't that criminally bad.

A hundred percent agreed. N3 is much better and more newbie friendly without losing anything.

I've gradually lost the desire to play Infinity N3 after its release. None of my N2 games felt so predetermined. Even, if I had fallen behind I could always try to bring the situation around with universal actions available to me on the table. Now the gimmicks are simply too strong, unless you have absurd luck. There are other gripes, but whatever. CB is going to do CB things.

Locally the game has somewhat died out, replaced by Xwing. I expect it'll gain steam after Human Sphere is released.

 Knight wrote:
I've gradually lost the desire to play Infinity N3 after its release. None of my N2 games felt so predetermined. Even, if I had fallen behind I could always try to bring the situation around with universal actions available to me on the table. Now the gimmicks are simply too strong, unless you have absurd luck. There are other gripes, but whatever. CB is going to do CB things.

Locally the game has somewhat died out, replaced by Xwing. I expect it'll gain steam after Human Sphere is released.

Would you care to elaborate on that? I can count on 1 hand the number of predetermined matches I've had, most of them involving me as a very noobish player deploying horribly bad vs a reactionbot (the rest should be self explanatory).

I completely understand why the scale shenanigans hurt so many people. I was effectively orphaned by GW with the release of AoS, and I'm still a little bit sore about the whole deal. I started playing Infinity only a few months ago and I'm not particularly interested in Corregidor, so the abrupt scale shift and any changes to the rules didn't affect me at all, but I can certainly identify with that sense of betrayal. If it's any consolation, at least those Corregidor miniatures on their own are still excellent sculpts.
I may be somewhat of an outlier when I say this, but I actually enjoy ITS missions. That being said, it'll be nice to try out 20x20 system and the new edition of YAMS when the local group starts to test them out.

ITS missions are fun, but the reliance on specialists hampers list building somewhat. If they let non specialists try at a -6, it would open list building up more. Also gives a nice sliding scale - primary specialist on base WIP, secondary specialist on -3, non specialist on -6.

Or if the mission always let you nominate one model to be a specialist regardless of any of its rules.

 Zewrath wrote:
Would you care to elaborate on that? I can count on 1 hand the number of predetermined matches I've had, most of them involving me as a very noobish player deploying horribly bad vs a reactionbot (the rest should be self explanatory).

It comes down how newer armies or their pet projects typically require a specific profile to really deal with them. For example against Steel Phalanx, I know I'll typically have one turn to deal damage to him, otherwise he'll win. I lack tools to really push him away when he's mid field and on top of objectives. Nomads have the perfect toolbox with top tier specialists (maybe even require their own category), there will be one moment in the game when I'll be able to snipe the most dangerous element, after that I can play token war with their camouflage specialists (stealth/camo abuse is fun when you're the one doing it).

Most of my victories in N3 come down to being lucky with ARM or WIP rolls (or opponent got unlucky) while looking how my entire army gradually melts. I simply got tired of this scenario repetition, although I've tried to change various elements, in the end, if you're not having fun and a game becomes a chore it's better to step back and weight your options.

As a new player (even seasoned 40k player) this really shouldn't be an issue, later on it'll depend on your meta, army you play and what crazy thing will CB introduce next.

 Knight wrote:

 Zewrath wrote:
Would you care to elaborate on that? I can count on 1 hand the number of predetermined matches I've had, most of them involving me as a very noobish player deploying horribly bad vs a reactionbot (the rest should be self explanatory).

It comes down how newer armies or their pet projects typically require a specific profile to really deal with them. For example against Steel Phalanx, I know I'll typically have one turn to deal damage to him, otherwise he'll win. I lack tools to really push him away when he's mid field and on top of objectives. Nomads have the perfect toolbox with top tier specialists (maybe even require their own category), there will be one moment in the game when I'll be able to snipe the most dangerous element, after that I can play token war with their camouflage specialists (stealth/camo abuse is fun when you're the one doing it).

Most of my victories in N3 come down to being lucky with ARM or WIP rolls (or opponent got unlucky) while looking how my entire army gradually melts. I simply got tired of this scenario repetition, although I've tried to change various elements, in the end, if you're not having fun and a game becomes a chore it's better to step back and weight your options.

As a new player (even seasoned 40k player) this really shouldn't be an issue, later on it'll depend on your meta, army you play and what crazy thing will CB introduce next.

Do you only play 'Annihilation'? I've found that winning a scenario other than Annihilation isn't about killing my opponent or lucky dice rolls but instead playing to the mission. This is another thing I love about the game, that it isn't just about who rolls the best dice. Also, if you're finding that you're struggling with a particular opponent then I would suggest changing up your list. I'm assuming from the symbol in your signature bit that you play Pan:O, in which case i would recommend taking a Jotum, spending all of your orders on him and applying robot. A heavy flamethrower will help with the camo abuse I've tried different lists every game I've played in an effort to nail down a list I'm really happy with, maybe it's time for you to try something new?

It seems Knight plays the Shock Army of Acontecimento. But even with only this Sectorial there are plenty of options to get rid of camo or these nasty ODD troops of the Steel Phalanx, especially with a Bagh-Mari Fireteam of five (Lt. Rao + 4) these given effects are basically negated.

Well now the on topic content:
CB definitely did a pretty good job with N3, the corebook is written better than that of N2 although there are still many ambiguities within the rules.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Just to reiterate:
Corvus Belli KNEW that they were revamping Corregidor. They started doing so with the Campaign: Paradiso book. They made it abundantly clear that the reason we were getting Wildcats in the CJC starter box rather than Alguaciles was because they had plans to redo the main Nomad starter and they stated that pretty publicly over a year and a half in advance of Icestorm's release--which, spoiler alert, is(according to them) when they started messing with the computer-assisted designs for the Icestorm models. There is a reason I am so militant about this, as I was assured when the CJC starter came out that the Corregidor range was "futureproofed" and that they were CAD sculpts that would be worked from for other Corregidor models.

I bought in heavy for Corregidor on the basis of that assurance, as it was from someone whom I knew was working on the line and had a significant insight as to what was coming.

I have no idea who you spoke to, but there's a bunch of errors in what you just posted.

1. Only the guns in the CJC Starter were CAD, the models themselves were traditional sculpts. Jose Luis Roig only moved over to digital sculpting during 2015 and as far as I'm aware Pedro Fernández is still a purely physical sculptor, which is presumably why he's not done anything for CB for some time.
2. The CJC Starter (May 2013) would already have been most of the way to production at the point that CB started planning the Icestorm models.
3. As far as I'm aware, the size change wasn't decided on until about halfway through the Icestorm design process, so after most of the traditionally sculpted Corregidor models had been sculpted and at least six months after the CJC Starter had been released. Bear in mind that it can be a year or more between a traditional sculpt being started and the product hitting the shelves.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Put that on top of the "N3 will have everything you need to play right away!" nonsense

That was forum wishlisting, not something that CB said.

 Kanluwen wrote:
and I think it should be rather clear why I have this specific axe to grind where a 300+ point collection of models gets literally screwed overnight by the fact that they would rather have put that CJC box and the accompanying models(Wildcat with Spitfire, HRL, Hellcat with HMG/Hacker double blister, Hellcat with Boarding Shotgun, Intruder with MSR) out ASAP than hold them back and explain that they were being redone to fit in with the forthcoming range.

Please don't get me wrong - I can completely understand your frustrations with the size change, but you're way off in your timescale. The vast majority of those models were not just sculpted but released before the scale decision was made.

That's nice, IJW.

I'm just going to leave this thread in any regards. I don't want to keep repeating myself nor do I really want to aggravate myself continuing to think about this. I'm going back to watching Godzilla and building my Raptors' Chapter Scouts

That was released nearly a year after the Corregidor starter, only five months before Icestorm came out.

EDIT - OK, that was in response to a question about the Tomcat Doctor which has now been removed.

A bit unfair, IJW, to aggress Kan with reasonable arguments.

But as the good sportsman and mature person he is, he knew how to come to an amicable closure of the debate.

I personally feel N3 built on everything in a sensible way. Most complaints people had, eg. first turn being too great an advantage, dominance of HMGs over rifles and other long-range weapons, limited use of hacking and close combat, etc etc were all addressed and the game made more enjoyable as a result. The rules also became clearer and more precisely laid out - while Infinity is a complex game, probably still quite hard to learn without help, there are concrete examples in the rule book and anything can be looked up. EDIT: just thought of how to say this: people may like N2 more because of some vague feeling that things were better then, or from rose-tinted glasses because it was all new and fresh to them, or because a certain opponent hadn't discovered or had available option X which always annoys them. But I've never met someone who really thinks the core rules were better in N2.

I don't see many of the problems Knight has with some opponents' armies - whatever can be used in Infinity, there are counters to. I accept that may involve changing an army list or tactics dramatically. It's hard to say there's too much repetition in the missions either - I believe there are about 15 ITS missions? More than most games can boast, surely. Some people have complaints about ITS, that it favours massed orders and puts too much emphasis on specialists. I still like it, but if it's not floating your boat, play YAMS or 20x20 or just plain objective-less games against your friends.

To keep the flogged-to-death Corregidor scale issue in perspective, it has always centered around one box of 6 models, the CJC starter, which is out of scale with the modern sculpts. I play Corregidor exclusively and own 50-70 models for them. How much does it really matter?

Treslibras, Aggress is not usually used as a verb--, but oddly, Digress, Regress, Progress are. Go figure. :S

N3 has been a boon to attracting new players, because it is very accessible due to the well written and presented ruleset, and that it has a starter set has been a help too. Infinity is growing in the LGSs around me, or, to me, GSs, since they are not that local :( Most of the online discussion is in the various Google groups, at least in this area, instead of traditional forums.

Personally, in my group Infinity has been in a holding pattern since we've been playing the new D&D, and RPGs take up quite a bit of gaming time, as do TTGs. This will change when HSN3 releases, because we will *finally* have a complete complete ruleset. Playing N3 as is, although perfectly playable and complete in its own way, still *feels* incomplete because we know more revision/improvement/updates stand to come.

I don't see many of the problems Knight has with some opponents' armies - whatever can be used in Infinity, there are counters to. I accept that may involve changing an army list or tactics dramatically. It's hard to say there's too much repetition in the missions either - I believe there are about 15 ITS missions? More than most games can boast, surely. Some people have complaints about ITS, that it favours massed orders and puts too much emphasis on specialists. I still like it, but if it's not floating your boat, play YAMS or 20x20 or just plain objective-less games against your friends.

Newer/updated armies will have crazy good order efficiency on top of some very interesting/good profiles. Once they gain the momentum I will be unable to do anything to them, there simply aren't enough rounds for it and I don't have profiles that would allow me to build up, or conserve on orders, or perhaps force the opponent to worry about my army composition for a change. It has little to do with "trying different tactics", as much as Infinity people in general like to chant it. I enjoy ITS and I don't want to play other formats, however I cannot agree that all armies are somehow equal in ITS format.

You're right there are Fractions with a slightly disadvantage, I think Hassasin Baram might be one whilst PanO has the worst specialists IMHO.
But you have to specify which newer/updates armies you want to adress. The new profiles of the Guijia and the Seraph look definitely pretty hard but you can get rid of both.
Also, regarding that "crazy good order efficency" that is more the ability of the player to use his/her orders and army list in an efficent way - Fireteams are obviously helping.

Bahram has issues, but putting specialists on the table isn't one of them. They can field linked Doctors and Hackers, AD hackers, cheap Doctors, Observers and Hackers, expensive Doctors. All of them with a base WIP of 14.

Bahrams issues come from the fact that unless you're really hankering to run a link of Muyibs, Lasiqs, Govads or, for some reason Asawira, then vanilla just does everything better. Higher AVA on Ragiks is a bit pointless when people rarely run the AVA of 2 in vanilla. AVA 3 on Fidays is nice until you realize Saladin, Al Djabel and a normal Fiday do it better.

 Red Harvest wrote:
This will change when HSN3 releases, because we will *finally* have a complete complete ruleset. Playing N3 as is, although perfectly playable and complete in its own way, still *feels* incomplete because we know more revision/improvement/updates stand to come.

That is a VERY good point...

Maybe that's part of what I was thinking of when I started this thread?

It doesn't help that I do not have a local INFINITY group, or really a local game store.

But even besides these points, it still 'feels' as if CB is not communicating as much or maybe as effectively as in the past.

Still, by all accounts they're doing well, so here's to a prosperous and fun 2016 - which includes ACHERON FALLS.

I hope!

The game has really taken off in my local area, picked up a bunch of ex-WHFB players.

Not sure what ITS attendance is like globally but in my own sphere they seem to be busier.

The rules are still pretty intimidating for the new player, but I think N3 has made it somewhat easier than it was before, and obviously Ice Storm has helped things on that front as well.

Miniature wise, think they are hitting the ball out of the park with some of the releases over the past year. I'm struggling to think of a game that I've played (ever) that has hit so high, so often. I don't think I can.

Agree N3 Human Sphere will probably help 'complete' the game. I'd like to see an 'official' version of something like 20-20 or YAMS, just to give casual players something to play other than ITS, which can get a little samey (lots of specialists!) if you play it too much. Can something be too balanced? Seems a ridiculous thing to say, in light of common complaints made against other games, but I'd like to see some more campaign-y stuff and more loose mission structure as an alternative.

As to why the company has been a bit quiet recently? Your guess is as good as mine! Perhaps another announcement on the horizon (or the guys needed a break? )

 Tristan228 wrote:
You're right there are Fractions with a slightly disadvantage, I think Hassasin Baram might be one whilst PanO has the worst specialists IMHO.
But you have to specify which newer/updates armies you want to adress. The new profiles of the Guijia and the Seraph look definitely pretty hard but you can get rid of both.
Also, regarding that "crazy good order efficency" that is more the ability of the player to use his/her orders and army list in an efficent way - Fireteams are obviously helping.

Just FYI, the Guijia didn't get a profile update, it's still Raicho-quality (nearly literally) and in a similar position as most piloted TAGs. Operated and remoted TAGs seem to, in general, be in a better position.

There's currently three factions that's really ailing and that's Shasvasti (decreased or stagnant playerbase) IS (strongly decreased playerbase) and ASA (stagnant playerbase) when compared to number of players 2014. Stats for 2015->2016 will be interesting. Having looked at Hassassin, though, I agree the faction has problems and while conceptually it has everything I'd want with a potential Haqq army, it wouldn't deliver onto me.

QK has been stated as being a finished done army, though, and it shows

 Alpharius wrote:

 Red Harvest wrote:
This will change when HSN3 releases, because we will *finally* have a complete complete ruleset. Playing N3 as is, although perfectly playable and complete in its own way, still *feels* incomplete because we know more revision/improvement/updates stand to come.

That is a VERY good point...

Maybe that's part of what I was thinking of when I started this thread?

It doesn't help that I do not have a local INFINITY group, or really a local game store.

But even besides these points, it still 'feels' as if CB is not communicating as much or maybe as effectively as in the past.

Still, by all accounts they're doing well, so here's to a prosperous and fun 2016 - which includes ACHERON FALLS.

I hope!

Most of the communication comes from the Conventions, GenCon for example, and the Spanish one, FicZone, and now CB's own Interplanetary. There are no major Cons ( of which I know) during the Autumn and Winter months. I just want to know the ETA for HSN3. I read somewhere that new product announcements have a shelf life of about 3 months, and it is unwise to announce something new any earlier than 3 months before release, since people rapidly lose interest. We are well past that fecha de caducidad (expiration date) for both Human Sphere and Acheron Falls.

Another good point!

Thank you Red Harvest for what is most likely the explanation for my current misgivings!

 Red Harvest wrote:
This will change when HSN3 releases, because we will *finally* have a complete complete ruleset. Playing N3 as is, although perfectly playable and complete in its own way, still *feels* incomplete because we know more revision/improvement/updates stand to come.

Yeah, one thing that really bugs me is that they didn't put all the rules in the core rule book. Having important rules be in an as yet unreleased expansion for no good reason is bad.

They should have updated all their rules from Human Sphere and the Core rulebook in N3, not left all the Human Sphere rules hanging out to dry. Human Sphere 3 should have entirely new rules, not be updating old ones. Its just lazy not to put Link Team rules and such in the core rulebook.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Red Harvest wrote:
This will change when HSN3 releases, because we will *finally* have a complete complete ruleset. Playing N3 as is, although perfectly playable and complete in its own way, still *feels* incomplete because we know more revision/improvement/updates stand to come.

Yeah, one thing that really bugs me is that they didn't put all the rules in the core rule book. Having important rules be in an as yet unreleased expansion for no good reason is bad.

They should have updated all their rules from Human Sphere and the Core rulebook in N3, not left all the Human Sphere rules hanging out to dry. Human Sphere 3 should have entirely new rules, not be updating old ones. Its just lazy not to put Link Team rules and such in the core rulebook.

Infinity Wiki. What's the problem? No access to the internet? The fireteam rules are really straightforward, and are even linked from the army builder. Or download the HS and CP for free. Took me less than 5 minutes to work them out. Seems to me like people are trying to find problems. I'm working on the assumption that there is a good reason why the rules for fireteams weren't included in the main N3 rulebook, possibly a re-working of the rules that are going to take a lot of playtesting? Much prefer this approach to that of another very well known tabletop wargaming company.

I wish they were in one book for ease of use. Having to flip through three books to find rules is irritating. Sure, it'll be two books with HSN3, but a single book solution would have been ideal.

-Loki- wrote:Bahram has issues, but putting specialists on the table isn't one of them. They can field linked Doctors and Hackers, AD hackers, cheap Doctors, Observers and Hackers, expensive Doctors. All of them with a base WIP of 14.

Bahrams issues come from the fact that unless you're really hankering to run a link of Muyibs, Lasiqs, Govads or, for some reason Asawira, then vanilla just does everything better. Higher AVA on Ragiks is a bit pointless when people rarely run the AVA of 2 in vanilla. AVA 3 on Fidays is nice until you realize Saladin, Al Djabel and a normal Fiday do it better.

I didn't say anything about HB having problems with it's specialists, only that PanOceania has the worst secialists...

Mahtamori wrote:
Just FYI, the Guijia didn't get a profile update, it's still Raicho-quality (nearly literally) and in a similar position as most piloted TAGs. Operated and remoted TAGs seem to, in general, be in a better position.

There's currently three factions that's really ailing and that's Shasvasti (decreased or stagnant playerbase) IS (strongly decreased playerbase) and ASA (stagnant playerbase) when compared to number of players 2014. Stats for 2015->2016 will be interesting. Having looked at Hassassin, though, I agree the faction has problems and while conceptually it has everything I'd want with a potential Haqq army, it wouldn't deliver onto me.

QK has been stated as being a finished done army, though, and it shows

Ok, I made a mistake there the Guijia was indeed not updated
And now a fun fact: the armies I lost against were Shasvastii (that Achilles chick in a fireteam of five, gruesome!), IS (actually the most frustrating game since i play tournaments, still managed to win one (at the german championship) out of three games) and QK (on a regulary basis), all three playes by really good and experienced players.

Yeah, fireteam rules are getting a tweak in the new HS book.
Adding "duo" to the list, and changing the "default" one to "core".

So there'll be:

Duo (2 person link)
Haris and Tohaa triad thing (3 person link)
Enomotarchos (Aleph's Steel phalanx 4 man circle jerk :p )
Core (3-5 man default sectorial link for the rest)

-Loki- wrote:I wish they were in one book for ease of use. Having to flip through three books to find rules is irritating. Sure, it'll be two books with HSN3, but a single book solution would have been ideal.

Or just click the wiki link I actually bought the Campaign Paradiso book for the fluff and the ICS, but haven't needed to look up any rules in the book as it's so readily available online. Compare this to, say, trying to locate the most up-to-date rules for a ForgeWorld unit

chromedog wrote:Yeah, fireteam rules are getting a tweak in the new HS book.
Adding "duo" to the list, and changing the "default" one to "core".

So there'll be:

Duo (2 person link)
Haris and Tohaa triad thing (3 person link)
Enomotarchos (Aleph's Steel phalanx 4 man circle jerk :p )
Core (3-5 man default sectorial link for the rest)

Sounds great, I thought there was probably a reason why they didn't just copy paste the fireteam rules into N3. Is this a confirmed rumour?

It's confirmed.
Bostria himself has spoken the words.

What's not confirmed is a real release date.
They would like it ready for the start of 2016 ITS (march) but they've been ambitious with release dates before and it didn't work out that well, either.

Rumor has it as well that different factions will have a small flavor bonus for their link teams. Not sure however if this is readily confirmable from any interview or presentation.

(ex, Nomad Core Link Teams of 3-5 would also get bonus X, PanO ones would get bonus Y, etc)

 Killionaire wrote:
Rumor has it as well that different factions will have a small flavor bonus for their link teams. Not sure however if this is readily confirmable from any interview or presentation.

(ex, Nomad Core Link Teams of 3-5 would also get bonus X, PanO ones would get bonus Y, etc)

Yeah, I don't see that happen and never heard that rumor you sure you or someone aren't wish listing.

Seconded. While it would be a fun addition if they could balance it, I haven't seen it pop up on the official boards yet, and those guys are on top of basically anything new.

Additionally, we don't know how linked teams will even work in HSN3. All we've heard is they will be 'revamped'. However, that's pretty vague, especially for CB. Critical hits were 'revamped' in N3, with only a small change. Coordinated Orders were likewise 'revamped', and changed massively.

 tyrannosaurus wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Red Harvest wrote:
This will change when HSN3 releases, because we will *finally* have a complete complete ruleset. Playing N3 as is, although perfectly playable and complete in its own way, still *feels* incomplete because we know more revision/improvement/updates stand to come.

Yeah, one thing that really bugs me is that they didn't put all the rules in the core rule book. Having important rules be in an as yet unreleased expansion for no good reason is bad.

They should have updated all their rules from Human Sphere and the Core rulebook in N3, not left all the Human Sphere rules hanging out to dry. Human Sphere 3 should have entirely new rules, not be updating old ones. Its just lazy not to put Link Team rules and such in the core rulebook.

Infinity Wiki. What's the problem? No access to the internet? The fireteam rules are really straightforward, and are even linked from the army builder. Or download the HS and CP for free. Took me less than 5 minutes to work them out. Seems to me like people are trying to find problems. I'm working on the assumption that there is a good reason why the rules for fireteams weren't included in the main N3 rulebook, possibly a re-working of the rules that are going to take a lot of playtesting? Much prefer this approach to that of another very well known tabletop wargaming company.

Because I shouldn't have to flip between tons of books and PDFs just to find the rules for one model during a game(especially since their books are horribly laid out, and there are some clear translation issues). Its not a big deal when I am at my computer, but carrying all this crap with me is a pain.

It's one book and a wiki.
It's 'uncomfortable' for those of us used to 40k, or whatever system we've been playing for years (decades), but it's hardly especially complicated or even unusual.

Its certainly not a deal breaker, but there was no reason to split the rules up like that. It would have been a simple thing to do everything in one go instead of dragging it out over another book.

It seems that way to us, but they obviously felt differently and presumably they know their limitations better than we do. 10 years of growth is an impressive feat in this industry, so I will happily cut them some slack, especially if it's all moot in about a year.

To be fair, that would have also doubled the size of the book, which would have at least doubled the price, as they would have had to split into more books and a much bigger protective jacket. Remember it's not only the rules in HSN3, it's the fluff as well from HSN3 and Paradiso. They can't really leave that out of the physical copy - if you don't want the fluff, you just get the rules for free.

It would also have meant no N3 rulebook until now...

 IJW wrote:
It would also have meant no N3 rulebook until now...

Or worse, as CB believed HS and Paradiso would work pretty much as writing with the N3 core rules. We could of ended up with a N3 book with new reworked core rules and just reedited HS/Paradiso rule to fit the new format and layout with the only changes being the HS/Paradiso N3 FAQ pdf.

For a relatively small company such as Corvus Belli, every release has to be carefully thought out as it could be the difference between continuing to grow as a company or going bust. They can't afford a 'Dreadfleet'. If that means I have to wait for a high quality release then so be it. I'll keep using the excellent army builder and linked wiki in the meantime, which, to be honest, I'll probably use even when the hard copy of the rules come out.

 -Loki- wrote:
To be fair, that would have also doubled the size of the book, which would have at least doubled the price, as they would have had to split into more books and a much bigger protective jacket. Remember it's not only the rules in HSN3, it's the fluff as well from HSN3 and Paradiso. They can't really leave that out of the physical copy - if you don't want the fluff, you just get the rules for free.

Thats why you would NOT put the HS fluff in that book. And do a better job of condensing the rules. Its silly that just about every special rule has at least half a page explaining what it does.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
To be fair, that would have also doubled the size of the book, which would have at least doubled the price, as they would have had to split into more books and a much bigger protective jacket. Remember it's not only the rules in HSN3, it's the fluff as well from HSN3 and Paradiso. They can't really leave that out of the physical copy - if you don't want the fluff, you just get the rules for free.

Thats why you would NOT put the HS fluff in that book. And do a better job of condensing the rules. Its silly that just about every special rule has at least half a page explaining what it does.

So, just like leave out half the games current fluff? Once those rules are in physical form, the old book goes out of print. Keeping both in print is economically bad for the company. By not putting the fluff in the physical book, you essentially cut half of it from availability. Like it or not, fluff is a part of the physical releases, because it's the only place they put it. So the Human Sphere and Paradiso fluff has to go in an updated rulebook.

As for the rules, I much, much prefer this way of doing everything than the way they did it in N2. There's so many ways skills and equipment interact with different types of orders in this game it really does need to be done like this. Condensing the rules means going back the the ambiguity that was N2.

I dont see it as so much a stumbling but more a natural slowdown after N3.

There was a huge influx of new players like me with Icestorm and N3. Some of whom, for various reasons, lost interest.

My personal reasons are that the people I knew who were into infinity stopped playing after the N3 launch, I don't learn rules located in 1000 places and I was for a while waiting for the rewritten HS/CP + AF before losing interest.

Im not sure that any of that counts as them stumbling tho, they had me buy a heap of their miniatures after all. So they've already profited from me over the year.

I just have a heap of scifi minis to repurpose now.

I have been eyeing infinity since before it was publicly released, but did not buy in and start playing until the past year.

Its hard to comment on how the previous editions worked compared to this edition, as I never player them.

I don't think looking at a rulebook, and wiki is a bad deal. Often for 40k I have a codex/supplement/rulebook to look through with a possible google search for a forum consensus on a rules call. Not exactly a one source system...

I realize CB is a smaller gaming company, but from a model perspective they put out as many, or more, new sculpts a month than GW for example- with a high quality. We often do not notice this, because the releases are spread among various factions and rarely are one faction centric. They also update the rules for free online, which is amazing.

The scale issue for corregidor is not really as extreme as the Azrail makes it out to be. Most of the models can be fixed by adding a small plastic piece the size of the base, under the base just making the model taller. I recommend getting a orange clear 25mm base that is 1- 1.5mm thick and gluing it under the base of models which are 'short'.

Some sectorals do seem to have lists that are stuck in older editions and need updating mostly revolving around options for specialists, which is unfortunate- but this is an issue with every mini game. Right now there is a big difference in 40k codex power even among codexes which were updated to 7th(pre necron/decurion style formations) and after. That's terrible, essentially the whole 40k system is stuck in 6th vs. 7th vs 7.5th with balance nowhere between.

I think the only real issue with N3 is the probably unintended time between N3 and HSN3, and they should update a few of the profiles on the army site to the HSN3 ones that are not going to change before release- especially for certain sectorals (Like ASA- which I do not even play) That could use even a few FO options thrown somewhere to help them in ITS.

Scale creep, or just Scale Correction?

 Bladerunner2019 wrote:




That's ridiculous growth. Achilles really hit the HGH these last few years

Well the guy's tougher to any TAG I have access to, so him being a huge guy doesn't strike me

He's a unique character so I don't think the scale comparison is really relevant other than as a curiosity. He's not going to be in a unit of Achilleseses.

I'd like to see a silhouette change in the profile commensurate with the model size change.

From very small S2 to slightly taller than S2?

Remember, the silhouette rule was added so models didn't gain benefits or drawbacks from their stance. This works both ways. Models crouched are taller because of their silhouette, making them easier to see. Models like Achilles, which are in a very upright position are slightly shorter because of their silhouette, making them a bit harder to see. CB want him to be S2, the model size/stance is irrelevant now that we have silhouettes.

Additionally, as posted in the news thread.



The old Achilles was really very small. New Achilles is basically normal sized for new models.

Where is that picture from? Giraldez' instagram?

Found it. On Giraldez' Instagram

as -Loki- pointed out the new model is actually closer to S2 than the old model.

The old model you could shoot nearly an inch above its head and still hit it because the model was so much smaller and crouching than the top of an S2 template/marker/whatever.

 Alpharius wrote:
Scale creep, or just Scale Correction?

 Bladerunner2019 wrote:




That's ridiculous growth. Achilles really hit the HGH these last few years

Scale Creep thread is here, http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/648702.page, Mr. Moderator, sir.

Are you telling me what I should talk about in the thread I started to pseudo-complain about Infinity?!?

The nerve!

Anyway, that link isn't working...

Thread creep?

I'm interested to see what they plan to do for HS, just 'here's the book' or are they going to make more of a splash?

Isn't there a mini campaign thing coming up through a sponsor?

 IJW wrote:
From very small S2 to slightly taller than S2?

The original comparison pic makes him look huge - S3 at least. Next to modern minis though he looks closer to S2.

 Alpharius wrote:
Are you telling me what I should talk about in the thread I started to pseudo-complain about Infinity?!?

The nerve!

Anyway, that link isn't working...

Telling? Naw, a hint to the wise is usually sufficient. Helps if the hint works though Here, http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/648702.page , this ought to work. Apparently that previous link embedded with a comma at the end

I assumed that you started this thread as click bait, to keep us from treating the N&R thread as a chat-box.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 IJW wrote:
From very small S2 to slightly taller than S2?

The original comparison pic makes him look huge - S3 at least. Next to modern minis though he looks closer to S2.

The original pic was compared to the old Achilles, who was a midget when he was released. The model now is S2. The old model was only by way of having it on its stat line.

Definitely think the new Achilles matches his stat line better. As someone who regularly got smacked around the chops by that little size TAG it always seemed a bit out of place.

The new one won't seem to be as contrary to the laws of physics

So in conclusion, INFINITY and CB possibly didn't stumble with N3, and it is most likely just me.

Your malicious attempt to tear the community apart has failed!

Third proper game this weekend maybe!

Has it?

Or...

...have I succeeded in my mission?!?

Good luck with that game - please post your impressions!

I know I'm not him, but I had my first game today, Caledonian sectorial against Aleph and it was more fun than I remember having in my 2nd ed games. Of course small sample size etc but promising start

Which army were you playing?

And who won?

I was the scots, and after an early game horror show (greys and uxia going down for nothing, cateran killing 1 bot and going down), my brave brave sir doctor cautious moved from one piece of cover to another (what a great order!) and got the AP HMG grey back on her feet, she then did a bunch of work, then the doctor crept over to another grey and kicked him in the head in a very doctorly fashion and got him back in the fight as well! The efforts of these two models put the game back into balance, and it ended as a draw. If I had realised I could go dogged in the reactive turn (my opponent who was teaching me didn't realise Greys had dogged) I could have won

 Alpharius wrote:
So in conclusion, INFINITY and CB possibly didn't stumble with N3, and it is most likely just me.

Honestly? I think you may be on to something, myself. My group played N3 for a couple of months and then shortly after we just kind of left it. Which is weird, I like N3 more than 2nd Edition. It got rid of the Normal-Roll-Or-Die playstyle that became the primary successful playstyle in 2nd Edition. As an update of the rules N3 was excellent. But it wasn't the quality that caused the main point of consternation with us, it was the execution of the rollout.

The rollout of N3 certainly wasn't perfect, and it certainly had a lot of stumbling points and places where CB could have been a lot clearer. To be sure, N3 was every bit as complete as the previous editions out of the box, it was fully playable, and I think it was a great improvement over the base game. But despite that, it was less complete out of the box than 2nd Edition was at the end of its run, and sadly a lot of folks started post HS and things like Sectorials weren't just an optional and unimportant part of the game to them. It took a good while after the initial release to finally get a stopgap update for HS material and later. And all the while CB drummed the drum of "none of your books are obsolete, continue buying old books. Everything is fine, nothing is broken."

But then we got the updates for Human Sphere/Campaign: Paradiso and it was kind of obvious that these weren't anything more than a stopgap... Then they announced updated N3 Human Sphere. And it does feel like the game has basically been in a holding pattern while N3 plays catchup with 2nd Edition. Sadly, CB's usual slow-roll on book releases isn't doing them any favours here.

N3 basically suffered from a less than graceful entry, and in a lot of ways it actually feels like it was an unplanned diversion from the line in a lot of ways. Part of this is CB's poor communication making it seem like much of it was last-minute changes, especially with regards to re-printing old material in the new edition where they went from "it's all compatible" to "we're doing re-prints!" in the blink of an eye. It was hard to tell if they had planned this all along (thus misleading us) or if they decided all of it at the last minute (thus indicating a general lack of pre-planning on the edition rollout). Neither is utterly unforgivable, but it did severely blunt my group's enthusiasm while we wait for N3HS to drop and finally complete the N3 experience.

I'm sure they're still doing fine, and Fall/Winter is usually a pretty slow time for updates anywhere. But you aren't alone in feeling that the release of N3 was slightly askew and not quite as graceful as it could have been.

A ha!

I knew it!

Magneto Alpharius was right!

I think a hell of a lot more people were paying attention this time around, certainly when compared to N2.

So while launch of N3 was definitely better than N2 (and they had a lot more to release and update), at the same time the company is now bigger, with a much bigger group of customers that expect more.

Next few months will be interesting. Personally, I think a game that has been made by people with such passion for creating a quality product, with such a beautiful range of sculpts, and such a wonderful set of balanced game mechanics, has a right(!) to succeed. But, I suppose time will tell

The reason so many more people were paying attention to Infinity for N3, and why so many people seem to have fallen off the wagon, is Icestorm. There was a massive influx of people who were evidently waiting for a 2 player starter to jump in, which magnified the amount of people paying attention to an edition change that was anything but smooth (which even started with Icestorms inclusion of quickstart rules, with the main rules lagging behind).

It seems they came out of it with a bigger playerbase than they went into N3 with, since they seem comfortable devoting a lot of time to resculpting the range - something that wouldn't be adviseable without a large influx of people who didn't have the old models, but they definitely didn't keep all of the people that jumped on board with Icestorm.

I imagine thats the pattern for most game systems. Peaks and then recessions, and growth is what you retain from those peaks.
It can feel like a loss of interest in any given area, but usually that's based on experiences with Magic or 40k which had the same ebb and flow but such a large player base that you barely even noticed it even at a local level.

It seems like the obstacle that CB hit when they released N3 was basically that:
* There's no way that CB would have had the budget to do all of the rules revisions at the same time.
* The difference in quality between the 2nd edition and 3rd edition rules was great enough that the 'left over' 2nd edition rules made the game look bad.
* At the same time, CB couldn't abandon the remaining 2nd edition rules because that would have meant writing off important rules like the link team rules.
all together meant that the revision of the remaining 2nd edition rules that they had the resources to do (the errata/FAQ that came out with the release) would end up being inadequate.

I mean, if you want to pick a fight in the rules forum, there's a list of un-FAQ'd Human Sphere rules like AI Beacon or G:Servant/G:Synchronized that have all been implicitly written under the 2nd edition rules assumptions that aren't valid in 3rd edition any more.

I think the success of N3 and Icestorm caught them by surprise a little and they have been working to catch up since.
An improved game system,
Implementing improved modelling/production process
Moving to new facilities
Adding to the miniatures range
Updating the free content such as Army V and the Wiki
And a steady trickle of articles and features on the Homepage and the next books in development shows a growing company going in the right direction to me.

It feels like a game worth investing my time in

On the flip side I haven't been as affected by the impact of N3 on HS and Paradiso as I mainly play Vanilla Yu Jing

To speak on the OP's question regarding popularity of Infinity. I can only speak on my area and on my perspective of a new player. I saw a single demo game, and knew this was the game for me. There are so many reasons, but the tactical appeal, time it takes to play and cost to play alone sold me very quick on Infinity.

No longer do I have to haul 3 cases full of figs across the city carrying $1800 worth of models to play a 6 hour game. I can now stop by my local store, carrying my army in a shoe box and play a 45 minute game.

Not to mention that I bought an Ariadna army, terrain and a game mat for the price of a small army with my previous hobby. I now have 2 other friends starting out in Infinity and am still seeing new people join in the short time I have been playing. I think this game is catching on very fast and will continue to grow steadily.

Honestly, if you wanted a streamlined, convenient, constantly updated, logically-released and supported game, play Dota or League of Legends, or X-Wing / Kromaster on the tabletop.

I think the sheer utter bloody intractability of Infinity is part of its charm.

It's difficult to find models and it's difficult to get them arrive on time.
It's difficult to find an official release date for updates and it's difficult to get models released on schedule per month.
It's difficult to assemble the models and it's incredibly difficult to paint them well.
It's difficult to learn the ruleset and difficult not to keep referring to the wiki when actually playing.
It's difficult to buy and paint enough terrain and it's difficult to set terrain up.
It's difficult to master the game and it's difficult to get to the point where there aren't any surprises.

The only easy thing so far is making a list and checking it (Army V is a godsend) but even Army V doesn't include pictures of models so new players have no idea what unit symbol corresponds to what.

Infinity is a difficult game, not for the casual or the undetermined. Fortunately, it's a rewarding sort of difficulty.

Once you accept that it isn't going to be a simple or easy game to play, everything becomes copacetic.

Wow, that read like a complete GW apologist's way of thinking.

"Infinity is SOOO EXTREEEEME that you gotta learn to take punishment to play this! If you can't, you're not gentleMANly enough to play!"

The reality is, everything CB has done has been to make it easier to get into and work continues on that front.

Delivery and stocking issues are just a normal problem for anything that's popular, but with slow production and overseas shipping.

Model assembly problems are also a legitimate issue. It's gotten better from the old days of wondering whether that's a piece of flash or an antennae, and it's something they'll have to continue to improve on via designing better cuts on models. Seeing it as some kind of selling point or badge of honor sounds more like stockholm syndrome.

Sure, there's a learning curve to any game, and Infinity's learning curve is steeper, but that doesn't mean you should just overlook the issues. You can still criticize where appropriate and praise where appropriate.

Infinity is a good game despite some problems, it can take the criticism.

The other thing to remember is that while it may be an issue to have variance of scale in your collection and not ideal, it is at least only an aesthetic consideration as the system uses silhouettes from a gaming perspective.

 Groundworks wrote:
The other thing to remember is that while it may be an issue to have variance of scale in your collection and not ideal, it is at least only an aesthetic consideration as the system uses silhouettes from a gaming perspective.

Speaking of silhouettes...

Who asked for them? Nobody I know asked for them. They were just such a useless addition to the game. The "official line" was that they were added to allow sculptors more freedom in sculpts--but that clearly hasn't happened.

From the reading of the offical Infinity board during N2, about half the forum. I would also add any one that complained about the pose. But, one of the biggest reason is people claiming you can't see him because he is crouched down. While the same unit but different pose was clearly in LoF.

Yeah. Multiple 100+ post threads on LoF rules, multiple threads either suggesting that cylinders be used instead, or that several US tournaments used cylinders anyway. It was so common it even had it's own term, the 'magic cylinder' approach.

My take on the changes- played a lot in V2 stopped for a over a year+ came back in V3 and have been playing again a fair amount the last 3-4 months.

silhouettes= good with the dynamic pose of many models they are needed....many cases its easy to see if you have LoS sometimes not so obvious.

Even with the scale changes don't think its that bad as the older ones even tho abit smaller still look fine on the table with new models IMO. Only a couple offenders like Azril are really bad an I just use that as a counts as Djban HMG now and my friends have been fine with it.

The rules IMO need more streamlining....to many if thens.....even after playing again about once a week for months now we are still having rules issues/clarifications almost every game. An I think both of us are decently read up the rules but with a big book, the wiki, and changes from V2 is a lot to keep up with. Almost to much.....thus my comment on becoming abit more streamline.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Speaking of silhouettes...

Who asked for them? Nobody I know asked for them. They were just such a useless addition to the game. The "official line" was that they were added to allow sculptors more freedom in sculpts--but that clearly hasn't happened.

How many posts have you made complaining about scale creep in Infinity?

Scale creep alone is reasonable justification for including silhouettes - you avoid the 40k problem where older, smaller models are easier to hide. Silhouettes far from useless.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Speaking of silhouettes...

Who asked for them? Nobody I know asked for them. They were just such a useless addition to the game. The "official line" was that they were added to allow sculptors more freedom in sculpts--but that clearly hasn't happened.

How many posts have you made complaining about scale creep in Infinity?

Scale creep alone is reasonable justification for including silhouettes - you avoid the 40k problem where older, smaller models are easier to hide. Silhouettes far from useless.

With any game that involves LoS you need to use fixed volume silhouettes to have balance or you end up with the GW problem of modeling for advantage or just the general pose screwing certain miniatures over and making others super strong.

It simplifies things and allows for smooth gameplay.

I think it's one of those things that in casual games you don't really bother with (or at least I don't).

But, in tournaments it definitely helps remove some of the ambiguity.

I clambored for Silouettes. Nearly all modern minis games use them, and for good reason: You no longer have arbitrary posing determine a game aspect (LoS) which can be extremely impactful.

For example, look at the old Backflipping Shaolin Monk: Huge area presence, much larger than a normal infantryman. Versus the 'sitting' Nisse sniper, who apparently then is always shorter than their non-sniper counterparts. How do you handle LOS to say, the crawling Regular, versus the Hungies who are flailing their arms around?

All of which are supposed to be the same sized units, but have dramatically different presences on the board due to differences in their pose.

 Pacific wrote:
I think it's one of those things that in casual games you don't really bother with (or at least I don't).

But, in tournaments it definitely helps remove some of the ambiguity.

Comes up plenty in our friendly games. When you've got super dynamic models like Bran de castro or crouching models like the Hunzakut LGL or Djanbazan sniper, knowing how big they actually are is very helpful.

Of course, the ironic part is since introducing silhouettes to combat dynamic models and LOS, they're moving to less dynamic models.

Fun fact: the Meteor Zond's model is almost totally outside of it's own S3 silhouette

 Asmodai Asmodean wrote:

It's difficult to ...

I generally find that the more difficult something is to do (or achieve) the more rewarding I find it.
I find Infinity a more rewarding game than the arms race that is 40k or the c-c-c-c-c-combo-breakers of Hordemachine.

Stuff that's given to me on a platter, is something that has no value.

I've all but given up. I mostly played tournaments and local leagues but the last tournament left a sour taste in my mouth.

Infinity seems to come down to who has read the latest FAQ (the rules are quite messy) and who can cram the most orders into their list.

I was excited for N3 but after about 3 tournaments I've given up, the community has seemed to become quite gamey by and large.

I way prefer the concept of unit volumes to true-line-of-sight. The idea that some figures are permanently crouching and therefore easier to hide behind things is really stupid.

I played probably less than ten games of N2, really enjoyed it. Used to only buy it and play it at conventions (barring sales on miniaturemarket), as the local player base was small to non-existent. Painted a lot of Haqq, read and enjoyed the fluff/rules, had token sets and templates.

The next time I went to a Con, the game was in the midst of the N3 changeover, no solid rulebook (or few people had it), app wasn't updated, everything is run off the wiki (I think, don't quote me on any of this). Icestorm selling like hotcakes, lots of excitement. I played maybe a game, forgetting weapon range modifiers and random stats consistently. Game still seemed fun, but a bit of a hassle to play with the rules spread out across multiple books.

Fast forward to this year, same Con, couldn't be bothered to even look at new models. I've owned N3 for maybe six months, haven't bothered to read any of it, it just keeps getting pushed to the bottom of the pile, just below the Skorne IKRPG supplement and Heroes of the Solar System.

I definitely think you are on to something Alph. People who were highly connected to the game weren't likely to drop off with an edition change. But folks like me, casual players who liked browsing the forums and buying models, if not playing consistently, kind of got lost in the shuffle. Doubly so if the didn't buy Icestorm because they didn't play either faction.

People like clean games, with readily available books/materials that aren't going away soon, I think X-Wing proved that. Infinity hasn't felt clean or streamlined for me in a long time.

 gunslingerpro wrote:


People like clean games, with readily available books/materials that aren't going away soon, I think X-Wing proved that. Infinity hasn't felt clean or streamlined for me in a long time.

While I'll agree they could of planed the change over better. The above is one of the funniest thing I've seen posted on a Forum with the name DakkaDakka.

That is probably infinities biggest problem and something they need to fix is orders stuffing.......

In V2 the list that had alot of orders over the other list usually won and its still the case in V3.

Elite models in general dont perform well in their own list, they basically have to be taken with 10+ cheerleaders and then hope your cool guys dont die to a lucky crit....and even if they do then you just drown the other guy in cheap guys/orders spam until you get lucky.......Also the template weapons auto hitting makes the cheapo throw away guys and orders spam even more powerful as you can for sure get a hit on the other guy by sacrificing a guy.

I love the idea of only playing a 10 man team in infinity, but the rules have never really supported it as a viable option against competitive lists IMO. You better off always bringing 15-20+ guys.....until they fix this part of the game mechanics I dont think it will ever make a top tier game as its something thats been broke since the game launched.

Love the miniatures and like the game still but I doubt I would play a competitive game for the above reason as you simply have to play lists a certain way to do well and elites in general are overprinted for what they give compared to cheapo throw models that still supply an order.

They need to add a bonus for smaller # armies or give a penalty to bringing alot of troops to balance out the system.

Maybe they could do the following,

Have every Lt give you a certain number of bonus regular orders. Say a basic Lt might give you 3 orders a turn, an elite expensive one might give you 5. These orders go in their own pool and can be spent by any model in any combat group. If you lose your Lt and promote a new one, the new one only gives whatever the basic number of bonus orders are(say 3 in the above example).

I heard an idea mentioned on Mayacast that I really liked :

The larger the order pool, the fewer Command Tokens you get.

It went something like this :

1 - 10 orders: 4 CTs.
11 - 15 orders: 3 CTs.
16 - 20 orders: 2 CTs.

Etc.

Fluff wise, it can represent high command having their hands full sorting everyone out. It doesn't seem to be gamebreaking, but it gives large order pool players a little something to think about.

It also helps with the strategic use of CT, in that a multi-order list may not use it, and save them for co-ordinated orders, heals and whatnot, whereas an order-starved force can afford to spend one to somewhat stop the tide.

Noir wrote:

 gunslingerpro wrote:


People like clean games, with readily available books/materials that aren't going away soon, I think X-Wing proved that. Infinity hasn't felt clean or streamlined for me in a long time.

While I'll agree they could of planed the change over better. The above is one of the funniest thing I've seen posted on a Forum with the name DakkaDakka.

The irony is not lost on me . I just never played 40k, so this is the first real time I've felt it.

 Chillreaper wrote:
I heard an idea mentioned on Mayacast that I really liked :

The larger the order pool, the fewer Command Tokens you get.

It went something like this :

1 - 10 orders: 4 CTs.
11 - 15 orders: 3 CTs.
16 - 20 orders: 2 CTs.

Etc.

Fluff wise, it can represent high command having their hands full sorting everyone out. It doesn't seem to be gamebreaking, but it gives large order pool players a little something to think about.

If you did that, you'd need to increase the number of command tokens that people have as a baseline.

So it would be something like

1-10 orders: 6 CTs
11-15 orders: 5 CTs
16-20 orders: 4 CTs.

2 CTs is too few.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Chillreaper wrote:
I heard an idea mentioned on Mayacast that I really liked :

The larger the order pool, the fewer Command Tokens you get.

It went something like this :

1 - 10 orders: 4 CTs.
11 - 15 orders: 3 CTs.
16 - 20 orders: 2 CTs.

Etc.

Fluff wise, it can represent high command having their hands full sorting everyone out. It doesn't seem to be gamebreaking, but it gives large order pool players a little something to think about.

If you did that, you'd need to increase the number of command tokens that people have as a baseline.

So it would be something like

1-10 orders: 6 CTs
11-15 orders: 5 CTs
16-20 orders: 4 CTs.

2 CTs is too few.

That would be the point wouldn't it, to make it a choice between lots of Order or more CT.

Except I don't think 2 CTs would be an appropriate reduction. That's too few. Give smaller groups more CTs, don't give big ones less.

His point was to give the bigger order pools less option (less link creation, less coordinate order) not to give the smaller order pools more options.

I don't really see a reason for it, except large order pools do make the game longer. But, even then it still is normally under 2 hours.

They don't even need to touch the rule book, nor should they. With the ever changing ITS they could try it for a season if people complain enough and they think its a issue for the tournament scene. Likely for time reasons. But, I change the numbers to some thing more like...


12 units and lower 4CT
13-18 units 3CT
19-24 units 2CT
25+ units 1CT

Or a little large range.

Noir wrote:
I don't really see a reason for it, except large order pools do make the game longer. But, even then it still is normally under 2 hours.

They don't even need to touch the rule book, nor should they. With the ever changing ITS they could try it for a season if people complain enough and they think its a issue for the tournament scene. Likely for time reasons. But, I change the numbers to some thing more like...

I'm assuming ITS is the reason for the suggestion, as ITS has moved from the old single combat group with 10 good models to multiple combat troops with specialist spam. I personally don't play that way, but if you ask around it's definitely becoming a problem.

While it can be pointed out that they are spamming cheap units, not good units, with the lethality of this game a good model dies just the same as a cheapmodel to a rifle. You've got less chance to hit, but you've got more guns pointed their way to compensate for that, in addition to far more specialists.

Ah the order pool spam. I hate it so much, yes I do. Reminds me a lot of X-Wing. Large blobs of TIEs.

Anyhow, still love both games. I try and fix the order spam by hopefully taking out the Rambos and getting the blobs of cheerleaders to do something that lets me handle them.

I mostly play Vedic ALEPH and have occasionally brought 8 orders in a 300pt game/tourney. Yeah, I'm a masochist but I love the challenge.

I have to be honest that I've done spam lists, though they're centered around a large group of Kum riders. I wind up with about 10 regular orders, but loads of Irregular and Impetuous orders.

I wouldn't call it particularly competitive, but it's certainly fun.

And I play USA. Sure, I have 20 guys. But I don't really have anybody I can reliably Rambo with, unless someone is stupid and leaves everyone's back turned to Van Zant(who still falls over if he gets hit).

 Grey Templar wrote:
And I play USA. Sure, I have 20 guys. But I don't really have anybody I can reliably Rambo with, unless someone is stupid and leaves everyone's back turned to Van Zant(who still falls over if he gets hit).

USARF isn't complete at the moment. We've got some units that have been namedropped but didn't even have dossiers as of November.

I doubt a 2 wound heavy infantry is in the lineup though. That's what the Minuteman should/could have been, but it appears its not in the cards.

Unless they gave USA a tag, that would be cool.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I doubt a 2 wound heavy infantry is in the lineup though. That's what the Minuteman should/could have been, but it appears its not in the cards.

Unless they gave USA a tag, that would be cool.

Doubt we'll get a TAG, but remember that Blackjacks are the HEAVY Ranger Regiment.

Hmmm, you are correct.

Something with 2 wounds would be nice. Really Van Zant should have two wounds for his point cost and given how squishy he is.

 Grey Templar wrote:
And I play USA. Sure, I have 20 guys. But I don't really have anybody I can reliably Rambo with, unless someone is stupid and leaves everyone's back turned to Van Zant(who still falls over if he gets hit).

If this is the case, I'd prefer it to be the norm. There's little fun on the reactive side of Aleph Steel Phalanx or Nomad's tricks.

Yeah, Steel Phalanx isn't fun.

A lot of the problem you're seeing with order spam has to do with ITS. Use another system like YAMS where specialists aren't necessary. I find that in games of YAMS, I run much tighter lists - ~10-15 models as opposed to 18-20, mainly because the objectives can be accomplished by any model, not just specialists. More coverage = less orders to move to particular areas.

The downside to YAMS is exactly that Specialists aren't necessary. They are moved back to their base function - Engineers repair stuff, Forward Observers mark stuff, etc.

I prefer a system where regular units can do objectives at a penalty, which still gives Specialists a more distinct place, yet means you can still accomplish objectives, less reliably, if your specialists all get KO'd.

 -Loki- wrote:

I prefer a system where regular units can do objectives at a penalty, which still gives Specialists a more distinct place, yet means you can still accomplish objectives, less reliably, if your specialists all get KO'd.

That's 20x20 isn't it? Specialists get bonuses in certain scenarios (hackers in hacking scenarios, engineers in demolition scenarios) but everyone else can still do it at a -3 or something. Or the favoured specialists get a +3 or something.

 -Loki- wrote:
The downside to YAMS is exactly that Specialists aren't necessary. They are moved back to their base function - Engineers repair stuff, Forward Observers mark stuff, etc.

I prefer a system where regular units can do objectives at a penalty, which still gives Specialists a more distinct place, yet means you can still accomplish objectives, less reliably, if your specialists all get KO'd.

Agreed, I think that's the best balance. I'd like to see a YAMS-style system where there are specific missions that are easier to do with a specialist, or require certain types. For example, "Designate enemy building for demolition" could be done at range by a FO, within ZOC of a hacker (spotlight), or in B2B as an engineer (no penalty) or regular unit (-3). Something like that.

The funny thing is, with some armies (Haqq, but not Ariadna) I end up taking just as many specialists in YAMS as I would in ITS.

You guys have looked at YAMS2, right? :(

Shoot us a link, double-quick please!

I vaguely looked at YAMS2 a while ago, IIRC, and that's doubtful, since it was a very vague look, my main issue with it was the same as with YAMS: the missions were too random, and you would often end up with two simultaneous single player games.

Also, they were no missions based on ground control.

http://infinitytheforums.com/forum/topic/36550-yet-another-mission-system-yams-2nd-edition-alpha-testing

Relevant to this thread:
One of the pre-game cards lets you give all Specialists a +3 bonus on objective rolls,
Most of the points are now from joint public missions, several of which are mutually exclusive,
Two of the 17 missions involve dominating areas and a further six involve area denial, controlling an item or piece of scenery or having troops in a specific area at the end of the game.

YAMS is really close to the Malifaux mission system that I love so much. If only there was a randomly chosen and generic mission objective both players were going for alongside the YAMS specific objecitves, that'd be awesome. Being able to make your army list in Malifaux after general mission objectives and personal objectives have been chosen also increases the tactical appeal. Might even make Multiterrain of some use.

What kind of information blackout do the folks in the Human Sphere live in where they get to the mission destination only to then find out what they're supposed to do? At least ITS missions often come down to protecting your specialist.

Haven't played with them specifically, but the Strategy cards seem to be randomness for the sake of randomness. Rerolling initiative and +3mod to specialists seems pretty good. Advance Scouting has the potential to be less than useful.