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

 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.