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.

I have decided to start Infinity with the arrival of Operation Icestorm, and have a few questions going forward.

1) Standard vs Sectorial Armies: which is the better option? Is it generally better to sacrifice some variety to be able to make use of Link Teams (they seem quite good) via a Sec Army?

2) How important are non combat specialists? Should I be looking to include a Doctor/Hacker/Engineer in every list, or is it more specific than that?

Thanks in advance.

1. Depends on the army. Some sectorials gain increased AVA for some units, cheaper point costs, and sometimes different abilities. The Kempeitai for yu jing is a great example of a unit you would never take in vanilla, but is a must in the JSA. Also there is the thematic reason which is why I play them, however some people like the flexibility of choice with vanilla.

2. In ITS they are absolutely vital. I believe anything that would be labeled a specialist can grab an objective, but with a lower chance of success then the unit that is meant too.

1. Neither. Sectorial armies are highly specialised and give much better access to some of a factions great units while also taking away a major portion of the faction. They also gain the ability to use Linked teams.

Vanilla armies get access to everything, but very limited access to the more specialised units and cannot make Linked teams. Also have a few units that no sectorials can take (yet).

It's really down to your play style. None are better or worse. Some are more difficult to play depending on what was taken away, like Hassassins losing a lot of tech for combating Camo units, but they're still absolutely playable and competitive.

2. Depends if you're playing ITS scenarios. If you are, you'll want at least one of each Doctor, Hacker, Forward Observer and Engineer, someone with D-Charges and someone with some kind of specialist ammo.

If you're not, Doctors can still be hugely useful reviving fallen comrades (or killing them outright if the dice hate you), Engineers can reboot immobilised TAGs and heavy infantry and repair TAGs. Forward Observers can mark guided and speculative shots and blind enemies in ARO. Hackers can hack TAGs and heavy infantry, and fry the brains of other hackers. D-charges can be hilariously placed in Immobilised units and used to put holes in walls, and special ammo is always good to have anyway.

The difference between ITS scenarios and normal games is that in ITS games you'll want at least one of everything, with extras for redundancy if possible. In normal games, just put them in if they fit your list. If you have no guided weapons or anything to speculatively shoot, you won't find much use for Forward Observers. If your doctors suck (hi PanO!) you probably don't want to risk them. If your opponent pulls out Ariadna, you'll find basically no use for a Hacker. And so on.

Cheers guys, clears up a lot. I won't be playing ITS missions for the most part, so I'll just use them they fit. Good to know that there's no inherent advantage to using/not using Sec Armies.