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.

Thats why the company put them on different bases, to somewhat help the problem you are addressing.

Its really the only way outside of colour to tell who belongs where, since none look cohesive to any faction.

 frozenwastes wrote:
So now they have too unified of an aesthetic?

That has been what I have been saying all along my english might not be good enough to communicate this good enough.. The Factions all look the same.. "They are not flashed out enough" that has been my standpoint from the begining.. And then I pointed out that they also mix the Factions with alot off diffrent Ideas that dont make any sense... making the cross faction comparision even harder to make... I think that is where we got our signals crossed.. Mixing 5 diffrent styles in all the armies MAKES everything look even worse when you compare Factions and some things in another faction looks like it should have been in your Faction and vice versa... As you can see even trying to explain what is wrong with the design of Infinity is messed upp hahah.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Thats why the company put them on different bases, to somewhat help the problem you are addressing.

Its really the only way outside of colour to tell who belongs where, since none look cohesive to any faction.

And I personaly think that is Infinitys Mayor Problem.. They need to fix this because it is costing them alot of customers... And I am not a fan of GW. But the one thing they do RIGHT is Army Concept design.. They have nailed that for years now.. And when a new player looks at a game and if he wants to start playing it "Concept Army Design" is the mayor factor if he will start playing or pick another game....

Warzone as I mentioned before have a much better grasp on this.. Privateer press is much better at it and GW is probably the best in the Buissness when it comes to good Army Concept Design to make it all look cohesive whithin said faction...

Wait, so at first you say that from within a faction, they look too different that they look like they belong to the same faction. Then now you're saying that they look too similar?

I have no words.

 heartserenade wrote:
Wait, so at first you say that from within a faction, they look too different that they look like they belong to the same faction. Then now you're saying that they look too similar?

I have no words.

Ok First off each Faction is a mess, there are like 5-6 diffrent ideas inside each faction... From small Pandas too Wolfs and people in kilts etc... THIS IS BAD

Second In the Next Faction we have the same 5-6 diffrent ideas of what the Faction should be, and because of lazy Posing and the Fact that if you have 9 factions (and they all have 5-6 subfactions within them), You will soon run out of totaly Uniqe concepts, they all soon start to look alot alike betwen Factions... they blend into one another so when you flipp betwen Faction it soons become one giant mess of failed concepts. That both Fail in defining one faction as uniqe and also makes everything look very messed up and lacking any thought or plan behind it.

Example:
Faction 1 the Blue elfs
You have an Elf faction and in this Elf faction you have Wood elfs with bows and knighly elfs in full Armour with Broadswords, and you also have these snow elfs that like to shoot bows but like to run around almost naked. Then you have these Stone men and you also have Tree men to help them fight battles.. then you throw in a Chaos dragon and they also Like to Shoot cannons and use Stempunk technology..

Faction 2 the Red Half elfs

This is a cross Faction of Half elfs, they have a Scouting commpany that like to run in the woods with camocloaks (and have pointy ears), They also have Knights on horses who like to swing big weapons.. And they have these snowmen who collect pelts and fight with clubs.. You have the Gras giants and Snow stone men helping them out to fight.. And they have a big Fire Dragon on their side.. And guess what they also like to shoot with cannons and use steampunk technology

This is how i see the Factions in infinity when I look at them without reading any rules.. It is a mess and everything is jumbled together to make it an EVEN BIGGER MESS with no clear COncepts or art direction..

Do you undestand what I am trying to say here?

 heartserenade wrote:
Wait, so at first you say that from within a faction, they look too different that they look like they belong to the same faction. Then now you're saying that they look too similar?

I have no words.

The factions are a mishmahs of models that dont really fit a design idea, BUT THEN ALSO you have another faction that is the same. Not only do they not mix within their own factions they dont look any different to the other factions UNLESS you paint them and base them differently.

A new player would not be able to tell who belongs where if you mixed them up. But in 40k its clear cut who is who and what belongs where most of the time. There are clear designs for each army that both are cohesive and different to the other factions.

Of course there are exceptions in all cases, but generally you could mix any infinity models together and nobody would bat an eye unless they actually knew about the game.

 Swastakowey wrote:

 heartserenade wrote:
Wait, so at first you say that from within a faction, they look too different that they look like they belong to the same faction. Then now you're saying that they look too similar?

I have no words.

The factions are a mishmahs of models that dont really fit a design idea, BUT THEN ALSO you have another faction that is the same. Not only do they not mix within their own factions they dont look any different to the other factions UNLESS you paint them and base them differently.

A new player would not be able to tell who belongs where if you mixed them up. But in 40k its clear cut who is who and what belongs where most of the time. There are clear designs for each army that both are cohesive and different to the other factions.

Of course there are exceptions in all cases, but generally you could mix any infinity models together and nobody would bat an eye unless they actually knew about the game.

This is Exactly what I mean.. Thanx. And I know alot of people who feel the same way about infinity and it is stoping them from even trying the game. And I do think the game is really good, so I find it sad that Corvus Belli dropped the ball in the design department...

Okay, I get what you're trying to say. I still don't agree: even when I wasn't playing Infinity I could tell them apart with no problems. Whereas with 40k, what's difference between two separate factions is literally the color of their armor (in which you criticized Infinty early on) or just change some of their bling.

So imagine my confusion on as to why you guys think that 40k is very unique in terms of defining faction design.

Suppose I had a game with perfectly-sculpted accurate models of all the current global Special Forces and SWAT-type paramilitaries: SAS,GSG-9, LAPD SWAT, HK SDU, Spetznaz, etc.

I prime them all in gloss black.

Can a n00b separate them into military v police, and then by nationality?

I think not.

That's the Infinity "problem" in a nutshell.

I really don't see this as a problem in infinity. The factions have enough unifying themes too them and the sub factions have very strong themes. I think this is just a matter of someone who doesn't know the game seeing a bunch of humans in SiFi gear.

Now that itself might be a problem, but given CBs growth over the past 5 years it definitely isn't a problem that's holding them back.


Also, someone mentioned GW didn't steal ideas, everything these days is influenced by what came before it. That's simply wrong in GWs case. GW made models for judge dredd and D&D before they made arbites and greater demons. Nothing about those are inspired by or influenced by, they are direct copies.

 jonolikespie wrote:
I really don't see this as a problem in infinity. The factions have enough unifying themes too them and the sub factions have very strong themes. I think this is just a matter of someone who doesn't know the game seeing a bunch of humans in SiFi gear.

Now that itself might be a problem, but given CBs growth over the past 5 years it definitely isn't a problem that's holding them back.


Also, someone mentioned GW didn't steal ideas, everything these days is influenced by what came before it. That's simply wrong in GWs case. GW made models for judge dredd and D&D before they made arbites and greater demons. Nothing about those are inspired by or influenced by, they are direct copies.

The main problem is that I personaly feel that the bad design decision are costing them customers who will never even try their game just because of this.. Also feel like they should get some critic for not making it better.... They are still a small company and might still appreciate getting some feedback why people will no buy their game even if the Rules are Solid..

So for those of you who are playing Infinity, why dont you ask around in your local stores and gaming groups why more people do not try Infinity.. Because I gave it a try with my local gaming group and got that the main reason nobody wanted to play it was because of the messed up Concept design of the factions of the game... And as we have seen on these boards those feelings are not an isolated thing... I personaly think that is the mayor obstacle standing in Corvus bellies way to making it really big in the Wargaming community..

 heartserenade wrote:
Okay, I get what you're trying to say. I still don't agree: even when I wasn't playing Infinity I could tell them apart with no problems. Whereas with 40k, what's difference between two separate factions is literally the color of their armor (in which you criticized Infinty early on) or just change some of their bling.

So imagine my confusion on as to why you guys think that 40k is very unique in terms of defining faction design.

Tau and a guardsmen look very different. But whats more is their tanks look very different BUT also fit the theme of the faction. You have auxiliaries in the tau that are the exception, but largely they all look like a force unpainted or painted. But put a human tank in a tau force and it stand out big time. Clear simple differences that anybody can pick up on. Put a Guardsmen in a Tau squad and it will look out of place. Even 2 similar armies such as eldar and dark eldar cant be mixed as whilst they are similar, they have very different designs that make them noticeably different from each other. even at a glance.

Infinity, the random panda bots and servo bots, you could swap out the lady between the two and it wont make a difference. Neither will stand out among the vast differences that are already present. Nor could one tell it belongs on the other team. I wouldnt know if you took swapped out the pandas and the servo bots either. There is no clear design to show who is fighting for who. I dont even know who is on whos team when I see them unless the players have painted their bases differently etc. This is bad.



If the above all had the same bases and are in the middle of a skirmish fight, could you tell who the teams are at a glance? I couldnt. In fact even with the bases im not sure whats going on there.

See below for a game with clear faction design differences BUT ALSO the same bases.



A new player will in seconds tell the difference. The same cannot be Said to infinity. A big reason why people here dont buy the models and play the game.

I'm gobsmacked to hear this about Infinity. I realize taste is subjective, but...a-buh-whut?

A couple points, valid to my way of thinking-

1. Real soldiers from opposing armies look almost identical, and why wouldn't they? They're humans wearing camo and carrying weapons of similar build. Infinity is(mostly) humanoid with similar sensibilities. If I could spot OPFOR units in my Army days, when the only difference was solid OD green vs my woodland camo, I think I can find my personally painted dollies(all 10 of them) adrift on the vast expanse of a 4' square table. At that realization, all other dollies aren't mine, and must be the opposition.

2. Clothes make the man. A cohesive paint scheme is arguably more unifying than the underlying sculpt.

3. I find 40K repetitive samey, largely due to it's reliance on multiple troops of the same ilk. It's by and large played with a larger model count...maybe a conditioned response here makes individualistic models such as Infinity feel mishmash? I personally prefer the special operator feel to it, but I guess it's a YMMV thing?

4. Corvus Belli is doing things right, at least as far as sculpt quality and game 'vision' goes. I found the models ideal long before even checking out the rules. Many people online seem to think similar.

5. The factions in Infinity do have unifying qualities...a few minutes is all it took for me to find them. Again, maybe it's a conditioned response from playing large company sized games composed of widely disparate races?

6. How is newbie confusion so damning when first viewing a game of Infinity? Unless you make a concentrated effort to confuse them with both opponents using similar/exact paint and bases, etc...I don't get it. Besides, most people have pattern recognition software hardwired into their brains. They can quickly sort out the differences.

Meh. Sorry, but it sounds sorta like looking for excuses to hand wave away a game.

Also sorry...typing this on a tablet currently. This response isn't as coherent and polite as I would wish.

There is meant to be equivalence of units across factions, as they represent future nations rather than vastly different nations, and don't do the 'complete exclusion' thing that 40k has. It's intended that each nation has basic light infantry, medium infantry and heavy infantry along with some of robot drones (Remotes) and large robots (TAGs), but each type has a different aesthetic line.

Factional differences come in to distribution and statistical differences between them, with a few exclusions (e.g. no hackers or TAGs in Ariadna, the low tech faction).

The most unique looking ones will be found within the sectorial (subfaction) of the Combined Army really, starting with the Morat (who are the most similar to the humans, and most straight forward) to the Shavaasti and stranger stuff.

I don't think anyone I've spoken to has ever thought the difference was the reason not to play. A few actually saw some of the identities in the faction and went for them - I know one wanted all the weird stuff and cute stuff in the Bakunin subfaction of Nomads, while another immediately saw the Morat, and one who picked Haqq because their design sensibilities (armour choice, default colour schemes as well) fitted, which he contrasted to my Yu Jing in their bright (I painted most of them yellow) powered armour. For me in particular, the oriental themes in Yu Jing (oriental super-nation) that showed up on the Chinese units and the pop culture stuff of the Japanese (bikes, ninjas)

The reasons people didn't want was high price per individual model, being wary of the Orders mechanic/ARO system of the game rules, but never visual design. In terms of visual, the main complaint was people saying it was 'too anime'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I would like to add:

There was a problem with the colours being a bit random in the official paint schemes. They HAVE noticed this as a weakness and specifically said that they are colouring new releases down to their sectoral colours. This would mean hints of other colours in some cases, or a completely different scheme in another.

40k does have visual distinction between things, and that has always been one of GWs great strengths (and good designers... in the past), but Infinity isn't trying to be that.

I actually think the problem you are seeing is what many people see with Historicals. Unless you are familiar, the only things separating two real life forces in a game would be the trims and details and the shape of their helmet. (notably Corvus Belli did 15mm historicals before Infinity)

The Infinity example you have has Combined Army and that would be like taking an old Daemonhunter one and having units of Grey Knights + requisitioned Guardsmen + Inquisitor's henchmen against Chaos Marines. The reason why the Combined Army force looks like units from three separate forces put together into one army is because they are.

I play a lot of history games. Notice how in the second world war, all the forces had different silhouettes? This ranges from the uniform and more importantly the helmet. Ideally gear is usually standardized but in practice it gets messy.

But ultimately you can tell on the table top who is who unpainted or not. Even tanks have unique flavours or looks that you can easily tell after a while which tank belongs where.

Its not as clear cut as 40k, but for a table top it should be at least standardized.

Anyone looking at an Indian soldier fighting the Japanese will be able to tell the difference between the 2. Even if they didnt know anything about the conflict. Even if the models are unpainted.

Anybody looking at the Polish defending against a german attack, will see the difference in uniform and know who is fighting who. Even if the models are unpainted.

The list goes on. A lot of infinity models dont even have head gear or standard uniforms. Who is in charge? Who is regulating these soldiers? Whats the standard gun?

I feel sorry for the poor guy in charge of logistics for infinity, thats a lot of ammo, clothing and gear that needs to be drawn from different sources and shipped for resupply.

In my opinion its not the same problem as historic games. Historic games have standardization. Infinity has whatever the designer felt like on the model. With little regard to all the others. Its very much an anime style/GI Joe style (although from limited knowledge even the bad guys have standard uniforms).

Anyway, as someone said, its all subjective. If you like rag tag forces then thats fine. But I know my buddies rather a unified force, either historic of fantasy or 40k.

Have you actually looked at Infinity models? The same factions have the same gun designs. Models of a similar unit have uniforms that you can recognize the difference from other units.

Seriously.

But those are only noticeable because you're familiar with them with historicals.

The helmets and armour parts in Infinity for the most part have unified themes through the whole factions with shapes that differ. The guns are standard over the whole faction (barring revamps like the Nomad ones got). All of those things are there the same as historicals and are not ragtag if you look at the different regiments - you don't see them due to being unfamiliar, but anyone unfamiliar with historicals has an even harder time.

Also bear in mind that all of them are different regiments for different combat types that are put together. A powered armour heavy infantryman is going to look different to a drop-ship trooper who will look different to an infiltrating skirmisher.

I don't know what you mean by anime style either, as in Ghost in the Shell anime series the protagonists wore their grey spec-ops suits when going an op. In Gundam, there are clear differences between the Earth Federation and Zeon side which are uniformed for the forces they are in, with only 'Red Baron' equivalents getting a paintjob and command fin different.

 Daba wrote:
But those are only noticeable because you're familiar with them with historicals.

The helmets and armour parts in Infinity for the most part have unified themes through the whole factions with shapes that differ. The guns are standard over the whole faction (barring revamps like the Nomad ones got). All of those things are there the same as historicals and are not ragtag if you look at the different regiments - you don't see them due to being unfamiliar, but anyone unfamiliar with historicals has an even harder time.

Also bear in mind that all of them are different regiments for different combat types that are put together. A powered armour heavy infantryman is going to look different to a drop-ship trooper who will look different to an infiltrating skirmisher.

I don't know what you mean by anime style either, as in Ghost in the Shell anime series the protagonists wore their grey spec-ops suits when going an op. In Gundam, there are clear differences between the Earth Federation and Zeon side which are uniformed for the forces they are in, with only 'Red Baron' equivalents getting a paintjob and command fin different.

Maybe you are right and im not familiar with them, but even people who didnt know what D-Day was can tell the difference between my Japanese and Russians.

Maybe its simply because I am not familiar with them. But its still off putting. I wouldnt know where to start judging by all the picture looking I have been doing today.

They have recognised there was some inconsistency, especially with the colour scheme so recent releases will clean that up going forward.

One thing the main site does not do is separate the Secorial armies, who are a LOT more unified looking. It's one problem with the miniatures list, which while handy to see what everything looks like, is listed in release order and all sectorials jumbled up.

When all the Japanese Secorial units are put together, they look a lot more consistent for example, even with weirder entries like the bikes.

 Daba wrote:
They have recognised there was some inconsistency, especially with the colour scheme so recent releases will clean that up going forward.

One thing the main site does not do is separate the Secorial armies, who are a LOT more unified looking. It's one problem with the miniatures list, which while handy to see what everything looks like, is listed in release order and all sectorials jumbled up.

When all the Japanese Secorial units are put together, they look a lot more consistent for example, even with weirder entries like the bikes.

So in other words the problem is how they are presented which leads to the misconception I may have?

 Daba wrote:
In Gundam, there are clear differences between the Earth Federation and Zeon side which are uniformed for the forces they are in, with only 'Red Baron' equivalents getting a paintjob and command fin different.

The Red Comet warrants more than mere palette swap!

Infinity models may be nice but I think they are ugly as hell hahaha!! GW makes the best looking models period

 Swastakowey wrote:


So in other words the problem is how they are presented which leads to the misconception I may have?

Partially, the model list in release order is very useful as a reference though, but I think some sort of presentation showing Sectorials together would be nice.

The spec-ops does have some element of taking from different regiments as it kind of represents an operation where they have been pulled from it rather than an actual battle (which would have an entire unit of Tiger Soldiers drop in - something that is not in the scope of the game)

You can take a 'vanilla' list which you can mix the different secotrials in the same nations - if you paint them with the same scheme they do have common features though it depends on the nation. Combined Army literally has different alien races so will look the most different, while PanO troops will have different equipment for their field of battle but will be a lot more similar (barring oddballs like Croc Men).

Even in Vanilla, their weapons will be the same (save for the Nomad update and the Yu Jing HMG update), and each will have a similar themes, such as the fins/antennae on PanO helmets or the 'bald' look of the Nomad ones, with a few exceptions (their heavy infantry and robots don't follow that look, and have their own appearance, and some of it is old PanO tech they bought up), and things like the Nomad outfits looking more like sealed void/pilot-suits even on the light infantry compared with PanO or YuJing's more traditional army trousers, as the Nomads are a completely space-borne nation. Yu Jing have a kind of 'padding' on their light infantry trousers unique to them, which only disappears on full armoured heavy infantry, Ninja or the Japanese hammer-pants.

40KNobz11 wrote:
Infinity models may be nice but I think they are ugly as hell hahaha!! GW makes the best looking models period

I don't have enough palms or faces... someone not on a phone please post the pig that thinks its a Porche.

 jonolikespie wrote:

40KNobz11 wrote:
Infinity models may be nice but I think they are ugly as hell hahaha!! GW makes the best looking models period

I don't have enough palms or faces... someone not on a phone please post the pig that thinks its a Porche.

There ya go

40KNobz11 wrote:
Infinity models may be nice but I think they are ugly as hell hahaha!! GW makes the best looking models period

You're awesome for a laugh.

On a related note, how much is GW paying you?

 Blacksails wrote:

40KNobz11 wrote:
Infinity models may be nice but I think they are ugly as hell hahaha!! GW makes the best looking models period

You're awesome for a laugh.

On a related note, how much is GW paying you?

Never confuse ignorance and stupidity with malice; there is an unlimited amount of the former.

Accolade wrote:
There ya go

Thank you

Blacksails wrote:

40KNobz11 wrote:
Infinity models may be nice but I think they are ugly as hell hahaha!! GW makes the best looking models period

You're awesome for a laugh.

On a related note, how much is GW paying you?

They aren't paying him silly, they are just testing out there new Citadel(tm) Fine(tm)Troll(tm).

I just can't understand anyone who so boldly claims that any game makes the best, well, anything. All the good games currently available are distinctly different from one another, either through aesthetics or mechanics, or both, yet offer players an enjoyable experience regardless.

Claiming that 40k makes the best anything is not only incorrect on several levels, its painfully ignorant and biased. I much prefer the aesthetics of 40k/BFG, but I love the mechanics of Firestorm Armada as being a simpler, yet equally complex game as BFG.

Anyways, that's why I laugh at people who make such ridiculous, even childish claims that 40k is the bestest that could ever be, ever. Also, my dad can beat up your dad.

 Blacksails wrote:
I just can't understand anyone who so boldly claims that any game makes the best, well, anything. All the good games currently available are distinctly different from one another, either through aesthetics or mechanics, or both, yet offer players an enjoyable experience regardless.

Claiming that 40k makes the best anything is not only incorrect on several levels, its painfully ignorant and biased. I much prefer the aesthetics of 40k/BFG, but I love the mechanics of Firestorm Armada as being a simpler, yet equally complex game as BFG.

Anyways, that's why I laugh at people who make such ridiculous, even childish claims that 40k is the bestest that could ever be, ever. Also, my dad can beat up your dad.

I agree, variety is key.

Only a sith deals an absolutes. (Ironic statement really).

 Blacksails wrote:
I just can't understand anyone who so boldly claims that any game makes the best, well, anything. All the good games currently available are distinctly different from one another, either through aesthetics or mechanics, or both, yet offer players an enjoyable experience regardless.

Claiming that 40k makes the best anything is not only incorrect on several levels, its painfully ignorant and biased. I much prefer the aesthetics of 40k/BFG, but I love the mechanics of Firestorm Armada as being a simpler, yet equally complex game as BFG.

Anyways, that's why I laugh at people who make such ridiculous, even childish claims that 40k is the bestest that could ever be, ever. Also, my dad can beat up your dad.

I sometimes think there is a group of the 40k customer base that believes that once they get rid of all players discontent with any aspect of the game/company (aka a huge portion of the base), Tom Kirby will personally reward them all for their faith in the Plastic Emperor of Mankind.