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.

After lurking in the news and rumor thread for years, I finally got my first Infinity model this week and plan to get the Military Orders action pack soon. Not knowing much about the actual rules beyond the basics, I figured I'd start a thread where folks like myself (or those with more experience too!) can post lists for others to critique.

In my case, I'm mainly building this out of the above mentioned Military Orders action pack with some substitutions/counts as and extra Sepulchre/palbot figs. Obviously I don't have a hacker here but I could run the Knight of Santiago as the hacker his fig actually is. I just wasn't sure with this kind of a list if I needed hacker support or if it would be better for him as a heavy armed and armored knight to just fight instead since most of my heavy infantry are BTS 9 (no idea how much protection this actually provides in practice). Ideas? I suppose I'd be running a five model core team with the crosiers/friar and a duo (is that even worth it with them?) with the Santiago/Justice knights. The Sepulchres will I suppose just be advancing fire support/melee beat sticks assuming they can actually do that job and survive (again... no idea!). Finally, the doc and palbot will be running triage between the more high value figs as needed. I'll be honest in that I have no idea if the above will actually work well. Ideas? Is the MSV L2 on the crosier spitfire worth it for what I expect will be a back field ARO unit along with the rocket launcher friar in the same core fireteam? Or is that five points better spent elsewhere?

Do you plan to play ITS scenarios? Having your only real objective piece also be your Lt is going to give you some trouble in a lot of them.

 LunarSol wrote:
Do you plan to play ITS scenarios? Having your only real objective piece also be your Lt is going to give you some trouble in a lot of them.

As a complete noob, I can't say with any certainty but just judging from how popular they are then I'd assume that I would. Any advice?

 warboss wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
Do you plan to play ITS scenarios? Having your only real objective piece also be your Lt is going to give you some trouble in a lot of them.

As a complete noob, I can't say with any certainty but just judging from how popular they are then I'd assume that I would. Any advice?

Part of ITS is that generally you know what you're facing before hand. You probably won't have a set list, but its a good idea to just get an idea of what models you like to run scenario for you. Things that deploy midfield that have something like Forward Observer or a more specific specialist is really helpful. I'm not super familiar with the new Military Orders options, but I find De Fersen an excellent hacking option. Having Stealth really limits the ability to shut him down with hacking while moving up to access terminals and having Trinity packed in means that he's very dangerous to attack with killer hackers. A good doctor and engineer option will cover the rest. You don't need it in every list, but it helps to have thought about including them in case you face a mission that needs them.

Thanks, and yeah, I just found out this morning from a friend about players knowing what games they're going to be playing beforehand which I didn't realize was a thing. My main experience was with "old" 40k (i.e. 3rd-5th) where you'd roll randomly and lists tailored to a single specific type of mission were both ineffective and generally frowned upon.