|
I am curious to see how its overall effect is going to recost and balance weapons and units. Although I see the whole "it's not your list it's you" line thrown around a lot on the forums some models are simply overpriced or undercosted etc for what they bring to the table. Even though I play Ariadna I feel they have a lot of models that are leaning towards being too cheap especially when you factor in ITS. If climbing is a long skill how will that effect Climbing+?
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 02:13 |
|
|
I imagine Climbing+ will stay the same: you just treat everything like a ladder and can move normally around on vertical surfaces. It's also possible that you can't shoot while on a vertical surface unless you have Climbing+. We don't have the full rules yet afaik.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
FINALLY new dog warrior models! And they look awesome
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
Hoboskins posted:I am curious to see how its overall effect is going to recost and balance weapons and units. Although I see the whole "it's not your list it's you" line thrown around a lot on the forums some models are simply overpriced or undercosted etc for what they bring to the table. Even though I play Ariadna I feel they have a lot of models that are leaning towards being too cheap especially when you factor in ITS. Man people who say "Its not your list, its you" are just pushing your poo poo in. Its a stupid phrase because knowing how to build a list to tackle your opponents is "you". If you bring a bad list vs. an opponent who is prepared for what you have, and their choices all give them the edge over what you can bring, its obvious who has the edge - the dude with the better list, that has the superior choices. Infinity favors a "toolbox" approach, but at the end of the day, the tools have costs - A 10 point basic order vs. a 4 point order, I'd take the 4 point and who cares that the 4 point can't move and can't shoot, I can have 4 orders for 16 points vs. the same costing me 40. But for what its worth, knowing how to play the game is worth more than 200 points worth of models on the table. If you gently caress up you'll get punished for it in the ARO. But against two players of equal skill, your list is part of that skill. Basically yeah I don't know if they will draw up new lists, or just introduce new models with new rules, but as all of the rules are available, for free, on their website including current army rosters and stat profiles, it makes updating way simple. Laphroaig fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Jul 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 04:38
|
|
|
Couldn't agree more, Laphroaig. I started a minir shitwar in the Infinity forum a couple of years ago because I described what was going on when my club first adopted Infinity (as in lists loaded with myrmidons and chasseurs rolling over newbies packing no counters) and urged people to reconsider that approach, and apparently tons of others felt the same way because the thing grew into a very long and contentious thread. It's been that way, but not as bad, regarding 150 points as the holy limit for teaching people (and even holding normal games), which often segues into "Why yes, I can fit my O-Yoroi and a 5-man keisotsu link in 150, why do you ask?", while others stress that having lists that cover more bases may be more important than the point limit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
Someday I want to play Uhlan + Fusilier link at 150. Because I am a bad, bad person.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
Laphroaig posted:Man people who say "Its not your list, its you" are just pushing your poo poo in. Its a stupid phrase because knowing how to build a list to tackle your opponents is "you". If you bring a bad list vs. an opponent who is prepared for what you have, and their choices all give them the edge over what you can bring, its obvious who has the edge - the dude with the better list, that has the superior choices.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 09:06
|
|
|
Anyone know how Ariadna can beat people who bring lists high in ODS/ODF or spam smoke grenades? I have pretty much no ability to see through any of it, and thus can't target or shoot said troops. Even spotting them out with targeting is out because again the -6 to hit pretty much makes it near impossible to get a hit in. I know flame weapons knock them off, but seeing as the only way this can come about is via suicidal troops with flamethrowers, it kind of makes it difficult to achieve. Any hints/suggestions? I'd like to be able to move dudes up into CC, but as they get negatives to throwing a smoke grenade if they are in one or can't see where they're throwing them, it's not so easy. And again, these don't even help if the opposition player has MSV3.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 11:41
|
|
|
A dual-chain wolfman will absolutely wreck a Myrm link, ODD or not. And yeah, flamer attacks are suicidal but often worth it, and LFT Chasseurs are filthy cheap. As for MSV3, Asuras don't have any form of camo/mimetism themselves, so an HMG Paracommando can do well there. Also: if you're using Highlanders for your smoke, stagger them so the next one throws the smoke from behind the template, not from within, while still having LOF to the target point. Kinda hard to tell without pictures.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 12:19
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:A dual-chain wolfman will absolutely wreck a Myrm link, ODD or not. And yeah, flamer attacks are suicidal but often worth it, and LFT Chasseurs are filthy cheap. As for MSV3, Asuras don't have any form of camo/mimetism themselves, so an HMG Paracommando can do well there. Won't that still trigger a normal roll ARO after the throw, albeit at a -6 penalty for the visibility? I thought you had to be completely outside of line of sight, not simply obscured by a zero visibility zone, to avoid the enemy firing back at you after you make an attack through or inside of a zero visibility zone? Also for what its worth, you can drop Suppressivion Fire through a zero-vis zone as a long order, and you just take a -6. If there is ODD+Smoke, the -12 is gonna hurt though. Lastly, I dislike the whole idea of there being "smoke" and then "super smoke". Its confusing that different sets of rules apply, I'd rather it was like smoke lvl 1/2/3 and you needed corresponding MSV to counter it. Laphroaig fucked around with this message at 16:06 on Jul 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 15:58
|
|
|
Laphroaig posted:Won't that still trigger a normal roll ARO after the throw, albeit at a -6 penalty for the visibility? I thought you had to be completely outside of line of sight, not simply obscured by a zero visibility zone, to avoid the enemy firing back at you after you make an attack through or inside of a zero visibility zone?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
Ugh, I want to play this more, but I'm still beginner level on the rules and it seems silly to learn this version with the new one coming. Any ETA on 3rd?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
Deviant posted:Ugh, I want to play this more, but I'm still beginner level on the rules and it seems silly to learn this version with the new one coming. I'd say go ahead and learn to play. There aren't going to be any dramatic changes to the rules (that we know of right now), other than to cammo attacks and loss of lieutenant. It's mostly going to be tightening and streamlining the existing rules. Getting the basics down now should only make getting into 3rd edition easier. There isn't an official date for 3rd yet (will probably be announced at Gen Con), but it should be out before the end of the year.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:But you'd have to attack them. If you're behind a smoke field and you throw another smoke grenade at an empty point, they don't get to fire at you. How does "Shooting Smoke Special Ammunition is always considered an attack but being a type of non-offensive ammunition, it is not necessary to target a model and it can be launched at a point without any enemy miniature needing to be specified." work then? Doesn't the act of throwing a smoke grenade, as it is "always considered an attack", through smoke, generate the response at -6 as per normal zero visibility zones?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
I would think the intent is that smoke 'counts as an attack' in terms of modifiers for distance etc - they just mean you roll as for a shot, it isn't an actual attack. Pierzak's interpretation is correct.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Deviant posted:Ugh, I want to play this more, but I'm still beginner level on the rules and it seems silly to learn this version with the new one coming. I would just play - again, 3rd edition is more about revisions and tweaks than huge changes. This isn't Warhammer or Warmachine; CB has stated that the overall mechanics aren't changing, just some of the poorly translated and/or imprecise rules.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Beasts of War just put up a video going over the changes to Camo in 3rd edition. http://www.beastsofwar.com/infinity/infinity-3rd-ed-sneak-peek-camouflage-rules/
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
I hope they take this opportunity to give a little flavor to some of the less optimal choices. E.g. Moblots, Orcs, Mobile Brigada I just realized all the examples I listed on my head were heavy infantry. Maybe their point cost doesn't reflect points per order well enough. Most of the powerhouse heavy infantry have visors or some other special rule, so maybe that is all they need.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
Genghis Cohen posted:I would think the intent is that smoke 'counts as an attack' in terms of modifiers for distance etc - they just mean you roll as for a shot, it isn't an actual attack. Pierzak's interpretation is correct. I think, given this FAQ: -When a camouflaged or impersonated troop throws a smoke grenade , Do troops with possible ARO perform their shots with a -6 modifier through smoke? Since shooting smoke grenade is resolved before anything-is a case of Combat Camouflage - those troops whose LOF is interrupted by the smoke are not entitled to ARO if needs LOF. That we have a case of LOF being denied to miniatures and thus losing the chance to attack - since the attack is not "at them". The corner case is Sixth Sense L2, which allows you to respond to attacks - like a smoke grenade being thrown - even if you don't have LOF. That looks to be the only exception though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
Comrade Merf posted:Beasts of War just put up a video going over the changes to Camo in 3rd edition. Huh. To summarize: "Surprising" someone (by coming out of camo) gives a -3 modifier to the target's ARO, on top of any other modifiers. But they all still happen simultaneously, so no more camo model attacks and the ARO happens if the target survives. An Intruder with camo (-3) standing behind cover (-3) surprises a target (-3). The target declares their ARO, which if they're shooting back will be at -9 before range modifiers. I like it. It'll make it so that the camo model doesn't have to be certain of killing their target, will make direct templates really good against camo, and camo will be worse at close range. Folks will also be more likely to dodge as an AR rather than always shooting back. Plus a straight modifier makes everything so much more simple. I wonder if this means that impersonation will just get a straight -3 modifier for surprise? Man, I hope so (though that would make them much weaker than camo). The other big piece was that no dice roll can be modified by more than -12 or +12. That'll give BS 13 and above troops the ability to always be able to try for a hail Mary shot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
Hmmm, unless 'Dodge' recieves the surprise penalty as well, this looks like a significant nerf to Camo. And a significant buff to Chain Rifles, Total Reaction and Neurocinetics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
I'd have to imagine dodge would as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Folks have said that it applies to any F2F roll. It's certainly a huge buff to template weapons though. Because, y'know, those totally needed a buff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
Fix posted:I'd have to imagine dodge would as well. My take on it is that dodge does take the -3 penalty. Still, a -3 to dodge is possibly less risky than a -6 (-9 for TO; more for cover and range) to shoot back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
I thought they were meant to be stealthy.  Glad to see you guys are enjoying some of the spoilered stuff though. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
This -->
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Flipswitch posted:I thought they were meant to be stealthy. Well yeah, the original Morat residents were killed in their sleep. Also, have one for Yu Jing: 
Pierzak fucked around with this message at 01:41 on Jul 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 12:56
|
|
|
Ok, I definitely didn't think that's how they were going to make shotguns better this edition.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
A quick&lovely comparison with the old ranges:
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Intriguing, I wonder if we are gonna see some new "dodge me to closer so I can get my +6 shotgun" shenanigans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
Laphroaig posted:Intriguing, I wonder if we are gonna see some new "dodge me to closer so I can get my +6 shotgun" shenanigans. That's some John Woo bullshit and I approve.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
So it seems that Operation: Shitstorm has come to a close, and CB will be keeping the offical forums open.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
Baron Snow posted:So it seems that Operation: Shitstorm has come to a close, and CB will be keeping the offical forums open. Was there ever a backstory to shutting the forums down?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:A quick&lovely comparison with the old ranges: I'm sort of bummed that there's no +3 on the shotguns from 8-16. I thought that would have been a better change than +6 at 0-8. Baron Snow posted:So it seems that Operation: Shitstorm has come to a close, and CB will be keeping the offical forums open. Hizzah!...or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
I am absolutely loving the weapons changes. While the shotgun is eye-grabbing and I'm glad it gets a boost, I think the extended -3 range for rifles (rather than -6 from 24") and the close range nerf to spitfires and hmgs, and to a lesser extent snipers, is the important bit. I think it does a lot to address the overwhelming importance of HMGs and other weapons over rifles. Under the old rules this was a very noticeable thing if you weren't playing on super close tables. Now we will see a greater mix of weapons being viable. Perhaps the days of almost always activating the hmg first are over!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
I am sad that sniper rifles are pretty much always going to be worse than the HMG, but that's alright. Assuming the Boarding shotgun translates to the light and heavy versions, as a Haqq player I might well be ecstatic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
It's often worse in the active turn, and often the same or better on ARO. Granted, 32"+ sightlines aren't always available, but it can happen, and parking on top of a building makes it more likely. Also, we don't know if CB will recost them upon the release of N3. Weren't there already some profile/cost changes in the new box? Edit: I hope you're right about shotguns, I also play Haqq. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 02:13 |
|
|
Give me a multi-sniper over a HMG in the reactive turn any day. Totally different roles there. Also loving the kick in the jimmies to HMG close range accuracy. It's often tough to force an engagement within 8", but within 16"? Definitely doable. Within 16" a plain rifle outperforms an HMG now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 21:28
|
|