Infinity is weird in that the best models at killing are rarely on the board but exist off the board, under a Marker of some sort or Transform. Out of all of the above miniatures, only Achilles is 32mm of pure suffering for your opponent. All of these models have uses, usually for the complaints of being superb "Rambos", but they are unable to win the game. That is what I find so interesting about Infinity. Many other wargames can be solved with the liberal dose of firepower but not Infinity. As a Black Ops Science Fiction "Simulator", you've got Specialists that need to be guarded to get the job done. Sure, there's a lot of cross-training in real covert operations but for a game that's a poor mechanic. There's a lot more tension when you've got some weak winners that need to be guarded, and alternatively, enemy Specialists that need dying. But a single model, whether a Specialist or murder machine, cannot win the game alone.
Strategy games like Warmachine, 40k and Fantasy are akin to creating an awesome wind-up robot, turning the key a few times and letting loose at your opponent's wind-up robot in the battle arena of the tabletop. This means a lot of information is known and the better researcher will usually win because they picked the parts that can beat your robot's known qualities. Infinity is not like that. Any model may act and react, meaning the majority of the game is making decisions during the game instead of prior. When something unfair happens, it is because you let it happen. Rambo, TO Camouflage, Airborne Deployment, Infiltration, Martial Arts and many other things can cause game loss that feels unfair from the wind-up robot camp because you've assembled your team without realizing that where and how is more fundamental than what. Infinity is quick, try again and don't repeat the mistake.
And that brings another fundamental problem with trying to teach Infinity: concepts are better than plans. With Where and How being more important than What, I can never directly say 'use this' or 'buy that'. If that is the advice that you're receiving, it's going to lead to quite a variable experience - whether your opponent already knows or can deal with your suggested solution. I try to give ideas like 3 Maxims, Perfect Composition or Equipping Heavy Weapons because I can't tell you how to play with any of those killers. And even if I did, you need to pilot your robot without relying on its wind up properties.
Some players still subscribe to "It's Not Your List, It's You" as a way to combat the rampant "Rate My List" that is all over the Infinity Forums. While I do think that the usage of a list is far more important than the building of one, I can't claim that list building isn't important. N3 Hacking, for example, is terribly complex and required for competition. Since Hacking is now important, a player needs to build with Hackers and their support in mind. They also need have a Lt., a few heavy weapons and basically Tamrielo's ITS Checklist is superb advice for list building creation. As a player, if you can't figure out which models you want to bring, then your play style isn't solid enough to build a list to it. I'm not fond of ITS, which is why we've got so many scenarios for Mission Monday. The hybrid requirement of list building and playing could lead to a soured experience.
 |
| Mad42Sam's DeviantArt |
This is positively the sole reason why I like Infinity. I've seen and played too many games where something is invincible which leads to a non-game state. There's no tension when something can't be hurt. Even if the gun is too weak to do damage due to high Armour and Cover, a Crit can still inflict a Wound. This means that uber killer you want to play with, even if they can't win the game single-handedly, needs to be played intelligently otherwise they might bite off more than they can chew. Since Infinity simulates a FPS more than a tabletop game, I like this and it also means if I'm behind I still have a shot at turning the tables.
No comments:
Post a Comment