Moreover I think that people do not want balanced games ! Let me explain - trying to beat a game within (its mechanics, find its flaws) is a part of the game itself.As many people have said, this is not really the way Infinity does things. In other games (WM/H, Malifaux, etc.) you look for the combos - the things that will give your list a serious advantage. In Infinity, it's more about your skill than your combos. You might have some crazy combination of models, but an experienced player will give you a thrashing because it's not about each individual model (or even a combination of models); it's more about how they're used.
Case in point: Akalis Spitfire drops down in someone's rear line. To an unprepared player, this will mean death. To a prepared player, the Akalis will take out maybe 2-3 models before going down in a shower of bullets. New players will make the mistake of taking certain risks with their air drop troops; veteran players won't (or will calculate those risks).
Most Infinity players do not seem to be "list-monkeys": that is, they do not try to beat the game from within. Even those players who I would consider more rules-lawyer-y (and we have had our disputes, they and I...) try to push the game towards balance rather than a breaking point.
If you know the kind of player who seeks the challenge of "breaking" a game from within, then I might suggest that Infinity is not for them. I think that people do want balanced games, so that they can see who's better tactically - not who's better at ferreting out "the winning strategy" (making most of the gameplay irrelevant).
If you know such a player, please refer them to this post. It might just get them to change their mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment