Infinity 3rd Edition Is Coming!
April 27, 2014 by lloyd
As you might be able to tell from the rather snazzy looking teaser trailer above the 3rd Edition of Infinity from Corvus Belli is coming later this year in 2014!
This is all being announced and revealed via the massive Infinity event going on at FicZone this weekend which Warren & Lloyd have both attended to get you some awesome access into this tournament scene for the game.
As well as the Infinity events going on over the weekend there are also going to be appearances from the maestro himself Angel Giraldez and Plastcraft Games who make whole swathes of awesome terrain for use in the world of Infinity.
As you read this the guys are going to be in the zone with the Infinity guys and hopefully will be bringing back some awesome discussion on where Infinity is going. It promises to be an epic event and for those of you would couldn't make it over there we hope we can show you just how ace this is!
The main thing of course is that Infinity is getting it's 3rd Edition this year! We want to know what you guys think about that in the comments below so get talking!
Drop a comment below to begin the discussion!
Oh boy, i’m so ready for 3rd edition! I hope there will be the much needed rules clarifications!
Awesome. Pure awesome.
I think it’s a great opportunity for Infinity to establish itself at least to the level of a game like Malifaux. As @infiniteferic mentioned the rules could do with a little tightening, also the English language translation could be better, and pretty much all of its peers now use stat cards. A new edition is a great jumping on point for new players and might finally get my group interested enough to have a good run at it.
I don’t think stat cards are, in themselves, any good. I don’t think they’ll even work very well in infinity. Other games probably have simpler profiles, and fewer profiles/choices per troop category than Infinity. I don’t fancy having to shuffle through 10 different cards just to find one variant of a Morat Vanguard. And then I’d be shuffling through a thick bunch of other cards for all the other guys. But yeah, new edition! =D
That assumes the new edition won’t make it easier to play with stat cards. 1st ed Malifaux minis had stat cards running to four sides. They halved that for 2nd ed.
Sorry, still can’t see cards as something even remotely probable. Changing the stats won’t be done since it would invalidate/be incompatible with several other books. Having less stats isn’t what infinity is about. Presenting the stats differently, in a more compact manner or perhaps only presenting the most important ones, is another matter. But still, the huge variety within even a single kind of troop choice is often so big that I don’t see cards as probable or, in my opinion, desirable.
Apology accepted ;). I didn’t mean to imply that 2nd Malifaux was a template for 3rd ed Infinity. I meant it as an example of how a new edition can accommodate changes of whatever kind. A stat card for a troop type with alternate weapon and equipment options could easily list the stats, abilities, and options on it. You could use the entire back of the card to list the options if needs be. The player would then just need to note which one is being used. A clear card sleeve and a dry wipe marker could do the job. Even a separate army list which can be referred to only to demonstrate the option chosen whilst using the card for everything else would be sufficient.
I think you’re probably right on whether the cards are probable. I don’t expect to see them in 3rd ed. Whether they’re desirable is a different matter. They may not be desirable for you, but I can tell you from first-hand experience that they are 100% desirable for some and are the demarcation point over whether the game competes for table time against WM, Malifaux, WWX, and other games which do use them. For many players, they make a skirmish game much more accessible, and consequently, they are desirable.
On a level with Malifaux? I’m glad we all have opinions, but I find Infinity to be a far superior game to Malifaux in rules, background, and aesthetics.
I’m sure there’s a lot more people playing Infinity in Spain than there are playing Malifaux…
I wonder how the Spanish translation of Malifaux compares to the English translation of Infinity?
Remember that because your perception is limited to your experience and region and tastes and preferences, that does not make it absolute or correct.
Stat cards would absolutely not be an improvement for Infinity.
If you like Malifaux or Warmachine, then by all means play those games. Don’t wish for Infinity to become them.
I don’t by any means want that. I just want the game to be more accessible so that more people play it. And given that I know for a fact that some potential players are put off by the lack of stat cards then it’s not a case of whether it will absolutely improve the game or not, it’s purely about accessibility, of which the lack of stat cards are the least of the problems so I don’t want to get hung up on that. Are Infinity players so elitist and exclusivist that they would rather the game did not address this? Do you not want the game to rival WM or Malifaux for popularity or do you get a kick out of being niche?
The relative popularity of Malifaux and Infinity must be a very regional thing, or varies a lot by country – I’ve seen maybe a dozen games of Malifaux played, ever.
With stat cards I don’t get the hate for them but I also don’t really see the attraction either.
All the list builders (which you’ll likely need to use anyway) will do printouts which list all the unit abilities and equipment that was chosen, including weapon stats. You can’t include the text for the skills and equipment on a card because they’re generally too long – in some extreme cases you’d be looking at 2-3 sides of A4 to fit all the abilities text associated with a unit.
So again, I’m not against stat cards but as they’d only have stats and a list of skill names I don’t see the benefit.
Malifaux is very successful in the US, which is the largest overall market for our industry. The UK market rivals the US market purely in terms of GW sales and is the second largest market overall. As a Spanish game, both in location and native language, Infinity is already starting at a disadvantage against Malifaux (and WM) in the big two markets. In the seminar CB did at GenCon (I think the video is on BoW somewhere) they even attributed their dramatic growth over the last few years to BoW introducing them to the English speaking market. I’ve no doubt that Infinity is bigger than Malifaux in Spain and other countries too, and it may even rival Malifaux in the UK, but overall its sales don’t match Malifaux’s. Bear in mind that Infinity has been around several years longer than Malifaux too.
It’s been mentioned elsewhere in these comments that PP made a big effort with their 2nd editions of WM and Hordes to make the rules much easier to get to grips with and its paid off for them in a big way. Since they released them in 2010, they’ve been able to rival WFB for the second most popular game in the industry, they may even have surpassed it. It’s hard to know as GW don’t break down their sales by product line. The original Malifaux rulebook was very poorly laid out and the rules were full of holes, so they released a 1.5 mini rulebook a little over a year later which addressed all the issues. Clarity of presentation is much more important than having stat cards, which seem to have become the wedge issue in these comments. I mentioned them last in the list of things I hoped that CB could address to make 3rd ed Infinity a more accessible game because I think they’re the least important thing CB need to do with Infinity. For many people their presence would be neither here nor there. There are people for whom it does make a difference though, so for that reason alone if I was CB I’d be seriously considering them. Though like I say, presentation and clarity of the rules is the real issue, stat cards are more a sideshow.
Without knowing Malifaux’s overall turnover I can’t make proper comparisons. CB’s turnover is at least 2m € by now.
‘it may even rival Malifaux in the UK’ feels odd, I don’t see it being played over here or hear that much mention of it.
PP I specifically didn’t mention, they’re much bigger than anyone but GW by now. 😉
I’m totally agreed on stat cards being a bit of a side-issue, clarity of rules is vastly more important.
As a privately held company, Wyrd’s finances aren’t publicly available for direct comparison. From sales through US distributors, Malifaux was the fifth best selling game up until the summer quarter of 2012 behind only the big four games from GW and PP. FFG’s release of X-Wing bumped it out of the top five in the fall of 2012.
sweeet! Moar Aleph TAGs please!
Looking forward to that! The game is already awesome, so likely it´ll just get better.
Awesome! So this was the big announcement that was hinted at! Looking forward to this so much!
I had a feeling that this was going to be announced, rather than another expansion.
Bring it on I say.
This is great news, my group tried this game and really liked the idea behind it. However the thing that most held us back from getting fully into was the rules translation, there where parts where the rules seemed vague and the translation didn’t seem to make sense. As we didn’t have a veteran player around to teach us we ended up giving up and moving on. I really hope they take this chance to address those issue because the world and the mini’s are great and the game was a lot of fun.
Yeah, having a veteran around, or a “champion” of the game certainly helps a lot. But… everything is available free on Infinity’s web site and the Infinity Wiki really clears anything you need to know up. Pretty sweet.
Although I agree with the comments above about translation, I only bought my rule book 2 weeks ago £30. Now I have to buy a new one.
Corvus Belli make the rules available for free on their website so you won’t immediately need to buy a new book to be able to keep playing. It’s also not due out until later in the year so you’ll get some use out of this book too.
You’re assuming they won’t pull a Wyrd and stop making their rules available for free. Malifaux used to be downloadable. It isn’t anymore except for stat cards.
That is true. I don’t think they will pull the rules as the game isn’t where Malifaux is in terms of popularity but they could.
Well, not for another 8 months or so. There’s still hours of entertainment to be had from reading all the background, history, and lore, as well as looking at all the pictures. I’ve looked at my core rulebook for more than 30 hours, I’m sure – where can you find quality entertainment for just 1£ per hour?!?
Cant wait for this one!
Yeah now is the right time for Infinity to transition from “That quirky sci-fi game my group couldn’t get in to” to something more mainstream. It should be a good year for the game 😀
Hmm I wonder if this means we will see a 2 player starter? Two ~125 point forces, 3rd edition book, templates, and maybe a double sided 2×2 mat (even better if it’s like the Deadzone one) and perhaps some cardstock or MDF terrain as a result of one of their many terrain partnerships (perhaps even Antenocitis).
Hmmm…
It’s a nice thought, but it would be hard for them to price it competitively while maintaining the quality of minis they normally produce. It would end up like the Firestorm Armada box set, cool but not really any cheaper than just buying the components separately. Or it would end up like the Battletech boxed set, cool but with minis that are of a noticeably lower quality than what you would usually buy.
I think people will be willing to spend those extra bucks when they see the out of this world quality … plus you dont need a lot of minis to have a fun game
Actually, if you mean the 2-player Valhalla box, you pay the same as you’d pay for 2 patrol fleets. Which means you get for 2 pounds more- a hardbound rulebook (20pounds price), a bunch of dice and a rather large space station and some cardboard asteroids. Even if you assume the space station is equivalent to 3 dindrenzi frigates that you’re missing compared to a patrol fleet set, it still means you pay 2 pounds for a 20 pound rulebook. plus of course the set has unique battleships so far unavalible elsewhere which might ot might not count towards “better value”. Either way, if you are just starting and want both fleets in the set, it does offer a significan saving over buying the rules and models separately.
As for this, I’m interested to see where they take the rules in 3rd ed. The minis were already taken to regions I dont care about so I doubt it’ll bring me back, but you never know.
Hi redden.
I wanted to edit my post and add a smiley face, but couldn’t. I just happen to be starting out just when a change is announced.
But from what I gather on the forum that this will be more of a update than a major change like other company’s. Except of course the use of 55mm bases, which seems to have caused quite a stir on the forum.
🙂
🙂
I am very excited for this edition because I do think it will jump infinity into mainstream. I know a lot of folks have asked for rules clarification (I don’t really get why) and hopefully hey hired a smart translated to help them capture the Anglo market. Great news CB!
I’m excited and a little wary. Will this be a rules revamp or mostly an advancement of the storyline? I wouldn’t like to see new rules for new rules sake, like we see with another well-known company.
And although I’ve bought the books a while ago I haven’t yet played the value out of them. IN fact I haven’t played from the campaign book at all.
Finally.
The rulebooks are a really hard read atm, with finicky rules and abysmal layout. I hope the lads at CB have hired a proper editor and a translator.
I sorta like the rules as is now, but it is such a slog to learn on your own.
A neater layout, the rules split more clearly into sections and some cleaning up wpuld do wonders for the game.
Also a 2 player starter set would be a neat idea.
I can’t speak to the writing in the original language, but the English translations are damn near incomprehensible. But even if the translation were better, the existing rulebooks are very poorly organized. I really hope they do better this time around.
All I want is for them to streamline the system a little, and add unit cards. Also if they can block the “Rambo” manoeuvre where people spend, like, 4 orders on one unit that would be grand.
YAYYEAH! WOO! *Runs laps around room.*
Infinity is a great game but has always lacked polish. Too many rough spots. Too much FAQ. A few completely absurd moments.I never bought the rulebooks, just used the free PDFs and the user-edited rulebook so I’ve missed out on all the fluff. I will gladly pick this one up when it comes out.
For those talking about the current rulebooks and perhaps a bit upset about them being replaced, I think it is worth remembering that as all the rules to play the game, excluding the mission system from Paradiso I think, are available entirely for free and always have been, the value of those books is not in the rules, but in the fluff, that is the exclusive bit.
Personally, I plan on downloading 3rd edition rules to start with and playing it that way,unless they offer some uber cool mini with pre orders like they have in the past that tempts me, happy with the fluff from the 3 books I have.
I approve. I’ve been meaning to get into Infinity a bit more and this will most likely be a good point, whenever it releases.
Its fantastic news and people must be rightfully excited about it, its going to be fantastic!
Great news! Hopefully stat cards as people have already said. And I think an ALL faction starter box should be in order! With tokens templates etc….. 😀
Not sure a short video clip was needed though tbh, especially as it was about as useful as a GW one, hehe.
WTF? Stat cards?!? Nope. Not needed at all.
Somebody seems to have gotten really offended by any post that mentions wanting stat cards….
Mrchom why would then need to have a rile to stop ramboing? It would take something away from the game if the put and order limit on what each model could use and also mess with the balane .
The anti rambo element in infinity is the ITS missions. When things are objective based just ramboing your most powerful unit into killing a load of guys will not win you the game. And if you have missions where certain troops have to do a task having a low order limit would really hurt armies with no access to cheap and therefore lots of specialist troops.
And 4 orders is not ramboing in my book. What if my doc needs to get to someone 16″ away. That’s 3 orders already.
Rule not rile damn tablet auto correct.
And I cannot wait for the new rules.
Well, other systems encourage you to keep your doc up with the troops and not leave them behind until they’re needed. In fact, in other systems you can move all your troopers (you know, models you paid money for) every turn and not be penalized for it. I dig a lot about the infinity ruleset, but the unlimited order cap per model is, to me at least, a serious flaw. Obviously they will not change it because fans love it though.
What has paying for models have anything to do with it? Do you have some urge to always move a payed for model X amount of times per round in the games you play? And why would it automatically be bad to move several models a few times rather than spending all your orders on only one? Ramboing only works against inexperienced players in their first few games, and even then only primaraly if they deployed very poorly. Once you have the experience from a handful of games, ramboing won’t be very beneficial any more.
Paying for a model has a lot to do with it. Due to the way the order pool works, the basic LI is essentially little more than a token that stands there at the back of the table hoping to not get shot as the HI and specialists do the job more often than not. And while in other games you can take chances and move the cheap unit to maybe rush enemy, in this game they’re to be coddled because if you lose one, you lose an order from the pool. It leads, in my experience, to very repetitve and extremely conservative gameplay- chances are something you desperately try not to take in case you lose the precious order from the pool. It’s gamey, unrealistic and frankly, disappointing.
As I said, I’m aware my opinion is in the minority as most people love the system.
You and I play the game very differently it seems. I think it’s a very poor plan to hide you LT in the back somewhere, if you do that often it will just tell your opponent what model you LT is. Hanging back, mostly alone I presume since it would be really bad to leave models babysitting the LT (thus rendering them also totally worthless) and a lone model without protections, which you have clearly signalled is you LT invited disaster. I’ve never played like you described that you play yourself and I’ve never had your problem. Try being more active with you LT and keep the opponent guessing who it might be instead of clearly telling him.
It may have just been that your list didn’t suit your playstyle.
I started out with Neoterrans and it sometimes felt the same with a gap in power between my cheap line troops and expensive my heavy infantry. With most of my force starting in my deployment zone, ramboing with the heavy infantry felt the fastest way to try to get anything done.
I eventually switched over to playing with Nomads, Ariadna, and Haqqislam instead. Now my forces are able to be mostly comprised of 20-30pt medium infantry and skirmishers able to easily spread out and each carry a decent portion of the load when and where needed. Felt much happier since then.
I think the game picks up when you try not to put all your eggs in one basket. Now whenever someone tries ramboing against me, it’s a game of showing all the different ways my whole team can kill that one threatening unit, no matter how strong it might have seemed.
So excited!!! Thank you Corvus Belli!!!!
Trim it down !
Gorgeous models (pretty hard to assemble though) but too much small rules, special weapon rules, special abilities, too much rulings have been built over a pretty simple basic game mechanic.
Looking forward to see if its the direction they’ll take. That might have me again interested in this game.
I think you’d lose the character of the game if you trimmed it too much. It’s like Battletech fans, we want six volumes of rules that cover every possible eventuality and force us to use spreadsheets to track our campaigns. Infinity is about high tech warfare with hackers, drones, jetpacks and kamikaze robots. Just hackers alone adds many layers of complication when almost all the weaponry is computerized.
But that’s what we want (well, not you, but that’s fine, different strokes for different folks). We want a ruleset that allows our scifi cyberpunk fantasies to be lived out, not trimmed down. I’m all for a rules reorganization and rewrite. God knows the existing rules are so terribly written and poorly organized that they need it. But I hope it doesn’t get oversimplified.
No. Never this. No.
The models are not “hard to assemble.” All of the minutiae add details, depth, life to the cinematic gameplay.
There is a simplified game – it’s called 40K. It sounds like that is more your speed, or perhaps a Clix game?
I suppose if the models are too hard to assemble, you could get yourself some GW “Bullgryns.”
It’s like a time machine to 1992.
To be fair, some of the older sculpts like the original Odalisque were a real pain to assemble. The newer releases are another matter entirely. 🙂
i have never played Infinity this could be the excuse i need
Take a look at the minis. Done? Now you have your excuse =P
Woooooooooo!
I understand the need for “cyberpunk fantasies to be lived out” but overcomplexification and a too great number of rules layers kills a game that’s supposed to be fast paced and cinematic.
So between oversimplification (which I don’t want) and overcomplexification (which will burry this game in a niche of hardcore players) there’s maybe a place for “streamlined” rules.
Only dabbled so far, a small haqqislam force and games against mate – plunge time
Infinity rules desperately need an editor. I love the game, but the rules need a clear distinction between fluff and rules; also the order in which abilities are presented need to be revised. Finally, I really hope they drop the huge amount of modifiers and exceptions/special rules so it can be more accessible to new wargame players and allow players to spend more time focusing on the action 🙂
Never ever ever. The modifiers are what makes the game tactical. Taking those out would make it “Build List, Pew Pew, The Better List Won.” That’s not Infinity. Same with the special rules. It makes the game what it is.
I think you want a different game. Some games are complex, some are beer&pretzel games. Most games are somewhere in between. I also want a clear separation between fluff and rules and also a better presentation of skills, weapons and such. However, Dropping a big chunk of the rules turns Infinity from the very rich and tactical game to a beer&pretzel game and that’s not what the majority of the gamers want (otherwise, they wouldn’t have supported the game for all these years).
With the great relationship CB has with BoW we are in some good times.
I’m also thinking the release of 3rd Edition is going to be an ideal time to promote the game down the club.
I hope they will revisit some rules and fix things that are obviously broken like retreat in its, take look at cost of some weapons (multi rifle, combi-light shotgun) and change some less desired characters like Phasant and Crane agents. I don’t think stat cards are a good idea, I like army builder much better.
What would make an excellent addition to rulebook would be videos about all the rules (presented with qr-codes) that you could look up as an examples.
Really excited about this!!!
Been playing Infinity for a while now, and it is difficult to get the hang of. That’s because the layout wasn’t the best and the rule explanations occasionally unclear. I hope the new edition contains plenty of clarifications to existing rules. Also rules sections being marked more clearly would be great.
I don’t really have a problem with the number of special rules in the game, that’s what makes the game great, they just need to be cleaned up a bit as I said above. Also some scenarios should be put in the new book.
Infinity is one of the best sci-fi skirmish games out there, long may it continue!!
Ooh. I hope it doesn’t change to much. I wonder if they’ll combine all three books worth of stats into one book.
No stat cards please. If I wanted stat cards I’d play one of those other games. Plus I don’t want to have to shell out for yet ANOTHER set of cards that are probably available only by factions and may need to be repurchased again later on. There’s nothing wrong with a single sheet of paper for your army list and everything is right there and not getting knocked off the table or requiring you or your opponent to shuffle through the pile just to find “that card”. Often they put them in the 8.5×11″ pocket protector sheets and then you end up with essentially… an army list with smaller stats than if you’d printed them out as an army list anyway. If they want to provide cards for those who want them then fine, but they should be optional and an army list should suffice for all gaming and tournament purposes. Other than a pretty picture I don’t see what the cards get you the blister packs already provide you with a nice card.. I suppose they could give you some stats on those so you could easily compare. Either way, they should not require the use of the cards.. It just smacks of a cheap way to get more money.
What’s the problem with stat cards? they’re great if they include all the abilities and equipment rules that infinity miniatures usually have; unloading a lot of “mental RAM” for players, making it easier to locate each miniature’s special rules.
I hope they build a better game
Just played my first game of infinity today ….and THE RULES SUCK.
My god we bitch about GW 40k rules ….. if you want complicated , and spent hours and hours looking up rules . don’t even think about using a index. then when you found what you looking for well , they where not explaining what you want to know some sentences even make no sense at all
ALSO the game system is clearly just broken, some rules are bogus a lot of the times. How can you miss some one moving cover to cover WTF also that system with that you can rambo your guys is just to unbalanced i had a drone 4 points with a flamer gave him 3 turns
i flamed 3 groups killed 6 models all of them with just 1 drone just by spending 3 orders on the same drone. If a game system alows that, you know its just broken.
how many times can 1 guy shoot in a turn take a sniper. he can shoot the entire board at all the opponents he can see.. in a few seconds of real time.
nah.
I did not like the rules 1st edition second edition rules still stuck…. 3th time a charm?
im not getting my hopes up…
also sniping is just to good reactions are bogus .
After playing this game for two years, I can assure you that’s not how the game plays.
Rambo doesn’t like stepping on mines. Nor does he like walking into view of a Total Reaction Remote, a suppressive fire marker or a hackers zone of control.
A sniper can’t hit what he can’t see. Use camo attacks or lob a grenade over a building. On your active turn, you have the advantage anyway. Get in your weapons good range and let off a full burst. The odds are in your favor.
It’s hard to read these kinds of comments about the game. Some people believe how you deploy your troops don’t matter. Some people believe once you’ve made your list, you shouldn’t have to make any real decisions and just let the game play out. That’s fine. Play a different game.
I’ll stick with Infinity.
To be honest, it does sound like you were getting rules wrong. Also as @melvinmcsnatch says, if a sniper can see the entire board you’re not using enough terrain, see the terrain about video on this site… 😉
I am afraid that it seems you were playing the game almost completely wrong, with wrong mentality and in insufficient terrain.
Groups of models that were close enough to be hit with a flamer but nobody ARO’d back? snipers who can see the whole board? and I must really ask now, 4 points drone with flame thrower?
Infinity is a skirmish game your list provides you with a toolbox, neither a combo list, nor a step by step approach game, your opponent, the terrain and the mission provides you with the challenge and the toolbox you brought with you provides the options to deal with them.
I would advice to see or read a few battle reports available online, to understand the terrain of Infinity and how the game plays both as mentality, for example because something has high armour (even a TAG) it does not mean it can takes strides on open terrain, it will die, and rules clarifications.
For the latter you can always ask for help from the Infinity community there will always be somebody available to help.
This is an impresion some players have after their first couple of games especially if the scenery is unbalanced (this is case (very) sensistive in Infinity) and if one of the player is more experienced than the other.
I’ve witnessed games that were utterly one sided : one player wipping more than half the opponent team with only 2 top notch TO camo sniper models… Trully this is a turn down for many beginners. And because the learning curve is so steep, because there are so many little rules and exceptions, beginners tend to suffer a lot and be discouraged.
What should be a streamlined, fun, fast paced, cinematic game is also, also, a game of erudition, which more than most others favoursexperience, and where you have no right to mistakes. This will please hardcore, competitive players and turn off more casual ones.
It’ so weird reading that a Wargame is defined by the way it presents its miniature’s information. Is Warhammer a different game if it used carsd instead of army lists? would games go differently? LOL
warhammer 40K second edition did have stat cards for all units that where not in the book.
I remember the vehicle ones from Dark Millenium, and they played like TOTALLY different from the ones at the printed army list XD
I think it makes your game system more flexible because your can expand as you grow . Make new units all the time in steed of once every few years.
There are five new releases every month. We use the free online army builder which stays up to date and there are also new profile pdfs by the end of the month for the new stuff if for some reason you would want paper.
For games which pack a lot of information into individual minis on the table, stat cards serve to make the game more accessible. An army list is sufficient for larger scale games which are based around a handful of units with simple stat lines and equipment. Leaving aside tracking damage, playing WM would be a time consuming business if you had to consult an army list for every model on the table. Malifaux would be close to unplayable.
Infinity is among the more complex games on the market in terms of having a variety of models with a with a variety of special rules and equipment. The half dozen times I’ve managed to play it I’ve had to write out all the stats for all the models onto flashcards and I’ve still needed to constantly reference the rulebook. It’s the single biggest reason why I’ve never been able to get the game to stick. It’s not absolutely necessary to have them to be able to play, but anyone who thinks it wouldn’t broaden the appeal of the game is mistaken.
That’s a great comment. My basic struggle with actual Infinity players is that is “their game” and it only takes 10 games to finally get all the stuff.
As a marketer and a game designer I know that I’ll lose tons of people before they get to that 10th game when noobs finally “get it” (even if the miniatures are awesome, the #1 reason people stay playing), fixing that is a lot of game design work and one I feel that CB is not willing to do. Even though, in the case of Infinity, improving how the information is presented would help a lot how new players get and stay in the game, and I’m sure it would also help actual players to enjoy the game more (as they spend less time looking for rules).
To be fair here, they do offer the free army builder program, and from that you can print out a list with all the stats and things on it, so whilst I understand the point about cards, the same functionality is there if you look. They should perhaps publicise it more.
I did try using it and found it to be not especially accessible either. My point isn’t that Infinity needs to have stat cards. It’s done quite well for itself without them. It’s that stat cards make a game more accessible for new players and when you have a game which isn’t very accessible to begin with, they help new players get over the hump and make it more likely they’ll stick around. You only have to read these comments to see that there are people out there interested in playing Infinity but have found it too difficult to do so. Stat cards aren’t the only answer. The rules could be a lot clearer, better laid out, and their level of complexity are always going to be off-putting to some, but they unquestionably help the new player get to grips with a game in which each mini has a lot of information attached to it.
I’m sure the 3rd ed book will present the rules in a more structured/logical way so players can understand them easier. One thing though…why does every game have to be easy enough for everyone to “get” in one game? This has always puzzled me. You can only structure rules so much, and given the complexity of the game it would still be a complex game even if the rules were optimally structured. If some people can’t grasp complex rules, don’t have the time, simply don’t want to, or any other reason then they have LOTS of other games to go to. EVERY game does NOT have to be easily accessible to EVERYONE.
Some people want a complex game with decent depth, and Infinity is a game for them. And considering the speed with which Infinity is growing from one year to the other it’s doing extremely well and is quickly addicting people. There simply doesn’t seem to be any pressing need for making it a less complex game to increase it’s market share since it’s doing stonkingly well as it is. It’s not a game for everyone, a fact which is true for any game ever invented.
Complexity and accessibility are two different things, and complexity should never be an excuse for a lack of accessibility.
“Complexity and accessibility are two different things, and complexity should never be an excuse for a lack of accessibility.”
This.
The thing is, Infinity’s basics are easy enough for new players to “get” in one game. The barrier isn’t Infinity’s supposed complexity, it was its incapability to present its depth in an approachable manner.
With the way the rulebook was written, it was near impossible for someone to do “get” them on their own without the assistance of an experienced Infinity player – at least not without a lot of grueling work.
I’m sure many of us have given demos to new players who’ve walked away with a clear idea of how to play the game and what to expect going deeper. I’m also sure there’s as many, if not more, players who’ve picked up the rules to read on their own, or just gotten bad help, and gave up out of frustration before even trying.
Most good games are easy to learn and hard to master. Infinity layers of rules (sometimes with 3 different sub-abilities/levels or types of gadgets/weapons) + the simultaneous actions (which is cool) makes it difficult to learn AND to master.
There’s a lot of depth and abilities in a game like Warmachine/Hordes but between MkI and MkII they made what was necessary to transform a niche game that failed to compete with GW majors into a serious commercial success.
They streamlined it, trimmed down a little bit and rationalised abilities, spells etc… And made a big redaction effort, making sure vocabulary and key words are standardized and their meaning is clear. I rarely had to use PP message boards to find answers to my questions about rules, most of the time the answer was in the book. Their game is not oversimplified, it still has A LOT of depth but it’s much easier to grasp.
Infinity needs a slow step by step approach, with (gentle) veteran players and I’ve seen loads of arguments in my local community message board regarding rules interpretation when the game started to have some success which discouraged several players.
Last thing Infinity fans should want is to bog this system down into a “hardcore-complex” niche. There’s some work to be done in order to give it a better commercial success and attract (and retain) more players. That doesn’t mean the game has to be oversimplified that means it has to be better wrtitten and designed.
Hot. Damn. Gimme! 🙂 So excited for this, but I guess it depends on how much of a re-write vs a tidy up it is. Still, CB has done a great job to-date so I reckon it’ll be awesome. 🙂 Now… WHEN is this coming? 2014? Do we get more than that??!?
As long as they tighten up the rules terminology, like Warmachine did between mark 1 and mark 2, so that when I see a term in a rule, it means the same thing in every other rule. And probably put a limit on the number of orders per model to prevent 1-turn-10-order-rambo-TAG-wipeouts. 2 or 3 per model would be fine. Most games set it at 2, 3 for the leader/LT.
There is no need to put an order limit, it would actually affect negatively the gameplay and the game system, the core understanding of how to counter the so called “rambo” is twofold, first one must understand that the more a unit is used the more it is open to attrition, the second is that the reactive player must maximize the areas they contest by overlapping LOS, a strong unit can and should try to attack in the active turn in solo duels, because that is the way to get the maximum efficiency from it, the reactive players goal is to minimize such chances and force the active models in fights were many can ARO back.
This is why terrain is quite important in Infinity.
IMHO, tightening the rules is something I don’t see CB doing, their main problem being the Spanish language in itself. Our native language (I’m a native Spanish speaker too) does not allow the writing of economic, clear-cut rules; that’s why their rulebook usually seems to repeats terms and rules, and word usage is sometimes ambiguous. This calls for a very strict M:tG-level rules writing, taking into consideration even things like the order in which rules are presented; having working definitions for game terms a must.
I hope they don’t simplify the rules. I cannot think of any that could go without losing something from the game in the process. The layers of rules are what gives players so many in game options and leads to so many great moments.
If the rules are made clearer in discription and with a good index system I think they will be good. Charts for things like what vision mods stack would be a great one too.
A special rules set of cards could be good. You could put out the ones contained in you list on the table to be seen by both players. Would make rule sneaking a lot easier.
I’m very happy to see the rules simplified, but I wouldn’t like to see the tactical depth of gameplay simplified.
A good example I’ve used elsewhere – Impersonators and models with Booty can pick up equipment in a similar but not identical way. streamlining them to be identical would have zero effect on complexity of gameplay but would make the rules simpler and easier to learn.
Another example would be Impersonators and Camo markers getting a first strike effect when shooting – two near-identical effects with non-identical rules wording.
Mixed emotions here… I’m already pretty happy with what is available, but I’m fairly well obligated to buy the new book since my Brother demos the game….
An obvious update will have to be the photos of the miniatures, many of the photos display long out of production miniatures, many that have been substantially updated (Morats, Aguaciles)…. A new broom sweeps clean….
One could speculate whether all factions will be represented in the new rules in one book, or just those that were in the previous volumes…
The folks at Corvus Belli tend to have better abilities in English than I have in Spanish; technically, I’m a Spanish Linguist (very much out of practice) I did get some practice explaining the Amish that live in our area, I held my own with a little grammar tweaking by the CB folks…
The Infinity books have some of the best fluff of any game, there is a great blending of History, traditional Manga/Anime and other sources…. it would be a pity to reverse any of that…
If that comment is related to mine, I never said that CB can’t speak English. I was saying that Spanish is a very tough language to write rules for, as a language. As a general rule you need 33% more words in Spanish to write the same English-written rule: you need more pronouns, all words are gender-specific, and words have many more meanings, that’s why I say you need to develop a technical vocabulary to write these rules, and work the structure in which they are presented. this way you avoid vagueness, ambiguity and the repetition of rules that I’ve seen in the rulebook to cover specific situations.
English is the golden language for rules, economical and mostly clear regarding word meanings, I suspect that German is also very good; I also suspect that Chinese would be a nightmare to write rules from 🙂
I’m hoping the Warcorp program finally takes off with this release. I’ve been signed up and waiting for a good while to start hosting events.
They really need an english speaking editor to help them out with the way the book is written and laid out. Maybe hire a freelance editor/book designer…
I agree the fluff is great, and more of it would be awesome.
As the gane stands now, unless you have a mate who is allready a veteran player, the. Learning the rules is an extremely steep learning curve, and quite a chore.
They need to fix that, if they want to keep having great success.
And an editor/book designer who speak fluently english would help alot with that.
I dont think the rules need dumbing down, but streamlined and presented more clearly and readable.
That about sums it up – they currently have a barrier to entry. Whats behind it is great but need to break that down – stat cards, editing etc or whatever does that is critical
I’m still puzzled by thus “barrier” to entry some people keep mentioning. I’m not a member of MENSA and I didn’t have any probs at all learning the game. You read the rule book once or twice, you start with very simple and basic armies of about 150 points and play a handful of games. Once you got the basics you can go to 200 points and include a little more advanced troop choices. What’s so difficult about this? Where is the barrier? A single game of infinity doesn’t even take long to play, so getting a few battles to boost experience doesn’t even take long. I think the barrier is pretty much self inflicted because if an average Joe like me can make this excruciating barrier, without problems, then so can anyone else.
A barrier to entry can be all sorts of different things and in the case of Infinity it’s nothing to do with intellectual capacity. Instead it’s a combination of the effort it takes to grasp the game given the lack of clarity in its presentation coupled with the ambiguities that remain once it has been grasped. The barriers are far from insurmountable, as evidenced by the success of the game, but they represent an opportunity cost which for a significant amount of the potential player base is too high to pay (as evidenced in these comments). It’s not that Infinity can’t be grasped with the expenditure of a little effort, it’s that it’s in competition with other skirmish games offering similar experiences but which are presented in a much more accessible way. Warmachine is a very good example of a game with complexity and depth, but whose presentation is much more accessible than Infinity. New players rarely find themselves getting bogged down in trying to locate or understand the rules. Consequently it is much less likely to lose players after a game or two. This is not simply speculation on my part. I have personally witnessed players give up on Infinity and play WM instead for precisely this reason. My LGS had to have a fire sale to move the dead Infinity stock because no-one stuck with it.
If you’re inclined to play Infinity regardless then you’ll overcome this. That said, you do need at least one other person who feels the same else you wind up with no opponents which is what happened to my attempts to start playing. If you’re interested in Infinity but not desperate to play then there’s a good chance you’ll fall at the barrier. I’m not trying to bash CB or their game and I don’t think most of the other people raising this as an issue in these comments are either. It’s more that we’re interested in playing Infinity and are hopeful that the 3rd ed will make that more possible.
Exactly what I meant @redben. It wasn’t a criticism of the game but more of ways to find the way in, such as what is a decent starter force? (Which I did find eventually on their website) – what rules do I need for it? They have all the factors to do far better than they do – and I would like to see that – but they just need to lay it out in a more accessible way. Particularly in an industry where there are so many potential games competing for your time and money.
Loving the Mass Effect 3 homage.
Not that I need another rulebook but I hoe they make it a bit easier to learn the rules especially since hopefully link teams etc will be in the same place.
Hah, yeah.. I was thinking that I can’t wait for the 7th edition 😉
Personally I can’t wait for BoW to FINALLY publish their piece on from the seminar so we can get all the goodies in English =)
I’ve got loads of minis for this and some scenery but every time i try to play a test game I get tripped up by some peculiarly-worded rule about dodging or something. The core mechanics are some of the best I’ve come across though and I love everything else about it.
So even if this is JUST a rewrite of the rules to make them clearer then I’m in! If it’s something more, that’s cool too!
@psychoticstorm @ yslaire
We have a table with to much terrain a table full of terrain like a small town . Playing a guy that has played infinity a lot.
I know war gaming very well I know how to use terrain as my advantage but also how to milk the rules to my avantage. and i like to take risks
if you give a 4 point robot the an big nasty flame template that few would survive and 10 INCH MOVEMENT and 9 ORDER DICE SO HE CAN BE ACROSS A TABLE IN 1 TURN AND FLAME EVERYTHING. what do you expect? robot point cost? 4 points
My opponent fumbled his react rolles the first time so i lid 2 guys up then spent an other action point and moved and used the flamer a second time the robot was still alive to every ones surprise so he moved again en toasted 3 more guys. then the robot died.
My point is the game mechanics are not good. in 200 points i can have 10 of these RAMBO robots if 1 dies … no wurry my opponen t does not get any points and i do not lose a action dice because the guy with the dice is not dead yet. so next turn i get to send a new rambo robot to do it all over again with a 86 inch movement range and a flame template the size of pizza slice your never going to miss and everything on d20 15 or less is dead.
I had a 10 man army nice one with only 2 of these cheap robots and guy in stealth suite, 2 jump pack guys 2 elites 1 dock and 5 basic troops 😛 i did not use the second robot but i know its to good not to use next time.
hehe. 1/2 way turn 3 my opponent gave up. next we played my game fire storm armada.
we had more fun that day and i lost that one. (bad luck at the dice) simple rules that work no BS RAMBO unites that just keep on going. sure fire storm has its unbalances but they are not that big. also if you make a mistake its much more forgiving most of the times
I don’t know where to start with this. There are sooo many mistakes here. I’m sorry you didn’t have a good time, but I really doubt your opponent who has “played Infinity a lot” actually had. Inept deployment being your first clue. Doing it twice would be a second. The fact that your “robots” which only cost 4 points don’t exist is another. An experienced player would have caught that. I also don’t know which “robots” you’re talking about because that’s not a unit type. A Remote? A TAG maybe? Was it synced to another unit which should have been within 8″ of said robot? Stealth suit? Jump Packs? That’s not from the rulebook, I assure you.
Perhaps I’m not familiar with your particular faction and it’s 4 point super robots, jump packs and stealth suits. I don’t think you mentioned that earlier.
All I can think of is that you’re talking about an Auxilia with Auxbot for 14 points. Which is truly terrifying to new players.
The downsides?
The Auxbot has no armour whatsoever.
Using the Heavy Flamethrower means that any shots at it are totally unopposed and are very likely to be in +3 range for the shooter. Obviously your opponent can fluff their reaction shots multiple times but that’s the luck of the dice.
Heavy Flamethrowers are Damage 14 so enemy models will go down on a 14 or less minus any armour and minus three if in cover. So for example a Heavy Infantry with ARM4 who is in cover is going to take a wound on a seven or less.
If it attempts to Dodge (and it can’t fire and Dodge in the same Order) it’s Physique is reduced to 2 on a d20.
It has to stay within 8″ of the controller (the Auxilia) all the time.
The Auxilia can only move 8″ per Order and that’s only if doing nothing but moving – any reactions shots against that Order will be unopposed.
The Auxilia is also a basic trooper with one point of armour, as soon as the Auxilia takes any damage the Auxbot deactivates.
For terrain, is there any chance you could post a photo? It sounds odd that the table was open enough for a single sniper to dominate the entire table but dense enough that an Auxbot with a 10″ template as it’s sole ranged weapon could cross the table without getting shot down. Getting the terrain right is definitely a big part of Infinity and an area that the rulebook doesn’t cover in enough depth. Hopefully third edition will include more guidance on setting up the table.
Where I can 100% agree is that Infinity can be very unforgiving, which is why everyone always recommends learning the game with very small forces, maybe 100pt or even just four basic models per side.
Bless your patience, Ian. You demonstrate the best humanity has to offer.
But this guy is obviously set on hating the game and I think it’s apparent that no one paid attention to the rules or much. He did not use a single term correctly. His story is full of mistakes and oddities. And at no point did he ask “why did this happen?”
It reminds me of this guy at my LGS. He hates the game. He’s admittedly never played it. Never touched a single model. Never watched a battle report or read the rules. I was inviting people to demo the game and he was trying to convince people not to play it. I asked him if he’d give it a shot and he refused. I asked him if he wanted to watch a game and he refused. But he still seriously walks around telling people “that game sucks.”
It’s clear from your posts you have zero intention of liking Infinity. It’s clear you endured a single first game and did so with the sole purpose of convincing yourself what a horrible game it is. Now, you’re a self-knighted critic to educate why the game “sucks” and is “broken” when you haven’t played the game yet. Believe me, you know nothing of this game and you never will as you’re brain and your approach to the game is still very much associated to 40k. If you were playing 40k, your grievances would be valid. But Infinity is not like 40k, it’s not remotely managed or handled like 40k. What is unfortunate is all the 40k mind-sets that insist on plaguing the game, the community and the rules like it was 40k.
Just to give an example of the kinds of things I believe get in the way of learning the game:
In the sixth section of the rulebook (“the troops”) the rules start talking about the ISC: Light Infantry, Medium Infantry, Heavy infantry, TAGs, Skirmishers, Warbands, Remotes and Special Units, and then goes onto troop classification. Besides hacking rules for Heavy Infantry, TAG and Remotes, do any of the other types and/or classification of troops are referenced again in the rules? I believe not (but please let me know if so).
Anyhow, this is an exception, a game mechanic, is not a rule. Is like if Warhammer 40K went discussing types of Chaos demons in the first three paragraphs of the rules.
Then you go to “Explanation of Unit Data”, where the FIRST attribute is Movement where it includes a table of the average movement rates per type of units, and shows rates for 1st and 2nd movement. This is a table you NEVER use again, as you refer to the actual unit data in the army list (or stat card 😛 ), and it has no meaning to a new player, as you haven’t explained yet how movement works.
These are the things that need to be cleaned up. Yadda, yadda, yadda, you learn it by the 10th time you go over it, but the point is that a lot of people don’t get to the 10th re-read, not even the 1st.
Yes, troop types have an effect on movement through terrain. However new players hardly ever use difficult/very difficult/impassible terrain so it initially looks like the troop types have no effect. 🙁
I’m hoping reorganising the structure of the rulebook is a high priority for Corvus Belli.
The unit types do matter, the unit classifications don’t. whatsoever. Well, outside of being one of the filters on the armybuilder. There’s no difference between being a Garrison Troop compared to an Elite Troop.
It was something we weren’t quite sure of why it was there either when we first started playing here.
The launch issue of the Spanish language edition of Ravage has a big feature on 3rd ed. Not sure yet whether it’ll be carried in the French and English versions too.
Nice miniatures?! Amazing minis!!